One of the top people they’ve appointed to OPM, (yes that OPM sending scam resignation deals to civil servants), graduated high school in 2024.
When they say Meritocracy they mean Aristocracy.
It’s written right there on the tag: “Escort”
Hardly. Escorts charge by the hour. She’s salary.
Going for some Ivanka resemblance, perhaps?
This journalist is going to have the nuclear codes in the tabloids before long.
gotta have them ribs
Topanga?
Vivek absolutely maldin’ right now.
Left-Wing: Diversity, Equity, Inclusion
Right-Wing: Deathcamps, Extermination, Invasion
Marrytocracy maybe
It certainly sounds more “educated” than blowjobtocracy
Also, looking past that spelling mistake, what the hell is a War Room White House? Is that meant to refer to the situation room? The briefing room? Is it that she’s in two places at once, the White House and a virtual War Room of whatever media organisation she represents?
Or is it, as I may be forced to suspect, a perpetual state of mind, a designation not in conflict of course with any of the above, but indicative of someone who not only cannot spell their job but is just there to, as the phrase goes, perpetually and obsequiously stir shit?
I think you might be right. She may be one of Eris’s representatives in the current administration.
I mean, all hail Discordia, but this isn’t how I imagined it.
These are the agents of strife incarnate. Sure, I too love to act as an agent of chaos and oddity and to challenge all that we know, but these are the people who dedicate their lives to causing problems on purpose. These are the people who revel in the confusion and pain of all around them. They argue not to find truth but to argue. They fight not to make a world they think is better but to find another fight.
IDK if this helps, but at least in IT a “war room” is usually a dedicated and specialized support team temporarily put in place when large changes or updates are rolled out.
It would make sense for the incoming administration to set up a war room to handle questions, exceptions and comments about both the administration change, and the sweeping (probably illegal) XOs issued by the President.
Edit: I just looked her up. She is not related to an internal “War Room” but is actually affiliated with Bannon’s stupid podcast.
War Room is a podcast of Steve Bannon. So she’s the White House correspondent for that podcast.
Yep Trump new press sectary said thsy would go beyond legacy media and allow influencer and podcast in on all briefing…
I am sure it meant only the right wing Podcaster and influencers though. No left wingers will be allowed.
So this lady and whoever Joe Rogen sends etc.
She’s a core respondent. Get woke libtard.
I almost wish that hadn’t been sarcasm, only because I haven’t seen libtard in the wild in a long time. 😀
There are certain things which are required of those who wish to serve in the Trump Administration. None of those things happen to be intelligence.
Covfefe
In her case, T&A don’t stand for talent and ability.
The term meritocracy was originally created as a satirical joke. It was never meant to actually be taken seriously
Wasn’t it the Greeks?
So was"The Donald" subreddit.
I dont see the reason why it shouldnt be used. Merit - earned, cracy - to rule. Seems like its self described well. Imo its a useful word and don’t see why we shouldnt use it just because it was meant to be satirical. Art imitates life and life imitates art.
Seems like its self described well.
In theory. But in practice what you’re describing tends to be the licensure of corruption. Rather than paying off a guy for a no-show job, you pay a school for a degree to show the guy (getting kickbacks from the school) that gives you the no-show job.
Great example of this was Bob Jones, Liberty, and the assorted christian conservative schools injecting whole graduating classes into the '00s Bush Administration.
When your “meritocratic” institution really starts to pay off is when it looks more and more like an MLM. The modern Ivy League/Federalist Society-based judicial system looks a lot like this. You need to be a member of a school who joined a club to get access to the clerkship that qualifies you to join a firm that will fast-track you into the appellate judiciary. So these “elite” institutions get swarmed with applicants, and now you need to go to a particular prep school or join a certain social group to get into the school/club. Now those schools/groups get flooded. So you need to join a partisan organization or work your way into a country club hierarchy to get access to the prep school / social group, and they start assigning ranks for members and fees to climb the ranks.
Now “meritocracy” is just a massive web of patronage, with access to the inner layer predicated on outclassing all your peers in the outer layer. Whole industries exist to prove “merit” either through cheating explicitly (straight up buying accreditation) or implicitly (paying for study guides that contain the exact questions to be asked) and get you special access to the people doing manual selection of applicants. Its almost exclusively pay-to-play and a lot of it is scams.
The issue is how do you “meassure” merit? How do you decide who has earned what they have and who hasn’t?
If you are a conservative it’s very easy, the status quo defines merit. Those who have are those who deserve because the system is working as expected. So rich people ruling is meritocracy for them.
If you are a racist/xenophobe/etc then it’s also very easy, those who are in the “good” (read white in the USA) group are the ones with merit, so they are the ones that should rule.
A few years back, when college degrees where just for rich people with connections, merit was having a college degree because that proved you where educated and hard working jajajaja. Now that a lot more people can get college degrees it no longer means that for some reason jajajaja.
Etc, etc. In general, people use meritocracy to justify their own biases and the decisions they make based on those biases. The USA is of course the current poster child of this, but by no means it’s exclusive to them.
The reality is that when you think about it there is no such thing as merit in the general sense. For example, I get paid well by working as a programmer. And I’m the first one to say that I’m very good at it and deserve my pay. Yet, if my toilet is broken I need to call a plumber and defer to them. So, who says I deserve to earn more than a plumber? I do say so because it greatly benefits me of course jajajaja. But if push come to shove I would absolutely prefer to have a society without programmers than a society without plumbers. So who has more merit?
