This show has such original, well-thought out and interesting current discussions, presented by two very well qualified hosts. I'm at a loss for why it's not more popular than it is, this show is definitely the cream of the crop discussing contemporary issues.
@@nancybartley4610 That's what inspired me to like and comment on the video too; he never asks for that, and when I noticed how few views these videos get I wanted to do my part to help spread the show
I'm surprised I finished the show. A 1 hour video is, usually, beyond my endurance level. I knew black students in STEM had a high drop out rate, but I was surprised to hear is was 50%. Yes. Give the students the information and let them decide for themselves.
Arcidiacono said "SWITCH out" repeatedly, so maybe that implies they're still at the university, but have changed their major. "DROP out" sounds like they stopped attending any university.
Another interesting, balanced and well-informed discussion from Glenn, John and guest. Going to listen to another one right now; I'm binge-watching the Glenn Show!
"Affirmative action for rich white kids." Let me just point out, I went to Harvard 40 years ago, the heyday of affirmative action, and I had many Black and Asian classmates. And all those classmates went on to have kids that were legacy admits, and those kids are having kids that will be legacy admits. So in 2023, it's affirmative action for affluent white and brown and black kids.
Affirmative action was supposed to bring balance. But it became a tool abused, and unfortunately, we now suffer the unintended consequences of that abuse.
Glenn strikes me as one of the sharpest people I’ve ever heard speak. And that’s not to put down, John, who is obviously highly intelligent. But everything Glenn says reeks of rationality to me in a way that few other speakers are able to achieve.
I would like to see Glenn debate people that disagree with him on this subject, because I trust him to find people who would argue in good faith and intellectual honesty rather than the typical hacks we see
This was a great conversation. Thanks very much. A few thoughts spurred by your conversation: Foremost, I think you're quite right that higher education is losing the trust of the population. I think most of the reason has nothing to do with this judicial decision. But Affirmative Action has certainly contributed to it: first, by championing a policy that a clear majority of the country finds unacceptable, and second, by hiding their motivations, their methods, and the effects of the policy. The leaders of higher education, especially the most selective universities that have most aggressively pursued this policy, have well earned the distrust of their fellow citizens. Second, I sympathize with the disagreement between John and Glenn on legacy preferences. There are practical and moral arguments that cut both ways. As Peter said, there's no legal basis for forcing colleges to abandon legacy preferences. Some colleges have announced an end to legacy preferences. I don't know whether this is a virtue-signaling move because many supporters of Affirmative Action have been so strident in equating legacy preferences with racial preferences, or whether they're genuinely committed to pursuing some sort of meritocracy. The most recent example I've heard of is Wesleyan, certainly a very liberal institution. At the risk of revealing prejudice, I doubt that Wesleyan has as many potential multi-million dollar donors as Harvard or Princeton, so they may be losing less potential donations than the most elite schools. On the other hand, their endowment is much smaller, so they could have more need of large donations. And clearly, potential donations is a primary reason for legacy preferences. But I didn't see Wesleyan announcing that large donors wouldn't get preferences for their children.
Just found this channel! So excited to have found some rational individuals having true intellectual discussion rather than fear mongering or pushing ideology. :)
The way to address the fairness versus inclusion issue is to have set asides based on need only. Any special admission must also offer remediation for students in particular subjects. This way they won't drop out and go to less competitive schools.
Something I have not seen comment on.... Apperantly the organization(s) that administer the ACT and/or SAT have come up with a SES score. (Socio-economic Something) As Thomas Sowell said, when you just look at race, you end up admitting black doctor and lawyer's childern, which are not going to give significant diversity of thought or experience from white students. However, no one has commented that if colleges use the SES scores for diversity to select a certain proportion of less fortunate applicants, it may create that socioeconomic diversity they allegedly desire. Will it create more black and hispanic admissions and/or graduates? Will the lower SES admits be in the lower academic performers? Will it cause discrimination to Asians who will have higher SES than whites? Will the " test prep" industry start a "low SES" adjunct? For example--use you poor uncle's address, not you own.
The fair admission standard will never be solved until the "Merit Standard" is wholistically defined. Until then we will be at the whim of the prevailing ideology and politics of the time.
Thank you for this podcast.. Affirmative action and various state policies that introduce "protected classes", are so racist and subversive to the uninformed.. precisely the kind of thing that has carved up the country into voter blockers and mind blocked factions. I pray both of you men, continue this good work, enjoy the great success, and John reconsiders his relationship with god :) John, no greater freedom is found outside following Christ, and you will enjoy the paradox and relationship once you really endeavor to seek him! Some mysteries have answers you'll never hear out loud! Peace!
One way to check if colleges are adhering to the law would be to check for "disparate impact" in something measurable like 4 year graduation rates or grades. That's the main way regulators check banks and financiers for discrimination.
Let's call "family preferences" what it is: the Old Boy system. I think it is reasonable to assume it has operated for as long as humans have been human. In 2021, that is the 21st century, should such a system still operate in a civil society such as ours, especially in our elite institutions, which set the standards other institutions try to emulate? I'm with John on this one. The answer is clearly no if the objective is to give opportunity based on merit and merit alone. What makes a person with money special is that they have money. That is advantage enough for anyone.
