Glenn Loury & Coleman Hughes | How to Talk About Race
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 ноя 2024
- Dive into the most impactful moments from an insightful panel discussion on race featuring Coleman Hughes and Glenn Loury, brought to you by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. This highlight reel captures the essence of their thought-provoking dialogue, offering a condensed exploration of key insights on how to navigate conversations about race in contemporary society.
Whether you missed the live event or want to revisit the most impactful discussions, this highlight video provides a curated experience of the panel's most compelling and thought-provoking moments.
Coleman Hughes and Glenn Loury, both renowned for their contributions to discussions on race, bring their unique insights to the table. As thought leaders and scholars, they offer valuable perspectives that challenge conventional narratives and promote critical thinking.
Become a Member:
isi.org/join-c...
Support ISI:
isi.org/donate/
Upcoming ISI Events:
isi.org/events/
“You might be wrong. I might be wrong.” Coleman Hughes will say things like this and this is why I respect what he has to say. Never in a million years would I expect certain people to admit they might be wrong.
Glen, Colman - we're depending on you both to save us. You're are an inspiration to so many.
In a sane world this comment would be ridiculous… This world is nuts and this comment nails it. Best of luck to Glen, Coleman, and all those who stand up to treating people differently based on the colour of their skin.
I’m impressed that you managed to misspell *both* of their names. Lol. Cheers!
We’re all in this together. We will save ourselves.
Glenn and Coleman are great but I’m afraid they just do not have enough pull in the mainstream to make a big difference. The mainstream messaging is very powerful and the exact opposite of what Coleman and Glenn want. Oh and then you have academia which is even worse
Too much responsibility! It is very difficult to fight white liberals and your own black community.
In the uk we had several black people writing a report called CRED UK. They got so push back from not just white people, but black people became racist to rubbish this report and its author's!
I have to applaud these brothers for their brilliant work. This is high quality RUclips content.
yes, i would add, All Humans Are Brothers and Sisters...we all come from Mother Africa...
My left ear loved this video.
And my have a romance with the left ear as well.
I always have to keep pausing any interview with Glenn Loury to make a note of the books he recommends. I hope his students realise how lucky they are to be taught by him, none of my university professors were in his league, I'm sorry to say.
Thanks for saying out loud what ought to be obvious to everyone, but unfortunately isn't. Common sense is so rare!
I love you guys. Thank you for continuing to speak truth to “anti-racist” cultural Marxist power!
I love listening to Glenn Loury. Great wisdom from a very wise man.
He's like an internet grandpa.
At this point in American history, it seems like you can only “discuss”race with people you are in 100% agreement with.
My husband is black. I'm white. We both would be considered terrible racists and say horrible things which happen to have a kernel of truth to them. Honestly accepting that kernel of truth would be the critical element in having a "conversation about race". Denial is the bigger problem.
A brilliant and informative discussion!
Good convo, but why is audio only on the left?
Thanks, I just spent five minutes thinking my right earpiece wasn’t working
Recorded mono? Didn’t think you could even do that anymore.
@@edwardobrien8930 It might be stereo, but you can change to mono in settings to make the audio setup listenable. I recommend it because its a good talk
Because it’s intended for the right half of your brain?
@@Henry84532 haha
Like Morgan Freeman says “Don’t talk about it, I won’t call you white you don’t call me black”.
one of the worst is african/american which seems to suggest that africa is the size of Rhode Island when it's the most genetically diverse continent on the planet.
Glenn Loury & Coleman Hughes Cruz. Is there any reason Coleman Hughes deleted his RUclips music video for his song "Fake" of him running around NYC in his underwear as a soundcloud rapper?
Great comments by Glenn on this [slavery] excuse!
There is no sound for peoples voices?
its one channel only, use other headphone.
@@nikesan2472 this is beyond science
Does anyone know when this was recorded
Here is the original video! ruclips.net/video/hkYlSHnaKVM/видео.html
Word.
there are several elephants in the room that would need to be honestly discussed before there's a possibility of a fruitful discussion about race.
audio on both channels would be great. gonna skip for now, bit annoying on earphones.
To believe that one of the body's organs has any bearing on a person's thoughts, intelligence, and actions is beyond ignorant.
Skin being the largest organ.
Cold man, gotta check out his album.
What about trigger words. I get "blacklist/whitelist" - it pertains to people that live today. I can see how the use of the term affects actual people - maybe not so much as creating a hostile environment, but maybe does have psychological effects. But canceling "master"? Master is a word that does not originate with slavery, slavery was not always racial, and none today experiences slavery. So there seem to be "three degrees of separation" between the word and the trigger and yet it gets cancelled. In my job as a programmer we used "master" and "blacklist" as technical terms. I did get rid of "black/white list" but ditching "master" seemed like succumbing to unreasonable demands and making language and culture shallower. It amuses me that one of the alternatives suggested to "master" is "guru", where we know that some Gurus are very harmful.
