RIP… D.E.I. with Ruha Benjamin | What Now? with Trevor Noah Podcast

So I was expelled from my primary school. And now, if you drive past it, I'm no joke. They have. They'll have, like, a banner flying sometimes. I love it. We're proud that Trevor Noah wins. And I look like you guys. Yeah, you guys kicked me out of the school, and now you're. putting up a banner like we are proud to be the school that Trevor Noah went to. Then I'm like, but you kicked me out. This is what now, Trevor Noah.

You know, it's funny, in preparing for this conversation, I was thinking, there's very few people. we sit down with where you can talk about. as many topics as we can with you. Like, when I think of. When I think of a Venn diagram of conversation, Ruha fits perfectly in the middle of most of these. Like everything. I mean, like everything.

A rooster of none, though. Master of none. Don't say that. No no no no no. Actually, no, actually, you should say that. You think she's a master of none. You. Actually, you should say that. Well, I I'm going to read you. I'm going to read you the full quote. Yeah. So I like to consider myself a master of. And I used to hate it my whole life. Okay. Until I'll read the full quote, the full saying is, a jack of all trades. is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one. Yes, I love it, I love it. You know the word amateur. There's a beautiful essay by Edward Assad where he talks.

about, you know, the difference between professionals and amateurs. And he says, you know, at the heart of amateurs are more. It's love. It is the love of something. Yeah. It's actually a source of pride because you're infusing love. You're led by love. Not necessarily a need for status and accolades and professional sort of titles. And so I embrace that. Let me say this lady has a MacArthur like the genius before we go down this. I'm a moron.

This is a very credentialed professor. You know, you could not be more Nigerian. Exactly. No, because it's. My parents are listening. They're like, oh, she's just speaking to some person with opinion. I'm like, no, mom and dad. Yeah, that's for your parents. That's for my best friend. Has a MacArthur genius grant. So, yeah. And a ton of books. For those at home that may not be familiar. Ruha is a tenured professor at Princeton University. That's why I'm like, she's not an amateur or guys who's currently in Nigeria. But let me tell you something.

There's nothing a Nigerian will point out more than this. This. This is a professor. Yes, sir. This is a doctor. I'm sorry, doctor. Do you know what's his PhD? Do you know? No. You're not talking to a person. This is a doctor. She's not your mate. You are so now. It's so crazy how you just like an another doctor. But it's important context. Let's. Trevor, let's start counting how many times she has to remind. Someone has to do it because she's too humble.

Yeah. And I think that's why you're the perfect person to speak to about. I wrote down a list of things because I don't want to miss anything. Everything from DIY. to the world of tech, education, community and the way we see it. Society, government, the role that it plays. I was like, it feels like your work has drawn you into everything. You know your degrees, your qualifications, your expertise, the amount of time you spend on it, your books. So maybe, maybe the first thing we should jump into is D has d I failed? Was it bound to fail?

Yeah. I was never a big booster of D's, so to see it coming down, I feel for those who were genuinely invested in that as a potential. to transform institutions and industries, but it always felt like a concession, a placeholder for something that could be more transformative. And so, like with placeholders, I think they become permanent. Then, as opposed to being a stepping stone, it becomes this kind of, you know, safe way of corralling those who would sort of cause trouble, right?

And so you know, you could say it was bound to fail, or you could say. it's doing exactly what it was designed to do. And so I think we shouldn't be. satisfied with kind of these sort of token, fleeting forms. of attention, because as we're seeing now, they come and go very quickly. So a lot, so many of the people who are hired under Dei programs, you know, after the killing of George Floyd, are now losing their jobs.

Entire programs are going up in smoke. So I think we should rethink what our demands are. Ruha it's interesting you say that the thing that made me come. across you not fast, but a very viral moment. You gave a commencement speech at your alma mater, Spelman College, and you said black faces in high places will not save us. For some people who really believe in, like, representation in politics, they jump up against the idea. They think no, we need black faces in high spaces.

What brought you to that conclusion? Because it's a very radical one. And also, like I would say, kind of cynical as well, I don't I'm, you know, I'm a cynical person, but I'm just interested by what? What about your life path, which you play? That place doesn't matter if it's a black person at the top. Yes. This is this system is rotten. So many stories I could tell. One is, as a graduate student, I was in that kind of position of being. enrolled to be the black face of, scientific program that was trying.

to recruit more black patients to undergo a very experimental treatment. So I was enrolled to be that person that was supposed to help win. over the trust of this community that was needed for this program. And it was a very uncomfortable position because I was at the one hand, you know, sort of touted and put up on a pedestal, but at the same time very vulnerable, because if I had said no, then I would have lost access to X, Y, and Z.

So one is my own complicity. Then, very recently in the last year, in my own institution, I've observed. how black administrators in particular. are really being called on to do the dirty work, to write the threatening emails, to call students who are demanding an end. to genocide, aggressive and, and, and, angry and a threat. And so it's not the white president, but a whole flank of black administrators.

who are the ones who are really, you know, doing. the work of these institutions to repress free speech and dissent. And I think that that is very strategic, because when that is the face of the message, people perhaps, who believe in representational politics may be less likely to question it. be critical of it, to push back against it. So it's really a way of insulating business as usual. with a cosmetic veneer of change and progress and inclusion.

That I really believe we have to look past. and look through in order to see what's actually going on. I can imagine, you know, as as I'm listening. to you say these two things about diversity, see. that the first part of it is, I can imagine a lot of people who don't share your politics cheering. with you, first of all, because they like I think of people like Elon Musk. who have said, no, you know, he's like, we don't want diversity. Yeah, we want the best people for the job. And that's it. And stop, stop hiring diversity.

Boeing planes are crashing because of the blacks. Yeah, the blacks don't know how to screw doors in. Right. Yeah. Even though there's no there's literally there's no record of this. So he would hear you and be like yes thank you. We don't want diversity. We want the best person for the job. Yes. Another person would be like, wait, but but then ruha, if. if we're not addressing. the exclusion of people like when I, when I think of South Africa's history. The intention. behind what we called black economic empowerment,

which was terribly implemented, by the way, I think the idea behind it was great and it was for a long time. black people couldn't go to schools, black people couldn't get this type of education. They couldn't get this type of job. They couldn't live in the city. They couldn't. Similar to America, right? You couldn't get a bank loan, you couldn't get the mortgage. Your your house was undervalued, etc. continues to be. And so someone said, how do we design a system that tries. to right that wrong and get people to where they should be? And I can I can imagine somebody listening to what you saying going.

like, whoa, wait, wait, wait. But then what are we supposed to do, not fix it? Yeah, because because I know you're very solutions driven as well. What do you think we're missing. when we only think of the inclusion or not the inclusion? Simply put, we're not asking what we're being included into. And so, you know, whether we draw on something that Martin. Luther King said in terms of being integrated into a burning house, or we think about the fact that plantations were very diverse places, but we would never say that, and we would never say that they were.

oh, we would never say that they were progressive or liberal. So diversity and domination can go hand in hand. And honestly, many of the institutions that we people. are currently working on, continue this plantation ethos. You know, I just came back from a conference where, educators of color working in schools. around the country, specifically independent schools, private schools.

that so many of them got hired a few years ago are now being let go. Their, you know, they were used up, they were put on the face of the websites. They were used to make these institutions feel good. And now that they are actually using their voices, they're being let go. And so that means that it was never about. true inclusion of people's insights and experiences, but it was there to make the institutions feel good about themselves. And so again, when we're offered two choices exclusion or inclusion,

we always have to ask ourselves what's being left off the table? I actually had a follow up. You have been an activist alongside the students. and the pro-Palestine movement kind of become the, I'd say, the professorial face of this movement at Princeton. And because of your your stance, you've been suspended. And that is what you're talking about when you're. talking about black administrators and the protests. go against genocide, etc., in the light of diversity and inclusion.

