Has Anti-Racism Become as Harmful as Racism? John McWhorter vs. Nikhil Singh
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 лис 2018
- An Oxford-style debate between McWhorter, an associate professor at Columbia University, and Singh, who teaches at NYU. Recorded in New York City on November 14, 2018.
_____
Subscribe to our UA-cam channel: / reasontv
Like us on Facebook: / reason.magaz. .
Follow us on Twitter: / reason
Subscribe to our podcast at Apple Podcasts: goo.gl/az3a7a
Reason is the planet's leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of view you won't get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.
_____
Is the message of anti-racism as harmful a force in American life as racism itself?
That was the resolution at a public debated hosted by the Soho Forum on November 14, 2018. It featured John McWhorter, associate professor of English at Columbia University, and Nikhil Singh, professor of social and cultural analysis and history at New York University. Soho Forum Director Gene Epstein moderated.
It was an Oxford-style debate in which the audience votes on the resolution at the beginning and end of the event, and the side that gains the most ground is victorious. In a close finish, Singh, arguing the negative, prevailed by convincing nearly 13 percent of audience members to come over to his side.
Singh is the author of Race and America's Long War (University of California Press, 2017), and Black Is a Country: Race and the Unfinished Struggle for Democracy (Harvard University Press, 2004).
McWhorter, who is a regular columnist for Time and CNN, is the author most recently of Talking Back, Talking Black: Truths About America's Lingua Franca (2017)
Comedian Dave Smith, host of the podcast Part of the Problem, opened the program.
Edited by Todd Krainin.
Music: "Voyeur," by Jingle Punks.
Photo Credit: Brett Raney
I'm halfway through this video, and I have yet to see either debater mention fatherlessness as a causal factor in poverty, crime, teen pregnancy, delinquency, low educational attainment, violence, gang activity, substance abuse and other behavioral, social and economic maladies that disproportionately affect the black community in the US (which happens to have the highest rate of fatherlessness).
Sigh.
Given that Nikhil Singh spends the whole debate trying to steer the debate question elsewhere, that wouldn't come up. Whether its Reason or Intelligence Squared debates, we are seeing more and more of this attempt to "reframe" the question.
Larry Elders loves to tweet the great question,, "Which is a bigger threat to the black community - white racism or black fathers missing in homes?" Even the president of the NAACP Kweife Mfume had to admit it was fatherless homes. I doubt Singh would admit the truth.
Black Fathers Matter - Larry Elders
ua-cam.com/video/FszQelEQ2KY/v-deo.html
karen straughan listen to Thomas Sowell
@karen straughan
Don't those things disproportionately affect the black community in every nation? Not just the US?
Ah, yes. One outlier disproves the general trend.
skip to 17:00 if you wanna avoid the bloviating by the "moderator" and the standup comedy routine, and get straight to the meat of it
Matt Comchoc thank you!!! Holy crap I was starting to lose hope
Thank you !
I thought for a minute when the stand up started I must’ve clicked on some amateur comedian fail compilation or something
Matt Comchoc you're the real winner!
Matt Comchoc wow, thank you
Thank you sir. I was just about to move on until I read your post. 👍
This was two years ago. I think the last few months have proven John’s side to be the truer.
Indeed!
"white supremacist violence uptick...which we see in tweets"
If you think twitter is reality, you lost the debate
There’s a documentary on Netflix called The Social Dilemma that addresses how social media does influence how people act out in real life and is contributing to the polarization in today’s politics. I haven’t gotten to this part yet for all the context but don’t underestimate social media’s influence
@@keeganslaney2381 Oh I'm not underestimating it at all. It's deceiving effects are heavy
Didn't the FBI also tell us this?
Ah so this is where all the violence is
It has to do with how 'violence' has been redefined to be any discourse other than Anti-Racism/Critical Theory
John McWhorter is friggin brilliant.
Yup! MCWHORTER - AMERICA HAS NEVER BEEN LESS RACIST
ua-cam.com/video/O3POpubeoIc/v-deo.html
@@pops1507 And having not watched the link but simply replied to the comment - It sounds perfectly reasonable that it could be less racist than it has ever been. However it's still racist and that's not acceptable.
@@ziggi08able Ta-Nehisi versus Shelpy Steele ua-cam.com/video/GIDBZSKktkQ/v-deo.html
@@ziggi08able Don't fall for the lies: ua-cam.com/video/ICo8ArskbMM/v-deo.html
@@ziggi08able At what point, in your mind, will you be willing to say the America is not a racist nation. Is it by the numbers, as in 40% racist, 30%, 20%, 10%? If there is still one racist person, is it racist? I am referring to the old definition of thinking that one is superior to another race or judging by race, not merely disagreeing with the welfare state or the concepts of implicit bias or white privilege.
Mr. McWhorter's comparison of Anti-racists to religious fundamentalists is worth further consideration.
He said in a different talk that the next book he writes will be based on that idea. He is currently of publishing a book on a different topic right now so it might be a bit.
wonder when people are going to be talking about the extreme systemic anti-white racism.
@Bill Cook yes, the comparison to "Original Sin" is very accurate. That begs the question, who is the sacrificial lamb to pay for Original Sin? I believe the goal of the Left is to sacrifice America as a Good Friday to have a Communist Easter Sunday.
In that further consideration I think foundations need to be addressed. We are ignoring that underpinning the anti-racist view is the idea the current economic and political system is racist. Ie capitalism, classical liberalism, and meritocracy. Hence they cant avoid calling people who oppose socialism and their socialist solutions racist. That's problematic as politics should not be so intertwined with race, unless the goal is conflict and not progress.
@@sridca
See response/link to Andrew Privateer. Linked info included.
