Comments
142

This is not a comment on the article - which i have not read yet. It is an expression of how pleased I am to find you as a writer. I happended to listent to a couple of long interviews you did on YouTube - one with Jordan Peterson - one of my favorite thinkers. You are terrific and are making a huge impact for good. Wow.

Expand full comment

"My generation hopes to live in an America where the racial wealth gap will no longer exist". This is nonsense. See "Wealth and religion" in Wikipedia. Orthodox Jews appear to have six (6) times the net worth of conservative Protestants. Is that because US society is somehow biased against conservative Protestants and in favor of Orthodox Jews? Really? That's nonsense.

Here is another germane fact. The per-capita GDP of Singapore is "only" 34 times higher than Haiti. Not a lot of white people to be found in either country.

The idea that racial wealth gaps will go away is just as much nonsense as blaming them on "racism" and/or "white supremacy". They are sadly rooted in human nature.

Expand full comment

This was one of the best interviews on this substack. Condoleeza Rice is an admirable person. A true overachiever, in a crowd of faux-overachievers. It is truly a shame that much of the Liberal establishment chooses to walk away from her example. Thanks for the wonderful interview.

Expand full comment

Quick reply: "I don't need you to tell me how to be Black. I've been Black all my life." Wow. I disagreed with Rice on many things of import to me, but that was a fantastic interview. I'm so very glad I took the time to listen to it. I admit I'm biased since she's a musician and especially a classical pianist (yes, it counts even though I'll admit it shouldn't), but I always wanted to hear interviews like this where you take accomplished people who seem like they are swimming upstream in some way and ask them how they arrived at their opinions in a calm fashion that doesn't assume they are speaking in bad faith.

If there's one thing I've realized about politics over the past five or so years it's that you can't assume who is operating in bad faith or good faith based on whether they agree with you or not. Let them speak, and draw your conclusions -- and always be willing to revisit them. I'll probably never agree with Rice on certain things, but those points of disagreement are not the whole story nor should they be.

Expand full comment

I was born in 1985. Never went to class from kindergarten through graduate school that there weren't black kids in class with me, and I never recall it being a 'thing' aside from jokes in every direction. My best friend in high school was black, and I also lived with him after college. All of this blows my mind. The rhetoric, finger pointing, and virtue signaling are all just that. And I'm glad that when my television and computer are off, racism doesn't seem to exist. I hold the door for black folks, and they hold the door for me. "Thank you, sir." "You're welcome."

But by today's broad definition, I may very well be racist. I have absolutely no problem wearing that. Nothing shuts down some idiot calling you a racist quicker than responding with "you're damned right!" I do judge people based on their appearance and behavior and avoid or welcome them based on my values, and the values I want to instill in my children.

Separating history into black/white/whoever seems to perpetuate the issue. Anyone who loves history wants as much information from as many different perspectives as possible. Anyone who doesn't love history, regardless of skin color, sleeps through class.

Expand full comment

Condi is just an amazing person

Expand full comment

Just listened to your interview with Condoleezza Rice. What a great interview. She is such an inspiration. So smart. It's a shame she has no interest in running for office or in being NFL commissioner for that matter!

Expand full comment

Racism: A Human Disease

As a kid, I thought we had reached a level of maturity that it was *understood* that it was no longer remarkable that the person next to you was a different color of skin. I thought it was also understood that being a bigot of any sorts was bad. It was more about ethnicity and culture. Colleagues of mine from Africa told me about how they viewed America and our racial divides. They talked about how they viewed both white and black people here as compared to where they came from in Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa). At first, I was surprised to find that we had not reached that level of maturity and that we still had rampant bigots.

I should not have been surprised. I was naive. I was wrong.

Two major events:

1) We elected Obama, and throughout the election and after I saw how people just could not get over, he is a black man. The birther nonsense was ridiculous. Some of the same people wanted Arnold Schwarzenegger (I'm a fan of his movies, btw) as President. Big secret, Arnold was not born in the US.

2) We elected Trump. A lot of people felt it was okay now to be more bigoted and be very open about it.

Over time, I saw how people from all cultures are bigoted towards each other. Over skin, religion, nationality, economic status, gender, sexual preference...

People also hate each other over historical events that happened multiple generations ago.

I learned that racism is not as much a white condition or disease and not just an American white condition or disease, but it is a human condition/disease. Hate and fear, it seems, is the true democratic equal opportunity condition. It crosses all lines, skin color, origin, nationality, religion, gender, etc. It exists all over the world today.

If someone is not the traditional racist, then why be surprised?

Before you can solve a problem, you need to ask the right question. How do you know what answer to give if you have not phrased your question accordingly?