Can you speak more about that because you're putting your career. on the line and absolutely, there's people out there. But like, what's Palestine got to do with you? I, I be I'm really curious about that. I'm happy to. And just quick clarification, I'm on probation for a year, okay. Specifically for accompanying the students in a sit in. that took place in the spring. And I went in because they were concerned about one police brutality. that we'd been witnessing at Columbia and other places,

and also because up until that point, the administration. was really distorting their activities and their motives. And so they were they wanted a kind of objective faculty observer. But the administration has rejected that. That status and just said I was with them. And so now I'm on probation. And so, you know, to think about again, at the very moment. you mentioned the MacArthur the day before, I, received the call from MacArthur that I won this award.

And in September, I had just had a very tense call with the administration. that was essentially investigating my role. And so when the award was announced, it was all over the university website, all of the accolades. So they take credit and at the same time they're investigating me for basically, acting on what I was hired to do. And so they're happy for it. to stay theory, they're happy for it to stay on the page. But when you start actually living what you're writing and studying about, then it becomes a problem.

And so that is, again, this disjunction between liking things. to be, controlled in the way that will benefit them. But as soon as you start to challenge them, then. they try to put you in your place. Try being the operative word. You spoke about this, you know, in that in that same address. that Christiana was talking about, that went viral. One of the things you speak about as well. is these universities and universities in general, being quick to suppress people's voices when a protest is happening,

but then many years later, rewarding those people. with honorary degrees or and I didn't realize that until you said it. I was like, oh yeah, there's so many people, you name it. Like from MLK to Nelson Mandela to where. universities like the institutions were against them. Yeah. And then many decades later, they're like, we would like to honor you, Mr. Mandela, with this degree, for the peace work that you've done. Exactly. And I wish, like Nelson Mandela, I wish like one time he would have come out.

I mean, like, pat your work. and yeah, it taught me to shut down when I was protesting. But, I mean, I guess you don't want to do it in that moment, but, yeah, but I mean, like, Alice Walker came to up to Spelman. She was an undergrad there. She left after a year or two. Matts because they were really against her civil rights activism. And now, of course, you will be touted as a former student, even though she had to go to another school to graduate. Wow. So it's there's so many cases like that. And all of these schools are talking about,

you know, had students. who are against apartheid, who fought apartheid, you know, like thinking about South African apartheid. It's like this touchstone in all of these places. where they really, in hindsight, they're like, oh, yeah, we should have been against that when it was happening. And so now it's like part of the history. Yeah, they want to rewrite tearing that tradition. They can't make connect the dots. I'm curious Ruha as like Trevor teases me all the time. because I'm a bit of a champagne socialist, right? Yes. So I'm. Oh, I'm always very curious about the people that it goes from.

Theory like you write. all these books to actual praxis, like you are on probation right now. You know, you're not you're not working because of what you believe in. What is it about you and your history that means you're like, oh, this can't just be what I write about. It has to be what I live. Yeah. So one is that. my work is not tied to the institution like I carry on doing the work. So this probation is like adult time out. It's like. It's like it's like if you do anything else, quote unquote unprofessional. as that's the language they use, then you'll really get in trouble.

So it's mild compared to those colleagues who have have been fired. and were tenured and who've who've been penalized much worse. The other thing is that, you know, I became a professor very reluctantly, like when I was applying to grad school, my undergrad professors were like, really? You want to get a PhD? Because I was always making trouble. I was always on the activists end of the spectrum. So they were actually surprised that I wanted to pursue this. And literally the day that I turned in my dissertation, I was still questioning.

So I've come into this profession. reluctantly, never fully wearing that coat tightly. It was it's always loose. And I always think of myself as like, more like a kindergarten teacher. and professor drag, you know, like, yeah, I'm much rather be talking. to a roomful of, you know, kids and teenagers, and I do often. And so, so I think partly is that I don't identify. strongly with this very uptight, insulated, sort of.

ideal of what it means to be an academic, a professor. I have one foot in the academy and always one foot out. I will never turn to these institutions for my sense of self-worth. or self or mission. It's like I don't give them my all and so they can't take anything from me. And doing this either. Wow. Let's talk a little bit more about, institutions themselves, you know, specifically institutions. of higher learning on previous episodes of the podcast. You know, we've talked to, you know, historians like, let's say, Yuval Noah.

Harari. And, you know, we've talked to people like Ta-Nehisi Coates and we've talked to. and obviously, because of the time we're in Israel, Palestine comes up, but then many other issues come up and that that one overshadows. some of the other conversations that are that are as prominent in different ways. Right. The one thing I found myself wrestling with over. the past few months is how universities have failed. In my opinion, to be the bastion of conversation. that moves people in a direction.

And what I mean by this is, you remember Christiana. This was even when we were still at the Daily Show. I didn't like that. universities were blocking people like Ben Shapiro from coming to speak. Right. And the reason for it was because I was because. at the time people were like, no, we don't want him to come. He's a Nazi. We don't want this, blah, blah, blah. So forget how you feel about him or not. The thing I kept on saying was, if a university. cannot immunize its students to the ideas of a quote unquote.

radical person, let's say depending on how you look at them, then what is the point of a university like? I feel like that's supposed to be the boxing ground where we go. It's almost like you want your kids to come back from school and say, hey, today we fought with each other about apartheid. And, you know, we fought about whether or not people should be segregated. And we fought about, you know, what's happening in the Middle East. But in our school, they teach us how to fight because there's like. a, there's a because there is there is a constructive way to do it.

And I wonder from your perspective, what do you think we're missing in higher. learning institutions that now it doesn't seem like. the kids or the faculty or the institution itself. have the ability to facilitate something that society definitely can't. Yeah, yeah, I think that's, you know, there's layers to it. because I don't necessarily think it's a new phenomenon. that this sort of lack of capacity to engender constructive conversation. I would say that is distinct from the kind of debate bro style.

of someone like Shapiro, where it is very combative. It's not about us gaining knowledge together, but it's really about me winning. Oh, it's about it's about owning. Yeah, definitely. We should be able to wrestle with difficult conversations. And so I think part of, you know, the exceptionalism. around, Palestine that we've seen in the last year in. particular has a lot to do with the idealization. of what the university should be, which it hasn't ever been.

For the vast majority of people. and really the economic underpinnings of these institutions. You know, one person described it as as a hedge fund that offers classes, you know, so so it's a really think about, you know, really. this idea that these are this enlightenment model of learning. and so much of it is profit driven, and these profits are deeply intertwined. with the military, military, industrial complex, weapons manufacturers. Like, it's not just about, disclosing and divesting.

specifically when it comes to Israel Palestine, but the fact that these institutions are in bed. with the military so that the calling. into question of that entire infrastructure is, is really like getting to the foundation of what's holding these places up. And so the crackdown that we think, oh, this is so disproportionate, these students are just trying to talk about this or that. It's because what they're talking about is really getting to.

the foundations of what's holding these institutions up. We're going to continue this conversation. right after this short break. Yeah. You know, I was thinking about it's for for a whole host of topics. like, let's say Donald Trump, for instance. I'm often surprised when I meet people. who cannot understand why anyone would vote for Donald Trump.

I go, you mean you you have no there. Like, I just don't get it. How could you? Then I'm like, what do you mean, how could you? You may not agree with the person, but surely you should be able to see. that this person is identifying an issue and they see Donald Trump. as the solution to this issue. Right? So even if you erase your politics just for a moment, yeah, the issue will remain. Right. So the factory job is gone. The land is now, you know, barren. There's more pollution, people, birth rates, you name it.

