This book attempts to offer an explanation of the differences between the Aristocracy of Europe and the Meritocracy in America. Comparing different times and different points of emphasis such as education, earning power, identity, backgrounds, and home neighborhoods, he makes the point that although the Aristocracy was once the leisure class, the Meritocracy, which he likens to America’s Aristocracy, are now workaholics. The working schedules have flipped, and rather than the lower classes working longer hours, now the upper classes work non-stop, putting job and achievement above all other obligations, even family. Hard work is expected, and is the norm, with all other concerns in life relegated to a less important stature. The children of Meritocrats are indoctrinated into the same way of life as their parents, and therefore, they perpetuate this system which is increasingly dividing us by class and increasing the divide from the top to the bottom, making it almost impossible for anyone on the bottom to achieve the American Dream that they once thought attainable.
With the development of improved technology, the emphasis on skills has gone to an emphasis on service. Instead of needing a trade, one needs a degree from a prestigious school, increasingly only available to those who are legacies and come from the best backgrounds. When he describes the methods needed to get to the pinnacle of success, i.e, appropriate parents, appropriate bank account and appropriate education, all else in life becomes secondary. Breaking into the stratosphere of high salaries and prestige is now virtually impossible without the appropriate pedigree.
For the author, the Meritocracy is now simply another form of Aristocracy, allowing the same group of people to succeed, leaving those with inappropriate backgrounds behind and unable to join them in the rarefied atmosphere of their schools and neighborhoods, travel opportunities and other social benefits like good health care. He states, repetitively, using myriad statistics, that the class divide has deepened, rather than merged closer, enabling only the rare soul to break out of the mold holding him firm. In years past, a person could start in the stockroom of a company and rise to the position of CEO, a person could start as a stockbroker and rise to be the managing director of the firm, a teller could become the director of a bank even if he started off in the backroom, but today, it is virtually impossible to do that.
Unfortunately, this book reads like a textbook. It is repetitious and often tedious, as statistics, sometimes so numerous as to seem random, are sited ad nauseum to prove the same point, over and over again in chapter after chapter. Also, the author seems to want to use as many words as possible and his descriptions often go on for so long with so many adverbs and adjectives piling up, that it is hard to follow his sentences and meaning. By the time one ends, the reader will not remember the beginning or the point being made. His use of expressions like “antecedent economic equality” only serve to confuse the reader. If there is a hard way and an easy way to explain something, the author seems to want to use the hardest, using convoluted sentence structure to impress the reader with his brilliance. The route he uses to make his point is so circuitous as to often make his intent incomprehensible. In addition, he uses words** uncommon in the daily use of most people, like stakhanovite and rentier; one is of Russian derivation and the other of French. However, why use words not in the common vernacular? I think the author has given himself away as a part of the group he is railing against. His education must have been superb. Now that he had achieved success, he seems to be questioning the way success is achieved.
The author seems to believe that Americans work excessively hard to rise to the top, squeezing out competition and making it impossible for others to reach that pinnacle. He believes the expectations in the work place for such superhuman effort perpetuates the upper class position and serves to further divide us by class and identity. If, in America, as the author states, the Meritocracy developed in response to our opposition to the idea of an Aristocracy, it has failed to make us more equal. Aristocrats worshiped their leisure and titles. Meritocrats worship their hard work and pursue higher education. They became the tools with which to succeed, rather than their background. After decades, however, the result is that the Meritocracy has created its own form of Aristocracy, with attendance in the best schools and achieving the best jobs now dependent on the legacy of the parent’s education, financial success, and name recognition. The ability to live the good life with good health care, travel opportunities and other luxuries, comes from one’s ability to attend elite schools so as to achieve financial success. The tools necessary to succeed, besides breeding, like having specialized tutors and doing well on standardized tests, cost money, so much so, that it effectively isolates and prevents an entire segment of the population from ever becoming the future leaders. Name recognition can easily get one into the best schools, though, i.e, the children of Presidents like Obama and Clinton or heads of companies and dynasties like Forbes, Zuckerburg and Bloomberg easily slide into the right segment of society, but few of us have such fame. It is becoming more and more uncommon for anyone to break out of their preordained position.
The author states that in order to equalize the playing field, attempts are now being made to help the disadvantaged get a leg up by offering them financial aid, tutoring, remedial classes, scholarships, academic and sports, etc. However, this takes time and leveling the playing field has its down side. Sometimes we are educating those who cannot succeed because they are not capable. Not everyone succeeds in college. Some people would be better off with a trade school, however, we no longer have them. For the author, in order to combat Meritocracy, the solution seems to depend on what he terms as Democratic Economic Equality as opposed to using one’s qualifications and capabilities as determinants. To create this more Democratic world, he would increase taxes on those able to pay, reduce hours of work to make room for others, provide subsidies for those in need, etc. Perhaps he dreams of a utopian Communist or Socialist society, both ideas which have been tried but proved unsuccessful.
In the beginning chapter and in the final one, the author’s true intent may have been revealed. It is obvious from his subtle and not so subtle comments, that he leans left and is decidedly critical of President Donald Trump. He believes that it is a frustrated, misinformed, wrong footed group that has elected him as President. His facts are not accurate, however, as he states that he Trump has been unsuccessful in helping the lower and middle class. It has been proven, statistically, that he has indeed improved the lot of the unemployed and those on the lower end of the financial spectrum. Among other achievements and promises made and kept, he has also improved the lot of Hispanics and Blacks, diminishing the effect of the identity politics of which the author disagrees. I was left wondering if the author really meant this book to be a rebuke of the President and those that voted for him. His agenda is Progressive as he compares the affluent (and I suspect evil) town of Palo Alto to the downtrodden, hopelessly trapped (I expect virtuous) town of St. Clair Shores. He wants to make both towns financially the same, diminishing the power of Palo Alto by taking its portfolio and using it to increase the portfolio of those in St. Clair Shores making them more powerful and equalizing their prospects. When both are equal, there will be equal work, education and economic opportunity for all.
In my opinion, this is just another anti-right, anti Trump book being published by the anti-Trump publishing world.

**”a worker in the former Soviet Union who was exceptionally hardworking and productive.”
“the Stakhanovites succeeded in increasing the quantity of goods produced”
”Rentier may refer to: Rentier (property owner) [fr], someone whose income derives from rents, interest on investments, and the like; Rentier capitalism, economic …”

The book can be summarized quickly.
1-Aristocrats do not work. They do not value education.
2Meritocrats work excessively hard and value education to advance themselves
3-Meritocrats were supposed to make the playing field more equal for everyone to get ahead, but instead they have become the new Aristocrats. As they worked harder and harder with longer and longer hours, they forced others out
4-As Meritocrats achieved more and more knowledge, skills were unnecessary. Trades disappeared.
5-As Meritocrats gained access into better and better schools, their children became legacies.
6-As the Meritocrats earned more and more money, the divide between those at the top an those at the bottom widened, making it impossible for those at the bottom to rise because of financial requirements.
7-Aristocrats were very rich and influential. Now Meritocrats are super rich and powerful.
8-Meritocrats have created a Meritocracy which has morphed into an Aristocracy.
9-The author states that only a nuclear debacle can now make the world a more equal place. Alternatively, he advocates higher taxes, more open enrollment and fewer restrictions on college admissions so that everyone has an equal opportunity, which disregards one’s ability to make use of such an education. He supports a host of other social programs all of which will be paid for by the rich for the advantage of those in need. Soon, there will be one class, no rich or no poor, no uneducated, none without health care, etc. In short, a utopia will be born with the principles of Socialism or Communism. We will all be equal. For how long will this be true before another Aristocracy rises?