Meritocracy must be tempered with equality

I wish to address certain points in the letter “Beware overcompensating in rush to recognise less academically inclined” (Jan 8).

Meritocracy is a value, not a system in which we exist. However, meritocracy becomes harder to adhere to with increased societal stratification.

Although it was ideal in post-independence Singapore and early United States, economic progress left some people behind as others benefited. These differing accumulated resources can then be used to perpetuate inequality through education.

A well-known Singaporean feature is tuition. Is one really more capable if one goes to four tuition classes and does better than another who cannot afford tuition and falls behind?

The writer mentions that meritocracy is a harsh reality in which many civilisations have thrived. Unfortunately, this is often not the case. Establishing the imperial examinations in the Han Dynasty did not prevent war, corruption and political manoeuvring.

It sustained such instability because it intrinsically gave the most “intelligent” the right to rule as they saw fit. More often than not, they cared only for themselves.

Meritocratic progression under the British and Americans is racialised too, depriving various ethnic groups of their deserved progress.

The writer perhaps feels a tinge of reverse discrimination. However, this fear is misplaced. If one is capable, one need not worry about the state actively assisting those who may have been left behind in society’s progress.

We should build compassion for the less fortunate and greater self-awareness that our place in society is today a result of a multitude of factors, such as our parents’ resources, and not solely our own ability.

So, while maintaining the spirit of meritocracy, by encouraging competition and reward for ability, we must always temper it with equality. The state should actively support those who are hungry to succeed, but are lagging simply because of economic factors.