-
Why Is IPAB M.I.A.?
April 29, 2013 | 19 comments
-
Sowell, Race Hustlers, and David Hume
March 29, 2013 | 8 comments
-
Thomas Sowell and the Intellectuals
March 28, 2013 | 9 comments
-
Thomas Sowell Live, Part II
April 16, 2012 | 20 comments
-
Snooki on Shore Leave
March 6, 2012 | 32 comments
TAS Live
Thomas Sowell Live
An interview with the Hoover Institution’s great economist.
The economist Thomas Sowell has just released the second edition of his book Intellectuals and Society. The American Spectator sat down with him recently for a lengthy interview. In this first part of the interview, we discuss the impact intellectuals have on society, why the second edition contains chapters on race while the first edition did not, and how intellectuals affect the issue of race.
AmSpec: How do you define an intellectual?
Sowell: An intellectual is someone whose end product is ideas. Not everybody who produces an idea is an intellectual because there are many intellectually demanding ideas that end up as products or services such as brain surgery or computer operating systems, etc. But those kinds of things differ in the sense in that there is an external test of the validity of the ideas, other than the approval of one’s peers. For deconstructionists, the only test is whether other deconstructionists like what he is saying. But for a financial wizard, he may be held in awe by his contemporaries and yet if he goes broke his ideas are regarded as failures. Consider that between the two World Wars, intellectuals promoted pacifism to the point they impeded the military build up of any military deterrents against Hitler or Japan, and yet men paid with their lives in the beginning of the war especially because Britain and America had far inferior military equipment. Men died needlessly but no one ever held them accountable for what they said.
AmSpec: How does that affect the incentives and constraints that intellectuals face?
Sowell: The crucial thing is there is virtually no external constraint on what the intellectuals do. They may believe in anything, say anything, and the consequences don’t matter. One of the books that people no longer know much about but was very influential at the time, was a 1916 bestseller called The Passing of the Great Race by Madison Grant. It was really a shallow book by a dilettante. But it was bestseller, it got translated into several languages including German, and Hitler called it his bible. And six million people were murdered on the strength of that. Madison Grant died before that happened, but had he lived I doubt he would have had to pay the price of unpopularity.
AmSpec: What is the “Vision of the Anointed?”
Sowell: It is the idea that third parties should preempt the decisions of ordinary people. Especially when those third parties are intellectuals or are operating on the prevailing ideas promoted by intellectuals
AmSpec: Obviously this affects the issue of race. But why did the first edition of Intellectuals and Society not have any sections on race, and why did you add them into the second edition?
Sowell: Very simple. I learned from the history of the book The Bell Curve. It was not a book about race. There were only two chapters on race and intelligence out of twenty-two chapters. Yet when the book was published, those two chapters became the tail that wagged the dog. And the whole major thrust of the book was lost in all the controversy and hysteria over those two chapters. So I decided that if the message I was trying to get out in Intellectuals and Society was to have any chance of being examined it would be by leaving out any chapters on race.
AmSpec: Have you gotten any critical feedback on including the chapters on race this time?
Sowell: No. And I would say more generally I seldom get any critical feedback on my writings on race, and the reason is the people who run the civil rights movements and “black leaders” and so on, they’re following what is their best strategy which is to ignore what I say and even if it gets a certain amount of attention just wait until that blows over and then resume saying what they’ve always said.
AmSpec: If they’re not out there stirring up trouble, the money stops coming in.
Sowell: I should have included a section on race as an industry. It’s really poisonous. I’ve recently been reading some writings by the late Derrick Bell, who has been in the news lately. I remember talking to Derrick Bell years and years ago when he was just a civil rights lawyer saying sensible things about civil rights. And to read his later writings you realize how he degenerated into a totally irresponsible charlatan. I attribute that to the fact that he was put into situations where he had nothing to gain by playing it straight. Whatever significance he might have would come from his ability to stir thing up and to appeal to a racial constituency on and off campus.
AmSpec: Could you give a general overview of how intellectuals impact the issue of race?
