[FRIAM] "certain codes of conduct"

Sat Aug 22 11:16:46 EDT 2020

Other Eric adds some interesting layers to add to the discussion!

"society is set up to need a permanent underclass, with limited and
> preferably little bargaining power"

I agree with this.  Societies *could *be set up in lots of ways, but ours
*is* designed to have a chunk of the population at severe bargaining
disadvantage at any given time. In that sense, there is
permanently-an-underclass. My only contention would be that (outside the
current apocalypse) membership in that underclass is more dynamic than most
give it credit for. So there is not a-permanent-underclass, in the sense of
multi-generational poverty being ubiquitous.

I remember being surprised, for example, by the data showing "Between the
ages of 25 and 60, over 60% of the population at some point sees an annual
income that puts them in the bottom 20% of earners. About 40% will live for
a year or more in the bottom 10%..... 70% of Americans will spend at least
a year in the top 20% of income by the time they are 60.":
https://money.com/six-in-ten-americans-will-experience-poverty/ .
Personally, that seems to me like a staggeringly high percentage of people
to have at least one really bad year and at least one really good year.
(Caveat on the limits of induction: Of course, a chunk of that data is
looking at people who are 60+ now, and there is no guarantee that those
numbers give a good prediction for people who are 25 now.)

It is certainly interesting to know that some societies with
ostensible caste systems are much more rigid than others.

The power curve thing is also interesting. The larger and richer society
the larger the disparities, even if on that basis alone. Similarly, the
larger the poker tournament, the larger the gap in earnings between first
place and all the rest.

<echarles at american.edu>

On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 2:01 AM David Eric Smith <desmith at santafe.edu> wrote:

