TÉCNICO UNIVERSITARIO EN TRADUCCIÓN

Español e Inglés

Criticisms of electoralism
Although highly controversial at various points in history, representative democracy (and electoral
systems in general) have become the modern civics global-standard. Nevertheless, criticisms of
electoralism continue to come from both within the Western world and the developing world. In the
Global North, criticism comes primarily from the anarchist, revolutionary communist, and left-libertarian
ends of the political spectrum.

Anarchists and libertarian socialists typically argue against the legitimacy of political representation
although most libertarians accept the concept of delegation. This is primarily due to their belief that
majority rule voting systems will erode the liberty of social and political minorities. Libertarians argue that
any truly just political system must include voluntary association to prevent the oppressive enforcement
of law. Additionally, libertarians argue that the election of representatives creates a priest-class of
political administrators while disempowering and alienating the general public, for which voting is a
highly mediated form of political engagement that diverts energy away from more effective means of
political and social reform (or revolution). Some libertarians argue that representation is philosophically
impossible due to the unique nature of each individual, distinct from social, political, and economic class
interests.

Most libertarians support consensus-based direct democracy as an alternative to an electoral system,

and direct action as a means to implement decisions made individually or collectively. Autonomism,
horizontalism, and topless federation are related concepts. There also exists a non-elective procedure
for electing a democratic representation called sortition, in which representatives are drawn at random
from the citizen population.

Revolutionary communists generally argue against elections under capitalism as being, at best,
insufficient for revolutionary change, and at worst as diverting the personal, economic, and mental
resources of the working class individual towards dead end politics when that same energy could be
used to foment a communist revolution and create a proletarian dictatorship. Communists see the
global-standard status of elections in the current world as clear evidence that market society has
entrenched itself and been, for the moment, completely victorious over armed struggle and other truly
grassroots forms of change. As self-proclaimed agents of the latter, communists generally see their

1
task as anathema to elections, since the revolutionary task involves physical overthrow of the entire
ruling class, seizure of their state power, and the forcible establishment of an entirely different form of
society where the working class controls production.

However, communists are not necessarily opposed to elections under the revolutionary communist
society once the latter has emerged and been consolidated. Election of leaders at the local level and, in
turn, for wider leadership on the global level, would to a communist undoubtedly make fully
participatory elections absolutely necessary. However, the difference under such circumstances as
compared to capitalism would be that communist elections would reject the representative democracy
model as a residual of capitalism; that model, in the view of communists, would make it more likely for
the new society to revert back to profit and the market if fully participatory democracy were not pursued.

A gerontocracy is a form of oligarchical rule in which an entity is ruled by leaders who are significantly
older than most of the adult population. Often the political structure is such that political power within the
ruling class accumulates with age, so that the oldest hold the most power. Those holding the most power
may not be in formal leadership positions, but often dominate those who are.

Gerontocracy's strength is seen as its stability, which can be more appropriate for institutions that
teach principles that do not vary over time. In institutions that have to cope with rapid change, the
decreased faculties of the aged can potentially be a handicap in providing effective leadership.

Meritocracy is a system of a government or another organization wherein appointments are made and
responsibilities are given based on demonstrated ability (merit) and talent rather than by wealth
(plutocracy), family connections (nepotism), class privilege, cronyism, popularity (as in democracy) or
other historical determinants of social position and political power.

The word "meritocracy" is now also often used to describe a type of society where wealth, position, and
social status are in part assigned through competition or demonstrated talent and competence, on the
premise that positions of trust, responsibility and social prestige should be earned, not inherited or
assigned on arbitrary quotas. Meritocracy is used both to describe or even criticize competitive
societies, that could accept large inequalities of income, wealth and status amongst the population as a
function of perceived talent, merit, competence, motivation and effort.

