Is Meritocracy a Myth?

I’ve been thinking a lot about this lately, in particular because in 5 months’ time I have to return to work.  A lot of decisions have to be made, including whether I wish to return to my previous organisation or move on to another via secondment or transfer.  In fact, I am having second thoughts about returning to the whole big establishment because after working there for over 3 years, I find my previous conviction in meritocracy totally shaken.

According to Wikipedua, Meritocracy, in the first, most administrative sense, is a system of government or other administration (such as business administration) wherein appointments and responsibilities are objectively assigned to individuals based upon their “merits”, namely intelligence, credentials, and education, determined through evaluations or examinations.  The “most common definition of meritocracy conceptualizes merit in terms of tested competency and ability, and most likely as measured by IQ or standardized achievement tests.”

Meritocracy is an ideology not a system.  Where I hail from, I must admit the society did start off as meritocratic because when we started off, there were much more poor than the rich.  Hence meritocracy worked, or seemed to work.  Now, as the people become affluent, the gap between the middle class and upper class closes up and suddenly moving upwards is no longer based on merit but based on who you are and who you know.

I pulled the above picture off a website that is well-known as a credible critic of the government.  It has quite succinctly captured the essence of what meritocracy has become although I don’t quite agree with the ‘elevators’ the boy on the left is standing on.  Essentially the two boys are on equal footing because both have an IQ of 150.  What makes the difference is what I called ‘social elevators’ like family background, extra-curricular activities, network sessions and quintessentially, money.  In this age where 10 out of 10 intelligent students score all As for the major examinations, what sets them apart is no longer the paper qualifications since there is no discernible difference.  So what happens?  You have to look at the other qualities they bring along.  And 9.5 out of 10 times, the boy from the less privileged background loses out.

This is a fact of life I didn’t used to see so clearly because I didn’t used to see and rub shoulders with so many of the upper strata of the society I belong to.  I used to naively think that they are a very, very small proportion of the population and hence we could afford to support to apex of the social class pyramid.  But the problem I now see clearly is, the base is getting wider and wider while the apex is increasing at a much slower rate.  What does this translate to?  More and more people/work needed to support the upper crust.  I just don’t know if I want to continue being that hardworking employee who pours her heart and soul into the work, not knowing (now I know) that I will never quite attain success the way the privileged will attain.

I was not a Sociology major back in school but speaking to a friend who is somewhat an expert in Sociology has helped in shaping some of my thoughts that used to be all over the place.  Still, I do not agree with her that everything evens out in the end.  You cannot have a society full of rich people and no poor people.  It just doesn’t work this way.

Eugenics

Eugenics, as defined by Wikipedia, is “the applied science or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population”, usually referring to human populations.

In other words, what the Nazi Germany claimed to have wanted to achieve through the genocide of the Jews, was effectively a form of eugenics.  But give it a pause before you think that only the Nazi Germany has ever practiced eugenics (although I must say that their method is easily the most harsh and cruel) because many countries have, at one point or another, practiced it.  Wikipedia would have all the facts, so do go read up if you are interested to know more.

Singapore, as mentioned in Wikipedia, practised a mild form of eugenics when the government encouraged graduate women to get married, and subsequently have more children, as opposed to non-graduate mothers.  This propaganda was aimed at ensuring that the educated procreate more to avoid ‘dilution of innate human talent’ in Singapore.

This propaganda didn’t go down very well with the public, but for the most part, didn’t voice out their displeasures.  Fact is, this mild form of eugenics policy to control population goes against the very grain of meritocracy that Singapore prides on.  A rather backward implemented policy for one of the most forward-looking and developed nations in the South-East Asia, isn’t it?