The issue is going to remain regardless of the politics. But I don't know, I find myself constantly in conversations with people. who cannot even begin to fathom the possibility. of another human seeing the world differently, or seeing the same thing, but coming to a different conclusion. on how to how to repair it. Trevor, we, we, the three of us, and many others like us, we have to navigate a world that was not built for us. So by a matter of survival, we have to take other people's position.

We have to know how we're being. seen at all times in order to navigate, to stay out of danger. It's a capacity that we have grown. We've had to grow. So we're constantly shifting positions. You know, we have language for this. Dubois called double consciousness, you know, looking through different lenses. And so this is part of how we see the world is not to only see it. through our own lens. And so the fact that people cannot switch perspective is a luxury.

It's a privilege. That means that you can only navigate the world only through your lens. You don't have to take other people's position. So when it comes to something like the Trump phenomenon, or just thinking. about what on the outside appears like, hate and vitriol and evil even. Yeah, part of what we have to reckon with is how, from the inside. of that perspective, it's not experience as hate and vitriol. In some cases, it's actually affinity love.

People are bonding over these perspectives and outlooks. And so I remember a few years ago I saw this really heartbreaking video, this like this cafeteria scene of kids that, I think it was right. after he was elected, the first time these kids were chanting, build that wall. And they were pointing at this little Latino boy. in the cafeteria, build that wall, build that wall dam. And and so I was thinking about not just those kids, but the parents of those kids.

who see the building of that wall, the borders of our world, not as an evil infrastructure, not as motivated by hate, but motivated by a distorted form of love for their own children. So the idea that we have to do this to protect our children, their jobs, their futures, yeah, it's really this. what Fanon would call like this perverse form of love.

I remember reading and as a grad student, a book called women in the Klan. that was talking about women's very prominent role in the Ku Klux Klan. And you know, this check diversity, hashtag inclusion eggs. I just want to acknowledge them. Thank you, thank you. Point point. And how, you know, the ethnographer who really infiltrated and went inside. these organizations and, you know, befriended and quotes these women. She writes about how, you know, they had potlucks, they took care of each other's kids.

You know, there was so much affinity and love in the inside. that then got expressed by who they hated, like they bonded over. Right, right, right. So unless we can understand that the kind of internal, workings, then we and we only think of it as what is experienced from the outside, we won't get to the root of the problem, which is people seeking bonds with other. human beings, but only being able to do it by having something to be against. And that is not inevitable, right?

That just what we what the pattern. But it's not inevitable. Yeah. It's interesting that you mentioned elementary school students. because I thought of little expelled Trevor, but. I must clearly state I should have been expelled. Okay. That's right. For the record. For the record, I am not. I was not in anything worth fighting for. I was an absolute terror. Yeah. And the school was right to expel me. Howell. No, no, no, no, I'm going to correct you. The schools should have been set up in such a way.

that would allowed you to express. Yes, I think we're going to we're going to disagree on this, but we'll come back. And I want one thing that struck me about what you said. They should have created a space where. demon Trevor could have thrived. And I'm just I would love for you to kind of speak. a lot more about, like, your abolitionist politics, because I think that is the thread that runs. Yeah. Everything you believe, whether it's Israel and Palestine, reproductive justice, how we approach universities. Yeah. You kind of have this worldview that everyone can kind of.

be redeemed and fixed, and that kind of starts in the childhood. arena of how we do elementary school, which I'm really curious about because. I'm currently going through the process of trying to get a little Trevor. Elementary School. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So I'd love to I'd love to know more of that. because you have this very compassionate, I think, lens on the Trump voter. that people may be surprised. that someone like yourself has, because no one thinks about the fact that, oh, these people do love their children and it's expressed by this antagonist.

So yeah. Yeah. To him. Yeah. And I think there's is different. You know like you can understand something and not abide at the same time. You know you can I can understand it. But I also feel very strongly that part of what sometimes get lost. gets lost when we talk about abolition, is accountability. And so it's not that we can just hurt each other, harm each other, say whatever. we want and just walk through the world sort of unaccountable to each other.

So I think hand in. hand with this worldview is this idea that we have to build a social fabric, that when I hurt you, I'm both going to be accountable to, and I'm going to take action to ensure it doesn't happen again. So when it comes to school and what we would call like the, the, you know, the, the school to prison pipeline and all the ways. that we incorporate and carceral processes and logics in school, including suspension and detention and all of these things. It's a lack of creativity.

It's a lack of thinking, how else could we organize this such. that we don't cut off people who have a bad day or are, you know, sort of wrestling with something. and can't express why it is so they act out in this way. There's examples of schools and communities. that are experimenting with that. And a lot of it comes down to, again, this prioritization of order. and excellence over really play and imagination. and thinking about the fact that oftentimes the first things to go.

from many schools when there's budget cuts, recess and art, like the very places that people would be able to have self-expression. and even our language of like black excellence, like, as something to strive. for, has a huge underside, you know, a going back to what. we're joking about, the kind of like Nigerian parents, like there's. so much that gets lost and repressed and discounted. when we strive for a very narrow form of achievement.

There's so many forms of intelligence and genius and creativity. that gets shut down. that we're never, never we never get to experience. because we want everyone to sit behind their desks. for eight hours a day, raise their hand, walk in line, you know? And so part of it is to rethink even what we consider education and excellence. And it right now, because everyone could ultimately benefit from those changes. So I love that idea, but I still say I should have been expelled.

Okay, okay. No, I'll tell you why. So I think I think this is one of the main things that we struggle with in society. Unfortunately, we are always at the mercy. of, you know, the average right. And that is that's most systems you're working at the mercy of the average. If a car is too high, it cannot drive into a parking garage, right? If something is too wide, it cannot fit into an aisle, etc., etc.. And so I think of like schools, schools are a crazy novel concept.

when you think about it. Right? You designed like one building where like a thousand odd people can come in. and all of them are learning and all of them are coming together. Where before it was just like a little community. Few people, you learn what you can, we do what we can and we sort of. we blew this thing out for good and for bad. Yeah. Yeah. Right. So what I mean by I should have been expelled actually. agrees with a lot of what you're saying. I think that you have to expel. Trevor from that environment because he's not good for that environment.

And so I think sometimes maybe the word expel has a different connotation. I don't think of expelled as like, oh, they hurt me. Yeah. No, they kicked me out. Yeah. You got a free day, you know. And let me, let me tell you why I say this. Trevor, you're so traumatized. No no no no, let me tell you why. Let me tell you why. When you talk about accountability, there is no world where exclusion will not be part of it. It is. It's it's quite impossible. The mere act of singling a person out is excluding them already. So if you have ten kids together, you tell them all to keep quiet and draw.

One stands up in screams. Even by saying to them, come over here, let me speak to you. You have expelled them from the group and you have excluded them right now. Your intention may be, oh, I'm going to make them feel good. I'm going to now encourage them. Hey, maybe you play a little bit more, but even when we create this new space for them, that encourages that they are excluded from the group. because they go like, no, I want to be in the drawing group. And you're like, no, but you're not the door. But the teacher having the conversation like bringing them aside.

to restore them back to the group. Yes, but it's different from bringing them to the side. Now, you say that this isn't a group, but this is what I don't like. This is what I don't like. Restoration. No. You guys are trying to brainwash me. This is what I don't like. And I mean it. This is what I think is is. The problem is they go, let us bring them aside. and then we'll try and turn them into the drawers. And it's like, I'm not saying that. I'm saying. And that's why I agree with you in, in, in large part of what you're saying. And maybe that's why I'm a fan of the upside of I if it doesn't. kill us all, okay.

