Taking Responsibility For Systemic Racism | The Problem With Jon Stewart | Apple TV+
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 มี.ค. 2022
- Watch now on AppleTV+
theproblem.link/RacismEpisode
White people say they’re ready to listen and learn, but Black people have been saying the same thing for centuries. Jon talks to Race2Dinner’s Resident White Person™ Lisa Bond, Yale professor Chip Gallagher, and writer Andrew Sullivan about how white Americans can take responsibility for upholding racist systems. It goes about as well as you’d expect.
Subscribe to The Problem with Jon Stewart podcast:
theproblem.link/ApplePodcast
Subscribe to The Problem with Jon Stewart’s TH-cam channel:
theproblem.link/TH-cam
Follow The Problem With Jon Stewart
Instagram:
theproblem.link/Insta
Twitter:
theproblem.link/Twitter
Follow Apple TV:
Instagram:
theproblem.link/AppleTVInsta
Facebook:
theproblem.link/AppleTVFacebook
Twitter:
theproblem.link/AppleTVTwitter
Giphy:
theproblem.link/AppleTVGiphy
Follow Apple TV+
Instagram:
theproblem.link/AppleTVPlusInsta
Apple TV+ is a streaming service with original stories from the most creative minds in TV and film. Watch now on the Apple TV app:
apple.co/AppleTVapp
#TheProblemWithJonStewart #Podcast #Racism - ตลก
![Fc ครับ ขอแนะนำให้รู้จักกับ "น้องเปียโน" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HQU6Q_IYTLo/mqdefault.jpg)
![[MPD직캠] 베이비몬스터 직캠 8K 'LIKE THAT' (BABYMONSTER FanCam) | @MCOUNTDOWN_2024.6.13](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8qa-nm9bCLs/mqdefault.jpg)
The good thing about this discussion is that it brings everyone together in agreement that this discussion was unproductive.
It was designed to be unproductive. If you treat your enemy with professionalism or respect then you might come to some agreements, learn to work together, and they will not be your enemy.
But if you are making your money by fighting then you must keep a enemy around to fight. You must keep your enemy your enemy.
If bigots, provocateurs and segregationists lose their enemy they lose their power, wealth, and privilege.
@@utubenewb1265 Most of Jon's interviews like this, or even his one-on-ones, are much more professional than this. I was quite surprised at how quickly this devolved. It seems Jon may have taken some things that the talking head on the wall said a bit too personally and he lashed back, which is very unlike him. Still, it was good to see two opposing view points between guests. I wish it could have been a bit more professional and less yelling at each other, cause that's not productive, but you still need both sides of the argument if you're ever going to reach the middle.
Not sure what you mean?
@@adidas2684 oh
You have 2 sides of the coin - one side says that Europe & America belongs to non-Whites, and the other side who have NEVER been allowed to speak in mainstream media or politics - except maybe via Skype while being shouted down & called slurs. Look up the law on GENOCIDE sometime - it's happening to Europe & America - no doubt about that
As a black man watching this conversation I think that it's important to remember that before we can start solving the problems of racism, we first have to normalize talking about it. Not arguing, not having heated debates, but talking. Just being able to freely discuss the topic at all with every side present is a feat, and until we can do that, there won't be any understanding. It will just be a continual pendulum swing between sides. So, while most will say this was unproductive, I think it achieved bringing us one step closer to what we actually need. It's a shame that the US didn't create a commission for racism like South Africa did after the fall of apartheid. Because they understood that step 1 was creating an environment where racism could be discussed openly.
We'll just talk until we stop stopping wakanda.
We can pretend together that the immigrants to south africa have treated the whites exceedingly well, and are actually victims for the mountain of free shit theyve received.
We dont need to discuss their inability to include the white man in the bantu tribes, and incorporate them into their laws and customs. That failure can be forgotten, and we can forge ahead in understanding
@@smokeyhoodoo Smokey, you're the problem. He gave a thoughtful and productive suggestion and you're implying he's wrong if it doesn't involve separating races and hatred.
Sincerely, you have a horrible attitude. LISTEN to him and consider he might be right.
Well said!
@@MrKeychange So what are you going to do about the problem?
@@smokeyhoodoo I'm going to listen to people like Dexter and try to follow the lead of those who have experience and also an inclusive oriented attitude.
I've been very fair in my professional life and fight when I see something wrong. I'm also limited in my understanding of what's wrong and how it gets fixed. I know my little slice of the world but that's not enough to force my views on other people.
I'm not an activist and feel it's disingenuous to pretend I have a broad enough perspective to be one. I have a singular voice from one perch, but one that's focused on listening and accepting invitations to the discussion.
My point was that everyone being involved means every perspective is seen and the best possible solutions are presented. You can't have a discussion on race without rational people from every angle educating each other.
andrew sullivan came from a town about 3 miles from where i grew up in England and is four years older than me. i recognize EXACTLY his attitudes because i grew up surrounded by them. I was one of only two non white kids in my elementary school and when i hear him speak i feel transported back to my childhood. What is the difference between me and him? he's white and i'm not. his life has allowed him to view racism as something external to him, something you can blame others for. I spent my entire youth being bullied by white people and being called every racial slur in the book.
I understand what white supremacy is because i have been treated as alien ALL MY LIFE.
it makes me so angry to listen to him. he OOZES white privilege....
As an Irish person, I can appreciate that Irish people emigrating to America were better able to integrate and therefore, in spite of initial prejudice in America (and certainly before they left in Ireland) could "pass" for white in a way that other victims of discrimination could not.
Andrew is typical of this lack of awareness
@@velvetunderpants44 same goes for Italians and I would argue Jewish Immigrants who passed as white as well
@@MadFlourish All NON-WASPS were able to find success in the US, eventually, but it usually involved subjugation of a minority group to get there.
This is just from my history background, not pointing fingers at one pale group over another in US History... We were all pretty terrible w/upholding white supremacist BEHAVIORS (in case white folk are in denial of their beliefs) because they benefit us... unless we are actively fighting against it at any given moment.
Thanks for sharing as well, OP. I grew up biratial, white passing, in a very similar sounding area of rural California. He sounds like my Oakey side.
@@MadFlourish Southern Italians had a harder time than the Irish I'd imagine.
My point is, just because we could pass for white shouldn't have given us the right to treat anyone else the way we were treated.
It's like a valuable lesson wasn't learned.
In fact, some Irish immigrants and their descendants went on to become the worst bigots.
Almost to put as much distance between then and their past as possible
Oh my god. This sounds so AWFUL... If you hate America so much, then why don't you emigrate to another country where you won't be bullied, subjugated and discriminated against? There is a great big wide world out there. Nobody is forcing you to stay. You have options. Every year, there are millions of people around the world who seek a better life in another country.
As a Black Woman I applaud you for having this conversation. If you don't see a problem, how can you then fix the problem?
I have in no way personally contributed to the racism issue in this country. I can't recall a situation where I had an encounter with a black, Hispanic, or Asian person that race had part to play in jt. I don't in anyway suggest that racism is gone or that we don't have massive issues facing us but... I'm kind of starting to wonder how this is my problum? Should I cut a part of mu check out and send jt to a black family? No, I put jn the hours for my pay. I have no control how other people treat me based on my skin color so I have no idea how you want me to fix that. Here is an idea... You want to have an honest conversation about race then maybe don't have it with 'experts who haven't lived in the real world for years. Over the last few years the conversation has changed from how can we do better to you should feel bad because if the way you where born. From trying toblevel things to telling me I should feel sorry for actions I didn't take and choices I didn't make. People keep generalizing white people the same way that people do with blacks. You're a black male, you must be a thug. You're a white American, your accomplishments don't mean anything because jts all based in privlage. I'll gladly have q chat about racism but I won't sit here and be told I'm responsible for something I've never played a part of.
@@mattsmith1859
The responsibility of starting Systemic Racism belongs to people. You weren't born this way, it's a taught behavior.
The United States of America, Spain and etc have made themselves and families quite profitable from Systemic Racism, along with Slavery, Jim Crow Laws, Redlining and Police Brutality.
If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem!!!
I want us to stop clapping at the bare minimum.
@@mattsmith1859 Having privilege doesn't mean that your life hasn't been hard, it just means that the colour of your skin hasn't made it any harder. White privilege doesn't not mean you don't deserve anything you've worked hard for, nor does it mean that ALL White people have benefited greatly from systemic racism. No, it's of course not your fault in any way personally that these systems of racism are as entrenched as they are, but you have a responsibly as I a White person, I much as I do in fact, to confront these inequalities which unfairly determine what opportunities, wealth and standards of living that people are presented with simply because of who they are. It is up to the White people of today to dismantle the shackles of oppression and disenfranchisement that their ancestors imposed upon countless generations, and until people are able to confront that truth, those same shackles will continue to bind countless generations to come.
But if you say 'we white people HAVE to talk about this problem'...then proudly say 'we don't even talk to white men in our group'...don't you think there's a problem there?
Isn't it just flagrantly dishonest to pretend to be open to discussion when you've made up your mind already and, worse, you won't even _talk_ to people who disagree?
This is a perfect recipe for:
a. never testing your debating skills in the real world, which means we as progressives/liberals end up getting routed on the political scene in live debates. You saw this with Hillary against Trump. And...
b. never knowing if there are errors in your arguments, because you simply don't listen to anyone who disagrees.
I think this was totally unproductive, and it wasn't because the views held by the panelists were wrong and Sullivan was right: I broadly agree that racism is baked into America, although calling it 'systemic' is too simple. I also agree that we should be more open to having conversations about this stuff.
But none of the panelists actually _wanted_ to have a conversation about it. They wanted to just say their piece and move on. And there lies the problem: we liberals seem to have given up on the idea that we need to _persuade_ our opponents that our arguments are correct. That's too much effort, so instead we say 'this is how it is, if you don't agree you're basically evil'. And, yes, a lot of people will hear that and be cowed; they'll stop going near this subject and they'll be afraid of saying the dumb racist stuff that people got away with saying for so long.
