Nepotism isn't a modern phenomenon, it has existed from ancient society to this modern society. It's natural for family members who find themselves in situations to help others to always prioritize family. This has existed in monarchies, political dynasties and in the modern society. They will always give a favor to family members. For most of them, they believe that the family is trustworthy and loyal, and rely on them to fill positions rather than a stranger.
It's very natural for humans to support family and a close friends more than strangers and this explains why nepotism is normal and common in our society, although this doesn't make it right or ethical.
The instinct of helping friends and family is natural and human. It's natural to want to love and connect with those we love to give opportunities. We often recommend friends and family when we are opportunities and that's totally human.
Nepotism is practiced in employment, promotion, contracts, scholarships and many other opportunities and that's normal. It only becomes an issue to me when family or friends don't merit such a position or favour, when it's done at a public opportunity and using influence or power to create unfair advantages. I understand we love our family, but it's important to also know where to draw the line.
Practicing nepotism isn't wrong, most times it depends on the setting. Let's consider a private business and a public institution. In a privately owned business or establishment, the owner has the freedom to employ whosoever he pleases to employ, a privately owned opportunity or scholarship. They still have that right to give it to whosoever they please to give without being questioned or interrogated about qualifications, but when it's an opportunity that serves the public interest, it's right to give such opportunities based on merit and not practice nepotism, the line should be drawn. An opportunity open to the public shouldn't be given to just family, a position that's based on merit shouldn't be given to family or friends that doesn't merit such opportunities.
Opportunities like jobs, scholarships and promotion that are not privately owned should be based on qualifications and merit. It's very understanding that people want the best for their families and friends, but they should know when to draw the line and do what's right.
Employing relatives isn't inherently a problem in this situation. If they are competent, accountable, and merit the opportunity to meet the same standards as everyone else, then they can be given too.
Manipulating the recruitment process just to employ family members who aren't qualified is bad, because it lowers the morale of qualified candidates, makes the environment seem unfair and unjust to others. This is the only reason I agree that nepotism should be criminalized.
When a deserving candidate is meant to lose an opportunity, the recruitment process is manipulated to favour family and friends who are undeserving. This is the reason why most people are unemployed in our society, regardless of their qualifications and qualities.
When nepotism attracts the abuse of public offices, misuse of public resources and opportunities, corruption in a public system, it shouldn't be considered or treated as loyalty to family, but a misuse or violation of public trust.
I believe society can preserve the natural human desire to support and help family and loved ones, without overriding fairness. Certain opportunities, especially public opportunities, should be earned through merit, competence, and integrity. Loved ones can still receive guidance, encouragement, and introductions, but they should still meet the same standards expected of everyone else.
