Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Unavailable
    Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy
    Unavailable
    Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy
    Unavailable
    Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy
    Audiobook7 hours

    Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy

    Published by Penguin Random House Audio

    4/5

    ()

    Currently unavailable

    Currently unavailable

    About this audiobook

    A powerful and original argument that traces the roots of our present crisis of authority to an unlikely source: the meritocracy.

    Over the past decade, Americans watched in bafflement and rage as one institution after another -  from Wall Street to Congress, the Catholic Church to corporate America, even Major League Baseball - imploded under the weight of corruption and incompetence. In the wake of the Fail Decade, Americans have historically low levels of trust in their institutions; the social contract between ordinary citizens and elites lies in tatters.

    How did we get here? With Twilight of the Elites, Christopher Hayes offers a radically novel answer. Since the 1960s, as the meritocracy elevated a more diverse group of men and women into power, they learned to embrace the accelerating inequality that had placed them near the very top. Their ascension heightened social distance and spawned a new American elite--one more prone to failure and corruption than any that came before it.

    Mixing deft political analysis, timely social commentary, and deep historical understanding, Twilight of the Elites describes how the society we have come to inhabit - utterly forgiving at the top and relentlessly punitive at the bottom - produces leaders who are out of touch with the people they have been trusted to govern. Hayes argues that the public's failure to trust the federal government, corporate America, and the media has led to a crisis of authority that threatens to engulf not just our politics but our day-to-day lives.

    Upending well-worn ideological and partisan categories, Hayes entirely reorients our perspective on our times. Twilight of the Elites is the defining work of social criticism for the post-bailout age.

    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherPenguin Random House Audio
    Release dateJun 12, 2012
    ISBN9780449010068
    Unavailable
    Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy

    Related to Twilight of the Elites

    Related audiobooks

    American Government For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      The Politics of Dignity

      Feb 20, 2020

      The Politics of Dignity
      12 min read

    • Article

      The Upside of Populism

      Oct 24, 2019

      The Upside of Populism
      8 min read

    • Article

      The Power of “We”

      Dec 4, 2020

      The Power of “We”
      3 min read

    • Article

      The Power of “We”

      Dec 4, 2020

      The Power of “We”
      3 min read

    • Article

      The Fifth Narrative

      Aug 15, 2021

      The Fifth Narrative
      12 min read

    • Article

      1. The Brightside

      Jul 2, 2016

      1. The Brightside
      8 min read

    • Article

      Wait, Wasn’t Peter Thiel a Libertarian?

      Jun 19, 2020

      ELEVEN DAYS AFTER the first case of an American suffering from COVID-19 was reported, an essayist at an online journal run by the Claremont Institute—whose stated purpose is to “restore the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preem

      16 min read

    • Article

      One World, Two Empires: Is China-US Conflict Inevitable?

      Mar 24, 2018

      We live in discordant times marked by a strange but striking fact: despite visible signs of waning American global power and the birth of a strident global China, few people dare openly use the word empire. It is as if things cannot be called by thei

      4 min read

    • Article

      One Week to Save Democracy

      Jun 5, 2020

      One Week to Save Democracy
      7 min read

    • Article

      ‘The Upswing’: From Personal Gain To Common Good And Back Again

      Nov 10, 2020

      Robert D. Putnam assesses the schisms and swings in 20th-century American politics – and why there’s hope for the future.

      2 min read

    • Article

      American Populism in the Early Twenty-First Century: Constitutional Resistance to the New Class

      Aug 4, 2021

      Populism is defense of rule by and for the populace-that is, the common people. American constitutionalism was forged in response to the problem of maintaining ordered liberty in a democratic society. It succeeded admirably in this endeavor until rel

      19 min read

    • Article

      How The Elites Lost Their Grip

      Nov 23, 2019

      How The Elites Lost Their Grip
      12 min read

    • Article

      Dissecting the Democrats

      Nov 1, 2022

      Dissecting the Democrats
      10 min read

    • Article

      Risk Of A New Civil War? Today 'Us And Them' Differs From 1850s.

      Oct 19, 2018

      Parallels to the 1850s abound, but America is not heading for a second Civil War, historians say. “Then” was an extreme version of “now,” and the results of its extremity may hold lessons for today. Fourth in an occasional series.

