7 Comments

Thank you for the conversation.

It's critical to understand that identity politics has been a blessing for corporate America (I recently retired from one of the world's most powerful banks). What identity politics does is to permit companies to launder reputation with a system of belief, ie identity politics, that in no way threatens business model. In that respect, Occupy Wall Street is the opposite of identity politics.

Put differently, identity politics provides a mask that allows class to obscure itself.

Dr. Mounk, I am not sure how you choose guest, but I will be intrepid and request that you consider the writers of these 2 great articles:

Tom Mackaman who recently wrote this stunning essay which is a rebuttal to historian Woody Holton article in the Washington Post:

"Historian Woody Holton launches 1619 Project-inspired attack on the American Revolution"

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/09/17/holt-s17.html

Also, Princeton historian Sean Wilentz who a few months ago wrote this:

"The 1619 Project and Living in Truth"

https://www.opera-historica.com/pdfs/oph/2021/01/05.pdf

Expand full comment

There is a problem with the statement that " the racial wealth gap owes itself largely to differences in the top 10%, and really the top 5% and 1%);." This conclusion is the result of a comparison of mean wealth and gives the extreme wealth a disproportionate impact. A more accurate depiction of the racial wealth gap is based on the medium wealth where the difference is very large. Another good measure of the racial wealth gap is the difference in the wealth tied up in home ownership. Again this is very large gap.

Expand full comment

Another excellent podcast, but I found the second half more accurate and more enlightening. In the transcript, start with: "Now, where I think the mistake is ..."

Expand full comment

“ When you say it's gone into “trolling” mode today, I take it you mean things like Dinesh D'Souza pointing out that it was actually the Democrats in the 19th century who defended slavery and Republicans who attacked it.”

Oh look, more Democrats trying to downplay the Democratic Party’s primary role in slavery and racial terrorism during a time(now) when the Democratic Party is using the history of slavery and racism to gaslight the American public into accepting its politics. How about you mention the obvious “trolling” of the Democratic Party’s official claim on their website that they have been fighting for civil rights for 200 years?

I suggest people read my nuanced examination of the Democratic Party and its loyalist’s current grotesque manipulation of history. This discussion with Mounk is just one more example of it.

https://minorityreport.substack.com/p/accepting-the-obvious

I voted for Democrats most my life, and canvassed for months for Obama. I have not voted Republican for a presidential election once. I recently voted for Kevin Paffrath for Governor to replace Newsom. Any Democrat who wants to be “anti racist” today needs to stop downplaying the Democratic Party’s past connection to slavery and racial terrorism. The Democratic Party needs to redeem itself moreso than “America” does with regard to slavery and racism. Acting like the last “20 to 40 years” is the most important time when the Democratic Party constantly, ad nauseum, invokes the history of racism in this country — - and the past 20 to 40 years have been the greatest period of opportunity for “black” people, including myself, in the history of the world in the US and other economically flourishing countries, is absurd political sectarianism.

Expand full comment

Excellent discussion.

Expand full comment