RSA Minimate: The Tyranny of Merit | Michael Sandel
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 май 2019
- Work hard, play by the rules, and you’ll go as far as your talents will take you. Right? But so often this isn’t how the system works. In this powerful new RSA Minimate, political philosopher Michael Sandel confronts our age of stalling social mobility and entrenched inequality, and asks: what would it take to give everyone a fair shot at a good life?
The minds behind the award-winning RSA Animate series are back! RSA Minimates are super-short, information-packed animations for busy people. All audio excerpts are taken from live, FREE events at the RSA’s HQ in London, and animated by Cognitive. This animation was produced by RSA Senior Events and Animations Producer, Abi Stephenson.
Find out more in Michael's RSA talk here: • A New Politics of Hope...
SUBSCRIBE to our channel!
Follow the RSA on Twitter: / rsaevents
Like RSA Events on Facebook: / rsaeventsoff. .
Listen to RSA podcasts: / the_rsa
See RSA Events behind the scenes: / rsa_events
Well done to the artist. This was one of the best RSAs I've seen... and also to Mr Sandel for his clearly articulated lesson
Absolutely brilliant.
Joseph Campbell (& others) "Follow Your Bliss" Brilliant brilliant illustrated talk.
You always hit below the belt. The message, the animation, the delivery, the coherence... Simply awesome!
Yes, you do ignite a burning passion and seriously, a prospect for change!
Thanks for all you do!
I wish everyone understood that merit is an aspiration and not a reality. It never has been a reality. Even in jobs and education, people have gotten where they are through their connections.
Most would have never gotten through the door if they didn't know someone, from birth to adulthood
cool, your comment enriches the video,
I find this explanation of the populist phenom enlightening. This meritocracy has been brewing for a long time. We have long since abandoned "all for one and one for all," to our downfall. The idea is explained further on Preet Brabara's podcast. It is well worth the time to listen.
ahhhh "all for one and one for all", makes me breath deeper again
The question is how much of my success are you willing to steal from me before I decide to leave? And what are we uniting under? atheistic socialism? No thanks. I am out.
It's all about being humble because you know that not all people who has a high/low position is because it's deserved, it could be maybe result of hard work, nepotism or just luck, so you should help and listen others and not looking them as trash who deserve 100% their misery. It's obvious that hard work is like 90% of the success, but some people circumstances never allow to achieve their goals. So, people in the button know that most of their politicians are there result of nepotism, and at the same time that that elite look them as just a bunch of lazy and stupids who don't deserve nothing because they don't work hard. This leads to instability due lack of comprehension from both sides, but specially the political because they have more tools to solve problems.
What a explanation
What does it really mean to deserve something? Does a person who inherited wealth deserve it more than a poor person who stole it?
There's no objective way to deserve something, you just have it, until you don't.
But if you want to live in a functional society; then it's useful to have people work towards their own success in a way that doesn't screw others over.
Everyone ought to see that as long as we're brought up in a society, everything is a collective effort to some extent. But those who succeed still deserve praise, as long as they're willing to show some humility.
That makes no sense, you can't have winners without losers...
learned that
How can I find the roadmap illustrated in this clip?
Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell is a good read if you like this video.
thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's luck
Provided they recognise it as luck...
Yes 👍
What I understand is that I am where I am not by myself, but by external circunstances and by others whether I know them. And, even, if I keep reaching success I have to look down to people that didn't have the circunstances I had so that I can help them somehow to move up with the help I received even if I didn't notice. I that's the point, I agree with the video but, I think I miss something else.
Meritocracy is the idea that those who have successes are solely responsible for them, and likewise, those who have failures are solely responsible for them. It is the idea we use to justify the fact that some people have everything and others have nothing. The reality is that successes always happen with a whole lot of help / luck, and failures always happen with a whole lot of obstacles / bad luck. The reality is also that the mentality is toxic and breaks social bonds, we no more see the need for solidarity and the need to pick each other up, there's no need to because everyone is exactly where they deserve to be. The message is to get over this flawed meritocracy idea, reconnect with and have empathy for others, and together build a society that leaves no one behind.
How did this get from hubris is bad to populism is bad? I'm not sure I followed the argument. I may have been distracted by the snakes.
EWKification
We didn't. His whole argument is crap.