McWhorter masterfully veils his eloquence with this cadenced, off the cuff delivery, making his points so easily digestible that it's not only near impossible to not understand what he says, but its also extremely satisfying to hear him speak.
wings of a butterfly - Curious to know what you disagree with him about! :)
Couldn't have said it better. McWhorter doesn't just regurgitate statistics, data, talking points and ideas, he applies logic and digs for logical explanations to why things are the way they are. He is truly one of the most rational and intellectually honest thinkers I've ever heard and read. He's true heavy weight of intellectualism.
Make sur to listen to the counterargument. While McWhorter's points are well put and accurate and worthy of consideration, he did re-frame the proposition and was therefore sidetracking the debate. In my opinion he lost because he did not take up the original proposition; rather, he re-framed it to fit his main arguments.
It wasn't a fair debate though. Human vs. Parrot? Come on...
@@Yesandsowhut I disagree. He got at the heart of the issue and put its flaws on full display. He did not follow the pedantic and surface level outline his opponent was prepared for.
A debate over the phrase, "Apple Pie is American" can either get to the heart of what that statement represents or it can remain surface level. A surface level rebuttal would be to point out that pies existed before America was formed, but that misses the entire point.
"I'm well aware that disparities are not enough to demonstrate racism."- Singh....Continues to list disparities as evidence of racism.
im tired of the racism of the gaps argument where there is no evidence in all of human history where you assume across the board equal in all statistics in order for no racism to exist.
If it was racism, then how is that people from Nigeria and Ghana and the West Indies are doing better than whites? How did that happen? Isn't there some kind of privilege that I'm supposed to draw upon that was to make me automatically have everything I needed without having earned it?
There is something in both the white and the black culture that is self-defeating. And I say both because I don't believe for one second that there is a whole lot of difference between these two demographics of the American culture. I only believe that whatever it is that is being embraced and causing this decline is being embraced with great love by both these races. Blacks were merely the first to get there. Don't fret, we white people will be there soon enough. It will be an SJW's wet dream when it happens, but it will.
Exactly. Especially when it takes little thought to see through it. Whites are obviously going to know more family and friends that can get them into the door for a job. It's a disparity, you can argue its a hold over from racism, though even that still has to be proved. But that is not racism.
@Dog Faced Pony Soldier It's similar to the god of the gaps argument.
God of the gaps is when someone claims that god must have been the reason behind something if no other reason can be found.
For example when someone says: science doesn't understand how the universe started, therefore it must have been created by god.
The flaw in this argument should be obvious, since it provides no evidence for it's claim, and only pushes a blind assertion where ever gaps in the current knowledge are found.
Racism of the gaps is similar. Rather then provide concrete evidence of racism in action, it asserts that where ever racial disparities exist, racism must be the origin.
@Dog Faced Pony Soldier kind off, yes.
Singh is very unimpressive. His first piece of evidence is about Blacks AND Latinos being disproportionately poor, which destroys his entire premise. If Latinos have the same economic level as Blacks, but they WERE NOT subject to slavery or racism, then perhaps racism isn't the cause of Black poverty either.
Or perhaps it's not racism that is the issue, but classism.
ThorsMjollnir0341 and classism knows no color :P
@@Idalych Yes Classism knows no color. As pointed out both of those minorities are same of, despite different backgrounds and different attitudes towards them and some of the issues are different that are holding them back. Its logical. So i dont know why you are being so smug or condescending. It just shows your manners or lack there of.
In fact studies have shown that white poverty stricken citizens have a lower possibility of upward mobility than those minorities. So this tone of yours, way you speak to people makes you look childish and immature.
walkinondamoon1
What kind of translator did you put my comment through to get you so worked up? I see it as totally benign with the exception of “:P”, which is quite ambiguous unless you’re actively searching to be offended.
The emoticon “:P” is not inherently “condescending” nor does it reflect a sense of smugness or lack of respect for any struggling group of people.
Personally, I thought “classism knows no color” sounded corny, so I used that kind of emoticon to show that I don’t take myself too seriously.
Maybe you shouldn’t either.
Latinos as a whole have a high poverty rate because 1/3 of them are foreign born and many of those struggle with english, many of them arrive with few marketable job skills, and many can't work legally so get paid less. Combine that with high fertility rates in low-income households and that's a lot of people at or near poverty. But once you control for recent immigrants and start looking at the 2nd and 3rd generations it's a markedly different picture. Just from immigrants to their native born kids (when they grow up and join the workforce) there's a 20% drop in the poverty rate for that subset. When you look at other subsets of Latino immigrants - Cubans, Columbians, etc who came here with an education and/or capital and/or marketable job skills then their kids typically fare as well or better than native born whites on average.
Look at West Indian immigrants to the US - and this is something McWhorter and Loury have discussed before - immigrants from the Caribbean who are indistinguishable from African-Americans in appearance and yet who, even in the first generation, have a poverty rate on par with Asians. Oh, yeah, and then there are Asians. Again, slightly higher poverty rate than whites but again, 60% of Asians in the US are foreign born. The Burmese have a 35% poverty rate while Filipinos have a 7.5% poverty rate. The median income of an Indian household is $100k while for Nepalese it's $47k.
Clearly this is because all white Americans secretly meet to discuss which ethnic groups will be allowed to outperform us and which groups we will hold back. We're so good at it we can evenly arbitrarily discriminate between Indians and Nepalese (seriously though, those damn Nepalese *shakes fist*)
Tip Topp I’m a minority and can say from experience that racism HAD been on the decline.
The last hiccup was Skinheads (Neo-Nazis) in the late 80s that petered our in the mid-90s.
The only racism I feel today comes from those who use the term White Supremacy.
It’s not just the fact that they are applying it to ALL white people. It’s also the fact that whenever I point out my experience, I am condescended to and “corrected” as not being as WOKE as I should be. I didn’t think racism was on the rise until I was “corrected” for my minority experience and opinion.
I suspect nice whites who were never racist are going to start seeing non whites as potential drama and avoid them like the plague. And that will be a perfectly rational response to what is going on now.
