Bridging Black Perspectives - Bob Woodson meets Hawk Newsome (with John Wood, Jr.)

This is a conversation like few others.
Bob Woodson and Hawk Newsome are among the most important voices in black America today, but their politics couldn't be any more different on the surface. Hawk Newsome is the chairman and former president of Black Lives Matter of Greater New York. Bob Woodson advised the Reagan administration, the Bush administration and is a veteran of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's. Woodson is an independent black conservative and frequent Fox News contributor while Newsome is considered one of the most radical voices in today's social justice movement. Yet both men have fought their way up from modest beginnings to become leading voices in the conversation over racism and the future of black America.
Newsome and Woodson collide in spectacular fashion in a conversation that is at times explosive and at times converges in profound agreement. John Wood, Jr. moderates as Newsome and Woodson represent the wide range of social, political and generational perspectives of the Civil Rights Movement, addressing black history, racism, the future of black America and their own striking life experiences. This back and forth that is guaranteed to give you an understanding of the range and depth of black perspectives in America that you did not have before.
This conversation is brought to you as a part of Braver Angels 2020. Learn more and get involved at www.braverangels.org
Follow:
Twitter: @IamHawkNewsome @BobWoodson @JohnRWoodJr @braverangels

[@Lucypetuniaggm]

Hawk: “Don’t broad-stroke us” immediately after broad-stroking Republicans as racists.

[@lokitekone]

I came here hoping to bring a little bit of nuance to my view of people like Hawk Newsome, but he ended up seeming like more of a caricature than I actually could have imagined.

[@Sinner-man]

bah posted the same but 2 days after you. i actually LOL'd when he said that.

[@PRODOS]

Good observation Lucypetuniaggm ! Similarly, Hawk Newsome tries to justify talking one narrative outwardly and another inwardly. He criticises Bob Woodson for having ONE TRUTH -- one consistent, uncompromising message both inward to the Black community and outward to the world.

[@roundedges2]

I was about to say EXACTLY THAT.

[@BhutanBluePoppy]

​@@lokitekone Yes. Also a liar, - claiming he "comes from a place of love". Those are his , but his actions speak more loudly - clearly coming from a place of anger & resentment.

[@ShawnWi]

Brought here on recommendation by Bret Weinstein

[@Telorchid]

Me too. Still need to check the other video he referenced.

[@bambi7154]

Same here~ check out every person or book or program he recommends haha

[@russellharvey7096]

@@bambi7154 Can't go too far wrong with that!

[@eFIFAjennings9]

Likewise

[@j.lingle4713]

I was aware of both debaters - and admire Mr. Woodson - but was unaware of this debate until hearing about it from Weinstein's video.

[@andrepack]

What can you do when you give someone fact, after fact, after fact and they still refuse to see. Thank you Mr.Woodson for your absolute honesty and giving absolute facts.

[@altonpaige2388]

Facts from Woodard ? You have got to be kidding.

[@ginamero]

@@altonpaige2388 Yes, facts, you just choose to be a victim...grown up and make ur way and stop blaming everyone else for ur problems in life...keep voting Democrat and stay in failing schools, keep voting Democrap and stay in failing neighborhoods. With some folks it will always be everyone else's fault but their own.

[@jbank2393]

Evolve past slavery is the take away

[@Lisapizza789]

Thank you for allowing Hawk Newsome to show us who he really is.

[@ginamero]

he came off to me as a giant 'thinks he knows it all' with a big O'racist streak in his heart.

[@lunchladyland1562]

Bob Woodson is schooling Hawk.. Hawk just can't let go of the racism in his heart long enough to learn and be taught by such an intelligent man.

[@highneedforcognition9660]

11:42, 57:48

[@Muftobration]

@@highneedforcognition9660 those are exactly the right time stamps to show Hawk was willing to listen, but I was frustrated with Hawk at the second one. Bob was trying to make Hawk get to the point instead of speaking vaguely and Hawk wouldn’t engage. Instead of engaging in back and forth dialog in this debate, he said he’d think about it later. I think it would’ve been better to go deeper during the debate.

[@gchuggins]

Woodson is stating facts, Newsome is spouting fallacies. Schools aren't the root cause for the failure of black students, black parents are.

