• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Meritocracy

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,848
Points
1,060

Meritocracy Is Worth Defending​

And if America abandons it, countries that don’t will outcompete us.​



Where Is Lori Loughlin Now? The Latest Update on the 'Full House' Star's Scandal​

Lori was released from a California prison in December after serving nearly two months.

blob:https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/c37ec530-8428-4db7-9d94-0f97fa3bc38d

The value of credentials. You get what you pay for.


Do you measure the person's character by the credentials they hold?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,848
Points
1,060
The Progressive Movement of the 19th century, and its meritocratic vision, is tied to both the Democrats and the Presbyterian Church by way of Woodrow Wilson. By 1920 Wilson also had technology on his side with the international pulpit supplied by Radio City and NBC.

The origins of that movement, I believe, can be found in the Scots Presbyterian oligarchy championed by John Witherspoon and Aaron Burr Sr at Princeton, its predecessor the Log Cabin University and its theological successor Princeton Theological Seminary.

It is ironic that the liberal tradition in the US is tied to the strongly illiberal Calvinist traditions of the Scot Presbyterians. The Scots Presbyterians, based on local control of congregations by local magnates, fought with the English Episcopalians and their more centralized, top down structure based on the King as head of society and the Church. For the Scots liberalism originally meant recognition of their system. That was resolved in 1689 when William and Mary agreed to recognize the Scots Church in Scotland and the English Church in England on the grounds that both Churches would tolerate each other's preachers. The compromise held for 18 years until the Union of the Parliaments in 1707. And then it started to come apart. And it came apart in Ireland and the US.

After 1707 both Scots and English were theoretically eligible for government positions. The Scots in particular, being broke after the Darien disaster were keen to take up the opportunity and headed to America, particularly New Jersey, to make their fortunes.

This put the Scots and the English venturers in conflict. Just as they were in Ireland.

In Ireland the North was largely a Scots fief. The South was English. The Scots were Presbyterians. The English Episcopalians.

In England, if you wanted a government job then you had to belong to the government church, the established church. The Church of England. Episcopalian.

In Scotland, if you wanted a government job then you had to belong to the established church in Scotland. The Church of Scotland. Presbyterian.

Ireland was neither Scotland nor England despite having Presbyterian Scots and Episcopalian English living amongst its Irish Catholic population. In Ireland, to get the government jobs then you had to belong to the established church in Ireland. The Church of Ireland. And it was Episcopalian and built on the same lines as the Church of England with the King at its head.

Preaching, in all three countries, and America, was essentially a government job. So, in both America and Ireland Scots Presbyterians were forced to bend the knee and become members of one of the episcopalian churches. In Ireland the church was short of preachers so it tended not to worry too much about what individual preachers believed and preached so long as they didn't upset the locals. In America the governing Church of England establishment fought back against the Scots presbyterians - both the strongly Calvinist types and the more latitudinarian, tolerant types that Ireland was producing.

The Irish troubles pushed the Presbyterians to emigrate to America. Thus the Scotch-Irish of America. And their citadel became Princeton. Princeton was where they taught people to be good Presbyterian ministers.

But the disagreement was what was a good Presbyterian minister. The Calvinists held that good Presbyterian ministers believed one thing and one thing only. Their catechism was the Westminster Confession of 1648. And a good minister had to swear to that confession and sign on to it, and subscribe to it, and be able to recite it to his congregation. And uphold it.

But the congregations, both Scots and Irish, were split between hard Calvinists and more tolerant, latitudinarian congregations whose ministers would not sign on to the Westminster Confession. They would not subscribe. These more liberal congregations formed their own non-subscribing synods, or groups of congregations.

This battle between the traditional Calvinists and the liberal Non-Subscribers came to a head with the Great Awakening of the 1730s, a battle strongly influenced by the Wesley brothers and their Methodist innovations in the Church of England. The earliest reference to Woke culture.

Princeton became a central battleground, as did the Synods of New York and Philadelphia. The battle ultimately became less concerned with Scots, Irish, English intolerance and more Establishmentarian, Liberal intolerance. Between Tories and Whigs. Both terms entering the vernacular from the Scots-Irish Presbyterian battles.

