@@kushclarkkent6669 First, these are "Yoruba" names, one of the ethnic groups in Nigeria. Olu is short for Oluwa. Both mean God or Deity. Oluwaseun means "Thank God." Salako means "wrap (rope) around." This name is sometimes given to babies born with the umbilical cord wrapped around their necks.
This is a great talk and I am definitely going to be looking further into Olufemi's work. That being said, it was odd not to hear of the Debordian recuperation as a forerunner or even as a concept that eclipses entirely the elite capture of identity politics. Look into recuperation of counterculture aims, means, and aesthetics by capitalism as a longstanding tradition.
@@IhaytFukkingsocialmedia He's a regular troll on the comments section. He posts under Alabama Man but also other aliases like: Beautiful Trouble, Let's Go Brandon, Obama's 65k hotdog, and so on. He posts COVID misinformation and other conservative talking points.
I really wish there was an actual discussion about the effectiveness of identity politics and what it's achieved. I think, like others, it only garners short term gains, at the expense of real tangible change in american racial relations.
As someone who's a 'Centrist' (although a Liberal Left-leaning one) - I really appreciate the good-faith portrayal and steelmanning of the takes and perspectives I have. Far too often I just see arguments made that mischaracterize people like myself as 'farther right' than we actually are. Sometimes we need to be convinced of the flaws of 'just treating everyone equally'. As a white person - I am regularly bombarded with right wing media that tries to misrepresent racial justice as an 'anti-white' pursuit. They portray the attempts to 'pull up' black folks as an attempt to 'push down' white folks. This kind of fear mongering perpetuates racial tensions and an apathy for the pursuit of racial justice. Interviews like this show me that the pursuit of racial justice of other races never has to be at the expense or detriment of my race.
It doesn't make sense to me that self-interest or one's group affiliation is deemed the best starting point for reflection on policies regarding justice and societal well-being. It would be unnecessary for activists to compete to persuade voters to prioritize the activist's issue over other issues -- for example to prioritize Medicare For All over ending discrimination against people of color -- if states replace primitive voting methods, which count at most one majority, with a voting method that counts all of the head-to-head majorities. This would create a strong incentive for politicians to support majority-preferred policies on many more issues, even on issues that voters don't consider the most important. On most issues, majorities of the voters already prefer reasonable policies, so activists on those issues ought to be able to rest. But when the primitive voting method counts at most one majority, that majority can often be a coalition of minorities, for instance the minority who want to ban abortions plus the minority who oppose gun regulations plus the minority who want to suppress people of color plus the minority who want to cut capital gains taxes, etc, which undermines majority rule and prevents issues from being settled. Many states allow citizens' initiatives, so those states could be compelled to replace their primitive voting methods, if activists learned why the voting method is so important. Unfortunately, the election reform movement has been hijacked by promoters of the Ranked Choice Voting method, which is just another primitive voting method that counts at most one majority. Like other primitive methods, it's highly prone to spoiling, contrary to the false claim by many of its advocates that it eliminates spoiling. Counting all of the head-to-head majorities is the real way to effectively eliminate spoiling. The information needed to count all the head-to-head majorities is in the voters' rankings, but the tallying algorithm used by Ranked Choice Voting ignores most of the information and counts only one majority.
It seems you are trying to comment on America's corrupt and nonfunctional voting system. Good luck with changing that mess. Unfortunately you will have to explain this "head to head majorities" system more clearly than you have, since most of us have never heard about it.
@@Kavafy : Why do you believe that? The most widely used voting method in the world is a Condorcet method: the Robert's Rules procedure for voting on motions. It understands the value of counting multiple head-to-head majorities, which is what makes it reasonably effective at defeating minority-preferred alternatives. There are many Condorcet voting methods. They're not equally good, but they're probably all much better than non-Condorcet methods. The one that Condorcet recommended in the summary paragraph of his 1785 essay on voting methods is pretty good, but it's been mistranslated in all the academic literature except Keith Michael Baker's biography of Condorcet. The one I believe is best is very similar to the one Condorcet recommended. The best way to construct the order of finish is to process the head-to-head majorities one at a time, from largest majority to smallest majority, placing each majority's more-preferred candidate ahead of their less-preferred candidate in the order of finish. It's also important to allow each voter to express indifference between candidates in their "order of preference" votes. Almost all of the academic literature, including Condorcet's essay, assumes it's okay to force the voters to express strict preferences (no "equally preferred" candidates) so their analyses failed to find important properties of some Condorcet voting methods, such as which ones satisfy the Minimal Defense criterion.