You give an inch and they’ll go the mile. This vague gesturing at “psychological effects” of these words is how they justify getting rid of everything. There’s nothing wrong with black list.
Colman spot on! I was raised as a victim. Trailer trash is what it was called. Irish was not looked upon as equal to whatever. It’s all so dumb and insulting.
"The constitution was designed to protect slavery" is a true statement. All you have to do is read the thing to see that there are provisions there to appease southern slave holders and keep them in the fold. This is where i start to get disappointed in the conservative reaction to campus politics. They complain left-wing bias - perhaps fairly - but then want to promote ideas that are often just incorrect at a basic level.
Funny (maybe not so funny), none other than Frederick Douglass would disagree with you. Excerpts from his speech titled "“The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-slavery?” (1860).
※ ... I only ask you to look at the American Constitution ... and you will see with me that no man is guaranteed a right of property in man, under the provisions of that instrument. If there are two ideas more distinct in their character and essence than another, those ideas are "persons" and "property," "men" and "things." Now, when it is proposed to transform persons into "property" and men into beasts of burden, I demand that the law that completes such a purpose shall be expressed with irresistible clearness. The thing must not be left to inference, but must be done in plain English. ...
※ [Many Americans] are in the habit of treating the Negro as an exception to general rules. When their own liberty is in question they will avail themselves of all rules of law which protect and defend their freedom; but when the black man's rights are in question they concede everything, admit everything for slavery, and put liberty to the proof. They reserve the common law usage, and presume the Negro a slave unless he can prove himself free. I, on the other hand, presume him free unless he is proved to be otherwise. Let us look at the objects for which the Constitution was framed and adopted, and see if slavery is one of them. Here are its own objects as set forth by itself: - "We, the people of these United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States of America." ... These are all good objects, and slavery, so far from being among them, is a foe of them all. But it has been said that Negroes are not included within the benefits sought under this declaration. This is said by the slaveholders in America ... but it is not said by the Constitution itself. Its language is "we the people"; not we the white people, not even we the citizens, not we the privileged class, not we the high, not we the low, but we the people; not we the horses, sheep, and swine, and wheel-barrows, but we the people, we the human inhabitants; and, if Negroes are people, they are included in the benefits for which the Constitution of America was ordained and established...
※ [T]he constitutionality of slavery can be made out only by disregarding the plain and common-sense reading of the Constitution itself; by discrediting and casting away as worthless the most beneficent rules of legal interpretation; by ruling the Negro outside of these beneficent rules; by claiming that the Constitution does not mean what it says, and that it says what it does not mean; by disregarding the written Constitution, and interpreting it in the light of a secret understanding. It is in this mean, contemptible, and underhand method that the American Constitution is pressed into the service of slavery. They go everywhere else for proof that the Constitution is pro-slavery but to the Constitution itself. The Constitution declares that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; it secures to every man the right of trial by jury, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus... Any one of these provisions in the hands of abolition statesmen, and backed up by a right moral sentiment, would put an end to slavery in America. The Constitution forbids the passing of a bill of attainder: that is, a law entailing upon the child the disabilities and hardships imposed upon the parent. Every slave law in America might be repealed on this very ground. The slave is made a slave because his mother is a slave. But to all this it is said that the practice of the American people is against my view. I admit it. They have given the Constitution a slaveholding interpretation. I admit it. Thy have committed innumerable wrongs against the Negro in the name of the Constitution. Yes, I admit it all; and I go with him who goes farthest in denouncing these wrongs. But it does not follow that the Constitution is in favor of these wrongs because the slaveholders have given it that interpretation. ...
※ My argument against the dissolution of the American Union is this: It would place the slave system more exclusively under the control of the slaveholding States, and withdraw it from the power in the Northern States which is opposed to slavery. Slavery is essentially barbarous in its character. It, above all things else, dreads the presence of an advanced civilization. It flourishes best where it meets no reproving frowns, and hears no condemning voices. While in the Union it will meet with both. Its hope of life, in the last resort, is to get out of the Union. I am, therefore, for drawing the bond of the Union more completely under the power of the Free States. What they most dread, that I most desire. I have much confidence in the instincts of the slaveholders. They see that the Constitution will afford slavery no protection when it shall cease to be administered by slaveholders. They see, moreover, that if there is once a will in the people of America to abolish slavery, this is no word, no syllable in the Constitution to forbid that result. ...