Once we realize that racism is a human condition and not just a "put your skin color" - condition. then we should ask ourselves:

1. How do you mature out of racism?

2. How do you go from a society that is extremely racist to one that is not?

Let us say that the society created extreme economic, education and social disadvantages on the targeted group.

1. How do you correct that?

2. Do you try to correct that?

3. If you correct it by tipping the scales the other way, at what point do you recognize that its not needed?

And then say we institute programs that help the oppressed group.

1. Should we, at some point, them back?

2. If we would roll them back, then when?

3. How do we decide when people are now on a level playing field to even consider rolling them back?

I do want to give brief mention to two other diseases: Power and Greed.

Someone wants power over someone else. Makes them feel safe and, in many cases, they can make some money off it too. Be famous. Be rich (greed).

We are seeing some examples of this now as people are taking the funds donated to them to get rich (I'm seeing it on both sides).

These diseases are enabled by racism. I think to solve the power problem we have to answer those questions I posed.

Is a Black History Month still necessary? Yes. We still have a severe racism problem in this country. I think both people should be educated about the achievements of black people and how they were treated. You need to remember the wrongs to not repeat them. And you need to know the all the good things, to cherish and celebrate what people can achieve as fellow human beings.

Answer those questions. Reach the point we do not need this discussion, and we can talk about what we do next. Maybe it should change to Culture and Ethnicity Celebration Month, and we still focus on the history of the wrongs and the celebration of the rights.

Expand full comment

After 4 decades of affirmative action, many Americans acknowledge that "special " hires are usually not the MOST qualified and even if so are still perceived as lesser. Those that get these plum positions (like VP Harris) and Ivy appointments (Pocahontas or Obama) feel shame and express anger because they realize via this race and gender based scheme they got the coveted "Brass Ring" but are always perceived with an asterisk . Poverty not race or gender needs to be considered going forward.

Expand full comment

Spentabulous Interview! Too bad Condie won’t run, though I agree with her regarding why !

This was some of the most insightful commentary on race I’ve heard in a decade !

Condie if you charge your mind , I already have our campaign slogan!

Condie not Commie 😹😹😹😹😹

Bari thanks again for a great topic - Fantabulos Guest! Let Common Sense Prevail! ❤️💋💋

Expand full comment

I think it was Glenn Loury who recently discussed the different philosophies about achieving black progress in a majority white country. He spoke of the practical as exemplified in Booker T. Washington's philosophy and education as the other route. Growing up in the South I saw and patronized black businessmen who obviously followed the practical advice. My family always used a black shoemaker and until I went to college, only black men at two different black owned barbershops cut my hair. Once I became a professional, I saw more of the other path, as my law firm represented a number of black professionals, particularly in healthcare. What I observed in both instances was that these black adults shared the same values as my parents and myself. None of these individuals were victims, but successful Americans.

Expand full comment

Can we please stop talking about race for just one year....please!

Expand full comment

T.Reid. Of course. The land, the climate, the environment, and the early settlers determine the individual traditions of any area. But one can look to the animal world to see the evolution of this diversity. However unlike animals, we as humans can recognize, imbibe and relish this regional diversity. Here is a thought. The fact that a predominantly white jury found white accused of hate crimes against a black is newsworthy. For my ideal American, it would not be necessary to note the color of the participants, it would be just some accused judged for hate crimes.

Expand full comment

Growing up in the Deep South (SC) in the 80’s - 90’s it was 100% clear to me that we were all equals, you judged people by their actions not skin color. We were on sports teams, in classes, at work together, etc. All the Jim Crow / Segregation we studied in school and that my parents told me about from when they were kids was over and good riddance. We’re Americans, that was settled.

The turning point was the death of Trayvon Martin when President Obama and Eric Holder, with help from many leftist activists, began the process of “re-racializing” the USA. And here we are.

That’s just one perspective, of course. But I’m not alone in that.

Expand full comment

This comment by Eli Steele summarizes for me what has been taken away by the current politics:

"Never would he [Carter Woodson] have imagined that his Negro History Week would morph into a corporatized Black History Month, corrupted by noblesse oblige from privileged whites and blacks invested in upholding the white-oppressor and black-victim dichotomy."

Expand full comment

The American love affair with racism has been lasting for roughly two and a half centuries now and there is still no end in sight. For the first almost one hundred years of its existence the USA lived with the declaration of human rights in its constitution and a very brutal kind of slavery coexisting happily and hardly anybody really noticed the lightyears between talk and walk, the mind numbing hypocrisy this simple fact represented. After slavery was abolished the USA, that shining beacon of light for the rest of the world it always has been pretending to be, being the last of civilized western countries to do so, took another century until black Americans were fully emancipated, at least on paper. By the way, did I already mention those lightyears usually lying between talk and walk in the American journey? That's certainly some progress although America is not there yet where it should be and I'm afraid it might not ever get there. Why? Because Americans never seem to quite get it. Even when they decide to become "antiracist" they can't help but continue to emphasize the differences between the races, just in a different way. That might modify the concept of race and racism but it doesn't get rid of it.

