I win, I win, I win, I win, I win, I win, I win, I win, I win, I win, I win, I win, I win.

In 1980, Reagan returned for a new presidential campaign. He was still calling for welfare reform, but now he was doing so as part of a much broader message.

He talked of states rights and of returning America to a better bygone era. While his message had a powerful appeal to many African Americans, it seemed like a thinly veiled attack on the progress made since the civil rights movement.

He runs on this campaign that's like, listen, we're going to actually make America great again. And then implicitly in that is the idea that making America great means we basically have to kind of put black people in their place.

We are taking our country back, we're making it great again. Reagan was setting that tone and black folk was saying, anytime Whitey leaves talking about taking that country back, you know what they mean. They coming at us with intensity.

Reagan made good on his campaign promises by rolling back social programs and making significant spending cuts.

His policies had immense consequences for America's already struggling in their cities. As the lack of federal support made the job of black civic leaders all but impossible.

Many of the cities with blacks have become mazes of all the nothing but garbage cans. Hell who wants to be the mayor anyway of a garbage can?

A great deal of the misery that black America is confronted with today has been exacerbated during the past couple of years with the cuts and basic survival programs that poor people and disadvantaged people have come to depend upon.

Welcome to the Michael Brooks show. I'm Michael Brooks with broadcasting live from Brooklyn where left is best as it is everywhere else with super producer Matt Lack.

Hello, head to your Titian David Grishkum. How's it going? It's going well. Greetings to comrades, friends and enemies on this week's TNBS Eric Turkheimer. He's a behavioral geneticist professor of psychology at the University of Virginia.

We're talking about class and IQ. What are hereditary traits, the moral policy, pragmire and opportunity and the actual conversation of the science of intelligence.

Then independent scholar, another con. She's with us. We're talking about independent journalists rather. We're talking about can you be progressive except Palestine any more the shrinking opportunity for liberal Democrats, normy progressive Democrats to say all the right things and be concerned about all the right places except for mass killings and Gaza plus Donald Trump and rap.

It's a thing. Netta used to also be a rap journalist. We're going to touch on that. Plus we have a very deserving gulag entrant and in the post game LeBron takes care of business unions unify in Brazil and much, much more plus of course a shout out.

But first, let's start with the return to the intellectual dark web. This movement of reifying conventional wisdom and soothing insecurities that is still dominating much of our intellectual or at least YouTube landscape. Luckily those are still somewhat different things.

And let's start by looking at a couple of different clips of a month debate that took place last weekend with Michael or Dyson and Michelle Goldberg on one side of the political correctness debate. I don't remember what was the question of the debate if you could scroll up for me.

To be resolved what you call political correctness I call progress arguing on the side of progress, Michael or Dyson and Michelle Goldberg and arguing on the side of political correctness in a bad sense Jordan Peterson and Stephen Fry.

Now there's a lot to disaggregate here and we're going to get to that in a minute. But let's first play the sort of hottest moments of this debate which really amounted to in the first instance, Michael or Dyson sort of calling Jordan Peterson out for being an angry white man.

So let's. Sorry. Okay, we have the order. Okay, first Jordan Peterson is going to demand that Michael Eric Dyson quantify his his white privilege in specific numeric terms much in the same way Peterson quantifies in the marriage turns dragons when he claims they exist literally. All right, let's play that clip first.

Let's assume for a moment that I've benefited from my white privilege. Okay, so let's assume that that's fine. Yeah, well, that's what you would say. So, um, so let's say here, let's get precise about this. Okay, was that in the very individual of you?

Let's get precise about this. Okay, to what degree is my present present level of attainment or achievement a consequence of my white privilege and I don't mean sort of.

I mean, do you mean 5% do you mean 15% do you mean 25% do you mean 75% and what do you propose I do about it? How about a tax?

...