Life reproduces and takes up both literal and conceptual "space". Since this "space" is finite, then so must the definition of successful life include "destroy" either by out-competing or outright. Meritocracy is baked into the definition of life.
All of this is very cold.
"Populism", as the artist demonizes, is a natural reaction to the modern condition. With the ever increasing scale of modern life, we do not simply worry about a random disease or flood, but also if some investor thousands of miles away and feet high decides your company, because of its ideals, "just needs to go". What else can a fellow drop of water in this ocean do but to join some part of a greater whole? Populism is just one of many solutions on this spectrum, many quite understandable and appropriate.
a human has movementdirections beyond water. and i sense i am not able to make a solid remark about the finity of space. i just sense there is more.
Do we change our philosophy on merit? Or do we make it so merit is the only thing that matters
I like the idea of merit.
the old saying it's not what you know it's who you know would be a thing of the past. Merit takes away people getting jobs as a favour or because of who they know. and replaces them with people who have prepared for the job. makes sense to me if I understood this correctly
@@bethegame0076 The problem is that preparation alone usually is not just your work though, but talent, relationships and a decent family background to support education. We do need the right man for the job, sure. But what about the guy who work hard just to live, trying their hardest but lack some of the three qualities I've mentioned. The problem is with the system that emphasise winner take all, let loser die. It would only get worse with the rise of AI as we are about to create many unemployed people unable to generate value in way that are reflected by number, hence recognised and rewarded. "Useless and worthless" class to say it bluntly. These 99% filled with anger, guilt and shame would not be a recipe for a flourishing human species.
We would only live in a meritocracy if everyone had the same opportunities and abilities, and of course we all know that doesn't exist in the real world.
no that's what defines character, a successful person will raise on ANY community you see it all the time in latin america, asia and africa.it takes a special mentality to be small business owners.
This video just perpetuates the crabs in a bucket hypothesis
@@nomad9338 well mentally challenged individuals wouldnt exist in your utopia, just abort and done
in a system with competition, players sorting their day to gain money, you, dear michael sandel, present an idea that could lead people to understand, if they so wish so. if they so wish so
If I was going in for brain surgery, I'd want the most competent person to be performing it. Whether they achieved the competency through hard work or "just" being born that good.
nobody question that fact, the video is about being humble because you know not all people who has a high/low position is because it's deserved, it could be maybe result of hard work, nepotism or just luck, so you should help and listen others and not looking them as trash who deserve 100% their misery.
@@sensereference2227 agree. I say it may be luck / they just born talented. Not hard work.
A lot of snakes and ladders in this video.
I suppose your ideal hierarchy would be organised according to victim status.
This video seems to be arguing we cannot be compassionate unless we believe people are suffering through no fault of their own. Surely one way to express compassion is by recognising that people contribute to their own suffering, sympathising with their mistakes, and helping them improve their lives. I don't see why we cannot have a meritocracy and compassion too.
Well, what form does your "meritocratic compassion" take? If people generally are poor as a result of their own flaws or mistakes and not a lack of assistance from society, then the "compassion" that stems from that view generally takes the form of moralizing, lecturing, and finger-wagging as opposed to any real material improvement in struggling peoples' lives.
That being said, if you can convincingly articulate a policy that would address rampant poverty and income inequality based around correcting their "mistakes," then I'm willing to listen, albeit skeptical of how this can be different or more substantial than the standard conservative ideas (or lack thereof) for addressing poverty.
Brian Hart
You're confusing class and meritocracy.
@@Bocbo Can you elaborate? Not sure what you mean, I'm pretty sure I understand the difference between them but maybe you can enlighten me.
Brian Hart
This thread was started addressing compassion and meritocracy.
You are trying to hijack it into a discussion about class values.
Enough?
Articulate Management
Is an empty channel.
Seen ya trollin, ya coward. Tell me... why should anyone care what a fake has to say?
Tell me coward. What makes you think you matter at all?
Basically, Sandel, is just contesting the "rightness" of saying that the structure of a given social arrangement (naturalizing it, or intellectual justifying it as "meritocracy") is justified, simply because it favors, me. The Tyranny is that of self-deception that is needed to rationalize of one's own self deception. Pointing out how we lose empathy, when lose self criticism: in the face of injustices that we participate in.