OKAY< I have liked and shared - now I comment. I persevered till the very end even though early on I had a hard time grasping what was being said. I think that was just me and some lack of grasp ability. But, as I say, I stayed on and am so glad I did. Things made sense, things fell into place and I shared some grief at the way Roland Fryer was treated. I wish HE"D go on the road and would be all the rage, giving "" Mark Chappelle some competition... but maybe he'd just be crucified for not talking against whitey frequently enough.
Well what if Harvard said our money for the funding of this institution was tied to the legacy of slavery and therefore we want to ameliorate the conditions we helped to create specifically for Foundational Black Americans and therefore meet the conditions of a "legacy student"? Is that acceptable?
Preferences for people already benefitted quite a lot! This is appealing to equity? If parents kept up with the alumni then it should add to the points. Now black people can Benefit from legacy entry!! Glenn is right! Affirmative action is not legacy or sports entry!!!
I remember the announcement of SCOTUS' decision in Gruter v. Bollinger (Michigan Law School case - 2003) too well. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor gurgling on about the marvels of racial discrimination, then in conclusion wagging her finger at American society, saying that the court doesn't want to have to weigh affirmative action 25 years hence and that America had better have all these racial problems solved before then. Despite all the verbal diarrhea what the court said is that universities are free to practice racial discrimination to whatever extent they deemed fit as long as the discrimination takes place in the context of an unstructured, Monterrey pop, loosey-goosey Woodstock-like admissions process. I'm seldom in agreement with what the current SCOTUS has promulgated recently, but they got this one (2023) right.
Legacy preferences are just as bad as race preferences. I have been just as interested in legacy, GPA, SAT, AA, test scores. My son's are grown, and all through the college days. I think all the above have flaws, and all can and are gamed, but test scores are the least able to be gamed. Yet test scores were the one that Colleges and universities were getting rid of before the AA SCOTUS decision. I just find it very curious, and often what was their true goal. I'm going to throw this out there, and I can change my opinion but I think it is this "the rich protecting the rich"
8:59 The reason test scores and gpa are the only 'legitimate' sorting device for these august academic institutions is their claim, their claim not mine, is that their purpose is to create the best thinkers and therefore leaders possible and they tell us the way you can tell if they have been successful is by the by the individual academic success of a student in their institutions (a little circular yes), and by far the most accurate predictor of success in these institutions IS TEST SCORES. So essentially the reason everything else is illegitimate is they can't say what the real reason for their sorting techniques are. You see the constitutional test needed to violate the 14th amendment requires a legitimate and compelling state interest, and it can't be anything but pedagogical according to Powell's ruling. That's why the fiction that 'diversity' somehow improves EVERY students educational experience was created.
can someone explain to me why asian people are still not happy ? i thought the affirmative action was reducing the amount of potential doctors in the USA. why was that action even created in the 1st place ? and who created it ?
Mr. Loury, you've had numerous conversations about the academic performance of blacks in best learning institutions in the United States. When, I wonder, will you have a conversation about the education offered to the average black child in America versus that offered to non blacks. When does this disparity in intellectual capacity begin to show itself?
George W. Bush would not have gotten into Yale without his family connections. Did he go on to accomplish things commensurate with his elite education? I suppose he did. If someone else took his spot because they had more merit, would they have gone on to accomplish such things, or maybe W would have accomplished what he did regardless of Yale. I am just not sure anyone was denied an opportunity and failed to accomplish their life goals because W got his spot or that W's life would have been all that different had he not gone to Yale.
Quaker schools give preferences to Quakers. In many (most?) schools, there aren't enough Quakers to fill the class. So other people are admitted. I'm sure that being Quaker is highly correlated with family. The people that built and supported these institutions have the right, not privilege, to expect their families and community (and yes religion) will benefit from their work, money and loyalty. They also have the right to maintain their own culture within their institutions. Quaker schools in Pennsylvania are given tax money for their libraries with the condition that they don't buy books on religion. Non-blacks should apply to HIstorically Black Colleges. They better admit 87% non-blacks, because blacks are only 13% of the population. This is madness. They weren't historically neutral colleges. They have their own culture. It deserves to be maintained.
Roland's sin is taking the dogma seriously. Dogma can only remain dogma if it is abstract and conceptual. The day you attempt to prove or provide evidence for the accuracy of the dogma, you run afoul of disproving the dogma- a sin
Glenn and John you speak about these anti black issues all then time. Why though? I am British we don operate affirmative Action policy here in UK but you seem to celebrate and seemingly happy about ending Affirmative Action as your title program suggest . why this insatiable need ?? against everything black 1619 projects the list goes on.....
I am a retired professor of psychology at a Midwest liberal arts college (related to those places John referred to a couple weeks ago) and I had a couple colleagues like you two when I was teaching, but only a couple. The rest were part of the herd. Thank you both for being such role models, not just for your logic and reason, but for your intellectual humility and openness to ideas. I look forward to your discussions each time. Keep doing what you do!
