oh damn
Dr. Tommy Curry - Failure of Black Studies and Intersectionality
- Thread starter AlainLocke
- Start date
see, I can enjoy this as a hobby...but I can't get a degree in this shyt 
ColdCutKing
Pro
Never heard of this dude but what I listened to so far has been on point nice drop going to listen later.
Kinda old, but I see why they dont invite Dr.Curry to panels.
breh too thorough.
Had to try and interrupt when that ether was coming.
He destroyed Ikard so throughly and completely the man had nothing to say. nikka started trying to change the subject.
The host and Ikard had an agenda to push and he didn't take their bait and responded with fact repeatedly, and they couldn't recover.
DrBanneker
Space is the Place
I read Losing the Race and some of McWhorter's other stuff when it first came out in the late 90s and early 2000s. He is a smart guy and I am happy he has outside knowledge (linguistics) besides just talking race issues so he isn't a one trick pony. Some parts of the book I strongly disagreed with though. I guess in order of agreement I would say the anti-intellectualism, victimization, separatism themes.
Talking about the need to enhance intellectual achievement in our community is pretty vital and there are unfortunately a lot of trends (not cool to be smart, smart people being teased, overemphasis on sports) that need to be brought out and tackled. For that reason alone this book needed to be written. As I read and re-read it though, I was disappointed in how anecdotal his book was.
He puts all the blame for these trends on Blacks not wanting to 'Act White' (which ties into his later separatist theme). I mean some kids are probably teased like that but basing a sociological conclusion that sweeping on a simplification of oppositional identity? It pretty much blames anti-intellectualism on Black people not trying 'hard enough' and not being compliant enough to integrate.
He talks about how his Black students in his class didn't put as much effort in. Ok, that's not good but to turn that into a narrative of all Blacks and their achievement is a bit specious. He makes it sound like without a few exceptions, regardless of class, Blacks don't have academic priorities where I would say it is heavily stratified with some doing real well. Again though, I wouldn't have cared much about this without the rest of the book.
My biggest disappointment was him taking the popular and shortsighted view that reduces Blacks interactions in politics and society to victimization (we complain and feel like victims) and our supposed separatism (Blacks are separating themselves from the mainstream; not the other way around). It is pretty much the standard conservative talking point to dismiss Black petitions and complaints and that he elevates it into some kind of grand theory about how the Black masses operate--to the extent he condones racial profiling and says he feels no sense of accomplishment (a professor at Berkeley at the time!) because of affirmative action--I was like, ok dude.
After Losing the Race came out, McWhorter became a celebrity amongst conservatives and left Berkeley for the Manhattan Institute in NYC. For those who don't know, this is the group that sheltered Charles Murray while he and Richard Hernstein wrote The Bell Curve and that is the staunchest defender of Stop & Frisk and every other draconian NYPD policy. His rhetoric also tilted to the whole Black cultural pathology is the source of all our ills. His next book Winning the Race was pretty much a defense of the cultural reasons for all of Blacks problems saying economics (de-industrialization, loss of jobs in the inner city, etc.) can't be a main driver since Indianapolis has a Black underclass and wasn't as deindustrialized as other cities. The 'winning' suggestions included stop being victims and get a new Black leadership. Kind of a let down from the kind of analysis I hoped was going to be a follow up to Losing the Race. I could have turned on Fox to get those suggestions.
I think it is kind of sad since he could have been an independent voice charting a new independent agenda for some part of Black scholarship. Instead he works with think tanks and all that like all the other ivory tower partisans on the Left and Right. Now (I think he is an editor at the New Republic) he seems to have fallen in the same book/op-ed cycle of most talking heads, right or left.
Scott Larock
Its hard leaving thecoli but I gotta find a way...
Im trying to learn the extremely intellectual words that Dr. Tommy Curry use, I have to stop and go back and google the words I don't understand the meaning behind.
Smh, I'm not giving up.
I love this brother man, I listen to all his stuff, don't even watch tv at all.
Smh, I'm not giving up.
I love this brother man, I listen to all his stuff, don't even watch tv at all.
Is Black Male Privilege A Real Issue in Our Community? - Atlanta Black Star
Posting from phone, so I'm not gonna copy paste article.
Posting from phone, so I'm not gonna copy paste article.
I got mine a few days ago. I won't have time to start reading for a while unfortunately.
Who is the boy in the image on the front cover?
EDIT: Answered my own question. George Stinney Jr. at 14 years old.
Last edited:
I've read McWhorter from a linguistics stance first and when I read Losing the Race I delated it.I read Losing the Race and some of McWhorter's other stuff when it first came out in the late 90s and early 2000s. He is a smart guy and I am happy he has outside knowledge (linguistics) besides just talking race issues so he isn't a one trick pony. Some parts of the book I strongly disagreed with though. I guess in order of agreement I would say the anti-intellectualism, victimization, separatism themes.
Talking about the need to enhance intellectual achievement in our community is pretty vital and there are unfortunately a lot of trends (not cool to be smart, smart people being teased, overemphasis on sports) that need to be brought out and tackled. For that reason alone this book needed to be written. As I read and re-read it though, I was disappointed in how anecdotal his book was.
He puts all the blame for these trends on Blacks not wanting to 'Act White' (which ties into his later separatist theme). I mean some kids are probably teased like that but basing a sociological conclusion that sweeping on a simplification of oppositional identity? It pretty much blames anti-intellectualism on Black people not trying 'hard enough' and not being compliant enough to integrate.
He talks about how his Black students in his class didn't put as much effort in. Ok, that's not good but to turn that into a narrative of all Blacks and their achievement is a bit specious. He makes it sound like without a few exceptions, regardless of class, Blacks don't have academic priorities where I would say it is heavily stratified with some doing real well. Again though, I wouldn't have cared much about this without the rest of the book.
My biggest disappointment was him taking the popular and shortsighted view that reduces Blacks interactions in politics and society to victimization (we complain and feel like victims) and our supposed separatism (Blacks are separating themselves from the mainstream; not the other way around). It is pretty much the standard conservative talking point to dismiss Black petitions and complaints and that he elevates it into some kind of grand theory about how the Black masses operate--to the extent he condones racial profiling and says he feels no sense of accomplishment (a professor at Berkeley at the time!) because of affirmative action--I was like, ok dude.
After Losing the Race came out, McWhorter became a celebrity amongst conservatives and left Berkeley for the Manhattan Institute in NYC. For those who don't know, this is the group that sheltered Charles Murray while he and Richard Hernstein wrote The Bell Curve and that is the staunchest defender of Stop & Frisk and every other draconian NYPD policy. His rhetoric also tilted to the whole Black cultural pathology is the source of all our ills. His next book Winning the Race was pretty much a defense of the cultural reasons for all of Blacks problems saying economics (de-industrialization, loss of jobs in the inner city, etc.) can't be a main driver since Indianapolis has a Black underclass and wasn't as deindustrialized as other cities. The 'winning' suggestions included stop being victims and get a new Black leadership. Kind of a let down from the kind of analysis I hoped was going to be a follow up to Losing the Race. I could have turned on Fox to get those suggestions.
I think it is kind of sad since he could have been an independent voice charting a new independent agenda for some part of Black scholarship. Instead he works with think tanks and all that like all the other ivory tower partisans on the Left and Right. Now (I think he is an editor at the New Republic) he seems to have fallen in the same book/op-ed cycle of most talking heads, right or left.
He is so far out of his wheel house educationally speaking, that it was a waste of time and nothing but a parroting of white supremacist black pathology.
Like I say, these liberal c00ns are just as bad as the conservative ones.
Yo....The Chronicle did a huge article on dude:
