Is Whiteness Killing Us? with Dr. Jonathan Metzl
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 авг 2024
- My guest today is Dr. Jonathan Metzl. Jonathan is a psychiatrist and author and a professor of sociology at Vanderbilt University. He's written several books including "The Protest Psychosis", "Prozac on the Couch", "Against Health" and the topic of today's conversation, "Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America's Heartland", which received the Robert F. Kennedy award for nonfiction.
In "Dying of Whiteness", Jonathan argues that GOP policies like cutting education funds, cutting taxes, opposing Obamacare, and opposing gun control are hurting the life expectancy of America's white population. In other words, hurting the very people who support these policies most. He also argues that support for these policies stems from racial resentment, a feeling of resentment towards minorities among white people. As you'll hear in the discussion, I don't agree that whiteness and racial resentment are the best explanations for why the median Republican supports these policies. I also think that concepts like "whiteness", and "blackness" are toxic. I think people understandably hear these words as attacks on their racial identities, which they can't control. And so I think we should just rid the discourse of these words. Jonathan obviously disagrees and we talk about that in the episode.
That said, there are some smaller claims I agreed with Jonathan like the fact that the easy availability of guns in this country has made suicide easier for people, especially for the very population that opposes gun control laws. Some of his other claims about the effect of cutting school budgets on life expectancy, I found to be poorly supported. And you'll hear me press him on that towards the middle of the episode. In general, I found that there was some distance between the tone of his book and the positions he was willing to defend in the room. I don't know exactly how to handle situations like that, as an interviewer. Do I just talk to the person I'm meeting in the room? Or do I hold people accountable to the precise claims that they made in the book? I don't really know. Anyway, I'm grateful to Jonathan for coming on the podcast and I hope you all enjoy the conversation as much as I did.
CHECK OUT JONATHAN'S BOOKS:
Dying of Whiteness - bit.ly/3BG5IPR
The Protest Psychosis - bit.ly/3OxZRUe
Other Books - bit.ly/438EvB2
FOLLOW COLEMAN:
Check out my Album: AMOR FATI - bit.ly//AmorFatiAlbum
Substack - colemanhughes.substack.com
Join the Unfiltered Community - bit.ly/3B1GAlS
RUclips - bit.ly/38kzium
Twitter - bit.ly/2rbAJue
Facebook - bit.ly/2LiAXH3
Instagram - bit.ly/2SDGo6o
Podcast -bit.ly/3oQvNUL
Website - colemanhughes.org
Chapters:
00:00:00 Debate Over GOP Policies And Their Impact On White Life Expectancy
00:04:05 Discussing Career Of Building Institutional Spaces To Study Medicine And Culture, And Introducing Book On Dying Of White
00:05:24 GOP Policies And Their Impact On Life Expectancy And Suicide Rates
00:18:26 Conservative Politics Affecting Healthcare Access For Black And Latino Citizens
00:21:42 Racial Resentment And Fear Of Resource Competition
00:25:27 The Importance Of Common Infrastructure For Cooperation And Collaboration.
00:30:06 Gallup Poll Shows Deteriorating Race Relations In The Us Since 2013
00:32:34 Monetization Of Conflict On Social Media
00:35:27 Tribalism And Lack Of Compromise In Today's Political System
00:38:38 Discussion On The Negative Effects Of High School Dropout On Life Expectancy.
00:42:37 Effects Of School Closures On Learning Loss During The Pandemic
00:45:05 Different Regional Experiences Of The Pandemic In The Us
00:49:59 Personal Background On Guns And Gun Control
00:52:07 The Effect Of Gun Sales In Missouri And The Second Amendment
00:54:13 The Evolution Of The Second Amendment And Its Relation To The Federal Government
00:56:18 Racism Embedded In Policies
01:00:14 Controversial NRA Marketing Campaigns Targeting Black Americans With George Floyd Imagery To Promote Gun Ownership
01:02:26 Guns And Crisis: The Dangerous Combination
01:05:26 Alarming Increase In Gun Deaths And Suicides In The Us
01:10:53 Deaths Of Despair In Communities Affected By Economic Decline And Policy Threats To White Population Health
01:13:28 Gun Suicides Contributing To Sense Of Hopelessness In The Middle Of The Us
#ConversationswithColeman #CWC #ColemanHughes #Podcast #Politics #society #Colemanunfiltered #Unfiltered #Music #Philosophy #BlackCulture #Intellectual #podcasting #podcastersofinstagram #RUclips #podcastlife #music #youtube #radio #comedy #podcastshow #spotifypodcast #newpodcast #interview #motivation #art #covid #history #republicans #blacklivesmatter #follow #libertarian #art #socialism #communism #democracy #journalism #woke #wokepolitics #media #whiteness #blackness #race #racialresentment #guncontrol #Jonathan #Metzl #JonathanMetzl 
Развлечения
![Write Your Life And Become A Better Storyteller - Mark W Travis [FULL INTERVIEW]](/img/1.gif)
As someone who lives near SF, which has more money than God and pours money into social issues constantly, money doesn’t solve complete break downs in society. There has to be a sense of law and order.
