right for that and we need leaders who are sacraficial in order for us to get there. and then we need disciplined focused, goal-oriented leaders who demand the best from the country because they're demanding it from themselves first. >> please join me in thanking senator tim scott. [applause] >> weekends on c-span2 are an intellectual feast. every saturday american history tv documents america's story and on sundays, book tv brings you the latest nonfiction books and authors. funding from c-span2 comes from these television companies and more. >> homework can be hard, but squatting in a diner for

internet is harder. that's why we're affording students access to internet, homework can just be homerk. >> cox, along with these companies support c-span2 as a public service. >> carol anderson, it's july 2022, what does the july 4th 1776 celebration mean to you? >> it means that we're so precariously purchased as this democracy that we're heralding on july 4th, 1776. we're in a perilous time, to me, as perilous as it was when the continental army looked like they were getting their butts kicked. as perilous as it looked when the south attacked fort sumpter and launched the civil war. we are in perilous times where our democracy is hanging by a

thread. >> why do you say that? >> because we've got what i call a land, sea and air attack that's happening right now on american democracy. the land attack is the assault on voting rights. the sea attack is the attack to wash away the teaching of real american history and the air attack is the loosening of gun laws, while having a narrative that the insurrection was legitimate political discourse and while seeing that there was all of this violence and threats raining down on election workers, and election officials, so when you're looking at what's happening with voting. when you're looking at what's happening with our education system and the ways, the narratives that we come to understand this nation and then when you look at the deployment of violence as a tool of politics, we are under a

full-blown assault, aided and abetted by the u.s. supreme court, aided and abedded by hyper extreme gerrymandering and we're in trouble. where the hope is we have always fought back. we have always known that this democracy was worth a fight and so we have to gear up again and fight for this democracy, fight for this nation. >> well, as a historian at emory university, there's been some comparisons made to pre-civil war times right now. can you make that comparison or see that? >> yes, in ways where you get the sense of two nations, two separate nations going in two very different directions. one direction is our states that believe in the fullness of

their citizen's humanity, that believe that people have rights, that believe that there is this they think called democracy. on the other hand, you have those who call -- who have what i want to say an invoked democracy, their vision is a democracy where you have a labor pool that's generating enormous resources that then go up to a small strata of whites, and then what that small strata have done is that they have convinced a larger number of whites that they, too, can get the benefits of this massive set of resources coming up from this vast rightless labor pool. that's now how this thing works, so, you're getting a sense of a hyper racialized democracy, where only a small strata have full-blown rights versus a democracy that's multi-racial, multi-ethic,

multi-religious and vibrant. so, those two visions of what this nation is and can be is where the collision course is. >> well, in this conversation today on in depth, i want to focus mainly on three of your books and that includes, one person no vote, white rage, and the second. they all seem to have come from incidents that happened in our world and you tell me if this is a fair comparison, one person no vote. we had the 2018 georgia gubernatorial race. white rage, amadou diallo. >> and the one was out of the 2016 races, the pundits saying hillary lost because black folks didn't show up because

they're not for hillary, she's hillary, she is not obama. black folks stayed home. what that analysis did, it ignored this is the first presidential election in 50 years without the protection of the voting rights act, which the u.s. supreme court had gutted in 2013. so once you began to factor in that you had a number of states implementing voter suppression take techniques. >> and closing voting polls in black communities, a different narrative what happened in 2016. >> what he is a racially tnged voter i.d. law? >> i love that question, thank you. it is where you have, for

instance, alabama. alabama with its voter i.d. law said you must have a government-issued photo i.d., but your public housing i.d. does not count as government-issued photo i.d. 71% of those in public housing in alabama were african-american and what the naacp legal defense fund found for many it was the only government-issued photo i.d. they had. then governor bentley shut down the department of motor vehicles in the black belt counties. so when you don't have-- when the one government issued photo i.d. that you have doesn't count and then you're like, okay, i'll get a driver's license, but then the driver's license bureaus are shut down and you have to go 50 miles to go get a driver's license, but if you don't have a driver's license, how do you go the 50

miles? basically 100 mile trip. and punk transportation is 48th. alabama is ranked 48th in the nation in terms of public trance takes, it's not like you can hop on public transportation to go that 50 miles. that's what i mean by racially decrim-- de crim tri. >> i was in this thing called the op-ed project, teaching faculty how to write, faculty op-eds and we had the tv on, the news is blaring, didn't matter which channel i was watching because ferguson, missouri was on fire and the pundits were all saying, wow, look at this black rage. who burns up where they live?

black folks burn up where they live. can you believe this black rage? didn't matter which channel i had on, it was the same narrative. i had lived in missouri for like 13 years so i found myself shaking my head, going, no, no, this isn't black rage, this is white rage, and this is where i came up with that we as a nation, we are so focused in on the flames that we missed the kindling. we missed the policies that are in place that generate that explosion. we miss what we do with education. we miss what we do with housing. we miss what we do with the criminal justice system, we miss what we do with voting rights. we miss all of those key fundamental basics of life in america, and the policies that systematically undermine them and then turn around and say, oh, look at black folks burning

up what they live without looking at the white rage underneath it. >> and this is a quote from white rage. white rage is not about visible violence, but rather, it works its way through the courts, the legislatures and a range of government bureaucracies. the trigger for black -- for white rage, pardon me, inevitably is black advancement. >> yes, this is what being a historian allowed me to do. it was to see the patterns. it was to see after of civil war when you have emancipation. this should have been, whew, but instead this massive backlash happened with the black coats that were trying to restall slavery by another name and having andrew johnson systematically undermine what the civil war should have been about and then having the u.s. supreme court gut the 13th,

14th, 15th amendments as well as the enforcement act and the force acts, which dealt with racial discrimination and segregation in public facilities, as well as going after white domestic terrorism. so when you have these entities such as the president of the united states, these governors and the u.s. supreme court issuing these edicts and these executive orders and these laws that undermine that advancement of what freedom meant, that's white rage and i carry it through through the great migration, through the brown division, through the civil rights movement and through the election of barack obama. >> one of the things you do with the brown decision, you talked about it was fully implemented in some places and used san antonio as an example. >> absolutely. part of what we see there in san antonio is that you have this massive disparity.

so you've got the sense of equality, coming up under the 14th amendment. equal protection under the law. so in a neighborhood in san antonio, it was overwhelmingly mexican-american and african-american they were only able $21 per head, per student, per capita. edgewood district which was a wealthy white suburb taxed themselves at a much lower rate, but because of property values they were able to generate so much more hundreds of dollars per capita, so the parents and the mexican-american parents sued saying, this is fundamentally unequal. it's fundamentally unequalm. we're taxing ourselves at the highest rate, but because of public policy that has devalued

our property, we cannot generate enough income, enough tax dollars to adequately fund a quality education for our children. u.s. supreme court looked at that and said, equality does not require equal funding. so that kind of disparity that you saw then and that we see now was blessed on high by the u.s. supreme court. >> carol anderson, your most resecretary book is the second race and guns in a fatally unequal america. about 42 million african-americans in the states and according to recent statistics, 25% of them are gun owners. that's doubling in the last 10, 20 years. >> i'm not surprised. one of the things that i look at in "the second" was how

access to gun that anti-blackness drove the second amendment. so regardless of the legal status of african-americans enslaved, free blacks, was called denizen, which is that piece between citizen and enslaved, emancipated african-americans, jim crow african-americans, civil rights african-americans, obama african-americans, regardless of the progress we've made the fear of black people has created this crisis that we're talking about, it's driven the second amendment. so african-americans buying guns, when you begin to think about the terror that has rained down on this society. you saw the rise of the right wing militia during obama's presidency, the rise of white

