In the article from La Nacion, historian Eliza Filby introduces the provocative idea of 'herenciocracia' (inherocracy) in her bestselling book, positing that younger generations have a greater chance of acquiring housing based on their loyalty to their parents rather than their bosses. This reflects a societal shift where, in the absence of effective government support and a malfunctioning market, parents are increasingly seen as the safety net for their children, impacting their opportunities and pathways to adulthood.

Filby argues that inherocracy defines a society where success is less about individual merit—what one earns or learns—and more about access to parental resources, which she views as instrumental for the current generation’s success. This stands in stark contrast to the traditional notion of meritocracy, where individual effort and self-made success are championed as the primary means to achieve goals. Instead, Filby points out the fallacy of claiming that anyone can attain success purely through hard work without the influence of their family's financial and social standing.

The implications of this discussion are significant, suggesting a need to reassess societal structures and values surrounding success, opportunity, and family. As the economic landscape continues to evolve, the concept of inherocracy raises critical questions about equity and the future of socio-economic mobility, prompting a re-evaluation of how society defines and supports its next generation’s aspirations.