88 Comments

Here's an example from an informed Trump voter that might perplex John.

A country's leader -- to be effective as a military leader -- needs to know how to play poker. And to put fear into the Other leaders. Rather than as a community organizer or some who wants to be seen as reasonable and nice. Obama was the latter; when he issued his red line, he was walked over. Jimmy Carter falls into this category as well. Biden's precipitous leaving Afghanistan as well. On the other side we have Nixon, Reagan and Trump.

So where would Harris likely fit? Would others like Vladimir Putin of Ali Hosseini Khamenei be more likely to run over her than Trump?

This psychological factor is important to the US role in world affairs. Trump has it. Harris is, at best, a puppet of the Obamas - who copied up to Iran as opposed to Trump sanctioning it.

So, even if I were incorrect, my position seems missing from John's analysis - or if present, negligible. 

Other positions that Trump takes, perhaps not verbalized as John would like, has a similar intellectual and moral (think women and transgender) underpinning.

Joe Nalven, Ph.D. JD

Expand full comment

I am glad that enough Americans who understand how far gone the Democrats are today decided not to sit on the sidelines as Glenn chose to.

Expand full comment

John. John! Are you alive today? Check on your TDS friends today.

Expand full comment

Trump will put RFK Jr in charge of health care and Herschel Walker in charge of the United States’ “Iron Dome”

He called Kamala Harris “trash”

If Dr. Loury can’t choose between the two, it speaks volumes.

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4970165-trump-herschel-walker-missile-shield/

Expand full comment

Okay, I've only listened to the introduction and a few seconds of John's remarks and will probably regret being so trigger happy as to write this now but maybe it's okay as merely a prediction.

If you look at our country, and indeed the wider world, as a science project, what would the nature of that project be? The studies of human behavior and psychology have developed with ever greater influence of evolutionary biology. It makes sense. Everyone from ornithologists to primatologists to dog trainers focus on the natures of their subjects. To me, when so much of our present culture seems inexplicable and when I try to predict what could happen next, it seems helpful to come back to the basics of human nature.

Evolutionary economy. We regulate our use of calories. We develop habits and remap our brains with experience so we don't have to relearn everything over and over again. Riding a bake. We identify things via pattern recognition and when we've seen what we think is enough, we conclude. We get especially quick about reaching conclusions when we're fatigued or hungry. When we need to fight or flee, we shut down that high calorie consumer, the cortex, because in real fight or flight moments, we don't need to deliberate or regulate impulsivity. We need to act immediately. We're social and status matters. To a lot of dimensions. Status and serotonin correlate. We survive because we live in groups. That's our super power.

Our nature can be hacked. Advertisers do it all the time. The classic old chestnut is cosmetics. Show an ideal, remind the viewer she falls short of it, then offer your product as an antidote. Create an insecurity and offer the remedy. Politicians do it too.

These days, we're tired. We stay up late, are always on and have fear messages blasted at us most of the day. We usually react to them before pausing to consider the source, if our viewership is simply being monetized, if we're being used in other ways, even if to our detriment. The primal instinct when we are under duress and even headed for impending battle is to align with a side. That's first. That's how we survive. It can also be how we are taken advantage of.

We're also way more impulsive and not at all good at applying logic to decision-making. (See Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind) We act first and rationalize after. We advocate for ourselves and what we've done. We double down before losing face from being wrong. If we have power, we need others a little less. If we are more on the weaker side, we need others more. The powerful have fewer, if any, others to say "no" to them. Some get used to doing what they want to others. It feels like status.

We're aspirational. We see things as we want to see them, not as a product of our evaluation of the evidence.

We have had a steady erosion of common sense over the past few decades. I think it's because we've had an erosion of common experience. For example, we all used to know what those rainclouds meant and the consequences of failing to get the seed in the ground before the rains came. We all knew what a limping horse could mean. We were all in the same life and the same experiences generated the same priorities. We are still the product of our experiences and our experiences enter our neural mapping the same way; it's just that experiences differ now and we can feel experienced even if we've all just sat at our own screens.

