This week, John McWhorter and I are joined by Jonathan Rieder, professor of sociology at Barnard and Columbia. Jonathan recently found himself in some trouble when a small group of his students complained to his school’s administration after he quoted a passage from the film
Here's why I think black people can for sure meet higher standards of academic work. Women were once thought to be ineducable, at least not to the level of your average male college graduate (going back aournd 150 years). Today, more women are graduating from college and university than ever before, far outpacing male students.
When I was growing up, everyone stressed about how fewer women were graduating college than men. Now we stress about not enough women (and POC) in STEM.
If women can do it, blacks can do it.
For the record, I don't know how Ketanji Jackson stacks up against Supreme Court nominees over the centuries but she sure as shit beats out any of the bozos Trump appointed (Gorsuch and Kavanaugh - not talking about the rape stuff) were both okay but neither were, IMO, SC material. Amy Comey Barrett is, like, are you fucking kidding me???
Jackson probably wasn't the BEST BEST BEST SC candidate ever, but I'll bet the top 50 candidates who are wouldn't touch the job with a 10-foot Hungarian. And the SC DOES need some diversity. And the SC has ALWAYS made it about biology, which is why the requirements were, over the centuries, white/male; male; white either; and finally, anything goes I guess. Jackson certainly brings some political diversity we didn't have under Trump, so for that alone I thank President Biden.
The Glenn Show has been on a roll since January. The episodes just keep getting better and better.
Professor Rieder made a great point about the topic of impunity concerning the police. You have to deracialize the topic to have an honest conversation. There will always be human themes regardless of how many tragic stories you see or read about. A thirst for money, power, and status is what drives many people. They can also get carried away while pursuing this trinity. But it's hard for many blacks to see the cop situations in a more complex way like Glenn, John and myself. It's a burden for some individuals to look at the world beyond the reflection they see in the mirror.
The racial preferences argument will continue to be another complex problem because of the country's history. It's difficult for certain people to understand how excellence gets compromised when you move the goal post. Just look at the way an audience complains when an NFL referee misses an obvious call. If it happens continuously in one game, we question the integrity of the entire game.
Maybe it's a transitivity rule ... you can't use the quoting defense if you are white and you are quoting another white. More likely it's resentment of "whitesplaining" where some black people don't want to be lectured by whites about race. It's still a horseshit argument. If you think you have nothing to learn about race from a white person then just don't take the damn course. I suspect that they took the course with the intent of forcing the issue. It's no better than DeSatan's Florida where one bitchy housewife can get a book banned. It was certainly different years ago my first job there was a project leader referred to herself as the Head Nigger. I learned pretty quickly that if black people demonstrated their comfort level by using it in my presence then it was ok for me to use it. I like to think it was a show of solidarity. But the reverse was also true you can't get all sensitive when ethnic slurs are directed at you. Times have changed and I don't think there's any situation now where it will be seen that way.
I used to teach social studies at a high school in the South Bronx. A little under 20 years ago, I had a student complain about my use of the word “negro.” It was a constitutional law class for 9th graders. We were getting ready to discuss Brown v Board, and I was talking about the line of cases decided before Brown in which the Court had found various separate facilities unequal. One of those cases, Sweat v Painter, dealt with a separate “negro law school” in Texas. An African-American student told me that I shouldn't have said that word. I asked why. He replied that he didn't like how I said it. How should I say it? I asked. “You shouldn't” was the answer. I asked if anyone agreed with him, but nobody raised a hand or spoke up. To the best of my knowledge, that student didn't file a complaint with the principal. But if that happened today, I could see that happening. A complaint being filed, I mean. I doubt that even in today's climate, a teacher could be fired for accurately quoting from a Supreme Court opinion, at least not from Brown. I suppose a teacher might get in trouble for reading parts of FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1978). That case dealt with a radio station that was given a letter of reprimand by the FCC for playing George Carlin's “Filthy Words” comedy routine.
RE: Affirmative action for middle-class blacks vs affirmative action based solely on socio-economic status. Is the claim that it's better to provide differential treatment for (e.g.) John's daughters vs a poor black from the slums *because* John's daughters are more likely to be successful and join the elite?
And this is good because either a) the poor blacks are screwed regardless, or b) society needs *some* blacks to join the elite?
Let me get this straight: It's better to favor middle-class blacks over poor blacks because we want successful blacks. And the poor blacks will look at (e.g.) John's daughters and say "Yep, that could be me" (when by assumption it can't be). Tell me again how this helps poor blacks?
I’m wondering if some slurs are not found in books or music because book and music companies censor themselves before a book or song is released to the public.
The appalling embargo on a word--the fetishizing of that word--makes teachers a nervous wreak and teaching worthless. What happens when you want to read aloud from Mark Twain? Maya Angelou? Allen Ginsberg? Nervously chirping, "uh, n-word," is not the way to go. The most basic thing we teach--critical thinking--shows students when a word is a slur and when it's a part of a literary work. Barnard College, where I got my B.A., owes Jonathan Rieder a big apology. Now.
Here's why I think black people can for sure meet higher standards of academic work. Women were once thought to be ineducable, at least not to the level of your average male college graduate (going back aournd 150 years). Today, more women are graduating from college and university than ever before, far outpacing male students.
When I was growing up, everyone stressed about how fewer women were graduating college than men. Now we stress about not enough women (and POC) in STEM.
