Sean Dafny it really does. anyone can get a website on youtube with any opinion. you can find results to fit whatever stance you want to take basically.
His thought process is far superior than the average US citizen. His break down of foreign policy it self, as simple as it may, is above and beyond the average thinking of Americans.
+beastmode32 You have a listening problem. Also he states facts and based on those facts he states his opinions. That's far different from someone just saying shit purely out of ignorance.
Marc Lamont Hill taking Vlad to school with facts, knowledge, and wisdom. Vlad would be well served to do some research before going toe to toe with Mr. Hill in the future.
A death penalty would obviously deter certain people from committing crimes, but he has a point regarding not trusting the state to use the penalty properly. You have to make sure 100% the person is guilty & deserves it.
I don't know who Marc is... sorry for being ignorant but I'm from the UK! I've got to say this is the best Vlad interview I've seen. Marc you're a great human and talk so much sense! Peace from the UK! 😯😯✌✌
djvlad interview Marc Lamont hill again. Actually everyday. Find out what he thinks about literally everything. These thoughts are golden. Get him on video as much as possible. He's Malcolm of our time.
clearly you just want to argue in circles. His argument was about state sanctioned decisions on killing people. He had no problem with killing in self defense. A personal issue such as self defense or abortion is separate.
Dr. Marc Lamont Hill is absolutely correct. He also forgot to elude that certain groupa of people are disproportionately given the death penalty over other groups; and are more likely to be wrongly accused in the first place.
I'm from the UK, we abolished the death penalty. There's no going back once a country gets rid of the death penalty. It's the right thing to do, there's no going back. That's morals matey.
If you think with your brain and don't just run with your feelings this guy makes a lot of sense. In other words, if you're a man you agree with this man.
Death is easy. Being sentenced to 10, 20, 50 YEARS... Or even LIFE behind bars dealing with the looming spectre of prison rape, inmate assault, prison slave labor, draconian confinement and personal restrictions*... Maybe it's JUST me, but I've never understood how is jail preferable to execution. * -- Severity/likelihood pending on which prison/jail you're in.
I thought I was pro-death penalty until I watched this interview. Now I'm questioning myself on this. I'm on both sides of the fence right now. Lamont makes some good points. This was a bad ass interview. I mean "bad" in a good way.
Not only is the death penalty superfluous, it's also more expensive than long term prison time or solitary confinement. From the fiscal side alone, the death penalty makes no sense
Dizzee Rascal, Akala and Marc Lamont Hill have all engaged VLADtv in some serious conversation built on a foundation of mostly facts. And I see the Dr. Umar Johnson interview being another epic interview. I have a love/hate relationship with VLADtv. One day the content is refreshing and another it's like slow death.
Vladimir is contradicting himself. In other interviews he said that jail should be for rehabilitation not for punishment. The Death Penalty is clearly a punishment.
Marc Lamont Hill is an intellectual lightweight. He claims that "we" might have to make short term sacrifices in order to create a more enduring progressive movement. Who the hell is this "we"? Hill has a Ph.D., a six figure job as a professor, not to mention the income he gets from having his own tv show and guest appearing on other programs. Marc Lamont Hill is amongst the most privileged people in this country; if Trump becomes president, he has the money and privilege to insulate himself from the consequences. What Hill really means is that other people should sacrifice for his movement, because he won't be sacrificing shit. Furthermore, compromise is the predicate for political action, not it's foreclosure. You can't make someone's moral purity the criterion for their electability. Moral action doesn't exist in a vacuum; every moral decision must potentially come at the expense of some other competing moral good. These are complicated moral and political issues, and you shouldn't make someone's disagreement a basis for their political disqualification. Finally, Hill is voting for Jill Stein? Why because they have similar moral convictions? That's idiocy; we're voting for someone to run the country. This isn't a "who's most moral" competition. Jill Stein has absolutely no qualifications to be president. None. She doesn't even have practical policy proposals for her positions. And I'm not even saying that morality counts for nothing, but there must be some balance between a person's moral stances and their actual ability to do the job for which they're potentially being elected.
The entire first chunk of what you wrote operates under the assumption that because Hill has money he won't sacrifice anything, but that's all that is, an assumption. You can't criticize someone for how you assume they'd respond to something, if anything all that shows us is how you approach things and that if you had his money you'd be the one insulating yourself since you assume everyone with money would too.
