I see the whole thing as a triangle:

nepotism on one point

dei on another point

and meritocracy on the third

Each presents different ways to make selection and each has intrinsic biases which are in tension with one another. Neither one can be the end all be all solution because each leads to unhealthy endpoints if carried on for long enough. I suspect Sergei Volkov did in fact benefit from nepotism but maybe that's not a bad thing on its own?

Where is discrimination on that triangle?

If discrimination is on that triangle, where do you place efforts to counter discrimination?

You suspect because it fits with your worldview, or you suspect because of your knowledge of the cosmonaut program, and their willingness to have less-than-the-best in what is otherwise a very competitive field?

What kind of discrimination isn't covered by motives of nepotism or DEI?

To be clear I think its not necessarily bad, its the dose. The Cosmonaut had proven genetics, that counts for something on top of meritocracy.

Do you consider slavery, the Trail of Tears, the internment of Japanese-Americans, and the restrictions on women from serving in combat or some juries as discrimination?

In many states, it is okay to discriminate based on political views. Here's an example of a socialist working at Goodwill who was fired for being a socialist - https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/07/can-your-boss-fi... with the quote: “The law is pretty clear that a private employer can fire someone based on their political speech even when that political speech does not affect the terms and conditions of employment.”

Is that form of discrimination either DEI or nepotism?

Some US veterans get preferential employment in the Postal Service.

Is that form of discrimination DEI or nepotism?

The Freedmen's Bureau assisted only former slaves. Was that discrimination? Was it DEI?

Japanese-Americans who were interned or their heirs received payment as reparations. Was that discrimination? Was it DEI?

Feel like we are talking past each other honestly. I don't think its worthwhile to label something discrimination without a clear motive behind it.

Nepotism == My tribe > other tribe

DEI == Diversity > mono-culture

Meritocracy == job skills > political skills

Note there is no prescribed method how you balance those forces for "peak results" because there is no generic "peak result". Maybe I should have stated Meritocracy is also a form of discrimination but one where its "common-sense" standard. Restrictions on foreign influence in war time would be meritocracy and nepotism at the expense of DEI for example. Can you see any use in the above definitions or would you add another point to the tension graph? Or is there no use in considering these in tension with one another?

These are far from the actual definitions of those words, to the point were I have trouble making sense of it.

Like, the history of racism in the Americas recognizes a lot of different cultures, and even puts a hierarchy to them, typically with Blacks and Native Americans at the bottom, along with terms like mestizo and quadroon to describe different combinations of intermixing. A lighter-skinned Black slave is more likely to work in the house, while a darker-skinned one works the fields. A "swarthy" Italian might be white according to the law, but of lower social standing than other whites.

Let's suppose I had a mestiza mistress, a mulatto manservant, a dozen black fieldworkers, and a Chinese wash woman, and a white wife, all under a white supremacist patriarchy.

Sounds pretty diverse, yes? It certainly is not mono-culture. Does that diversity make it part of DEI?

While if we use the definition at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusi...

"Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are organizational frameworks which seek to promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, particularly groups who have historically been underrepresented or subject to discrimination on the basis of identity or disability."

we can see that the mistress, wife, etc. are not able to engage in full participation like I am.

I therefore conclude that DEI is not simply the idea that 'diversity > mono-culture'.

Is there any definition you would use for "my tribe == other tribe"?

You asked "What kind of discrimination isn't covered by motives of nepotism or DEI?"

One of my examples was how women couldn't be in combat roles until recently.

Is that 'Nepotism'? No, not unless you have a very strange definition of "tribe" such that men and women are in different tribes.

Is that 'DEI'? No, not unless you have a very strange definition of culture such that men and women are in different cultures.

In both of those strange definitions, where do you stop? How does the tribe of "American" overlap with the tribe of "woman" overlap with the tribe of "State U. graduate" overlap with the culture of "Southern" overlap with the culture of "menopausal" overlap with the culture of "home owner", and so on.

And to be clear, discrimination is not always bad. We have bona fide occupational qualifications, like how a church can discriminate on the basis of religion, and a strip club is not required to accept male strippers. We have age restrictions, like how the president must be at least 35 years old. We can fire people with excessively foul body order, even if they have the right job skills.

So when you ask "What kind of discrimination isn't covered by motives of nepotism or DEI?", the range is quite large.

In my last response I admitted Meritocracy is a form of discrimination (often an acceptable one).