legitimate elected parliament or we decide what is in the best interest of the country, not the size of the crowd. and lavrov said that the government was legitimately elected in ukraine. nobody questions that. why would the size of the crowd, the size of the crowd protesting the policy would be an indication of what the ukrainians really new? treachery you raised a general issue which one of the problems in the u.s.-russian relationship is a tendency summit on the part of the russian government the question the consistency of what the u.s. does, the sincerity of that, and to point out that what russia does is absolutely no worse than what the u.s. does. so that's a general framework of when we get into these arguments, that is part of the reason why this is a concrete relationship. one of the analogies that russia sometimes like to use is the occupy movement. ..

in the negotiated. sir there are some people in the united states who questioned why since this every cabbage was democratically elected whether

the u.s. should be going to try to push one ukrainian direction. there's a lot of criticism of what happened and there's some people who endorse it. i think it shows also russia plays very well this time. >> host: professor stent, it is important, informative and fair book. congratulations. >> guest: thank you.

>> and "critical race consciousness," gary peller argues the african-american community today can be found in the struggle between liberal integration as an black nationalists between the 1960s and 70s. he discussed his book at georgetown university law center washed in d.c. this interview is part of the tedious college series. >> host: "critical race consciousness" is the name of the book reconsidering american ideologies of racial justice is a set title. the author as georgetown law professor, gary peller. professor peller, what is your goal in this book?

>> guest: the goal of this book is to address what i see as the critical and kind of despairing situation of the african-american community at this point in american history. the starting point is the realization despite sun's embolic barack obama's president that the african-american community in the united states today is really in very bad straits economically, culturally, spiritually, in terms of a vision for the future, in terms of leadership. and so i set out to explore the roots of the situation. how did we get to a situation which whites, liberals and progressives traditionally would be allies of african-american oration on progress. today basically the african-american community is thinking this is my job, my responsibility. obviously conservative leaders

are begrudging with the affirmative-action programs in african-americans and society. it seems we are at a crisis with no way forward. what i set out to do is diagnose how we got here from what i would say is an ideological point of view. what set of concepts and ideas and assumptions about race injustice in america has led us to this stalemate and deadlock in hopeless situation as i describe it. so when my analysis, the roots of the current situation from an ideological point of view can be found in the confrontation in the 1960s over race, but not the conventional confrontation people usually look to. the conventional story of racial justice and enlightenment in america describes the 1950s and 1960s as a confrontation

between advocates and proponents of white supremacy, segregation and those of integration, those looking for racial mike meant in those who understood race doesn't matter. it's just an arbitrary factor of individuals. i want to focus on the critical focus obviously we know who won the confrontation and integrationist them, liberals and progressives out there. but there is another confrontation in that one was about how exactly racial injustice should be understood, racism should be understood in how racial justice should be understood. that part in the 1960s has been neglect to in today's conventional understanding of linear development of racial enlightenment. that confrontation was within the advocates, within the community advocates for racial justice to train those who advocated integration as a way

to understand what races consisted of and a way to remediate racism versus those who advocate what i call black nationalists. the thought of malcolm x, stokely carmichael at the time, follows at the movement. various oration. black power -- but after party. not the most famous of the black nationalist group of the late 1960s and 1970s. in my argument, what happened in that confrontation is that a wide start term of american enlightened culture interpreted the black nationalist position through a lens that's all black nationalism as equal to white supremacy yet it's as if the advocates of black nationalism or just like why segregation in any equation was based on the idea that what they share in

common was the racist idea that reese made a difference. that it wasn't just an arbitrary characteristic of skin color. so when this lens, all kinds of arbitrary or irrational they said inking about people tend to become equated. so there's an armored equal treatment and be nondiscriminatory, nature regardless of race. that's insane to equate the situation of racial minorities at the situation of women, central minorities. any group is similar to every other group in this respect to the extent they've also been discriminated against. so in this vision, racism consists in what i call the integration. race and mistaken consciousness is rooted in people thinking the wrong thing about each other because they are making a mistake here gaping prejudice,