MasterSinh I don't presume to speak for the original poster, however what I took from his message is that Dr. Hill's "experiment" will have consequences which will have a disproportionate negative affect on many other American's (as well as non-American's) of lesser means than his own. No matter whet Dr. Hill expects to sacrifice during this endeavor will never compare with those borne by everyday people. Public policy is not a zero sum game where negative outcomes in the short-term are mitigated by positive responses which occur as a result; Dr. Hill is an academic and tends to think in idealistic terms... ie his staunch "moral" stance. Unfortunately (or fortunately) we live in the real world where decisions are made based upon pragmatic variables and outcomes. This is why he is an intellectual lightweight; much the same way libertarians are intellectual lightweights, Hill refuses to live in the realm of what is possible; rather, he goes all in on a possibility that has never occurred. Instead of breaking the system and rebooting (Hill's position), history has shown us that what is more than likely to occur is that both the parties will move further right which will certainly run contrary to his intentions. His decision is disastrous and I hope to never have to say "I told you so"! Peace
This nigga stay schoolin Vlad with straight facts
Vlad was like, I never heard of that, let me look it up
Marc: Intelligent argument
Vlad: "I mean, I don't know"
+VIRTUE PRODUCER Google really dont be lying too much.
Sean Dafny it really does. anyone can get a website on youtube with any opinion. you can find results to fit whatever stance you want to take basically.
Well google havent lied to me yet i put it that way.
His thought process is far superior than the average US citizen. His break down of foreign policy it self, as simple as it may, is above and beyond the average thinking of Americans.
He said serial killers
+beastmode32 You have a listening problem. Also he states facts and based on those facts he states his opinions. That's far different from someone just saying shit purely out of ignorance.
+ⒷⒶⓃⒼ|ⒷⒶⓃⒼ ...Which is what most people do.
beastmode32 until you point out exactly how Marc is spinning you are basically saying nothing.
beastmode32
You ain't said shit yet.
Marc Lamont Hill has made me realize Vlad is not that smart.
its amazing how little vlad knows about social issues..
Lmao @ it taking you this long
Vlad made me realize he's not that smart 5 years ago, even before he brought in these black scholars and intellectuals
Lol Vlad's interviews make me realize he doesn't even know much about hip hop either.
I realized that *WAAAAY* before this video dropped.
Vlad hold your L bruh
"You have yet to make an argument for why" 😂😂😂😂😂
THEINFAMOUS1011 Facts 💯🤣😂 Vlad tried to weasel out and say, "well that's my PERSONAL opinion" LMBO 🤣😂
COOKED that boy
Marc Lamont Hill taking Vlad to school with facts, knowledge, and wisdom. Vlad would be well served to do some research before going toe to toe with Mr. Hill in the future.
People need to admit that revenge is a thing people enjoy and they use it to justify their actions.
Exactly.
marc lamont hill is a legend...i wish i could take one of his classes...very brilliant man.
I was,going to skip this interview but this was a good interview
Whose here after the JBP episode
✋🏿
Me lol
As soon as he said ‘Check my interview with Vlad on the death penalty’ I hopped straight back here 😂
@@kevin084life 🤣🤣🤣
👋🏾
Death Penalty is immoral & doesn't prevent crime
Marc made great points. Respect to Vlad for trying to make sense of his stand on the death penalty.
A death penalty would obviously deter certain people from committing crimes, but he has a point regarding not trusting the state to use the penalty properly. You have to make sure 100% the person is guilty & deserves it.
Saajid Lipham I just commented similarly on the main comment section. Too many Americans see the world myopically.
السلام عليكم
Why do you think so?
Vlad took the L in this one.
One of the best videos on this channel I've seen in months. It got so bad, I stopped checking for videos.
Put him and Akala in the same room, do an entire session. Do it Vlad, just, do it.
he wont
What would that do?
@@selfishstockton6123it will change the course and trajectory of history
Marc Lamont Hill is a smart dude man. Really smart cat.
absolutely enjoyed this. just two grown folks having a good convo. we definitely need more of this
Very wise man.
This was a good debate. I side with the death penalty in rare cases, but Marc's points kinda make me rethink my position on this
“You think a person can be a serial killer and not have a mental illness”
😂 bodybag
the shit that Trump talks is just how most other politicians in his age group think but won't speak.....
what's with the name calling ?
Thanks for the interview Dr.Hill
I don't know who Marc is... sorry for being ignorant but I'm from the UK! I've got to say this is the best Vlad interview I've seen. Marc you're a great human and talk so much sense! Peace from the UK! 😯😯✌✌
The Pod got me here
MLH has many reasonable points
Vlad's brain is not as sophisticated as Marc Lamont. But Vlad is honest about that ,good interview.
This is what happens when you instigate in interviews instead of critical thinking. Step yo game up Vlad.