[@altonpaige2388]

Schooling? No he is not schooling at all. Bob was getting schooled by Hawk on using white supremacists talking points while including fake points/ stats.

[@bosho871]

@@MuftobrationHawk knows what Bob’s saying won’t work. If what Bob’s saying is so profound and truthful how come it’s not resonating? He’s no different than any other politician.

[@pmotty1]

This Hawk dude just lost an amazing opportunity to have a very valuable interaction with a man who is wise and he could learn so much from.

[@gaspardjess]

Woodson is amazing 👏 I love you sir thank you for your wisdom.

[@SongADayChallenge]

I don't think Hawk realizes that the diversity of thought Bob isn't seeing in the BLM discussion-- didn't mean various social justice inspired interpretations of the conversation (i.e. LGBT, defund police, abolish police, etc.). Bob is referring to absent conversations on whether or not the central claims of BLM are accurate or not. For example, a John McWhorter, Glenn Loury, or Coleman Hughes argument is not welcome in the BLM movement. In fact, Hawk immediately demonstrates how single note the BLM discussion is by writing off Bob's criticisms as something a white supremacist/racist would say. Him categorizing the REAL diversity of thought on the matter as racist talking points-- shows that he has never been confronted or addressed actual criticism of the movement. He just smears the argument so he doesn't need to address it. And then he warns another black man of wrong think. How is that not a perfect example of the lack of nuance in the BLM conversation. It is all emotion and zero tolerance for different perspectives on the matter.

[@CranmanPhotoCinema]

EXACTLY what I was thinking. That wasn’t diversity Hawk was listing.

[@st89]

Agree - when diversity of thought to you means having Socialists, Communists, and Anarchist, it's hard to take seriously that you've had a true debate on the central issues. If your view on racial issues necessarily excludes those who have differing economic views, it's clear the racial issue is not what you're trying to resolve.

[@CVLFMG]

Again with the broad brushes. Hawks is not the be all end all of the movement. I welcome Coleman and Loury and I'm BLM

[@roundedges2]

T T But the excessive force is itself a statistical red herring, given life only by selective infrequent brutal video (out of millions of interactions) deliberately made to go viral versus many more kind interractions never seen.

[@roundedges2]

T T That would work if both issues got equal attention and demonstrations and occupied the national psyche to the same degree. But they don’t, do they?

[@michelep6300]

Thanks for a rare debate on this issue. While I appreciate Hawk’s passion, Bob was spot on with every single comment and rebuttal. “I only have one truth.”

[@wynandbritz9056]

Classic case of facts vs feeling. Props to John for staying cool during the talk.

[@niemand262]

What hawk doesn't understand... People aren't living in food deserts, they are living in food wastelands. If you want stores with stuff you want, stop stealing, stop looting, stop vandalizing, and stop burning stores down. If you "built this country", demonstrate how productive and skilled you are by building a supermarket in the neighborhoods you say you care about.

[@ladyj3173]

I dont feel like Hawk was very respectful of his elder and his legacy and experience

[@305savage]

True story!

[@jonlauer6754]

I just looked at Hawk's LinkedIn. Looks pretty fishy. Did he even pass the bar?

[@Gaglias123]

I'll put Bob Woodson up against this guy any day of the week in terms of how much good he's actually done versus how much hot air is actually he lets out.

[@bric6454]

This debate needs to go viral. Bob is the man!

[@julian65886]

Hawke is just a machine that repeats slogans/ Woodson is a billion miles ahead of him.

[@dharris6219]

Light years ahead. Bob Woodson!

[@ckahlquist2129]

"SOUL NOT FOR SALE" Because it has already been bought.

[@playapapapa23]

I was thinking the same thing. That dude sold his soul a long time ago.

[@playlist55]

@@playapapapa23 He sells t-shirts too!

