The creator of one of the most powerful ideas of the last century died on
14 January. He was Michael Young, the main intellectual enemy of Thatcher,
author of "The Rise of the Meritocracy" in 1958, and the founder of many
organisations such the Consumer Association, the Open University and many
more.

In his famous book he advanced the notion that we were entering a
meritocratic society. He was greatly troubled by this possibility, as were
others, and, in fact, a direct political result was the Labour Government's
scrapping of the 11-plus examination in the 60s, the process by which most
of the talented poor previously leapfrogged into a grammar education (a
route I had taken myself some years earlier).

Although meritocracy is certainly an id�e re�ue it seems to me that it is
scarcely given any attention even though the steady decline in voting at
elections by the underclass, old-working class, and the present-day young
is now spreading into the lower middle class. In the next few years, it
will soon be the case that the only people who will turn out to vote
elections will be the people who already run society -- the top 25% of the
population (that is, the top 25% in both brains and income) -- and who
receive most of the available perks. They will naturally want to see the
continuation of the system that looks after them so well.

Even though the Labour Government of the 60s tried to prevent the rise of
the meritocracy for egalitarian reasons (by the scrapping of the 11-plus
already mentioned) they accidentally instituted even more efficient
filtering systems at a multitude of educational levels, even though they
weren't called exams. But they hadn't thought this through and, as
Herrnstein later commented: "The more egalitarian the educational system,
the more stratified the society becomes."  

Although politicians are deeply worried (or *say* they are, anyway) about
the declining turnouts and are trying all sorts of alternative voting
experiments (in England, but without success so far), they do not seem to
want to draw attention to the reason behind the trend -- that is, the death
of democracy, and the arrival of meritocracy.

Apart from the fact that there has been a notional loss of political power
by about half the electorate so far -- even though voluntarily yielded --
there doesn't seem to be a great deal wrong with meritocracy. It seems to
serve us quite well.

I can think of one reason why this is a very dangerous basis for society.

Keith Hudson



  
__________________________________________________________
�Writers used to write because they had something to say; now they write in
order to discover if they have something to say.� John D. Barrow
_________________________________________________
Keith Hudson, Bath, England;  e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________

Reply via email to