Over at Vox today, Roge Karma examines the book “The Meritocracy Trap,” which posits that meritocracy — the idea that social and economic rewards should track talent, effort, and achievement — “produces radical inequality, stifles social mobility, and makes everyone — including the apparent winners — miserable.”
Meritocracy produces radical inequality, stifles social mobility, and makes everyone — including its apparent winners — miserable. Should we get rid of it? https://t.co/3hYQ4ZEVcE pic.twitter.com/g3ozs4N2e1
— Vox (@voxdotcom) October 24, 2019
Author Daniel Markovits explained in an interview with Vox’s Ezra Klein:
“Fifty, 60, 70 years ago, you could tell how poor somebody was by how hard they worked. Today, that relationship has been completely reversed. Elites work for a living. They work harder than they used to. They work harder in terms of brute hours than the middle class on average, and they get most of their income by working.”
The rich today are no longer an indolent “leisure class” but what Markovits calls a “superordinate” working class: they work harder, longer, and perform more high-skilled work than ever before. As a result, Markovits calculates that three-quarters of elite income now originates from labor rather than inherited capital.
So we should get rid of it?
Good work fighting merit.
— Anthony Bialy (@AnthonyBialy) October 24, 2019
BREAKING: millenial DC blogger assumes everyone is miserable like him
— Jason (@jasonelevation) October 24, 2019
Written by a guy regularly passed up for promotions by people who work harder and are smarter than him, but who deserved it because he worked there longer.
— Bitter Grizzly (@Bitter_Grizzly) October 24, 2019
This tweet just killed some brain cells I needed to achieve my goals for the day. #NoMeritForMe
— Oscar (@RandomFLDude) October 24, 2019
I'm sorry you spent $88,000 on that communications degree only to be left writing dreck like this for $41,000 per year.
— ? Brian B?? (@applecharlie5) October 24, 2019
— LORD SCREWTAPE (@screwtape1a12) October 24, 2019
— Rita Panahi (@RitaPanahi) October 24, 2019
It’s pretty clear you are leaders in getting rid of it.
— Chris (@DaBurr58) October 24, 2019
And the "VOX: time since self-beclownment clock" is once again reset to Zero.
— MnMonger (@mnmonger) October 24, 2019
If it makes Vox miserable, I'm all for it.
— ? ?????????? ? ? (@SisyphusGoals) October 24, 2019
— Tom (@RoninVision) October 24, 2019
VOX demonstrating its commitment to anti-meritocracy again.
— Rob Roskowiak (@nILFeed) October 24, 2019
I’m considerably dumber from reading this.
— Scott (@croncrete) October 24, 2019
it's that kind of thinking that made Venezuela the economic power house it is today
— Glenn Amurgis (@gamurgis) October 24, 2019
Meritocracy is the only way for anyone to succeed. Can't hack it? Too bad.
— otterween or deb ? (@livefreeordeb) October 24, 2019
Yet still better than any alternative anyone has come up with.
— Steve (@CaffeinatedinAZ) October 24, 2019
Agreed. Even if it terrible, it’s the least terrible of any of them.
— Cody Mikles (@CodyMikles) October 24, 2019
I expect to see this same energy when I come strolling in to apply for that Senior Editor position.
What do they actually do? I don't know. It no longer matters, apparently. Hire me, bigots.
— Rachel ???? (@RaychelTania) October 24, 2019
Is this a parody account?
— mallen (@mallen2010) October 24, 2019
None of those things are true
— Boston joe (@ramadiroach) October 24, 2019
“Should we get rid of meritocracy” is very on-brand for Vox. It would certainly keep their contributors in jobs for many years.
— Thomas Adamson (@tomthecamel2093) October 24, 2019
This journactivist definitely didn't get here on merit
— Luke JW McEvoy QC (@lukejmcevoy) October 24, 2019
Participation trophies for the soy latte drinking contest.
— Patrick Grattan (@PatrickGrattan) October 24, 2019
The very existence of Vox contradicts the idea that we live in a meritocracy. If we did their website would be something more useful like cat videos.
— AtlasShruggedTreeFiddy (@5toeGimp) October 24, 2019
You hire talent to perform a job at a level that you need. I need my doctors, pilots, lawyers, even journos to be top notch, not hired on quota. I even need my sports professionals to be the best at the game, or why watch?
— Robert Feake (@RobertFeake) October 24, 2019
Couldn’t have said it better myself ??Just picture the scenario of having having major surgery and finding out the the doctor cutting you open got his position on a quota rather than qualification.
— Cool New Yorker (@Emillan01) October 24, 2019
It's really not surprising that Vox would print this. Of course they would be against meritocracy. Just look at the quality of work they put out.
— AzulJoel (@AzulJoel) October 24, 2019
In other words: “I don’t want to work for a living”.
— potlizard (@potlizard3) October 24, 2019
This explains why Vox is such a sub-par publication.
— Michael J. Caruso (@MJ_Caruso) October 24, 2019
— J.L.A.W. ?????? (@Doming0) October 24, 2019
Equality of outcome produces mediocrity and fosters lack of ambition. Sounds great, let us know how that has worked out in the past
— Paulotics (@myapaulogies) October 24, 2019
I tried to read it, but my eyes started rolling.
— Danny Peoples (@Danny99634068) October 24, 2019
What happens when Vox writers no longer have their trust funds?
— Sailor Benis (@SailorBenis) October 24, 2019
‘Started around 2014’? Vox gets some help exploring ‘how fake news conquered the world’ https://t.co/IfRZYIJXe6
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) October 24, 2019