优绩主义太该被反思了！不过这本书非常美国中心

感觉身边的人可以这样分类：赞同优绩主义的公平性vs不赞同。很多自己有很多特权（包括智识）的人觉得一切都是该得的这种态度真是糟糕。我感觉他想要的美国社会就是一个更社会主义的社会呀，怎么不说呢。。笔记：
- Incisive (not all novel, but complete with an analysis of the cultural history) commentary on the Obama Trump era.
- The West got too comfortable after the wall fell
- Going to college being the elixir for globalization woes disrespects other forms of work!
- The interplay of facts and opinion in political persuasion. It’s a technocratic conceit that facts and science speak for themselves. Political debate is often about how we identify and characterize/frame the facts relevant to the controversy. Our opinions direct our perceptions! Democrats and Republicans who have a college degree disagree about climate change way more than people without a college degree from the two sides - so it’s not that if we can only give people more facts and education that they’d all agree about climate change.
- Allocating jobs and opportunities according to merit does not reduce and only reconfigures inequality to align with ability, creating the presumption that people get what they deserve.
His argument is very America-centric or at least assumes nation state is the biggest unit of justice we can work with. But globalization is a leveling process of the whole world - yes some American white men are losing their dignity of work, but is it just to sacrifice the welfare or sense of respect of third world people? Justice among nations is something I’m really curious about.