      8 min read

    • Article

      George W. Bush Slams 'Bigotry,' Politics Of Populism That Led To Trump, Sanders

      Oct 19, 2017

      The former president made the remarks at a forum put on by his namesake center. "To renew our country, we only need to remember our values," the 43rd president said.

      8 min read

    • Article

      Middle Class

      Oct 11, 2023

      Middle Class
      2 min read

    Reviews for Twilight of the Elites

    4/5

    105 ratings11 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 5/5
      America from our beginnings as a nation has always inclined toward what we now call meritocracy--the idea that talent rather than birth should be the major determinant of gets the jobs and positions that make society, business, and government run. It's an inarguable idea; no one wants their surgeon to be selected on the basis wealth and connections, or by the superficial "fairness" of a lottery. That would be foolish. And since the word was invented, and the formal tools started to develop, in the early part of the last century, the USA, more than any other major country, has fully committed to an utterly uncompromising version of meritocracy.The result hasn't been heaven on Earth. It's been, after initial success, the ever-increasing and ever more disastrous failure of our elites and our institutions. Why? Because aggressive meritocracy, with ever-increasing emphasis on high-stakes selective testing, highly selective "best" schools, and all the rest, pitched as equality of opportunity, without any commitment to some rough equality of outcome, ultimately kills equality of opportunity--and it cripples the ability of our carefully selected meritocratic elites to actually to the excellent job we assume they will do, or ought to be doing.Some of the reasons were obvious to me even when I was in high school. I love standardized tests. They're fun. I "test well." Those test scores got me some excellent choices in colleges.And I knew kids just as smart as I was, in any practical sense, who froze when confronted with a standardized test. They did not "test well."The implications of the still relatively new test prep industry were less apparent to me. My classmates and I were mostly lower middle and working class. Stuff was going on in the high schools of the leafy suburbs that we knew not of. In the decades since, it's gotten more extreme, and the notion that kids from ordinary, working class families, much less working poor families, have an equal shot at a quality or prestigious higher education is little more than a bad joke. This book was published in 2012; it's now 2019, and the latest higher ed scandal is not another round of the same old stuff, but wealthy and connected families getting their kids into the "best" schools, not with the usual institutional bribery with buildings and resources that might benefit every student, but frank bribery of coaches and sports directors. "Athletic scholarships" get privileged kids in who can't make those test scores or play those sports at an elite level or, sometimes, at all, and some less privileged kid who could is displaced.But Hayes to a great extent looks at the highest-end consequences--a financial crisis that nearly crashed the global economy, because the relentless focus on "meritocracy" and rejection of any concern for outcomes meant the decision-makers at the top have no idea what's going on in the real economy, where most people live, work, and struggle to earn enough to pay their bills. The great gulf of social distance means bankers have no idea how lending policies affect neighborhood stability and the long-term stability of banking; political leaders have no idea how decisions about war and peace really play out either on the ground, or in the lives of the soldiers and their families. Political leaders of both major parties, mostly without military experience in the current leadership generations, are much more inclined to believe military action is a good idea than military veterans and elites who, since 2001 especially, have seen a lot of combat.I've thought, for a long time, contrary to my generation and my overall political views, that ending the draft was a terrible mistake. It creates the "social distance" Hayes talks a lot about in this book, with most civilians knowing nothing of the reality of military life, and career military knowing very few civilians well who aren't themselves members of military families. There's a loss of mutual understanding and communication, and I think it's very dangerous in the long run.I also remember listening to Alan Greenspan on tv, saying it was "foolish" for potential home buyers not to "take advantage of the "creative" financing inventions to buy more home than they needed or to use equity in their homes to finance other things. And I was screaming at the tv that he had no excuse to be that stupid and oblivious to how dangerous was the behavior he was recommending. But who listens to librarians about banking? No one.Hayes gives a much calmer, more comprehensive, analytical presentation of the history, the facts, and the consequences, whereas I still have a lot of rage on the subject. Go read his book, and I'll end my comments here.Even seven years later, this is still a book you should read or listen to. Highly recommended.I bought this audiobook.
    • 4/5
      Best for: People looking for some insight how the U.S. got where it is, and some ideas for what we need to do to change that.

      In a nutshell: The inequality in this country is harming us, and the powerful (in Government, in Business, in Banking) are so focused on the idea of meritocracy that they can’t see that it isn’t working.

