Universities Cause Reversion to Emphasis on Ascribed Status

American society has become increasingly stratified and the reason is increasing regulation, universities' domination of the labor market and the Federal Reserve Bank. Max von Weber argued that the Protestant ethic engendered capitalism. Talcott Parsons argued that social norms that are fundamental to economic development include universalistic versus particularistic; specificity versus diffuseness of role relations; achieved versus ascribed status; and collectivity versus self orientation.

The idea of universalistic versus particularistic social norms is that in order for a society to develop, laws must apply universally. Resources must be allocated on the basis of universal criteria that reflect objective achievement such as competence rather than by social class, race or other ascribed characteristics. Relations should not be based on general considerations such as family connections, but rather on specific achievements.

America has increasingly become a society where status counts more than achievement. We can see this in the recent proposal to appoint Caroline Kennedy to the US Senate. To see how far we have fallen from America's past achievement orientation, let us compare a Senator from the early 1820s, Andrew Jackson, with the proposed appointee from New York, Caroline Kennedy.

Andrew Jackson, assisted by Davy Crockett who was under Jackson's command, defeated the Red Stick Creek Indians at the Battle of Horseshoe Bend in 1814. In the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, according to Wikipedia:

"on January 8, 1815, Jackson's 5,000 soldiers won a victory over 7,500 British. The British had more than 2,000 casualties to Jackson's 13 killed and 58 wounded or missing."

In 1817 Jackson led a campaign against the Seminole and Creek Indians. Having been ordered to prevent runaway slaves from going to Florida, Jackson invaded Florida, resulting in calls for his censure. Using the invasion as a pretext, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams negotiated the Adams-Onis treaty with Spain, whereby Spain ceded Florida to the US. Jackson served as the first US governor of Florida in 1821.

In 1822 the State of Tennessee elected Jackson to the US Senate. He ran for president in 1824, and although he won the most votes he did not win a majority, and John Quincy Adams was selected by special vote of Congress. Of course, Jackson was elected to the presidency in 1828, and in his second term abolished the then-central bank, the Second Bank of the United States.

Now, let's compare Caroline Kennedy's resume to Jackson's. Caroline Kennedy's grandfather was a wealthy bootlegger who managed to get himself appointed to several government sinecures, to include the first chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission and Ambassador to Britain. Her father was president. Kennedy attended Harvard and Columbia. She is a mother and wife. She has coauthored and edited several books. She has no other important achievements.

Americans are increasingly insensitive to the lack of emphasis on achievement in their culture. The reason is that universities have intruded into the allocation of labor. Universities masquerade as a form of selection-by-achievement, but they are nothing of the sort. The reason people get into a selective college is a test score that is independent of achievement and/or family connections or other status criteria. Few if any college students can boast of important achievements, and the few who do achieve important things in college like Bill Gates or Michael Dell, do so in spite of the college curriculum, not because of it.

The emphasis on attending a selective college would not in itself render American society ascription as opposed to achievement-based without a second factor: the increasing dominance of Wall Street over American business life. In the nineteenth century Wall Street was a neutral actor that served to finance American business in light of small-scale banks and scarce credit (scarce because of the gold standard). However, that changed in 1913 when the Federal Reserve bank was established and given the power to expand and contract the money supply. In 1933 the gold standard was abolished, and in 1971 its final remnant was cleared away. Since 1971 Wall Street has expanded dramatically because of the massive support it has received from the Fed.

The beneficiaries of the massive expansion of credit have of course been Wall Street executives. They have benefited at the expense of the public and of other businesses, which have not had equal access to credit and to resources that they would have in the absence of the Fed's credit monopoly. This is because of the income tax, the inheritance tax and the inflation tax.

Given the allocation of the public's wealth into Wall Street's hands, the question needs to be asked: who gets to be the recipient of the Fed's beneficence? The answer, of course, is that selection is made on the basis of family background and academic credentials.

Thus, universities serve as the selection device by which a privileged aristocracy, handed wealth by the Fed, gains entry. Universities are the post-World War II form of primogeniture.

Achievement no longer matters for much in American culture. Rather, you get into a good school and then hope you get a job on Wall Street. You try your hand at the markets, and if you're lucky you become a billionaire. This trend of allocation of wealth on the basis of status rather than achievement has brought us Caroline Kennedy. What is new about Kennedy is the arrogance of our politicians. They are willing to put forward a candidate who lacks any competence whatsoever, and whose only claim to the post is aristocratic family background.

America is reverting to the 17th century before our eyes.

Letter to Governor Paterson: Kennedy Appointment Turns My Stomach

PO Box 130
West Shokan, NY 12494
January 3, 2009

The Honorable David A. Paterson
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224

Dear Governor Paterson:

I oppose the appointment of Caroline Kennedy to the Senate. Ms. Kennedy lacks meaningful political or business experience. Indeed, she lacks meaningful work experience of any kind. While experiences gained in motherhood can be transferable to work, a series of responsible but more limited posts leading to the Senate would be an appropriate career path.

Rather than basing your interest in Ms. Kennedy on her experiences, achievements or characteristics, you are basing it on her family name and background. Sociologists would call your fixation on her background ascription- as opposed to achievement-based. Ascription of status is characteristic of feudalism and aristocratic societies, not of growing or successful ones.

