The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good?
- Downloads：2410
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-07-19 03:41:08
- Update Date：2025-09-24
- Status：finish
- Author：Michael J. Sandel
- ISBN：0141991178
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
A TLS， GUARDIAN AND NEW STATESMAN BOOK OF THE YEAR 2020
The new bestseller from the acclaimed author of Justice and one of the world's most popular philosophers
"Astute， insightful， and empathetic。。。A crucial book for this moment" Tara Westover， author of Educated
These are dangerous times for democracy。 We live in an age of winners and losers， where the odds are stacked in favour of the already fortunate。 Stalled social mobility and entrenched inequality give the lie to the promise that "you can make it if you try"。 And the consequence is a brew of anger and frustration that has fuelled populist protest， with the triumph of Brexit and election of Donald Trump。
Michael J。 Sandel argues that to overcome the polarized politics of our time， we must rethink the attitudes toward success and failure that have accompanied globalisation and rising inequality。 Sandel highlights the hubris a meritocracy generates among the winners and the harsh judgement it imposes on those left behind。 He offers an alternative way of thinking about success - more attentive to the role of luck in human affairs， more conducive to an ethic of humility， and more hospitable to a politics of the common good。
The new bestseller from the acclaimed author of Justice and one of the world's most popular philosophers
"Astute， insightful， and empathetic。。。A crucial book for this moment" Tara Westover， author of Educated
These are dangerous times for democracy。 We live in an age of winners and losers， where the odds are stacked in favour of the already fortunate。 Stalled social mobility and entrenched inequality give the lie to the promise that "you can make it if you try"。 And the consequence is a brew of anger and frustration that has fuelled populist protest， with the triumph of Brexit and election of Donald Trump。
Michael J。 Sandel argues that to overcome the polarized politics of our time， we must rethink the attitudes toward success and failure that have accompanied globalisation and rising inequality。 Sandel highlights the hubris a meritocracy generates among the winners and the harsh judgement it imposes on those left behind。 He offers an alternative way of thinking about success - more attentive to the role of luck in human affairs， more conducive to an ethic of humility， and more hospitable to a politics of the common good。
Reviews
jude
，
philosophically and morally illuminating， if a bit textually repetitive in the first few chapters trying to repeat — over and over again — the flaws of meritocracy that could have kept itself to only one chapter， this book nevertheless serves a scathing critique on the hyper-individualistic， success-driven， meritocratic， globalist system that seeks to alienate us from our bonds to our community， our identities， and each other。there's also this very interesting anecdote of the author trying to re philosophically and morally illuminating， if a bit textually repetitive in the first few chapters trying to repeat — over and over again — the flaws of meritocracy that could have kept itself to only one chapter， this book nevertheless serves a scathing critique on the hyper-individualistic， success-driven， meritocratic， globalist system that seeks to alienate us from our bonds to our community， our identities， and each other。there's also this very interesting anecdote of the author trying to reveal to his students that they — harvard students as they are — did not get in 'merely' because they worked hard but had a plethora of factors behind their admission to the elite university。 the reactions he outlines are glorious but the most telling one has a student insist on forming a quasi-noble lie about the strength of the american dream。 it's better for people to believe in it because it gives them hope。 sandel doesn't really elaborate more on this， but it's a very clear action of upper-class elite interest looking after their own。 of course a harvard student would like the noble lie to persist; they actively benefit from the noble lie！quite unfortunately， however， sandel doesn't go far enough in fully correcting the mistakes of meritocracy。 he makes concessions for elite universities to allow their preferential treatment for children of alumni。 this is beyond incomprehensible to me: first， for the matter of still allowing for hereditary inheritance of merit; and second， for the continued existence of 'elite colleges' in his ideal world。 i think an equality of condition — which is what he ultimately recommends as the solution for the tyranny of merit — would need also do away with the whole idea of 'elitism' in terms of education in the first place， but maybe that's just me。 there are other shortcomings in his solutions — which， i must also mention， are fleeting and short in comparison to the time it took for him to diagnose the problem， a common tendency of philosophers everywhere （and i say this as a student of philosophy） — but this is perhaps the most egregious。 。。。more
Geoffrey Bateman
