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.
I worked in law enforcement for 34 years, and police abuse against Blacks is quite real. Some European countries require police or correctional officer candidates to pass psychological and IQ tests. Many fail. The use of lethal force in most European countries isn't "I feared for my life." It's exercising reason (critical thinking) based on real circumstances. There are thousands of police agencies, jails, and prisons in this country that need to be closely monitored by the feds. I suggest you get out of your white ivory tower (bubble) and add field work to your empirical experiences. Talk to people who are in the trenches. I survived with basic common sense, not with flawed academic theories presented by talking heads cozing up in their very comfortable bubbles.
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?
The "poor blacks" will look at John's daughters and think "I could do that too if I had 50% or more white ancestry." From the 19th century onward there has been an assumption that "mulatto elites" could be used to "prove" that "Negroes" were not inferior. The tacit assumption, of course, was that the real "Negroes" were probably inferior and "the race" needed the "blood" of its hated but adored "enemy" to "improve the racial stock." Why do you think the NAACP and other black elites went into a collective fit at the rather modest request for a "Multiracial" census category?
So, in other words, "The poor blacks will derive no benefit from John's daughters doing well, because they aren't enough like John's daughters".
OTOH, as I understand it, some of the highest performing blacks in the US are first generation Nigerian and Ghanan immigrants, who presumably have 0% white ancestry.
Yes, the African immigrants don't need John's daughters as "role models." They are their own "role models." The black American underclass, by contrast, believes in its own "inferiority" and reinforces it with a criminal subculture. Parading more mulatto elites before them will not change that.
Blacks need to teach their own children from k through 12. 80% of the teachers are white females. During desegregation, the good black teachers were transferred to white schools, and mediocre white teachers were placed in black schools. My cousins on my dad's side in Virginia went to segregated schools with good black teachers. A number received engineering degrees from HBCUs.
One of my cousins is a highly recognized Chancellor at North Carolina A&T, an HBCU. His proactive measures have significantly improved academic performance. The college graduates most of the black engineers in the country.
I would like to see more blacks attend HBCUs, especially Black athletes. White colleges are making billions on black athletic talent.
Desegregation destroyed many black businesses, cohesiveness, a sense of community, and resilience. Now, blacks spend their dollars on nonblack buisneeses. Black farms have decreased from 1 million to 40 thousand. Social integration isn't measurable;it can't be deposited into the bank to compound interest.
Asians and Jews bounce dollars several times around in their communities before it leaves. Blacks: Zero. Blacks have been conditioned to nothing more consumers in making other groups richer and more powerful. 🙄
Blacks totally depending on whites and other groups for basic necessities to sustain life is stupid. Unfortunately, it will take a major catastrophic event for Blacks to wake the f'kup! [Charles] just wants to have more access to interracial sex, thinking it would elevate his status to white. Too bad he's not mulatto. Lol!!!!
Racism is a power relationship between groups---a team sport and reality. Blacks have never been part of the race. Defaulting is suicide!
It’s amazing the things we agree on. The fact that the black community was stronger during Jim Crow should tell us something. Sadly, we generally draw the wrong conclusions.
I assume you mean the Jim Crow comment. The black community had risen to impressive heights in many respects in spite of the lack of acceptance from some (much?) of the white community. This included business, education, family solidity, civic pride and on. This was partly through service to the larger community as well as internal trade. It was clear that both the black community as well as gifted individuals were capable of standing on their own and rising to parity in the national economy. This would have come as a surprise to many whites who had never seen a black person in other than a servile role and believed the prevailing science that they weren’t generally capable. And some were threatened by the competition.
For a significant segment of the black community, this success collapsed in the 60s. There are many opinions as to why.
First, I would like to say that Professor Reider should not have been fired. His comment wasn't malicious. I'll get back to you on the Jim Crow era. I'm trying to visit old friends in California before returning to Georgia.
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.