I know nothing about the author of this book, but his name has a lot of accentuation marks so that makes me feel like he knows what he’s talking about. (This is 99% a joke, please don’t get mad at me.)
I said it 2 years ago, and I'll say it again. Idpol can produce short term results but it has no legs, to the point of being counter productive long term.
You are just blathering away here. You don't understand ANYTHING about identity politics. Repeating something that is wrong over and over doesn't somehow make it right. "Identity politics" is just normal everyday politics...but presently it is the politics of those who come from wealth and power...from people who see the world from their own self-serving perspective...from people that have the power to shape society in ways that benefit them. It is politics that comes from their identities and it has been successfully practiced for so long that they consider it to be the natural order. It IS NOT the natural order of things...it is THEIR order of things. The term "identity politics" is being cynically used by those who control our society to demean anyone else who wants their identities included in how our societies function. This is pure hypocrisy...because they are basically saying..."OUR identities matter and yours don't".
Guy supposedly against idpol is the biggest proponent of idpol. Witness his lack of issue with Clarence Thomas, because he's a rich black and Alito because he's a rich brown. On the flip side black and colored people without money and white people without money are divided from black and colored people with money (witness his comments about Obama, Justice Brown and Ilhan Omar). Selective racism mixed in with some pocket money for the good ones like Alito and Thomas. He can't be racist because he likes colored judges.
Vaccine hesitancy varied widely by occupation, from less than 10% in educators and people working in life, physical or social sciences to a high of 46.4% among people working in construction, oil and gas extraction or mining, followed closely by people in installation, maintenance, repair, farming, fishing or forestry careers
Liar March 14, 2023, 2:42 PM Mask report misinterpreted, leads to unproven claims about mask effectiveness The Cochrane Library report results were inconclusive and did not find masks do not work. Recently, a review from the Cochrane Library set off a firestorm after headlines declared research published by the respected organization's study found masks don't work and don't stop community transmission of respiratory viruses like COVID-19. Over a two-month period, some commentators and politicians took to op-ed pieces and social media to say the study proved masks weren't needed the whole time and that mandates had been ineffective. However, the editor-in-chief of the Cochrane Library, Dr. Karla Soares-Weiser, issued a statement on March 10 to say the analysis had been misinterpreted and that the review didn't find that masks do not work. Rather it looked at how effective masking programs, like mandates, were at slowing the spread of respiratory viruses and, from there, found the results to be inconclusive. "Many commentators have claimed that a recently updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work,' which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation," Soares-Weiser wrote. "It would be accurate to say that the review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses, and that the results were inconclusive." Experts told ABC News the findings from the meta-analysis from the Cochrane Library have not been accurately represented and that evidence shows masks do help prevent the spread of COVID-19. How the Cochrane review addressed different questions The Cochrane review, published in late January, looked at several studies that had examined physical interventions to reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. Many of the studies analyzed looked at masking interventions, meaning how effective masks are if people are given masks and information about masking, and encouraged to wear them. However, giving people masks does not necessarily mean that people will wear masks. "The study was misinterpreted and, when you give it a very quick glance, you see how that would happen," Dr. Jessica Justman, an associate professor of medicine in epidemiology at Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, told ABC News. "It's looking at interventions that tried to promote the use of different kinds of protective equipment, such as masks, and the outcomes are all going to depend on how well people actually adhere to the particular type of protective equipment." She continued, "So, it's not as much a study of the mask but a study of the intervention to get people to wear a mask." Additionally, many of the studies analyzed in the Cochrane review didn't look at whether people were wearing