Princeton, like Harvard, Yale and William and Mary were all seminaries that created good sectarian preachers. Just as Georgetown and Notre Dame would later when Catholics were granted recognition.

Those seminaries became the Ivy League universities.

It is my contention that those universities, particularly their "liberal" arts faculties, never lost touch with their theological cultural roots and they attract those that seek the singular truth and inculcate that singular truth in their studies. Some people are inclined to see that as indoctrination.

Which brings me to this:

Guided by Faith, Divinity Student Fought His 'Anti-Racist' Princeton Seminary -- and Won​



New awakening. New catechism. Same culture. Same battles. Same establishment?
 
Last edited:

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
9,163
Points
1,160



blob:https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/c37ec530-8428-4db7-9d94-0f97fa3bc38d

The value of credentials. You get what you pay for.


Do you measure the person's character by the credentials they hold?




blob:https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/c37ec530-8428-4db7-9d94-0f97fa3bc38d

The value of credentials. You get what you pay for.


Do you measure the person's character by the credentials they hold?

Dude.... American society is driven by fear. This one doesn't even make it into the top 10 or so...

Government Corruption Tops the List Once Again For the fifth year in a row the top fear of Americans is corrupt government officials. And as in the previous five years, the fear that our government is corrupt far exceeds all others we asked about. More than 3/4 of Americans said they are afraid or very afraid of corrupt governmental officials in 2019. By comparison, the next highest level of fear was nearly 10 points lower at 68% (pollution of oceans, rivers and lakes). Government corruption aside, our top ten list suggests that Americans are preoccupied by fears of four different types. Americans fear for the environment (#s 2, 4, 6, 8, & 9), fear devastating cybercrime (#7), fear bad things happening to loved ones (#s 3 & 5), and worry about their finances (#s 3 & 10). High levels of fear of loved one's becoming ill (#5) and high medical bills (#10) also indicate that health care remains a primary concern of Americans. Fear in the Cyber Dimension Americans are becoming more fearful of crime in cyberspace. Fear of cyber-terrorism makes it to the top ten list for the first time since increasing from 52.5% (2018) to 59.2% in 2019. The internet is an essential resource for the modern person and identity, therefore more individuals can be impacted by threats over the internet. A change in the landscape of terrorism is visible, seeing how Americans’ fear of cyber-terrorism is substantially greater than the fear of a random/mass shooting (47.4%), biological warfare (46.6%), nuclear weapons attack (43.8%), and terrorism (43.4%)

 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,848
Points
1,060
You can't have Hope to drive Change in the future unless you Fear the present.

Five Alarm fires drive Change.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,848
Points
1,060
There is a difference between anti-intellectualism and anti-intellectual. I tend to run as far as possible from anyone who self-identifies as an intellectual. Almost as far as from any self-proclaimed experts.

On the other hand I greatly enjoy intellectual conversations with tattooed gits on Harleys. With or without prison time.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
2,516
Points
1,010
America for a long while was a country in which former peasants (by European standards) could come into their own and rise above their former stations. In rising, they learned that their "betters" were more mediocre and corrupt than they had previously dared to believe. Much of what intellectuals are seized with - art, literature, Truth, fashionable imminent doom hypotheses, etc - isn't as important to most people. The weakness of intellectualism is that it skews and overrides common sense. There are too many outspoken Dunning-Kruger champions among the intellectuals. Intellectuals are a sort of meta-guild, and they do a piss-poor job of policing themselves.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,848
Points
1,060
The Great Awakenings (Moral Crusades)

The First Great Awakening (1730 to 1755) - prompted by the work of George Whitefield, co-founder of the Anglican Methodist movement together with the Wesley brothers. Characterized by anti-establishment revival meetings. Associated with the backcountry in the US.

The Second Great Awakening (1790-1840) - the Second Great Awakening in North America reflected Romanticism characterized by enthusiasm, emotion, and an appeal to the supernatural.[2] It rejected the skepticism, deism, Unitarianism, and rationalism left over from the American Enlightenment,[3] about the same time that similar movements flourished in Europe. Pietism was sweeping Germanic countries[4] and evangelicalism was waxing strong in England.[5] The Second Great Awakening occurred in several episodes and over different denominations; however, the revivals were very similar.[3] As the most effective form of evangelizing during this period, revival meetings cut across geographical boundaries.[6] The movement quickly spread throughout Kentucky, Indiana, Tennessee, and southern Ohio, as well as other regions of the United States and Canada.

