Speaker 1: Good morning, Peepsen, and welcome to bookf Daily with Me
Speaker 1: Your Girl Daniel Moody recording from the Home Bunker, Folks,
Speaker 1: I am very excited for you to hear today's conversation
Speaker 1: with Keith Boykin, author, national political commentator, producer, filmmaker. His
Speaker 1: latest book, Why Does Everything Have To Be About Race?
Speaker 1: Is on stands now and you know, we get into
Speaker 1: a conversation that offers thoughts and suggestions as well as
Speaker 1: a critique on how we have had conversations around race
Speaker 1: and racism. And in this book he debunks twenty five
Speaker 1: of the most top sick racist arguments, breaking them down
Speaker 1: one by one, everything from critical race theory to affirmative
Speaker 1: action and other issues, and gives the logic behind how
Speaker 1: we should respond. And one of the questions that I
Speaker 1: ask Keith in this interview is, well, if we're never
Speaker 1: going to get back you know, the thirty percent, like,
Speaker 1: who is this book for and how how should it
Speaker 1: be used? Because I think that what we know is
Speaker 1: that when we have issues of racism, right, whether it's
Speaker 1: the killing, you know, murder of a black person, the
Speaker 1: rhetoric around immigration, people either shut down or they go
Speaker 1: into their corners right coming out ready to swing, And
Speaker 1: so I think that Keith's new book gives a lot
Speaker 1: of great perspective as well as tools to add to
Speaker 1: your toolkit. The book is why does Everything have to
Speaker 1: be about Race? That conversation with Keith Boykin is coming
Speaker 1: up next, folks. I am very happy to welcome TOKF
Speaker 1: Daily national political commentator, author, executive producer, all around bad
Speaker 1: ass Keith Boykin, whose latest book, Why Does Everything Have
Speaker 1: to Be About Race? Twenty five Arguments that Won't Go Away?
Speaker 1: Is out this week. Keith, first of all, wonderful, Like
Speaker 1: that is the question, that is the question on top
Speaker 1: of questions. I think that people on the left pose
Speaker 1: it as why does everything have to be about race?
Speaker 1: Like why can't you know, people on the right have
Speaker 1: a conversation that doesn't come back to racism, that doesn't
Speaker 1: come back to white supremacy. Then you have people on
Speaker 1: the right that say, why does everything have to be
Speaker 1: about race? Because I think any conversation that you have
Speaker 1: that is about equity and justice for them. Why can't
Speaker 1: we just have these neutral, you know, non racial conversations.
Speaker 1: Why was it important for you to write this book
Speaker 1: right now?
Speaker 2: Wow? Yes, thank you? Danielle. I'm glad you framed the
Speaker 2: question that way, because it is a question that comes
Speaker 2: from both the left and the right. From the right, obviously,
Speaker 2: it's more of a perspective of why do we keep
Speaker 2: talking about this race issue, Let's get beyond it. From
Speaker 2: the left, I think it's more of a question of
Speaker 2: how do we create a race neutral, progressive society. Let's
Speaker 2: not talk about race, let's focus on economic issues. And
Speaker 2: I think that both of those are problematic because America
Speaker 2: was built on race. It was built on racism, to
Speaker 2: be honest, and it's important to acknowledge that it's becoming
Speaker 2: increasingly important because we were living in an era where
Speaker 2: there is a great deal of denial about that racial history,
Speaker 2: where presidential candidates and people in political prominence and positions
Speaker 2: of power and influence are trying to erase black history,
Speaker 2: trying to deny the existence of continued black oppression, trying
Speaker 2: to center a white victimhood, and trying to gaslight us
Speaker 2: all about what's really taking place. So the reason why
Speaker 2: everybody everything is about racist is because white society made
Speaker 2: everything about race. They created a society where we had
Speaker 2: no choice but to uh to see ourselves because of
Speaker 2: our of our race. And I, you know, I do
Speaker 2: this test in the book. I won't call it test.
