To watch the video, click here.


Peter Robinson: Welcome to Uncommon Knowledge, I'm Peter Robinson. Born on the South Side of Chicago, Glenn Cartman Loury became a tenured professor of economics at Harvard at the age of 33. Four decades later, Dr. Loury holds a chair in social sciences and economics at Brown. Dr. Loury also hosts a weekly podcast on the Ricochet Network, The Glenn Show. Professor Loury, thank you.

Glenn Loury: My pleasure.

Peter Robinson: On The Glenn Show, you call yourself a woke buster. Now, what I want to know is what a chaired... this is really quite an August thing. You are a chaired professor at one of the nation's oldest and most prestigious universities. What do you do on calling yourself a woke buster?

Glenn Loury: Well, with the other side, so to speak, that is the woke side, and weren't so crazy I could go on with my equations and my lectures and mind my own business. I'm trying to stay in touch with reality and maybe save the country.

Peter Robinson: Maybe save the country, modest ambitions. All right. You're a man who has traveled great distances. One of these journeys for a word of a better term is socioeconomic. You grew up in a rough neighborhood in Chicago, you become a father while you're still in your teens. You take a job as a clerk in a printing plant, and that's where you start. Here's where you go, doctorate at MIT by age 27, MIT is not a easy place to get through. Tenure professor of economic by 33, chaired professor at Brown. We could devote the whole show to your life story, but what would you want people to know about how Glenn Loury made that particular journey? How did Glenn Loury get from here on the south side of Chicago to a chaired professorship in Providence, Rhode Island?

Glenn Loury: Well, it's a long story, Peter. I don't think we have all day. I got a lot of help. I got inspiration from my father. Very good man, no longer with us. Self-made man who labored hard all of his life and rose to a high level in the internal revenue service as a federal employee. I got wonderful support from teachers. I was fortunate enough at Northwestern University to have been recruited as a scholarship student, even though I was married with kids and working a full-time job. But they were looking for some promising prospects from the South Side of Chicago to bring in the Northwest and in the early 1970s. And gosh, I discovered the whole world intellectually speaking at that university in the few years that I spent there, got Tremendous inspirational teachers at MIT. A great economics department now, but even a greater department then with Nobel laureates despair and God given talent, if I may say so that allowed me to take advantage of these opportunities. I worked my tail off. I kept my nose to the grindstone. Finally, even though I bounced around a little bit in my teens and it has paid off.

Peter Robinson: All right. You granted you work hard, but only after expressing gratitude three or four times in a row, did you come to how hard you worked? I'll come back to that. That strikes me as a kind of fundamental piece of your outlook about life Glenn, but we'll come back to that. A lecture you deliver delivered in Richmond, 2005, you discussed the 1968 Kerner Commission, which issued a report on the riots during the long summer of 1967. The commission, as you note, blamed the riots on racism, failed social programs and a lack of economic opportunity.  And this is what Glenn Loury said in 2005, speaking in Richmonds, "To a significant extent, the Kerner Commission's recommendations were heeded. There is not one significant institution in American political or economic life, which has been unaffected by the push for diversity and the emphasis on multiculturalism, which now dominate discussions of race relations. Blacks wield vastly more political clout at all levels of government today than was the case four decades ago. Yet it is arguable that conditions are worse. The prisons of the nation overflow with young black men. Two thirds of black babies are born to unwed mothers nationwide." Why, what went wrong? The Kerner Commission said reasonable things, the country responded, and you say it is arguable that conditions are worse.

