Other Sellers on Amazon
+ $17.23 shipping
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
The Aristocracy of Talent: How Meritocracy Made the Modern World Hardcover – July 13, 2021
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| $7.95 with discounted Audible membership | |
|
Audio CD, MP3 Audio, Unabridged
"Please retry" | $37.69 | — |
- Kindle
$16.99 Read with Our Free App -
Audiobook
$0.00 Free with your 3-Month Audible trial - Hardcover
$15.0512 Used from $9.99 16 New from $15.05 - Paperback
$19.9917 Used from $19.63 19 New from $15.04 - Audio CD
$57.992 New from $37.69
Purchase options and add-ons
In The Aristocracy of Talent, esteemed journalist and historian Adrian Wooldridge traces the history of meritocracy forged by the politicians and officials who introduced the revolutionary principle of open competition, the psychologists who devised methods for measuring natural mental abilities, and the educationalists who built ladders of educational opportunity. He looks outside western cultures and shows what transformative effects it has had everywhere it has been adopted, especially once women were brought into the meritocratic system.
Wooldridge also shows how meritocracy has now become corrupted and argues that the recent stalling of social mobility is the result of failure to complete the meritocratic revolution. Rather than abandoning meritocracy, he says, we should call for its renewal.
- Print length504 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherSkyhorse
- Publication dateJuly 13, 2021
- Dimensions6 x 1.4 x 9.25 inches
- ISBN-101510768610
- ISBN-13978-1510768611
Frequently bought together

What do customers buy after viewing this item?
- This item:
The Aristocracy of Talent: How Meritocracy Made the Modern WorldHardcover$17.23 shippingGet it as soon as Monday, Jul 24Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, and the Fate of LibertyHardcover$18.75 shippingGet it as soon as Thursday, Jul 20
Losing the Long Game: The False Promise of Regime Change in the Middle EastHardcover$16.29 shippingGet it as soon as Monday, Jul 24Only 3 left in stock - order soon.
Editorial Reviews
Review
--James Marriott, The Times (London)
"Unfailingly entertaining, effortlessly drawing on a wealth of anecdote and statistics." --Times Literary Supplement
"This unique and fascinating history explains why the blame now being piled upon meritocracy is misplaced—and that assigning responsibilities to the people best able to discharge them really is better than the time-honored customs of corruption, patronage, nepotism, and hereditary castes. Wooldridge upends many common assumptions and provides an indispensable back story to this fraught and pressing issue."
--Steven Pinker, Johnstone Family Professor of Psychology at Harvard University
"Wonderful...The Aristocracy of Talent provides an important and needed corrective to contemporary critiques of meritocracy. It puts meritocracy in an illuminating historical and cross-cultural perspective that shows how critical the judgment of people by their talents rather than their bloodlines or connections has been to creating the modern world. Highly recommended."
--Francis Fukuyama, Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
"This is an important, fascinating and superbly written book. The Aristocracy of Talent pulls the rug out from under the current assault on meritocracy. How quickly we forget that reformers struggled for centuries to displace privilege of birth with merit-based judgments. Rejecting merit in favor of equal outcomes, Adrian Wooldridge persuasively argues, is like handing the keys of the future to China and other cultures focused on results. Does the assault on core values leave you at a loss for words? Read this book."
--Philip K Howard, author of The Death of Common Sense and founder of Common Good
"Wooldridge... makes intelligent contributions to the fraught cultural debate about the value--or lack thereof--of meritocracy." --Brooke Allen, The Hudson Review
About the Author
Product details
- Publisher : Skyhorse (July 13, 2021)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 504 pages
- ISBN-10 : 1510768610
- ISBN-13 : 978-1510768611
- Item Weight : 1.55 pounds
- Dimensions : 6 x 1.4 x 9.25 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #408,198 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #179 in Labor & Industrial Economic Relations (Books)
- #236 in Political Economy
- #575 in Economic Conditions (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
This is a mostly brilliant, courageous, and very important book in many respects. First, it presents a fascinating history of the issue of selection based on talent from Plato to the present. Second, it shows that recognizing and rewarding talent is pro-progress and pro-life. Third, the author explains how talent recognition is properly based heavily on the use of objective tests, especially cognitive ability (IQ) tests, but he does not recommend locking them in (through government tracking) for life at an early age. IQ is mainly genetic and that IQ tests are not racist. Higher IQ leads to better outcomes among all groups. The author strongly favors finding talented people from poor families and supporting their education with scholarships. Fourth, the author argues that meritocracy is moral in that it allows everyone to have the chance to fully utilize whatever talents they have while totally rejecting the idea that everyone must come out the same. Fifth, he fully supports the concept of a Constitutional Republic that protects rights rather than a pure democracy (unlimited majority or mob rule). In sum, this book primarily pro-justice and pro-individualism and, as such, is a very valuable antidote to the hateful attacks on merit by leftists who relentlessly push to replace individual merit with quotas for favored collectives. I should add that the author does NOT say that people should base their self-esteem on income or status-seeking but rather on what they are able to achieve in their own work. He thinks, correctly I think, that the elite universities are snobbish, but I did a bit of research and found that Harvard gives 50% of its students need-based scholarships and 20% full scholarships. It is clear that he would like more scholarships at all levels.