Everyone in the US is racist because they are always aware of race. Fuck each other, have children together and you will see your brown kids won't care that much about skin color... it works in Latin America... except Argentina, that's why we don't let them win the world cup anymore
@Jo Jo I agree there are different types of racism but being dark is far from being considered the "worst a person can be" most of us already have african and amerindian ancestry. It's true there are some groups more racist than others, particularly arabs and chinese in my country. Im not saying that there's no racism but is not as present as it is in the US because tribalism is not that strong. Our most powerful prejudice is probably against women and lgbt people, that is something that is really strong in our culture and is going to take generations to overcome. But I disagree that being dark is the worst as you say, a parent would rather have 100 black kids instead of 1 gay son
@Jo Jo I think you have no idea what you are talking about and probably you've never been in a single country of the Latin Americas. I respect your decision to believe what you like. As a mixed race person who lives in a multicultural society I just tell you about my experience. Racism is real but we don't feel it the way you do on the States and we don't give race that much of importance cause the great majority of us has black, Amerindian and white ancestry at the same time. Your are probably going to feel more rejection from supporting a different soccer team than having a different skin tone
@Jo Jo God bless you. Hopefully you'll understand that others know more than you on certain matters. If you hate latinos or gay people that's your own personal problem. I'm happy for how good my people is doing on race and I would say it's thanks to multiculturalism on all social sectors. We still have a long way to go on many other social matters and it's ok to recognize it. I hope you feel less attacked in the future and overcome your need to accuse others of things you barely know
“Black supremacy is as dangerous as white supremacy, and God is not interested merely in the freedom of black men, God is interested in the freedom of the whole human race and in the creation of a society where all men can live together as brothers.”
-MLK
White people have developed an expertise in mis contextualizing MLK to use against black people; white people have been free since the inception of this country, free enough to collectively deny the full human rights of all others it interacts with.
God ain't interested in the human race , it set things in train and left the universe to its own devices.
Ron Hall People have turned their back on MLK’s teaching. That’s the only reason it appears some might be experts at “using” his teachings against others. Unfortunately, the evil of slavery has existed for at lest 10,000 years and has occurred on every inhabited continent on planet earth. It’s not unique to anyone skin color. To paint white people with such a broad brush is the exact opposite of MLK’s teachings.
@@mralanmcbride apparently YOU didn't notice that brush when YOU were painting with it. Of all the things MLK said that could be used here, that seem to be most white people go to quote, to misuse of course. Racism is EMBEDDED in US laws, institution, customs and culture and to deny that it is so is the fuel that drives racism in our country today. Mcwhorter and others are mere racial ventriliquists, using black faces to parrot white racist talking points masked as original thought and civil discourse; to rationalise it, condone and in their most egregious offense trivialize it.
Ron Hall I feel sorry for you. I truly hope you find your way someday. Have a good day.
This was a great public discourse. I personally think John McWhorter won the debate but those who were heckling Nikhil Singh are part of the problem.
Brilliant
You know what, that's reasonable. No sense in being an ass against people you disagree with.
Thank you! I was looking for comments that commends the civil handling of this debate and I finally found it.
John didn't even argue his side....
@@ericmanget4280 You may want to watch it again.
being woke too often just means you don't sleep too well
Damn Ho, thats a good quote.
Ask Brett Weinstein if there are real examples where free speech against PC creates a dangerous environment
Or anyone in the Soviet Union, Venezuela, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, Germany, Canada, England, France, Russia, Albania, China, Hong Kong....
Geee .... its almost as if.... Identitarianism Intersectionality - IS RACISM!.
FYI (This is real) the modern usage for Racism was coined by Trotsky in about 1924. He said anytime you are losing an argument, you can just call the opponent a racist, and he will have to spend the rest of the time defending himself.
@@oscargoldman85 The term predates Trotsky's use by several decades. Also, I don't see anything about it being used as a cudgel to win an argument. Can you provide me with something on that? I would really like to see it!
@@furtim1 Hi @furtim1.
Check out the word using the :"Google ngram viewer". Oddly, the graph used to have a noticeable kick at about 1924, which now seems to have moved up to 1940 (no idea why - maybe because so many more books?). Also, I was always puzzled how it would feature at all, since I assume that Trotsky would have spoken in Russian, but I have no idea about how the ngram viewer works.
There was a previous meaning for the word "racist" , which was not used much (meaning - I believe - a feature of a race).
I will try to find the quote from Trotsky.
I actually seriously doubted this claim when I first heard it, and was shocked when it seemed to be correct, I am little surprised the search results have changed substantially... Ill check up further and get back to you.
@@furtim1 The fact that you group Canada and China in this enumeration shows that you have no grasp on the events that went down at Evergreen or about the debate you probably did not watched. You would have heckled Nikhil.
Here is the problem with racists and anti-racists: They both see the world through a racial lense. How does that get us further away from race being an issue?
@Jesse 🏆
I would like to think race was not a problem today but look at the rise of anti-racism, in various forms, in recent months. It must be addressed.
I think Nikhil presented a good case that systematic racism exists is a very distributed manner. The anti-racism philosophy isn't helpful but it's a fact that we can't just ignore discrimination.
More important, how does it address and solve any of the residual effects of racism? So broken families, disrespect for education, criminality are effects of poverty aggravated by racism. FINE. So what to DO about these things? 50% change policy (get rid of war on drugs, reform police culture, etc.); 50% change personal behavior (and enhance opportunities to do so--tutoring, funding schools that work, enhancing job training and vocational ed, etc. etc.)
Just read your article on the Atlantic Monthly on White Fragility. As an Asian American, I am grateful for your perspective on this. I find that the label and judgement of White Fragility does little more than shut down dialog and bully people into agreeing with DiAngelo or being labeled as racist. I also believe that silence does not necessarily mean enabling and supporting a racist system, it can also mean self reflection, respect, LISTENING, things that many of us could benefit from doing more of, rather than offering uninformed opinions about how things should be, and how people should behave. Thank you for your thoughtfulness and your modeling of critical thinking.