SOCAL Facts💯
Old video but I am recently reconsidering my position on the death penalty and this guy just gave me even more to think about.
this was a good convo need more vids like this vlad
Good dialogue i thoroughly enjoyed this
Who should we interview next?
djvlad bring Dr Boyce back, get Tariq Nesheed, Brother Polight, Nate Parker, Ryan Coogler
Disl Automatic. Real hiphop and knowledge
djvlad interview Marc Lamont hill again. Actually everyday. Find out what he thinks about literally everything. These thoughts are golden. Get him on video as much as possible. He's Malcolm of our time.
Do a full Eddie Griffin interview. Also Chris Rock, D.L. Hughley, and Corey Holcomb.
Corey holcomb, Vince Staples, Alicia keys, Bernie Sanders, Jhene Aiko, Regina Hall, Paula Patton, Ameriie, Trey Songz, Lauren London, Meagan Good, kylie Pratt, Tatyana Ali, Donald glover, chance the rapper, Wale, Zoe Kravitz, Pusha T, Vic Mensa, and Schoolboy Q
Death is the end of suffering; why would you kill someone that you want to suffer?
prison is expensive for the tax payers.
Well, they should stop locking up so many non violent drug offenders then.
A death penalty trial is way more expensive than someone going to trial for life in prison without the possibility of parole.
That's the realist shit I've heard today.
YOU GOT THAT SPOT ON
I aint agree with every stance for EITHER PERSON but this was definitely I'd say, the best interview on this channel. Amazing. I loved this.
This is why I luv, Mark Lamont Hill... He can debate any issue put in front of him... Great interview!!
Good points made. Good debate
Great interview. I enjoyed listening to the different perspectives. Both Lamont and Vlad made good points.
LESS LORD JAMAR AND MORE MARC LAMONT HILL. PLEEEEEASEEE.
Marc: lays out cogent, well thought-out, evidence based argument
Vlad: well, look at (quotes lame overused platitude)
This was a cool one Vlad!
This was a good convo. It made me think more about the death penalty. Good job Vlad
I learnt so much from Marc.
Peace to that brother.
Thanks vlad for bringing this brother on your platform.
I bet they all agree on abortion.
Because that's the same right? 😒
LOL...SJWs find a way anywhere..SMH
clearly you just want to argue in circles. His argument was about state sanctioned decisions on killing people. He had no problem with killing in self defense. A personal issue such as self defense or abortion is separate.
Why is abortion bad
Dr. Marc Lamont Hill is absolutely correct. He also forgot to elude that certain groupa of people are disproportionately given the death penalty over other groups; and are more likely to be wrongly accused in the first place.
This guys IQ way to high for Vlad.
Well he does have a PhD lol
Who’s here after Joe budden?
This argument reminds me of when Daredevil and Punisher were arguing on the rooftop. Two different philosophies on moral beliefs.
I don't know this Marc Lamont dude, but he seems to be a pretty smart guy.
One of vlads best interviews
Vlad just exposed himself as a dummy! lol
Exactly bro Vlad stupid as fuck
He showed his mentality is pretty basic.
Major dummy.
We need more of these Vlad
VLAD AINT GOT THE ANSWERS!!
Vlad got spanked in this debate.
I'm from the UK, we abolished the death penalty. There's no going back once a country gets rid of the death penalty. It's the right thing to do, there's no going back. That's morals matey.
Marc came with straight facts b lol
Here after Marcellus Williams. Rest in power ✊
Vlad i dig these types of interviews more than the hip hop interviews
everybody think they are smart until they run into somebody that's smart
Who is watching this after JBP show.
great video and discussion Vlad. 👍🏾
If you think with your brain and don't just run with your feelings this guy makes a lot of sense. In other words, if you're a man you agree with this man.
Marc Lamont Hill is an intelligent and articulate man.He put Vlad in his place!!
"You said you would rather have Trump as president instead of Hillary"
"Thats not what I said" - this basically sums up the whole of Vladtv
"If you look historically... Humans haved killed each other" lmao
Kanye>Hillary and Trump as president.
Stfu
Almost anyone> Hillary and Trump as president.
+Idk Man Lol nah that nigga's way of dressing is mad trash
+Idk Man Ya
No. Vote Trump
jill stien is great... my vote
Gr8 interview Vlad. 🙏🏽
This the first time I agreed with vlad 😂
Death is easy.
Being sentenced to 10, 20, 50 YEARS... Or even LIFE behind bars dealing with the looming spectre of prison rape, inmate assault, prison slave labor, draconian confinement and personal restrictions*... Maybe it's JUST me, but I've never understood how is jail preferable to execution.
* -- Severity/likelihood pending on which prison/jail you're in.
GREAT DEBATE!
This nigga Vlad brought a knife to a gunfight.
idk Vlad this guy murking you on this discussion
His brain works very fast
Marc Lamont Hill gets it.
