There's a simple mathematical or logical concept that solves the problem: For absolute value of differences between X and Y, there is no difference between an advantage or a disadvantage.

The formula for people who care about 'liberty and justice for all' is to say, 'we agree about eliminating racial or other biases in hiring and promotion' and then also identify and eliminate programs and processes biased in favor of, e.g., white males (the bias varies by situation, of course, but generally - almost by definition - favors the status quo).

For example, in college admissions eliminate legacies, wealthy donor's kids, and other things are biased toward white men and women. And then in OpenAI hiring, look beyond elite universities that have biased results, and beyond personal networks that are biased. In internal hiring and programs, eliminate or change those that advantage any groups, not just those that advantage vulnerable groups.

Another way of saying the same thing is that the standard hiring practices are DEI / affirmative action for the status quo (usually white males, possibly Asian males in SV) - that's what they always have been.

I'm serious. We can all then agree: Eliminate affirmative action and DEI for all. Could civil rights advocates use anti-DEI laws to sue on behalf of vulnerable minorities, saying that hiring practices are DEI for the status quo?

Or imagine Congress passing a law requiring merit-based advancement; imagine how that could be used to provide true 'liberty and justice for all.' (I don't know how that would work practically - how it's defined, how enforced, etc. Maybe you just have to quantitatively prove bias.)