Mr. Loury, I’m 64, retired, and live alone. I was so starved for intelligent adult conversation, in which the participants were very obviously striving for objectively, and not pushing an ideology-and then I discovered your show. Love it when you’ve got John McWorter on! “I could listen to him read the phone-book .” 🙂 Edit: I mentioned living alone, I’m not the least bit lonely, my sons and grandchildren provide all the human contact I need, plus I help to care for an older relative. I miss a certain amount of female companionship, “cough,” but it comes at too high a price. It’s as though instead of God making woman out of Adam’s rib, Satan made them out of cocaine and heroin.
I dunno about you, but I want desperately to PARTICIPATE in the very kind of honest, open, and challenging intellectual discussions that they do on this show. Watching them engage just piques my hunger for it. I may start my own channel, if I can find people to engage in this kind of format with. I think the most important aspect is that people can have different, even opposing ideas and still work mutually to come to an understanding of each other's position, and even find mutual ground despite perhaps never agreeing. I love that about this show (Glenn and John started out complete opposites in a lot of topics, and I believe one even thought the other one iffy), but also about the "heterodox" circle of similar people that is developing out of necessity. Brand, Dore, Rogan, Peterson, Rubin, Carlson, et cetera will talk to each other, or almost anyone else, about anything, without that hateful and counterproductive "I won't legitimize him by talking to him" sort of mentality, and without assuming ill intent or an adversarial stance. When we look at US foreign policy, we can see that if you won't even talk to someone, it only makes things worse. There are countries we refuse to engage with diplomatically, and others as evil or worse that we do, and it's clear that we're artificially making the former group long-term "enemies" and whipping boys to foment strife and justify authoritarianism and legal plunder domestically.
@KAZVorpal I'm not entirely sure about Dore. He seems to have walls around his areas of good faith that when are passed over quickly results in tribalism and name-calling. Its been a while since i watched him tho. Perhaps hes changed over time.
@@jackbrewster9766 When I first started watching Dore, I had exactly that concern about him. And I still don't know what's going on in his head. He does seem to struggle to play neutral on certain issues. But he talks stridently about reaching out to both sides, because common people on the "right" and "left" have common cause on so many issues. So even if he's pandering, it may be for good reasons, not as a profiteer or agent provocateur. But what it comes down to is this: He covers many important issues more stridently and thoroughly than anyone else, so I essentially feel that he's worth following, regardless of any possible ulterior motives. In fact, I sometimes find his "humor" frustrating...and I joke to my girlfriend that I have to suffer it to learn things only he covers.
I'm commenting, as requested. I've been watching for years, even though I live far away and have no stake in american culture. I still think your podcast is excellent.
Prof Loury your comment on “turning them into baubles to wear on a charm bracelet on your wrist…” was to the point. I may be paranoid but I bristle when I perceive people think I got to where I am because of my ethnic background rather than my hard work. Maybe I’m wrong but it’s out there.
Glenn played a great devil's advocate in regards to legacy entrants, his reaction to John's quick response was perfect. About 12 minutes in. Thank you everyone, Peter, John, and Glenn, great discussion. Peace
Affirmative Action is just one of many topics where schools model irrationality in their arguments. I mean that when they say illogical things like "race is only a positive" in AA they are modeling bad reasoning to their own students. The same when they blame parents for outcomes they (K-12 or higher) clearly are responsible for, themselves. And their one-sided teachings on many issues, like race/sex, religion, various political topics, et cetera. It is no surprise that younger people accept insane authoritarian arguments today, as the rationale fit what they were taught in school.
Some good points. When it comes to Education, I fear the ship has sailed. And that those who have charted its course, consider Logic, Reason, and Common Sense, unnecessary cargo.
@@ShockwaveSoundwave-z2m I feel that people claiming that to you are lying. Because they are. I have examined the actual curriculum outline, plus watched a detailed explanation by one of the two black scholars directly involved in its creation. The point, clearly, is not that anyone ever benefit from slavery per se, but that people subjected to the evil of slavery nonetheless have the perseverance and strength necessary to make things of themselves.
Excellent conversation as always. I’ve watched you since you started. I work for the city of Minneapolis and I’m in a doctorate program and I see this in all spaces.
I notice that in many cases both of you and sometimes the guest are challenging your own beliefs not just communicating a die hard position. I see the thoughtfulness and thought in your responses as opposed to having standard dogmatic responses that many of the "intellectuals" spotlighted today have.
John is right. If there is a standard the standard must be maintained. You dont get in with a 18 on your ACT because your father and grandfather went there.
I have my bachelors in economics and a masters in international business, so basically I can't claim to be an expert in much, but I have had enough exposure to academia to say that I am very concerned at the politicization of academic research and teaching as I saw it encroach over years being in and out of school. Some fields are better insulated than others, but once the administrative staff became stand-ins for culture warriors every field was put at risk.
I had no idea what economics career paths existed until my son who is currently a third year economics major talked to me about his studies. It is fascinating. These conversations are fascinating and I am convinced that if we had economics minded people running the country then a better day it would be. Imagine a world where people actually studied solutions and adjusted them to find what works. As a 25 year cop, i have seen many SARA projects that the final A assessment never get done and these failed policies and projects live on forever.