Is because the average needs to be the average. This is how any system works. You just need to find a way. for the anomalies to exist, and it's hard to cater to all of them. But when you. exclude somebody, I don't believe in trying to get them back. in, a no, I mean, it's, I mean, because they're not of the in. The more you try and put me as Trevor back into their classroom, the more I'm going to be disruptive. And that's why I love imagination. Let me just for the record yes you can go and see me all.

That's why I love your book. I love your ideas. I'm a big fan of the imagining because I go, imagine a world where you could have expelled Trevor to a school. Yeah, like they did with Harry Potter in them. It's actually a school for the gifted. You go like, yo, man, you magic kids, you need to be separate. All these other kids, they don't do magic. We're going to put you in a magic school, and then you find community in and amongst magic and magicians. Does that make sense? So I'm saying you should be expelled. And I'm saying what we need to imagine is where we take expelled.

people to, as opposed to trying to bring them back into the thing. So a couple things. One is, you know, if if the kind of phenomenon you're. describing of people being pulled out or expelled, let's say if it was, an equal opportunity, expelling, you know, we're all. kids were treated with that same, the same level of scrutiny, etc. that would be one conversation. But what you're describing is there's a very strong selection effect in terms.

of which young people's behavior is deemed so troublesome as to warrant expelling. We have very stark disparities in the percentages. No, no, no, blacks do like, you know, native students, etc.. Yeah. Who are expel. And if you look country by country, there's another level to this. where the rates of punishment that we think of. as normal, let's say in South Africa or the U.S. or etc., somehow magically, other societies have been able.

to organize their schooling such that they don't have those outcomes. They're not expelled. So so what we normalize and I think this is the only way. we can deal with this issue of the average and gifted, etc. somehow it's not universal. That should be a clue for us. that it's possible to approach education in a way that's not like a factory. You know, where we're graduating batches of kids, and if you don't, if you. have any little problem with the product, you have to pull it aside. And so partly as to really rethink our model of education.

that we've inherited as normal and say, what if we could approach things. in a way that wasn't so mechanical, that wasn't so rigid? From the start. Right. And, and and we don't have to, you know, we don't have to come up with scratch. because there's other places that are already doing this. One of the examples that I've discussed is how in Finland, like kids, they're not really focused on reading and math, etc. until the kids are older, they're really take place seriously.

So the teachers are like studied, the kids play, you know, and like getting all these letters tells you everything. By the way, that's something I've learned from therapists and like, great teachers. Yeah. Play tells you everything. Yeah, play tells you everything. And so they're really taking it seriously. And what's so kind of paradoxical in a way, is that when they administer. these universal tests across countries, you know, to rank which countries are doing better or worse? Yeah, Finland out tests all the other countries, like a place. that's not focused on testing, that's focused on play and imagination.

and expression and cooperation and learning. how to fight, learning how to compete, you know, productive. It's not like it's not Kumbaya. It's like, how do we how do we manage conflicts? You know, if you can't practice that as a kid, like, of course you don't have adults that can do that. if you don't learn how to negotiate that when you're younger. and you always have a teacher to step in and say, pull this aside, pull Trevor aside, expel him. No, let let's figure out how to conflict and fight productively.

in a way that we can, you know? So part of it is to recognize that spending time and investing in this, actually leads to happier, you know, more well-rounded. human beings and people who can take tests if you really care about that. You know, when I, when I was sitting looking at some of your work, there's one question I wanted to ask you, which is extremely controversial. I'm going to say this ahead of time, but and I'll preface it with. this, I oftentimes think to myself that as human beings,

we're searching for solutions to real problems. We very seldom think that we've reached the wrong solution. Right. Because we have a good intention. I really believe most human beings do. And in looking at some of your work, your speeches, your, your writing. and even society itself, even some of the things you're saying now, I found myself wondering and this applies to America, and then maybe it'll go to other places in a different way because Finland ties in.

Do you think that integration. was the right move, like, and now I'm separating two things, because I know in America people like, well, of course, I mean, there were people where there was racism and there's segregation. And I go, yeah, no, no, no, I'm separating them. Let's separate someone being oppressed and someone not being able to get a job. and someone not being able to get a bank loan. Let's take all of those the negative things away. Because I'll put myself out personally and say, I think whether we talking about gifted kids.

who are anomalous, let's say, to the norm, whether we are talking about, and I mean. anything, anything that does not fit into a category, I think part of the reason Finland is able to do it is because. Have you been to Finland? Very much. I've been to Finland. You know who's in Finland? Finnish people. That's it. That's it. And because they're all Finnish, there's an idea of like, no, we all have in the same direction. We all know what our actions mean.

And that's a really powerful thing. I've learned in communicating with other people. When I'm in a room with anyone, where we start to tie together multiple things. So if I'm in a room with black people already, there's like an implicit trust. because we know what certain actions, words and vibes mean. And then you're in a room with another African. Already? Yes. Now, even if you shout at me, I know what your shout means. The same way in Italian knows what an Italian shout means. Yeah, right. And also I'm prefacing it with a lot.

Yes, it's a loaded question. Yes, but I would love to know if you think integration was the right solution. Maybe I'm on the other side of, you know, one of civil rights. Yeah, no I don't and I, and I don't think it's actually. that controversial when if, if you understand that segregation. and integration weren't the only options like those are. within those two options, it may seem like integration. is the more progressive like, of course we don't want segregation.

But again, when you're being integrated into institutions, into a culture. that's a supremacist culture, that's a culture that feeds off of hierarchy, that feeds off of insecurity, anxiety, why are we being integrated into that? And so part of it is to question what we're being invited into. And so again, when you think about the example of Finnish being homogenous, you know, nation states are imagined the, the, the national identity is not something that is, you know, God given.

It's not something that, you know, existed for eternity. These identities were created, maintained, you know, made durable over time. And so part of the stretching our imagination is to recognize. all of the things that have been made up, but made to seem immutable or fixed, you know, intrinsic, including our national sort of identities. And so part of it is really like to do naturalize the things that we take for.

granted as somehow magically operating to make us feel connected. to each other and ask ourselves, how else can we be connected to engender the sense of solidarity. where what I want for my kids, I also want for my neighbors kids. I want for the kids who don't speak English. I want for the kids who are just arriving. And so, again, to push ourselves. When you think about expanding our imagination to. to make it more embracing of seeming differences. that are not intrinsic, that are not something that are inevitable.

You know, my sister in law lives in, Japan. And again, it's one of those places that people think, oh, you know, it's homogenous. It's, you know, from the outside, people think everyone is, you know, a shared identity. But Japanese of Korean descent, among many other groups, are treated like shit. You know, they're treated it's. discriminated in so many different areas of life and education and health care. When two people go to marry, sometimes their families do a deep genealogical. dive to find any Korean descent in the line before that.

And so again, we are so creative. in creating hierarchies and distinctions out of nothing. You know why we we channeled that creativity. to actually work in the opposite direction. If we're doing it to maintain hierarchies and division, perhaps. we can do it to engender solidarity and connection. Right. And I think it's a choice. when we give up our power and think, oh, this is something happening to us, we have to just navigate this crooked system as it is.

I think, you know, that only serves. those who are currently benefiting from the status quo. And so I always have to ask myself, who who does my pessimism serve? I don't know what to say. So that's amazing I so this this is this is what I'll say. So that is I think of I think a lot of this was inspired by me. looking into your story. You know, how you were raised, the many places you were raised. and how I think that influenced your life.

