I was greatly dismayed by the cynicism expressed by John Spritzler’s May 1 letter, “ ‘You can’t question a meritocrary’? Oh, yes you can.’’ It seems that Spritzler’s idea of a “meritocracy’’ is something like a God’s-eye weighing of our innate merits, the goodness of our hearts, and our life situation.

He suggests that a true meritocracy would ask why kids did poorly on tests, how wealthy were their parents, and whether they refused to try their best, or to study hard, because they humbly chose not to show off how smart they were, or wished to show “solidarity’’ with their peers.

Or perhaps, as Spritzler suggests, the kids cynically believed that the promises of hard work and good grades were merely lies told by the rich and powerful?

The liberal excuse factory never runs out of rush orders.

I don’t deny that it’s very hard in this country for poor kids to get a good education or to climb up out of poverty, but arguments such as Spritzler’s, which knock Boston Latin, one of the city’s few escape hatches for the city’s disadvantaged kids, make it much harder.

Michael Christian

Haverhill