Very late comment... I find myself irritated by John's apparent lack of empathy for this man's murdered father. I had more to write but it was unpleasant and I really like John.
consider an alternate world where, instead of 40 years in prison, the perp is executed in his neighbhorhood, in public, 100% medieval spectacle, no consideration of cruel or unusual punishment. Is that a stronger or weaker deterrent of future murders than the likely sentence of 40 years behind bars?
On the face of it the answer might be that it’s a pretty good deterrent but in the guts of it it’s a terrible idea imo. In the short term that could work, it’s obviously been done in the past, probably for thousands of years. Over the past few decades I’ve thought that might be an effective plan - at least theoretically. But I don’t think it would be. Going back to more violent means of punishing criminality is just that - going backwards. We need to go forward- which to me means taking all the knowledge we have gained and looking for better solutions, then trying those. I heard a lecture a few months ago on early American (I mean at the time of the founding of the US) crime and punishment and the lecturer suggested that the goal of criminal punishment at that time was twofold - punishment for the crime committed and motivation to not repeat the crime but instead, after paying the price, re-enter society as a law-abiding citizen. That sounds like a good goal. But it’s all easier said than done. But ultimately returning to those types of punishments (like public hangings) is a horrible idea. We can do better.
On the face of it the answer might be that it’s a pretty good deterrent but in the guts of it it’s a terrible idea imo. In the short term that could work, it’s obviously been done in the past, probably for thousands of years. Over the past few decades I’ve thought that might be an effective plan - at least theoretically. But I don’t think it would be. Going back to more violent means of punishing criminality is just that - going backwards. We need to go forward- which to me means taking all the knowledge we have gained and looking for better solutions, then trying those. I heard a lecture a few months ago on early American (I mean at the time of the founding of the US) crime and punishment and the lecturer suggested that the goal of criminal punishment at that time was twofold - punishment for the crime committed and motivation to not repeat the crime but instead, after paying the price, re-enter society as a law-abiding citizen. That sounds like a good goal. But it’s all easier said than done. But ultimately returning to those types of punishments (like public hangings) is a horrible idea. We can do better.
Somewhat off topic, but I was delighted to see your recent appearance on the Young Turks and your engaging conversation with Ana Kasparian, Glenn. I've been following the Young Turks for a while now. In the past, I tended to disagree with many of their views on issues related to the culture wars, but lately I've been impressed by how Cenk and Ana have seemingly drifted back towards the center on matters such as race and crime. What I especially appreciate about TYT is their anti-establishment bona fides and their willingness to call out the corrupt nature of American politics. Their stance on the recent war in Gaza is oftentimes to me a refreshing antidote to the deluge of Western chauvinism present in mainstream reporting on the matter.
Anyway, thanks again for appearing on TYT and for being willing to engage with people across the political spectrum.
After the murder, after the violence, after the blood & senseless destruction .... "What would justice mean to you, in my shoes?"
Well...the Justice we want; the Justice we believe we deserve....the Justice which requires a cosmic rebalancing of time itself, and the resurrection of the Dead.. THAT kind of Justice is beyond us.
“I see no justice in that plan." (said Peter Lake, in Helprin's work, "A Winter's Tale"_
"Who said," lashed out Isaac Penn, "that you, a man, can always perceive justice? Who said that justice is what you imagine? Can you be sure that you know it when you see it, that you will live long enough to recognize the decisive thunder of its occurrence, that it can be manifest within a generation, within ten generations, within the entire span of human existence? What you are talking about is common sense, not justice. Justice is higher and not as easy to understand -- until it presents itself in unmistakable splendor. The design of which I speak is far above our understanding. But we can sometimes feel its presence.... "
So the short answer to the question, 'what is justice to you in my shoes' would be that the immortal, golden, infinite impossibility described by Helprin as Justice with a capital 'J' is not for us...not in this place, not at this time.
The real answer, however.... the immediate answer, the secular, temporal answer , appropriate to the here & now is that justice as measured by the Law, requires the arrest & conviction, and punishment of the perpetrator. That's it.
