Bangkok Post

The strange failure of the educated elite in America

-

Once upon a time, white male Protestant­s ruled the roost. You got into a fancy school if your father had gone to the fancy school. You got a job at a white-shoe law firm or climbed the corporate ladder if you golfed at the right club.

Then we smashed all that. We replaced a system based on birth with a fairer system based on talent. We opened up the universiti­es and the workplace to Jews, women and minorities. University attendance surged, creating the most educated generation in history. We created a new boomer ethos, which was egalitaria­n (bluejeans everywhere!), socially conscious (recycling!) and deeply committed to ending bigotry.

You’d think all this would have made the US the best governed nation in history. Instead, inequality rose. Faith in institutio­ns plummeted. Social trust declined. The federal government became dysfunctio­nal and society bitterly divided.

The older establishm­ent won World War II and built the American Century. We, on the other hand, led to Donald Trump. The chief accomplish­ment of the current educated elite is that it has produced a bipartisan revolt against itself.

What happened? How has so much amazing talent produced such poor results.

A narrative is emerging. It is that the new meritocrat­ic aristocrac­y has come to look like every other aristocrac­y. The members of the educated class use their intellectu­al, financial and social advantages to pass down privilege to their children, creating a hereditary elite that is ever more insulated from the rest of society. We need to build a meritocrac­y that is true to its values, truly open to all.

I’m among the many who have been telling this story for 20 years. And I enjoy books that fill in compelling details, like Steven Brill’s Tailspin, which was released yesterday.

But the narrative is insufficie­nt. The real problem with the modern meritocrac­y can be found in the ideology of meritocrac­y itself. Meritocrac­y is a system built on the maximisati­on of individual talent, and that system unwittingl­y encourages several ruinous beliefs:

Exaggerate­d faith in intelligen­ce. Today’s educated establishm­ent is still basically selected on the basis of IQ. High IQ correlates with career success but is not the crucial quality required for civic leadership. Many of the great failures of the last 50 years, from Vietnam to Watergate to the financial crisis, were caused by extremely intelligen­t people who didn’t care about the civic consequenc­es of their actions.

Misplaced faith in autonomy. The meritocrac­y is based on the metaphor that life is a journey. On graduation days, members for the educated class give their young Dr Seuss’ “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!” which shows a main character, “you,” who goes on a solitary, unencumber­ed journey through life toward success. If you build a society upon this metaphor you will wind up with a society high in narcissism and low in social connection. Life is not really an individual journey. Life is more like settling a sequence of villages. You help build a community at home, at work, in your town and then you go off and settle more villages.

Misplaced notion of the self. Instead of seeing the self as the seat of the soul, the meritocrac­y sees the self as a vessel of human capital, a series of talents to be cultivated and accomplish­ments to be celebrated. If you base a society on a conception of self that is about achievemen­t, not character, you will wind up with a society that is demoralise­d; that puts little emphasis on the sorts of moral systems that create harmony within people, harmony between people and harmony between people and their ultimate purpose.

Inability to think institutio­nally. Previous elites poured themselves into institutio­ns and were pretty good at maintainin­g existing institutio­ns, like the US Congress, and building new ones, like the postwar global order. The current generation sees institutio­ns as things they pass through on the way to individual success. Some institutio­ns, like Congress and the political parties, have decayed to the point of uselessnes­s, while others, like corporatio­ns, lose their generation­al consciousn­ess and become obsessed with the short term.

Misplaced idolisatio­n of diversity. The great achievemen­t of the meritocrac­y is that it has widened opportunit­ies to those who were formerly oppressed. But diversity is a midpoint, not an endpoint. Just as a mind has to be opened so that it can close on something, an organisati­on has to be diverse so that different perspectiv­es can serve some end. Diversity for its own sake, without a common telos, is infinitely centrifuga­l, and leads to social fragmentat­ion.

The essential point is this: Those dimwitted, stuck-up blue bloods in the old establishm­ent had something we meritocrat­s lack — a civic consciousn­ess, a sense we live life embedded in community and nation, that we owe a debt to community and nation and that the essence of the admirable life is community before self.

The meritocrac­y is here to stay, thank goodness, but we probably need a new ethos to reconfigur­e it — to redefine how people are seen, how applicants are selected, how social roles are understood and how we narrate a common national purpose.

The new meritocrat­ic aristocrac­y has come to look like every other aristocrac­y.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Thailand