Speaker 2: Maybe it's a question. I guess it's probably a better
Speaker 2: way to say it. Where I ask people, I tell
Speaker 2: them to do a Google search. Look for Just do
Speaker 2: a simple Google Google search, look for the history of
Speaker 2: racism in fill in the blank. Whatever topic you're interested in.
Speaker 2: It could be hockey, it could be homemaking, it could
Speaker 2: be chemistry, it could be whatever it is you're interested in.
Speaker 2: Just do look up that the history of racism in
Speaker 2: that field that you're interested in, and you will find
Speaker 2: that racism has had an impact on every single element
Speaker 2: of our lives, of our lives. And that's really the
Speaker 2: sad state of affairs that black people and other people
Speaker 2: of color have been dealing with for centuries without acknowledgement.
Speaker 1: Do you think that there is a different framing or
Speaker 1: messaging that we should have in terms of basically saying,
Speaker 1: is everything about race or is everything about racism? Right?
Speaker 1: Does everything go back to racism in this country as
Speaker 1: opposed to race being this made up construct as a
Speaker 1: way to compartmentalize, silo and dehumanize black people and then
Speaker 1: other people of color.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, that's exactly right, because race, as we know,
Speaker 2: is a social construct, and to social construct that white
Speaker 2: people invented hundreds of years ago for the purpose of
Speaker 2: creating this segregated, racially privileged society, for the purpose to
Speaker 2: of peeling off oppressed, poor white people and associating them
Speaker 2: with the white privileged colonizer class, the white privileged planter class,
Speaker 2: if you will, and when their economic interests were probably
Speaker 2: more aligned with the poor black and brown people who
Speaker 2: were in a similar boat that they were. But by
Speaker 2: creating this thing called whiteness, they were able to allow
Speaker 2: white people, even who don't have anything, you know, a
Speaker 2: pot to pissen or a window throw it out of,
Speaker 2: to make them feel like they have this sort of
Speaker 2: investment in whiteness too. I've talked about this sort of
Speaker 2: property right in whiteness that people have written about, including
Speaker 2: my former law professor Derek Bell at Harvard Law School,
Speaker 2: this idea that even poor white people get some benefits
Speaker 2: of benefit or privileged because of their whiteness. And part
Speaker 2: of that privilege means that they don't have to talk
Speaker 2: about it or acknowledge it, because once you acknowledge it,
Speaker 2: then it becomes this zort of burden. But if you
Speaker 2: can just sort of carry on throughout your life and
Speaker 2: pretend that it doesn't exist, and you put the burden
Speaker 2: on everyone else and make them prove that they're the
Speaker 2: ones who are being oppressed when you're actually the one
Speaker 2: doing theress pressing, or you're the one who benefits from it.
Speaker 1: You know, I think that one is so necessary about
Speaker 1: your book right now, is one. There are these themes, right,
Speaker 1: this theme of you know, black people and other people
Speaker 1: of color, we're the ones that have made up racism.
Speaker 1: Everything isn't as bad as they say it is. All
Speaker 1: they do is complain, right, All they want is a handout. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And the whole point I think about it just very clearly,
Speaker 1: and I forget the name. You probably remember the white
Speaker 1: professor many many decades ago who asked the question as
Speaker 1: she's explaining racism in our class, and says, to the
Speaker 1: white people in the class, raise your hand if you
Speaker 1: would want to be black, m right, just raise your
Speaker 1: hand if you would want to be black in this country,
Speaker 1: given everything that you've seen, you've heard, and blah blah.
Speaker 1: Not one person, right, and so not one white person
Speaker 1: raised their hand and so there is this thing where
Speaker 1: they absolutely know that racism exists because when asked basic questions,
Speaker 1: the contortionism that they do to have it be that
Speaker 1: we're making this up in our heads. And I'm like,
Speaker 1: how could every group be making this up? And the
Speaker 1: reason why I say that your book is necessary is
Speaker 1: because absent curriculum right that is being gutted in places
Speaker 1: like Florida and Texas and other places. What do you
Speaker 1: believe happens, Keith if Republicans and the MAGA supremists are
Speaker 1: successful in their race a black history, black contribution, diversity, equity,
Speaker 1: and inclusion, and the list goes on.
