Podcasts about alcoff

Ein Vortrag des Erziehungswissenschaftlers Markus Rieger-LadichModeration: Katja Weber **********"Ich als alter weißer Mann..." - diese Aussage signalisiert: Ich bin auf der Höhe der Zeit, ich kenne die gängigen Diskurse. Aber als ritualisierte Beichte bringt diese Erkenntnis gar nichts, meint der Erziehungswissenschaftler Markus Rieger-Ladich.Markus Rieger-Ladich ist Professor für Allgemeine Erziehungswissenschaft an der Universität Tübingen. 2022 erschien sein Band "Das Privileg. Kampfvokabel und Erkenntnisinstrument". Seinen Vortrag mit dem Titel "Was heißt hier Privileg? - Privilegienkritik neu gedacht" hat er auf Einladung des Hörsaals am 11. Oktober 2024 anlässlich des Pocast-Festivals Beats & Bones gehalten. **********Schlagworte: +++ Freiheitsrechte +++ Menschenrechte +++ Feminismus +++ Klassismus +++ Status +++ Soziologie +++ Erziehungswissenschaftler +++ Tradition +++**********Ihr hört in diesem Hörsaal:00:02:20 - Gespräch vor dem Vortrag und was Rieger-Ladichs Oma damit zu tun hat00:08:04 - Beginn Vortrag: Einleitung, These und Überblick00:10:33 - Privileg aus rechtstheoretischer Perspektive00:16:41 - Der Begriff Privileg in der Bildungssoziologie der 1960er und 1970er Jahre00:17:49 - Privilegienkritik als Kampfbegriff in emanzipatorischen Bewegungen00:38:30 - Herausforderungen für einen Neustart der Debatte00: 42:32 - Publikumsfragen nach dem Vortrag**********Empfehlungen aus der Folge:Mohamed Amjahid. Unter Weißen. Was es heißt, privilegiert zu sein. München: Hanser Berlin 2017.Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte: Privilegien. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung 2024.Rolf Becker/Wolfgang Lauterbach (Hrsg.): Bildung als Privileg. Erklärungen und Befunde zu den Ursachen der Bildungsungleichheit. 5., erweitere Auflage. Wiesbaden: SpringerVS 2016.Pierre Bourdieu/Jean-Claude Passeron. Die Illusion der Chancengleichheit: Untersuchungen zur Sozio-logie des Bildungswesens am Beispiel Frankreichs. Stuttgart: Klett 1971.Pierre Bourdieu. Bildung. Aus dem Französischen von Barbara Picht u.a. Mit einem Nachwort von Markus Rieger-Ladich. Berlin: Suhrkamp 2018.Esme Choonara/Yuri Prasad. Der Irrweg der Privilegientheorie. In: International Socialism 142 (2020), S. 83-110.Combahee River Collective. Ein Schwarzes feministisches Statement (1977). In: Natascha A. Kelly (Hrsg.): Schwarzer Feminismus. Grundlagentexte. Münster: Unrast 2019, S. 47-60.Didier Eribon. Betrachtungen zur Schwulenfrage. Aus dem Französischen von Bernd Schwibs und Achim Russer. Berlin: Suhrkamp 2019.Roxane Gay. Fragwürdige Privilegien. In: Dies.: Bad Feminist. Essays. München: btb 2019, S. 31-36.Michael S. Kimmel/Abby L. Ferber (Hrsg.): Privilege. A Reader. New York: Routledge 2017.Maria-Sibylla Lotter. Ich bin schuldig, weil ich bin (weiß, männlich und bürgerlich). Politik als Läuterungsdiskurs. In: Herwig Grimm/Stephan Schleissig (Hrsg.): Moral und Schuld. Exkulpationsnarrative in Ethikdebatten. Baden-Baden: Nomos 2019, S. 67-86.Peggy McIntosh. Weißsein als Privileg. Die Privilege Papers. Nachwort von Markus Rieger-Ladich. Ditzingen: Reclam 2024.Walter Benn Michaels. Der Trubel um Diversität. Wie wir lernten, Identitäten zu lieben und Ungleichheiten zu ignorieren. Aus dem Englischen übersetzt von Christoph Hesse. Berlin: Tiamat 2021.Linda Martín Alcoff. Das Problem, für andere zu sprechen. Ditzingen: Reclam 2023.Charles W. Mills. Weißes Nichtwissen. In: Kristina Lepold/Marina Martinez Mateo (Hrsg.): Critical Philosophy of Race. Ein Reader. Berlin: Suhrkamp 2021, S. 180-216,Heinz Mohnhaupt. Privilegien als Sonderrechte in europäischen Rechtsordnungen vom Mittelalter bis heute. Frankfurt/Main: Klostermann 2024.Heinz Mohnhaupt/Barbara Dölemeyer (Hrsg.): Das Privileg im europäischen Vergleich. 2 Bände. Frankfurt/Main: Klostermann 1997/1999.Toni Morrison. Die Herkunft der Anderen. Über Rasse, Rassismus und Literatur. Mit einem Vorwort von Ta-Nehisi Coates. Aus dem Englischen von Thomas Piltz. Reinbek: Rowohlt 2018.Markus Rieger-Ladich. Identitätsdebatte oder: Das Comeback des Privilegs. In: Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik 66 (2021), S. 97-104.Markus Rieger-Ladich. Das Privileg. Kampfvokabel und Erkenntnisinstrument. Ditzingen: Reclam 2022.Markus Rieger-Ladich. Privilegien. In: Merkur 77 (2023), Heft 889, S. 71-80.Markus Rieger-Ladich. Neustart der Privilegienkritik. Ein Plädoyer. In: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 21 (2024), S. 4-10.Jörg Scheller. (Un)Check Your Privilege. Wie die Debatte um Privilegien Gerechtigkeit verhindert. Stuttgart: Hirzel 2022.Steffen Vogel. Das Erbe von 68: Identitätspolitik als Kulturrevolution. In: Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik 66 (2021), S. 97-104.Katharina Walgenbach. Bildungsprivilegien im 21. Jahrhundert. In: Meike Sophia Baader/Tatjana Freytag (Hrsg.): Bildung und Ungleichheit in Deutschland. Wiesbaden: VS 2017, S. 513-536. **********Mehr zum Thema bei Deutschlandfunk Nova:Soziologie: Freundschaften hängen auch vom Geldbeutel abSoziologie: Warum die Klimakrise polarisiertSoziologie: Geld als Kriegsmittel - Wie effektiv das ist**********Den Artikel zum Stück findet ihr hier.**********Ihr könnt uns auch auf diesen Kanälen folgen: TikTok auf&ab , TikTok wie_geht und Instagram .

On this episode of Chasing Leviathan, PJ and Dr. Linda Alcoff discuss the life and work of Charles Mills, a radical philosopher who made significant contributions to the methodology of political philosophy. Dr. Alcoff explores Mills' emphasis on the importance of understanding the historical and political context in which ideas are developed, arguing for a shift from ideal theory to non-ideal theory. She also highlights his discussion of the epistemology of ignorance, which examines the ways in which knowledge is shaped and limited by social and political factors. Additionally, Dr. Alcoff calls to attention the significance of Mills' focus on race and colonialism, along with his efforts to challenge misconceptions and exclusions within liberalism.Make sure to check out Dr. Alcoff's article: The Life of Charles Mills, Radical Philosopher Extraordinaire

For this episode, I spoke to Wendy Salkin, a philosophy professor at Stanford University, about informal political representatives: people who speak or act on behalf of groups in the political sphere without being elected to do so. Familiar examples include Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Malala Yousafzai, and Greta Thunberg.Informal political representatives raise awareness of issues and bring about political change, often achieving things that people with more formal power cannot or do not. But their existence also raises some ethical questions. Do they need to be authorised? Can they be held accountable? What if the things they say diverge from the views of the people they represent?Professor Salkin's book on this subject, Speaking for Others: The Ethics of Informal Political Representation, was released by Harvard University Press on July 9th.Relevant reading:Alcoff, L. (1991). The Problem of Speaking for Others. Cultural Critique, 20, 5–32.Chapman, E.B. (2022). Election Day: How We Vote and What It Means for Democracy. Princeton University Press.Du Bois, W.E.B. (1997). “Of Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others” in The Souls of Black Folk, ed. David W. Blight and Robert Gooding-Williams, 62–72. Bedford Books.Jagmohan, D. (forthcoming). Dark Virtues: Booker T. Washington's Tragic Realism. Princeton University Press.King, M.L., Jr. (2010) Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story. Beacon Press.Mansbridge, J.J. (1983) Beyond Adversary Democracy. University of Chicago Press.Montanaro, L. (2017). Who Elected Oxfam?: A Democratic Defense of Self-Appointed Representatives. Cambridge University Press.Pitkin, H. (1967). The Concept of Representation. University of Los Angeles Press.Rehfeld, A. (2006). Towards a General Theory of Political Representation. Journal of Politics 68, no. 1: 1–21.Saward, M. (2010). The Representative Claim. Oxford University Press.Washington, B.T. “The Standard Printed Version of the Atlanta Exposition Address,” in The Souls of Black Folk: Authoritative Text, Contexts, Criticism, ed. Henry Louis Gates, Jr., and Terri Hume Oliver, 167–170. W. W. Norton.Ethics Untangled is produced by the IDEA Ethics Centre at the University of Leeds.Twitter: @EthicsUntangledFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/ideacetlLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/idea-ethics-centre/

