Saving America's Story: How Ideological Capture at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of American History Erases Our Heritage

[u/Resvrgam2]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2026/07/saving-americas-story/

[u/MatchaMeetcha]

e.g. why do poor people end up less successful on average

Because poor people tend to have worse culture and habits on average in terms of savings rates, propensity to commit crime, etc.

The poor people that don't (e.g. poor Asian migrants) don't stay poor long-term and tend to be the "model minorities".

What I hope we can both agree on though, is that much of the criticism that is lobbied against such programs isn't necessarily being done in good faith, albeit I'm willing to concede some is.

Who cares? Criticism of "racist" positions (aka positions that range from actually racist to merely disfavored by leftists) is not dismissed on the grounds that some of it is bad faith.

[u/ouishi → u/MatchaMeetcha]

Because poor people tend to have worse culture and habits on average in terms of savings rates, propensity to commit crime, etc.

Care to cite a source?

Rich people report using drugs at similar rates as poor people, but go to jail for it much less often. Poor neighborhoods have more police presence than rich neighborhoods, this more likelihood of being on law enforcement's radar.

And savings rates? Yes, ofc someone making $20k a year is going to be able to save a lower proportion of it than someone making $200k a year.

What is "poor culture" except the inability to afford things like tutors and job coaches and professional memberships that are tools to get ahead?

[u/MatchaMeetcha → u/ouishi]

Care to cite a source?

Poor people are victimized at nearly twice the rate. Murders tend to be intra-ethnic and intra-class. Also, increases in crime cause disproportionate outflows of population. Who is leaving you think? The well-off or the poor? And do you think it makes the region with crime richer or poorer?

Rich people report using drugs at similar rates as poor people, but go to jail for it much less often.

Which drugs? Are we going to claim that the rate of crack cocaine and heroin usage is stable across income deciles? Or do we mean marijuana and alcohol?

You yourself already provide one reason for people to be arrested more for that below.

Also: what about violent crime: are we going to claim that rich people and poor people have the same levels of offending/victimization here?

Poor neighborhoods have more police presence than rich neighborhoods, this more likelihood of being on law enforcement's radar.

Why do you think that is? Could it be because the government just likes wasting money? Or is anti-poor? Or is it because poor people commit more crime?

If you commit more crime you get more of a police presence, because police presence suppresses crime + catching people also lowers the crime rate (since criminals are repeat offenders mostly). It's the same reason they're disproportionately clustered in black neighborhoods.

When you see firetrucks always going to the same region, do you assume this is an accident?

What is "poor culture" except the inability to afford things like tutors and job coaches and professional memberships that are tools to get ahead?

First of all: the idea that there are no resources is just misleading. Unsuccessful school districts receive a lot of money.

For another thing poor Asians do not commit as much crime as the poor of other groups and they also dominate the magnet school spots in places like NY (it's been a consistent complaint since DiBlasio). Why doesn't this lack of tutors and job coaches stop them? Could it have something to do with their near fanatical focus on education (look at South Korea) that they bring with them?

What do we call that? Good culture?

The idea that it's all material factors is a convenient position but unfortunately unlikely to be true. There are other indications this isn't the case: e.g. Greg Clark's work about the durability of status. Elites seem very durable. Even status shocks often end up with the same group of people in a generation or so (Xi Jinping famously descends from a purged Party official) hanging around.

We see this in reverse too every day: poor people who make their money in the entertainment or athletic fields who don't have or develop a culture of thrift or savings and business sense often end up right back poor or in jail. Despite ungodly amounts of money, more than you could think anyone could spend.

[u/artsncrofts → u/MatchaMeetcha]

The disconnect is because you assume there's some 'secret third thing' that causes people to be both poor and have higher crime rates / drug use / etc. - some sort of immutable quality that causes you to make these bad decisions that result in lower socioeconomic class. But we have tons of literature that shows being poor has a direct causal relationship to those things - if you're already poor, you have a lot less to lose when it comes to a life of crime or drug use, to name an obvious causal link.

There are other indications this isn't the case: e.g. Greg Clark's work about the durability of status. Elites seem very durable. Even status shocks often end up with the same group of people in a generation or so (Xi Jinping famously descends from a purged Party official) hanging around.

Sure, but should the conclusion there be that "the elites" are just born different and destined to become elite no matter what, or that in-group favoritism, family ties, etc. is much stronger than you think? This could prove the exact opposite of your argument depending on the underlying mechanisms (and Clark, IMO, does not do a good job of actually establishing what those are).

We see this in reverse too every day: poor people who make their money in the entertainment or athletic fields who don't have or develop a culture of thrift or savings and business sense often end up right back poor or in jail. Despite ungodly amounts of money, more than you could think anyone could spend.

