Racism of course. Since it’s selecting people based on race.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

43% of white students at Harvard are legacies, athletes, or related to staff and 75% of these 43% wouldn't have been admitted on merits.

Around 1/3 of white people at Harvard are there because of effectively white affirmative action.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/study-harvard-finds-43-...

A drive to pick people solely on merits would sound more meritorious if we applied it to white people first. I say this as a white man who believes in theory colorblind meritocracy in an imaginary world where such a thing can actually exist.

This can also apply to antiracism, which as I understand it [1] is policy that attempts to undo structural racism, not policy that is absent of race-conscious treatment. I think this question would also be more interesting to answer because everyone already agrees that affirmative action literally does factor in race. The more controversial part is whether it serves to reinforce or counteract some forms of systemic racism.

[1] From a modern viewpoint (e.g. Kendi), although I'm not sure if this word previously had different uses.

Hmm, is this racism or anti-racism? Because it's literally what Harvard does.