Glenn Loury: It's a hard question that you're asking I think, Peter. I think the vision of the anointed as our friend Thomas Sowell would say, the vision that we could solve this problem by expanding the great society, by enacting more anti-discrimination laws, by doubling down on affirmative action and so forth was, is in error. This problem is a development problem. This is the way that I would put it now, not a bias problem. This is a issue of empowering and envisioning a confrontation with the consequences of our history that have left the African American population, large swaves of it not performing in ways that allow us to take advantage of the opportunities that have been created. As my friend, Shelby Steele is fond of saying, the problem before us now is not a problem of oppression. It's a problem of freedom. It's a problem of seizing opportunity. It's a problem of taking responsibility. I mean, let's just look at some of those statistics. Outsize rates of criminal participation of violence of the kinds of in uncivil behavior that get you locked up in prison. That's why the jails are overflowing with African Americans. Not because there's a conspiracy in the state legislature or in the several police departments to go around locking up black people. But because too many of our youngsters, of our young men are behaving in ways that end up leaving them in confrontation with the law and leaving them susceptible to imprisonment. In education, the skills development gap is reflected in test scores or the representation of African Americans in certain elite educational venues. The kind of circumstance that people want to invoke affirmative action to repair are to a large extent, a result of the failure of public institutions of educational service delivery to deliver for their clients. But also a reflection of the patterns of behavior, of the allocation of time, of values, of communal norms, of the extent of parenting, of the emphasis on developing the intellectual potential of our population. Look at the family. You say two thirds of kids born to women who are not married, you should look at the abortion rate amongst African Americans, it's stratospheric. The gender relations between men and women, which is the central focus of how it is that societies reproduce themselves in a healthy fashion is deeply, deeply troubled. So, whereas in 1968, it was a compelling argument to say, two nations, separate and unequal, that's what the Kerner Commission said. White America must own up to its responsibilities in 1968 that could have made a lot of sense. In the year 2021, the ball is in our court. I speak now about African Americans. This is basically a level playing field that we are dealing with right here in the freest, most prosperous, most dynamic society on the planet that millions of people are willing to risk everything just to get into. We are birthright citizens here, the ball is in our court.

Peter Robinson: Glenn, let me take you through events of the last couple of years. Honestly, I just made notes on events I'd like to hear you talk about. I just want to know how Glenn Loury thinks about certain events.

Glenn Loury: Okay.

Peter Robinson: Two quotations. Here's the first one from the We Believe page of the website for Black Lives Matter, "The impetus for our commitment was, and still is the rampant and deliberate violence inflicted on us by the state." Here's the second quotation, this happens to be from an article in Newsweek about a year ago, but I could have chosen dozens of sources. Here's what Newsweek had, "On Sunday, May 30th, 2020 Chanel Hawk's store was one of dozens looted in Atlanta and many more across the US amid days of protests following the death of George Floyd. As a black business owner, black business owner Hawk said she was shocked to learn looters targeted her store at a time when protestors were taking to the streets to call on the government to address systematic racism."

Peter Robinson: So what do I know? I'm just a white guy and a layman looking at this and I said, black lives matters. It sounds noble in some ways, it sounds aspirational, but what is happening in these cities? How do you think about that? [inaudible 00:10:12] that took place.

Glenn Loury: Any violence against black people, I think is hysteria. I think its wild hyperbole. I think we have to keep the issue that they're talking about, which is that sometimes police acting badly or outside of their legitimate authority take black life. That does happen. It has happened in the country. We can tick off the examples. On the other hand, it's a country of 330 million people. There are tens of thousands of arrests that take place every day in this country. We're talking about a handful of incidents that become viral events on the social media, in which there can be some question about inappropriate behavior by police toward black people. But the metaphor that Al Sharpton invoked at George Floyd's funeral, America take your knee off of our neck is fiction. It's a lie. It's not an apt description of the actual circumstance for a black person to fear going out of their door, that the police might somehow inappropriately treat them.

Glenn Loury: It's like not going outside because you're afraid of being struck by lightning. So that's objectively an inaccurate characterization of the circumstance. And if you lay that alongside the actual threats to black life, which are sadly coming from the possibility of violent criminal victimization in the neighborhoods in which they live often by other black people, the hyperbole, the stick that they've got going here, the narrative that they're pushing, I'm talking about black lives matter. I'm talking about anti-racist activists who take the unfortunate few incidents of police mistreatment of black people, and use it as a general characterization of the circumstances of black people in the country. It is something that a woke buster like myself, is willing to devote a little bit of time debunking.

Peter Robinson: Glenn, Chicago. Again, I'm just throwing things up to you to see how you think about them. But Chicago during the last 12 months, 790 people have been killed. 626 of them, almost 80% were black. I mean, isn't there an argument that... and this is a city where the superintendent of police is African American.

Glenn Loury: Yes, and the mayor.

