« The Lunatic Fringe | Main | More Thoughts On Selling Cars »



Chuckles is a social construction! And blacks and whites are social constructions, unless we want to perform kidney transplants or prescribe Bidil or enact racial preferences.

Chuckles, you do know that writing

"Youre a moron"

makes you look foolish? One might at least take the time to properly spell and punctuate when you're calling the *other* guy an idiot! :)

[by the way tommy, this guy is too stupid to breathe. Not really worth your time, or mine for that matter. He probably thinks that the sun and the moon are "socially constructed". ]



I apologize if it went over my head. It was quite amusing. If it was satire, it was quite good.


I thought Brian's post might have been satirical, but it was so close to what people were writing seriously, it was hard to tell.


I just took one look at his blog and hit the back button. It's so visually busy and cluttered I didn't want to spend more than 10 seconds there, much try to find a comments section.


"several populations of African descent"

There is no such thing as Africa! Populations of African descent are socially constructed! All delineations of humans based on geographic ancestry are equally arbitrary! And in other news, 3.8 is just as close to 3.9 as 3.8 is to 38098098!


"the bankrupt classical notion of race into modern day population genetics"

derrida, PLEASE! :)

and here's your numerical accuracy, ya idjit...


Genetic structure, self-identified race/ethnicity, and confounding in case-control association studies.

* Tang H,
* Quertermous T,
* Rodriguez B,
* Kardia SL,
* Zhu X,
* Brown A,
* Pankow JS,
* Province MA,
* Hunt SC,
* Boerwinkle E,
* Schork NJ,
* Risch NJ.

Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA.

We have analyzed genetic data for 326 microsatellite markers that were typed uniformly in a large multiethnic population-based sample of individuals as part of a study of the genetics of hypertension (Family Blood Pressure Program). Subjects identified themselves as belonging to one of four major racial/ethnic groups (white, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic) and were recruited from 15 different geographic locales within the United States and Taiwan. Genetic cluster analysis of the microsatellite markers produced four major clusters, which showed near-perfect correspondence with the four self-reported race/ethnicity categories. Of 3,636 subjects of varying race/ethnicity, only 5 (0.14%) showed genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified race/ethnicity. On the other hand, we detected only modest genetic differentiation between different current geographic locales within each race/ethnicity group. Thus, ancient geographic ancestry, which is highly correlated with self-identified race/ethnicity--as opposed to current residence--is the major determinant of genetic structure in the U.S. population. Implications of this genetic structure for case-control association studies are discussed.


The role of self-defined race/ethnicity in population structure control.

* Liu XQ,
* Paterson AD,
* John EM,
* Knight JA.

Program in Genetics and Genomic Biology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Population-based association studies are powerful tools for the genetic mapping of complex diseases. However, this method is sensitive to potential confounding by population structure. While statistical methods that use genetic markers to detect and control for population structure have been the focus of current literature, the utility of self-defined race/ethnicity in controlling for population structure has been controversial. In this study of 1334 individuals, who self-identified as either African American, European American or Hispanic, we demonstrated that when the true underlying genetic structure and the self-defined racial/ethnic groups were roughly in agreement with each other, the self-defined race/ethnicity information was useful in the control of population structure.


Genetic structure of human populations.

* Rosenberg NA,
* Pritchard JK,
* Weber JL,
* Cann HM,
* Kidd KK,
* Zhivotovsky LA,
* Feldman MW.

Molecular and Computational Biology, 1042 West 36th Place DRB 289, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA. noahr@usc.edu

We studied human population structure using genotypes at 377 autosomal microsatellite loci in 1056 individuals from 52 populations. Within-population differences among individuals account for 93 to 95% of genetic variation; differences among major groups constitute only 3 to 5%. Nevertheless, without using prior information about the origins of individuals, we identified six main genetic clusters, five of which correspond to major geographic regions, and subclusters that often correspond to individual populations. General agreement of genetic and predefined populations suggests that self-reported ancestry can facilitate assessments of epidemiological risks but does not obviate the need to use genetic information in genetic association studies.


Does *it* see that cluster analysis specifies no right number of clusters

Robert Tibshirani, Guenther Walther and Trevor Hastie.
"Estimating the number of clusters in a dataset via the Gap statistic". Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B, 63:411-423,2001.



Hey Sweetness...

Sailer only allowed comments after Malcolm called him on his hypocrisy.

Don't you have a better response to my post? Or was it so bloody accurate in its assumptions about the basis of Sailer's arguments?

Again..."Black men like to be seen overpaying for things" could only be written by someone with contempt, whether conscious or subconscious, for black people.

Pure and simple.

Ben Donley

* I can't believe Malcolm Gladwell has time to read his blog comments. We cannot possibly be providing intellectual stimulation.

* Steve Sailer is apparently desperate to have a scar on his face that he can say he got from Malcolm Gladwell. That's vanity more than chicken.

* I don't read MG's blog to hear about racist jackasses. I skipped that entry because it got obvious and boring. Bad polling technique. It wasn't boring to racists.

* SS's readers are vain and looking for a fight. They'll outnumber thoughtful people in blog comments. MG should have thought of that.

Please stop talking to Steve Sailer, y'all. Unless he says something interesting or new. Basically, forever.

