The Glenn Show

This week I welcome Sam Harris to TGS. Sam is a neuroscientist and philosopher, the host of the podcast Making Sense, and the proprietor of the meditation app Waking Up. He’s a searching, truly open-minded thinker who follows the evidence where it leads, even if that means admitting that he was wrong about a previously held position.

We begin by discussing Sam’s uncertainty about how to navigate some aspects of the discourse on race. He wants a world in which race simply doesn’t matter all that much, but he’s unsure of how to bring that world into being. Sam highlights the stakes of the affirmative action question by asking us to imagine that we have to undergo brain surgery at the hands of a surgeon who got through medical school despite relatively low performance. Would we want this surgeon operating on us or our children? (I raised a similar concern in the past.) We then move on to Charles Murray, who Sam has had as a guest on his podcast. Sam was appalled by Charles’s treatment at Middlebury College, where he was violently deplatformed by a group of student protesters. Sam shares my view that nobody, and especially not a figure as significant as Charles, should be prevented from airing their views in public, no matter how wrongheaded we might find them. (For the record, I don’t find Charles to be “wrongheaded.”) If you disagree with a speaker, argue with them. We know that certain groups perform worse on tests and other quantifiable measures of academic performance than others, but we’re not yet sure why. Sam asks an intriguing question: Are there certain things we’re better off not knowing? If we knew that a given group had an inherent, perhaps ineradicable disadvantage on quantifiable measurements of performance, would we want to know? Could the social ill that such knowledge might produce make us worse off than the social good that would come from it? We then consider whether there are still circumstances in which affirmative action is necessary. From there, we pivot to God. Sam is, famously, a critic of organized religion. But religion is one thing and belief in God another. Sam frames the question of belief as one that can be addressed through mindful introspection. But at the level of community, it seems more difficult to find a secular alternative to the networks of support and spiritual sustenance that many find in temples, churches, synagogues, and mosques.

I had a great time thinking along with Sam. There is much more that we could have discussed had time allowed, so hopefully he’ll join me again soon.

Note: We encountered some problems with Sam’s audio. As a result, the sound quality on his end is less than optimal. Many apologies.

This post is free and available to the public. To receive early access to TGS episodes, an ad-free podcast feed, Q&As, and other exclusive content and benefits, click below.

0:00 The principle that race shouldn’t matter and the fact that it does

6:17 The high stakes of affirmative action

17:00 In defense of Charles Murray

25:35 Are there facts we’re better off not knowing?

36:30 When does affirmative action make sense and when is it counterproductive?

48:01 Is belief in God irrational?

52:32 Suffering and the illusion of self

1:00:27 Finding meaning in secular community

Links and Readings

Sam’s books

Sam’s podcast, Making Sense

Sam’s app, Waking Up

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit glennloury.substack.com/subscribe

Matt’s brief career as a professional basketball player in Mongolia ... What drove Putin to invade Ukraine? ... Are there limits to Putin’s power in Russia? ... Putting ourselves in Russia’s geopolitical shoes ... The appeal of Russian nationalism ... Did we learn anything from Iraq and Afghanistan? ... Did Russiagate obscure Americans’ ability to see Russia’s actions clearly? ... The value of public apologies ... Matt: Journalists are now in the narrative business ... The foreign policy language barrier ... Matt’s recommends some modern Russian writers ... Matt answers the most pressing question of our time: Celtics or Nets? ...

This week on The Glenn Show, John McWhorter and I are joined by the journalist Matt Taibbi. Many of you are likely familiar with Matt from his many books, his political journalism for Rolling Stone (among other outlets), his Useful Idiots podcast, and now his outstanding Substack newsletter, TK News. Matt lived and worked in Russia and the former USSR for several years, so I thought he’d be an excellent source for some insight into the war in Ukraine.