As a tie breaking deciding factor I see the value in legacy preference. Imagine you’re the GM for a baseball team. You have two completely evenly matched prospects but one of their fathers played professionally. It’s more likely that the legacy would be steeped in the culture in a way that could better prepare him for being a professional athlete both on and off the field.
I just want to place a comment here to express how much I enjoyed this video. I also clicked the 'Like' button. I would've shared it as well, but unfortunately I have no friends.
I was going to skip the Roland Fryer bit, but I’m glad I didn’t. It sounds like he is an extraordinary individual, but I had never heard of him before (although I do live in the UK). This behavior from Harvard doesn’t surprise me after reading Rajiv Malhotra’s “Snakes in the Ganga”. It seems that this once great institution no longer wants to solve society’s problems but exacerbate them for a wider stelth Marxist agenda (under the guise of "woke").
It annoys me how the collage system holds on to very large amounts of money. If I was in charge I would invest it in the lower schools mainly in the ones that have to most problems. I would think that would improve the applicants they are getting and probably make them grow. Love the show!
... College in US is not perfect. But it gets half of kids to keep studying at their own expense. Half waste these college years but half do become skilled docs, scientists, accountants... Yes they mostly do it for parties, sex, booze, avoid work.... Some countries lack this and look at US w envy... Yes there are problems, but boy it mostly does good. Imagine a world where most Americans dropped out at 16 to just dig ditches, buy beer, and be pathetic from 16 to 65. We are lucky, the US is pretty awesome despite us all mostly focusing on flaws. . . Diversity too lets the 50% women, and 20% minority contribute fully and some of them do become leading scientists and best doctors, compare this to say France which is more sexist and unwelcoming to minorities. Or say Italy. Or Iran. USA in 1960 in colleges only let in 40% of the best brains, women and minorities excluded, now wow we try to select from 100%, this is a good good good boost even if for say 5% of people we wrongly let them in.... Overall US education system is awesome.. Even lower education mostly is good, especially for immigrants learning English the US is amazing.. as guess it does fail quarter of the 20% that are minorities and maybe tenth of the whites --- applying math this is failing 5% and 8% so 13% as guess get bad education, other 87% get good education and some of them awesome education..... It's easy to forget the good side to US education...
@@madameclark3453 I think in some communities the students need more of a one n one setting and money would have to be involved. I would rather it spent on that then sitting in endowments especially considering how much of it is tax money.
"...That was the thing that persisted in the whole Harvard trial. Your race can never be used against you. It's only a plus factor. That doesn't make sense in any context that's serious. It's a zero sum game in terms of who's getting in. And to see institutions of higher learning do that, it's, it's crazy" - Peter Arcidiacono Exactly. To argue that "your race can never be used against you. It's only a plus factor" when it comes to Affirmative Action be it in Education, Employment, etc., is not only disingenuous, but illogical. For any opportunity afforded someone - even partially - based on race, allows for the denial of that very same opportunity, also based on race. How some people don't acknowledge, or even understand this, is mind-boggling!
![The Problem of Race with Glenn Loury [Bonus Episode]](/img/n.gif)
Glenn & John have a dynamic synergy that shows up every episode.
More people need to hear these conversations
I always appreciate the rational discussion of difficult topics that are found on the Glenn Show. Thanks for everything you do!
More people than you would expect, can recognize thoughtfulness and they will wait for it.
This show has such original, well-thought out and interesting current discussions, presented by two very well qualified hosts. I'm at a loss for why it's not more popular than it is, this show is definitely the cream of the crop discussing contemporary issues.
I wonder the same. I am Glenn reminded me to "like" the show. It will help.
@@nancybartley4610 That's what inspired me to like and comment on the video too; he never asks for that, and when I noticed how few views these videos get I wanted to do my part to help spread the show
I agree this is an amazing show. And love the counterpoint discussions with most of times the greatest introduction to solutions!!!!
I can't say how much I appreciate your Podcast. Thank you for fighting and tell the end.
I love Glenn's rants so much!!!! 👏 👏 🎤 drop!!
Commenting because I like you guys!
I'm surprised I finished the show. A 1 hour video is, usually, beyond my endurance level.
I knew black students in STEM had a high drop out rate, but I was surprised to hear is was 50%. Yes. Give the students the information and let them decide for themselves.
Arcidiacono said "SWITCH out" repeatedly, so maybe that implies they're still at the university, but have changed their major. "DROP out" sounds like they stopped attending any university.
Where does the statistic from?
The data came from Harvard and UNC data given to the teams for their analysis.
@@Tomasquo I meant dropping out of STEM. As far as I’m concerned, if they get a degree in history instead, that is a net loss.
Always an incredible conversation with these two !😊
Another interesting, balanced and well-informed discussion from Glenn, John and guest. Going to listen to another one right now; I'm binge-watching the Glenn Show!
Hope more people see your videos.
Thanks for this interview. Sowell has been talking for decades about how affirmative action sets up the 'so called' diverse to fail at college.
does legacy admissions fail as well? Or they can't fail out because of their legacy?
Thx so much. Mike Finlayson, Winnipeg, Canada. I love Justice Thomas and despair at his treatment
Thankful for you guys! ❤
"Affirmative action for rich white kids." Let me just point out, I went to Harvard 40 years ago, the heyday of affirmative action, and I had many Black and Asian classmates. And all those classmates went on to have kids that were legacy admits, and those kids are having kids that will be legacy admits. So in 2023, it's affirmative action for affluent white and brown and black kids.
