The Rise of the Meritocracy

Last updated
The Rise of the Meritocracy
The Rise of the Meritocracy (1967 cover).jpg
Cover of the Pelican Books edition
Author Michael Young
LanguageEnglish
Genre Dystopia, political fiction
Publication date
1958
Publication placeUnited Kingdom

The Rise of the Meritocracy is a book by British sociologist and politician Michael Dunlop Young which was first published in 1958. [1] It describes a dystopian society in a future United Kingdom in which merit (defined as IQ + effort) has become the central tenet of society, replacing previous divisions of social class and creating a society stratified between a meritorious power-holding elite and a disenfranchised underclass of the less meritorious. The essay satirised the Tripartite System of education that was being practised at the time. [2] The narrative of the book ends in 2034 with a revolt against the meritocratic elite by the "Populists". [3]

Contents

The book was rejected by the Fabian Society and then by 11 publishers before being accepted by Thames and Hudson. [4]

Meritocracy is the political philosophy in which political influence and power is concentrated in those with "merit", according to the intellectual talent and achievement of the individual. The word is formed by combining the Latin root "mereō" and Ancient Greek suffix "cracy". In his essay, Michael Young describes and ridicules such a society, the selective education system that was the Tripartite System, and the philosophy in general. [2] Michael Young is widely credited with coining the term "meritocracy" in the essay, [1] but it was first used (pejoratively) by sociologist Alan Fox in 1956. [5]

The word was adopted into the English language without the negative connotations that Young intended it to have and was embraced by supporters of the philosophy. Young expressed his disappointment in the embrace of this word and philosophy by the Labour Party under Tony Blair in The Guardian in an article in 2001, where he states:

It is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others. [2]

Journalist and writer Paul Barker points out that "irony is a dangerous freight to carry" and suggests that in the 1960s and '70s it was read "as a simple attack on the rampant meritocrats", whereas he suggests it should be read "as sociological analysis in the form of satire". [6]

In 2006 The Rise and Rise of Meritocracy commented that The Rise of the Meritocracy "was intended to help turn Labour away from meritocracy, by reminding it of the importance of communitarian values. Curiously, though, half a century later we have a Labour government declaring the promotion of meritocracy as one its primary objectives." [7]

In 2018, to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the publication of The Rise of the Meritocracy, The Young Foundation, named after Michael Young, launched Beyond Meritocracy, [8] a competition to answer the questions "What lies beyond Meritocracy?" and "What might be the equation for the 21st century?" The Rise of the Meritocracy did not say what came after the challenge to meritocracy by the Populists that it predicted in 2034. Coming after the rise of populists in 2016 such as Donald Trump in the USA and Nigel Farage in the UK some of the essays suggested that the dire predictions in the book were proving prescient, and earlier than predicted.

Synopsis

Introduction to the Transaction edition

The author had difficulties in finding a publisher for the book. One wanted a new Brave New World . Another told him they did not publish PhD theses: finally, a friend published it. It deals with "Meritocracy", a term part Latin term and part Greek, its theme being a fictitious change in society. Before, there were castes. Now with the industrial era, there are classes. People are defined by their achievements rather than by the families they are born into. Social inequality can be justified.

A meritocratic education and society can lead to problems. The rich and powerful are encouraged by the general culture and become arrogant. "The eminent know that success is a just reward for their own capacity, their own efforts", whereas the poor are demoralised. The latter "are tested again and again… If they have been labelled 'dunce' repeatedly they cannot any longer pretend; their image of themselves is more nearly a true, unflattering reflection." [9]

Education is not only a way to get productive people. It could enrich them too.

Introduction

In 2034, a revolution with deep historical roots is approaching in the UK. The narrator wants to explain the rise of the meritocracy in a socialist essay.

Part One: Rise of the Elite

Chapter One: Clash of Social Forces

Previously the job one had was that of one's parents; lawyers were the sons of lawyers – unfortunately, since people were not always suited to their jobs. It was an era of nepotism which survived because of tradition and the importance of family. Zealots for progress successfully introduced another education system – one that was free and elitist.