Speaker 2: That's a great point. And I like the way you
Speaker 2: framed that one too, because the example I always point to,
Speaker 2: and I use this in the book is the example
Speaker 2: from Little House in the Prairie. In nineteen seventy seven,
Speaker 2: there was a TV episode where Todd Bridges played the
Speaker 2: role of a young black boy whose father had been
Speaker 2: killed and he was living with the Ingles family, and
Speaker 2: one day he gets in trouble at school and he
Speaker 2: comes back home and Charles the fall there figure asks
Speaker 2: why did you do that? And he says, because the
Speaker 2: truth is that I'm black and being black is problematic
Speaker 2: in the society. And then he asked Charles w He says,
Speaker 2: would you rather be black and live to be one
Speaker 2: hundred or white and live to be fifty? And we
Speaker 2: all know they answer that question, and Charles Ingles doesn't
Speaker 2: answer the questions, just kind of walks out, you know,
Speaker 2: Michael Landing's character just kind of walks out. But you know,
Speaker 2: the reality is that most people who are white wouldn't
Speaker 2: want to trade places with us because even though they
Speaker 2: gas light us and pretend like racism doesn't exist. They
Speaker 2: wouldn't want to be black when they're pulled over by
Speaker 2: the police. They love that white privilege. They wouldn't want
Speaker 2: to be black when they try to get a taxicab
Speaker 2: in New York City or a major city and they
Speaker 2: know that it would be harder for them to do so.
Speaker 2: They wouldn't want to be black when they walk into
Speaker 2: a department store and would have to be fouled. They
Speaker 2: wouldn't want to be black or even have a black
Speaker 2: sounding name when they apply for a job and know
Speaker 2: that that might have a negative impact on their ability
Speaker 2: to get hired. They wouldn't want to be black when
Speaker 2: they go to a doctor, and the doctor is white
Speaker 2: and is likely to see them differently and likely not
Speaker 2: to offer them the same pain medicine that a white
Speaker 2: patient would receive. You know, they wouldn't want to be black,
Speaker 2: certainly when they go to sell their home, because we
Speaker 2: know from all the documented evidence that black people who
Speaker 2: try to sell their homes find their home praise at
Speaker 2: lower values than when white people try to sell the
Speaker 2: exact same home. There is a privilege, a benefit, a
Speaker 2: financial benefit, and a property right in their whiteness, and
Speaker 2: they don't want to They don't want to give that up.
Speaker 2: So to answer your question, you know, is that they're
Speaker 2: trying to turn back the clock, Daniel. They want us
Speaker 2: to go back to that point in the past where
Speaker 2: we had no rights, not just African Americans, but people
Speaker 2: of color in general, LGBTQOA people and women who are
Speaker 2: already losing their rights in terms of reproductive rights. They
Speaker 2: want to go back to that time in the past.
Speaker 2: That's what MAGA means. Make America great again means that
Speaker 2: there were some point in the past when they think
Speaker 2: that America was great and for those of us who
Speaker 2: were black are people who are a part of marginalized communities.
Speaker 2: There was never a time that America is better for
Speaker 2: us because we didn't have any rights. You know, they
Speaker 2: want to go back to the nineteen fifties when when
Speaker 2: women couldn't could Yes, women could vote technically, but they
Speaker 2: couldn't even open a credit card without without their husband's consent.