I have some reservations about the book. (i) He wants more government involvement in people’s lives than I would support, such as government involvement in news broadcasting and he is not 100% opposed to affirmative action. (ii) He wants government bureaucrats to be intelligent, ok fine, but he does not say that there should be many fewer of them with less power; and (iii) he wants intelligent people to feel in some form duty above self and implies that people should feel some guilt about wanting to better their own lives and the lives of their children, which means that people should not fully use their ability for their own benefit. These altruist-statist premises somewhat undermine an otherwise great book.
Meritocracy is a deceptively ambiguous word and this author's own definitions only emerge in his final chapter--even then in poor focus. Until then the reader must infer from elusive clues what he means. An overlong discourse on the importance of Plato's "Republic" near the beginning is the first clue. Another is his tendency to dismiss personal traits like perseverance, deference of reward, integrity, or a strong work ethic as "mere training"--something to be academically separated from true "ability", i.e., doing well on IQ tests--which he seems to see as the essence of merit. And high merit is to be rewarded by an education fitting the student to join the "Aristocracy of Talent" in governing those who flunked the tests.
The expansive middle of the book, particularly his wonderfully amusing historical anecdotes about hereditary aristocrats' incompetence and how the rising ideas of the enlightenment reduced them from royal dictators to items of tabloid gossip is wonderful. And his warnings about abandoning merit just when it's ascendant in the rest of the world--especially China--is timely. Many will find some faults with some of the author's arguments but at least he can create an entertaining narrative in spite of some gaping blind spots.
For example: His focus on the problems of racial inequality of income and education in the U.S. has numerous taboo subjects, like the teachers' unions' strangle hold on inner city schools. Their rigid focus on lavish retirement benefits combines perversely with an ironclad tenure for lazy or burned-out teachers to create an Aristocracy of Incompetence where merit is most sorely needed. Unions also underwrite expensive political campaigns to thwart charter schools or any innovation that threatens union control. This contributes to a rapidly widening gap in educational attitudes between blacks & almost all other ethnicities (not just whites).
An ignored elephant in the room is the importance of culture to merit. Why do Jews or Asians rise so disproportionately to elite positions in academia and commerce? This happens all over the planet--often in spite of strong local prejudices and explicit legal discrimination. Such obvious facts once generated Jewish quotas in academia, and are today cited almost exclusively for reducing Asian student enrollments. The impact of culture--positive or negative-- on success deserves frontal consideration in any discussion of merit--not just as a gripe for identity racists.
Also taboo is mentioning the existence of numerous black intellectuals (Tom Sowell, John McWhorter, Jason Riley to name a few) who challenge "structural racism" as a cause of the failure of black families to rise after the fall of Jim Crow. Many point out that black families had been poor, but most were as strong and as committed to education and upward mobility as white families--until subjected to corrosive disincentives of welfare subsidies. The good intentions of the 60's were enacted in political haste and they backfired slowly but disastrously. Meritocracy--however you define it--cannot backfill this growing gap without a fundamental change of focus. The solutions currently contemplated--more white guilt, identity politics, and racial reparations will only deepen it.
Nor is there a credible plan in the "Conclusions" chapter for addressing it. No army of Meritocrats can solve problems that go unacknowledged. There are some worthy observations in that final chapter, but they're lost in a thicket of mediocre & outright bad ones. Lacking a unifying vision--or even concise definition--of his subject, he needs a long chapter to make his points. Mostly he backtracks to the vision of Plato's ideal of the lofty philosopher-king whose massive intellect and the ascetic ways in which he was groomed for absolute power make him invulnerable to the mob (people), the generals, and merchant interests--and to removal from office. He seems to be the author's ideal meritocrat, and he believes that Plato's vision can be adapted to the modern world.