Law and order 😮 ya mean whiteness??
@@theotherview1716 I honestly don't know what is expected of me anymore, being white, being told that anything representing order, lawfulness, timeliness, ambition, safety, accountability, good fences, yada yada yada, is the ambition of whiteness and a white society
Order comes from structure. Structure is impossible without infrastructure to support it. I think it's important that there are people out there arguing for it, even if we might disagree on some of the fundamentals of how we get there.
@@theotherview1716 generally, yes.
So True!
It starts with morals.
No lying, no stealing, no envy,
No false witness.
Police shouls punish that... I mean catch them and righteous judge should without looking at a person judge the issues: everyone equal.. wrong=wrong.
Coleman, this format of bringing on guests, especially those with whom you disagree with on some core claims/ideas, and putting their ideas to the fire is a great format. Really great job. I want to see more of this.
Coleman has invited many that he disagrees with - only a few like Metzl agree .. but yes these conversations are nice
@@brianmeen2158 For sure. They rarely have the courage to do so. I give Jonathan props for his willingness to do this. Vincent Lloyd was the other recent guest who agreed to come on despite obvious differences of opinion. Enjoying these.
@@LeviNotikwhat did you think of Jonathan’s definition of whiteness?
@@brianmeen2158 It was awful. His definition: "the politics of what I call racial resentment the idea of a kind of anti-government anti-immigrant pro-gun, make America great again kind of politics that that's really the operative definition in my book" This has nothing to do with white people per se or with being white, etc. Those ideas have no relation to race whatsoever and I think it's pretty clear, as Coleman tried to get at, calling this "whiteness" serves no purpose whatsoever; it's completely vacuous.
@@LeviNotik I agree the term is clumsy, but somehow it seems that whatever term you use, some fraction of people would get offended when you point out the fact that it is majority white people that support such policies. But I'd say forget about this term, if you feel triggered by it and listen to the arguments that he presented. They make a lot of sense.
I don't disagree with much of what Dr. Metzl is saying but I think he picked "whiteness" in his book title to help sell. That is not respectable.
Every country has a debate on whether to invest in projects to improve national health. Only in America is 'whiteness' brought into that debate.
The suicide rate in Europe, among the very same “demographic” (whites), is identical to the rate of suicide in the US despite their lack of access to any firearms whatsoever…. those without guns simply tie a noose. As it turns out, committing suicide is not terribly difficult to achieve for those intent on doing so, given that he is a sociologist I presume he is aware of this fact, the fact that the facts did not prevent him from making such an erroneous case for gun control is deeply disqualifying and sadly to be expected from a person in his “field” of “expertise”. Lies by omission are still lies, I hope you learn that lesson Mr. Metzl, rather than continuing down this path of abusing your credentials to further your own egoic pursuits.
I'm as irked by "whiteness" as by "blackness". Sure, there are stereotypes, and they provide the basis of some funny jokes. But when they become prescriptive instead of descriptive, black kids get taunted for "acting white" when they do their homework and come to school on time. A multi-racial guy like me gets taunted for being "not really black". The modern Left is trying to exacerbate racial divisions, not erase them.
Read Coleman’s description. Particularly the part about distance between what he’s willing to defend in the interview versus what he claims is his book. I’m thinking Coleman was disappointed that he didn’t hold his feet to the fire over more grifter claims he made in his book, not just the title.
Stop being so politically correct.
I notice that he totally avoided the question of whether black people's belief in "white privilege" isn't also "racial resentment". I don't particularly care at this point whether he's "trying to change hearts and minds", as he keeps repeating. I care whether he can justify ascribing the negative outcomes to "whiteness". I don't think he does and that overshadows all the interesting points he makes about structures.
Yep, he also fails to define "whiteness" and fails to address the fact that if he used "blackness" in a similar manner, he would not only immediately turn off most black people, but be branded a racist and hounded out of a job, and seems to think that because he's not Ibram Kendi or Robin Diangelo he's somehow not engaged in toxically framing "whiteness" as negative. He's loathesome IMO and makes me hate Woke Dems even more than I do.
ageed.
He sees white people who support the left as good and thosr wjo support the right as bad.
Also, not wanting to pay taxes that support millions of illegals is not necessarily racist; it is certainly socio-political.
Agree completely. Not only is the definition(that he gave) of whiteness very slippery and irrational it’s a very divisive term . What surprises me is how people like him that use that term don’t realize this….?
@@brianmeen2158 Well it makes sense when you understand jews do not consider themselves white. He understands perfectly how divisive it is but he doesn’t care and is using the term exactly the way he intended to.