This is an awful lot of words to come to this: we're seeing expressions of what sound like observations when they're really aspirations. I'll never forget the lady all dressed up in red, white and blue, waiting to get into a Trump rally, saying, "Well yes, I think Donald Trump is VERY Christ-like." Well, she certainly wished so. We have people believing unrelated events are actually a choreographed plan leading to a necessary civil war. Well, maybe in their heads. We have people up all night, so fatigued by the self-inflicted barrage of doom scrolled "information" that they can hardly bring themselves to read more than the click-bate headlines. Wanting to be outraged and finding plenty to be outraged about, quickly believing things the smallest amount of common sense would reveal as hogwash. And doubling down on anything which suits their aspirations. And the group they've aligned with. God Lord, don't let me be ostracized by my chosen group.

We arrived at a point where a Supreme Court Justice nominee has to dodge the question of what a woman is. And on the other hand, repeat talking points which do Putin's job for him, cheaply and effectively. For ready examples of self inflicted wounds, read H.R. McMaster's most recent book describing his service as Trump's National Security Advisor. Now there's a man who had his eyes on the ball, tried to get things done and made me wonder time and again, why does it have to be this hard?

Glenn, I love you, Uncle, but from my own perspective you're seeing Trump as you'd like him to be.

We could all do with some rest, with putting down our damned phones, with meeting each other in the wild and not doing bad guys' work for them.

Expand full comment
Nov 5·edited Nov 5

Sorry, but I am with John more than Glenn on this one. We can go back and forth on policy. I don’t think he did a good job in the least when he was president. He let others put forth a conservative agenda-some of which I could side with-and became obsessed with himself, what people were saying etc. He was impeached the first time because he’s a fool and doesn’t have the discipline to control his mouth and the second time-well if what he did is not worth impeachment then I don’t know what is. He totally failed to lead during the Pandemic, waiting to gage the political winds to decide which course to take. If ever there was a man unqualified to serve Trump is it.

Expand full comment

I could not bear to listen and suffer John’s insufferable TDS. Nobody expects him to vote for Trump but it’s clear that Harris-walz would impose more “woke racism” on the country than you could imagine. If his life project is to end “woke racism” than his support for Harris is inexplicable.

Expand full comment

Do you agree with Trump and Vance calling Harris “trash”?

What “woke racism” will Harris/Walz impose?

Expand full comment

DO you agree with the dems calling Trump Hitler and his supporters garbage?

Expand full comment

Lastly. Does decency and character matter?

Forget politics. Talking about the human spirit. The willingness to be kind and humane.

I think America can be transformative when we elect loving leaders. Power without love is deeply dangerous.

Expand full comment

Um. Glenn??? Are you ok?

40 of his 44 military generals have come out and said “code red”

He will not agree to a peaceful transfer of power…which is the nucleus of our democracy. He still says he won. He is the ultimate grifter. A blind man can see that. Wow!

Expand full comment

Great conversation. John always kills me with his TDS. There is so much anger there. It seems that Glenn has the same anger towards the Obamas. But he has a much stronger argument for why. Talking down to black people about how they should vote is embarrassing. Who gives Barrack and Michelle the moral authority to do so. I guess the standards people set for you, is what they think of you.

I do agree with what Glenn said about historians looking back. The question will always be-What made President Trump so popular with his fans??

Expand full comment

It is a label used to intentionally distract. I remember pointing out that after the 2020 election the only deranged people seemed to be a majority of the GOP and yet conservatives wouldn’t admit that they are just as touchy and sensitive as the “snowflakes” they had been taunting for years. So, call me names, use whatever phrase you want…that’s not going to change the reality of nature.

If i step out of the way of a moving bus are you going to tell me I have “bus derangement syndrome”?

Expand full comment

TDS is a mythical disease used by cult members to distract from Trump’s flaws. Trump had to shut down a university and a charity. Several of his businesses went into bankruptcy. Trump short pays vendors. Trump failed to take action on January 6th.

When Trump says his political opponents and members of the press are enemies of the people, his cultists laugh it off.

Trump says that Jews who vote for Harris have lost their minds and his cultists gleefully agree.

Expand full comment

“As my lovely wife says, “Voting for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil,” and that’s more or less how I feel about it, too.”

That explains a lot. So you’re now “more or less” happy to abstain and sit on the sidelines rather than make a tough choice? Nothing admirable about that.

Sure, it makes no difference in RI — would you still abdicate responsibility if you lived in PA?

Expand full comment

Great episode! Americans, love thy neighbour as thyself whatever the outcome of the election.

Expand full comment

In the near future John McWhorter could justifiably face Federal charges for calling for the murder of am ex-President. I predict that prison time will satisfy John's inexplicability regarding the majority opinin in the USA. John is unlikely to emerge a more informed and critically astute person, but he will know not to commit federal crimes.

