If there is anything I despise more than the limited thought-structure of religious and political zealots, it is the complete lack relativism in dealing with self-identifying intellectuals and revolutionaries. Those of you familiar with the idea of paradigm shift must understand the complete stranglehold words have on people, and their ability to grasp certain concepts. In order for the public to grasp and support extraordinary or new concepts, it is often best to repackage that information coded in the language and culture of the audience. Think about all the enlightenment-era writers describing themselves as âDeists/Theistsâ rather than Christians, because in this identification they could be either Christians, Agnostics, or Gnostic, depending on whom asked them. I have failed to understand why the writers of the Meritocracy website wish to alienate hordes of potential supporters by a willingness to condense 200 years of highly varied political theory and distil it into a simple amalgamation of Randian, pro-christian psycho-babble. Maybe it is because this whole movement (and other associated sources of writing) is so incredibly British in outlook that it neglects the complex realities of Libertarian thought in America, but one would expect such highly intelligent and capable people to do their homework.
Iâm a unemployed psychologist living as legal pot-farmer in Colorado, Iâve spent years on the road, have engaged in civil disobedience and protest, and have wandered all over the pacific northwest and Northern California. Along my travels I met many extremely dedicated activists who would put many of us to shame in their willingness to fight for change, almost always in movements that Meritocrats would approve of. Almost all of these people identified as both Anarchists and Socialists. In my decade of experiences with such people Anarchism=Socialism, and Capitalists as such were always seen as another form of authority. Thus, by default, Anarcho-Capitalism was seen as an oxymoron. It is offensive to my sensibilities as an activist that all identifiers with the Anarchist title be written-off as pro-god republican shit-heads. For the most part because these people are the ones who much of you watch on tv while they are actually protesting or making a difference. There is an Anarchist organization called food not bombs who collects unused foods from local businesses and distributed them to the poor. Anarchists and Socialists were the ones who fought in the Seattle riots against the World Trade Organization and their capitalist exploitation of 3rd world countries. So I ask again, why am I a psycopath, a christian, and an anarcho-capitalist, because Iâve identified myself as Libertarian. Youâve all mangled the meanings of these words along with the media to a point that they barely have meaning anymore.
I acknowledge that the âLibertarian Partyâ exists and has a pro-republican, negative-liberty stance. But The word Libertarian by itself means simply âanti-authoritarianâ. Arenât all of you? When I read all this information on Meritocracy and its platform, I agreed with virtually all of it. There is nothing wrong with a market-based system if a ruling elite is not allowed to form and take control, exploiting others systematically. Obviously that is what I see having gone wrong with our current system. Social order and harmony does not have to equate with coercive force, or be synonymous with dependence on the state. The only reason why Iâve continued to label myself an Anarchist or Socialist-Libertarian rather than Meritocrat is because the former suggests a voluntary choice, rather than yet another ideology being forced on someone from without. Thats how most people will see it anyway, another crazy left-wing phenomenon which wonât gain much traction. The point is, if I agree with your platform, and would be willing to vote for your candidate, but in a philosophical sense consider myself an anarchist at heart, does that make me your enemy.
For those of you confounded by the supposed contradiction, let me explain. Its about what works. I am not apposed to the idea of government, but Iâve never felt like my vote actually counted. Iâm not apposed to the idea of voting, but Iâve never seen a candidate worth voting for. I donât play this bullshit lesser of two evils game. I WOULD vote for a Meritocrat, but as of now you are a marginal movement whose long-term existence has yet to be established with no candidates. What i do know works though are small self-sustainable agricultural based communities, collectively-owned businesses and housing co-ops.The green energy and organic food movements help bring an end to pollution, capitalist exploitation, economic inequality, etc. These are real changes which slowly gear society towards a healthy, conscious, resource-based economy. Not a bunch of self-congratulatory ideologues who dismiss such efforts as trivial or inauthentic. Donât get me wrong, my writing all of this is not to be a troll or piss you off. I see myself as one of you, just one who is able to understand the Existentialist philosophers. Those of you who have read Buck-minster Fuller or have familiarized yourself with Jacque Fresco should understand my point of view. Rather than expecting to enlighten the entire society and bring change through liberal democratic reform, we could focus our energy on making such antiquated and detrimental forces like religion and government obsolete.
I have obsessed over how I can affiliate myself with a movement that so drastically ignores the sort of organic grass-roots approach I am talking about. Fuck the politics, we need a Meritocratic city-state. The best leadership is that done through example. How much easier would it be for those of you above (dealing with the politics) to convince the public if you could point towards an active non-political wing below (those of us focusing on an intentional community). We can have our cake and eat it too, by proposing a completely voluntary process of change appealing to anti-authoritarians/anarchists, and the politics appealing to liberal reformers. Its not as crazy as it sounds, living in Eugene and northern California I have personally met many such individuals already involved in such communities. Iâve met people with solar-powered eco-farms, people living in hollowed out trees, anything you can imagine. Anyway, may the philosophy be damned, this post is to let you know Iâm in the process of writing a full book which I intend will outline all the âhowsâ of a Meritocratic society. In particular I am attempting to create the proposed structure of Meritocratic banking, the structure of Meritocratic companies, organizations, and how they might all relate to one another in a functioning meritocratic economy and community.
My goal is to design a society based only on principles of science and psychology, specifically designed to not allow any one ideology to form and take control. Rather than elected leaders, decisions would be made by a panel of individuals recognized by their peers as the best in their fields. There would be an individual to weigh in the potential costs and profits of an action to the community in economic terms, an individual weighing out possible environmental damage and preservation issues, as for one analyzing psychological impact, transportation, and so on. You would end up with a fully self-sustaining, fully voluntary community, yet with leadership derived only of the most qualified. Anyway, that is the direction I would like to take the dialectic in. It unites two very fractured philosophies while achieving the same goal. I wont have to see myself as an anarchist any longer, when a truly just society actually exists. As you work from above, so will I from below.
