What's the plan?

#1

"What’s the plan?

Our current goal is to unite 1,000 meritocrats from around the world who
are willing to put in the time and energy in getting local meritocracy
initiatives started where they live."

Do you not think that the plan needs to be more specific and go into detail? Because after we’ve got 1,000 meritocrats around the world, where do we go from there? And how are we going to get to that point? Now to the day of the revolution has to be planned out in detail, at the moment everyone is speculating of how things are going to go about, we know how to go from A to B but we don’t know how we’re going to go from A to Z. If we continue to speculate, we may just progress up to a point where we hit a wall, for example;

  • What if they meritocracy party is bought out?

  • How are going to prevent that?

  • And do we have a plan B to being voted in?

  • How exactly are we going to get 1,000 local meritocracy initiatives? Set up a website to teach people about meritocracy rather than having the information scattered all over the AC website, keep it together and structure is as lessons.

  • What if a peaceful revolution does nothing? Most do nothing.

Many things haven’t been considered, people don’t want to address this, they think it’s going to go flawlessly but It won’t if if we don’t have a plan, the plan needs to be constantly improved in order to speed things up, we need to go in detail of each small part from now to the day of the New World Order. If we have a flawless plan everything will go flawless. Keeping the plan vague is going to hold us back.

3 Likes
#2

To plan, you need to have the basics: people, organisations and resources, which we’re working on developing. Without the basic structures in place we’re armchair activists.

It’s a balance between action and theory. The instant you start to implement a plan is when it changes which is why I, personally, don’t think creating a super meticulous plan is the way to go forward at this stage.

If you’d like to develop one however and search for answers to the questions you lay out, please feel free to go ahead.

I haven’t met anyone who thinks this is going to go flawlessly, which would be naive.

#3

I have proposed to other members of the Meritocracy party that we should be semi militant and have suggested that we recruit people who have military experience or encourage our members to serve their armed forces maintain their affiliation and commitment to the party and contribute the knowledge they gain to it. In my opinion it would be beneficial if we set up military chapters (groups or cells) in different countries. I believe that Meritocracy has a better chances being established in countries that are facing economic and political crises. If a country is under insurrection and has a weak government this will give us the opportunity for our militia to cease it. of course it would be preferable if the country is rich in natural resources or if it is part of the European Union it could very well create a domino effect. Some of the members prefer it to be a third world country as well. A third world country in my opinion may provide for us an experiment to see and demonstrate how a Meritocracy political system will work before applying it to first world nation. A sort of trial and error that we could learn from.

#4

To adress your quetion of a plan ,First things first to get started, we need an increase in membership and massive amounts of funding. Since our Democratic Meritocracy incorporates a Social Capitalist system where free lancers and other businesses remain within the private sector, (I still need to do the research and I encourage other members to look into this as well), and since we will be implementing a millionaires inheritance tax, I am proposing that we look into the Separation of Business and State where the state does not tax corporations and allow them to operate freely until the owner is deceased where the state collects all the assets at the moment of the CEOs or shareholders death in which we of course distribute that money into the public sector as originally planned by the Meritocracy party. If we can promise certain enterprises more market revenue then what is allowed by the current political establishments we can perhaps attract wealthy people to fund our party. At the moment I still don’t know how exactly to implement this strategy and I am not that knowledgeable concerning economic matters but I highly suggest and encourage members who are look into this idea. To begin I am currently reading a book called The Separation of Business and State by Ryan Dawson and The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths by Mariana Mazzucato to develop a thesis, antithesis and then synthesis to my idea. I believe that our Social Capitalist system should differ from other mixed economies by havin g a clear division between the public and private sector.but we must all educate ourselves so that we may implement this new economic model efficiently. The first country to establish Democratic Meritocracy will either reflect greatly or poorly on the rest of the party depending on whether it succeeds or it fails. keep in mind that our system is completely new and do not know what the outcome will be it is important that we address all possible flaws within the Democratic Meritocratic system.

#5

Whether we should not tax ALL corporations or may be some corporations and not others still remains the question. also the state can apply a meritocratic rule where those corporations that contribute more revenue, capital in GDP or what not into the nation can get a taxation exemption. but like I said this requires much research.