Sowell: Intellectuals can predetermine the whole position on race. One of the peculiar things of the 20th century is that for the first two decades, intellectuals, by which I mean primarily progressive intellectuals, were the biggest promoters of racism in the country. The seized upon evidence that was emerging from IQ tests, studies of difference in crime rates and rates of advancing and not advancing in the schools and so on, in order to argue that there were superior and inferior races, that they were genetically predetermined. And they were pushing very hard for a ban on or severe restrictions on immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe that actually became law in the 1920s. They were also for eugenics, with any number of them calling for the sterilization of people. Our only president with a PhD, Woodrow Wilson, was right in the middle of all that. People who are admirers of Wilson try to portray this as an odd aberration of his, but by no means was it. He was absolutely in the mainstream of progressive thought at the time. He became president. There were government agencies that were unsegregated. He segregated them. When the movie Birth of a Nation, glorifying the Ku Klux Klan, came out, he had it played privately at the White House, and he invited political dignitaries to come and watch it with him.
About the Author
David Hogberg is a senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research. Follow him on Twitter.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (77) | Leave a comment
More Articles by David Hogberg
More Articles From TAS Live
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/04/13/thomas-sowell-live
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
spike59| 4.13.12 @ 7:22AM
Sowell is an intellectual giant; and the Left HATES him for it
Pelleas| 4.13.12 @ 6:26PM
"An intellectual giant...."
Based on WHAT--EXACTLY..?
... just because he brought up, for the up-teenth time, as is the wont of a number of posters on this site who seem to love to do, ad-nauseum, that Woodrow Wilson had a screening of "Birth of a Nation" at t he White House ?( with the lame intent, on Sowell's part, to try and paint the CURRENT Democratic Party as "racist"?)
I have sat in on a number of Sowell's long-winded "lectures"...and those in the audience who weren't snickering... were...snoring...
I actually crave some real intellectual meat to chew on, from opposing positions.. but I gotta confess... I have never found it coming from this particular "gent"
..just my opinion..I would LOVE to have someone show some me intellectual "brilliance" they find ,coming from this quarter...
Quartermaster| 4.13.12 @ 7:17PM
Te only people that would be snickering would those who are mental midgets. Those that are snoring are like people dying of thirst in desert next to a well.
Sowell and Walter Williams are intellectual giants. There works demonstrate it beyond question. That you would accuse the man of being a lesser being as you yourself are because he mentions Wilson enpassant says much about what you are and none of it is good.
Pelleas| 4.13.12 @ 8:15PM
What is up with the personal insults??
I asked a valid..albeit pointed (I fully admit) question .. and was hoping for a legitimate answer..
..Too much to ask for...??
Pelleas| 4.13.12 @ 8:36PM
...AND....
EXACTLY WHICH "Government Agencies" were "un-segregated", when Wilson was President..?...in a Washington
DC which was a real southern City, at t he turn of the 2oth Century?
tankrtrash| 4.13.12 @ 10:53PM
One was the United States Army....Numbnuts
Pelleas| 4.14.12 @ 7:58AM
Sorry...
Between The War of 1812, and President Harry S. Truman's order to desegregate the Military, all fighting forces in this Country WERE SEGREGATED
My nuts might be numb,,,BUT not my brain...!
tankrtrash| 4.14.12 @ 9:42AM
http://www.academia.org/progressive-segregation/
Pelleas| 4.14.12 @ 9:57AM
I have no real desire to come to Woodrow Wilson's defense..other then to state that his attitudes were part and parcel of those of the ruling White Class, regardless of Party affinity, in the early part of Twentieth Century
Can you show me a Republician who felt differently, on matters of race, AT THAT TIME?
The Military was ALREADY SEGREGATED when WWI broke out... While it might have been a noble act for Wilson to break the color -bar at that time, he was only acting on well-established precedents..HE WAS NOT the President who put those nefarious policies into place, however..
As I mentioned.. The War of 1812 was the LAST time black and white forces fought in intergrated unity, until Truman's order in the late '40's....