This comment is for your producers!
I might as well write my favorite quote, “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
This is me.....
It's topical to point out it would be appropriate to attribute that quote.
🙃🤣
Love Glen & John 👍🏻
Thank you. 🙏🏾🇺🇸❤️
Love your show!
Thank you very much 🤲🙏🌷
Affirmative action was supposed to bring balance. But it became a tool abused, and unfortunately, we now suffer the unintended consequences of that abuse.
It’s great to find a place to celebrate the judicial victory over affirmative action in academia. (I hope I’m stating that correctly.)
Great show gentlemen! Kudos to John for being quoted/referenced by Richard Dawkins on Peter Boghossian’s recent podcast!!
What was the quote?
After decades of affirmative action, there will be many Black and Hispanic alumni who have children admitted through legacy preferences.
I appreciate the discussion.
Glenn strikes me as one of the sharpest people I’ve ever heard speak. And that’s not to put down, John, who is obviously highly intelligent. But everything Glenn says reeks of rationality to me in a way that few other speakers are able to achieve.
Glenn and John are some of the best and Peter appears to be a very interesting person too.
I would like to see Glenn debate people that disagree with him on this subject, because I trust him to find people who would argue in good faith and intellectual honesty rather than the typical hacks we see
This was a great conversation. Thanks very much. A few thoughts spurred by your conversation:
Foremost, I think you're quite right that higher education is losing the trust of the population. I think most of the reason has nothing to do with this judicial decision. But Affirmative Action has certainly contributed to it: first, by championing a policy that a clear majority of the country finds unacceptable, and second, by hiding their motivations, their methods, and the effects of the policy. The leaders of higher education, especially the most selective universities that have most aggressively pursued this policy, have well earned the distrust of their fellow citizens.
Second, I sympathize with the disagreement between John and Glenn on legacy preferences. There are practical and moral arguments that cut both ways. As Peter said, there's no legal basis for forcing colleges to abandon legacy preferences. Some colleges have announced an end to legacy preferences. I don't know whether this is a virtue-signaling move because many supporters of Affirmative Action have been so strident in equating legacy preferences with racial preferences, or whether they're genuinely committed to pursuing some sort of meritocracy. The most recent example I've heard of is Wesleyan, certainly a very liberal institution. At the risk of revealing prejudice, I doubt that Wesleyan has as many potential multi-million dollar donors as Harvard or Princeton, so they may be losing less potential donations than the most elite schools. On the other hand, their endowment is much smaller, so they could have more need of large donations. And clearly, potential donations is a primary reason for legacy preferences. But I didn't see Wesleyan announcing that large donors wouldn't get preferences for their children.
Just found this channel! So excited to have found some rational individuals having true intellectual discussion rather than fear mongering or pushing ideology. :)
Very insightful and informative. Thank you!
The way to address the fairness versus inclusion issue is to have set asides based on need only. Any special admission must also offer remediation for students in particular subjects. This way they won't drop out and go to less competitive schools.
Something I have not seen comment on....
Apperantly the organization(s) that administer the ACT and/or SAT have come up with a SES score. (Socio-economic Something)
As Thomas Sowell said, when you just look at race, you end up admitting black doctor and lawyer's childern, which are not going to give significant diversity of thought or experience from white students.
However, no one has commented that if colleges use the SES scores for diversity to select a certain proportion of less fortunate applicants, it may create that socioeconomic diversity they allegedly desire.
Will it create more black and hispanic admissions and/or graduates? Will the lower SES admits be in the lower academic performers?
Will it cause discrimination to Asians who will have higher SES than whites?
Will the " test prep" industry start a "low SES" adjunct? For example--use you poor uncle's address, not you own.
10:58-12:15 is genius.
The fair admission standard will never be solved until the "Merit Standard" is wholistically defined. Until then we will be at the whim of the prevailing ideology and politics of the time.
great stuff!!!!
Thanks I do like what I see
Thank you for this podcast.. Affirmative action and various state policies that introduce "protected classes", are so racist and subversive to the uninformed.. precisely the kind of thing that has carved up the country into voter blockers and mind blocked factions. I pray both of you men, continue this good work, enjoy the great success, and John reconsiders his relationship with god :) John, no greater freedom is found outside following Christ, and you will enjoy the paradox and relationship once you really endeavor to seek him! Some mysteries have answers you'll never hear out loud! Peace!
I like what I see 🎉
It's always good to reduce actual systematic racism.
One way to check if colleges are adhering to the law would be to check for "disparate impact" in something measurable like 4 year graduation rates or grades. That's the main way regulators check banks and financiers for discrimination.
Let's call "family preferences" what it is: the Old Boy system. I think it is reasonable to assume it has operated for as long as humans have been human. In 2021, that is the 21st century, should such a system still operate in a civil society such as ours, especially in our elite institutions, which set the standards other institutions try to emulate? I'm with John on this one. The answer is clearly no if the objective is to give opportunity based on merit and merit alone. What makes a person with money special is that they have money. That is advantage enough for anyone.