[@Leadeshipcoach]

Robert Woodson is one of my new heroes. This was an interesting interview. And interesting points made. However ... I think Hawk contradicted his own principle ( or request) to not “broad brush”. He did this himself a few times in calling all republicans racist ( that is a broad brush and huge generalization). And saying that the only piece of the truth they (white people?) will run with is the words spoken about black people needing to take responsibility... that is a broad brush. And at times he didn’t directly answer the question asked. He did admit that there were things that Mr Woodson said that he needed to research... I appreciate him acknowledging that. And contrary to some on here I do think he was respectful to Mr. Woodson. He use of “Sir” to me communicate that. I think he was just very passionate in his views and in how he expressed it. To me what we heard from Hawk was not disrespect but passion. Which can sound disrespectful. The inside house conversation and outside house conversation idea... well to a certain degree I have seen that growing up in the black community. However ... I have also seen inside house discussions also deny the reality of what is going on in our African-American communities and homes. Things we don’t talk about or mention. I’m in agreement with Mr Woodson that the discussion needs to be had inside and outside. One message... not two. Thank you John Wood for this.

[@MrJustSomeGuy87]

Whenever someone (Hawk) starts saying “Sir” too much, you just know it’s a facile cover for disrespectful treatment. You wouldn’t have to say Sir so much if you just spoke in a respectful manner

[@missmerbella]

100%.

[@DBushX2]

One problem with black America today is that Hawk Newsome is considered one of America’s most important black voices today (like the description says).

[@dmr6390]

Hawk is refusing to acknowledge the cultural issues in the black community which makes up a majority of the issue. Bob absolutely destroys him here

[@davidgaskin1558]

Hawk: “there is a conversation!” Goes on to list 7 different versions of the exact same ideology. Well done!

[@trickeyD]

One thing that has been lost for sure is respect for our elders. Hawk is an aggressive, disrespectful, patronising bully.

[@MrJustSomeGuy87]

So sayeth everyone in every generation. Look, here’s Socrates saying it: “The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show *disrespect for elders* and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room” www.bartleby.com/73/195.html

[@highneedforcognition9660]

Could have been way worse. He gave some credit where it was due 11:42, 57:48

[@dharris6219]

Hawk Newsome is a disrespectful bully!

[@ginamero]

@@highneedforcognition9660 Please....if you posted all the places he was smug and rude there would be 6 full lines of time stamps!

[@andreakemp2260]

He blames the schools verses the families not teaching their children. It starts with the family. If you want to start with the root cause, it’s the breakdown of the nuclear family.

[@KeganVanSickle]

This video needs many more views.

[@cynthiaaltamirano6383]

Hawk loves to hear himself talk,he’s not worthy of even breathing the same air as this elderly 💎 gem,God bless him and may the good lord preserve him!!!

[@wallinle]

I know the purpose of this channel is to give hope to the idea that people can come together again in open discussion but this video has only made me feel the opposite. The old school (Bob) seems to understand the position of the new school (Hawk) and raise points that undermine the new movement based on fact and experience. The new school (Hawk) responds emotionally and comes off as smug, unwilling to even engage with the deepest objections the old school (Bob) makes (i.e. the very problem that the movement lacks diversity of thought). I hope that I have missed one side of this because otherwise it feels like I’m watching my own self righteous and entitled generation spitting in the face of the wisdom of a more resilient past generation for fear of straying from an ideology.

[@EuropeanQoheleth]

Wisdom? Resilience? Where was their wisdom when they wrecked the economy in 2008? Where is their resilience when they get criticised?

[@wallinle]

@@EuropeanQoheleth I'm not sure what either of those critiques have to do with the conversation between Bob and Hawk or the criticism of how our younger generations view their elders.

[@guyser1975]

I agree with respect to Hawk’s coming off as smug, and it’s unfortunate. I couldn’t make up my mind as to whether or not his punctuated delivery, emotive repetition of cliches and offers to ‘walk us through’ his non-sequitur responses was a part of his method, or if it’s just him being out of his depth. I do appreciate his introduction of the concept of ‘outside conversation vs. inside conversation’. The necessity of ‘saving face’ in light of the broader social justice aim needs more fleshing out.