Michael Blowhard

The time really has come for Malcolm to write a profile of Sailer! He might want to spend a little time with da boyz at GNXP too. I'm looking forward to that piece.

BTW, I was raised Presbyterian. As Dave Barry likes to say, Presbyterianism is a synonym for "we pay retail." New York City, where I live, is full of hard-bargaining non-Presbyterians, few of whom have any respect for the concept of "list price."

I'm pretty sure I've been outbargained by lots of them.

Can we, using MG's logic, conclude that everyone who has squeezed a few extra bucks out of me was motivated by unconscious anti-Presbyterianism?



"Sailer only allowed comments after Malcolm called him on his hypocrisy."

Sailer already explained that his main blog is old-fashioned and doesn't allow for comments. He went ahead and enabled comments on his archiving blog. The fact that comments weren't allowed on the archiving blog isn't anything unusual. It is, after all, an archive, not a place originally intended for significant debate. Given that, who wants it being filled with endless spam about boner pills and pornography? Since Gladwell was so concerned with it, Sailer did what he could to accommodate Gladwell's concerns. Sounds reasonable to me.

And so far Gladwell has yet to take advantage of that open comment policy, so who cares?

Besides, as has been pointed out previously, Gladwell could have easily sent Sailer an email and I'm sure Sailer would have been happy to publish it in full. Furthermore, this entire debate between Gladwell and Sailer has mostly focused on what Gladwell has said in his pieces versus what Sailer has said in his own blog's writings, not what is or is not going on in the comments section of either blog. Sailer generally provides some indication in the comments section of Gladwell's blog to let him know that he is writing something about Gladwell on his own blog, providing Gladwell an opportunity to respond to Sailer's criticisms if he cares to do so. That seems like the gentlemanly thing to do.

This concern about blog comments appears to be little more than a red herring.


"Ancillary evidence suggests that the dealerships' disparate treatment of women and blacks may be caused by dealers' statistical inferences about consumers' reservation prices, but the data do not strongly support any single theory of discrimination."

Folks, the discussion or conclusion section of any research study is the OPINION of the researcher, not a rehash of the data. The data show that car dealers discriminate based on race and gender. End of story. There is NO evidence in this study that the car dealers' behavior was caused by statistical inference of reserve prices. That is a hypothesis that will have to be supported with hard data in another study. It is not supported in this study whatsoever from what I see.

A researcher's next step is either to replicate these results in another sample, expand the study to other car dealers or selling situations, or go and chase down any of the SPECULATIONS offered in the conclusion/discussion section in future studies.

No one here in my cursory scroll, offered the results (DATA, not conclusions) of a study in which:

1. Black male consumers desire to pay more for a product than another consumer type.

2. Car dealers desire to offer consumers a fair price, therefore alter their quotes based on who is more likely to low-ball. If their goal is to maximize margin on a sale then there is no reason for the unequal treatment that makes sense other than implicit bias or lack of skill in closing sales with some customers.

3. The well-documented (supported by DATA) tendency of women to avoid negotiations in monetary transactions with men. Why on earth wouldn't these dealers, if male, offer women who don't tend to negotiate with them a lower initial price?

4. Black and White women differ in their purchasing behaviors, with Black women low-balling more frequently than White women.

5. White men refuse to negotiate prices more than Black men or Black/White women.

Conjecture and speculation are not scientfic. Without the data to back it up I am calling "Bullshit" on this little theory.

Michael Byrnes

There's one key point in Ayres' study that no one seems to mention. It wasn't just about the initial offer made, his participants had to haggle for up to an hour and then report the inital offer and the final offer.

The FINAL offer to black men was higher than the INITIAL offer to white men.


All about where Steve's paycheck comes from:

Follow the money Malcolm.

Steve is basically paid to do this so he is working off your site. That is not cool in and of itself.




Still out with Steve Sailer! It's not censorship if you don't want his comments on *your* blog, but it is hypocrisy if he cries censorship while blocking others from commenting on his blog.


and light:
"I thought we left behind most of these notions following the Civil War."

Lincoln was a white supremacist :

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."


Mr Gladwell,

I don't know if you are reading these now, but I'll post this one just in case.

I'm hungry for a fresh portion of your insights and am disgusted to see that your site is being hijacked by these lowlifes.

That being said, the fact that you, as a bestselling author would even bother to think about the comments of a bunch of nobody bloggers shows me a humility which is certainly worthy of respect.

best wishes,


I wouldn't pay too much attention to Steve Sailer's views on race. Anyone who writes for a site (Virginia Dare, or VDARE) named for the first white child born in America, has serious problems.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo


  • I'm a writer for the New Yorker magazine, and the author of four books, "The Tipping Point: How Little Things Make a Big Difference", "Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking" and "Outliers: The Story of Success." My latest book, "What the Dog Saw" is a compilation of stories published in The New Yorker. I was born in England, and raised in southwestern Ontario in Canada. Now I live in New York City.

    My great claim to fame is that I'm from the town where they invented the BlackBerry. My family also believes (with some justification) that we are distantly related to Colin Powell. I invite you to look closely at the photograph above and draw your own conclusions.

My Website


  • What the Dog Saw

    buy from amazon


    buy from amazon

    buy from amazon UK


    buy from amazon

    buy from amazon UK

    Tipping Point

    buy from amazon

Recent Articles

Blog powered by Typepad