Is eugenics all that bad?  And no basis at all?  Of late, I find myself thinking about it more and more.  Not that I support eugenics, because I’m all for meritocracy.  However, evidence all around me reveals that children born to better-educated parents tend to do better in life for one main reason: because the parents are educated, they tend to be better off and can provide their children with much more in life.  I’m not saying I have not seen children from near-poverty conditions, against all odds, rise to become very successful in life.  It’s possible, but only with innate talent and intelligence; working hard no longer seems to be the foolproof strategy to success because well… everyone works hard.  Furthermore, there is just so much against the poorer cousin.

Why am I thinking so much about eugenics?  Because I spent a spell processing the applications to my country’s most prestigious undergraduate scholarships and I saw a pattern.  Thousands of them had the same dream of making it big (by clinching the most prestigious scholarship available) but only about 5% of the applicants go away with their dreams fulfilled.  And I’ve noticed, in the three years, that it was usually the ones that come from good family background that ace the shortlisting rounds and interviews.  Without delving too much into the selection process (which I believe is fair and rigorous), I find myself wondering about eugenics and the truth or value in it, if any.

I have not completed my thought process about it, but one thing’s for sure, I don’t know if, ever when I become a parent, I am able to provide the best for my child, in his/her best interests.  I have seen far too many parents around me who are more than eager to do what they think it’s best for their children, but I always wonder if it is really the best for themselves, or for their children?  Knowing how impressionable and susceptible I am, the likelihood is that I will also jump onto the bandwagon and do what other parents are doing i.e. spending my weekends rushing the children from one enrichment class to another.  It is with this fear and trepidation that I do not actively seek to have children.  Parenthood is a very heavy responsibility, and I just cannot convince myself that doing the best I can is good enough.

Domestic Help

Most families in Singapore cannot live without their domestic help.  In a competitive society such as Singapore’s, most women continue working after marriage.  There are few options opened to working mothers of young children – sending to an infant care, letting mothers or mothers-in-law take care of the children, or employ a domestic help.  The first option is not preferred because the infants fall sick far too often.  Moreover, the fees are exorbitantly expensive.  The second option is sometimes also not viable because Singaporeans are now retiring later and later, which translates to the fact that the mothers and mothers-in-law may still be working!

More often than not, the third option is chosen.

Because of my hiatus, I have been roaming around my estate of about 700 households during the hours when normal average working adults are still hard at work.  And I’ve seen quite a bit of what the domestic helpers are capable of.  Well… not enough to be representative of all domestic helpers in Singapore, but enough to make me shudder out of fear for their employers.

• I once saw two domestic helpers sitting and chatting by the waiting area near the roads (which perimeters around the estate), paying no attention to both their young charges (about 3-4 year olds) who were venturing out to the roads.  If this doesn’t scream ‘dangerous!’, I don’t know what does.
• One domestic helper was walking the employer’s dog and talking on the cell phone at the same time.  She was paying no heed to the dog that was pooping in a public area.  Naturally she walked off without picking up the poop.
• Just this evening as I was driving home from picking up the hubby at work, we saw a domestic helper crossing the road with three of her charges ranging from 4 to 8 year olds.  I slowed my car to allow them to pass, although they were totally unaware of my car’s existence.  When the domestic helper finally saw my car, she ran to safety on her own, leaving her 3 charges to run behind her.  I was appalled beyond words.

Sometimes I just wonder… if the employers are aware of their helpers’ antics, and the kind of risks they are getting their children into?  I have a good mind to let them know, if I find out which apartments the errant maids work for.  And even if I do, would they believe me?  Or would they prefer to be blissfully unaware?

I could offer little solution, for I see that domestic helpers are necessary.  However I feel that parents should know the risks involved, and if possible, never ever leave young children alone with their domestic helpers.  Some of these helpers are mere children themselves less than the age of 20 who are forced to leave their remote villages in Indonesia, Myanmar or The Philippines in order to feed the many mouths back at their homes.  To these young girls who have never stepped out of their villages prior to working here in Singapore, taking care of young children in an urban jungle like Singapore is a huge responsibility many cannot shoulder.

Energy

Re-reading one of the Cesar Millan books I have, thanks to a certain someone who has been gushing over his Dog Whisperer program in front of me.

