The Illusive Panacea of Meritocracy

Ever wonder why certain people hate Socialism? Probably not. Ever wonder why certain people hate capitalism? Probably not. Have you ever heard the complaint that those systems are unfair? Of course. Okay, so none of this is earth shattering, but there is a common thread that creates disdain? It is the idea of "deserving."

Since the time we were five years old our parents, teachers, storybooks, literary pieces, the movies we watched and our interactions with friends in the school yard all centered around "getting what one deserved." Why do we form lines? It's not because it is the best system for each person individually regardless of their place in the line, but it compliments a system of agreed upon fairness. We believe that first come, first served is fair. That those who are first shall be served first because their timeliness shall be rewarded. They deserve it.

We just as easily could have created a system where the tallest person in line shall always go first. The problem is that if someone is really short they could be waiting for a really long time. They could theoretically be helped after people that arrived much later than them but made the line before they were helped. That just wouldn't be fair would it? The tall people didn't do anything to deserve to be helped first. In fact a system like that would become hard to enforce as short people would be likely to opt out of lines all together and base who is served next on other criteria such as violence, intimidation or "cutsies."

In fact, allowing someone to benefit for something they had no control over would be deemed in the same family as dumb luck. That sure isn't a flattering statement. Luck is receiving something by chance, something one doesn't deserve. Undeserved achievement is so unflattering that one of its recipients may say "better lucky than good," or even more austencious "people create their own luck" to deflect the resulting stigma.

So we have been taught esoteric concepts such as karma, what goes around comes around and someday we all get what we deserve. Is it true? In socialism, their is a tremendous tendency for "free riderism," where individuals can get something they do not deserve. This absolutely burns many who feel like they are getting exactly what they deserve and nothing more. How dare someone get something they don't deserve? In fact, many people are so concerned with who deserves what, that they really don't care if they are getting more than they deserve so long as no one else is. That wouldn't be fair.

In capitalism, often times people condition wealth or monetary success with how deserving the person who possess it. Self made millionaires are far higher regarded than those who inherited money. Those with inherited wealth must "do something" to make a name for themselves or else they are seen as a waste. Smart people stay poor and dumb people rich all the time. While this is not a correlation that we see to be common, it is also not an isolated incident. We all sleep better when the good ones, who deserve it, have good things happen to them. Too bad that this system isn't as correlated as we expect?

Many of the wealthy are born wealthy. They are literally starting the game ahead in the score. Some get lucky and some unlucky. At times, good "deserving" people lose wealth, jobs and stature. At times, people of poor quality gain wealth and prosperity. The reason; capitalism doesn't judge, it rewards much like the polls for an election. When a person exchanges dollars for a good, service or opportunity it is given instead of that dollar being given to another for a good, service or opportunity. It's literally voting with money. It's democracy for commerce, the winner attracts the most dollars. As such, popularity, appearance, timing, feasibility, communicability, connections, access to markets, marketing, perception and momentum are usually the factors with the most magnetic effect with dollars.

Sometimes, that recipient is also a deserving person who worked hard, showed brilliance, was ambitious and withstood great obstacles to achieve. We love these stories because like being first in line, this person used what is generally available to all to succeed- they deserved it. Sometimes, the person got very lucky and was in the right place at the right time. Not bad, but we condition their success. Sometimes, the recipient didm't earn the money used, committed none of the brain power, and achieved on the back of others. Just like the tall people and the free riders, these people are scorned. The deserved, the lucky and the undeserving all get the same result in the accumulation of societal claim checks (or currency), but we don't have the same feeling.

That is why the meritocracy looks so great. In a meritocracy everyone gets exactly what one deserves. However, who is to decide what we deserve? How do we create such a system? What criteria would we use? I guess the root of our frustrations are easy to identify, but beyond our ability to rectify. The humerous part is how something so inherent in our nature is so difficult to attain.

PROBLEM SOLVED!!!!!

Just a quick note.  Have you ever wondered what happened to the old fashioned problem solving nature of the American public?  The attitude that no mountain was too high and no valley to low.  The resolve that made our country eternally optimistic and willing to believe in the motto: "Work hard and you shall be rewarded."

When was the last time the media dared to declare a problem was solved?  What would you do if the evening news began with a story with the headline "PROBLEM SOLVED!"  Is it possible?  Have the passed thirty years, thirty months, thirty days and thirty minutes been without any success?  Have we turned into whining, snivling, problem finders or are we still ingenuitive problem solvers?

I suggest Americans are worthy of more credit than the media would ever be willing to give them.  Moreover, I believe if one is only looking for problems, that's all they shall find.  That said, the mindless twenty-four hour reporting of actual and potential problems seems counter productive.  In fact, this endless search to uncover problems is even less productive than the endless stream of "news analysts" that are paraded in front of the general public to interpret the facts.  This behavior is literally story telling for adults and permission to create facts out of conjecture.  

Funny as this sounds, CNN created a word cloud to illuminate on the President's speech last week.  Love President Obama or hate him, he is direct, clear and unambiguous when he speaks.  There is no need to interpret.  That said, assuming news sources needed to fill empty time by rewording the speech, a contemporary illustration made up of all the words used in the speech with the words used most frequently appearing in the largest font is simply silly.  The analysts dissecting the word cloud to find the greatest sense of meaning was even more outlandish. Is this productive?  Is it genuine? What happened to simply listening to the source to figure out what they meant? 

With the news transitioning from informative to entertaining, it dangerously borders on being purposely misleading.  The largest worry is that many Americans believe news sources are bound by certain protocols to report facts.  The media has wandered astray and with it so has the focus of America.  The news has created fear in every man, woman and child in a torrent of problems.  They have changed the lending practices of banks and the willingness of people to invest by the constant bombarding of negativity and their endless search for troubling data, potential problems, and what ifs.  While the media is free to write and broadcast as they wish, a greater sense of common good and Country demands the reporting of our numerous achievements in at least equal frequency to our shortcomings.  After all, wasn't America a better place when Mickey Mantle was a hero and  American companies were the envy of the world?