The term 'meritocracy' was first used, in a pejorative sense, in Michael Young's 1958 book Rise of the
Meritocracy, which is set in a dystopian future in which one's social place is determined by IQ plus

2
effort. In the book, this social system ultimately leads to a social revolution in which the masses
overthrow the elite, who have become arrogant and disconnected from the feelings of the public.

Despite the negative origin of the word, there are many who believe that a meritocratic system is a good
thing for society. Proponents of meritocracy argue that a meritocratic system is more just and more
productive than other systems, and that it allows for an end to distinctions based on such arbitrary
things as sex, race or social connections. Detractors of meritocracy, on the other hand, argue that the
central dystopian aspect of Young's conception -- the existence of a meritocratic class that monopolizes
access to merit and the symbols and markers of merit, and thereby perpetuates its own power, social
status, and privilege -- has rapidly appeared in many if not all societies that have embraced meritocracy.

In writing the United States "Declaration of Independence" Thomas Jefferson relied heavily on Chapter
Five of John Locke's Second Treatise on Government, which conceives of a society where the
foundation of all property is solely the labor exerted by men. Locke argued that the acquisition of
property was not morally wrong, if it were acquired through the exertion of labor and if it were in order to
meet one's own immediate needs. So, he said, society is necessarily stratified, but by merit, not by birth.
This doctrine of industry and merit as opposed to idleness and inheritance as the determining factor in a
just society argued strongly against kings and governments of nobles and their lackeys, in favor of
representative republicanism.

Often, opponents of the concept of meritocracy argue that characteristics such as intelligence or effort
are simply impossible to measure accurately. Therefore, in their view, any implementation of meritocracy
necessarily involves a high degree of guesswork and is inherently flawed. Those who support free
markets, on the other hand, believe that the free market can and should determine both merit and
reward.

Confucius

Many western admirers of Confucius, like Voltaire or H. G. Creel, have pointed out an innovative and
revolutionary idea of Confucius': he replaced the nobility of blood with one of virtue. Jūnzǐ, which had
meant "superior person," coming from the contemporary meaning of the literal translation "son of the
ruler," slowly took on a new meaning close to the English "gentleman." A virtuous plebeian who
cultivates his qualities could be a "gentleman", whilst a shameless son of a King was only a "small
man." That he allowed any kind of student to be his disciple (his teachings were intended to train future
rulers) is a clear indication that he didn't wholly support feudal structures in Chinese society.

3
Han Feizi

In addition to Confucius, another ancient Chinese philosopher of the same period advocated a
meritocratic system of government and society. This was Han Feizi who was famous as being the
foremost proponent of the School of Law (otherwise known as the philosophy of Legalism). The central
tenet of his argument was the absolute rule of law, but there were also numerous meritocratic elements
to be found. Another Legalist, Shang Yang implemented Legalist and meritocratic reforms in the state of
Qin by abolishing the aristocracy and promoting individuals based on skill, intelligence, and initiative.
This led to the armies of the Qin having a critical edge over the other nations that adhered to old
aristocratic systems of government. Legalism, along with its anti-aristocratic, pro-meritocratic ideals,
remained a key part Chinese philosophy and politics for another two millennia, although after the Qin
Dynasty it was heavily diluted.

Genghis Khan

Meritocracy was the primary basis for selection of chiefs and generals in the Mongol Empire. Genghis
Khan chose whoever was talented and fit for his military chain of command. He even trusted generals
and soldiers from opponents' armies if they showed loyalty to their leaders. For example, Genghis Khan's
general Jebe had been an enemy soldier who had shot Genghis's horse in battle before he became
Great Khan.

Napoleon

Napoleonic (Revolutionary) France is also sometimes considered to have been meritocratic. After the
revolution of 1792 hardly a member of the former elite remained. When Napoleon rose to power, there
was no ancient base from which to draw his staff, and he had to choose the people he thought best for
the job, including officers from his army, revolutionaries who had been in the peoples' assembly, and
even some former aristocrats such as prime minister Talleyrand. This policy was summed up in
Bonaparte's often-quoted phrase "La carriere ouverte aux talents", careers open to the talented, or as
more freely translated by Thomas Carlyle, "the tools to him that can handle them". A clear example is the
order of the Légion d'honneur, the first order of merit, admitting all kind of men (cases of women have
been found) not on ancestry or wealth, but on military, scientific or artistic prowess.

