Murray acknowledges the irony: if the _goal_ is colorblind individualism, why write about group differences!? The problem is strategic: if we can't _talk_ about group differences, but group differences actually exist and are actually pretty stable, then well-meaning people who are distressed by group differences in socioeconomic outcomes end up conducting an increasingly paranoid witchhunt for systemic racism, eventually casting aside the American creed. Murray quotes Daniel Patrick Moynihan—I feel like I've [mentioned him on the blog at some point?](/2020/Nov/nixon-on-forbidden-hypotheses/)—"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not to his own facts."
+[TODO: talk up front about the lameness of the causality-blindness as a response to steelmanned charges of systemic racism]
+
After introducing our topic, Chapter 2 covers the stats on American demographics. At present, the country is about 60% white, 18% Latino, 13% black, and 6% Asian, but the, um, black-and-white framing of American racial discourse makes more sense when you consider that there were a lot fewer Latinos and Asians before a [1965 immigration reform](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965): in 1960, the figures were 87% white, 11% black. Big cities have become much more multiracial, whereas smaller cities and towns remain either monoracially white or biracial (the two races being white/black in the South, or white/Latino in the southwest and southern California).
Here and through the remaining chapters up until the conclusion, Murray elects to switch to the nomenclature "European"/"African"/"Latin" rather than white/black/Latino (respectively, with "Asian" remaining unaltered), on the grounds that using less familiar terms for these groups will drag along less cultural and political baggage without resorting to outright obfuscation ("populations A, B, C, and D"). It doesn't feel that effective to my ear, and I kind expect it to backfire for a lot of readers, to whom the continental African/European/Asian terms probably sound _more_ racially essentialist than I think Murray wants to come off as! (The aim of the book is to argue that intelligence and crime differences _exist_ as not _trivially_ mutable facts of our world, as contrasted to the theory that outcome differences are solely due to direct discrimination by employers, schools, and the justice system; the strawman of "And this is 100% genetic" is not implied—not that "And this seems likely to be somewhere between 40–80% genetic" would be more than 40–80% less unpalatable.) [TODO: "Causes are irrelevant" (!) p. 47]
Of course, one can't just point to test scores and say "Those are the facts" without addressing what test scores _mean_. A vast space of "objective" procedures can come up with a number, without giving anyone a reason to care about that particular number. (People with more letters in their name take longer to say their name out loud, on average! Cats do better than humans on a test of scratching, on average!) In this matter of cognitive ability scores by race, Murray briefly addresses two popular (but mutually in tension) classes of objection: that the gaps will vanish with better education, and that the tests are biased. [TODO: ... finish summary]
-At times, Murray's inability in his commentary to consider flaws in the _status quo_ seems like a blindness bordering on complicity—even while, simultaneously, I find many of his specific arguments convincing!
+At times, Murray's inability in his commentary to consider flaws in the _status quo_ seems like a blindness bordering on complicity—even while, simultaneously, I find his arguments and data convincing!
Of the criminal justice system, he writes:
> The social scientist's view of who commits crimes is a set of snapshots—the report of a crime, an arrest, the decision to prosecute, the charge on which the suspect is tried, the outcome of the prosecution, and the sentence for a guilty plea or verdict. At each step, the authorities are usually trying to get it right, but "getting it right" means different things. Decisions to prosecute depend on many factors besides the likelihood that the arrested person committed the crime (e.g., whether these is evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt if it goes to trial). The decision about the charges that will be filed is a main bargaining chip in a plea bargain negotiation.
-This is all very "reasonable" by the methods and epistemology of Murray's world, and I'm afraid—not a figure of speech, actually afraid—that there's nothing I could say, no words I could possibly type to explain the cruel and capricious insanity of that world's "reasonableness" to those who haven't personally been on the other side, who have never been abused by a total institution like the "justice" system.
+This is all very "reasonable" by the methods and epistemology of Murray's world, and I'm afraid—not a figure of speech, actually afraid—that there's nothing I could say, no words I could possibly type to explain the cruel capriciousness of that world's "reasonableness" to those who haven't personally been on the other side, who have never been abused by a total institution like the "justice" system. Two three-day stints in the psych ward are [what did it to me](/2017/Jun/memoirs-of-my-recent-madness-part-i-the-unanswerable-words/). Going to school might not be bad enough if you went to a good school.
+
+_The authorities are usually trying to get it right._ [by the authority's own corrupt standards!! TODO: ...
+http://benjaminrosshoffman.com/can-crimes-be-discussed-literally/
+https://archive.is/HUkzY
+finish section]
+
+Murray presents a table of black/white and Latino/white ratios of arrests for violent crimes in thirteen cities for which data was available. The median black/white ratio was 9.0 (that is, 9 blacks per 1 white) and the median Latino/white ratio was 2.4.
+
+To argue that these ratios are driven by real differences in behavior rather than biased police, Murray attempts to "triangulate" the true crime rate with other data.
-(Two three-day stints in the psych ward are [what did it to me](/2017/Jun/memoirs-of-my-recent-madness-part-i-the-unanswerable-words/). Going to school might not be bad enough if you went to a good school.)
+For example, arrests for murder specifically are going to be less biased by selective enforcement or fraud: even evil and corrupt cops who don't consider themselves above, say, planting evidence of drugs, seem less likely to fake a human corpse. So if racial differences in murder charges match differences in violent-crime arrests more generally, that's probabilistic evidence that arrests are tracking a real difference in criminal behavior.
-_The authorities are usually trying to get it right._ [by the authority's standards!!]
+Interestingly, Murray argues that this is true even if you don't think police are generally getting the right suspect (!!), as long as the suspect who is arrested is of the same race as the actual perpetrator, which will usually be the case given how many murders are crimes of passion where the victim and perpetrator knew each other (in highly segregated communities), or tied to gang activity (where gangs are almost always monoracial). The scenario most prone to racist police getting the wrong guy—non-gang-related murders where the alleged perp is black and didn't know the victim—only accounted for 4% of all homocides. Meanwhile, the group ratios for murder arrests are more stark than for violent crimes more generally: a median black/white ratio of 18.1, and a median Latino/white ratio of 4.7, which is not the pattern we would expect to see if cops were using their discretionary powers to falsely imprison blacks and Latinos on lesser charges.
+[TODO: the police getting the wrong guy of the same race is the kind of thing that would contribute to structural racism—if the System is going to treat you interchangeably anyway, that changes your incentives]
+Another source of data for triangulation is in reports of crimes _to_ the police: crime _victims_ might not be racist in the same way the police themselves are—and it turns out that even black and Latino _victims_ report more black and Latino perpretrators, even in neighborhood where they are an minority.
+
+[TODO: summarize chapter on first-order effects of IQ]
+
+[TODO: summarize chapter on first-order effects of crime]
+
+Murray wraps up with a chapter on "If We Don't Face Reality." The
-----
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He_Jiankui_affair
https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/even-during-a-reckoning-mind-reading
+
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff