By Jace L. and Tahia F.

On the first day of Princeton’s Summer Journalism Program, reporters were set loose to answer a question: Is the United States a meritocracy? Or could it ever be one? With each answer, it became increasingly clear: The future of our government has never been as unpredictable as it is now, according to the people of downtown Princeton.

The common opinion was that the U.S. was not a meritocracy, and many added that it would be impossible to go down that path. The question also opened the door to the disparities that plague American society, from nepotism to unqualified politicians.

“We have a lot of nepotism,” says Jolita Auguste, 38. “We’ve had that since the founding. I don’t think we’re going to get rid of that because most people, even when you ask them, what are you working so hard for? It’s so that my kids can have a better life.” She raised a point that others also communicated: In many ways, the U.S. is based on connections.

Grace O’Donnell, 23, offered an alternative system for elections. “I think there would have to be qualifications for certain positions within the government,” she says. “Right now, I feel it’s more like who can command a room, who can get votes… But I think certain people should be excluded. There should be certain barriers to even run for positions.” 

Networking is a major part of American society—in corporate jobs, in internships, and in the government. “In the government, especially in the United States system, I think a lot of it is who you know,” says Sejal Joshi, 22. “It is a game, and I don’t know if the people who have the correct and the most beneficial skill sets that the country needs are often the elected ones.”

Despite the current situation, Auguste stressed that the idea of a meritocracy is worth pursuing.

“There’s always a level of bias that happens in all interactions, but we do know that there are huge disparities,” she says. “So when you see such wide gaps, I do think that it’s important to at least acknowledge those and try and even them out in the meantime.”

By Brianna A. and Grace S.

For years, Americans have held the “American Dream” as a classic ideal of success, believing that through hard work and determination, anyone can climb the social ladder. 

But some believe that the battle for equality and the American dream has waned and that hard work has taken a back seat to privilege, where race, gender, and economic background determine success. Can a meritocracy—the idea that rewards are earned by talent and effort—even work in the modern United States?

Residents of Princeton, New Jersey, had lots to say on that.

“I found that until I worked hard, I couldn’t achieve anything,” says Jyoti, 46. Her belief in the value of persistence is rooted in personal growth, she says.

The idea of hard work is a major factor among those who believe in a meritocracy. 

“If you work hard and have the talent, you can make a decent living,” Sunil Suri, 54, says. 

He says he strongly believes that no matter where one comes from, they can succeed in the U.S., remembering classmates from his university in India who immigrated.

“Some of them are actually billionaires now. So coming from nothing, literally, they walked in,”  Suri says.

But others in Princeton challenged the idea of a meritocracy, arguing that while hard work matters, it’s not the only factor and often not even the most important one. 

Tim Quinn, a 67-year-old former journalist from a working-class background, doesn’t believe America functions as a true meritocracy. 

“The meritocracy as it exists now is kind of a fraud,” he says. “We have an education system that favors kids who are really good at school…. If you’re good at taking tests… then you will go on to a better college. And a lot of that is based on your ZIP code.”

Reflecting on his own experience, Quinn says, “as a white man, I was born on first base. Even though I came from a working class family…it’s only because my father had got a union job that I was the first in my family to be able to go to college.”

Allegra Brennan, 19, a Princeton native, believes that it is harder for women and minorities to succeed, especially in the current political environment.

“I think to be successful, especially as a woman, or as a person of color, especially now in Trump’s America, you have to jump through ten more hoops,” Brennan said. 

Is America on a path to success based on background or a meritocracy?

“I know now that there was some Black woman somewhere who was as smart as I was and who could have written what I wrote and edited papers that I wrote,” Quinn said, reflecting on the advantages he had as a white male. “She was just getting in the batter’s box.”

By Gabrielle B. and Alya M.

If knowledge, skills, and talent determined an individual’s power and influence in society, would a meritocracy result in a fair system for the United States? For Princeton residents, this question revealed a common understanding: meritocracy is the ideal, but not always a reality. 

Most explained that it is complicated to define meritocracy and the role it plays in the U.S., as everyone has different experiences that shaped their perspectives. 

In today’s society, success can be determined by one’s connections, wealth, and privilege, from college admissions to education to social capital. Yet, meritocracy is supposed to award ability over affluence, but who would really benefit? 

“Will [merit] open doors to certain conversations about you going far? Yes. Will you go far? I don’t know about that one. That’s a bit iffy,” said 28-year-old product analyst Kasheif Harrison. 

While he understood the dictionary definition of meritocracy, he believed that merit alone can’t ensure success, instead it’s the people you meet, the connections you form, and the impressions you make that will help you flourish. 

George Cohen, 66, a former New Jersey Deputy Attorney General, said that meritocracy correlates to work ethic: “If you’re the fastest runner, you win, you study the hardest, and you do the best, you’re the smartest.” 

Nevertheless, he added, success and equal access to opportunities are also determined by privilege. Not everyone starts on an “equal playing field,” he said.

Many people also shared a similar sentiment, that while meritocracy is fair in theory it does not account for barriers such as gender, race, class, as well as unequal access to resources, education, and opportunities. 

Cohen believed he had an upper hand compared to his high school classmates, because everyone did not have the same opportunity and time to dedicate to activities that could build merit.

“That’s why SATs ought to come back, because as much as they may be biased, everyone was taking the same test.”

On the other hand, Harrison believed that it’s the people you know that matters, and that merit alone will not help you succeed.

Hungtang Ko explained that merit did help him to an extent, but there were other factors involved. “I was lucky enough to get into Princeton and they thought I got in through merit, —which is probably true—for a certain part, but there’s a lot of luck involved. Just like anything,” he said.

While most Princeton residents agreed that meritocracy exists in the U.S., they said it does not operate effectively in society to promote fairness. 

Harrison said the main problem with meritocracy is that it “oversimpli[fies] how the world really works.”