We begin by discussing Matt’s brief career playing in the MBA—that’s the Mongolian Basketball Association. We then move on to more pressing matters. Like many journalists and experts, Matt had been confident that Putin would not invade Ukraine. Unlike many journalists and experts, he issued an apology to his readers for making the wrong call and explained what led him to make it. Even after the invasion, it’s not clear why Putin is pushing as far west as he is—we talk about the difficult of getting inside his head. I ask if the media’s portrayal of Putin as a true autocrat is accurate, and Matt affirms that, while it’s hard to know what’s really going on inside the Russian government, Putin does seem to have more or less total control of domestic and military policy. The best way to deal with Russia is to first understand how it sees the world, so how do we put ourselves in its geopolitical shoes? This exercise leads John to reflect on his own lack of tribalistic feelings, and how tribalism is driving Russian and Ukrainian responses to the war. Shouldn’t all this feel a little familiar to Americans? Can we apply the lessons we learned (or should have learned) in our own disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to Ukraine? Matt was an early and vociferous critic of Russiagate, the discredited idea that Russian interference swung the 2016 election in Trump’s favor. But has the hangover from Russiagate made it difficult to view Russia’s actions clearly? And why have those who were wrong about Russiagate (and many, many other things) continued to exert influence in the media despite never admitting to the kind of errors that would have ended careers not so long ago? Matt argues that journalism is no longer about reporting news but about building narratives, and that media outlets are now rewarded primarily for keeping their viewers angry. We then move on to cultural matters. I’m a great fan of classic Russian literature, and I ask Matt to recommend some modern Russian writers. And finally, the big question: Who’s going to triumph in the NBA Eastern Conference, the Celtics or the Nets?

Many thanks to Matt Taibbi for dropping in. Hopefully we’ll be able to get him back on TGS in the not-too-distant future.

This post is free and available to the public. To receive early access to TGS episodes, an ad-free podcast feed, Q&As, and other exclusive content and benefits, click below.

0:00 Matt’s brief career as a professional basketball player in Mongolia

5:45 What drove Putin to invade Ukraine?

14:54 Are there limits to Putin’s power in Russia?

19:33 Putting ourselves in Russia’s geopolitical shoes

27:35 The appeal of Russian nationalism

30:55 Did we learn anything from Iraq and Afghanistan?

36:25 Did Russiagate obscure Americans’ ability to see Russia’s actions clearly?

40:08 The value of public apologies

41:28 Matt: Journalists are now in the narrative business

49:45 The foreign policy language barrier

55:00 Matt’s recommends some modern Russian writers

58:18 Matt answers the most pressing question of our time: Celtics or Nets?

Links and Readings

Matt’s newsletter, TK News

Katie Halper and Matt’s podcast, Useful Idiots

Matt’s mea culpa on the Russian invasion of Ukraine

Wesley Lowery’s NYT piece, “A Reckoning Over Objectivity, Led by Black Journalists”

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit glennloury.substack.com/subscribe

Daniel: Putin’s actions in Ukraine demonstrate the decline of American global hegemony ... Did the Soviet Union have the same expansionist ambitions as the US? ... How the war in Ukraine could increase nuclear proliferation ... Daniel: It’s absurd that people got so upset about Whoopi Goldberg’s Holocaust comment ... Does the US have “mass politics” anymore? If not, is that a bad thing? ... When does it pay to privatize? ... What’s so bad about utopianism? ... Is true meritocracy possible within a highly unequal society? ... The uses (and possible abuses) of game theory ...

With the war in Ukraine escalating, I thought it would be a good idea to bring on a guest with some expertise in international relations. So I called on Daniel Bessner, an intellectual historian, associate professor at University of Washington’s Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies, and a co-host of the American Prestige podcast. Daniel is a man of the left, so we spend a lot of time here arguing, and we have a great time doing it.

Note: We recorded on February 22, 2022. Between then and now, the situation in Ukraine has changed quite a bit. In order to avoid confusion, we have edited out a portion of the conversation that is no longer up-to-date.

Daniel and I begin by discussing what Putin’s invasion of Ukraine might tell us about the US’s standing in the world. Daniel argues that Putin’s willingness to ignore the US’s warnings reflects the decline of America’s global hegemony. He compares the present situation to America’s geopolitical position in the wake of World War II, arguing that the US imputed unrealistic hegemonic ambitions to the Soviet Union in order to justify the Cold War. He worries that the lesson many nations will draw from Ukraine is that the best way to forestall aggression from a stronger state is to acquire nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, this strategy makes a lot of sense to me. We then take a hard turn away from war to talk about Whoopi Goldberg. Daniel and I agree that the outrage over her remarks about the Holocaust is completely overblown. But he sees in this outrage the sign of a frustrated populace with no other way to express its political will. I’m skeptical of the idea we should want a return to mass politics, though. We shouldn’t throw the fate of our institutions to the political winds. We then debate the role of private industry in administering services to the public. We agree that our public schools are in bad shape, but Daniel thinks that market logic is at the root of the problem, whereas I think the market can help offer solutions. The question of meritocracy emerges, and Daniel argues that real meritocracy is impossible within a highly unequal society. No doubt that’s a problem, but I think abandoning meritocratic principles would be a huge mistake. And finally, we get into a debate over the uses (and possible abuses) of game theory.

