Is it really? Think about the often used phrase in regards to subjects like this: 'equality of opportunity' vs. 'equality of outcome' think of all it would take in America to come close to equality of opportunity: you would need vast levels of education and housing reform at the minimum. That reform would no doubt 'disadvantage' those who have benefited from the discrimination and lack of access that others have dealt with. Fundamentally it looks like an institution like Harvard taking into account this context when determining admissions. This is beyond the individuals who may or may not participate in the discrimination itself because the outcome of that discrimination is everywhere now, no one can escape it.
There's no way that you can form a tally from the sum total of a person's entire lineage in order to equalize them according to their ancestors struggles. Attempts to do this seem mostly to act as a laundering scheme for financial privilege. Now all someone from a wealthy family needs to do to justify their admission to elite institutions is to find some great great grandparent who plausibly suffered a systemic injustice.
I see the good intentions here, but I get the impression that well meaning rule oriented people are being used to further the very injustices they mean to solve.
Now all someone from a wealthy family needs to do to justify their admission to elite institutions is to find some great great grandparent who plausibly suffered a systemic injustice.
Such as being 1/1024 Native American, that technique is known to work at Harvard
> There's no way that you can form a tally from the sum total of a person's entire lineage in order to equalize them according to their ancestors struggles.
Inherited family wealth nominally does this. There wouldn't be a need for reparations after a generation or two of a 100% inheritance tax.