gun ownership during obama's presidency and then we had trump and you saw the embrace of white nationalism, white supremacists and you saw because of the technology the kind of police violence that rains down on black folk and so you have african-americans doing what they have consistently done, which is to say we have to defend ourselves in this society, nobody's coming to help us. >> was this a book you thought you were going to write? was this something you'd thought about for quite a while? >> no, actually. it really was the killing of castilla that did it. my body of work deals with human rights, civil rights in-- and when he was gunned down

because he had a licensed to carry weapon, that was why he was gunned down, and the n.r.a., the national rifle association went virtually silent on this killing of a man simply because he had a gun. and so, you had pundits asking, don't african-americans have second amendment rights? and i went oh, that's a great question and that's a question that i have not explored yet and so, i went hunting and i went back to the 17th century. >> what did you find? >> i found this incredible fear of the enslaved and of free blacks and the laws coming through to try to deal with this fear, to try to protect the white community from the enslaved, what free blacks and a key element in that was

disarmament, or was the banning of access to guns. so you saw that laws coming out of virginia and south carolina where thou shalt not have guns for those enslaved and for free blacks. you saw this in the constitutional ratification convention where you get to virginia and virginia is like, i'm not really sure about this constitution thing and why virginia wasn't so sure about this constitution thing, one of the key elements you had patrick henry and george mason saying, you know, this militia that we need in order to keep the enslaved in check, james madison has put control of that thing under the federal government, under congress, so we can't rely upon the feds to defend us when the enslaved

rise up. i mean, because several government had folks in there from like pennsylvania and from massachusetts. they're not going to be coming down here to defend us, so we need to have the protection or we will be left defenseless. and they basically threatened to scuttle ratification. when that didn't work, they threatened to hold a new constitutional convention. madison was scared out of his bee jeebers, that's the scholarly term. the articles of confederation had not worked so they had pushed through this new constitution that gave the federal government enhanced powers, but there was this fear that the federal government was too powerful and this is why we have in the first congress the bill of rights. but when you think about that bill of rights, freedom of

religion, the right not to be illegally searched and seized. the right to a speedy and fair trial. right to not have cruel and unusual punishment. the militia for security of a free state? that thing is an outlier and that outlier is basically the bribe to the south to not hold a new constitutional convention. it's to say you are protected, the militia is safe. >> were you surprised about what you found about the second amendment? >> yes, i really was. i thought, because so much of our discussion today about the second amendment is about the individual right to bear arms or was this really about a militia? you know, so we get in binary going on. >> is this all about individual rights coming out of the supreme court and then the mcdonald decision?

or is this about the militia which it had-- the courts had long held this was really about militia, but that argument, that binary argument is irrelevant. it's irrelevant because the foundation of the second amendment is the fear of blackness, the fear of black people, defining african-americans as criminals as a threat, as dangerous, as violent, and that the white community has to be protected. and i went, wow. wow. and that's why things then began to make sense in its own really weird way. so, as i walk through this book, i even take us up into the 20th and 21st century and i'm seeing the pays that we understand citizenship through gun rights, you know, open carry. castle doctrine, able to defend your home against an invader.

what at this point. but those kinds of doctrines that become foundational, stand your ground. those kinds of doctrines that become foundational when they're applied to african-americans they don't hold. and i went, wow. wow. so i have examples in there like tamir rice in an open carry state. 12-year-old boy playing in a park by himself in cleveland with a toy gun. granted it didn't have the little red trip on it that says, hi, i'm a toy. and ohio is an open carry state as long as you're not threatening anyone, you can carry your weapon openly. police rolled up within two seconds they shot tamir rice

down. he was dangerous. he was a threat. and then i juxtaposed tamir rice to rittenhouse, a 17-year-old with an ar-15 strolled by the police officers in kenosha, with is wisconsin where there's a protest and you want water here, it's hot out here. he shoots three people, two he kids and walks back toward the police officers with his hands up, they don't see threat. they don't see danger, they're not afraid. that speaks volumes about the second amendment. >> carol anderson, were you in any way, shape or form a gun person prior to writing your most recent book? >> a gun person? no, no, it wasn't like i was

pro gun or anti-gun. i was just here and it was-- like i said, it was this discussion about castillo that sent me down this path of really trying to find, you know, do african-americans have second amendment rights. i have always, always, i think always is a long, hard word, but i have generally been one that has said that we need to be reasonable about guns and so, the semi automatic weapons being readily available to civilians makes no sense to me, none. you can't hunt with an ar-15 and eat the deer afterwards, come on. so just, the kind of lodge-- ar-15's are for hunting people. so the basic logics in there, i've been there on the basic

logics. well, welcome back to the book tv in depth studio the first time in two and a half years that we've been back with a guest in the studio and we're pleased that it's emery professor and author carol anderson. if you've been listening you've heard some of the topics that we're going to be talking about today. your participation is key. on book tv. here is how you can get through. the phone numbers, if you live in east or central time 202-748-8200. the number for you to call. live in the mountain or pacific time zone 202-748-8201. now, if you can't get through on the phone or would like to make a comment via text, the text number, these are for text messages only, please include your first name and city if you would, 202-748-8903. now, we'll also scroll through our social media site, twitter,

facebook, just remember @book tv if you'd like to make a comment on those sites as well and we'll begin talking those in a few minutes. carol anderson, how long have you been at emory? >> i got there 2009. >> from? >> from the university of missouri i was there for 13 years. >> why did you transplant yourself to georgia? >> emory is an amazing university and it was an opportunity to really grow and thrive and to be in a place surrounded by scholars who are asking really tough, hard questions and seeking the answers. and then there's atlanta, which is an amazing city. so, yes. >> missouri, columbia,

missouri. atlanta. >> yes. >> where did you start life? >> i started life in columbus, ohio. actually that's not accurate. my father was in the military so i was born on army base and then we lived in germany for several years and then when he retired from the military after 20-plus years, he then moved to columbus, ohio because he wanted my brother to go to ohio state. so that's where i did a lot my growing up in columbus, ohio. >> where did you go to school? >> i went to school, undergraduate and masters at miami university at oxford, ohio and my ph.d. from the ohio state university in history. >> and why did you decide to become a scholar? what appealed to you about getting a ph.d.? >> oh, i love learning. i have -- there were always

books in our home, always books and there were always discussions in the house about what was happening in the world, about politics, about civil rights, about injustice and it was me trying to figure this thing out. and i had wonderful mentors along the way that really helped me figure out how to become a scholar. there was alan ingle, my con law professor at miami who, i know this is going to be hard to believe, but we were going over some case and i'd popped off, right? and he went, ms. anderson, may i see you after class? and i'm going through the oh, my gosh, i am getting ready to get out of this class, it's a five hour going to lose the full-time status. and i said yes, professor?