them all the time, like a at home around others, and if they were wearing them properly, including tight-fitting and covering the nose and mouth. "Masks work if you wear them," Justman said. "But if you wear them very imperfectly, if you wear them in a way where they are only loosely fitting on your face and you take them off, let's say in a crowded restaurant to eat a meal, you can't then conclude when you get COVID that the mask didn't protect you because if you don't wear the mask properly, you're not going to get the full protection." Ramifications of people misinterpreting the results Because the review was misinterpreted to say masks don't work rather than the results being inconclusive, Dr. Bruce Y. Lee, a professor of health policy and management at City University of New York School of Public Health, said this could influence people to believe they don't need to wear a mask, which could have consequences. "This has potential ramifications like long COVID, potential hospitalization and we have to wonder how many lives could have been saved, hospitalizations could have been averted how many cases of long COIVD be avoided if masks were more prevalent," he said. Lee added it helps that the editor-in-chief issued the statement, but worried the misinterpretation has already been widely spread and it will be hard to change people's minds. "The concern is that the initial message has already been amplified and the degree to which it was amplified was significant," he said. "One of the challenges is, once information gets out there, it takes twice, triple, sometimes quadruple, or even more than that, the effort to try to correct information that's already out there." What the science tells us about masks "We already have information from other studies that show almost a dose-response relationship between wearing no mask at all, wearing a cloth mask, wearing a surgical mask and wearing an N95," Justman said. "As you go up the ladder, so to speak, with each step of a better-quality mask, you see more protection." One example is a study published in February 2022 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention examining those who said they wore masks all the time in indoor public settings. Researchers found cloth masks were associated with a 56% decrease in testing positive for COVID-19, surgical masks by 66% and N95/KN95 masks by 83% compared to those who didn't wear masks or face coverings. Lee added that masks are population-based interventions, not individual-based interventions, meaning their efficacy depends on not just one person wearing a mask but how many people are wearing masks too. "We know that masks not only protect the wearer from other people and from the virus, but they also protect other people from the wearer, because if someone's infectious and shedding the virus, the mask can prevent them from spewing the virus into air, or at least reducing the amount of virus the air," he said.
Why has this Administration been lying about Ukraine? Why is Ukraine losing so badly? And why are our troops on the ground getting killed (like I said 3 months ago)?
Remember all those stories about the hero fighter pilot who took down like 5 Russian planes multiple times. Yeah those were multiple pilots. It's in Ukraines and America's interest to downplay the losses and exaggerate the wins. It's propaganda pure and simple.
@2445ace 1) no idea who that is 2) it is Ukrainian not Russian who is using WWII tanks 3) it is actually Ukrainian who has been loosing their planes to drones and the answer is because drones are more maneuverable than an airplane. There are so many limitations a pilot has but drones doesn't have such limitations
Olufemi means "God loves me."
Taiwo means the "first baby of a twin to be given birth to."
Interesting discussion.
Thank you. I'm really interested in names and their meaning. What about yours? "Oluwaseun Salako"
@@kushclarkkent6669
First, these are "Yoruba" names, one of the ethnic groups in Nigeria.
Olu is short for Oluwa. Both mean God or Deity.
Oluwaseun means "Thank God."
Salako means "wrap (rope) around." This name is sometimes given to babies born with the umbilical cord wrapped around their necks.
There are few who do a better job helping a guest explain their ideas to the viewers than Sam Seder.
Another great interview Sam!
That "a" fucks up your comment
@@billyconnelly3568
Cheers for pointing out my typo!
This is a great talk and I am definitely going to be looking further into Olufemi's work. That being said, it was odd not to hear of the Debordian recuperation as a forerunner or even as a concept that eclipses entirely the elite capture of identity politics. Look into recuperation of counterculture aims, means, and aesthetics by capitalism as a longstanding tradition.
Yeah.... if y'all only just now realizing you've been co-opted, you're way too late.
@@letsgobrandon9867 Shut up.