Pelleas| 4.14.12 @ 10:08AM
It is VERY TELLING, that the article that tankrtrash links to , refers to The American Civil War of 1861-65 as "The War Between the States"-- which, in my NOT so humble opinion, shows where that author's head is at...nu?
tankrtrash| 4.14.12 @ 10:38AM
The site is Accuracy in Academia, and where, pray tell is the author's head? Was it not a war of secession? Lincoln's (a republican) Emancipation Proclamation didn't happen until 1863.
Pelleas| 4.14.12 @ 10:51AM
It was... a CIVIL WAR--
The (mainly used by Southern supporters of The Confederacy) term "War between the States" tends to be a biased way of "sanitizing" that particular conflict--that's "where" that author's mind-set seems to be....
Neither "good 'ol honest Abe", or any of his Republican cronies at the time REALLY cared much about, or wanted to emancipate the slaves, until their hands were forced to do so by Abolishionist demands.
tankrtrash| 4.14.12 @ 10:57AM
Ahhh........the infamous R word. When all else fails....et tu' Pelleas???
Pelleas| 4.14.12 @ 11:15AM
what "R" word are you referring to....??
("Republician"..?... didn't you use it in your earlier post, albeit in lower-case, for some reason..?)
("REALLY"?-- well, read Lincoln's own musing on racial matters, and see for yourself what he actually thought and felt...)
Aces and Eights| 4.14.12 @ 1:18PM
Excuse me, but a "civil war" is a contest for control of a nation's governmental powers. The South at no time threatened to take control of the United States Government from its duly elected representatives and leaders. The South seceded from the Union. It did not try to take it over. So, you statement is rather silly.
Pelleas| 4.15.12 @ 5:52PM
Aces:
The "wikipedia" definition of a CIVIL WAR....
"A civil war is a war between organized groups within the same nation state or republic,[1] or, less commonly, between two countries created from a formerly-united nation state.[2] The aim of one side may be to take control of the country or a region, to achieve independence for a region, or to change government policies.[1] The term is a calque of the Latin bellum civile which was used to refer to the various civil wars of the Roman Republic in the 1st century BC.
A civil war is a high-intensity conflict, often involving regular armed forces, that is sustained, organized and large-scale. Civil wars may result in large numbers of casualties and the consumption of significant resources.[3]
Civil wars since the end of World War II have lasted on average just over four years, a dramatic rise from the one-and-a-half year average of the 1900-1944 period. While the rate of emergence of new civil wars has been relatively steady since the mid-19th century, the increasing length of those wars resulted in increasing numbers of wars ongoing at any one time. For example, there were no more than five civil wars underway simultaneously in the first half of the 20th century, while over 20 concurrent civil wars were occurring at the end of the Cold War, before a significant decrease as conflicts strongly associated with the superpower rivalry came to an end. Since 1945, civil wars have resulted in the deaths of over 25 million people, as well as the forced displacement of millions more. Civil wars have further resulted in economic collapse; Burma (Myanmar), Uganda and Angola are examples of nations that were considered to have promising futures before being engulfed in civil wars.[4]"
...NU....?
Aces and Eights| 4.15.12 @ 9:56PM
Your history is weak. A "State" is not a subset of a larger unit. A State is an independent nation. These United States are separate nations that have voluntarily banded together for mutual benefit. The only central government that legally exists is one created by the States acting in concert, and it only has powers delegated to it by a the superior authority of the States.
You can quibble over words all you want, but it is quite irrelevant. You started this with a sarcastic remark over the term "War between the States" which is just as legitimate as the term "civil war".
As for "wikipedia", I would take that with a grain of salt. A war of independence is usually called a "war of independence" or "revolution." No one called the American Revolution a "civil war" yet the purpose of the American Revolution and the purpose of the American Civil war were similar, that being separation and independence, one from the crown, and the other from Washington.
Pelleas| 4.15.12 @ 11:22PM
"The War between the States" tends be used primeraly among those apologists for the aims of the Southern Slave-holding Confederacy, in the period in question.
Show me ONE objective Academic scholar of the conflict, who would use that term, referring to the American Civil War of 1861-65, without getting hooted, or corrected...if you can....
The same folks who use the term, tend to be those who advocate "States Rights". in an isolationist frame of mind...
