Of course I think the majority of people are stupid; the servant-worshipping fundamentalism that is based on religion has apparently convinced you that if anyone recognizes themselves as more developed in any certain trait, they must be a bad person because that's called arrogance.
There are plenty of people who are more impressive than others in multiple ways. If they recognize that and value that characteristic personally, that isn't a bad thing. I'm more intelligent than the average person, and I have no qualms admitting I have that view. Granted, I only formed that view because of my performance in multiple assessments.
I'm also more than willing to admit that I am only average to below average as far as physical ability goes. I've always been healthy, but I'm unable to build upper body strength as well as many of my peers. Guys gifted physically will find their dates through appearance, and I'll find mine through playing mind games and a somewhat greater financial situation.
I'll also openly admit that I enjoy being told I'm intelligent; who doesn't? Other people want to be recognized for their musical ability or their developed physique, so why is it criticized when someone seeks recognition for their mind? It doesn't quite make sense.
It's not pandering, it's a legitimate decision based on values. Do you seriously think there is no benefit to a society with more socialistic policies? Even conservative economists would tell you that's ridiculous. The difference between liberal and conservative is not effectiveness, it's their goals.
Conservatives, despite their proclamation of Christ-like values, desire a system that gives them hope of "getting ahead" of others, rather than aiding the poor as the Bible suggests. Meritocracy appeals to their personal view that they can ultimately beat most others in their occupational competition. Pure and unregulated capitalism suits their selfishness. I'm not making a moral judgment; it is simply human nature to be selfish which in my mind makes it a completely neutral position.
Liberals desire a society that everyone enjoys equally for the most part either because (yes I have no problem admitting this) they wish to benefit by putting in less effort than everyone else, or because they recognize that they are disproportionately fortunate in their ability to produce compared to others and want to use their fortune to ease others' misfortune.
Both ideologies are effective in realizing their goals, they just happen to be completely opposite goals. If all conservatives would just admit that their motivating factor is selfishness, as Ayn Rand did, it would make discussion much easier. With two desired systems with competing motivations, it should be pretty goddamn obvious why we can't get anywhere politically in this country. That's even without addressing the issue of corruption.