Love this convo
Just started reading this book, it's wonderful
I just love it when Alabama Man makes it soooooo easy to report his accounts for botting by reposting the exact same post via multiple accounts.
Who is this mythical alabama man
@@IhaytFukkingsocialmedia He's a regular troll on the comments section. He posts under Alabama Man but also other aliases like: Beautiful Trouble, Let's Go Brandon, Obama's 65k hotdog, and so on. He posts COVID misinformation and other conservative talking points.
Great interview
I really wish there was an actual discussion about the effectiveness of identity politics and what it's achieved. I think, like others, it only garners short term gains, at the expense of real tangible change in american racial relations.
As someone who's a 'Centrist' (although a Liberal Left-leaning one) - I really appreciate the good-faith portrayal and steelmanning of the takes and perspectives I have. Far too often I just see arguments made that mischaracterize people like myself as 'farther right' than we actually are. Sometimes we need to be convinced of the flaws of 'just treating everyone equally'.
As a white person - I am regularly bombarded with right wing media that tries to misrepresent racial justice as an 'anti-white' pursuit.
They portray the attempts to 'pull up' black folks as an attempt to 'push down' white folks.
This kind of fear mongering perpetuates racial tensions and an apathy for the pursuit of racial justice.
Interviews like this show me that the pursuit of racial justice of other races never has to be at the expense or detriment of my race.
Great interview.
Great interview!
This was really encouraging for a burgeoning activist. Thank you. Very deep. I recently went from being a dispositional activist to a practical one.
Identity politics is older than we think. It was around even before it got its name. The black and white races developed from identity politics.
Yes and race identity politics can't be defeated by counter-race identity politics.
consider that there is no such thing as black or white people
Man, this was great to munch on a mandarin to!
Love the show. Left is best!
It doesn't make sense to me that self-interest or one's group affiliation is deemed the best starting point for reflection on policies regarding justice and societal well-being.
It would be unnecessary for activists to compete to persuade voters to prioritize the activist's issue over other issues -- for example to prioritize Medicare For All over ending discrimination against people of color -- if states replace primitive voting methods, which count at most one majority, with a voting method that counts all of the head-to-head majorities. This would create a strong incentive for politicians to support majority-preferred policies on many more issues, even on issues that voters don't consider the most important.
On most issues, majorities of the voters already prefer reasonable policies, so activists on those issues ought to be able to rest. But when the primitive voting method counts at most one majority, that majority can often be a coalition of minorities, for instance the minority who want to ban abortions plus the minority who oppose gun regulations plus the minority who want to suppress people of color plus the minority who want to cut capital gains taxes, etc, which undermines majority rule and prevents issues from being settled.
Many states allow citizens' initiatives, so those states could be compelled to replace their primitive voting methods, if activists learned why the voting method is so important.
Unfortunately, the election reform movement has been hijacked by promoters of the Ranked Choice Voting method, which is just another primitive voting method that counts at most one majority. Like other primitive methods, it's highly prone to spoiling, contrary to the false claim by many of its advocates that it eliminates spoiling. Counting all of the head-to-head majorities is the real way to effectively eliminate spoiling. The information needed to count all the head-to-head majorities is in the voters' rankings, but the tallying algorithm used by Ranked Choice Voting ignores most of the information and counts only one majority.
It seems you are trying to comment on America's corrupt and nonfunctional voting system. Good luck with changing that mess.
Unfortunately you will have to explain this "head to head majorities" system more clearly than you have, since most of us have never heard about it.
Condorcet methods don't solve voting problems either
@@Kavafy : Why do you believe that? The most widely used voting method in the world is a Condorcet method: the Robert's Rules procedure for voting on motions. It understands the value of counting multiple head-to-head majorities, which is what makes it reasonably effective at defeating minority-preferred alternatives.
There are many Condorcet voting methods. They're not equally good, but they're probably all much better than non-Condorcet methods. The one that Condorcet recommended in the summary paragraph of his 1785 essay on voting methods is pretty good, but it's been mistranslated in all the academic literature except Keith Michael Baker's biography of Condorcet.
