Meritocracy: The Lingering Shadow Within South Korea

Envision a scenario in which success is determined purely by individual abilities, talents, and aptitude, excluding extrinsic criteria such as one’s social status, wealth, race, or gender. Meritocracy, the concept of proportional reward in turn for effort, is at once an appealing and idealistic prospect, at least on paper. 

In recent years, however, the downsides have been highlighted in what has been branded ‘the meritocracy trap’. Several (and diverse) dissections of meritocracy exist, from critiquing society’s collective failure to fulfill the moral aspirations necessitated, to challenging the morality of the act of assigning a standardized value as a whole. 

The ‘meritocracy trap’, in particular, addresses the systemic problems at hand. By assigning value to particular abilities and achievements, meritocracy, in the words of Yxta Maya Murray, consequently and implicitly, devalues others. Furthermore, by omitting acquired traits from consideration entirely, their cascading influence on success goes overlooked. Instances such as the Varsity Blues scandal, in which children from affluent backgrounds attempted to increase their college acceptance rates through forged test scores and bribery, exposed the undeniable weight of power even in today’s world. Wealth, amongst other factors of systemic inequalities, is a considerably large determinant of success. Ergo, some view meritocracy as having failed to present a holistic perspective of the current status quo. Even worse, it is perceived as having exacerbated social inequality and impeded progress. 

South Korea is a nation deeply rooted in meritocracy. This phenomenon can be traced back to the poverty-stricken aftermath of the Korean War. Many were displaced or impoverished, stripped of any social standing, wealth, or material possessions they had before the war. For them, the idea that success was achievable based on a strong work ethic, grit, and aptitude alone served as a motivator to rebuild and renew. Meritocracy also happened to align with Confucian values, both emphasizing the importance of hard work, as well as adherence to societal rules and hierarchies. Post-meritocracy adaptation, with government investments and a capable workforce, the country has experienced exponential growth and is currently the world’s 13th biggest economy. 

Following the turn of the 21st century, however, the Miracle of the Han River began to subside. The ramifications of Korean meritocracy can be divided into three interlinked segments: 1) overcompetition, 2) societal mobility, and 3) stunted progress. 

Accentuating meritocracy resulted in overcompetitiveness, further distancing citizens from solidarity, ironically also a Confucian value. This stems from a very narrow idea of “success”: a degree from a prestigious college followed by a desk job at a large company. Under pressure to comply with set expectations, people often forgo their well-being. For instance, 야근 [yageun], or working overtime is frequently, viewed as an extension of grit and devotion to the company. As the trend of overcompetitiveness persists, the decline of societal empathy is sure to follow. 

As mentioned previously, meritocracy blindly disregards the effects of race, gender, wealth, et cetera on one’s success. With a lack of solutions to mediate these inherent advantages, social mobility has only worsened, resulting in further blind spots. One of the most prominent instances is the educational system. To rank within a certain percentage of the class, students often utilize academies or private tutoring. For underprivileged students, this is not an easily available option. Additionally, those without both inherent and earned advantages have no means to augment their situations. 

South Korea has relied heavily on its people to collaborate and grow, but as societal pressure and stress have increased, a nationwide burnout phenomenon has occurred. To resolve this situation, we should reduce emphasis on meritocracy, and instead vouch for individualism. This will widen the societal perception of success, and allow for consistent and diverse growth in the future. Balancing ambition with social welfare remains a crucial task. To prevail, it must be remembered that to grow as a society, the individual must not be neglected.