"Credentialism is the last acceptable prejudice."

 

「人種差別や性差別が嫌われている時代にあって、学歴偏重主義は容認されている最後の偏見なのだ」マイケル・サンデル『実力も運のうち　能力主義は正義か？』試し読み｜Hayakawa Books & Magazines（β）https://t.co/v36nroAvPG

— mozu (@mozumozumozu) April 12, 2021

下のNYTの記事のほうが短くてわかりやすい。 

Disdain for the Less Educated Is the Last Acceptable Prejudice

It’s having a corrosive effect on American life — and hurting the Democratic Party.

By Michael J. Sandel

If you did not go to college, and if you are not flourishing in the new economy, your failure must be your own fault.

The credentialist prejudice is a symptom of meritocratic hubris. By 2016, many working people chafed at the sense that well-schooled elites looked down on them with condescension. This complaint was not without warrant. Survey research bears out what many working-class voters intuit: At a time when racism and sexism are out of favor (discredited though not eliminated), credentialism is the last acceptable prejudice.

 

The researchers surveyed attitudes toward a range of people who are typically victims of discrimination. In Europe, this list included Muslims and people who are poor, obese, blind, and less educated; in the United States, the list also included African-Americans and the working class. Of all these groups, the poorly educated were disliked most of all.

One consequence of the diploma divide is that very few members of the working class ever make it to elective office

But history suggests little correlation between the capacity for political judgment and the ability to win admission to elite universities. The notion that “the best and the brightest” are better at governing than their less-credentialed fellow citizens is a myth born of meritocratic hubris.

We should focus less on arming people for a meritocratic race and more on making life better for those who lack a diploma but who make important contributions to our society — through the work they do, the families they raise and the communities they serve

Is it my doing that I have the talents that society happens to prize — or is it my good luck?

Appreciating the role of luck in life can prompt a certain humility: There, but for an accident of birth, or the grace of God, or the mystery of fate, go I

　学歴があると、いい職について金儲けもできるし、議員にもなるには学歴が必要、と思っているひとが世間には多い。しかし、学歴の高い人が政治的に良い判断ができるとは限らないし、社会に貢献しているとも限らない。学歴がなくても家族や社会に貢献している人たちが報われるような社会にしていくべき。

　世間さまが評価してくれる自分の能力ってのは、一体、自分の努力の末なのか、それとも、ちょっと運がよかっただけなのか？　生まれた家庭環境が偶然よかったのか、あるいは、時たま恵まれていたとか・・・人生において運が果たす役割が大きいと理解すれば、尊大な気持ちから解脱できるのではないか、と。

---bullshit jobs クソどうでもいい職業が高給取れて、汗水流している社会に貢献している介護士さんや保育士が低級というのはいかにもおかしい。

　能力に応じてではなく、というより、社会への貢献度に応じて報われるべき、とでも言おうか。

ただ、私は以前にも書いたけどやはり、「必要に応じて」という分配原理も加味されるべきだと思う。

2021年1月2日土曜日

能力主義の闇：高学歴？ーー一裕福なお家に生まれただけでしょ、と。

2020年9月8日火曜日

Fair competition does not constitute a just vision of society.