Unpopular Opinion- Legacy vs AA
I saw this on another thread and was curious what people think. I often see the argument that legacy kids are no more qualified than AA kids, and therefore people should be equally frustrated with them. I wasn't legacy, and I'm not AA- so I hope I have an objective perspective.
I think we can agree people should be judged off what they bring to the firm/school. A connection or a large donation is a tangible improvement to business- Jeff Bezos son working at GS is going to bring in business, the top universities in the world are the best because they have the largest endowments (alumni donate to get children in). AA kids often don't bring as much new to the school/workplace.. new perspectives? Inspiration of someone working hard? Tell me why an affluent African American has had a tougher journey than an inner city Asian kid... (if we are going to do AA can we at least base it off socio-economic class).
"Qualified" is not just what you've done-it's what you bring. You don't get hired for being intelligent, you get hired if you are going to make the place better and more successful. IMO, money and new business will always be more important to an institutions survival and success than artificial diversity- I'm sorry if that is upsetting