slowpoke well

route 33 to the future

Category: Politics

there’s no merit in meritocracy

Ah, meritocracy! The great solution to all of society’s problems, at least if the white, heterosexual, cis-male hacker is to be believed. If just we’d had meritocracy, then we could actually solve the important problems, and everyone would be happy!

I’m tired of hearing it, really. It gets brought up every time someone calls out issues in hacker or nerd communities, and it doesn’t get any less wrong with every repetition. The idea behind meritocracy is certainly a commendable one – that everyone be judged by their merit, not superficial other criteria. Even the hacker ethics of the CCC reflect this:

Hackers should be judged by their acting, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position.

The problem is that in practise, the ones who define merit are those already in power, and in both these communities as well as society at large, the ones in power are white, cisgendered, heterosexual men, and as long as these people get to define what merit is, meritocracy will merely reinforce existing power structures. It’s nothing radical, really. It’s the exact opposite, a reactionary, conservative rhetoric that’s used to subdue criticism.

One of the best examples for this is Linus Torvalds, idol and hero of hackers and nerds alike. He’s the “Benevolent Dictator For Life” of the Linux kernel, an unarguably brilliant engineer… and a massive, unapologetic dick. He’s been called out for his behavior for years, by many different people, and pretty much all that he has ever answered is “lol deal with it”. He’s a prime example for a toxic individual who’s tolerated a) because he is an (or rather, the most) important contributor to the Linux kernel, and b) because the abusive shit he constantly pulls is not just ignored by his peers, it’s basically applauded and espoused.

Just recently, when questioned about the lack of diversity in tech (the existence of which is inarguable), his response was basically “I don’t care, I’m an asshole”. And this is the person heading arguably the most well known FLOSS project in existence. If you look at the hashtag #IStandWithLinus on Twitter, you’ll see legions of rabid fanboys fanatically defending his right to be an abusive shitbag, people who look up to Torvalds and idolize his behavior. If you do not think this is fucked up, then please don’t bother talking to me, ever.

And it’s not just Torvalds. If that would be the case, it would be the least of our problems. The issue is that this kind of behavior is not just widespread, but also widely tolerated. You can be an abusive asshole as much as you want as long as you contribute technical things – provided you are a white, heterosexual cis-male, because otherwise, your behavior would be unacceptable.

I’ve seen this pan out before me several times already, and I still see it all the time. I’m part of several communities where assholes are tolerated as long as they do stuff, where people don’t see an issue with the fact the 98% of the people in the community are white cishet males, or if they do, they think that this will eventually fix itself as long as you tell yourself the lie that everyone will be respected as long as they have merit. Worse, if you call people out on their bullshit, instead of telling the abuser to stop, will start telling you to stop criticizing the abuser because they do stuff and how dare you imply that they are bad.

Also, as I have said above, the ones in power define what merit is. This leads to the phenomenon that everything which could potentially hurt this existing power structure is deemed as “not merit” and therefore dismissable. When people question this or call out people on their behavior, they’re questioned what they have contributed to the community and how dare they criticize someone who does more stuff than them. It’s a shaming tactic that works to constantly undermine the achievements of people, aimed at eventually getting them to question their own achievements.

Meritocracy fails because it fails to question existing power structures, it merely defines them away. This plain doesn’t work, it never has. No victory over oppressive structures has ever been achieved by saying “this structure no longer exits” and subsequently ignoring its existence, nor will this ever happen. Those victories have to be fought for, and meritocracy does not do this, because it’s a passive denial of existing hierarchies.

We seriously need to get rid of this poisonous concept for good. We need to tell the many Torvalds in our communities and spaces to either stop being assholes, or get the fuck out, no matter how valuable their technical contributions may be. We need to actively fight to end the lack of diversity instead of ignoring it. We need to stop tolerating douchebaggery, and stop being douchebags ourselves.

Fuck meritocracy.