The good thing about re-reading a book, any book, is that it oftentimes gives rise to new perspectives because we are always learning, and while reading the book, we bring to the activity recent life experiences. The particular book I picked up – Be the Pack Leader – emphasises a lot on the dog owner emitting calm-assertive energy, and the dogs in the household will naturally want to follow this leader. I’m not particularly having issues at home with my furkids; they are not the most obedient pets in the world, but there is no obsessive behaviour I need to change, except perhaps Paris’ barking whenever someone comes near the door. And this behaviour takes time to correct.

I’ve benefitted from re-reading this book because I am recently coming across some people who have filled themselves with negative energy, so much so that it consumes them. I’m not the kind to pick friends (well, friends are friends, you know… you accept them for who they are) but recently, I have been instinctively shying away from people who emit negative energy all the time, or most of the time. They make me feel tired and negative too. I know they need a listening ear or advice, but I’m weak-minded so it’s not going to help if the both of us end up sinking deeper into negativity.

I’m by no means a fair-weather friend, but I have enough issues at hand to handle. Till you resolve your issues with living in Singapore or with your neighbours, I’m sorry that I will be keeping my distance from you. I can’t allow you to suck out what little positive energy I have in me, that will no doubt throw me straight into the deep abyss of darkness. I’ve been there before, and I have no intention to revisit. In the meantime, I’m sure the more optimistic and strong-willed friends will tide you through your difficulties.

It’s very important that I move on at this stage in my life. Call me selfish or whatever you would, point is I don’t want to be stuck in the rut because of friends who cannot get out of it themselves.

Peace be with you.

Trapped within the Matrix?

As a general rule, I don’t watch Sci-Fi movies or read books of the same genre.  This may appear really strange (considering that I am an engineer by training), but I don’t enjoy the scientific postulations that are almost always permanently present in all Sci-Fi movies.  Which was why it came as a pleasant surprise when I watched, and found myself enjoying The Matrix trilogy.

That said, I found myself profoundly disturbed and intrigued after watching the very first installment.  And this is likely to be so because I am seldom exposed to out-of-the-world scientific postulations.  Could it even be remotely possible that we are all presently plugged in to the system without realising it?

I actually find the idea plausible and very palatable.  In the very least, it gives me something – in this case the elusive Matrix – to blame for all the bad behaviours I encounter in my interactions with people.  That they can’t help it because they are plugged in.

Who am I kidding?  Just me, I reckon.

Let’s take things a step further and attempt to view the concept of The Matrix as a mere allegory of the Society.  Then oh yes, we are all plugged in – the only difference is the extent of the ‘involvement’.  And the awareness, or lack of, that we are and have a choice not to be.

Did you know that Will Smith and Nicholas Cage both declined being casted as Neo?  Thank goodness for that.  I cannot quite imagine anyone else as Neo except for Keanu Reeves.  And that Sandra Bullock was also once considered for the role of Trinity and Sean Connery for Morpheus?  Oh, I’m so glad it all worked out in the end – The Matrix trilogy did eventually assemble quite a stellar cast.

The Imp, I

And who is this cute little girl in her PJs?!

Some of you might have already guessed it, that it is I.  I thought some of you might be interested to know how I looked as a child, considering the numerous stories I’ve written of my childhood.  So there you go… not astoundingly pretty but cheeky.  Very cheeky and mischievous.

The hubby and I do not have any brood of our own yet but if I ever have a daughter who takes after my character, I will tell you then, that I believe in retribution in this life.  Because I was such a PAIN IN THE ASS.  During my growing years, I gave my parents and my late grandma so much heartache.  I required disciplining on a daily basis because I was always either doing something naughty or getting myself into all sorts of trouble (e.g. climbing into the big monsoon drains to catch fishes or getting chased around the neighbourhood by a german shepherd).  And I constantly needed my poor cousin to get me out of sticky messes.