Peter Robinson: And the mayor. I checked the statistics that about 30% of the city is African American and only about 20% of the police force. But the superintendent of police is African. Anyway, I think to myself, why aren't there protests calling for more police? Those neighborhoods-

Glenn Loury: Not only calling for more police and making public safety of black people in that city a primary issue, but condemning relentlessly the despicable behavior of a few people, which is making that city so unsafe for everybody else. Instead, too often, we find intellectuals and political leaders, some black, some white, all progressive making excuses saying there's nothing to see here, turning away from the obvious failures within society that are manifest in this despicable behavior. I mean, think about it, taking a human life. Hundreds of times, a not small number of these victims are children. This is barbarism. This is unacceptable behavior. I don't think I am out of school simply to say condemn it. We're better than that. We African-Americans, where is the leadership who talk about African-American society saying of this issue, we're better than that? This is not us. This is not what a healthy African American community would produce. Condemn this behavior.

Peter Robinson: Glen, once again, that lecture that you gave in Richmond, I'm quoting you, "Liberals insist that these problems derive ultimately from the lack of economic opportunities. Conservatives like Charles Murray have argued that the problems are the unintended legacy of a welfare state. If the government would stop underwriting irresponsible behavior, poor people would be forced to discover self restraint." And then you write, "These polar positions have something very important in common. They both assume that economic factors lie behind the behavioral problems." What are you up to there?

Glenn Loury: On being a Christian and an Economist was my subtitle for that lecture. And what I'm up to is I'm an economist. And we do the things that we do. We have our theories about human behavior. We are basically in a mode of the idea that people respond to incentives as they do. And we want to get the prices right as we should. So we have a pretty deterministic and a pretty materialistic outlook on things left or right. But in those years I was a better Christian perhaps than I am now. I was on fire and it occurred to me, notwithstanding my training at MIT and not withstanding my positions in the universities that I've worked at, that there's more to human motivation than getting more, than greed, than satisfying want, than maximizing utility, than accumulating wealth. There's also something called right living. There's something called being comfortable with the way in which I am living my life. There is a spiritual dimension. What people believe, what they take to be significant, where they draw meaning in their lives is also a fundamental aspect of human culture and of human civilization. And I simply wanted to give voice to that idea, that everything's not about getting more or about what Charles Murray, whom I respect as a social scientist says that we had a war on poverty and poverty won. He says this in his book, Losing Ground, reflecting on the inadequate outcomes associated with the great society. He's right about that. He's right that the incentives of the welfare state often were poverty promoting as opposed to poverty alleviating. But that's not all that's going on when I look at two thirds of kids being born to an African American woman, being born to a woman without a husband. That's not all that's going on when I look at the rates of violence that we were just talking about a moment ago. There's space for appealing to people at the level of their spiritual responsibilities and urging them to look differently at how it is that they should live their lives. I say in that essay, what a program could be more effective at encouraging parents to take responsibility for their children than persuading them that they're God's stewards in the lives of their children. A clever economist can come up with all kinds of schemes to motivate them financially. But if they embrace that idea that this is a precious responsibility, this is a sacred obligation, they're going to get the job done that we want them to get done.

Peter Robinson: I'm quoting you again, "Raising the issues of morality and values is vitally important. The family and the church are the natural sources of moral teaching. Indeed, the only sources." Okay. If we were a tent meeting, I'd have converted now listening to preacher Loury. This is very moving and it feels to me right. You're saying true things about human beings. What is the government... if you say that it's church and family, those are organic, either they're there or they're not. I don't know how government puts the family back together. I certainly have no idea how any government program can reassert the centrality in African American life of the black church. So I guess what I'm saying is it's powerful and moving, and it sounds like the clarion sound of a trumpet, but there's a sense in which it could let everybody off the hook and say, well, it's the black church and the family. And if they're not there, there's really nothing we can do about it. Do you see what I mean?

Glenn Loury: No, I do see what you mean because the ability of the state through law and through policy to tell people how to live is limited because we're a pluralistic society. We don't have a state religion. We don't tell people what to believe at that level. So therefore given that what they believe is important to how they function and that the state can't dictate to people what to believe. There's a conclusion there, which is that there's a limit on what the estate can achieve in the face of this problem. And that if we really want to see this problem, ultimately resolve, we have to encourage the development of institutions from the ground up. We have to in our rhetoric and in our public leadership, extol the virtue of these institutions. So let me be very concrete education. Big city, public school, teachers unions basically control the flow of resources for the delivery of those services to youngsters. There's nothing written anywhere that says that the only model for educating young people is large public union driven institutions delivering the services. You could have 1,000 flowers blooming, 10,000 flowers blooming, a million flowers blooming. They could be charter schools with some public funds going in. They could be parochial schools with a particular religious conviction that they might have. They could be homeschooling. There could be 20 families getting together and deciding to pull their resources in a way to educate their children. I don't know all the possibilities that lie there. I do know that the entrepreneurial spirit and the convictions that people bring about their responsibilities to their children have unlimited potential. This is what I believe.