I truly enjoyed this good-natured sparring match with Daniel, and I hope you do, too!

This post is free and available to the public. To receive early access to TGS episodes, an ad-free podcast feed, Q&As, and other exclusive content and benefits, click below.

0:00 Daniel: Putin’s actions in Ukraine demonstrate the decline of American global hegemony

7:02 Did the Soviet Union have the same expansionist ambitions as the US?

16:01 How the war in Ukraine could increase nuclear proliferation

23:46 Daniel: It’s absurd that people got so upset about Whoopi Goldberg’s Holocaust comment

27:27 Does the US have “mass politics” anymore? If not, is that a bad thing?

34:35 When does it pay to privatize?

38:55 What’s so bad about utopianism?

44:18 Is true meritocracy possible within a highly unequal society?

58:04 The uses (and possible abuses) of game theory

Links and Readings

Glenn’s Intellectual Origins, a series of interviews with Daniel

Daniel’s podcast, American Prestige

Daniel’s most recent appearance on Chapo Trap House

Stephen Wertheim’s book, Tomorrow, the World: The Birth of U.S. World Supremacy

Paul Chamberlin’s book, The Cold War’s Killing Fields: Rethinking the Long Peace

Derek Masters and Katharine Way’s book, One World or None: A Report to the Public on the Full Meaning of the Atomic Bomb

Daniel’s essay, “The End of Mass Politics”

Walter Lippmann’s book, Public Opinion

Walter Lippmann’s book, The Phantom Public

Glenn’s book, The Anatomy of Racial Inequality

Daniel Markovitz’s book, The Meritocracy Trap: How America's Foundational Myth Feeds Inequality, Dismantles the Middle Class, and Devours the Elite

Kenneth Arrow’s book, Social Choice and Individual Values

Paul Erickson’s, The World the Game Theorists Made

S.M. Amadae’s book, Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy: The Cold War Origins of Rational Choice Liberalism

Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman’s book, Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Slavery

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit glennloury.substack.com/subscribe

Glenn contemplates exiting academia ... Why should Jeffrey Lieberman lose his jobs over a tacky tweet? ... The historical significance of the word “Negro” ... The revolt against “Latinx” ... Why Glenn doesn’t capitalize “black” ... Why does “blackness” take precedence? ... Glenn: Tenure without mandatory retirement can be a problem ... Will the US send troops to Ukraine? ...

It’s John McWhorter time once again here at The Glenn Show. Let’s get into it.

John and I are both busy guys, but people might not realize how much juggling it takes to manage life as both an academic and a public intellectual. I talk about why I may soon wind down my role at Brown University and devote myself more fully to public endeavors. We then move on to discuss psychiatrist Jeffrey Lieberman, who has been fired or suspended from several academic and medical appointments after referring to Sudanese model Nyakim Gatwech as a possible “freak of nature” in a tweet. It was a tacky, poorly worded tweet, no doubt. But clearly Lieberman was attempting to compliment Gatwech in the same way one might might refer to an unusually gifted athlete as a “freak.” John and I ask, does Lieberman really deserve to have his life destroyed over this? We then move on to discuss how the word “Negro” is now getting the n-word treatment in some quarters. To me, there is absolutely no justification for eliminating the word “Negro” from our lexicon, especially since it was once used to confer dignity on black people. Relatedly, John reports that efforts to replace “Latino” and “Latina” with “Latinx” are not faring well outside of academic circles. The question of when to capitalize “black” comes up, and I discuss why we don’t do so here at the Substack and why I’m opposed to doing so in general. We ask why children who come from families with highly varied racial and ethnic backgrounds are still often raised as “black” in the US if even one of their parents or grandparents is black. Why does blackness take precedence? We close on two unrelated topics. The first addresses whether or not academic tenure is necessary. The second addresses the very grim situation in Ukraine and Europe more broadly.

It’s always a pleasure to talk with John, and I hope you enjoy the conversation!

This post is free and available to the public. To receive early access to TGS episodes, an ad-free podcast feed, Q&As, and other exclusive content and benefits, click below.

0:00 Glenn contemplates exiting academia

7:28 Why should Jeffrey Lieberman lose his jobs over a tacky tweet?

15:11 The historical significance of the word “Negro”

24:05 The revolt against “Latinx”

27:49 Why Glenn doesn’t capitalize “black”

34:04 Why does “blackness” take precedence?

40:09 Glenn: Tenure without mandatory retirement can be a problem

49:31 Will the US send troops to Ukraine?

