Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#504871 - 09/01/17 01:45 AM The Myth of Meritocracy
DRACV Offline


Registered: 11/05/13
Posts: 52
I was just reading this article when something caught my attention:

Quote:
Satanists see the social structure of humanity as being stratified, thus each person reaches a level commensurate with the development (or lack thereof) of their natural talents.


I get that Satanism advocates stratification but I think believing it is the status quo is naive. The current social structure in the real world is far from being a meritocracy. You can have two people with the same personal achievements and abilities and just because one happens to be of a certain sex, gender, race, or class, they will be in a very different position on the stratification pyramid. On the other hand, there are plenty of good-for-nothings pissing all over right from the top of the pyramid.

I just thought I should mention this and open it to discussion, since it's not only this particular article, but elsewhere in Satanic thought that I have seen a disposition to think the world is ruled by meritocracy when the facts speak otherwise. Your thoughts are welcome.


Edited by DRACV (09/01/17 01:32 PM)
_________________________
There is no knowledge that is no power.

Top
#504872 - 09/01/17 03:43 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: DRACV]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
I’ve always taken the commitment to meritocracy as more of an aspiration than a belief – something that can be applied within local organisational structures, such as the Church of Satan, but not universally. When push comes to shove, it’s philosophically logical for Satanists to pin their pennant to that of social Darwinism because they’re individualists rather than collectivists; but it’s not terribly realistic. Even if one used the sole example of the current American President, it becomes obvious that one can still rise to the pinnacle of international politics while simultaneously being a fucking idiot.

As a global economic norm, neoliberalism makes meritocracy impossible (given enough time). A smart child born to poor parents will still do worse than a dumb child born to rich ones almost 99% of the time, given that the rich child can afford to make substantially more mistakes than his poor counterpart. A good analogy is buying into a poker game where one person holds most of the chips. LaVey himself stated that a person’s worth is measured in how well they utilise what they have, which can be applied as far as the Church of Satan is concerned, but this isn’t a sociological truism because it can’t be.

Money and influence are attracted by money and influence; invariably that which is inherited. Any argument to the contrary is overwhelmingly disproven by observable evidence. Those arguments typically revolve around survivor bias, but that’s fortunately easy to identify. It’s probably also no coincidence that Satanism, as codified in The Satanic Bible, is most prevalent in what we loosely term “western democracies” - or, perhaps more prosaically, where neoliberalism is most rampant.

Your mileage may vary.


Edited by Isobel Gowdie (09/01/17 03:45 AM)
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504874 - 09/01/17 07:52 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: DRACV]
LowKey Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 04/07/13
Posts: 374
Loc: Nashville, TN
I agree with Isobel - it's an ideal that Satanists would like to see implemented.

Top
#504875 - 09/01/17 10:33 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: DRACV]
Drake_Bamboozle Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 06/25/02
Posts: 10715
Loc: England
I don't believe it has ever been espoused in any of our literature that we actually live in a meritocracy. Within our socio-political strata it has, in fact, been pointed out that we live in an egalitarian society.

I'd say we recognise it for what it is. The harsh blade of reality cuts through bullshit every time.

I call bullshit when I see it. That's all.
_________________________
www.uvray.co.uk

Top
#504876 - 09/01/17 04:29 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Drake_Bamboozle]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Drake_Bamboozle
Within our socio-political strata it has, in fact, been pointed out that we live in an egalitarian society.

This is untrue.

In the United States and the United Kingdom, in particular, the socio-political strata has almost never been as unequal, or anti-egalitarian, as it is now. Even at the most basic conceptual level, we live in a world where the law does not apply equally to every citizen.

As I intimated earlier, any argument to the contrary is quickly rubbished by the evidence.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504877 - 09/01/17 09:46 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Drake_Bamboozle Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 06/25/02
Posts: 10715
Loc: England
Originally Posted By: Isobel Gowdie
Originally Posted By: Drake_Bamboozle
Within our socio-political strata it has, in fact, been pointed out that we live in an egalitarian society.

This is untrue.

In the United States and the United Kingdom, in particular, the socio-political strata has almost never been as unequal, or anti-egalitarian, as it is now. Even at the most basic conceptual level, we live in a world where the law does not apply equally to every citizen.
As I intimated earlier, any argument to the contrary is quickly rubbished by the evidence.



Society is currently driven by a belief in equality and human rights for everyone. That's fact. You don't seem to understand what egalitarianism is.
_________________________
www.uvray.co.uk

Top
#504878 - 09/01/17 11:15 PM The Use of Meritocracy [Re: DRACV]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 13135
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
Satanism is a set of tools intended to give more power to the individual willing and capable of using those tools.

So what is personally more useful to you?

If you assume that by your own efforts you will do better and be rewarded more will that be more useful?

If you feel you are trapped in a society in which your efforts are unlikely to assist you will that be more useful?

Notice please that I am not using the word "truth".

Personally I am really not interested in "truth".

I am really only interested in what is more useful. wink
_________________________
Magister Nemo's Satanic Offerings:
DISCOVERING THE SATANIC GOD - The heart of Satanism.
THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Ritual in virtual reality.
BENEATH THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Deeper VR ritual.
THE FIRE FROM WITHIN - My book.

My first audio interview on GREATER MAGIC
My second audio interview by Rev Campbell



Top
#504882 - 09/02/17 03:47 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Drake_Bamboozle]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Drake_Bamboozle
Society is currently driven by a belief in equality and human rights for everyone. That's fact. You don't seem to understand what egalitarianism is.