As to the question of 'mitigating factors'....the so-called 'madness' of the 2022 American Zeitgeist and the pollution of the media and the effect of all that on the Perp's 'fragile, eggshell mind'? Forget it. All that is nothing.
In the penultimate moment, when confronted with the choice to commit murder or walk away, the young man pulled the trigger, twice, and chose death. He chose sin. He chose obviation. He chose, indeed, what he absolutely -- in his heart, in his gut -- knew was terribly & horribly wrong. And there is no excuse, no mitigation, no 'justifying' circumstances which would allow Justice of either kind to somehow pass him by.
Viktor Frankl, when confronted with the homicidal horrors of Auschwitz ... the madness of the Nazi Zeitgeist... put it this way: "The one thing you can’t take away from me is the way I choose to respond to what you do to me... Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.” Or not, as the case may be.
So it doesn't matter how mad the world. What matters is what we choose to do in the midst of that madness.
[Time 19:40]; January 6 as “insurrection” vs. protest that got out of hand. Journalist Glenn Greenwald reported that before January 6th; the FBI had successfully infiltrated the three lead groups that organized the event. And an FBI-infiltrator was texting his management from the steps of The Capitol during the January 6th protest.
[Time 14:00]; McWhorter does not want the USA run by one of the smarter baboons. My response is that since 2019; every time I approach my best friends or a director or elected official with information/evidence of extreme misconduct or criminality in an organization or in gov, - I encounter baboon behavior. On Tuesday, June 18th, 2024; I presented in-person at SF Supervisors meeting, a 1-page document with photo evidence of 2021 SF-Gov DEI extreme antisemitism directed at employees. Thus far the response has been baboon-like. Zero phone calls, zero email and zero postal mail. And I am not even a parent of school-age children. They can’t decide whether to drop off their children at school or at the local zoo.
"...not having an overt conversation about something that everybody else can see, which is that blacks are vastly overrepresented amongst those who are committing violent criminal offenses."
To my mind this is getting to the heart of the matter. I believe crime is more germane to racial issues in America than anyone would care to admit -- assuming they were allowed to talk about it.
I say so for several reasons:
1) Crime is both a cause and a consequence of fatherlessness, which I believe is the root problem of the black underclass;
2) American law enforcement is in constant contact with the black criminal class, resulting in a more adversarial police relationship with the greater black community than would otherwise be the case; this in turn leaves upstanding black citizens facing unfairly increased scrutiny which can often be de facto racist;
3) Crime feeds racism. I am an old white guy and I can't remember having ever heard a single racist comment that wasn't in the context of crime. Meanwhile people who don't come in contact with a lot of normal upstanding black Americans wind up with a skewed view of the black community from the news etc. (This is also a genesis of newly racist attitudes among non-white/immigrant communities, seeding the racism of the future).
4) The black criminal class is a progenitor of most racist or racial challenges historically faced by the greater black community, from employment to redlining to white flight to other forms of everyday discrimination.
I could come up with more but right now I have to go.
But allow a quick quibble with the assertion that the increased police scrutiny, increased police awareness of Black behavior, which quite predictably results from racially imbalanced crime rates, is somehow unfair. It's not.
If you and I are playing basketball...and you average 25 points / game shooting from beyond the 3-point-arc, is it 'unfair' if we double-team you when you go outside? Of course not. Indeed, it's eminently fair because your demonstrated scoring ability directly threatens us (and our ability to win the game). We'd be stupid if we didn't recognize the threat that you represent. We'd be extraordinarily stupid if we defended you the same way we defend your 7' center who misses every shot beyond 3 ft.
Fairness is not treating everyone equally. It's treating everyone according to their merit, in accordance with what they've earned and what they 'deserve'. If I shovel Bill's sidewalk and you don't. It would be unfair if Bill gave us both, $5. Conversely, it would be entirely fair if Bill gave me the $5 I earned and gave you nothing. You'd be unhappy, but the outcome would be absolutely fair.
