I just finished episode #221 - "Success, Failure, & the Common Good" this morning on my walk to work, and right at the very end of the episode, Michael sort of summed up everything he was talking about throughout the episode, and I really enjoyed it. I think it's literally the first time that I've rewound an episode not because the point was lost on me or I had lost focus, but rather, because I was so taken in by what he was saying that I just had to listen again.
The quote came after their in-depth discussion of some of the failings of our currently imperfect incarnation of a meritocratic system, and how the generally unspoken aim of a perfectly meritocratic system may lead to some really counter-intuitive and undesirable results. This was the second time I had heard this idea fleshed out before (I think the first time was on Sean Carroll's Mindscape podcast), so it wasn't totally new to me, but it's still an idea that I have yet to really internalize or give any significant amount of thought to, although I find it really compelling and interesting. The quote in question:
>Instead of building a political project of trying to perfect the meritocracy and equip a handful of people for meritocratic competition; instead, we should diffuse democratic learning broadly throughout the society. There's no reason why liberal-arts learning and moral and civic education should be sequestered in the citadel of higher education, and then we hold a tournament to try to determine who will gain access to the citadel. I Think that we should get back to a kind of broad democratic equality of condition, where we focus on creating public spaces and common places of shared democratic citizenship within civil society; class mixing institutions, where people from different walks of life encounter one another; and where everyone, not just those with high SAT scores, gain access to the moral and civic learning and deliberation that a democratic society, at it's best, offers and makes available to everyone.
I thought this was a powerful and well-spoken summary of what was discussed throughout the episode (helped along by his soft-spoken, soothing, and very wise-sounding voice), and it's certainly made me intrigued in his book (which is now on the ever-expanding reading list!). Anyways, I thought I'd share, and hope some comments or opinions on the matter ensue!
'Book Review by Dr. Jan Stroeken
Michael J. Sandel has written a book about the deep causes of the inequality that is a key driving force behind the populist backlash of recent years. His analysis serves as a basis for justification of the introduction of a universal basic income. For the complete review, see: https://basisinkomen.nl/wp-content/uploads/Book-Review-Michael-Sandel-Jan-Stroeken.pdf
And in Dutch:Β https://basisinkomen.nl/boekbespreking-de-tirannie-van-verdienste-michael-j-sandel/
Here you will find a short summary, being the last part of the review:
Public Debate and Basic Income
Sandelβs analysis is razor sharp. What he brings to the fore more than anything is how present-day populism is only indirectly fuelled by the unequal distribution of income and essentially dominated by an ethical and cultural component. A growing section of the population feels underrated. This has everything to do with the tyranny of merit driven by the meritocratic ethos that, over the past decades, has led to meritocratic hubris. This hubris is reflected in the winnersβ tendency to let their success go to their heads, forgetting about all the luck and good fortune that helped them along the way. Those who make it to the top believe with self-satisfied conviction that they deserve their fate and that those who end up at the bottom do too. This leaves little room for the kind of solidarity that could arise if we were to realise just how haphazardly talent is distributed and how randomly fate can either be kind or cruel. Merit-based pay is, according to Sandel, thus a form of tyranny β an oppressive regime.
And so, Sandel launches into a plea for a sweeping public debate on how to move from todayβs individualisation to a greater [...]'
Read more at: https://basicincome.org/news/2021/05/the-tyranny-of-merit-by-michael-j-sandel
Short TED talk from Sandel himself explaining the main idea of the book.
The Tyranny of Merit - What's become of the common good? (August of 2015)
The main thesis of the book is that a meritocracy (people ascend in the social scale according to their abilities and credentials) not only hasnβt been achieved, but it isnβt a desirable outcome or a moral or just system. He also exposes the flaws and fallacies of the equality of opportunities.
The author cites the market approach by traditional center-left political parties; the rhetoric of talent and success; the inequality in the distribution of the fruits of globalism; the credentialism and overvaluation of university degrees and the loss of the concept of dignity of work or the common good, among other reasons for the populist and xenophobic rhetoric of the last years. The author also denounces that the elite or university class looks down on common workers (the ones that later vote Trump, Farage, or LePen) as a result of believing that they have earned their position.
While recognizing the obvious advantages of recompensing talent, Sandel also empathizes the immorality of a system that rewards some abilities (that are not the merit of each person) and the unfairness of recompensing some activities that, while being heavily profitable, don't add anything valuable to society. The author denounces the increasing credentialism and financialization of the current economy.
The book has changed my view on many topics. For example, I had never thought of the concept of citizenship in the way he does; or that a system that rewards each one according to its achievements can be unfair. I would also point out that he not only complains and criticize but also proposes viable and fairly concrete solutions in the framework of a market economy. Also, if you were thinking of it, he is neither a Marxist, a communist, nor a supporter of equality of results.
TL;DR: I absolutely recommend his book to anyone interested in social-democracy, politics, or sociology. The essay is not very long (less than 300 pages in my edition) and easy to read. Even if you don't agree with everything said here or in the book (just as me), I think it will enhance your view of the current political conflict in the US and Europe. If you've read it, what do you think of it?
(It also has some awards from newspapers and stuff)
>A *Times Literary Sup
... keep reading on reddit β‘βThe meritocratic ideal is not a remedy for inequality; it is a justification of inequality.β β Michael J. Sandel β£ For most of my life, it seems I've taken for granted that the idea of βequality of opportunity,β or meritocracy, while not perfect, is a democracyβs best tool to ensure everyone a fair place at the starting line. In the Tyranny of Merit, political philosopher Michael Sandel attacks what he calls βthe rhetoric of risingβ and ideas about meritocracy on both the political left and right in the United States.
Listen to the complete review on Audiobook Reviews in Five Minutes: https://podcast.jannastam.com/episode/review-of-the-tyranny-of-merit-whats-become-of-the-common-good-by-michael-j-sandel
Rate, review, and subscribe to this podcast on Apple, Anchor, Breaker, Google, Overcast, Pocket Casts, RadioPublic, and Spotify