There is no belief in equality; if there were, the Conservatives of the western world wouldn't be driving all wealth up the way and, therefore, damning those born at the bottom of the tree to permanent (and grinding) poverty.

One doesn't need to read too much material to figure this out.

No government would ever admit to this, of course, as they all happily espouse equality - but neoliberal policies, largely dictated by international corporate lobbyists, ensure that equality is impossible.

Arguing otherwise is either ignorance, or gross naivety.

As for egalitarianism, I understand it explicitly. Where Satanists and I perhaps differ is in my belief that everyone should have equal opportunities. Without them, we've no idea if the smartest or most creative people really are the ones rising to the top - or if it's merely those with inherited wealth and influence who purchased both networks and titles.

Education is arguably the key to social mobility.

That "equality" you're talking about sees the nations on either side of the Atlantic ramping up student debt that those with rich parents can happily ignore.

It's the very crux of "inherit over merit".
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504884 - 09/03/17 12:24 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Dax9 Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 1003
Loc: near Baton Rouge, LA
From what I gather you are just angry and resentful toward the wealthy because you feel they have had it easier than you. Okay, so what is your point? That life isn't fair? Egalitarianism is simply the doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities. By "equal" it means that we are all human and should be treated "the same". Yes, everyone is entitled to an education, but everybody is NOT entitled to go to Harvard law school for free. How do you propose we fix the "inherit over merit" problem? Make inheritance illegal? Prohibit rich parents from providing for their children?

Your arguments focus mostly on what should or ought to be. Weak arguments. A Satanist would not waste time kicking and screaming about a system that will not change. Instead, he would concentrate on how he can realistically improve his own status through productive, PRACTICAL action without trying to play the victim.

Remember the Declaration of Independence? In that document it stated that "all men are created equal" while the authors of that famous hoopla actually owned slaves. My point is that situations do improve over time -- but never fast enough. Agreed, our government is not perfect, but if someone doesn't like it here, let them move to North Korea or the Middle East!

Quote:
No government would ever admit to this, of course, as they all happily espouse equality - but neoliberal policies, largely dictated by international corporate lobbyists, ensure that equality is impossible.


Yeah, yeah, yeah, again, we all know this. "...ensure that equality is impossible". Of course "equality" is impossible! I'm not talking about just financial equality either...would you let a surgeon who was blind or had cerebral palsy operate on you? (Why not? After all, we should ALL have the same opportunities!)

Quote:
That "equality" you're talking about sees the nations on either side of the Atlantic ramping up student debt that those with rich parents can happily ignore.


Are you suggesting they should pay for all these students' financial aid? Personally, I graduated college in 1995. With all the interest I paid on my loans I could have put a down payment on a house. But I have no one else to blame but myself. I took out too many loans and always assumed that things would just "work themselves out" on their own back then when I was young and stupid. Responsibility to the responsible.

Sorry if this post came off as mean or insensitive, but this is my honest viewpoint.
_________________________
"The difference between the man or woman who's a practicing Satanist, from an identity Satanist is that the practicing Satanist looks at the picture, while the identity Satanist studies the frame."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

"Anyone without a sense of humor is too pretentious to be a good magician."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

Life Everlasting

World Without End





Top
#504889 - 09/03/17 07:11 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Dax9]
LightAngel Offline


Registered: 09/10/05
Posts: 1737
Loc: Scandinavia
Originally Posted By: Isobel Gowdie


As for egalitarianism, I understand it explicitly. Where Satanists and I perhaps differ is in my belief that everyone should have equal opportunities. Without them, we've no idea if the smartest or most creative people really are the ones rising to the top - or if it's merely those with inherited wealth and influence who purchased both networks and titles.




Originally Posted By: Dax9


Your arguments focus mostly on what should or ought to be. Weak arguments. A Satanist would not waste time kicking and screaming about a system that will not change. Instead, he would concentrate on how he can realistically improve his own status through productive, PRACTICAL action without trying to play the victim.



You both have very valuable points.

Top
#504890 - 09/03/17 07:17 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Dax9]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Dax9
From what I gather you are just angry and resentful toward the wealthy because you feel they have had it easier than you.

Nope.

I've done pretty well out of life. The nation I live in provides me the opportunity to take advantage of the tilted table, and that's exactly what I've done. I'm an inheritor. That doesn't, however, make me blind to how the world works.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Okay, so what is your point? That life isn't fair? Egalitarianism is simply the doctrine that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities. By "equal" it means that we are all human and should be treated "the same". Yes, everyone is entitled to an education, but everybody is NOT entitled to go to Harvard law school for free. How do you propose we fix the "inherit over merit" problem? Make inheritance illegal? Prohibit rich parents from providing for their children?

The problem with the definition you're using is that it's self-contradictory.

I believe that everyone should have the same opportunities. That does not, however, mean that I believe everyone is equal; everyone isn't equal. Some excel physically, some academically. Some are imaginative, some are creative. Some are educationally bright, some are vocationally bright. Give everyone a ball and see who runs with it, and makes the most of those opportunities.

That's how meritocracy works.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Your arguments focus mostly on what should or ought to be. Weak arguments. A Satanist would not waste time kicking and screaming about a system that will not change. Instead, he would concentrate on how he can realistically improve his own status through productive, PRACTICAL action without trying to play the victim.

