R: Down with Meritocracy

As far back as the founding, Americans have considered our nation a “land of opportunity” where hard work and determination are the driving factors of success and upward mobility. Yet, in recent years, many individuals in fields such as sociology, economics, and politics have challenged the traditional “meritocratic” view of achievement and reward in our society. These individuals claim that meritocracy no longer functions the way we claim it does. The wealthy and privileged maintain their power while ensuring that the upper echelons of society become closed off to anyone not born into them – no matter how much hard work and sacrifice an outsider might offer up in an attempt to move up in society. It is harder today to achieve a true “rags-to-riches” social leap than perhaps ever in our nation’s history. In light of this, is it not time we proclaim “Down with Meritocracy!” and adopt a new (or perhaps old) system?

On the one hand, meritocracy has indeed become somewhat of a false promise in our society. When we imagine a meritocratic system, we envision our democracy as a sort of referee which will make sure that everyone plays the game of life fairly, that no segment of society is disadvantaged purposefully. In this way, with an “equality of opportunity” those who put in the hard work and maintain the drive it takes will rise to the top, attaining lucrative careers in whatever field they enter. However, the actual outcome of this “fair” system has been massive wealth inequality and a cementing of social stratification. The reality is that those in the top tier of our society have the resources to ensure that their children also make it into the top tier through intensive education and social opportunities. It is somewhat like an intensive, annual race where the finish line moves further and further back each year and where there are a limited number of places in the “winners circle.” The privileged individual must push himself to the limits of human potential even after being allowed to begin far ahead of the average person’s starting line. For the hard-working, self-driven man not lucky enough to be born into the top 25% of society, there’s almost no way to place into the winner’s circle.

Yet, this bleak depiction of one’s hope for success in life seems wrong. Our nation was indeed founded on and flourished under the notion that hard work pays off. If we abandon that idea, it would encourage millions of people to feel as if they are not independent beings responsible for their own success but rather are helpless to improve their lot in life. It would seem that abandoning meritocracy as a sham could incentivize a kind of “learned helplessness” which would cripple many parts of society. We need meritocracy alongside our democracy to ensure that human potential is being maximized within our government and business structures. Surely the best person to become a Representative or a CEO is the individual who attended the most elite institutions while pushing himself to the limits of his potential. Without meritocracy, without this competition in human capital, we would not be able to maintain the level of excellence we need to have strong and effective leadership across our society.

This topic raises many questions about the nature of our society and about how it ought to be guided – or perhaps not guided. To what extent do we have equality of opportunity in our education, business, and social structures? How else other than by merit could we judge the value of one elected official or business over another? How closely linked to the American spirit and core American identity and culture is meritocracy? Would removing meritocracy from our social order remove a part of ourselves which we could not replace or do without?