Why respond to a fictitious student named Simone? Why not interview sociologists, historians, and economists who disagree with you? Why not talk to Eduardo Bonilla-Silva or Matthew Desmond or Heather McGhee or Douglas Massey or Matthew Clair or Thomas Shapiro or Mario Small or Thomas Sugrue or Angela Davis or Monica Bell or Kimberlé Crenshaw or Cheryl Harris or Dorothy Roberts or Sherrilyn Ifill or Sheryll Cashin or Kristin Henning or Paul Butler or William Darity? I think that focusing on students & activists with rather than engaging with academics is avoiding the most serious articulations of the opposing view.
...or Peniel Joseph or Elizabeth Hinton or Tommie Shelby or Dorian T. Warren or Felicia Wong or Charmaine Royal or Rhiana Gunn-Wright or Mehrsa Baradaran or Jim Freeman or Dorothy Brown or Peter Irons or Patricia Hill Collins or Richard Delgado or Richard Rothstein or any of these scholars: https://aas.princeton.edu/faculty
My major problem with John McWhorter's book is that it includes almost no citations to people articulating the views he is criticizing and is thus based on him putting words in their mouths rather than actually responding to the words they do say. This falls far short of the basic standards of research and argument that an academic should be adhering to and it's clear that those standards disappear in criticizing the left.
John is not responding to the specific scholars you are mentioning, I think. More a general attitude in the air in the USA. (And globally for that matter.)
Again, Nathan I am very impressed by your respectful engagement with John and Glenn. Hats off to you.
Adam thank you for articulating so well the concept of grievance industry as an end in itself while providing the Simones with temporary power and temporary security.
I have the following advice for Simone:
Any social “power” contains within two subcategories; the real and the imagined. As I am not psychic- I do not know the relative percentages in your scenario. A further complication is silence, not because it is fragile, but because none of us are psychic mind readers.
In terms of equity, I want Simone to have the tool that I have. Numerous years ago, I was mentally trapped in a corner by circumstance. My previous models for story navigation were based on text clearly labeled as science (AAAS standard) or clearly labeled as fiction (Harry Potter novels by J. K. Rowling). Suddenly out of nowhere, I encountered a fiction story presented authoritatively as “science”. My world immediately changed in a traumatic way. It was because of this mental pain and trauma that my brain entered “fight” mode. Consequently, within 4 days - I invented a model for story navigation that became my escape door. Inventing your own escape door is real power. And I did this alone, not because I am antisocial but because others refused to cooperate. The invention of this model was my greatest lifetime achievement at the time. I have since surpassed that achievement with others.
To be fair and honest, I sincerely doubt that I actually invented something never before seen in the world. In fact, I imagine that reputable PhD research scientists have their own version of such a “story navigation model”, except far superior to mine. What is so empowering about my story is that I created a homemade version in isolation from scientists and by only using the information inside my brain. If I can do it, so can others.
Respectfully, Adam and Glenn…. While you both raise important points, there is no way on *Earth* that this is the rebuttal Simone would make. I wasn’t Simone, but I was her best white friend and woke as could be until last year, ha. The points that Adam made never remotely crossed my mind, and I probably would have been offended by someone raising them, suggesting activists were playing a game, or that these wins came anywhere close to counterbalancing centuries of oppression, or that they weren’t over-emphasizing exceptional cases. So your response, while also thought-provoking, is not a particularly relevant one when dialoguing with the “woke.”
Since last year, I’ve realized how much tunnel vision I had on these issues, and haven’t done a 180 but maybe a 170 from my prior position. But if I were channeling Simone’s strongest case against Profs Loury and McWhorter, it might be something like this:
“Prof McWhorter, in promoting his book, regularly acknowledges that racism and anti-black bias still exist in this country and need to be fought. You are both aware of the studies showing that black job applicants are usually at a disadvantage, for example. Some of the most pernicious stereotypes about black people is that they are violent, lazy, and/or stupid. Any black person in this country could relate to feeling like they have to prove those kinds of assumptions wrong on a daily basis. You both know these assumptions are not true about the vast majority of black Americans, and not UNtrue about every members of every other racial group. And yet you use your platform as highly visible black intelligentsia not to challenge these stereotypes, but to reinforce them by speaking disparagingly about an imagined monolithic “black culture” allergic to work and prone to violence! You know that your blackness gives cover to white people who want to believe ugly things about black Americans to say ‘I’m not racist, a black guy said it too.’ Anti-racist activists are fighting for a level playing field for black Americans, a fight you benefit from, and your work is tilting it against us once more. Why are you making our work harder?”