Speaker 2: You know, people couldn't vote in a number of cities
Speaker 2: and number of states across the country, even though they
Speaker 2: legally had their right to do so. There are all
Speaker 2: kinds of restrictions against them where LGBTQA people were forced
Speaker 2: to live in the closets and couldn't be open about
Speaker 2: who they were and their identities, and immigrants were unwelcome
Speaker 2: unless they were white European. So that's the America they love,
Speaker 2: that they cherish and they want to restore, and that's
Speaker 2: what they're trying to do. So the result of that
Speaker 2: shift is they want to erase all the people who've
Speaker 2: come in the past few decades and tried to change
Speaker 2: America into a better place that's more welcoming. They wanted
Speaker 2: to go back to that unwelcoming place where they can
Speaker 2: say racist, sex is homophobic, vow bigoted things all the
Speaker 2: time without consequences. They don't have to be challenged on
Speaker 2: it by somebody in their in their office or one
Speaker 2: of their classmates or co workers.
Speaker 1: I guess what I find terrifying. You lay it all
Speaker 1: out right, and you bust these myths, you know, in
Speaker 1: your book. And yet Keith, right now, there is a
Speaker 1: faction of black men that want to vote for Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: that are aligned with Donald Trump. And Trump isn't that
Speaker 1: he's been able to peel off this sect of people.
Speaker 1: And I'm just curious from you, you know, as a
Speaker 1: black man, like, what does that mean?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 1: But do we in the media pay too much attention
Speaker 1: to it or do we not pay enough attention to
Speaker 1: the peel off? What could possibly be attractive to black
Speaker 1: men about Donald Trump?
Speaker 2: Well, that's a very astute observation that I think requires
Speaker 2: us to look back in history and in order to
Speaker 2: understand the present. There have always been black people who
Speaker 2: have aligned themselves with their oppressors. This is true and
Speaker 2: every group of marginalized people in fact that there were
Speaker 2: always people who aligned themselves with their oppressors. There are
Speaker 2: always sheep who like the wolves because they somehow, somehow
Speaker 2: feel like the wolves will protect them and they feel
Speaker 2: like they're going to be a part of that group,
Speaker 2: and it's never been a productive, safe strategy for any
Speaker 2: group of people. So if you look back at you know,
Speaker 2: I've been for the past few months, I've been looking
Speaker 2: at this documentary on BBC called The History of Africa
Speaker 2: was you Know Badali, And it's fascinating story about how
Speaker 2: African cultures evolved over centuries. And the reality is that
Speaker 2: a lot of the way that European colonists were able
Speaker 2: to take over parts of Africa is because black people
Speaker 2: were paid to sell out other black people. And we're
Speaker 2: seeing the same thing now. There are some people who
Speaker 2: don't necessarily align themselves with the interests of black people
Speaker 2: in general. That's one category. Second category of people who
Speaker 2: feel like they don't really want everyone to be free.
Speaker 2: They just want some people to be free. They want
Speaker 2: black men to be free in particular, and they're not
Speaker 2: usually interested in liberating black women or black lgbt q
Speaker 2: A people or black people who come from different backgrounds
Speaker 2: and experiences. They're not interested in any of that. They're
Speaker 2: interested in replicating a form of white male privilege, but
Speaker 2: putting it into black contexts so that they have the
Speaker 2: same privilege that white men have over their white women.
Speaker 2: Why can't we as black men, assistant and heterosexual black
Speaker 2: men have the same privileges that assistants or heterosexual white
Speaker 2: men do. I mean, you know, that's really popular in
Speaker 2: some cultures. You know, it's interesting because a lot of
Speaker 2: people talk about rap and hip hop. Funny to me
Speaker 2: is that Donald Trump is the embodiment of everything that
Speaker 2: rap and hip hop uh is as well, and they
Speaker 2: and they all the negative aspects. I should say that
Speaker 2: that people ascribe to rap and hip hop and and
Speaker 2: and nobody ever knows and nobody ever really talks about that.
Speaker 2: You know, Donald Trump lives in this gold plated penthouse
Speaker 2: in Manhattan on Fifth Avenue. He's got this model wife
Speaker 2: who's been a who's post Newton magazines before. He's got
Speaker 2: all these charges against him. Uh, he's reckless about the
Speaker 2: law and completely uh law not law abiding, but law breaking.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: And these are all the stereotypes associated with black black
Speaker 2: men in particularly Yeah, black men, you know, they just
Speaker 2: they're not interested in being serious people. They just want
Speaker 2: to do all these all these things. But some black
Speaker 2: men apparently do want those things and not all fortunately,
Speaker 2: and and so the reality is I'm not I'm not.
