Governing “Democratic” Equality

Baum, Bruce J.

doi:10.1177/1065912911421014

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead of pursuing equal opportunity, Tawney rather argues for equalizing the conditions for health and education in order to ensure equal opportunities for all individuals to cultivate those abilities that nature bestows upon them. Tawney ( 1922 : 33, 141–5, 218; Baum 2012 : 719–24) is in particular concerned about the equality of educational opportunities. He criticizes the vicious circle of systemic inequality in education and the wider class stratification which perpetuates class divisions, defeats social solidarity, and poses a threat to democracy.…”

Section: Controversies Of Meritocracymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Siyang Liu ( 2022 : 16–8) refers to David Miller’s liberal nationalism and criticizes that political deliberation is insufficient to cultivate the sense of solidarity and motivate people to give in support of distributive justice, because it fails to explain why people are willing to engage in public deliberation without nationalist sentiments in the first place. While Baum ( 2012 : 726) strongly supports Tawney’s, as well as Sandel’s, democratic equality, he also admits that such an account “has a somewhat utopian character, pointing beyond the horizon of what currently is ‘realistic’ politically… In our era of transnational corporate power and diverse noneconomic (or not strictly economic) sources of political struggle, economic democratization may be harder than ever to realize.”…”

Section: Beyond Equal Opportunity: Republican Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Case for Communitarian Meritocracy: A Critical Engagement with Michael Sandel

Hung

2023

Fudan J. Hum. Soc. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I examine Sandel’s recent criticism of meritocracy. I argue that even though Sandel appeals to the rhetoric of luck in his criticism, unlike Rawls, his fundamental political aspiration is a kind of communitarian republicanism rather than liberal egalitarianism. However, Sandel’s suggestion of lottery elements in college admission does not help much in reducing inequality and political polarization. After comparing Mulligan’s meritocratic thesis, I argue that the problems of inequality and polarization in the U.S. are not caused by meritocracy; rather it is due to a lack of substantive equal opportunity. And I would argue that as long as substantive equal educational opportunities are guaranteed, there is no reason to reject meritocracy. And by taking reference from the experience of Hong Kong’s educational reform, I further argue that one important way to achieve equal educational opportunities is through leveling-up educational policies, such as providing competitive publicly-funded education, which not only provides equal opportunity to everyone to develop their capabilities regardless of their different family backgrounds, but also establishes citizens’ participatory readiness, so that they can effectively participate in creating and sustaining communitarian meritocracy.

show abstract

Section: Controversies Of Meritocracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Beyond Equal Opportunity: Republican Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%