Every story needs a hero, the one who stands up against injustice and wins. In the story of inequality, meritocracy has long been a hero. To be fair, it did quite a job, dislodging inequalities that had become systemic. But then again, to twist Ra’s al Ghul’s words “..if you devote yourself to an ideal, you become something else entirely.”
One entity that has been at the centre of the debate around meritocracy is Silicon Valley given its influence on the immediate environment and clones developing across the globe. A popular line of thought among those who have made it there is that they earned it all on their own and are not obliged to give anything back to society. (read)
As this excellent related post titled ‘Is Our Strategy Working For Me?’ states, it is is difficult to objectively look at a system when one is part of it, even if one is at the farthest fringes. Though the post itself connects the thought to work in the context of organisations, Elizabeth Warren’s point about the social contract that allows any enterprise to thrive is even more valid in this context.
Like I mentioned earlier, I wonder whether Silicon Valley would agree. So, what does a win for meritocracy mean for the ones who didn’t even get to pick a side? Probably an ever widening gulf, and a sense of desperation. Perhaps the mistake is in seeing meritocracy as an ideal. Like every other system, it creates its own sets of winners and losers. I read a post on Gawker some time back titled The Flaws of Meritocracy, and thought it did a good job of dissecting it.
Is a meritocracy a more fair system than one in which dynastic wealth and privilege is handed down from father to son, and sexism and racism and WASP tribalism exclude the vast majority of people from having access to the gates of power? Yes it is. Is a meritocracy the best and highest ideal that we should seek to achieve? No it’s not. A meritocracy, like the system we already have, is good for some people and not good for others.
When we discuss the subject of meritocracy, I doubt whether we factor in the difference in starting points, and therefore the opportunities one gets. Nothing I have seen explains it better than this comic. (must see!) As it rightly points out, over the years it adds up, to a significant divergence of paths and the way a life is lived. Reminds me of the helplessness I wrote about in a post sometime back. Is the empathy to understand that, a necessary quality of the winners in the system of meritocracy in which the currency of success is one’s ‘hard earned’ money? Not. And that’s probably where our hero lives long enough to see itself becoming the villain.