In episode 102 of Overthink, Ellie and David discuss diverse ideas of racial mixedness, from family-oriented models of mixed race to José Vasconcelos' and Gloria Anzaldua's idea of the ‘mestizo' heritage of Mexican people. They work through phenomenological accounts of cultural hybridity and selfhood, wondering how being multiracial pushes beyond the traditional Cartesian philosophical subject. Is mestizaje or mixed-race an identity in its own right? What are its connections to the history of colonialism and contemporary demographic trends? And, how can different relations to a mixed heritage lead to flourishing outside of white supremacist categories?Check out the episode's extended cut here! Works DiscussedLinda Martín Alcoff, Visible Identities: Race, Gender, and the Self Gloria Anzaldúa, Borderlands/La Frontera Rosie Braidotti, Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Contemporary Feminist Theory Elisa Lipsky-Karasz, “Naomi Osaka on Fighting for No. 1 at the U.S. Open”Mariana Ortega, In-Between: Latina Feminist Phenomenology, Multiplicity, and the SelfNaomi Osaka, “Naomi Osaka reflects on challenges of being black and Japanese”Octavio Paz, The Labyrinth of Solitude Adrian Piper, “Passing for White, Passing for Black” Carlin Romano, “A Challenge for Philosophy”José Vasconcelos, La Raza Cósmica Naomi Zack, Race and Mixed Race Patreon | patreon.com/overthinkpodcast Website | overthinkpodcast.comInstagram & Twitter | @overthink_podEmail | Dearoverthink@gmail.comYouTube | Overthink podcastSupport the show

In the first segment of this week's episode of The Indypendent News Hour on WBAI-99.5 FM, we spoke with Linda Martín Alcoff, who penned an article in the April issue of The Indypendent titled “White Fright and a Changing World: Here's What Keeps MAGA up at Night.” In her article, Alcoff writes “We need to understand today's political crisis as epochal rather than merely current and caused most fundamentally by the slow demise of the modern colonial world system.” Alcoff is a professor of philosophy at Hunter College and the CUNY Graduate Center and the author of numerous books including “The Future of Whiteness” and “Race and Racism: A Decolonial Approach,” which will be released later this year by Oxford University Press.

In the first segment of this week's episode, we spoke with Linda Martín Alcoff, who penned an article in the April issue of The Indypendent titled “White Fright and a Changing World: Here's What Keeps MAGA up at Night.” In her article, Alcoff writes “We need to understand today's political crisis as epochal rather than merely current and caused most fundamentally by the slow demise of the modern colonial world system.” Alcoff is a professor of philosophy at Hunter College and the CUNY Graduate Center and the author of numerous books including “The Future of Whiteness” and “Race and Racism: A Decolonial Approach,” which will be released later this year by Oxford University Press. In the second segment, we hear from New York State Senator Jabari Brisport, a democratic socialist from central Brooklyn. Negotiations on the roughly $230 billion annual state budget have sailed by the March 31 deadline mandated by state law and remain deadlocked. Gov. Kathy Hochul, Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and their staffs are negotiating behind closed doors while other legislators weigh in on the talks. We talk about efforts to weave affordable housing policies into the budget and the competing claims of landlords and tenants about how to address New York's housing crisis and more.

The Context of White Supremacy welcomes Racist Suspect Dr. Linda Martin Alcoff. She has one White parent and one non-white parent. A professor of philosophy at Hunter College and the Graduate Center, CUNY, Dr. Alcoff is a past president of the American Philosophical Association. Her areas of work include epistemology, Latin American philosophy, feminism, critical race theory and continental philosophy. Gus learned about her work from our recent study of Whiteout: How Racial Capitalism Changed the Color of Opioids in America. Interestingly, there are 1 non-white and 2 White authors for this book, and the non-white lead author also has one White parent and one non-white parent. We spoke with White co-author Dr. David Herzberg, who talked about being bullied as a child and his so called Jewish parents' challenge to being accepted as White. There are several points in Whiteout where Dr. Herzberg and his co-authors suggest that poor White people are mistreated similarly to black people. Additionally, the authors reference Dr. Alcoff's work when talking about listless White opioid addicts and their frustrations about the reduced percentage of Whites in the world. Gus thought The Future of Whiteness, Dr. Alcoff's 2015 publication, would have amazing insight on the demographic worries Dr. Frances Cress Welsing theorized about. Wrong. Dr. Alcoff's work reads like the typical Racist who deliberately obfuscates and lies about the practice of Racism. Just like Dr. Herzberg's crew, Dr. Alcoff suggests the mistreatment of some White people is "analogous" to the abuse of niggras. The book makes questionable claims with paltry supporting evidence, and posits that there are “armies of progressive Whites in the antiracist struggle.” Easily one of the worst books Gus has ever read. Zero constructive value, and may be deliberate misinformation promoted by a White Supremacist/Racist. Dr. Alcoff told us she has "White presentation." Gus has heard an array of categories similar to this ("honorary white," "white adjacent," "probationary white"). Racist Suspect is a more accurate description of someone you think might be widely accepted as 1 1111 other people classified as White and able to practice White Supremacy. #AffirmativeAction #TheBellCurve #TheCOWS14Years INVEST in The COWS – http://paypal.me/TheCOWS Cash App: https://cash.app/$TheCOWS CALL IN NUMBER: 605.313.5164 CODE: 564943#

This episode gets an enthusiastic yes from us. In episode 85 of Overthink, Ellie and David dive into the crux of sexual consent. They work through some of the earliest attempts on the part of American universities at developing a sexual consent policy, before unpacking the fiery debates surrounding consent today — ranging from complex legal cases as well as instances of “gray rape.” They probe the limits of popular understandings of consent with cases involving intense physical pain, and cases which undo the very stability of our idea of consent. (Can one meaningfully consent to one's own murder?) They explore Ellie's own proposal for rethinking our idea of consent. Is consent contractual? Performative? Magic? And, should it really be the central tenet of our sexual ethics?Content warning: this episode contains graphic discussions of sexual violence and bodily harm.Check out the episode's extended cut here!Works DiscussedLinda Martín Alcoff, Rape and ResistanceEllie Anderson, “A Phenomenological Approach to Sexual Consent” and “The Limits of Consent in Sexual Ethics”Katherine Angel, Tomorrow Sex Will Be Good AgainAnn Cahill, Rethinking RapeHeidi Hurd, “The Moral Magic of Consent”Jonathan Ichikawa, “Presupposition and Consent”Joseph Fischer, Screw ConsentJoan McGregor, Is it Rape?Caleb Ward and Ellie Anderson, “The Ethical Significance of Being an Erotic Object”Bari Weiss, “Aziz Ansari Is Guilty. Of Not Being a Mind Reader”Is It Date Rape? (1991 SNL Skit)Patreon | patreon.com/overthinkpodcast Website | overthinkpodcast.comInstagram & Twitter | @overthink_podEmail |  dearoverthink@gmail.comYouTube | OverthinkSupport the show

