Kevin's Reviews > Outliers: The Story of Success
Outliers: The Story of Success
by
by

The Banality of Neoliberalism...
1) Sloppy methodology:
--Let's take a gentle start. Even a lottery has real people winning it. If your methodology is to only examine the winners (and bypass the structure of the lottery system), then you can surely come up with some highly entertaining (and biased) results!
--The whole point of study designs/methodologies and statistics is to analyze the chaotic noise of the real world without getting distracted by certain human heuristics/biases (this does not mean we can avoid morals/politics, more later); see Ben Goldacre:
-I Think You'll Find It's a Bit More Complicated Than That
-Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks
...In fact, Goldacre has a couple words on Gladwell:
2) A First-World, Middle-Class Fantasy:
--"John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -Ronald Wright
--Onto morals/politics: the real-world lottery system, with its violent conquests, inherited wealth, abstract contradictions and social struggles are whitewashed into a bland, apolitical marketplace composed of competitive automatons each trying to maximize their personal gains/utility, culminating in a meritocracy.
--On this edifice, we see the heaps of First-World glossy-covered self-help (The 4-Hour Workweek), pop-psy, pop-econ (Freakonomics), and business books to make the target audience feel more professional/self-accomplished.
--Of course, this system (capitalism, state capitalism, neoliberalism, whatever you want to call it) has to work for some given its ceaseless mobilization of wage labour generating tremendous surpluses to extract from. The question is to what degree competition and meritocracy exist (not to mention the perverse consequences, let alone alternatives).
--Gladwell's storytelling features some highly political figures (Gates/Skadden/Oppenheimer); we have firmly stepped outside of cute marketing gimmicks and quirky entertainment/sports stats...
--Sterilizing the politics from the story requires limiting the scope of analysis to make meritocracy ("10,000-Hour Rule" to gain world-class expertise) more plausible. This requires skimming off undeserving peoples, usually starting with a national/colonial bias (by assuming the US/First World) and then certain classes/social groups.
--However, the system of capitalism is global; that was the whole point of colonialism, the slave market, the "coolie" market that replaced slavery, and today's transnational corporations and institutions (World Trade Organization, World Bank, IMF) backed by the US military to maintain capitalism's imperialism. Many poor countries are perfectly embedded into global capitalism, being the most "open for business" for transnational corporations their resources, dump their pollution, and (crucially) prevent alternatives ("Red Scare", "War on Terror", etc.): The Divide: A Brief Guide to Global Inequality and its Solutions
...Global capitalism features social dislocation, be it:
i) Booms of financial speculation/gentrification (And the Weak Suffer What They Must? Europe's Crisis and America's Economic Future) and jobless growth (Capitalism: A Ghost Story), or
ii) Busts leaving behind rust belts and mega slums (Planet of Slums).
...Thus, there's always enough dispossessed poor people to exploit (tens of millions of preventable deaths each year under global capitalism is somehow normalized), just as there's always enough environment to exploit (well, until that collapses: Facing the Anthropocene: Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System).
--Curiously, the US (in particular the book's "middle class" target audience) is more and more experiencing the spatial (global) and temporal (boom/bust cycles) nature of capitalism that have ravaged the Global South.
--The most destructive war in human history (WWII) was the "creative destruction" that saved global capitalism from the endless Great Depression, with the US as chief creditor/arms dealer. The post-WWII boom built the US "middle class" with the US as the factory of the world; this lasted only decades before it collapsed under contradictions (Super Imperialism: The Origin and Fundamentals of U.S. World Dominance).