I’m a big admirer of John McWhorter and Glenn Loury
John McWhorter is a voice of reason from the left. I would like to hear more from him!
If you like him check out Thomas Sowell and Glenn Loury. If you want a younger voice then it's Coleman Hughes.
I am conservative and I agree. Reasonable, respectful minds like his from the left are suppressed. Leftists are not looking for solutions, only to create chaos with the intent of gaining power..that's it. The leftists are primarily concerned with Marxism, Socialism, and using pawns to usher in the age of aquarius, the Baphomet, and the spirit of Thelema as most of their agendas are of a sexual nature.
Also check out Derryck Green from Project 21.
The far left will begin to vilify him, that's how they deal with those who destroy their ideas.
To all you heart of darkness folks on this thread. One word: Redlining.
It's amazing how much two intelligent people from supposedly opposite views actually AGREE once they start discussing the nuances. We need to stop listening to the voices that only want to "win" for their team, and have more conversation like this which focuses on common ground and solutions.
Calling someone or something racist isn't an argument it's just name calling.
No, calling someone racist is saying they acting or speaking in a way that seems to be denigrating one ethnicity as an group, making a negative generalisation about that ethnicity. Calling someone a dickhead would be name-calling. It's the difference between calling someone and a brick layer and saying they're ugly - one is an objective description of their actions and the other is a subjective insult. Sure, there are people who might wrongly attribute a racist motivation to something they've seen someone say or do, but even then their intention is to call out what they have perceived as racist, not to just say the person is a jerk. Of course, they probably think racists are jerks because it's pretty jerky to be a racist, but the two descriptors are not the same thing.
@@PinataOblongata it's just name calling. When you call someone racist you're not making an argument, You're not disputing anything they said, You're not even saying that they're wrong... You're just calling names. It goes for all these words like racist sexist homophobe etc... If I said it's not okay to be gay and you called me a homophobe, You are not making an argument, You're just calling names.
@@PinataOblongata Calling someone racist in a political context is never used as a descriptive function. It is always used to discredit or silence someone because we know that nobody wants to be associated with a racist. Its used as a rhetorical device. Your point is valid when speaking about the dictionary definition. But it does not take into account the reality of the word being used.
@Matthew Chandler how so?
-Racist used to mean someone judging another person on their race and treating them differently because of it.
-Then it started losing meaning and became an insult.
-Now that everything is called racist it has no meaning at all.
With John McWhorter every step of the way.
He is wrong about Georgia. The law concerning voter record verification was simply enforced and it was very above board. Despite dozens of black candidates winning perfectly fine, one black woman doesn't win in a single district and it is suddenly a huge conspiracy...
Of course you do. But most black Americans don’t know who he is. And thank god we don’t.
Fast forward to June 2020, and the answer becomes "OBVIOUSLY".
trucker embargos + police simply not answering calls made by Elites might be the best way forward
•Lean-Forward
I know you are a bot, but at least try to spread propaganda correctly. You aren't even talking about anything you just randomly say "OBVIOUSLY"
Obviously what? Anti racism is as much of a problem as regular racism? Or is it that Racism is so big of a problem that anti racism isn't that big of a deal? At least try to spread propaganda in a way that makes people able to understand it!
@@olmis6289 "Has Anti-Racism become as harmful as racism" -> OBVIOUSLY re: riots that have killed much more people than the initial perceived "racist" act and has distracted the mass populous of the issue at hand. An act that should have united everyone in your nation (Police brutality is bad and we should do something about it) has not united your nation, but has divided it into anti-racists vs. everyone else. Voices shouting "if you're not with us you'e against us" are overpowering the voices saying "we need systemic change in our police departments". Anti-racism turned a non-racist murder into a racist murder. Anti-racism marginalized communities and convinced them that this is a racist issue when it never was. Anti-racism is serving the "powers that be" because an act that should have united your nation and streamlined systemic change has divided it and derailed any focused effort toward systemic change because people have shifted their focus to racial reconciliation. SAD!
@@Jacob-gi8ww Dude, the person who said that was a Bot. Look at his account, it's obvious. These bot's are easily identified based on their zero content, zero subscribes, likes, or playlist. It's just trying to spread propaganda for the sake of propaganda. My comment was suppose to be something other people laughed at BECAUSE the fact that i was responding to a bot...
The fact that you actually went to respond to me shows you have no idea whats going on with my statement, or even the "person" i was responding to.
LOL
@@olmis6289 thanks
I came across John Mcwhorter because of my interests in linguistics but listening him debate makes me appreciate him even more. He is more sensible and more useful than any of the so called black leaders like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. He's right about modern day anti racism policies they are more detrimental than they are helpful.
Me too! I loved the lecture series he did on linguistics for the Great Courses series, and then I started to see his political commentary and he became basically my favorite person!
I have a huge intellectual mancrush on him.
🌍❤
Al and Jesse make ther living off of shallow thinking. This guy is deep.
@@Whelknarge thanks for that. I love the field of linguistics and will check his Great Courses out.
a better topic would've been anti-racism is doing far more harm than good
Agreed. McWhorter “Anti-Racism Is a Dead End”
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/why-third-wave-anti-racism-dead-end/578764/
That's kinda what JM chose as his actual thesis, instead of the one provided. It was, "Is anti-racism the best way to go about fighting racism." Not is it worse than racism itself. I think it is worse than racism itself, given it's basically French Revolution concept. And given how "racism" has been defined down to a cult that ignores scientific reality.
@@lauramartel5297 Agreed. McWhorter “Anti-Racism Is a Dead End”
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/why-third-wave-anti-racism-dead-end/578764/
As much as I appreciate McWhorter's arguments, I have to agree that he missed the point of the resolution in my opinion. To me the dangers of anti-racism lie more in the effect they are having on freedoms. The censorship and bullying that is becoming prevalent. The suppression of voices of any color that dare disagree on any issue on which the anti-racists have claimed a side. The growing idea that violence is an acceptable response to words they disagree with as represented by the growing Antifa type organizations. The anti-racists, among other interest groups, are laying the groundwork for a society that can easily become the antithesis of what the founders attempted to allow us to become.