SPEAKERSAlecia Jackson, Liza Mazzei, Jessica Van Cleave Jessica Van CleaveHello and welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast hosted by the qualitative research SIG of AERA, the American Educational Research Association. I'm Jessica Van Cleave, Chair of the Qualitative Research SIG and Associate Professor of Curriculum and Instruction at Gardner Webb University. The Qualitative Conversations podcast doesn't have a regular host. Instead, each episode is organized by our podcast committee. Today I have the pleasure of hosting this episode, in which I interviewed Dr. Lisa Mazzei and Dr. Alecia Jackson about their recently published second edition of Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research. Lisa Mazzei is Professor of Education Studies and Alumni Faculty Professor of Education at the University of Oregon, where she is also affiliated faculty in the department of philosophy. She is a methodological innovator in post human inquiry, and her work is widely read and cited across disciplines such as education, psychology, sociology, political science, anthropology, business and medicine. She is the author of Inhabited Silence in Qualitative Research from 2007. Alecia Jackson is Professor of Educational Research at Appalachian State University in Boone, North Carolina, where she is also affiliated faculty in the Gender, Women's and Sexuality Studies program. Dr. Jackson's research interests bring feminist post structural and post human theories of power, knowledge, language, materiality and subjectivity to bear on a range of overlapping topics deconstructions of voice and method conceptual analyses of resistance freedom and agency in girls and women's lives and qualitative analysis and the posts. Her work seeks to animate philosophical frameworks in the production of the new and her current projects are focused on the ontological turn qualitative inquiry and thought. Together they are co-authors of Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research, first and second editions, and coeditors of Voice in Qualitative Inquiry from 2009. Their forthcoming edited book, Postfoundational Approaches to Qualitative Inquiry, will be published in 2023. Lisa and Alecia, thank you so much for joining us on this episode of Qualitative Conversations. Liza MazzeiDelighted to be here. Thanks for inviting us. Alecia JacksonThank you for the invitation. Jessica Van CleaveAbsolutely. So some of our listeners may not be familiar with your work, or maybe new to your work. So would you be willing to tell us a little bit about yourselves, how you came to write together, and how you came to write Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research? Liza MazzeiWell, Alecia and I say that we share an academic genealogy. We first met at AERA in 2005, I think I was presenting a paper on some of my voice work. Alecia came to attend the session. And she came and introduced herself at the end of the session. And I had just finished reading an article that she had written about subjectivity with new teachers. And so I was so excited to meet her and I had just been reading her work. And so we sat out in the hallway for about an hour. And we're talking about projects. And we said that we should propose a session for AERA the following year on voice because we were both looking at voice and challenging conventional understandings. And so that was right before I was moving to England, I moved to England in 2006, was attending the British Education Research Association Conference, started chatting with a book editor. And like a good editor, he always says, What's your current project? And so I told him about this idea that Alecia and I had for a session and he said, that sounds fabulous. Can you get a book proposal to me in a month? So I'm at this conference, emailing this woman that I've met in person once saying, can we put a book together, a book proposal, and that was the proposal we wrote for voice and qualitative inquiry. And the reviews were very positive for the book. But people who read the proposal didn't think that we could secure some of the authors that we had said we would put that would contribute. And they didn't know that I had studied with Patti Lather at Ohio State University, Alecia had studied with Bettie St. Pierre at the University of Georgia, and through these feminist networks, we had connections with some scholars who were doing some very interesting work. So that was the that was the beginning of our long and fruitful partnership. Alecia JacksonYeah, when we were working on the voice book, I traveled to Manchester. And so we had some writing time together. So one thing I do want to say is that Lisa and I have, ever since the collaboration began, we've never we've never lived in the same time zone. Is that right? Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Yeah. So I think that's something that, you know, is really unique to the way that we've made things work. But we went to Manchester, we worked on the voice book, and then you came here, and we were working on Thinking with Theory. So we've had a couple of times that we've worked together, but in you know, Lisa has explained kind of the origin story. And then how Thinking with Theory came about is that after the voice book, we got really interested in we both were doing separately, we both were working on philosophically informed inquiry. And it didn't have that name at the time. Nobody was calling it that. Nobody was you know, calling it thinking with theory. It didn't have a name. And but it's what we were doing. And we started because we're reading each other's work and through the voice book, we realized is that, you know, what, what would it be like to, you know, to write something together, that was an alternative to, quote, data analysis. We were both talking about how to teach this way of doing this kind of analytic work and conceptual work. And there were lots of journal articles that people doing this kind of analytic thinking. But there wasn't anything that was out there cohesive, that we could use me, really to us in our teaching, that was kind of the impetus. So we were at the Congress. And we were out to dinner with Philip Mudd, who was our editor for the voice book. And we pitched this idea of taking, you know, one data set, and we will talk about how we don't really use that language anymore in a moment. But we talked to him about how to maybe conceptualize a book where we had one set of data that we looked at, that we analyzed across different theories. And he really loved it. And at that dinner, you know, he said, Yeah, let's put this together and see, see what it's like. Jessica Van CleaveThank you so much. It's really fantastic to sort of trace that process, obviously, briefly from that first meeting, until the beginnings of thinking with theory. So as you began the process of writing, thinking with theory and moving through to publication, what were your hopes for the book at the time? Liza MazzeiI think I don't know, I don't know what our hopes were, I think our hopes were that it would be I mean, we've talked, we talked about our work when we started envisioning a new project as what kind of intervention do we want to make? And I remember extending what Alecia was saying, I remember being at the Congress, and we started talking about wanting something for our teaching and going to the book exhibit and looking at what was what was presented as analysis. And it was all about coding. And so our I think, you know, our initial hope was, well, this, this isn't what this is not representative of the kind of work that we do. This isn't how we teach our students. And so as Alecia said, We wanted something for our own teaching. And maybe I guess the hope was that it would be picked up by others and be useful to them. So Alecia Jacksonyes, I think it was a matter of, of what Lisa said, the intervention, I think, is a really good word. We, as I mentioned, what we did there wasn't a name for what we were doing. And we said, we wanted that we you know, Bettie St. Pierre always says write something that people can cite. And so that was something that, you know, she's always said to, and you've probably heard it too, Jessica, write something that people can cite. And, and, and put something out in the world that people can, you know, can use, and I really have a big part of part of the impetus for both of us, I think was to give this alternative to the field and name it in some way and have it so that, you know, it was it would become something that was recognizable that people could use, and really to take the field into that direction. I think that we, you know, back in the early 2010 to 12 qualitative research was shifting. It was shifting away from, you know, interpretive work and even critical work. And it was just time, it was time to bring it all together and give it a name and give it a place. And there was just so much enthusiasm right away because I think people were really didn't feel like coding was really analysis. So, you know, we had already done some work on that talking, writing about pieces, we're writing about how coding is not analysis and, and I thought this was just a way to give it a place in in the in the in the field Jessica Van CleaveWell, I mean, it's fascinating because as you said, Yes and that advice from Bettie it's definitely something that that I think all of us who have ever worked with her have heard, and it's so true. since y'all have published the first edition of Thinking with Theory, there's been an explosion of all of the you know, the methodologies without methodology, and concept as method and anti-methodology. You know, this sort of thing that you said there was a hunger for at the time. I mean, I think there's no better evidence than how much has proliferated since then. So in the years since its initial publication, Thinking with Theory has become a staple in qualitative inquiry. People are citing it not only in dissertations, but in articles across the field, across publications. Instructors are using your text in their masters and doctoral level courses, Thinking with Theory has really become part of the canon of what qualitative analysis can be and can mean. And one thing also from Bettie, that comes up for me a lot when I think about what work does, especially aside from what your hopes might have initially been, is Alcoff's, quote, to paraphrase, you never know where your work goes and what it does there. So what do you think about where your work has gone? And what it's done there? How it's been taken up and received, since you published? Liza MazzeiDo you want to start Alecia or? No? Um, you know, I think, what do I think? This isn't about I remember the first time I was at AERA decades ago, and I had a piece that had come out in ED Researcher, and I was walking, like, from building to building and there was someone sitting on a bench. And I happened to glance and they were reading my article. And I thought, oh, my gosh, what, what? What a, what a validation, I guess, of one's work to know that someone would take the time to actually pick it up and read it. And so I think that the fact that people are talking about thinking with theory as a methodology is not something that I ever imagined would happen. I think one of the things that I'm most proud of in terms of the work that Alecia and I've done together is that people will say to us at conferences, or students will say to us how pedagogical the work is how, how much it helps them understand. And that was really a primary goal of ours was to, to extend the reach of this way of thinking, so that people would consider a new analytic, if you will. I'm not I don't feel like I'm really answering your question. I don't go ahead, Alecia. Alecia JacksonNo, I think it's, I think that Lisa and I are both very, I don't know, humble people, and we just didn't really write this book in order to, you know, do anything other than, I don't know, I think we kind of wrote it for ourselves, at first, you know, and then because we wanted to do something together. And then I think, I've been most surprised, I guess, at how it's not just in educational research, like when I've had to go through and do my, you know, annual reviews, and, you know, going up for promotion, and all that. And you pull up the, you know, the Google Scholar citations, and it's just surprising to me that all sorts of social science disciplines have picked up this work. It's not just educational research, but it's, you know, people in, in all sorts of disciplines that I never would have imagined. I think there was even some citations from a business journal. And I just thought, wow, you know, so I guess what's been most delightful is that it's crossed all kinds of boundaries, which I believe that's one of our missions in, you know, is reaching into other found, you know, do some do some deterritorialized thing through the book, in terms of qualitative research, but it moving across all these other fields, you know, anthropology, sociology, business, I mean, just, there's just a whole, a whole lot of other disciplines that have taken it up. And just the expansion of that has been really surprising. I would have never thought that the work would go there. But it's really, I think, it's exciting. It's humbling. It's very endearing for people, you know, on social media to, you know, make comments about that. They have it, they've read it. It's, you know, I had a colleague who did a Fulbright in Australia. And she got there and was working with a faculty member. And the first thing they said is, oh, you work with Alecia Jackson, look, I have the book, you know, do you know. And it's just so it's just wonderful that it's just connected us, to so many people. And it's been so useful and so helpful. So. Jessica Van CleaveSo then you get asked to write a second edition of this incredibly impactful book that has gone all of these places and done all of these things. When you were first asked to write that second edition, how do you approach that as a project, especially given how big Thinking with Theory is? Alecia JacksonIt was very difficult. And we've been working on the second edition for a while the pandemic hit us, and it slowed everything down as it did for a lot of people. We changed editors, in in the at somewhere in the middle of all this, but we, we wanted to do something because it will talk a little bit about how the book is different. But in the intervening years after this was published, we began to critique some of the things that we had done in the first edition. And we wanted to update some of the things that we had written in chapter one in particular, the way we were conceptualizing some different aspects of it. And we'll get into that, but the main thing we struggled with was, do we add more theoretical chapters? Do we keep them really, you know, they work? Why change them? Do we want to add? So it took us a while, a couple of years to really think about how we wanted it to look and what we wanted to say that would be different enough, so that people would, you know, find the second edition, you know, an actual extension of what we had done. Something different. So it, it took a while. It was a process, but once we really figured out what we were doing, it flowed pretty well, you know, we were able to really work with it. Quickly. So. Liza MazzeiI mean, yeah, I think, I think initially, when we first started talking about the project, we thought that it would not, it would not involve as much new writing as it did. And when we started even, even the chapters that we that we said, Okay, well, you know, we're pretty solid with the with Derrida, there's not a lot we need to change. But then when we started really getting into it, it's like, oh, everything has to change, because all of our thinking and languaging is different. And as both of you have talked about, you know, I think when the first edition was published, that was about the time when, when Bettie published her first piece on post qualitative inquiry, and then we had special issues on data analysis after coding and so forth. And so everything that was informing our thinking, in addition to the way we were doing our own work had shifted, and, and then what we learned from working with students and the places that, that we were able to be more that we were able to show more well, what we were doing, or what we thought we were doing, because we had been doing it, you know, in the intervening time, we've been teaching it, we've been working with students around these texts in the intervening time. So I think it was it's, it's a completely different text in many ways. Jessica Van CleaveSo that kind of leads in you, you have spoken to this, I think a little bit already with that, that your thinking and your languaging and your processes and your experiences and your inter and intra actions had all shifted since the initial publication, but how did you end up deciding then what to include, what to change ,and what not to include in that second edition? Alecia JacksonThat was a process. I think that emerged from what Lisa was saying about the teaching, you know, using the book and teaching what really kind of confused students, you know, what, what was what were some things that they just couldn't, you know, make the turn into, because it was some languaging. Also related to where the book has gone. What it's done is we have done lots of workshops, using this text at the Congress in particular, but also individually, we've gone to institutions and have done workshops together and individually. And we just started to notice there were some some languaging, that that didn't really quite represent what we really wanted to do. And part of that was if we wanted to really make a break, we really wanted to escape conventional qualitative inquiry and go on this line of flight, we would need to really, really change how we talked about it. So the second edition, we dropped data altogether, it's not even in the title anymore. We don't use that word anywhere in in the book, and we call it instead, we came up with a concept, you know, so we were very much into this work is about concept creation, and, and so we came up with performative accounts. And that's how we talk about the so called stories that are that are part of the part of the plugging in. So performative accounts helps us to say something differently about, about memory, about language about subjectivity, what words do, what stories do and rather than representing reality or experience that they're, that these are actually ontological stories and the process of plugging in is a performative and so we use that language in Butler's chapter. And we just decided to pick it up and use it in the intro to make well actually, in the preface, we, we describe that shift from data to performative accounts, and then we had to rewrite the whole, you know, all of the middle chapters because data was everywhere. And really reconceptualize not just replace the word throughout, but really rewrite what was going on in plugging in if we call this entire process performative. So that was that was one. Lisa, if you want to talk about a couple of the others. Liza MazzeiYeah, I think we do a much better job in this edition talking about the questions and the emergence of the questions. That was also a thing that I think, through workshops and teachings that students were, how do I, you know, how do I do this? And so so an example when I sit on dissertation committees and students would, you know, in their proposal say, well, this is my analytic question. Well, now we call them becoming questions, but I would, but then it's like, no, you're you're missing the point. Because you can't identify that question up front, because you don't know what's going to emerge until you are actually immersed in the texts, both the conceptual philosophical texts and the research texts. So I think we did, we spent a lot of time talking about how to explain the process and the way that we sort of came to the process, or the process came to us. I think, another thing and Alecia picked up on the, the nature, the ontological nature of this work that, particularly in the last chapter, we we talk about the ontological nature of writing, and we talk about the way in which the very act of doing is producing these new ontological formations. And so that, that that language, I think, is also present throughout and it's, it's showing how we're shifting in our, in our present work both individually and together. Alecia JacksonYes, a couple of other new changes and additions, I think, we do a better job in the second edition addressing thought and thinking. In the first edition, we were really focused on theory and I think in that first chapter, really justifying the use of theory and the importance and also in the handbook chapter four. We, we really focused on that and and in, in this second edition, we do a lot with thought and the movement of thought we rely a lot on Erin Manning's work. And in her collaboration with Massumi, and in writing about thinking and thought and in the ontology of that so that's some something that's, that's new. The Barad chapter is brand new, practically, of in the first edition, when it came out in 2000. When we were writing in 2010 and 11 new you know, Barad's book was very that's what everyone was reading. And everyone was there a lot of conference presentations on you know, using Barad, and we had to do it in the first edition, what we thought was some background work on new materialism some historical kind of description and tracing of how the emergence of this particular theory into the qualitative profession, but when we read it, when we read, we read it in terms of the revisions were like, we don't really need this background anymore ever. It's it's been around now for 10 years. People are very familiar with them. And it's new materialism and Barad and, and intra-action. And so we felt like we could do, you know, take a lot of that conversation out around some of the other feminists who were working on new materialism. So the Barad chapter is very much more focused on just Barad and intra-action, and we bring in power and we move the Barad chapter to follow Butler and Foucault that made it a little bit more sense to us, since we also added a section on post human performativity, it flows better, and we added a section on power in Barad. So both of those, the post human performativity, and the materialization of power are nice sections in Barad that flow from Foucault and Butler. So we felt like those three chapters just work together better. And then we moved Deleuze and added Guattari to the end. Liza MazzeiSo and just a note on the the flow. I'm I'm teaching a course this term and the students one of our texts is thinking with theory. And so last night, we started looking at we introduced her concepts last week. And so we actually took one of the performative accounts in class last night, and looked at the way it was talked about differently with Butler's concept of performativity. And then looking at the same account with post humanist performativity. And it really, it was a fantastic discussion, and the connection was much more clear for students. Alecia JacksonSo I think it's, we've just really worked to connect, you know, really pull through the coming questions, you know, game, we don't call them analytic questions. And we really make as obvious as we can the process of the emergence of those questions, how plugging in works, and just trying to be a lot more pedagogical, with with the process. Jessica Van CleaveSo I feel like you've already discussed this, and in your response to the last question, but I didn't know if there was anything else that you wanted to add in terms of thinking with theory as a as a concept or as a text. How, how would you say it has shifted for you both over the last decade? Liza MazzeiWell, I think maybe I think we did talk about this, but but the emphasis on thought, the emphasis on newness. One of the things we talked about, I think in the preface of the second edition is how in the first edition, and we've talked about this in other ways that we were, we were still in the mode of of writing against or, or deconstructing some of the, the interpretivist hooks, if you will. And we started from that place still with this addition. And then at one point, we both said, we don't need to do this anymore, we need to push into this different territory. And so I think that's one of the that was a very important but also very freeing moment, because it's like we can, we can let go of some of this language. And we had fabulous support with our editors, partly because I think of the success of the first edition. And so then we were able to say, this is what we're going to do and you know, dropping things like the starting with method, which we did in the first book. We don't we don't do that anymore. So that we I think we felt a lot more confident in our in the acceptance of us saying this is this is how the work is now and we're not going to pretend that it we're not going to try to fit it into another way of making itself intelligible. Jessica Van CleaveSo one of the one of the other things that has changed a lot in the last 10 years is the material discursive conditions of the world. So in what way does do those shifts mean that we should or need to, or might, think with theory differently or think with different theory or what? How do y'all think about those kinds of things? Liza MazzeiI'll start and then Alecia. I mean, one of the things that we do in this edition is we, we deal with the idea of the collective. Deleuze and Guattari, this idea of collective enunciation, we talk about memory in a very different way. I think even the way that we mobilize Barad's concepts is an attention to the the formation of subjectivity and and the way things are, the way not talking about agency as some even though we worked against humanist agency in the first book, it's not even attributing agency to individuals and things and talking about agentic capacities. And so I think it's a it's a reconceptualization, and I've had some students in recent years really do some very interesting work, I think that, you know, moving and thinking very differently. So that's a that's a beginning answer to that question. Alecia JacksonUm, I'm very excited about the way in which we talk about or write about power in in the new Barad chapter in terms of the materiality of power, I think it's a very different way of conceptualizing it. So that that's something that I think, that we've, that we paid really close attention to. I think that that's a concept that, that once you plug it into materiality, you know, because it's history is really connected to knowledge. You know, Foucault's famous couplet or doublet, the power knowledge workings, and, you know, when we get into the materialization of power in the Barad chapter, I think it just really opens up, you know, a whole conversation and I think it's got, we have a lot to say about about that, in terms of, like Lisa was mentioning the collective. And how that that is working, were much more, I think, smarter about assemblage in the second edition, I think that has some some implications for materiality, language, subjectivity, all of that. So we've got some real, I think, shifts in, in how we're bringing those, those theories in, not only in the Barad chapter, but also when in chapters one and eight. When we're talking about thinking, we talk, we, you know, we are using some of the material discursive theories around how thought is, is material, how thinking is, is material and that that's Barad, you know, we, we quote her on that, and then, and write about what that what that looks like. So I think those theories also allowed us to make the shift away from epistemology to ontology. You know, this book is not a knowledge project. It's not representation. So we, you know, we really relied on those theories to make arguments for how research is creation, it is creation. So when we're in this, this ontology, these theories that you've mentioned, Jessica, we, we can't talk about research as knowledge production. Really, we're in a, you know, an ontology where research is helping us to imagine the worlds that we want to live in. So that's what we talk about a lot in my classes is, so what's the what's the use? You know, why are we doing this? If we're not, you know, we know so much already. Like, why do we want to keep asking the same questions. I was somewhere one time, I don't remember maybe getting my hair cut, I don't know. And I was talking to someone about what I do. And I was in that that semester, in particular, I was teaching a women's studies course and feminist theory was a graduate feminist theory course. And she said, Oh, that sounds so, so cool. And so awesome. And I'll say, Well, it's kind of depressing, because for 10 years, we've been talking about the same things, you know, in this feminist theories class, and, and nothing is really different. So I've started thinking about that and talking with doctoral students in my research courses saying, Well, what if research was became something completely different, you know, its use its purpose. And I think what we're doing in this book, is we're saying that we're making worlds, when we think with theory, we're creating something new, we're creating openings for possibilities that have been unthought. So and I see students doing this in their dissertations now. So they're picking up, you know, their theories, you know, we just went to a defense last week of a student, I was chairing a dissertation for and she's, she has a son who has autism. And so she basically did a power knowledge reading of all the, the materials of autism, all the the documentation, the special ed, you know, just everything that the path to diagnosis is what she called it and, and just recreated an entirely different world. Through that work, you know, the outcome of what she did the she got to the end and, and she said, this is this is what we need to do to the DSM to make this entire framework less deficit oriented, and less damage centered. So she recreates she did her critique, you know, her thinking her thinking with, but what came from that was her own creation, you know, a creation of a different concept, you know, how do we redefine this? How do we, you know, how do we talk about it differently? Y'all know, Heather Cox Richardson, that the historian on Facebook has been doing her letters, and posting a lot. And as a historian, she said something recently that that I've been using in my class, and she said, the way that we make change is that we have to change the way that we that people think about something. And the only way we can change the way people think about something is to change the way that we talk about it. That's it from a historian's perspective, that's, that's how change happens. And so it is about language, but it's also about worlding. And I think that, with this, these new theories and the material discursive turn and attending to ontology, in qualitative work, we can begin to create the worlds through the words that we use, changing the way that we talk about it, changing the way that people think about it, and then the doing. So I think that this book, in particular makes those connections between thinking and doing creation, experimentation, and really pushes that, again, what we talked about this in the chapter eight, what we do in research is unleash becomings. And that still is so I can read chapter eight and see what we have to say about unleashing becomings. But, but that's what I I envision, I would like to see research moving in that direction. I think that that's what those these theories, these post foundational theories enable us to do. And students are doing it like, I see them taking risks in ways that are very exciting. Liza MazzeiThey recognize that the descriptive project is not is not moving us. I mean, we talked about that in class last night. Okay, we know we know what's happening. So how do we what are the mechanisms for, for creating these new worlds that Alecia is talking about? Jessica Van CleaveSo that was really exciting, because I was hoping you all would have something fabulous and, and generative and opening up to say, in relation to that, and I wildly underestimated what might happen. So I really appreciate that. That was, that was really helpful. I'm sure the, the audience is going to get a lot out of that. And I think, as I go back to the second edition of Thinking with Theory, I will now be reading it differently because of hearing the ways that you all frame it and how it's now being taken up and seeing where it goes with your students and in relation to the current projects that you have going on. So thank you for that. Um, so I'm gonna shift a little bit, if you don't mind to talk about the writing process. And you said that you have shifted and talked about writing as an ontological project as well. So what does that look like in terms of your writing partnership or your coauthorship? Either for this book, obviously, you've published a lot together and separately, so what does coauthorship look like and how has that shifted for you over the years? Liza MazzeiI'm not sure it has shifted. I think that we're I think we're very appreciative of the generative nature of our collaborations together. And we often when we have not worked together on a project before, and we're working on something separately, it's like, oh, we miss we miss this. Because it does, there is a, there is an energy. And a, I don't even know how to talk about it the way in which I think we've established a great deal of trust in one another. And so it's not. So there's not maybe a hesitation that there might have been at the beginning. But it's, I can't imagine not having projects to work on together. And we keep coming, we keep dreaming up new ones. Alecia JacksonIt feels often like it just a zigzag, you know, we're just kind of in it, we're in the middle of something. Sparks fly, and Lisa will write a word. And it'll remind me, I can you know, she'll she'll write a word that will just spark an idea. And then I can develop a paragraph from that, vice versa. We're not sensitive to, we don't hang on to our we're not, you know, if I write something, I'm not hanging on to it. And I think how many times have I said in the margin? I'm not wedded to this, or this is terrible. Just rewrite it? Or, you know, I think that we just have a real? I don't know, we see it, we look at it as as equals we don't, you know, we take turns on lead. You know, who's first? Who's second, but don't really track that. I mean, I couldn't even tell you, like, who's first, who's second on however many. It's very 50 50, I think, you know, on both of our leaders, we have that written very clearly that, that it's it's 50 50. And that way, it's in these collaborations we've done in the last decade with me on the East Coast, and Lisa on the West Coast, you know, we've had, we've joked a little while I'll get up and maybe work first, you know, and then and then, you know, Lisa will sometimes say, Oh, I can't wait to go in and see, you know, like what you've done and, and then I'll come back in the afternoon to kind of see, so it always feels like a gift. You know, when I go into the document, I there's never a time where I'm not a little bit excited to see what's developed and what's what's being made. Because it isn't an act of creation. And you know, we're not, but we're just you know, we're reading the same things. You know, it's just, it's, it's a collaboration in every sense of the word, you know, from reading the writing to, you know, the publishing, it's just yeah, it's, you know, we're respectful of when there's other things going on, you know, travel or family stuff. And, you know, it's just, yeah, it's just easy. Jessica Van CleaveWould that we all could have such lovely, collaborative relationships that are just easy. That's wonderful and of course, we all get to be the beneficiaries of that easy work for you. Not that it's easy, but um, so is there anything else that you want to share with the qualitative conversations audience either about thinking with theories, specifically, or qualitative research broadly or anything else that comes to mind? Liza MazzeiThis is not my this is not my original thought. This is something that you know, Bettie St. Pierre says all the time, but that I say to students, if you if you want, I mean, two things, I guess, you get into the middle of a project and you think that you want to think with this particular concept? Well start thinking with it. But if it's not doing the work that you want it to do, then try something else. But you have to be willing to spend the time to immerse yourself in the reading and the study in order to be able to, to do the work. I mean, Alecia, and I talked about with the first edition, people say, Well, how did you choose these theories? Well, some of them were ones that we had, because we had worked with them in pre, you know, with some of our other work. But then we as we started thinking, for example, with Barad, it was okay if we're going to do this, we need to really spend some time with it to see if it if it is doing something for us. And if it's not, then we need to find something else. So that's, I mean, we we talked about that a little bit in the book, but I think it's just really emphasizing that it's, it's it's not easy work, but it's such exciting and generative work. And I think once the students start, start encountering it then it's hard for them to imagine not doing their work in this way. Alecia JacksonYeah, I think that what, what Lisa just said reminds me of how I talk about theory is that it just finds you, you know, that's something I say, in every class, we're, you know, we're, we have two theory classes that we offer in our doctoral program. We just call it theory one, theory two, and it's just, it's pretty linear. You know, it starts with positivism. And then just, by the time we get to the end of theory two, we're in post humanism. So it's, you know, just going through those frameworks, and and there were some times students just nothing really speaks to them. And so we just say, you know, just keep reading, and something, you know, that language. You know, I tell the story of how, when I first read Foucault, it was like, wow, this is language that I've always sensed, and felt that I couldn't articulate, I didn't know what I needed to say. And then here's somebody who's saying it for me. And then all I had to do is plug it into, you know, what I was encountering in the world. And, and that helped me to think differently about it and opened up to the end thought so, you know, a lot of what I like to say to students is, you know, this, this work is the pursuit of the unthought it is the pursuit of what we, you know, can't imagine yet, the not yet. We were back to the movement between the first and second edition. And, and, you know, Jessica, you read a chapter for us on Manning, because we thought we need to add a new theorist, you know, and we'd both been reading a lot of affect and gone with the affect conference. And, and we thought that that was something that was missing from the book. And so we thought, well, let's just add a Manning chapter. And it didn't, it didn't fit well. It didn't, it didn't, it didn't, it wasn't working the way that we wanted it to work. But Manning was working on us, but we couldn't figure out what was going on. So we just kept wrestling with it. And and, you know, you read it, and we got great feedback from you. And it made us really ask some questions about what what is, what are we doing? And how are we putting this to work? And what happened is, I remember we were going back and forth on it. And, and I think I texted you, Lisa, or sent you an email, and I said, I think we're using Manning, Manning methodologically like as a technique. And so we're like, whoa, that's exactly what's going on. It's not that we need to plug Manning into the performative accounts, we need to plug it into writing and thinking and doing. And so chapter eight is where Manning shows up and affect because we do a lot with pre individual sensing, and how that is part of of a thought. That thought is not just cognitive, but it's this pre individual syncing of something coming into being of the coming that's emerging. So we just stayed with Manning, but it it shifted and helped us to say something about writing and thinking and ontology that we could never have planned for. So the last thing, yeah, I'll just say is that you just don't know where you'll end up. And all of this is emergent, contingent, relational, all of those things. So just stay, as Donna Haraway says, just stay with the trouble and you know, something will will come, Donna Haraway says something, something always happens, and it always will. So I think that that's part of what the message is in in the the second edition. Jessica Van CleaveWell, I want to thank you both so much for your time today. This has been a delightful conversation for me, and I know our QR SIG listeners are really going to appreciate your, your descriptions of the text, as well as the connections that that you are making and thinking about, both in their roles with students and in their roles as instructors as well as methodologists. So thank you both so much for your time this afternoon. Liza MazzeiThank you, Jessica. And thanks for prompting us to think more about our own process. Alecia JacksonYeah, it's very nice to, to articulate it and, and be able to really appreciate, you know, what, what we've done, I don't think I really sat and thought about the, you know, I mean, I know what the differences are between first and second edition, that really going back on this journey in time and space has been a real treat. So thank you. Jessica Van CleaveThank you. Thank you. It's been a gift this afternoon.

