The assorted definitions of assorted political terms are amusing at times. The word for today is.... timocracy.
The primary definitions of timocracy are :
1. A state described by Plato as being governed by persons whose political power accrues through (primmarily military) honor and glory.
2. An Aristotelian system in which civic or political power increases with wealth.
Wellllllll, okay. sorta. Not that these definitions have conflict and that there are several modern alternative usages.
Let's break it down to "governance by worth"
Disregarding, for the moment, the national party system we inherited from the post-Nixon reforms- and looking solely at grass roots political activism, consider this question:
Is traditional american party politics- republican and democrat- in local organisations, with local effort *required* to acheive position, power, influence- is this not, in a very essential way, timocracy in the sense that those attaining power have the worthiness of stepping forward and *trying*?