How the Ivy League Broke America

[elleng]

The meritocracy isn’t working. We need something new.

'Vvery coherent society has a social ideal—an image of what the superior person looks like. In America, from the late 19th century until sometime in the 1950s, the superior person was the Well-Bred Man. Such a man was born into one of the old WASP families that dominated the elite social circles on Fifth Avenue, in New York City; the Main Line, outside Philadelphia; Beacon Hill, in Boston. He was molded at a prep school like Groton or Choate, and came of age at Harvard, Yale, or Princeton. In those days, you didn’t have to be brilliant or hardworking to get into Harvard, but it really helped if you were “clubbable”—good-looking, athletic, graceful, casually elegant, Episcopalian, and white. It really helped, too, if your dad had gone there. . .

People living according to this social ideal valued not academic accomplishment but refined manners, prudent judgment, and the habit of command. This was the age of social privilege. And then a small group of college administrators decided to blow it all up. The most important of them was James Conant, the president of Harvard from 1933 to 1953. Conant looked around and concluded that American democracy was being undermined by a “hereditary aristocracy of wealth.”>>>

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/12/meritocracy-college-admissions-social-economic-segregation/680392/

[harumph]

1. Uh, that's because it really isn't a "meritocracy."

There's somewhat of a meritocracy as you descend the income and power scale or by contrast, if you're considering
certain particularly stellar individuals (doctors, scientists, writers, etc.,) at the very top of their field. But in the skills
at the very upper end of management and board rooms - GMAFB. The willingness to take a hit for those
directly above you is a primary criteria rather than expertise or ethics.