Apologies if that sounds too accusatory- I am trying to channel what I think would be her toughest critique! (Note to other commenters, please don’t pile on me as this is not what I myself would say today, not in so many words at least :) )
It is too complicated with the levels of indirection (for me, anyway), but my gut reaction was, like you, that Simone would never say those words. Pose? Black helplessness and prostration? Uh, huh, sure, that's exactly what Simone would say...
No, Simone would say she was the squeaky wheel getting the oil, oil which had long been denied to her for whatever her list of grievances might be. She would inform you she is certainly not posing, and that her strength in activism was the very opposite of helplessness and prostration.
I think Adam was picturing a secret conversation between Prof Loury and Simone where a very cynical Simone lays it all on the table.
Wonderful. Professor Loury carries along those of us who have not been able to articulate for ourselves what he sees so clearly. We who cannot abide the foolish stance of the darkening blue or the saturating red of supremacy learn so much from every conversation he engages in. Adam, thank you for laying pavement on which he could baby-step us to a higher level of understanding
Here is an interesting take on Glenn's 6 minute video on why "blacks" should give up the race card:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPEWKEohsJc
Would be curious to hear more perspectives on it.
Why respond to a fictitious student named Simone? Why not interview sociologists, historians, and economists who disagree with you? Why not talk to Eduardo Bonilla-Silva or Matthew Desmond or Heather McGhee or Douglas Massey or Matthew Clair or Thomas Shapiro or Mario Small or Thomas Sugrue or Angela Davis or Monica Bell or Kimberlé Crenshaw or Cheryl Harris or Dorothy Roberts or Sherrilyn Ifill or Sheryll Cashin or Kristin Henning or Paul Butler or William Darity? I think that focusing on students & activists with rather than engaging with academics is avoiding the most serious articulations of the opposing view.
...or Peniel Joseph or Elizabeth Hinton or Tommie Shelby or Dorian T. Warren or Felicia Wong or Charmaine Royal or Rhiana Gunn-Wright or Mehrsa Baradaran or Jim Freeman or Dorothy Brown or Peter Irons or Patricia Hill Collins or Richard Delgado or Richard Rothstein or any of these scholars: https://aas.princeton.edu/faculty
My major problem with John McWhorter's book is that it includes almost no citations to people articulating the views he is criticizing and is thus based on him putting words in their mouths rather than actually responding to the words they do say. This falls far short of the basic standards of research and argument that an academic should be adhering to and it's clear that those standards disappear in criticizing the left.
John is not responding to the specific scholars you are mentioning, I think. More a general attitude in the air in the USA. (And globally for that matter.)
Again, Nathan I am very impressed by your respectful engagement with John and Glenn. Hats off to you.
Nathan, I agree with you. My hope is that when Glenn frees up from writing the memoir, he interviews several of these people.
I would not include William Darity on this list. Glenn and William Darity know each other well and have a long history.
Thanks so much for sharing your insights on Glenn's substack!
:-)
Response to Simone:
Adam thank you for articulating so well the concept of grievance industry as an end in itself while providing the Simones with temporary power and temporary security.
I have the following advice for Simone:
Any social “power” contains within two subcategories; the real and the imagined. As I am not psychic- I do not know the relative percentages in your scenario. A further complication is silence, not because it is fragile, but because none of us are psychic mind readers.
