>And merit is transferred down the generations. Privilege begets privilege. Etc. This is the issue that we are rightfully trying to counter. Counter that by pr

>And merit is transferred down the generations. Privilege begets privilege. Etc. This is the issue that we are rightfully trying to counter. Counter that by providing less privileged people with more opportunities, not by changing the definitions of merit. It's basically impossible for anyone to become a chess grandmaster without exposure to competitive chess when you're less than 10. This obviously favors the children of the well off, but you can't deny that these children end up being better at chess. The same goes for education in general. If elite preparatory schools didn't offer a better education than public schools, nobody would pay for them. You shouldn't use their doing better on standardized tests as an indictment on standardized tests because they're genuinely better educated. Asians tend to have the highest SAT scores of all races, and they're the least likely to drop out. Black people tend to have the lowest SAT scores, and they're also the most likely to drop out. This is a sign that the SAT is a good metric. Yet, the far left frames this two examples of racism: that both the SAT and colleges themselves are systemically racist. By principle, I actually am in favor of affirmative action, but I'm tired of all the anti-merit rhetoric used to justify it.