The concept of meritocracy is fascinating. The power of the aristocracy fell when people stopped believing that Kings were appointed by God (and thus deserving of their position). Almost no-one would accept the condition of the poor if it was openly dictated along racial lines, or by some other kind of system that didn’t veil itself behind the idea of personal responsibility - including the poor themselves. South Africa of course was unable to sustain such a system. I wonder if the decline of the middle class and of social mobility (which is largely occurring in a generational way, as children being worse off than their parents), will also weaken the idea of meritocracy. It’s really the most important foundation of liberal ideology as a belief system.
The concept of meritocracy is fascinating. The power of the aristocracy fell when people stopped believing that Kings were appointed by God (and thus deserving of their position). Almost no-one would accept the condition of the poor if it was openly dictated along racial lines, or by some other kind of system that didn’t veil itself behind the idea of personal responsibility - including the poor themselves. South Africa of course was unable to sustain such a system. I wonder if the decline of the middle class and of social mobility (which is largely occurring in a generational way, as children being worse off than their parents), will also weaken the idea of meritocracy. It’s really the most important foundation of liberal ideology as a belief system.
An ancillary question: Is a meritocracy on its most fundamental definition, a concept of "haves and have nots"?