I was FAR from being "sarcastic ", in my objection to the very pointed, and chilling,( imo), expression, "War between the States"-- I do NOT find it a valid , correct naming of that event, in the slightest...
Aces and Eights| 4.16.12 @ 2:55AM
"Sarcastic" was a poor choice of words. I apologize. "Caustic" would have been better. Also, an "apologist" literally is one who explains or defends, not one who apologizes for. As for a "frame of mind", this is nonsense.
Your call for "academic scholar" is a logical fallacy termed "appeal to authority" and is used in the absence of a valid argument. I gave you a valid argument and you ignored it.
"War between the States" is not only a valid term, it is more literally accurate than "civil war" under the circumstances and considering the literal definition of the word "State", which I discussed in my previous post.
But then I earned my History degree without Wikipedia. I went to the library and read books, and I wrote papers making valid arguments, supported by facts and research. Plus I understand the English language very well, and I have actually read the Constitution, and I understand it.
Lastly, I have no idea what you mean by "States Rights in an isolationist frame of mind." It sounds like nonsense. In the first place, "States" of any kind do not legally have "rights." People have rights. States have powers, delegated to them by the People, and powers are revocable.
The big problem with you Leftists is that you see the State as supreme, not the people. You see rights as given by the State, not inherent in the people (the Crown thought the same way in 1776). And you worship government above all else. Had you the slightest understanding of the intellectual underpinnings of the American Revolution and its significance in World history, you would not write such drivel.
Herb| 4.14.12 @ 12:27AM
You just don't like black conservatives, I take it.
Or are you Jack in WI under a pseudonym?
Pelleas| 4.14.12 @ 1:20AM
I actually find Black conservatives sort of an oxymoron...akin to Jewish Nazis, or Gay Republicans... but...I CAN also listen to an intelligent arguement given by someone whose views I disagree wit.. and Sowell bores the living crap out of me with his long -winded way of saying ...NOTHING,,,,
Calvin| 4.14.12 @ 8:22AM
Pelleas wants blacks back on their reservation and pronto. The Democratic Party was the home of slavery and Jim Crow, the institution that prevented the the Civil Rights Act from being passed in the fifties, the home of our corrupt cities that provide such wonderful homes for those that have the misfortune to be stuck there, the Party encouraging mothers to kill their babies, the Party that encourages broken families, the Party of the race obsessed vision that pushes for race war one minute and gives government accolades to hucksters like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson the next, the party of crumbs instead of real jobs, the home of truly unaccomplished and functionally idiotic nitwits like our President, the Party of payoffs to money bundlers under the guise of energy of the future, the Party that tries to mimic the failing and near dead states of Europe. He must have been trying to be ironic in his above posts. Nobody would actually try to defend being a corrupt progressive would they? Sadly yes. The only question is whether Pelleas is corrupt or just stupid. I'm thinking stupid.
Pelleas| 4.14.12 @ 8:30AM
What is the deal with calling people whose opinions differ from yours, "Stupid"...???
I didn't call Sowell "stupid", btw.. just boring...and no great intellect, either.
The hackneyed painting of The CURRENT Democratic Party as being "racist", due to past errors among it's SOUTHERN MEMBERS , is a pretty worn out one...except on this site, it seems
(The term "progressive" is rarelly used any more...except on this site, as well)
Clint| 4.14.12 @ 10:59AM
Tell Hillary Clinton.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2oOoCdFblc
Calvin| 4.14.12 @ 1:28PM
You're stupid. It is not an insult any more than calling somebody boring. If you are progressive you are race obsessed and therefore a racist. I suppose it is possible not to be race obsessed and progressive but I have never seen it. By the way liberal may be rarely used but progressive is used by many of my progressive "friends".
Pelleas| 4.14.12 @ 12:06PM
"...on their reservation..."
Aren't you mixing up a number of different non- white groups, in that rather baffling statement?
ROTFLMAO..!!
Calvin| 4.14.12 @ 1:41PM
You really are quite stupid. If you want to know where these reservations are, think of a bad thing like a murder rate, or per capita abortions, or per capita single mother households, or violent assaults or rape or corrupt city government and search where these things are the highest and you will be right at home if you are a Democrat and right in the middle of these reservations where you store these people you use. You have made a ton of promises; you should go savor the reality of what you do.