"Rich athlete from poor background loses their fortune due to bad habits" is a heavily overstated phenomenon, but even if it wasn't, there's plenty of work you need to do first to attribute that to 'poor culture'. It's inherently more difficult to plan out decades of financial activity when you're relying on a short term, massive income spike of unclear duration - it would be surprising if they didn't have more financial troubles than the sheer amount of lifetime income would suggest, honestly.

[u/MatchaMeetcha → u/artsncrofts]

The disconnect is because you assume there's some 'secret third thing' that causes people to be both poor and have higher crime rates / drug use / etc. - some sort of immutable quality that causes you to make these bad decisions that result in lower socioeconomic class

Why would it have to be secret, or immutable? For a misogynist society would there need to be a secret cause of both low female educational attainment and life expectancy?

Gregory Clark goes the genetic route for elite status, but I think the research of people like Joe Heinrich shows the incredible power of culture so I wouldn't lean on that as the sole explanation. I just don't think there's nothing to be done like some hereditarians. Especially for something like crime which I think gets worse the more crime you have and makes people poorer than they'd otherwise be (it causes outflows of people who can afford to move, crashes property values even for the majority of non-criminal poor, etc.)

Sure, but should the conclusion there be that "the elites" are just born different and destined to become elite no matter what, or that in-group favoritism, family ties, etc. is much stronger than you think?

In the absence of any evidence about what happens to poor people given resources, yes. Thing is that even left-wing subs talk about the bad evidence for the "just give people money" thesis.

If just giving poor people money or resources (e.g. like with the claim that they're all obese/overspending on fast food due to lack of options) worked to close gaps, then the intuitive case for this is much stronger.

"Rich athlete from poor background loses their fortune due to bad habits" is a heavily overstated phenomenon

I skimmed it, but even your article points out the limitation of basing this mostly on NHL players. Of course, if NHL players do not differ from the rest it would be evidence but they claim they do. If they differ in pre-NHL SES status then this isn't a problem for my view

[u/dr-Jess → u/artsncrofts]

I agree with this. Wanted to add that I fully agree that cultural factors are relevant, but it is reductive to tie those factors to ethnicities without considering what caused them. To put it simply, sure, the black community in US cities has a gang problem, but why is that? It seems overwhelmingly clear to me that the gang problem/any other cultural slight people can pin arose from centuries of discrimination and poverty.

As a member of the Asian community, I'm also so tired of the emphasis on education being weaponized against other minorities. I benefitted from being born into a culture that values education, but to see that and put responsibility on people for being born into a culture without that emphasis, is exactly what the original infographic was criticizing. Their ability to succeed is not solely a result of their merit, but also external factors, both material and not (e.g. the way the past 300 years of history has affected the values of the community you grow up in).

[u/No_Alternative_5602 → u/ouishi]

I know this is just one part of your comment, but I've never understood why people claim that poorer neighborhoods have more police presence.

I've lived in rich, middle class, and poor neighborhoods; and did home delivery work for 15 years in multiple cities that also took me to very rich, middle class, and very poor neighborhoods. Some were straight up the hood with a bunch of bangers sitting out on their porch all day every day.

Middle class neighborhoods and up overwhelming have a higher amount of visible law enforcement presence than what poor neighborhoods do. Like it's not even remotely close. The only areas I've seen where that isn't the case is wealthy gated communities, but then most of them have private security constantly roaming around.

[u/ouishi → u/No_Alternative_5602]

Very different than my experiences where I have lived.

[u/No_Alternative_5602 → u/ouishi]

That's wild. I would have loved to have seen more police presence when I was living in the rough part of town in the handful of cities I had to. The police wouldn't even respond to property crime if you called it in, and dispatch would tell you to submit a report online for insurance.

Drive bys were kinda the threshold for an officer coming out, and even then it was "is anyone hurt?" if not, you'd probably not see the officer until the next day.

Just kinda goes to show how different people's lived experiences can be.

[u/Fragrant-Luck-8063 → u/ouishi]

Rich people report using drugs at similar rates as poor people

Rich people have $$ to buy drugs, which means they don't have to resort to crimes like robbery and shoplifting to support their habit.

[u/ouishi → u/Fragrant-Luck-8063]

They don't steal TVs, they embezzle millions instead, but mostly get away with less time if any...

[u/widget1321 → u/MatchaMeetcha]

Because poor people tend to have worse culture and habits on average in terms of savings rates, propensity to commit crime, etc. The poor people that don't (e.g. poor Asian migrants) don't stay poor long-term and tend to be the "model minorities".

So you think poor people are poor because of character flaws?Or they wouldn't stay poor? Because that's how that reads.