You know, the Marshall Islands, for instance, is something it's funny. how sometimes in life you start to experience. a story from many different angles at the same time. You know how that happens. Like might be a TV show, it might be a historical event. The Marshall Islands, for me, because of the Cold War, I've just been inundated with Cold War stuff in life right now. I don't know why I'm loving it. And now with your story, it ties in in a different way. because you live there with your family, and you talk about how even growing. up, you in a world where this is an American owned area now,

and the people of that place who've been displaced and affected. by the testing and the military base, they still have ideas. They still have dreams. They still have hopes. They still have. But it's interesting to see how that's affected you. And I'd love to know how much of you living as an outsider everywhere, has, has. sort of made you want to fight for everyone who is an outsider. I resonate with the statement you made about.

being in and being normal is the luxury. Right. It's a luxury to go like, oh, this is the way it is. Yeah. The more you moved around as a child the more you're like oh wow. There is no normal. And I have to rediscover the normal every single time. So was there like one moment and one place you moved to as a child. that, that stirred this up inside you. Oh I think what do you think it came from? It was definitely a recurring theme. It was that kind of thing where again, that distance between. what's how I'm being perceived and how I'm experiencing the world.

And so although on one level, I was definitely an outsider. in all of these places at the same time, I carried home within me. I didn't need other people to make me feel, oh, like you belong. It's like I remember listening to Lupita on the show. and she's talking about, you know, I, I belong wherever. I am, you know, and I really resonated with that. It's like when you're not looking for it from the outside, you cultivated within. No one can shake it.

No one can take it from you. And at the same time, being in all those places really gave me. a keen sense that as human beings like what. we think of as our world, this is the way things are. I can get on a plane and move with my family, you know, and into a completely different, you know, universe. And it's, you know, all of the things that I took for. granted in one place are different, whether it's racial classifications, whether it's who's on top, who's considered beautiful. or not, you know, like you had a great conversation about weight,

like thinness is not fetishized everywhere in the world, you know. And so that just tells us, oh, this thing that we think of as universal. and inevitable in a different context. There's a whole different set of, you know, these parallel realities in a way. And I was a sci. fi nerd starting at about a teenager moving to the Marshall Islands, like. the only thing being able to watch a Star Trek and realizing, know, you know, like we are very adept at creating these parallel universes.

And part of it is to be able to, like, step in and out and see, okay, this is not working for us in this reality that we currently live. Yeah. Why don't we change it? Why don't we, you know, work with other. and it's not like we have to start from scratch. Let me show you. I'll peek into this other reality. and show you they're doing something completely different. with education or with accountability and safety or with health care. And so, you know, part of it is not to get so locked in. to one way of perceiving things. And I think that childhood of having to move every 5 or 6 years.

was, the classroom that I needed to, to be able to do that. Don't go anywhere because we got more. What now? After this? So, Trevor over here. is a real eye enthusiast, and I am a tech person. Like, I'm a Luddite. He talks a lot about, like, the transformative possibilities of AI.

I'm terrified. Now, I know also the reality. If you even rewind this exact conversation, is grounded. But you know he is because he is an optimist in nature. Yes, yes, very optimistic view of AI. And I know you'll work with the new Jim code. you speak a lot about like racist robots and all of these things. I don't want you to feed into my it. Yeah. I want you to describe this world. If we use our imagination to its fullest, what could AI perhaps do for us?

That's really good. You know, I think that there are many different types of AI, and the one that people often think about is artificial intelligence. That's the one that people are excited about. That's the one getting all the funding, all the hype. Yeah. And what I my little soapbox is to say that there are other types. of AI that we need to be prioritizing investing in, not necessarily, to get rid of the first kind, the artificial kind, completely,

but to really put it in its place, I personally think it's getting. too much space, attention, investment as it is. And so ancestral intelligence is one thing that I think of, as an important type of AI that has to do with collective wisdom, know how the insights and experiences of people. who have to learn how to navigate the underside of society, who are constantly buried under the rubble of so-called progress. So there's the kinds of knowledges that grow in that rubble.

that are often discounted as backwards is no longer needed. As you know, in the past, that I think we need to center. The other type of AI is abundant imagination. Like again, going back to thinking about what often. the artificial type of AI is displacing our ability. to actually use our imaginations and creativity. rather than just plugging in prompts and getting the outputs. The other thing is that what appears so efficient.

and convenient and magical about artificial intelligence. Hi, is the fact that there are people behind these screens. that are doing the grunt work to make these systems work, and this labor is outsourced to places like Kenya, to places like the Philippines in which workers are there. Can't doing the content moderation, doing the work. that on our end seems like, wow, this is just, sent talent being. No, they're armies of laborers that are there.

making these systems go and they're being mistreated. They're having mental health toll because they're often seeing the worst. of the worst in order to clean, these systems and the internet. So anyone who is a proponent of AI, the first kind artificial, they need to have an answer. or have a reckoning with the human dimensions, the human costs, the labor, and also the environmental costs of these systems, the energy, the water usage to simply train one algorithm.

At one point, a study at MIT made it a said. it was equivalent to the life span of five cars. So it's not to say you have to be against it, but you need to reckon. with the costs of creating these systems, the human, the environmental in a way that's taken seriously. Yeah, I think I think that's the difficulty with AI. Right? Is, you know, I've heard. some people say AI is like the atom bomb. You know, when we made the atom bomb, we didn't consider all the things.

I disagree with that for a few reasons. One, because the atom bomb could not think or create or do right. And I used to think in inverted commas. Okay. It could not generate is what I mean. And more importantly, the atom bomb had only one use. Do you know what I mean? Even when they were making it, they weren't like and it will help. you cook your food. No, everyone knew what the bomb was for. There was no other purpose. There was no other intention. The difficulty with AI is that we have. something that puts us on the precipice.

of everything that we haven't even imagined, right. So here's a simple example. You know, and I credit you, Christiana, with this. Like you're the person who came into my life kicking down doors, telling me to consider women's health more and more and more and more. Do you know what I mean? Like just kicking down my door. at the Daily Show and being like, do you know what it is to be a woman? Do you know the pain? And no need to use this? And Dimitrios, do you know that? And I was like, oh man, I got to pay attention to this stuff. Like Christiana was wrong, but in a good way, because you're my friend, you know? Exactly.

And so I think of the conversations I've had with a professor at Johns Hopkins. who has shown me the AI that they use to detect breast cancer in women. long before it would have ever been humanly possible to detect it. And sometimes, even more importantly, to prevent false positives. You know, many women are getting mastectomies, but they don't have any type of cancer. And it's like, well, thanks for playing folks. Who has the debt? Here's your health care bill and you actually didn't have this thing. Yeah, I look at that just in one space.

Right? I look at it in in the world of education, a teacher is a finite resource. You know, AI is the first thing we've seen where you could genuinely. have a teacher for your child, and. it isn't tied to the money that your child has right now. I know some people are like, oh, but it's still out of reach. It is. In many ways it is. But, the average cost for processing a transaction, even in the conversations we've had since 2022, has gone down 95% just cost wise.

So the accessibility has has accelerated. And the one thing that I keep grappling with is this, yes, we know that it's using up energy because it is it is, but it is also. the thing that has helped data centers optimize how much energy they use. And so data centers that before were just like these little hubs, ovens cooking up all of our cloud information. Those data centers can save like up to like 25, 30% of their energy bill.