I'm not making an argument per se, let alone a weak one.

What I'm doing is telling you how the world works.

And rather than discussing how that works with the Satanic concept of meritocracy, you're projecting that I must be "kicking and screaming" instead. What's more productive? Dismissing a point of view that you've misunderstood (potentially my fault for being unclear), or simply pretending that what you think is correct by virtue of misrepresenting what I'm saying?

If you're looking for the definition of a weak argument, then I'm afraid you've just provided it. And it seems you have a penchant for this type of thing:

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Agreed, our government is not perfect, but if someone doesn't like it here, let them move to North Korea or the Middle East!

Because those are the only options, right enough. Rampant neoliberalism, or communism/authoritarianism.

I'd recommend reading up on how governments in Europe of Scandinavia work. Alternatively, if that's a little too far from home, take a look at how Canada works. It's patently absurd to present the options you've presented. Almost as absurd as suggesting that anyone would be okay with a blind or disabled surgeon.

That's one of the daftest statements I've ever seen to dismiss equality of opportunity. Honestly, I expected better from a forum such as this.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Are you suggesting they should pay for all these students' financial aid?

In general terms, I support governments paying tuition where there's economic benefit to be had afterwards. But education is a horribly convoluted topic that I could speak about for hours without getting to the bottom of it. I think education should be funded as part of an overall plan, but places like Britain and the United States think the point of education is test passing and certificates.

I reckon education should be about the presentation of new viewpoints, equipping youngsters with the tools to critically assess those viewpoints, and then encouraging them to incorporate what's valid into productive changes of behaviour.

'Tis up to you how you approach it.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Sorry if this post came off as mean or insensitive, but this is my honest viewpoint.

I didn't find it mean or insensitive, because I'm not made of glass.

I just found it laughably misguided.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504892 - 09/03/17 06:20 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Dax9 Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 1003
Loc: near Baton Rouge, LA
Quote:
Almost as absurd as suggesting that anyone would be okay with a blind or disabled surgeon.


That was not meant to be taken so literally. I was demonstrating that when you take the idea that "everyone deserves equal opportunities" and follow through with it, you will get preposterous implications. Logically, if we are going to advocate equal opportunities for everybody, then we have to let the mentally retarded become astro-physicists, midgets play professional basketball, and morbidly obese women become Victoria Secret models if they choose to. When fully extended, the concept of equal opportunities collapses on itself. Alas, I didn't think I would have to spell out to someone on this message board that I was merely drawing out a counterexample.

Quote:
I believe that everyone should have the same opportunities. That does not, however, mean that I believe everyone is equal; everyone isn't equal. Some excel physically, some academically. Some are imaginative, some are creative. Some are educationally bright, some are vocationally bright. Give everyone a ball and see who runs with it, and makes the most of those opportunities.

That's how meritocracy works.


Ah, much better. I have no problem with that reasoning. But that's not the impression I was getting from your last post.

Quote:
I'd recommend reading up on how governments in Europe of Scandinavia work. Alternatively, if that's a little too far from home, take a look at how Canada works. It's patently absurd to present the options you've presented.


I wasn't offering options, much less claiming that the US, North Korea, and the Middle East were the only options. However, I do get irritated when I hear folks complaining about how "bad" things are in the US. In my view I feel the US is often too kind; other countries such as the Philippines don't grant welfare, foodstamps, aid to single mothers, aid to disabled citizens, etc. I know so because my wife is from the Philippines. The bottom line for me is that if someone thinks another nation's government better suits their needs, let them move there. One shouldn't complain about a situation they need not subject themselves to.

Quote:
In general terms, I support governments paying tuition where there's economic benefit to be had afterwards. But education is a horribly convoluted topic that I could speak about for hours without getting to the bottom of it. I think education should be funded as part of an overall plan, but places like Britain and the United States think the point of education is test passing and certificates.


Ok, good. At least now you're being more clear. I can agree with governments (actually the tax payers) funding education for those who truly deserve it. My wife has been a high school science teacher for twenty-three years, both in the Philippines and here in the US. The problem is that many youngsters in this country don't deserve a free public school education because they have no desire to learn. Delinquents who constantly fight, bring drugs/weapons to school, have sex in the school bathrooms, and disrespect their teachers should be pulled out and sent to work in the fields as far as I'm concerned. Better yet, such brats should never have been born in the first place. If our government would stop wasting so much money on such ingrates, maybe then it could provide useful education for those who truly want it and will make the most of it.
_________________________
"The difference between the man or woman who's a practicing Satanist, from an identity Satanist is that the practicing Satanist looks at the picture, while the identity Satanist studies the frame."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

"Anyone without a sense of humor is too pretentious to be a good magician."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

Life Everlasting

World Without End





Top
#504894 - 09/04/17 02:39 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Dax9]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Dax9
That was not meant to be taken so literally. I was demonstrating that when you take the idea that "everyone deserves equal opportunities" and follow through with it, you will get preposterous implications. Logically, if we are going to advocate equal opportunities for everybody, then we have to let the mentally retarded become astro-physicists, midgets play professional basketball, and morbidly obese women become Victoria Secret models if they choose to. When fully extended, the concept of equal opportunities collapses on itself. Alas, I didn't think I would have to spell out to someone on this message board that I was merely drawing out a counterexample.

No, no, and no.

This is not logical, no matter how much you wish it to be.

