Our government is definitely not meritocratic. We have elect the least objectionable, best looking, best advertised candidates. We do not go the effort of finding the best qualified. We don't care if they are smart or a good leader. The process is do destructive on a personal level, that the best leaders go into the private sector. They are CEO's and executives of the great American corporations.
The last real leader we elected was Reagan, and he was scared to say the word AIDS. Clinton did O.K., but he really just rode the fence most of the time. Bush Jr. is the worst of the lot. He only won because people are scared that someone might let two men get married.
O.K, I'm on the verge of breaking down into a tirade. If you are looking beyond politics you can state we are in a meritocratic society. A highly disciplined person from any level of society has a chance to get an education and work their way up the pay scale. Gifted leaders and thinkers can, with guidance, to very well for themselves. However, our government is just the opposite. You get elected with lots of money, rich friends and savvy advertising. A blow up doll could get elected with the right backers.
2007-01-03 02:19:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by Lew 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't believe that any society can be entirely meritocratic. In order to do that, we would have to earn and succeed based solely on our own merit, but, this is not the case, because someone may be financially advantaged, leading to a better education and prospective inherited weath simply because of their family situation. They have received a better education than someone born into a poorer family and therefore they start off with a better chance in the world. If people do not start off on a level playing field, there can be no true meritocracy. In fact, with the new tuition fees and removal of the grant system this society is becoming less of a meritocracy than ever before, where children from poorer families are becoming less and less likely to go to university or any other kind of higher education.
Hope this helps
2007-01-03 03:21:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by deee999 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Our society does have this trend. If you haven't noticed, only the good looking, well trained, and well groomed are movie stars (that's just an example). Also, people aren't going to elect a president because they think he's stupid. They want to elect someone that they think will make smart decisions, has experience, will lead our country to prosperity, etc... I've also never seen a coach put a bad player in a game, IF that player made the team. I hope this helped!
2007-01-03 10:37:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Our society is quite meritocratic...
People work for what they have and you usually get success depending on how many contacts they have or how much work they did during years of education.
If you are writing about meritocracy are you writing about Davis and Moore and Functionalism?
Then countering it with Marxist perspectives?
Sorry, just got my sociology exams coming up, needed to jog my memory.
2007-01-03 02:58:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by Badgerer 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi,
I had a course last year on this topic. So, I have a lot of inspiration. Unfortunately, I don't have time right now to give you my complete view on this topic, because of new exams coming up. But, a dense answer to your question is: 'Fortunately and unfortunately, NO'.
So, I'm just going to give you a few names that have interesting ideas on the topic.
- Michael Young (Rise of the Meritocracy)
- Alain de Botton (Status Anxiety)
- Talcot Parson
- Max Weber
If you need more help, just email.
Greet
2007-01-03 21:45:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by Greet Sleurs 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
In a word, no. There is much favouritism is society, the people who gain promotions in the work place don't usually merit it. There is a lot of nepotism. Look at political kwangoes. Often getting a job depends more on who you know than what you know.
2007-01-04 10:41:08
·
answer #6
·
answered by funnelweb 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with Lew! What does Meritocratic mean?
2007-01-03 02:21:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
different meritocracvy has been around because of the fact the classic greeks/chinese language and its in uncomplicated terms applied now because of the fact why could the stressful worker be pushed down for working stressful? probably a string of matters usual meritocracy.
2016-10-06 09:16:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes it is if you look at schools, then there is the banking system of education where the more qualifications you get the more money you earn.
Can you answer my question on Gender & Community work?
2007-01-03 10:57:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Could be happier 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It depends on what society your talking about and one would assume that different sectors and sub-sectors would differ.
2007-01-03 18:36:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by Mike J 5
·
0⤊
0⤋