>A society should delegate its jobs to those who are smartest, most capable, and most accomplished in that field. Because they are the ones who can best lead so

>A society should delegate its jobs to those who are smartest, most capable, and most accomplished in that field. Because they are the ones who can best lead society through the worldly challenges we face everyday. Corrupting this process by discriminating on the basis of family ties, personal friendships, wealth, race, or gender, is simply cutting your nose to spite your face. I'm confused because it seems like the article is arguing for meritocracy. How else would you measure who's the "most accomplished" in their field without some concept of "merit"? It's confusing as hell to even discuss this if we just switch the terminology all around, and we don't have to. Discrimination based upon family ties or personal friendships is nepotism, based upon wealth it's classism, based upon race it's racism, and based upon gender it's sexism. To me, addressing these issues in our society is the priority.