You called it
We live in a society of individuals.
Anti-racism is nothing more than dividing people into groups based on their immutable traits, ascribing characteristics to them, denying their individuality, and prejudging them.
Doesn't sound like "anti" racism at all, does it? It's just good ole fashioned racism.
@Matthew Chandler okay, who gets to decide who the racists are?
@Matthew Chandler - WHAT ??
Or one of the biggest claims made is that the answer to past discrimination is current discrimination. This is a popular thought among anti-racists.
Holy shit McWhorter is brilliant and ahead of his time
Here in 2021 and totally agree. Sad how people use lense of oppressor to see everything and destroy that which they are actually yearning to attain. Unfortunately the powerful elites take advantage of the vulnerability and aspirations of a people who should be embracing their strengths.
Why ahead of his time? Far as he says, his ideas are more based in a 60s liberal
@@xXJLNINJAXx Because this was before the BLM riots of 2020.
John McWhorter is the finest with his ability to speak non aggressively, compassionately and articulately ✨
The "anti" in anti-racist or anti-fascist does not mean "not" it means "inverted". Its the mirror image just as bad
Like anti Christ?
@@GODCONVOYPRIME that's a good example. You have to believe in christ to believe in the anti christ
Dr E........
Nice try. Very Jordan Peterson of you to try to change the meaning of words. Anti does not mean inverted or mirror image or just as bad.
anti
/ˈanti/
INFORMAL
preposition
opposed to; against.
"I'm anti the abuse of drink and the hassle that it causes"
adjective
opposed.
"the local councils are anti"
noun
a person opposed to a particular policy, activity, or idea.
"the threat to field sports from the antis is a serious one"
@@redmed10 1) The meaning of a word can't always be derived from the etymology 2) I am talking about schools of philosophical thought. Both fascism and antifa are based on Hegelian philosophy. Not liberalism or religious philosophy. This means they have more in common with eachother than the others 3) you cant define something by what it is not. Most things are not fascism 4) there are many examples of using "anti" in this way something antisymmetric is more symmetric than something unsymmetric 5) do not try to discredit reasoned argument by saying it is the sort of argument somebody unpopular would make. That is basically an Ad hominem
@@redmed10 LOL
Regardless of who you believe “won” the debate, I think we can all appreciate the beauty of civil discourse/dialogue. Happy to have found this video.
Anti-Racism is nothing more than PURE Racism. When you put one race of people on a pedestal and give them special privilege it does not matter if you are doing it with the intent to somehow convince society you are doing it to make them more equal. The act is racist and the debate that Anti-Racism is not racist needs to be argued with the same level of intolerance as the liberals are on anything they dont agree with!
Kevin Morrison All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others...
I totally agree, it's a terrible thing when anyone patronized by another accepts righteous indignation veiled as virtue with open arms, then again who wouldn't as we praise them for it
Requiring voter ID IS NOT voter suppression.
Whenever I vote, I show the poll worker my ID. How else do they know it's me?
Requiring voter ID *is* vote-fraud suppression,
however, and thus an impediment to commerce
and a departure from tradition.
@@DFWNites Pure nonsense. In America today, a citizen has to present ID to do almost anything. Why should voting be any different? Its a tactic of the left use to allow questionable ballots to be cast and counted. Many of the large inner city voter rolls are very dirty. Then left cheats in elections.
Of course.
I love an intelligent debate that is backed by facts rather than just feelings.
Heather Jones that “feelings” narrative is overplayed. I would simply say “I love intelligent debates supported by facts.”
Nikhil's leaning pretty heavy on that harm🛎bell.
I was thinking the same thing. Haaarm.
Yo it's Ben!
"I hate using this very punitive word but virtue signaling now stands in for being politically concerned. A person who in 1965 would have said what can I do to help, is now asking how can I show that I'm a moral person, but that's more Martin Luther than Martin Luther King"
Brilliant
Dare I say... iconic
John McWorther has the intonation of James Spader in The Blacklist. Very easy on the ear and yet highly compelling.
That's exactly who I think of when I hear him speak
There’s a lot of Liberal Posturing that the President is racist with very unfounded and specious reasoning , But McWhorter really touched on the Problems with groups like Black Lives Matter and why they don’t actually bring any change but are in fact just trying to say hey look at me I’m a moral person because I’m kneeling , or because I posted a Black Square.
I get called racist because I don't have a lot of patience for that kind of nonsense. It looks pretty, but does as little as possible.
Everyone is looking for the obvious signs of racism. The Jim Crow laws that are specifically meant to target minorities. The person who uses the n-word or the guy wearing the white hood. And when they can't find that, at least not at a rate that really explains what's happening, they start tearing up movies. Gotta be in there somewhere. And we microaggressions. And a moving goal post is just telling me that you're not sure you're doing. And barking up the wrong tree.
If we are to believe that there's institutional racism, and I believe there is, then we need to locate the source. And when I trace the numbers and the timelines back, I'm seeing a lot of failed government policies that were meant to "help" people. I see welfare dilapidating the family structure. You're going to pay women to not get married and then be surprised when they don't and the father doesn't stick around.
I see bad business policies. Do you really think that the sugar tax or the excessive enforcement of business regulation really cares about the color of your skin?
TheRisky9 see that’s exactly what I’ve been saying. I don’t even think we have so much a race problem in the country on a mass scale, as we do a Black Underclass similar to when The Irish were an underclass in England and when the Jews were an Underclass . But this underclass is in a violent environment . This Black Underclass didn’t exist in the 60’s. It was created as you said by the Policies of LBJ’s “Great Society”. And it destroyed the Black Community . All Institutions in America are on the Left, Academia , Hollywood, Mainstream Media, etc. so if there is any institutional racism then whose fault is that? Affirmative action and Laws against School Choice are perfect examples of Institutional racism in who they specifically hurt in the country and we don’t talk about that because the Institution is controlled by the American Left .
