The new era of segregation

Here is the second video based on The Complacent Class:

Here is the first video and a way to sign up for the whole series.


'Through the power of algorithmic matching, people are self-segregating like never before.'

How did those all aristocratic families throughout human history manage the process before using the power of algorithms to self-segregate?

And how did the Cohanim manage that process over thousands of years? 'Calculations based on the high rate of genetic similarity of today's Cohanim resulted in the highest "paternity-certainty" rate ever recorded in population genetics studies -- a scientific testimony to family faithfulness.

Stated Dr. David Goldstein of Oxford University: "For more than 90 percent of the Cohens to share the same genetic markers after such a period of time is a testament to the devotion of the wives of the Cohens over the years. Even a low rate of infidelity would have dramatically lowered the percentage." [Science News, October 3, 1998]

Wider genetic studies of diverse present day Jewish communities show a remarkable genetic cohesiveness. Jews from Iran, Iraq, Yemen, North Africa and European Ashkenazim all cluster together with other Semitic groups, with their origin in the Middle East. A common geographical original can be seen for all mainstream Jewish groups studied.

This genetic research has clearly refuted the libel that the Ashkenazi Jews are not related to the ancient Hebrews, but are descendants of the Kuzar tribe -- a pre-10th century Turko-Asian empire which reportedly converted en masse to Judaism. Researchers compared the DNA signature of the Ashkenazi Jews against those of Turkish-derived people, and found no correspondence.'

Why do Ashkenazi Jews have lighter skin and eyes than the Sephardi Jews? Was it interbreeding with the locals after the diaspora? My impression is that the Ashkenazi did not begin to marry into European Gentile families until the 19th century. Did the Ashkenazi look markedly different before this occurred?

What I have read are that the Ashkenazi are descended from a founder population composed of Middle Eastern men and European women, dating from sometime around 300-800 AD. So there was some initial out marriage in the matrilineal lines, but that would have been in keeping with Jewish law at the time in which membership in the community was determined by the patrilineal bloodline (just think of the patriarchs and kings, whose wives often weren't members of the tribe).

Any chance we could get proper subtitles on these videos? The auto-generated ones are worse than useless.

Around 4m10s segregation is discussed on terms of desirable places to live. Austin appears as #1 in economic segregation, but why is it bad? Other places have lived under these conditions for a long time and are fine. London? It may not be perfect, there's always something to improve but it's much better than the world average of life quality. All the rich enclaves in Europe have priced out poor people and life goes on: Monaco, San Marino, Andorra, Luxembourg, Hamburg, Switzerland.

In another topic, Tyler may be right on complacency: people take the integration of US states for granted. In Europe there's the Erasmus program to push the integration agenda among college and grad students. In the US the National Student Exchange program extent is ridiculously small. It's more probable a US college student will study a semester abroad that in another US state. The US is geographically huge, it's not a bad idea if someone from Texas spend some months in Maine or Idaho. A larger US Army (in % terms) did this job before, someone has to pick this job, universities?

Segregation by income is good in the short term. Tyler agrees with that. Segregation is bad for long term economic trends like upward mobility, innovation, and competition.

Scratch that, I don't want to speak for Tyler

@Axa: this Sunday's NYT had a great op-ed by Roger Cohen calling for a new program of mandatory national service (not the armed forces necessarily, just an expanded AmeriCorps). Young people could choose from a few options (AmeriCorps, Peace Corps, military service, etc), 1 year minimum, to be completed by say age 25. This would be a way to restore some civic duty and impart skills and let the races and classes mix. I really can't see any downside.

I think that the downsides would be the expense, and the potential for abuse of young people. Do you really think it is a good idea to send more young women into the Marines?

Um, I said the military would be only one of the choices. Are women being inordinately abused in AmeriCorps today?

The expense would be minimal relative to the budget, and to the massive benefit to society and the kids themselves. Maybe $20-30 billion/year. Far more bang for the buck than most programs.

Read the article:

Downsides? The mandatory part considering salaries in AmeriCorps is 12-13K a year, almost poverty level + $1.

