Then the problems are further down the talent development chain - where corporations have limited remit.

A well-intentioned corporation might make sure it was not creating nor subsidizing the problem (say, dumping toxic waste in disadvantaged areas while donating generously to universities priced for the 0.01%), not tolerating stupid racism/sexism in its white male staff, and not motivating its staff to be racist sexists by exposing them to lower-bar "peers" who were selected for their non-white-male status.

Then I employ the white guy. I'm running a company, creating a product, not changing the school system of my country.

If you were running the business, what would you do? Would you intentionally damage your odds of producing the best outcome for your company to support someone because of their race or gender?

Or that the metrics we use to judge these things disproportionately rank white men better even if they probably aren't the way we should be identifying "best" candidates?

When I started working in financial services in 2000, what shocked me was just how diverse the traders were. There were some people from rich families, some working class (I particularly remember one who had previously been running a market stall).

Turns out that capital markets have a great metric for ranking people without discrimination: how much profit they can make by managing their risk.

Ironically, the worst places I've seen for discrimination is in the public sector. They seem to see it as a virtue to promote people of their favoured race or sex/gender.

When the results aren't satisfying, change the metrics?

Silicon Valley is full of Indian and Chinese engineers and executives for a reason. The only ones who believe in Western exceptionalism are biased Westerners who lack exposure to the rest of the world and a solid education in world history.

Of course we could ask all sorts of "what if pigs could fly" questions and then redesign our farms as if pigs could fly. But those farms will go bankrupt sooner or later because they won't be competitive. Just like how the West will decline if they keep chasing these false ideas. Meanwhile Asia keeps building and Asian companies keep hiring based on merit. The West won't be able to compete in the long run, not only because of DEI policies but other self-imposed handicaps that stem from the same ideology.

For some reason these questions are not asked when the selection process ends up favouring those with higher skin pigmentation like e.g. happens in the NBA or in long-distance running.

Should there be a call for more 'white' or 'east-asian' basketball players or long-distance runners? No, there should be not, may the best person win. The same should be true for every other field of endeavour, identity politics should be removed from the narrative and shunned for the divisive effects is has had and has on public discourse where it served and serves to create a fractal of warring factions.