7 ms·

The Myth of Meritocracy Runs Deep in American History

36 points by MarlonPro 3y ago

LazarWolf_ 3y ago
[flagged]
- next_xibalba 3y ago
  I have noticed a strong undercurrent among some on HN that has bought into the anti-work movement that seems to have a very high overlap with anti-capitalist/communist/socialist crowd (and also, I suspect, a very poor grasp of history and economics).
  - bannedbybros 3y ago
    [dead]
- greesil 3y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1781417 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1781417
- bannedbybros 3y ago
  [dead]
- CartyBoston 3y ago
  The meritocracy myth is s fundamental tenet of tech and Silicon Valley culture.
  - asow92 3y ago
    Maybe it's because they feel as if their success is undeserved and they project that feeling about themselves onto others?
clintonbush 3y ago
This is pure garbage. Please suggest an alternative to "The Myth." I see two immediate problems with any alternative that far out-weigh its purported benefits. (1) Any solution you propose involves a government imposing its will on the people, 'reallocating' their wealth, and using that loot to pick and choose the winners. (2) Any alternative to "The Myth" necessarily deprives people of ownership of their future -- you create more victims. When people believe they have no control over their destiny, they fall prey to nihilism. Thanks to rhetoric like yours coming from BLM, Antifa, and the rest of the progressive ilk, you only need to look at the news to see how well a nihilistic society works.
- Clent 3y ago
  A false belief that we we have control over our destinies and ignoring the vast amount of luck is how we end up with increasing suicide rates. It also leads to poor outcomes because we can blame simply blame the poor performers rather than examine the systems. Why adjust the system when we can blame it on personal failure for free.
  - cheeseomlit 3y ago
    You can turn that right around though- Why improve yourself when you can just blame the system? Nature, nurture, free will, and pure luck all have a role to play. Sometimes a system is dysfunctional, sometimes a person within that system is dysfunctional- no matter what there's always a tendency to avoid personal responsibility when things don't go well (for all parties involved, the system included)
    - Clent 3y ago
      People improve themselves for reasons beyond monetary gain, therefore money is not the sole motivating force. Your belief that "there's always a tendency to avoid personal responsibility when things don't go well' is your personal opinion and says more about your personal view of the world. If this is true, why the increase in suicide, depression, anxiety. Why are American's the most stressed out population? Ignoring the affects of American's economic system and the role it plays in our growing mental health issues is itself not mentally healthy. Blaming each of the millions of individuals for not thriving for personal failings in a system we control is sociopathic.
taeric 3y ago
I'm a huge critic of a lot of uses of "meritocracy" as a sole guide in how things are or should be, but this attack on it still feels lacking. Would be akin to my talking about "the myth of good people", because there have always been bad people. Or because the "good people" we look towards were not perfectly "good" in all ways. It seems it is still very fair that the US approached an ideal meritocracy far more so than many of the other nations that could be looked towards. Is that not at all the case?
Clent 3y ago
A myth that runs so deep especially in silicon valley that any article about it gets flagged to death rather than being discredited in the comments.
- greesil 3y ago
  I agree completely. I also think it's not relevant for HN. It's what we used to call "flamebait".
- taeric 3y ago
  A lot of the annoyance in SV for this being a "myth" is it easily turns into "the myth of individual achievement." That is, folks see it as an argument to show why individuals are not worthy of the praise they may or may not get. I think it is very fair to argue against the idea that there are perfect meritocracies. But... there are few perfect anythings? To what end does that argument go? Put differently, the dream of a meritocracy is far more appealing as an ideal than the vast majority of ideas that have been competed with it. To directly address the rhetoric of the article. The concern at the end of "It will be no small task to right this ship, and to refit it to more closely resemble the vessel of opportunity we aspire to." But, the entire point of the success of the US system is that we do, in fact, have the best chance at getting to this ideal over anyone else. And we have had our best successes not be replacing older ways, but by incorporating them into what we try next. We more closely resemble that aspiration today than we ever have in the past. And yet we have far more calls for ceasing our progress in the name of past mistakes than ever in our past, too. This could be fine, as we also have far more capability today than ever in the past. But it is tiresome to hear wave after wave of why the successes we have, are somehow not actually successes at all.
