Meritocracy in 21st century America—Fact or Fiction?
It is 2012 and another Presidential election is on the horizon. The past four years have been troubling ones for Americans. We have experienced four years of economic recession. Unemployment remains high, the nation’s debt continues to skyrocket, and all the while politicians argue about the best ways to address our current economic and social woes. As our society struggles with the options to address our dilemma, many are advocating tax cuts and reductions in entitlement programs as the best method for reviving our economic system. Proponents of this approach justify this path by arguing that our nation was founded on the American Dream—a belief that everyone has the opportunity to “make it” in America. Inherent in this American Dream is the idea of meritocracy. Meritocracy suggests that financial success in America is justly and fairly earned through hard work and performance. Conversely, meritocracy implies that the poor are lazy and actually deserve the station in life which they find themselves. If both financial success and financial failure are “earned”, then politicians can, in good conscience, vote to cut programs like unemployment, Medicaid, food stamps, and other entitlement programs. They can argue that “my hard-working tax dollars” should not be used to help those who didn’t help themselves. After all, we all had the same chance to succeed, didn’t we? Why should successful people be penalized at the expense of the lazy and indolent? Do we have a meritocracy in America? Is success or failure determined by our own efforts—or lack thereof? Consider these facts. In America today, 38 million people, including 14 million children, live in households experiencing hunger. That represents 8 percent of our population. The top 1 percent of Americans have more wealth than the lower 95 percent. Does individual initiative and effort explain these facts? Two top US executives, who are among the wealthiest people in the world, admit that individual effort does not explain their financial success. Erik Schmidt, CEO of Google, said, “Lots of people who are smart and work hard and play by the rules don’t have a fraction of what I have.” And Warren Buffet, second richest man in the world, recently stated, “I personally think that society is responsible for a very significant percentage of what I have earned.” Obviously other factors play important roles in achieving success. Among those could be the wealth (or lack of it) of a person’s parents; the education level of that parent; God-given talent—like a professional athlete or musician; or chance or luck (winning the lottery). Regardless, it must be obvious that meritocracy is a flawed concept. Why, then, do we cling to this ideal? It’s easy--the wealthy love it because acceptance of the principle helps to maintain our current system. Economic reform is discouraged. There is no need for affirmative action or many of our social programs. Pull yourselves up by your own bootstraps—that’s the mantra of 2012. The myth is so alluring that even many of our poor have bought into the ideal. We are taught meritocracy in our schools and we see it reinforced on TV shows, movies, and the popular media. The danger of America being so smitten with meritocracy is that it has justified the status quo. Why aren’t Americans shocked and angered by the growing inequality in America? A recent study reveals that America has less social mobility than most European countries. The gap between the rich and poor is the worst in this country since the Gilded Age of the late 1800’s. A growing middle class has always been the backbone of our democracy. As these trends, mentioned above, continue, we move further away from a democracy and closer to a plutocracy. This trend has been justified and rationalized by our belief in meritocracy—an American myth that needs to be debunked.