--The US's next "creative destruction" was to smash its unions and factories (outsourcing) to unleash Wall Street's Finance Capitalism, resulting in the past 40+ years of global booms/busts while parts of the US were left with Rust Belt deindustrialization, opioid crises, precarious work, mass homelessness and uninsured, etc.
--Without a clear understanding of the profit-seeking spatial/temporal logic and disruptions of global capitalism (indeed abstract, where long-term power hides), those disillusioned with the status quo are susceptible to scapegoating, symptomatic explanations targeting the visibly-different and vulnerable. Hence, "global Trumpism" repeating the history of fascism which arose during the Great Depression. Vijay Prashad elaborates:
-
-
--Accessible resources capitalism's abstract contradictions:
-Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: or, How Capitalism Works—and How It Fails
-Another Now: Dispatches from an Alternative Present (including alternatives!)
-Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism
-Bullshit Jobs: A Theory
--On a more positive(?) note, search up "Malcolm Gladwell Book Generator" and look at all the fashionable book covers and subtitles:
-My Retirement: What Super-Trendy Book Buyers Like Yourself Are Paying For
-Subtitles: How Secondary Titles Inflate a Sense of Importance
-Vague: The Power of Generalization to Impress the Bored
...and my favorite:
-Nothing: What Sandcastles Can Teach Us About North Korean Economic Policy
1) Sloppy methodology:
--Let's take a gentle start. Even a lottery has real people winning it. If your methodology is to only examine the winners (and bypass the structure of the lottery system), then you can surely come up with some highly entertaining (and biased) results!
--The whole point of study designs/methodologies and statistics is to analyze the chaotic noise of the real world without getting distracted by certain human heuristics/biases (this does not mean we can avoid morals/politics, more later); see Ben Goldacre:
-I Think You'll Find It's a Bit More Complicated Than That
-Bad Science: Quacks, Hacks, and Big Pharma Flacks
...In fact, Goldacre has a couple words on Gladwell:
On my left shoulder there is an angel. She says it's risky to extrapolate from rarefied laboratory conditions to the real world. She says that publication bias in this field [psychology] is extensive, so whenever researches get negative findings, they're probably left unpublished in a desk drawer. And she says it's uncommon to see a genuinely systematic review of the literature on these topics, so you rarely get to see all the conflicting research in one place. My angel has read the books of Malcolm Gladwell, and she finds them to be silly and overstated.--Here's a revealing interview of Gladwell as a salesperson rather than a serious social theorist, study design be damned (emphases added; source: ):
The A.V. Club: Your books all focus on singularities—in The Tipping Point, singular events, in Blink, singular moments, and in Outliers, singular people. Was there a single instance in your life that made you start seeing the world in terms of single points?...My definition of "mundane" (banality) features salespeople (con artists?) pretending to popularize social theory while actually just selling quirky stories that conveniently re-enforce status quo myths.
Malcolm Gladwell: I just think I'm attracted to those kinds of singular things because they always make the best stories. I'm in the storytelling business, and so you're always drawn to the unusual. And early on, I discovered that's the easiest way to tell stories, so I've stuck with it ever since. And if you come up through a newspaper as I did, your whole goal is to get a story on the front page, and you only get something on the front page if it's unusual, so you're quickly weaned off the notion that you should be interested in the mundane.
2) A First-World, Middle-Class Fantasy:
--"John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -Ronald Wright
--Onto morals/politics: the real-world lottery system, with its violent conquests, inherited wealth, abstract contradictions and social struggles are whitewashed into a bland, apolitical marketplace composed of competitive automatons each trying to maximize their personal gains/utility, culminating in a meritocracy.
--On this edifice, we see the heaps of First-World glossy-covered self-help (The 4-Hour Workweek), pop-psy, pop-econ (Freakonomics), and business books to make the target audience feel more professional/self-accomplished.