So, if we consider the Police the same way we'd consider a defensive BBall Team, then their increased scrutiny of a population segment well-recognized as much more prone to commit criminal acts would be both entirely fair....and entirely frustrating to the good people being scrutinized simply because they're members of a demographic which commits proportionally more crimes.
Undoubtedly. I'd hate it if I were a member of a demographic which was, by nature, more subject to police scrutiny because it was, by nature, statistically more prone to commit criminal acts.
Men are much more subject to police scrutiny than women. And statistically more prone to commit criminal acts. So if you’re male you’re in that demographic. But it’s a pretty boring conversation I guess. Considering I never hear any conversations about that. It doesn’t really serve anyone’s narrative.
"crime is more germane to racial issues in America than anyone would care to admit"
I think you hit the nail on the head.
"upstanding black citizens facing unfairly increased scrutiny"
If a white career criminal hillbilly who cooks meth in his bathtub resists arrest and dies while being taken into custody, I don't shed a tear. Put angel wings on him? Put up a statue? Ain't gonna happen. Rushing to defend and glorify every Black person "wronged" by a white cop might bring a "racism" high, but there are repercussions.
This fits with an idea I've brought up here on Glenn's substack: that upstanding white citizens are more inclined to "write off" the white criminal underclass as "trash" etc., while upstanding black citizens seem more burdened by a need to "uplift" the black criminal underclass. While this response is understandable for historical reasons and laudable for moral ones, it is nevertheless counterproductive for the greater black community, as it leads to more cross-cultural contamination between the criminals and the upstanding citizens. Cheap example: the saggy pants thing started in the criminal underclass and spread to normal black teens, who then seemed lower status than they actually were. In this way criminal chic becomes a threat to black youth from upwardly mobile families while white youth from similar families instead face a greater social imperative to prove that they are not among the white "trash."
I think I recall that discussion. I remember John one time saying something to the effect that Black people often didn't want to harshly enforce laws because they frequently knew someone who would be affected. But, while it offers an explanation, that line of thought seems a dead-end road. No chance of anything improving; a tacit endorsement of the status quo.
Read the 2 previous comments after reading your thoughtful critique. Can these men not see the mutuality of their disdain and its paralyzing effect?
Loury AND McWhorter are two of the most analytical, insightful and courageous voices in America today. Bless them both. (Yeah, publicly thanking God for them.)
Does that sound bias? I don't care, because it's the truth.
I can really relate to this story because my dad was trying to do the same thing in Watts and Compton for over 50 years. Mentoring, sending kids to private school, part time jobs for a little spending money.
Results, 42 burglaries with no one ever caught, 2 major riots. Watts in 1965, LA riot in 1992. 3 major arsons, burnt to the ground once. 6 shoot outs, and 6 employees murdered. I remember helping carry the casket of a 9 year old that was killed in a drive by, and not by a stray bullet. She and her 11 year old friend were walking back from the store with some candy, when someone drove up, asked them where they were from and started shooting.
We are dealing with a small amount of feral degenerate savages that will not be swayed with midnight basketball, or any other social programs. Deal with it, it's the truth. If you want you and your loved ones to stay alive, Follow the Scott Adams rule, realize that this can not be fixed no matter how badly you want to and that this is as good as it gets.
OH! MY! GOD! ("OMG") John McWhorter; openly; sincerely and repeatedly, calls for the ASSASSINATION of DJT. DJT was a POTUS, an Ex-POTUS and will probably be a future POTUS. McWhorter blissfully represents himself to be a 'black academia' and social commentator. His hypocrisy and one-eyed prejudice towards DJT, is worthy of the KKK. I don't want to say this, but I am moved to do so, John McWhorter is at least two standard deviations of IQ below that of Glenn Loury. And, only an IGNORAMUS is that IGNORANT. John McWhorter should be prosecuted by the DoJ and made to face-up to his blind prejudice. It is a federal crime.
