Merit without the -ocracy

Abstract

This chapter explores the logic that seemed to guide interviewees' responses in the question: “Do Americans think they live in a meritocracy?” It looks at the conclusions we reach about what we have earned or deserve and the standards we use to reach them, arguing that the most common standard for deservedness Americans use is merit more than meritocracy. The chapter also details the interviewees' responses about American ideas of success, and notes that people evaluate success in the context of their parents' jobs and finances, the neighborhoods where they grew up, and the educational opportunities afforded them. The chapter asserts that our ideas about what it means to earn or deserve something are so flexible for two main reasons: the bigness of life and the subjectivity of experience, and the second reason for our flexibility is that in turning our lives into stories and asking whether we have done enough, we find ways to avoid using the standard of societal meritocracy to evaluate ourselves. Ultimately, the chapter notes that the absence of meritocracy does not preclude the possibility of individual deservedness being realized.