Who’s success is it anyway ???

Neo-liberalism sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency.

The concept is not new, it started in the late 70s, early 80s. The view emerged stronger when the process of nationalization of assets in the post-world war scenario started failing. It was cemented in the 80s by the policies of Ronald Reagan in the US and Ms. Margaret Thatcher in the UK. The policy prescribes minimal government interference in the economic issues of individuals and society. This theory is characterized by the belief that continued economic growth will lead to human progress, a confidence in free markets, and an emphasis on limited state interference.

What this did to western democracies predominantly is that it decentralized industrialization driving lasting changes in the labour markets. It drove globalization and outsourcing which helped the other half of the world to pull millions of people out of poverty, it also helped these countries with a developing knowledge economy attract talent from across the world. But this has also led to deepening inequality.

This free market phenomenon has also had an influence on our thinking about success. If everyone has an equal chance, the winners deserve their winnings. This is at the heart of the meritocratic ideal. In practice, not everybody has an equal chance to rise. Those who landed on top came to believe that their success was their own doing, a measure of their merit, and that those who lost out had no one to blame but themselves. 

Image by Joshua Chiang

Martin Luther King once said, "The person who picks up our garbage is, in the final analysis, as significant as the physician, for if he doesn't do his job, diseases are rampant. All labor has dignity." 

Today's pandemic makes this clear. It reveals how deeply we rely on workers we often overlook. Delivery workers, maintenance workers, grocery store clerks, warehouse workers, truckers, nurse assistants, childcare workers, home health care providers. They are not the best-paid or most honored workers. But now, we see them as essential workers.

Michael Sandel who teaches political philosophy at Harvard in his latest book, The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good? says we should renew the dignity of work and place it at the center of our politics. We should remember that work is not only about making a living, it's also about contributing to the common good and winning recognition for doing so. In his Ted talk on the same subject, he has articulated the divide between winners and losers and how it is driving us apart. Some of the points mentioned above are from his arguments.

I continue to believe in the role of the free market, that it can deliver benefits that can never be achieved by planning. The concept of meritocracy needs to be at the core of this philosophy. History shows that exceptional and ordinary people who have come through the grind are the ones who move civilization forward with the greatest leaps and bounds. But insisting that one’s success is one’s due makes it hard to see ourselves in other people's shoes. Appreciating the role of luck, grace of God, accident of birth can prompt a certain humility. We can surely do with some more of it.

Source:

Pic- Natural Aristocracy: The myth of meritocracy- The Online Citizen

Tyranny of merit - Michael Sandel - TED2020