The one I believe is best is very similar to the one Condorcet recommended. The best way to construct the order of finish is to process the head-to-head majorities one at a time, from largest majority to smallest majority, placing each majority's more-preferred candidate ahead of their less-preferred candidate in the order of finish.
It's also important to allow each voter to express indifference between candidates in their "order of preference" votes. Almost all of the academic literature, including Condorcet's essay, assumes it's okay to force the voters to express strict preferences (no "equally preferred" candidates) so their analyses failed to find important properties of some Condorcet voting methods, such as which ones satisfy the Minimal Defense criterion.
I know nothing about the author of this book, but his name has a lot of accentuation marks so that makes me feel like he knows what he’s talking about.
(This is 99% a joke, please don’t get mad at me.)
Maybe paying attention to what matters might help you learn something.
I said it 2 years ago, and I'll say it again.
Idpol can produce short term results but it has no legs, to the point of being counter productive long term.
Can you explain why the russian military thinks it is a good idea to bomb their own cities?
You are just blathering away here. You don't understand ANYTHING about identity politics. Repeating something that is wrong over and over doesn't somehow make it right.
"Identity politics" is just normal everyday politics...but presently it is the politics of those who come from wealth and power...from people who see the world from their own self-serving perspective...from people that have the power to shape society in ways that benefit them. It is politics that comes from their identities and it has been successfully practiced for so long that they consider it to be the natural order. It IS NOT the natural order of things...it is THEIR order of things.
The term "identity politics" is being cynically used by those who control our society to demean anyone else who wants their identities included in how our societies function.
This is pure hypocrisy...because they are basically saying..."OUR identities matter and yours don't".
Very much a white guy in ohio take
Guy supposedly against idpol is the biggest proponent of idpol. Witness his lack of issue with Clarence Thomas, because he's a rich black and Alito because he's a rich brown. On the flip side black and colored people without money and white people without money are divided from black and colored people with money (witness his comments about Obama, Justice Brown and Ilhan Omar). Selective racism mixed in with some pocket money for the good ones like Alito and Thomas. He can't be racist because he likes colored judges.
PhD graduates being the most vax hesitant of all education groups (including no education) was the first clue something was seriously wrong here....
Can you explain why the russian military thinks it is a good idea to bomb their own cities?
Vaccine hesitancy varied widely by occupation, from less than 10% in educators and people working in life, physical or social sciences to a high of 46.4% among people working in construction, oil and gas extraction or mining, followed closely by people in installation, maintenance, repair, farming, fishing or forestry careers
Why is this comment under every leftist video right now?? You’re a nut.
Well well well... the most extensive study into masking ever conducted has concluded there is absolutely no evidence it prevents transmision.
None.
Liar
March 14, 2023, 2:42 PM
Mask report misinterpreted, leads to unproven claims about mask effectiveness
The Cochrane Library report results were inconclusive and did not find masks do not work.
Recently, a review from the Cochrane Library set off a firestorm after headlines declared research published by the respected organization's study found masks don't work and don't stop community transmission of respiratory viruses like COVID-19.
Over a two-month period, some commentators and politicians took to op-ed pieces and social media to say the study proved masks weren't needed the whole time and that mandates had been ineffective.
However, the editor-in-chief of the Cochrane Library, Dr. Karla Soares-Weiser, issued a statement on March 10 to say the analysis had been misinterpreted and that the review didn't find that masks do not work.
Rather it looked at how effective masking programs, like mandates, were at slowing the spread of respiratory viruses and, from there, found the results to be inconclusive.
"Many commentators have claimed that a recently updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work,' which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation," Soares-Weiser wrote. "It would be accurate to say that the review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses, and that the results were inconclusive."
Experts told ABC News the findings from the meta-analysis from the Cochrane Library have not been accurately represented and that evidence shows masks do help prevent the spread of COVID-19.
How the Cochrane review addressed different questions
The Cochrane review, published in late January, looked at several studies that had examined physical interventions to reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.