prejudging based on skin color and racism achieves the social form in the form of discrimination based on this wrong ideas rather than a plate equal and institutions and employers. in this vision, the kind of racism achieves it institutional form in segregation and jim crow practices a segregation of rules america till the 1950s or 1960s. but the black nationalist perspective when it's not understood simply as another form of racism because it sees race to make a difference between people, the black nationalist perspective is a deep philosophical confiscation of those assumptions of integrationist in the first confiscation of the most important one from my dearth is contesting the idea that there's a national on, natural way to

perceive each other. neutrality is a real possibility. the very idea of racism consisting the mistake of consciousness is contested in the black nationalist to buy different historical view of racism. racism consists in the maldistribution of power, prestige and wealth. between races in america. and in social form rather than a match in a to simply treat everyone equally regardless of race, social form of racism has been understood as a massive ordination of one group to another in the solution to that subordination is not equal treatment. the solution is reparation. and then on the institutional form, just as integrationist and

saw the institutional form at this individually consciousness view of racism has been segregation, the black nationalist position imagines what is really going on is similar to one nation colonizing other nations. african-americans in the late 50s were conceptualized as forming an internal colony in the united states that was administered by an external occupying force. what i think is particularly appealing about the black nationalist position as its starting point assumption that race really does matter. i think it is a false assumption that largely was apologetic about existing social practices. to understand racism in a relatively superficial way is simply a mistake of consciousness, a form of irrationality as opposed to understand more deeply inscribed in the institutional part this

is and customs of our society. so the black nationalist position understands raise to tend to difference in nationality between communities. the african-american community a separate history from white americans in north america. that had a particular history. much of it is subordination that within that subordination has created a community of culture that are worth preserving as opposed to the deep integration assumption is criticized by the black nationalist of 1960s and 1970s are basically imagines the black community should cease to exist once integrationist and succeed, but there will be a kindness painless genocide is african-americans are integrated into mainstream majority white

institutions. so that is the thesis in a nutshell. the good and well-intentioned people in the 1960s and 1970s embraced racial justice that limited the amount that would need to be reformed in american society. for example in legal education s.a.t. schmidts university virginia school of law come a segregated institution by law until the late 1960s was part of the never say die persistence of the state of virginia. when i got there in the early 80s the school had been integrated at least there is no racial exclusion. integration is understood to be simply taking on the white only signs and allowing, permitting finally black students to matriculate at the university with the assumption that everything else about the law school would basically remain

the same as if racism, said the racial supremacy ideology that justified us even consistent with justice and the rule of law, the racial apartheid america in the 1950s and earlier as if those institutional practices only involvement racism is the fact of exclusion as opposed to the way the races integrated deeply in to the picture, into the doctrines of that institution. so take the debate from adoption. basically today the conventional controversy of the race. that's where it's kind of located in the talking heads closer of american discourse. but affirmative action is only problematic for what is called affirmative action, from my dad that if you didn't prefer based

on race, we'd be making decisions on a neutral object is in the universal basis is fair to everyone. so when i see the integration is unapologetic that there is the critique of american society that really is the dismantling of apartheid should've involved, what i mean is perhaps this is like the admission criteria to law school went unchallenged because it was assumed the only problem was the fact of exclusion. the fact that african-american applicants gorgeous torsional a less low on these kinds of standardized test was brushed aside as that is because they come less prepared to the task or that is the unfortunate consequence is of our past. as opposed to critical examination of whether the lsat should be used as admission criteria if it has this

disproportionate impact. the justification does actually correlate with performance in the first year. this is the manner in which i'm arguing the integrationist of work to define and keep from critique the existing social practices. as i just said, the practices the first year of law school at the university of virginia were developed in an era of apartheid. they were practices and harper used to justify a separate but equal doctrine in american apartheid with the american constitution with the promise of equal protection of the laws. to use the first year of law school as the base from which to judge the accuracy of the lsat seems to be a very narrow vision. as you play it out, it turns out the justification is this is how we test people for existing