      Line that sticks with me: “In reality our meritocracy has failed not because it’s too meritocratic, but because in practice, it isn’t very meritocratic at all.” (p53)

      Why I chose it: I finally read the back cover and realized that the topic is something that interests me greatly.

      Review: This well-paced, well-researched, easy to read book is yet another one that I wish I’d read as part of a book club. I want to talk about the things I just read, and get other perspectives! Which I think is a pretty strong endorsement.

      Mr. Hayes (of MSNBC fame - also his twitter feed @chrislhayes is a nice mix of news and incredulity at the news) divides the 240 pages of his book into seven meaty chapters that fly by. He starts by providing the reasonable premise that the U.S. likes to think of itself as a meritocracy - that anyone can get ahead if they just pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Never mind institutional challenges (don’t worry, he gets to those); those who get to the top are there because they deserve it.

      He then goes on to explain how this mythical notion, if it every actually was true, is certainly no longer true. Using such great examples as steroid use in baseball, the banking collapse (and bailout), and the Iraq war, Mr. Hayes provides a thoughtful commentary on how our systems are not operating in a way that allows people to get what they deserve; they instead are functioning in such a way that they foster even more inequality as time goes on. He provides some interesting reasons for why it is getting worse, such as the fact that the elites of any field are out of touch with the rest of us, and that when we set ‘being the best’ as the ultimate goal, we also set ourselves up for people to cheat their way to the top.

      I found two parts of the book especially compelling: the first is early one, when Mr. Hayes uses his high school alma mater (Hunter College High School) to demonstrate how something that is ostensibly 100% merit-based has become quite inequitable. The other is his ability to remind the reader that people have different descriptions of the elite — the Left see the Elite as the power-hungry corporate CEOs and Wall Street Banks; the Right see the Elite as Hollywood, academics, and fancy intellectuals — but that ultimately what matters is that the elite don’t seem to care for or represent the rest of us.

      Mr. Hayes doesn’t leave us without hope; he offers up examples like the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street as different ways the people have gotten together to fight back against those in power. The entire last section is full of different ideas, although none so concrete that I feel I can point to what I need to do next. That said, I think a lot of what we’ve seen in reaction to the 45th U.S. President fits in line with his suggestions.

      I’m leaving out other important things, such as his fascinating discussion of insurrectionists versus institutionalists is fascinating, but hopefully you get the point. What’s so disconcerting is that this book was published five years ago, and yet the downward spiral continues. I wish this book weren’t so relevant, and that it was more history book than current events, but alas, here we are.
    • 4/5
      I really liked this book, but not for it's beginning, which read like a highly academic proposal for a research grant. Nor did I like the ending. Not for the same reason, but because it was clear the author was neither as confident in his statements, as he was in the rest of the book. However, the vast middle of the book was outstanding. Hayes introduced me to new ideas and new perspectives on the complexities of our society and our politics on which I am already fairly well read. Anyone who doesn't spend more time reading (intentionally or otherwise) about the Paris Hiltons of the world than they do the Grover Norquists, should read this book. He sees light at the end of the tunnel of America's great political divide. Light that doesn't involve violence and hatred.
    • 5/5
      Twilight of Elites by Christopher Hayes cleverly redefines "elites" & reclaims a term long ago hijacked by right. He may be the Moyers of his generation. So stop reading your newspapers, turn off the TV & read this excellent book.

      This is the best book about the "fail decade" of the 00s. It's original, lucidly written and amazingly ranges from Iraq war, steroids in baseball, Catholic pederasts, Katrina, housing bubble - all with original insights - and I've read plenty of books on most of those topics. My bookshelf titled "our Current Dark Age" lists these books, and many are first rate. This book is special however. Don't miss it.

