THE MAKINGS OF MOBILITY: SELF-EMPLOYMENT AND THE MERITOCRACY MYTH

Abstract

Meritocracy, a political and economic system that originally promised fair equality of opportunity to the working class, has come to be viewed with much scrutiny in modern times. At its core, meritocracy requires that rewards and advantages be allocated to individuals based on merit, a hard-to-define term that refers broadly to skill level and deservingness. In allowing for positive economic outcomes to be bestowed upon the most meritorious and hardworking individuals, regardless of their background, the system of meritocracy aims to curtail the negative effects of inheritance and wealth on economic opportunity for non-elites. Although attractive in theory, this system has been criticized for its inability to fulfill its promises to the working class, both in practice and in principle. One criticism is that meritocracy is a myth that has deviated from its original intentions and is often the most rewarding for members of the elite. A second criticism is that meritocracy, in principle, is an inherently undesirable system because it is based on the flawed notion that individuals should be rewarded based on natural talents and endowments, aspects of their life over which they have little control. Throughout this thesis, I introduce a third criticism that builds upon these two and posits that meritocracy is ambiguous between a commitment to formal and fair equality of opportunity in a way that has allowed for the propagation of a discriminatory and elitist manifestation of meritocratic discourse. I argue that this exclusionary discourse is embedded into the fabric of our most foundational institutions in the United States and has contributed to the economic stagnation of members of the working class, who seek economic opportunity. Moreover, I contend that meritocratic discourse is particularly ripe within the wage-earning system and am interested in how successful the system of self-employment would be at evading this discourse sufficiently enough to allow for greater economic outcomes for the working class, the sector of the labor force that is particularly susceptible to the ills of meritocracy. I find that self-employment, compared to the wage-earning system, would foster a greater sense of labor autonomy and may be able to increase the potential for upward mobility since it allows for more direct engagement with the free market. Ultimately, I offer a nonideal theory which posits that self-employment would be a small and imperfect, yet timely and impactful, step toward the ideal goal of unfettered economic freedom for the working class, a goal that could only be achieved through our rigorous commitment to aligning with the true intentions of democracy and creating a shared understanding of the common good.