Speaker 2: I'm not alarm by it or surprised by it, because
Speaker 2: this is a trend that's been going on for eternity,
Speaker 2: since eternity. But I also think it's important to put
Speaker 2: it in context because the overwhelming majority of black men
Speaker 2: do not support Donald Trump. It's maybe it ends up
Speaker 2: being eighty percent or eighty five percent instead of ninety
Speaker 2: five percent as it is with black women, but that's
Speaker 2: still larger than it is in any other group of people.
Speaker 2: You know, my mom lives in Texas. Whenever I go
Speaker 2: to Texas, I'm always suspicious of people in Texas. You know,
Speaker 2: my mom is very friendly with everybody, and I get
Speaker 2: that because she lives there and all that, But I'm
Speaker 2: not as friendly and trusting of white people in the South,
Speaker 2: and white people, you know, who I feel like would
Speaker 2: take away my rights in a moment's notice. And people
Speaker 2: who voted for Donald Trump and both of his elections
Speaker 2: and didn't vote for Barack Obama. So yeah, there's a
Speaker 2: lot of people who want that privilege for themselves and
Speaker 2: don't want it for any other people.
Speaker 1: And I'm glad that you put it in the context
Speaker 1: of Okay, so if it's eighty five percent as opposed
Speaker 1: to ninety five percent, right, so that we can get
Speaker 1: a better picture. Because the tale that the Republican Party spins, right,
Speaker 1: is about lifting up, like you said, all of the
Speaker 1: negative attributes that Donald Trump has and saying like, look,
Speaker 1: he should be your king, because this is what you
Speaker 1: all are about. And I'm just like, how could you
Speaker 1: be like even more insulting, even more demeaning, right even
Speaker 1: to the people who quote unquote support you and want
Speaker 1: to wear the Blacks for Trump t shirt, right, Like,
Speaker 1: you know, whatever that is about, I want to pivot
Speaker 1: to another piece of your book where you are talking about,
Speaker 1: you know, the biggest boogeyman that we I don't think
Speaker 1: as Democrats actually faced in the way that it should
Speaker 1: have been faced, which is critical race theory. I think
Speaker 1: that when critical race theory was made up by the
Speaker 1: republic plins use very successfully to turn Virginia blue right
Speaker 1: couched in this idea of parental choice, that Democrats went
Speaker 1: on the defensive and said, well, we don't teach that.
Speaker 1: That's not what we're doing, right, And it was always
Speaker 1: about negating as opposed to posing better questions, right, talk
Speaker 1: to us about that piece in your book and why
Speaker 1: it's something that we actually need to be pulling the
Speaker 1: wool from our eyes about.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we've talked about this before, and I think it's
Speaker 2: an interesting concept that you're bringing up, because I don't
Speaker 2: necessarily think it's defensive to speak the facts, the factual
Speaker 2: truth that it's not taught in schools, but you know
Speaker 2: that's the misrepresentation that it is. But I do agree
Speaker 2: with you that it is important to understand what it
Speaker 2: is and to speak affirmatively about that and to talk
Speaker 2: about why it's important to st our history. But you know,
Speaker 2: the way I positioned it in my book is I
Speaker 2: explained what critical race theory is. I was there, and
Speaker 2: I studied critical race theory in law school back in
Speaker 2: the nineteen eighties and nineties, so I'm very familiar with it,
Speaker 2: and I know the scholars who started it. But I
Speaker 2: also know that what is being taught in classrooms is
Speaker 2: not critical race theories. For the most part, it's American history.
Speaker 2: And people are so afraid of American history that they've
Speaker 2: managed to anything that they think is negative about American history.