In terms of equity, I want Simone to have the tool that I have. Numerous years ago, I was mentally trapped in a corner by circumstance. My previous models for story navigation were based on text clearly labeled as science (AAAS standard) or clearly labeled as fiction (Harry Potter novels by J. K. Rowling). Suddenly out of nowhere, I encountered a fiction story presented authoritatively as “science”. My world immediately changed in a traumatic way. It was because of this mental pain and trauma that my brain entered “fight” mode. Consequently, within 4 days - I invented a model for story navigation that became my escape door. Inventing your own escape door is real power. And I did this alone, not because I am antisocial but because others refused to cooperate. The invention of this model was my greatest lifetime achievement at the time. I have since surpassed that achievement with others.
To be fair and honest, I sincerely doubt that I actually invented something never before seen in the world. In fact, I imagine that reputable PhD research scientists have their own version of such a “story navigation model”, except far superior to mine. What is so empowering about my story is that I created a homemade version in isolation from scientists and by only using the information inside my brain. If I can do it, so can others.
Respectfully, Adam and Glenn…. While you both raise important points, there is no way on *Earth* that this is the rebuttal Simone would make. I wasn’t Simone, but I was her best white friend and woke as could be until last year, ha. The points that Adam made never remotely crossed my mind, and I probably would have been offended by someone raising them, suggesting activists were playing a game, or that these wins came anywhere close to counterbalancing centuries of oppression, or that they weren’t over-emphasizing exceptional cases. So your response, while also thought-provoking, is not a particularly relevant one when dialoguing with the “woke.”
Since last year, I’ve realized how much tunnel vision I had on these issues, and haven’t done a 180 but maybe a 170 from my prior position. But if I were channeling Simone’s strongest case against Profs Loury and McWhorter, it might be something like this:
“Prof McWhorter, in promoting his book, regularly acknowledges that racism and anti-black bias still exist in this country and need to be fought. You are both aware of the studies showing that black job applicants are usually at a disadvantage, for example. Some of the most pernicious stereotypes about black people is that they are violent, lazy, and/or stupid. Any black person in this country could relate to feeling like they have to prove those kinds of assumptions wrong on a daily basis. You both know these assumptions are not true about the vast majority of black Americans, and not UNtrue about every members of every other racial group. And yet you use your platform as highly visible black intelligentsia not to challenge these stereotypes, but to reinforce them by speaking disparagingly about an imagined monolithic “black culture” allergic to work and prone to violence! You know that your blackness gives cover to white people who want to believe ugly things about black Americans to say ‘I’m not racist, a black guy said it too.’ Anti-racist activists are fighting for a level playing field for black Americans, a fight you benefit from, and your work is tilting it against us once more. Why are you making our work harder?”
Apologies if that sounds too accusatory- I am trying to channel what I think would be her toughest critique! (Note to other commenters, please don’t pile on me as this is not what I myself would say today, not in so many words at least :) )
It is too complicated with the levels of indirection (for me, anyway), but my gut reaction was, like you, that Simone would never say those words. Pose? Black helplessness and prostration? Uh, huh, sure, that's exactly what Simone would say...
No, Simone would say she was the squeaky wheel getting the oil, oil which had long been denied to her for whatever her list of grievances might be. She would inform you she is certainly not posing, and that her strength in activism was the very opposite of helplessness and prostration.
I think Adam was picturing a secret conversation between Prof Loury and Simone where a very cynical Simone lays it all on the table.
Precisely.
Adam's comment and Glenn's response go to the very heart of the matter. That's intellect well used.
Glenn’s response to Simone is superb!
This is one of the best short videos I have seen.
It gets right at the question: "Why give up the black card?".
This is just brilliant, thank you.
It was an honor to get a personal response from you in the comments, Prof. Loury, and doubly so to have the exchange memorialized in its own video.
Well put Adam!!
Wonderful. Professor Loury carries along those of us who have not been able to articulate for ourselves what he sees so clearly. We who cannot abide the foolish stance of the darkening blue or the saturating red of supremacy learn so much from every conversation he engages in. Adam, thank you for laying pavement on which he could baby-step us to a higher level of understanding