#6

I would also like to add that computer hacking skills are an essential tool/weapon for our movement :wink:

1 Like
#7

A militant part of meritocracy sounds like a very bad plan. Meritocracy should not be seized but earned. The best way in my opinion is to win the elections in a democracy. Then slowly implement changes that are needed. Meritocracy isn’t a revolution but a change of thought in the heads of people.
I like the other part of your plan though, Manuel. We do need funding so it would be nice if we had a source of income. This can come from corporations who see that we are not their enemy, but of course we could also start meritocratic businesses ourselves to fund the party. These things go slowly at start, of course, almost nobody knows anything about meritocracy, so one of the finest ways to make it known is to be successfull in business to prove we’re not a bunch of idealistic naysayers but strong individuals who will change this world.

2 Likes
#8

due to the fact that our parties proposal is to overthrow the current establishment and replace it with a new one, including a new constitution. I highly doubt that we have much of a chance to win in general democratic elections. Although I would not disregard the possibility that having prestigious business people funding our party may change this circumstance (Money Talks in the U.S.) However I would still think it would be in our best interest to have a militia irregardless of whether we choose to engage in a revolution or not. It would serve as a protection for the party in case we came under attack or if the circumstances did indeed favor to pursue a revolution hence the saying “better to have one and not need it, then need it and not have one”

#9

I think you are referring to the USA or the UK where there is a two party system. Isn’t it time a third party came along?
When meritocrats have a militant part they become a threat to the national security. The government then has a perfect excuse to ban the party and make it illegal.
When most people in a country want a meritocracy there is no stopping them in a democracy.
Non-violence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. - Gandhi
At the center of non-violence stands the principle of love.- Martin Luther King

1 Like
#10

To not have a militant body would be foolish in my opinion. I mean, on my next encounter I’m going to actively find a partner whom I would assume doesn’t have HIV, but I’m still going to put a condom on.
Having a military strength does not equate to using military might. In fact, having the power to do so often prevents the necessity of its existence.
The alternative is: one day we will be more than an idea. We will be a threat to those we seek to replace. We could be labeled terrorists, radicalists, it doesn’t matter. Some adjective meant to misguide the people regarding our mission will be issued and general consent will be assumed so that the inherited powers that be can act.
I truly hope that not one bruise occurs due to this movement. However, if it happens who do you want it to happen to? Which side do you believe should lose so that we can win?

This may not be applicable now, but the time may come.
"It is better to be violent if violence is in our hearts; than to wear the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence."
If you’re wondering, that was Gandhi.

1 Like
#11

I find taking non-violent measures to be spurious and ineffective. ofcourse if the circumstances do not call for violence then we must not use it but if we seek to replace a political establishment that uses coercive measures through pacifistic tactics we can all just forget about Meritocracy all together. We are a threat to National Security because we seek to replace the constitution with our own we must be careful not to make the same mistakes as other groups who have been close in the past of over throwing the government. groups such as the KKK,The Black Panthers, and now ISIS. each one of these has been successful in developing a good orginizational structure. the problem with these ideologies is that they do not get the support of the people because they are deemed as too radical and their values and ideals clash with that of mainstream society.ours do too but not as fundementaly as these I have mentioned. We are not Racists and we are not religious. To my understanding We promote a Civic Nationalism that is compatible with Liberal values.that is something very extraordinary indeed and has the potential to captivate the mainstream audience of which we do need their approval.

#12

Every radical cause feels just and extraordinary

1 Like
#13

We are not supportive of liberal values, we are radicals, there is a really good article here.

http://meritocracyparty.org/2014/02/death-liberalism/

2 Likes
#14

thanks emx. I enjoyed the article. I think I could stand to argue a couple of points but it seems semantics.

I do stand firm that propaganda has historically been an extremely powerful motivator. More so when used in a manner which is not deceptive.

That said, I am fully willing to seize, by whatever means necessary, for the collective good. My life is of infinitesimal importance considering all. Besides I’ll simply become a god, rinse and repeat. My daughter would one day understand. If not, all sentiment leaves with my body anyway.

I’m drinking, so I’ll cease the rant. Cheers.

#15

yes thank you, I have read that article but to my understanding, that article points out that we do not adopt the same attitude as the modern day liberal. The modern day Liberal has become a coward that blankets himself with the notion of political correctness and is too afraid to tackle real issues and concerns that go on in the world. I compleltely agree with that. But what I meant by “Liberal Values” is that we promote gender equality and no discriminate against race,religion,non religion,sexual orientation etc. We adhere to a seperation of Church and State and we base advancement soley on Merit (competence,skill,virtue,knowledge,experience,etc.).

1 Like