Hmm, no it's a good thing the WSJ mentioned this in passing. When merit is eroded bad things happen, when that approach becomes societal the society itself is damaged. It seems to be something every multi racial/ethnic/cultural society attempts at some point, from all my reading on the subject the best case scenario for anywhere that attempts this stuff (informal and formal quotas in employment etc) is stagnation and polarisation. The worst case scenarios lead to the darkest parts of human history.
Seeing as the Nazis are in the UK political news, it's worth remembering what the actual arguments made in 1930s Germany were. The angle Lineker takes, that Jews were a scapegoated minority blamed for all manner of problems Germany was facing none of which had anything to do with them, is one part of it. The other component, which is basically never mentioned in the West, is the Nazi claim that Jews were 'over represented' in certain white collar professions (law, medicine, etc) and these professions should reflect the demographics of Germany (which often meant Jews losing their careers). In other words it's a literal 1930s Nazi claim to say that the demographics of a country should guide hiring practice in each individual business (rather than the entire economy simply being left to reflect who is working), when this is done across a society the market distortion becomes significant and everyone ends up worse off.
This isn't focused on in the West, because a lot of elites think it's correct. They are fighting for elite positions to reflect the demographics of their country. To do this they appeal to fairness and equality, but the argument is really no different to those made elsewhere.
Seeing as Rwanda gets mentioned in UK politics now, it provides another example. Decades before the genocide areas controlled by government (university places, civil service jobs, etc) had been made to reflect the demographics of the country, which in practice meant excluding Tutsis (who were/are a small minority).
It's an evil idea that's the opposite of MLK's dream, it goes unchallenged because it's easier to ignore. Mentioning it potentially means being called racist, then you lose your job etc, and it's the orthodox view so will not change anyway. I hardly think genocide is likely in the West, but it does seem to me that if elite positions are optimised for capturing a wide spread of identities (and that's what is now happening), then merit is going to be undermined and there'll be poorer outcomes than otherwise would've been the case. If it continues to go unchallenged then the logic of the argument means it'll be applied further down the food chain eventually (probably once whites become a minority).