Speaker 2: They've managed to construct some sort of other category called
Speaker 2: critical race theory. No, this is true. Yes, America was
Speaker 2: founded on racism. Yes, slavery was a part, not just
Speaker 2: a part, It was a critical component of the success
Speaker 2: of America. Yes, the Constitution did count black people as
Speaker 2: three fifths of a citizen. Yes, the Supreme Court did
Speaker 2: say that black people, even if they weren't slaves, don't
Speaker 2: have the right to be citizens in this country. Yes,
Speaker 2: even after the Civil War, the Supreme Court came back
Speaker 2: and said that black people could be segregated racially by
Speaker 2: their government, and that was okay because it was separate
Speaker 2: and and and separate but equal. Yes, our country has
Speaker 2: had thousands and thousands of extra judicial murders of lynchings
Speaker 2: of black people after the Civil War in order to
Speaker 2: try to keep us in line. Yes, our government policies
Speaker 2: were created with the purpose of excluding black people. That history.
Speaker 2: That history wasn't something that black people just made up.
Speaker 2: It's not something that you know that that people are
Speaker 2: just kind of constructing the whole thin cloth. It's it's
Speaker 2: the reality. You know. I heard Donald Trump the other
Speaker 2: day talking about how we want to preserve Confederate monuments
Speaker 2: and why are they trying to change the names of
Speaker 2: these mind of these forts and all this stuff because
Speaker 2: the World Wars were fought out of these forts. First
Speaker 2: of all, the world wars.
Speaker 1: Were not follow of course, of course.
Speaker 2: But secondly, why are you holding on to these names?
Speaker 2: Why is are these people who Republicans of the Party
Speaker 2: of Lincoln allegedly holding onto names of Confederate traders, racist
Speaker 2: Confederate traders who fought against Lincoln, who killed Lincoln. How
Speaker 2: is that? How is that perpetuating the Party of Lincoln.
Speaker 2: It's perpetuating the antithesis of Lincoln. Because this whole part
Speaker 2: of this whole this shift, that Southern strategy and then
Speaker 2: the shift from the parties in the nineteen sixties and
Speaker 2: seventies that Republicans hate to acknowledge, but there's a long
Speaker 2: history that needs to be discussed. Thomas Jefferson, Yes, he
Speaker 2: deserves the memorial because he wrote the Declaration of Independence,
Speaker 2: but we also need to acknowledge it he was enslaver
Speaker 2: with hundreds of slaves, and he raped his black slaves.
Speaker 2: You also need you acknoweds that Thomas Jefferson wasn't in
Speaker 2: that George Washington wasn't enslaver and literally used the teeth
Speaker 2: of his slaves, enslaved people to put in his own mouth.
Speaker 2: You know, there's a whole history. Even Abraham Lincoln was
Speaker 2: a white supremacist. Yes, he signed the Emancipation Proclamation and
Speaker 2: pushed to the thirtie Amendment, but he made it very
Speaker 2: clear in his remarks repeatedly that he believed that there
Speaker 2: was a superior race, and that was the white race.
Speaker 2: There's a whole, long history. They don't want to talk
Speaker 2: about that, even a lot of the Democratic heroes of
Speaker 2: the twentieth century. You know, until we get to the
Speaker 2: nineteen sixties, what both parties had in common, in my opinion,
Speaker 2: was that they were both racist, overtly racist. You know,
Speaker 2: they made appeals every now and then to try to
Speaker 2: be less racist, to be more inclusive, but they were
Speaker 2: both overtly racist. When the Social Security Act was signed
Speaker 2: in nineteen thirty five, it did not include most black
Speaker 2: people because most black people were agriculture and domestic workers,
Speaker 2: and they were purposely excluded because the southern Dixiecrats didn't
Speaker 2: want them included. You know, when Lyndenhnsen was a notorious
Speaker 2: racist who used the N word repeatedly until he had
Speaker 2: a change of heart and he became this civil rights champion,
Speaker 2: his hero in the nineteen sixties. Even people who Republicans
Speaker 2: love to talk about, you know, the who is the
Speaker 2: West Virginia Senator I can't think of right now Robert Byrd,
Speaker 2: who's a former Klansman. They always say he was a
Speaker 2: grand Wizard of the Klan. Well, first of all, he
Speaker 2: was a klansman, but he apologized for that, recanted his
Speaker 2: beliefs and moved on. And unlike some of the other
Speaker 2: people in the Republican Party, the Storm Thurman's of the
Speaker 2: world who never really apologized. And yet Trent Lott in
Speaker 2: the two thousands, the former Republican Senate majority leader, was
Speaker 2: praising strom Thurman's nineteen forty eight segregationist campaign. That's American history.
