John and I have spent a long time under the glare of the spotlight as public intellectuals. He began opining on race matters in print back in the 1990s. I began doing the same back in the early 1980s. We’re both intellectuals by nature; it’s the “public” part that’s tricky. Figuring out how to balance both sides of the public intellectual’s brief—to bring your expertise to bear on matters of public concern and to do so before a general audience—requires calibrating your writing and speaking in subtle ways, anticipating your listeners’ skepticism, and trying to make yourself heard over the racket of the discourse.
Time 56:00; On link between message content and potential outcomes - I can teach “research methods” to those who are interested. Such concern is legitimate. But Glenn - I am going to have to take away your “conservative card”. On Proud Boys , I am not an expert. But, YouTube videos shows ProudBoy Asian, Black, Latino, White. Director’s name is Enrique, (Puerto Rican). Proud Boy Tenets list about 10 items, reads like classical liberalism + proud Americanism.
Time 46:00; On Scott Adams, I misread word spelling in notes. I thought it read “Atlas” instead of Adams so I became excited about segment. Now I know who Scott Adams is thanks to Glenn/John. I searched youtube for video of Adams’ race-statement but only found others speaking about Adams. Whenever I hear a story like this, I ask “What would Sherlock Holmes do?” Holmes would seek the original text from speaker/writer. But on race, the people who would be vulnerable to anti-White ideology are “non-White” just like those vulnerable to radical Islamic extremism are among us Muslims. Correction: we whites also do a great job at being “anti-White”, so vulnerability to ideology exists across race.
Pausing at 17:48 to comment. I am beginning to think of uncivil discourse in terms of “gateway drug”. If you look at any individual- John Doe, what was his “gateway drug” to his discourse decline? If we want to be a society that lives in caves, then emulate Professor Bridges at the 2022 July Senate Hearing on “What is a woman?” And Bridges has essentially 2 PhDs with words in Latin meaning she ranked among elite performers in both programs. At some point, the threshold is crossed into the realm of mental illness. I am not qualified to say what that threshold is. But, normalizing narcissism cannot be good for anyone’s mental health.
I really enjoyed this episode, thank you so much for your candour. I cannot wait to read your memoir, if you ever do a book tour in the UK I will be first in line.
I was wondering if you would ever consider doing a interview with Bill Kristol? I have really enjoyed listening to both of your podcast for the last three years or so. I really find both of your political evolutions very interesting and I think it would be a very illuminating conversation.
I realise that you fell out with each other around the time that you were moving more to the left politcally and perhaps there is still some bad blood between you both.
I was very moved by the interview that you did with Shelby Steele and I hope that you might consider burying the hatchet with Bill Kristol enough to do an interview together.
I haven’t yet listened to this installment but it may have a tie-in w something I’ve observed - consciousness of public persona influence, etc. I don’t have time to expand upon it at the moment, but since John will be on Bill Maker’s Real Time tonite, I just want to say, after seeing him in various appearances on TV & podcasts (The - ugh - View, Chris - ugh - Hayes, etc) I truly hope he will channel his passion and outrage against Woke gone wrong with the boldness & clarity necessary to hit the bullseye 🎯. No pulling punches or watering it down or going off in some hazy direction. Name ppl besides Kendi. Media? Dems? They STOKE the fires he fights, yet he seems to ignore this.
Ppl count on him. It would be nice if he’d step up to the plate like it truly counts to him. And nice if he would back it up, show the harm & negative implications, paint the picture so that the message won’t get lost on those who still need to get it.
The same sentiment that McWhorter expresses about not wanting to touch trans issues is one that I think many people share regarding questions of race. The cost of engaging with these issues is so high as to be prohibitive. In and of itself, that seems to imply that the people disrupting, say, Charles Murray's talk, have achieved some pretty significant "success".
Here is a case in point regarding the double standard: "Former NBA star JJ Redick chastised ESPN host and 2008 NBA Champion Kendrick Perkins on Tuesday following Perkins's apparent implication that racial bias plays a factor in the voting for the NBA's MVP award."
I totally agree that race relations are worse because of these initiatives, and the way that they frame racially disparate outcomes as the be all end all, and blame them entirely on the actions of white people.
The 538 guys have a podcast where they discuss the poll that evoked the response from Adams.
I agree that Scott might have been trolling the censors with his diatribe, but his interpretation of the poll is also inaccurate. This poll says nothing about the actual state of race relations in the United States.