    • 4/5
      This is a great analysis of the failures of meritocracy, a system that seems impossible to criticize. Hayes shows how a meritocracy does not really allow for all people to rise by their own efforts but rather that those at the top use the system, as all other systems, to protect their own position, promote advancements for their friends and family and ignore the needs of those lower down. From the financial system to education to health care and even baseball emphasis on a meritocracy is shown to promote cheating in order to rise in the system and a sense of entitlement that leads to a distance from and lack of care about those further down the system. This attitude in the long run can lead to a collapse of the whole system. If only we could come up with a solution, but I guess pointing out the problem is a first step
    • 4/5
      I was already a fan of Chris Hayes due to his work on MSNBC, so I fully expected to like this book, and I did. He is describing how the "meritocratic elite" that has run things in the US for so long is breaking down in its ability to make good decisions, and how the public at large has grown disillusioned with their ability to do so. The examples he keeps returning to include our political leaders, the Catholic Church (and its response to the sexual abuse scandal), and Wall Street in light of the banking crisis of 2007-09. The book was written in 2012, but it holds up very well five years later, especially in light of Donald Trump's election- which is really all about the Rabble rising up and displacing the elites, first in the Republican party and then in the country as a whole. The sad reality at the center of the book is that what we think of as purely meritocratic processes, starting with the example of the exclusive public school in New York for the gifted that Hayes attended, has become a rigged game- yes, anyone who tests high enough can go to the school, but wealthy and privileged families are the ones who can afford the test prep required to get to the top of the heap. Similar gaming occurs in every sector, and the US has consequently become a place with high inequality and low social mobility.I totally agree with the diagnosis of the problem. I was less excited about the end- prescription for fixing this problem seems vague and unlikely. But a great read, not hard to get through.
    • 3/5
      Meritocracy created insulated, partly corrupt, elites in a wide variety of institutions, elites that are out of thouch with and reach of the rest of society. There may be something to it. Ok.
    • 3/5
      A bit of a rant, seeping with sad helplessness.
    • 3/5
      Meritocracy is a self-destructing paradigm. Once people earn their way to the top, they tilt the playing field in their favor, which creates a more or less entrenched elite class. The social distance between the elite and the rest renders the elite unable to govern effectively. The solution is to enforce equalization, the main tool for which is taxation. The top 20% of the populace is becoming increasingly discontent as power becomes concentrated in an ever smaller (.001%) elite, and in their disaffection they will power a new movement for equality. This latter idea comports with the idea I've been harboring for several years of a revolt of the middle managers.

      The writing is intelligent and engaging, animated by anecdotal examples that illustrate Hayes' well constructed thesis. My 3 stars is a reflection of the depth and breadth of the argument, not of the writing. It was necessary for Hayes to spend the time he did to make his argument, but I think a thumbnail would have been sufficient for me to grasp it. I'd like to see him engage that disaffected top 20% to see how willing they are to move toward equality.
    • 4/5
      A good, brief, easy-to-read survey of the ways in which the pathologies of our current elite have helped produce the various disasters of the past decade (financial, military, etc.)

      Hayes' big idea is that an overzealous, ideological application of the idea of "meritocracy" is responsible for all this. Meritocracy -- using supposedly objective criteria to pick out the best people and then giving them the reins of power -- isn't a bad idea, exactly, but (says Hayes) it has flaws and failure-modes that that we haven't sufficiently accounted for. It can encourage risky and irresponsible behavior by rewarding those who luck out and benefit greatly in the short term from the risks they take, since they're indistinguishable (in the short term) from those who are simply "good enough" to achieve such results consistently. (This is what happened in the competitive, intensely "meritocratic" internal culture of Enron.) It can create a hugely unequal playing field, despite its pretenses of neutrality, by creating explicit standards that can be carefully gamed by those with time and money on their hands. (Hayes gives the example of his high school, which viewed itself as egalitarian because its only admission criterion was a single, difficult test. But, unsurprisingly, many of the school's students were the products of expensive private tutors who taught to the test.) And even if meritocracy succeeds in singling out the most competent people, it can produce "social distance" between those people from the masses they are responsible to, making them less able to empathize with those people or understand why they behave the way they do.

      If there's a flaw in this book, it's the broadness and vagueness of the central claim. Hayes is loose enough with his definition of "meritocracy," and ecumenical enough in his consideration of its flaws, that he's able to tie a huge range of seemingly disparate facts and anecdotes to his theme. For instance, the different types of meritocractic failures he talks about seem, to me, to be quite different beasts. In some cases -- the Enron example, for instance -- it seems like he's complaining that so-called meritocratic systems actually aren't meritocratic enough, that they reward short-term performance when long-term performance is what really matters (i.e., is the relevant definition of "merit"). At other times, it's not clear whether the problem is with meritocracy per se or just with the basic positive feedback loop of power -- the fact that having more power makes it easier to get even more. It's certainly true that having money and power makes it easier to collect credentials that in turn lead to even more money and power, but is that a problem with meritocratic credentialing, or just part of the way power works?

