This is a fascinating take. Thank you for writing this, Eli. The notion that Coates can write something with utter disregard to facts and history, picking out what helps his arguments and ignoring the rest, isn’t good writing, no matter how elegant his prose.
He can try to justify their actions if that’s his opinion, I suppose, but leaving them out is a deliberate effort to mislead through omission. One can’t write about the south without writing about slavery; one can’t write about Andrew Jackson without the trail of tears, and one can’t write about the plight of today’s Palestinians without giving the context of their sworn hatred for Jews.
One has to wonder if it’s not the writing Glenn likes but the conclusion?
As a huge Glen Loury fan, I have been saddened by his lack of understanding about the history of Israel and the Jewish people. Criticize governments and weep for loss of all lives. But to support wiping a country and people off the face of the planet? Really disappointing.
Hey, I too am a big GL fan, and I too was disappointed in his recent commentary on Coates. He deserves most of the criticism he is getting for that, including the one in this excellent post.
But it’s more than a bridge too far to suggest that Glenn actually supports wiping Israel off the face of the planet.
There are enough people out there these days who DO in fact support that. We don’t need to falsely criticize those who don’t believe that and paint them with that brush.
Criticize him for his actual opinions and actions.
For those interested in the follow- up discussion on the Coates book between Loury and McWhorter, see link to it (and my take) I posted elsewhere in this comments section.
Loury tends to shoot from the hip. in the short time that I've followed him, he's retracted many things he said, changed opinions he's had.
in addition he seems to fall into the trap (as does Coates)as do many academics, the trap of their own ego, that while they may know one subject well, they convince themselves they are experts on everything. (it's actually a little embarrassing to watch sometimes...)
I can’t follow Loury anymore. Coates really needs to shrink into obscurity after the damage he’s done to our discourse around race. McWhorter literally called for attempts on the life of the former president. How does either still have a platform even? Bizarre.
I don’t follow Glenn anymore basically because he still continues to partner with John McWhorter. John called for someone to assassinate Trump and refused to take it back. That was the end for me and I canceled my subscription.
I haven't read Coates's Messages yet, so I can't comment on Glenn's take on it. Unfortunately, I am familiar with McWhorter's smug pronouncements about Trump and McWhorter's indifference to the causes and effects of the Dems' Russiagate hoax. Thus, when I heard McWhorter react to Glenn with his (McWhorter's) trademark airs of intellectual and moral superiority, I was not impressed. I obviously need to order Messages and read it myself. There's something about the online discussions of it that feels positional and propagandistic rather than analytical.
Hey, bottom line: McWhorter is indeed wrong on the Trump assassination stuff (and I agree too smug on Trump in general), but he was absolutely spot on here re: Coates while interacting with Glenn. To me this was the rare time where McWhorter’s usual tone was not merely acceptable but actually was called for and entirely appropriate.
I too canceled my subscription after McWhorter's take and before the Coates kerfuffle. After watching Glenn's praise of Coates, I am very glad I did. (And that was before he came out saying that he would be open to participating in Oct 7type barbarism.)
I strongly disagree about Coates’ “talented prose.” I find his prose sophomoric and vacuous. Puffed up with his self-importance. He’s a faux intellectual, a know-nothing. Why anyone takes him seriously is beyond me.
Wow, that's unfortunate. Glenn Loury doesn't strike me as a sympathetic ear for Coates' message, nor his perpetually aggrieved victim identification. Loury made hay from his own checkered past, but never blamed anyone else for his troubles. I can't imagine what these two fellows have in common.
Eli - you are spot on with your analysis. No challenge - only an appended 'memory'.
Please recall that Ta-Nehisi Coates was front and center on the 'USA/NATO-Europe' destruction of the African nation of Libya back in 2011. We must centrally focus on the fact that, in the subsequent 10+ years - the results of the bombing of all prime Libyan Naval & Coast Guard ships - neutralized the 'migrant interdiction' operations that took place near the Libya shore - prior to the deadly cross-Mediterranean voyages that proved deadly to 10's of thousands of souls. Why didn't Coates set foot on African soil, in Libya, to hear the perspective of the people - as he did in Gaza?
I am disappointed that Dr Loury chose to be impressed by 'epic novelistic prose' , instead of choosing not to 'forget', the role that Coates once played by 'Providing Cover' for all of the American 'Black Studies Professors' - the ones that taught us every 'western coup in Africa, Asia and South America' but for some strange reason chose not to open up this 'historical archive' when it would have cast the 'moral /historical ' rejection to the notion that Coates was selling: "Gaddafi was about to mass slaughter his people - so the USA /NATO were obliged to protect human lives'. [Sadly - black Americans are made to 'Remember The Alamo ' - the Central Park 5 from 1989, while the 'Congressional Black Caucus' ' support of the coup in Libya (US Rep Alcee Hastings, and later defended in the US House by Elijah Cummings - doing battle with the GOP visa via Benghazi ) seems to have received the "Men In Black" memory zap as no one even talks about the compromise from 'Living Vicariously Through 'The Commander In Chief'.