“Equal opportunities” is about providing the same chances for everyone, irrespective of their economic, cultural, racial or ethnic background; it’s not about ignoring the basic criteria required for a specific choice. No campaigner or legislator for equal opportunities has ever suggested that mentally retarded people should become astro-physicists, because such a suggestion is patently absurd (as I told you in my earlier post). All you are doing is making an extraordinary straw man to present what you think egalitarianism is, perhaps even honestly, and then wrongly concluding that egalitarianism must be bad as a result.

Meritocracy and egalitarianism are not mutually exclusive. I find it bizarre that there seems to be an organisational push asserting that they are.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
The bottom line for me is that if someone thinks another nation's government better suits their needs, let them move there. One shouldn't complain about a situation they need not subject themselves to.

Straight from The Satanic Bible.

And that’s cool.

But moving from an undesirable country, without the money or means to move safely, is what’s seeing Syrians drowning in the Aegean and Mediterranean. They didn’t ask for western governments to reduce their nation to rubble in a hopelessly misguided “war against terror”, but they’re sure paying the price for it.

The point I’m making is that a great many people are not complaining about something they needn’t subject themselves to. They’re suggesting that, perhaps, western foreign policy or economic orthodoxy shouldn’t be putting a boot on the head of those born impoverished. My own personal view on champagne socialism and its ilk is, however, probably in line with your own.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
The problem is that many youngsters in this country don't deserve a free public school education because they have no desire to learn. Delinquents who constantly fight, bring drugs/weapons to school, have sex in the school bathrooms, and disrespect their teachers should be pulled out and sent to work in the fields as far as I'm concerned.

Children born into a poor family of generational joblessness and poor parenting aren’t going to school with the intent of being a nightmare; it’s the only behaviour they’ve ever learned from a “family” unit that’s hopelessly dysfunctional to the point of parental negligence. Problems range from being up all night due to drug-addled parents that won’t turn the TV down, and extend to physical, mental and sexual abuse on a daily basis.

Satanic realism doesn’t really advocate wishing the problem away; a realist would accept that it happens, and come up with the best solutions possible. These children sure as heck aren’t getting equal opportunities, and their only crime is being born to horrendous parents. Maybe they could be good scholars, if a little discipline and authority could get into their lives while they’re saved from parental brutality.

This might amuse you, but I recall reading an essay in Satan Speaks! about third-side awareness and found LaVey’s argument about sterilisation quite persuasive.

In the meantime, we need to deal with these kids in some way.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504896 - 09/04/17 09:09 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Dax9 Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 1003
Loc: near Baton Rouge, LA
Quote:
This is not logical, no matter how much you wish it to be.

“Equal opportunities” is about providing the same chances for everyone, irrespective of their economic, cultural, racial or ethnic background; it’s not about ignoring the basic criteria required for a specific choice.


It is perfectly logical, no matter how much you wish to deny it. There is no straw man or even slippery slope argument. I am in no way claiming that supporters of egalitarianism want mentally challenged individuals to become astro-physicists. Furthermore, I am not even asserting that such ludicrous situations will arise if egalitarianism were fully implemented. What I AM doing is underscoring the implications of egalitarianism to illustrate that the original concept is not very sound. That's it -- a counterexample. As for "ignoring the basic criteria" I can think of various scenarios, such as affirmative action, where individuals are awarded positions they are not really qualified for because of a sickening attempt to "equalize" the lot of us.

Quote:
No campaigner or legislator for equal opportunities has ever suggested that mentally retarded people should become astro-physicists, because such a suggestion is patently absurd (as I told you in my earlier post).


Of course not! So what? In any case I am certainly not the only one who has used counterexamples to demonstrate unwanted implications of egalitarianism. The satirical science fiction short story Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut comes to mind: In the year 2081 society forces everyone to be equal by requiring the strong and athletic to wear heavy weights and restraints. People of higher intelligence are required by law to wear a headset that produces loud, piercing noises to interrupt their thoughts. Folks who are too attractive are forced to wear masks. (Forgive me if you are already familiar with the story.)

Now this is not just some obscure, crackpot tale I discovered on some psychotic website. This is a story many of us were required to read in high school. A movie was made from the story as well as several short, creative films.



With that story Vonnegut is not claiming that anyone in their right mind wants the government to enforce such restrictions on its citizens nor is he even predicting that such a fate awaits us in the future. He is simply trying to open our eyes to the fact that total equality may not be such a nifty idea after all. And that was what I was trying to do with my blind surgeon and retarded astro-physicist examples.

If the implications of egalitarianism are disturbing that is because the concept itself is not very reliable.

Quote:
But moving from an undesirable country, without the money or means to move safely, is what’s seeing Syrians drowning in the Aegean and Mediterranean. They didn’t ask for western governments to reduce their nation to rubble in a hopelessly misguided “war against terror”, but they’re sure paying the price for it.


I have all the sympathy in the world for unfortunate people who live in oppressed, third world countries. I served a tour of Iraq (hence my avatar) and have no inherent dislike of Middle Easterners or even Muslims. Sadly, the upstanding good folks have to suffer for the actions of the handful of nut cases. My comments in my last post were directed at spoiled Americans who needlessly complain.

Quote:
This might amuse you, but I recall reading an essay in Satan Speaks! about third-side awareness and found LaVey’s argument about sterilisation quite persuasive.