，
Thoughtful critique， philosophically speaking， of meritocracy， and near the end， some helpful ways of thinking about the dignity of work and the common good。 Sandel sometimes seems blind to issues of race， or perhaps universalizing the nature of problems too much from a white perspective。 But still， always worth reading。
Spencer Fancutt
，
A thought-provoking and persuasive take on， well， the tyranny of meritocracy。One gets the feeling that about 50 pages could have dispensed with if he didn't keep repeating his main thesis， but the thesis is a good one。 A meritocracy creates hubris in the 'winners' who are entitled to their takings， and humiliation and resentment in the 'losers' who have noone but themselves to blame for ther inability to 'make it'。 This is our currently accepted model of society at the moment and has been for at A thought-provoking and persuasive take on， well， the tyranny of meritocracy。One gets the feeling that about 50 pages could have dispensed with if he didn't keep repeating his main thesis， but the thesis is a good one。 A meritocracy creates hubris in the 'winners' who are entitled to their takings， and humiliation and resentment in the 'losers' who have noone but themselves to blame for ther inability to 'make it'。 This is our currently accepted model of society at the moment and has been for at lest 30 years， but it is a flawed model and some of its fruits have been an astronomical increase in the rich/poor divide， and the backlash of populism that brought us Trump and Brexit。When the book seems to progress in spirals through the first two-thirds， with thinkers like Michael Young being introduced for the first time at least twice and arguments being restated and paraphrased， it gets a little frustrating， and perhaps the chapters are intended to be taken as stand-alone lessons or papers， but it doesn't seem to be the case。There were also a few eyebrow-raising moments， such as when Sandel tries to make a case for high stakes pressure for university admissions resulting in miserable， anxious， depressed high schoolers being a consequence of societies with high levels of income inequality。 This may be true， but he uses Japan （a country with a lower wealth gap） as a example of the opposite。 This is hard to square with my experience， and also the highest teen suicide rate in the OECD。He also tells us that the fact that college kids use more drugs and drink more than other kids of the same age， is evidence of the incredible pressure and emotional stress placed on them by the need to achieve。 lol。These things aside， his overall argument is coherent and necessary。 One can't help feeling that if his suggestions were adopted， we would lessen at least some of the ills and injustices of modern life。 At the same time， I doubt his message will find its way into American mainstream politics anytime soon， enthralled as both sides of the spectrum are with a meritocratic vision of the American dream that ignores the reality of the current social situation。 。。。more
Natividad Medina Daza
，
Gran reflexión aunque esperaba un análisis global de la meritocracia， el autor se limita a lo que suele ocurrir en las universidades de élite americanas。 Puedo resumir sin temor a revelar algo inesperado que implantando el sistema que fuere los beneficiados siempre serán quienes ostentan el poder y el dinero。
Jo-Ann Leake
，
Highly recommended in order to understand the deep divisions in modern social， economic and political life。 Though the content is difficult to process emotionally at times， Sandel offers his outlook in a highly compassionate manner， and offers solutions to implement to heal the breaks。 He breaks through the mythology of merit and achievement to offer a more realistic， multifaceted explanation for improving one's situation in life， and he dispels the notion that America offers a level playing fie Highly recommended in order to understand the deep divisions in modern social， economic and political life。 Though the content is difficult to process emotionally at times， Sandel offers his outlook in a highly compassionate manner， and offers solutions to implement to heal the breaks。 He breaks through the mythology of merit and achievement to offer a more realistic， multifaceted explanation for improving one's situation in life， and he dispels the notion that America offers a level playing field to all who want to try。 。。。more
Diz
，
Sandel critiques the concept of meritocracy in this book and describes how it damages society。 Both the left and the right promote meritocracy in different forms。 On the left， meritocracy comes in a form that focuses on education。 In this form， those who get educated deserve to reap the rewards in society。 In particular， the left promotes going to university （a prestigious one if possible） and encourages graduate study or developing a high level of expertise in one's field。 While education is ce Sandel critiques the concept of meritocracy in this book and describes how it damages society。 Both the left and the right promote meritocracy in different forms。 On the left， meritocracy comes in a form that focuses on education。 In this form， those who get educated deserve to reap the rewards in society。 