To me, a very humble idealist, it is very clear, where You have to get to, what a society without racism has to look like: You have to arrive at a stage, where the colour of Your skin is about as relevant as the colour of Your hair or that of Your eyes. Where nobody really cares about it and doesn't even really notice it, because it is absolutely irrelevant.

But I'm afraid, the approach taken at the moment will never get America there, because Americans can't help but making the colour of one's skin the single most defining feature a person has and that's exactly the wrong direction. Those promoting "identity politics" might not be aware of that, but they do not fight racism, they keep extending it.

Let me end, with what is meant to be a blunt provocation: Can someone please explain to me what's so different with defining Your identity as being black compared to defining Your identity as being white, that You can idealize one and condemn the other? I personally believe both is equally inadequate to define a person and I've always despised white supremacists for that. I rather define myself as a member of the human race, as brother amongst brothers, because that's where we need to get to, not just in the USA but everywhere in the world to enjoy our finally racefree and racismfree shared world together.

And now You can guess what colour my skin is, if You like. I won't tell You, because it is irrelevant to me and it doesn't define me, not even a little bit. I don't let it.

Expand full comment

"Those promoting "identity politics" ... keep extending it."

This is a feature; not a bug

Expand full comment

Spain and Portugal are not “civilized Western countries?” Both ended legal slavery after the USA (1873 and 1869, respectively). The Netherlands barely so, 1863. I assume you don’t consider Brazil worth mentioning.

Expand full comment

OOOPS! I was wrong here. That slavery continued only in the colonies of Spain and Portugal and not in the motherlands doesn't change the fact that slavery continued in those empires.

I correct: The USA were one of the last civilized western countries to abolish slavery. Thank You for bringing this error of mine to my attention. Doesn't make a big difference for my argument though...

Expand full comment

"Civilized Western Countries" lumps Brazil, China, the Ottoman Empire, etc as what - uncivilized? Barbarians?

Having said that, the only other nations that would seem to fit your definition are Great Britain and France who ended slavery in their empires ~1840. It seems rather hard to discern anything relevant from the fact that your selected basket of nations, who had utilized slavery for a few centuries, all ended it within 30-40 years of each other.

I would just summarize as "Slavery existed globally from ancient times. European nations, Brazil and the US had all abolished it by the latter part of the 19th century. Other nations mostly abolished it in the 20th century. Slavery still exists in isolated pockets of Earth."

Expand full comment

China and the Ottoman Empire are definitely no western countries. They cannot be considered part of western civilization. They were/are part to other civilizations with a much different cultural history.

It's still an interesting fact of history, that Americans claim their war of independence was about freedom and in fact it meant the continuance of slavery for a significant part of the American people for a significant amount of time. If You were born black in the year of American independence in the USA You were most likely born a slave and You would most likely die a slave too. One way to avoid slavery was to escape from the "free" America into Canada, still part of the British empire, to gain Your freedom. Pretty strange concept of freedom we can still find in American history books. Don't You think?

I believe one reason why racism persistently exists in the USA is that there has never been an honest approach to American history. In order to hold up the myth of American exceptionalism Americans created a whole bunch of other myths to keep the core of the ugly truths about American history securely locked in the closet. Not just racism against blacks and the legacy of slavery, but also racism against the aboriginal inhabitants of US territory and racism against European immigrants like for example Jews, catholics, Italians or Irish.

Expand full comment

I believe as long as Americans perpetuate the myth of that "shining city on the hill", which is American exceptionalism, they will be profoundly unable to deal with their past in a rational and reasonable way. Unless Americans admit, that their's is just another normal country on our planet with both strong suits and some ugly flaws, they will continue to have a way to flattering view of their country, overestimate themselves and try to impose their power on other countries for mostly quite selfish reasons. Which constitutes another can of worms, I haven't even opened yet, which is the reason why the US has been much more often at war with the outside world than at peace and still are.

It's about time that the USA starts reflecting about itself in a more realistic and honest way. That has to happen first before America can start defeating flaws like racism. I do not deny that well intended people have been fighting racism throughout the history of the USA and made at least some progress, but these efforts have all been fallen short of ending racism in the US and I have just laid out my opinion about why that is. Americans as a people have no history of being honest to themselves.

Expand full comment

Virtue signal much, Hans?

Expand full comment

Did I hurt Your patriotic pride, Bill? I'm sooo sorry.

Expand full comment

Nope, it's immutable. Good to be American. Sorry, Hans.

Expand full comment