Yes, that would be practical, but we both know such a thing would never be legislated. There is an essay in Peter Gilmore's The Satanic Scriptures simply titled "Eugenics" that you may wish to check out if you have not.
_________________________
"The difference between the man or woman who's a practicing Satanist, from an identity Satanist is that the practicing Satanist looks at the picture, while the identity Satanist studies the frame."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

"Anyone without a sense of humor is too pretentious to be a good magician."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

Life Everlasting

World Without End





Top
#504897 - 09/05/17 05:50 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Mannyowar Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 08/16/09
Posts: 144
Loc: London, England
Originally Posted By: Isobel Gowdie
[
I believe that everyone should have the same opportunities. That does not, however, mean that I believe everyone is equal; everyone isn't equal. Some excel physically, some academically. Some are imaginative, some are creative. Some are educationally bright, some are vocationally bright. Give everyone a ball and see who runs with it, and makes the most of those opportunities.

That's how meritocracy works.



I'm afraid I find that self-contradictory. You admit that people are not equal, that means there are always going to be those who have a head start in life or are disadvantaged, because of the merits (or lack thereof) of their parents. Yes, that means the child who may make the best brain surgeon or astronaut or racing driver may never get the opportunity to develop their talent and people from poorer background will have to work a lot harder than their richer counterparts. Is that fair? No, but life/nature isn't fair! A lion cub has a far greater chance of growing to maturity than a tadpole, and the strongest lion cub in the litter might be the one that finds itself in the poacher's rifle sights. That's just how nature works, and those laws of nature apply to human beings too. When we talk about meritocracy or survival of the fittest we can only talk about general trends. Luck will always play a part and there will always be those who attain more or less than they deserve. Shit happens, sometimes it's good and sometimes it's not.

Always remember, as Satanists we are pragmatists. We have to deal with the world as it IS, not how we'd like it to be. Man-made concepts like fairness and egalitarianism, that have no basis in nature, should not guide our thinking.
_________________________
My Undercroft profile: http://www.satannet.com/profile/Mannyowar1


Top
#504898 - 09/05/17 08:04 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Mannyowar]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
If you don’t mind, Dax, I’m going to cut out the first half of your post. Our intercession is starting to become circular, which is completely unproductive, and we seem to both be mishearing each other over the (digital) shouting.

Let’s summarise it like this:

- Equality of opportunity is an appropriate goal, assuming standards are maintained. This is the Satanic root for “meritocracy”.
- “Equality” should not be extended to allow all people to do all things, outside of their physical or mental capability.

Does that sound reasonable?

Originally Posted By: Dax9
I have all the sympathy in the world for unfortunate people who live in oppressed, third world countries. I served a tour of Iraq (hence my avatar) and have no inherent dislike of Middle Easterners or even Muslims. Sadly, the upstanding good folks have to suffer for the actions of the handful of nut cases.

The current President of the United States is no more sane than the people you’re indicting.

Seeing through the fog of propaganda might eventually prove that he’s worse than the likes of Assad, Jong-un or Rouhani; certainly academics like Chomsky believe so, given that the rest of the world considers America the biggest threat to its peace.

The CIA’s history in the Middle East, and Iran in particular, would certainly back up Chomsky’s hypothesis. And even the internal audience of the United States is likely to suffer for the idiocy and narcissism of “the Donald” when this all shakes out; most solely by virtue of the class they were born into.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Yes, that would be practical, but we both know such a thing would never be legislated. There is an essay in Peter Gilmore's The Satanic Scriptures simply titled "Eugenics" that you may wish to check out if you have not.

Thanks for the recommendation, I’ve read it. I’ve no specific issues with eugenics, really, and imagine that it’d be a potential solution to a lot of problems were it not hindered by Third Reich baggage.

Much like Satanism per se, I suspect.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
You admit that people are not equal, that means there are always going to be those who have a head start in life or are disadvantaged, because of the merits (or lack thereof) of their parents. Yes, that means the child who may make the best brain surgeon or astronaut or racing driver may never get the opportunity to develop their talent and people from poorer background will have to work a lot harder than their richer counterparts. Is that fair? No, but life/nature isn't fair!

“Life”, within your current context, is a matter of political will. A series of policies that diverted wealth downward, and concentrated it in education for those disadvantaged, would promote the concept of meritocracy while simultaneously developing the talent pool that the human race could be developing with.

The law of the jungle does not apply to national economies or matters of policy. To suggest otherwise is to misunderstand one, the other, or both.

And I’m going to deliberately ignore your analogy, if you don’t mind; mainly because it’s ludicrous.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
When we talk about meritocracy or survival of the fittest we can only talk about general trends.

This is a debate worth having.

When discussing trends, particularly societal trends, it’s probably worth fully defining what you think “meritocracy” should be. The reason I bring up economic orthodoxy is because it’s the absolute opposite of meritocracy, as Dax and I (I hope) defined earlier. Western economic orthodoxy is promoting the upwards movement of wealth via private ownership and inheritance, which is the opposite of what Satanism promotes.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Man-made concepts like fairness and egalitarianism, that have no basis in nature, should not guide our thinking.

It entirely depends on what you want to achieve or, to paraphrase Nemo from above:

“What’s more useful?”

Do we think funnelling wealth upwards to where it has less impact on the economy (via the lower propensity to consume, among other things), while creating an overtly burgeoning underclass, is useful?

Or do we think wealth transfer down the way, concentrated into better education for everyone (and, particularly, the disadvantaged), will end up more useful in the end?

