When Michael Young, a British sociologist, coined the term meritocracy in 1958, it was in a dystopian satire. At the time, the world he imagined, in which intelligence fully determined who thrived and who languished, was understood to be predatory, pathological, far-fetched.
Today, however, we’ve almost finished installing such a system, and we have embraced the idea of a meritocracy with few reservations, even treating it as virtuous. That can’t be right. Smart people should feel entitled to make the most of their gift. But they should not reshape society so as to instate giftedness as a universal yardstick of human worth.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 22 2016, @02:12PM
popularity might not be the kind of merit you want in the 'leaders of the country', but it's still a kind of merit
as it stands the race for office is based on popularity-based merit
so it _is_ a meritocracy, just not the right kind
as a sidenote, it's a very rare politician that actually leads as opposed to ruling or managing