The importance of "aspiration" over equality both focuses on individual success, and in turn attributes failure to individuals, rather than a system designed to promote a few, transferring wealth to the "aspirational" at the expense of many, many others. Rather than admit that life chances, and the lack thereof, stifle ambition and outright block financial and professional achievements for poorer citizens, a society that promotes "aspiration" must rely on outliers. Interviews with the newly rich from humble and disadvantaged beginnings reveal a tendency not to rail against the injustices systemic inequality perpetuates, but instead to turn inward, focussing on individual achievement as proof that these barriers do not exist for those who pull themseles up by their bootstraps.
the sheryl sandberg approach is to take an unfair and inefficient system and figure out how a few people can game it, rather than to question why the fuck we're using this system in the first place