Let's take meritocracy.

The Myth of Chinese Meritocracy

The Rise and Fall of Meritocracy

And it is, again, linked to something nice, and that nice thing is called meritocracy.

So meritocracy seems preferable, at least at first sight. But, on closer inspection, things are not so simple.

Everybody, all politicians on Left and Right, agree that meritocracy is a great thing, and we should all be trying to make our societies really, really meritocratic.

In many ways, Bo personified the Chinese concept of meritocracy well educated, intelligent, sophisticated, and charming (mainly to Western executives). But, after his fall, a very different picture emerged.

Creation of a strong bureaucracy based on the principles of meritocracy, continuity and insulation from day to day political pressures played a major role in establishing an effective government business network needed to ensure reciprocity.

In personalizing Saudi politics to the extent that he has, Abdullah has also personalized foreign policymaking. That has meant subordinating meritocracy to kinship and loyalty, which has inevitably weakened the regime s capacity to respond effectively to regional developments.

Unfortunately, meritocracy has been eroded by a political culture of sycophancy and cynicism. Designing a screening mechanism to minimize adverse selection in choosing bureaucrats and party officials has become one of the biggest challenges that China s ruling elites confront.

That appears to be the case with the Bo Xilai affair in China. One enduring political myth that went down with Bo, the former Communist Party boss of Chongqing municipality, is the notion that the Party s rule is based on meritocracy.

Yes, Lee s system enabled him to remain in power for 31 years, and he did use the civil not criminal courts to harry his opponents. But Lee, more importantly, also relied on elements of democratic contestation to ensure that meritocracy triumphed over patronage.

Given such systemic debasement of merit, few Chinese citizens believe that they are governed by the best and the brightest. But astonishingly, the myth of a Chinese meritocracy remains very much alive among Westerners who have encountered impressively credentialed officials like Bo.

There is a need, however, for a healthy skepticism towards the claims of a meritocracy based on academic achievement alone. Such a society is not the answer to all our prayers for decency and fairness, or even for sensible and good decisions.

Who would not wish to live in a meritocracy? It is certainly preferable to a plutocracy, in which wealth determines status, or a gerontocracy, in which age leads one to the top, or even an aristocracy, in which what counts are inherited titles and properties.

Indeed, nowadays meritocracy seems to be simply another version of the inequality that characterises all societies. It may in fact be a particularly cruel form of inequality, as those who do not succeed cannot argue that they were unlucky or kept down by those in power.

In some countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Oman, perceptions of corruption are linked to the absence of meritocracy. Moreover, the overriding importance of personal networks helps to maintain or even increases socio economic inequality and hinders inclusive growth, as do weak intellectual property laws and cumbersome bureaucracies.

Did she create a new economic dynamism, or did she leave the United Kingdom bitterly divided, more unequal, and less cohesive than before? Did she destroy the power of vested interests and create a genuine meritocracy, or did she entrench bankers and financiers as the new elite, with disastrous consequences?

In this sense, it is the countries that spearheaded the creation of the Bretton Woods institutions that pose the greatest threat to their legitimacy, impact, and, ultimately, relevance. After all, emerging economies cannot reasonably be expected to support institutions that offer unfair advantages to countries that so often preach the importance of meritocracy, competition, and transparency.

To this must be added another feature that Young described meritocracy means only that another ruling group closes the gates behind it once it has achieved its status. Those who made it on merit now want to have everything else as well not just power and money, but also the opportunity to determine who gets in and who stays out.