So in that sense the 'this is how it is' tactic works, because it scares people away from using shitty language about minorities. Which is a win of a kind.
(Although I would argue that the political correctness movement has been winning since the sixties and has mostly been winning by doing it the right way, ie. by _persuading_ people, by pointing out that bigoted language hurts people and has a history of pain and suffering, and that that history turns certain words into something more than just collections of letters. The political correctness movement started out making actual arguments to justify its case.
It's only relatively recently that the political correctness movement has decided it has won the debate full stop, and no longer has to argue its position or persuade its opponents.
And the truth is, in politics you never win the debate. You have to keep making those arguments forever, for each new generation - 'the price of liberty is eternal vigilance'.)
But in a much more important sense that tactic fails miserably. Because people don't like being told _'this is how it is - disagree on any point, or attempt to add some subtlety and nuance, then you are racist.'_ In the short term it bullies people into behaving better, but in the long term it builds enormous resentment, which finds outlets in garbage people like Trump and deSantis and basically everyone in the modern Republican Party. And they gain power, and they vote down abortion laws and ban books and load the supreme court with psychopaths and crooks.
This kind of 'conversation' is not a sign of a healthy society - it is the opposite. If we as liberals cannot even speak to the most moderate, milquetoast conservatives out there then what hope is there for a functioning society?
This was a fundamentally unhelpful conversation, and I'm a person of color on the side of the in-person panel. The fact of the matter is that Jon made a big deal out of having an all white panel for this conversation but then didn't use the white panel in any kind of constructive way. Andrew has a single big question: what systems are white supremacist? What they should have said was that while many policies existed in the past, many of them persist until now and even the ones from the past have had long lasting, generational effects. Additionally, the power structures in place apply otherwise equal laws in unequal ways. Some examples they might have brought up:
-Marijuana laws are applied 4 times as much against black people as white people, despite similar usage rates.
-Our history textbooks are extremely white centered, even though Native American people lived in these lands all this time.
-Gerrymandering so that black voices are disempowered by either carving up or isolating black neighborhoods.
-Generational trauma left over from slavery: kids today are raised by people whose parents raised them based on what they learned growing up. In many cases, for families that have been here for a couple hundred years, that was literally slavery.
-The knock-on effects of segregation: integration happened most swiftly in the south, but in the north schools remain even more segregated to this day. Predominantly black schools get less funding than predominantly white schools, not because the law says they should but because people decide to do that. Why do they do so? I'd say racism but without knowing them personally, lets be generous and say we don't know. It's still unfair, and it still leads to worse educational outcomes for kids of color.
These are some of the structural problems that are missed if we look for flaws in the wording of laws. No one on the panel said anything like any of that, and some of them even just shut down Andrew instead of arguing with him. If people of color are not going to have a seat at the table to explain our perspectives, that means our white advocates have to work at least twice as hard to actually have the conversation, otherwise our voices are just silenced.
Thank you for offering your keen insight and perspective. Completely agree. This conversation was SO performative and unhelpful. From the minute he said “all white” I said “what? Why?”
Height of ironies that one of the systems of white supremacy in this country has been excluding bipoc ppl from the conversation and having white ppl discuss and make decisions ABOUT bipoc ppl, and then John goes and does exactly this and wants a pat on the back.
Thank you for sharing these points. I think one of the difficulties in media is to have complex discussions in such a way that important nuances don’t get drowned out or left behind because to slow down would seem pedantic or boring. Perhaps Jon just couldn’t think of the responses you gave in the moment - I’m sure he’s aware of them even though they didn’t leap to mind.
- I've never seen a white person do an open air sale. Thats the first one right there. Nor do I see white ppl usually smoke outside in possible view of cops or other people who would turn them in. Were paranoid. Thus we don't usually ride around with it in our car.
-white people don't tend to make excuses, poor or not, they just keep soldiering on. It's actually a problem for white people because they take that mentality so far sometimes it puts them in an early grave when really they should have sought help
-there is an abundance of attainable jobs in the city, almost any city, that black people don't work. That starts and stops with them.
You can argue they are behind in the race, that's perfectly fine, however, there is no excuse for making excuses to not start running NOW, en masse. We don't see that, why? Can't help but feel it's because of the victim mentality you seem to be espousing. It helps no one.
Agreed, definitely. I think they address most of those things throughout the episode, but since this is an isolated clip on TH-cam and there's no mention of those points, it comes off as a very lazy effort. I don't think this segment added a whole lot beyond going, "See!? There are STILL people who don't get it!" Which... eh. They could have done more with the time.
How can you explain this to a man that doesn't believe theres racism?
You cannot fix something that people don't see as a problem.
It doesn’t exist that’s why
You're right. Jews (like Stewart), Chinese, Indians and many more ethnic groups all earn more per capita than whites in America. The problem for blacks has always been listening to Democrats.
So you're actually right essentially. Because you are the problem and you listen to spineless lying opportunists like Stewart that tell you that all your problems are someone else's fault.
Love when Tony Robbins says "Don't try to fix your own problems it's someone else's fault!"
Oh that's right, he never does, because that would be moronic advice. Nevertheless you morons take it from democrats every day!
@@fundzreal7680 What doesn't exist? Racism?
@@fundzreal7680 Are you a baby? Haven't you acquired the ability of object permanence - i.e. the understanding that just because you can't see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
@@agilemind6241 you have no proof that it’s related to race….it’s just an easy excuse to not take any responsibility
The expression on Sullivan's face right out the gate shows you he knows what's going to happen.
"What are these systems??!"
"Housing-"
"That's ONE!"
"GI Bill-"
"That's ONE!"
"Redlining neighborhoods-"
"That's ONE!"
I think the dude needs to go through primary math class again.
“One plus one plus two plus one…plus one…is….”
1 + 1 + 1 = 1?
Sounds like the Trinity to me.
Dude must be a Christian. 😁
Him and Lauren Boebert would be battling for the lowest class average/grade
I think what he was saying before people started talking over him is that, Gi bill/Housing/Redlining are all tightly related to one thing shelter/livings paces.
@@nope53926 that’s a MASSIVE one system with multiple avenues tho.
Her: We have to have the conversations with white people everyday.
Also her: this is why i don’t talk to white men.
Clearly she is a loon.
...which she says on a white man's show, while talking to other white men.
It's baffling how "white men" only ever means "people from the other political party".
@@AlexReynard speaking the white man's language*
Wearing the white man's clothes*
Using the white man's inventions*
To bad no white men were watching this segment.
@@AlexReynard John is Jewish not white
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”
I am huge fan of Jon but this was a really unproductive conversation.
I was first made aware of this as a young adult when I watched Fight Club. Some line about going to group meetings for alcoholism or whatever because people actually listen instead of waiting for their turn to talk.
That line stuck with me for the last 20 years, and I see it _everywhere._ It's shocking how many people can't even wait until you reach the period in a sentence before they feel the need to reply.
Thanks for pointing this out... it’s so true , I’m going to try to be conscious of actually listening 🤙🏽
Agree completely. John Stewart is one of my favourite people just in general but this debate/discussion was terrible. Much as I may not agree with Andrew (as far as I could tell!) I would have liked to hear what he had to say. I think it's unhelpful to assume the worst about someone you disagree with, for one thing it means you're incapable of understanding why they think what they think. Even if someone is completely wrong about something there's usually a reason why they believe it and having a calm, rational even 'friendly' discussion about it surely has more chance of changing their ideas than insulting them, ignoring them and cutting them off?
What was unproductive about it?
@@18rollinhard the point of the conversation should have been to give Andrew points and counter points to his out dated views. nobody is going to change andrew(white people)'s mind, unless they themselves come to that conclusion. NOT to openly berate and belittle him. speaking down to someone will not change any minds, rather give Andrew the opportunity to recognize the faults in his own beliefs.
"I'm not responsible for the people that came before me" is the typical response of people that benefit from a system that actively discriminates against a group or groups of people so they can avoid having to change a system that benefits them.
Well its true
But people aren't responsible for their ancestors actions... A lot of these people live in a lefty echo chamber and it's sad to see!
@@jackrayner711 except we are all still upholding that system. Now.
Yeah, sure. Name one. "benefit from a system that actively discriminates against a group "
@@ericfernandez9 sure, if you’re white it’s much easier to get a job and a high paying job. i’m sure you’ve heard about how simply using a white alias on a resume makes getting hired much easier
The problem with self reflection is if one does it right you find the real essence of yourself either you’re going to change or you’re going to except who you are and that is why majority of us do not want to self reflect because a lot of the time to change will not be beneficial to us in that moment in time
03:34 Lisa Bond: "If we don't talk about it (to white people about racism) then we are never going to see movement"
Also Lisa Bond: "We will not talk to white men about it"
At that point, if I were Andrew, I would have just said, "Who do you think you're sitting at a table with? Looks like white guys to me! White guys who think the solution to black problems is for white people to mommy them!"
Absolutely zero attempt at persuasion. This was a sermon.
I don't get her position. Doesn't she want to at least try to convince as many people as possible to vote for things that she sees as positive. She's alienating a huge portion of the population.
if america stops buying this fake narrative that the country is racist that slob lisa loses her income ! think of that for a second
@@danheuser5148 The whole ideology is just one big contradiction that ends up just hating on straight white cis men.
"It's wrong to racially stereotype so we need to tell all white people they are upholding a racist system."
"We've got to talk about it" -> "I don't engage in conversation with white men"
Is she on drugs?
Lets complain about racism while being racist, got to love people's rationalization sometimes.
Imagine being racist against your own race. Absolute brain washing
Shes a grifter
may be she is on bbc...