A later non-meritocratic practice, however, was the appointment of family members and Corsican friends
to important positions (specifically regional leadership); loyalty may have been a more important factor
than sheer merit in performance, a common case in political situations.

4
Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson was a strong advocate of meritocratic types of government, believing they are superior
to all other known forms of government; in more general terms, he believed a noble "natural
aristocracy" would arise to look after the common good.

Meritocratic states

Singapore

Among modern nation-states, the Republic of Singapore claims to be a pure meritocracy, placing a great
emphasis on identifying and grooming bright young citizens for positions of leadership. The
Singaporean interpretation places overwhelming emphasis on academic credentials as objective
measures of merit.

Meritocracy is a central political concept in Singapore, due in part to the circumstances surrounding the
city-state's rise to independence. Singapore was expelled from neighboring Malaysia in 1965 as a result
of the unwillingness of the majority of its population, mostly ethnic Chinese, to accept a "special
position" for the self-proclaimed bumiputera (Malay for "inheritors of the earth") Malays. The federal
Malaysian government had argued for a system which would give special privileges to the Malays as
part of their "birthright" as an "indigenous" people. Political leaders in Singapore vehemently protested
against this system, arguing instead for the equality of all citizens of Malaysia, with places in
universities, government contracts, political appointments, etc., going to the most deserving candidate,
rather than to one chosen on the basis of connections or ethnic background. The ensuing animosity
between State and Federal governments eventually proved irreconcilable. Singapore was expelled, and
became an independent city-state. To this day, Singapore continues to hold up meritocracy as one of its
official guiding principles for domestic public policy formulation.

There is criticism with evidence that from within that the increasing stratification of Singaporean
society and the creation of an elite class based on a narrow segment of the population as a result of this
system has some serious disadvantages. Commentators have also criticized the city-state for not
applying this principle uniformly, citing for example the disproportionate influence and presence of the
family of the founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew in both political and business circles. Although most
Singaporeans still agreed that the city-state's tremendous economic success was due in part to its
strong emphasis on developing and promoting talented leaders there are increasing signs that an
increasing number of Singaporeans believe that Singapore is becoming an elitist society instead.

5
Grand Duchy of Finland

Another example is the 19th century Finland, which was formally ruled by an autocrat, though in practice
governing was exercised by the educated class. Although ancestry and inherited wealth influenced one's
educational opportunities, education and not ancestry was the principal requirement for admittance to,
and promotion within, the civil service and government. Well into the mid-20th century, academic
degrees remained important factors for politicians asking for the electorate's confidence. Likewise,
one's military rank in reserves has been a decisive factor on selecting leaders and managers both in
public and private sector. Even today, most Finnish managers are amongst those who have attained are
either NCO or reserve officer rank during their conscript tour of duty.

1-2-3-4

1. Write the definitions in English for seven of the words in bold print.
2. Copy the sentence from the text where the vocabulary word is used.
3. Compose your own original sentence using the vocabulary word (the same meaning as in
the text). [Use the seven sentence patterns.]
4. Write one paragraph about what this text is about.

abolish

alienate

amongst

anathema

ancestry

animosity

argue

armed

arrogant

attain

collectively

6
conscript

cope

decisive

delegate

dilute

disempowering

disproportionate

divert

emerge

enforcement

entrenched

equality

erode

expel

foment

Grassroots

implement

inherent

inherit

irreconcilable

legitimacy

merit

overwhelm

7
perpetuate

prestige

Prowess

random

residual

revert

seizure

sheer

stratification

surrounding

vary

vehemently