If you go back in history, I believe you'll find that most socially advantaged people simply thought they were inherently better than others. "I worked harder", whether true or not, is a better narrative.
That's true now, is it not? It's certainly a common view. People who are rich deserve it; they are more deserving. They're better people. They must be, because how else would they be rich? In the US meritocracy (and indeed, many others), anyone who has done well must have done it through merit because that's how the system works, so they must be a better person.
Modern society may have its flaws, but I do think this particular historical trend is positive.
The political system is currently having a meltdown because it has done an excellent job of eliminating the non-rich, but an absolutely terrible job of finding rich people with real merit.
So we've had a few years of entitled morons - not an exaggeration, in any way - from all the best schools and universities doing and saying incredibly stupid things.
And yet... the polish remains untarnished. Oxford and Cambridge are still considered ivy-festooned havens of academic excellence, and not bought-and-paid-for finishing schools for academically mediocre plutocrats.
A handily supportive media means many voters still trust and respect the plutocrats, in spite of the evidence that they're essentially just self-serving wasters, and not too bright at that.
It's too late to return to an aristocratic system, because we already have one. So, by all accounts, does the US - although both are camouflaged by an expediently deceitful narrative of tough self-made meritocracy which is wholly dishonest.
The problem isn't so much that it is frowned up or declared evil, but it's that we have somehow built the worst of both worlds: we are most definitely not a "privilege-free" meritocracy, but we like to pretend that we are. The British aristocracy gave their kids all the advantages they could, too, but at least everyone knew that system was unfair and the concept of "noblesse oblige" came out of that knowledge. We've replaced noblesse oblige with "I got all my success through my own brilliance so screw your lazy ass."
I'm not suggesting we return to an aristocratic system, but I am suggesting we fully acknowledge the role of unfair advantage, and luck, in anyone's success, in addition to their own skill and hard work.
One of the things I found most interesting about the current scandal is that one of the parents paid over a million dollars to commit this fraud. With numbers that big you have to wonder why they just didn't give a donation that large - probably would have had a similar effect. I think one main reason is that a donation would make everyone say "Oh, well your kid got in because of your huge donation." (See Jared Kushner). Committing the fraud allows the fiction that it was just skill and hard work that was the reason for the acceptance to continue.