@@ileavazan7693 I've never seen her on the BBC TV, not on BBC One, nor Two. 😆
The words "we don't talk about this enough" and "I'm shutting you down" surely don't belong in the same sentence? How can you talk about it if you shut down someone who disagrees with you? Rightly or wrongly
Because he’s actively trying to stop her from talking about it? Like that’s the dude’s whole shtick, he’s TRYING to prevent the conversation
That is actually a very good point. The subject of racism is extremely difficult to have due to the charged emotions involved. It takes ALOT of patience to maintain your composure and not allow your personal emotions to take over. You have to be willing to listen to someone even if they don't agree with you, and that's difficult in general, but especially when racism is the subject. People have very different definitions of the term, and most people can't get past how it effects and pertains to them personally. Everyone gets defensive over it, and once people stop listening to each other it's already over. I actually prefer to talk to people that don't agree with me, and strive not to simply debate which is easy, but try to understand, which is VERY hard.
She was the worst.
@@evanseesred I disagree. I get ger point of view too. It's a very tough subject to have an objective discussion about . Like my reply above.
@@sidwestcott4718 in the spirit of camaraderie, I will like your comment per your request. Perhaps you can like mine as well and we can dance and sing like wild turtles.
Poor Andrew, given literally 8 examples of systemic racism and then still says “give me one example”.
his ears are closed and he is very afraid
He asked for evidence that we're living in a white supremacist society and then they just tell him all the racism that happened 60-400 years ago
He asked for one example from 2022 and was given examples from the 1960s and earlier.
This is a great example of how not to have a productive conversation about racism.
It's also a great example of why nothing will continue to be done regarding racial equity. You can't have a conversation about a problem with people who, whilst being presented with evidence of the problem, dogmatically believe the problem doesn't exist. Jon spent so much time on Andrew's attempts to derail the conversation that the conversation they tried to have never happened.
It was not productive with Andrew though. H e started out claiming that water was not wet and stuck to that despite all the evidence presented
If you watch Joe Rogan - Daryl Davis you can see when Sullivan wall of defense comes up. Jon did a great job at desculation. I think Jon should have Daryl Davis on his show on systematic racism. Watch the most recent episode with Daryl and you can see what went wrong in the episode once Andrew felt attacked his defense wall went up and didnt want to come into the converstion. So he shut down and become defensive which started attack or making other guests unconvertable which at that point everyone defensive went up because you can see it with Lisa Bond of Race2Dinner. Jon defense wall didn't really go up because I went into the converstation with an open mind but he used vulgarity eventhough joking Andrew took it as a defense. If you havent watch Joe Rogans episode with Darly Davis please do I personially like Darly.
@@richbrescher6544 Daryl Davis and Joe Rogan would never go on his show. They need to maintain their plausible deniability, which is what Andrew was trying to do. By saying they do not see racism today they can absolved themselves of reaping the benefits of it but try to avoid helping fix it.
This was never about having a productive discussion, it was about using a hot button issue to gain viewership and to make Jon look good.
This literally could have been a Babylon Bee satire skit.
I wish I had two thumbs to give!
It isn't????
The normal news in 2022 is now the onion from 10 years ago so this is accurate
Wish youtube didn't disable the dislikes lol, I'd love to see the numbers on this video. Judging by the comments here, people are starting to wake up to how absurdly exaggerated and unhinged most of the rhetoric around this topic has become.
@@tuanjim799 11k likes to 30k dislikes
I'm halfway in and I'm exasperated at how little they tried to engage honestly with each other. It's a damn shame. If they admitted some level of vulnerability and some fallibility to their world views, they may have been able to learn something together. But everyone is so rigid and defensive. Lisa and Jon seem to want to score points on Andrew when instead they could point out how historical racism and racist laws, as well as individual prejudice towards people of different races, have led to differential outcomes where the majority has distinct advantages.
We desperately need to put more effort and money towards better schooling and medical care, need to invest in black people to prove to them they are not second-class citizens and give them more hopeful futures. Jon made a good point that "some white people think they have to be taken from for this to happen" and that narrative needs to be changed. It is not a zero sum game. Goodwill and building people up is the only way out of this. When you think the game is already rigged against you, it's going to be so hard to engage in positive ways. We need to reassure disadvantaged white people that they will get better services too if we want this to be politically viable in any short-term way, or they'll be easily captured by right wing propaganda and there will be no opportunity for positive change.
I think the issue a lot of people have is when many different overlapping problems are oversimplified by throwing out terms like institutional racism and white supremacy. I understand a lot of this comes from an impatience with hearing white people minimize the issues and say we can't do anything to help and blaming minorities, which is profoundly hurtful and unhelpful. But I also think it gets people on the defensive, and when Lisa said "this is why I don't talk to white men about this," she most definitely lost a lot of people who would have been open to listen beforehand.
Everyone wants to feel they have a spot at the table and I think most people want to be good too. Weaponizing guilt instead of appealing to our better natures is a cheap trick to jockey for temporary power over someone, not a way to meaningfully change minds and hearts. Especially when that guilt is levied in a generational and resentful way. Many people will reject everything you say after they detect this manipulation, because they know you are not treating them with respect as a thinking person.
We should not be blaming people for their ignorance. Instead we should engage them in an open dialogue, gently help them find contradictions in their worldview, and let them come to their own conclusions through careful questioning. It's the only way I've ever changed someone's mind, or had my own changed. We've known this for thousands of years but our media almost never shows people this is possible or worth doing, and it's fracturing our society.
I prefer Jon's solo interviews. Though in them he sometimes attempts to speak more to the audience than the interviewee, essentially trying to score points, he usually only starts doing that once the interviewee has proven themselves dishonest, or they're obviously a talking head for big business or something and it is a public service to expose their contradictions clearly.
Thank you for reading, if anyone does. Sorry I couldn't make it more brief.
Sometimes brevity is impossible.
You raise excellent points, one of the best was when Lisa castigated "all white men"; which surely meant some stopped listening to any of her points.
There is something to be said about being empathetic with your listeners so that they don't feel singled out and get defensive...
It's true in discussing anything; the moment you put your listeners on the defensive is the moment you fail to get your point across.
We also run into issues where people take a single example, even a fabricated one (ahem, Cadillac driving welfare queen), as representative of an entire group.
This even includes Trump supporters; some of whom may only support him because they're upset with how government has failed to work for them in their lifetime...that's why the "basket of deplorables" hurt Clinton, despite her saying "some of them".
People within any subgroup are very rarely 100% in agreement or identical...
What's to engage? Andrew asked for proof of systemic racism. Stewart gave it to him and then Andrew ignored and glossed over. Andrew is a bad faith actor who is in denial. You can't engage people like this.
I feel the exact same way, and it's really refreshing to hear somebody share an opinion that mirrors my own, it's been a while since I've felt that way on this topic. Thank you for that.
I think that a conversation of this nature calls for compassion and understanding on both sides. Social conservatives constantly point to this feeling of "white guilt" that is driven in these conversations, and while it can often be an attempt to misrepresent the movement, it resonates with their audience because of the aggressive tone people take against them. It's the tone she uses here, saying things like "we don't even bother talking to white men". It is this public applause when she says it, it makes white people defensive. I think that the people being put on the forefront of these conversations should be the kind of people who would know that it's not okay to say racist things just because you were saying it about white people. If he had said "I don't bother talking to black people about this" he would have never been able to get a job again. This is why this movement isn't making the progress it needs to be making.
Personally, I think that the big aspect of the conversation that they miss is that our systematic oppression of poor people is intrinsically linked with the minorities who have also been kept poor. I think conservatives look at all of the progress we have made in the worlds most multicultural society, and can't reconcile it with the "black people can't live here" level systemic racism of the past. I
would argue that systematic racism should be explained to the general public as those incredibly racist policies put minorities into poverty, and modern day economic systemic oppression of the poor now disproportionately affects those minorities. The way we address the problem in the modern day is for liberals to advocate for policies that help the lower class as a united front. The way we communicate it is by unlinking the systemic oppression of the poor and minorities, and communicating both in a way that doesn't make conversatives don't feel like they're being targeted.
I admired Jon Stewart. A lot. Not anymore. He does his tricks for an intellectually lazy audience of fools gasp and moan every time Sullivan tries to have real discourse instead of the performative crap from the other guests and especially Jon stewart. He's just making everything worse now.
preach dude this was my exact thought this whole video
i love jon stewart but man this discussion felt very pandering like they were tryna score points
Definitely need a number of hours devoted to this topic. Was not long enough to really dive deep into the issues and discussing practical individual, communal, and governmental solutions that should be considered.
I'm a person of colour and I thought this was so cringe. Expressing white guilt doesnt solve anything. Talk about policies instead
I agree 💯. So sick of discussions trying to corner WP into admitting their "white privilege". It doesn't accomplish anything.
Indeed. The one thing that I can't get over is I think we can all agree is that education is a great place to try and change things. But as soon as anyone starts talking about school choice, whether that be charter school, parochial schools, or anything different than a regular public school, the left in this country will be 100% against it. If the regular public school isn't meeting the educational needs of a community, why would they be against it? If they are truly looking out of the needs of the students they wouldn't. But if they changed something then they would lose power, money, and authority.
A person of “colour” is not a BLACK person. This conversation granted could have been better with brilliant Black American panelist’s. This is coming from a Kenyan that grew up in the UK.
@@inveele - It was shit, but they weren't trying to "admit white privilege", they were trying to get him to acknowledge that the underlying problems they were talking about even exist in the first place. They just went about it in a really, really counterproductive way.
@@colbogus2947 - "or anything different than a regular public school, the left in this country will be 100% against it."
Because private, for-profit and religious schools are not the answer? Charter schools are bad because they're usually for-profit scams that extort money from the government and are worse at educating than public schools (for-profit institutions have all the same inefficiencies conservatives complain about the government for, _plus_ a profit motive). Religious schools are bad for obvious reasons (not secular).
Why are conservatives against doing the obvious: changing how public schools are funded? The reason black schools are underfunded is because the funding comes from taxes only from their district. This means "previously" redlined districts have less funding and are therefore less able to meet the needs of their students. That is the problem, so fix that instead of trying to shoehorn some for-profit institution into it for someone's private gain. Normalize school budgets by supplementing poorer districts to bring them to a similar (or equal) amount of funding per student compared to the schools in wealthier districts. And yes, overhaul the administration because good lord there are way too many school admins per teacher.
