A user who introduced himself as the operator of a delivery agency posted a post and a recorded tape on an online community on February 2^nd, which shocked many people. The delivery driver of the user’s company delivered to a private educational institute the day before, and a lecturer, who was annoyed due to the delivery, made a personal attack on the driver, saying, "Delivering is the only thing you can do because you are bad at studying." The incident, which many have criticized, makes us think about the meritocracy of Korean society. There are probably not many people who are free from such a way of thinking, which only judges others by their "ability." Since Michael Sandel published "The Tyranny of Merit" in December last year, which points out the problems of meritocracy, discussions on the ideology of meritocracy have heated up. It is time to think about whether our society's meritocracy is fair.

           Meritocracy is the idea that when everyone is given equal opportunities, individuals are rewarded with the utmost ability. It seems fair that individuals are rewarded based on his or her ability, not on natural status or luck. However, the biggest problem with meritocracy is that there is no equality of conditions. The College Scholastic Ability Test is often considered a fair system. But students who have been supported by wealthy families and prepared for the test with high-priced private education start with more advantages. They have the upper hand in terms of securing competitiveness to enter top-ranked universities than those who did not have the same upbringing. In other words, opportunities are not given equally to everyone. Under these conditions, Michael Sandel said successful people forget the good environment or luck that enabled them to succeed and believe that they succeeded only because of their abilities. British political philosopher Michael Young, who first used the term "meritocracy," further warned that it could be abused as a basis for winners to exclude and insult losers. Just like the lecturer and delivery driver mentioned above. On the other hand, unsuccessful people blame themselves for their lack of ability. Second, meritocracy intensifies inequality and polarization. Wealth and power accumulated through ability are inherited and form a new privileged class, and such accumulated power continues to monopolize wealth and status. Statistics show that college students who do not receive need-based aid from the state due to their parents' high income are mainly at top universities in Seoul. Park Chan-dae, a member of the National Assembly's Education Committee who released the statistics, explained, "The fact that there are primarily students from high-income families in top universities in Seoul means that university became a means of solidifying the social hierarchy, not as a means of overcoming the gap." Meritocracy is far from the democracy we are aiming for. If a small number of elites monopolize policy-making rights due to the principle that competent people should do politics, citizens are gradually alienated from the political process and public discourse gradually fades.

Michael Sandel suggested "restoring the sanctity of the profession" as the first solution to overcome the problems of meritocracy. It means that a social atmosphere should be created where most citizens who contribute to society are esteemed. It is said that if garbage cleaners on the street disappear, a disease will break out. The role of a garbage cleaner or a doctor who cures disease is therefore equally important, so all labor is dignified. In modern society, we cannot deny the idea of meritocracy itself. However, meritocracy has a pitfall on the premise of equal opportunity, and it would be hard to expect an equal society without overcoming it.