>> he thought have you ever thought of going to undergraduate school? yes, but i have no idea how to get there. come with me. and he shepherded me through an arcane opaque process. and it was natural learning, i was one of the kids who would read the world book encyclopedia from a to z and read it all over again in case i missed something. >> what do you teach at emory. >> the civil rights movement. i teach genocide, i teach american rights policy. i teach the black athlete in american society. and at one point, i also taught u.s. cold war foreign policy. >> let's go back to your home state of georgia, you've got a

black athlete running for senate down there. >> yes, we do. yes, we do. and so, what we really have is a deployment of representation that is not representative. it was -- it was the same way that the republicans tapped alan keyes to run against obama thinking here is somebody black that ought to just-- that ought to do it and it was the same thing with hershel walker. football star out of university of georgia, wow. you know, let's put him up against rafael warnock. and what we're seeing is someone who has a history of violence, someone who consistently lies about his credentials and someone who has not thought through policy, so to have someone so-- the reason he's there is

because he's black, not because he can do the heavy lifting of being a u.s. senator. it was a cynical ploy and so the answer that he gave after uvalde, after the killings in uvalde, texas, when they asked how would you handle the issue of guns. >> he said well, cane flew abel and then you've got this disinformation so what we need to have is a department where you have so you can have, a department that looks at young man looking at young women on social media because of constitutional rights and it was like a hard drive that has been corrupted and so it had these little sound bytes on there and then he strung them together so, i know i need to say something about the bible. i know i need to say something

about social media and constitutional rights and disinformation and that's what we got, but that wasn't policy and that wasn't -- and that was insulting to think that black folks are going run that way simply because he's black. that's not enough. >> have you ever been in ebenezer when pastor warnock is preaching? >> no, i haven't. no, i haven't. >> is it hard to get in at that point, do you think? on a sunday morning into ebenezer? can anyone can come in? >> anyone can come in, i'm sure, i'm sure. ebenezer is a storied church. it is like bedrock foundational to the history of black atlanta and to the history of the civil rights movement. it is where reverend dr. martin luther king preached. it is where daddy king was. it's ebenezer. it's ebenezer.

>> now a lot of news reports indicated that the 2022 georgia primary elections after the georgia legislature made some changes to the voting laws went very smoothly and that there was good turnout. >> and i'm going to liken that to-- so you get the how suppressed can it be when we get the great turnout. what it doesn't look at, what the narrative doesn't look at is all the mobilization of civil society. all of the work of the new georgia project. all of the work of the black voters matter fund. all of the work of the naacp, all of the work of the ldf and a.c.l.u. and ga layo and african-americans advancing justice. all of those groups trying to move through, over, bond,

across the barriers that the georgia legislature set in place. and so i'd liken it to somebody tries to rob you, they don't succeed. you're able to fend them off, there are a group of folks payable to fend them off. does the fact that they weren't able to be successful wash away the fact that they tried to rob you? no because they tried, but you had a group of folks who helped you fend off that person that was mugging you. and so when you look at sb202, it is a mugging of georgia voters. it is predicated on the big lie. the trumpion big lie of voter fraud that no one can prove because it didn't happen. and it is predicated on how do

we stop these folks because we had incredible turnout in the 2020 election. and in the 2021 runoff. in the 2021 senatorial runoff black voter turnout was almost 92%. now, when you're in a democracy that's multi-racial, multi-ethic, multi-religious, you embrace that kind of turnout. you're like, ooh, we did something right. how do we continue on with this unless you're going for an invoked democracy, how do we stop this. >> professor anderson last question before we get to calls, in all of your books, the subject of human rights plays a role, it doesn't permeate necessarily, but you bring it up and you weave it in and why is that? >> human rights are so

foundational for me. it was my first book, my dissertation that became my first book, eyes off the prize. and i asked the question, how could all of the blood, all of the courage, all of the efforts by civil rights folks lead to an america where the life expectancy of african-americans has declined, where you're having massive disparities of infant and maternal morality rates. where you've having massive wealth gaps that shape the kind of ways that people can move through this society? how could the civil rights movement that is one of the things that we herald, we look at this going oh, we have overcome. look, this is the unfinished business of democracy handling that business. how could all of that have

still left the america that we're in and what my research showed was that we had a civil rights movement, not a human rights movement and i wondered how that happened because remember, you had malcolm x saying how is a black managing to get his civil rights before his human rights and everybody was like woo. and you found you had the naacp and web deboise saying the same thing a generation earlier. so what could create that level of community and amnesia as if malcolm was the first one to say it? and that's where i found the power of the cold war, and the power of anti-communism and the mccarthy witch hunt that defined the rights, right to health care, right to education, right to housing, as communistic, those are things that the soviets want and if

you're a real patriot you don't want that. and how those witch hunts were systematically just targeting african-americans and african-american organizations that were vying for this human rights platform, to the point where it became politically safer to argue on a platform of civil rights and safer doesn't mean safe because we know the violence that rained down on folks, for fighting for civil rights, but it became politically safer to be able to argue on a civil rights platform. all we want is in the bill of rights. what could be more american than the bill of rights than to talk about wanting the right to housing, the right to health care, the right to employment, the right to leisure, looking

at the universal declaration of human rights because the u.n. had been cast as a communistic organization by the right wing and american politics, so, my work really deals with those kinds of truncated rights and the residuals of what that looks like as we live through this america. >> i promised that was the last question before we go to calls. a couple more came to mind, but we will hear from leo in the bronx. leo, you're on with author and professor carol anderson. >> caller: thank you. ms. anderson, i enjoying seeing your lectures on c-span when you speak to college students. but my question is, stacey abrams changed her position. she used to be against the idea of requiring people when they vote to present i.d. and i heard recently she changed her position. could you explain why?

>> and so part of -- thank you for that question. part of what you're seeing it has been basically the work of the sense that voter i.d.'s are reasonable. voter i.d.'s are -- everybody has had an i.d. and that we have voter fraud, voter fraud, voter fraud, voter fraud. so that's not too much for people to ask to show i.d. in order to protect democracy. in order to protect our elections. they looked at polls and it's something like 70% of americans believe that voter fraud happens on a regular basis or something like that and 50% believes it happens regularly. and so, coming up against that tide it allows for the discussion about we'd got to have laws that protect our voting rights. when that becomes--

when the show at that it runs up against is it voter i.d., and you've got most americans believing that voter i.d.'s are fine because, again, because it plays to a middle class norman the racial discrimination that is inherent in the ways that the states have deployed voter i.d., it felt like a battle, a battle too far. >> cornelius, alexandria, louisiana. good afternoon to you. >> caller: good afternoon c-span and happy and bless fourth coming up for the fourth of july. miss carol anderson, i enjoy yourself and i see you're history, i happen to be african-american, a democrat for a long time, but i joined the republican party because of the different things that the democrats are doing. my parents were kennedy democrats, but they were

republicans first because the republican party helped out african-americans and stuff. and my question for you, i believe in god, guns and bible, bullets and beans. our constitution, if you look at ben franklin, he said this is a represented republic, it's not a democracy, we're supposed to be a represented republic, or a constitutional republic. i agree with you on racism, the leo castillo got murdered, the cop never should have done that, the n.r.a. should have done that. after the civil war the n.r.a. was trying to teach blacks to have gun ownership to protect themselves where the democrats had the klan and stuff. i don't know if you know the history of the democratic party, the klan was the military wing of the democratic party. they were the ones that came up

with the jim crow laws and all like that. >> all right. >> martin luther king, jr.-- >> cornelius, quickly, why are you a republican today? >> because the democrats have lied to us. they've always wanted to defund the police, they don't want us to have guns, we're killing our own selves with these gang members and drug dealers and stuff, so all of us need to be armed up. arm up america. >> cornelius, thank you very much. professor, this is somebody-- did somebody raise that point to you. >> one was what the democrats are, and yes, after the civil war, the democrats were the party of white supremacy. unabashed white supremacy. one of the things that's happened though, it's called the southern strategy and what the southern strategy did was

as the democrats began to deal with the issue of civil rights for african-americans, because of the great migration, because african-americans were moving out of the jim crow south, is that you had the republicans going, oh, there is gold in those hills of white resentment about civil rights and you see it being deployed. you see it being deployed in '48, you see it deployed in '52. deployed in '64 and particularly deployed with richard nixon in '68 and with ronald reagan in '80. if you wonder why we have this demographic shift, it is because of the southern strategy where the republicans brought in the sense of anti-civil rights as their mantra. and with the issue about guns, and that we're killing each