"But if they changed something then they would lose power, money, and authority."
Is this a joke? You're literally advocating for private special interest groups being granted power, money, and authority with no oversight. That's significantly worse than just fixing our back-asswards funding model.
Generalizing and assigning value to an entire race is an incredibly ironic way of fighting racism.
Liberals enjoy that modern day segregation
Yes, and let me point out that I think she's confused. I view racism as a choice within one's own brain and heart, also known as your soul. She is acting virtuous as though she is swept along like a leaf in the wind along with all other white people. Poor her. And since she lost control and corrupted the conversation with name calling, I should take this opportunity to point out that she may want to consult with a nutritionist for a healthy body, mind and spirit.
@@jword6845 thank God whites made slavery illegal right? Slavery still exists today back in Africa but thankfully whites have created a place of puppy and even playing field for everyone.
And gender
@@jword6845 souls aren’t even real 🙄You sound like such a hippie
“Give me just ONE system…okay, not that system, give me another one. Okay, no, not that system either. No, that third one either. Okay, so besides all those systems, give one system. See? You can’t.”
Gotta do 2 things to improve this……
1: Shut that audience up
2: Make sure all your guests are physically present
It’s a very nuanced/important/fascinating conversation to have, but the audience and the physical barrier undermine it.
Maybe bring black people on......
How do they know some violent white guy like will smith won’t jump out of the audience and attack
@@joedellabate306 LMFAO! The Karenicity is strong in that couple
I thought the audience reactions to andrews nonsense was a great backdrop to show how a group sees his statements
@@Tortilla.Reform Groupthink and the “reaction of the masses” shuts down and serves to silence unpopular opinions which definitely need a space to breathe in a conversation like this imo.
Mr. Jon Stewart: a rare example of a man that was once a butterfly, who turned into a caterpillar
I'm beginning to think people like Jon were always like this but now the curtain has simply been peeled away
His actual ethnicity is showing ✡️
@@tressietes04 cool it with the anti-semitism
Just curious, are you a fan of Huey Lewis and the News?
@@johannliebert2870 Yes, random, but yes
@@justinbendel3002 oh I was talking to "Mr. Smith" lol, but good taste in music.
Watch the movie American Psycho for the context of the quote.
The “Mmm hm” from the black woman in the audience at 5:13 😂😂😂
This might sound backwards, but I want to applaud Andrew for going on that program and having the guts to speak his mind, and to present a viewpoint so that others can dissect it. I'm sure he was very frustrated afterwards for being made into a whipping boy, but by giving us a chance to see someone try (to very marginal success) to defend that stance gives us a better opportunity not only to understand it but also to realize how to address it.
This video has 79k dislikes to 32k likes. He was a "whipping boy" to your tiny little echo chamber. Can't wait for the reckoning.
Considering he did Stewart a favor and agreed last minute to be a guest- remotely no less- Stewart did him dirty. These are the kind of conversations that make people not want to talk about it. This bunch only want to talk to ppl who uphold their specious and baseless points.
@@artis1969 except that the points aren't baseless and Andrew not only was cherry picking his "data" (historically black marriage rates have always been lower than any other race in the U.S.) and his missing the real problem. To illustrate there's a medical saying, "treat the cause, not the symptom". What Andrew thinks is the core problem isn't the cause, it's the symptom and he feels that treating the symptom will solve the issue when it won't. Jon tried hard multiple times to get Andrew to figure out that there's a deeper root cause to the issue. Until we recognize and address the racist systems we utilize and fix them to work for everyone the struggles of black people that are fundamentally rooted in and perpetuated by racism will continue.
@@artis1969 "Considering he did Stewart a favor and agreed last minute to be a guest- remotely no less- Stewart did him dirty. These are the kind of conversations that make people not want to talk about it. This bunch only want to talk to ppl who uphold their specious and baseless points."
Exactly this. This awful debate did nothing but turn off people who might have been persuaded if they'd bothered to engage with Sullivan's arguments reasonably. Instead they just said 'I'm shutting you down' and piled on.
This is not argument, it's not persuading the other person to think differently through reason and evidence - it's just brute force humiliation that forces conformity through fear of ridicule and scorn.
The effect is that people will conform in public...then they'll go into the private voting booth and elect Donald Trump or Ron deSantis or whoever says they're against 'wokism'. And we will end up losing our democracy, all because liberal figureheads like Stewart no longer bothered trying to _persuade_ people that their arguments were correct, and instead turned to a kind of social blackmail in order to force them to conform.
This is the rocket fuel that powers people like Trump.
@@thesprawl2361 Well said. But apparently it's much more fun to pile on a potential ally and force them into an opposing camp. It couldn't be made any clearer than the woman with her "this is what happens when we don't talk about it/no, now I'm shutting you down" paradigm.
This time, the problem was Jon Stewart and his panel
Jon Stewart has changed.
absolutely.
Jon Leibowitz
Oh that's so witty! Gooooood job!
@@maxmeier532 Cry more your idol is an establishment neoliberal shill now lolol
Important history: families were SOLD APART. Huge impact
Also a point...black men were being killed and being targeted
And more recent history of 50 years of targeting black men and unjustly incarcerating them for long periods of time for non violent crimes.
@@annabananaSplitz1 AND Black women.
@@ekdaufin1485 and its still happening. Ntn has changed
How in the HELL
U white people can say the state I’am in in USA is
Because of Slavery!
I am 64
The problems I am in is bad choices
If u three on want to do something about me
Be about it !
Don’t just talk about !
I have All skin tone family
Friends have the same as blacks
But u don’’t see them making excuses
I was a slave man !!!!
Adam and Eve made this generation
Lisa calling Andrew a racist...well, that's one way to shut down a dialogue, which she is trying to promote.
Did she lie
@@JamesJohnson-yy3wv Thanks for checking in. Well, she is being honest in her belief. In her believing that the USA is inherently racist/white supremacist, I'd imagine she thinks everyone participating is the systemically racist system is racist...except people of color, of course. 🤔
well he is!
Lisa Bond, very elegant speaker, I'm impressed with how she handles herself. I believe her to be very authentic. More people should be listening to her. She's a pioneer in closing the gap between the ignorant people and the other people who want to solve this issue, but don't know where to start. I applaud her. She gets it, she's a winner.
You mean that angry self righteous ignorant ideologue, completely incapable of a mutually respectful nuanced conversation. Yeah. She was a real treat
Lisa charge that white babies had 400 years to fix racism is a serious one. hate needs to return to it
tribal roots in the African utopia of 400 + years ago.
YEEESSSS! My sentiments exactly!
No!
Oh god no. She was terrible. She is making a fortune of white guilt and says absolutely nothing of value. Also the second someone disagrees with her 'I'm going to shut you down' great. She waddled on stage and acted like a petulant child. She doesn't get it
"We don't talk about race..." No. It's all we talk about, and we're terrible at it. We are, however, quite skilled in scoring cheap rhetorical points.
And what's your contribution other than blabbering in the youtube comment section.
yeah, who would have thought that a tv show with snippets on youtube isnt helping. WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT.
@@maxmeier532 Lol how can anybody contribute when the topic has become so divisive in a society that takes all their opinions to comment sections of social media to bash other people’s comments in a manner that is destructive
@@maxmeier532 You really just *actually* blabbered at someone else’s *supposed* blabbering mate 😂
@@maxmeier532 The point of the comment was for fewer words and more meaning. Depth in a conversation matters, and this conversation focused on rhetorical virtue signaling rather than establishing well-thought out arguments.
For the original poster, based af comment bruh!
@@maxmeier532 And what is YOUR contribution aside from blowing Mr. Stewart? Are you donating your time to your local homeless shelter? Big Brothers, Big Sisters? Volunteering to help out at the underfunded schools in your area? Yammering on and on and on around a table helps no one, how about getting out there and doing something useful?
"this is what happens when we don't have the discussion" next sentence "I'm going to shut you down now".... these are jokers. Way to keep perpetuating this crap Jon
An entire team of editors and producers reviewed and promoted this video and literally do not see the problem.
I've seen this comment so many times on this video. What y'all don't realize though and refuse to see is that he wasn't having the conversation either. All he kept doing was deflecting minimizing the others' arguments and the validity of them. He didn't want to have a discussion. So when it happens to him, no we're not having the conversation.
Hypocrites.
These wokesters don't want a conversation - the want submission.
@@iodine-wine BS. What is your gripe with "woke"? Why is it so bad to people like you? Why do y'all keep mentioning some sort of agenda?
Let me tell you what woke is in the real world and not what y'all's twisted distorted view of reality makes it out to be. Woke is simply accepting any and everyone and who they want to be as equals. That's it. That's it in a nutshell. So, is that what you hate about "wokesters"?
You'll cry about cancel culture from the left but when people like you do it, it's ok right? Maybe I'm wrong; maybe you did go online and defend Liz Cheney losing her commission and leadership in the GOP just because she had a different opinion. Did you? Perhaps you were against Kathy Griffin having the worst stretch of her career the last 5 years because she made a fake image of her holding Trump's head. Were you? The left didn't cancel these ppl. That's only 2 examples. Talk about canceling people? Trump fired ANYONE that so much as disagreed with him. Maybe that made you as upset as Twitter suspending his account? I doubt it very seriously, but I could be wrong. Perhaps you went on FB and said that since Kathy Griffin lost damn near everything for her fake image then the GOP Congressman who doctored the opening to Attack on Titan by putting his head on Eren Jaeger and the heads of Biden and Harris on 2 Titans that Eren kills in the clip should lose damn near everything too. Again, doubt it.
