0
0
In my last post I continued discussing some of the issues that exist with the implementation of the first key element of democracy in society.
As a reminder, in general there are four key elements that make up a democracy:
- Free and frequent elections by which representatives are chosen by receiving a majority vote by the people;
- An equal society where people are rewarded on merit and not by wealth, privilege or status;
- People have the freedom to make their own choices subject to the laws of their country; and
- Limitations on power exist to ensure that Governments, Institutions or other powerful societal figures/forces cannot limit the civil liberties of the people
In the last post I discussed the difficulties in making educated decisions when voting, which undermines the rationale for having the people being able to vote!
In this post I want to move on to the second key element of a democracy, which is having an equal society where people are rewarded based on merit and not wealth, privilege or status. Just typing the description of this element makes me think of many examples of where this is not true!
What does it mean to be rewarded on merit? Simplistically it means that the rewards you receive should be based on your effort and/or performance. In a corporate setting, your pay and annual pay rises are based on your performance against annual objectives and these are often referred to merit incentives and/or pay.
Key element number two means that, in a democratic society, the opportunities that come to a person should be based on merit (i.e. their effort and/or performance). It means that if I were to work hard and try hard that I should have the same opportunities as anyone else in the democracy.
Does this work in practice?
After spending over 10 years working in a large global company, I took the opportunity to work in a small local company. It was a big change after working in a highly structured and process driven organisation! I now report into the CEO of the company, who through merit had worked themselves into the position they are in. I hesitate to guess their financial worth but, given the collection of high end sports cars and property portfolio, I would have to guestimate in the tens of millions.
As I said, the CEO had earned their financial rewards through hard work and effort, so it seems all is working well with democracy with this story thus far!
However, now that the CEO is wealthy, let’s now explore some of the benefits that come their way. Their kids go to high-end private schools and their network of friends are all from families with wealthy parents. One of the CEO’s kids has successfully started their own business levering the resources that were available to them.
The CEO would tell me stories of business opportunities that came their way through the people they met on their round of golf at their exclusive golf course. There were many stories about people ringing them up or wanting to meet with them to offer them exclusive opportunities to buy into investments.
I’m sure all of us have similar stories that also include people that inherited their wealth and/or status.
Can we honestly say that opportunity is based on merit in our democracy? Or maybe a better question is whether it is feasible to have opportunity not be related to wealth, privilege and/or status.
If opportunity goes more to people of wealth, privilege and/or status then is the second element of democracy really valid? Maybe it’s there because it is something to aspire to? It sounds good in theory but unfortunately I fear it doesn’t work in practice!