This seems a poor choice of muses. As he concedes early on, Plato's vision is seen by many as a blueprint for the totalitarian state. Plato's republic seems an analog of Sparta's. The philosopher-king and his many subjects (and slaves) are not unlike Sparta's minority warrior caste and many helots (slaves). All are bound together in rigid rules of behavior and training. Everybody's place is defined by authority. Plato doesn't ask which ideas, opinions, or songs the king should censor, he asks which ones the king should permit. The Republic is the original formula for all Utopian plans to come: a top-down authority enforcing a rigid uniformity, a suppression of individuality, and an expectation of willing (or unwilling) obedience. Authority always trumps human nature. The only check on the philosopher-king is his early indoctrination. The inevitable corruptions of power were one of Plato's many blind spots.
So how can Plato's dream be civilized for the modern world? The author will need most of that last chapter and a maze of digressions to explain that. Better you should read it for yourself. But be skeptical.
The author is British (nothing wrong with that) and his interpretation of what was happening in America is an academic approach, as if he read about what was going on with merit in the US but didn't have a cultural understanding of it. His opinions lean heavily on items that were relatively unknown outside of academic circles.
Chapters 14 through 16 read more like a polemic against people he dislikes, primarily the British upper class and the uber-rich. Rather than focus on the small minority of the top socio-economic strata, he completely misses the chance to discuss the much broader classes of society where meritocracy is far more important. The ability to move from lower to middle class and from middle class to upper middle class based on your own abilities.
Top reviews from other countries
Meritocracy itself is not a political system, for all systems of government are inherently meritocratic is some fashion. An aristocratic house - no matter how old – can fall in a generation or two when held in the hands of unworthy heirs. A king or emperor who is not suited to his throne will lose it in equal measure (Richard II and Charles I). Meritocracy is that which allows those borne into privilege to retain it. History is made in this way on meritocratic values. Thus, any attempt to pen a history of meritocracy itself, as Wooldridge has done so here, would simply be a history of humanity.
‘We should nevertheless be cautious about rejecting an idea that is so central to modernity.’ Really? What is worth preserving? Modernity is a word synonymous with decline. The decline of art, design, nations and mental health. All have crippled under the heavy mantle off modernity. All that has replaced them is a partisan private sphere and a generation of unhappy individuals. Regardless of whether meritocracy can really be claimed as a modern idea (see those above), I doubt this argument would convert any decenters to the meritocratic cause.
The one powerful point made in this work is that meritocracy is worth preserving in order to prevent equality of outcome. A dangerous and despotic principle which is incapable success and its attempts deadly beyond imagination. It is not then worth preserving as an item if modernity, but that of tradition and stability. This argument is this works greatest rallying cry. As this works sole convincing argument, it alone has the weight to pull in support from opposition on the right.
It is the mark of an educated mind to entertain an idea without accepting it. Unfortunately, this work entertains the anti-meritocratic idea too well for too long, without rebuke. As a result, I found myself more convinced than ever of the faults of meritocracy, which -as Charles Ryder so eloquently put it - has taken us to a place ‘where wealth is no longer gorgeous and power has no dignity’. Unlike their aristocratic predecessors, todays meritocrats network at tech and finance conferences (rather than racecourse and regattas). As a result, we are now deprived of pleasure, instead being forced to listen to repulsives drone on about crypto currencies and new tech. I should sooner know my place and some enjoyment!
Overall, this book lacks direction. It is based on the misconception that meritocracy is somehow endangered. Of course the rise has been made harder for many by the closure of most grammar schools, but only slightly. The old avenues are just as open now as they have always been. The military still needs officers (recent data shows they are desperately so) and those who do not have the right qualifications - on account of poor education - are able to rise through the ranks on their own merit. This is but one avenue through which all are free to rise. The Aristocracy of Talent strikes me yet another book which was the product of an author with too much free time during lockdown and a desperate attempt to fill it.
I commend Wooldridge all the same for wishing to prevent those ‘horrible people’ who ‘want to build neo-Georgian houses’ (Ben Pentreath - Financial Times 2017) from solidifying their power for their children, good on him… I couldn’t agree more.








