The Tyranny of Merit

1. Meritocracy undermines social solidarity and fuels inequality

The more we think of ourselves as self-made and self-sufficient, the harder it is to learn gratitude and humility. And without these sentiments, it is hard to care for the common good.

Meritocracy's dark side. While the idea that people should be rewarded based on their talents and efforts seems fair, it has corrosive effects on society. By suggesting that success is solely the result of individual merit, it:

• Leads successful people to believe they deserve their good fortune
• Makes those who struggle feel personally responsible for their difficulties
• Erodes empathy and social solidarity between different groups
• Justifies extreme inequalities as reflections of differences in talent and effort

The meritocratic ideal ignores the role of luck, circumstance, and societal support in shaping outcomes. This makes it harder for people to recognize their interdependence and shared fate as members of a community.

2. The rhetoric of rising masks the reality of stagnant mobility

The American faith that, with hard work and talent, anyone can rise no longer fits the facts on the ground.

Mobility myth. Political leaders across the spectrum invoke the promise that anyone can rise through hard work and talent. However, this rhetoric obscures inconvenient truths:

• Upward mobility has declined in the US in recent decades
• Children born to poor families are unlikely to reach even middle class status
• Other developed countries now have higher rates of social mobility than the US
• The rhetoric of rising justifies inequality by suggesting it results from merit

This gap between rhetoric and reality breeds resentment among those who feel the system is rigged against them. It also allows elites to avoid addressing structural barriers to opportunity.

3. Credentialism has become the last acceptable prejudice

Liberals who defend the welfare state on the basis of luck egalitarianism are led, almost unavoidably, to a rhetoric of victimhood that views welfare recipients as lacking agency, as incapable of acting responsibly.

Degree divide. As higher education has become the primary path to high-status jobs, a new form of discrimination has emerged:

• Those without college degrees face stigma and limited opportunities
• Well-educated elites look down on those with less formal education
• Political representation is increasingly limited to those with degrees
• This "educationism" is more socially acceptable than other prejudices

The credentialist system:

• Ignores valuable skills and intelligence not captured by formal credentials
• Devalues the contributions of those in working-class occupations
• Breeds resentment among those without degrees who feel disrespected

4. Higher education reinforces privilege rather than promoting mobility

American higher education is like an elevator in a building that most people enter on the top floor.

Entrenching advantage. Despite rhetoric about equal opportunity, the higher education system largely reproduces existing inequalities:

• Elite universities enroll far more students from wealthy families than poor ones
• Legacy admissions and preferences for athletes favor the privileged
• Even public universities increasingly cater to affluent out-of-state students
• The admissions process rewards expensive test prep and resume-building

Efforts to increase diversity have focused more on race and gender than class. As a result, higher education often functions to:

• Provide elite credentials to those already advantaged
• Offer a veneer of meritocratic legitimacy to an unequal system

5. Success ethics ignore luck and overemphasize individual responsibility

If my success is my own doing, their failure must be their fault.

Responsibility trap. Meritocratic thinking promotes an ethic of extreme personal responsibility that:

• Ignores the role of chance, circumstance, and social support in outcomes
• Leads successful people to believe they fully deserve their rewards
• Makes those who struggle feel they are to blame for their difficulties
• Justifies limiting social assistance only to the "deserving" poor

This mindset:

• Erodes social solidarity and empathy
• Makes it harder to address structural inequalities
• Contributes to stress, anxiety, and "perfectionism" among the privileged

A more nuanced view recognizes how factors beyond individual control shape opportunities and outcomes.

6. Technocratic governance erodes democratic debate and citizen engagement

Conducting our public discourse as if it were possible to outsource moral and political judgment to markets, or to experts and technocrats, has emptied democratic argument of meaning and purpose.

Democracy deficit. The rise of technocratic approaches to governance has:

• Reduced complex political and moral questions to matters of economic efficiency
• Elevated the authority of credentialed experts over citizens
• Narrowed the scope of democratic deliberation and debate

This trend:

• Disempowers ordinary citizens from engaging in self-rule
• Breeds resentment toward elites seen as out of touch
• Fails to address fundamental questions about the common good

Revitalizing democracy requires creating space for meaningful civic engagement on substantive moral and political questions.

7. Renewing the dignity of work is crucial for social cohesion

What accounts for the inordinate levels of emotional distress among young people from affluent families? The answer has largely to do with the meritocratic imperative—the unrelenting pressure to perform, to achieve, to succeed.

Work reconsidered. The devaluation of non-credentialed work has:

• Reduced the social esteem accorded to working-class occupations
• Contributed to a sense of cultural and economic displacement
• Fueled resentment toward elites seen as looking down on ordinary workers

Renewing respect for the dignity of all socially valuable work is crucial for:

• Restoring a sense of shared purpose and mutual recognition
• Addressing the anger and alienation fueling populist movements
• Creating a more cohesive society with opportunities for all to contribute

This requires moving beyond narrow economic metrics to consider the civic and social value of different forms of work.

8. Moving beyond meritocracy requires rethinking success and opportunity

A lively sense of the contingency of our lot can inspire a certain humility: "There, but for the grace of God, or the accident of birth, or the mystery of fate, go I." Such humility is the beginning of the way back from the harsh ethic of success that drives us apart.

Reimagining the common good. Addressing the downsides of meritocracy involves:

• Recognizing the role of luck and social support in individual success
• Expanding notions of valuable contribution beyond credentialed achievement
• Creating opportunities for dignified work and civic engagement at all levels
• Cultivating humility, gratitude, and social solidarity

This shift requires:

• Rethinking education to value diverse forms of intelligence and contribution
• Developing economic policies that share prosperity more broadly
• Revitalizing democratic culture to engage citizens in shaping the common good

By moving beyond the limits of meritocratic thinking, we can build a society that is both more just and more cohesive.

Last updated: August 11, 2024