William Shakespeare

What would john rawl say about meritocracy

Hark! If we muse upon the thoughts of John Rawls, that noble architect of justice, methinks he would take great heed of the principles that govern the land of meritocracy, a realm both lauded and lamented. In his enlightened discourse, Rawls would first raise the veil of ignorance, a shroud most profound, behind which none may divine their station, nor the gifts bestowed upon them by fortune’s fickle hand. Should thine eyes be opened to the meritocratic vision, lo! how oft doth it ensnare the unwary, proclaiming that the fruits of success are but due reaping of labor’s virtuous toil, neglecting how uneven the soil is ploughed, and how much weight the heavy yoke of privilege doth confer upon some while leaving others bereft of even the barest opportunity to ascend the heights of achievement. He would argue, perchance with furrowed brow, that such a scheme, while ostensibly just in its design, veils great inequities that, like shadows at twilight, pervade the fabric of society, leaving many untrodden by the light of advantage. For in this hierarchical order, must we not question the fairness of the game when those who strive beneath burdens of ill fortune and neglect are denied the very arms with which to compete? Thus, Rawls would summon us to ponder the Structure of Society, that it might be reshaped, so that the principles of equality and fairness might reign supreme, and that merit, when spoken of, be not merely the chant of those who rise untrammeled, but rather a melody sung in harmony with the labors and aspirations of all, regardless of birthright or the caprice of fate. In this way, justice, like a river swift and clear, might flow for every soul that walks upon this mortal coil, enriching the ground from whence we spring, and paving a path adorned with hope for generations yet to come.