So it's this weird situation where, you know, you have something that you're making, and you have to make the thing to try and help you fix the thing. And finding that balance is where I go. That's the real. But the reason I'm optimistic about it is because it has another use. It has a good purpose. It has, and that doesn't discount the other things. Yeah. And one last thing I'll say. I'd love to know. what you think about this rule, because I know you are a techie like me is. the thing I love about. AI or tech in general, is that.

it's bust double, which is not a word, but it's like you can bust it. Okay, okay. If you say to me as Trevor, Trevor, I'm going to put you in front of a judge. And this judge is going to rule on your life. If I go, this judge was biased. The judge goes, no, I want I wasn't, I wasn't biased. We talk about like, you know, we had this back in the day and we still see these. You type in image black person on the internet. Oftentimes the image that will come up black man it'll be a guy. mugshot dangerous looking or a chimpanzee or chimpanzee. Yes.

And then you go, white man. and we'll show you like, you know, an Ivy League like Abercrombie and Fitch. Okay. But what I'm saying is, unlike humans, you can actually find that and see it and code against it's. You cannot with humans. I cannot prove it with a human. We've lived in a world for so long where we've gone, you discriminate and the person is like, no, I do not be like, all right, well, fun conversation. Thanks for playing. You saying I can't gaslight us. No no no no, I'm saying we can because we have data now.

And the data. I'm not saying the world becomes perfect, but I'm saying. it becomes a lot easier to get to a more perfect place. when the thing that we're using is itself not personal, and then has data that we can work off of, and that's why I'm hopeful. Okay. I'm not a person who's like this is going to be the best thing ever. I'm saying there are many places that could be better. Yeah. And I'm hopeful because we can catch it when it's not in a way. that with humans we just flat out could not. Yeah. Because you couldn't prove it and I do I do think that one of the ways that.

I think of these technologies as useful is, as Trevor described as a mirror. Yes, but that presumes that people are motivated by data. and facts and information like by that seeing is believing. And we know through studies that have presented hard data. to people to show them this disparity exists. This inequality exists. Seeing that information or data often has them double down.

on whatever their priors were. You know, there was a study out of Stanford a few years ago. They presented data on incarceration to white Americans in San Francisco. and New York, said, look at these black people. being warehoused at disproportionate rates in our jails and prisons. And when they were exposed to the data, they became more. supportive of the policies that were creating that effect. Stop and frisk in New York, three strikes, law and and California. And so partly is to reckon with, yes, these systems. can be a reflection of society, but the facts alone will not save us.

This is not people are not simply. motivated by information, but by story, by stories. But then when it comes to like the examples. you offered, which I think are really important, whether in health care, you know, you talked about the breast cancer. screening or in education, more tailored learning. There are, again, studies that are showing that, many of these systems are just reproducing and hiding. existing problems in these institutions or in these industries in health care.

There was an audit a few years ago. where they looked. at a widely used health care algorithm. that was discriminating against black patients. because it was trained on data in which doctors were not offering. adequate services and time to their black patients. Right. So the smarter the algorithms get, the more racist and sexist they often become. Like intelligence is like learning. Well, this is how you came in become. Yeah. Not I think that's the key distinction for me. Not inevitable. So there's another counter example, and this is a positive one.

I think that sort of lends itself to your optimism, is that a group of researchers said, okay, we understand this phenomenon. It's getting reproduced in these systems. So what they did was trained eye not on doctors. The official medical reports, but they trained the system. to predict what a patient would say about their own experience of pain. So the eyes intelligence was based on patient's own self-report. Oh, wow. So it didn't have that anti-black bias that is embedded in those doctor's. reports.

So it was not only more accurate but less biased. So this is the lesson. It matters where we go. looking for the data, the knowledge that we're training these systems on. If we only train them on the the the official record or the official data, without being more creative and thinking what is being left out? What perspectives aren't in the official record. that we need to actually train these systems on? Then in this case, the embodied knowledge of patients. who know what they're feeling and, you know, pain is often discounted.

We have to turn our attention. and be more creative about, again, what even counts as knowledge. And so, so many of the things in education are trying to predict whether students. are going to graduate or be successful, or whether they're at risk. And they're reproducing the categories like if I say guess. which students are are deemed higher risk by these AI systems, right. You know who that's going to be, in my view, rather than pointing it to the students, let's figure out which adults are creating risks for these students.

Let's train the AI to figure out which fields and departments. are creating a hostile environment for these young people, but we never turn the lens to those who actually have the power. to shape the experience. We always look at the most vulnerable and label them and stigmatize them. Can I tell you that's just an amazing one to just jump in on? Can you imagine? Because I love this idea. Now imagine if we designed a system which is not very hard. No. And you actually looked at judges.

Actually, if someone goes to this judge, they have a higher chance. of going back into the system. And then I love this because then you shift the blame, so you go, you're like, actually there are ten judges, these three with their sentencing. We've noticed that the people actually don't come back into the system. And we look at what they sentencing is and you go like, oh, these judges seem to look at you as a human. They more compassionate, they give you maybe they do as you said. They hold you accountable, but they don't think of the most punitive measure, etc., etc..

So they're still a judge. Then we look at another group and we're like, hey you guys on the other end, this, these three, we notice that everyone. that you incarcerate, your rate has the highest rates of recidivism. So actually we don't think you're good for the system. because you don't seem to be doing the thing that the other judges are doing. And I love that idea. I really love that idea. So amazing. And so that's and that's why I say I think we agree on a lot of it. Because I do like that you can do that. So for instance, here's a simple example. When we talk about. AI, we talk about this big thing, this massive thing.

But going to some of the things we've spoken about in this conversation, the like the UAE is building their own. And so they have one that is going to be trained on. whether it's religion in the Middle East, whether it's the histories in the Middle. East, the cultures, but their data set is going to be more focused on the world. And many people who work in the field have said. the future is not going to be one grand AI, you know? In fact, if you look at the most of the data, AGI looks like it's a scam.

That's just getting people to put more money in. the real thing that it looks like, which this is what I'm hopeful. for and optimistic about, is not that there is an AI. It is more that every country, for instance, will be able to have its AI. Every community will be able to have its AI, you know, so you can go, oh, I'm. Nigerian, I'm evil, and this, I'm this, I'm going to put all these pieces together. and my AI within the context of my world, is able to give me everything that I need. because it has the context of who I am and who who my people have been.

And I think that, for me is like one of the most magical ideas. of context contributing to culture. Does that make sense? Yeah, I go, I'm if you know, you know me, I'm just scared of the machine. You said I. By the way, what's your what's your favorite tech? Are you are you still a techie or did you switch it out for old books? You just went for books? No, because I know you have a lot of books. I'm still hybrid. I'm hybrid? Yeah. I don't know what I would say. You know, I'll actually. I'll tell you, I just came out of a two day, hosted a two day VR exhibit.

I wasn't I have not, I wasn't really I for VR. I've written about it of how it's manipulated and used for like trauma, porn, etc. but I'm collaborating with an amazing team. that's working on a project called Phoenix of Gaza. It's a VR exhibit that has footage, from the last few years. in Gaza before the devastation, many cultural, everyday activities, weddings, sewing groups, children playing people doing pool,

sharing poetry, and also now in the aftermath of this genocide. And so this is where you enter the world. It's very different from seeing something on film. or on screen, like the kids are looking at you eye to eye, like you're. standing over the shoulder of a teenager reciting poetry, passionate. And you're on your wall. The little boy on a skateboard going on the beach. He has the camera and you're you're riding with him. And so this experience of entering this world is one thing,

but it's the fact that it's created by and for Palestinians. And I don't think it matters who's creating these technologies. with what values and goals in mind, like, you know, the stories that they're telling are about preservation. It's about rebuilding. It's about having now. the footage of churches that have been demolished, mosques that have been demolished. But but having the the architecture there, you know, in this 360 camera. with the idea that we are going to go home and we are going to rebuild this.