other. one of the things that we often hear about is black on black crime. that's the narrative of black pathology. yes, over 80% of black people are killed by black people. over 80% of white people are killed by white people. but we don't have the narrative of white on white crime. why is that? sometimes we have to ask the next question and what you also have is that you had washington d.c. and chicago have implemented gun safety laws to try to deal with the homicide rates in those cities. you have the u.s. supreme court first in the heller decision and then in the mcdonald decision undermine those safety laws and you saw guns flooding into those communities again. this is why after uvalde, while you have governor abbott

talking, yeah, but what about chicago? because that becomes the kind of trope of black violence that gets deployed consistently by republicans. >> text message from kelvin in baltimore. good afternoon, dr. anderson, how does the evangelical right play a part in fueling our divide in our society, presumably, and or presently, and its influence in the scotus, the supreme court, ie, the federalist society? >> whew, the role of white evangelical christianity is powerful. it really became a force, i want to say, in the '70s and really took hold in the '80s and has not let go. there's a wonderful book called the long southern strategy by todd shields and angy maxwell that looks at the three pillars

of the long southern strategy. one of those racism. another pillar is patriarchy and the other pillar is white evangelical christianity and the role that it plays in the republican -- in the domination of the republican party and in shaping those policies, and so we're seeing this in the recent scotus decisions where you have in maine, where maine was only funding secular schools and vouchers for secular schools and where you had the white evangelical christian schools saying, hey, we want some of that public money, too. and the u.s. supreme court says, yeah, you have to do this. it is where you have the recent decision where the coach was kneeling on the 50th yard line and you had the supreme court

ignoring the evidence that this was a public school. this was a public event, on a public field, where you had the power of the coach around his players in a christian prayer. now, you have to ask yourself if maine happens to have a-- the school of satanic devotion, are they going to be eligible for public funds, too? so, part of what you're seeing happening is this narrowing definition of what is religion and you had lauren bobert saying she's so sick of hearing about separation of church and state. well, that's the first amendment, but treating it as if it's made up. so much of what we're seeing in america is myth history, made up history, used to justify policies that are absolutely abhorrent to this democracy. >> next call for professor

carol anderson comes from pamela in upper marlboro, maryland, here in the suburbs. hi, pamela. >> hi, thank you for taking my call and dr. anderson, it's an honor to speak with you. i'm a married 36 years married african-american mom of two sons and husband and can you speak and kind of been alluded to already, can you speak to the issue and ideology that we're still fighting the confederacy and ideology through the state rights that have been sued from andrew johnson who was the president after lincoln's assassination who was a staunch states right supporter and favored the restoration of the confederate states for them to be back in power as a result of that time, black codes were passed, the pride, the former slaves of their rights guaranteed by the

federal government. for example, they never got their 40 acres and a mule and in fact the former slave owners were given money for every slave that was made free, i think something around $300 or something to that effect, but anyway how all of this still is going on as the undercurrent today that we face and how in the '60s there was like a flip and like you said, the republicans began to embrace the states rights ideology and i guess i thought they were dixiecrats, but the former democrats now embracing the rights of the federal government to protect african-americans and others. can you expect we're still fighting this confederacy and ideology and changed forms. >> pamela before we get an answer. you tell about yourself. you live in one of the nicest communities, one of the we wealthiest majority black

communities in america. have you faced some of the issues that you talked about? >> well, i service, i'm a public service, i'm a state employee and i work for under-- young ladies on medical assistance and the undocumented who don't have health care and we provide health care and make sure that they have access so they can have healthy babies so i'm a public servant, but-- and i believe in giving back. i was raised by a maternal grandmother, i lost my mom to pneumonia who happened to be a nurse at a young age and i believe in giving back, but i just see what we're dealing with. i thought-- this is stuff that i read about. i never thought i would be living in a time where my rights were being assaulted and having to go vote. i have family, my family came from alabama. my mom was born and raised in alabama to see to see what we have to go through. my father born and raised in georgia and what we have to face in 2022 is mind-boggling,

just wanted to see if she could give me an answer. >> professor anderson. >> and absolutely, one of the things, i was giving a talk in virginia and i said one of the things is when we look at germany, germany had a denazication program. >> we never had a de-confederacy program, what we had, instead, we started erecting statutes to it, its leaders, robert e. lee, jefferson davis. we started having in our textbooks, because of the united daughters of the confederacy, the lost cause becomes in heroic event and when you begin to think what that means for the way that our children learn, what they understand so that slavery really wasn't that bad. you had benevolent kind owners.

you had-- they were-- the enslaved were fed well, they were clothed, they had housing, i mean, what could be so bad and you had this big, mean, nasty north coming down and trying to impose its will on these really good, honest, hardworking noble folks, when that becomes the narrative that's in our next books until like the 1970's, and think about the battles that we've had recently over taking down these confederate monuments in these public spaces, because what's that telling us is that this is who we should be honoring and so, we've got these tectonic plates underneath american society that basically says, you know, the confederacy, they were good. slavery really wasn't that bad.

i think about bill o'reilly after michelle obama talked about building in a house built by the enslaved on his show he said it really wasn't that bad, they were housed, well clothed, well-fed so how bad could it be? when you get that coming in in the 21st century, it is the thing that we have not dealt with. we have not dealt with slavery and when you look at how these states are demanding a revision of the curriculum, so that it doesn't make white students feel uncomfortable, that it doesn't cause a kind of sense of being ill at ease. so we don't talk about slavery and i saw where in texas they're thinking about renaming slavery involuntary relocation.

so when you can create these euphemisms to cover the horrors of what this nation has been through. when you don't deal with the reality of slavery. when you don't deal with the reality of genocidal violence against indigenous people. when you don't deal with the reality of xenophobia in our anti-immigrant policies. when you don't deal with the reality of the relocation of the japanese. when you don't deal with any of those realities, you don't understand america. and frankly, you do a disservice to america because america is an aspirational nation. we hold these truths to be self-evident and so having folks fight to make those seem self-evident is a key piece of american history, but when you remove that and you treat those

aspirations as if they're already been achieved, that is what allows for the embrace of the confederacy and the whitening up of slavery, of whitewashing of slavery. i remember i got a notice from an organization that i had been supporting that said come visit our beautiful plantations in mississippi. come see true southern charm. and i thought what kind of mess is this? ... i sent them a note back and i said, no more than you would herald a tour of auschwitz as a testament to find german engineering should you look at these plantations as anything then what they are, a place where human beings were bred, were born,

a place for human beings were bred, were born, were beaten, were work without pay, were tortured, these slave labor camps. when you try to pretty it up, you do, you defile american history. and so part of we're looking at is the defiling of american history by not dealing with the confederacy and how it was able to maintain its power through the southern democrats, and now through the republicans. >> host: should those plantations though be maintained as historic sites? >> guest: yes, they should, and they should be maintained as historic sites the same way auschwitz is maintained as a historic site. you need to have accurate history in those sites laying out what really happened there. you know, there was one of those

battles, annette gordon-reed is the one to really talk about this, those battles over monticello, thomas jefferson's place, where prior to, you had this, he was one of the founding fathers. he was brilliant, he was wonderful and then you look okay, so where was sally hemmings? that narrative, that history is essential for understanding the battles that we have in america, this kind of we hold these truths to be self-evident but we've got to protect slavery. this is, we are the leader of the free world. we are the jim crow leader of the free world. that kind of dichotomy is absolutely essential for understanding this nation. >> host: next call for carol anderson comes from nate in mesa, arizona. >> caller: this is a wonderful show.

ms. anderson, i never watch c-span. i just happened to turn the tv on and i just got intrigued. i'm 60, black man. i live in mesa, arizona. and i had returned to school back when i was 47, got a degree in entrepreneurship. but to go into the class i had to write an english paper to get accepted into the university. and so i basically just picked a topic of the disproportionate incarceration of african-american males, between the ages of 18 and 35. and so i called the paper bound by law.

as i was listening to you, you are a teacher, you are a professor of a masters program at emory, is that correct? >> guest: i'm a professor at emory university in the department of african-american studies, and i have history doctoral students. >> host: and you chair. >> guest: and i chair. >> caller: my grandfather was a historian, and so i was thinking i wanted to get my masters but i wasn't sure what i wanted to do. and then i just turned your show on and i heard you talking. my question is for those and might have the same question, i can go to emory. does a call for any online masters program to take your classes? >> host: thank you, nate. >> guest: none of my classes are online. during the height of covid we went to online classes for the

kind of protection of our students and the faculty, but we are now back in the classroom. >> host: carol anderson, we always ask authors what their favorite books are, or what they are currently reading. i want to go to what you said about currently reading. usually we get specific titles, but this is a quote from an e-mail, a bazillion. [laughing] i am a judge in the nonfiction category for the national book award, some of your books have been listed for that as well. >> guest: and so that's why i couldn't, what are you reading? a bazillion books. i mean, they are coming in and then going through them. they are fascinating. it's really intriguing seeing authors wrestle with the different types of subjects across the board. >> host: and this is your first time being a judge?

