Perhaps I can summarize what I think are her real points:
The old system was an aristocracy, where people were born into positions at the top of society, and this was obvious unfair. However, this system was not stable.
The new system is (supposedly) a meritocracy, where people have to work towards high positions in society. This system is not obviously unfair. But it is stable, because parents tend to instill the qualities required to succeed in their children.
Her point was that what these two systems have in common is that who your parents were is a good predictor of where you will end up.
The old system was an aristocracy, where people were born into positions at the top of society, and this was obvious unfair. However, this system was not stable.
The new system is (supposedly) a meritocracy, where people have to work towards high positions in society. This system is not obviously unfair. But it is stable, because parents tend to instill the qualities required to succeed in their children.
Her point was that what these two systems have in common is that who your parents were is a good predictor of where you will end up.