Retrogression to medieval aristocratic privilege has increasingly become characteristic of our society in general, and of New York State in particular. That is, the nation and the state have become increasingly fixated on privilege and status at the expense of achievement. This, in turn, is related to excessive power of Wall Street and big business reinforced by government whereby business success is no longer based on innovation but on political power and access to government, particularly to Federal Reserve Bank credit. Your appointment of Ms. Kennedy is symptomatic of New York's culture of privilege. It turns my stomach.

Sincerely,

Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

Caroline Kennedy and the Progressive Hoax

"Progressivism" is the idea that government can "solve problems" that politicians, academic "experts" and "the media" identify. But what if these sources lack the ability to identify problems much less solve them? One would expect that those who claim that government can identify and solve "problems" would insist on political leaders who are competent to do so. Problem solving is hard work. If they do not require competence among their political leadership, why might they believe that government can solve problems?

Recently, "Progressives" claimed that Sarah Palin "lacks experience" and therefore is incapable of solving problems or representing the nation in the manner that "Progressives" require. At the same time, Barack Obama revealed ignorance of the most elementary aspects of foreign affairs. For instance, he was unaware that returning Jerusalem to Israel would cause resentment among the Arabs. This kind of whimsical picking and choosing, i.e., the people we don't like must have experience but the people we like need not, suggests that there no serious problems that "Progressives" have any ability to solve, and there is no problem solving. "Progressivism" is a hoax.

New York is one of the most "Progressive" states, a failed state that demonstrates the cruelty and viciousness of big government. New York's economy has been dismal for decades. Led by "Progressives" like Michael Bloomberg, Mario Cuomo, Nelson Rockefeller and George Pataki, New York City and State have failed to prepare for a Wall Street slowdown. Now that it is occurring, college-trained professionals are seeking work at the Bread Alone Bakery in Boiceville, NY. Mayor Bloomberg, himself an experienced trader, has served nearly two terms yet was not willing to take the most modest political risks necessary to attract alternative industries to the state and city. Doing so would have involved cutting massive waste in City Hall, cutting taxes, and reducing regulation.

Tonight Yahoo! features Larry Neumeister's AP release that quotes Kennedy:

"She said two events shaped her decision to ask Gov. David Paterson 11 days ago to consider her for the position if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is confirmed as secretary of state: the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and her work for Barack Obama's presidential campaign."

If Kennedy were interested in public service and "Progressives" were interested in solving problems, they would have Kennedy serve as a staff analyst in the Senate or the State Assembly, and let her run for state senate office thereafter. After five or six years at the state or congressional level, she might be ready for a senate run.

But since "Progressives" don't solve problems and cannot identify them, the singularly inexperienced and unprepared Kennedy is hailed by the "Progressive" left.

Kennedy Rates New York and New York Rates Her

Governor David A. Paterson has not yet appointed Caroline Kennedy to fill Hillary Clinton's Senate seat but the proposition seems to have an air of inevitability. Hopefully it won't occur. New York has a different style of corruption from Chicago. In Chicago the governor sells Senate seats for cash. In New York, cronyism, incompetence and legislated theft are the rule.

With respect to Sarah Palin, who does not come from a wealthy background and did not attend an Ivy League university, the Democrats and their television propagandists were eager to criticize her inexperience and make fun of her abilities, despite her having been elected to governor and having held an executive position. Let's see what kind of experience Caroline Kennedy has.

Besides being the scion of a wealthy family, Kennedy attended Harvard and Columbia, and so is acceptable to Progressives and their propagandists. She worked at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. After marrying, Kennedy lived on Park Avenue for about 20 years, unlike Wasilla an address acceptable to Progressives, and had two children. Kennedy holds a legal degree and has co-authored several books. She worked for two years in a $1 per year, part-time staff job for New York City's Department of Education. She was a successful fundraiser, raising over $65 million for New York's schools. She is also on the board of the American Ballet Theatre.

This is impressive experience indeed. Impressive, that is, for a rich housewife. The most impressive thing about Caroline Kennedy's resume is that it is probably the lightest weight resume of any serious contender for Senate in New York's history. It is impressive that someone with a resume this thin would be taken seriously for a City Council, much less a Senate seat.

What would make a lightweight like Kennedy think that she ought to be Senator? Her politically correct, socially acceptable ideology? Her rich family? Her attendance at expensive private schools? All of the above?

America has been in the process of devolving from a republic into an aristocracy. Kennedy represents not the natural aristocracy that Jefferson anticipated, but a throwback to the Federalist belief in an aristocracy based on family connections and inherited wealth. Caroline Kennedy's application for New York's Senate seat represents a deeper and more profound corruption than the Blagojevich scandal.

A second-rate mayor who bought his way into City Hall has recently been able to repeal the term limits law, undoubtedly through intelligently placed contributions and pressure. A city that has banished its middle class, destroyed tens of thousands of jobs and presented unlimited eminent domain and real estate development opportunities to developers who have failed to produce value but have managed to suck the state and city dry. A state that has seen more hard working people exit than any other state and has become a two-tiered society devoid of economic opportunity. A state that has banished freedom in favor of corrupt wealth and aristocracy, all in the hypocritical name of helping the poor.

Caroline Kennedy rates New York, and New York rates her.