[@highneedforcognition9660]

57:49 "I listened to what you had to say, sir. You made some very good points and I'll take that on board and I'll research it and apply it" says Hawk. Also 11:42 "That was pretty profound, and I was just really digesting that" he says about Bob's opening points. Based on these two data points, I don't think Hawk is as close-minded and hopeless as you suggested

[@jtzoltan]

@@highneedforcognition9660 yeah he had moments of showing respect. I do feel the point made in this post when Hawk makes such a broad swathe of saying that Bob is "reinforcing the talking points of white racists" which destroys all nuance and implies that if you have a criticism that comes anywhere near what a white supremacist might say on some point then that disqualifies what you say. It doesn't, there might be some things that a white supremacist might say that might be reasonable even if their overall view on the subject is hateful and wrong-headed. You gotta address the point, not that it might be close to a subset of what someone bad might think. Stalin might be an evil guy, nut he probably got some criticisms correct about capitalism. Then the fact that Hawk made this big long emotive argument based on the fact Bob used the word "predator" in passing on a specific point as though that alone was something you are not to touch on because Clinton once said "superpredators" and that hurt the black community. I'm just looking at hi first long-winded response at the 25 minute mark and it's not promising for this guy.

[@wolfy789]

One wants to build. The other destroy.

[@PRODOS]

Very impressive job by John Wood Jr. ensuring a fair and open discussion -- helping us better understand where each of his guests are coming from. Terrific! Thank you.

[@guyser1975]

Enlightening conversation. And a masterclass in the art of moderating! Well done.

[@Rykbui]

This conversation needs to be 2 hours longer

[@maierAK]

What a wonderful and thought-provoking conversation. I rarely see such depth in today's discussions. Congratulations to Bob Woodson and Hawk Newsome for this open, honest, and direct conversation. Also special thanks to John Wood Jr. for his unbiassed moderation of the discussion.

[@tysparks598]

Yes I agree, the moderator John Wood Jr was excellent, I too appreciate this opportunity to listen to a conversation that's probably very rare outside the confines of a single community. I get the feeling that, if Mr Woodson took these positions to the streets & the heart of the riot/protests, he would probably need protection... They're not tolerating any dissent, from any quarter, neither white nor black, in the current movement on the streets of American cities.

[@ginamero]

@@tysparks598 Not tolerating any dissent doesn't make them right, it makes them Marxist...and very dangerously deluded.

[@ArterialJames1990]

Bob accomplish so much!! Hawk accomplished NOTHING except a degree in Emotional studies

[@juegacomocampeon4493]

TY Mr Woodson for sharing your acquired wisdom. And hats off to the moderator (John Wood Jr) for trying to glue together the chasm caused by Newsome.

[@brittanytalissaking1411]

Black people were not hit with covid-19 harder because of "food-injustice." Hawk is so off-based in every way.

[@mattyj4852]

Hawk, you have a long way to go in persuading someone who doesn't already agree with the foundations of your perspective. I was immediately put off not by your approach,

[@highneedforcognition9660]

It seems to me like he knows he can't and that's why he abdicates the responsibility of " convincing people that racism exists" along with various other strawmanned opposition points he refuses to engage with

[@wweeks]

@@highneedforcognition9660 I was also struck by that statement "I do not have time to convince people racism exists" because the phrase "BLM" implies you are talking to someone that does not believe that BLM

[@lisapawlik2510]

He was very faux respectful. With his “sir”s and “with respect”, but he was incredibly condescending and arrogant. Very off putting, but the same style and tactic we see used in the movement as a standard.

[@words-in-context]

This was an awesome conversation! Many thanks to Hawk Newsome, Bob Woodson, and John Wood, Jr. for sharing it. I hope you will all come together for another one.

[@dokota1]

Mr. Woodson, if American people can hear you on MSM, a lot of burning, looting and deaths could have been avoided. People like you will have to save America from ourselves.

[@bebejful]

@dokota - The liberal media don't want Woodson on their shows.

[@Sinner-man]

Best part 43:28 "Republicans are a bunch of racists... So please dont broad stroke us." I literally laughed out loud. Sorry i am really enjoying the talk and will finish it all, but that was an amazing statement to me.

[@dsjluc]

@T T The point is that Hawk was guilty of the very thing he requested not to be done to him, i.e., he paints all Republicans with a broad stroke, then immediately asks Woodson not to paint BLM with a broad stroke. Trump being a racist does not prove that all Republicans are racists.

[@Doutsoldome]

@Jason Apple That was really amazing.