>> guest: i judge for the national book award, right. i was a judge last year it was for the pulitzer, but this is the first one for the national book award. >> host: how many books will you have to read before the ceremony in november? >> guest: we get in somehwere between 600 to 700 books, a bazillion. [laughing] and just plowing through them to really make sure we're making really good choices. >> host: favorite books, professor carol anderson, sing, unburied to sing. norm ornstein, it's even worse than it looks. ste larson, "the girl who kicked the hornet's nest. john dower,ar without mercy, and william and kristin, from here to equality. which of those five books do you want to speak to? >> guest: i think it's going

to be somewhere between jasmine ward and steve larson, "the girl who kicked the hornet's nest." i mean, i know that might sound like a really odd choice because this isk based in sweden. >> host: it's fiction. >> guest: it's fiction. i think i've reread it maybe five, six times. i love that book. it speaks to my sense of justice. it speaks to my sense of, even when you're looking at a leviathan, you can take on the leviathan and win. it's going to be hard. it's going to be tough. and so the story deals with a young woman who was brutalized by her father, but her father was basically a secret agent for

the government, and so they let him get away with this violence against his family. and she had had enough, and so this is like the first book, "the girl with the dragon tattoo." so she had had enough and she sets him on fire. they commit her to an insane asylum, and then she has a ward who abuses her, not a ward, a trustee who abuses her. and you see this story unraveling where she's getting at the heart and soul of a corrupt government, one that defies the constitution, one that had set itself up outside the government to be more important than the representative government that was there. and she takes them on. she has an incredible journalist

who is helping her. she has an attorney who sees how the law can be deployed to help her. and she has incredible computer skills to help herself. and that combination, i mean, that book speaks to me because again, it is about justice. it is about what is right. it is about righting a wrong. it is about holding folks accountable who abuse the trust in government, who abuse the trust of the people. >> host: we have about an hour left with our guest, author carol anderson. we will put the phone numbers up on the screen if you like to dial-in your 202-748-8200 if you live in east and central time zones. 202-748-8201 for those of you in the mountain and pacific time zones. if you want to send a text message instead, 202-748-8903.

please include your first name and your city if you would. we also had some social media sites that we will scroll through in case you want to make a comment that way. nana, louisville, kentucky. >> caller: good afternoon, dr. anderson. i almost forgot to me. my name is nana and i and african cultures collar 71 7s old and i've been listening to the show. i blocked it out earlier in the week that she come the dr. anderson was going to be on. i wanted to speak to her. dr. anderson, as i looked at her second book, and forgive me, i don't know how i don't know more of you and better of you because you are outstanding. about your second book, not your fourth book, the second pick something that's happening now that want you to address. i see what just in kentucky, four police officers were killed, and also a few days

before that a young african-american man was stopped by police and he was not comfortable with them and he fled. but he ended up getting 90 shots fired at him. 60 entered his body. i think his name is jailed in walker, if i remember correctly. but anyway, the crux of what i'm asking is, i want you to speak to how can come under the second amendment, we all have a right to bear arms but when an african-american person has a gun and not even in kentucky, it don't even have to have permits anymore. you can just carry, i'm thinking about getting me a holster and a gun and carry it openly. then we'll have some gun-control menisci african-americans in mass walking around with guns on their hips. then we love gun-control. what i wanted you to address is, the whole dynamic of a white man can kill some amount of people.

somehow they can capture without a scratch and the taking to burger king. but on the flip side as you're talking about orlando castille, an african-american man doing everything lawfully with the weapon and soon as as a weaps entered into the discussion with the white police officer, they gun him down and they just gunned this young boy down, shot in 60 times. i will listen to you and i'm enjoined you and your fantastic. >> host: thank you, thank you, thank you. this is really what i'm talking about here. with the book, "the second." so you look at a lock who was a young man at the minneapolis was in his apartment and the police burst through and basically a no-knock warrant. he has a gun fight as he is asleep on the couch. they see the gun. they see threat and the shooting dead within ten seconds. so that sense of the castle

doctrine. i mean, this is what breonna taylor supposedly had and now she's dead. this is what kathryn johnston and atlanta supposedly had, and now she's dead. the ability to protect your home from an invasion. no. and then yes, jay lynn walker, you know, i'm reading through that story and the last time i read someone gunned down in a hail of 60 bullets was a quadruple lynching in 1946 in mann road georgia where two men and to make women, two black men into black women were basically executed in hail of bullets, and the report described 60 bullets in each of their bodies. the kind of fear that has to

generate to create that depth of violence against that young man. when you think about it, the guy who shot up the movie theater in aurora, colorado,, he was taken alive in the parking lot. i think 12 dead, 70 would become something to that effect. yes, in dylann roof guns down nine folk in church during bible study, and he is taken alive. that is what i mean by white is not the threat. black black is the default d american society. armed black is an exponential threat. this is why during the late 1960s in california you saw the passage of what was called the mulford act, that was because the black panthers were caring, openly carrying arms to

police the police, because violence, the police were raining gun violence on the black community and there was no public entity that was willing to do a doggone thing about it. and so the black panthers said we will police the police. and so they knew the laws about open carry. they knew the loss about what kinds of guns they could have. they knew the laws about how far they had to stand away from the police. the police hated it from the debts depths and the brats and the heights that the soul shall reach, they hated it. so they ran to don beauford who was a conservative estimate man and the california legislature and said, you've got to help us. you've got to find a way to make what they are doing illegal because every time we pulled over we can't arrest them because you're not doing anything illegal. and so mulford writes the law with the help of the nra, and eagerly signed by republican governor ronald reagan to ban

the kind of open carry that the black panthers were doing. so you don't even have to come up with a hypothetical that have blocked those are carrying guns you're going to gun regulations happening. we've got a history of that. >> host: denise, jacksonville, florida, good afternoon. >> caller: good afternoon. i love c-span and when i found out that dr. anderson was going to be on this show, i set my tv up so i could watch it. i just want to thank ms. anderson for the books that she's written. i did not realize that i i dit know much about black history in america and ella started reading your book "white rage." i was just shocked, and i just thank you thank you so much. i'm going to buy the other three books that you have out there, because i had decided i want to invest myself to learn critical

race theory after 2019 when the black lives matter movie went on, and i i just didn't realize how much you did not know. i just want to thank you for that. >> host: can you tell us a little bit about yourself? >> caller: well, yes. i will be 65 issue. i live i live in jacksonville, florida. i became interested in politics when i started learning corporate finance at the university for my undergrad degree. but when i start looking at politics and seeing all the different things that were going on and really could relate to it really couldn't give an educated conversation with it, that's when i started really investing in myself to learn things. i wish a shock, i never knew about -- after emancipation of the slaves. i didn't know myself, someone else brought it to my attention,