These statements are both crassly oversimplified, but one promotes meritocracy and the other doesn’t.

You might be surprised by which is which.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504899 - 09/05/17 10:23 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Dax9 Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 10/16/10
Posts: 1003
Loc: near Baton Rouge, LA
Quote:
- Equality of opportunity is an appropriate goal, assuming standards are maintained. This is the Satanic root for “meritocracy”.
- “Equality” should not be extended to allow all people to do all things, outside of their physical or mental capability.

Does that sound reasonable?


Partially. I wonder about that second locution. Society sometimes seems to be lowering standards so as to not "offend" anyone. The "lets give everyone a participation trophy" trend seems to now be the "in" thing!

Quote:
The current President of the United States is no more sane than the people you’re indicting.


Well, first of all most Satanists view politics from an aloof vantage point and see elections and politicians as an amusing circus act. In fact, many Satanists, such as myself, do not even bother to vote. (There are many reasons for this that I don't care to elaborate on at this time.) Considering that I am half Honduran I can't say I appreciate his comments regarding "Mexicans". Still, as a president, I don't feel he is doing any worse than Obama, and I'm sure as hell glad that Hillary didn't get elected. All in all, I think that the US and the world at large will survive the presidency of Donnie boy! laugh

What amazes me the most is how much media attention Trump still gets. CNN never shuts up about him. The last time I saw so much fuss was when David Duke got elected to the Louisiana House of Representatives back in 1989. I remember I was a junior in high school back then, and I actually lived in Duke's district. Let me tell you straight that I have never been one of his supporters, but I still have an old Duke campaign doubloon from back then as a souvenir....

Now this is something you might find amusing: Do you know what was on his campaign doubloon? On the front around the coin was written: Equal Rights For All, Special Privilege For None. On the back the coin said:

1. Workfare not Welfare
2. Save Our Homestead
3. No New Taxes
4. Protect the Environment

...and, my dear, this is why I rarely take anything politicians say seriously! laugh


Attachments
IMG_0782.JPG

IMG_0783.JPG


_________________________
"The difference between the man or woman who's a practicing Satanist, from an identity Satanist is that the practicing Satanist looks at the picture, while the identity Satanist studies the frame."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

"Anyone without a sense of humor is too pretentious to be a good magician."
-- Anton Szandor LaVey

Life Everlasting

World Without End





Top
#504900 - 09/06/17 06:02 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Dax9]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Dax9
Partially. I wonder about that second locution. Society sometimes seems to be lowering standards so as to not "offend" anyone. The "lets give everyone a participation trophy" trend seems to now be the "in" thing!

Perhaps we’re back in the delta between aspiration and reality. I suppose I’m merely trying to ascertain a definition that we both find agreeable, rather than one that happens to be true at this time. Even the concept of the “participation trophy” is something that has validity, depending on what someone does with it; settling for perennial second-best finishes is an ugly consequence, as is celebrating mediocrity, but learning to love what you’re doing irrespective of peer acceptance? That’s probably a happier consequence.

A Satanist may even consider it “Satanic”, as you’re effectively taking collective views out of the mix entirely.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
Well, first of all most Satanists view politics from an aloof vantage point and see elections and politicians as an amusing circus act. In fact, many Satanists, such as myself, do not even bother to vote.

I don’t vote in British General Elections.

I’m not personally interested in the laughable periphery that it would influence. There really are no choices in the United Kingdom, just as there aren’t in the United States, as the system is rigged to only work one way; economic neoliberalism, mixed with interventionist foreign policy. The colour of tie a politician wears in this endeavour makes no difference to me and I actually find the reasons some espouse for their voting history pretty cute.

My husband put me onto a George Carlin video where Carlin pointed out that only those who don’t vote have a right to complain; they’re not responsible for picking those in charge.

Originally Posted By: Dax9
What amazes me the most is how much media attention Trump still gets.

He’s easy copy.

There’s no real journalistic effort required if you’re writing about him, because he self-generates ludicrous content. His other influence is something that would require a whole other topic, and that’s to do with biased journalism, information operations and (his favourite term) fake news.

James Sass wrote an essay in his book, I think it was ”How not to be an idiot”, and that helps people to understand what they’re really being presented with, but then we probably agree that the general person in the street hasn’t the self-awareness to apply that type of rational thinking.

We then end up with social media echo chambers that, like it or not, influence popular opinion and, thus, policy.

This point in history is a reasonable time to reconsider the potential impact of Rupert Sheldrake’s concept of morphic resonance.


Edited by Isobel Gowdie (09/06/17 06:04 AM)
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504902 - 09/06/17 05:15 PM Aside on Sheldrake... [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 13135
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
Quote:
This point in history is a reasonable time to reconsider the potential impact of Rupert Sheldrake’s concept of morphic resonance.


Met him last month in Seattle.

Still as smart as a whip and continues to offer excellent lectures.
_________________________
Magister Nemo's Satanic Offerings:
DISCOVERING THE SATANIC GOD - The heart of Satanism.
THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Ritual in virtual reality.
BENEATH THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Deeper VR ritual.
THE FIRE FROM WITHIN - My book.

My first audio interview on GREATER MAGIC
My second audio interview by Rev Campbell



Top
#504904 - 09/07/17 12:01 AM Re: Aside on Sheldrake... [Re: Nemo]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Nemo
Met him last month in Seattle.