[@ginamero]

@@dsjluc You saying President Trump is a racist doesn't make it so, either. You Blue folks just lie and lie and lie and I'm not even a Trump fan but I will vote for him next year if he's the candidate because the two we have now are just stoopid!

[@Grequierecafe]

Excellent work, Mr. Wood.

[@taylorboggs50]

I feel like I’ve seen Hawk discourse much better than this in the past. Bob has always been consistent. Well done John. Thank you for hosting this.

[@Mikethebeast131]

I mean this in the most sincere, non-patronizing, and empathetic way--good luck in the fight, Hawk! But remember, if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.

[@playlist55]

Too late, Hawk is already a monster.

[@blujay9191]

I never knew how continually referring to someone as 'sir' could be so disrespectful.

[@chaoscultus]

Bob Woodson is right on!

[@JacksonPinckney]

This was brilliant! Thank you for doing this. This is so needed!

[@davidkooi4349]

Thank you for this. A breath of fresh air.

[@dharris6219]

Hit him with the facts! Bob Woodson ❤

[@rgonzalez100]

Wow. I think this serves as a perfect example of why there are so few Woke debates happening. Always going to degrade to emotional appeals and fallacies vs facts. Nice job Bob. Thanks for putting this content out there. Hopefully people can see the lack of thoughtfulness and basic reason of Hawks argument.

[@niemand262]

This hawk guy is used to being cheered by people who are impressed when he clumsily uses the word ramifications.

[@dorianjohnson8480]

Hawk said don’t broadbrush his org but then broad brushed ALL black and brown political leaders as being racists.

[@missmerbella]

Next time I decide to eat a cake rather than a salad I’m going to blame it on “food injustice.”

[@majfauxpas]

Feels like a meaningful conversation was interrupted by BLM chanting

[@Lisapizza789]

This went exactly how I expected it to go.

[@jordanmcintyre5148]

Came into this hoping it would be a respectful discussion. Not sure why I thought that. Hawk was rude from the outset with his phone ringing and only got ruder throughout. This is literally the only video I've seen where someone who is actually part of the BLM movement engaged in a debate but he just reverted to ideology at every point. So sad.

[@theearlynerd1]

I just want to say I'm thankful to listen to this conversation. I learned an incredible amount from both sides, but most of all I'm encouraged that people with extremely different takes can discuss a topic and leave the conversation without any harm or insults of character.

[@stampede4107]

This is a great conversation. Thanks for doing it.

[@ibanezdudeck]

Thanks for hosting. This is a rare, honest, debate direct from source to source rather than news hosts interpretations of what they think the people stand for.

[@duncansh81]

Hawk seems to me to be more of an idealogue than a genuine thinker. I say that because Woodson already knew all the points that Hawk was making, he's been there decades before Hawk was even born. Woodson knows Hawks point of view and has a much broader vista himself whereas Hawk has a more narrow view which is clouded by idealogy and he can't see beyond those blinders. Hawk never actually answered many of Woodson's questions and just said points we've already heard from others before.

[@TheSAD999]

Someone tell hawk to read the comments !

[@musiclighthouse1913]

Hawk thinks that Bob's generation had it easy

[@ShawnWi]

4:23 “...the black woman is the key to our liberation” How, Sway? How?!?!

[@freedomordeath1805]

You disagree because of what ??

[@ginamero]

@@freedomordeath1805 probably because they were the key in destroying it by going along with Democrat handouts and eschewing the father! They were the ones having 6 kids by 5 different men. They were the ones who didn't marry so they could get a check, they were the ones who would have another kid for food stamp money and sell the food for other things, that they hit their kids instead of reading to them, that they didn't care if they went to school or not, that head start was funded by the government because women who stay at home and get to send their kids off to daycare for free don't bother to teach them colors or numbers and just don't give a F....maybe that's what he's thinking, I don't know but who knows

[@rogerwelsh2335]

Listening to Hawk made this really hard to get through.

[@Dream-bebe]

Politicians need to be held accountable!