You do realize the constitution has been amended.
Yes, Douglass was going for the big picture of the Constitution and as a strategy for abolition that flatters the sensibilities of his target audience, it makes sense. But we're long past abolishing slavery and if the Constitution were really anti-slavery, there wouldn't have been any need to amend it to actually abolish slavery. @@benjaminperez969
@@benjaminperez969 Frederick Douglass’ opinion doesn’t change the fact that the Constitution gave slave owners the right to recapture their slaves, among other things.
Do you understand the word context? What the left wants to do is teach kids as if America and white people invented slavery, like it was our original sin. Do you realize that slavery was an institution that was pervasive on every continent since antiquity? Do you realize that it was Western white Christian men who fought to abolish slavery, not Africans or Muslims? Academia want or kids to believe it was evil white Americans that created slavery. I have seen curriculum that does this. It’s divisive and a lie.
LOL pure bullshit. Find a friend and read a book.
Use the Morgan Freeman method of race relations.
Talking about race is super easy. Just don't. It's not relevant to a person. Stop talking about race. It's not the color of someone's head, it's what's in it that matters. Why would the topic come up between two people having a conversation except to talk about groups of people and one should never ascribe the characteristics of a group to an individual. It's fallacious.
Wearing a MAGA hat is not racist itself. But it is a good signal of what you are.
Can we stop talking about it, period?
Maybe we should stop talking about this BS.
I respect you guys but I as mixed race person has had countless beyond countless racist experiences in and outside the country.
I wonder why they don't talk more about the cult-like thinking around intersectionality and Marxian power dynamics that switched from class to race. That's really where education has morphed off into praxis, but the two guests here would know that. "White" has turned into essentially a pejorative in the elite progressive institutions to describe anything oppressive, such as.. why people feel it's excusable to allow the mistreatment of Jews here in America, who have nothing to do with conflicts in the Middle East. It's because they are included in the "oppressor" class. I get it, America has a long history of ugly race relations, but I don't think the critical theorists along with the race hustlers have done any good, except to stir the pot and rile people up. I just ignore this stuff, if you can't.. you don't owe it any answer. People won't give it up, it's turned into the new morality, and there is too much pride at stake. In any case, good conversation..
One way is avoid poli sci major. Take science, engineering, music, language, or ancient history. No poli sci or sociology. But even with American history you can run into the bs.
this video was racist to my right ear.
Conservatism:
An ideology that seeks to preserve the established social and economic order. No matter how rotten.
Conservative:
An individual who whines about being "bullied" when other people say things like, supporting a racially lopsided system (in America, until very recently, little more than 50 years ago, was preserved by force of law) of social and economic order, is racist.
American Republican Party.
Political identity group that seems to have no real "values" other than complaining about their perceived victim hood, and believe they are being persecuted because other people call out their white supremacist (supporting) take on many issues of the day. Up to and including, in some cases, some members of this political identity group say rotten things like slavery wasn't that bad.
Have a swell MLK Day tomorrow. And please remember the speech called the I have a dream speech, was mostly about defeating white supremacy, and definitely was not about something as idiotic as the idea of a color blind society. I am looking at you Coleman!
the same premise could lead to no matter how good. gives us your alternative based on real circumstances.
@@carlosgaspar8447he cant. He is too buay complaining himself
I've gone off Coleman. His callousness towards the dead of Gaza is unsightly.
Your callousness toward the torture and rape of Israelis is worse.
@grybnyx
The massacre of Israels is one of the most savage attacks I have had the misfortune to hear about. People who excuse the attacks are scum. Just like the people who play down Israel's barbarism.
There are people out there (like you and Coleman) who rather have a side to choose rather than weep for all civilians and demand a stop to fighting. I know for certain you think Ukraine should keep fighting until not one man of fighting age is left in the vague hope they defeat Russia. You disgust me. War mongering ghoulish creature.
I still like Coleman… abut I think yeah he’s got a distorted view of Israel/Gaza
@@grybnyxWhy is it worse?
buh bye
That's all these two guys ever do is talk about "race'.
Basically they're PROJECTING.
Is anyone in North American public education teaching citizens about Marxist atrocities like the Chinese Cultural Revolution? Maybe we start with speaking about the problems of cultural Marxism in Communist countries, and then draw parallels with what we are seeing now with DEI.
They are countering the weapons used in institutions
@@justinwyatt8 That's like saying the SF49ers are countering the Baltimore Ravens; _both_ teams are playing football.
Glenn and Coleman are countering IX Kendi and Michael Eric Dyson; BOTH groups are grifting (and maintaining) the _"race racket"_ .
@BleyBlair right, who gives a crap about race?