It will take some considerable time for this US Supreme Court decision to work through American society. It will completely unremarkable in 5 years, but until then there will be world class histrionics because, as you note, the race baiting industry will not go quietly.
It is worth noting that President Donald J Trump is responsible for the current makeup of this current Supreme Court. It will be his lasting legacy that he appointed good Justices who focused solely on the law and the Constitution.
Roberts is a RINO. He doesn't like to move the court radically. Given the history that he laid out in his opinion, this is NOT a radical move by the court and evolutionary.
If you think about it, a lot of the rancor in this country today is factions of people worrying about others cheating or using nefarious methods to gain leverage or advantage. The need for fairness is an embedded almost innate human trait (among non-psychopaths), and it's absolutely necessary for civilization to advance and live in peace in the long run.
Name any society/country in the past that succeeded when it used unfair principles in governance, picking winners and losers based on "what" they were versus "who" they were? The U.S. succeeded precisely because it abandoned these thousand-year old traits and gave everyone a fresh start. That's why the Europeans left - nobility and peasantry and the inability to escape your station -- the use of arbitrary or immutable characteristics to determine outcome, rather than *behavior*.
Prior to today's decision, we were heading closer and closer to this same reality. Even if you agree with it, it ultimately doesn't work.
Life is hard enough, and people get disgusted quite quickly when they see obvious advantages bestowed on others simply because of power. In the long run, it never works, as the structures are overthrown.
In that sense, the SC did all of us a huge favor here. If you think that our current system is "unfair" then attack the root causes, don't band aid it with other immutable characteristics that exclude people for arbitrary reasons.
• The colleges will work their magic to practically undo the decision. See: California and Michigan
• An even larger improvement to fairness would be to eliminate legacy admissions.
• Elite schools are a cartel. The US population is over 50% larger than in 1980. Yet the list hasn't grown from the 'top 20' to the 'top 30' nor have the old top 20 expanded their enrollment by 50%
• A lot of the schools issue lies in the business world. Why do so many people focus on the 'elite' schools when there are plenty of non-elite capable people? Cronyism is easy, sloppy, and lazy.
• Lack of spots and the cronyism issue drives lots of upper-middle class parents crazy. This pressure wasn't there in the 1980s (at least) even at 'elite' high schools. Here's Parker's students' choices for this next year. Not very many quirky, smaller liberal arts colleges that one might have seen in older times. https://fwparker.myschoolapp.com/ftpimages/1048/download/download_3561742.pdf
Colleges (and other institutions) will work to try and undo the decision; but now plaintiffs have a case to cite to try and correct that decision.
I agree on the cartel and cronyism. Businesses de facto support it in their hiring practices. Institutions support it in who they give prestige/honor/money to.
Surprised the Parker thing is published!! I count 4 Ivies; but the rest of the schools are all elite. When my kids were at Parker, the college counseling office did a tremendous job matching kids to schools. Sometimes kids don't fit, even if they could get in.
Lab is largest of the three. Latin second, Parker third. My kids had under 90 in their graduating classes at FWP. I met a lot of great people there even though I disagreed with them politically
It will take some considerable time for this US Supreme Court decision to work through American society. It will completely unremarkable in 5 years, but until then there will be world class histrionics because, as you note, the race baiting industry will not go quietly.
It is worth noting that President Donald J Trump is responsible for the current makeup of this current Supreme Court. It will be his lasting legacy that he appointed good Justices who focused solely on the law and the Constitution.
JLM
www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com
Justices identified by long time conservative and non-populist Leonard Leo. Opinion written by John Roberts, notorious RINO.
Roberts is a RINO. He doesn't like to move the court radically. Given the history that he laid out in his opinion, this is NOT a radical move by the court and evolutionary.
If you think about it, a lot of the rancor in this country today is factions of people worrying about others cheating or using nefarious methods to gain leverage or advantage. The need for fairness is an embedded almost innate human trait (among non-psychopaths), and it's absolutely necessary for civilization to advance and live in peace in the long run.
Name any society/country in the past that succeeded when it used unfair principles in governance, picking winners and losers based on "what" they were versus "who" they were? The U.S. succeeded precisely because it abandoned these thousand-year old traits and gave everyone a fresh start. That's why the Europeans left - nobility and peasantry and the inability to escape your station -- the use of arbitrary or immutable characteristics to determine outcome, rather than *behavior*.
Prior to today's decision, we were heading closer and closer to this same reality. Even if you agree with it, it ultimately doesn't work.
Life is hard enough, and people get disgusted quite quickly when they see obvious advantages bestowed on others simply because of power. In the long run, it never works, as the structures are overthrown.
In that sense, the SC did all of us a huge favor here. If you think that our current system is "unfair" then attack the root causes, don't band aid it with other immutable characteristics that exclude people for arbitrary reasons.
I'm very glad today.
I agree more with you than you do with yourself. Bravo and well played!
JLM
www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com
100%
13. Pay Rick Singer to get you in via a side door
A few random thoughts:
• Another example of where the political parties are dominated by their activists. Even most Ds are skeptical at least about affirmative action in school admissions. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/04/26/u-s-public-continues-to-view-grades-test-scores-as-top-factors-in-college-admissions/
• O'Connor's '25 year' statement was made in 2003
• The colleges will work their magic to practically undo the decision. See: California and Michigan
• An even larger improvement to fairness would be to eliminate legacy admissions.
• Elite schools are a cartel. The US population is over 50% larger than in 1980. Yet the list hasn't grown from the 'top 20' to the 'top 30' nor have the old top 20 expanded their enrollment by 50%
• A lot of the schools issue lies in the business world. Why do so many people focus on the 'elite' schools when there are plenty of non-elite capable people? Cronyism is easy, sloppy, and lazy.
• Lack of spots and the cronyism issue drives lots of upper-middle class parents crazy. This pressure wasn't there in the 1980s (at least) even at 'elite' high schools. Here's Parker's students' choices for this next year. Not very many quirky, smaller liberal arts colleges that one might have seen in older times. https://fwparker.myschoolapp.com/ftpimages/1048/download/download_3561742.pdf
Colleges (and other institutions) will work to try and undo the decision; but now plaintiffs have a case to cite to try and correct that decision.
I agree on the cartel and cronyism. Businesses de facto support it in their hiring practices. Institutions support it in who they give prestige/honor/money to.
Surprised the Parker thing is published!! I count 4 Ivies; but the rest of the schools are all elite. When my kids were at Parker, the college counseling office did a tremendous job matching kids to schools. Sometimes kids don't fit, even if they could get in.
Here's Latin's. It's 5 years worth of students, so a much larger list. Slightly more diverse. https://www.latinschool.org/academics/college-counseling
Here's Lab's for 4 years. It's by far the most diverse of the 3. https://www.ucls.uchicago.edu/program/high-school/where-u-high-graduates-go
Lab is largest of the three. Latin second, Parker third. My kids had under 90 in their graduating classes at FWP. I met a lot of great people there even though I disagreed with them politically