      Hayes ends his book with a plea for redistributive taxation. He points out that most Americans already support a much less unequal distribution of wealth (and in fact fail to appreciate just how unequal the current distribution is), and claims that with less inequality, the people at the top would be less out of touch. The book is clearest and strongest when it's pushing this conventionally leftist line of reasoning: too much money and power has concentrated in the hands of too few, that's bad news, and it can be fixed with redistributive policy. Hayes is on shakier ground when he blames that this concentration on meritocracy -- not because the basic idea isn't promising, but because Hayes' version of it is too vague, too under-specified, too Malcolm Gladwell-esque in its ability to absorb every cool anecdote Hayes wants to tell. (But then, given the culture of modern nonfiction publishing, I can't blame Hayes for choosing to focus on such an edgy, counter-intuitive, Gladwellian big idea.)
    • 4/5
      In a decent political environment, Chris Hayes would be a center-right social democrat. In the United States, he is considered a flaming liberal, at least in the terms his employer, General Electric's MSNBC, still deems acceptable. The strangeness of "Twilight of the Elites" is that Hayes fully stays within the reigning paradigm. He is no iconoclast; he more or less wants to restore and fiddle a bit at the margin of the system. Restoring the legitimacy of the elite is his goal.The flaw of the book is Hayes' deep belief in meritocracy, a reign the Greeks didn't know about. They called it aristocracy, the rule of the best which quickly degenerates into an oligarchy. It is certainly true that the US society contains large pockets of meritocratic potential. A winner-takes-all society allows for the rise of talented individuals. If one looks a bit closer, however, one sees that these examples, such as Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, have been successively groomed in highly exclusionary institutions. Hayes' himself went to New York City's Hunter College High School whose criterion of admission is an aptitude test, open to all. In practice, high income parents spend large amounts of money to teach the test to their children. Schooling in the United States still works under a "separate but equal" frame. As Elizabeth Warren has shown in The Two-Income Trap, a lot of the real estate mania is driven by parents' jockeying for access to the right school for their kids. Everybody knows that an early educational misstep is hard to correct in America's meritocracy. Compared to European universities, the size of the classes of America's Ivies is extremely limited. Harvard University for instance admits 2100 students per year. America's elites are sealed off quite early in their life. Hayes is correct in mentioning that meritocratic criteria play a large role in the selection process, but so does nepotism.Hayes realizes that the the "Iron Law of Meritocracy" predicts and the current US shows that "over time, a society will grow both more unequal and less mobile". "It would reflexively protect its worst members, it would operate with a wide gulf between performance and reward, and would be shot through with corruption, rule-breaking, and self-dealing as those on top pursued the outsize rewards promised for superstars." A meritocracy can only work if a level playing field exists and rules are enforced. The US, unfortunately, lives in a Friedmanesque flat world of cheaters and crooks.The failure of the media (CNN in its death spiral comes to mind) to provide accurate information is one of Hayes' explanations: "Americans simply don’t trust the various forms of scientific and elite authority through which information about the threat of climate change is transmitted. And this is the crux of the problem. As unreliable as elite authority has been over the past decade, we can’t fix what needs fixing without it." "Money, political power, platform, and network power may be distinct conceptually, they are tightly correlated in practice." This nexus or cabal increasingly lives apart from the rest of the population, in gated communities, separating the haves from the have-nots South America-style. What software developers call the "eat your own dog food" to test your product, Lincoln called "government of the people, by the people and for the people". The separation cuts the feedback loop, shown by Hayes recalling elite reaction to church abuses, Katrina, Bush's and Obama's unequally shared burdens of war and the botched rescue of the US financial system.In his concluding chapter, Hayes rightfully acknowledges that post-WWII USA knew how to create a better society (rampant racism apart). Higher taxes, public education and accountable media are the key to restore fairness. Hayes' appeal for the masses to break their chains (an expression he doesn't use), to re-claw power from the 1 percent is weak. A weakness shared by all US reformists such as Lessig, Reich, Warren, Krugman, Maddow, Greenwald. The US still is in the Erasmus of Rotterdam/Benjamin Franklin of the 1760s stage of reformation where clear-sighted elites see the failing system but are unwilling to push for fundamental change.There will be a long dark time before dawn.