https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SICa0tWHzJQ&feature=youtu.be
“The year was 2081, and finally everyone was equal….”

As has been pointed out, you would have to be omniscient and have perfect knowledge of everyone’s entire life and circumstances to make the Solomonic judgement as to who should get how many “adversity points.”
* * *
Matt. 7
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

John 7
24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

Romans 14
13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.

As has been pointed out, you would have to be omniscient and have perfect knowledge of everyone’s entire life and circumstances to make the Solomonic judgement as to who should get how many “adversity points.”

Who makes this call anyway, who will be assigning these adversity points, and what are their qualifications for making these decisions?

To take just one example, what about the kid who comes from a wealthy family and neighborhood, but whose parents are neglectful and abusive alcoholics, who belittle him and beat him up, and are no help at all, but a hindrance to his ability to learn and do well in school?

Should this student be given fewer points just because of outward circumstance, of his parent’s income and where he lives, of his “privilege”?

What about the kid from the wrong side of the tracks, whose low income parents are loving and supportive and, as a result, he is an excellent student.

Should his score be boosted even higher just because of his parent’s low income and the neighborhood he happens to live in, of his outward lack of “privilege”?

What about kids from a school which has a generally bad track record, antiquated textbooks, and limited equipment–computers, say–but which also has a couple of outstanding teachers, who regularly turn out very well educated students, who are far above average.

Does each individual student from this school get more or less points?

Apparently, listening to the head of the College Board and architect of this cockamamie social engineering scheme, everyone from the same sub-standard school would get the same number of points.

Moreover, does anyone really think it is a good idea to set up students–if they are not well prepared, may not have innate talent, and who are not highly motivated–for failure, by inflating/augmenting their SAT scores so that they can gain admission to very competitive schools that they would not otherwise be able to gain admission to, and where they will likely fail?

And why make these adversity point augmentations secret, and only visible to the schools themselves, and not to the students or their parents?

Is this scheme really the best thing for these students?

What a bad idea.

Moreover, what a way to sabotage each one of these students, our country, economy, and society, by making it harder for the truly talented–regardless of their background, race, income level, or home address–to succeed–to rise to the top–on their own merit and moreover, at the same time, to likely sabotage the less motivated and talented by increasing their chances of failure in college, and by saddling them with the suspicion that, as recipients of such an “adversity score” augmentation, they are not really able to cut it.

It would seem far more beneficial to all potential college students if–as used to often happen in the bad “old days”–a very candid assessment were made of their levels of knowledge, skill, and ability, and, based on their results, they were to be directed down a path that they would likely succeed in, be happy with and, not coincidentally, make a good living at, whether it was college, or some other form of education, say, a trade, a technical school, or on the job training.

Not everyone has to go to college.

There are a lot of supposedly “less glamorous” and “dirty” but often high paying jobs that keep this country running, and jobs in these fields are reportedly just begging for people to fill them.

https://humanevents.com/2019/05/13/roger-scruton-get-rid-of-universities-altogether/

LOL, Urban Dictionary says “Actually, “Cor Blimey!” is derrived [sic] from the middle-aged [siccer] expression “God, Blind Me!”, used when someone saw something they shouldnt have,” which seems very appropriate for the condition of Great Britain today.
Wiktionary concurs, with slightly better grammar.

Fed research funding should be removed from Harvard, no students should be getting Fed supported loans.

Universities need to have some quota, like 20%, of conservative pro-life professors. This is not a popular proposal, and is unlikely to get implemented, yet it would help save the universities.

It’s going to get worse before it gets better.

“Adjusting” the SATs by the test givers is terrible — any such adjustment should be done by the colleges. It’s very racist; yet the Democrats are good at finding some plausible excuse to be racist & tribalist.

Creating and supporting tribes is what the Dem “identity politics” is all about. Throughout history, tribal warfare has been the norm. The prior American Dream included a “melting pot” to make all US citizens American, German- or English-American, Black or White or Brown or Yellow-American, but “American” first. If some other tribe comes before American in priority, America gets into trouble.

Voluntary black segregation at elite colleges, supported by the racist administrators, is a clear expression against melting pot integration. Instead of judging people by their character, these official organizations will judge people based on some other tribal identity. It’s so sad.

That is what personal statements and essays are supposed to do, plus, of course, interviews. The imitation of objectivity is important to race hustlers.

The gates of intimidation have been thrown open.

And the Red Guards—those passionate guardians of virtue—have been let loose across the land.

(Which is absolutely fine as long as they can confine their virtuous enthusiasms to the right people…and groups. IF….)