5 ms·
Why is this at all surprising? In any status-conscious society (read: any human society), given enough time, the people who make it to the top will invariably
by oofnik 4y ago
Why is this at all surprising?
In any status-conscious society (read: any human society), given enough time, the people who make it to the top will invariably maximize opportunity afforded to their affinity group (i.e. offspring) at the expense of everyone else. This process manifests itself regardless of the role merit plays in the sorting algorithm. If the rules are relatively meritocratic (and relatively stable), and merit broadly defined is largely a heritable trait either via genetics or culture, it follows that given enough iterations, a structure will eventually emerge that exhibits strong nepotistic tendencies. The growing call for greater diversity and equity among high-status occupations is a reaction to this phenomenon.
Alternatively, many long-lasting power structures throughout history attempted to mitigate the phenomenon of hereditary nepotism via the policy of enforced celibacy among the elite class: eunuch advisors in many classical near-Eastern empires, Catholic clergymen, etc.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago> many long-lasting power structures throughout history attempted to mitigate the phenomenon of hereditary nepotism via the policy of enforced celibacy among the elite class: eunuch advisors in many classical near-Eastern empires That is not a goal of having eunuchs around. Eunuchs usually don't have children, but they pretty much always have family members.
- raducu 4y ago> attempted to mitigate the phenomenon of hereditary nepotism via the policy of enforced celibacy among the elite class That just tells us nepotism is bad. We have much better ways of dealing with it -- strong independent institutions, transparent rules, free education, social programs for the poor and so on.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- klqp 4y agoThis is an excellent explanation, but I have one small remark: Diversity and equity is taught at elite cadre schools and used as a distinguishing marker from the proletariat. This gives elite children a wedge to get into Ive League institutions without high test scores. Think of it as the new "extracurricular activity" on steroids. Diversity and equity have been co-opted by the elites and are a powerful tool (smoke screen).
- barry-cotter 4y agoQuite. See abolishing the GRE and similar exams for entrance to graduate school as well. Letters of introduction come much easier to the right sort of people than to the kind of strivers who have to rely on objective tests to get into prestigious institutions.
- rayiner 4y agoI went to a merit admissions high school, and as a teenager I’d say stuff like “there are too many Asian nerds here, we should get rid of the admissions tests!” to be edgy. (I was obviously joking—I was an Asian nerd who got in on standardized testing.) In recent years I’ve been shocked to learn how many “nice” liberals basically agree with such statements, except unironically.
- bhouston 4y ago> Diversity and equity is taught at elite cadre schools and used as a distinguishing marker from the proletariat. This gives elite children a wedge to get into Ive League institutions without high test scores. Can you prove that in any way? This sounds like a made up "fact."
- aquaduck 4y agoI'm not OP, but this is a made-up interpretation, not a fact. Unlike facts, interpretations don't have unambiguous true/false values - the question is whether or not (or to what extent) the statement is consistent with facts.
- 4y ago
- carlob 4y agoA small caveat: nepotism was the practice when cardinals (who were celibate) would push their nephews into positions of power. So, strictly speaking, it is the other way around: celibacy caused nepotism, otherwise we would have had filism (from filius/son rather than from nepos/nephew).
- barry-cotter 4y agoCardinals were very often not actually celibate, just like less promoted priests.
- carlob 4y agoYeah, those nephew were often illegitimate sons, but that just goes to prove that forced celibacy has never worked.
- barry-cotter 4y agoDepends what you mean by “worked”. It prevented the emergence of priest kings quite well. Not allowing legitimate sons puts a major crimp in anyone’s plans to turn a religious organization’s land into their personal property. See how the Teutonic order turned into Brandenburg upon Protestantisation.
- treis 4y agoThe Pope was a priest king for centuries not to mention the smattering of Bishop/Cardinal led mini statesi n the HRE.
- RickJWagner 4y agoNepotism today is probably most notable in politicians and Hollywood. (Hollywood is especially fascinating. Royalty runs rampant there.)
- zzbzq 4y ago
- mr90210 4y ago> Why is this at all surprising? That's exactly my reaction. It's like concluding that 1+1 is equal to 2.
- Cthulhu_ 4y ago> In any status-conscious society (read: any human society), given enough time, the people who make it to the top will invariably maximize opportunity afforded to their affinity group (i.e. offspring) at the expense of everyone else. You state this as if it's an inescapable fact instead of something that we as a society should improve upon. Case in point, I grew up in a "working class" factory but thanks to socialist policies of affordable and state-sponsored education, I got a college degree and work in IT now. Everyone should have that opportunity IMO. Of course, your point does stand, because our government started to pull up the ladder behind me; first with policies to reduce "eternal students", people who abused the system and stayed in school until their 30s because they got paid; then with getting rid of the state-paid thing entirely, changing the whole scholarship system to a loan - leading to young graduates to start their career tens of thousands in debt. Great start, keep 'em financially weak. They seem to be reversing that, but there is a whole generation now that has suffered under it. TL;DR, I think education at all levels should be free or cheap / affordable, to avoid education becoming something for the rich elite.
- nemo44x 4y agoEducation is everywhere and essentially free today. There’s tons of content, some even from universities, on the internet and plenty of forums stocked with experts on subjects. It’s the credential that’s expensive. It’s the gate you must pass through. It would be nice if there were ways to determine someone’s level of expertise in a subject that didn’t directly involve the university system.
- goodpoint 4y ago> Why is this at all surprising? Nobody said it is surprising. You don't need something to be surprising to write an article about it. Nepotism has been around for millennia and it's good to point the finger at it.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoLife is not fair. It only bothers you if you allow it to. Don't be bitter. Be better. Be grateful for what you have.