Synthesis Essay Sample on Meritocracy: Achieving Power & Industrial Goods Through Performance

Introduction

Meritocracy is a political philosophy, which holds that there are certain things including; power and industrial goods that should be vested in individuals on the grounds of achievement, effort, and talent, rather than aspects like gender, sexuality, race and wealth. Advancement in the system of Meritocracy is based on the performance of an individual, through an examination and demonstration of their achievement. Meritocracy as a concept has existed in many centuries but was created by sociologist Michael Young in 1956. In a meritocracy society, the gifted, the smart, the energetic, the ruthless, and the most ambitious are sifted out carefully and are assisted towards their destined dominant positions. In the United States, most people believe that people are judged by their abilities other than their family connections. Americans believe that equality of opportunities has given them a chance to benefit from the skills of the general population, a concept that lacks substantial evidence. This paper argues on the side that Meritocracy does not exist in the United States, basing its arguments on 'The Other Wes Moore' by Wes Moore and other legitimate sources.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

'The Other Wes Moore' by Wes Moore

The book, 'The Other Wes by Wes Moore' touches on many issues, mostly asking what allows some people to live healthy, fulfilling lives while others do not enjoy the same privileges. An essential point between the two Wes Moore is their shared age, and their place of birth, Moore shows a lack of equality in their lives by stating, "The truth is that his story could have been mine. My tragedy is that my story could have been his (Moore 200)." Moore shows how Meritocracy does not exist in America by illustrating the fact that even though both men were black, Wes is entirely African American while Moore's grandparents are Immigrants from the Caribbean. The family of Joy is that of 'outsiders' to the life of Americans, and Moore's mother points out her efforts to study so that she can integrate into Americans lifestyle. Moore's parents, being college graduates, experience little marginalization that results from a person being weak, as is the case with non-college-educated African Americans like the family members of Wes. In a Meritocratic society, people are not distinguished based on race, yet in 'The Other Wes Moore,' the theme of racial injustice is visible throughout. There is a lack of opportunities and resources in the two, which is fuelled by racial discrimination. Wes illustrates a lack of opportunity by drawing back on the effects of drugs, poverty, and a lack of public assistance in his neighborhood, Baltimore and some part of the Bronx where his mother has her upbringing. In one of his texts, Moore identifies the issue of racial inequality by quoting, "it was definitely a far more egregious situation, but I could sense faint echoes of Baltimore and the Bronx in the story of these two townships (Moore 213)", he highlights that the United States has been affected by the same inequalities in South Africa, and that there are evident issues of racial segregation that might not be visible on the surface. A further illustration of Meritocracy not existing in America is when Moore gives an example of his life; he says, "Sitting in a business class, I am held to a disadvantage. I was never able to discuss the stock markets with my parents or discuss micro-economics with Bill Gates son, and although I worked hard, the opportunities and experience I have lacked, still hold a detriment against me (Moore 230)." The idea of Meritocracy is mostly heard when the American Dream is discussed, that by working hard, you can attain anything. This statement does not, however, include all the factors that contribute to the effectiveness of hard work. Moore addresses the idea that a person's background can determine their fate.

Chris Hayes Book, "Twilight of the Elites. America after Meritocracy"

In the book by Chris Hayes, 'Twilight of Elites. America after Meritocracy', Hayes illustrates the argument against Meritocracy by underlying on the demographics and socioeconomics opportunities which were accorded to both Wes Moores in 'The Other Wes Moore.' He shows how a few people in the United States achieve social mobility based o the education and their background (Hayes 260). The book by Chris Hayes also highlights the reasons why Trump attracted many voters and why the political establishment of the current society has had a hard time understanding his success. He illustrates that most people in the middle class think and feel that the system was unfair, and that most elites that include; business people, politicians, and prominent journalists work to achieve the privileges enjoyed by their children. A gap exists in America on people rising through talent and hard work, and growing based on inequality in the country; this has generated a political crisis where people have lost their trust in institutions and have become radicalized. 'Twilight of the Elites' outlines that "economic inequality is not a mere statistical relationship where some people earn more while others earn less, but it is also an engine of institutional transformations, holding the regulations, rules, and practices needed by every country (Hayes 270)." People at the top have resources which can cater to the financial and social needs of their children and with which they can protect themselves, while the middle-class people feel that the powerful have immense connections.