Still as smart as a whip and continues to offer excellent lectures.

I just wanted to say that I very much enjoyed your essay on morphic resonance (I said so in the review thread for your book, but it didn't post).

While I didn't agree with all of your conclusions, I've found myself thinking a great deal about it recently due to the explosion of social media.

Additionally, I'm quite jealous that you've met Sheldrake. My favourite lecture was one I attended in Lond by another "maverick" scientist that I'm sure you're aware of, Aubrey de Grey.


Edited by Isobel Gowdie (09/07/17 02:28 AM)
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504905 - 09/07/17 05:56 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Mannyowar Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 08/16/09
Posts: 144
Loc: London, England
Originally Posted By: Isobel Gowdie

“Life”, within your current context, is a matter of political will. A series of policies that diverted wealth downward, and concentrated it in education for those disadvantaged, would promote the concept of meritocracy while simultaneously developing the talent pool that the human race could be developing with.

The law of the jungle does not apply to national economies or matters of policy. To suggest otherwise is to misunderstand one, the other, or both.

And I’m going to deliberately ignore your analogy, if you don’t mind; mainly because it’s ludicrous.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
When we talk about meritocracy or survival of the fittest we can only talk about general trends.

This is a debate worth having.

When discussing trends, particularly societal trends, it’s probably worth fully defining what you think “meritocracy” should be. The reason I bring up economic orthodoxy is because it’s the absolute opposite of meritocracy, as Dax and I (I hope) defined earlier. Western economic orthodoxy is promoting the upwards movement of wealth via private ownership and inheritance, which is the opposite of what Satanism promotes.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Man-made concepts like fairness and egalitarianism, that have no basis in nature, should not guide our thinking.

It entirely depends on what you want to achieve or, to paraphrase Nemo from above:

“What’s more useful?”

Do we think funnelling wealth upwards to where it has less impact on the economy (via the lower propensity to consume, among other things), while creating an overtly burgeoning underclass, is useful?

Or do we think wealth transfer down the way, concentrated into better education for everyone (and, particularly, the disadvantaged), will end up more useful in the end?

These statements are both crassly oversimplified, but one promotes meritocracy and the other doesn’t.

You might be surprised by which is which.


Whether it's funneling wealth upward or downward, what you are talking about is still social engineering. What I understand by Stratification is the State employs a 'hands off' approach to social engineering and merely concerns itself with maintaining law and order, national security and the country's infrastructure. In his essay Satanism: The Feared Religion Magus Gilmore outlines clearly what stratification entails, in particular you might find the following paragraph illuminating.

"Satanists see the social structure of humanity as being stratified, thus each person reaches a level commensurate with the development (or lack thereof) of their natural talents. The principle of the survival of the strong is advocated on all levels of society, from allowing an individual to stand or fall, to even letting those nations that cannot handle themselves take the consequences of this inability. Any assistance on all levels will be on a “quid pro quo” basis. There would be a concommitant reduction in the world’s population as the weak are allowed to experience the consequences of social Darwinism. Thus has nature always acted to cleanse and strengthen her children. This is harsh, but that is the way of the world. We embrace reality and do not try to transform it into some utopia that is contrary to the very fabric of existence. Practical application of this doctrine would see the complete cessation of the welfare system, an end to no-strings attached foreign aid and new programs to award and encourage gifted individuals in all fields to pursue personal excellence. A meritocracy will replace the practice of such injustices as affirmative action and other programs designed to punish the able and reward the undeserving."

While the Church of Satan is never going to tell you who to vote for in an election, there are certain Satanic doctrines (like Stratification) that would require political changes to be brought into reality, and therefore there are some political positions that are incompatible with Satanism. Trying to marry social justice warrior ethics with Satanic aesthetics just doesn't work, there is already a pseudo-satanic group doing just that who are rightly looked on with derision by real Satanists.

I think a good litmus test of whether Satanism is for you or not is this. Imagine you are going for a night out with a wallet/purse stuffed full of cash that you are just going to blow on frivolous stuff that gives you pleasure, booze, restaurant food, concert merch, whatever. Do you feel a sense of guilt or responsibility when you pass people who are sleeping on the street and begging? Do you feel a sense of resentment when someone drives past in a car that cost several times what your house is worth? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then I think you need to query your allegiance to Satanism.
_________________________
My Undercroft profile: http://www.satannet.com/profile/Mannyowar1


Top
#504906 - 09/07/17 01:45 PM Re: Aside on Sheldrake... [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Nemo Offline
CoS Magister

Registered: 10/06/02
Posts: 13135
Loc: Point Nemo s48:52:31:748, w123...
Glad you enjoy being open to those kind of "mavericks" ...since those are generally the ones still actually following the scientific method and do not reject evidence that offends their prior assumptions. grin

And thank you for the positive review of my book even if it did not get posted. I do appreciate it.
_________________________
Magister Nemo's Satanic Offerings:
DISCOVERING THE SATANIC GOD - The heart of Satanism.
THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Ritual in virtual reality.
BENEATH THE SEVENTH TOWER OF SATAN - Deeper VR ritual.
THE FIRE FROM WITHIN - My book.

My first audio interview on GREATER MAGIC
My second audio interview by Rev Campbell



Top
#504907 - 09/08/17 12:18 AM Re: Aside on Sheldrake... [Re: Nemo]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Whether it's funneling wealth upward or downward, what you are talking about is still social engineering. What I understand by Stratification is the State employs a 'hands off' approach to social engineering and merely concerns itself with maintaining law and order, national security and the country's infrastructure.