This was a great debate
this dude puts in mind of Michael from Goodtimes
good debate & points
Word. Vote Jill Stein if you plan on voting and actually give a shit about your well being and other people.
There are way too many innocent people on death row for the death penalty to be justified.
This is gold, Vlad. Good shit.
This brother is Super wise he folded Vladimir up like a lawn chair with the conversation
I am so sick of hearing that youtube music ad
good interview
I thought I was pro-death penalty until I watched this interview. Now I'm questioning myself on this. I'm on both sides of the fence right now. Lamont makes some good points. This was a bad ass interview.
I mean "bad" in a good way.
The Beauty of a civil conversation
He wasn't lying to Joe Budden lol
Not only is the death penalty superfluous, it's also more expensive than long term prison time or solitary confinement. From the fiscal side alone, the death penalty makes no sense
Here after Joe Budden Podcast
VLAD WHEN GET AN INTELLECTUAL LIKE MARC ON YOU HAVE TO DO YOUR RRESEARCH... U WERE CLEARLY OVERMATCHED
This guy spoke negatively about Dr. Francis Cress Welsing.
Vlad had to work his ass off to think on this interview I bet he won't be on any more future projects LOL
love how he mentions the occupation of Palestine in all of the interviews. #marclamonthillforprez
Dizzee Rascal, Akala and Marc Lamont Hill have all engaged VLADtv in some serious conversation built on a foundation of mostly facts. And I see the Dr. Umar Johnson interview being another epic interview.
I have a love/hate relationship with VLADtv. One day the content is refreshing and another it's like slow death.
Totally agree with Marc.
Nah dude....’eye for an eye’!.... yeah if a mofo is GUILTY WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT.....⚰️⚰️⚰️⚰️⚰️⚰️
Vladimir is contradicting himself. In other interviews he said that jail should be for rehabilitation not for punishment. The Death Penalty is clearly a punishment.
The pod brought me here
But "what do you think about the whole situation?"
Agree 100 with Hill
Marc Lamont Hill is an intellectual lightweight. He claims that "we" might have to make short term sacrifices in order to create a more enduring progressive movement. Who the hell is this "we"? Hill has a Ph.D., a six figure job as a professor, not to mention the income he gets from having his own tv show and guest appearing on other programs. Marc Lamont Hill is amongst the most privileged people in this country; if Trump becomes president, he has the money and privilege to insulate himself from the consequences. What Hill really means is that other people should sacrifice for his movement, because he won't be sacrificing shit.
Furthermore, compromise is the predicate for political action, not it's foreclosure. You can't make someone's moral purity the criterion for their electability. Moral action doesn't exist in a vacuum; every moral decision must potentially come at the expense of some other competing moral good. These are complicated moral and political issues, and you shouldn't make someone's disagreement a basis for their political disqualification.
Finally, Hill is voting for Jill Stein? Why because they have similar moral convictions? That's idiocy; we're voting for someone to run the country. This isn't a "who's most moral" competition. Jill Stein has absolutely no qualifications to be president. None. She doesn't even have practical policy proposals for her positions. And I'm not even saying that morality counts for nothing, but there must be some balance between a person's moral stances and their actual ability to do the job for which they're potentially being elected.
Great post! Very well said
The entire first chunk of what you wrote operates under the assumption that because Hill has money he won't sacrifice anything, but that's all that is, an assumption. You can't criticize someone for how you assume they'd respond to something, if anything all that shows us is how you approach things and that if you had his money you'd be the one insulating yourself since you assume everyone with money would too.
see below
MasterSinh I don't presume to speak for the original poster, however what I took from his message is that Dr. Hill's "experiment" will have consequences which will have a disproportionate negative affect on many other American's (as well as non-American's) of lesser means than his own. No matter whet Dr. Hill expects to sacrifice during this endeavor will never compare with those borne by everyday people. Public policy is not a zero sum game where negative outcomes in the short-term are mitigated by positive responses which occur as a result; Dr. Hill is an academic and tends to think in idealistic terms... ie his staunch "moral" stance. Unfortunately (or fortunately) we live in the real world where decisions are made based upon pragmatic variables and outcomes. This is why he is an intellectual lightweight; much the same way libertarians are intellectual lightweights, Hill refuses to live in the realm of what is possible; rather, he goes all in on a possibility that has never occurred. Instead of breaking the system and rebooting (Hill's position), history has shown us that what is more than likely to occur is that both the parties will move further right which will certainly run contrary to his intentions. His decision is disastrous and I hope to never have to say "I told you so"! Peace
I never said that. What I said is that it's disingenuous to claim that others should sacrifice for your ideals when you will be sacrificing nothing.
Vlad is lost in this conversation LMAO.