> It could be if you insist that it's a meritocracy in the face of all the evidence that it is overwhelmingly biased towards white people
Last time I checked, Asian Americans were the wealthiest racial demographic in the US. Does it follow that meritocracy is even more biased towards Asians than it is towards Whites? Or, perhaps there's more to it than blanket claims that, "it is overwhelmingly biased towards white people."?
This is what is so insidious about accusations of dog-whistling. It's a cheap and effective way of simplifying reality and portraying the target as a straw man.
I wonder if the right will adopt this tactic and start calling things like "diversity initiatives" as a dog-whistling for the exclusion of conservatives.
It could be if you insist that it's a meritocracy in the face of all the evidence that it is overwhelmingly biased towards white people.
(It could equally just be an ignorant statement from a blistering ignorant fool who hasn't done any thinking, mind.)