The great irony is that many people trumpeting the value of meritocracy are otherwise very well-acquainted with Hayekian arguments and public choice.
Having a true meritocracy is impossible if you take public choice and Hayek seriously. We don't have all the knowledge necessary to set up a truly objective and universal system for sifting the chaft from the wheat, or even an idea of how to frame that knowledge. And even if we did have that ability, the people and institutions that the meritocracy is embedded in would twist that meritocracy and pervert its original aims.
It's obvious when stated, but if you suggest that patriarchy or white supremacy might be undermining some imagined meritocracy, you're some kind of bitter idiot who is just looking for reason to complain.
Having a true meritocracy is impossible if you take public choice and Hayek seriously. We don't have all the knowledge necessary to set up a truly objective and universal system for sifting the chaft from the wheat, or even an idea of how to frame that knowledge. And even if we did have that ability, the people and institutions that the meritocracy is embedded in would twist that meritocracy and pervert its original aims.
It's obvious when stated, but if you suggest that patriarchy or white supremacy might be undermining some imagined meritocracy, you're some kind of bitter idiot who is just looking for reason to complain.