A letter sent to the editor of El País, published on November 14, 2026, presents a direct critique of politician Feijóo's remarks on meritocracy.
In the letter, a reader highlights how Feijóo expresses ideas about meritocracy in real life, specifically mentioning daily realities such as gender discrimination and citing the film 'The Beloved' as an example. However, the author points out that if the government has municipal land and municipal architects, it does not build public housing for citizens.
Critics political practice
The letter underscores a contradiction between Feijóo's political theories—promoting a model based on individual merits—and his actual actions. The reader asks: why, if technical and territorial resources are available, is there no construction of public housing?
No specific numbers of suspended or launched projects are mentioned, nor are figures provided regarding urban land availability or current status of municipal plans. The criticism limits itself to pointing out the absence of concrete action that supports theoretical claims.
The context of meritocracy
Feijóo has defended in multiple occasions a vision of society based on personal merits rather than favors or privileges. In his public statements, he has consistently emphasized that everyone should have access to success through individual effort.
However, the email reader argues that this stance becomes problematic when there are no effective policies to ensure adequate housing, especially in urban contexts where resources are available but not being utilized.
Lack of evidence on construction efforts
The original text does not include official data on public housing projects, nor information about progress or suspensions. The absence of specific figures or dates limits the depth of analytical insight available.
It also does not specify which municipal authorities are involved, the current state of urban land, or whether approved plans exist for constructing collective housing. Therefore, the criticism remains within the realm of a general observation and is not supported by detailed verifiable facts.
The reader does not claim that Feijóo has lied, nor that his statements are false; they simply point out a gap between what is said and what is actually done. The letter does not call for additional verification, but rather raises an ethical question: What does it mean to speak of meritocracy when resources are available yet unused?