Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is actually the point of the elite overproduction hypothesis, although the article doesn't get that across. People who pose the theory don't believe that actual elites are being overproduced, but people who believe they should be elite and act as though they are.

Many people with a degree believe that they should be elites (because they would be in the 1960s) and are disappointed that they are not. The elites have circled the wagons and use friendships to determine eliteness (see WeWork and Theranos - where elites started companies that are total frauds and still were billionaires for a while).

At the same time, it is good for society to have a meritocratic component to the measure of "eliteness." This is why generals who won battles was a good example, and college degrees used to be: people who became generals or got into college were generally not there purely on merit, but the cream of the crop became apparent through challenges relevant to the society of the day.

The meritocratic component also allows for social mobility for people who are really damn good at whatever the merit is: great soldiers could find their way into the roman aristocracy from nothing, and colleges always admitted a few exceptionally talented lower-class people who became great scholars. The "elite overproduction" theory suggests that there is too much social mobility for the wrong people, and not enough for the right people.



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: