On a superficial level, the idea of meritocracy seems more or less ideal. A merit-based society sounds like an indubitably fair system, one in which the rewards of life — money, power, careers, etc. — are distributed on an even basis of skills and efforts. However, questions of whether it’s achievable or actually desirable are constant. There are many harmful nuances underlying the concept of meritocracy, starting with the fact that it wouldn’t necessarily reward people for their hard work. In fact, it would more often reward citizens for external factors beyond anyone’s control.
This may sound like a ludicrous statement because meritocracy is derived from the idea of replacing those external, uncontrollable factors with “merit.” But external and uncontrollable luck is so closely intertwined with society’s perception of “merit” that this wouldn’t be conceptually possible. There is a concept called the “birth lottery”: it’s the idea that the certain uncontrollable circumstances of one’s birth determines the bulk of their opportunities and privileges. Some individuals are gifted with certain genetic advantages, others grow up in homes that nurture them into being hardworking or driven while others don’t get the same opportunities. Sometimes two people are even born with similar amounts of privilege and merit yet there are long-shots and coincidences that carve an exclusive path for one while the other is left in the dust. It cannot be denied that this perpetuates inequality: there will be an unfathomably stark contrast between the opportunity offered to children born into poverty and children born into royalty. Thus, success and failure in a meritocracy would still be largely determined by luck.
Another important factor to think about in a hypothetically “merit”-based society are personal ideals. Meritocracy would inevitably enforce a uniform and complete lack of work-life balance, something certain people will simply never feel particularly compelled toward. The notion of what a life well-lived or well-“merited” is hard to define, often tying into individual, subjective perspectives of fulfillment and autonomy. For some, merit may be derived from attaining lofty social status, wealth, or professional achievements. But others may find that high-quality life lies in contributing to their community, fostering close relationships, and simply putting a bigger emphasis on fun. While there is nothing objectively wrong with someone like this, in a meritocratic society, they would be constantly alienated and undervalued. Meanwhile, those who have achieved the height of measurable success will be given the license to perceive themselves as productive, competent, and superior humans. Essentially, everyone except those who have clawed their way up to the very top will be viewed as defective somehow; lesser than, a worse person and a less worthy contributor to society. In this way, meritocracy is the most hubristic and self-serving of all the ideological societal models. On a personal level, meritocracy dehumanizes individuals by reducing them to their “merit”. In a meritocratic society, people are not viewed as multifaceted, full individuals.
Rather, they are academic machines. They are their careers. A set of attributes, skills, and achievements. In a meritocracy, people are alone in their responsibility for their success or failure. This puts people under constant pressure, holding them accountable for their place on the societal ladder, wherever they are on it. This is, quite frankly, depressing, and puts people in a perpetual state of psychological strain: those who are high-ranked in society could eventually be led to chronic stress and eventual burnout. In 2021, it was reported by the APA that 61 percent of high-achieving professionals reported feeling overwhelmed, with 26 percent of them describing it as burnout. And in 2024, a Mercer study reported a staggering 80 percent of employees were at risk of burnout, with recent research showing that depression rates among CEOs nearly double the national average. Meritocracy prioritizes alienation and competition over collaboration and thus reduces relationships to transactional things, formed based on someone’s accomplishment-based value.
I say all of this but I am a Freshman at a school that very much perpetuates meritocracy. At Andover, a lot of students will do practically anything to decorate their Linkedin profile — join extracurriculars they don’t even like, stress over grades, sports, clubs, to an obsessive degree — and let’s face it, many of Andover kids are also immensely well-connected. A lot of people here have parents who are professors at Ivy leagues or successful doctors or whatever other glittery corporate job it may be, and there is nothing wrong with that — it’s just what they were born into. There’s simply some injustice that comes in where other kids who are just as driven and ambitious and intelligent may not have been born into the same, or even remotely similar, circumstances and lack the same connections. Another fundamental problem with meritocracy can be seen in how there is still an extremely narrow understanding of what success is at Andover–most are striving for the same unrealistic ideal of living, and if someone wants to live a life that strays a little bit from that lifestyle, they’re dumb. Lazy. Some of their peers might even question how or why they’re at Andover in the first place. The meritocratic system of Andover is not only toxic and unjust, but it also forces students to conform to one extremely restrictive mold of success and shames anyone who dares try to step out of that mold.
So, while there is nothing inherently wrong with striving for personal success in a traditional manner, getting into a good university, getting a good career, and earning good money — meritocracy is a deeply harmful construct. It allows for only a very narrow pathway of success and merit, reducing people to mere measures of achievement and disregarding the other values of a meaningful life. As an ideological model, meritocracy promotes an arrogant, self-serving worldview that disregards the importance of community, morality, and the varied ways in which individuals contribute to society. Meritocracy is a harmful and dehumanizing system that strips people of value and meaning.