The Third Great Awakening (1855-1930) - The American Protestant mainline churches were growing rapidly in numbers, wealth and educational levels, throwing off their frontier beginnings and becoming centered in towns and cities. Intellectuals and writers such as Josiah Strong advocated a muscular Christianity with systematic outreach to the unchurched in America and around the globe. Others built colleges and universities to train the next generation. Each denomination supported active missionary societies, and made the role of missionary one of high prestige.[6] The great majority of pietistic mainline Protestants (in the North) supported the Republican Party, and urged it to endorse prohibition and social reforms.[7

Across the nation drys crusaded in the name of religion for the prohibition of alcohol. The Woman's Christian Temperance Union mobilized Protestant women for social crusades against liquor, pornography and prostitution, and sparked the demand for women's suffrage.[10]

The Gilded Age plutocracy came under sharp attack from Social Gospel preachers and reformers in the Progressive Era. The historian Robert Fogel identifies numerous reforms, especially the battles involving child labor, compulsory elementary education, and the protection of women from exploitation in factories.[11] With Jane Addams's Hull House in Chicago as its center, the settlement house movement and the vocation of social work were deeply influenced by the Social Gospel.[12]

In 1880, the Salvation Army denomination arrived in America. Although its theology was based on ideals expressed during the Second Great Awakening, its focus on poverty was of the Third.

All the major denominations sponsored growing missionary activities, both inside the United States and around the world.[13][full citation needed]

Colleges associated with churches rapidly expanded in number, size and quality of curriculum. The promotion of "muscular Christianity" became popular among young men on campus and in urban YMCAs, as well as in such denominational youth groups such as the Epworth League for Methodists and the Walther League for Lutherans.

The Fourth Great Awakening (1960-1980) - Typified by Billy Graham evangelism. The Fourth Great Awakening was a Christian awakening that some scholars – most notably economic historian Robert Fogel – say took place in the United States in the late 1960s and early 1970s, while others look at the era following World War II. The terminology is controversial, with many historians believing the religious changes that took place in the US during these years were not equivalent to those of the first three great awakenings. Thus, the idea of a Fourth Great Awakening itself has not been generally accepted.[1]

Whether or not they constitute an awakening, many changes did take place. The "mainline" Protestant churches weakened sharply in both membership and influence while the most conservative religious denominations (such as the Southern Baptists and Missouri Synod Lutherans) grew rapidly in numbers, spread across the United States, had grave internal theological battles and schisms, and became politically powerful. Other evangelical and fundamentalist denominations also expanded rapidly. At the same time, secularism grew dramatically, and the more conservative churches saw themselves battling secularism in terms of issues such as LGBT rights, abortion, and creationism.[2][3]

Courtesy of Wikipedia

The Wokening (Or the Fifth Great Awakening) - same moral impetus, same organizing principles. The secular church.

The 2nd to 5th Awakenings were, IMO, typified by their rejection of the liberalism of the Enlightenment, rationalism and of natural law and natural religion. But all of them spoke to a cultural need within society on both sides of the Atlantic and across the Pacific. Something that offers a rock to hold on to while everything changes.
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,149
Points
1,110
The 2nd to 5th Awakenings were, IMO, typified by their rejection of the liberalism of the Enlightenment, rationalism and of natural law and natural religion. But all of them spoke to a cultural need within society on both sides of the Atlantic and across the Pacific. Something that offers a rock to hold on to while everything changes.
I don't need a rock to cling to, I have a pretty sync'ed moral compass, and I suspect that most Canadians echo my stance.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
9,163
Points
1,160
The Great Awakenings (Moral Crusades)

The First Great Awakening (1730 to 1755) - prompted by the work of George Whitefield, co-founder of the Anglican Methodist movement together with the Wesley brothers. Characterized by anti-establishment revival meetings. Associated with the backcountry in the US.

