Meritocracy, Machiavelli, and Ethical Influence: Building Sustainable Success

Learn how to balance ambition with integrity and create systems where individual success uplifts everyone. Dive into the modern playbook for sustainable leadership with Jordan Peterson

On Saturday morning while doing my Power Athlete programming, I listened to Jamie Wheal and Jordan Peterson dissecting the complex idea of meritocracy, questioning what true success should look like in a society that often celebrates cutthroat ambition. I couldn’t help but connect their ideas to the themes I explored in my recent post, Machiavelli for Nice Guys. Peterson gives a modern take on Machiavelli’s “The Prince” – he acknowledges the need for strategy and assertiveness but insists on the importance of integrity, especially in a merit-based society.

Peterson gives a stern warning about unchecked manipulation. While Machiavelli argued in favor of ruthless tactics like deception, manipulation, intimidation to elevate someone to power, Peterson claims this success is unsustainable. As he puts it, “if it don’t look right, it don’t fly right.” Leaders who adopt psychopathic strategies may see short-term gain, but in the long game, they tend to fail. People remember cheaters, and our communities have an evolved a keen system for detecting those who violate the global trust. Trying to game the system can only get you so far before it ends badly for you.

Peterson’s critique of meritocracy is relevant in today’s world, where wealth and power disparities are under intense scrutiny. He argues a meritocracy’s real purpose isn’t just to elevate the talented but to allow society to benefit from those who excel. For example, he points to places like Harvard, where top students aren’t just educated for their own gain; their skills and knowledge, honed to the highest level, ideally contribute to a greater society. It’s a model where individual achievement acts like a high tide rises all boats.

However, Wheal points out, the gap between high achievers and everyone else has widened massively over the last 50 years. Back in the ’70s, CEOs earned about 30 times what the average worker did, now, it’s well over 300 times. Wheal asks if this level of disparity is still aligned with the ideals of meritocracy or if it’s creating master/slave society surrounded in an illusion of capitalism. Peterson states this is a universal problem that’s existed in every economic system. For him, the solution isn’t to tear down the system but to tilt it toward rewarding contributions that genuinely benefit society.

It’s here that the conversation intersects directly with *Machiavelli for Nice Guys*. In a way, both Machiavelli and Peterson agree that virtuous behavior won’t always yield rewards in a competitive world. But where Machiavelli might suggest using manipulation when necessary, Peterson warns that cutting corners ultimately leads to a self-destructive path. Instead, he advocates for what could be called “ethical influence” – a blend of competence, accountability, and strategy, built on a foundation of integrity. Peterson’s vision of meritocracy isn’t a race to the top, it’s about creating a system that uplifts everyone while ensuring that those who make the biggest contributions are rewarded.

Wheal also touches on the failures of “techno-philanthropy,” or the idea that billionaires can single-handedly “fix” societal problems with their wealth. Even well-meaning initiatives, like the Gates Foundation’s malaria nets, can backfire, highlighting how difficult it really is to make meaningful, positive change. Just as Machiavelli noted that good intentions alone are often not enough, Peterson reminds us that “doing good” is a lot harder than it seems. Wealth doesn’t equate to wisdom, and genuine impact requires more than throwing money at problems; it requires thoughtful, sustainable action.

Wheal and Peterson’s conversation serves as a reminder that true meritocracy should be more like an ecosystem than a hierarchy. Real success doesn’t come from crushing competitors or exploiting the tax code, it comes from creating an environment where individual achievements drive progress. This kind of system doesn’t reward manipulation or underhanded dealings. Instead, it rewards those who know how to balance ambition with accountability and strategy with ethics.

As I argued in Machiavelli for Nice Guys, navigating the modern world often means blending moral intention with strategic drive. Success is a balance – a place where “nice guys” can blend their intentions with a Machiavellian mindset. The real game is recognizing that the most sustainable form of power comes from building a system where everyone can thrive.

For those of us who still believe that merit matters, Peterson’s draws a hard line – the road to influence doesn’t require sacrificing integrity. Instead, it’s about learning how to play the game with purpose and understanding that success is measured not just by what we achieve individually but by how our actions lift others up.