Rankism: The All-encompassing "Ism" for the Ages

Summary:
"People do not object to differences in rank, only to abuses of those differences. They feel they have a right to equal dignity," writes Robert W. Fuller, author of "Somebodies and Nobodies: Overcoming the Abuse of Rank."

Forms of Rankism

The Opposite of Service

A "Dignitarian Society"

---

Forms of Rankism

Has anyone ever called you a name that has a racial or sexist slur?

Have you ever been made to feel less than you are by a teacher? A sibling? A parent? A boss? Students at school? Society as a whole?

Have your actions been called "gay" at some point?

Have you been called a "retard" or a "spaz?"

These are all examples of what Robert W. Fuller, co-founder of the Hunger Project and former President of Oberlin College, calls "rank-based abuse" in his book, "Somebodies and Nobodies -- Overcoming the abuse of Rank."

Recently the Rutgers Women's Basketball team has been ranked by the nationally syndicated shock jock, Don Imus.

Talk show hosts from all political stripes regularly take pot shots at women, at people with disabilities, at liberals, at conservatives, at racial minorities.

Rap music performers take delight in ranking other people, especially women, by calling them names that have a sexual connotation that is offensive. Or they highlight only body parts taken at obscene angles.

And we've seen tragically at Columbine, Dawson College in Montreal and at Virginia Tech what being a "nobody" can wreak on innocent victims when the victims of rankism are finally pushed too far.

"Then it dawned on me," writes Fuller, "that the familiar isms could be seen as subspecies of rankism. Racism, sexism, Anti-Semitism, ageism and others all depend for their existence on differences of social rank that in turn reflect underlying power differences. So they are forms of rankism."

Go to Top of Page

The Opposite of Service

Fuller defines "somebody" as "the relatively powerful and successful." "'Nobodies,' on the other hand, are the relatively weak and vulnerable. Somebodies with higher rank and more power in any given context can maintain an environment that is hostile and demeaning to nobodies with lower rank and less power in that context."

He further explains, "Rankism occurs when rank holders use the power of their position for unwarranted benefits or advantages to themselves. It typically takes the form of self-aggrandizement and exploitation of subordinates. It is the opposite of service.

Good leaders, according to Fuller, eschew rankism. Bad ones indulge in it.

"Since rankism is an impediment to meritocracy, overcoming it is a strategy for equalizing opportunity and securing social justice," he writes.

Who are the victims of rankism? We all are. In one context, we may be a "somebody" - such as at school as a professor or teacher or coach or in the business world as a boss or a middle manager. But we can lose that job or position for any reason and become a nobody overnight. Think of losing politicians or entertainers who no longer draw in the big crowds or the huge ratings numbers.

Fuller asserts that "we are all potential victims of rankism." This is because rank is not fixed but relative. "Like racism in the era of segregation," he writes, "rankism is pervasive and sanctioned by a tacit social consensus.

And, like the other "isms," it takes both an interpersonal and an institutional form."

Some of the examples I cite at the beginning of this article are instances of interpersonal rankism. Teachers sometimes mistreat students. I had one teacher who liked to rap our knuckles with a yard stick, if we didn't conjugate our Latin verbs fast enough for her liking.

Bosses sometimes bully workers. Apparently in Canada such bullying accounts for stress on a third of Canada's workforce.

Blacks sometimes look down on other blacks who may not be as light skinned as they are.

Students bully other students who may be new to the country or disabled or who are "different" in some way.

I'm sure you can cite your own examples of interpersonal rankism.

Fuller also writes about institutionalized rankism and defines it this way: "Institutional rankism is the rankism we encounter when we deal with governments, corporations, hospitals and other bureaucracies. In police states, it takes the form of oppression of the citizenry. In democracies, it consists of the daily indignities of dealing with institutions whose de-facto goal is self-preservation and aggrandizement rather than service."

He also notes that, "when bureaucratic, corporate or governmental rankism rises to the level of scandal, revulsion for institutional rankism can cause indignant shareholders or voters to turn against incumbents."

We've seen examples of this when governments fall or are defeated because of their policies -- or when CEOs are indicted and sent to prison for stealing monies from their companies. Another example is when certain charities are called on the carpet for not following the rules while dispensing monies or not regulating themselves properly according with state or federal guidelines.

Go to Top of Page


A "Dignitarian Society"

Ridding ourselves of rankism will be the last "political correctness" movement, according to Fuller. He says, "Much of what is now labeled racism or sexism is actually not triggered by a difference in color or gender but rather by a perception that the target lacks the protection of rank." It is rankism.

"So overcoming rankism is a universal and unifying goal that reduces the myriad of injunctions of political correctness to just one: Protect everyone's dignity equally," Fuller concludes.

I can hear the screams now: "But I've worked hard to get where I am and earned my rank. What do you want? A utopian state? It'll never work.

Fuller is not saying we need to get rid of rank. Instead, he writes, "When earned and exercised appropriately, rank is a legitimate, virtually indispensable tool of organization, and we rightly admire and respect those who attain it. But, when those of higher rank abuse their authority, those of lower rank experience discrimination and injustice not different in their material and psychological effects from the discrimination and injustice we now disallow victims from the familiar identity groups. People do not object to differences in rank -- only to abuses of those differences."

He proposes a "dignitarian society." People do not really want or expect an egalitarian society, He writes, because "everyone recognizes how different we all are. But they feel they have a right to equal dignity. A central tenet of every religion, dignity would not be easy to campaign against."

Here's how Fuller describes what a dignitarian society, to him, would look like:

"A dignitarian society would mean universal healthcare, equal access to education (including adult education and retraining), an equitable tax structure, affordable housing, and compensation compatible with living in dignity. The dignitarian framework encompasses all identity groups, spans old divisions and takes aim at what still divides us -- the dignity gap sustained by rankism. A dignitarian society embodies what our nation's founders imprinted on the national psyche: the right to both liberty and justice."

Wouldn't this be something to shoot for no matter what political party you belong to or what philosophy you hold about life whether you are an American, Canadian or a global citizen?

For further information go to www.breakingranks.net, a web site for discussing the social cost of rankism and developing a grassroots capacity to defend and protect dignity in everyday life.

Go to Top of Page

Bookmark this article to: