Comment by sschueller
2 months ago
I don't have a problem with hiring qualified people instead of meeting quotas but the fact that the ones pushing this are them selves the most unqualified people is just beyond me.
2 months ago
I don't have a problem with hiring qualified people instead of meeting quotas but the fact that the ones pushing this are them selves the most unqualified people is just beyond me.
I'm not sure about most unqualified but I will say that it's people the bubble who are most impacted by these policies.
The elite are getting hired no matter what. It's the average person who was just barely above the bar that gets bumped to make room for a quota based hire that really feels the impact.
Well then it demonstrates their sincerity I suppose.
[dead]
That’s because it isn’t actually about qualification. It’s actually about a lack of accountability. Trump wants everyone to be able to hire their friends just like he does, optics be damned. I think a lot of people actually agree with this at a visceral level.
Left leaning people are more concerned with power controlled by nepotism and “unfair” connections. To me that is a kind of sour grapes view fueled by too many participation trophies.
A government full of cronies sucks but we can at least hope to get our own cronies in at some point. A meritocratic/technocratic government sounds like a dystopian novel.
Sour grapes rather than valuing fairness?
Elementary school kids are huge on fairness and injustice. It seems like it's built in to facilitate group social dynamics in great apes. It takes a lot of sophistication to be able to frame valuing fairness as a character flaw.
elementary kids are also some of the most violent people per capita.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3283570/
Downvote if you like, but kids' community values are typically enforced with antisocial behavior
In your view, is that how all businesses should be run as well? Hiring your least qualified friends? Surely, cronyism exists in corporate America, but I'd venture a guess that a company run in this way would fail almost immediately. No, this style of management and hiring is more like that of a crime boss - and it's not about friendships - it's about LOYALTY.
They don't "fail" as such. They burn through the money, spread it around, and then declare bankruptcy while everyone involved is somehow wealthier. It's kleptocracy.
2 replies →
>A government full of cronies sucks...
>A meritocratic...government sounds like a dystopian novel.
So nepotism + networking = bad, but meritocracy also = bad...?
>...we can at least hope to get our own cronies in at some point.
OR you reduce the risk vector and limit the size & scope of government. Most people agree with your earlier premises, so why would I support adding powers to a structure where folks I strongly disagree with will lead that structure ~50% of the time?
> So nepotism + networking = bad, but meritocracy also = bad...?
The downsides of meritocracy invalidate the almost idolatrous worship of the idea seen in the tech field.
Tolstoy wrote “It is principally through this false idea of inequality, and the intoxication of power and of servility resulting from it, that men associated in a state organization are enabled to commit acts opposed to their conscience without the least scruple or remorse.”[1]
See also:
Sandel, Michael J. The Tyranny of Merit : What’s Become of the Common Good?. [S.l.]: Penguin Books, 2021.
Niebuhr, Reinhold. Moral Man and Immoral Society: A Study in Ethics and Politics. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995. https://archive.org/details/moralmanimmorals00nieb_0.
[1] Tolstoy, Leo,. 1894. “‘The kingdom of God is within you’ Christianity not as a mystic religion but as a new theory of life;” New York: Cassell Pub. Co. /z-wcorg/. 1894. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/api/volumes/oclc/3859761.html.
2 replies →