I think the difference between you and I is that I consider the maintenance of law and order a form of social engineering, because the priorities will always be set by vested economic interests. In other words, the rich make the law and everyone else needs to live by it.

Similarly, a national security policy (or set of policies) requires a certain amount of expenditure to achieve, even when you account for waste. That money needs to come from an economy that works, and will need workers to make it do so.

Practically anything a government does is a form of social engineering. I reckon the erudite ask themselves:

1) Do I agree with this approach?
2) Can I amend this approach?
3) Can I live with this approach?
4) Can I make this approach work for me?

My suspicion is that Satanists and witches should probably start at question four, because a positive answer to that completely invalidates the other three.

Much of society bothers itself too much with question 1.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Trying to marry social justice warrior ethics with Satanic aesthetics just doesn't work, there is already a pseudo-satanic group doing just that who are rightly looked on with derision by real Satanists.

I'm not trying to "marry" social justice into Satanism because I tend to agree that it's ultimately a bad fit. But I'm not a Satanist; I'm disagreeing with your stance, and presenting my reasons for doing so. Social justice can be meritocratic, even by virtue of pure logic, and I think that's a reasonable place to start a discussion.

Originally Posted By: Mannyowar
Do you feel a sense of guilt or responsibility when you pass people who are sleeping on the street and begging? Do you feel a sense of resentment when someone drives past in a car that cost several times what your house is worth? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then I think you need to query your allegiance to Satanism.

I can only answer personally.

I think homelessness is a problem that needs solved, because it's economically costly to have high levels of it. I don't feel guilty about that, because it's not my governmental policies that contribute to the problem. But not feeling guilty does not equate to ignorance of the problem, or what causes it.

As for the person in the car... Meh, I don't care. What other people have makes no difference to me being happy with what I have. I have pretty simple tastes, really, and the means to ensure I always have a plentiful supply of them.

Originally Posted By: Nemo
Glad you enjoy being open to those kind of "mavericks" ...since those are generally the ones still actually following the scientific method and do not reject evidence that offends their prior assumptions. grin

I recall reading an article a couple of years back, I think authored by Rupert Sheldrake actually, that suggested almost all scientific work has been compromised by bad peer review. There were a great many reasons for this to be the case, some wholly avoidable, but the potential ramifications are terribly ugly.

Then we reach de Grey, an individual who was roundly mocked when the SENS facility was set up, and is now considered one of the world's primary gerentologists.

Originally Posted By: Nemo
And thank you for the positive review of my book even if it did not get posted. I do appreciate it.

I enjoyed it, Nemo. Of particular interest was the commentary on the "Satanic panic", given that I wasn't around for it and strongly dislike the way the Witchcraft community reacted to it. Satanists seemed the most level-headed at the time, and unwilling to effectively say they were really just Christians with a different view of divinity.

LaVey, Shreck, Aquino and the others (I know some of their history; it's... Colourful) acquitted themselves very well.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504932 - 09/24/17 12:09 PM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: DRACV]
Old_Pig Offline


Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3976
Loc: The Deep South
I disagree. I think the world is indeed a meritocracy.

All you need to do is reevaluate the concept of "merit". Today's society defines merit mostly as level of contribution to society, a concept rooted on the Judeo-Christian ideals of charity and altruism. Under those standards, merit would always imply the individual being subservient of the common good.

That's a concept of merit based on religious and moral standards of the majority, which are not necessarily my own as an individual.

If we define merit from a pure biological point of view, then merit should be the ability to survive and thrive in your environment. A strong organism contributes more to its species by devouring the weak than any artificial device that would give the wark a better advantage.

Despite all the artificial rules society imposes to prop up the inferior and hold down the resourceful, at the end nature's rules always prevail, the strong still rules over the weak and the meek have not inherited the Earth.

So seeing it from that point of view, we live in a meritocracy where might is merit.
_________________________
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.
Robert A. Heinlein


Top
#504938 - 09/25/17 05:25 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Old_Pig]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Old_Pig
All you need to do is reevaluate the concept of "merit".

Which we don't get to do.

Words have set definitions for a whole host of very good reasons. Building your own reality, or "total environment", is all well and good - but ignoring the fundamental building blocks of language?

No, thanks.
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
#504942 - 09/25/17 11:23 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Isobel Gowdie]
Old_Pig Offline


Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3976
Loc: The Deep South
I was not trying to change the meaning of the word itself, I was pointing at the way the concept is interpreted by society in general versus the way a Satanist would understand it.
_________________________
You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.
Robert A. Heinlein


Top
#504950 - 09/29/17 02:06 AM Re: The Myth of Meritocracy [Re: Old_Pig]
Isobel Gowdie Offline


Registered: 12/28/15
Posts: 46
Originally Posted By: Old_Pig
I was not trying to change the meaning of the word itself, I was pointing at the way the concept is interpreted by society in general versus the way a Satanist would understand it.

I think we largely covered that in an earlier post; namely, in the way a Satanist or witch would decide whether they can make a society work for them and then not really worrying about whether or not it's "fair".
_________________________
Darkest Auldearn: Raising Hell since 1662
Avatar by Luis Falero

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >


Forum Stats
13166 Members
73 Forums
44451 Topics
407332 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 04:49 AM
Advertisements

hold