Chapter Two: Threat of Comprehensive Schools

Exceptional brains require exceptional teaching. Although society has changed, it has remained hierarchical. Aristocracy of birth has turned into an aristocracy of talent. When comprehensive schools appeared, a later development, parents were not keen to send their children there. The idea behind them was to construct a social ladder at school. The problem is the following: if one starts to study too late in life it is too hard to acquire knowledge. Comprehensive schools did not work and less importance was given to them.

Chapter Three: Origins of Modern Education

Everyone was against the comprehensive school, including the socialists. Secondary school became free. By 1950, entering grammar school no longer depended on social origins. But if the lower classes entered, they did not stay. To solve this problem, a system of allowances was set up. You were paid if you came to school. Engineering and science were judged superior to Latin. Intelligence tests called "QI" were set up, with different QI tests at different ages. There were attacks against them, but statistics showed that they worked. Some people were frustrated, not because of the idea of segregation but because of the idea of being deprived of a superior education.

Chapter Four: From seniority to merit

Industry is as important as education and there were tests in industries too. Adult merit is as important as childhood merit. Having a person giving orders just because he is older is useless and so seniority ceased to be a distinguishing feature for those at the top of the social ladder. A judge could become a taxi-driver at the end of his life. Change in the mental climate happened because merit became progressively more measurable. Intelligence and effort together make up merit; a lazy genius is useless. The narrator wonders if the stupid persons were upset. Psychologists said that they suffered but were unable to express themselves.

Part 2: Decline of the lower classes

Chapter Five: Status of the Worker

No society is completely stable. There was an age when merit was important and the distance between classes became wider. The upper classes were proud and did not have sympathy for those they governed. Meanwhile the lower classes experienced difficulties and saw themselves as "dunces" who could turn into bad citizens or bad technicians.

The schools of the upper classes tried to teach humility, and a mythos around sport, the "mythos of muscularity", was created in the education of the lower classes. Some of the latter became sports professionals, but the majority became TV-watching sport fans. The lower classes grew to esteem physical achievement, whereas the narrator and the upper classes value mental achievement.

Another solution was to make psychological treatment free to help people fulfil their own potential. The idea spread that the lower classes' children could be successful. Machines replaced unskilled men. Therefore a third of all adults were unemployed and became servants.

Chapter Six: Fall of the Labour movement

Religion had to change. Christianity kept the idea of equality of opportunity, but constructed a world of ambition. As for the political field, the selection of clever people was substituted for elections. No-one responded to the appeal of "labour". "Worker" became a discredited word and was replaced by "technician" instead. Cleverness became the quality required for a union leader. The socialists agreed with the new system and instead populists acted for the technicians.

Chapter Seven: Rich and Poor

In meritocracy the differences between the high salaries of the upper classes and the low salaries of the lower classes are justified. The salaries within each class are exactly the same and only change once every year. The populists say that it is unfair and clamour for more justice.

Chapter Eight: Crisis

Girls from the elite have started to fight on behalf of the technicians, who do not mind. An idea develops that all jobs are equal. The populists argue for schools to promote more diversity. Women want equality. Until now their cleverness has only been used to educate their children. They are judged for their warmth of heart and not for their worldly success. Men choose their wives according to their QIs. Women do not, instead choosing by physical appearance.

Elite status is becoming hereditary. Now, there is no longer any hope because a person's ability is known even before he or she is born. There is a traffic in babies to get those who are clever. The conservatives want this hereditary status to continue. A latent crisis is growing and a revolution is coming; the people are rising up, but they are more against the conservatives than for the populists.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Confucianism</span> Chinese ethical and philosophical system

Confucianism, also known as Ruism or Ru classicism, is a system of thought and behavior originating in ancient China, and is variously described as a tradition, philosophy, religion, theory of government, or way of life. Confucianism developed from teachings of the Chinese philosopher Confucius (551–479 BCE), during a time that was later referred to as the Hundred Schools of Thought era. Confucius considered himself a transmitter of cultural values inherited from the Xia (c. 2070–1600 BCE), Shang (c. 1600–1046 BCE) and Western Zhou (c. 1046–771 BCE) dynasties. Confucianism was suppressed during the Legalist and autocratic Qin dynasty (221–206 BCE), but survived. During the Han dynasty, Confucian approaches edged out the "proto-Taoist" Huang–Lao as the official ideology, while the emperors mixed both with the realist techniques of Legalism.