@@kutie216 many Jews do consider themselves to be white though . Others do whenever it works well for them .. that said I try to see Jonathan as being “good faith” but the more I listened to him the more I almost put him into the “enemy” box . I don’t know
Coleman is getting so good at these discussions. I appreciate how much Coleman works to flesh out his own blind spots. It gives him so much credibility with me. When he says something I disagree with, I find myself questioning my own assumptions.
So appreciative for Coleman’s work
I saw Coleman in the subway couple months ago , was great meeting you my guy . Big ups n respect from a yard mam
Love Coleman but he should bring on either Jared Taylor, Keith Woods, or the other side like an Amy Goodman
Another reminder that the ivory tower left's attitude towards "deplorables" has not changed since What's the Matter with Kansas.
Great interview, Its hard to push back when you want the person in the hot seat to feel comfortable enough to express their views open and honestly. In this respect Coleman always does a wonderful job.
Coleman is not a “gotcha” interviewer and that’s a very good thing.
Very well said, it's a really tough balance to strike.
He should bring on Keith Woods
ok, i'm 20 minutes in and the guest has already admitted that he chose to study a particular demographic because (he assumed) it demonstrated a particular quality, and suprise! it did. Some people might call that a bias. He says he can't define racism and doesn't know whether someone is racist or not, and then in the next sentence he procedes to tar an entire group of people with the epithet. You'd think that with all these degrees he has, somewhere along the way he would have learned how to set up an unbiased research project.
Agree and I’m not sure about you but I think the term racism has been so overused and used where it doesn’t line up that it no longer has any meaning. Our country has gone “race crazy” and it has made talking about it rather pointless . That’s the way I see it anyways
Agree, Mensa Metzl is completely blinded by his own class privileged elitism.
He doesn’t consider himself white. He is jewish.
@@brianmeen2158 it’s because our country is become less majority white and more diverse. That means racial tensions will go up and up and up. Without a white core… it’s a mish mash of whatever.
Metzel is trying to make money by selling a book filled with unsubstantiated ideas that omits the real facts on medical, criminal, and sociological issues in America. To put it short, he's white bread trying to pretend he cares while selling you garbage. 😅
Coleman is the most balanced person i've come across, the world needs you dude
To answer your question. Push harder against flighty answers.
Definitely. The author lives in an academic bubble, and clearly has no real life experience with the deplorables he claims he wants to help.
I'm glad Coleman had him on, but this man is actually insufferably arrogant in regard to his own lack of lived experience, and his positions are basically shallow talking points that won't hold up to intense scrutiny.
I hope this will land correctly:
Does this fellow understand that the plural of anecdote is NOT data ?
Excellent point lol. It does seem like he conflates the two things.
I’m confused . Jonathan talks about how everything is tribal and puts races against each other - he then writes a book called “is Whiteness killing us?”.. is that not throwing more gasoline on the fire that he wants to put out ..?
Oh and the concept of “whiteness” still doesn’t make sense to me. The way he described it is like it’s a shape shifting term that you can just use whenever you want and then pull it back
Props to Jonathan for coming on the show though
What an awful racist... it's good that Coleman allowed him expose himself.
No he didn’t they had a good conversation you weirdo
I think this guest is a bit out of touch with the middle America that he thinks is so toxic
It's funny how the last couple guess he had on that were more on the woke side really downplayed their claims when they were talking to Coleman.
The minute someone tries to explain whiteness to me, I know I’m going to be explaining a lot about Maoism and neo-marxism to them
Yep. The concepts of “whiteness” and “blackness” still do not make any sense to me .
We live in America where it's asked on a census. It's a measure....it'll always be a topic.
@@glocofrmrxncho1836 What are you talking about? Since when does the census measure "whiteness"? Just because you are counting how many whites, blacks, Latinos, etc there are, doesn't mean they are measuring "whiteness". This jerk Coleman is interviewing can't define "whiteness" himself but you're claiming the census does?
@@glocofrmrxncho1836 whiteness is on the census?
@@brianmeen2158 racial classifications are. Baseline for identity politics.
Vague, obscure, and opaque are words that I would use to describe this person’s argument. I don’t know what he’s talking about, and I’m pretty sure he doesn’t either.
Interesting conversation.
I appreciate folks with his background who are willing to have a straightforward probing of their views.
That story at the beginning sounds way too stereotypically convenient for his pre conceived thoughts. I’m skeptical.
I hear you. I’m trying to keep an open mind but I’ve heard people like him speak before and they tend to all think the same way. You know where it’s going right off the bat .
no, its real. black doctors routinely get told by white patients that they wont be treated by black doctors.
".....and then he twirled his mustache while laughing maniacally!"
Seriously. I'm picturing a white guy with a cowboy hat spitting into a spittoon right after he says "Mexicans and welfare queens!".
@@tap_water872 only rational considering black doctors are worse than white ones because of affirmative action.
