Yet "capitalism" is actually the best way to limit that power of powerful people and make status pretty closely linked with ability.
In every other attempt at forming different societies (from feudalism to capitalism) it's generally the ones good at power games that win, not the ones with the actual best abilites.
It is said of Stalin he was the best power game player ever born, he was equalled by no one in power accumulation games.
The possible exception to this is small tribes, where it was usually the people who added the most to a tribe that got power (if you were a power game player two friends could basically topple you).
But we're not going back to tribal life, so there we go. Capitalism is still the best of all the bad systems we have.
Is status really linked to ability? Was SBF an anomaly, or just might it have been the case that he benefitted from obvious unearned social capital, like his Stanford professor parents? And that he, like plenty of others, told a story about “doing good by doing well” that so many wealthy people love to hear?
In every other attempt at forming different societies (from feudalism to capitalism) it's generally the ones good at power games that win, not the ones with the actual best abilites.
It is said of Stalin he was the best power game player ever born, he was equalled by no one in power accumulation games.
The possible exception to this is small tribes, where it was usually the people who added the most to a tribe that got power (if you were a power game player two friends could basically topple you).
But we're not going back to tribal life, so there we go. Capitalism is still the best of all the bad systems we have.