In particular， the left promotes going to university （a prestigious one if possible） and encourages graduate study or developing a high level of expertise in one's field。 While education is certainly a positive thing， the unspoken reverse of this idea is that those who are less fortunate are too dumb and uneducated to improve their situation because they failed to educate themselves。 In other words， it is the fault of the unfortunate for not pursuing higher education。 This is a corrosive attitude for building a democratic society as 2/3 of the U。S。 population do not have a university degree。 As a result， elites who follow this form of meritocracy may feel that experts should make more decisions， which devalues the voices of the less educated as participants in the democratic process。 Additionally， this form of meritocracy devalues work that doesn't require a university degree， which is ironic considering what types of work were deemed essential in the recent COVID-19 pandemic。On the right， meritocracy comes in a form that focuses on material wealth。 This is connected to the ideas of the Protestant work ethic and more recently to prosperity gospel。 In its non-religious version， this form of meritocracy promotes the idea that wealth comes to those who work hard， so they deserve the wealth that they have。 In its religious form， wealth is a sign of divine blessing and is thus the will of God。 The unspoken part of this form of meritocracy is that the unfortunate either did not work hard enough or have somehow displeased God。 This puts the unfortunate in a hopeless position as there are many of them that work harder than the more fortunate， or they may actually be more religious than the rich around them。 When working or believing harder doesn't work for them， it's very demoralizing。Towards the end of the book， Sandel provides a few solutions。 The one that he seems most interested in is eliminating payroll tax and replacing it with a tax on financial transactions。 By doing this， the penalty on doing productive work is decreased and the penalty on doing non-productive work is increased。 Something to think about。 。。。more
Advait
，
A society that enables people to rise， and that celebrates rising， pronounces a harsh verdict on those who fail to do so。 A page-turning work of philosophy that articulates the demerits of meritocracy and argues for reinstating the "common good" and dignity of work for all。 Especially liked Sandel's clear-eyed progression， and grounding in specifics of the current political moment with stats on education and work in the U。S。 and U。K。 He also introduces relevant concepts as needed （credentialism， A society that enables people to rise， and that celebrates rising， pronounces a harsh verdict on those who fail to do so。 A page-turning work of philosophy that articulates the demerits of meritocracy and argues for reinstating the "common good" and dignity of work for all。 Especially liked Sandel's clear-eyed progression， and grounding in specifics of the current political moment with stats on education and work in the U。S。 and U。K。 He also introduces relevant concepts as needed （credentialism， liberal egalitarianism etc。） without getting stuck in jargon or pseudo-scientific BS that hounds so much of contemporary philosophy。 Sandel's own credentials as a political philosopher at Harvard U。 is also a timely reminder of the very real role of premier academics in setting aright the moral compass of the world of work with overall framework， questioning the frames of political buckets and rhetorical holes AND offering practical solutions （lottery vs。 SAT scores for academic selections， taxes on the speculative finance industry etc。）。 。。。more
Summer Kartchner Olsen
，
Definitely recommend this one for rethinking the way the world works and alternate ways we might want it to work。
עדית （Edith）
，
Mostly skimmed the second half because the chapters got repetitious。 The argument boils down to two things， 1） a meritocracy will also lead to inequalities， and 2） the inequalities in the wake of a meritocratic system stings more， as the “winners” get smug that their spoils are their just deserts， and the “losers” feel extra humiliated。 These lend the outcomes a moral judgment that somehow the poor were to blame for their plight， that welfare should only be for those who “deserved” it， the cult Mostly skimmed the second half because the chapters got repetitious。 The argument boils down to two things， 1） a meritocracy will also lead to inequalities， and 2） the inequalities in the wake of a meritocratic system stings more， as the “winners” get smug that their spoils are their just deserts， and the “losers” feel extra humiliated。 These lend the outcomes a moral judgment that somehow the poor were to blame for their plight， that welfare should only be for those who “deserved” it， the cult of personal responsibility， all of which creates resentment and divisions in society。 Meritocracy isn’t wrong and is probably more “fair” than hereditary aristocracies， but talent and upbringing are also dependent upon one’s luck。 The author argues for us to reconsider the idea that just because the market rewards one job with $$$ does not mean that it provides a service that has value to society， and the idea the wealthy “deserve” all their wealth and shouldn’t have to pay taxes/can buy a yacht if they choose， is problematic from the “just desert” argument， which smacks of moral condemnation that has its roots in the Protestant Reformation and early capitalism。 。。。more