Links and Readings

John’s NYT piece, “One Graceless Tweet Doesn’t Warrant Cancellation”

William Levi Dawson’s Negro Folk Symphony

The New York Times book, How Race Is Lived in America: Pulling Together, Pulling Apart

John’s NYT piece, “I Can’t Brook the Idea of Banning ‘Negro’”

John’s NYT piece, “Capitalizing ‘Black’ Isn’t Wrong. But It Isn’t That Helpful, Either.”

Thomas Chatterton Williams’s book Self-Portrait in Black and White: Family, Fatherhood, and Rethinking Race

Stanley Crouch’s book, Notes of a Hanging Judge: Essays and Reviews, 1979-1989

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit glennloury.substack.com/subscribe

Matt’s new book, What Next, Chicago?: Notes of a Pissed-Off Native Son ... Piecing together the puzzle of race, crime, and corruption ... Some Chicago success stories ... Matt: Charter schools are a necessity in Chicago ... Chicago’s thriving Latino communities ... Is increased enforcement the best way to solve Chicago’s crime problem? ... What is disrupting traditional family structures in Chicago’s black communities? ... Darryl Smith, the (unofficial) Mayor of Englewood ... The decline of the South Side and the efforts to revive it ... So, what’s next for Chicago? ...

This week, I welcome Matt Rosenberg to TGS. Matt is a journalist who grew up in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood and the author of the recently published book What Next, Chicago?: Notes of a Pissed-Off Native Son. The book delves into the causes and effects of the city’s recent, alarming rise in crime and also chronicles those who are trying to address the problem. As a native of Chicago’s South Side, I share Matt’s concerns, and I highly, highly recommend that everyone read his book.

We begin by talking about Matt’s personal connection to the city, and his memories of the Yippie protests at the 1968 Democratic National Convention. Matt explains what drove him to return to Chicago after leaving the city years ago. He then gets into the deep relationship between street crime and political corruption in the city. He notes that he’s not the only person covering these stories, but there are few journalists making systematic efforts to connect the dots between them. It’s not all bad news from Chicago, though. Matt discusses a few organizations that are making change at the grassroots level, including Corey Brooks’s outstanding Project H.O.O.D. We move on to one the city’s most pressing problems: schools. Matt underscores the necessity of school choice and charter school funding in a city where many public schools are underserving students and parents. One under-discussed but important story Matt covers is Chicago’s sizable and thriving Latino communities. He finds them full of hard-working, family-oriented folks who are making the most out the opportunities afforded them. We then move on to talk about the problem of crime and enforcement. Is a highly punitive crackdown on the crime the best way to combat rising crime? Matt doesn’t think it’s that simple. We know that incarceration is linked to the break-up of traditional family structures, but is it really the primary cause? Matt introduces us to Darryl Smith, a remarkable man who did time in prison but came out and turned his life around while helping out his neighbors in Englewood and staging nonviolent protests that resulted in construction unions opening their ranks to local black laborers. We end the discussion by taking a broad view of the South Side’s decline and talking about what can be done to reverse the damage.

This is a subject near and dear to my heart, and one that has broader significance to other troubled communities across the country.

This post is free and available to the public. To receive early access to TGS episodes, an ad-free podcast feed, Q&As, and other exclusive content and benefits, click below.

0:00 Matt’s new book, What Next, Chicago?: Notes of a Pissed-Off Native Son

8:48 Piecing together the puzzle of race, crime, and corruption

18:53 Some Chicago success stories

23:19 Matt: Charter schools are a necessity in Chicago

34:16 Chicago’s thriving Latino communities

40:35 Is increased enforcement the best way to solve Chicago’s crime problem?

54:08 What is disrupting traditional family structures in Chicago’s black communities?

59:02 Darryl Smith, the (unofficial) Mayor of Englewood

1:03:43 The decline of the South Side and the efforts to revive it

1:14:42 So, what’s next for Chicago?

Links and Readings

Matt’s book, What’s Next, Chicago?: Notes of a Pissed-Off Native Son

Corey Brooks’s Project H.O.O.D.

University of Chicago’s Crime Lab

Northwestern University sociologist Andrew Papachristos

Jane Jacobs’s classic book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit glennloury.substack.com/subscribe

John: Don’t dismiss West Side Story just because it was written by white men ... If the Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action, will higher education “resegregate”? ... Are meritocracy and racial diversity initiatives inherently opposed to each other? ... What, if anything, are we losing when we give significant weight to racial preference? ... John: Certain Black academics are valued for the way they represent their race rather than their scholarly achievements ... The perils of the DEI industry ...