Meritocracy: The Wage Gap Between Rich And Poor

The world’s leading psychological researcher of the Just-World hypothesis, Melvin J. Lerner (1980) describes a meritocracy as “a human tendency to maintain the belief that the world is fair.” Although the definition is broad, it describes the belief the general population holds in achieving success; it is attainable to anyone willing to work hard (as cited in Hafer & Bague, 2005, p. 128). However, if meritocracy is true, how are the differences between the rich and poor explained and why is that not everyone is successful. Supported by those in power, meritocratic ideologies promote disillusionment in the general population by promising social equality and success to all. Not only, are those in power promoting tyranny through meritocracy, but

In a study done by Knowles & Lowery (2012), it was determined that the denial of white privilege was predicted by meritocratic ideologies, even more so than anti-black discrimination, and that holding these beliefs reduce the perception of racial privilege among those who are of white backgrounds. This study implies that those who are white deny that they hold privilege against those of different backgrounds as they possess merit but only when they endorse meritocratic ideologies. These ideologies may negate racial inequalities by disillusioning those that are privileged to believe that they are not at an advantage because they work hard to achieve their goals. However, in Guinier’s (2015) research, she demonstrates that students of different ethnicities underperform on the SAT’s, specifically those who self-identified as white obtained an average score of 1576 whereas those who self-identified as black or African American achieved an average of 1278. However, she argues that those who do not internalize racial stigma can perform better on these tests because they have less anxiety around conforming to their racial stereotypes, in terms of intellectual inadequacy. This suggests that not only are these individuals experiencing inequities with regard to privilege but they are also, under increased pressure to obtained high scores to outperform their

One of the main arguments Guinier presents is that we must change the definition of meritocracy to, rather, working in collaboration to achieve success. Guinier (2015) believes that the current definition of meritocracy creates a society of individualists striving for self-preservation whereas, society could preferably promote collaboration. Thereby, decreasing actions that only achieve personal merit, and increasing achievements that will benefit entire groups of people. This was tested at a high school in an area of the United States in which families had a lower socioeconomic status. The students were taught to collaborate with other students of different ethnic, gender and societal backgrounds. These students were encouraged to participate in groups to learn and solve mathematical problems as well as, approach the problems from multiple perspectives. At the end of the four-year study period, the students outperformed on standardized tests compared to other wealthier schools in the area. In short, by changing the definition of meritocracy it is being implied that a collaboration of groups of different background and social classes would work together to increase the success of society as a whole. Snyder (2017) expresses as one of the twenty lessons from the twentieth century that we must be a patriot as they have “[…] universal values, standards by