And so the Phoenix of Gaza XR project is one of the few, you know, of these kind of emerging technology. projects that I think of as truly liberatory. in that the goal is to, you know, engender self-determination. and cultural preservation and a return right to return. I've been wrestling with this idea, and some of it has been inspired by conversations. Some of it has just been reading, learning, etc., about how much.

responsibility everybody bears. for how they frame every single conversation they have. Right. And and the reason I think about it is because, you know, in our conversation we've touched on ideas of intention, culture, power, perception, you know, all of these things. And I can't help but think about Israel, Palestine and how. when I've sat down. with people who are pro-Israel, Israeli or Jewish and Jewish American,

what's been interesting to me is seeing how different. or how differently people are hearing the same thing. Do you know what I mean? So here's a simple one. Not the simple issue, but like just an example. You know, there's a chant that people often say from the river to the sea. Yeah. Palestine shall be free. for anyone. I know who's Palestinian when I've asked them what does that mean. They say, well, we want freedom for all our people, not just in Gaza, but from the West Bank.

We want freedom for everyone. River Jordan. Yeah. From the River Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea. We want our freedom, you know, and that's what we chant. And then when I've spoken to my friends who are Jewish or Israeli, maybe, and not even, you know, religious Jew or whatever, but Jewish, they go, no, this is a chance of genocide. They're saying from the river to the sea, they're going to cleanse us. What is what stands in the way of the river and the sea? It's Israel. And.

and I can't help but have compassion. for anyone I speak to in this, because it it in some ways, like in South. Africa, we've had stories like this where there was a struggle song and a chant. that was sung by black people who were fighting against an apartheid government. And then now that song, some people feel like targets them. If they were a white person who's a farmer in the country. and then the person singing, it goes like, no, no, no, no, no, it's not about that. And I couldn't help but think about like, how many times.

Nelson Mandela would give a speech, and at times. I would think it was unnecessary, but he would say he would go like, I am not for the oppression of black people. And he's like, and I'm against the oppression of white people. I'd be like, well, that's a. that's an unnecessary why would you need to say, I used to think that all the time when I'd hear it. Yeah. And then now I find myself wondering, how much burden should we be? Like, how much should we be cognizant of how we are saying what we are saying.

because the fights are still going to happen? But we almost want the most clarity to be fighting about the thing we actually, or arguing or discussing the thing we actually need to be discussing. That does make sense, because you would think it's not necessary. for Nelson Mandela to say that he does not want white people to be oppressed. But then you realize that if he. black Lives Matter is a good example and all these things, if you do not say that at times, and even if you do because he was labeled a terrorist, let's not forget them.

There are some people who go, whoa, wait, you don't want black oppression. So what about white oppression? And it's amazing to me that he thought about there was no social media. Nelson Mandela wasn't on Facebook. This was long before this time. But he intuitively knew that. He has to say, I don't want black people to be oppressed. However, this does not mean that I want white people to be oppressed either. I'm against all oppression. And so I'd love to know. Yeah, I love that because you can interpret. that as you know him, sort of pacifying or conceding to this sort of. white fragility, let's say,

but you could also understand that going back. to how we started the conversation. about, you know, sort of what we're being integrated into. is that oftentimes we've seen when an oppressed group gets power, they reproduce the same forms of domination that they were once resisting. And so part of it is the fact that his historical imagination. is so keen that he knows that it's not out of bounds to think that, oh, if this is all you've known, this is how you've seen power exercise.

That's all you've known. Then once you seize it, you are very likely going to mimic. or reproduce exactly what you were against. And and so part of it. is really to think about, you know, not just who is doing the action. or saying the words, but really what are the logics behind it. And so language, you know, it is a kind of technology in that way that can be wielded in, in various ways. My own sort of approach is really to try.

to stay keenly attuned to those who are, you know, oppressed in any situation. and thinking about, you know, language from that perspective. I just came from a conference where after I gave my talk, there was a backlash. because people, I guess, don't like using the word genocide. to describe what's happening to Palestinians. And so I said, but I also had a slide there about caste and caste hierarchies. I was born in India, and there's this, an image that I show of Dalit. protesters having saying caste is evil.

And I said, you know, upper. caste people who see that, I'm sure that makes them very uncomfortable. They're opposed to it. You know, I talk about how religion is used to naturalize caste. and make it seem like it's ancient and inevitable and cultural. Right. And so I said, you know, the difference is, is those people, the upper caste, who might be opposed to me showing that and talking about that. they don't currently have the power to impose their worldview on me.

And I think it's a kind of hubris, and it's a kind of supremacist. thinking that you can tell me or tell an oppressed group. how they can talk about their own oppression. You know, that is itself a symptom of supremacist. thinking and hubris that I think people need to reflect on themselves. No, I, I agree with that. But I think even in trying to channel, let's say, an argument, someone might have, they would go, yes, but you are not in that situation, so I'm not telling them how to say it. I'm saying to you, as the person who's not in the situation,

that your language is dangerous. Does this make sense? Yeah. No, I completely and and that's this I and I mean this when I say I wrestle, I mean I think is a tool for censorship there. So it's interesting you say this. Yeah. Because that's how I feel like I think about it in many ways. I can't tell them how to articulate their experience exactly. And so like if we convert that, it's exactly if we say, well, I believe it's a genocide, I think this is a chance it as an ally. Yeah. Why that in turn say, well, your language is problematic and it's insulting to me.

I'm not allowed to do no. And I'm like, my view is it's like if we really do have free speech. Yeah. If we have freedom of thought and expression and views, everything is fair game. You know, I, you know, my favorite saying racists have outlets too. is the fact that, like, people should be free to say what they like. And I resent not policing instinctively on either side. Okay, so what about power? Who can impose their language on others? Who can get people fired for using certain language.

now, actually certain things, whether that's the white genocide or so. But actually that's a I agree with you on that. Yeah, I think that's a different thing that I'm speaking to. Okay. What are you speaking to. No, no, no, I know because because I think so many of these things overlap. You know like it. It's it's the Venn diagram again of issues. So for instance, to play devil's advocate or whatever, there are many conservative. people in America who have said, it's interesting how if that person, the person who is black, gay, trans, what if they say something about me. or my group or whatever, they can say it, but if I say something, even questioning,

you know, I, I just wonder, like, should a trans child be converted at this age? I am then labeled as transfer and I'm fired from my job and I'm. And it's exactly what you're saying, by the way they go. But I was not trying to be inflammatory. I'm trying to ask a question. And the person goes, no, by even asking that question, you are you are enabling the idea. And they go like, well, what do you what are you doing to me? And then their job goes, hey, we we have to let you go because you're transphobic. I've I've always kind of thought that's a strawman argument.

Just because if we look at the state of society today and who has actual power, you know, these people aren't talking about freedom of speech. People we know people are free to say what they say, but the people. who bear the most consequences, I think, seem to be the most radical, especially if we think about people who bear the most consequences, the brunt of the consequences have the more radical view, which I think is normal in the society now. It's it's very hard to find a professor on probation for being pro-Israel. Let's be clear in this moment in time now. Yes.

And that's that's what that's why I'm saying. we're causing probation, right, for being pro-Palestine. And it's the the chants of the people who align with Palestine. who are being censored and the is making me uncomfortable. Right. So I'm you see on that part. Yeah. I'm saying that is clearer to me. Yeah. Right. Because whether we like it or not, throughout history, those who have power. have used their power to protect themselves. And, I mean, this seems like a natural human,

like it would be weird for a person without power, with power to not use it. You would be a very interesting type of person. I'd love to meet. Please send us an email so we can talk to you. know I'm speaking to something different like Ruha. I'd love to know, even from your experiences. were there moments where you were able to either facilitate or notice. a breakthrough in the communication that the kids on campus. were having with each other? That's what I'm talking more about. making the ramifications of your speech are a separate issue. Okay. And who gets to decide. is a separate issue I'm just talking about with us as people.