So we've established that the right cancels as much as the left. What else is so upsetting about equality for everyone, I mean, being woke? Is it that people are still talking about racism? You think it ended when Obama was elected? NVM the birther BS, Moscow Mitch saying he will obstruct Obama at every turn, making up fake election issues to have an excuse to restrict voting rights, unarmed people of color being killed disproportionately at the hand of the police, the GOP making up CRT issues to have an excuse to mandate what can and can't be taught in history, making it illegal to discuss gay in schools, and I could go on and on ad nauseam. Everyday, people like those of you in these comments upset at "wokesters" because how dare they demand acceptance and respect, you make the case for why these discussions are needed and you do it every single day.
Amen. This sucked.
I grew up in a black community and I can tell you there we’re single parent families everywhere and somehow I made it out of there and made a good life but not many in my old neighborhood didn’t, many of them are in jail now.
Jon is using his survivorship bias
Name one system
Names a system
Yeah. That's bad, but name another
Names another symptom
But why can't you name a system?
Exactly😂😂
Andrew didn’t do his point of view any favors here by saying “That’s one thing!” to literally every different systemic advantage they named.
I really thought someone was going to ask him to start counting 😂
Like 1 thing plus 1other thing plus 1 other thing…
@@Mystrohan First he said there werent any systems.
Andrew literally immigrate to Amerikkka explicitly because of WHITE SUPREMACY and he denies the feature that drew him there.
We should make a drinking game around how frequently race activists say, “we need to have conversations about race” in the middle of a conversation about race.
And that reveals that they don't really want a conversation about race. They want servile acquiescence to their position.
They want to monolog about race.
They're talking about a societal conversation, not the one they're participating in. Four people gathered on a stage talking about a problem isn't going to fix the problem. They're trying to encourage people to have these conversations on their own.
@@havable but if they were really interested in ANYONE having a conversation, why would they constantly talk over people they disagree with, insult them, tell them who and/or what they are, despite that person saying, "No, I'm not." They don't want ANYONE to have this conversation, especially "white" people, you can tell, because they're all okay with writing off Andrew Sullivan simply because he's a "white man." She even kind of wrote off Jon Stewart because *HE* is a white man. They do not want a conversation, they want to tell everyone that doesn't look like them or think like them that "YA WRONG" and that's all.
@@havable and you can believe if a white woman was on there disagreeing with him, they'd write her off because she's "white" and "hasn't had the African American experience." And if a black person was on there disagreeing with them? Woman or man, they'd call them "white supremacists" or "right-wing puppets." Like they do with Larry Elder, Candace Owens, Kanye, the Hodge Twins, Anthony Brian Logan, etc. etc. They always have a way of discrediting and writing off any opposition by somehow accusing them of hating black people, even against black people who they disagree with.
It's not a discussion when 3 of 4 are singing the same song and doesn't want to here another opinion. The topic is important and needs an open talk with qualified people not a populists.
This is Good Trouble stuff 🙌🏾☝🏾🥰keep it coming ‼️‼️‼️
The backlash to this insane rhetoric is really heartwarming. It feels like we're finally waking up.
We're still seeing some butthurt white men here in the comments, so, there's work still to be done.
Propaganda like this is far more effective in small doses. When you continue to force feed this BS down people's throats, it's easier to see it for what it is...bullshit! And when its THIS aggressive and completely out in the open, it starts looking like something much darker...like a highly organized "divide and conquer" campaign, with BIG money behind it. 😈
Waking up to what?
Exactly. The reparation argument is hollow AF and the way slavery is framed is completely out of context. No reparations
Besides you not understanding what the issue laid out is, what 'rhetoric' are you referring to...?
What do you think we need to do about this?
Lisa - “I think we as white people need to have discussions about this”
…didn’t you just shut down conversation with Andrew?
exactly, she shut off Andrew Sullivan, she refuses to discuss with "white males" about race. Then what to talk about?
You mean when he dismissed the discussion and what the others said? She explained this when she was shutting him down.
She misspoke. People like this don't actually mean discussion. They mean you sit there, listen and eventually agree. Every conversation I have had like this, I start by finding things we agree on and trying to move on from there...it ALWAYS begins to devolve the second you don't agree with a single proposition they make. Any disagreement is called white, defensiveness, or discomfort. There is an entire lexicon of terms to describe why you just don't get it if you don't agree with a single idea...sometimes it isn't if you fully disagree with the idea, but just disagree with the severity of their argument. There is no room for you to be nuanced. It is like a religious debate.
Andrew should have brought up Jon's Jewish supremacy.
She just wants to have dinner, she doesn't engage with white men about it.... but thats ok.
This was uncomfortable, but that's good! Change and progress need to happen, we can't just ignore it!!
I’m impressed with the conversation and I appreciate the panel for having it.
14:17 this is the face of a man who is realizing that he was brought here as a prop. Something to be screamed at and lectured to. Nothing he said was listened to.
Given he didn’t listen to anything that was said to him, I guess that’s at least fair. This was not a productive conversation.
(When someone said that white people are complicit in upholding systemic racism, he heard “you’re an evil bigot because you’re white”, which nobody said. “Racist”≠”intentional bigot”. If you believe that the only way to be racist is to intend to be racist, then any time someone tries to explain that a specific action or system is racist, they will reject that, because to accept it would mean to accept that they are themselves bad. There’s no possibility for improvement until they can accept that “racist” is an outcome, as well as sometimes being an intention. Without that, the only possible responses are to accept the accusation of racist action which means accepting that you are a bigot and then deciding to change that, or to know that you aren’t a bigot and therefore reject the accusation of racist action as misguided or malicious, and therefore refuse to even consider examining yourself, let alone changing. )
@@natbarmore What kind of stupid argument is that. Racism is by definition intentional. If you hurt somebodies feelings without that intention it's nothing more than a miscomunication. If you open the door that racism can be unintentional it leads to the dangerous path were people especially with mental disorders will feel insulted from ANYTHING. If we as the society constantly affirm them in those believes those people will dictate how the future of the society is shaped. Agreement, Disagreement and the debate itself however are very important factors in finding a common ground. At the edges of the society these processes do not work because of the lack of empathy for the arguments of the others. That's why society ALWAYS tends to center around the beliefs of the average member and not the weakest link. That doesn't mean you just ignore or abandon the latter. In fact it is important to protect them but you also wouldn't start an argument about how you should plan your and the future of your family with the grandpa suffering from sever dementia.
If we just affirm that every action is racist as long as the receiver think it is, people with certain mental disorders (and I count narcisistic behaviour into that) may get into a loop were they see racism in the tiniest of things and our constant affirmation will radicalise those people up to a point were they think that violence is an legit tool to fight the "opproses" or at least the ones from which they think they are. "I didn't get the job?" - "That is because you are racists". Well in extremely rare cases that might be the truth but in the vast majority it wasn't but rather your qualification and your self presentation compared to others. If we leave these statements uncommented or even applaude them without the proper discussion of other possibilities a certain group of people will learn from that and try to abuse it to their advantage and that at a disadvantage of all others.
And that's why I can't stand that women on the panel. You think that she is doing all of that for others but every word that came out of her mouth was just to create a reaction from the audience. She desperatly searches for the apporval of the audience, she want's to be that shining figure that's fighting against injustice. Deep in her heart she knows that many of her arguments are just fabricated and that's when she switches on the insult mode. And that's when you realise her true selfish motivation behind all of that and it's disgusting.
If Men and women all treat each other and everybody with the same respect INDEPENDENT of their nationality, ethnicty or religion they are not racist even if they hurt the feelings of somebody of another "group" from time to time. And no that does not mean you are automatically a "bigot"
andrew was remarkbly aggressive and uncivil from the get go.
@@k03dz0n3 Lol... Imagine thinking that Andrew was aggressive and uncivil after watching this... You are full of Kool-aid aren't ya? lol.
@@natbarmore Why do so few people pay attention to the actual WORDS that were said? Its as if the words fade from your mind after hearing them speak, and all you hold onto is the emotions you had while listening.
Once she said the phrase "white supremacy" she muddied the waters too much for there to ever be a productive conversation after that. "white supremacy" is not a catch all term for any race based power structure, it has a very specific meaning to almost any normal person who hears it. "White Supremacy" is an ideology, that individuals hold.
What they were talking about was "systemic racism" which is a complex problem with many facets that is for the most part distinct in every way from the ideologies held by racist organizations like the KKK and neo nazis.
By using that phrase, anyone who doesn't understand leftist jargon is going to be thrown for a loop.
You'll note that after that, jon says he's going to clarify the language to get rid of any confusion. If he had then explained systemic racism, or explained what they meant in that specific context by "white supremacy" that would have been much better, and might have allowed for a productive conversation. Instead what he did was grand stand with a pearl clutching speech that literally had the phrase "how dare you!" in it.
You need to understand that its not just that andrew perceived what they are saying wrongly; but that by adopting the term "white supremacy" as an umbrella term, they SPOKE wrongly.
i'm going to translate from what lisa said to what right wing people are going to hear. This is always going to be the case, unless they share your terminology and its associations, which they wont.
2:50 "This system of white supremacy has done such a good job of teaching us as white people that racism is bad. And that if we are talking about racism, we are talking about your character flaw... and i know that im racist, because every single day i uphold the systems and structures of racism."
translation: "the cabal of uber racists has been teaching white people that being racist is bad. but its not bad. And I'm helping them do this because I'm racist. which is what makes me a good person because I recognize the fact that I cant be anything but racist"
The reason he gets upset at them calling it "white supremicy" is because as far as he, or any one else on the right is concerned, thats just a short way to say "because of people who literally want an ethnostate"
Why do you think he asks "show me these systems" and isn't satisfied with the answers? Its because he wants them to point out some evidence for the existence of this neo nazi conspiracy that hes hearing them talk about.
But because jon and the other lefty panelists assume from the start that andrew is stupid and racist, they never once entertain the idea that they are doing a terrible job of explaining anything about what they believe to him.
jon and lisa leave this debate thinking they super dunked on the bad guy, when they were actually failing miserably to do anything other than preach to the choir. and Andrew leaves the debate satisfied with his conception of the left as schizo conspiracy theorists with a moral high ground complex
In other words everyone who participated in this debate is now dumber for having participated in it.