@@i_am_thebatman Right. And when you have an underclass society and you make rules and laws designed to keep competition out, you better believe the poor will stay poor.
John Mcwhorter is a jedi.
While i have my "side" like most people, i'm impressed that 2 people can have a civil, intelligent debate with no tantrums and personal attacks, since that seems so rare these days. Bravo!
I think John was arguing with the more popular forms of anti-racism that Nikhil also seems to have issues with. They did not agree on the same use of terms. I think if they used the same framework for the conversation they would agree far more than they seemed to here
I’m a conservative and I’ve just started listening to Mr. McWhorter. I don’t agree with everything he says but I agree with a lot. I really respect and admire the deep thought and actual concern on focusing on actions that help the black community vs just virtue signals and calling everyone racist. That does nothing but create hatred and division.
There used to be a time when conservatives and liberals would vote much more intermixed and often times swing across lines on various issues. Those times were when people spoke and thought like McWhorter and from both sides came together to actually discuss issues.
Somehow we've arrived at the idea that we can racist our way out of racism, if we just make endless discussion and exaggeration of our differences inescapable. I don't know how this supplanted things like "working toward common goals" and "increasing access to prosperity for everyone" as societal values, but here we are. Talking about race. All the time.
Given that most of these comments are not pertaining to the debate itself, let's change this. John McWhorter had an *_excellent_* performance here. The rigorous work that went into assembling the real life examples to undermine the often cited anecdotes of "racial" incidents, the firm grasp on statistics, etc. Sometimes I hear people I agree with debate and think to myself, "Yeah, I could've winged that myself." That's not one of those times.
Further, really? "Voter suppression?" That's your best evidence, Nikhil? That's laughable.
I live in a European country, where voting requires not only ID, but our cheapest form of ID costs €60, and you need to show a birth certificate, citizenship certificate, and bring a passport-ready photograph, as well as a witness who themselves has a valid ID, if they they have no other valid ID to prove their identity. You can do that only in what would be the equivalent of county capital offices.
This is *far* more difficult than aquiring ID in _any_ US state. And that's commonplace all over Europe. Guess as racist as the US is, we're _way_ more racist. Funnily enough, though, our blacks manage to overcome the minimal requirement for a functional adult to participate in voting. Are you saying US blacks are too incapable of doing that, Nikhil?
In the face of evidence, anti racist don't have to prove anything to straight white males with privilege. Makes L. Ron Hubbard look interesting.
Nikhil Singh was focused on the proposition more but played a subtle game of "No true Scotsman" in which anti-racism is not the policies such as the one that allowed disruptive black students to remain in class and make schools more dangerous.
McWhorter “Anti-Racism Is a Dead End”
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/12/why-third-wave-anti-racism-dead-end/578764/
Man, everything John said was prescient. 2020 has validated his assertions and every time Nikhill agreed with him makes me wonder if he would have the courage to stand by those agreements now,
The only thing they seemed to disagree on is the influence the kind of thinking John was against would have on American society. 2020 shows that he was right in that regard
Singh: “I Don’t believe we can necessarily convince racists with reason or through shame. I think we have to crush them politically.”
Daryl Davis would like to have some words with you, ya left-leaning fascist.”
Yes he would because Daryl obtained way more results with his methods and proved that you don't have to go to war and, as Singh says, "destroy them politically." That would obviously means destroy the Republican Party, assuming they are the racists that are holding African Americans back and upholding the systemic racism. Ridiculous concept and terrible strategy. That would mean that every African American is relegated to voting for the Democrat party in effort to destroy racism through the battle against the Republican party with no tangible offering from the Democrat Party.
John-- long super researched reasoned argument. Nikhil-- but Muh white supremacy and BuzzFeed headlines
Nikhil brought plenty of research to the table and cited numerous instances of systematic racism, what debate did you even listen to?
Exactly Eric. This is the problem with American public. They won't even listen to the views they dislike.
Yea... the guy with the real life stats that effect black ppl’s lives... easy to ignore when it doesn’t effect you
McWhorter offers straight-forward insight and concrete solutions. Its so refreshing.
McWhorter is just plain brighter than his opponent.
This is what they thought 5 years ago. Just imagine if they could see us today. Anti-racism is not a problem, but just being racist and calling it "anti-racism" has become ubiquitous.
I thought that Singh made his point quite well. He actually agreed with McWhorter on most of what I would consider the important points.
This video is 18 months old. I wonder if Singh would have this position of "anti-racists haven't been violent" now after weeks of riots.
Lela Markham my guess is he either plays it down by saying “majority of protesters are peaceful” or shifts the goal posts by saying “violence is justified when you’re systematically oppressed”
@@skkxgunner It seems you've mastered their language
@@diranshouse7061 Unfortunately I know too many of these people
@@skkxgunner They either move the goalposts, say their own terrible actions are justified (its ok when WE do it) or just lie. Lie lie and lie again.
False equivalence all over this. Conflating anti-racist protestors with looters. Comparing hundreds of years of strife to weeks of relatively minor unrest. Don't need to move a goal post or downplay, just be honest about scale and relevance. For instance do you have a larger point or just want to demonstrate a lack of appropriate scope in your constructed False Equivalence? The evidence would indicate you intended a summary dismissal.
57:20 I was in and around NYC in the 80's and old enough to watch the evening news and read the NYTimes. Tougher criminal sentencing wasn't passed because of racism (sure, there were some racists who were probably cheering.) The loudest voices calling for it were coming from black, urban communities. Those laws came into effect because people were legit scared. The murder rate in NYC, just as one example among many, rose almost every year from 634 in 1965 to 2,245 in 1990. It has dropped almost every since then and in 2017 it was 290. In 1990 there were 110,000 robberies (people getting mugged). In 2017 there were 13,000. Statistically, crime in NYC is the lowest it's ever been in the 100 years that we've been keeping good records on it. Part of that is economics, sure. But as was studied in "Carrots, Sticks, and Broken Windows" most of it was a result of the "get tough on crime" measures of the 1980s.
