Meritocracy is complicated. On one hand it allows for the efficient allocation of incentives and resources. On the other it also produces extreme feelings of despair as we all fall short of an ideal.
“But the dream of writing hung around my neck like an Albatross slain by my sanity.”
I believe that even when our dreams seem most impossible it is our duty to those who have failed their dreams to keep pursuing our own.
“The many men, so beautiful!
And they all dead did lie:
And a thousand thousand slimy things
Lived on; and so did I.”
The thing is I know how to be successful on substack. Make direct responses and critiques to certain big-ish accounts which entail maximum engagement. Then write posts that have one or two novel framings or points that also satisfy the intended audiences biases and worldview, that which is not too hard to comprehend or read. Then, continue this cycle, be a dedicated reply guy to big accounts, and don’t ever voice opinions or posts which will alienate your current or target audience.
Imagine if Benthams Bulldog wrote a post admitting how true HBD is. He won’t and can’t, because he wants to succeed.
Unfortunately, being brutally honest and yourself doesn’t work unless your identity and beliefs just so happens to be perfect for engagement. Most aren’t, so most bend or chip away parts of their identity. I am still unwilling to do this until I have published my important 100% honest corpus.
No no! More important for now! Unfortunately I can’t permit myself to be principled. I will in time seek clout. I’m just trying to set my opinions in order before then!
I'm glad you stopped listening to your inner saboteur. Thank you for sharing.
Positive Psychology is looking at meritocracy and ways to positively reinforce creativity around Meritocracy. I'd have to find articles, but there are things like statistical improvements in performance when someone believes in you. So just want you to know, I believe in you.
I believe the meritocracy question is not framed properly in the current Indian H1B visa debate. Specifically meritocracy looks only at an individual and if his skills are high quality. This conspicuously leaves out the management and their responsibilities which include: allocating the man's work, deciding the goals of the system, measuring if the system works properly, allowing the man to use his merits to the best of his ability, etc.
Blind meritocracy leads only to this: A fully meritocratic washing machine installed in a closet that can't physically be opened because no one thought about the system the meritocratic man lives in.
Any discussion about meritocracy is simply managers abandoning all responsibility they have for the system. Take Henry Ford's assembly line system and you will see it created excellent output because of the systemic design and not any particular excellence from his employees. Take modern Boeing's Max plane and you'll see it falls apart despite hiring engineers 'for merit' probably from India because the managers don't take any responsibility for the system output.
Modern American Manager: "Hey, I hired this H1B with like 4 degrees! I am no longer responsible for the plane blowing up because I hit checkboxes and more degree = more good!"
"If the endogenous barriers to success for non-Americans and immigrants are as weak as the boardrooms of Google or the GSB faculty would suggest, little protects an American worker from a life of grinding poverty beyond the privilege of their birth"
Management, in this case the most recent managers being the Deep State, is responsible for their citizens not living a life of grinding poverty. They failed because they suck btw.
USAID proves that we lived in a system where the management wanted woke, pushed woke, funded woke. It doesn't matter how much merit you had if the manager wants a blue haired tranny.
“But the dream of writing hung around my neck like an Albatross slain by my sanity.”
I believe that even when our dreams seem most impossible it is our duty to those who have failed their dreams to keep pursuing our own.
“The many men, so beautiful!
And they all dead did lie:
And a thousand thousand slimy things
Lived on; and so did I.”
The thing is I know how to be successful on substack. Make direct responses and critiques to certain big-ish accounts which entail maximum engagement. Then write posts that have one or two novel framings or points that also satisfy the intended audiences biases and worldview, that which is not too hard to comprehend or read. Then, continue this cycle, be a dedicated reply guy to big accounts, and don’t ever voice opinions or posts which will alienate your current or target audience.
Imagine if Benthams Bulldog wrote a post admitting how true HBD is. He won’t and can’t, because he wants to succeed.
Unfortunately, being brutally honest and yourself doesn’t work unless your identity and beliefs just so happens to be perfect for engagement. Most aren’t, so most bend or chip away parts of their identity. I am still unwilling to do this until I have published my important 100% honest corpus.
Hera 🤝 Banks
Dying in obscurity because honesty is worth more to us than fame.
No no! More important for now! Unfortunately I can’t permit myself to be principled. I will in time seek clout. I’m just trying to set my opinions in order before then!
I'm glad you stopped listening to your inner saboteur. Thank you for sharing.
Positive Psychology is looking at meritocracy and ways to positively reinforce creativity around Meritocracy. I'd have to find articles, but there are things like statistical improvements in performance when someone believes in you. So just want you to know, I believe in you.
Thank you for reading and enjoying! I really appreciate you believing in me!
I believe the meritocracy question is not framed properly in the current Indian H1B visa debate. Specifically meritocracy looks only at an individual and if his skills are high quality. This conspicuously leaves out the management and their responsibilities which include: allocating the man's work, deciding the goals of the system, measuring if the system works properly, allowing the man to use his merits to the best of his ability, etc.
Blind meritocracy leads only to this: A fully meritocratic washing machine installed in a closet that can't physically be opened because no one thought about the system the meritocratic man lives in.
https://digestibledeming.substack.com/p/all-unit-tests-passed
Any discussion about meritocracy is simply managers abandoning all responsibility they have for the system. Take Henry Ford's assembly line system and you will see it created excellent output because of the systemic design and not any particular excellence from his employees. Take modern Boeing's Max plane and you'll see it falls apart despite hiring engineers 'for merit' probably from India because the managers don't take any responsibility for the system output.
Modern American Manager: "Hey, I hired this H1B with like 4 degrees! I am no longer responsible for the plane blowing up because I hit checkboxes and more degree = more good!"
"If the endogenous barriers to success for non-Americans and immigrants are as weak as the boardrooms of Google or the GSB faculty would suggest, little protects an American worker from a life of grinding poverty beyond the privilege of their birth"
Management, in this case the most recent managers being the Deep State, is responsible for their citizens not living a life of grinding poverty. They failed because they suck btw.
USAID proves that we lived in a system where the management wanted woke, pushed woke, funded woke. It doesn't matter how much merit you had if the manager wants a blue haired tranny.