Over the past couple of years, The Indypendent News Hour has become the premiere news and public affairs show on WBAI, a listen-sponsored community radio station whose signal beams 90 miles in all directions from atop a Midtown skyscraper. On Nov. 8 2022, we expanded our normal one-hour news show into a five-hour election night special. We not only keep track of key races in New York and nationally but provide a deeper analysis of the issues that have animated the midterms — crime, inflation, abortion rights, the threat to democracy — and ones that haven't been discussed nearly enough: the racist backlash to Black Lives Matter, the demise of local news and the spread of conspiracy theories, the growing power of the billionaire class over the rest of society. Throughout the show, we heard live interviews with NYC voters by roving Indy reporters. Here is the five-hour breakdown. FIRST HOUR —Interview with Ben Max, editor of Gotham Gazette, about the most competitive governor's race in New York in a generation as well as key congressional and legislative races that could swing the balance of power in Washington and Albany. —Interviews with Socialist state legislators Jabari Brisport and Phara Souffrant Forrest about Kathy Hochul turning to the New York Left to save her floundering campaign. SECOND HOUR —Interview with legendary NYC journalist Tom Robbins. —Interview with Bob Hennelly about the demise of local media and the national media echo chamber that has been promoting the “red wave” for weeks. —Grassroots report from Florida where Gov. Ron DeSantis is pioneering is testing out his version of homegrown American fascism as prepares to run for President in 2024. THIRD HOUR —Interview with acclaimed Marxist-feminist-anti-racist scholar Linda Martín Alcoff. Will there be a backlash against the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade? If not, why not? —Interview with Indy Contributing Editor Nicholas Powers about the underlying causes of the public hysteria over crime, the rise of conspiracy theories and why working class people of color are now also starting to move away from supporting the Democrats. FOURTH HOUR —Grassroots report from North Carolina where Cheri Beasley is trying to become the first Black woman from the South to be elected to the Senate. —Interview with Mondale Robinson of the Black Male Voter Project. —Interview with Carrie Santoro, executive director of Pennsylvania Stands Up. —Interview with historian Max Elbaum about what the left must do to defeat MAGA and reset U.S. politics in a more progressive direction FIFTH HOUR —Interview with Linda Sarsour, Brooklyn-born Palestinian-American activist, Women's March co-founder and national surrogate for Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020. —Grassroots report from Arizona. —Interview with Ron Daniels, President and Founder of the Institute of the Black World 21s Century about the Midterm elections and their impact on Black America.