- drewcoo 3y ago
  It's less about SV being history-averse than the crowd here. Meritocracy fantasy seems to play a large role in libertarian dogma.
asow92 3y ago
This same guy said that $2T in reparations is the least we could do to fix systemic racism. Where does it end? What is the end game? What is the definition of done when your career depends on discussing such topics?
georgeplusplus 3y ago
It’s known that China, Russia, and their Allie’s promote anti-western content to steer discussion or drown out engagement through the use of bot networks upvoting and downvoting content across social media. I don’t know to what extent, but if I had to guess it’s pretty significant. Is that happening here? Perhaps. Perhaps not. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/20/technology/china-facebook-twitter-influence-manipulation.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/20/technology/ch...
fzeroracer 3y ago
Realistically, the game was always played by the wealthy and the few that were lucky enough to be at the right place and the right time. Survivorship bias is almost inescapable as the mega successes crowd out all of the other failures and attempts. To use myself as an example: My family was poor and my father passed away when I was young. A wrongful death suit was the sole reason why I had a modest college fund. That fund was the reason why I was able to go to college and become a software engineer and escape poverty. I still had to sacrifice my personal health in many ways to make that money last, as a large amount of it went to supporting my parents. Multiple steps of the path that lead me today could've failed. My personal health sacrifice very literally could've killed me given the stuff I put off, I could've gotten injured, my mother could've needed more medical support. There's so many dice rolls that can put you on the path to success or failure in America and a lot of people don't even see them, or are lucky enough to not have to make those rolls in the first place. In every step I took there's a shadow of me whose roll failed. In many senses I'm somewhat thankful of that poverty I went through because it keeps me grounded. But also that poverty and system that created it is a construct of over a century of the 'American Exceptionalism' mythos. And I didn't even have to experience the worst of it.
cheeseomlit 3y ago
I get the impression reading articles like this that the authors take exception not only to the 'myth' of meritocracy in regards to its misrepresentation in political rhetoric in the past couple centuries, but to the idea of meritocracy itself. There is an underlying animosity towards the very concept that makes me think the idea of any one person being better than another in any regard is what truly makes the author uncomfortable, and motivates them to try deconstructing the entire idea of meritocracy on the basis of discrimination (as opposed to just pointing out some historically unfair applications of it)
- semi-extrinsic 3y ago
  My theory is that Americans struggle with this topic because of the distinct lack of socialist (for lack of a better word) policies. If your society has a rigorous social safety net that essentially prevents homelessness and deep poverty, you can still have meritocracy in how the upper-middle class income is distributed, and still retain a good conscience. If you have to pass rows upon rows of homeless people on the way to your six-figure-salary job, you need to either get rid of you conscience on behalf of those people, or be deeply critical of the system.
gustavus 3y ago
I love how people act like Meritocracy is oppressive, or something like that mertiocracy is as simple as this. You have a choice of two surgeons to operate on you for a rare and risky surgery. One has 80% of his patients die on the operating table the other has 10% of his patients die on the operating table. Which one are you going to choose? That's meritocracy Another example, you need to hire a carpenter. Both your neighbors recently had to hire a carpenter. The neighbor on the right hired a carpenter that showed up late, overcharged, and did shoddy work that is already coming undone. The neighbor on the other side hired a carpenter that was punctual, did good work and finished ahead of schedule. Which carpenter are you going to choose? Congratulations you're reinforcing the "Myth" of meritocracy.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
happylrac 3y ago
This article is worthless. It's just another made up 'thing' to prop up some other 'thing'. It's just more noise, and we already have a lot of that. It's also got so many holes that it looks like someone used it for target practice.
smitty1e 3y ago
If everything is a social construct, why is socialism not equally myth?
6R1M0R4CL3 3y ago
i prefer meritocracy to anything else. it may not be perfect, but talk is cheap, world is filled with people on bullshit jobs where they do nothing. there are people that push science, human achievements and create new things we did not have before. if you think you have better, create a company, apply your "rules" there and let's see how it goes. me, seeing that POS article you linked, i'm just gonna move my left hand towards my popcorn.