Well done Coleman! As to whether you should hold the interviewee to precise claims or just talk to the person in the room, I would offer you should strive to do both and perhaps more severely. You are gifted in your ability to sniff out BS on the fly while keeping the conversation going. That said there is nothing more icky than watching a sophist race hustler or any such enabler walk away scot free after an interview. Praise the good ideas, then go for the KO, then help them back to their feet. So something like this: “…that’s a very interesting point, but I’d like to return to my question ‘What does the concept of Whiteness add to the diagnosis of self-destructive GOP policies?’ I’ve pressed the point twice, you have doubled down on your concept of ‘white racial resentment’ as an answer. I think that rings of a tautology to my viewers.
So to recap, you have said you have no knowledge of the mean attitudes across the GOP other than anecdotal evidence, and you appear to agree with me that partisanship is a reasonable framing of the subject. You lament policies that sow social friction and zero-sum thinking, but title your book "Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America's Heartland"? You have also said that you might title the book something differently today. So which is it? Are you sold on the racialized framing or not? Can you give us your most cogent argument as to why Whiteness is the best way to view self-destruction GOP policies?”
Then comes more sophist contortions and digressions, you bat them down one by one, and failing the revelation of a cogent argument you step in and say, “look I don’t want to belabor the point, but you have offered at best a toehold on an argument to warrant the primacy of race on this subject. That shouldn’t be. To justify racialist framing you should have a rock solid argument. By being unclear, you contribute to the chorus of divisive rhetoric that hurts us as a society. That relentless barrage of bad reporting and scholarship on racial issues has not only trained a new generation of activists to essentially ignore sociologically rigor, but has led to bad policies that kill the very people one seeks to protect - which certainly goes back to your thesis.” So as he picks up his teeth from the carpet, segue into the harms of social media. Dust him off. Talk shoulder to shoulder about the things you agree with. He will recover and you will not have a nagging doubt at the end of the interview. My two cents, if that.
Bravo!
I would have enjoyed that quite a bit. The mild and evasive Dr. Metzl is a race hustler. I don't think attacking so forcefully is Coleman's style.
@@galaxytrio There is also colorblind races hustlers as well.
lmao, you support ideological rigidity. This guy had a unique perspective and explained it well. Dont be such a baby.
Smart.
I think you should press him on the things he doesn’t want to talk about.
I feel conflicted listening to this because as a policy I no longer humor these types of ideas, it’s a bit like debating the roundness of earth at this point. Also by ignoring them I think their ideas will lose merit.
Mics are too hot. I’ve been noticing this on Coleman’s podcasts lately.
Yeah, I'm hearing lots of swalling and inner throat movements.
@@rooruffneck I do hear some breathing through the nose most of which I could do without. Overall it’s not too bad though
Coleman could do some deep-sigh ASMR. :)
Great talk ! It was good seeing on CNN yesterday Coleman ! It is nice that they are trying to add different perspectives to their news segments.
Just as an FYI USA is ranked number 4 as of 2019 on money spent per student and if you expand that to money spent over the last 30 years, USA is number 1. That's right the USA has spent more money per student collectively over the last 30 years than any other country in the world.
The kids can't read
@@StarBadger07 Kids- I want to learn to read and be able to balance a budget.
Public Schools- Hey kids, men can have periods.
But also, US students graduate with roughly 10 times the amount of debt of students in other countries, or other developed countries provide third level education free at point of access, just like public elementary and high school for a much lower cost per student. What is more accurate is that the US government gives that very large amount of money proportional to individual students . . . to universities and technical institutes, and their ancillary organisations like administration, sports teams, research labs, and, yes, hedge funds and investment portfolios. That doesn't necessarily mean undergrad students themselves derive value from that spend at course level.
@StarBadger yeah but they know 2+2=5
@@steelpainter free at the point of access with tax rates at 60%. get it right. im from the EU countries that do this and it is shit. there is no social mobility and there will never be. at least in the US they can cut down on admin costs and colleges with endowments in the billions can remove tuition fees altogether. EU has nothing it can do to reduce 60% tax rates lol
American discourse is basically just class based with a random mesh of race over the top. So many times in this conversation he spoke about class problems and then just labelled whatever is bad in those circumstances as “white”
I would love to ask him what utility the concept of whiteness has in a situation where, for-example, a whole cohort of black conservatives voted for things he described as bad.
Are they “acting white”? Do they have “internalised whiteness”?
How do these concepts help at all?
because white bad
Every single time
I was wondering if anyone else was going to say it 😂
Yup.
I greatly enjoyed this conversation. Keep up the great work Coleman!
It was interesting to hear him say if the book came out today he might not have called it that. Given the entrenched milieu at the time it was likely the publisher thought it would sell more books. I thought he made some good points about infrastructure that unites, however with everyone addicted to their screens now it’s likely no longer the case “build it and they will come” which is sad.