The HBS hosts ask Dr. Linda Alcoff just how close to the edge of the bed is the United States sleeping?A year and a half ago, as an angry, armed mob stormed the U.S. Capitol building in what was, thankfully, an unsuccessful insurrection attempt, many of us watching the event unfold on television asked ourselves: is democracy itself in peril? This is, of course, a question we should have been asking for many years prior to Jan 6, 2021. And it is a question we should still be asking. At the federal level, an activist and regressive Supreme Court is aggressively chipping away at the rights of citizens, and an almost perpetually-stalemated Congress refuses to act on real existential threats (like climate change, COVID, and income inequality). At the state level, more than half of the legislatures have restricted voting rights, gun regulation, and protections for BIPOC, women, LGBTQ people, and the poor. States' legislatures are busy gerrymandering districts, under-funding public education, over-funding police, and extending corporate welfare tax benefits carte blanche, while at the same time refusing to raise the minimum wage for workers, mitigate the affordable housing crisis, repair crumbling infrastructure, or exhibit even the most minimally-decent concern for the good of their citizens. Meanwhile, the average U.S. citizen is sick, indebted, demoralized, underinformed (or misinformed), and disillusioned. Why vote? Why care? What has democracy done for me lately? Today, we're going to be talking about the peril(s) that democracy is facing, how we should think about them, and what, if anything, we can do about them.We are honored to be joined by Linda Martin Alcoff, Professor of Philosophy at Hunter College and CUNY Graduate Center. Prof. Alcoff is the author, most recently of Rape and Resistence: Understanding the Compoexities of Sexual Violation and The Future of Whiteness.Full episode notes at this link:http://hotelbarpodcast.com/podcast/episode-70-democracy-in-peril-with-linda-alcoff-------------------If you enjoy Hotel Bar Sessions podcast, please be sure to subscribe, submit a rating/review, and follow us on Twitter @hotelbarpodcast.You can also help keep this podcast going by supporting us financially at patreon.com/hotelbarsessions. 