Americans often talk about exploitative farm labor from migrants, as if those people were a cartoon devoid of humanity.
Thank you, Prof!
Eat the Rich!
These comments are rife with extrapolation. This man is trying to bring awareness to the social disparity that an ideal meritocracy tends to create; not argue the illegitimacy of them altogether. As he said, a perfect meritocracy is a double edged sword that creates feedback loops which uplift the competent but also bury the underprivileged. Those who think he's proposing Marxist policy are mistaken, as it's his intent to warn us of the populism that is fueled by said social disparity. Although it is incredibly difficult to diffuse this disparity without inhibiting the function of the meritocracy itself, we need to at least try and work towards reducing the stigma towards the less merited in order to keep tensions from rising so we don't risk losing the system altogether.
He's not a neo-Marxist. He's a neo-Aristotelian, or what some philosophers call a communitarian.
@@mitlouwin100 So he's a commie that believes "everyone is a winner there's no losers, here's your participation trophy". Got it
People are missing the point of the video. Criticising meritocracy does not mean you to banish the best construction workers, the best medicine men, the best chefs - from work, that would be absurd. Instead it wants to signify that in a world of absolute meritocracy, those of lesser talent and capabilities, those who are "unworthy" - they have no place to go to. Society wants to reject them and treat them cruel and aggressively, offering them no livelihood because they are simply "not good enough", even if they can be competent in their field in a different, or more local environment and be respected for it. What this video asks is not to demonise the losers, who often do the best they can under their own financial circumstances, or upbringing, or education, because people just need to get by, and they deserve a basic living standard, decency and respect every step of the way.
Without this respect or a place in life, where do these "losers" go to? They become angry and form populist, prejudiced parties because they are angry at the way their life is treated and their populist politicans point the cause to foreign workers or minorities, and try to tell you you belong in their "special club" that's going to "take this country back". They are swayed to fight their fellow workers, who also have it hard in life and also are struggling to survive, when instead they need to be angry at and challenge this value system, sponsored by capitalists and corporate leaders, that says that "losers are scum" and "it's your fault". Be angry at them, not your fellow worker.
SEGAClownboss
Life is inherently unfair.
You will likely have less than you feel you deserve.
Assholes being mean to subnormals has nothing to do with meritocracy it's biology.
Striving is the basis of sexual reproduction.
Empathy for incels is nice but the entire trajectory of life itself ain't changing so they can get laid.
Strive or be relegated to the genetic dustbin.
Begging for the dominant to be nice is pathetic.
"Need to be angry at and challenge this value system" you're an idiot. You say people deserve a basic living standard but reality tells us no one deserves anything.
This can be swapped with a bunch of socialistic losers frustrated with the riches in the hands more ignorant or in their view "less-deserved" individuals.
Knowledge and Decisions by Thomas Sowell blows this out of the water.
We are limited, heuristic creating individuals. Some understand how they got somewhere others do not. Whether they have hubris in their success doesn't matter.
This goes so well beyond politics, but using politics as banner of change is the easy way of avoiding the true issue, personal accountability. True, there is luck involved with much of the success of certain people, but at the same time there is preparation and perseverance which is seldom attributed. Notice I didn't mention talent; there are many untalented people who were both prepared and persevered until an opportunity came along and took it. They weren't even the best suited for the job but their preparation and stick-to-it nature allowed them to move beyond what was referenced to as "common life" in the video.
Yes, just because you "try" hard, it doesn't mean that you will get what you want. But you can't expect to force something to happen if you only do the exact same thing day after day. Also, you have to be rational about your goals. Finally, there is no achievement in just "trying." You either do it (whatever that may mean for your specific situation) or don't.
I think the main point of this video is to stay HUMBLE because your achievements have not been made 100% by you ALONE. People who are "self made" sure 80% has been made by their hard work but the rest 20% is influenced also by lessons of masters, your parents, co-workers, friends, connections/relations, geo-political factors, the economy of the country, political situation and even some luck. But also lot of "success" people are made by the opposite, 80% external factors and 20% hard work like wealthy kids who have a great fundation of factors in favor in order to "make it". And even some of them are just parasites sucking the system like royal families or richies kids destroying the family wealth. No matter your current economy situation, just the ACTION will take you in an upper level, like Bill Gates said; "if you were born poor is not your fault but if you die poor it is."