Does Glenn have anything to say about the Riverboat incident? My guess is he won't but i had to put it out there.
👏👏👏👏
OKAY< I have liked and shared - now I comment. I persevered till the very end even though early on I had a hard time grasping what was being said. I think that was just me and some lack of grasp ability. But, as I say, I stayed on and am so glad I did. Things made sense, things fell into place and I shared some grief at the way Roland Fryer was treated. I wish HE"D go on the road and would be all the rage, giving "" Mark Chappelle some competition... but maybe he'd just be crucified for not talking against whitey frequently enough.
Well what if Harvard said our money for the funding of this institution was tied to the legacy of slavery and therefore we want to ameliorate the conditions we helped to create specifically for Foundational Black Americans and therefore meet the conditions of a "legacy student"? Is that acceptable?
What people fail to understand is getting rid of affirmative action, now makes it harder to do legacy admissions.
Preferences for people already benefitted quite a lot! This is appealing to equity? If parents kept up with the alumni then it should add to the points. Now black people can Benefit from legacy entry!!
Glenn is right!
Affirmative action is not legacy or sports entry!!!
I remember the announcement of SCOTUS' decision in Gruter v. Bollinger (Michigan Law School case - 2003) too well. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor gurgling on about the marvels of racial discrimination, then in conclusion wagging her finger at American society, saying that the court doesn't want to have to weigh affirmative action 25 years hence and that America had better have all these racial problems solved before then. Despite all the verbal diarrhea what the court said is that universities are free to practice racial discrimination to whatever extent they deemed fit as long as the discrimination takes place in the context of an unstructured, Monterrey pop, loosey-goosey Woodstock-like admissions process. I'm seldom in agreement with what the current SCOTUS has promulgated recently, but they got this one (2023) right.
Do the legacy student's families pay for their tuition?
Ignore your producer, Glenn. I'd recommend channels FAR more when they don't beg for likes/subs/etc.
Legacy preferences are just as bad as race preferences.
I have been just as interested in legacy, GPA, SAT, AA, test scores. My son's are grown, and all through the college days.
I think all the above have flaws, and all can and are gamed, but test scores are the least able to be gamed. Yet test scores were the one that Colleges and universities were getting rid of before the AA SCOTUS decision.
I just find it very curious, and often what was their true goal.
I'm going to throw this out there, and I can change my opinion but I think it is this "the rich protecting the rich"
Algorithm love baby
8:59 The reason test scores and gpa are the only 'legitimate' sorting device for these august academic institutions is their claim, their claim not mine, is that their purpose is to create the best thinkers and therefore leaders possible and they tell us the way you can tell if they have been successful is by the by the individual academic success of a student in their institutions (a little circular yes), and by far the most accurate predictor of success in these institutions IS TEST SCORES. So essentially the reason everything else is illegitimate is they can't say what the real reason for their sorting techniques are. You see the constitutional test needed to violate the 14th amendment requires a legitimate and compelling state interest, and it can't be anything but pedagogical according to Powell's ruling. That's why the fiction that 'diversity' somehow improves EVERY students educational experience was created.
can someone explain to me why asian people are still not happy ?
i thought the affirmative action was reducing the amount of potential doctors in the USA.
why was that action even created in the 1st place ? and who created it ?
Mr. Loury, you've had numerous conversations about the academic performance of blacks in best learning institutions in the United States. When, I wonder, will you have a conversation about the education offered to the average black child in America versus that offered to non blacks. When does this disparity in intellectual capacity begin to show itself?
Like comment and subscribed lol
Legacy admissions is an affront to meritocracy, and in turn an affront to our founding principles.
Okay, so go and protest.
Over 100 HBCU's yet blacks are crying Victimhood and oppression from past harms. 😂😅
George W. Bush would not have gotten into Yale without his family connections. Did he go on to accomplish things commensurate with his elite education? I suppose he did. If someone else took his spot because they had more merit, would they have gone on to accomplish such things, or maybe W would have accomplished what he did regardless of Yale. I am just not sure anyone was denied an opportunity and failed to accomplish their life goals because W got his spot or that W's life would have been all that different had he not gone to Yale.
hold on he had a doubt that racism as still there in the USA ???
Quaker schools give preferences to Quakers. In many (most?) schools, there aren't enough Quakers to fill the class. So other people are admitted. I'm sure that being Quaker is highly correlated with family. The people that built and supported these institutions have the right, not privilege, to expect their families and community (and yes religion) will benefit from their work, money and loyalty. They also have the right to maintain their own culture within their institutions.
Quaker schools in Pennsylvania are given tax money for their libraries with the condition that they don't buy books on religion.
Non-blacks should apply to HIstorically Black Colleges. They better admit 87% non-blacks, because blacks are only 13% of the population. This is madness. They weren't historically neutral colleges. They have their own culture. It deserves to be maintained.
Goldwater11111111111111
Roland's sin is taking the dogma seriously. Dogma can only remain dogma if it is abstract and conceptual. The day you attempt to prove or provide evidence for the accuracy of the dogma, you run afoul of disproving the dogma- a sin
Why is it that the capitalist elite comment on the effects felt by those less fortunate?
