3 ms·
In a truly genuine meritocracy, everyone would have the same opportunities in terms of upbringing, schooling, college etc. If resources were scare (such as an e
by alasdair_ 5y ago
In a truly genuine meritocracy, everyone would have the same opportunities in terms of upbringing, schooling, college etc. If resources were scare (such as an elite private school for kindergartners) then the most talented children would go there, not those whose parents had lots of money.
In practice this doesn't happen - some children have massive advantages compared to others. To then take all of these children and one day try to use an objective measure to decide who gets access to yet more advantages is obviously going to massively favor the non-meritocratic-to-that-point advantaged children.
So yes, a true meritocracy may be completely fine, but in the real world "meritocracy" is. anything but.
- BurningFrog 5y agoWhat you're describing is an equal opportunity society. That's a worthy goal, but trying to redefine "meritocracy" to also mean that results in confusion at best. Without a common language communication becomes impossible. The normal definition of the word is that those who are best at a task should perform it. The most competent applicant should be hired for a job. If a billionaire's kid happen to be best, because of all the private tutoring they got, that's not really relevant for a meritocratic decision.