Counsel or advise: Never forget that merit, justice, fairness, are mere epistemological constructs. These things can be viewed as ideals, unreachable goods. However, they are fictions. Consider suggesting complete impartiality. Not that no person should be at the top, as would be idealized by an anarchist or communist. Rather, consider that positions in society should not be subject to any merit or inheritance. Mere random selection. Both in politics, as it is in true democracy, and economics, as would be in a new form of economics… Random selection… As a rhetorical strategy you could even argue that random selection is the will of God…
I would be concerned though at having the nuclear codes be in the hands of a president who was selected by lottery. To me, the problem is that the smartest should be in power, but due to the effects of nepotism and cronyism, that isn't currently happening. Instead the rich do whatever they can to make sure their kids are their successors, even though many of them don't deserve it. If we were to periodically (maybe once per generation) purge and destroy the bottom 10% of leadership who were unfit for their positions, that would disincentivize the rich from trying to ensure their inbred mentally deficient descendants succeeded them, since they would actually be placing their own children in mortal peril by trying to put them in positions that they were underqualified for.
Right now there's zero disadvantage or personal risk from being one of the global elites, which is why the wealthy and successful always try to make sure their kids get those positions, regardless of whether they are qualified or not. This is bad for society because an underqualified leader can do a LOT of damage. However, if the bottom 10% of leadership were periodically killed, this would force our wealthy elites to reflect on whether their children were QUALIFIED to be leaders, since they would now be doing their kids a huge disservice by putting them in positions that they were unfit for. Putting your child in a role that they were underqualified for might literally lead to their death, so as a caring parent you would need to do some deep reflection on whether your kid could handle leadership, instead of automatically just trying to max out their wealth and social status by exploiting nepotism to get your kid into the highest position possible.
Basically I think that the best way to achieve good results is to change the incentives. Make wealth and power into a double-edged sword that carries RISK in addition to opportunities, so that the global elites don't automatically seek to put their kids in positions of power unless they're absolutely confident that their kids can cut it and won't end up in the bottom 10% that gets the axe.
I agree with much of your reply. Allow me to clarify two things about Random selection:
As for politics, as in Ancient Athens, there would not be an office such as the presidency. That is naturally undemocratic, and would be absurd… Meaning, no such office would be subject to Random selection… Random Selection would be key in ridding corruption and nepotism from much of society. For example, currently there are lotteries. Random Selection in economic competition. A commoner may, by chance, rise to the status of millionaire. Let the same function in the inverse. Let a millionaire fall simply by random chance. As ever, as it is natural with democracy, the question would be not how good are the elites, but how good is the average. The average of the nation must be improved! Elitism is naturally corrupt and nepotistic!
The prior segues into the second point. Meritocracy is physically impossible. Standardized tests, as Confucius would have it, only, at best, theoretically, select the best of those who are willing to follow the standardized test. There is a strong tendency for the psychologically autonomous, the creative, the non-followers, to disregard any standardized metric. The result being that the successful are either the followers, the herd, or the children who are privileged in hidden fashions. The ones whose parents force them to train the hardest and so forth…
Counsel or advise: Never forget that merit, justice, fairness, are mere epistemological constructs. These things can be viewed as ideals, unreachable goods. However, they are fictions. Consider suggesting complete impartiality. Not that no person should be at the top, as would be idealized by an anarchist or communist. Rather, consider that positions in society should not be subject to any merit or inheritance. Mere random selection. Both in politics, as it is in true democracy, and economics, as would be in a new form of economics… Random selection… As a rhetorical strategy you could even argue that random selection is the will of God…
I would be concerned though at having the nuclear codes be in the hands of a president who was selected by lottery. To me, the problem is that the smartest should be in power, but due to the effects of nepotism and cronyism, that isn't currently happening. Instead the rich do whatever they can to make sure their kids are their successors, even though many of them don't deserve it. If we were to periodically (maybe once per generation) purge and destroy the bottom 10% of leadership who were unfit for their positions, that would disincentivize the rich from trying to ensure their inbred mentally deficient descendants succeeded them, since they would actually be placing their own children in mortal peril by trying to put them in positions that they were underqualified for.
Right now there's zero disadvantage or personal risk from being one of the global elites, which is why the wealthy and successful always try to make sure their kids get those positions, regardless of whether they are qualified or not. This is bad for society because an underqualified leader can do a LOT of damage. However, if the bottom 10% of leadership were periodically killed, this would force our wealthy elites to reflect on whether their children were QUALIFIED to be leaders, since they would now be doing their kids a huge disservice by putting them in positions that they were unfit for. Putting your child in a role that they were underqualified for might literally lead to their death, so as a caring parent you would need to do some deep reflection on whether your kid could handle leadership, instead of automatically just trying to max out their wealth and social status by exploiting nepotism to get your kid into the highest position possible.
Basically I think that the best way to achieve good results is to change the incentives. Make wealth and power into a double-edged sword that carries RISK in addition to opportunities, so that the global elites don't automatically seek to put their kids in positions of power unless they're absolutely confident that their kids can cut it and won't end up in the bottom 10% that gets the axe.
I agree with much of your reply. Allow me to clarify two things about Random selection:
As for politics, as in Ancient Athens, there would not be an office such as the presidency. That is naturally undemocratic, and would be absurd… Meaning, no such office would be subject to Random selection… Random Selection would be key in ridding corruption and nepotism from much of society. For example, currently there are lotteries. Random Selection in economic competition. A commoner may, by chance, rise to the status of millionaire. Let the same function in the inverse. Let a millionaire fall simply by random chance. As ever, as it is natural with democracy, the question would be not how good are the elites, but how good is the average. The average of the nation must be improved! Elitism is naturally corrupt and nepotistic!
The prior segues into the second point. Meritocracy is physically impossible. Standardized tests, as Confucius would have it, only, at best, theoretically, select the best of those who are willing to follow the standardized test. There is a strong tendency for the psychologically autonomous, the creative, the non-followers, to disregard any standardized metric. The result being that the successful are either the followers, the herd, or the children who are privileged in hidden fashions. The ones whose parents force them to train the hardest and so forth…