Yeah. When we say something and how we say it's. How much responsibility do we bear to clarify. And then also because you've been in like literally the hotbed of it. in America in many ways. Have you seen anything that was a glimpse of hope. Have you seen a conversation or, or a or a, you know, an idea. where you went, oh, wow. As a sociologist, you know, as a MacArthur genius, you were even surprised. by the effect that it had, I would say, the most.

heartening and the, the most, surprise is the wrong word. But the breakthrough that you might say, yeah, yes, that I've observed. is not about this kind of like this kind of liberal speech. exchange where we understand the other person's perspective. But it's been seeing specifically how Jewish students. have stood with many others in terms of being against genocide, and so that it doesn't break down.

neatly along identity lines that they are able to understand, not despite their Jewishness, but because of their Jewishness. They're able to articulate how their values as Jews actually motivates. their understanding that somehow this radical notion. that all life is sacred, that that their well-being, their security, should not be at the expense of anyone else like that, to me, has been. the most heartening way in which things are not reduced to identity.

And they don't simply live at the realm of speech, but at the realm of action, like people, actually Jewish students putting their own, you know, their own status, and, and well-being on the line in order to stand in solidarity. So I would point to that as a place where, you know, we're. breaking all patterns, right? I often wonder. to myself, you know, I wrote this thought down, it it applies to everything the world of tech.

ruha when I, when I've read your work, you know, talking about who designs the tech that shapes our lives. There was a. a professor who's really, well acclaimed, all like a research scientist. And he said, you know, and I paraphrase. like the problem with having women in the lab. is that they're distracting and they're beautiful, and you fall in love with them and they make, you know, they. Yeah. And it's. and it was just like, well, these ladies, they can't think about the test tubes. When I'm thinking of fallopian tubes, it's like that kind of vibe, you know. Yes. And and I was listening to that and obviously, you know, rightly so.

There was like a straight up backlash. like all women who are scientists were like, what? So we're not supposed to be in a lab because of this. But but I found myself thinking about how. every group is affected. by another group in some way, shape or form. And to your point of imagination, can we imagine other ways to do the thing, or is homogeneous sameness the only way to achieve it's. Right. Because I think of like let's say schools at the lowest level.

At the lowest, like even before sort of like people are formed. You see these little kids where they show that. if girls are in a class with boys they perform. Less. Oh yeah. You know I'm very proud girls school. Yeah. Yeah I'm a product. Yeah. And so. I don't know what, what I, what I, what I found myself thinking about is, is there's something to be said to the idea of like creating. more of as a, as opposed to trying to jam everybody more in.

Does it make sense. Yes. Yes, yes. And I know I can't waste my time. You say this and go like what. So are you saying we should have like a women only lab. Maybe is what I'm saying. I'm saying I don't know by the way. I'm just saying like what would happen. Yeah. Because that guy's not wrong. Like even in war. But it's going to be tough for you mixed race people, isn't it? Oh, don't worry about us. Don't worry about us. Dominican, Nigerian, Puerto Rican, Brazilian, British, American. Yeah. They're going to be the only ones in the lab. Yes, but can I tell you something?

And I'll. I'll tell you. I've believed in this for a long time, I still do. I believe adversity is your friend. If you're taught to deal with it. You know, I talk to you all the time about anti fragility as opposed. to just resilient. I remember having a conversation. with a group of like former military you know I don't know what they. where they served and how I think it was even from different countries. And they talked about how they were less efficient and less able to do their jobs. if they were serving with women. and not in like these people weren't being shitty, by the way. It just gave me a new perspective.

You know, they weren't like women shouldn't be in the military. They were like, can I be honest with you? When I'm in a gunfights. and I'm surrounded by guys, I just think about winning the gunfights. When I'm in a gunfight and there's a woman in the battalion, I'm like, damn, we got to make sure she's also. Because when we picking up the backpacks and we're running, and then I'm thinking of her, the weight that she's carrying and some of it. I know some of it will tap into, like patriarchy, some of it will tap into it, but some of it also taps into the very real thing that human beings. have, where a mother will care more for a child than she will for an adult.

You know what I mean? And where like instinctively, as people, sometimes we act differently. in an environment. So I just wonder, even for you talking about the sisterhood, what do you think is so important about finding spaces where people. who are alike can come together without those spaces being exclusionary? Yeah, because it's a paradox. Yeah, yeah. And so I think, you know, it's like when I talk about the sisterhood is always. with an eye to what often gets assumed about the sisterhood.

For me, the value of bringing together everyone that seems the same on one level. is that you immediately realize how different you are. So yeah, for me, the great value of my Spelman education. is I realized how much difference and hierarchy there is among black women, whether it's because of skin tone, region. where you're born, your class, your religion, your sexuality.

And so the value is to actually undo the notion that we're all alike. and that you actually get to wrestle deeply with the faultlines that you often. don't have to get to do in. predominantly white settings because you have to band together. And so it the value of it is not to relish in some idealized notion. of shared identity, but to actually say crap like, we have all of these issues that we never, ever get to deal with. because we always have to have this false sense of unity and sameness.

Right? Yes. And so there is there is definitely a function for that. I would love to know, like, you know, I know it's a it's a big thing, but. from your self personally and then what you what you see hopefully unfolding. or what you see realistically unfolding in the landscape of education. So I'm, I'm terrible at prognostication and prediction, in part because that's what sociology sociologist, you know, none of them do. Yeah. Like I'm not doing. But I mean, it's going back, I love it, I look at it, but it's also like that's the whole like so much of AI is about prediction. and it's it closes off possibilities in my view, like closes off,

you know, futures when we try to predict everything. And so part of it is like, you know, we think about these institutions, what we've been experiencing. I think it's like pulling back the curtain on what was already there to begin with. It just has become more manifest, like these interests of big donors, for example, that was always there manipulating things behind the scenes. But now it's come to stark light because of the the protests. So I feel like in this moment, it's an opportunity to be truthful.

about what these institutions are about, what our own complicity and obligations. are, and to and to act on those truths rather than feeling disillusioned. or we're going backwards somehow really thinking about. who we join in community with to actually build the world. And the world is not some grand thing, but like the micro worlds, the reality. that we have to function in. And I would say one thing that gives me hope is that I'm in a department.

within a larger institution that is acting on different values, where. we're not trying to be stars, but we're trying to cultivate. a constellation, a community in which we're in this together. And so I feel tangibly that it's possible to do things differently, even if the dominant culture. of whatever industry or institution we're in is moving in one direction. We have the power, especially when we band together and we work together. to actually create a different way of doing things,

perhaps like a seed that can grow and become a model for something. that we want to develop over time. Wow. That's amazing. You know, from saying maybe you won't have something and then you had it all. I know. Ruth, thank you so much for joining us. A pleasure. Yeah, I can't wait to see where you where your journey takes you. We'll be we'll be following keenly reading book, listening to what you say, and hopefully you'll you'll come and join us again. Absolutely. Thanks for having me, both of you. Thank, thank you for coming by.

What Now with Trevor. Noah is produced by Spotify Studios in partnership with Day Zero Productions. The show is executive produced by Trevor Noah. Sanaz Yamin and Jody Avirgan. Our senior producer is Jess Hackel. Clare Slaughter is our producer. Music mixing and mastering by Hannis. Brown, thank you so much for listening. Join me next Thursday for another episode of What Now?

For.