The Second Great Awakening (1790-1840) - the Second Great Awakening in North America reflected Romanticism characterized by enthusiasm, emotion, and an appeal to the supernatural.[2] It rejected the skepticism, deism, Unitarianism, and rationalism left over from the American Enlightenment,[3] about the same time that similar movements flourished in Europe. Pietism was sweeping Germanic countries[4] and evangelicalism was waxing strong in England.[5] The Second Great Awakening occurred in several episodes and over different denominations; however, the revivals were very similar.[3] As the most effective form of evangelizing during this period, revival meetings cut across geographical boundaries.[6] The movement quickly spread throughout Kentucky, Indiana, Tennessee, and southern Ohio, as well as other regions of the United States and Canada.

The Third Great Awakening (1855-1930) - The American Protestant mainline churches were growing rapidly in numbers, wealth and educational levels, throwing off their frontier beginnings and becoming centered in towns and cities. Intellectuals and writers such as Josiah Strong advocated a muscular Christianity with systematic outreach to the unchurched in America and around the globe. Others built colleges and universities to train the next generation. Each denomination supported active missionary societies, and made the role of missionary one of high prestige.[6] The great majority of pietistic mainline Protestants (in the North) supported the Republican Party, and urged it to endorse prohibition and social reforms.[7

Across the nation drys crusaded in the name of religion for the prohibition of alcohol. The Woman's Christian Temperance Union mobilized Protestant women for social crusades against liquor, pornography and prostitution, and sparked the demand for women's suffrage.[10]

The Gilded Age plutocracy came under sharp attack from Social Gospel preachers and reformers in the Progressive Era. The historian Robert Fogel identifies numerous reforms, especially the battles involving child labor, compulsory elementary education, and the protection of women from exploitation in factories.[11] With Jane Addams's Hull House in Chicago as its center, the settlement house movement and the vocation of social work were deeply influenced by the Social Gospel.[12]

In 1880, the Salvation Army denomination arrived in America. Although its theology was based on ideals expressed during the Second Great Awakening, its focus on poverty was of the Third.

All the major denominations sponsored growing missionary activities, both inside the United States and around the world.[13][full citation needed]

Colleges associated with churches rapidly expanded in number, size and quality of curriculum. The promotion of "muscular Christianity" became popular among young men on campus and in urban YMCAs, as well as in such denominational youth groups such as the Epworth League for Methodists and the Walther League for Lutherans.

The Fourth Great Awakening (1960-1980) - Typified by Billy Graham evangelism. The Fourth Great Awakening was a Christian awakening that some scholars – most notably economic historian Robert Fogel – say took place in the United States in the late 1960s and early 1970s, while others look at the era following World War II. The terminology is controversial, with many historians believing the religious changes that took place in the US during these years were not equivalent to those of the first three great awakenings. Thus, the idea of a Fourth Great Awakening itself has not been generally accepted.[1]

Whether or not they constitute an awakening, many changes did take place. The "mainline" Protestant churches weakened sharply in both membership and influence while the most conservative religious denominations (such as the Southern Baptists and Missouri Synod Lutherans) grew rapidly in numbers, spread across the United States, had grave internal theological battles and schisms, and became politically powerful. Other evangelical and fundamentalist denominations also expanded rapidly. At the same time, secularism grew dramatically, and the more conservative churches saw themselves battling secularism in terms of issues such as LGBT rights, abortion, and creationism.[2][3]

Courtesy of Wikipedia

The Wokening (Or the Fifth Great Awakening) - same moral impetus, same organizing principles. The secular church.

The 2nd to 5th Awakenings were, IMO, typified by their rejection of the liberalism of the Enlightenment, rationalism and of natural law and natural religion. But all of them spoke to a cultural need within society on both sides of the Atlantic and across the Pacific. Something that offers a rock to hold on to while everything changes.

Visited John Knox in Edinburgh a couple of years ago.

Typical Dissenter: always trying to be more useful and practical than the Catholic 'gentry' :)

1629674999494.png
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,848
Points
1,060
I don't need a rock to cling to, I have a pretty sync'ed moral compass, and I suspect that most Canadians echo my stance.

While I suspect many do echo your stance I think it is an open question if most do. I think a lot look to the herd for guidance.
 
Top