But yeah, Singh's contempt for the great unwashed is everywhere in this talk but especially in their back and forth.
Dude, Singh proves his opponents point with his closing story about triggering his students...
Their behavior towards each other at the very end is captivating. Thank you both for sticking with each other FOR a common goal.
The only thing that grows racism in 2019 is Identity Politics
@C o Only if you look at the projection of politics onto the domain of race and sex would you reach such a conclusion. Only your type would consider the condemnation of pedophilia as an infringement of someone's sexuality.
Identity matters boomer.
@@couldbe8348 Does it matter more than character or merit?
@@Chasstful You can't and shouldn't shy away from group identity. Escaping group identify will always lead to more strife and suffering. On an individual level you should judge others based on their behavior, but as a collective, race and religion matter. We should learn to respect other people and other peoples. The current "conservative" movement has this all wrong.
22:48 - Explains in like, five sentences, how “anti-racism” is clearly identifiable by any sociologist as a “faith.”
Then strikingly elaborates:
“When we say ‘problematic,” what we mean is ‘blasphemy.’”
It’s a religion. And it hurts people.
Nikhil Singh uses the word "crush" like a cultist on a religious crusade.
If more people had the patience to watch academics debate like this rather than learning from the news or from comedians, people would be much more critical and balanced thinkers.
If only.
mcwhorter is a academic singh is a crapademic
"If you want to know what it's like to be a Mormon, being an "Anti-racist™️" is like being a Mormon." 💯 As an ExMormon (former missionary and all) and a former piously Woke person, this is dead on. The mental gymnastics, the deep fear of stepping out of line, everything.
Is "anti-racism" just as racist as old-fashioned, run of the mill racism?
(Yes, Racism is just simply racism. Let's call things for what they are.)
Yeah, even racism against white people is also racism
On the face of it, anti-racism seems like less of a problem. Someone shooting people and then declaring his hatred for their group is obviously not the same as affirmative action, right? Leftist racism is a package deal, and a lot more subtle and long-lasting. Look for the leftist hand in creating racial divide, and you'll see an explanation for why someone 'randomly' shoots up a church.
I respect McWhorter, but how many anti-Trump media hoaxes can these people fall for? And I hasten to add that I'm apolitical. In spite of this, however, I am very critical of the media, which has led to me defending Trump quite a lot over obvious lies about him and about things he has said that are easily disproved just by going to the original sources.
Amazing how relevant this is now
How McWhorter lost this, and that this was even a close decision is baffling to me
I'm an admirer of John McWhorter but the motion was "Has Anti-Racism Become as Harmful as Racism?", NOT "Is Anti-Racism Harmful?" and MOST CERTAINLY NOT "Will Anti-Racism (as currently known) solve all the problems created by Racism?". An answer to the debate's motion requires a comparative analysis, i.e., Aspect X of Anti-Racism is as harmful (or more) as aspect Y of Racism. Speaking about the harms of Anti-Racism only shows that it is harmful (which most of us will agree to) but it fails to address the motion. I believe Nikhil Singh could've argued his point better but at least he addressed the motion, John did not. Overall, it could have been a lot better for both participants. Still worth a watch.
john gave them facts singh just baffled them with bullshit
@@mauro1990ism
The problem with "anti-racism" is that "anti-racists" define capitalism as a "system of white supremacy". There's a whole lot of Marx wrapped up in the movement.
@Matthew Chandler, the anti racists are explicitly racist morons. Moron.
really enjoyed this, thank you!
Great debate, both sides argued their side well.
I think that while I tended to be more swayed by McWhorter's ideas, I found Singh extremely respectful and thoughtful. I don't agree with the animus against him in the comments. Neither was arguing in bad faith so there's no reason to be hostile toward either of them.
I agree. I think Singh was too dismissive of John points that's my only critique. John recognizes the only way to crush people politically is to swing moderates from right through independents to left towards voting for politicians who will do something about these issues. You don't gain support by attacking people in witch hunts, which is what I think John concern is. Real work stopped because moderates stopped being elected. It's going to take a plurality of people from both sides of the isle to address this. Screaming from the far left is unlikely to work except when a super majority happens.
If only this debate took place today.
Where can I find the economics debate between the introductory speaker and the other guy?
The fact that this is even up for debate should tell you all you need to know about social justice "anti-racism".
Wouldnt removing birthright citizenship actually stop family separation because kids would be deported with their parents?
@jeice
There are no developed countries still using jus soli. They've moved to jus sanguinis. Are we to believe that every one was motivated by bigotry?
@@sv3931 im not familiar with that latin
@@jeice13
Are you fluent in Google?
@@sv3931 i dont care enough to sign in on a computer to copy paste or manually type it in
Singh's closing statement about his students - those students should just be expelled and go learn trades so they can be useful instead of graduating as indoctrinated babies. Singh should do the same.
John's leads to a mutual liberation, hiding truth never helps anyone. He is a breath of fresh air.
This was a very fruitful, interesting, and insightful debate. I learnt plenty from both arguments that I believe can and will help me to better evaluate my civil stance and moral conviction on the issue of racism.
Jesus Christ said it to himself "we must treat others as we want to be treated" just think about that. How would we all be right now worse or better?
Interesting format.
By the end of this I felt bad for Singh. He threw ad hominem-dressed word salads at McWhorter, until McWhorter got fed up, fired up that Rolls Royce of a mind and embarrassed him.
1:35:35 The way he tried to ramble through that and could not come out and say that it is toxic is a clear display of how terrible things have gotten if this is what is considered a reasonable response to such a straight forward question.
Professor McWhorter made a more cogent argument and should have won. He stuck to the thesis statement. The other professor dominated the summation and left me to think real hard about some points that I hadn’t heard framed that way before. This is really valuable. Hats off to both!