--Of course, this system (capitalism, state capitalism, neoliberalism, whatever you want to call it) has to work for some given its ceaseless mobilization of wage labour generating tremendous surpluses to extract from. The question is to what degree competition and meritocracy exist (not to mention the perverse consequences, let alone alternatives).
--Gladwell's storytelling features some highly political figures (Gates/Skadden/Oppenheimer); we have firmly stepped outside of cute marketing gimmicks and quirky entertainment/sports stats...
--Sterilizing the politics from the story requires limiting the scope of analysis to make meritocracy ("10,000-Hour Rule" to gain world-class expertise) more plausible. This requires skimming off undeserving peoples, usually starting with a national/colonial bias (by assuming the US/First World) and then certain classes/social groups.
--However, the system of capitalism is global; that was the whole point of colonialism, the slave market, the "coolie" market that replaced slavery, and today's transnational corporations and institutions (World Trade Organization, World Bank, IMF) backed by the US military to maintain capitalism's imperialism. Many poor countries are perfectly embedded into global capitalism, being the most "open for business" for transnational corporations their resources, dump their pollution, and (crucially) prevent alternatives ("Red Scare", "War on Terror", etc.): The Divide: A Brief Guide to Global Inequality and its Solutions
...Global capitalism features social dislocation, be it:
i) Booms of financial speculation/gentrification (And the Weak Suffer What They Must? Europe's Crisis and America's Economic Future) and jobless growth (Capitalism: A Ghost Story), or
ii) Busts leaving behind rust belts and mega slums (Planet of Slums).
...Thus, there's always enough dispossessed poor people to exploit (tens of millions of preventable deaths each year under global capitalism is somehow normalized), just as there's always enough environment to exploit (well, until that collapses: Facing the Anthropocene: Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System).
--Curiously, the US (in particular the book's "middle class" target audience) is more and more experiencing the spatial (global) and temporal (boom/bust cycles) nature of capitalism that have ravaged the Global South.
--The most destructive war in human history (WWII) was the "creative destruction" that saved global capitalism from the endless Great Depression, with the US as chief creditor/arms dealer. The post-WWII boom built the US "middle class" with the US as the factory of the world; this lasted only decades before it collapsed under contradictions (Super Imperialism: The Origin and Fundamentals of U.S. World Dominance).
--The US's next "creative destruction" was to smash its unions and factories (outsourcing) to unleash Wall Street's Finance Capitalism, resulting in the past 40+ years of global booms/busts while parts of the US were left with Rust Belt deindustrialization, opioid crises, precarious work, mass homelessness and uninsured, etc.
--Without a clear understanding of the profit-seeking spatial/temporal logic and disruptions of global capitalism (indeed abstract, where long-term power hides), those disillusioned with the status quo are susceptible to scapegoating, symptomatic explanations targeting the visibly-different and vulnerable. Hence, "global Trumpism" repeating the history of fascism which arose during the Great Depression. Vijay Prashad elaborates:
-
-
--Accessible resources capitalism's abstract contradictions:
-Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: or, How Capitalism Works—and How It Fails
-Another Now: Dispatches from an Alternative Present (including alternatives!)
-Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism
-Bullshit Jobs: A Theory
--On a more positive(?) note, search up "Malcolm Gladwell Book Generator" and look at all the fashionable book covers and subtitles:
-My Retirement: What Super-Trendy Book Buyers Like Yourself Are Paying For
-Subtitles: How Secondary Titles Inflate a Sense of Importance
-Vague: The Power of Generalization to Impress the Bored
...and my favorite:
-Nothing: What Sandcastles Can Teach Us About North Korean Economic Policy

Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Outliers.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Finished Reading
September 28, 2014
– Shelved
Comments Showing 1-32 of 32 (32 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Rishab
(new)
May 06, 2020 01:57AM

reply
|
flag

Cheers! I waded through a lot of trash to educate myself after high school, and I plan to go back and salvage my efforts by leaving some thoughtful reviews haha. I have many still to do: Pinker, Sam Harris, Hitchens, Krugman, Michael Lewis, Ron Paul, Hayek, Mises, etc.

Cheers! I waded through a lot of trash to educate myself after high s..."
What's wrong with Hitchens? (Besides his reactionary turn after 9/11)

Hitchen's reactionary turn is indeed my focus, as he went quite neocon which was a bad match with his rhetorical flair (ex. "bomb them back to the Stone Age").
As for prior, I'm not inclined to nitpick because I think a diversity of tactics/perspectives is useful. I remember his pre-neocon works as more style than substance (esp. the Clinton book, so much more could be in that). I think style can be very useful for grabbing attention as it did with me, but this ratio can make one a loose cannon.


Cheers Peter, that's indeed the struggle with deciding the audience; I rarely review the "fluff piece" genre, so I'm set in the mode of preaching to the critical social science audience ;)
But now that you mention it, I don't think there can be an opener summary of this book that isn't as vague as the description on Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ. Gladwell isn't actually interested in social theory. He's interested in quirky stories to sell books:
"The A.V. Club: Your books all focus on singularities—in The Tipping Point, singular events, in Blink, singular moments, and in Outliers, singular people. Was there a single instance in your life that made you start seeing the world in terms of single points?
Malcolm Gladwell: I just think I'm attracted to those kinds of singular things because they always make the best stories. I'm in the storytelling business, and so you're always drawn to the unusual. And early on, I discovered that's the easiest way to tell stories, so I've stuck with it ever since. And if you come up through a newspaper as I did, your whole goal is to get a story on the front page, and you only get something on the front page if it's unusual, so you're quickly weaned off the notion that you should be interested in the mundane."
Blasphemy.


oh for sure! I imagine Gladwell's podcast is fun. Like, we can appreciate the different purposes for a charismatic travelling show vs. geopolitical theory, or a vivid nature show vs. ecological theory.
I'm the last to prance around on my high horse regarding entertainment podcasts. When i was first started learning "economics"/social issues, I had to wean myself off of Rogan's podcast back when I was an apolitical adolescent. In fact, Rogan got me into Ron Paul (anti-intervention rhetoric, since for a novice understanding empire was more accessible than understanding "economics"), who got me into Mises (more "free market" than Hayek!).
And even then, it was foreign policy that alerted me first, when Rogan repeated invited I-only-consider-religious-texts New Imperialist Sam Harris. Of course, Rogan is mostly an empty vessel, having also had on stellar anti-imperialist Abby Martin numerous times. But it's no surprise the reactionary crowd is more accessible to a centrist in the heart of the US entertainment industry.


Cheers Robert! I haven’t heard Gladwell on radio and wasn’t aware of the “intellectual with an anti-intellectual stance�. It’s messy because I’m all about (1) opening up the silos of academia with popular works (hence recommending Ben Goldacre to replace the Gladwell-types), and (2) critiquing the elitism in the intelligentsia. Of course, neither of these require being anti-intellectual, which at best seems like some confused aestheticism and at worst is conveniently reactionary.


I'm reminded of Varoufakis' accessible quip on why "economics" is not a "science" like natural (esp. physical) sciences, but a social science (which all its humanities):
a) Natural (esp. physical) sciences: some separation in our observations and experimentations, i.e. we can observe the weather/run isolated experiments, where our resulting theories will not fundamentally change the weather that we are studying.
b) Social science: much less separation where our theories can directly change what we are studying, i.e. economists, being perceived as the experts on the economy, can alter the behavior of participants in the economy with their theories and thus the economy that is being studied changes. Isolating human communities to run experiments is also difficult.
...Of course, the latter does not excuse sloppy methodologies, but the point is to understand the limitations of rigid quantifications that miss the volatilities/qualitative aspects etc.
...So, Varoufakis critiques the overly-deterministic/rigid quantification of certain "Marxist economists" (and aspects of Marx himself, ex. Marx's Value, Price and Profit pamphlet) as well as Keynes' The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, saying both Marx/Keynes are at their best when they appreciate the volatility/uncertainty/contradictions of capitalism. Source: youtube lecture "Yanis Varoufakis: Confessions of an Erratic Marxist /// 14th May 2013".
...a further example is the successes/limitations/contradictions of the paradigm of "evidence-based medicine", where "health" has a lot of coverage in natural/physical sciences as well as social sciences. It shouldn't be surprising that psychology is even messier.