I think it’s pretty revealing that gently pushed to defend the concept of ‘whiteness’ or the framing of issues in such terms he quickly descends into utter gibberish and spends most of his time backtracking and pointing out what it’s not.
He also doesn’t seem to grasp that saying he rejects some of the even more absurdly essentialist definitions of the term just undermines him even further, as it just highlights the extent to which it’s little more than an empty rhetorical trick that someone if they play with words enough can make virtually anything be an example of ‘whiteness’. He gives the impression that deep down he understands it’s an empty unscientific term but clings to it because with a certain crowd it gives him a particular cache and a hearing he wouldn’t get otherwise.
I also wonder if he regrets be decent enough to be challenged by Coleman, as it does little but highlight why so few of these kinds of scholars are willing to be directly challenged. Their framing is simply a house of cards.
If anyone is genuinely interested in these topics being investigated robustly, they’re far better listening/reading the work of someone like Nobel Laureate Angus Deaton & his wife.
Ironically, if he completely abandoned his habit of trying to fall back on a racial framing for everything, he often talked a lot of sense & even more ironically rightly identified polarisation on identitarian lines as massive barrier to progress or rectifying problems. Sadly he seemed utterly oblivious to the role his & other rhetorical framing plays in the very thing he decries.
Excellent analysis. Quite true.
Thanks for watching my latest episode. Let me know your thoughts and opinions down below in a comment. If you like my content and want to support me, consider becoming a paying member of the Coleman Unfiltered Community here --> bit.ly/3B1GAlS
I think he has too much whyte privilege and doesn't know anything about blak people and he shouldn't be a professor of African American studies. He soaked up a spot that a blak man should have had. We need less of his supremacy taking spaces...
"Do I just talk to the person I'm meeting in the room? Or do I hold people accountable to the precise claims that they made in the book? don't really know." @ColemanHughesOfficial interesting question. Unfortunately i think the interviewee is compromised as soon as you notice this and it should be addressed. The value of the interview is already lost. I know you dont want them to walk off but i think its important to hold people accountable. Shame is a useful tool for maintaining standards in society. Most likely theyd just double down and pull back their real self or even walk off but if that happens we didnt want to hear what they had to say anyways.
At 23:20 Mr. Hughes really torpedoes the bulk of the Author’s assertions.
His response sounded highly similar to the rhetoric of the far left white apologists, and what he seems oblivious of, and what Mr. Hughes was getting at, is that the message is delivered IN the terminology,(obviously) and that the terminology itself IS divisive and is the major driver of our racial divide.
By the end, I was very disappointed in the Author by how he was unable to answer so many of Mr. Hughes questions.
While he could document the policies and he could document later outcomes, he didn’t display much understanding of how and why.
With this much time since publishing, he really has no excuse for being so under-prepared.
Well said but I doubt the author sees himself as wrong. He has almost certainly been and will continue to be praised by his fellow academics and most of the people in his Woke bubble. He seems to believe that because he's not Ibram Kendi or Robin D'Angelo (who have been praised/handsomely paid by most institutions), his use of divisive and offensive terms is not really a problem. He can't seem to wrap his mind around the very simple idea that if he (or a black academic) were to link "blackness" to negative outcomes, he (or they) would immediately be condemned as "dangerous" and engaging in "hate speech" by every liberal with a platform.
Same nagging question I have - how do people like Jonathan and Diangelo throw around that term and not see how divisive it is? It’s common sense to me really that it is .. like Coleman said - flip the word to “blackness” and ascribe a handful of negative traits that some blacks have to it and write “is Blackness killing us?”.. it is very racist and divisive . People in that chamber on the left just must think much differently than I do .
@@liberallatino but it’s such a glaring issue . Has no one ever pointed that out to him before Coleman did? How does he not realize that on his own? Echo chamber indeed
Worse yet he seems completely unable to see how BLM and certain aspects of “anti racism” are what’s making racism worse, not structures that are being built
@Brian Meen, I think the crux of their argument is that it doesn't and can not go both ways. There is no such thing as flipping it, and never mind the fact that name and word association has no political sentience per se, because black people can not be racist. If it's labeled as prejudice, this type of description takes a back seat to the ever looming presence of racism. White people are always in the driver's seat, and minorities are always in the trunk, so to speak. I've tried flipping an argument to the opposing group before, only to be swiftly rebuffed because their argument is not flipabble. There is no, minorities do this to white people therefore we're working under the same rules.
The game is rigged from the beginning in their mind, so the argument, which works to their advantage, can only exist in their favor. For people on the outside its a clear double standard, but then they'll use the in group out group argument, or any of the other multitude of the historical reasons it can not work that way.
They're simply playing by a different set of rules within the same game.
@@shettywap That whole "minority group can't be oppressive" is historically and factually bunk. Thomas Sowell's books go over international history that test that hypothesis and put it to shame. And even if there weren't such evidence, their argument is based not on the ideal of equality, but merely a grudge that the wrong people are in power. Thus they are philosophically indistinguishable from the white supremacists they decry, but the two are easily distinguished from liberals who hold equality up as a virtue in its own right.