What if it's not possible to fix an outside system until a person fixes their internal values first?
What I find stunning is that this supposedly " meritocratic " system rewards those who own, yet not those who actually work. Everyone knows billionaires are rich through the work of others.
yes, it is because money has one of its birthvalues in external control and detention(sry my english, i mean making people responsible for what they cause). and one exitgateway is to truely want other to be superior and forgivness
Beautifully drawn and animated but the art injects a whole lot of political bias that wasn't in the original source audio. The art implies conservatives = bad! liberals = good! But that's not what Sandel seems to be saying here. He's calling out the meritocracy, which is now just as likely to be urban technocrat liberals as it is wealthy conservatives.
I didn't see a simplistic "liberals = good!" message from the art, personally. I do agree that establishment liberals are also responsible for upholding the myth of meritocracy, though I would point out that the US's "liberal party" has traditionally governed from a center-right to outright conservative position on most issues, at least when measured against most European democracies.
Where did you get the sense that the art was saying "liberals good, conservatives bad"?
@@brianh5844 I see it in the depiction of Trump and Farage. Farage saying "hate" and Trump shitting on top of a bus. Not very charitable representations, compared to a smiling Obama holding an "opportunity" sign (reinforced with sound: applause for Obama, booing for Trump). And yes I use the words "liberal" and "conservative" in the US context. In others it would be "more conservative" vs. "less conservative."
Aynn Rand would disagree
At the end of the day, it's all about predators and prey.
This line of thinking does not seem like a productive path for the overall success of most people and in my opinion. This almost this sounds like a political/market version of no child left behind further limiting opportunity and possibly creating a more submissive population (just accept this average way of life just like everyone else and no reason to take risks or try harder cause the rewards are greatly reduced). I think this also oversimplified/leading logic type of thinking that comes from having an understanding of game theory, but due to the complexity and non-discrete nature of reality nor considerations of unintended consequences.
On top of that historically any changes to the policy for the rich/companies will face immense resistance with legal lobbying aka. bribery aka. special interest. Changing anything with unions is always a game to see when the cat will jump out of the slowly boiling pot and maybe bite cutting off valuable services and causing a ripple effect through the economy. The overall state of influences of big oil, tech, big pharmaceuticals, and the militarily industrial complex dwarfs the overall interest of the people. Just look at how net neutrality is playing out, “war on drugs”, teacher salaries, and war in Iraq.
Possible solution: I think we need something similar version of separation of church and state for the separation of private interest from elected interests, as well as more consequences contracts to the people for politicians to hold consistent interests. I don’t think we need to limit success or merit but set clear boundaries for self-interest/special interest is allowed and were people interest are.
Possible solution2: Let game theory play out with winners and losers finding their own Nash equilibrium for society with moments of disparity and success for large groups of people.
EKDesign
The speaker is just bitter that people he deems less worthy have things He's jealous of.
World ain't fair... ain't never gonna be.
Millions strive and get nowhere but this cat with degrees aplenty has the GALL to demand wide scale mediocrity because that's the only way he gets to be best not just better than most.
Him a crybaby and demanding an end to ANY measure of worth is the pathetic whining of a bitter old man that lacks the resilience to strive.
@@Bocbo I don't think he is advocating an absolute end to all meritocracy.
I cannot enumerate how many fallacies are misused in this short speech. You're equating having merit with being rich/powerful, when everyone knows they are unrelated: blood relations, cronysm etc means the rich/powerful are not rich/powerful because of merit and people of merit are not rich/powerful. This is capitalism, not meritocracy. You cannot blame meritocracy for the status quo when meritocracy in not part of the status quo.
« Everybody knows that the boat is leaking.
Everybody knows that the captain lied.
The poor stay poor, the rich get rich.
That's how it goes.
Everybody knows.»
If you want something to work well, you need some form of meritocracy. When you need a dangerous form of surgery, you want a well performing surgeon and not some diversity hire. When an organization helps many people and effects many lives, having it ran by competent people benefits the masses. Meritocracy may have down sides but it is still far superior to any competiting systems.
It is perhaps not meritocracy itself which is the problem but what our system merits. Our current system seem to mainly merit the generation of short-term profit for investors. If being sensible, emphatic, humble, responsible, etc. were meriting traits, we'd probably be better off.
