Re:The 'glass floor' keeps the children of the rich at the top
by chongli on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @02:01PM
(#21261596)
The way I see it, proponents and opponents of meritocracy are arguing for/against different things.
Proponents of meritocracy see it as an ideal to strive for based on the idea that the most competent people should fill the most important roles. It's about trying to make society better through competence.
Opponents of meritocracy see it as a cover for privilege. They see people who are unfairly privileged using meritocracy as an excuse to reward themselves for their privilege.
This is how I would characterize the debate, anyway. It's hard to say whether anyone is arguing that only incompetent people should fill important roles. Nor do I see anyone trying to claim privilege doesn't exist at all, that everyone starts from an equal blank slate.
Ultimately, I don't see any way of breaking this impasse. At least not unless we succeed in creating a post-scarcity society where rewards for filling important roles are at best symbolic and everyone has all their needs met, regardless of ability.
Proponents of meritocracy see it as an ideal to strive for based on the idea that the most competent people should fill the most important roles. It's about trying to make society better through competence.
Opponents of meritocracy see it as a cover for privilege. They see people who are unfairly privileged using meritocracy as an excuse to reward themselves for their privilege.
This is how I would characterize the debate, anyway. It's hard to say whether anyone is arguing that only incompetent people should fill important roles. Nor do I see anyone trying to claim privilege doesn't exist at all, that everyone starts from an equal blank slate.
Ultimately, I don't see any way of breaking this impasse. At least not unless we succeed in creating a post-scarcity society where rewards for filling important roles are at best symbolic and everyone has all their needs met, regardless of ability.