As Coates is allowed to 're-brand himself' as an Opponent To Imperialism - no one will jog his memory - because - (as you can see from his reception on 'the talk shows' subsequent to CBS - they are all in on the fraud scheme. ) Keep your eyes on the partnership between African Nations and Russia and China. Africa - will become the proxy battle ground (again) , like it was when the USSR versus 'The West' was the case in the Post-Colonial era - 40 years ago.
great point. I have to wonder how one can be a self-declared "opponent to imperialism" and not be against the imperialism of radical Islam, in all its many forms? And how can one square the circle of Israeli "apartheid" but not find apartheid in the mass genocides that has taken place in many dozens of Islamo-fascist countries?
I suppose the hypocrisy is the feature, not the bug. His answer to both would be that only "oppressors" can be imperialists or apartheid-ists, and only Israel and the USA (and perhaps west Europe) bear that mantle. all others - radical Islam included - are victims and therefore justified in all forms of ills, masquerading as Resistance.
Thank you for this, Eli. Glenn’s blindspot where Israel is concerned has been heartbreaking to me, as I’ve respected and enjoyed him for many years. What has frustrated me most—up until his starry-eyed reaction to Coates’s book—is that he seems to believe his views on Israel are balanced, based on the fact that almost the only Jews he interviews happen to be severely anti-Israel.
Loury probably just wants Coates to endorse his book! I used to enjoy listening to Loury. But he’s become self-absorbed and lost perspective. This latest situation vis/vis Coates is disgusting. I think Loury has surrendered his independence of thought.
Very disappointing and surprising to hear that Glen has fallen for Coates' dishonest and bigoted opinions about Jewish people. Hopefully, Coleman will knock some sense into him!
This is a fascinating take. Thank you for writing this, Eli. The notion that Coates can write something with utter disregard to facts and history, picking out what helps his arguments and ignoring the rest, isn’t good writing, no matter how elegant his prose.
He can try to justify their actions if that’s his opinion, I suppose, but leaving them out is a deliberate effort to mislead through omission. One can’t write about the south without writing about slavery; one can’t write about Andrew Jackson without the trail of tears, and one can’t write about the plight of today’s Palestinians without giving the context of their sworn hatred for Jews.
One has to wonder if it’s not the writing Glenn likes but the conclusion?
Great comment
You nailed it.
Glenn Loury is a huge disappointment. I thought he was better than that.
Same. Like so many people, his anti-Jewish bigotry has diminished him.
As a huge Glen Loury fan, I have been saddened by his lack of understanding about the history of Israel and the Jewish people. Criticize governments and weep for loss of all lives. But to support wiping a country and people off the face of the planet? Really disappointing.
Hey, I too am a big GL fan, and I too was disappointed in his recent commentary on Coates. He deserves most of the criticism he is getting for that, including the one in this excellent post.
But it’s more than a bridge too far to suggest that Glenn actually supports wiping Israel off the face of the planet.
There are enough people out there these days who DO in fact support that. We don’t need to falsely criticize those who don’t believe that and paint them with that brush.
Criticize him for his actual opinions and actions.
Appreciate your comments. I'll continue to listen to what GL says on this issue before making any rash conclusions.
For those interested in the follow- up discussion on the Coates book between Loury and McWhorter, see link to it (and my take) I posted elsewhere in this comments section.
Loury tends to shoot from the hip. in the short time that I've followed him, he's retracted many things he said, changed opinions he's had.
in addition he seems to fall into the trap (as does Coates)as do many academics, the trap of their own ego, that while they may know one subject well, they convince themselves they are experts on everything. (it's actually a little embarrassing to watch sometimes...)
I can’t follow Loury anymore. Coates really needs to shrink into obscurity after the damage he’s done to our discourse around race. McWhorter literally called for attempts on the life of the former president. How does either still have a platform even? Bizarre.
It’s said that even in the softest of hearts there is a hard place for the Jews.
anyway Eli you are awesome for writing this, and providing some pushback.
I don’t follow Glenn anymore basically because he still continues to partner with John McWhorter. John called for someone to assassinate Trump and refused to take it back. That was the end for me and I canceled my subscription.
I haven't read Coates's Messages yet, so I can't comment on Glenn's take on it. Unfortunately, I am familiar with McWhorter's smug pronouncements about Trump and McWhorter's indifference to the causes and effects of the Dems' Russiagate hoax. Thus, when I heard McWhorter react to Glenn with his (McWhorter's) trademark airs of intellectual and moral superiority, I was not impressed. I obviously need to order Messages and read it myself. There's something about the online discussions of it that feels positional and propagandistic rather than analytical.