about rosewood florida 1901 i believe that was, tuscaloosa oklahoma, and i always say why people say black people will tear up stuff where did they learned from? every time it seems like black people would be successful, why people would get in just in jealous and tried to do destroy that. now a lot of things that didn't make sense to me, it makes sense now when i go to work and i see people at a certain way or if you can't advance a job regardless of your education and experience. now it makes sense to me. >> host: thank you. we will leave it there. professor? >> guest: this is why i write these books. my first two books were academic books, "eyes off the prize" and "bourgeois radicals." they were both for an academic audience but my writing style is very accessible. and so it translated really well into being able to provide these

rich histories, well documented rich histories for a broader public because there is so much that we are not taught in schools and we are seeing that push again. so in florida there is the push not to have the kinds of history that can talk about rosewood, they can talk about florida in 1920 where you basically had ethnic cleansing because black folks dare to try to vote, and whites burned down the black part of town, ran black folks out of there and for the next five decades there were no black people in ocoee florida. we don't know that history. if we are not taught, if it is not made readily available to us. so that's why i do this work because a really believe once we know our history we are having a very different conversation about where we are as a nation

in what we need to do and what you mention the "bourgeois radicals" was more of a scholarly book rather than accessible book. what read a quote and that he explained that he would. the semantic rabbit hole that made the naacp a standardbearer for imperialismnd the soviet union synonymous with anti-colonialism greased the way into a wonderland with the association disappeared like a cheshire cat from the histories of colonial liberation struggles. >> guest: yeah. [laughing] >> host: congratulations on that. >> guest: thank you. what i was dealing with there was that since 1971, in this book came out in like 2015 or so, since 1971 -- 2014? since 1971, the histories that have been written about decolonization struggles, the role of african-americans in

these decolonization struggles,, the dismantling of these empires in africa and asia, they all have championed the left, the role of the black left, the role of the left itself. and have treated the naacp is basically water boys for truman and imperialism and colonialism. they basically said that the naacp turn its back in 1947 with the rise of the cold war, turned its back on these struggles and basically left it to the left. well, when i was finishing up "eyes off the prize", it's that one last sweep through the archives because there could be that document that just blow your whole book apart, so you just want to make sure. so i'm going to the archives, the naacp papers, and i find this letter from the somali youth league in 1949, two years after the naacp ostensibly

turned its back and it says thank you so much for all of your help in the u.n. and keeping the italians off of us. i went, right. i went, what is this? excuse me? you know you've hit something, and that became the foundation for "bourgeois radicals" ." i said i'm going to go wherever the naacp went and lord did they go. they took on south africa. they took on the dutch in indonesia. they took on the italians for somalia, libya and eritrea. i mean, they are taking on these struggles. i figured out that what they were doing was dismantling the norms that made colonialism and imperialism acceptable. so they took on the white man's burden, the european powers would walk in the meetings going my empire is so big, my empire is bigger than your empire, right? everybody is like i i would wt

to have that empire. they made being an imperial power not a badge of honor but a scarlet letter. and so watching how the naacp was instrumental in reshaping the norms of colonial empires, of imperialism. and again when we only have a narrative about the power of the left in doing this work, we don't understand how change is made. i wanted to be able to excavate that narrative. because having -- the avatar of all that is good and just and right in the world, no. no. there's just a longer history there. i wanted to make sure that that was clear. and having the naacp basically denigrate it as a toady, that's not what the historical record shows. >> host: teaching, writing

books, he also do public speaking as well. you get invited to quite a few places tragic yes, i do. yes, i do. >> host: at what point does everything too much? >> guest: well, we've got a document or a out soon. that is a great question that i'm asking myself. but there's just so much work to do. like i said, when we started this conversation this democracy is in trouble. it is under a full-blown assault and to just go lord, i'm tired. just doesn't sit with my sense of justice. it doesn't sit with my sense of "the girl who kicked the hornet's nest." it doesn't sit with my sense of right and wrong, and knowing, and knowing that the vision that the right has for this nation is

a vision that will send us hurtling back to a place where we may never recover. we've got to fight. >> host: keith, middletown, connecticut, you are on booktv with author carol anderson. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. i enjoyed listening to dr. andrew whenever i had a chance speak on c-span. and like many of your previous colors i was very happy when i learned that she is going to be on your in-depth show today. i wanted to just make a a coue of comments and get her thoughts about them. regarding gun rights versus voting rights. if i'm not mistaken i believe there are four constitutional amendments that deal with voting rights, and it seems like we are numerous states that are trying

to put up barriers and make it more difficult for people to vote. and yet, when we talk about the second amendment and people's rights to keep and bear arms, people are aghast when anyone tries to put any type of regulation or any requirement. just within the past week or two i think it was very sad when the supreme court i think ruled against the new york law that required people to show a cause for carrying a weapon outside of the home. to meet it just seems like a bit of hypocrisy that we can't come but in cup of regulation on the second amendment, the people's right to carry weapons, yet it seems we have tons of speech that is trying to restrict people's rights to vote. i would like to get the professor spots. >> guest: and thank you for that. back i had a student right a paper on the very dichotomy.

one of the things that you see here because the 15th amendment and the 19th amendment and the amendment the bands the poll tax in the amendment that lowers the voting age to 18, all of those have been under assault, absolute assault. we see that, for instance, in the ways that you have states removing, for instance, polling places off of college campuses. the way in north carolina where they divided one university between two separate congressional districts as a way to dilute the voting power of that hbcu north carolina a&t. the way that they had lower, fewer, fewer early voting days for prairie view a&m in texas

than they have with surrounding wallin county. we see this consistently. we see this in the terms of the banding of the poll tax where you had in florida when amendment four came through that reagan franchised those with felony convictions, and you had the courts rule after the state legislature came through and said, they were scared about that ballot initiative coming through. after it won then the state wrote in line think okay then, you have to pay all fines, fees and restitution in order for your sentence to be complete. and the courts and the federal courts ruled that is not a poll tax. except i don't have to pay my income tax to vote. i don't have to pay my property tax to vote. but here is a payment that i have to make in order to be able to vote. but even worse, they added the

horrors of the literacy test were in a previous literacy test the questions were things like how many bubbles in a bar of soap? how high is up? here the court ruled that florida does that to tell folks how much they owe. so florida can require that you make payment before -- florida does have to tell you how much that payment has to be. yeah. >> host: text message. my name is pastor ellie brown from springfield, missouri. my question is what would you believe is the most important message that ministers should speak to for our world today? >> guest: that message, i love that question. that message is what i'm hearing from reverend william barber, that this is a god and a jesus of all of us, that we are here to help all of us, that we have

to heal the sick. we have to feed the hungry. we have to clothes the unshod. we have to do that work, that there's a greater humanity at stake here. when we, in fact, use -- one of the things i say, the question we earlier received about the role of white evangelical christianity is that this is where i talk about folks putting their hands on god and using the power of god to put forth their own agenda. instead of letting god put their hands on them. and then moving in that way for a better world, for a safer, a kinder, a much more humane world. that i think is the most powerful message. and getting your folks out there

registered to vote and giving them to the polls. because of that political realm is so important in terms of being able to create a much kinder, gentler america. >> host: next call is from lou in las vegas. thanks for holding. you were on with author carol anderson. >> caller: you guys are knocking me out. i love everything that i have heard. it's just amazing. thank you for taking the call. i grew up in los angeles. i grew up with -- well, i'm 71. i grew up with kids who have never heard of john holt franklin. my earliest memory was of the mccarthy hearings but i did know what they were. i just heard my grandfather and my father crying because of what joe walsh was saying. and then i remember my mother going nuts when louis armstrong