Arlene Whitlock
，
Meritocracy doesn’t work so well in a democracy contends Sandel。 He is a political philosopher at Harvard。 In a nutshell， a meritocracy divides and rewards those who are on top， even if being on top is contrived and dishonest， and punishes those who happen to be on the bottom。 I don’t think this is a book about party lines or the rich or the poor。 It is what is the result of maintaining a meritocracy， like college cheating scandals。 It also devalues the dignity of work， and makes the poor resent Meritocracy doesn’t work so well in a democracy contends Sandel。 He is a political philosopher at Harvard。 In a nutshell， a meritocracy divides and rewards those who are on top， even if being on top is contrived and dishonest， and punishes those who happen to be on the bottom。 I don’t think this is a book about party lines or the rich or the poor。 It is what is the result of maintaining a meritocracy， like college cheating scandals。 It also devalues the dignity of work， and makes the poor resentful。 I like that a philosopher is discussing this and not a politician。 Being a philosopher， a good one at least， requires one to observe and contend with all angles， not as good and bad， but the nature of the human condition（culture， religion， history ， etc。）。 Yes， the book makes the future bleak if we continue in pushing meritocracy， but it also lays out some alternatives。 The alternatives do not point fingers， but observes how a society can work with rich and poor。 。。。more
Khetha
，
A thoughtful and thought-provoking book about what we value and what we dishonour in society。 Obviously geared to an American/western audience particularly around its discussions on higher education。 Nevertheless one can see many of the trends identified in the book creeping up here as well。 If you have ever been in a policy debate about anything， this book will make you ask the question have or do things have to be this way？
Ciaran Monaghan
，
I particularly enjoyed this at the start but my interest waned somewhat， perhaps as I was listening on audio。 Sandel does a really good job of explaining the issues with meritocracy， but it still took me some time to understand why it was fundamentally wrong， even if the system could be perfected。 But I was convinced when he eventually explained how meritocracy accepts inequality， even if it is based on ability。 I also liked the simplicity of some of his solutions， such as the lottery for univer I particularly enjoyed this at the start but my interest waned somewhat， perhaps as I was listening on audio。 Sandel does a really good job of explaining the issues with meritocracy， but it still took me some time to understand why it was fundamentally wrong， even if the system could be perfected。 But I was convinced when he eventually explained how meritocracy accepts inequality， even if it is based on ability。 I also liked the simplicity of some of his solutions， such as the lottery for university places， but it does seem like a distant hope。 。。。more
Shane
，
Sander develops an interesting an important thesis about the dangers meritocracy poses to all of us。 Not just questioning whether we are failing to truly be meritocratic （we are）， but also identifying the harms to society and individuals meritocratic thinking brings。 This is a really important questioning of a predominant philosophy in our society with wide ranging policy consequences。 His critique falls on liberals and conservatives alike。 While I accept his premise and want to think further ab Sander develops an interesting an important thesis about the dangers meritocracy poses to all of us。 Not just questioning whether we are failing to truly be meritocratic （we are）， but also identifying the harms to society and individuals meritocratic thinking brings。 This is a really important questioning of a predominant philosophy in our society with wide ranging policy consequences。 His critique falls on liberals and conservatives alike。 While I accept his premise and want to think further about its consequences， the book has some issues。 While he cites evidence for his claims， there is often only a loose connection between his evidence and his claim。 There are consistently many alternative explanations or causal routes for the relationships he claims。 He rarely acknowledges these。 The book is also incredibly repetitive。 I would love to read and assign the New Yorker length article version of this thesis that wasn’t so repetitive。 。。。more
Sabrina
，