Hey, bottom line: McWhorter is indeed wrong on the Trump assassination stuff (and I agree too smug on Trump in general), but he was absolutely spot on here re: Coates while interacting with Glenn. To me this was the rare time where McWhorter’s usual tone was not merely acceptable but actually was called for and entirely appropriate.
I too canceled my subscription after McWhorter's take and before the Coates kerfuffle. After watching Glenn's praise of Coates, I am very glad I did. (And that was before he came out saying that he would be open to participating in Oct 7type barbarism.)
I did not know that last bit! Horrifying!
McWhorter did indeed “take it back”, expressing regret for his comment.
I strongly disagree about Coates’ “talented prose.” I find his prose sophomoric and vacuous. Puffed up with his self-importance. He’s a faux intellectual, a know-nothing. Why anyone takes him seriously is beyond me.
Wow, that's unfortunate. Glenn Loury doesn't strike me as a sympathetic ear for Coates' message, nor his perpetually aggrieved victim identification. Loury made hay from his own checkered past, but never blamed anyone else for his troubles. I can't imagine what these two fellows have in common.
Loury's wife is super-Woke.
Eli - you are spot on with your analysis. No challenge - only an appended 'memory'.
Please recall that Ta-Nehisi Coates was front and center on the 'USA/NATO-Europe' destruction of the African nation of Libya back in 2011. We must centrally focus on the fact that, in the subsequent 10+ years - the results of the bombing of all prime Libyan Naval & Coast Guard ships - neutralized the 'migrant interdiction' operations that took place near the Libya shore - prior to the deadly cross-Mediterranean voyages that proved deadly to 10's of thousands of souls. Why didn't Coates set foot on African soil, in Libya, to hear the perspective of the people - as he did in Gaza?
I am disappointed that Dr Loury chose to be impressed by 'epic novelistic prose' , instead of choosing not to 'forget', the role that Coates once played by 'Providing Cover' for all of the American 'Black Studies Professors' - the ones that taught us every 'western coup in Africa, Asia and South America' but for some strange reason chose not to open up this 'historical archive' when it would have cast the 'moral /historical ' rejection to the notion that Coates was selling: "Gaddafi was about to mass slaughter his people - so the USA /NATO were obliged to protect human lives'. [Sadly - black Americans are made to 'Remember The Alamo ' - the Central Park 5 from 1989, while the 'Congressional Black Caucus' ' support of the coup in Libya (US Rep Alcee Hastings, and later defended in the US House by Elijah Cummings - doing battle with the GOP visa via Benghazi ) seems to have received the "Men In Black" memory zap as no one even talks about the compromise from 'Living Vicariously Through 'The Commander In Chief'.
As Coates is allowed to 're-brand himself' as an Opponent To Imperialism - no one will jog his memory - because - (as you can see from his reception on 'the talk shows' subsequent to CBS - they are all in on the fraud scheme. ) Keep your eyes on the partnership between African Nations and Russia and China. Africa - will become the proxy battle ground (again) , like it was when the USSR versus 'The West' was the case in the Post-Colonial era - 40 years ago.
great point. I have to wonder how one can be a self-declared "opponent to imperialism" and not be against the imperialism of radical Islam, in all its many forms? And how can one square the circle of Israeli "apartheid" but not find apartheid in the mass genocides that has taken place in many dozens of Islamo-fascist countries?
I suppose the hypocrisy is the feature, not the bug. His answer to both would be that only "oppressors" can be imperialists or apartheid-ists, and only Israel and the USA (and perhaps west Europe) bear that mantle. all others - radical Islam included - are victims and therefore justified in all forms of ills, masquerading as Resistance.
Thank you for this, Eli. Glenn’s blindspot where Israel is concerned has been heartbreaking to me, as I’ve respected and enjoyed him for many years. What has frustrated me most—up until his starry-eyed reaction to Coates’s book—is that he seems to believe his views on Israel are balanced, based on the fact that almost the only Jews he interviews happen to be severely anti-Israel.
Yes, it has been disappointing. I didn't say anything for a year, but this Coates thing broke it for me.
Loury probably just wants Coates to endorse his book! I used to enjoy listening to Loury. But he’s become self-absorbed and lost perspective. This latest situation vis/vis Coates is disgusting. I think Loury has surrendered his independence of thought.
Thank you for expressing this, I had been thinking this but could never have articulated it as well
I love Glenn Loury, and usually find him reasonable even where I disagree with him.
But he’s just wrong on this topic. And your description re: treating Coates as a white liberal would was SPOT. ON.
Bravo!
Very disappointing and surprising to hear that Glen has fallen for Coates' dishonest and bigoted opinions about Jewish people. Hopefully, Coleman will knock some sense into him!