called out eisenhower and said you got to do something and then he sent the airborne down south. as time went on i realized man, i'm old and i'm still hearing the same stories and the same battles and it's like, like the guy that was, he was beating his head against the wailing wall in israel and somebody said what are you doing? he says i'm praying for peace in the middle east and i'm praying for just for people to get along, and just like here, you know, they're 17 different lynchings and he said, the guy said, how do you feel? he said i feel like i'm beating my head against the wall. so now 60 years later, and i'm thinking nothing has really changed except awareness and knowledge and people knowing about books. right now i'm reading again i'm reading one of james baldwins great books which is the devil,

the devils find works which takes them back to the '30s and look yet bette davis eyes and seeing himself because he had popeyes, to. now here we are and we still judge people by their looks, how beautiful they are or how ugly they are, and yet we still have this other thing going. >> host: we are going to leave it there and see if professor anderson has anything should like to add to that. >> guest: and so part of, part of what oppression a part of what voter suppression is designed to do is to make you think that there is no hope, that it is always going to be this, it's always been this, it's never going to get any better, why bother to beat my head up against the wall? the thing is, is that it is in, the reason why we we're stiln this struggle is because we are

still fighting. we are still fighting and oppressive force, and because we refuse to give up, we refuse to accept our subjugation. and that is so important. we refuse to cede our power, because it is in that fight, it is in that struggle when we continue to move forward, where we continue to be able to create the knowledge, where we continue to be able to protect our communities. when we don't struggle, when we think, this stuff is just messed up, then all of our protections are dissolved. that's why we fight. that's why we have to know what they gain is. >> host: text message. please ask dr. anderson if she's a with the work of professor john lott who is taught at yale law school and his book more

guns less crime. >> guest: i am vaguely familiar with john lott. john lott is one of the heroes the second amendment school of individual rights, of guns, guns everywhere kind of deal, of being against gun safety regulations. as i have mentioned earlier, i haven't been pro-gun anti-gun, but what i have have been is for reasonable gun safety laws such as there's no reason to have semiautomatic weapons in the hands of civilians on our city streets. that just doesn't make any sense. so it's just being really common sense about it and not doctrinaire. >> host: david in tennessee, text message. i agree with what i believe is

your critique of our racist and violent society, but we have created a collateral parasitic layer of well compensated commentators and helpers, many of them ensconced in universities, a critical foundation of the system, who appeared to be neutralized and subsumed sufficiently by the dominant culture. comment? >> guest: okay. i thought i knew where that was headed and then it just veered in another way. i think that part of what you are laying out here is that there are scholars who feed on the kind of bills in american society, and who provide cover for that. and this is why having freedom within the university, the freedom of exchange of ideas within the university are so

important. because what that does is that when you have evidence-based scholarship you are allowing that evidence-based scholarship to do the heavy lifting of democracy, and you are able to discern the difference between that evidence-based scholarship and the ideologues. >> host: what do you think about some reports that academia has been overtaken by the left. [laughing] >> host: i guess you don't agree with that, those reports. >> guest: oh, lord. [laughing] sorry. i think that that is also part of the smoke and mirrors that's out there that is designed to denigrate the incredible work coming out of these colleges and

universities in terms of that scholarship. because if you can denigrate that scholarship then you are able to create a new truth, a truth that is that fact-based, that is not evidence-based. and we see that happening a lot. so this is why saying the left, so i got to say, when you talk to block scholars were in the academy, they are not seeing this incredible left that has taken over. they are looking at the kind of entrenchment of power and working through that in order to do this work. >> host: next call for doctor carol anderson comes from carol in greensburg pennsylvania. >> caller: i have a question whether any research has been done to compare what the laws have changed significantly over the years for the disabled. i mean i'm 86 and in a wheelchair and it worked as a vision therapist for years but

also ran a program from 58-68 that was 49% black and 51% white. i have a lot of positive things to say about the black community, and a local black author has convinced me i should write a book. and i'm not a writer. but but i would love to see me research that can prove that laws can change people's lives. i don't think there's been anything done in comparison between race and the disabled that i can find. i'm very interested in your opinion on that, and also i would like to ask -- >> host: i apologize, we are going to leave it at that first question. there's a lot there and we will see if dr. anderson has a response for you. thank you for calling in. >> guest: the role of

disability laws and disability policy are absolutely essential. it's one of the key movements for word that made this nation much more humane, and so then seeing the way that race works in those disability policies is also essential. there is some work done. i have seen some of it. i can't recall the names off the top of my head right now. basically doing library searches like a world cat search, a search on your local library, finding the books that are there and building, and if you have access to a university library that can get you what's called j store see you can see the articles that have been created and produced that's doing this work, that will give you the kind of foundation that you need to see what's out there and where your intervention would be really important.

>> host: one dita, cincinnati, good afternoon. >> caller: how are you? i used to be a librarian. she could also try -- [inaudible] library association, the african-american part could help you with that and also with the national library -- [inaudible] in bethesda, maryland. the recycled is i like dr. anderson. i'm 71, and our house -- [inaudible] we had hundreds of books. [inaudible]

my question to dr. anderson is, i was really taken aback by a comment that was made earlier -- i'm not angry with her. i was just wondering -- [inaudible] i wanted to run something across dr. anderson to see if i could get back -- [inaudible] hockley taught young people and let them know that this is not history, this is like, this is what we live. my parents and grandparents talk to us like this was -- [inaudible] this is not history. this is a continuum. thank you and it's really wonderful to see you. >> guest: thank you. so the question is how do we, you know, we are consistently are stunned by the lack of knowledge about tulsa, about,

you know, so how many folks, until they saw watchmen they didn't even know that also happened. who know about, when i'm teaching the civil rights movement i start up my class going, you know, how many of you basically heard of the civil rights movement as rosa sat down, martin stood up, he had a dream and we all overcame? and so when you get that incredible movement reduced to rosa and martin and overcome, then what we lose is a massive local organizing that happened that made movement happen. when we don't have that history, we have the sense that they should happen quickly, and that all you have to have is a leader. no. it takes a lot of folks. a lot of hours. a lot of commitment. so it is knowing that history. so how do we do this? one of the things is that i do

have on the ann marie website at basic history call the hidden history of civil rights where i provided it in those soundbites that allows teachers to be able to use that in their classrooms as a foundation for greater discussion, for greater knowledge. there's also some incredible websites that are out there. they gilder lehrman institute, the -- all, i'm blanking right now. the civil rights movement veterans website that have the documents and the narratives that really can provide access to the knowledge. and that's what we really have to begin to, , you know, facing history, facing ourselves. those entities have provided much broader access to this

history that helps us understand. i mean, this is one of the things about "one person, no vote," "white rage," and "the second" that where we are now with what happened then so we can see the through line. we can see, was a faulkner? the past isn't the past -- the past isn't over. it's not even the past. i'm blowing that line but if something like that. the past is still with us. we still living it. >> host: a tweet from stewart. your works are essential to understand the need for our complete history. after the backlash against nikole hannah-jones, 1619 project, you know of an organized effort by the academic community to preserve our undiluted u.s. history? >> guest: you know, so what i

see is to the american historical association, through the american, of the association for the study of african american life and history, i'm seeing that those organizations are really doing the work of ensuring that our history is taught, that it is preserved. i'm seeing this in archives, the archives are working overtime to make sure that the original documents and the original artifacts are still there so that we can see them. in at emory we have our stewart rose library, and in there, for instance, we had the sclc papers, and we've got the signs, actually the street signs from resurrection city which was the poor people's campaign in 1968

that continued on after the assassination of martin luther king. so you see archives, d.c. historical organizations, associations really doing this work. but it behooves all of us too, when you have the school board flooded with angry parents, and i put that in quotes because sometimes those folks don't even have children in those schools, it behooves us to pay attention to that and to participate in that process so that the backlash from teaching device of history and history that makes our children feel uncomfortable is, in fact, being pushed back saying, we must know this history. we cannot be the nation that we can be if we keep telling lies about ourselves. if we don't understand how we got here. >> host: about 15 minutes left

with our guest, carol anderson. the next call comes from frank in west palm beach. >> caller: good afternoon. i want to say the show is excellent and the professor is very, very good. i disagree with almost everything she says, but that being said, my question is, can she explain why the crime rate, especially murder, in the black communities in major cities is so out of control? is that a white issue or is that totally a black issue? >> host: frank, before we let you go, why do you disagree with professor anderson? >> caller: well, because i'm on the right, i guess. that's my best way putting it, you know? some of the things i hear i just disagree with. and that's all i can say.

