Despite good points this article confuses the need to respect and promote intelligence with Young/Sandel’s critique of the meritocratic neglect of the flourishing of all, the diversity of kinds of ability (not all intellectual) and the need to marry cleverness with honour.
https://twitter.com/johnmilbank3/status/1396505719097200645
Honour means respect for inherited role not being overridden by the ambition that allowed you to occupy it. Anti-meritocracy may also see some advantages in people inheriting positions of all kinds via birth: it can nurture inherited responsibility and early vocational formation.
Wooldridge is failing to see that despite admitted collapse of channels of aspiration for a working-class few, in general we now have a far greater dominance of an educated elite with typically liberal views that is facing populist resistance from the less educated.
Restoring the old grammar school channels etc, though a good plan, would not remedy this divide since there are structural economic reasons for its increase. But more regarding of technical and vocational training as other modes of reward-worthy merit *would* help to do so.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
