It's about whether we're good or bad. And lately we've been getting pretty bad.
Matt Yglesias looks at two possible ways of organizing the world. In the first instance, it's "merit" that lifts you above others even though that merit may have grown at least in part out of having good parents, a good education, a helpful peer group. In the second, it's your physical and mental capabilities that put you in the lucky leader group.
I don't think American society resembles a pure version of either of those things, but the more important point to keep in mind is that a meritocracy is not necessarily a very admirable place, unless it's also a humane society in which people are enjoying a high quality of life. ...Yglesias, Moneybox
This, of course, is what people who study societies have found. Even the people at the top (who may or may not deserve to be there) don't flourish to the extent they would if everyone were flourishing. Opportunity can make a society great, but only if those who achieve it -- or those who are given it -- bring others of lesser fortune along with them.
Comments