|
His tone is perpetually friendly and he has the
charisma of a reserved gentleman. At the same time, he has that
presence that is typical of American stars, regardless whether
they’re in Hollywood, politics or at a university. His arguments are
razor sharp and often accusatory in nature.
Michael Sandel, 67, is a professor of philosophy
at Harvard University. Millions have viewed his popular Ted Talks
online.
The release date for his latest book, "The Tyranny
of Merit,” has deliberately been pegged to the final weeks of the
presidential election campaign in the United States. Fittingly, the
book is about U.S. President Donald Trump, his predecessor Barack
Obama, Trump’s challenger in the last election, Hillary Clinton, and
her husband Bill, the former president.
In the book, Sandel seeks to identify the culprits
behind the division of American society and that of so many
countries, including Germany. He is critical of Donald Trump, but
his indictment also targets the Democratic Party in the U.S. and the
left-leaning social democrats in Europe.
DER SPIEGEL: Professor Sandel, readers are getting
used to the publication of books in rapid succession that always
seem to have the same tone: Trump is dangerous, Trump is stupid,
Trump is to blame for everything. But in your latest book, "The
Tyranny of Merit," you focus on his opponents, the Democrats, and
blame them for the plight of American society. That's a bit
surprising.
Sandel: To make one thing clear: My book in no way
excuses Donald Trump for the damage he has done to American politics
and society. He has inflamed racial tensions and he has inflamed all
of the divisions that already existed in American society before he
entered into office. He has made them worse. But the book also tries
to show how the Democratic Party - with Bill Clinton, Barack Obama
and Hillary Clinton – opened the way for Trump.
DER SPIEGEL: You argue that the Democrats have
established a "success ethic” that has turned their former voters,
including the working class, against them. What’s wrong with the
idea of performance? The message that, "You can make it if you try,"
has always been part of the great American promise.
Sandel: It is true that the Democrats have
repeatedly made this promise with good intentions: to show people a
way out of the inequality that has worsened as a result of
globalization. They emphasize university education as the avenue for
upward mobility. But this leaves out over half of the population. We
now have intense meritocratic competition for spots at the best
universities, for the best grades and degrees, and we’re seeing an
epidemic of overly protective parents because they are worried their
children will be left behind. The notion that fate is in your hands
is inspiring in one way but invidious in another, especially for
those who don’t manage to succeed. Trump taps into that feeling.
DER SPIEGEL: But the development of the kind of
elite thinking you describe isn’t exclusively the domain of the
Democrats.
Sandel: That’s true. In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan
and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher promoted the free
market and globalization. In the course of the 1990s, Bill Clinton
took office as president, Tony Blair as British prime minister and
Gerhard Schröder as German chancellor - all representatives of
center-left parties. They accepted the basic principle of their
conservative predecessors that market mechanisms are the primary
mechanism for achieving the public good. Their faith in the markets
was softer than that of Reagan and Thatcher and they also tried to
strengthen the safety net for those the markets left behind, but
they did not question the market faith itself.
DERR SPIEGEL: What should they have done?
Sandel: They should have shown more humility.
DER SPIEGEL: Humility?
Sandel: Yes. Think of Hillary Clinton’s use of the
word "deplorables.” She used it in the last election campaign in
reference to Trump voters, blue-collar workers. It showed an
arrogance toward the less educated. Obama spoke of people who "cling
to guns or religion.” The liberals emphasize rising based on merit.
But we don’t live up to the meritocratic principles we proclaim. Of
course, you have to pass difficult entrance exams to get into
Harvard, but some people are groomed for it throughout their
childhood and youth, with hockey lessons, piano lessons, foreign
language classes, and their parents pay for it. Other parents can’t
afford it at all. So, good performance depends heavily on family
background and a good deal of luck. By realizing this, we can
develop a sense of humility and identify more easily with those less
fortunate than ourselves.
DER SPIEGEL: Obama was the first black president
of the U.S. He would certainly reject the accusation that he spoke
to a largely white elite.
Sandel: He would also have some arguments in his
favor. Obama and Bill Clinton could say: We offered working people a
much more generous set of policies. We offered universal health
care. The Republicans were against it. We offered more childcare.
The Republicans were against it. We fought for a tax policy geared
to the middle class. The Republicans were cutting taxes for
millionaires and billionaires. Your follow-up question to Clinton
and Obama would then be: Well, then why is it that working people
voted for Donald Trump instead? The Democrats were shocked when
Trump was elected. They didn’t take seriously the legitimate
grievances with which the ugly sentiments that drive supporters of
populism are entangled. For Trump’s supporters, it’s not only about
wages and jobs but about humiliation. The grievances are not only
economic, but also moral and cultural. It's about the lack of
dignity and esteem.
DER SPIEGEL: If Trump's followers feel humiliated
by the elite, was it particularly intolerable for them to see a
black man rise to the presidency and, with Hillary Clinton, almost a
woman, too?
Sandel: Racism and sexism are certainly factors.
Trump makes misogynist statements and overtly racist appeals. But it
is important to remember that Obama got elected president twice, and
some Obama voters went for Trump. Sexism was a factor in Hillary
Clinton’s defeat, but so was her identification with meritocratic
elites who seemed to look down on working people. With Trump, they
didn't have that feeling.