Peter Robinson: So there, the government just has to get out of the way or force the reunion.

Glenn Loury: It could provide some resources because people are paying taxes, but it would give parents the autonomy to redirect those resources in the ways that they saw were best.

Peter Robinson: Glenn, let me quote to you from a column that Tom Sowell, now 91 years old and still swinging. Tom Sowell just wrote a column, published a column this month.

Glenn Loury: Wow.

Peter Robinson: Yes.

Glenn Loury: I should be so lucky.

Peter Robinson: Well, you will be. At least there are those of us who are going to get on the phone and say, hey Loury, another book, please. A lot of us.

Glenn Loury: Okay.

Peter Robinson: All right, so here's Tom Sowell, "When school propaganda teaches black kids to hate white people, that is a danger to all Americans of every race. Low income minority students especially cannot afford the luxury of having their time wasted on ideological propaganda in the schools when they're not getting a decent education in mathematics or the English language. When they graduate and go on to higher education that could prepare them for professional careers, hating white people is not likely to do them nearly as much good as knowing math and English."

Glenn Loury: Oh, I couldn't agree more. He's absolutely right about that. The ideological temper of much of the educational establishment, which wants to spew its propaganda over our children is a waste of time because we don't really have that luxury to indulge, given the serious impediments to African American children's participation in our society that comes about from their failure to get a decent education. But I would go further. We're Americans here, black people, African Americans. We're 10, 12% of a population of a dynamic, growing, constantly changing country. We need our fellow citizens onside with us on behalf of any program of any worth that we might want to pursue. Hating white people is madness in this country. I mean, it's simply a losing strategy. It is akin to a toddler throwing a tantrum when he doesn't get his way, it gets us nowhere. The intellectuals, the people who... I could name names, but it's not about personalities here, who throw this kind of stuff around. Why do you use your enemy? Are already living high on the hog of this society. They can afford to alienate their colleagues, but people who are dependent upon basic functioning of social institutions to further their effort at achieving prosperity, those black people, working class black people, lower class black people, people who are just barely holding on need our fellow Americans onside. Alienating them gratuitously with this racist and its racism, this racist rhetoric, hating white people, hating people because of the color of their skin, blaming them for the sins of their fathers or the supposed sins of their fathers, it is not only a waste of time in the schools, it's a political distraction that we really can't afford.

Peter Robinson: Glenn, let me take you back to your day job as professor at Brown.

Glenn Loury: Okay.

Peter Robinson: Last spring, you conducted a seminar at Brown called "Free Inquiry and the Modern World." And you were kind enough to send me the syllabus. And I showed that syllabus to my research assistant, who by the way, is a recent graduate of Yale, sister school, sister Ivy school of Brown. And my research assistant could hardly believe his eyes. He said this is the most courageous syllabus I think I have ever seen. So could you just take me, I know the seminar lasted a whole semester at Brown, but I'd like to ask you a few questions. Tell me the significance. Tell me why the items I'm going to mention are on your syllabus. And by the way, you've described this as a seminar. How many kids were involved?

Glenn Loury: 20.

Peter Robinson: So this is not a lecture class.

Glenn Loury: No.

Peter Robinson: There's nowhere to hide. You're running a conversation, you're calling on kids, they have to participate. All right. Socrates apology quote, and this I'm quoting from Socrates or I'm quoting from Plato's... You know what I'm quoting.

Glenn Loury: Plato's apology excerpt, yeah.

Peter Robinson: "I prophesy to my murderers, that after my death punishment far heavier than you have inflicted on me will surely await you. For the noblest way of life is not to be crushing others, but to be improving yourselves." What did the kids make of that?

Glenn Loury: They loved it. I should mention David Sacks here, who was my teaching assistant because this course... he's an undergraduate at Brown. He's a great concert pianist and he's also reading Greek and Latin. He's a classics major at Brown.

Peter Robinson: You know kids that smart really annoy me, Glenn.