36 points by MarlonPro 3y ago

LazarWolf_ 3y ago

[flagged]

next_xibalba 3y ago
I have noticed a strong undercurrent among some on HN that has bought into the anti-work movement that seems to have a very high overlap with anti-capitalist/communist/socialist crowd (and also, I suspect, a very poor grasp of history and economics).
- bannedbybros 3y ago
  [dead]
greesil 3y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1781417 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1781417
bannedbybros 3y ago
[dead]
CartyBoston 3y ago
The meritocracy myth is s fundamental tenet of tech and Silicon Valley culture.
- asow92 3y ago
  Maybe it's because they feel as if their success is undeserved and they project that feeling about themselves onto others?

clintonbush 3y ago

This is pure garbage. Please suggest an alternative to "The Myth." I see two immediate problems with any alternative that far out-weigh its purported benefits. (1) Any solution you propose involves a government imposing its will on the people, 'reallocating' their wealth, and using that loot to pick and choose the winners. (2) Any alternative to "The Myth" necessarily deprives people of ownership of their future -- you create more victims. When people believe they have no control over their destiny, they fall prey to nihilism. Thanks to rhetoric like yours coming from BLM, Antifa, and the rest of the progressive ilk, you only need to look at the news to see how well a nihilistic society works.

Clent 3y ago
A false belief that we we have control over our destinies and ignoring the vast amount of luck is how we end up with increasing suicide rates. It also leads to poor outcomes because we can blame simply blame the poor performers rather than examine the systems. Why adjust the system when we can blame it on personal failure for free.
- cheeseomlit 3y ago
  You can turn that right around though- Why improve yourself when you can just blame the system? Nature, nurture, free will, and pure luck all have a role to play. Sometimes a system is dysfunctional, sometimes a person within that system is dysfunctional- no matter what there's always a tendency to avoid personal responsibility when things don't go well (for all parties involved, the system included)
  - Clent 3y ago
    People improve themselves for reasons beyond monetary gain, therefore money is not the sole motivating force. Your belief that "there's always a tendency to avoid personal responsibility when things don't go well' is your personal opinion and says more about your personal view of the world. If this is true, why the increase in suicide, depression, anxiety. Why are American's the most stressed out population? Ignoring the affects of American's economic system and the role it plays in our growing mental health issues is itself not mentally healthy. Blaming each of the millions of individuals for not thriving for personal failings in a system we control is sociopathic.

taeric 3y ago

I'm a huge critic of a lot of uses of "meritocracy" as a sole guide in how things are or should be, but this attack on it still feels lacking. Would be akin to my talking about "the myth of good people", because there have always been bad people. Or because the "good people" we look towards were not perfectly "good" in all ways. It seems it is still very fair that the US approached an ideal meritocracy far more so than many of the other nations that could be looked towards. Is that not at all the case?

Clent 3y ago

A myth that runs so deep especially in silicon valley that any article about it gets flagged to death rather than being discredited in the comments.

greesil 3y ago
I agree completely. I also think it's not relevant for HN. It's what we used to call "flamebait".
taeric 3y ago
A lot of the annoyance in SV for this being a "myth" is it easily turns into "the myth of individual achievement." That is, folks see it as an argument to show why individuals are not worthy of the praise they may or may not get. I think it is very fair to argue against the idea that there are perfect meritocracies. But... there are few perfect anythings? To what end does that argument go? Put differently, the dream of a meritocracy is far more appealing as an ideal than the vast majority of ideas that have been competed with it. To directly address the rhetoric of the article. The concern at the end of "It will be no small task to right this ship, and to refit it to more closely resemble the vessel of opportunity we aspire to." But, the entire point of the success of the US system is that we do, in fact, have the best chance at getting to this ideal over anyone else. And we have had our best successes not be replacing older ways, but by incorporating them into what we try next. We more closely resemble that aspiration today than we ever have in the past. And yet we have far more calls for ceasing our progress in the name of past mistakes than ever in our past, too. This could be fine, as we also have far more capability today than ever in the past. But it is tiresome to hear wave after wave of why the successes we have, are somehow not actually successes at all.
drewcoo 3y ago
It's less about SV being history-averse than the crowd here. Meritocracy fantasy seems to play a large role in libertarian dogma.