I worked in law enforcement for 34 years, and police abuse against Blacks is quite real. Some European countries require police or correctional officer candidates to pass psychological and IQ tests. Many fail. The use of lethal force in most European countries isn't "I feared for my life." It's exercising reason (critical thinking) based on real circumstances. There are thousands of police agencies, jails, and prisons in this country that need to be closely monitored by the feds. I suggest you get out of your white ivory tower (bubble) and add field work to your empirical experiences. Talk to people who are in the trenches. I survived with basic common sense, not with flawed academic theories presented by talking heads cozing up in their very comfortable bubbles.
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?
The "poor blacks" will look at John's daughters and think "I could do that too if I had 50% or more white ancestry." From the 19th century onward there has been an assumption that "mulatto elites" could be used to "prove" that "Negroes" were not inferior. The tacit assumption, of course, was that the real "Negroes" were probably inferior and "the race" needed the "blood" of its hated but adored "enemy" to "improve the racial stock." Why do you think the NAACP and other black elites went into a collective fit at the rather modest request for a "Multiracial" census category?
So, in other words, "The poor blacks will derive no benefit from John's daughters doing well, because they aren't enough like John's daughters".
OTOH, as I understand it, some of the highest performing blacks in the US are first generation Nigerian and Ghanan immigrants, who presumably have 0% white ancestry.
Yes, the African immigrants don't need John's daughters as "role models." They are their own "role models." The black American underclass, by contrast, believes in its own "inferiority" and reinforces it with a criminal subculture. Parading more mulatto elites before them will not change that.
Let’s start being concerned about poor blacks at the home level, and then in first grade and then in middle school...
College admissions is far too late and serves only for virtue signaling. De-stigmatize work and give the non-students a degree of hope.
Blacks need to teach their own children from k through 12. 80% of the teachers are white females. During desegregation, the good black teachers were transferred to white schools, and mediocre white teachers were placed in black schools. My cousins on my dad's side in Virginia went to segregated schools with good black teachers. A number received engineering degrees from HBCUs.
One of my cousins is a highly recognized Chancellor at North Carolina A&T, an HBCU. His proactive measures have significantly improved academic performance. The college graduates most of the black engineers in the country.
I would like to see more blacks attend HBCUs, especially Black athletes. White colleges are making billions on black athletic talent.
Desegregation destroyed many black businesses, cohesiveness, a sense of community, and resilience. Now, blacks spend their dollars on nonblack buisneeses. Black farms have decreased from 1 million to 40 thousand. Social integration isn't measurable;it can't be deposited into the bank to compound interest.
Asians and Jews bounce dollars several times around in their communities before it leaves. Blacks: Zero. Blacks have been conditioned to nothing more consumers in making other groups richer and more powerful. 🙄
Blacks totally depending on whites and other groups for basic necessities to sustain life is stupid. Unfortunately, it will take a major catastrophic event for Blacks to wake the f'kup! [Charles] just wants to have more access to interracial sex, thinking it would elevate his status to white. Too bad he's not mulatto. Lol!!!!
Racism is a power relationship between groups---a team sport and reality. Blacks have never been part of the race. Defaulting is suicide!
It’s amazing the things we agree on. The fact that the black community was stronger during Jim Crow should tell us something. Sadly, we generally draw the wrong conclusions.
Jason, could you elaborate on your comments?
I assume you mean the Jim Crow comment. The black community had risen to impressive heights in many respects in spite of the lack of acceptance from some (much?) of the white community. This included business, education, family solidity, civic pride and on. This was partly through service to the larger community as well as internal trade. It was clear that both the black community as well as gifted individuals were capable of standing on their own and rising to parity in the national economy. This would have come as a surprise to many whites who had never seen a black person in other than a servile role and believed the prevailing science that they weren’t generally capable. And some were threatened by the competition.
For a significant segment of the black community, this success collapsed in the 60s. There are many opinions as to why.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/black-progress-how-far-weve-come-and-how-far-we-have-to-go/
First, I would like to say that Professor Reider should not have been fired. His comment wasn't malicious. I'll get back to you on the Jim Crow era. I'm trying to visit old friends in California before returning to Georgia.
Of course.......
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.
Or the Harlem Renaissance writers!!!
Exactly.