- Wikimedia Commons
- Evan Mandery
Op-ed columns are written to rock our world. The authors clearly believe they’re delivering insights that—if properly attended to—will open the eyes of all decent people and change the course of America. But as having one’s eyes opened half a dozen times a day is taxing, it’s always a pleasure to come across an op-ed column that is completely unpersuasive. I’m not as smart as most of these pundits, you think, but at least I’m not as dumb as he is.
Reading a completely unpersuasive op-ed column, one has the bracing sensation of being the first person to consider the points the author is making, as the author clearly hasn’t given them any thought himself. Making his case, Mandery tells us that the advantage of legacy has been found “to be worth the equivalent of 160 additional points on an applicant’s SAT, nearly as much as being a star athlete or African-American or Hispanic.” Further making his case, he accuses legacy of further contaminating “a system where the deck is stacked at every level in favor of rich, white students.”
