Gladwell has a really strong liberal bias. Of course he doesn’t see it, he’s been to too many New York cocktail parties.
I just loved much of that book, especially the age of hockey players and the 10,000 rule. The timing of your arrival in the world too.
If he had been less biased he would have pointed out how the timing of affirmative action had placed an increased number of blacks in college and later in high positions, e.g., Fannie Mae, American Express, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, TIAA-CREF, the government, etc.
Instead he says southern men have a problem. Huh? He cites one silly psychological study about men from the south and how they behave in the library in Minnesota (or was it Michigan)?. Double huh. Traces it back to Appalachia. Totally overlooks the bias on the part of the experimenters or the fact that these are out of state students and 100 other possible explanations. He totally overlooks the much higher level of aggression on the part of urban black men. That wouldn’t fit into his paradigm of southern white men are bad.
Oh yes, he also butchered the part about the Italian men who moved to PA who didn’t get heart disease. Any epidemiologist reading that chapter would tear their hair out.
In spite of all the crap he tries to peddle, the good parts were as interesting as anything I’ve read in the past 5 years.
Great analysis - you’ve captured the essence of Gladwell.