But are expenses paid for that year? Anyway, the idea would be to fund this program properly, and as I said above the costs would be minor and the bang for the buck would be immense.

Tell me what's wrong with the actual program itself. I can't think of anything. And that's worth $20B a year.

You don't know what is wrong with a government program that takes one year of the life of every young person in America?

Nothing I can say could address the underlying problem with your thought process. Once someone falls into the socialistic thought chasm, it takes a bigger ladder than I can build to get you out.

What sort of prison term would be appropriate for those who refused to perform the one year of service? One year? Six months? Two years?

Would you have medical deferments and conscientious objector deferments? Would those be gamed by folks with access to medical excuses from MD friends, and invented conscientious objections?

The problem with all idealistic childish socialistic utopian (but I repeat myself) ideas is that sooner or later you realize you'll need to build some death camps for those who won't willingly place their neck under the boot.

What do you mean "takes"? Right now kids that age either go to college and pay out money hoping to learn skills like working hard, collaborating, and such....instead we will pay them a little to do that, and to do it immersed in a milieu different from the bubble they grew up in. So instead of taking 4-6 years to get through college now they take 4-7...

Medical deferments? Sure, if you are in a wheelchair or something I guess they would find you a desk job. 99% of young people could do this.

Conscientious objectors? What the hell? People object to working for a year helping people?

I suppose you can say anything that helps society is "socialist", but then you are just playing hysterical vocabulary games. God forbid we try to make things better. Oh no, I'm being idealistic!

No downside.

I forgot to ad, either kids go to college or as so many do they just graduate high school and end up playing videogames and snorting oxy. Why not give those kids from dead-end places one year of doing something productive, rubbing shoulders with people who maybe come from a more ambitious background, to at least see the country and earn a little cash? It's UBI paid for with a year of service.

No downside.

msgkings March 7, 2017 at 12:46 pm

this Sunday’s NYT had a great op-ed by Roger Cohen calling for a new program of mandatory national service (not the armed forces necessarily, just an expanded AmeriCorps).

There is a simple way to do this - send every young person to prison for a couple of years. No, no, hear me out. I mean a mandatory term for marijuana possession would probably get most of them. A three year term for alcohol consumption would get most of the rest. In prison they would mix with different races and social classes. They could learn some skills. I am not sure that shank-making transfers to the real economy but hustling on the cell block can't be a bad life skill.

After all, most of the infrastructure is already there. Walls, cells, and so on. It would be cheaper too as you wouldn't need to pay them anything. Perhaps you could give some of the older prisoners responsibilities and even guns as in the old trustee system. It would greatly reduce crime as the most crime-prone sections of society would already be locked up.

And it would have a great effect on racial equality. Don't need to ban the box if everyone ticks it. I defy anyone to think of a single downside.

Thanks for proving my point. Anyone dumb enough to compare AmeriCorps to prison knows they have no argument.

What is ideal: more building permits in San Francisco or better transportation systems to San Francisco from neighboring more affordable cities?

You imply that segregation plays a role in social mobility but I'd argue that the big issue there is poor people/towns being consistently served with below ideal education and other services that should work as playing field equalizers.

Most people don't like long commutes one bit.

But maybe they'll manage to get one of those 1000km/hr tubes up or something and have a few dedicated lines to get to suburbs 50km away in a few minutes.

Simply too much imposition of too many so-called "rational categories" and "rational criteria" upon nature and human existence, yielding a gracious plenty of natural and social disequilibria, sigh alas alack.

Is it the case that we do not know how to model chaos? or are we to suspect that overzealous attempts to impose "rational solutions" are capable only of yielding near-chaotic outcomes?

Do you give proper attribution to The Bell Curve and Peter Thiel for most of these ideas? I feel like a lot of the most important ideas by TC are basically derivatives of ideas formulated long-ago by more "disreputable" people, and the value-add that TC brings is that he has credibility with liberals.

A lot of people had these sorts of ideas. Schelling in 1971 on self segregation, just to mention one.

If a talented chef whips up an awesome omelette do they get criticized because they are, after all, using the same ingredients as everyone else?

Glad to see I'm not the only one who accidentally mispronounces "assortative"

Well we found something that Tyler isn't the authorative source on.

