https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/09/meritocracys-miserable-winners/594760/
Not surprised at the burnout problem. But I would argue that this opining "NewDealism" is misplaced, even if the author notes it's not a matter of government redistribution. It's significantly part of the "Dire Problem." In super simplified terms, you actually can't teach coal miners to code. At the other end, there's only so many chairs. Speaking only for the US, all immigration being halted would be a partial fix. Stop introducing an ever increasing number of contestants for jobs. What is left out of all of these analyses is immigration. The New Deal worked in accordance with a low immigration atmosphere (maybe it was just the immigration reduction).
lol that article was disgusting, not surprised that a Daniel Markovits wrote it, not that the average Atlantic story is much better. He describes multiple real problems and then identifies the wrong causes and prescribes exactly the wrong cures.
Meritocracy causes burnout and unhappiness due to over competition? Sure, it takes a lot of effort to make it into a top school *if* you don't come from a legacy family. But right off the bat that's a bullshit assumption. As any studies will show you, Asians and other recent immigrant groups are top of the game in terms of standardized scores, extra-curriculars, etcetc. I believe any study will also show that Asians have the lowest rates of alcohol and drug abuse in America as well. As if every kid busting his ass in Hagwon belongs to the same statistical group as every GWB snorting his way to the Ivies.
The solution, oh-so-simply, is just to force virtually every school in the country to have "half of their students come from families in the bottom two-thirds of the income distribution". Like, it's that easy. Your dad is an average engineer and makes $75k a year and can afford a $150 SAT/ACT study book? Tough luck shithead, you should have been born to a single mother, now due to
mathematical necessity you can only attend full-private diploma mills. It's not as if meritocracy isn't at least half-scam to begin with. The Chinese fucking invented that bullshit hundreds of years ago and they had nothing to show for it beyond a new weapon of social violence to reinforce a totally stagnant nepotistic society. But he names exactly no other criteria by which to admit kids beyond his incredibly shitty income quota.
And never mind that nowhere in the article does he attempt to define the actual value of an elite college. Is it the case that only the absolute best colleges in the world have decent enough professors to teach new students, and that the only reason to go to school is if it's an Ivy? Or maybe he's more practically minded; he mentions that the top banks and law firms cherry-pick Ivy kids, the problem must therefore be that the obviously-vital service that elite financial power brokers protected by government monopoly provide is one that should be shared: HALFOFTHE1%SHOULDHAVEPARENTSOFTHE99%. As we all know, mega-businesses *never* pick kids for their
political connections alone, it's not as simple as Ivies simply being over-represented in legacy kids, oh no not at all.
This is just more Jewish propaganda to remove as many goyim as possible from the bosom of the political elite. I really really really really really hope that affirmative action lawsuit by Asians against the Jewish-run neo-Bolshevik Ivy university cabal is successful and expels as many of these jaundiced social creditors out of their temples as possible. In practice it will probably just drop the white enrollment at Ivies to record lows, but hey, that's their fault too.