Glenn and John you speak about these anti black issues all then time. Why though? I am British we don operate affirmative Action policy here in UK but you seem to celebrate and seemingly happy about ending Affirmative Action as your title program suggest . why this insatiable need ?? against everything black 1619 projects the list goes on.....
Liked & commented! Love your work!
Political prosecutions 🤡
I am a retired professor of psychology at a Midwest liberal arts college (related to those places John referred to a couple weeks ago) and I had a couple colleagues like you two when I was teaching, but only a couple. The rest were part of the herd. Thank you both for being such role models, not just for your logic and reason, but for your intellectual humility and openness to ideas. I look forward to your discussions each time. Keep doing what you do!
Wesleyan
Mr. Loury, I’m 64, retired, and live alone. I was so starved for intelligent adult conversation, in which the participants were very obviously striving for objectively, and not pushing an ideology-and then I discovered your show. Love it when you’ve got John McWorter on! “I could listen to him read the phone-book .” 🙂
Edit: I mentioned living alone, I’m not the least bit lonely, my sons and grandchildren provide all the human contact I need, plus I help to care for an older relative. I miss a certain amount of female companionship, “cough,” but it comes at too high a price. It’s as though instead of God making woman out of Adam’s rib, Satan made them out of cocaine and heroin.
I dunno about you, but I want desperately to PARTICIPATE in the very kind of honest, open, and challenging intellectual discussions that they do on this show. Watching them engage just piques my hunger for it.
I may start my own channel, if I can find people to engage in this kind of format with.
I think the most important aspect is that people can have different, even opposing ideas and still work mutually to come to an understanding of each other's position, and even find mutual ground despite perhaps never agreeing.
I love that about this show (Glenn and John started out complete opposites in a lot of topics, and I believe one even thought the other one iffy), but also about the "heterodox" circle of similar people that is developing out of necessity. Brand, Dore, Rogan, Peterson, Rubin, Carlson, et cetera will talk to each other, or almost anyone else, about anything, without that hateful and counterproductive "I won't legitimize him by talking to him" sort of mentality, and without assuming ill intent or an adversarial stance.
When we look at US foreign policy, we can see that if you won't even talk to someone, it only makes things worse. There are countries we refuse to engage with diplomatically, and others as evil or worse that we do, and it's clear that we're artificially making the former group long-term "enemies" and whipping boys to foment strife and justify authoritarianism and legal plunder domestically.
“I could listen to him read the phone-book .” That would be Seal.
@KAZVorpal I'm not entirely sure about Dore. He seems to have walls around his areas of good faith that when are passed over quickly results in tribalism and name-calling. Its been a while since i watched him tho. Perhaps hes changed over time.
@@jackbrewster9766 When I first started watching Dore, I had exactly that concern about him.
And I still don't know what's going on in his head. He does seem to struggle to play neutral on certain issues. But he talks stridently about reaching out to both sides, because common people on the "right" and "left" have common cause on so many issues. So even if he's pandering, it may be for good reasons, not as a profiteer or agent provocateur.
But what it comes down to is this:
He covers many important issues more stridently and thoroughly than anyone else, so I essentially feel that he's worth following, regardless of any possible ulterior motives.
In fact, I sometimes find his "humor" frustrating...and I joke to my girlfriend that I have to suffer it to learn things only he covers.
@@KAZVorpalYou are a MAGA extremist
I enjoy this weekly podcast and I hope your voices continues to be heard. As a 29 year old stay at home mom and wife.
My favorite time of the week! I love these conversations.
Makes two of us
Part of my bi-weekly routine. Thanks for what you guys do!
Correction: "Weekly."
Weekly for me - Saturday morning ritual ❤😂
I love this show. There’s nothing like listening to very intelligent people have nuanced conversations on complex issues.
I'm commenting, as requested. I've been watching for years, even though I live far away and have no stake in american culture. I still think your podcast is excellent.
Prof Loury your comment on “turning them into baubles to wear on a charm bracelet on your wrist…” was to the point. I may be paranoid but I bristle when I perceive people think I got to where I am because of my ethnic background rather than my hard work. Maybe I’m wrong but it’s out there.
Glenn played a great devil's advocate in regards to legacy entrants, his reaction to John's quick response was perfect. About 12 minutes in. Thank you everyone, Peter, John, and Glenn, great discussion. Peace
Legacy enrollment is a method of cultivating Alumni donations and loyalty.
I love this show, Thank you for spending your time, to bring us smart discussions with smart people.
Affirmative Action is just one of many topics where schools model irrationality in their arguments.
I mean that when they say illogical things like "race is only a positive" in AA they are modeling bad reasoning to their own students.
The same when they blame parents for outcomes they (K-12 or higher) clearly are responsible for, themselves.
And their one-sided teachings on many issues, like race/sex, religion, various political topics, et cetera.
It is no surprise that younger people accept insane authoritarian arguments today, as the rationale fit what they were taught in school.
How you feel about Florida is going to teach that African slaves receive benefits in the form of skills during slavery?
Some good points.
When it comes to Education, I fear the ship has sailed. And that those who have charted its course, consider Logic, Reason, and Common Sense, unnecessary cargo.
