[fintstone]

Originally Posted by Shaun @ Tru6

OK, that doesn't really mean anything and the argument is very complex, one example, not even a great one, isn't meaningful to the discussion. The problem is your own term, "qualified," which is subjective. So here we are. Asians sued Harvard over their implementation of racist policies, I don't recall how that turned out. But I do think there is a need for a school(s) that will only accept the academically best and brightest. Not everyone needs to be well-rounded.

But yes, my dream in life is to create a meritocracy. I only have 100 years left to do it, not looking good unless something happens in my 90s.

Anyway, a meritocracy requires a level playing field, otherwise there's no baseline to assess basis of ability. I'm sure you thought of that but were distracted by some crows flying away outside. So clearly a meritocracy is untenable at best with systemic racism in place.

It was the DOJ suing Yale because of clear evidence that Yale intentionally did not admit better qualified Asians solely due to the fact that they were Asian. The Biden DOJ just dropped suit (at the Supreme Court) without justification (alleging discrimination against white and Asian applicants). One can only hope the court still makes a decision.

While some may advantages...anything from being taller or brighter or growing up in a better school district, in the past, we strove to reduce subjectivity with objective measure. That is no longer the case..so we are going backwards...practicing racism using racism as an excuse.