They need to do this without pandering. This guy has a point of view that can be deconstructed but not if he’s treated like an ignorant villain.
100%
Yes, using racist in a derogatory fashion towards them only seems to cement their point. Jon had an oversight with the definitions of "racist" and "white-supremacy." To reduce all of American history to the lens of a white supremacy is incredibly dangerous and untrue.
Not saying these things didn't happen but to define our history on it and to say we are racist for participating in this system. Minorities participate too!
@@letsgetshwiftyy6780 doesn't cement their point at all because their point is a depthless opinion that is not based on fact, nor logical reality. Asking to explain racist systems again, after just having several pointed out to him; is beyond help. That's cognitive dissonance.
@Mint Mastering that's not what I meant, it cements his point in his mind.
@@letsgetshwiftyy6780 and then when we try to debate in good faith they keep moving the goal post or play the plausible deniability game.
You know the meme " it's only real systematic violence if it is from the tiny France region of oppresìò otherwise it is just sparkling racism."
How is that guy Andrew the " chieff editor" of ANYTHING!? lmao!
I am not American and I have no gain or loss in this debate but the amount of black kids that die in gang violence is insane to me.
How's that third season coming along? Yeah...
Point? Over your head I guess
Lisa: "We have to hold them accountable, but we also have to hold them with grace and compassion"
Said the same woman who insulted a man by calling him a racist and "shut him out" from the conversation by completely ignoring him.
Is this entire segment a parody?
She was engaging in a blatantly bigoted attitude and openly, clearly stated her organization doesn't "engage with white men", a specifically segregationist behavior.
Don't you know? It is ok to be a misandrist.
Could it be that John Stewart himself feels guilty? He must be a millionaire for like 30 years now. Maybe all his surroundings are rich, so he associates all whites with rich and all blacks with poor. He just can't conceptualize the majority of whites also struggle to get ahead. That's my explanation for the really, really weird level an otherwise very intelligent guy is reasoning on.
I have nothing but respect for Jon's previous charity work and the way he fought for the firefighters who were denied health care after working in New York on 9/11/2001. This segment clearly shows a woman who (if she were any other ethnicity) would be considered racist against whites in addition to being a sexist.
Jon, in the off chance you read this comment. I grew up watching your show. Before discovering you, I watched mainstream "news" channels which (as you know) is not good for the mind. Jon, I don't know if you realize this, but Lisa literally acts and sounds like a spoiled, privileged, angry, narcissist (aka a Karen), the very people they use as talking heads on the mainstream news outlets. Please don't become like them.
@@xiaomistijn4743 it's by design. The discourse around modern progressivism is DESIGNED to obfuscate issues of class. If Jon can blame all white people, then we're not blaming the rich. That's THE POINT.
I would love to hear more of what Chip has to say.
Ewwwwww
He has a great book that the Green party put on their reading list and I can't think of the name of it right now to save my life.
I agree, he was invited to be a different opinion but then he was cut off and insulted. Good way to make sure people that differ don't come on.
Andrew was the most logical fact based person there. Lisa knows her arguments are weak. That’s why she openly admitted she doesn’t even allow “whíte” men in her group.
@@GhostSal no..just no
I'm white and I refuse to be self-loathing and apologize for it. Sorry, not sorry.
John let the man talk !
"We need to have conversations" says the lady who doesn't speak to men.
She doesn't speak to men who refuse to listen because there is no point.
@@hopefulspectator6573 she said specifically that she doesn't allow people to speak based on their race or gender
@@hopefulspectator6573she never once said that lmaoooooo
@Jack black people have had 400 years to stop enslaving their own people and they can't lol
@@hopefulspectator6573 refuse to listen? You mean refuse to agree.
As soon as I saw who was on the panel, I knew exactly how this conversation was going to go.
Shame on Andrew for acknowledging redlining in one breath and then dismissing systemic racism in the next. Shame on Lisa for calling for a conversation immediately after dismissing white men's contribution to that conversation.
This should be the top comment.
Very based take.
Not one of them was arguing in good faith, it is a farce
This is a great summary of this video, bad faith argumenting from both sides and Jon honestly not doing the best job of remaining civil
Right? I wanted to hear more from chip frankly, both of those guys are part of the problem, they are perfect stereotypes which is absurdly fascinating.
@@Infernus25 I think he got a little caught up with Andrew and wasn’t able to manage the discussion cause of that focus but yes I agree that it was a failing
They don't believe it...because it doesn't happen to them...
Hey Jon, here's a question that l think is worth asking your panels: How has racism affected you in your life? Give a story.
Follow up question: Based on your experiences, would you freely switch places with any other so-called "race"? Why or why not?
Therein lies your answer to white supremacist systems and structures.
What like affirmative action? This country is anti white. You've got it all backwards
"Follow up question: Based on your experiences, would you freely switch places with any other so-called "race"? Why or why not?"
If I choose to switch race and become say, black, what kind of black family do I go into? Do I become Nigerian, Ethiopian, Somali, Jamacian, or African-American?
Flawed premise. Most people wouldn't swap races. As its part of their identity.
Black people are way more proud of their race than white people (Which logicaly means that they are less willing to swich race.). By your reasoning this would mean we are living under black supremacy.
The woman takes virtue signaling to a whole new level.
The woman lol... Smh.
@@philipwipernickle4780 the fattened ham wearing a dress
I can't wait to pay her to eat with her and explain how terrible I am.
Yea usually people like her, a disgrace that doesn't even respect herself or her own health, they find something to feel good about themselves
yet no comment about the guy on cam... why did at 16:02 he shake his head after Jon is spitting STRAIGHT FACTS?
This conversation felt like a caricature of how reactionaries describe activism: performative rather than substantive. These issues are extremely important and I think they were poorly represented by these particular voices. This devolved into a real dumpster fire.
Absolutely agree.💯
Well put, no notes.
Would be great if people talked about RACISM instead of privilege. It's every time they open their mouth. It's fine to acknowledge this country has a lot of reactionaries and bigots. Use normal language, just say shit like the Ahmed Arboury killing is proof lynchings still happen. Buh buh buh privilege this, privilege that, every time. We heard you!
They didn't say anything, yet these people clapped for what?
@@bf2068 I can only assume they were prompted to
We know racism exists bc Jon Stewart would NEVER live near a hood
Something is only racist if it’s not based in truth.
Jon would never live near ‘a hood’ because they’re dangerous eyesores. Not racist, that’s reality.
These people hate you and want to destroy your family.
The tv format of twenty minute segments for such conversations never helps. You need a lot of time to deconstruct why people think the way they do, with grace!
I would definitely enjoy hours of a conversation like this.
Not only that, but you need to get rid of the audience. The moment the laughs and jeers start, you begin performing for them.
Hence Joe Rogan
@@jakobmorningstar Nah.
@@Darke_Exelbirth so people want long for discussion but also don’t want it? Got it.
Should be titled "How not to have a conversation" This was terrible, I want my 20mins back.
Take that 20 minutes and write something about this topic. I did, got Lots of flack for it, but I don't give a rats ass what people think of me. I have a mind, and it works well...
@@jeffreyphillips4182 good thing is, when you get flack by both of your readers you dont need buy them presents for christmas.
This was fascinating to watch. It’s unfortunate that Andrew argued points that weren’t relevant and took the conversation in a unconstructive direction.
Its part of the Racists playbook
John Stewart started off with a Toni Morrison quote that it was "time for white people to talk". I feel like Toni Morrison would have been disappointed by a conversation that seemed to revolve around the need for white people to be aware of their privilege but short on solutions to improve the plight of black people.
I’m honestly so relieved that people are not agreeing with this bullshit
Which side are you on, Stewart or Andrew ?
Me too, I thought all the top comments would be agreeing with the panel.
I'm with Team Andrew on this one.
Me too. That's the one thing that lifted my spirits a little bit. Lol. This sh** gets me so heated. They never gave 1 fact. Not 1. Just emotional, broad statements.
AMEN TO THAT BROTHER
I can’t believe this is the same man who stood up for the 9/11 Fire Fighters.
You better believe it!!
Why even invite andrew if you wont let him finish a sentence?
he’s not wrong in saying (compared to many parts of the world) that America is tolerant and diverse…. that doesn’t mean that there isn’t more work to be done and that doesn’t mean we don’t still have problems.
But he didn't say "compared to some other places" he said it's the most tolerant nation in the history of the world.
Apparently forgetting all of europe exists... Minus eastern europe nd the balkan states. Most of europe is better than america on most issues of tolerance
"Name me one system"
Jon goes on to name one
"Okay but that's just one"
Then he names another. "Okay but that's just one." Like, no... we're on two now, learn to count. This was all after they listed off four or five of them.
Every time. And Jon didn't even get to the justice system or financial aid from the government or loans from banks or school funding etc. And Andrew knew there was an entire list of systems, it's why he kept interrupting.
You really believe that's it? You're the problem
Good point. It's at that comment where I would decide to end the conversation sadly because a person who gives me a response of "Okay but that's just one" is someone who doesn't want to learn, who doesn't want to find common ground and understanding with me. That's someone who wants to argue.
Andrew should be deported
I really appreciate the attempt here, Jon. But this discussion just wasn’t productive. This would be much better as a very long form talk (over an hour), without a live studio audience. There was a weird performative aspect to this discussion where managing the energy of the crowd seemed to override any genuine attempt to get to the root of why Andrew held these beliefs and to deconstruct them.
I think there is an important point to the audience being involved, though. Without the audience specifically reacting and identifying as a social group that some comments were wholly reprehensible it just becomes a talking-head discussion and becomes easier to dismiss.
Andrew wouldn't get to the root of what he was trying to say which was they wouldn't be in their situation if they were white. Every point he made was that it's the culture of the blacks to live in poverty, that they must overcome their heritage and rise up.
@@MinionNumber3 I don't see a live studio audience for Jon Stewart in NY / LA being particularly representative. Imagine they had this conversation in Arkansas in front of an Arkansas studio audience. I don't think the crowd reactions would have been the same as here.