> So, Eric, at risk of asking a question I am not willing to make the effort
> to follow up (for the reason that I really _should_ be working and am over
> deadlines, but also too half-hearted),
>
> But I sort of would like to explore this question a little on the list.
>
> Here is the same woman who write the NYT piece.  This time in the
> Guardian; I haven’t read this one, but given her theme, I expect I will
> find similar content.
>
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/28/untouchables-caste-system-us-race-martin-luther-king-india?utm_source=pocket-newtab
>
> Here was the NYT piece that I did read:
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/magazine/isabel-wilkerson-caste.html
>
> I know why you say the US isn’t a caste system, and in the sense that it
> isn’t like India’s, yes, agreed.
>
> But I also understand what Wilkerson wants from the term.  She wants to
> say the society is set up to need a permanent underclass, with limited and
> preferably little bargaining power, and preferably a relatively predictable
> group.  That if our system as currently set up doesn’t have those, if it
> has fairer bargaining and less predictability, it can’t operate because it
> needs too much on unfair terms to support the structural commitments to
> wealth concentration, certain wasteful or profligate expenses, etc.
>
> And if I come back to caste, I think: how essential is it that a caste
> system be as well developed and as rigid as India’s has been for a long
> time?
>
> Nominally, Bali has the Hindu cast system copying the Indian form.  If you
> go to a wedding, it looks like it does too.  Husband can’t eat from the
> wife’s family’s table if it is a “marry up”, but the reverse is okay.  So
> they have to have two ceremonies.  And marrying up is allowed one for
> women, but not for met.  And so forth.
>
> But I was in extended communication with Steve Lansing when he was doing
> Balinese genetic studies, having similars for India, and his result was
> that they are massively different.  You can see caste lines respected
> strongly in Indian genetics.  In Balinese, little, and if you didn’t
> constantly re-divide the population to keep track of short-term changes,
> you wouldn’t have a partition to track.  So when push comes to shove, the
> Balinese marry who they want to marry, and they keep the caste system to
> some degree and with context dependence.
>
> For mobility data, I wish I had a record of the various talks I have
> attended or articles I have read claiming that social mobility has dropped
> severely over the past five decades.  I am glad to have your Brookings data
> below, and should have looked it up myself.  But what then is the data
> source for people making the claim that it has been dropping?  I don’t
> think they are nuts or liars.  Maybe ideological to some degree, but short
> of ideologues.
>
> I also tried to do some work with Duncan Foley a few years ago (like 15)
> on income distributions, and where the exponential x powerlaw form in the
> US and elsewhere comes from.  An easy explanation would be random mixing
> from an output stream (income-generating capacity)  with a constraint for
> wage earners, and some less obvious multiplicative process for the investor
> class (though that is not conceptually simple, despite hack approaches that
> treat it that way).  I was interested to not only match the distribution,
> but also track mobility figures, to make a “Green’s function” for the
> diffusion process that underlies that kind of mixing model.  Duncan put a
> student on it for maybe a year, and reported back that the diffusion model
> that would fit the stationary distribution was wildly inconsistent with the
> time-trajectories of family portfolios, because they were much too sticky.
> We didn’t publish it, because it was never a thorough enough result, and we
> couldn’t get a model that _did_ account for both aspects of the data.  But
> again it was a claim that the apparent mixing by one signature was larger
> than what could be directly observed.
>
> I have the impression — now admitting that I have no method to be careful
> — that there were a few decades from the mid-60s through the early 80s,
> when many programs created an escape hatch for a significant segment of the
> black population into the middle class.  This is Michelle Obama’s
> generation, and as I read her memoire I see the combination of the various
> programs I went through in all the same years, with various specific
> programs that made them available to her in Chicago where otherwise they
> would not have been.  I feel like that window has significantly closed.
> The ones who got through it are today’s relatively comfortable, relatively
> safe middle class (such as it survives secondo E. Warren), and the ones who
> didn’t as it started to close are the growing precariat.  Am I completely
> wrong in having this impression?  The shouting is so loud from the shouters
> that I don’t know what a balanced reading is.
>
> I thought I caught an echo of that in the McWhorter book review that Glen
> forwarded, which I liked, and I have read McWhorter on linguistics since
> probably 15 years ago and liked him.  Somewhere in there, and I forget on
> exactly which point, he objects to the arguments that are part of his
> larger claim of condescension, that they provide cover to those who want to
> claim affirmative action doesn’t work.  I think he came up through my
> generation too, and I wonder if his awareness of the detailed results of
> opportunity programs is one of the things we are hearing.
>
> Anyway, one could stop and make this a career, and I won’t and can’t.  But
> it would be nice to resolve what seem to me like considerably contradictory
> claims around mobility.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 31, 2020, at 8:19 PM, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Discussions of social mobility are odd. I understand that many countries
> have more than the U.S., but whenever I see actual numbers, the mobility
> seems pretty reasonable on average, and we are far from a caste system. If
> you scroll down here can see data from Pew data from 2015 (in the right
> part of the 2nd and 3rd graph). Of those in the bottom 20% at the start,
> less than half are there in adulthood, 4% have made it all the way to the
> top 20%. The numbers are similar going in the opposite direction: Of those
> in the top 20% at the start, less than half are there in adulthood, with 8%
> having dropped all the way to the bottom 20%.
> https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2016/01/12/how-much-social-mobility-do-people-really-want/
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.brookings.edu%2fblog%2fsocial-mobility-memos%2f2016%2f01%2f12%2fhow-much-social-mobility-do-people-really-want%2f&c=E,1,wARI_Rqqmjsngze-BCXF4KQDiF733j4KuqciluS8XPutBUIXdS_fVNj1wthNnK1s-k6yHVmIh8LbT_IDtcBGQ84ea9OolTDdjXs-Zuddzjc,&typo=1>
>
>