The problem is that meritocracy does not work, so your surgeon won't be the best one, nor a good one, but just a lucky one.
@@whatithink5330 no, luck is a small factor in achievement, you still have to be at the top of your game to reach great heights
WOW what a load of trash!
"Anger and resentment" yeah sounds like 2016
It's not tyrannical to hire the best people for the job. This video is nonsense.
You seem to have missed the point: it's not as you suggest; it is about understanding and ideally acting upon the value leakage from our current 'merit' paradigm.
@@Beresfordbear That's just a fancy way of saying it's tyrannical to hire the best people for the job. You took exactly what I said and repeated it back to me as a word salad.
well infact the problem he drafted is far bigger. you will know some day
So in summary, you are saying that "nobody deserves anything?" Well your conclusion still sounds equivalent to saying that God/luck chooses everything we get. Sounds like you are accidentally supporting the perspective you claim to oppose. Also your definition of Meritocracy seems inaccurate. Sounds like you want to destroy all standards of measuring quality of work. Ironically this video and your channel is supported by a type of Meritocracy which measures support by likes and subscribes. Would you still post videos every week if you got zero likes? You use a lot of drawings and sound effects seemingly to distract from the fact that your premise actually doesn't make logical sense but end your explanation with "but it is important to try." Try what? Try to destroy all forms of measuring justice and quality of work? Ironically, the idea of prohibiting standards of justice results in arbitrary and tyrannical decision making. Perhaps what you call Meritocracy is actually tyrannical leaders pretending to use Merit-based standards, but actually the standards are not actually understandable because they are mostly arbitrary. You have a little 3 minute video which tries to completely shut down the merit of Meritocracy, but ironically has no substantial merit to people who oppose tyranny.
Michael Sandel should look in the mirror, if he can face reality.
For 'merit' substitute 'effort': is the road sweeper/plumber/ nurse/ shop assistant being the best they reasonably can? If so, surely this is meritorious.
So those struggling at the bottom of the heap make the effort to vote and Mr. Sandel criticises and castigates them for voting for 'populist' (= bad) politicians rather than the self-opinionated, unrepresentative power-players who actually shape the laws which keep the less fortunate 'in their place.'
Mr. Sandel's argument has no merit, quite the reverse.
the stupidest thing I've ever heard. This is a great video guide on how to literally make yourself poor and keep yourself there
xApemanx
That's the point. Don't strive, it will just make you unhappy.
Slaves need to be happy they are slaves. All that striving to be "better" is just keeping people from enjoying kardashia's funniest talent survivor bachelor 's and their Xanax.
Ideological fucktards.
Sense Reference
People will always be mean.
No really... no amount of nice training in grade school or reeducation camps for the bully adults will change that.
It's been tried. Over and over and over...
Females will chose big aggressive males to reproduce with.
Big aggressive males by nature will show little and cannot be trained to show, empathy.
You ask for the impossible so that lesser males can have access to higher smv females. That's all this is really about.
Money, status... all about getting laid.
If striving sucks for hurting the feels of those who fail that's too bad.
Resilience. Learn it.
I agree with most your videos, not this one. Meritocracy isnt the problem, ppl resigning to the idea that they may never succeed because of listening to b.s. like this, that's a problem
All claim, no warrant.
A fact that's only true if held as such is not a fact, its a placebo. The idea that people's income or position in the social hierarchy is in proportion to what they deserve is no more than a religious tenet, presumed to become reality if widely held as such. The reality is that people have no say in what circumstances they are born into nor how they spend their first years of their lives. Moreover, psychology and sociology exist because people behave in predictable ways under given external circumstances. Perfect agency is a religious belief.
@@TheLivirus that's a lot to unpack. I agree tho, ppl act predictable, especially when facing defeat. It takes self awareness to break the habit of giving up, and feeling helpless; we are the master of our own destiny. Aside from a random unfortunate event, we're I full control to shape our lives. To piggy back off the religious bit, even finding the grace of God requires effort.
bj0rn
Big damn difference between striving to achieve and perfect agency...
Sense Reference
So why should YOUR shame and resentment be MY problem?
Suck it up snowflake... resilience beats crying in a safe space every time.
Fire the narrator
Word salad with no substance.
I can see why the author doesn't appreciate the subject of merit.