@Brian Meen I thought natural curiosity would lead people like him to at least encounter other arguments but I have met enough people like that to learn that no, they really can go that long in total ignorance.
Metzl's use of "whiteness" to describe racial resentment and/or GOP partisanship is as reprehensible as it is irrational. However, it might have been expedient.
Irrational and quite divisive I must add. His line “there are several ways to being white” just had me rolling my eyes .
@@brianmeen2158 Quite. Sell a book with a term created to refer to white people's supposed inclination to see non-white people as inferior, claim you meant something else and dodge when asked to justify. Appalling.
Well he’s jewish so he’s already conveniently excluded himself from the “white” group.
@@brianmeen2158 As many as "several"? Generous of him, and not racist at all, to collapse all white people to "several" types vs just one.
Bless him. I have heard no data yet. I have heard only stories. Thomas Sowell would debunk his claims immediately. Perhaps an economic degree would be helpful??
I think that if you have a guest who is willing to make different claims to what they write, then it can help to have some quotes on hand of the more inscindiary things that they might have said. "So if I can summarise your position, you mean that x, do I have that right?" "Okay... well that is interesting, because in your book you said y".
Also, I just find it incredibly interesting that he is willing to hide behind "well, it's not my statement". I understand that writing a book is not a literature review, but I feel like the honus is on you to actually check that you are citing valid studies with good methodology before including them in a book them you are putting your name behind.
You are so humble and so important!!
Parents dropped their kids off at the public pool close to where I live. Kids were out of control. Pool closed down after decades. At the mall, nobody under 17 is allowed without a parent for same reason. Skating rink, same.
Quickly becoming my favourite podcast, great work Coleman! Love the clarity and calm methodical way you interview, hit important points and push back in a level headed way.
Touché! Planned parenthood! We just look at the racist history we like. Fantastic point Coleman.
Same thing with the NRA - "Were they wrong?" God, I'm not even mad about any of the specific politics, I'm mad that his arguments are just so consistently cliche and shitty. Give me some meat here!
It's fascinating that he seems to just assume that we all agree that being anti-government is racial resentment. If I don't like endless wars and police violence and corporate cronyism then that's somehow racism.
The first part of investing in a community is policing it and securing it so that subsequent investing isn’t a waste due to criminal degredation.
I can't believe I kinda listened to this for a half an hour.
Great job, Coleman. Dr Metzl, was often shown to be wanting in the arguments.
The audio sounds...not good
Metzl needs to understand that forcing people to interconnect their communities in ways they might not be comfortable with isn't the answer. He needs to recognize that bike lanes also connect criminals to victims.
Keep bringing on these "experts" and destroy their ludicrous ideas to their faces in front of thousands of people. This is good work. Hopefully there are more people like him that are willing to get torn to shreds.
I don’t think Jonathan even realizes after this discussion the holes in his ideology though .
I would have liked to have listened to more of this conversation, and hopefully l will find a transcript. I can't be the only person who does not want to hear someone drink and gulp through a discussion. (Yes, it's misophonia, I know.) I got 15 minutes in and had to shut it off. 😢
He needs a better sound engineer. Very poor audio.
Every time Coleman breaths heavily into the mic I expect alt universe Coleman to flip out on his guest with how he really feels. 😂
I wish he were more specific about "cutting funding for public education" because on the surface it sounds really bad, but upon a deep dive you would find that cutting funding for CRT is a good thing as is ending PRE-K programs that have been shown to produce no measurable positive effects.
"When people think in terms of competition with other groups instead of cooperatively..." we actually develop a politics and policies that lead to the thriving of society, says Metzl as he traffics in Critical Theory. His Critical lens is foundationally based in Marx's Social Conflict Theory, which explicitly posits that society is built by perpetual conflicts between groups.
Coleman is really leveling up lately.
Jared Taylor bring him on
Please have Philip Ewell as a guest. The musicologist who has just published a book, where he claims that musicology is racist. John McWhorter's latest NYT column is on it.
Jonathan Metzl has some very good ideas, in spite of his use of a bit of pathologizing racialist jargon that might sell books but also isn't where Coleman wants to go with public discourse for reasons he has defended ably.
Per 2:00, if there is a discrepancy between positions held here vs positions espoused in the book, I wonder if just noticing that there’s a discrepancy in the moment would suffice. It would at least allow him to account for the distance between the two points without being too confrontational.
Social engineers. I’m only beginning to understand how this has been the pattern or progressivism going back decades
Coleman, this is why I keep subscribing to you: Keep it up! So good!