Linda Martin Alcoff, a leading critical race theorist, talks with us about why the Left should stop running from the controversy around critical race theory and see it as an opportunity. She says that pretending CRT isn't real robs us of the chance to mount a strong defense.

Season five of our podcast concludes with another presentation from our 2020 annual conference: ‘Engaged Phenomenology' Online. This episode features a presentation from Marieke Borren, Faculty of Humanities, Open University Netherlands.   ABSTRACT: Within critical race theory, phenomenological scholarship is unique in focusing on the racialized body. Based on the work of Fanon and Merleau-Ponty (even if the latter does not address racial difference), phenomenologists have recently developed rich explorations of racial embodiment, predominantly in a visual register (Alcoff, Al-Saji, Gordon, Weiss, Yancy, among others). However, ‘white' and ‘black' embodiment are not just involved in perceptual (notably: visual) habits, but also, so I will argue in this paper, in ways of inhabiting and taking up space and habits of moving. What ‘I can' do, and where, is to a large extent dependent upon my racial situation. This presentation seeks to expand the phenomenology of racial embodiment, more particularly whiteness, by attending not just to the (in)visibility but also to the spatiality and motility of racialized – in particular: white – embodiment. To this end, I will I confront the conceptual resources for understanding spatiality and motility in relation to embodiment, present in the work of Merleau-Ponty (while challenging its false racial neutrality), Fanon's phenomenological account of black racialization, and Shannon Sullivan's (feminist) pragmatist account of the ‘ontological expansiveness' of whiteness. Being a key feature of what the latter calls ‘the unconscious habits of racial privilege', white expansiveness entails the taken-for-granted freedom to inhabit space and move around as one sees fit. Finally, I will argue that the normative implications of the phenomenology of white expansiveness are undecided. It might be strategically employed for undercutting itself. However, any effort to fight white privilege may end up reconfirming rather than undermining white expansiveness. I will illustrate this undecidability with the case study of Carola Rackete, the self-proclaimed white and privileged German captain of the Sea-Watch 3, who rescued 42 African migrants on the Mediterranean and brought them into port in Lampedusa in July 2019.   BIO: Marieke Borren currently works as an assistant professor in philosophy at Open University Netherlands. From 2015-2017, she held a postdoctoral fellowship at the department of philosophy of the University of Pretoria, South Africa. Specializing in Hannah Arendt's political phenomenology, her research expertise lies at the intersection of continental political philosophy, philosophical anthropology and phenomenology. She is particularly interested in feminist and postcolonial perspectives. She has widely published on Arendt's work, in particular about dis-placement and having a place in the world (‘the right to have rights'), focusing on the predicament of refugees and undocumented migrants.   This recording is taken from the BSP Annual Conference 2020 Online: 'Engaged Phenomenology'. Organised with the University of Exeter and sponsored by Egenis and the Wellcome Centre for Cultures and Environments of Health. BSP2020AC was held online this year due to global concerns about the Coronavirus pandemic. For the conference our speakers recorded videos, our keynotes presented live over Zoom, and we also recorded some interviews online as well. Podcast episodes from BSP2020AC are soundtracks of those videos where we and the presenters feel the audio works as a standalone: https://www.britishphenomenology.org.uk/bsp-annual-conference-2020/   You can check out our forthcoming events here: https://www.britishphenomenology.org.uk/events/   The British Society for Phenomenology is a not-for-profit organisation set up with the intention of promoting research and awareness in the field of Phenomenology and other cognate arms of philosophical thought. Currently, the society accomplishes these aims through its journal, events, and podcast. Why not find out more, join the society, and subscribe to our journal the JBSP? https://www.britishphenomenology.org.uk/  

Voters across the country head to the polls today on the first election day since Donald Trump's defeat last November. Governorships are up for grabs in New Jersey and Virginia. Boston, Buffalo, Atlanta, Seattle and Minneapolis are choosing their next mayors. The future of policing has been a flashpoint in each of those races. In Minneapolis, where George Floyd was murdered, voters will also vote on whether to abolish their current police department and replace it with a new Department of Public Safety. Our special guests include WBAI's Tom Robbins and Ben Max, Alex Vitale, author of 'The End of Policing,' Linda Martín Alcoff, author of 'The Future of Whiteness,' a newly elected Socialist City Councilwoman from Sunset Park, Brooklyn, and more.

In 2021, the Republicans have used racial dog whistles around critical race theory, “parents rights” and other manufactured culture war controversies to energize their base, especially in Virginia where their candidate won the governor's race. In our election night special, we speak with Linda Martín Alcoff, author of T'he Future of Whiteness,' about this and how the Left should respond. We also speak with Alex Han, executive director of Organizing Upgrade, about the impact of national Democrats being unable to deliver on their promises in a moment of surging right-wing populism.

JB Pritzker announces he's running for re-election. Ben ponders the frightening alternative. Dian Palmer, president of SEIU Local 73, and negotiator Larry Alcoff, on negotiating with Toni Preckwinkle. Also, political strategist Jason Lee on the Republican onslaught in Texas. And the fallacies of using pre-trial detentions to fight crime.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Baron chats with Dr. Linda Martín Alcoff about ways to deal with the end of empire. Before that, Katrina Davis strikes back with an all new seasoning of Qatrina Thyme. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Tarleton, Editor-in-Chief of the Indypendent newspaper interviews: —Linda Martín Alcoff, a professor of philosophy at CUNY’s Hunter College, long-time writer for the Indypendent and the author of numerous books including “The Future of Whiteness” and “Rape and Resistance.” They talk about the Capitol insurrection, a second failed impeachment of Donald Trump and where we go from here. —Shawné Lee, daughter of "Mama" Joy Chatel, who lived in and fought to protect the "Truesdell House," a relic of the underground railroad's presence in Brooklyn. After years of community efforts, the Landmarks and Preservation Commission of New York City just announced its plans to confer historic landmark status to the house, also known as 227 Duffield Street and 227 Abolitionist Place. —Peter Rickman, who was an officer in the grad student union at the University of Wisconsin, playing a key role in organizing the Wisconsin Capitol occupation of 2011. Ten years later, John and Peter reflect on the public sector labor unionists and their supporters taking over the Wisconsin State Capitol Building in protest of Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s push to strip Wisconsin public sector workers of their collective bargaining rights.

John Tarleton interviews Linda Martín Alcoff, a professor of philosophy at CUNY’s Hunter College, long-time writer for the Indypendent and the author of numerous books including “The Future of Whiteness” and “Rape and Resistance.” They talk about the Capitol insurrection, a second failed impeachment of Donald Trump and where we go from here.

