Let's play it forward where in some alternate reality we were able to reset the current "inequity" and give lots more people from non-elite backgrounds a good shot at proving their capabilities. Or even have that as an ongoing policy in a very fair way. ("Fair" being the problematic word which will constantly be debated.)
Do you imagine that a new elite of some new type of class would not emerge? Would that new elite be more acceptable?
Is the problem that we just don't like our current kind of elite? That it doesn't provide for "fair" resetting of the system periodically? (or within each generation) Does it unfairly give children of the elite access to things they wouldn't otherwise be qualified for, compared to some other better system? What is that system? Some kind of setup where every kid gets to have equal access to showing his/her value -- yet you don't like having tests to do that?
I am not against the idea of an elite class. There will always emerge people who succeed and pass on their success. The question is, what is the outcome we're trying to achieve?
Since elite classes are probably inevitable without significantly reengineering the human condition, we at least want elite social structures that...
1. Do not stifle the well-being of lower classes
2. Allow upwards mobility into the elite class from lower classes
Today's elite caste fails both criteria: the current elites have architected the US, if not the world, to the detriment of the working class. Upwards mobility is very low - which drives resentment and distrust. The elite tends to select for its children moreso than any hypothetical notion of "merit", which gives the feeling that they are less "the best our country has to offer" and more "space aliens that happen to run everything".
would a new elite emerge? Probably, if there are certain traits which tend to predict success in a given endeavor, the new elite would tend to have those traits.
But one would hope for an elite rather like the Navy SEALs, where selection is based on the ability to handle difficult conditions, not one where selection is based on being born to the right family.
Yes, there is evidence that intelligence is at least partially hereditary, so if we assume intelligence is correlated with academic success, one would expect children of academic successes to have a slightly higher chance of academic success. Similarly, if we assume that height is correlated with success in basketball, since height is partially genetic we should expect children of basketball successes to have a slightly higher chance of success in basketball.
Still, I think an elite based on "fair" selection in the form of some set of hard-to-game test (for an unfeasible example, give everyone who wants to apply to a PhD program a 3-6 month mini-research internship, select the best ones and ignore all other criteria) would create a society where the people in charge tend to make better decisions/increase the global utility function more/produce better research in the case of academia than one where it's just rich kids aping their parents.
Do you imagine that a new elite of some new type of class would not emerge? Would that new elite be more acceptable?
Is the problem that we just don't like our current kind of elite? That it doesn't provide for "fair" resetting of the system periodically? (or within each generation) Does it unfairly give children of the elite access to things they wouldn't otherwise be qualified for, compared to some other better system? What is that system? Some kind of setup where every kid gets to have equal access to showing his/her value -- yet you don't like having tests to do that?
I am not against the idea of an elite class. There will always emerge people who succeed and pass on their success. The question is, what is the outcome we're trying to achieve?