Uncommon Knowledge

Jason Riley On “False Black Power?”

Recorded on February 21, 2019.

What is “false black power?” According to Jason Riley, author of False Black Power?, it is political clout, whereas true black power is human capital and culture. Riley and Peter Robinson dive into the arguments in Riley’s new book, the history of African Americans in the United States, and welfare inequality in black communities. 

Riley discusses the Moynihan report of 1965, which documented the rise of black families headed by single women in inner cities and how this report was something black sociologists had already been writing about for several years. He argues that there was clearly a breakdown of the nuclear family and that this is a result of the “Great Society” welfare programs of the 1960s rather than the legacy of slavery or Jim Crow laws.

In the 1960s, Riley posits that the black activist community’s shift towards political engagement was misguided. He argues that the idea of black political clout leading to black economic advancement was misplaced. Other impoverished communities (i.e. Irish, Jewish, and Italian immigrant communities) at various times in American history focused on economic advancement first before trying to achieve political clout, and they were successful. Instead, the black community focused first on electing black politicians, which ended up doing very little for the economic advancement of the community as politicians typically put their own interests first, above their communities’. Riley points out that the economic data shows that black communities became more impoverished under black leadership.

Riley proposes a solution of advocating for more school-choice vouchers, which allow black parents to take better control of their children’s futures and place them in the best schools for them. He also argues for reducing social safety nets, making them a more temporary form of welfare rather than the multigenerational welfare system currently in place.

Other resources

https://www.amazon.com/Please-Stop-Helping-Us-Liberals/dp/1594038414/ref=pd_bxgy_14_2/147-2230119-8429907 Please Stop Helping Us, by Jason Riley

https://www.hoover.org/research/discrimination-and-disparities-thomas-sowell - Discrimination and Disparities, with Thomas Sowell

https://californiaglobe.com/fr/stanford-hoover-institution-economist-targets-socialism-fears-we-may-not-make-it/ Stanford Hoover Institution economist targets socialism, fears ‘we may not make it’

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUvQxcVYQlY - Sowell: Politicians using race as their ticket to whatever racket they're running

Cost-Effective Approaches to Save the Environment, with Bjorn Lomborg

Recorded on February 11, 2019.

How much will it cost to slow climate change? Bjorn Lomborg, president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, performs cost-benefit analysis on the Green New Deal and the UN’s Climate Report, analyzes the economic impact of climate change in the next century, and proposes economically feasible alternative plans to reduce climate change.

Is climate change the rapidly impending apocalypse it seems? Bjorn Lomborg discusses climate change as depicted in doomsday films like The Day after Tomorrow and breaks down why it will not be an instantaneous apocalypse as often portrayed. He talks about the economic impact climate change will have on the global GDP in the next one hundred years if not solved and the impact on the global GDP if money is spent towards resolving it. He details the reasons Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal is not feasible in the ten-year timeline she has proposed and why, even if it were feasible, it would be prohibitively expensive. He discusses the reality of reducing the amount of energy used in developing countries and how it’s unlikely that those countries will be willing to give up on things like electricity now that they have it.

Lomborg suggests that the best way to resolve climate change is to put money now towards research and development for new, cleaner sources of energy that are cheaper than coal and natural gas, because countries will be much more likely to adopt a new energy resource if it is the cheapest option. Finding cheaper energy solutions will have a positive impact on global GDP, and people will be much more willing to adopt it. He also suggests implementing a modest carbon tax, which would have a great long-term impact on reducing climate change.

Related Resources

• Free-Market Environmentalism
• Carbon Taxes: The Most Efficient Way to Reduce Emissions
• Energy Efficiency: Our Best Source of Clean Energy
• Identifying Smart Climate-Change Policies
• Statement Backing Hoover Fellow and Stanford Professor’s Carbon-Tax Proposal Garners Record-Setting Support from Economists
• The Conservative Case for Carbon Dividends