Glenn Loury: And he's a contrarian. And he walked into my office one day and he says, you're one of the two or three professors around here I think's got his head on straight. Can I talk to you? Would you mind giving me some time? This is just out of the blue a couple of years ago, he walked into my office. He said I want to break free from the group think, can you help me? So we put together a reading list and we, over the course of a year did an independent study. Just him and me reading some of the works that ended up in this course.

Peter Robinson: So stop, we'll come back to this course. I really want to come back to the course. But wait, this kid is reading Greek and Latin. He's a smart kid. He got into Brown. He's reading Greek and Latin, plays the piano, he's smart and he's talented and I want to break free of group think?

Glenn Loury: Yeah.

Peter Robinson: Why is a kid at one of most elite institutions in the country feel shackled in his mind, intellectually subjected to group think? How can this happen?

Glenn Loury: Now, this was a kid who thought that every Republican politician was not necessarily a fascist. This is a kid who thought that capitalism might not really be the road to hell. A Kid who thought that while he's Jewish and not especially observant, religious people actually have a place within society. Isn't there something interesting about the fact that people constantly seek meaning in these mythological and fanciful systems of belief? And what he's getting all around him in the dorm, at the lecture hall or in the classes, the other classes that he's getting is this kind of left of center, secular, ultra woke mantra he's getting. And he knows that it isn't quite right. It certainly hasn't hit his mind as being right. And he's looking for an alternative. And he found out about... he followed my podcast a few times. His parents encouraged him because they followed the podcast, go talk to Loury. And so he walks into an economist office to say, can you help me? Can I breathe? I can't breathe around here. Can you help me get some fresh air?

Peter Robinson: I can't breathe. I can't breathe, that's just awful.

Glenn Loury: Anyway, all I want to say is the course that you're referring to came about after that year of reading with David and we sat together and said we can make a course out of this. Why don't we? And you can be my TA, even though it was only his third year, he's in his fourth year now. He's in his third year and there were seniors sitting in the class. So he was junior to some of the people whom he was TA, but he's a cracker jack smart kid. They loved being challenged to think about what does a philosophical life mean? What does an examined life? What was Socrates about as Plato presented in the dialogue? So it was scintillating. The questions, the discussion that went on within the class was really deeply rewarding. And I've gotten some tributes from students after the course who have written me things, best experience in my educational career by far.

Peter Robinson: Milton, Areopagetica, "Give me the Liberty to know, to utter and to argue freely according to conscience above all liberties." The liberty to argue freely above all liberties [crosstalk 00:28:59] . What do the kids at Brown make of that?

Glenn Loury: Paradise Lost. Well, he's trying to envoy against the idea that the crown should license the printing of books. The printing press is 100 years old or so at the time he's writing and books are pretty dangerous things. And he's saying, look, I don't want to live in a society in which political commissars decide what it is that I can read and what I can't read. There's freedom in those books. There's immortality says Milton in that great essay, in those books. You write a book that says something really important about life, you may die but that book lives forever. As long as they don't ban the printing of the book. Keep your hands off my books.

Peter Robinson: Vaclav Havel, the dissonant in Czechoslovakia becomes president of Czechoslovakia after the communist regime falls. He writes a book called The Power of the Powerless. "In everyone there is some willingness to merge with the anonymous crowd and to flow comfortably along down the river of pseudo life." So the kids read this and say, wait a minute, is professor Loury trying to tell us we're all accommodationist.

Glenn Loury: No, they got it. They really did. And I love that essay by Havel and I love that particular quote. So if your audience doesn't know Vaclav Havel, he was a playwright and became president of the Czech Republic. Was a dissident at the time that the Soviet Union was dominating political life in countries like Czechoslovakia. And he was a part of the underground samizdat producing critique of the status quo. And it was life or death. I mean, you could lose your livelihood, you could end up losing your freedom if you spoke against the party. So it was a very closed, very cloistered system. And people were being betrayed by their loved ones and things like this because they weren't adopting the party line. And he says, we're dying over here. These are my words but this is what he's saying. We're living in unfree doom. And believe me, we are the ones who produced the system, going along with it is making the system possible to work. We have a choice to make, are we going to live or are we going to die? Are we going to embrace life or are we going to embrace what is in effect spiritual death? The power of the dissident comes in his or her relentless affirmation of life by standing for the truth come what may. And you know what? That's more powerful than those tanks at the end of the day. This is Vaclav Havel and the kids loved it. They could see the kernel of the idea, which is that the true teller is a very subversive and a very dangerous fellow.