About black vs white marijuana arrests. I’ve observed that more blacks often smoke weed in the open and more whites smoke weed in more private settings. I’ve seen blacks standing outside a corner store just puffing away, in cars while driving, walking on the side of the road, etc. which makes you more vulnerable to getting arrested for marijuana use.
I think this happens often enough to be considered a factor and studied further to determine whether this could be tied to the number of black arrests for marijuana.
This debate aged brilliantly
I like John McWhorter, he's interesting.
Why does EVERY debate start with a rambling geezer? Same with Intelligence Squared debates.
We need to debate on the utility of pre-debate rambling geezers.
Hear hear!
Will such a debate still start with a rambling geezer? I mean, if for no other reason than irony, I think it's a good idea.
@@ESRohner I second your motion that said debate on 'the utility of pre-debate rambling geezers' shall be started with a rambling geezer.
I could do with opening stand up though
I always find these gold nuggets so late.
McWhorter and Singh both represented their positions well. Though I don’t think I have ever seen such a calm, well-reasoned, balanced, articulate, and decisive “win” in a debate as McWhorter did here. I am convinced now more than ever that anti-racism is a “whitewashing” distraction from identifying root causes and making the real changes that need to be made. Seattle and other cities have been protesting for some time now, and when city officials tell them they’re listening and willing to negotiate, the best the protesters can come up with is “defund the police” (as in completely) and asking the mayor to resign. This is angry, adolescent attention-seeking at best, and is nowhere near addressing the issues of police and prison reform needs and systemic inequality.
Watching this in late June 2020 and wishing one could vote for BOTH. Combine the two speakers to get the full picture.
John gave a beautiful speech! People need to hear him talk more...👍😃
Criminalization of drugs and the the New Deal had the biggest negative impact on the lack of two parent homes… which also is the strongest predictor of success in life.
I think Daryl Davis would disagree with the idea that you can't reason with a person who is a racist.
"And I want you to remember those 4 words: as harmful as racism itself (5 words)" 😆
That’s the part that doesn’t make sense that I think people are losing track of. He’s stating that Anti-racism is as dangerous as racism. And then comparing anti-racism to a religion. LOL Please people think logically and gather the facts and make up your own mind. But to me this isn’t even a debate. It’s almost laughable.
Should have just let them talk without the moderator intervening.
I often think the same about these structured debates - they end up being a kind of intellectual game show and the debate feels cheaper for it.
I don't see an outright winner to the debate except for those of us that watched it all the way through. It was very interesting to understand what they actually agreed upon and then hear the very detailed differences. This kind of debate should lead us to further the discussion with our friends and in our work place.
This video is months old and less than 100k views... That is a major bummer. I really enjoyed this debate
@Jo Jo It was literally a debate - the word's meaning is not subjective lol. I don't understand how you can say that... but hey, it's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
I think the question tries to prove too much. The question should be "Has anti-racism become a part of the problem?"
@Jo Jo it is a completely different statement with a different meaning.
@Jo Jo anti-racism is a particular culture that has sprung up around the notion that racism, and ideas and assumptions related to racism, must be actively combated. What I propose is that anti-racism has become a part of the problem, but that it is not as dangerous as traditional racism. This is a bit like saying that antifa is a part of the problem, but they are not as dangerous as Nazis. This is distinct from saying the antifa are just as bad as Nazis.
marsjacobvolta Nice to see someone making a good humoured joke about Nazis not existing
I find it hard to take seriously a college professor that bleaches his hair like a 14 year old girl.
John Anthony I wonder what caste Mr. Singh is from? He has light skin for a South Asian. Does he feel guilty about it? Indians are so racist that they throw acid in the face of the untouchable class.
Don't make personal attacks in argument
His ideas and arguments are what you should be concerned with; Not his hair style. Poor form.
@@amritjanardhanan lol
I think that it’s become clear that the concept of “anti-racism” is absolutely as damaging as racism.
I'm an admirer of John McWhorter but I have to say that he did not win this debate. The motion was "Has Anti-Racism Become as Harmful as Racism?", NOT "Is Anti-Racism Harmful?" and MOST CERTAINLY NOT "Will Anti-Racism (as currently known) solve all the problems created by Racism?". An answer to the debate's motion requires a comparative analysis, i.e., Aspect X of Anti-Racism is as harmful (or more) as aspect Y of Racism. Speaking about the harms of Anti-Racism only shows that it is harmful (which most of us will agree to) but it fails to address the motion. I believe Nikhil Singh could've argued his point better but at least he addressed the motion, John did not. Overall, it could have been a lot better for both participants. Still worth a watch.
Anti-racism hysteria is far more dangerous, cuz it's gone mainstream n unlike White supremacists, has actual sway w/corporations n media to cancel/ruin livelihoods. I'm a Korean woman n I got attacked for being a racist by woke-tards just cuz I wasn't offended (but flattered) when a British guy wanted to become Korean lol. Ridiculous.
I totally agree with John on how to teach children to read. All the actions he mentions are what is considered anti-racist action on this other side of the Atlantic Ocean. Also, you don't need to transform the parties, you need more than two.
We SO NEED more than 2! And yes to all 4 of his points!
@Paavo Ylonen
The number of parties is of no matter...
VOTERS should not be party members! Let the politicians organize themselves if they will. Let voters, of all stripe, stand off the plantation and force the pols to fight for your vote!!
John doesn't talk here - as he often does with Glenn - how "anti-racism" hurts the black community itself.
It really does hurt the Black community.
I LOVE this stuff! Regardless of who you agree with, we need to find a way to ease this conversation into our primary -12 curriculums. Not just in a forced, perfunctory, hit and run way, but in a constructive ongoing discussion. Thanks for posting this!
Who is the author McWhorter is referring to at about the 1:13:30?
Ta-nehisi coates' book "Between the world and me"