“That’s simply not true, at least when you are talking about Northwestern and Cornell compared to KCL. Look at the number of grads of NU, Cornell, and KCL at MBB, for instance, compared to student body size.”
This is what happens when you are comparing apples to oranges.
The UK is a very different place from the US.
The UK has embedded classism which leads to old boys network hoarding positions for themselves (certain private schools and Oxbridge graduates) irrespective of other’s abilities. This does not happen in a more expansive USA because of its decentralised system (it has many states with their own governance and educational institution elites). In the UK, almost everything is centralised … in the hands of the aristocracy.
In the UK, if you look at the last 30 Prime Ministers, at least 24 of them would be Oxford graduates, extend this to 27 or so when you add Cambridge.
Over 70% of top posts like Justices are Oxbridge graduates.
Over 60% of cabinet members are Oxbridge graduates.
Over 55% of permanent secretaries are Oxbridge graduates.
Over 50% of diplomats are Oxbridge graduates.
Same happens at MBBs.
The system is deliberately set up to favour the aristocracy! They strictly appoint themselves and people are supposed to “know their place”.
This does not happen in the US or any other country. No university was allowed in England until 1820s (i.e. when KCL, UCL and Durham were founded) to establish this continuing aristocractic system and advantage.
There is hardly any industry the the Ivy League or HYPSM dominate overwhelmingly like that in the US. Tops all those universities combined would account for about 25%.
So your basis of comparison is faulty!