legal this. but i think is the complete circularity justified racial segregation in legal practice certainly needs radical transformation before it should be used and justified admission criteria against african-americans. so that is an example of the basic limitations and self-serving quality of integrationist ideology. >> host: professor peller, you've made out the problem in your book "critical race consciousness." if you lay out a solution? >> guest: i think the solution is a radical -- turning a radical i toured stingrays in america we distribute wealth, power and thursdays. i've talked in the book about the manner in which the existing

practices are presented as true and legitimate and fair to all and how that is not true from the race is. it's also not true from a lot of other decades. i think the situation of african-americans points to the situation of other locked out communities. it is time to critically question the ideology which distributes wealth at such an absurdly and not eating the disc torsion that basis in american society to question the justifications. it is time for racially supporting communities to join other economically support rating communities and overthrow the power. so i'm hoping that critical thought can be quicker that combine rekindling and start a flame to reignite a march for

justice in america, the likes of which we haven't seen now for decades. >> when you are going through school, et cetera in the 60s and 70s, did you think integration was a good solution? agora in atlanta, georgia started in segregated schools. i had the typical liberal views that i described. i understand there's well-meaning people embrace these views. but many of the book progresses i didn't have knowledge or access to the tradition of an alternative way of thinking about racial is that existed in the black community i described as being articulated in 1960s and 1970s, which matches up the mills with my vision. but the tradition goes back to the early mid 19th century and the african-american community. so yeah, i also understood at an

early age as somebody who questioned authority in many ways but let like integration was proceeding on the faculty of my high school by putting african-americans in similar positions of illegitimate authority. and so, that is how it came into question. if you go through an entire school teachers and it is traders have too much power, it is not necessarily a sign of progress juice the illegitimate forms of power by now been exercised by a more diverse you of authority. this again was one of the problems of the integrationist vision that i described. and some hands, integration really present a radical and

american institutions. martin luther king jr. with the paradigm of the integrationist vision from the rhetoric of this anti-racists and christian frederik nevertheless adjusted integration as a radical critique of the southern towns in 80s that he transformed with the civil rights movement. when this integrationist went into the town, the town was in eugene while this is just going to be a minor revision to admission standards. the southern towns and cities that martin luther king transformed me that moore was being shaken up and under the complexion of these ways. >> gary peller, what do you teach your georgetown? >> guest: i teach contracts with constitutional law, criminal law, jurisprudence, economics, radical legal thought

and several other. >> host: you touched on this, but lyrical race consciousness, how does this play out in law? >> guest: the book called "critical race consciousness" is one of the articulation of a broader. approach to questions of racial justice but charted the legal academy called critical race theory. typical raise the he started as a movement questioning the limitations of the missing protection that driven much from the perspective i'm describing question the false claims of neutrality come universality and fairness. so i am part of a much larger group and scholars in the critical race theory tradition for making these kinds of critiques of american legal doctrine. >> host: another sermon had today that use your book is to

culturalism. how does that play? >> guest: multiculturalism should be understood as a very important refinement to the 1960s version of integration that i described, which is largely an individualist tradition that individuals are all unique and race doesn't matter. it is somewhat of a child the multiculturalism that institutionalize in american culture at this point. much of its radical possibilities as a critique of integrationist i'm it is a kind of decorative view of our identities.

the differences are wonderful. they would say an uncritical view. sometimes differences are wonderful, sometimes different is of oppression. female mutilation and then groups in africa they need to be remedied and that is the difference to accelerate it. the multiculturalists movement also is in effect for particularly liberals and progressives allies of racial justice. it gives groups that are so contained entities wishart

borderers and what i described earlier as a kind of neglected the african-american communities on the part of white liberals and progressives who now see from a multicultural event the african-american community should be determining taking care of itself. each community takes care of itself, has the right to community integrity. would-be colonialists or imperialist to interfere. it will take care of their community. the fall space and that is the idea that any of our communities , regardless of differences come any of our communities for their self-contained. the african-american community exist today in north america and send dialectical relationship with the dominant white community. the gender relations in the african-american community horse are heavily influence by the history of slavery, jim crow