On Free Speech

Trigger Warning: Hate Speech, Abuse

To make the introduction short, I’m sick and tired of people screaming “Free Speech!” when you call them out for abuse or hate speech. I’m fed up with entitled, privileged people immediately accusing you of “censorship” when you tell them that what they say is hurtful, dehumanizing, and therefore unacceptable. And I’m so fucking done with people giving platforms to these kinds of assholes under the banner of protecting Human Rights.

Free Speech is a very specific kind of right that many people completely misunderstand or intentionally misrepresent, often to push their own oppressive agenda or to escape eating up to the consequences of their actions. And this is despite the fact that Free Speech is actually a very simple right that can completely and sufficiently be defined in a single sentence:

Free Speech is your right not to be interfered with in expression by the government.

Notice the emphasis? That’s because it’s important. The right to Free Speech exists to prevent your government to stop you from criticizing it. It exists to make it possible to have free and unhindered political discourse without fear of governmental repression. That is literally all that Free Speech is. Nothing more, nothing less.

Now let’s focus on what Free Speech isn’t:

Free Speech is not your right to abuse people and get away with it. Free Speech is not your right to harass people and then complain about people telling you to fuck off. Free Speech is not your right to demand a soapbox, and not your right to have an audience that listens to you. Free Speech does not mean there are no consequences to what you say. Free Speech does not make you immune to scrutiny and criticism. Free Speech is not your ticket to be an asshole and not get called out for it. Free Speech does not mean you’re allowed to say anything anywhere to anyone.

Likewise, censorship simply means the restriction of Free Speech. As I have explained above, that means censorship only happens when the government stops you from expressing yourself.

Calling people out on harassment is not censorship, that’s called being a decent human being. Not giving hate speech a platform by kicking out the people who espouse it (or outright denying them entry) is not censorship. Telling white supremacists and Nazis to fuck off is not censorship. Blocking people on social media is not censorship. No, not even when it’s done with shared blocklists. Not wanting to listen to sexist, racist, ableist, homophobic, transphobic, or elitist bullshit is not censorship. Demanding that all of the above happens, everywhere, is not censorship, either.

In a decent society, hate speech and abuse do not exist. There’s no need for them to have a platform, anywhere. If you demand that they be given one, you support them, and if you support hate speech and abuse, you’re a shitty excuse for a human being – so do not complain that people will treat you like one.

Love Football, Hate the World Cup

It’s not really a secret that I don’t really get Football (or Soccer, for you crazy Americans), and don’t really understand what’s so interesting about watching twenty-two people in mostly single-sex teams chasing a round object. I do understand it’s a thing a lot of people apparently find interesting, though, and I respect that. Other people might not understand why people gather at various places in weird clothing to listen to loud, abrasive music, or hold entire congresses devoted to creative usage of computers and ethical considerations of technology. Or any of the other diverse things the uncountable subcultures on this planet do.

What I do not respect, however, are people who go on to claim that any of the aforementioned things are not political. Nothing is not political, especially if it involves a gigantic international sporting event with several billion dollars of corporate sponsorship and governmental aid behind it – aid that’s missing in so many other areas, like education – in a country where street kids are being murdered by the police to “clean up the city” for the influx of foreign visitors, slums are raided to crack down on drug trafficking without actually trying to fix the problems behind it, child prostitution is common, and social unrest is met with violence and repression by the government.

This is as political as it will ever get. Every conscious supporter of the World Cup, every sponsor, every athlete playing in it, every artist associated with it, and every football fan who doesn’t boycott it are as guilty of the crimes happening in Brazil as the perpetrators – they have the blood of countless innocent victims on their hands, murdered and abandoned for the entertainment of the rest of the world. It’s an insult to any conceivable definition of sportspersonship. And don’t get me started on the braindead surge of nationalism, xenophobia and racism it causes – especially here in Germany.

If you are truly a football fan, if you really love the sport, it is your duty to boycott the World Cup. Instead, go support a cool local football club (i.e. one without a fan scene full of homophobic, racist macho nutjobs). Or better yet: go campaign and protest against the capitalist abuse of your favorite sport.