Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Two America's...riven by completely different purposes

By David Brooks, New York Times, January 30, 2012
I’ll be shocked if there’s another book this year as important as Charles Murray’s “Coming Apart.” I’ll be shocked if there’s another book that so compellingly describes the most important trends in American society.

Murray’s basic argument is not new, that America is dividing into a two-caste society. What’s impressive is the incredible data he produces to illustrate that trend and deepen our understanding of it.
His story starts in 1963. There was a gap between rich and poor then, but it wasn’t that big. A house in an upper-crust suburb cost only twice as much as the average new American home. The tippy-top luxury car, the Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz, cost about $47,000 in 2010 dollars. That’s pricy, but nowhere near the price of the top luxury cars today.
More important, the income gaps did not lead to big behavior gaps. Roughly 98 percent of men between the ages of 30 and 49 were in the labor force, upper class and lower class alike. Only about 3 percent of white kids were born outside of marriage. The rates were similar, upper class and lower class.
Since then, America has polarized. The word “class” doesn’t even capture the divide Murray describes. You might say the country has bifurcated into different social tribes, with a tenuous common culture linking them.
The upper tribe is now segregated from the lower tribe. In 1963, rich people who lived on the Upper East Side of Manhattan lived close to members of the middle class. Most adult Manhattanites who lived south of 96th Street back then hadn’t even completed high school. Today, almost all of Manhattan south of 96th Street is an upper-tribe enclave.
Today, Murray demonstrates, there is an archipelago of affluent enclaves clustered around the coastal cities, Chicago, Dallas and so on. If you’re born into one of them, you will probably go to college with people from one of the enclaves; you’ll marry someone from one of the enclaves; you’ll go off and live in one of the enclaves.
Worse, there are vast behavioral gaps between the educated upper tribe (20 percent of the country) and the lower tribe (30 percent of the country). This is where Murray is at his best, and he’s mostly using data on white Americans, so the effects of race and other complicating factors don’t come into play.
Roughly 7 percent of the white kids in the upper tribe are born out of wedlock, compared with roughly 45 percent of the kids in the lower tribe. In the upper tribe, nearly every man aged 30 to 49 is in the labor force. In the lower tribe, men in their prime working ages have been steadily dropping out of the labor force, in good times and bad.
People in the lower tribe are much less likely to get married, less likely to go to church, less likely to be active in their communities, more likely to watch TV excessively, more likely to be obese.
Murray’s story contradicts the ideologies of both parties. Republicans claim that America is threatened by a decadent cultural elite that corrupts regular Americans, who love God, country and traditional values. That story is false. The cultural elites live more conservative, traditionalist lives than the cultural masses.
Democrats claim America is threatened by the financial elite, who hog society’s resources. But that’s a distraction. The real social gap is between the top 20 percent and the lower 30 percent. The liberal members of the upper tribe latch onto this top 1 percent narrative because it excuses them from the central role they themselves are playing in driving inequality and unfairness.
It’s wrong to describe an America in which the salt of the earth common people are preyed upon by this or that nefarious elite. It’s wrong to tell the familiar underdog morality tale in which the problems of the masses are caused by the elites.
The truth is, members of the upper tribe have made themselves phenomenally productive. They may mimic bohemian manners, but they have returned to 1950s traditionalist values and practices. They have low divorce rates, arduous work ethics and strict codes to regulate their kids.
Members of the lower tribe work hard and dream big, but are more removed from traditional bourgeois norms. They live in disorganized, postmodern neighborhoods in which it is much harder to be self-disciplined and productive.
Brooks closes his piece with a recommendation for some program that forces each "tribe" to walk a few miles in the shoes of the other tribe.
No, Mr. Brooks, the time for that "simulation game" is over. We are no longer living in a world, or country, or continent in which the words being used by the political establishment are congruent with the continental divide that grows on the streets and in the neighbourhoods of our towns and cities.
I grew up in a small town in which the professional class, lawyers and doctors and dentists and maybe engineers and accountants were socially intertwined. The teachers, clergy, social workers and bankers did not "cut it" in the upper group. And the semi-skilled and unskilled workers drank their beer in the Kipling Hotel, for those who recall, on the road to the First Nations reserve on Parry Island. There have always been classes, and the divide has always been significant.
What is now so different, and it was described by John Reed, former Chair of Citigroup, in an interview with Bill Moyers just this past Sunday, is that one group is completely dedicated to "making money" as their personal goal, while others, like Mr. Reed, believe that the goal used to be, and must return to being, the production of some good, value or service, through which one generates income. The generation of income, according to Reed, lies at the root of the disaster of the economic crash of 2008-9 and he could not believe the depth and the commitment of those who pursued that goal, in an of and for itself.
Sociology, Mr. Brooks, is useful. However, it will never be able to dig into the primary motives of individuals, who, when they become a significant and powerful group, leading lives of absurdity demonstrate their greed, narcissism and contempt for the rest of us.

No comments:

Post a Comment