@@MinionNumber3 Yeah, I see what you're saying. I just think the dynamic here with the audience was off point. I very much disagree with what Andrew was saying, but I also disagree with the manner in which he was responded to. He was basically mocked, laughed at, and then dismissed. What's the point of inviting him to this episode then? He wasn't really a part of the discussion, which is what this segment was trying to do (get white people to start discussing the problems of racism in our country and solutions moving forward). Surely Jon knew what his views were before this aired. Andrew's views are exactly the views held by a lot of white people in this country that need to be addressed and changed. This whole segment could have been great teaching/learning moment for his audience to see how to gracefully handle people in their lives that think this way and begin to steer them in the right direction. But the way Jon and the panel handled what he was saying will give you the opposite results of what we're trying to achieve. People that think like Andrew need to be engaged with and they need to realize on their own (through peaceful discussion and light shedding) that their beliefs don't align with reality. This can cause a change of thinking in their minds. The way he was treated here will only solidify the bigoted thoughts in his mind, and it will only cause others like him to harden themselves more and feel like they can't speak with others about this topic (which will cause more division and the opposite of progress).
@@budsak7771 Bwahahahahahaha.....and John kept pressing. ... "where did this culture originate from?" "what outside elements ESTABLISHED this "culture""??? Upon which Andrew (and many others in this comment section) would then "him and haw".
has it ever occured to these "immigrants" they have a better time in America because they're white? Italian immigrants and Europeans immigrant can integrate instantly on day one because they can pass for American, meanwhile some Asian Americans who's been living in US their whole lives gets yelled "go back to your country". your race is a HUGE factor on how people see you
10:18 Imagine the backlash if she had said that they don't engage with any other race. That's fucking ridiculous and I say that as someone who supports reparations.
Imagine supporting reparations....
such a pointless fucking argument. "if she said X about a non-white person" but she didnt. she said it about the most privileged skin color on the planet. the rules are different for us BY OUR OWN DESIGN
cant blame her. His opinion was very... well yeah.. dumb and no point
@@thurstonaxel8505 You do realize you are supporting racism and sexism here?
79,662 downvotes and counting, Leibowitz. Good times.
Growing up I experience a ton of racism from all sides. However some of my best friends who stuck their necks out and defended me were white. There is no way I could blame all white people for something because that feels like it would be disrespectful to all the people who never judged me by my skin color.
I realize racism is a very real thing, but to say all white people/white men are to blame seems... unproductive. Where does that get us? Pitting everyday struggling white people against everyday struggling black people, when we have a huge class divide just seems sad. It feels like a distraction... from the fact that the entire lower/middle class is being more screwed over by the govt all the time. Like I just think, ... can we start with raising the minimum wage? Im a white person but, I'm always interested in hearing what black people have to say.
crazy to think that not everyone is racist huh?
There's a difference between individual racism and systemic
@@joelopez7459 I have heard stories from my parents who did not speak good English of how things were bad when they were kids. Because of that they only spoke English around me and my sister. We had some difficulties growing up with Teachers and Principals, but by Highschool most systemic stuff was gone.
@@Krristopher By highschool systemic stuff is gone? That's not how systems and structures work, systems determine how our society is organized, they don't disappear they always exist. Everything from how corporations is set up to how we speak is in turn a result of systems, from laws and institutions to culture and norms.
An observation:
How come the topic of institutional racism seems to only focus on black Americans?
How come the topic of oppressors only seems to focus on white Americans?
Appreciate the attempt to have the conversation. Hopefully it can bring about change at some point
Andrew is the perfect example of the problem with racism today.
Exactly
andrew didnt even get to say anything what the fuck are you talking about
No he is the only reasonable person in the room.
@@PotatoSlices no, he's the poster child for white fragility. BTW, pointing out the decline in marriage rates in no way proves his point.
@@PotatoSlices thus says mote about you than anything else
This feels like a failed attempt at a struggle session.
Yes, CRT has Marxist origins.
Struggle sessions only work if the victim has been adequately subjugated.
@@jutsu1 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
@@jutsu1 which is meant to be..bad?
@@spencerharmon4669 it's only bad if it wants to make effective and positive changes to society.
As a homeless white person of 32 years of age from the projects. I understand people get set up poorly. My question is what action can take place to equal the playing field while also being merit based besides just talking about it? It's complex. Some people are not racist and never have been should they be responsible for fixing it? It's the government that needs a solution and they're to corrupt to care. It seems they don't care about most people. How can a middle class or lower class family actually get enough resources to help.
The powers that be that really run this country are racist, singularly you can only be prejudiced because you have no power by yourself unless you own a corporation, so your statement is incorrect because it’s impossible for you to be racist, If you have prejudice ways, you can contribute to the racism in this country through your votes which effects a system that can be oppressive and disenfranchises another race such as police departments, sheriff departments ,state governments. Etc. etc..
The problem with racism in this country it also disenfranchises the poor and some of those people are not black . This is where you get into voting and doing things that cut off your nose to spite your own face.
What a shameful episode for Jon Stewart. Lost respect for him. Andrew makes valid points backed up by data and statistics well documented by people like Thomas Sowell. Gets ganged up on by the panel because he doesn't have a PHD-level command of the facts for a talk he was invited to at the last minute. Obviously there is more work to be done but considering our racial diversity, the U.S. is currently one of the least racist countries in the history of the world. Slavery was the rule not the exception for most of history (e.g. condoned by Christianity and Islam!), Britain then America were the first in history to abolish it. Let's not forget that while we're flogging ourselves for how awful we are as a country. And this self-congratulatory lady: "we don't even engage with white men..." Assuming something negative about a group of people based on their gender and skin color. Totally not racist or sexist.
Dude don't throw Thomas Sowell's name around like he means anything, Andrew here is an example of white privilege, he doesn't think there's racism because he's chosen to be blind to it. I don't experience Asian or Jew hate cause I'm neither of those however I know it exists as I see it and hear it. Stop b!thing about Jon Stewart talking about hard issues, kid you don't get upset just cause you don't like what someone has said, do me favour and stop reading Thomas Sowell, go and do proper research.
This lady’s sassy comebacks don’t really help with difficult conversations like this. If there’s a stupid point raised we should be able to easily respond to it instead of doing a response for claps and cheers.
It reminds me of the petty banter for audience jeering from old Bill Maher clips. Some elements of the showmanship must go if a productive conversation is the goal.
She said That's why we don't even engage white men in the conversation. Then why was she invited to this talk? You can't talk about inclusion when you are celebrating excluding an entire gender or sex or race of people.
I don't really like the line that all white people are complicit in these systems. That's bullshit, and I'm Asian - honestly I know i am complicit too. Literally almost every single American is complicit to some degree. The issue is indeed that, a matter of degrees. A rich black person can be far more complicit in the system, in this day and age, than a poor white person.
Framing this as: "all white people are complicit" erases the complicity of everyone else, and makes it a conversation about blame instead of constructive. It's not just white people who perpetuate racist system, just like it's not just men who perpetuate patriarchy. Everyone is complicit. That's what a System IS!!
The antagonistic framing of "every white person is complicit" is just really bad rhetoric imo. At best, it's a lie by omission by erasing everyone else's role in upholding these systems. It doesn't even make sense to assign this to any racial category, per se. Because whether you uphold or attack the system isn't about your race. It's about your actions, your political values. Anti-racist attitudes are not exclusively for black people, and racist attitudes aren't exclusively white - this is patently obvious. Complicit suggests not only blame and that you greatly benefitted but that you are upholding the system. All are reductionist. A white McDonald's worker can recognize how they might have benefitted from the system (however minimally), and that they should NOT uphold this system. White people can be harmed by racial hierarchy, and black people can be helped by it - i.e. Many wealthy (black) people likely earned some significant portion from that racial hierarchy and exploitation. They are complicit too.
Fully agreed. She had some good points, but the manner in which she advocates is bad and denoted bad processes.
Absolutely. The guy on the video call was definitely out to lunch, but good grief -- let the man talk, and then respond with a counter-argument, not a slap in the face. How are you going to change minds like that?
You want to devastate someone? Show them their ignorance.
As an admirer of Jon Stewart, this has to be the worst I've ever seen him run a debate. He lost his credibility when he lost his neutrality. Which is pretty most at the outset. He first lets a very sanctimonious white woman blame white males for bearing the brunt of the racism facing blacks, for over four hundred years no less, not wanting to talk to another white male (oh no!) - and then crucifies Sullivan for having the audacity to say that the lack of a structured Black family life factors into this (of course it does). Be that as it may, Sullivan could have done himself a favour by saying that Barack Obama said the very same thing in 2008.
there is no neutrality to be! the British guy is talking about surface level problems that hinder the black community but he will not acknowledge the root cause of those problems
Thanks really well said!
@@veronicakormendy4642 really you too? Don't you ppl acknowledge the root cause of a problem?? you rather just hear "oh its their culture"
@@alexusbratva878 I seems unproductive to keep rehashing the root causes of a problem when we have eliminated that cause. For example, we no longer have state sanctioned slavery; instead we have had affirmative action for 50 years. Andrew did not blame black people for the lack of family stability, he stated it as a fact, not a moral judgement. It was Jon that took it that direction which reflects poorly on him. Blaming people and looking to the past does not solve problems. Andrew named better education and child care as things that could help and I agree.
@@MsReasonableperson _it seems unproductive to keep rehashing the root causes of a problem when we have eliminated that cause_ ??!! WTF you have got to be kidding me. racial/social economic Gerrymandering, there been studies if the applicants name on a resume' is ethnic sounding they dont get hired, there is the school to prison pipeline problem ...Like Jon said you guys are living in a different reality.
I'm leaning left and agree on some points that institutional racism exists.. But WHY do you call someone with opposing view only to either laugh at them, or constantly cut them off mid sentence..? If you treat opposition this way, are you honestly surprised why they are unwilling to have an open mind.. Usually John has some REALLY good points, especially when he confronts Republican politicians.. but on this particular issue it seems that he called the guy ONLY to make fun, whilst the overweight lady was putting EVERYONE in same brackets.. not the best work from John I'm afraid..
