[Lee Geun-hyeong's Odok Odok] Is Meritocracy Truly Fair on a Tilted Playing Field?

Michael Sandel's New Work 'The Illusion of Fairness'

On the 1st, at the '19th International Anti-Corruption Conference (IACC)' special session held at COEX in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Professor Michael Sandel of Harvard University, USA (right on screen), who appeared as a speaker, is seen having a dialogue with Professor Kim Sun-wook of Soongsil University. Professor Sandel stated, "Unlike Americans, Koreans honestly acknowledge the social mobility barriers caused by unequal opportunities," adding, "This awareness of the problem is the first step toward reforming the economy and society." The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission recorded lectures by Professor Michael Sandel and Chairperson Jeon Hyun-hee on the 1st, and will release the videos on the 19th IACC website from 2 PM on the 2nd. (Photo by Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission)

The fairness controversy sparked by the 'Incheon International Airport Corporation (In-guk-gong)' incident, the dichotomy of winners and losers destroys social cohesion

The weakening of democracy led to the rise of the Trump administration; democracy must be restored through the recovery of the common good

Our society is sensitive to fairness. President Moon Jae-in was elected under the slogan, "Opportunities will be equal, processes will be fair, and outcomes will be just." Fairness is a value we must uphold. At its foundation lies the myth that "a dragon rises from a small stream."

The most frequently mentioned incident related to fairness this year was the 'regularization of security screening personnel at Incheon International Airport,' known as the 'In-guk-gong' incident. The regularization of non-regular workers is one of the Moon Jae-in administration's key pledges. Accordingly, security personnel, whose regularization had already been announced in 2017, were decided to be converted to regular employees at headquarters after a certain process.

This sparked a major fairness controversy. Incheon International Airport Corporation is a workplace with an average annual salary exceeding 90 million won, a place everyone wants to join. The main logic of the unfairness criticism was the anger that "people who have been preparing for years to pass a needle's eye exam are now seeing others easily hired as regular employees at the airport corporation."

News poured in, and backlash arose in employment communities. The In-guk-gong incident became a symbol of unfair policy that granted regular positions at the 'dream workplace' without going through the most fair process of examination.

Is it really unfair? Is passing an exam the only just method of hiring? Why is recognizing experience unjust? People who must work and those who can study only with family support are not standing on equal footing from the start.

The mechanically fairest points in the In-guk-gong incident are as follows. First, security personnel take exams similar to the existing open recruitment. Second, open recruitment applicants must have accumulated experience equivalent to that of security personnel to be eligible. If these two conditions are met, it can be said to be close to complete fairness. Have you ever heard such an argument?

Applicants and the media only insisted on the fairness of the open recruitment exam. Since when did 'fairness within my world' become the standard of fairness? Can we say that fairness is satisfied simply by a simultaneous exam, even if starting points differ?

Michael Sandel, a Harvard professor who sparked a humanities wave in Korea with 'What Is Justice?', delves deeply into this point in his new book, 'The Tyranny of Merit.' The meritocracy he frequently discusses in the book is about providing equal opportunities, allowing full exercise of abilities, and distributing outcomes according to ability.

No one would oppose such a proposition. However, he diagnoses that providing equal opportunities and guaranteeing the exercise of abilities is not as simple as it sounds, and controlling factors that hinder this is becoming increasingly impossible.

The author points out that meritocracy ironically makes successful people arrogant, thinking "I succeeded solely because I was good." He argues that it causes failed people to live with defeatism.

Professor Sandel notes that social background and luck, among other complex factors, greatly influence the process by which successful people reach their positions. Nevertheless, successful people mistakenly believe they succeeded solely through their own efforts and feel justified in looking down on losers. This weakens social cohesion and reverses democracy.

As evidence of this weakened cohesion, Professor Sandel cites the rise of extreme populists and voting patterns that diverge sharply according to educational background. He says that weakened democracy gave rise to figures like U.S. President Donald Trump.

According to Professor Sandel, the success myth based on meritocracy has long since expired. Seventy percent of Americans believe that poor people can escape poverty through their own efforts. Only about 35% of Europeans believe this. However, social mobility occurs much more frequently in European countries like Germany and Denmark. In the U.S., the majority of 'dirt spoons' do not even reach the middle class. Only 4-7% reach the top tier.

President Moon's campaign slogan was originally unattainable. Equal opportunity and just outcomes cannot fully coincide. Finding the optimal combination is the best way to approximate complete equality. If equal opportunities are mechanically given, no matter how fair the process, just outcomes cannot be derived. For outcomes to be just, opportunities must be weighted differently from the start.

Writer Jang Gang-myeong pointed out in his book 'Election, Passing, Class' that if the barriers to social mobility throughout our society were lowered to allow free movement, the culture of clinging to 'my own fairness' could be alleviated. Of course, he added that he knows this is an idealistic view.

Professor Sandel's alternative is the recovery of the common good. This too is idealistic. There is obviously no immediate way to resolve the entrenched situation. What must be engraved in our minds is that democratic civic consciousness must be restored no matter what.

A line from the movie 'Eungyo (2012)' that struck me most strongly comes to mind: "Just as your youth is not a reward for effort, my old age is not a punishment for wrongdoing." Let's apply this to today's topic.

"Just as your success is not merely a reward for your own effort, someone's failure is not merely a punishment for their own fault."

The Tyranny of Merit / Michael Sandel / Translated by Ham Gyu-jin / Wiseberry / 18,000 won

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.