In a meritocratic society, people with more exceptional merit rise to the top. Their hard work and natural ability make them deserving to superior positions. The problem is that this is just a theory, which does not necessarily create an openness to practice in the United States. Hayes argues that, "the equality of opportunity that meritocracy holds will always be overwhelmed by the inequality of outcome, that people who dwell in meritocracy will invest the proceeds from their successes in working the system to ensure that they and their kids attain resources that they need to keep on doing well (Hayes 300)." It gets harder to claim that America is a meritocratic country, as it keeps on becoming unequal. The view of the entire world contradicts with that of the people below, as the people at the top continue to prosper. The people below like the idea of equality, which they are not entirely sure that it works. The people from above become more distant from the people below, with Hayes illustrating this by stating, "Power narrows the vision of the powerful (Hayes 250)." In America, where people believe that people succeed on their own merits and not through a rigged system, it was easier for people to vote in Trump whose imagined life story represented him as a self-made man who had succeeded on his own merits.

Other Scholarly Sources

Contrary to most beliefs in American society, the United States is not a meritocratic system, and yet it is widely presented as one. The notion that America is meritocratic continues to affect the affairs of students and their works in higher education. The root of the meritocratic belief stems from the American dream, which is a major determining factor in the myths associated with a person's ideas (Arrow et al. 103). The American dream outlined "a vision of a land that had a life that would be richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunities according to their achievements. The American dream entailed:

• Hopefulness for success
• Everyone would attain success regardless of their origin or status
• The American dream would be possible through the actions that an individual undertook within their control
• The American dream would come true because of the relationship between success and virtue.

In the consciousness of most Americans, the aspects of the American dream is well rooted, with most agreeing that everyone is rewarded for their skills, efforts, and intelligence. It is ascertained that the most hardworking people, the most talented and the smartest people, will attain the American dream since they can obtain merit.

Michael Young in his book, "Rise of Meritocracy" describes a society where those at the top of the system are autocratic rulers, and control those at the bottom, who are not capable of protecting themselves from the system (Young 100). Instead, o existence of a fair and enlightened society, Meritocracy which exists in America is ruthless and cruel. The book by Young was intended to show that people in the community get what they deserve, whether good or bad, meaning that they have a merited status. Young looked into the adverse side effects of Meritocracy by identifying that for some people, and it meant an erosion of self-worth for those who were at the bottom of the society. Most people blame themselves when they think and believe that the status they are in, is due to a lack of hard work and talent. He stated that "they can become demoralized easily by being looked down upon, so woundingly by people who have achieved something; no underclass has ever been left as morally naked as that (Young 103)." This applies to the pressure of people in America that are working too hard to achieve merit, and to fulfill the American Dream, and are not getting convinced that their efforts are bearing much fruit. The process causes such people to experience a decrease n their self-esteem, depression, and some anxiety disorders, especially in late adolescence.

Reviews of various pieces of literature have ascertained that many values come into direct conflict when specific issues of merit are raised (Solt et al., 113). Several conflicts arise when one thinks of some benefits. Institutions of higher learning and some companies have had a problem rewarding intelligent people because, in the current society, it is hard to determine when natural intelligence in earned. Giving everyone equal opportunities conflict with the idea that most certainly, parents will favor their children over those of others. Supporting intelligent people creates an unequal society by creating arguments on a system that lacks social mobility. When wealthy people are allowed to spoil their children and offspring's, there are many arguments that every child should start the life that has a chance to succeed. When it comes to Meritocracy, many Americans have an internal conflict of values.

Those who argue on the side that "Meritocracy exists in America" are mostly managers who see themselves as objective and fair and having the ability to look into the affairs of women and the minorities (Solt et al. 115). These people are enthusiastic about the idea of Meritocracy and tend to believe that as compared to other countries, they reward ability and effort. They fail to think that as compared to intelligence and skills, family wealth plays a significant role in ensuring a person gets ahead in life. Support by Americans of Meritocracy remains stable despite the current visible economic inequalities, recessions, and the fact that there still exists limited mobility in the United States as compared to other developed countries. The commitment to meritocratic beliefs has raised suspicions aiming to support certain demographic groups. For instance, some companies have justified their lack of policies with believing in Meritocracy. Managers feel that as long as they recruit based on abilities, skills, and merit and not based on sexuality, gender, and race, they do not need to consider diversity. When managers think of themselves as unbiased and objective, they assume they are always right and end up making inaccurate assessments. Stereotypes of ethnicity, gender, race, and disabilities have become the filters of evaluating others in ways which have advantaged some dominant groups and disadvantaged those in lower statuses. Studies have shown that the cu...