The Rise of the Meritocracy
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 intelligence and merit have become the central tenet of society, replacing previous divisions of social class and creating a society stratified between a merited power-holding elite and a disenfranchised underclass of the less merited. The essay satirised the Tripartite System of education that was being practised at the time.[2] The book was rejected by the Fabian Society and then by 11 publishers before being accepted by Thames and Hudson.[3]
.jpg.webp) Cover of the Pelican Books edition | |
| Author | Michael Young |
|---|---|
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Language | English |
| Genre | Dystopia, political fiction |
Publication date | 1958 |
Meritocracy is the political philosophy in which political influence is assigned largely according to the intellectual talent and achievement of the individual. Michael Young coined the term,[1] formed by combining the Latin root "mereĊ" and Ancient Greek suffix "cracy", in his essay to describe and ridicule such a society, the selective education system that was the Tripartite System, and the philosophy in general.[2]
The word was adopted into the English language with none of 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".[4]
Synopsis
Introduction to the Transaction Edition
The author had difficulties publishing the book. A first publisher wanted a new "Brave New World". Another told him they did not publish PhD theses.
Finally, a friend published it. The book is about "Meritocracy". It is a word with a Latin prefix and a Greek suffix.
The plot of the book is about a fictional 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 issues. The rich and powerful are encouraged by the general culture and become arrogant. The poor are demoralised.
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.
Chapter One: Clash of Social Forces
Before, the job you exercised was the job of your parents; lawyers were sons of lawyers. It was a pity, because people were not always suited to their jobs.
It was the reign of nepotism, which survived because of tradition and the weight of family.
Midwives of progress successfully introduced another education system - one which 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, later in the cursus, parents were not ready to send their children. The idea behind them was to construct a social ladder at school. The problem is the following one: if you start to study too old, it is too hard to become knowledgeable.
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 as better than 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.
Chapter Five: Status of the Worker
No society is completely stable. There was an age where merit was important and the distance between classes became wider. The upper classes were proud and did not have sympathy for those who 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 fulfill their own potential. The idea that the lower classes's children could be successful was spread.
Machines replaced unskilled men. Therefore, 1/3 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.
Regarding the political field, the selection of clever people replaced 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
With meritocracy, the differences between the high salaries of the upper classes and the small ones 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 hope anymore because the ability of someone is known before they are even born. There is a traffic in babies to get clever ones.
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.
References
- Fox, Margalit (25 January 2002). "Michael Young, 86, Scholar; Coined, Mocked 'Meritocracy'". New York Times. Retrieved 11 July 2018.
- Young, Michael (28 June 2001). "Down with meritocracy". The Guardian. Retrieved 27 April 2017.
- Obituary: Lord Young of Dartington, The Guardian 16 January 2002
- 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.