3。5 starsThis was an eye-opening and thought-provoking book that investigates whether the Western world can really be considered a "meritocracy，" and whether this societal structure has even been beneficial for those who live within it。 While I'm not someone who typically enjoys more heavy political philosophy texts such as this one， Sandel's work here is accessible enough for the everyday person without a background in this field to understand。 I found the book repetitive at points however- he 3。5 starsThis was an eye-opening and thought-provoking book that investigates whether the Western world can really be considered a "meritocracy，" and whether this societal structure has even been beneficial for those who live within it。 While I'm not someone who typically enjoys more heavy political philosophy texts such as this one， Sandel's work here is accessible enough for the everyday person without a background in this field to understand。 I found the book repetitive at points however- he drove the point repeatedly to the point of exhaustion that it is those who are at the "top" who have a moral condescension and look down on those below them， and that this creates a dangerous acrimony。 The book also could have benefited from more concrete examples to illustrate some of Sandel's more esoteric concepts （I particularly liked when he brought in Breaking Bad， for example） and I also would have appreciated a more thorough consideration of his policy proposal that we introduce a lottery system to Ivy League and competitive higher education institutions。All this being said， as an Oxbridge graduate myself I enjoyed reading this book and confronting the fact that likely much of my own success can actually be attributed to luck and privilege。 While this isn't the kind of popsci book I'd recommend to just anyone， for those who want to seriously interrogate the world we live in and think long and hard about it， it's one I would readily suggest。 。。。more
Rodrigo Estefan
，
Crítica contemporânea sobre os ideais meritocráticos valorizados pela sociedaode。 Faz com reflitamos sobre em qual sociedade devemos viver。
Fawwaz
，
I always had this idea in my mind that rewarding people based on merit isn't actually fair。 Sandel just came and wrote a whole book about it and I loved it。The book starts with how faulty our system is in terms of choosing people based on Merit。 Not all skilled or hard-working people have the same chance to succeed。 The second part of the book discusses how even if we managed to live in an ideal world， where chances would be equal， meritocracy would basically reward the people with the best gene I always had this idea in my mind that rewarding people based on merit isn't actually fair。 Sandel just came and wrote a whole book about it and I loved it。The book starts with how faulty our system is in terms of choosing people based on Merit。 Not all skilled or hard-working people have the same chance to succeed。 The second part of the book discusses how even if we managed to live in an ideal world， where chances would be equal， meritocracy would basically reward the people with the best genetics。 The final third of the book tries to find solutions to this problem and how to address it in a realistic way。The book is written by Michael Sandel， the author of probably the best non-fiction book I have read; Justice。 This feels like another idea to add to that but expanded into a full book。 You will not find the same breadth of topics here as in Justice， but it's also not a long read。 。。。more
aoi
，
4。5absolutely enlightening。credentialism'smart/dumb politics'luck， aristocracydeath by despair <=> shame and anger in those without college degrees=the TYRANNY of Merit 4。5absolutely enlightening。credentialism'smart/dumb politics'luck， aristocracydeath by despair <=> shame and anger in those without college degrees=the TYRANNY of Merit 。。。more
Arjun Srinivasan
，
repetitive， but persuasive critique of meritocratic ideal。 some ideas I liked:- meritocracy implicitly shames those who don’t make it to the top- market value isn’t a good measure of social contribution， even w/ efficient markets， because market value represents ability to satisfy others wants， and our wants （for example， meth or gambling） may not be socially good- what talents society values at any given time may be arbitrary: why should LeBron make more than the world’s best arm wrestler- how repetitive， but persuasive critique of meritocratic ideal。 some ideas I liked:- meritocracy implicitly shames those who don’t make it to the top- market value isn’t a good measure of social contribution， even w/ efficient markets， because market value represents ability to satisfy others wants， and our wants （for example， meth or gambling） may not be socially good- what talents society values at any given time may be arbitrary: why should LeBron make more than the world’s best arm wrestler- how scarce your talents are within society is also arbitrary- individual success today is then not only a function of our race， parents wealth， but these arbitrary features of society， so even the ‘ideal’ meritocracy will still arbitrarily privilege some over others for no good reason。 recognizing this should also encourage more humility in the successful。 。。。more
Sven Gerst
，
Sandel x Lasch crossover to criticize progressive liberalism。 What’s not to love about it？ On a more serious note: Important book with many good and correct observations—and even more bad recommendations （luckily those aren’t important to the argument of the book）。 A classic Sandel， one might say！
Sean Lee
，
Quite good， but I liked his books “Justice/What Money can’t Buy” more。 Parts of the book is quite heavy on politics。
manaal
，
