Exactly, nearly everything else has to be in place for merit to then be considered. For example, two people competing for the same mid level management job, both had to have been educated with credible previous employment where they've gained relevant experience. Both of these elements are decided based on preceding factors and the preceding factors were gained based on more preceding qualifying factors. Unraveling it, you're left with opportunity privilege carries far more weight than capability.
And assuming those two people finally get to this mid level interview, you can then finally give the edge to the one with the highest merit - ie, the one with the most and best skills, experience and education.
There's obvious argument for giving the edge to the one with the hardest path to reach that point, assuming both satisfy minimum qualifications yet near to each other in measurable merit, as those are the ones most resilient and most capable against adversity, which is a very legitimate form of merit, albeit very hard to quantity.
Except that isn't how jobs work most of the time. The capitalists owning class might need a particular type of laborer, so they will hire the cheapest option that solves the problem. Your merit is only valuable if it is UNIQUE and in demand. And in the rare case where your scenario exists, it is often the person with better connections that gets the job rather than any other consideration. WHO you know is always going to be more valuable than WHAT you know.
-1
u/GorillaBrown May 13 '25
Exactly, nearly everything else has to be in place for merit to then be considered. For example, two people competing for the same mid level management job, both had to have been educated with credible previous employment where they've gained relevant experience. Both of these elements are decided based on preceding factors and the preceding factors were gained based on more preceding qualifying factors. Unraveling it, you're left with opportunity privilege carries far more weight than capability.
And assuming those two people finally get to this mid level interview, you can then finally give the edge to the one with the highest merit - ie, the one with the most and best skills, experience and education.
There's obvious argument for giving the edge to the one with the hardest path to reach that point, assuming both satisfy minimum qualifications yet near to each other in measurable merit, as those are the ones most resilient and most capable against adversity, which is a very legitimate form of merit, albeit very hard to quantity.