> As I understand actual caste systems, the number who go from the bottom
> rung to the top rung in a generation should be easily roundable to 0%.
>
> There are definitely racial differences not captured in that data, and I
> have seen some studies showing outcomes for African Americans at about half
> the national averages (so we could infer that in the above data set only 2%
> of Afircan Americans would make it from the bottom quintile to the top
> quintile).  This presentation shows the differences between races better:
> https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2019/02/14/no-room-at-the-top-the-stark-divide-in-black-and-white-economic-mobility/
> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.brookings.edu%2fblog%2fup-front%2f2019%2f02%2f14%2fno-room-at-the-top-the-stark-divide-in-black-and-white-economic-mobility%2f&c=E,1,jgCmupDNPtblowoirtdwRknBZ-uxnjh2mXu2LQunKxCCbTmGtRZ9jGsjBpITdXYcccmbqzpMz6abD05eVhuJ1clDpPGDRMQhJzvUB-l_NckM99o,&typo=1>
>  It shows that white children from the bottom quintile are 45% less likely
> to end up in the top quintile than would be expected at totally random
> chance. In contrast, African American children from the bottom quintile are
> 85% less likely to end up in the top quintile than would be expected at
> totally random chance.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:50 PM David Eric Smith <desmith at santafe.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Here I think we have to ask Ta-Nehisi Coates, and simply accept whatever
>> he says, making a good-faith effort to not pick nits in the sentences out
>> of context, but to engage with the causal picture he argues at the system
>> level.
>>
>> One part of the argument is: Whiteness is a myth (both figuratively and
>> in the more analytical sense).  It is fluid and opportunistic, and
>> constantly reconfigured to maintain and concentrate power structures.  So
>> there is no real intrinsic to it; it is only instrumental and must be
>> understood in that functional way.
>>
>> The other part of it, which looks opposite if nitpicked, would be: You
>> don’t get to claim there is no white and therefore you have it as tough as
>> everybody else.  There are real oppressed and real oppressors, and if you
>> are in the group that contains the oppressors, then you are an oppressor,
>> whether you want to think of yourself that way or not.  The oppressed don’t
>> get to opt out of their group, so neither do you.  So it’s not _all that_
>> fluid, or at least not fluid in a way that would let you off the hook.
>>
>> There was a nice article in the NYT about two weeks ago (or three?),
>> arguing that the US is in important ways a caste society first and
>> foremost, and that race is recruited as an instrument to define and
>> implement caste.  I find the logic of that argument both plausible in mind
>> and viscerally appropriate in experience.  It also gets around the
>> awkwardnesses of language in talking about whether “whiteness” is or is not
>> fluid, to whom and for what purposes, because caste is a language
>> specifically about the implementation of power, so it is automatically
>> functionalist.
>>
>> However, tread carefully:  I hear Bernie saying what in essence is the
>> same thing — maybe because I know something about the historical data on
>> social mobility through Sam Bowles over years at SFI, and those who start
>> trapped also stay trapped when everybody is trapped, so mechanistically I
>> hear that part of Bernie’s characterization as correct — and yet a very
>> large majority of black voters did not think Bernie was their ally.  I
>> don’t know if they disfavored him for the same reasons I preferred others
>> (by quite a lot) to him, or for completely different reasons such as
>> hearing him as denying that race oppression is a problem.  In the small bit
>> of his heavily repetitive rhetoric that I heard, I never heard that, but
>> I’m not black and I didn’t listen to it all with fine attention, so what I
>> did or didn’t hear doesn’t count.
>>
>> Once the society is full of mines, it doesn’t matter where you walk, you
>> are going to lose a leg.  So probably best to accept that everybody is in
>> the same boat, and be on each other’s side trying to get to something
>> better.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 31, 2020, at 11:29 AM, jon zingale <jonzingale at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Frank says: "The Republic by Plato"
>> > Merle says: "Clearly the implicit bias is that all of these reading
>> > requirements were written by White men."
>> >
>> > One point that interests me here is the determination that Plato was
>> white.
>> > Perhaps he should be considered white: he likely owned slaves, he was
>> > educated, and likely had about as much privilege as anyone could
>> imagine at
>> > the time. On the other hand, if any of his ancestors found themselves
>> in the
>> > new world circa 1900 they likely would have found themselves digging the
>> > most profound ditches. What exactly is meant by white anyway? Is it
>> possible
>> > that producing work powerful enough to influence 2500 years of white
>> > thinking is what makes Plato white? What about white Jesus?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sent from: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> >
>> > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,62QM-Wdg3Nee6i7UxiImiXxBPpYJPXgUwtTPn9oSAlPmqGB_KZaJUyVUq-b-UlBh3Yl1h1lxBsBDbwse2VsKkgfnMJ07K73AZE8h9hJfZ0Z8JsM,&typo=1>
>> > un/subscribe
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,-rEnl3id--x64n9NkfU9ptfNqaFHGptVhEWOVngXJ6JY7LtzjK-132j9v9DENAZoDM6WvGeMYAuP_yQM27AiizDn6CRymuZH0wlHbqsA_I44FJ0,&typo=1
>> > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> > FRIAM-COMIC
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,ZZc_iwrFBAInR9ZO9xu2dez9Nvscx09ePf5lybvvFThvURksPI9-mQsdp9Z9KZxYlUIN7f4O4hRdXkSbpe4FzwT36b8upf1n-aRGaXF-&typo=1
>>
>>
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,X7zJv47Q0OAuweIo89mP7nHkO00Y7DSRlkcaZuMcnt1NUAYOVi-f7F6LPUUElVBA1J8z2mQ7ZC7awPUai5iwM_6KJ1YFyXQSd828JHevPt1HdBjCF24gxlck&typo=1>
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,9EY1qPmx4rrSBe_dY3e21EUl7pdWmGExdF8gBWOBNqcGmpkjurS8j2gEoKvow3cupIfNtUze2d-2-hfadwW8ZWbCwQf_mu-upMGnY3RqVT8-yb9CsYJa3A,,&typo=1>
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC>
>> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,CEUJTU2yPOUz5eC8quaHLlVGYcNZSqKpWuNfmAnsuxI3a6xEwVMN727Nt-LOU_Tz6Ph0K4foF2KKdaIZZ975QJOmYuTFzTUJMAH7CS7INzkVGw,,&typo=1>
>>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,BqtignNnIlu1TGhBv8RjziOxVUzU8UJ7Abc0l-lSeTp0eP2s0AjZsojNLWafOt5dPydy8d1CwUaNgIGugwFAbtC0N1bgMntOANoYtkkg&typo=1
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,zQDUNnlkHIfBi34pM6OMaJW5CH7bdoSL7L6pNS4zi2liUWCQoDcK4mLEPnG6u5PYD16bTSSbnPH0l0hYfduIBVOJy6o0YYRRsMo1gV-nZcHGRvlYUyhJ&typo=1
>
>
> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200822/2502b3db/attachment-0001.html>