OK, moving on to the next Coleman video 😁
Whats good about this format is that he brings on guests and allow them to express their view wish he would push back on more often sometimes though
There's nothing ambiguous about "shall not be infringed.". rorschach test
Also, the part about the militia is not a rorschach test if you know about the "right to keep and bear arms in the English Bill of Rights" which the Second Amendment is modeled after. The Catholic Tutor Kings restricted individuals' right to keep and bear arms to weaken Protestant militias.
There haven't been slaves in England since the middle ages , serfs are a little different. Therefore the idea that the right to keep and bear arms was conceieved so Southern plantation owners could round up escaped slaves is absurd.
As someone who was living in TN when he is talking about this is complete BS.
The guest is assuming that reduction in school funding “leads to” dropouts. As someone who graduated from the Cleveland, OH public schools while they were in receivership in the ‘80s I can say that school funding has NOTHING at all to do with the decision students make to drop out. It may impact the quality of the education but implying causation from an obvious correlation tells a great deal more about his approach than the theory. He chose to spin his data to suit his predetermined outcome.
“We missed the opportunity to leverage the pandemic to expand healthcare…” Hmmm….sounds a lot like never let a good crisis go to waste regardless of the actual needs and desires of the governed.
Oh so this is quite different than what I thought it would be. When I read the title of the video I was sure this guy was just another of these sociologists who thinks "Whiteness" is some kind of a conspiracy against non Whites and serves to oppress them and that this is going to be the central thesis of his argument here. I am right wing and identify as White, but I'm actually neutral on the specific policies he talks about like gun control, taxes and cutting education (although I do think educations system has become left wing indoctrination). I also think that some degree of resentment against minorities by Whites is understandable and justified given demographic changes, preferential policies and the extremely biased media/higher education.
Lots of discussion of suicide and gun homicide without discussing addiction/alcoholism.
Most black people are not in line to abolish gun rights
There is nothing wrong with not wanting to grow the power of the state, even if you might benefit in some way in the process. Taxation is theft.
Of course, its the Republican's fault. THis guy is completely unbiased.
prime exmple of an "anointed" intellectual with "great" social engineering ideas
About 17 minutes in. I am a practicing physician in this country and as a brown man in this country, I can assure you , I have seen many hundreds of these types who themselves are the racist to the core simply engaged in projection. Tell you guys, one simple thing. Whatever he is interested in studying or researching is making a ton of money for him or his institute and that is all he cares about. He’ll try to defend that in any way possible, manipulate statistics as long as the revenue stream continues to flow
25:37 It's interesting that Metzl says he's not trying to change hearts and minds while assuming that cooperation and collaboration must be accomplished by government. It's as if he hasn't encountered people who prefer to cooperate without having to get permission.
Coleman at the end is striking hard.
Thanks for the conversation. I doubt Coleman's had a guest that I disagreed with more.
Coleman, this guy makes my ears bleed. I couldn't make it all the way through it, however, I love the way you handle him, keep it up, guy.
Great conversation. I was sorry that you couldn't needle him on his definition of 'whiteness' a bit more (I remain totally unsure what he means by it), but amazing job keeping things moving along and civil.
Ok, 25 minutes in now. And sadly I have to conclude that I still haven't heard anyone from the field of Afri-Ame studies make very much sense ...
"I'm talking about the health outcomes of policies, and way those policies use racial resentment to further their aims of getting implemented in the first place, acknowledging that there are... I mean I don't call anyone racist in the book...etc."
Right.... saying white people vote for policies based on racial animus isn't calling them racist? Seriously?
I had a few good laughs listening to the grandson of my peers using imprecise language to prevent a “white boy” from 🎉detribalizing
his folks
You know this man is a snake by the way he hisses when he speaks. 🐍
Is the implication here really that Americans did not have the right to own/ have guns in their own home until a 2008 SCOTUS decision?
Great convo! Coleman I'm not sure it's a tick or something but the sighing and hmm can come across as a bit of impatience and exasperation?
"Let me tell you how much i am concerned about n**ro health outcomes!" - Metzl, in a different timeline, probably.
Was there any mention of FREEDOM as a motivating force for attitudes and policies?
No, he is misrepresenting republicans
20:35 Making moral assumptions about people who are politically different is central to Metzl's thesis.
Good conversation overall, but Jesus. I dont know. It seems pretty obvious that the guy worked backward from whatever conclusion he had on a topic with little regard to any evidence to the contrary. Ots like he never even questions it. Either way, I liked it.
I think you did a great job with how much you pressed him. I didn't read the book though. Maybe you could send him some quotes beforehand and read them for us together.
What some do not take into account is the fact that the South was a third world Country until the 1950’s. Southerners had to dig their way up and out of that. There was a certain amount of resentment toward the poor. Black and white
23:21 perfect question, 0/10 dodge by the doctor. (Question starts at 22:38)
Errr ummm grrr blaaa "let me re-fame that question"
The reason a lot of states did not enact Obamacare is that the federal funding began in earnest and then was pulled away after a few years. Many swimming pools and the like get defunded because of strained state budgets due to unfunded Pension liabilities. Here in PA our unfunded pension liability is over $80 billion.