great time for me to read this lol。 hadn't really made the explicit connection between religion and meritocracy wrt the US。 also helped me reflect on islamic rejection of the idea of meritocracy， which south asian immigrants in the us never seem to dwell on。。。so it goes great time for me to read this lol。 hadn't really made the explicit connection between religion and meritocracy wrt the US。 also helped me reflect on islamic rejection of the idea of meritocracy， which south asian immigrants in the us never seem to dwell on。。。so it goes 。。。more
Frances Attwood
，
A thought provoking read。
Vinicius Boreki
，
Não sei nem por onde começar essa review， na realidade。 O argumento do livro， no início， me pareceu fraco。 O capítulo 2 me incomodou profundamente， comparando mérito e religião。 Mas， de repente， acabo a leitura com uma nova visão sobre a sociedade。 Melhor do que a minha análise é uma citação que engloba vários dos temas trazidos à tona: "We do not have much equality of condition today。 Public spaces that gather people together across class， race， ethnicity， and faith are few and far between。 Fou Não sei nem por onde começar essa review， na realidade。 O argumento do livro， no início， me pareceu fraco。 O capítulo 2 me incomodou profundamente， comparando mérito e religião。 Mas， de repente， acabo a leitura com uma nova visão sobre a sociedade。 Melhor do que a minha análise é uma citação que engloba vários dos temas trazidos à tona: "We do not have much equality of condition today。 Public spaces that gather people together across class， race， ethnicity， and faith are few and far between。 Four decades of market-driven globalization has brought inequalities of income and wealth so pronounced that they lead us into separate ways of life。 Those who are affluent and those of modest means rarely encounter one another in the course of the day。 We live and work and shop and play in different places; our children go to different schools。 And when the meritocratic sorting machine has done its work， those on top find it hard to resist the thought that they deserve their success and that those on the bottom deserve their place as well。 This feeds a politics so poisonous and a partisanship so intense that many now regard marriage across party lines as more troubling than marrying outside the faith。 It is little wonder we have lost the ability to reason together about large public questions， or even to listen to one another"。 。。。more
Vanessa
，
At times I enjoyed this book。 The sections where Sandel wrote about how certain words and phrases （such as "smart"） become more prevalently said by presidents was fascinating。 The story about why the SATs became a popular way to determine college admissions was something I did not know before。 （It was actually meant to be an equalizer for those who did not get into schools by legacy admissions or from private high schools。 Fascinating story。） Then there was a philosophical section I got complete At times I enjoyed this book。 The sections where Sandel wrote about how certain words and phrases （such as "smart"） become more prevalently said by presidents was fascinating。 The story about why the SATs became a popular way to determine college admissions was something I did not know before。 （It was actually meant to be an equalizer for those who did not get into schools by legacy admissions or from private high schools。 Fascinating story。） Then there was a philosophical section I got completely lost during。 It is mostly that section that made me question if I liked the book。 It also got decently repetitive at times， like it could have been an essay instead of a whole book。 Interesting read， but maybe not super worth it （except for the story about the SAT）。 。。。more
Jo
，
Excellent read。 Thought provoking and insightful。So much to love about this book。 Combines historical analysis with practicalities。Really well referenced - so many books and papers to seek out。 Importance and role of education， jobs， respect， dignity in society。 How this has been eroded， ways to take these back and what this would mean - for ‘the common good’。And ‘the common good’ really is the common good。 Feel very light for having just read a text based on such heavy themes。
Sven
，
An amazing book that shows the hidden flaws and corrosive influence of a meritocratic system。 The negative influence of this system （an unrealistic adherence to mobility and meritocratic hybris and contempt） is seemingly present in every polity。 Sandel argues very clearly and convincingly how the meritocratic system alienates the lower classes and produces hybris in the upper ones， and how a focus on meritocracy leaves out more important questions of the dignity of work and life
Donna Rigg
，
