The cognitive elite are highly intelligent people who have quietly moved into higher social positions throughout the twentieth century in America. In the early part of the century, many of these individuals were not well-educated and lived among the general population, doing different jobs. As time went on, smarter people started to concentrate in top colleges and high-status jobs, creating a new class of cognitive elites. This group now has significant influence in areas like business, law, medicine, and politics. Joining this elite class depends on intelligence rather than social background or ethnicity, allowing more people to rise to powerful roles.
Meritocracy has led to many positive changes, allowing people to succeed based on their talent and hard work. This idea matches what Americans believe: that everyone should have the chance to do well. Advancements in technology have created more jobs for people with high IQs, helping them move from less satisfying jobs to better ones. These advancements also allow people to work together from anywhere in the world through modern communication tools. As a result, productivity and creativity have improved, and the economy has grown. Traditional social classes are disappearing as society values merit more than status. Overall, these changes promote individual success and reflect important American values.
The cognitive elite is becoming increasingly isolated from the rest of society, viewing the world through a narrow perspective shaped by their shared experiences. Factors like the end of the military draft and segregated education contribute to this separation. Social critic Mickey Kaus highlights that members of the cognitive elite often only socialize with those of similar intelligence, making it hard for them to understand the beliefs of ordinary people. Their lifestyles are similar, as they frequent the same schools, neighborhoods, and media. This isolation is growing, with technology and communication enhancing their separation, leading them to form a distinct class that lacks connection with broader society.
The main ideas discuss how the relationship between the cognitive elite and wealthy Americans is changing and what it means for society. In the past, especially before 1960, the government had less power in people's lives, so the ideas of the cognitive elite didn't greatly influence most Americans. But since then, the government has become more centralized, giving more influence to the cognitive elite over laws and court decisions.
From the 1960s to the 1980s, political fights mainly involved clear liberal and conservative sides. However, in recent years, those distinctions have faded. Wealthy people and intellectuals, once seen as opposites, now share more interests. The affluent class is growing, and many in this group are now well-educated and financially successful, leading them to align more closely with intellectual leaders. This relationship can be concerning because as these groups come together, they may prioritize their own interests, such as safety for their families and good education.
Affluence is defined as having an income over $100,000 a year. More families have become affluent, which highlights a rising gap between the rich and everyone else. While the average family income has not increased much since the 1970s, the number of affluent families has continued to rise, driven by broader economic changes, not just by specific government policies.
As more people become affluent, they may start to separate themselves from public institutions they don't like and seek private alternatives. This "secession of the successful" means wealthier individuals might avoid using public schools or services. This change could affect the political system because affluent people tend to vote more and give money to political campaigns, making their influence stronger. Overall, as the cognitive elite and affluent Americans join forces, they may reshape how democracy and civic life work in the United States.
There are growing worries about the underclass in society, especially concerning children born to unmarried mothers with low cognitive ability. These children often struggle with many challenges, such as low social and economic standing, behavior problems, and a higher chance of going to prison. Their situation becomes even harder due to poor home environments that limit improvements. As these children grow up, their future looks bleak because they will face a tougher job market with low-skill jobs that pay very little. Raising the minimum wage may not help; it could lead to job losses and make things worse.
The formation of an underclass community among whites is also increasing, particularly with the rise in illegitimate births among low-income and low-cognitive women. The number of these births is going up in poor areas, raising questions about how well these communities can cope. Statistics show that many of the illegitimate births among whites come from women with below-average IQs, which may result in negative outcomes for their children.
A critical mass concept is important here: when a community reaches a certain number of illegitimate births and individuals with low cognitive ability, it can lead to more crime, social problems, and a breakdown of community structures. This trend reflects what has been seen in historically disadvantaged groups. As the number of low-cognitive individuals grows, the rest of society may respond with frustration instead of understanding, often wanting to deal with the issues more harshly.
Finally, there is a major concern that the resources needed to support complex communities are declining, as populations with lower cognitive abilities can weaken social organization. Although there are some signs that communities are trying to recover, such as efforts to reduce crime and strengthen families, the rising number of children without fathers and the migration of more capable individuals could make these efforts ineffective. Without significant changes, the problems are likely to increase, leading to serious challenges for society.
When a society becomes wealthy, the people with more resources often feel sympathy or guilt for those who are poorer. This leads to the creation of a welfare state aimed at helping the needy. However, as the wealthy and educated become more fearful and distrustful of these recipients, the welfare system may evolve into what is called a custodial state. This state would provide services to the underclass while limiting their independence, as those in power lose faith in traditional social programs.
In this future scenario, the cognitive elite may view the underclass as being in their situation due to inherent issues that cannot be easily fixed. As a result, they may push for more state-run programs such as childcare and education, which would deeply involve the government in the lives of the underclass. The hope is that these services will lead to better outcomes for children and families. Homelessness could decrease as more people are placed in controlled environments or shelters, and stricter policing may emerge in response to rising crime fears. Enhanced surveillance and technology for tracking offenders may also be accepted.
Geographically, the underclass is likely to become more isolated in the inner cities, where most services will be located. As family structures break down and their culture diverges from mainstream society, many children will struggle to rise above their circumstances. This could lead to an increase in the underclass size, making it harder for families to instill positive values in their children.
Furthermore, as social issues worsen, racism may resurface in more severe forms. The balance between acknowledging racial issues and the fears surrounding them could lead to greater societal division. Overall, without a thoughtful approach to policy-making, society risks creating a permanent underclass reliant on government support, deviating from ideals of individualism and equal opportunity. Addressing these problems is essential for ensuring everyone has a chance for a fulfilling life.