Aces and Eights| 4.14.12 @ 1:34PM
Exactly what is your fascination and obsession with centralized government? A brief perusal of history shows that governments are prone to abuse their citizenries rather than protect them. Centralized Governments start wars, murder millions of people, and they do it to satiate the egos of politicians. People, free of opressive government, build, create, and prosper. Government destroys what people build. This is why we in these United States have a system of Law that strictly limits the powers of government. We are free, and our freedom has built the greatest, most prosperous society in history. And fools like you want to destroy that by giving more power and stolen wealth to government.
Frankly, you wouldn't know an intelligent argument if you ate one for breakfast. And you remarks about "Jewish Nazis" and "Gay Republicans" demonstrate a profound inability to think critically. You parrot "ideas" espoused by self serving politicians and intellectual busy-bodies, but offer absolutely nothing of substance. You really are not very bright.
There is a recently coined word to describe you and your "heroes" in government: "ineptocracy." Look it up.
Jack in Wi.| 4.15.12 @ 1:46PM
Jack from Wi. likes conservative and libertarian black intellectuals like Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams. Where the hell did you get the idea I hate blacks or anyone else?. Every thing I write here is based on Christian universal ethics of love of neighbor. You are just too much of a bigot to understand that.
O.F. A.N. A.S.S.| 4.14.12 @ 6:58PM
We sheep were watching our backsides fearing another assault from the sodomizer fckewe.
Even sheep know the combination of being spurned by women and an abundance of sheep is pedestrian and/or pederastian even for the fantasies of camelot by the 1%er mensan.
Ovines For
A Nation
Absent Species Sodomization
Clint| 4.14.12 @ 10:39AM
Thomas Sowell endorses Newt Gingrich
"Why not vote for the candidate who has shown the best track record of accomplishments, both in office and in the debates? That is Newt Gingrich. With all his shortcomings, his record shows that he knows how to get the job done in Washington." ~ Thomas Sowell
old white guy| 4.15.12 @ 9:16AM
sowell is an articulate and intelligent man. pelleas would appear to be one of those others.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.13.12 @ 7:30AM
“It’s amazing how much panic one honest man can spread among a multitude of hypocrites. ”
― Thomas Sowell
Brian Mc| 4.13.12 @ 8:00AM
Thanks for the quote, Bill.
Tired Taxpayer PRM| 4.13.12 @ 8:11AM
My hero!
Con Chef (NB) | 4.13.12 @ 8:23AM
I can't get enought of Dr. Sowell. He usually has two or three columns a week on Townhall.com. I NEVER miss them & they are ALWAYS the bussiest threads, comment-wise.
W| 4.13.12 @ 8:56AM
All of Sowell's books are great, especially "Backs, Rednecks, and White Liberals," and Economics.
The info about Woodrow Wilson is revealing. One of the worst presidents ever, got us into WW1, reinforced segregation, threw war protesters in jail, a totalitarian.
Von Mises Jr.| 4.13.12 @ 10:37AM
Hey Con Chef. I just finished "The Sowell Reader." Dr. Sowell has several books that are a compilation of his articles from Townhall and Jewish World Review. "Dismantling America" is a recent one, and "Controversial Essays" and "Barbarians at the Gates" a couple more.
Walter E. Williams does the same, as my friend Indy references him. I am in the middle of "Liberty Versus the Tyranny of Socialism" by Williams.
These kinds of books make good beach reading. Both economist unify the essays under sub-sections such as "education," "cultural issues," "race" and "politics," "legal".....So it is an easy read for the beach since you can read five or ten two-page columns and then go for a walk or swim. I usually have one of these books and a more difficult intense read at the same time, so when Mises or Hayek are about to make my head explode; I can enjoy something less demanding.
Al Adab| 4.13.12 @ 12:14PM
More wisdom from the man who should be President. If only we could get the GOP to listen.