It is methodologically flawed and it’s only purpose is race-baiting. “It’s OK to be white” is a white nationalist meme, but hardly anybody knows that. When asked how they feel about the question most people are just confused.
There are far better ways to tease out racial resentment among different groups using polling.
I wonder how many folks opining here (other than Valencia) have taken the time to actually watch the "offending" Adams podcast or his several followups developing context for what he said.
It’s not ok for men “trans” to enter women’s sports. Yet, where are the women, the “feminist” who marched about women’s body rights. Seems a bit contradictory. These same women now support an idea men can have babies. So John, (even though he doesn’t read these comments) if your daughter is selected to attend an event as a female and because of her intelligence is passed over for a trans you will accept? You say you will not “touch” this topic and you have two female children. The USA powerlifting lost the case to exclude trans in powerlifting. Powerlifting! Really?! Swimming, powerlifting, track and field... yet silence from the liberal, women’s right activist. Talk about performative. A person can support trans rights and a person can also say “this is not acceptable.” Regarding Adams remarks. He obviously is not black so he “stepped out of line.” Had Chris Rock or another black artist said the same there would be no push back. No doubt the cancel culture have been after comedians as well. Yet black comedians can get away with far more than white comedians. Ironically it’s the white liberals who have made this possible. They hate Trump because he doesn’t sugar coat, they essentially rocked a President’s term, elected by the people, with their continued lies; an assault on all Americans, without apology. And STILL cannot acknowledge what he accomplished. When did it become a prerequisite that leaders have to be so adored they must be a person who would be invited to sit at their dinner table or everything they accomplish is rubbish. When did it become main stream that a President has the ability to stop a virus for crying out loud. Because each of them have been successful in keeping a virus from entering their homes. Americans and especially white liberals live in a altered universe. They can’t speak truth to anything, bouncing around social justice warriors in all their narcissist contradiction.
Lia/Will Thomas is a sexually abusive man who exposed himself to his female teammates and expected them to feel perfectly fine undressing in front of him. He’s a sex offender. It’s also been confirmed that what’s motivating him to identify as a woman is a sexual fetish:
The comments below defending Scott Adams below are disappointing.
John McWhorter get its exactly right in the podcast in the two minutes beginning at 58:30. Adams is being willfully obtuse here; the people responding to the poll are not saying there is anything wrong with Adams (or anyone else) being white. It's a point about the idea of "whiteness" and history. If you're confused about this, listen to John's point at 58:30 again.
Dilbert is a great comic (especially if you're someone like me who has spent most of his working life in tech companies) and like John I don't feel the least bit bad about continuing to enjoy it. That said, Adams remarks were way over the line, and he either is having a mental breakdown, is being willfully obtuse, or is simply a flat out racist. But there is no defending his rant.
In Richard Bach's Jonathan Livingston Seagull book, a seagull separates itself from the masses to explore and learn new things and in the process makes a paradign shift in his thinking that his native tribe cannot understand and resent. Likewise, I empathize with Glenn and John and those of us that are sometimes reluctant to express our honest thoughts about social issues within the black town square in fear of being rejected or on the receiving end of frowns and hostility. I also have/had friends that think of me as "conservative" rather than simply rational, and refuse to let go of the accusatory "them versus us" victim tropes. Like the seagull, it becomes awfully lonely and disheartening when flying around on your own and moving to the beat of your own post-racial drum all along hoping others will join you in breaking the fever of victimhood and racial grievance.
Regarding Adam Scott, I watched his online video last week containing the controversial remark, and I must say, forgive me, but I laughed out loud within the quiet comfort of my home as it struck me as funny albeit tacky and divisive. I simply felt his exasperation and understood it. I also sensed that he was not an evil person but only someone who was fed up with hearing persistent complaints about white people. Afterward, I read some of the comments and a few whites indicated that Scott mirrored precisely what they were thinking, too. Unfortunately, it is yet another reminder of how pressing it is for some black people to move on from identity politics, DEI, affirmative action, racial grievance, grievance, and more grievance. We are simply better than that as our forebearers so bravely demonstrated a century ago on the upward trail of self-responsibility and independence during the worst of times.
It seems that on the Scott Adams issue the conversation missed the point. His remarks were in direct response to a poll which, if accurate, implies that the majority of black Americans are anti-white in which case his response was, "hey, if we are this reviled then stay away from people who hate us". The other aspect is that, were the races in this poll reversed, there would have been outrage with all kinds of accusations about white Americans being racist, supremacists would haven unleashed.