DER SPIEGEL: Why do you think that the Democrats,
in particular, are attached to the idea of an elite?
Sandel: The Democratic Party once stood for
farmers and working people against the privileged. When Hillary
Clinton reflected on her presidential campaign, she boasted that she
had won the places that represent two-thirds of America’s gross
domestic product. Electoral studies found that education, not
income, best predicted support for Trump. Among voters with similar
incomes, those with more education voted for Clinton, while those
with less voted for Trump.
DER SPIEGEL: Barack Obama undoubtedly had his
arrogant moments and an intellectual arrogance too. But he also had
an ability to speak from the heart in his desire to overcome
divisions. Look at his speech at the funeral service in Charleston
in 2015, where nine members of a Black church had fallen victim to
an attack while praying in church. They came to the memorial service
full of rage. Obama held the eulogy and then sang "Amazing Grace” to
help relieve their anger. The speech he gave was one of the greatest
presidential political speeches in recent years.
Sandel: Yes, that’s true. He was more eloquent
than any other political figure in my lifetime on racial equality. I
think history will look back positively on Obama and view him as an
inspiring figure. When he ran for office in 2008, he inspired a kind
of moral and civic idealism that we had not seen in generations. But
2008 was also the peak of the financial crisis. And on economic
issues, he embraced neoliberal globalization. When it came time to
reform and restructure the financial industry, he bailed out the
banks without holding them accountable for their irresponsible
behavior, and did little to help ordinary citizens who had lost
their homes. Lingering anger at the bailout fueled a politics of
protest - on the left, the Occupy movement and the candidacy of
Bernie Sanders; on the right, the Tea Party movement and the
election of Trump.
DER SPIEGEL: How do you view yourself? You’re a
white man and a professor at Harvard. That’s pretty elite.
Sandel: It’s true, I write critically of elites
and meritocracy having witnessed it personally. I see the damaging
effects that intense meritocratic competition has on many of my
students. They arrive at college having prevailed in a stressful,
anxiety-inducing meritocratic competition, which increasingly
consumes the high school years of many teenagers. I understand the
situation in Germany is different. But in the U.S., by the time
young people arrive at elite colleges, some are so accustomed to
striving for credentials that they find it difficult to step back to
explore, to reflect on what is worth caring about. The pressure to
achieve can crowd out learning. The tyranny of merit harms the
winners as well as those left behind.
DER SPIEGEL: Tyranny is a pretty strong word.
Sandel: There’s also a sobering statistic from a
recent study that looked into the mental health of 67,000
undergraduate students at more than a hundred colleges. The study
found that enormous stress levels are leading to rising rates of
depression and anxiety. One in five college students reported
thoughts of suicide. The suicide rate among young people aged 20 to
24 increased 36 percent from 2000 to 2017.
DER SPIEGEL: Only a few weeks are left until
Election Day in the U.S. on Nov. 3. What tasks will the political
class be facing if, a.) Trump wins or b.) his challenger Joe Biden
wins?
Sandel: If Trump wins, the central question for
politics will be how to protect democratic norms and institutions in
the face of the threat Trump presents. If Biden wins, the central
question will be how to heal the deep divisions in our society, how
we can renew the sense of common good. But we can’t begin to heal
our divisions if we don’t understand the cause of the loss of social
cohesion. My book attempts to start a conversation about those
causes, and about how we can build a politics of the common good.
DER SPIEGEL: But solidarity and community spirit
aren’t easy to impose politically, and certainly not humility.
Sandel: Right. Humility comes from experience,
from the messages parents give their children as they raise them and
through the implicit lessons that schools convey about success. Is
it mainly cognitive performance that is rewarded or are social
skills also cultivated and appreciated? Can we create public spaces
where people from different social classes come together, or must we
retreat into gated communities in the company of our own kind? Do we
send our children to public schools, where they meet children from
other social classes? Do we give up the VIP skyboxes in the sports
arenas that separate us even while watching our favorite team? And
above all: Do we acknowledge that we are indebted for our success -
to family, community, life circumstance and a good bit of luck?
DER SPIEGEL: We are now months into a global
pandemic that has shown us just how vulnerable humanity is. Are
there perhaps - not on a large scale, but on a smaller one – signs
of a new solidarity among students?
Sandel: In an individualistic society like the
U.S., solidarity can be difficult to achieve. Otherwise, we would
have a more generous welfare state. There may be some small signs
things are heading in the direction you are suggesting. Recently, I
asked a group of students whether, during the pandemic, they would
favor a lockdown of the economy to protect the vulnerable members of
society, or a policy of herd immunity, as in Sweden, where the
government risked major outbreaks in order to keep the economy
going. The students were overwhelmingly against the idea of herd
immunity, because they felt that it was too dangerous for society’s
weakest, the elderly and people with underlying medical conditions.
But it is too soon to draw any conclusions. At the moment, my
students are spread out all over the world, learning remotely, as we
try to think through the meaning of justice in the midst of a
pandemic.
DER SPIEGEL: Professor Sandel, we thank you for
this interview.
|