Meritocracy is the notion of a political system in which economic goods or political power are vested in individual people based on ability and talent, rather than wealth or social class. Advancement in such a system is based on performance, as measured through examination or demonstrated achievement. Although the concept of meritocracy has existed for centuries, the first known use of the term was by sociologist Alan Fox in the journal Socialist Commentary in 1956. It was then popularized by sociologist Michael Dunlop Young, who used the term in his dystopian political and satirical book The Rise of the Meritocracy in 1958. While the word was coined and popularized as a pejorative, its usage has meliorated. Today the term is often utilised to refer to social systems in which personal advancement and success primarily reflect an individual's capabilities and merits, frequently seen as equality of opportunity.

Productivism or growthism is the belief that measurable productivity and growth are the purpose of human organization, and that "more production is necessarily good". Critiques of productivism center primarily on the limits to growth posed by a finite planet and extend into discussions of human procreation, the work ethic, and even alternative energy production.

Populism is a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of the common people and often position this group in opposition to a perceived elite group. It is frequently associated with anti-establishment and anti-political sentiment. The term developed in the late 19th century and has been applied to various politicians, parties and movements since that time, often as a pejorative. Within political science and other social sciences, several different definitions of populism have been employed, with some scholars proposing that the term be rejected altogether.

Michael Dunlop Young, Baron Young of Dartington, was a British sociologist, social activist and politician. Young was an urbanist, known as an academic researcher, polemicist and institution-builder.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael Sandel</span> American political philosopher (born 1953)

Michael Joseph Sandel is an American political philosopher and the Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Government at Harvard University, where his course Justice was the university's first course to be made freely available online and on television. It has been viewed by tens of millions of people around the world, including in China, where Sandel was named the 2011's "most influential foreign figure of the year". He is also known for his critique of John Rawls' A Theory of Justice in his first book, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (1982). He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2002.

Differential Educational Achievement (DEA) is a sociological term often given to a concept that disagrees with some of the functionalist views on education.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scholar-official</span> Learned men in government in Imperial China

The scholar-officials, also known as literati, scholar-gentlemen or scholar-bureaucrats, were government officials and prestigious scholars in Chinese society, forming a distinct social class.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sociology of education</span> Study of how public institutions and individual experiences affect education and its outcomes

The sociology of education is the study of how public institutions and individual experiences affect education and its outcomes. It is mostly concerned with the public schooling systems of modern industrial societies, including the expansion of higher, further, adult, and continuing education.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social inequality</span> Uneven distribution of resources in a society

Social inequality occurs when resources within a society are distributed unevenly, often as a result of inequitable allocation practices that create distinct unequal patterns based on socially defined categories of people. Differences in accessing social goods within society are influenced by factors like power, religion, kinship, prestige, race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, intelligence and class. Social inequality usually implies the lack of equality of outcome, but may alternatively be conceptualized as a lack of equality in access to opportunity.

Elitism is the notion that individuals who form an elite — a select group with desirable qualities such as intellect, wealth, power, physical attractiveness, notability, special skills, experience, lineage — are more likely to be constructive to society and deserve greater influence or authority. The term elitism may be used to describe a situation in which power is concentrated in the hands of a limited number of people. Beliefs that are in opposition to elitism include egalitarianism, anti-intellectualism, populism, and the political theory of pluralism.

The following events related to sociology occurred in the 1950s.

