Meritocratic Capitalism

Meritocratic Capitalism, clipped to MeritCap and also called Market Meritocracy, is a fictional, economically right ideology. It takes the economic system of and combines it with an extreme principle of. MeritCap believes that competitive markets are good, but passive wealth accumulation—such as inheritance, interest, and debt—isn't, and a system that has it can't be a true free market. One should not be paid money simply for having money; wealth must be earned by work and innovation, and the customer is king.

MeritCap is wacky/unrealistic because of its desire to abolish passive wealth accumulation (PWA) as a concept in society, which would require forgetting how basic finance works. In fact, it can be argued as not being a true capitalist at all in the modern sense

Meritocratic Capitalism strives for a free market economy where advantages and wealth cannot compound passively but instead require continuous innovation and competition to maintain a leading position in the market. It relies on the foundational belief that without PWA skewing the playing field, a free market would be able to naturally arbitrate itself such that only the businesses who give the best possible products and services for customers' money are allowed to thrive.

MeritCap aims to solve a fundamental problem in capitalism where market leaders only need to be innovative once or a few times in their early stage. Their passively accumulated wealth will then just compound to keep them on top of the market, no matter how awful their practices and services get from there. This can best be seen in real life with large corporations, who can afford to be terrible at delivering their services and products because they have enough passively accumulated wealth to act as a cushion against these failures and snuff competitors out. (And granted this, are still given massive government bailouts, which act as further cushions.)

Hence, PWA—which includes inheritance, interest, and debt—creates a system where wealthy people who have no idea how to run an effective business, or have stopped caring to deliver the things their businesses promised, can still stay on top of the market by using passively accumulated wealth to kill competitors, cripple the market, and disempower the customer. This results in a market held prisoner by weak businesses, while newer, more innovative competitors who can better serve customers are snuffed out by those at the top before they can even thrive.

Meritocratic Capitalism believes that any market which would allow for this outcome is not truly a free market. PWA is the worst enemy of both the customer and laborer. PWA is not deserved wealth, and must be abolished. The only rightful kind of wealth is that which you actively compete and innovate to obtain. This leads to a permanently free market where there is no safety net to keep weak businesses afloat.

To be wealthy, therefore, is to run competitive businesses that best serve one's customers. The moment one sits on one's wealth and stops prioritizing the customer, a true free market would kill this business in favor of a more competitive one. The rich class is only determined by their businesses' utility to wider society.

MeritCap also addresses the abuse of the common worker. It's well known that slave-like conditions kill business efficiency, but under pure capitalism, PWA allows the wealthy to treat their employees as expendable. After all, only a monopoly can run on dying slaves. However, without PWA as a cushion, the inefficiencies of slave labor would quickly kill a business. Improving worker conditions then becomes essential to be a competitive business.

Another major problem of pure capitalism is invented wealth. Invented wealth is a direct consequence of extrapolations made on the stock market with the clear purpose of maximizing PWA. In other words, one can get rich purely off of hype. With PWA abolished, invented wealth like this is exposed as the sham that it is, and a true free market won't tolerate it.

A Meritocratic Capitalist society can exist alongside a strong state. In fact, government regulations can be used to abolish PWA and legislate against those who aim to disrupt the free market. However, a strong state can also descend into tyranny or corporatocracy if it has weak institutions that can be easily undermined by authoritarians or populists.

MeritCap can just as well exist with a decentralized or even nonexistent state if the people in the society all abide by the principle of markets without PWA. But it would be best for there to be a state as a guarantor of this principle, since there's no certainty that people will follow it otherwise, and a stateless society could descend into tyranny by the PWA-hoarders (see: Anarcho-Capitalism).

Nationalism Meritocratic Capitalism is incompatible with nationalism. Strong national borders and/or isolationism is detrimental to free trade. MeritCap believes that markets should be set free from geopolitical squabbling, so that they may expand based on their own merits.

Religion Meritocratic Capitalism can exist alongside religion. In fact, religions that are opposed to interest because they see it as usury (Islam) or gambling (Amish and Mennonites) are already halfway to being opposed to PWA anyway.

Culture and Diversity Meritocratic Capitalism is variable on the cultural axis, but leans towards progressive. It believes that diversity is the best source of innovation. The free market is handicapped without diversity because possible founders of new, innovative businesses are hindered from pursuing entrepreneurship. MeritCap also views foreign cultures as sources of inspiration.

Individualism Meritocratic Capitalism strongly champions individualism. It believes that groupthink is the enemy of innovation. Imagine a business filled with people of similar backgrounds and mindsets, unable to think outside of established consensus. That's going to become stale quickly.

If you give a job to someone who can't do their job properly, it's not really a good outcome. This is why we need merit or meritocracy. The way jobs are distributed amongst people should be determined by the effort and talent of the individual itself rather than their amount of wealth or their relationships. You have to pass some qualifications and you have to be strong in order to get a job because if you get the job without passing through any qualification and you can't do it properly, then it's not a good outcome.