Very late comment... I find myself irritated by John's apparent lack of empathy for this man's murdered father. I had more to write but it was unpleasant and I really like John.
consider an alternate world where, instead of 40 years in prison, the perp is executed in his neighbhorhood, in public, 100% medieval spectacle, no consideration of cruel or unusual punishment. Is that a stronger or weaker deterrent of future murders than the likely sentence of 40 years behind bars?
On the face of it the answer might be that it’s a pretty good deterrent but in the guts of it it’s a terrible idea imo. In the short term that could work, it’s obviously been done in the past, probably for thousands of years. Over the past few decades I’ve thought that might be an effective plan - at least theoretically. But I don’t think it would be. Going back to more violent means of punishing criminality is just that - going backwards. We need to go forward- which to me means taking all the knowledge we have gained and looking for better solutions, then trying those. I heard a lecture a few months ago on early American (I mean at the time of the founding of the US) crime and punishment and the lecturer suggested that the goal of criminal punishment at that time was twofold - punishment for the crime committed and motivation to not repeat the crime but instead, after paying the price, re-enter society as a law-abiding citizen. That sounds like a good goal. But it’s all easier said than done. But ultimately returning to those types of punishments (like public hangings) is a horrible idea. We can do better.
On the face of it the answer might be that it’s a pretty good deterrent but in the guts of it it’s a terrible idea imo. In the short term that could work, it’s obviously been done in the past, probably for thousands of years. Over the past few decades I’ve thought that might be an effective plan - at least theoretically. But I don’t think it would be. Going back to more violent means of punishing criminality is just that - going backwards. We need to go forward- which to me means taking all the knowledge we have gained and looking for better solutions, then trying those. I heard a lecture a few months ago on early American (I mean at the time of the founding of the US) crime and punishment and the lecturer suggested that the goal of criminal punishment at that time was twofold - punishment for the crime committed and motivation to not repeat the crime but instead, after paying the price, re-enter society as a law-abiding citizen. That sounds like a good goal. But it’s all easier said than done. But ultimately returning to those types of punishments (like public hangings) is a horrible idea. We can do better.
Somewhat off topic, but I was delighted to see your recent appearance on the Young Turks and your engaging conversation with Ana Kasparian, Glenn. I've been following the Young Turks for a while now. In the past, I tended to disagree with many of their views on issues related to the culture wars, but lately I've been impressed by how Cenk and Ana have seemingly drifted back towards the center on matters such as race and crime. What I especially appreciate about TYT is their anti-establishment bona fides and their willingness to call out the corrupt nature of American politics. Their stance on the recent war in Gaza is oftentimes to me a refreshing antidote to the deluge of Western chauvinism present in mainstream reporting on the matter.
Anyway, thanks again for appearing on TYT and for being willing to engage with people across the political spectrum.
After the murder, after the violence, after the blood & senseless destruction .... "What would justice mean to you, in my shoes?"
Well...the Justice we want; the Justice we believe we deserve....the Justice which requires a cosmic rebalancing of time itself, and the resurrection of the Dead.. THAT kind of Justice is beyond us.
“I see no justice in that plan." (said Peter Lake, in Helprin's work, "A Winter's Tale"_
"Who said," lashed out Isaac Penn, "that you, a man, can always perceive justice? Who said that justice is what you imagine? Can you be sure that you know it when you see it, that you will live long enough to recognize the decisive thunder of its occurrence, that it can be manifest within a generation, within ten generations, within the entire span of human existence? What you are talking about is common sense, not justice. Justice is higher and not as easy to understand -- until it presents itself in unmistakable splendor. The design of which I speak is far above our understanding. But we can sometimes feel its presence.... "
So the short answer to the question, 'what is justice to you in my shoes' would be that the immortal, golden, infinite impossibility described by Helprin as Justice with a capital 'J' is not for us...not in this place, not at this time.
The real answer, however.... the immediate answer, the secular, temporal answer , appropriate to the here & now is that justice as measured by the Law, requires the arrest & conviction, and punishment of the perpetrator. That's it.
