“Merit”: Word Hijacks the Conversation around Racial Disparities [VIDEO]

Channing Kennedy

“Merit”: Word Hijacks the Conversation around Racial Disparities [VIDEO]

Welcome to the second installment of our new video series, WORD!, in which we take a look at the language that controls the discourse around race. Today’s WORD! is:

“Merit”

In a meritocracy, perfection is realized. It has to be. Right? Every day we run into those undeniable virtuous people (our family, our friends, ourselves) who never needed a helping hand and purely through hard work and high moral character have earned their high social status. So those who don’t excel in life (incidentally often people of color and the poor) get what they deserve. Or do they?

For extra credit, check out the Newsweek article “The President’s Whiz Kids,” about the limitations of meritocracy in action.

about the WORD! series:
Words. You cant escape them. They headline the evening news, buzz around the water cooler and blow up your cell. They invoke powerful images that convey values, beliefs and an understanding of how the world works. And when repeated, words shape how problems are defined and which solutions are pursued. Words. They whitewash. They blindside. They leave you seeing red. In this series, ColorLines Magazine looks at what we talk about when we talk about race.

Posted at 12:55 PM, Jun 18, 2009 in Featured | Video & Multimedia | Permalink | View Comments

Comments

While I agree that the word "merit" may be used to categorize the "deserving" and the "non-deserving," that doesn't fairly depict how the word is often used. Granting that people may abuse their power to afford benefits based on merit, I pose to you: what system CANNOT be manipulated and abused to meet improper personal goals? The fault of abuse does not lie with using a merit system, but the use of that system. Thus, I would suggest that the notion of a "meritocracy" should be applauded as a general approach, and then the application of that meritocracy should be evaluated...based on its own merits.

Since ColorLines and RaceWire are too polite to say it, let me just make clear for Ms. Kamber and others who may miss the point: the united states of america has always lived by the golden rule--the people who have the gold make the rules. To pretend that the conversation is about some societal ideal--which, by the way, serves the misguided notion of individual achievement whereby the person who takes away your garbage has not contributed to your success--is a fairly unsubtle way of saying, "I don't want to talk about race or racism."

Since when do we live in a meritocracy? Don't hate a good idea just because people are using the word incorrectly.