Iosipos Moisiodax or Moesiodax was a Greek philosopher, an Eastern Orthodox deacon, and one of the greatest exponents of the modern Greek Enlightenment. He was also director of the Princely Academy of Iași.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-intellectualism</span> Hostility to and mistrust of education, philosophy, art, literature, and science

Anti-intellectualism is hostility to and mistrust of intellect, intellectuals, and intellectualism, commonly expressed as deprecation of education and philosophy and the dismissal of art, literature, history, and science as impractical, politically motivated, and even contemptible human pursuits. Anti-intellectuals may present themselves and be perceived as champions of common folk—populists against political and academic elitism—and tend to see educated people as a status class that dominates political discourse and higher education while being detached from the concerns of ordinary people.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Elise Brezis</span> Economist

Elise Scheiner Brezis, professor of economics at Bar-Ilan University, is the director of the Azrieli Center for Economic Policy. She has been the head of the Statistics division at the Research Department in the Bank of Israel, and from 1999 to 2003, she was the president of the Israeli Association for the Study of European Integration. She holds a PhD in economics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1989).

Justice and the market is an ethical perspective based upon the allocation of scarce resources within a society. The allocation of resources depends upon governmental policies and the societal attitudes of the individuals who exist within the society. Personal perspectives are based upon ones circle of moral concern or those who the individual deems worthy of moral consideration.

Myth of meritocracy is a phrase arguing that meritocracy, or achieving upward social mobility through one's own merits regardless of one's social position, is not widely attainable in capitalist societies because of inherent contradictions. Meritocracy is argued to be a myth because, despite being promoted as an open and accessible method of achieving upward class mobility under neoliberal or free market capitalism, wealth disparity and limited class mobility remain widespread, regardless of individual work ethic. Some scholars argue that the wealth disparity has even increased because the "myth" of meritocracy has been so effectively promoted and defended by the political and private elite through the media, education, corporate culture, and elsewhere. Economist Robert Reich argues that many Americans still believe in meritocracy despite "the nation drifting ever-farther away from it."

Daniel Markovits is the Guido Calabresi Professor of Law at the Yale Law School and the founding director of the Yale Center for the Study of Private Law. He is the author of The Meritocracy Trap (2019).

Professor Geoff Dench was a British social scientist whose work related particularly to the lives of working class men. He did extensive research using opinion surveys and arrived at conclusions relating to immigration, meritocracy and feminism that were out of keeping with prevailing attitudes in British academia in the later twentieth century.

The natural aristocracy is a concept developed by Thomas Jefferson in 1813 which describes a hypothetical political elite that derives its power from talent and virtue. He distinguishes this from traditional aristocracies, which he refers to as the artificial aristocracy, a ruling elite that derives its power solely from inherited status, or wealth and birth. Jefferson considers the natural aristocracy to be superior to the artificial aristocracy, and he believes the ideal ruler must come from the natural aristocracy. The natural aristocracy has been interpreted as being related to the concept of meritocracy.

References

  1. 1 2 Fox, Margalit (25 January 2002). "Michael Young, 86, Scholar; Coined, Mocked 'Meritocracy'". New York Times. Retrieved 11 July 2018.
  2. 1 2 3 Young, Michael (28 June 2001). "Down with meritocracy". The Guardian . Retrieved 27 April 2017.
  3. Young, Michael D (1994). The Rise of the Meritocracy. New Brunswick (USA) and London (UK).: Transaction Publishers. ISBN   1-56000-704-4.
  4. Obituary: Lord Young of Dartington, The Guardian 16 January 2002
  5. Littler, Jo (2018). Against Meritocracy: Culture, Power, and Myths of Mobility. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. p. 32. ISBN   978-1-138-88954-5.
  6. Barker, Paul (2005) [1995]. "The Ups and Downs of the Meritocracy". In Geoff Dench; et al. (eds.). Young at Eighty. London: Carcanet. p. 158. ISBN   9781857542431 . Retrieved Mar 5, 2016.
  7. Dench, Geoff (2006). The Rise and Rise of Meritocracy. Oxford: Blackwell.
  8. "The Young Foundation: Beyond Meritocracy" . Retrieved 2024-05-09.
  9. Young's original citations taken from: Appiah, Kwame Anthony (19 October 2018). "The myth of meritocracy: who really gets what they deserve?". The Guardian. Retrieved 22 July 2021.