Talk:Kritocracy

This article was nominated for deletion on 2006 June 21. The result of the discussion was keep.

Stanley Reed was, of course, correct. We now live in "The United States of Krytocracy".

Give me a break- this adds no value to the discussion. Every branch of government should work, not just the legislative and executive. Your comment just shows the attitude of a certain un-American element in society that is unhappy that they cannot control every facet of the US Government.

((Below: Just copying someone else's material they left on the main page after the last edit. Also, capitals are like swearing. They're good to add emphasis sometimes, but annoying when used constantly. Omnipotent Q 04:34, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)))

THESE CHANGES ARE SUGGESTED BY ART SAPPER (ASAPPER@MWE.COM) BECAUSE:

1. THE WAY THAT THE PREVIOUS ENTRY WAS WRITTEN IMPLIES THAT JUSTICE REED WAS RESISTING VOTING WITH THE MAJORITY BECAUSE HE DID NOT THINK THE MAJORITY RESULT TO BE DESIRABLE. THAT IS UNTRUE. HE THOUGHT THAT DESIRABILITY WAS IRRELEVANT.

2. THE REFERENCE TO THE BOOK OF JUDGES AS ILLUSTRATING A PERIOD OF KRYTOCRACY IS INACCURATE. THE HEBREW WORD "SHAFAT" OR "SHOFET" (PLURAL: SHOFTIM) MEANS "CHIEFTAIN" OR "LEADER," NOT JUDGE. THAT IS WHY THE LATEST JEWISH PUBLICATION SOCIETY TRANSLATION NOW RENDERS THE WORD AS "CHIEFTAINS," COMMENTING THAT "the corresponding verb shaphat is usually rendered not 'judged' but 'ruled' or 'led'." SAMSON DID NOT RENDER JUDICIAL RULINGS. HE LED BY STRENGTH.

NPOV[edit]

While "krytocracy" may indeed be a valid word for a form of government, it is used mostly in the US by elements of the extreme political right- which should indicate that we must insure such an article meets the NPOV of Wikipedia. - user:24.6.229.157

The NPOV template is to dispute the neutrality of information already in the article, something which you are not doing. If you think it should talk page something, then add it. Don't misuse the tag for a purpose other than what it was intended for. →Raul654 18:44, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Fictional krytocracies section[edit]

I don't think that Judge Dredd is really a good example of this, since although the fictional rulers in those stories are called judges, that title is misleading, because they are not actually judges in the sense that we understand the term. They do not "rule" by allowing their own opinions to influence their court rulings and thereby usurping the legislative branch's function; they rule in the same way that the Nazis ruled Germany. I'm removing this example. Richard75 01:35, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kritocracy vs. kritarchy[edit]

If these two are different as the article states then why are Somalia and ancient Israel given as examples of both forms of government? AstroMark (talk) 12:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]