Time 56:00; On link between message content and potential outcomes - I can teach “research methods” to those who are interested. Such concern is legitimate. But Glenn - I am going to have to take away your “conservative card”. On Proud Boys , I am not an expert. But, YouTube videos shows ProudBoy Asian, Black, Latino, White. Director’s name is Enrique, (Puerto Rican). Proud Boy Tenets list about 10 items, reads like classical liberalism + proud Americanism.
Time 46:00; On Scott Adams, I misread word spelling in notes. I thought it read “Atlas” instead of Adams so I became excited about segment. Now I know who Scott Adams is thanks to Glenn/John. I searched youtube for video of Adams’ race-statement but only found others speaking about Adams. Whenever I hear a story like this, I ask “What would Sherlock Holmes do?” Holmes would seek the original text from speaker/writer. But on race, the people who would be vulnerable to anti-White ideology are “non-White” just like those vulnerable to radical Islamic extremism are among us Muslims. Correction: we whites also do a great job at being “anti-White”, so vulnerability to ideology exists across race.
Pausing at 17:48 to comment. I am beginning to think of uncivil discourse in terms of “gateway drug”. If you look at any individual- John Doe, what was his “gateway drug” to his discourse decline? If we want to be a society that lives in caves, then emulate Professor Bridges at the 2022 July Senate Hearing on “What is a woman?” And Bridges has essentially 2 PhDs with words in Latin meaning she ranked among elite performers in both programs. At some point, the threshold is crossed into the realm of mental illness. I am not qualified to say what that threshold is. But, normalizing narcissism cannot be good for anyone’s mental health.
Dear Glen Loury
I really enjoyed this episode, thank you so much for your candour. I cannot wait to read your memoir, if you ever do a book tour in the UK I will be first in line.
I was wondering if you would ever consider doing a interview with Bill Kristol? I have really enjoyed listening to both of your podcast for the last three years or so. I really find both of your political evolutions very interesting and I think it would be a very illuminating conversation.
I realise that you fell out with each other around the time that you were moving more to the left politcally and perhaps there is still some bad blood between you both.
I was very moved by the interview that you did with Shelby Steele and I hope that you might consider burying the hatchet with Bill Kristol enough to do an interview together.
I haven’t yet listened to this installment but it may have a tie-in w something I’ve observed - consciousness of public persona influence, etc. I don’t have time to expand upon it at the moment, but since John will be on Bill Maker’s Real Time tonite, I just want to say, after seeing him in various appearances on TV & podcasts (The - ugh - View, Chris - ugh - Hayes, etc) I truly hope he will channel his passion and outrage against Woke gone wrong with the boldness & clarity necessary to hit the bullseye 🎯. No pulling punches or watering it down or going off in some hazy direction. Name ppl besides Kendi. Media? Dems? They STOKE the fires he fights, yet he seems to ignore this.
Ppl count on him. It would be nice if he’d step up to the plate like it truly counts to him. And nice if he would back it up, show the harm & negative implications, paint the picture so that the message won’t get lost on those who still need to get it.
The same sentiment that McWhorter expresses about not wanting to touch trans issues is one that I think many people share regarding questions of race. The cost of engaging with these issues is so high as to be prohibitive. In and of itself, that seems to imply that the people disrupting, say, Charles Murray's talk, have achieved some pretty significant "success".
Here is a case in point regarding the double standard: "Former NBA star JJ Redick chastised ESPN host and 2008 NBA Champion Kendrick Perkins on Tuesday following Perkins's apparent implication that racial bias plays a factor in the voting for the NBA's MVP award."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/video-jj-redick-chastises-nba-champion-for-implying-mvp-voters-are-racist
Will Redick be punished for calling out the "reverse racist" claims of Perkins? Or, will Redrick be fired by tomorrow?
I totally agree that race relations are worse because of these initiatives, and the way that they frame racially disparate outcomes as the be all end all, and blame them entirely on the actions of white people.
Can’t wait for Glenn’s memoir, warts and all! (Glenn, my failings would fill a book as well. We are all flawed humans)
The 538 guys have a podcast where they discuss the poll that evoked the response from Adams.
I agree that Scott might have been trolling the censors with his diatribe, but his interpretation of the poll is also inaccurate. This poll says nothing about the actual state of race relations in the United States.
It is methodologically flawed and it’s only purpose is race-baiting. “It’s OK to be white” is a white nationalist meme, but hardly anybody knows that. When asked how they feel about the question most people are just confused.
