Sandel argues that this started with Reagan/Thatcher and was maintained by Clinton/Blair afterwards. They've become so disenfranchised by way of the political elites who have led us for the last fifty years.
Trump by Way of Technocracyīrexit, Trump, soaring enthusiasm for nationalism - all are driven by the anger of the disenfranchised.
They have paid for merit, because it is the thing most sought after. Namely, those that are more likely to get in simply have more money. While legality is one question and relatively clear cut, it does not square the moral problem. Rather than donating huge sums to colleges to (legally) get in the back door, parents were paying to enter the (illegal) side door. It all relates to the reasons behind who gets ahead, and why. The college admissions scandal is the perfect microcosmic symbol of the problems of merit, emblematic of a bigger problem that's harder to articulate. In a meritocratic society, this means the winners must believe they have earned their success through their own talent and hard work.' 'In an unequal society, those who land on top want to believe their success is morally justified. In short- everyone deserves what they get. Those that have not? That's their fault for not earning it. In a meritocratic system, the winners believe that they have earnt all that they have on their own, therefore they deserve it. Parents, teachers, systems, institutions etc.
That is, we end up ignoring everything and everyone else that has helped us get to where we are. Meritocracy makes us buy in to the 'self-made and self-sufficient' argument. Almost none are about meritocracy itself-there is a cultural assumption that is the best and only way to organise society. Most arguments about meritocracy are about how best to achieve it and to offer the same opportunity to all.
0 kommentar(er)