As to the question of 'mitigating factors'....the so-called 'madness' of the 2022 American Zeitgeist and the pollution of the media and the effect of all that on the Perp's 'fragile, eggshell mind'? Forget it. All that is nothing.
In the penultimate moment, when confronted with the choice to commit murder or walk away, the young man pulled the trigger, twice, and chose death. He chose sin. He chose obviation. He chose, indeed, what he absolutely -- in his heart, in his gut -- knew was terribly & horribly wrong. And there is no excuse, no mitigation, no 'justifying' circumstances which would allow Justice of either kind to somehow pass him by.
Viktor Frankl, when confronted with the homicidal horrors of Auschwitz ... the madness of the Nazi Zeitgeist... put it this way: "The one thing you can’t take away from me is the way I choose to respond to what you do to me... Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.” Or not, as the case may be.
So it doesn't matter how mad the world. What matters is what we choose to do in the midst of that madness.
[Time 19:40]; January 6 as “insurrection” vs. protest that got out of hand. Journalist Glenn Greenwald reported that before January 6th; the FBI had successfully infiltrated the three lead groups that organized the event. And an FBI-infiltrator was texting his management from the steps of The Capitol during the January 6th protest.
[Time 14:00]; McWhorter does not want the USA run by one of the smarter baboons. My response is that since 2019; every time I approach my best friends or a director or elected official with information/evidence of extreme misconduct or criminality in an organization or in gov, - I encounter baboon behavior. On Tuesday, June 18th, 2024; I presented in-person at SF Supervisors meeting, a 1-page document with photo evidence of 2021 SF-Gov DEI extreme antisemitism directed at employees. Thus far the response has been baboon-like. Zero phone calls, zero email and zero postal mail. And I am not even a parent of school-age children. They can’t decide whether to drop off their children at school or at the local zoo.
"...not having an overt conversation about something that everybody else can see, which is that blacks are vastly overrepresented amongst those who are committing violent criminal offenses."
To my mind this is getting to the heart of the matter. I believe crime is more germane to racial issues in America than anyone would care to admit -- assuming they were allowed to talk about it.
I say so for several reasons:
1) Crime is both a cause and a consequence of fatherlessness, which I believe is the root problem of the black underclass;
2) American law enforcement is in constant contact with the black criminal class, resulting in a more adversarial police relationship with the greater black community than would otherwise be the case; this in turn leaves upstanding black citizens facing unfairly increased scrutiny which can often be de facto racist;
3) Crime feeds racism. I am an old white guy and I can't remember having ever heard a single racist comment that wasn't in the context of crime. Meanwhile people who don't come in contact with a lot of normal upstanding black Americans wind up with a skewed view of the black community from the news etc. (This is also a genesis of newly racist attitudes among non-white/immigrant communities, seeding the racism of the future).
4) The black criminal class is a progenitor of most racist or racial challenges historically faced by the greater black community, from employment to redlining to white flight to other forms of everyday discrimination.
I could come up with more but right now I have to go.
Yes,
But allow a quick quibble with the assertion that the increased police scrutiny, increased police awareness of Black behavior, which quite predictably results from racially imbalanced crime rates, is somehow unfair. It's not.
If you and I are playing basketball...and you average 25 points / game shooting from beyond the 3-point-arc, is it 'unfair' if we double-team you when you go outside? Of course not. Indeed, it's eminently fair because your demonstrated scoring ability directly threatens us (and our ability to win the game). We'd be stupid if we didn't recognize the threat that you represent. We'd be extraordinarily stupid if we defended you the same way we defend your 7' center who misses every shot beyond 3 ft.
Fairness is not treating everyone equally. It's treating everyone according to their merit, in accordance with what they've earned and what they 'deserve'. If I shovel Bill's sidewalk and you don't. It would be unfair if Bill gave us both, $5. Conversely, it would be entirely fair if Bill gave me the $5 I earned and gave you nothing. You'd be unhappy, but the outcome would be absolutely fair.
