Back

The article discusses the revolt against meritocracy in the left-wing political movements and intellectual circles. It explains how the left initially embraced the meritocratic revolution in order to provide equal opportunities and open up society to working-class individuals. However, over time, the left turned against meritocracy in three waves. First, academics questioned the ability to measure merit accurately. Second, public intellectuals argued that meritocracy was not worth having at all. Finally, progressives embraced the values of equality and community as alternatives to meritocracy.

The article begins by examining the criticism of meritocracy by sociobiologists and eugenicists in the 1930s. These critics argued that factors such as environment and genetics played a significant role in determining merit, making it difficult to accurately measure. They also criticized the concept of different occupational groups having different average IQs, claiming that such groups lived in different environments which affected their performance.

This criticism was further developed by sociologists and intellectuals in the post-war period. They conducted studies on the impact of the educational system on social mobility and argued that education did not significantly improve the life chances of disadvantaged children. They also criticized IQ tests for reflecting cultural advantages rather than innate ability.

The article then discusses the work of critics like Michael Young and David Halberstam, who argued that meritocracy perpetuated inequality and alienated individuals. Young, in particular, viewed meritocracy as a false god that created a dystopia masquerading as a utopia. Halberstam’s book, “The Best and the Brightest,” criticized the intellectual elite for their role in the Vietnam War and argued that their intelligence and rationality were unable to solve complex problems.

The article also explores the work of philosopher John Rawls, who argued against meritocracy in his book “A Theory of Justice.” Rawls believed that differences in talent and ability were morally arbitrary and that society should aim for a more equal distribution of wealth and power.

The article highlights the impact of the revolt against meritocracy on social policy in the UK and the US. In the UK, grammar schools were abolished, and mixed-ability teaching was introduced. In the US, affirmative action policies were implemented to address past injustices and promote diversity.

However, the article also acknowledges the shortcomings of the revolt against meritocracy. It argues that the left’s focus on dismantling elite educational institutions, such as grammar schools and selective high schools, often overlooked deeper structural inequalities in society. The article suggests that the left’s critique of meritocracy sometimes became self-indulgent and short-sighted, failing to address the root causes of inequality.

Overall, the article provides a detailed analysis of the revolt against meritocracy and its impact on social policy. It highlights the complexities and contradictions in the left’s rejection of meritocracy and raises important questions about the viability of alternative values such as equality and community.

Words: 468