Comments on: In 1820, Harvard paid lip service to meritocratic virtues while producing aristocrats

By: Lucklucky

Lucklucky — Fri, 05 Aug 2022 08:03:54 +0000

This is the most important part.

“…theorists of virtue politics elevate the selection of rulers over the restriction of their power…”

Marxism is this primitive. No checks and balances, no limits on power.

Read Hegel. The “ethical state” is the reason for more than 100 million political deaths in The 20th Century.

By: Bomag

Bomag — Tue, 02 Aug 2022 22:28:14 +0000

“Darwin alone defines merit”

Not sure; doesn’t this mean rule by rats and cockroaches?

I’d say we need rule by selective breeding. But this reliably goes off the rails.

By: Harry Jones

Harry Jones — Tue, 02 Aug 2022 18:38:48 +0000

In a truly free society, Darwin alone defines merit. Any other definition of merit is suspect.

Any given elite is replaceable. Our current elite has passed its expiration date.

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 02 Aug 2022 16:53:35 +0000

While this is true, it is also true that, for a patronage network’s prestige to persist, the “children” of such network must go on to head organizations of significantly greater competence than the effective alternative—and they must achieve such lofty position, at minimum, before the onset of middle age: 35. If a prestigious patronage network cannot reliably “place” its children between 22-29, it is on death’s door.

For example, between about 1973 and 1975, Hillary Clinton, at the age of about 26 to 28, dropped in on the Congress to serve as a congressional lawyer for the abortive Nixon impeachment, before she was fired.

Needless to say, that sort of age-appropriate experience tends not to happen today, in late-stage Boomerist, geriatric America.