Washington Monthly - September/October 2020 - 117

The Politics of
Pretention
How the meritocracy bred smugness-
and drove voters to Donald Trump.
By Richard D. Kahlenberg

n examining the 2016 populist revolt that gave rise to Donald Trump and Brexit, most observers have focused on two explanations. Some say the uprising was
driven by economic dislocation: Voters were angry about rising inequality and felt
they were losing out because of trade. Others argue that anger with the establishment stemmed from racist discomfort with immigration, demographic change, and
growing religious diversity.
In his new book, the Harvard political philosopher Michael Sandel focuses on a
third factor: elite smugness and self-dealing. To Sandel, 2016 represented a rebellion
of voters lacking a college degree against a governing class that believes that its credentials, wealth, and power are the products of its merit. These leaders, Sandel argues, have condescended to blue-collar workers, "eroded the dignity of work and left
many feeling disrespected and disempowered."
Sandel focuses primarily on the left. For three decades, he writes, leading Democrats-including Bill Clinton (Yale Law '73), Hillary Clinton (Yale Law '73), and
Barack Obama (Harvard Law '91)-embodied personally, and touted rhetorically, a
brand of meritocracy hopelessly oblivious to what he calls the "tyranny of merit."
Sometimes, this is implicit, as when Pete Buttigieg flexes on his ability to speak eight
languages and his experience as a Rhodes Scholar. Other times, it's explicit. Speaking in Mumbai in 2018, Hillary Clinton bragged that she "won the places that represent two-thirds of America's gross domestic product"-that is, the places that had
been successful in the era of globalization. This, Sandel writes, "displayed the meritocratic hubris that contributed to her defeat." The Democratic Party "once stood for
farmers and working people against the privileged. Now, in a meritocratic age, its defeated standard bearer boasted that the prosperous, enlightened parts of the country had voted for her."
Sandel isn't opposed to a system of governance that prioritizes merit. He acknowledges the obvious benefits of meritocratic hiring over decisionmaking based on alternative reasoning, such as nepotism and racial or gender bias. And he knows that
skills are important too. As a matter of efficiency, one wants a dentist who can repair a tooth competently. Moreover, after living through Donald Trump's presidency, marked by shameless race baiting and bumbling incompetence in the face of a
global pandemic, a nondiscriminatory meritocratic approach to leadership looks
pretty good.
But Sandel is right to probe the dark things that can come from embracing meritocracy. Liberals have been overemphasizing their credentials and the economic success of their cosmopolitan metropolises. In doing so, they've forgotten that these
markers are not good indicators of worth. The ability to obtain post-secondary degrees, particularly from elite institutions, is at least as much a reflection of one's
class and race as it is of one's deservedness. The wealth and success of more liberal places has as much to do with an unequal system that allows existing wealth to

The Tyranny of Merit:
What's Become of
the Common Good?
by Michael J. Sandel
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 288 pp.

Washington Monthly 117

Washington Monthly - September/October 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Washington Monthly - September/October 2020