>> host: do you in anyway consider yourself to be a racist? >> caller: never have. that being said, somebody might look me in the face and said i was, but i never have. i don't believe i am. >> host: thank you, sir. >> guest: so the framing of that question i thought was quintessential. you know, why do we have all of this murder happening in the black community? and so remember earlier when i said 80% of african-americans can over 80% of african americans are killed by african-americans, and over 80% of whites are killed by whites. what we don't get then when we're talking all of this black crime, that is a narrative of black pathology. that is the narrative of anti-blackness that i laid out in "the second", because what it

is saying is blacks are inherently violent, they are inherently criminal and so, therefore, we must have, we being the white community, must have protection against this source of incredible instability and violence in american society. now, what we don't get to our those issues of watching what happens when our schools are devalued and defended, what happens when jobs go away, what happens when we have this massive, massive discrimination happening in our employment processes, and there's incredible research out there that shows that if you have a racially identifiable name, but the qualifications are the same as someone who does not have a racially identifiable name, so for instance, should make with chante jackson has a resume, and jennifer sue jones has a resume, equal qualifications, she make

what chante jackson will have to send in multiple, multiple resumes and letters to get the interview. opposed to jennifer jones. because of the inherent racial discrimination. so when we're looking at the kinds of biases that are in american society that limit limit access to jobs, that limit access to housing, we have incredible studies about what that means in terms of the discrimination in housing. the discrimination in health care, we were looking, the discrimination in policing. when we're looking at all of this, when we're just asking a black folks killing black folks can we not looking at whites who kill whites and when a look at the kind of structural inequality that are there in american society, then we're not

asking for a real answer. we are asking for that kind of sound bite answer. >> host: what did you think of frank saying, i like everything you're saying, i'm loving everything but disagree with what you're saying. >> guest: i i smile because ie had that before, right? and i'm like, great, come with the evidence, come with the facts, come with the historical documentation, come with the valid research studies. so you know, i just know it doesn't work. but this is what i mean about the kind of undermining of academe because what it does is it undermines the rigors of the research, the rigors of the analysis to make how i feel on par with that and to make how i

feel become part of policy instead of the rigors of the work. >> host: tallahassee, florida. >> caller: , hello, go. thank you, dr. anderson, for your work. my question has to do with whether or not dr. anderson can address what appears to be a lot of, i shouldn't say, i hate to use a lot of, but how other populations in this country that are nonwhite but they are not black, seem to pile on and promote or perpetuate stereotypes or biases against the black race. and if there's any comments you can make toward that, and also if you have a book that addresses how we as a people, black people, can utilize the

capitalistic ideas in this country to kind of the show better our position and have a better impact on the economy and in this country. i hope that makes sense. >> host: thank you. >> guest: and so one of the things, there was a book, i'm going to do to mcdevitt books. one is how do i wish became white. when the irish immigrants were here they were treated horrifically. i mean, the bottom of the barrel, or close to bottom of the barrel. what key document is that what they begin to learn in american society is at the way into whiteness is anti-blackness. when you talk about the piling on, this is really what you are laying out. the other, i'm sorry can't remember the author's name right now, but dealt with how japanese americans and chinese americans became the model minority, and

that really happen in the 1960s. so while you're having the civil rights movement happening, while you're having this force say america must become america, you have this backlash that puts up asian americans as the model minorities as opposed to these black folk. and what she lays out here is that, because she asked the question how do we go from the chinese exclusion act and the, the, i hate it when my brain fries like that, and the interment of the japanese and the internment of japanese in the 1940s, how do we go from that and from the banning of all asian immigration in the 1924 national origins act, how do we go from that kind of policy to

model minority in the 1960s? and what she laid out was that asian americans went from being not white in the 1890s, the 1920s, the 1940s, to being not black in the 1960s. when you are having the civil rights movement and the black power movement. and so that kind of linguistic turn that then elevates. see, they believe in family. asians believe in education. they believe in hard work. they are not looking for a government handout. so you get these kinds of tropes that attached to model minority as a way to help create the fishers and in communities of color. but one of the things that we are seeing is that as powerful as that is, i mean that's like

an old british colonialism thing, divide and conquer. one of the things you are saying, this is why i love human rights. on human rights frame we all are in this together. we all work together. we see this with the coalition of immokalee workers down in florida that deals with tomato growers. and in this organization, in this mobilization of workers use on human rights frame where you had african-americans, you had latinos, you had asian americans, you had whites all working together to improve the quality of life and the working conditions in the tomato fields in florida. so when folks who try to split them apart they were like no, no. that's what becomes so essential at this is also again where i go back to reverend william barber.

the movement that he is creating is multiracial, multiethnic, old-time religious because that's where the powers lie, darrell is going from u.s. virgin islands. you on with author carol anderson. >> , good afternoon, ms. anderson. i had a question and the concern. [inaudible] i am studying the 1900s from early 1900s up to the 1970s. are you familiar with -- [inaudible] at the new negro movement and his work? your book about "bourgeois radicals," i thought that the naacp had dropped the bomb in the work in our time. but when you explained the work that they have done for people of color and oppressed people outside the u.s., and inside the

u.s., it gave me another perspective on them here but i think currently they are in my opinion dropped the ball in their efforts in being able to affect real change for people of color in america. >> host: we are going to leave it there but it did want ask you, is your research personal is a professional? >> caller: personal right now. i wish i had a teacher like her. i went to morgan state and i wish i had a teacher like her in morgan state. >> host: thank you for calling in. >> guest: kind of sort of, too vague for me to be specific. because i really focused in on the 1940s and taking it through to the 1960s. .. work looked at, for instance, the

naacp, the civil rights congress, the national negro congress, the council on african affairs, those were the those were the organizations following through in my work. the committee on africa, seeing those organizations and how they were deployed, how they were succumbing to their weaknesses is essential for me in terms of the struggle for decolonization work. >> host: 6 books down, is there another in my work? >> guest: there's another in my work. >> host: do you want to do a little group therapy? >> guest: i'm thinking of a book i'm entitling the ties that bind and silence.

african-american response to political violence in haiti, congo, and nigeria 1960-nineteen seventy. in my initial research, one of the things i found -- let me give you a broader concept than that. what i'm intrigued by are organizations that say they are there for the people, to protect the people and they don't. what are the forces that create that? what are the forces that create them to move. what i saw in haiti and congo, looking at 5 different organizations, 5 liberal organizations, black liberal organizations, not seeing them really engage with violence raining down in haiti and congo. why would they have been so involved in providing resources to those nations, fighting for

those nations, arguing in the state department and the white house for those nations, why the silence when black folks are getting slaughtered? >> host: where did you get that idea? >> guest: it was me being stunned at the silence because at the same time haiti is erupting in silence i'm not seeing any -- very little. what i am seeing is sharpville in south africa is happening and these groups are all over south africa with the violence and masker that rained down, and get the protection of black folks. to fight for this. and see them getting engaged in the civir