RJ| 4.13.12 @ 8:11PM
I would think much more of any candidate for President if he/she pledged that Thomas Sowell would have an open invitation to stay at the White House and would give Dr. Sowell daily, direct access to the President to discuss government policies.
Pecos Pete| 4.13.12 @ 8:26AM
Outstanding!
It would sure be nice if we could have Dr. Sowell write a weekly commentary for TAS, but not one of his published pieces that ends up in "newspapers" etc. Add in Dr. Walter Williams for an every other week sort of discussion among the two of them and the readers of TAS. Well, something to think about.
tankrtrash| 4.13.12 @ 8:31AM
Thomas Sowell should be required reading in every high school and university in the country. In a very short time, his intellectual honesty and common sense would expose and explode all the progressive cultural BS of the last 50 years.
He makes the likes of Bill Ayers and Cornell West look like the small-minded douchebags that they are.
Tim the Enchanter| 4.13.12 @ 3:20PM
Stop insulting douchebags.
Mr ED| 4.13.12 @ 8:38AM
As always lucid, rational and devastating insight into the perversity of Modern Liberalism and its house-of-clay theoretical underpinings. In this short interview he has the new Left pinned to a wall like a wriggling insect for anyone wanting to see the truth.
I have few heroes in this world, but Dr Sowell is right at the top of that list.
Appleby| 4.13.12 @ 8:39AM
Couldn't we have him instead of Ben Stein? Frankly, I have heard well past enough about how wonderful Stein's life is and how many Five Star Hotels he has patronized since he graced our pages last.
Dr. Sowell has something to say to us besides "Aren't you glad I'm so wealthy?"
Frekki| 4.13.12 @ 9:52AM
I promise that if you stop reading and complaining about Ben's missives, I will do the same for yours.
Herb| 4.14.12 @ 12:31AM
Laugh out loud, you have pegged Ben Stein (who is a nice man, now let's allow) as the wealthy male equivalent of "please, don't hate me because I'm beautiful!"
Thomas Sowell is the mental giant we refer to when we say, "now I'm no mental giant, but....."
Indy| 4.13.12 @ 9:12AM
Dr. Thomas Sowell and Dr. Walter E. Williams are both national treasures, I wish one of them would have run for President, wow what could have been...
Grock| 4.13.12 @ 9:50AM
Excellent interview , I have his latest book , words humble when Mr. Stowell speaks.
Louis Jenkins| 4.13.12 @ 10:12AM
Dr. Sowell is an intellectual giant, but speaks in terms that we may understand. No jiving here, just the plain truth. Those children in Harlem better take notice and learn to speak in correct english.
David T| 4.13.12 @ 1:18PM
The sad fact is those children in Harlem will never hear about Dr. Sowell, because the education bureaucrats and "black leaders" don't want them to know.
Bob Grant| 4.13.12 @ 10:30AM
An excellent interview. I respect Thomas Sowell because he transcends race; he courageously places race in it's proper perspective as it relates to the character of the individual. He truly lives the dream of Martin Luther King.
Now about those typo's...did anyone proofread the article?
csj1960| 4.13.12 @ 10:36AM
I would like to hear Dr. Sowell's thoughts on the islamic/muslim radicalization of african american men... the basis for this trend... and what it portends for the country.
I would also like to get his thoughts on the coming Travon/Zimmerman trial in Florida in terms of its's potential impact on Hispanic/African American relations and what that means for the country's future political landscape.
SUBVET| 4.13.12 @ 11:23AM
The Travon/Zimmerman trial is going to be used by the left as a political "fast ball".
Folks this dog and pony show has just begun......we can't afford to sit back in our lounge chair, eat popcorn and watch. This will be a fight to the end come November.
If he can't win it he will steal it........
Bob Grant| 4.13.12 @ 11:33AM
So lets vote early and often!
I for one plan to use Eric Holder's ballot for my sixth vote.
I'm Eric Holder. We are all Eric Holder!
Al Adab| 4.13.12 @ 3:25PM
When do we all become Spartacus? That indeed could be the next step.