Formal education most definitely tamed me down – how not to when I was so bogged down with homework?  And it perhaps also stifled my creativity and doused my spiritedness in the process.  Growing up in the 80s, conforming to the social norms was the only way to go.  And back then, outliers were not viewed upon as kindly as they are today.  It is fortunate that I performed rather well in school, thus bringing comfort to my parents as both of them did not complete their education back then due to their family circumstances.

But really, is formal education so important in the overall scheme of things?  I find myself questioning that rationale often recently as I see more and more well-educated countrymen of mine behaving badly.  Or perhaps I should rephrase… that I personally value morality and social graciousness more than knowledge acquired through formal education.

Oh gosh, I seemed to have gone off tangent again…

Deviance

The social construct where I come from dictates that one should receive the highest eduation attainable, find a partner, get married, and have numerous children.  In between trying to achieve all that, one should also go find a proper high-flying job and contribute to society.  On top of all that, one must attain the infamous 5Cs coined by Singaporeans – cash, car, children, career, credit card and condominium.  You have all that, and you will be deemed to have ‘arrived’.

Tall order trying to achieve all of that, isn’t it?

There are some things that are achievable and within our control, and some less so, in particular finding a partner, getting married and having children.  You simply cannot judge a person by whether he or she is married with children, or not.  That is warped and unfair because honestly, who wouldn’t want to find true love?  Well… there is another group out there who do not believe in the institution of matrimony, but let’s not assume that every single folk of marriageable age but is not married falls under this category.

Having children is more subjective, but hey, there are people out there who just cannot afford to have children, or cannot conceive naturally.  The way the society goes about trying to improve an all-time low fertility rate reported recently makes me see red.  Chill it, folks.  Since when is making people feel bad part of the social construct?  Sure, we all have our social obligations but let’s not be mean, insensitive or even intrusive.

A little tolerance goes a long way.  We subscribe to this ideology for different races, but forget to embrace the uniqueness of every individual?

That said, I am not encouraging deviant behaviour from the social construct just because.  Rebellious and wilful behaviour have no place in the society and it should continue to stay that way.

Had a conversation with a single friend (in her late 20s) the other night, and she was lamenting the pressure she felt to find a proper job.  By definition, proper job refers to one which will look good on your resume when you move on to higher undertakings, and her current job as a part-time lecturer is not, for lack of a better word, proper?   Not stable (in terms of income) yes, but most definitely proper.  I don’t see anything wrong with her occupation, really.

But of course, social norms view otherwise.

In my humblest opinion, I think a person who is living life the best way she could and stretching her abilities to her potential is living as meaningful a life as any one else.  Living a meaningful life is much more important than a successful one.  Many fellow countrymen of mine, like millions of identical others living in different cosmopolitan cities, have become slaves to money and are so caught up in the rat race they forget to live their lives.  I politely but adamantly refuse to become one of the rodents by trying to work myself out of a job.

Is it the same where you come from?  How bad is the social stigma if you do not adhere to the social construct?

Niceness is a Choice

I’ve always believed in that.

Niceness is subjective and very… vague.  That I agree wholeheartedly.  And it isn’t that I have personally met many un-nice people recently.  It’s just a general observation, inspired from my recent interactions with some people of power, wealth and repute.

I don’t expect much, but it’s nice to be appreciative of others.  Even if it’s just paying lip service.  It makes people happy.  And it doesn’t pinch, unless you have been trying to put up a macho front, well then yes, it diminishes the effort.

There is a distinct difference between being reticent, and being un-nice.  I can tell the difference, and I’m sure many others do, too.  Hence I do not admire un-nice people who try to hide behind the hood of reticence.  It’s even a little despicable.

And, no-nonsense people can be nice too.  I like to think that I am one fine example.

If you are rich and powerful, and still choose to be nice to everyone, then it says a lot about your character.  And vice-versa.

I wish I could write more, but I can’t.  Bounded by rules.