Cited by 196Social and Cultural DynamicsGlobalization and political ideologiesPolitical Philosophy and Ethics

Meritocracy as Plutocracy: The Marketising of 'Equality' Under Neoliberalism

Littler, Jo·2013·New Formations

Abstract

Meritocracy, in contemporary parlance, refers to the idea that whatever our social position at birth, society ought to facilitate the means for ‘talent’ to ‘rise to the top’. This article argues that the ideology of ‘meritocracy’ has become a key means through which plutocracy is endorsed by stealth within contemporary neoliberal culture. The article attempts to analyse the term ‘meritocracy’, to open up understandings of its genealogy, and to comprehend its current use. It does so through three sections. The first section considers what might be wrong with the notion of meritocracy. The second traces some key points in the travels of the concept within and around academic social theory, moving from Alan Fox and Michael Young’s initial, disparaging use of the term in the 1950s, to Daniel Bell’s approving adoption of the concept in the 1970s, and on to its take-up by neoconservative think tanks in the 1980s. The third section analyses the use of meritocracy as a plank of neoliberal political rhetoric and public discourse. It focuses on the resonance of the term in relatively recent British culture, discussing how what it terms ‘meritocratic feeling’ has come to operate in David Cameron’s ‘Aspiration Nation’. This final section argues that meritocracy has become a potent blend of an essentialised and exclusionary notion of ‘talent’, competitive individualism and the need for social mobility. Today it is a discourse which predominantly works to marketise the very idea of equalit…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3898/newf.80/81.03.2013

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Authors
Littler, J.
Affiliations
City, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Littler, Jo
Venue
New Formations
Published
2013-11-12
Volume
80
Issue
80
Pages
52-72
ISSN
  • 0950-2378 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-0789
OpenAlex
W2053184204
Cited by
196
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2
FWCI
24.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • New Formations (publishedVersion)
  • Goldsmiths (University of London) (acceptedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Cultural Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Globalization and political ideologies
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
Keywords
meritocracy, plutocracy, neoliberalism, social mobility, talent, competitive individualism, David Cameron, Michael Young, Daniel Bell, neoconservatism, political rhetoric, British culture

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review