“Everyone can make it.” “Work hard enough and you will be successful.” “And if you are not successful you did not work hard enough.” That’s how most people think. But this thinking brings forth a problem called the:

Meritocratic hubris

This is the tendency of winners to be too proud of their success. To forget the luck and good fortune that helped them on their way. “It’s the conviction of those who land on top that they deserve their fate.” That there is no other reason for their success other than their hard work. This is of course not true. There is always a bit of luck involved and circumstances we have no control over like: time, location, education, parent wealth, physical health etc. 

By implication, according to the meritocratic hubris, those on the bottom deserve their fate. It’s solely their wrongdoing and their fault. They did not work hard enough, they did not make it. They deserve it. “The idea that everyone is exposed to a certain kind of fate, by the grace of god or sheer luck makes room for compassion. A perfect meritocracy banishes all sense of gift or grace or luck; it diminishes our capacity to see ourselves as sharing a common fate. And so, it leaves little room for the solidarity that can arise when we reflect on the contingency of our talents and fortunes.” This is what makes merit a kind of tyranny.

The Tyranny of Merit

Based on the book, the Tyranny of Merit by Michael Sandel, who teaches political studies at Harvard University, we uncover many causes for the current state of democracy. As we are in an election year here in Australia but also because of the challenges to democracy posed by the pandemic and the rise of political partisanship, we need the identify the problem and find achievable solutions. What’s the future of democracies? For Sandel it is a future in which we have: 

equality of opportunity in a democracy of humility. 

Equality of opportunity

Equality of opportunity you might think is already part of our society. But if you look closer it’s not. Over decades people from different economic backgrounds have less and less common ground. They live in different suburbs, go to different schools and have different cultural, educational and financial possibilities which in turn creates a sense of disconnection. Although free democracy promises equality of opportunity in reality this is less and less true. Children from lower-income families do not have the same opportunity as others who visit elite schools and enjoy private tuition. This hopelessness creates in return frustration and resentment. “Why try when failure is certain?” Recent developments show for example that children in the USA will be worse off than their parents. Just as in Australia most young people can’t afford to buy a house like their parents realistically hope to be able to do.

In human history, there was always a gap between the rich and the poor. The kings and noblemen and the peasants and common folk. But, even that gave room for humility and compassion. Because the rich knew they were born into it and the poor had to live with their fate. In a meritocracy, there is no room for compassion because the poor are poor because of their own fault and the rich can feel entitled because it’s their earned right. 

“Seen from below, the hubris of elites is galling. No one likes to be looked down upon. But the meritocratic faith adds insult to injury. The notion that your fate is in your hands – that you can ‘make it if you try’ – is a double-edged sword, inspiring in one way, but discriminatory in another. It congratulates the winners but denigrates the losers – even in their own eyes. For those who can’t find work or make ends meet, it’s hard to escape the demoralizing thought that their failure is their own doing – that they simply lack the talent and drive to succeed. This gives rise to a politics of humiliation.

It combines resentment of the winners with nagging self-doubt. It’s a potent ingredient in the volatile brew of anger and resentment that fuels populist protest.”

Democracy of Humility

To reinvigorate democratic politics, we need to find our way to a morally more robust public discourse; says Sandel. “One that takes seriously the corrosive effect of meritocratic striving on the social bonds that constitute our common life.” “If the common good can be arrived at only by deliberating with our fellow citizens about the purpose and end worthy of our political community, then democracy cannot be indifferent to the character of the common life. It does not require perfect equality but it requires that citizens of different walks of life encounter one another in common places. It leads to a more generous and compassionate society where even those who are not fortunate enough, who do not make it, have a place to live and be heard. 

Is that a good solution? Is that a way forward? And if it is, in which political Agenda and which political party do we find this proposition. And if we do not find it how can we influence the next government and politician to devise the necessary policies? What would be the alternative solution? 

Source: Tyranny of Merit by Michael J. Sandel

Check out the video linked below for more information about this topic.