This is an old article, but at least it openly makes the case that we should value racial diversity and people who look like "the communities they serve" being valued more, and absolute technical perfection being valued less. We discriminate based on absolute technical perfection, instead we should discriminate based on identity and then based on absolute technical perfection. That's about as coherent as an argument as I've heard on the subject, and it's an argument entirely about what we should value, which makes it difficult to logically refute.<p>Personally, I don't see any reason each orchestra can't come up with its own basis to select its members, and you can let people vote with their feet.
If you go to an orchestral concert to listen to the best musicians, this is a terrible idea. I don't think it is even legal in the US to pick based on race and gender
You can keep the blind auditions, but use them to pass X number of people into the final round, then use a (biased if you want that outcome) lottery to pick the actual winners.<p>I'm generally a fan of this concept. It forces people to acknowledge and deal with the pre-existing random element rather than false precision of saying X is best for this role. (Says who? By what metric? Are they infallible?) and stops people overinvesting in attempts to game that metric.