asow92 3y ago

This same guy said that $2T in reparations is the least we could do to fix systemic racism. Where does it end? What is the end game? What is the definition of done when your career depends on discussing such topics?

georgeplusplus 3y ago

It’s known that China, Russia, and their Allie’s promote anti-western content to steer discussion or drown out engagement through the use of bot networks upvoting and downvoting content across social media. I don’t know to what extent, but if I had to guess it’s pretty significant. Is that happening here? Perhaps. Perhaps not. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/20/technology/china-facebook-twitter-influence-manipulation.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/20/technology/ch...

fzeroracer 3y ago

Realistically, the game was always played by the wealthy and the few that were lucky enough to be at the right place and the right time. Survivorship bias is almost inescapable as the mega successes crowd out all of the other failures and attempts. To use myself as an example: My family was poor and my father passed away when I was young. A wrongful death suit was the sole reason why I had a modest college fund. That fund was the reason why I was able to go to college and become a software engineer and escape poverty. I still had to sacrifice my personal health in many ways to make that money last, as a large amount of it went to supporting my parents. Multiple steps of the path that lead me today could've failed. My personal health sacrifice very literally could've killed me given the stuff I put off, I could've gotten injured, my mother could've needed more medical support. There's so many dice rolls that can put you on the path to success or failure in America and a lot of people don't even see them, or are lucky enough to not have to make those rolls in the first place. In every step I took there's a shadow of me whose roll failed. In many senses I'm somewhat thankful of that poverty I went through because it keeps me grounded. But also that poverty and system that created it is a construct of over a century of the 'American Exceptionalism' mythos. And I didn't even have to experience the worst of it.

cheeseomlit 3y ago

I get the impression reading articles like this that the authors take exception not only to the 'myth' of meritocracy in regards to its misrepresentation in political rhetoric in the past couple centuries, but to the idea of meritocracy itself. There is an underlying animosity towards the very concept that makes me think the idea of any one person being better than another in any regard is what truly makes the author uncomfortable, and motivates them to try deconstructing the entire idea of meritocracy on the basis of discrimination (as opposed to just pointing out some historically unfair applications of it)

semi-extrinsic 3y ago
My theory is that Americans struggle with this topic because of the distinct lack of socialist (for lack of a better word) policies. If your society has a rigorous social safety net that essentially prevents homelessness and deep poverty, you can still have meritocracy in how the upper-middle class income is distributed, and still retain a good conscience. If you have to pass rows upon rows of homeless people on the way to your six-figure-salary job, you need to either get rid of you conscience on behalf of those people, or be deeply critical of the system.

gustavus 3y ago

I love how people act like Meritocracy is oppressive, or something like that mertiocracy is as simple as this. You have a choice of two surgeons to operate on you for a rare and risky surgery. One has 80% of his patients die on the operating table the other has 10% of his patients die on the operating table. Which one are you going to choose? That's meritocracy Another example, you need to hire a carpenter. Both your neighbors recently had to hire a carpenter. The neighbor on the right hired a carpenter that showed up late, overcharged, and did shoddy work that is already coming undone. The neighbor on the other side hired a carpenter that was punctual, did good work and finished ahead of schedule. Which carpenter are you going to choose? Congratulations you're reinforcing the "Myth" of meritocracy.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

happylrac 3y ago

This article is worthless. It's just another made up 'thing' to prop up some other 'thing'. It's just more noise, and we already have a lot of that. It's also got so many holes that it looks like someone used it for target practice.

smitty1e 3y ago

If everything is a social construct, why is socialism not equally myth?

6R1M0R4CL3 3y ago

i prefer meritocracy to anything else. it may not be perfect, but talk is cheap, world is filled with people on bullshit jobs where they do nothing. there are people that push science, human achievements and create new things we did not have before. if you think you have better, create a company, apply your "rules" there and let's see how it goes. me, seeing that POS article you linked, i'm just gonna move my left hand towards my popcorn.