Speaker 1: I think that what is extraordinary is everything. Every bullet
Speaker 1: that you just hit, every point that you just hit,
Speaker 1: isn't Black history. Yeah, it is American history. And to
Speaker 1: deny American history is to deny who we are and
Speaker 1: how far we've come, and yet how far there's still
Speaker 1: is left to go. The last question that I want
Speaker 1: to ask you, Keith, is this for all of the
Speaker 1: things that you've laid out, and the point that I
Speaker 1: want to pull on is that you know, up until
Speaker 1: the nineteen sixties, up until more so in the modern
Speaker 1: era of our body politic, both parties harbored, celebrated, created
Speaker 1: monuments for racists. Right that that is the thing that
Speaker 1: these two parties have in common, and I've had in common.
Speaker 1: While one has tried to become more multiracial and try
Speaker 1: and right the wrongs of its past and look together
Speaker 1: to a more progressive future, their formation and their beliefs
Speaker 1: only began to deviate right part way through the twentieth century.
Speaker 1: And so when young people gen zers, a very important
Speaker 1: voting block, say I don't like neither of them and
Speaker 1: I'm not going to vote. And this spans race and
Speaker 1: spans ethnicity, and spans orientation and identity, what is your
Speaker 1: response to that.
Speaker 2: Well, I think it's important to understand that you're right,
Speaker 2: that the parties were similar in many respects for so
Speaker 2: many decades, and it's important to say they're not very
Speaker 2: similar anymore on this one issue of race, and that
Speaker 2: they aren't completely different. But you know what, it bothers
Speaker 2: me when I hear a lot of liberal or progressive
Speaker 2: commentators talk about how the Democratic Party has lost the
Speaker 2: working class. That's beloney Black people are mostly working class voters,
Speaker 2: and the black people have been the most loyal constituency
Speaker 2: of the Democratic Party. What they mean is they've lost
Speaker 2: a percentage of the white working class. And the truth
Speaker 2: is that no Democratic candidate for president has won the
Speaker 2: white vote since nineteen sixty four, when Lyndon Johnson signed
Speaker 2: the Civil Rights Act. Ever since then, white voters have
Speaker 2: fled flocked to the Republican Party, abandoned the Democratic Party
Speaker 2: because the Democratic Party broke the contract. The contract was
Speaker 2: that two parties could argue about tax cuts and power
Speaker 2: in foreign affairs and all those other issues for years
Speaker 2: and years as long as they were both basically pretty
Speaker 2: much racist. And even you know, a Republican Party of
Speaker 2: the of the nineteenth century that pushed the Civil Rights Amendments,
Speaker 2: the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth Amendments, and the Reconstruction era,
Speaker 2: that party died. It died in the nineteenth century after
Speaker 2: when they made a deal in eighteen seventy seven to
Speaker 2: allow Rutherford B. Hayes to be president and in exchange
Speaker 2: for that, they withdrew federal protection for black people in
Speaker 2: the South, and that ended Reconstruction and the Republican Party
Speaker 2: of the eighteen sixties and seventies essentially began to die
Speaker 2: at that point. And so yes, there was there was
Speaker 2: lip service to civil rights, but nobody did anything about it,
Speaker 2: and neither party cared about it for first centuries. But
Speaker 2: once once you get Lyndon Johnson New Sciences, Will Rights
Speaker 2: Act to sixty four, the Voting Rights Act to sixty five,
Speaker 2: the Fair Housing Act of nineteen sixty eight, and introduces
Speaker 2: Medicare Medicaid and changes the policies about the way we
Speaker 2: treat black people and endorses affirmative action that this is
Speaker 2: white people the hell off, yep, And that's when things
Speaker 2: start to change. So I think it's you know, it's