4。5 Stars。 This non-fiction book scrutinizes the American concept of upward mobility and our supposed reliance on a meritocracy。 The author argues that the US is not as upwardly mobile as we think it is， and challenges the premise that the most talented and hard-working rise to the top。 We falsely believe that the very wealthy have earned and thus deserve their fortunate station in life， and the reverse， that those in the underclass are impoverished because of their own failings。 The reality is 4。5 Stars。 This non-fiction book scrutinizes the American concept of upward mobility and our supposed reliance on a meritocracy。 The author argues that the US is not as upwardly mobile as we think it is， and challenges the premise that the most talented and hard-working rise to the top。 We falsely believe that the very wealthy have earned and thus deserve their fortunate station in life， and the reverse， that those in the underclass are impoverished because of their own failings。 The reality is quite different。 The wealthy are continuing to pass on the "tricks of the trade" to their descendants and maintain the status quo by passing on their wealth， providing unfettered support， having the upper hand in admission to elite universities， and by using their connections to acquire favorable positions。 Simultaneously， we're continuing to devalue non-credentialed labor as being less important。 The overemphasis on credentials and ranking people by their income has created a hubris， conceit in the elite classes where they feel more deserving， and the lower classes are feeling more alienated。 As we witness increasing income inequality， greater polarization， greater alienation， we're also seeing the rise of populism， and higher rates of suicide and drug addiction amongst those without college degrees。 Although the book challenges many of our basic assumptions about class mobility and is quite thought-provoking， I have a couple of criticisms。 Firstly， I think the book was too apologetic over White rage， and should have discussed the plight of people of color further。 Secondly， I think the book was a bit repetitive and should have spent more time on offering more concrete， realistic solutions to the problem of growing income inequality and elitism， more solutions that have proven effective in the past and/or in other countries。 In sum， I highly recommend this provocative book。 。。。more
Daniel Vásquez Vega
，
Este es el tercer libro de Sandel que leo。 Aunque en una medida importante es un desarrollo adicional a su ética comunitaria （una ética que promueve y privilegia el interés por la comunidad y las virtudes ciudadanas）， el enfoque de este libro ha sido para mí el más sorprendente de los tres， pues ataca un modelo que yo siempre había visto promovido como algo bueno: el de la meritocracia。En este libro Sandel explica cómo la meritocracia es defectuosa debido a que justifica la desigualdad y promuev Este es el tercer libro de Sandel que leo。 Aunque en una medida importante es un desarrollo adicional a su ética comunitaria （una ética que promueve y privilegia el interés por la comunidad y las virtudes ciudadanas）， el enfoque de este libro ha sido para mí el más sorprendente de los tres， pues ataca un modelo que yo siempre había visto promovido como algo bueno: el de la meritocracia。En este libro Sandel explica cómo la meritocracia es defectuosa debido a que justifica la desigualdad y promueve actitudes nocivas para la vida en sociedad， principalmente un sentimiento de merecimiento por parte de aquellos que han tenido más éxito， y sentimientos de frustración y resentimiento por parte de aquellos que no lo han tenido。 Estos sentimientos no solo deterioran la vida en comunidad， sino que son inapropiados dado que aquellos que terminan en lo más alto de la cima meritocrática siempre deben gran parte de su éxito al contexto social en el que viven。Sandel le da vuelta a estas ideas una y otra vez a lo largo del escrito （de hecho， creo que le da demasiadas vueltas al asunto y en varios momentos me pareció que el libro pudo haber sido más corto sin que con ellos se estuviese sacrificando ni claridad， ni contundencia）。 Y esto era lo que esperaba del libro。 Lo que me sorprendió fue la forma en que Sandel expone su hipótesis según la cual el modelo meritocrático tal vez es responsable de las victorias que en los últimos años tuvieron demagogos de derecha en países como Estados Unidos y el Reino Unido。 Así， el libro se convierte no solamente en una análisis ético interesante， sino en una explicación de la coyuntura política。Hacia finales del libro， el autor pasa de exponer los problemas con el problema meritocrático， a aventurar algunas soluciones o modelos alternativos。 Aquí es donde más salen a relucir las ideas tradicionales de Sandel sobre la importancia de las virtudes comunitarias。 Sandel propone que se debe promover una reevaluación de la dignidad del trabajo y proponer por una justicia contributiva en la que se dé valor a las contribuciones que cada miembro de la sociedad hace por el bien común。Más allá de lo repetitivo que se vuelve en algunos capítulos， creo que las críticas que se hacen en el libro a la meritocracia son importantes y necesarias para revaluar algunos de los valores que parecen haber ganado aceptación generalizada en las últimas décadas。 。。。more
Guido Calderini
，
I never thought I would ever have anything good to say about a book by Michael Sandel， but this is a really insightful exploration on what a just society should be and the often inarticulate shortcomings of the meritocratic ideals that have shaped us for over 50 years。Sandel rarely provided specific solutions or alternatives， but whenever he did， I found myself wholeheartedly agreeing with them。 Definitely a stimulating and timely book。 Also quite accessible and light。
Mathilde Stich
，