The simple truth is that we are all valuable in our own context and we should try to build a society where we all can participate and contribute as needed. Ideas like meritocracy are used by right wing people to justify the existence of hierarchies and social classes. If there are better people (with more merit) then of course they should be in charge and everyone else must obey. But the more you dig into the idea, the less it makes sense. Meritocracy is just a very easy trap to fall into because it’s the kind of idea that sounds good to people until you really think about it, but in practice it’s just a useless idea if you want to make rational decisions.
Absolutely. Words change, and it’s not an unhelpful term, but we already had a word for ‘ruled by the best’, aristocracy. Over time it became very apparent that aristocracies did not promote leaders who were objectively ‘best’ or often even ‘adequate’, so it began to mean a small group of privileged people who used their power to keep that privilege for themselves and their peers.
So although meritocracy started as a joke, it could be used sincerely. But unless it’s pretty clear how ‘merit’ is assessed its hard to take it more seriously.
I get that it feels cool when you think about it, but it falls off shortly after, same as Communism :P
But “Meritocracy Has Never Been Tried!” is not something liberals constantly repeat to one another cynically.
We should totally go back to “I’m in charge because my daddy built me a goon squad”.
/s
Maybe sarcastic people should stop inventing shit ideas ironically for a minute while we clean up this mess.
Yeah
Power in a state should be based on how good you are at not being sarcastic and caught saying something sarcastic should be given the death penalty
What? You mean you don’t want a Tournament Nexus?
Sarcasm and parody were tools used against corrupt oppressors for centuries. The problem is, it requires education, context, and the capacity for abstract thought to process and understand. If everyone requires we put “/s” after everything, then they are just taking everything at face value without any attempt at critical thinking or reading between the lines. Which I guess is why we are where we are today.
I quite agree, and I tend to resent and resist the tag unless the sarcasm would otherwise rely on tone or delivery, in which case why write it at all.
I think the internet has spawned a nascent global culture, and while that is still taking shape we are often left feeling as if we share insufficient context with one another to form an understanding. We’ll grow together as a global culture in time I hope and trust, but in the meantime I think it’s an error to rely on low-context modes of communication. It is a crutch, and it only perpetuates the distance between us.
But they aren’t in a position of power to change anything. Maybe if we lived in a sarcastocracy though
I’m really starting to feel that way lmao
see: Daylight Savings
Elon is a DEI hire because of his Asperger’s that causes sudden nazi salutes.
As someone who was diagnosed with asperger’s syndrome when I was like three, I want to skin him alive for that piss poor excuse. The South African Nazi is just a maladapted sub-human who incapable of owning up to the fact that he is aggressively mediocre. Also im calling him sub-human cause je thinks he is better than anybody, its meant to be demeaning to his ego.
Also because he is an immigrant. This is like Dr. Strangelove, except he’s not in a wheelchair. He’s jumping around on stage. MEIN FUHRER, I CAN WALK!
She didn’t get her job by knowing how to spell or read
Go on…
It was probably by being racist.
A certain age range of men have a Topanga fetish. Or maybe that’s just me.
Boy meets inevitability. She has a special place in my heart.
$10 says she’ll speak out about sexual harassment like that cunt Megyn Kelly.
Don’t get me wrong, Megyn Kelly is a victim and is also a fascist.
I don’t think fascist can be victims. Does not seem to compute.
As soon as the same rules they want to apply to everybody else are applied to Fascists, they’re immediately convinced they’re victims.
So yeah, as soon as the pretty little Fascist ends up treated as a pussy-with-legs with no upsides for herself (so, not a trade but a taking by people with more power than she has) even though she’s ben part of making sure that legally there is no such thing as sexual harassment, she’ll feel like a victim.
Why not?
Because, if I’m stabbing and killing people, I can’t complain about being stabbed.
What even is a Meritocracy
Traditionally promotions to leadership positions could only be selected from a small pool of men: wealthy, with good pedigree and with some kind of connections to the current top leader(s). Any top leadership positions had to be filled with people from this small pool: the aristocracy. They could be incompetent or corrupt, but that was usually not that important, as long as they had the right parents and kissed the right ass(es), they were the right person for the job.
Meritocracy is when people are selected for promotions based on something other than social standing or wealth. Merit for the job can be: getting a top score on an anonymous uniform exam, having a good track record in similar roles, having a solid plan to solve the problem at hand, … Any positive qualification that is not based on social standing or wealth. And all candidates for the job have to be weighted based on the same qualifiers.
As I understand it, the usa federal administration used to have a meritocratic system until right under the top departemental positions, who were politically appointed (appointed based on loyalty, not merit). But while those top positions were political appointees, they were usually selected from the top meritorious people, so those people were usually qualified for the job.
Trump has politized the promotions much deeper into the administrations, basically doing away with meritocracy and replacing it with a system based on personal loyalty and a willingness to break laws when asked to.
Trump and his administration might say that his appointments are based on merit, but that’s just Trump speaking, his words have no meaning.
It’s when you replace an Army four star general with a major from the from the national guard.
The reason they keep saying the word merit is to convince their base they have any. Many of them do not. No offense to any retired majors out there, but do any of you think you are more qualified than a 4 star general to fill the position of Secretary of Defense?
Well I would ask what they’ve done in addition to being a Major. Just in case it’s something that qualifies them to run an organization with over a million people and a budget that’s nearly a trillion dollars. You know like being a news reporter for a biased organization. (Ugh)
A way to justify letting an aristocracy form while calling it something else.
“Merit” it a vague and nebulous term, so you can set the rubric however you want to justify the merit of any mouth breather with their head so far up their own ass they can see their own tonsils.