So, if we consider the Police the same way we'd consider a defensive BBall Team, then their increased scrutiny of a population segment well-recognized as much more prone to commit criminal acts would be both entirely fair....and entirely frustrating to the good people being scrutinized simply because they're members of a demographic which commits proportionally more crimes.
Point taken. I guess I really meant that it "seems" or "feels" unfair to upstanding black people, which no doubt it does.
Undoubtedly. I'd hate it if I were a member of a demographic which was, by nature, more subject to police scrutiny because it was, by nature, statistically more prone to commit criminal acts.
Men are much more subject to police scrutiny than women. And statistically more prone to commit criminal acts. So if you’re male you’re in that demographic. But it’s a pretty boring conversation I guess. Considering I never hear any conversations about that. It doesn’t really serve anyone’s narrative.
"crime is more germane to racial issues in America than anyone would care to admit"
I think you hit the nail on the head.
"upstanding black citizens facing unfairly increased scrutiny"
If a white career criminal hillbilly who cooks meth in his bathtub resists arrest and dies while being taken into custody, I don't shed a tear. Put angel wings on him? Put up a statue? Ain't gonna happen. Rushing to defend and glorify every Black person "wronged" by a white cop might bring a "racism" high, but there are repercussions.
This fits with an idea I've brought up here on Glenn's substack: that upstanding white citizens are more inclined to "write off" the white criminal underclass as "trash" etc., while upstanding black citizens seem more burdened by a need to "uplift" the black criminal underclass. While this response is understandable for historical reasons and laudable for moral ones, it is nevertheless counterproductive for the greater black community, as it leads to more cross-cultural contamination between the criminals and the upstanding citizens. Cheap example: the saggy pants thing started in the criminal underclass and spread to normal black teens, who then seemed lower status than they actually were. In this way criminal chic becomes a threat to black youth from upwardly mobile families while white youth from similar families instead face a greater social imperative to prove that they are not among the white "trash."
I think I recall that discussion. I remember John one time saying something to the effect that Black people often didn't want to harshly enforce laws because they frequently knew someone who would be affected. But, while it offers an explanation, that line of thought seems a dead-end road. No chance of anything improving; a tacit endorsement of the status quo.
Read the 2 previous comments after reading your thoughtful critique. Can these men not see the mutuality of their disdain and its paralyzing effect?
Loury AND McWhorter are two of the most analytical, insightful and courageous voices in America today. Bless them both. (Yeah, publicly thanking God for them.)
Follow the Scott Adams rule.
You can not fix this.
This is as good as it gets.
Does that sound bias? I don't care, because it's the truth.
I can really relate to this story because my dad was trying to do the same thing in Watts and Compton for over 50 years. Mentoring, sending kids to private school, part time jobs for a little spending money.
Results, 42 burglaries with no one ever caught, 2 major riots. Watts in 1965, LA riot in 1992. 3 major arsons, burnt to the ground once. 6 shoot outs, and 6 employees murdered. I remember helping carry the casket of a 9 year old that was killed in a drive by, and not by a stray bullet. She and her 11 year old friend were walking back from the store with some candy, when someone drove up, asked them where they were from and started shooting.
We are dealing with a small amount of feral degenerate savages that will not be swayed with midnight basketball, or any other social programs. Deal with it, it's the truth. If you want you and your loved ones to stay alive, Follow the Scott Adams rule, realize that this can not be fixed no matter how badly you want to and that this is as good as it gets.
OH! MY! GOD! ("OMG") John McWhorter; openly; sincerely and repeatedly, calls for the ASSASSINATION of DJT. DJT was a POTUS, an Ex-POTUS and will probably be a future POTUS. McWhorter blissfully represents himself to be a 'black academia' and social commentator. His hypocrisy and one-eyed prejudice towards DJT, is worthy of the KKK. I don't want to say this, but I am moved to do so, John McWhorter is at least two standard deviations of IQ below that of Glenn Loury. And, only an IGNORAMUS is that IGNORANT. John McWhorter should be prosecuted by the DoJ and made to face-up to his blind prejudice. It is a federal crime.