"By Gladwell’s warped reasoning, young Black people in New Orleans with a history of encounters with the criminal justice system should be picked up and exiled straight from the street to Seattle or Salt Lake City, before their next conviction, for the greater good. If the exiled young man was raised in a neighborhood of deep poverty, the rest of his family should probably be sent out of town, too � but not to the same city as the son, since that would tend to further concentrate the Black poverty that, according to Gladwell, makes cities go bad, and would also reinforce the son’s bad habits. Momma and daughter get a ticket to Minneapolis."
Pretty intellectually embarrassing on Mr. Gladwell's part.


"By Gladwell’s w..."
Cheers Sam, your reference also reminds me that I first read about the "broken windows theory" on crime prevention in Gladwell's sterile The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference.
It is disturbing how Gladwell can take social theory mired in the messy real-world and sanitize them into abstractions that conveniently match confirmation biases for middle-class liberal consumption. Jordan Peterson's 12 Rules for Life does the same for conservatives, which I'm still working on...

Cheers David, you reminded me of starting to self-explore nonfiction in high school and seeing the glossy covers of Gladwell's books prominently displayed in the public library. I'd like think when I then worked for the library I made sure they became shelved like all the other books, but I can't remember...

On marketing books, I'm also reminded of Michael Hudson/Varoufakis' quip that people only buy Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century to display it in their "I'm educated" bookshelves, leaving it mostly unread...

This book is targeting a lay audience, so it will definitely fail to snare you just a few years back, Steve :)
However, I first read it when I was uncritical/apolitical, and could really have used some big-picture frameworks (which I lay out here, rather than actually detailing the specific anecdotes/contradictory theories) to unpack the content and not get lulled into the accessible rhetoric.
We all start uncritical; it's a long process. If I only review critical nonfiction, that's already severely narrowing the audience. Politically, I don't think we can only prioritize deep dives; communication (i.e. addressing the contradictory concerns of a wide variety of audiences) seems neglected.


That's one way to get rid of a bad book haha! Alas, I was much more naïve when I first read Gladwell and nonfiction in general.
I remember telling my dad about reading in Gladwell that Chinese culture had a strong work ethic because rice cultivation was so difficult. He was not impressed.
Also reminds me of starting "economics" with Mises (recommended by Ron Paul, who hooked me with his anti-intervention rhetoric) and telling my dad how liberalism's "free trade" was the path to peace/prosperity because both countries participate in mutual business and will not jeopardize this. He was not impressed.


Cheers Sabareesh, I'm grateful for the authors that got me pass Gladwell ;)


Hi Julier, that’s exactly my experience as well. I would unpack this as follows:
1) Gladwell is a talented salesperson (“I'm in the storytelling business […] your whole goal is to get a story on the front page�), which is rewarded in our capitalist society which tries to commodify everything. Our cultural “value� system (i.e. “success�) is geared for this skill.
2) On a deeper level, Gladwell’s topics speak to the public hunger of social analysis, which is so purposefully vapid under capitalism dominated by advertising/entertainment (since the goal is to increase short-term sales, not long-term understanding/fulfilment which could transcend short-term addictions).
…Thus, in the condition of a sea of vapid ads and news media sensationalism (basically entertainment), a talented salesperson can exploit this by extracting tidbits from social analysis and hype it up for sale with quirky ads like:
Ch.8: Rice Paddies and Math Tests...A brief glimpse at social analysis is indeed a breath of fresh air!
“No one who can rise before dawn three hundred sixty days a year fails to make his family rich�
…Of course, if we are lucky to then pursue these subjects, we soon realize that any meaningful social analysis Gladwell fails to completely distort are still placed outside of critical context (ex. the changing values behind our changing definitions of “success�?) and into the status quo context.
--This salesperson (i.e. grifter, con artist) phenomenon reminds me of unpacking Jordan Peterson’s 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos (one of his lures is mentioning “s³Ü´Ú´Ú±ð°ù¾±²Ô²µâ€� 139 times).