Favorite part is the Elephant Jumps easter egg.

Excellent video.

Murray claimed that assortative mating causes the society to coming apart,

Kling argued that the effects of assortative mating can be observed from the IQ distribution, that Murray's assertion would produce bimodal (actually multi-modal) IQ distribution.

It is unlikely that any US gov agencies will release any raw IQ distribution data. What can be done is to infer the distribution from other data.

The NAEP has the average state scores for G4, G8 and G12 students. The distribution of state mean scores can be considered from central limit theorem as the distribution of sample means which should exibit normal distribution unless the raw distribution is way off. The null hypothesis of testing for unimodality (bell curve) for the distribution of state mean scores gives the results for the US White students (thus no race effect) gives,

Hartigans' dip test for unimodality / multimodality

D = 0.040367, p-value = 0.7707 (i.e. reject null hypothesis)

alternative hypothesis: non-unimodal, i.e., at least bimodal

Therefore there are significant noticable effect of assortative mating.

However, is the situation getting more extreme?

I look at the town/city distribution of education attainments of the children generation with National Merit Scholarship semi-finalists NmsNdx (top 1% of academic achievement) for California and the fraction of the (mostly) parent generation with uni degress EduNdx, both with respect to the relevant mean values of their peers. Equations can be statistically fitted for the population dynamics and it is interesting it is the similar cubic equation that others had proven that chaos theory could explain the chaotic results.

I constructed the index WobegonNdx=NmsNdx/EduNdx as the ratio of the children's generation performance with that for the parent generation. In the scatter plot of NmsNdx vs EduNdx, three distinct zones can be seen.

NmsNdx gt 2.1907 : WobegonSurge (digressive); cases=125
0.9892 lt NmsNdx le 2.1907 : WobegonMix (regressive); cases=35
NmsNdx le 0.9892 : WobegonDrop (digressive); cases=52

In the WobegonSurge zone, on average the childrend generation performed better than that of their parents' generation, i.e. there is a 'strange expeller' pushing the performance of the children generation higher from the population mean of their peers. The WobegonDrop zone is the reverse but still digressive, also with a 'strange expeller' pushing them lower from the average peer mean. In the WobegonMix zone, on average they are trapped around the 'limit cycle' though some might be statistically crossed over to the other two digressive zones and others into it.

Thus the situation is getting worse, the smarts are getting smarter and the less wise are getting otherwise. Two extreme examples, for Atherton with US second most expansive housing zip code, socio-economic percentile SESpctl=99.99%, median income IncK=$250K, EduNdx=2.44, the NmsNdx=49.08 giving WobegonNdx=20.11 . For Los Angeles city, SESpctl=38.0%, IncK=$55.22K, WobegonNdx=0.09/0.86=0.11 , on average getting otherwise.

Progress, like running where the centre of gravity must be outside the stabilityzone between the feet and the legs must constantly counter balance the potentially falling motion. It will be impossible to run with the centre of gravity in the stability zone. How much inequality and segregation are desirable is the question.

There is no mention of religion in the segregation issues. It is no longer so big, and especially not so important among the elite.
Moralistic Therapeutic Deism is the sort of assumed and not talked about stance.

Similarly, on "books reviewed", I haven't heard Tyler suggest that he would be reviewing the Benedict Option (Rod Dreher) or any other important book for religious conservatives. Let me suggest he do so, while there are still lots of interesting reviews of The Complacent Class coming in.

On the problems of segregation, you should consider visiting Stanford or Harvard or Georgetown, and getting info about the actual classes that black students attend. I'm pretty sure there's (statistically!) significant segregation of most classes having "too few" of the percentage of blacks, and some classes having "too many" of the percentage of blacks. The desire for this to not be the case shouldn't obscure factual observations about how much it is the case, or not -- with only anecdotes from years ago, I'd be interested in more hard facts. Tho I also believe the colleges don't want the facts to come out, because if they did, the facts would show how bad the situation is. Sort of like how Sweden stopped tracking rapes by immigrant status 10 years ago; collected facts are no longer available.

Comments for this post are closed