Also, many school systems are fully funded yet the results are very poor. Think NYC and Baltimore. So, I don't agree with him the poor performing schools are due to a lack of funding
It's maddening! Here, let's just ignore massive amounts of left-wing spending that is draining the public coffers and cry "racism" when the park gets shut down and blame it on crazy Trumptards.
Coleman: [asks nuanced question].
Metzl: "Systems, structures, structural systems, systemic structural spaces, and whiteness"
Many excellent comments here, but this is the ultimate nutshell. Bravo. It often boils down to the way the interlocutor blandly boils things down.
This guy has a vendetta. He is like the bullied kid who becomes a cop.
Isnt it possible that tribalism is also simply a consequence of the growing diversity of the country? Now that no people or culture dominate society each group is starting to realise the importance of negotiating its position within the power structure. I realise Coleman doesn't like identification with racial identity but ethnic/ancestral identification is pretty hardwired into the human condition - it is going to be difficult to get rid of.
This was a frustrating interview in that Dr Metzl seems to have not considered the many points Coleman raises which are totally logical inquiry which leads me to suspect his Book(s) maybe many pages of fitting stats to a narrative rather than genuine scientific enquiry.
It seems Metzl has never had any real interviews but instead 5 minute Morning Show Advertorials/Book promos replete with adoring, nodding media heads (none which read the book) simply reading his listed credentials (3 degrees) and therefore promoting every thought bubble he exposes.
lol, now *this* was a read
I’m part of these “communal” spaces people build
They’re usually more like HR areas where they try to disarm you and if you don’t say exactly what they want you’re fired
Also you end up marked for life by that group for small mistakes
There’s probably good ways that people have built community but there’s a lot of them that are punitive
Colman stance on guns is conflating a right and a privilege. The rules are differant you cannot use the example of how a.privlage is regulated and apply that regulation to a right.
That is how a liberal looks at it. At least he is honest about it. Not sure how else to interpret "Shall Not Be Infringed" but leave it to people educated beyond their intelligence to justify whatever they want.
@@landonfire4589It’s interesting how people always forget the well regulated militia part. Very very convenient.
@@Kami84 or the commas, people read it like they aren't even there.
@@landonfire4589 Does a comma completely negate the 1st part of a sentence when it's all one sentence?
@Kami84 Try reading it backward asking questions, and you will see why commas are important
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed
Shall Not be infringed. What should not be infringed?
The right of the people to keep and bear Arms. Why is it a right?
Being necessary to the security of a free state. How does that secure a free state?
The ability to form a well regulated Militia.
See, every individual needs the right to bear arms independent of government so that they can form a well regulated Militia to secure a free State if the government infringes of said freedoms.
Did that help?
26k gun suicides per year (and suicide is a right according to most on the left, so a red herring as a gun control reason).... Between 60k and 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year (cdc).
I’m amazed at Coleman’s suggestion we rid our conversation of the words “whiteness” and “blackness.”
I don’t oppose use of those words, however I admit their use can result in a large portion of people turning off to a discussion. I’ll admit I’ve not done enough to oppose all kinds of oppression in my life. However I doubt that accusing all “white” persons of original racial sin can actually assist people to change.
"And if you just look at why people own guns, like, Pew-Pew opinion polls for example..."
Pew-Pew!
💥💥🔫🤠
"Is this racial resentment when black people feel this way about white people" This guy's expressions at 23:26 and total avoidance of the question really sums the whole thing up. When pressed on other things, he says "It's not my research" or just dodges the question. Ok, I agree, defunding schools and having kids drop out is pretty damn bad. But ascribing this to whiteness? Really?! All those degrees and he's still that ignorant? And the Coleman stomped out this dishonest tactic - let's point out all the racist things about [people I don't like] but ignore all the racist things by [people I like]. And again! The guy goes after the NRA for "targeted ads" and Coleman says - were they wrong? There were historic rates of violence. The guy just changes the subject or dodges the racial point and goes back to "building infrastructure" which apparently means having city-funded summer camps. The guy cites vague "sociological research that suggests" that you get lower crime rates if you invest. Yeah, maybe if you invest in the goddamn police and enforce the law! Maybe this guy has interesting stories to tell about good and bad policies, but he's a total bigot. I mean just imagine replacing "whiteness" with anything else. "Dying of Jewishness" anyone? What about "Dying of blackness?" Yeah this guy can fuck right off.
Got to feel for the guy. He planned to release this book for a media climate that peaked and disappeared. His publisher may have strongly recommended emphasizing the "whiteness" angle. Now he has to walk it back in an awkward way. The research may be interesting, but is completely undermined by the confusion that terminology and approach creates.
To answer the question in the description, you hold them accountable to the statement they made in their book. You don’t allow them to get away with anything because they are nice to you in the room.