Ever since the comedy outfit “Bizonto” were held,there has been a discussion on how certain ethnic regions got a huge chunk of the National cake,in a silly bid to defend themselves, folks have argued that these people earned their place on merit and therefore should not be judged.
Thence, let us dwelve into Meritocracy; what are the flaws,does it purely lie on a fair share of everything in a perfect world? We assume that Meritocracy is supposed to address the aristocratic tendencies and unfair distribution of resources.
Suffice to say,there is the accident of birth, where one doesn’t choose his parents and is bred into the privilege or destitution. In essence, it’s supposed to give a fair chance to even a person with no hope as long as they have the right training and qualifications, Education is said to be the equaliser to the inequalities in society but again those who can afford ivy colleges and universities are a select few and this is seen from the ethnic lense.Those that afford to have the capital or maintain a certain cash flow partly fall on one side of ethnography so the argument that merit propelled certain folks is wrong.
Merit is bred and this is seen from the accident of birth so the whole concept is flawed. Perhaps,we can argue, how did we get here. Merit was bred in a certain ethnicity and we are reaping from the fruits of flawed meritocracy.
Anyone who makes the merit argument is simply clothing the unfair chance at life as a way of pursuing life goals while ignoring the fact that our forefathers didn’t fight for this.