A Sphincter Says What?| 4.15.12 @ 9:55PM
Bob, your comment is exactly correct and exactly why we needed to nominate a conservative non-douch the likes of Obomney. Nov is lost for Obomney. As you said, if he can't win it, he'll steal it. In order to steal it, it has to be close enough to steal. The Obomney nomination guaranteed an Obama win.....win or lose.
Anthony| 4.13.12 @ 11:26AM
Sowell, Williams and Thomas, as opposed to Jackson, Sharpton and Obozo. I'd say truly we are on the side of the angels.
Ammo Guy| 4.13.12 @ 11:37AM
Yep, just when I begin to despair, I think of these intellectuals and my faith in this country is renewed.
Al Adab| 4.13.12 @ 3:26PM
...and Pontius Pilate asked, "Quid est Veritas?"
albert constantine jr.| 4.13.12 @ 11:26AM
One of our flaws as human beings is we all have the capacity to be disappointed, and more importantly, to disappoint. Dr. Sowell has yet to disappoint me.
LiveFreeOrDie| 4.13.12 @ 1:28PM
Excellent! More, please.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 4.13.12 @ 2:30PM
My Main Man, Doctor Sowell!
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 4.13.12 @ 2:33PM
Sure is nice to see at least one comment board not completely taken over by people that are obsessed with Ron Paul or on the other hand seeing Mitt Romney fail. Sheesh.. Gypsies in the palace.
albert constantine jr.| 4.13.12 @ 9:32PM
Another obscure but colorful Jimmy Buffett song (You'll never work in show business again).
Crassus| 4.15.12 @ 12:45AM
Yeah, and that great filling station hold up just cost me two good years while a woman was going crazy on Caroline Street committing a Cuban crime of passion.
DRed| 4.13.12 @ 4:52PM
If the first siege of Vienna had gone the other way, then the Ottomans would have captured Vienna. Saying that Europe would be an Islamic continent now if one siege had turned out differently is pretty preposterous.
Calvin| 4.14.12 @ 8:26AM
Well they survived the Ottomans but they won't survive Progressive thought. Much like homosexuals they don't reproduce which has its consequences. Visit while you can.
Roy| 4.16.12 @ 8:26PM
Vienna was the capital of one of the only two major European powers of the time. Ottomans take it, then Holy Roman Empire is through. Ottomans consolidate control over eastern/central Europe. You're now depending on France to stop them, and they are just a tad bit outnumbered. Ottomans are also past a lot of natural barriers.
Sure, it wouldn't be a foregone conclusion but it isn't "preposterous".
rhoetus| 4.13.12 @ 8:56PM
"Conflict of Visions" by Dr. Sowell underscores his understanding of both history and the ideas that case polar conflict in today's society.
Bob K.| 4.13.12 @ 10:06PM
He is an Economist.
How could he come up with a statement blaming Intellectuals between the 2 wars who promoted pacifism of being responsible for the USA not being prepared for war without discussing the effects the Depression might have had on this very subject?
General MacArthur, Major George Patton and Major Eisenhower had to use troops to drive the Bonus Marchers out of Washington DC in 1932.
The economy was in really bad shape during those years. Nobody was listening to these kinds of intellectuals.
albert constantine jr.| 4.13.12 @ 10:47PM
The Bonus Marchers did apparently believe rumors that they were going to be paid a bonus, though, and squatted on land they didn't own along with women and children waiting to get money they thought they were due.
Without having read Mr. Sowell's work on this particular topic, I would think that the intellectual embrace of pacifism between the wars might effect preparedness by failing to develop weapons sytem equivalent to what your potential adversaries were developing, despite their own bad economies, because non-Germa Western intellectuals thought preparing for war was passe'.
I could, of course, be wrong in my assessment, but I can't picture F. Scott Fitzgerald writing Zelda as a woman falling for a tank officer at Fort Knox in the 20s or 30s.
albert constantine jr.| 4.13.12 @ 10:50PM
"because non-Germa Western intellectuals thought preparing for war was passe'."
By the way, I didn't invent a new word with Germa, I meant German (oder Deutsch, fuer ein man der alle dies verstehen kann).
