User blog comment:Disfigure/If you were teleported into the New World with your.../@comment-29707962-20160901183426/@comment-29707962-20160902123217

A preemptive sorry for the rambling that probably follows.

A meritocratie is one of the types of gouvernance which should be the most highly regarded, but least likely to be acomplished in any kind of modern democracy, because those make the misassumption that "demos" means all citizens instead of the responsible ones and therefore are doomed to degenerate into either an Ochlocratic quagmire, as desillusioned citizens followe the words of demagogues and letting their passions rule instead of their reasons, unnable to achieve any needed long term goal or falling into an Oligarchie, as disillusioned citizens abstain from expressing their opinion because they do not matter in the masses and only a few and their paid/indebted/loyal subordinates use the democratic tools present, giving advantages to the few and taking them away from those needed.

Most democracys suffer from inactivity and massed lies in the time before the votes take place, made even worse as the rabble is more inclined to vote for someone who goes around hugging babies and supporting inconsequential participents of team sport instead of those who analyse the current situation and deducing and explaining the needed changes in the future, as those do not come without disadvantages, real or imagined. Tiday, it is exemplyfied by those who want to forbid the right to choose to carry or abort a fetus or in those who do not trust our scientists to research and experiment responsible on and with human and non-human DNA and Stemcells.

Also, forcibly inducing democratoc processes lead mostly to ineccessant slaughter, death and strife, either instantly or hidden for some time.

Most people do not really think about why monarchic or semi-monarchic forms of gouvernance where so prevelant for a long time. They forget that freedome isn't a common good, it is a luxury, only affordable if the more basic needs are met. Like every luxury, not everyone can use it responsibly and it has to be restricted for those persons. (aka. jail time.)

Like I initially said, I would interfere if someone tried to change the system of gouvernance (amongst others) too fast, but if it where to be encouraged that the change occures slowly enough so that certain misdevelopements can be detected and dealt with before they would become a problem, I wouldn't interfere, maybe even help them a little.

Still, for a real meriocratic system you need either a Monarchy or an Aristocracy run by competent people, who prune themselves, or are pruned by external forces, of incompetent stock. Those should be able to accurately evaluate if someone has done their job exceptional and in which higher function he/she will be more useful.

Every form of gouvernance has its advantages, disadvantages and weak points. I just get kind of enraged if someone just tries to force a society to rapidly change any kind of their characteristica in short order, just because the person thinks their own vision would be way better all around, without disadvantages and/or is the only right one. It is true a very few times, but way less times than most think.

Again, sorry that this needed to be written out and for taking up your time.