Thank you for finally exposing Andrew Sullivan. I’ve been saying this about him for years and the fact that some JUST figured this out IS the problem. Thanks Jon Stewart.
You live your entire life enviously seething over White excellence.
“What systems?” “You know, how it used to be 60 years ago?” “But what about now?” “But 100 years ago it was bad.”
Right! Those “systems” don’t exist anymore. This SJWs need to STFU! They are doing a ton of damage to our culture.
But the point is that there are effects and consequences of things that happened 60 years ago. You can't just say "well that was the past and this is now" and refuse to recognize that the current systems are still built on the systems of the past.
A good example that Jon tried to bring up is the example of redlining. Yes, we no longer do that. But that still means a massive discrepancy in rates of homeownership based on the fact that some people's parents got to have houses that they then passed on to their kids, and others didn't. This discrepancy is a direct result of that original racist system. So if we have, as we do, a system of taxation that prioritizes homeownership over renting through things like the mortgage-interest deduction, then we are continuing to perpetuate the same inequality that was created by the original very clearly racist system of redlining.
There’s a little merit to your argument. However, over reasonable time, you must stop looking for excuses for why you made poor decisions in life. School is free, you can easily get a loan for college. Stop acting like you can’t succeed in life because you weren’t given something for free. That’s a discredit to all the hard working people of all races that also didn’t get free hand outs, but made good decisions that have enabled themselves to have opportunities to buy a house etc. The victim mentality is poison that does nothing to move yourself forward.
@@Snooder Okay, so why can't you take out a loan now to buy a house?
@@elliott2922 This, this right here? This defensive refusal to actually think or engage with the truth? This is the problem Jon is highlighting.
Did you actually read what I wrote? All of it? Because I don't see any acknowledgement or recognition of the point being made about some people having houses that they inherited from their parents.
That's a "free handout". Not everyone got that. And a lot of the reason why not everyone got that is specifically and explicitly due to racism. Not "personal choice" not "good decision". Some dude in 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, or 1970s said "we don't let black people buy houses" and now the children and grandchildren of those people who were denied houses don't get to inherit that store of personal wealth. If you want to engage in a fruitful conversation, you need to acknowledge that and start from that truth.
Your refusal to acknowledge that self-evident truth is a problem that you need to reconcile with.
I didn't know Jon Stewart could do such a good Bill O'Reilly impression; I could almost see the derisiveness radiating from him.
@Justin Holmes
He’s actually trying to prevent the country from becoming Bill O’Reilly.
Fo real tho! So disappointing and frustrating
Bill O'Reilly always had far more integrity. You just believed second hand bullshit about him.
That tends to happen when the people you're talking to are full of shit and arguing dishonestly.
Just because something is a problem because of past misconduct doesn't mean it's wrong to point out it's a problem. Who is defensive here? Yeah, they don't take care of the kids, but it's not their fault! Okay, but don't we need to fix it anyway? Which is all Andrew said.
When you know better, you do better. Talking is great👍🏾
This is effectively the “original sin” argument applied to racism in a way. born innocent/born evil, born oppressed, born oppressor…
The "original sin" argument is better because its more universal, more abstract, and doesn't breed antagonism between groups of people. Unrelated but thats also why sin is a better version of the concept of toxic masculinity.
It's a socialist concept: having a binary of an oppressor and oppressed. It's moronic, gives people a false justification to be lazy, steal, hurt/kill people all because it's the oppressors fault. Take responsibility for your life, gain knowledge + hard work = prosperity
Well that's because progressivism is secular religion and this is their established dogma
@@RA-ie3ss And original sin can be washed away, according to Christians who believe in it. This "racism as original sin" is a stain on everyone from a specific group that can never be cleansed from their souls.
@@EL-Nope and racism, couched in fundamentalist religion, is your established dogma.
"racist dog whistle tropes" That's not a real person engaging in a good-faith conversation. That's an ideologue reading from a script.
Yes I agree Andrew only had dog whistle racist tropes to offer.
These people can't name one problem post 1970. That's why they won't engage in good faith with anyone, because their worldview boils down to one where good things like hard work, financial planing, and meritocracy are all associated with white people and antithetical to blackness. They are the most racist people on the planet. Pure filth.
@@phatpat63 the logic you took to come to that conclusion is the same steps that take someone to blaming blacks for not picking themselves up by there boot straps and then entrentching themselves on that viewpoint.
“Black culture” is a racist dog whistle. She called it what it is.
@@larymcfart4034 nonsense
I see people kept saying Andrew shouldn't have been here and he didn't belong in the conversation. That sounds like so many of you didn't want a conversation, but an echo chamber. I mostly agree with Jon, but if you want a real conversation you need people with differing views, not people that already agree.
Now let's have the same conversation about indigenous people please!
It bothers me that they didn’t include any Black conservative voices or Republican voting/leaning Black immigrant perspectives.
You might not like it, but they are a part of this conversation too.
Black conservatives don't fit the white supremacy narrative pushed by the left. They don't exist as far as democrats are concerned. It reminds me of when MSNBC deliberately cropped out the face and hands of a black Tea Partier so they could have a panel convo on white gun violence.
as an immigrant who grew up with black families in the ghetto I can assure you that they hang on to family values more than you think it just becomes increasing harder and harder to do that when the culture around them de-incentivizes them to do so and the government makes it harder instead of easier to maintain that kind of unit
@@Embarrassed4U every culture in america is toxic because they refuse to talk to each other properly this is the main thing we need to fix in this country
What culture would that be?!?!? First of all, MOST Black people do NOT live in the Ghetto! Most Black people are either classified as middle or upper class even though there is a large wealth disparity between Black and White do to ALL of the unearned wealth that White people stole! Black people overall have conservative values and the crime rate overall in the Black Community is almost non-existent! So, what are you guys talking about?!?!
Well said… you should be on the next panel 😂♥️
@@Embarrassed4U You are right.... the American culture!!!
@@Embarrassed4U our culture is the American culture. We are the children of slaves who were brought here. Any culture we learned is directly from those who captured our labor commoditized our bodies for their profit.
John does a really great job of pinning down Andrew's argument at the end there. It's easy for a guy like him to talk in circles without coming to terms with the weight of what he's really saying.
I am having trouble watching this. This guy is so upsetting. Thanks for Jon and this lady! She killed it!!
White Fragility is a hell of a drug
It upset you that a man defended himself from the accusation of racism simply for being white?
Jon always talks about how bad Tucker Carlson is for American media, and yet here he is doing his best Tucker Carlson impression. I wouldn't be surprised if he walked out wearing a bowtie on the next episode of "The Problem With Jon Carlson". You owe your fans an apology for this one, Jon. Be better.
What he do?
@@AdrianMendoza23 He straw mans all the time. He uses videos out of context for "shock" and "humor" value (hasn't changed since The Daily Show). He and his woke guests bloviate and preen for applause and collect their money and think they're doing blacks a service. I'm sure most blacks want to be left the hell alone and cringe at their BS
@@billr55 I loved the Daily Show when he was the guest. Anytime someone uses "woke" in an argument I usually ignore them. I'm black people want to be left alone, but so many of them seem to be harassed by cops or by Karen's or Ken's.
@@billr55 Thanks for your opinion on 'The Blacks' but you have no idea what you are talking about. Come watch some of our videos and learn something.
@@billr55 I like how you use "woke" and "blacks". Totally not a giveaway.
As someone who is a second generation immigrant from England, that guy pissed me off. We should not use those terms in any meaningful way because we don't have the associated difficulties that immigrants from non white/western European countries have. That guy can go around calling himself an immigrant all he wants but it doesn't mean anything when the biggest challenge for him was filling out the visa paperwork and having women tell him his accent is sexy.
"I'm an immigrant", yeah, you're a white immigrant from one country built on white supremacy to another country built on white supremacy, big surprise that you think there's no such thing as systemic racism
I thought it was perfect. More often than not, this is how a conversation will go. The key to its success is the moderator and their ability to diagnose and steer the conversation. Noting that they cannot "control" the conversation once it has begun, but "steer" it in a direction. Jon did a wonderful job and as someone who has moderated panel discussions on transgender experiences and HIV awareness I commend him.
Heaven forbid a topic go "off narrative" amirite?
Lisa made me roll my eyes constantly, but Andrew just pissed me off
It’s hard to watch Lisa actually say the words “I’m shutting you down” after all the conversations Jon has had with others advocating for engagement. The live audience really did not help, but I do hope that the team makes an effort to have more convos like this. Rotate the panelists, give time for rebuttals and keep the conversations happening. Any person who genuinely wants to make progress must know these talks can’t just happen once.
A.S. was being deliberately obtuse to the point of being annoying but that was pretty 3rd grade...
@@Esquarious I don't think anyone would have been able to relate their point of view with this set up: Interrupting speaker, deriding speaker, applause after John's statement not even listening to his point of view.
Instead of making his points void, they were shouting him down... which is very unfortunate.
@@Custo911 I mean he still hit his talking points as I see them which were 1) disagreeing on the assertion of a 'white supremacy' and 2) some increasingly vague notions about cultural norms and the black family. If I wanted to be super generous to A.S. I might believe his point was actually something like "these are historical examples that I deem largely irrelevant to the modern discussion," and then maybe they could've talked about generational inheritance and inequalities in today's justice system, but mans just listened to five minutes worth of examples and suddenly develops selective dementia.
Still, you're right about the format. Bound to be a shit-show. And Dinner Lady somehow still ends up being the most explicitly racist person there, albeit in an ineffectual petty af way.
The one other guy did slip in a really good point about how the immigrant and the black experience were really false equivalencies.
@@Esquarious all of those points are ok only for people who completely agree with John. If you are even remotely uncertain, this looked like a hit piece.
@@Custo911 I mean...Its the same format as a million other shows. Pretty much every panel show in existance.