There are far better ways to tease out racial resentment among different groups using polling.
I wonder how many folks opining here (other than Valencia) have taken the time to actually watch the "offending" Adams podcast or his several followups developing context for what he said.
It’s not ok for men “trans” to enter women’s sports. Yet, where are the women, the “feminist” who marched about women’s body rights. Seems a bit contradictory. These same women now support an idea men can have babies. So John, (even though he doesn’t read these comments) if your daughter is selected to attend an event as a female and because of her intelligence is passed over for a trans you will accept? You say you will not “touch” this topic and you have two female children. The USA powerlifting lost the case to exclude trans in powerlifting. Powerlifting! Really?! Swimming, powerlifting, track and field... yet silence from the liberal, women’s right activist. Talk about performative. A person can support trans rights and a person can also say “this is not acceptable.” Regarding Adams remarks. He obviously is not black so he “stepped out of line.” Had Chris Rock or another black artist said the same there would be no push back. No doubt the cancel culture have been after comedians as well. Yet black comedians can get away with far more than white comedians. Ironically it’s the white liberals who have made this possible. They hate Trump because he doesn’t sugar coat, they essentially rocked a President’s term, elected by the people, with their continued lies; an assault on all Americans, without apology. And STILL cannot acknowledge what he accomplished. When did it become a prerequisite that leaders have to be so adored they must be a person who would be invited to sit at their dinner table or everything they accomplish is rubbish. When did it become main stream that a President has the ability to stop a virus for crying out loud. Because each of them have been successful in keeping a virus from entering their homes. Americans and especially white liberals live in a altered universe. They can’t speak truth to anything, bouncing around social justice warriors in all their narcissist contradiction.
Lia/Will Thomas is a sexually abusive man who exposed himself to his female teammates and expected them to feel perfectly fine undressing in front of him. He’s a sex offender. It’s also been confirmed that what’s motivating him to identify as a woman is a sexual fetish:
https://twitter.com/JakeCrain_/status/1625866886851223553/photo/1
Why do guys feel the need to show respect to sex offenders?
The comments below defending Scott Adams below are disappointing.
John McWhorter get its exactly right in the podcast in the two minutes beginning at 58:30. Adams is being willfully obtuse here; the people responding to the poll are not saying there is anything wrong with Adams (or anyone else) being white. It's a point about the idea of "whiteness" and history. If you're confused about this, listen to John's point at 58:30 again.
Dilbert is a great comic (especially if you're someone like me who has spent most of his working life in tech companies) and like John I don't feel the least bit bad about continuing to enjoy it. That said, Adams remarks were way over the line, and he either is having a mental breakdown, is being willfully obtuse, or is simply a flat out racist. But there is no defending his rant.
In Richard Bach's Jonathan Livingston Seagull book, a seagull separates itself from the masses to explore and learn new things and in the process makes a paradign shift in his thinking that his native tribe cannot understand and resent. Likewise, I empathize with Glenn and John and those of us that are sometimes reluctant to express our honest thoughts about social issues within the black town square in fear of being rejected or on the receiving end of frowns and hostility. I also have/had friends that think of me as "conservative" rather than simply rational, and refuse to let go of the accusatory "them versus us" victim tropes. Like the seagull, it becomes awfully lonely and disheartening when flying around on your own and moving to the beat of your own post-racial drum all along hoping others will join you in breaking the fever of victimhood and racial grievance.
Regarding Adam Scott, I watched his online video last week containing the controversial remark, and I must say, forgive me, but I laughed out loud within the quiet comfort of my home as it struck me as funny albeit tacky and divisive. I simply felt his exasperation and understood it. I also sensed that he was not an evil person but only someone who was fed up with hearing persistent complaints about white people. Afterward, I read some of the comments and a few whites indicated that Scott mirrored precisely what they were thinking, too. Unfortunately, it is yet another reminder of how pressing it is for some black people to move on from identity politics, DEI, affirmative action, racial grievance, grievance, and more grievance. We are simply better than that as our forebearers so bravely demonstrated a century ago on the upward trail of self-responsibility and independence during the worst of times.
It seems that on the Scott Adams issue the conversation missed the point. His remarks were in direct response to a poll which, if accurate, implies that the majority of black Americans are anti-white in which case his response was, "hey, if we are this reviled then stay away from people who hate us". The other aspect is that, were the races in this poll reversed, there would have been outrage with all kinds of accusations about white Americans being racist, supremacists would haven unleashed.