Summary by Rafaela Prifti/
Rather than focusing or even blaming the 0.1 percent for America’s economic woes, philosopher and historian Matthew Stewart, takes aim at the upper middle class in his latest book “The 9.9 percent” The New Aristocracy That Is Entrenching Inequality and Warping Our Culture (Simon & Schuster) Here is a list of defining characteristics of today’s American upper-middle class, as the author presents it: “they are hyper-focused on getting their kids into great schools and themselves into great jobs, at which they’re willing to work super-long hours. They believe in meritocracy. They want to live in great neighborhoods, even if that means keeping others out, and will pay what it takes to ensure their families’ fitness and health. They believe in markets. They’re rich, but they don’t feel like it — they’re always looking at someone else who’s richer. They’re also terrified.” On the one hand, this 9.9 percent drives inequality — they want to lock in their positions for themselves and their families — on the other, they’re also driven by inequality. They recognize that American society is increasingly one of have-nots, and they’re determined not to be one of them.
The new book focuses on the space between 0.1 percent and the 90 percent that’s often overlooked – the 9.9 percent that resides between them. Matthew Stewart has been interviewed by several outlets. Here is a brief summary of some of his interviews:
Why focus on the 9.9 percent?
A lot of us are sliding in and out of a middle group that is much more complicit than we’re willing to acknowledge. We talk about Jeff Bezos [’86] and Elon Musk all day long. But there is this group below that, which even if it isn’t increasing its relative share [of the economic pie], it’s holding on. That makes it very distinct from the bottom 90 percent that is falling behind.
Who are these 9.9 percent?
The statistical side of it is very imprecise. I don’t think of the 9.9 percent as just everybody who has more than a certain amount of money and less than another amount of money. I see it more as a culture, and it’s a culture that tends to lead people into the 9.9 percent of the wealth distribution. It’s a cultural construct that is defined by attitudes toward family, toward identity issues about gender and race, by education and educational status and the idea of what constitutes a good career, which is mainly professional and managerial.
What does the middle class culture look like? How do they separate themselves out?
The guiding ideology is essentially that of a meritocracy. The driving idea is that people get where they are in society through a combination of talent and work and study. The main measures of that are educational attainment and material well-being, and anything that we provide to society or other people is on top or on the side of that and is a reflection of our own virtue and not in any way necessary for social functioning or part of a good life. It’s always, essentially, a sacrifice.
The obvious place to look for it is the whole college admissions game. I put a lot of emphasis on the family aspect because I think that’s a place where you really see in operation the attitudes and practices that go into child rearing and family formation. You have at least two very different groups emerging in American society. At a high level, you have people who have their kids late in life after getting a lot of education, have fewer kids, and invest massively in them. And then you have a large group that is much closer to the traditional style of having kids early and not investing as heavily in them — although many of them, of course, try to emulate the practices of the upper-middle class.
You write about how much this 9.9 percent are willing to invest in their children — in nannies, in schools, in extracurriculars. Where does this pressure come from, this urge to make their kids the best?
I think the driving motivation is fear, and I think that fear is well-grounded. People intuit that in this meritocratic game, the odds are getting increasingly long of succeeding. They work very hard to stack the odds in their kids’ favor, but they know as the odds get longer, they may not succeed.
How do you distinguish between meritocracy and what you call “the merit myth?”
Meritocracy means that we allocate power in our society through open, transparent, and rational standards. The merit myth is, in essence, that everybody in our society gets what they deserve according to their individual merit, and our economic product is nothing but the sum of a bunch of individual merits. And that is wrong, it’s false, and it’s dangerous.
What’s your basic argument?
Rising inequality has corrupted some of the essential ideals of America’s middle class. It has taken what I think is a sensible, good, and, in some ways, revolutionary project to build a society that’s fair, open, transparent, where everyone’s judged on merit, and turned it into something that’s more like its opposite.
What is the role of the 9.9 percent in making this better?
The key contribution of the 9.9 percent, the culture of the 9.9 percent, is going to be to return to the actual original values of America’s upper-middle class. If you get rid of the false idea of meritocracy that everyone earns what they deserve and substitute the idea that meritocracy means holding power accountable to rational standards of public scrutiny, you have a class that can actively contribute in a positive way toward equality. There are some core values in what we call meritocracy — of holding power accountable to reason, of treating people as equals under the law, of making deliberations public, and professionalism. All of those core values are intrinsically good things. What’s happened is that inequality perverts and distorts them. The contribution of the 9.9 percent would be to pursue those.