If women can do it, blacks can do it.
For the record, I don't know how Ketanji Jackson stacks up against Supreme Court nominees over the centuries but she sure as shit beats out any of the bozos Trump appointed (Gorsuch and Kavanaugh - not talking about the rape stuff) were both okay but neither were, IMO, SC material. Amy Comey Barrett is, like, are you fucking kidding me???
Jackson probably wasn't the BEST BEST BEST SC candidate ever, but I'll bet the top 50 candidates who are wouldn't touch the job with a 10-foot Hungarian. And the SC DOES need some diversity. And the SC has ALWAYS made it about biology, which is why the requirements were, over the centuries, white/male; male; white either; and finally, anything goes I guess. Jackson certainly brings some political diversity we didn't have under Trump, so for that alone I thank President Biden.
Be safe.
"Fielding Complexities"
The Glenn Show has been on a roll since January. The episodes just keep getting better and better.
Professor Rieder made a great point about the topic of impunity concerning the police. You have to deracialize the topic to have an honest conversation. There will always be human themes regardless of how many tragic stories you see or read about. A thirst for money, power, and status is what drives many people. They can also get carried away while pursuing this trinity. But it's hard for many blacks to see the cop situations in a more complex way like Glenn, John and myself. It's a burden for some individuals to look at the world beyond the reflection they see in the mirror.
The racial preferences argument will continue to be another complex problem because of the country's history. It's difficult for certain people to understand how excellence gets compromised when you move the goal post. Just look at the way an audience complains when an NFL referee misses an obvious call. If it happens continuously in one game, we question the integrity of the entire game.
Maybe it's a transitivity rule ... you can't use the quoting defense if you are white and you are quoting another white. More likely it's resentment of "whitesplaining" where some black people don't want to be lectured by whites about race. It's still a horseshit argument. If you think you have nothing to learn about race from a white person then just don't take the damn course. I suspect that they took the course with the intent of forcing the issue. It's no better than DeSatan's Florida where one bitchy housewife can get a book banned. It was certainly different years ago my first job there was a project leader referred to herself as the Head Nigger. I learned pretty quickly that if black people demonstrated their comfort level by using it in my presence then it was ok for me to use it. I like to think it was a show of solidarity. But the reverse was also true you can't get all sensitive when ethnic slurs are directed at you. Times have changed and I don't think there's any situation now where it will be seen that way.
Great discussion with Prof Reider! There should be no capitulation to the woke reign of terror.
I used to teach social studies at a high school in the South Bronx. A little under 20 years ago, I had a student complain about my use of the word “negro.” It was a constitutional law class for 9th graders. We were getting ready to discuss Brown v Board, and I was talking about the line of cases decided before Brown in which the Court had found various separate facilities unequal. One of those cases, Sweat v Painter, dealt with a separate “negro law school” in Texas. An African-American student told me that I shouldn't have said that word. I asked why. He replied that he didn't like how I said it. How should I say it? I asked. “You shouldn't” was the answer. I asked if anyone agreed with him, but nobody raised a hand or spoke up. To the best of my knowledge, that student didn't file a complaint with the principal. But if that happened today, I could see that happening. A complaint being filed, I mean. I doubt that even in today's climate, a teacher could be fired for accurately quoting from a Supreme Court opinion, at least not from Brown. I suppose a teacher might get in trouble for reading parts of FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1978). That case dealt with a radio station that was given a letter of reprimand by the FCC for playing George Carlin's “Filthy Words” comedy routine.
Barnard definitely had some issues re: free expression in the aughts when I was there, but it's nevertheless sad to see it become the joke it now is.
Hello Glenn and John. Great discussion as always!
Great show as always. I am attaching a link some may find interesting if not certainly ironic based upon n Harvard’s stance on policing…. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/6/17/harvard-police-arrests-data/
Friends don’t let friends teach on Zoom
RE: Affirmative action for middle-class blacks vs affirmative action based solely on socio-economic status. Is the claim that it's better to provide differential treatment for (e.g.) John's daughters vs a poor black from the slums *because* John's daughters are more likely to be successful and join the elite?
And this is good because either a) the poor blacks are screwed regardless, or b) society needs *some* blacks to join the elite?
Let me get this straight: It's better to favor middle-class blacks over poor blacks because we want successful blacks. And the poor blacks will look at (e.g.) John's daughters and say "Yep, that could be me" (when by assumption it can't be). Tell me again how this helps poor blacks?
I appreciate your commentary on Kennedy’s essay (which I addressed in an earlier TGS episode). It seemed out of character 🤔
Using the word in context should not be an issue.
I remember when Sony removed Michael Jackson CDs from shelves because of a Jewish slur
https://www.wiesenthal.com/about/news/jew-me-sue-me-kick-me.html
I’m wondering if some slurs are not found in books or music because book and music companies censor themselves before a book or song is released to the public.
The appalling embargo on a word--the fetishizing of that word--makes teachers a nervous wreak and teaching worthless. What happens when you want to read aloud from Mark Twain? Maya Angelou? Allen Ginsberg? Nervously chirping, "uh, n-word," is not the way to go. The most basic thing we teach--critical thinking--shows students when a word is a slur and when it's a part of a literary work. Barnard College, where I got my B.A., owes Jonathan Rieder a big apology. Now.