Keynote lecture by Prof. Linda Martín Alcoff at the Sexual Politics of Freedom conference at the Irish Centre for Human Rights [18/09/2020].

In this episode, Lauren R.E. Larkin (whom you might remember from a previous episode on dialectical theology), host of Sancta Colloquia, and I introduce our special project: Sacred Seminary Symposium, and talk about what we learned from the Intro to Mujerista Theology. There's a lot to dig into, including privilege in theology, liberation, the kind of fruit theology produces, and more. Follow along, read along, and let us know what your thoughts are! Here are the excerpts we reference: “In developing a method to do theology that uses religion of grassroots Latinas as its source, mujerista theology puts into practice a preferential option for the oppressed.” (1) “Mujerista theology is not a disembodied discourse but one that arises from situated subjects, Latina grassroots women, and, yes, even me.” (3) “‘In other words, the claim that I can speak only for myself assumes the autonomous conception of the self in Classical Liberal theory--that I am unconnected to others in my authentic self or that I can achieve an autonomy from others given certain conditions. But there is no neutral place to stand free and clear in which one's words do not prescriptively affect or mediate the experience of others, nor is there a way to decisively demarcate a boundary between one's location and all others.” (Alcoff qtd in Isasi-Diaz 7) “The goals of mujerista theology have always been these: to provide a platform for the voices of Latina grassroots women; to develop a theological method that takes seriously the religious understandings and practices of Latinas as a source for theology; to challenge theological understandings, church teachings, and religious practices that oppress Latina women, that are not life-giving, and, therefore, not theologically correct.” (1) “[...] my liberation is not possible apart from the liberation of grassroots Latinas. I do what I do because I believe it is a liberative praxis[...]”(6) Seminary for the Rest of Us, a tiny podcast where everyone is welcome to God-talk, is produced by Sabrina Reyes-Peters, occasionally sound engineered by Mason Mennenga, web engineered by Charles Peters, and the theme music is by Matthew Scott. Support: https://ko-fi.com/sdrp_. Find us on Twitter and Instagram @seminaryshow. Email: seminary.show@gmail.com

On Alia Al-Saji’s “A Phenomenology of Hesitation” (2014), bits of Maurice Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology of Perception (1945), and Linda Martín Alcoff’s Visible Identities (2006), plus Alex Vitale's The End of Policing (2017). Is there sub-conscious racism, and how might we root it out and fix our policing problems? Ex-cop Phil Hopkins joins to look at how phenomenology can help. Don't wait for part two, get the full, ad-free Citizen Edition now. Please support PEL! Sponsor: Visit thegreatcoursesplus.com/PEL for a free trial of The Great Courses Plus Video Learning Service.

Är feminism som är populistisk möjlig? Och marxistisk samtidigt? I manifestet Feminism för de 99 procenten försöker Cinzia Arruzza, Tithi Bhattacharya och Nancy Fraser lansera en sådan plattform för den globala feministrörelse som växt fram de senaste tre åren. Den fjärde vågens feminism som en populism för att samla en majoritet. Utan att tumma på radikaliteten. En majoritetsfeminism, där alla ryms och som utgår från den sociala reproduktionen av arbetarklassen. LÄS MER: Feministiskt perspektiv: #8mars: Ostoppbara – feminister för alltid! https://feministisktperspektiv.se/2019/03/12/8-mars-2019-varlden/ Upprop: Towards a feminist social strike in Sweden the 8th of March https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb39jPYeuX8&t=15s Upprop: Angela Davis, Barbara Ransby, Cinzia Arruzza, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Linda Martín Alcoff, Nancy Fraser, Rasmea Yousef Odeh och Tithi Bhattacharya: Beyond Lean-In: For a Feminism of the 99% and a Militant International Strike on March 8 https://www.viewpointmag.com/2017/02/03/beyond-lean-in-for-a-feminism-of-the-99-and-a-militant-international-strike-on-march-8/ Transnational Social Strike Plattform: Power Upside Down - Womens global strike https://www.transnational-strike.info/wp-content/uploads/TSSJ-03_Power-Upside-Down.pdf Viewpoint magazine: Tema sociala reproduktionen: https://www.viewpointmag.com/2015/11/02/issue-5-social-reproduction/ The Dig: Feminism for the 99% with Tithi Bhattacharya https://poddtoppen.se/podcast/1043245989/the-dig/feminism-for-the-99-with-tithi-bhattacharya Tithi Bhattacharya: How Not To Skip Class: Social Reproduction of Labor and the Global Working Class https://www.viewpointmag.com/2015/10/31/how-not-to-skip-class-social-reproduction-of-labor-and-the-global-working-class/ Bue Rübner Hansen: Surplus Population, Social Reproduction, and the Problem of Class Formation https://www.viewpointmag.com/2015/10/31/surplus-population-social-reproduction-and-the-problem-of-class-formation/ Agata Czarnacka, Agata Araszkiewicz: Poland’s rebel women https://www.eurozine.com/polands-rebel-women/ Thalia Beaty: Strike to Win: Can Polish Feminists Turn Protest Into Power? https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/poland-feminists-strike-manifa-razem-protest-power Julia Lindblom: Feminismen går inte att vräka https://tidningenbrand.se/brand/nummer-1-2018-wetoogether/feminismen-gar-inte-att-vraka/

Exposed "Antifa Leader" Charged With Multiple FELONIES. Joseph Alcoff who was exposed by the Daily Caller was recently arrested and charged with multiple felonies, including ethnic intimidation, after police and the victims pointed to his photo in connection with the Antifa attack on innocent people in November.The "Antifa Leader" has plead not guilty and was released on bail.The incident in question involved an innocent jewish man being attacked by Antifa and far left protesters as well as two marines being attacked just outside of a rally where people claimed Proud Boys were attending. Alcoff is also allegedly associated with Smash Racism DC, the group that protest in front of Tucker Carlson's home recently.Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)

Professor Linda Martín Alcoff talks about next steps after Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination confirmed. You can find his article in the October issue of The Indypendent or at https://bit.ly/2yotdfp To support this podcast and our publication, it´s as easy as visiting our Patreon page and becoming a monthly subscriber. bit.ly/2xsDpR

In the second segment of this week's Indy Radio News, we talked with Linda Martín Alcoff about the #MeToo movement and the troubled Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh. Alcoff is a professor of philosophy at the City University of New York and the author of numerous books including Rape and Resistance and the Future of Whiteness. To read Linda Alcoff's article published in The Indypendent go to https://bit.ly/2zlxoKo

In this episode, Linda Martín Alcoff discusses the subtle ways that things like your race, gender, sexual orientation, and class can influence your life. She argues that the best way to understand that kind of influence is by looking to the history of the relevant social group. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week's guest is Linda Martin Alcoff who is a professor of philosophy at Hunter College and the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. She specializes in epistemology, feminism, race theory and existentialism. Alcoff has called for greater inclusion of historically underrepresented groups in philosophy and notes that philosophers from these groups have created new fields of inquiry, including feminist philosophy, critical race theory, and LGBTQ philosophy. She earned her Ph.D. in Philosophy from Brown University. She was recognized as the distinguished Woman Philosopher of 2005 by the Society for Women in Philosophy and the APA. She is the author of 13 books, including The Future of Whiteness, published by Polity Press, 2015. She began teaching at CUNY in early 2009, after teaching for many years at Syracuse University.

What are the next steps for the #MeToo movement? Linda Martín Alcoff, professor of philosophy, author of the forthcoming book Rape and Resistance (Polity Press) and a member of International Women’s Strike NYC walks us the through the past, present and possible future of #MeToo. If you like what you hear, support Indy Audio: bit.ly/2xsDpRQ To read Linda´s article online go to http://bit.ly/2E6F9nS Illustration by Naomi Ushiyama.

Linda Martín Alcoff writes about how we can fight white supremacists groups by creating a sense of community and belonging for all. To read Linda´s full article go to http://bit.ly/2ikhZUf To subscribe to Indyaudio and get our recent episodes go to apple.co/2wwtyh5 Photo: BOOTS ON THE GROUND: Counter-protesters challenge white nationalists who gathered at a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville’s Emancipation Park on Aug. 12. Credit: Karla Ann Coté.

Guests include Jersey's own Daryl Brooks and also Linda Martín Alcoff is Professor of Philosophy at the City University of New York, author of The Future of Whiteness (Polity press, 2015), and past President of the American Philosophical AssociationFrom 2012 to 2013.[1] Alcoff has called for greater inclusion of historically under represented groups in philosophy and notes that philosophers from these groups have created new fields of inquiry, including feminist philosophy, critical race theory, and LGBTQ philosophy.[2][3] To help address these issues, with Paul Taylor and William Wilkerson, she started the Pluralist Guide to Philosophy.[4] Join us tomorrow night. You may call in, listen and press 1 and ask a question, 646 915 8117. Call in to speak with our guest and the hosts: Reuben Torres & Mark Falzon Show sponsored by Studentsforabetterfuture.com http://www.blogtalkradio.com/students-for-a-better-future-radio/2016/05/03/new-age-politics STUDENTSFORABETTERFUTURERADIO Online Radio by Doreen Finkle   blogtalkradio.com    

