SEEING THE FALLACY OF MERITOCRACY
Putting a political speech to reggae beats could make for a long and boring song, but when Bob Marley adds his touch, the final product is an enthralling and popular hit track.
Drawing from an address that Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie I made to the United Nations General Assembly in 1963, Marley added his signature rhythmic melody to the Emperor’s words. Calling for world peace, the Regent gave strong caution to other world leaders:
Until the philosophy which holds one race superior and another inferior is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned...Until there are no longer first class and second class citizens of any nation...Until the color of a man’s skin is of no more significance than the color of his eyes...Until the basic human rights are equally guaranteed to all without regard to race…Until that day, the dream of lasting peace...will remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued but never attained.
His words caught the attention of many ears and, through Marley’s reinvention in 1976, reached the ears of those outside of political circles. They stand as true today as they did then; and are just one of the legacies left by the Ethiopian monarch.
An assessment of his 14 years in the position of Regent and 44-year reign as Emperor, will however garner some concerns and criticism.
Detractors might question Selassie’s success; while fans will applaud the advances Ethiopia made under his leadership. They may differ in their assessment, but both camps must start with the understanding that Selassie was not interviewed and appraised for the job and then found to be the individual with the best and right talent.
When he was born in 1892, Selassie was automatically inferred with the distinction of being of the lineage of the biblical King Solomon. As a member of Ethiopia’s noble blood, he became first a governor and was then appointed Regent or King by the then Empress Zewditu. Following her death, Selassie became the Emperor or King of Kings. It was a position for which there were few contenders, and one that was more his birthright than a reflection of extraordinary skill or talent.
DIFFERENT BUT NOT NECESSARILY BETTER
This is a chief shortcoming of aristocracy – that authority is given rather than earned. Leaders like Selassie obtain their positions whether or not they have good leadership skills. In fact, sometimes even when they have been found wanting, they are able to maintain their standing and power. A birthright is difficult to reverse or reassign.
Meritocracy has become the popular antidote for such flaws of aristocracy.
It’s a political or social system where merit and not bloodline determines who gets power and position. Proponents believe that when heredity or existing wealth are discounted and talent, effort or achievement are recognised, the playing field is levelled for anyone to stand a chance.
Meritocracy has become a commonly vaunted social ideal that gives promise and hope to those without a royal connection in life. Under a meritocratic society, money, power and jobs are available to all. Those who achieve their dreams can, for example, credit intelligence, ability and effort for the results; and not necessarily having the right surname.
Democracies are often seen to be meritocratic systems of governance where all citizens have the power to shape their destinies. Anybody can become a president, whereas if you weren’t born into the right family, becoming queen is unlikely.
A meritocratic belief is that all opportunities are open for all people; this, however, is a fallacy.
Even in the world’s most advanced or long-standing democracies there are barriers to success that are enforced for some and lifted for others. Despite an appearance of equality, meritocratic systems aren’t equal or fair in reality – players need to pay in order to be in the game.
For example, while lottery tickets aren’t reserved for special individuals, they do need to be purchased. So those with the money to spare can play the game.
University admissions are a great illustration of the deficiencies of meritocratic thinking. South Africa’s tertiary institutions do not represent a pool of the country’s smartest matriculants. Many students are there because their families can afford to pay the fees; or because universities cannot afford to lose the endowments/gifts and donations that come with the admission of certain children.
By contrast, some of the country’s brightest minds defer or never get the opportunity for tertiary qualifications because of financial limitations. In a meritocracy as in a monarchy, many have merit but only a few have the opportunity.
In a meritocracy, success cannot be inherited but it is awarded to those deemed to be worthy.
Meritocratic thinking argues that social inequality is due to inequality of talent. But what about prejudice or discrimination or bigotry? Human beings are liable to these. Those who espouse the short-sighted belief that the world is an even playing field forget their own human fallibility. Instead they falsely believe that effort creates opportunities which then foster prosperity.
In reality, however, merit and capability are not enough. Factors such as institutional injustice, corporate favouritism and personal hatred towards select groups or individuals mean that those with the right connections can advance. They will not necessarily be limited by their talent or lack thereof.
Moving away from meritocratic thinking is important in acknowledging privilege and seeing poverty as systemic rather than just the outcome of poor personal choices. Seeing that the field may be geographically level but that some players have an additional advantage through family wealth or network or luck, can aid in correcting judgement towards the poor.
Merit is important and for some it’s a key determinant in the trajectory of their lives; but for many merit will never be enough. Their expertise, flair or genius will take them only so far – and no further.