Expand full comment

Apparently we define majority differently in the US

Expand full comment

Puhlease…mate (in my worst Australian accent)

Expand full comment

Wow. I do agree that he suffers from serious TDS, but I think Federal charges is a bit of a stretch. He made an emotional reaction when he expressed what he said. But give the man some grace. There are many more Trump haters like him. I still love his John's commentary about race and politics, but when it comes to Trump, John makes me cringe. As do others who can't let their anger go. I'm not a fan of many politicians, but I would never call for something bad to happen to them.

Expand full comment

Spoken like someone who has no idea what would cause someone to "justifiably face Federal charges."

Expand full comment

Birtaud Abraham, I actually agree with your sentiments. I nevertheless stipulate the law: "Making statements that call for or suggest the assassination of a former President can potentially constitute a crime under U.S. federal law. In particular, such statements might fall under 18 U.S. Code § 879 or 18 U.S. Code § 871." John McWhorter is a professor and should know better. Irresponsible statements, especially by people in authority can influence impressionable minds. If a lesser personage than John McWhorter could be prosecuted for such a crime, why is John exempt. I listened to John double down and admit to Glenn that he had made the statements and stood by them. John does not appear to be particularly masculine, in fact he has a soft or effeminate affectation. His rough and tough talk about the desireability of assassinating DJT is bravado. However, the statute was enacted to stop the influence of such talk on impressionable minds. Surely professor McWhorter should at very least withdraw his statements and apologise. Seriously who does he think he is?

Expand full comment

As the Zen Master said, "We'll see". We are on the eve of election day and Glenn finally shows his cards. I confidentally assert that in the privacy of the election booth Glenn Loury will vote for the Donald J. Trump & JD Vance ticket. Glenn is far too intelligent and informed, to do anything else. McWhorter is already a vanishing target and slippihg into oblivion. We are in Queensland, Australia, and our future is explicably tied to the MAGA Movement. In contemplation of a a joyful victory, we congratulate our American cousins and reiterate our love of America and Americans.

Expand full comment

Dr. McWhorter is an accomplished author and lecturer. Read his books on linguistics “Power of Babel”. Watch his lectures on The Great Courses. Ad hominem attacks do not an argument make. Maybe you need to watch more Bluey.

Expand full comment

You consider Trump a moral and ethical man?

John Bolton says Trump would tear up the submarine agreement.

Expand full comment

I stipulate the law: "Making statements that call for or suggest the assassination of a former President can potentially constitute a crime under U.S. federal law. In particular, such statements might fall under 18 U.S. Code § 879 or 18 U.S. Code § 871." John McWhorter is a professor and should know better. Irresponsible statements, especially by people in authority can influence impressionable minds. If a lesser personage than John McWhorter could be prosecuted for such a crime, why is John exempt. I listened to John as he double-downed and admitted to Glenn that he had made the statements, he said he stood by them. John does not appear to be particularly masculine, in fact he has a soft or effeminate affectation. His rough and tough talk about the desireability of assassinating DJT is bravado. However, the statute was enacted to stop the influence of such talk on impressionable minds. Surely professor McWhorter should at very least withdraw his statements and apologise. Seriously who does he think he is?

Expand full comment

Robert Redd, I suppose you are referring to the Australia / US contract to build nuclear submarines for our navy. Australia contracted with France and then reneged on the contract. Emmanueo Macron of France was seriousoy pissed off and with good reason. Australia buys all its sophisticated aircraft and equipment from the USA. If Australia had delusions that they were free agents, the French embarrassment was a wake-up call. Why would Bolton make such a stupid statement, the USA demanded the business in the first place.

Expand full comment

Now that I have listened to the entire show I have to ask Dr. Loury if he were deliberately playing Devil’s advocate when he asked if Dr. McWhorter didn’t have any imagination regarding the Democratic talking points.

Expand full comment

Pretty sure Glenn "The Master of the Universe" Loury has spoken with pride about the speaking fees he commands, his beautiful home, the vacation properties he rents, and the social circles he runs in.

I suspect there may be a hint of envy in that anti-Obama tirade.

Expand full comment

I had the same reaction for a few seconds. But I think Glenn is holding the Obamas to a higher standard because they were in the White House. And because of their lecturing to blacks about how they should vote.

Expand full comment

Don’t hate the player Dr. Loury…

Expand full comment