@@ShockwaveSoundwave-z2m I feel that people claiming that to you are lying. Because they are.
I have examined the actual curriculum outline, plus watched a detailed explanation by one of the two black scholars directly involved in its creation. The point, clearly, is not that anyone ever benefit from slavery per se, but that people subjected to the evil of slavery nonetheless have the perseverance and strength necessary to make things of themselves.
Excellent conversation as always. I’ve watched you since you started. I work for the city of Minneapolis and I’m in a doctorate program and I see this in all spaces.
This show is awesome
I notice that in many cases both of you and sometimes the guest are challenging your own beliefs not just communicating a die hard position. I see the thoughtfulness and thought in your responses as opposed to having standard dogmatic responses that many of the "intellectuals" spotlighted today have.
Ahhhhhh, smart people. So grateful for you guys.
Thanks again for another good interview!
John is right. If there is a standard the standard must be maintained. You dont get in with a 18 on your ACT because your father and grandfather went there.
but they do......?
I have my bachelors in economics and a masters in international business, so basically I can't claim to be an expert in much, but I have had enough exposure to academia to say that I am very concerned at the politicization of academic research and teaching as I saw it encroach over years being in and out of school. Some fields are better insulated than others, but once the administrative staff became stand-ins for culture warriors every field was put at risk.
I had no idea what economics career paths existed until my son who is currently a third year economics major talked to me about his studies. It is fascinating. These conversations are fascinating and I am convinced that if we had economics minded people running the country then a better day it would be. Imagine a world where people actually studied solutions and adjusted them to find what works. As a 25 year cop, i have seen many SARA projects that the final A assessment never get done and these failed policies and projects live on forever.
how do we know they are failed policies??? what evidence do we have?
As a tie breaking deciding factor I see the value in legacy preference. Imagine you’re the GM for a baseball team. You have two completely evenly matched prospects but one of their fathers played professionally. It’s more likely that the legacy would be steeped in the culture in a way that could better prepare him for being a professional athlete both on and off the field.
Case in point: Ken Griffey Senior and Junior.
Great guest. Love Glenn so much, and John is a delight.
Love your show, appreciate y’all!
liked
Legacy admissions… The policy that gave us Bush II…
And hunter biden at Yale
I just want to place a comment here to express how much I enjoyed this video. I also clicked the 'Like' button.
I would've shared it as well, but unfortunately I have no friends.
Following your lead Glenn.
I love this show…such a pleasure listening to intellects
I was going to skip the Roland Fryer bit, but I’m glad I didn’t. It sounds like he is an extraordinary individual, but I had never heard of him before (although I do live in the UK).
This behavior from Harvard doesn’t surprise me after reading Rajiv Malhotra’s “Snakes in the Ganga”. It seems that this once great institution no longer wants to solve society’s problems but exacerbate them for a wider stelth Marxist agenda (under the guise of "woke").
It annoys me how the collage system holds on to very large amounts of money. If I was in charge I would invest it in the lower schools mainly in the ones that have to most problems. I would think that would improve the applicants they are getting and probably make them grow. Love the show!
... College in US is not perfect. But it gets half of kids to keep studying at their own expense. Half waste these college years but half do become skilled docs, scientists, accountants... Yes they mostly do it for parties, sex, booze, avoid work.... Some countries lack this and look at US w envy... Yes there are problems, but boy it mostly does good. Imagine a world where most Americans dropped out at 16 to just dig ditches, buy beer, and be pathetic from 16 to 65. We are lucky, the US is pretty awesome despite us all mostly focusing on flaws. . . Diversity too lets the 50% women, and 20% minority contribute fully and some of them do become leading scientists and best doctors, compare this to say France which is more sexist and unwelcoming to minorities. Or say Italy. Or Iran. USA in 1960 in colleges only let in 40% of the best brains, women and minorities excluded, now wow we try to select from 100%, this is a good good good boost even if for say 5% of people we wrongly let them in.... Overall US education system is awesome.. Even lower education mostly is good, especially for immigrants learning English the US is amazing.. as guess it does fail quarter of the 20% that are minorities and maybe tenth of the whites --- applying math this is failing 5% and 8% so 13% as guess get bad education, other 87% get good education and some of them awesome education..... It's easy to forget the good side to US education...
Is more money the answer?
@@madameclark3453 I think in some communities the students need more of a one n one setting and money would have to be involved. I would rather it spent on that then sitting in endowments especially considering how much of it is tax money.
"...That was the thing that persisted in the whole Harvard trial. Your race can never be used against you. It's only a plus factor. That doesn't make sense in any context that's serious. It's a zero sum game in terms of who's getting in. And to see institutions of higher learning do that, it's, it's crazy" - Peter Arcidiacono
Exactly. To argue that "your race can never be used against you. It's only a plus factor" when it comes to Affirmative Action be it in Education, Employment, etc., is not only disingenuous, but illogical. For any opportunity afforded someone - even partially - based on race, allows for the denial of that very same opportunity, also based on race.
How some people don't acknowledge, or even understand this, is mind-boggling!
More likes and comments people! Glenn's is the most criminally under-exposed voice on the internet. Let's help make him a household name.