Herb| 4.14.12 @ 12:44AM
Well, if I recall correctly, Congress did indeed pass a law to grant Great War vets a $600 bonus payable in 1945. The Bonus March sought to speed up that payment for thousands of vets impoverished by the Depression which in 1932 had hit what our pro-New Deal history texts called `rock bottom'.
What those history books didn't report, after all the appalling descriptions of Douglas MacArthur smashing the camps in D.C. with tanks, was that Congress passed and FDR signed, legislation to pay the bonus early, in 1935. That alone was enough of a grubstake to enable lots of folks to begin their march out of poverty. My grandparents bought their house that year that they lived in for the rest of their lives.
And I am absolutely no fan of the New Deal. Neither was Grandpa, but them's the facts.
Bob K.| 4.14.12 @ 2:44AM
It's an oversimplification and it is likely due to the quotes the author of this article selected. I note that quotation marks are missing from this article. I don't think it properly portrays what Sowell really thought. As an example, there were also the Intellectuals of the left who were not in favor of a war until Hitler invaded Russia when they changed their minds. Surely Professor Sowell was aware of that.
The havoc that "Intellectuals" have caused throughout history has been written about often. Most recently Paul Johnson wrote a best seller titled "Intellectuals: From Marx and Tolstoy to Sartre and Chomsky."
http://www.amazon.com/Intellec.....0060916575
Theo Prinse| 4.14.12 @ 12:34PM
Thanks for the article professor Sowell. I always put your articles on my Facebook and share it with my 1.700 + South African black and white and colored friends.
Here is my addition to your article:
Professor Sowell distinguishes in the fiction of ethnic race, 19th century pseudo scientific racialism and 1930 political racism the intellectuals of the respective era's.
Professor Sowell dissects the fiction racism in the 20th century and exclusively for the American society given the racial poison from the democratic presidential campaign with people like Al Sharpton, Bill Cosby, Jesse Jackson, mr. Obama etc. in the Martin Travyon case.
Professor Sowell omits to qualify anti-Semitic hatred as the historically highest form of racism.
Professor Sowell does not fully recognizes the ideology of communism and later the 'ideology' of multiculturalism (rainbow nation) with respect to leftish defined political racism like the 'Critical Race Theory' of late 'professor' Derrick Bell.
The term 'intellectuals' even over a period of that of the 20th century cannot be presented as homogeneous. In my opinion intellectualism is dialectical. Professor Sowell does however recognize that the leftish intellectuals got hold of their debate after 1945.
Here is an example why it is important to include the 19th century intellectualism as well in the debate on the fiction race, racialism, and racism.
It is a comment on the article of George Will in several occasions (Human Events & others) whether marihuana should be legalized in the US or not.
------------------------------------
.... Drug addiction is based on the believe that drugs broaden the mental awareness, are mind-expanding, psychedelic.
This belief originates from the MKULTRA, Artichoke, Bluebird etc. projects of Richard Helms and Sidney Gottlieb.
This abject Allan Dulles 'experimentation' was then insinuated by Christian mysticism based New Wave Movement (The weekly journal of Christian liberalism and socialism titled The New Age was published as early as 1894 D.H. Lawrence, W.B. Yeats, Carl Jung, Rudolf Steiner, Blavatsky etc, etc).
This belief was then propagated among the masses with rock concerts like Woodstock.
2. The alcohol addiction was cultivated in America by the degenerate Southern Italian mafia families who got hold over the FBI of Edgar J. Hoover.
3. The idea that drug addiction can be solved in an economical perception as to where the profit is concerned which George Will is referring to .. is a Keynesian derivative. Legalization of any drug will not work because the mafia will immediately switch to other drugs.
----------------------------
So as with the fiction race etc, the fiction drugs and mind expansion have a historical root in the intellectual discourse of the 19th century as well.
Racialism was debated in the salons of the 19th century, so was drugs. (Opium, Laudanum)
Than communism came in debate at the end of the 19th century .. but where racialism became racism ... drugs disappeared from the intellectual world.
After 1945 racialism had become leftish racism and even black victim supremacist racism and drugs where on the rise again too
Denise| 4.14.12 @ 10:43PM
It's called education. Without a proper education a person lags behind and becomes a burden on society.