Peter Robinson: Glenn, one more from your syllabus. You entitle week number 12, the case of Clarence Thomas. Clarence Thomas, Mr. Justice Thomas, Supreme court justice. And you assign for that session, Justice Thomas' memoir My Grandfather's Son. Why? What do you hope for the students at this elite university to learn from his example?

Glenn Loury: The very interesting question, Peter, I'm so glad you raised it because it's not necessarily what you would expect, which is these kids they're pro-choice in terms of abortion and pro-gay rights and things like that. A conservative Catholic, long serving jurist on the US Supreme Court is an unlikely hero for them. My point was, you may agree or disagree with this or that opinion of the great Justice Clarence Thomas. Let me tell you about his life. Born off the coast of Georgia in one of those sea island situations where it gets you speaking and whatnot. Dirt poor, scraped his way along, et cetera. You want a model of African-American heroism, you want an ideal of what it is that we should teach our kids to aspire to, I don't see how you could do any better than the life of Justice Thomas. But guess what? When the National Museum of African American History and Culture decided to stand up a museum, they didn't even have an acknowledgement of the existence of Clarence Thomas and until people started complaining about that. And guess what? If you go to any liberal law school and you ask civil rights professors who teach about civil rights law what they think about Justice Clarence Thomas, they'll say he's a sellout and he's an uncle Tom. And you can't find in Hollywood, you can't find in the TV scripts, you can't find in the novels that are being produced by these publishing houses any affirmation of the heroic character of this man's life. Why? He's a black conservative, he's off the reservation, he's thinking for himself. I had them, it's not on the syllabus, look at the film from that testimony that Thomas gave at his confirmation hearings, as I'm sure you're familiar with it, in which he very valiantly and powerfully affirms his right to think for himself. Justice clarence Thomas was on my syllabus because he thinks for himself, he's iconic representative of the cost you pay for thinking for yourself. And I wanted my kids to be able to look at his life in the hole, not filtered through what the talking heads at MSNBC might have to say about him.

Peter Robinson: Glenn, last question. You gave a lecture at Oxford that contained the following two sentences. First of all, let me repeat what I said at the beginning, you've traveled places. You've traveled intellectually, but you've also made a socioeconomic journey. You're in your 70s now, you do not look it and you do not act it, but you are.

Glenn Loury: Thank you.

Peter Robinson: And you have some wealth and a tenured position and kids clearly who love you. And here are the two sentences that your Oxford lecture contained. "I am a black intellectual and I must stand with my people." Why? Glen you don't have anything to prove to anybody. You could just relax and enjoy yourself.

Glenn Loury: Well, I guess it's my upbringing at South Side of Chicago of 1950s and the 1960s. As you said that, Peter, it reminded me of something that my uncle Alfred now deceased, my mother's brother, a patriarch in our family, I loved him. He was a wonderful man in so many ways. And early in my flirtation with Reagan Reaganomics in the 80s when I started moving right, he pulled me aside and he said, "Son, we can only send one from the South Side to MIT and Harvard. We sent you and we don't see us in anything you do." And it crushed me. I wanted him to see me as a furtherance of the river that's flowing along of our human existence, of our culture, of our family, of our 'people'. I wanted to be seen as a black man, making it in the world and making the world a better place for 'his people'. Now in that very same essay, I acknowledge that when I say my people, the antecedent is ambiguous. I mean, my people, I'm an American. So my people are the American people, as well as the African American people. And maybe 100 years from now of a man like myself, with the same kind of background of dissent of Africans, wouldn't feel it so necessary to affirm as his people, that subset of the American nation, which is the African American people. I expect that if you were of Irish descent or Italian descent or Jewish descent now, perhaps not so much the latter, but the need to affirm people-hood in your ethnicity is less than 2021 than it was in 1921. I hope for the sake of our country, that that'll be something that we can also say about blackness in 2121. But I don't think we are there yet with the jails overflowing and the et cetera, et cetera. And I just feel as a part of my own identity, a call of the tribe, and I'm not resisting it entirely.

Peter Robinson: Professor Glenn Loury, woke buster. Thank you.

Glenn Loury: My pleasure, Peter.

Peter Robinson: I'm Peter Robinson for Uncommon Knowledge, the Hoover Institution and Fox Nation, thank you.

overlay image