Many of the studies analyzed looked at masking interventions, meaning how effective masks are if people are given masks and information about masking, and encouraged to wear them.
However, giving people masks does not necessarily mean that people will wear masks.
"The study was misinterpreted and, when you give it a very quick glance, you see how that would happen," Dr. Jessica Justman, an associate professor of medicine in epidemiology at Columbia Mailman School of Public Health, told ABC News. "It's looking at interventions that tried to promote the use of different kinds of protective equipment, such as masks, and the outcomes are all going to depend on how well people actually adhere to the particular type of protective equipment."
She continued, "So, it's not as much a study of the mask but a study of the intervention to get people to wear a mask."
Additionally, many of the studies analyzed in the Cochrane review didn't look at whether people were wearing them all the time, like a at home around others, and if they were wearing them properly, including tight-fitting and covering the nose and mouth.
"Masks work if you wear them," Justman said. "But if you wear them very imperfectly, if you wear them in a way where they are only loosely fitting on your face and you take them off, let's say in a crowded restaurant to eat a meal, you can't then conclude when you get COVID that the mask didn't protect you because if you don't wear the mask properly, you're not going to get the full protection."
Ramifications of people misinterpreting the results
Because the review was misinterpreted to say masks don't work rather than the results being inconclusive, Dr. Bruce Y. Lee, a professor of health policy and management at City University of New York School of Public Health, said this could influence people to believe they don't need to wear a mask, which could have consequences.
"This has potential ramifications like long COVID, potential hospitalization and we have to wonder how many lives could have been saved, hospitalizations could have been averted how many cases of long COIVD be avoided if masks were more prevalent," he said.
Lee added it helps that the editor-in-chief issued the statement, but worried the misinterpretation has already been widely spread and it will be hard to change people's minds.
"The concern is that the initial message has already been amplified and the degree to which it was amplified was significant," he said. "One of the challenges is, once information gets out there, it takes twice, triple, sometimes quadruple, or even more than that, the effort to try to correct information that's already out there."
What the science tells us about masks
"We already have information from other studies that show almost a dose-response relationship between wearing no mask at all, wearing a cloth mask, wearing a surgical mask and wearing an N95," Justman said. "As you go up the ladder, so to speak, with each step of a better-quality mask, you see more protection."
One example is a study published in February 2022 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention examining those who said they wore masks all the time in indoor public settings.
Researchers found cloth masks were associated with a 56% decrease in testing positive for COVID-19, surgical masks by 66% and N95/KN95 masks by 83% compared to those who didn't wear masks or face coverings.
Lee added that masks are population-based interventions, not individual-based interventions, meaning their efficacy depends on not just one person wearing a mask but how many people are wearing masks too.
"We know that masks not only protect the wearer from other people and from the virus, but they also protect other people from the wearer, because if someone's infectious and shedding the virus, the mask can prevent them from spewing the virus into air, or at least reducing the amount of virus the air," he said.
Can you explain why the russian military thinks it is a good idea to bomb their own cities?
What are you talking about
@@bdenbhurrito OP claims to be a "data analyst" but completely misreads and misinterprets everything single thing he posts about.
No it hasn't.
Why has this Administration been lying about Ukraine?
Why is Ukraine losing so badly? And why are our troops on the ground getting killed (like I said 3 months ago)?
Russia is a superpower and haven't won yet. Move back to Russia and take everyone in Alabama with you!
Why is Russia losing Aaron? Why is Russia using tanks from WWII? Why did Russia lose a fighter jet to a drone?
Can you explain why the russian military thinks it is a good idea to bomb their own cities?
Remember all those stories about the hero fighter pilot who took down like 5 Russian planes multiple times. Yeah those were multiple pilots. It's in Ukraines and America's interest to downplay the losses and exaggerate the wins. It's propaganda pure and simple.
@2445ace
1) no idea who that is
2) it is Ukrainian not Russian who is using WWII tanks
3) it is actually Ukrainian who has been loosing their planes to drones and the answer is because drones are more maneuverable than an airplane. There are so many limitations a pilot has but drones doesn't have such limitations