[INTRO MUSIC] Welcome to Mere Rhetoric: a podcast for beginners and insiders about the ideas, movements, and people that have shaped rhetorical history. I'm Mary Hedengren.  Last time we did a podcast, I was at the Rhetorical Society of America's biannual meeting in San Antonio. Well now that the conference is over and everybody is home, I thought I might go through a few of the things that happened at this conference.  The conference lasted from Friday all the way to Monday afternoon, and included a lot of interesting presentations. If you've never been to a rhetoric conference before, it can be kind of daunting to see all of the different types of papers. For example, we had papers on things like "Bordering on Obsolescense: The Fate of Race-Based Affirmative Action After Fisher v. Texas", "Queer Technotopias: Technology, Cyberspace, and Queer Politics in the Digital Age", or how about "The Gendered Borders of Sports Rhetoric". What about something a little bit more traditional, like "Rhetoric, Poetic, Aesthetic: Studies in Ancient Theory", or "Approaches to the Rhetoric of War" or "Rhetorics of Birth." There's so many different topics. And it would be impossible for me to give you a full range of all of the many different presentations from great scholars from around the country and around the world. But I'm going to talk about a couple of the presentations that many people were able to see. They first is the keynote address by Linda Martin Alcoff. Alcoff is actually a philosopher -- she teaches in a philosophy department. But much of her work fits in with rhetoric. She gave the keynote address titled Whiteness on the Border: What Happens When the Walls Come Down, on Friday. And this topic addressed the future of whiteness as whites cease to be the majority, but still enjoy white privilege. As racial demographics in the U.S. shift in the next 20 years, Linda Martin Alcoff suggested the future of what whiteness is will change. We can't just say that we'll be in a post-racial society where race doesn't matter and only class is the difference, Alcoff says, because  "We need race to explain how class functions." While whites often describe themselves in complex percentages of European backgrounds -- 15% Swiss, 12% German -- they will have to give up on identifying as white and become what Alcoff calls "a particular among particulars," instead of the default race. In this situation, some white people are going to feel dissettled and feel like they're a minority surrounded by other minorities. She illustrates the displaced white figure through two films that talk about this anxiety: Dances with Wolves and Avatar. In both of these films, the white man becomes a fish out of water, recognizing the moral deficiencies of his previous experience, and clumsily trying to assimilate into an alien culture. In Avatar, the culture is literally alien, and the hero decides to stay in the culture. He integrates in a way to stay forever, instead of returning back to white culture as a figure of prophecy, like in Dances With Wolves. But somehow, he still maintains his super heroic white privilege; not just seamlessly integrating, but becoming the culture's preeminent warrior, and even savior. Although outnumbered and displaced in the alien culture, the hero retains privilege while still being a minority, like a white reconceptualization of a post-white majority America. On Sunday, Krista Ratcliffe also talked a little bit about race and whiteness. Her address was called Aristotle, Enthymemes, and Rhetorical Listening. Rhetorical listening is Ratcliffe's idea that the audience kind of needs to be pulling its own weight in considerations of rhetoric. And it was first articulated in discussions of, again, whiteness. Ratcliffe's book, Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, Whiteness, confronted the problem that many people -- especially white people -- have a difficult time resisting the pull of oppression. And so,  "Rhetorical listening compels us to contemplate arguments based on the relation to culture and to engage the possibilities of bringing those differences together,"  in the words of one review. That's the identification stuff again, which may be familiar to those who are fans of Burke, is a sense that you connect and disconnect with different groups. In this address though, Ratcliffe expanded on rhetorical listening to discuss the enthymeme the enthymeme, if you're not familiar, is sometimes called the rhetorical syllogism. And the syllogism is a series of proofs leading to a conclusion. For example, you might have a formal proof that says  "If it is raining, rain will get in, and it will be unpleasant."  And then have another sub-point that says  "If you close the window, rain won't get in."  And then have a conclusion that says  "Therefore, shut the window so that it doesn't get wet and unpleasant inside."  Now in an enthymeme, you cut out one or two of those. So you might just tell somebody "Oh it's raining, shut the window," without stopping to explain to them that you need to shut the window so the rain doesn't get in, and that if the rain gets in, it will be unpleasant. So the enthymeme is this way of assuming that your audience has some sort of knowledge that will fill in the gaps. Now this comes into play really differently in terms, for example, of race. Different views and philosophies of race will interpret the phrase "race matters" in different ways. So if you're a white supremacist intent on essentializing and separating groups, you're going to say "race matters". Whereas "race matters" is going to mean something different to somebody who is doing work like the stuff Linda Martin Alcoff is doing: how race impacts cultural and class relations. You have to consider how the audience or author has constructed that particular enthymeme. Well the Rhetoric Conference of 2014 had a lot to offer. It happens every two years, and there are a lot of projects besides just panel presentations. There were groups who were working together to workshop their stuff, there was an undergraduate research section, there were sections for professionals to meet together and graduate students to meet together. There were even reconsiderations of previous debates that had happened, where writers who had written to each other in their scholarship were able to respond to each other. Lots of great stuff. And I hope that we'll be able to see you next time in 2016 when the conference reconvenes in Atlanta, Georgia. I'm especially excited about this one because Greg Clark is in charge of it, and he was my old mentor. So I hope that we'll be able to see you in Atlanta in 2016. [OUTRO MUSIC]            

On this episode we bring back a Trumpdate and contrast his policy's on Jews and Muslims. Then we tell you what the president did to make two separate usually family-friendly Fox News correspondents on two separate shows curse! We talk to Democracy Now's Sam Alcoff, who calls in live from Paris to tells us why politicians will never solve the climate crisis and how he knows the man who ran his car into him wasn't actually Putin dressed as a Frenchman. And then we chat live in studio with Jeremy Newberger about his documentary "The Anthropologist," which is basically a mother daughter relationship road trip movie, except the trips involve flights to places that are facing climate change crises like Peru, Siberia, Kiribati. The movie was so good, it was invited to be screened at COP21. And I talk about my film Commie Camp, which is playing at Anthology Film Archives on Dec 14th.

Edition #933 Today we examine the complicated dynamics of the race of Rachel Dolezal and the simple dynamics of the white supremacist terrorist attack on a historical black church on Charleston, SC   Be part of the show! Leave a message at 202-999-3991 Show Notes Ch. 1: Opening Theme: A Fond Farewell - From a Basement On the Hill Ch. 2: Act 1: Rachel Dolezal, Guilty or Not Guilty? - @theyoungturks - Air Date: 06-16-15 Ch. 3: Song 1: Can't Pretend - Tom Odell Ch. 4: Act 2: Linda Martín Alcoff on Rachel Dolezal: Race Not an Individual Construct - @democracynow - Air Date: 06-17-15 Ch. 5: Song 2: Chameleon - Ryan Beatty Ch. 6: Act 3: Tamara Winfrey Harris (@whattamisaid): Black Like Who? Rachel Dolezal’s Harmful Masquerade - Backtalk (@BitchMedia) - Air Date: 6-25-15 Ch. 7: Song 3: Accept Yourself (David Jensen session 8/25/83) - The Smiths Ch. 8: Act 4: Rachel Dolezal has nothing to do with trans people - @Radio_Dispatch - Air Date: 6-16-15 Ch. 9: Song 4: Big Winter Jacket - Cayucas Ch. 10: Act 5: A Hate Crime in Charleston - @onthemedia - Air Date: 6-19-15 Ch. 11: Song 5: Dust In the Wind - Kansas Ch. 12: Act 6: The process of trauma in black America - This Week in Blackness (@TWiBprime) - Air Date: 6-18-15 Ch. 13: Song 6: A Dose of White Supremacy - Neffe Odom Kragh-Muller Ch. 14: Act 7: The Charleston shooting is part of a long history of anti-black terrorism - @voxdotcom - Air Date: 6-20-15 Ch. 15: Song 7: So Terrible It's Terrifying - Earmint Ch. 16: Act 8:  FBI Director Denies Charleston Shooting Was Terrorism - @theyoungturks - Air Date: 06-23-15 Ch. 17: Song 8: Coward - Vic Chesnutt Ch. 18: Act 9: Why Charleston Shooter Dylan Roof Isn't a “Terrorist” But Maybe Some of Us Are - @blkagendareport - Air Date: 6-24-15 Ch. 19: Song 9: Turtle (Bonobo Mix) - Pilote Ch. 20: Act 10: John Oliver on The Charleston Shooting - @LastWeekTonight w/ @iamjohnoliver - Air Date: 06-22-15 Ch. 21: Song 10: The losing kind - Harry Shearer Ch. 22: Act 11: The real history of the Confederate flag - @allinwithchris Hayes - Air Date 6-23-15 Ch. 23: Song 11: Know Your History - Drumma Boy Ch. 24: Act 13: Tim Wise: Black Deaths and White Culture: Challenging Racism After Charleston - @ToThePoint_KCRW - Air Date: 6-24-15 Voicemails Ch. 25: We need a real conversation on race, not the distractions - Marcus from Wichita Falls, TX Voicemail Music: Loud Pipes - Classics Ch. 26: Final comments on what's still missing from this episode Closing Music: Here We Are - Everyone's in Everyone Bonus Clips! You can't have your identity anymore, just oppression - This Week in Blackness - Air Date: 6-17-15 You almost had me fooled, Rachel - The Read - Air Date: 6-16-15 Produced by Jay! Tomlinson Thanks for listening! Visit us at BestOfTheLeft.com Check out the BotL iOS/Android App in the App Stores! Follow at Twitter.com/BestOfTheLeft Like at Facebook.com/BestOfTheLeft Contact me directly at Jay@BestOfTheLeft.com Review the show on iTunes and Stitcher!

The Laura C. Harris Series welcomes Linda Alcoff, professor of philosophy at Hunter College and Laura Gray-Rosendalep, professor of English at Northern Arizona State University presenting "College Girl: Telling our Transgressive Survivor Stories." Alcoff's most recent book is "Visible Identities: Race, Gender and the Self." Gray-Rosendale is the author of "College Girl: A Memoir," in which she revisits the memory of a brutal sexual assault and her route from assault to recovery to becoming a university professor.