Speaker 2: ahistorical for people to look today and say, oh, there's
Speaker 2: no difference between the two parties. I will grant you
Speaker 2: that the Democratic Party hasn't been able to achieve in
Speaker 2: recent years some of the many things that I would
Speaker 2: like to see it do, namely, and I pointed to
Speaker 2: the George Floyd Justice and Placing Act and the job
Speaker 2: is Voting Rights Act. But the Democrats are at least
Speaker 2: trying to do that. I mean, there are some Democrats
Speaker 2: who are not on board with that, and I would
Speaker 2: be the first to criticize those people. But the president,
Speaker 2: the vice president, the leaders of both houses, and most
Speaker 2: of the people who I respect to the Democratic Party
Speaker 2: have been pushing for those things. If the Republicans who
Speaker 2: have been in opposition to it, and a lot of
Speaker 2: people say, well, the Democrats or relation, they shouldn't be
Speaker 2: claiming that they're going to do these things if they're
Speaker 2: not able to deliver. But you have to understand the
Speaker 2: way our system works, and you understand it. You know,
Speaker 2: one king, the president is not a king, can't do
Speaker 2: anything on his own. That's also why I'm a little
Speaker 2: you know, I love Cornell west and I and I
Speaker 2: love what he represents, and that actually love Marian Williams
Speaker 2: since he's authored one of my favorite books, Returned to Love.
Speaker 2: But to be honest, I don't think either one of
Speaker 2: them would ever be uh. First of all, I don't
Speaker 2: think it could be elected. But even if they were elected,
Speaker 2: I don't think either one of them would ever be
Speaker 2: an effective leader because you can't lead our country if
Speaker 2: you don't have people in your in your party who
Speaker 2: were who are supporting you, who are following you, and
Speaker 2: you know, running a third party is not an effective
Speaker 2: way to to run a country in this nation, because
Speaker 2: you can't get anything passed through Congress. If you don't
Speaker 2: have people in your in who represent your party in Congress,
Speaker 2: you can't get any legislation passed. You can't sign executive
Speaker 2: orders because the courts will just overturn them. So people
Speaker 2: need to really study their history and understand the way
Speaker 2: the American civics works before they start talking about what
Speaker 2: they want to happen without figuring out how we're going
Speaker 2: to make this happen. So, yeah, I would love to
Speaker 2: see third parties. I don't think the Democrats Republicans are enough.
Speaker 2: I think we need other parties. But I think in
Speaker 2: order to do that, we have to start by building
Speaker 2: the grassroots infrastructure. We have to elect city council members
Speaker 2: and mayors and state representatives that's so important, and school
Speaker 2: board members and governors and state legislators and others. You know,
Speaker 2: that's why you really start to build that momentum for change.
Speaker 2: It doesn't start by electing a president who can only
Speaker 2: serve for two terms eight years max. And then have
Speaker 2: everything overturned by the following president. You have to have
Speaker 2: sustainable change, which means you have to have an expansive
Speaker 2: view of where that change takes place.
Speaker 1: Absolutely one hundred percent. Keith Boyken, thank you so very
Speaker 1: much for this new book, Folks, which is out now.
Speaker 1: Why does everything have to be about race? Twenty five
Speaker 1: are us that won't go away? It is out now.
Speaker 1: Heath always appreciate your time, your voice, your intellect, your
Speaker 1: critical thought and your writing. Thanks so much.
Speaker 2: Thanks Danielle.
Speaker 1: That is it for me today. Dear friends on Woke
Speaker 1: af AS always, power to the people and to all
Speaker 1: the people. Power, get woke and stay woke as fuck.