[@MikeJones-xl3ti]

Great to see dialogues like this. Seems to me we need much more of it, or rather that the activists and their movement need to have more of it. It was telling that it made Hawk think to hear Bob’s thoughts. Thanks BA for all your doing, you may already have started a shift in thinking with enabling dialogues like this 🙏

[@frankcastle5513]

Hawk's "place of love" seems to be one of unreasonableness, disrepect and is out of tune with reality.

[@roundedges2]

Losing ground: Don’t make it a comparison of white to black. The question is “Why did we regress?” From the pinnacle of the 1940s Harlem Renaissance, with elderly walking in safety through parks at night, like Woodson and Sowell and Walter Williams remember -How did the black community fall off a cliff from a HIGHER, better state, to a lower one?

[@DBushX2]

Main reason, they got rid of black fathers and made them unimportant (null & void) and replaced them with the government; whom the black women then married. That’s your honest ‘why the regression’ answer. Blacks have ALL the same opportunities and rights as any other citizen in America (actually more when you consider the FACT that some very qualified Whites and Asians are denied entry into some colleges for the sake of less-qualified black skin to sit in the classes instead). The ones who have a sin problem, not a skin problem, will always make it a comparison of skin color because they’re now raised (by the mother and government) who instill in them that the “white devil” (yes, I’ve actually heard them say it. A lot) is the cause of all their problems.

[@roundedges2]

Isaiah 53 I am with you on the horrific impact of pres “I’ll have them n***** votin Democrat for a hundred years” Johnson’s welfare programs, but there’s more to the perfect storm: Simultaneous massive 1970s bluecollar job losses in inner cities Chicago, Detroit from globalization. Not only closing of the meat-packing Chicago stockyards, Detroit auto makers shifting factories overseas WITH many small statellite businesses downtown making bearings, small parts etc. Ditto washing machines, appliances in small towns. Hence the GREATNESS of Trump beating all the companies to bring their factories JOBS back to the US. If those jobs had stayed, far fewer would have joined gangs right when cocaine exploded popularity, blue vs. red going to war over drugs instead. My overrarching point is to remind we WERE far better before, and can be again. Jobfare not welfare. That is what Trump is doing.

[@DBushX2]

roundedges2 I completely agree there need to be more manufacturing jobs ie here instead of overseas, but when you’re raised by a mother and government who aren’t instilling values they won’t work those jobs anyway, even if they were plentiful. In the 1930’s when blacks were slaves why were more of wed when having babies than whites? Values, beliefs, standards, morals, ethics, morals.....God. The ones involved in all this nonsense are Godless; no matter the skin color.

[@bosho871]

@@DBushX2Are you kidding me? The prison industrial complex locking black men up and breaking up the family structure. Leaving these young black men out here with no guidance. That’s one of the main reasons. You would know that if you were out here in the streets. Hawk knows what he’s talking about. He’s on the front line.

[@ginamero]

@@DBushX2 The blacks were NOT slaves in the 1930's WTF is wrong with you

[@HoseaCuervo]

this guy Hawk Newsome ideology is terribly dangerous, yes he has passion, but he sounds like a straight up anarchist. take and overthrow by any means

[@Grequierecafe]

I didn’t recognize the younger man as Hawk Newsome. He’s usually got it together. In this conversation he’s flailing. Woodson is holding his own in the face of all that swinging. I have to go back to pick up the final. Thank you to Braver Angels.

[@danieldanielson2650]

"there is not enough being done [by others]." Says every self proclaimed victim all the time

[@Bo12346hhgfgdg]

This guy Hawk Newsome is a comedian, lets be clear on that!

[@jeffyboyreloaded]

John Wood Jr, great job moderating

[@paigemccormick6519]

John is a superstar, yet practical, intellect. Stay grounded (I wish to say that as your admiring elder). This was very hard to watch. I haven't made it through completely yet, but I will. Mr. Newsome is so confusing, unreasonable, and therefore unsympathetic. I respect the community struggle so much, but I am in the past where I learned it: at 1970s liberal arts college with plenty of black friends in close settings for four years. John is helping me fast forward to the critical-theory present, and transformational future. Please the lord. Keep it up and I promise to support.

[@clay1678]

I appreciate both these men for their courage and willingness to act to fix problems they see. As much as I respect them, I don't think either of their perspectives is sufficient on its own as a narrative of self for black Americans. Without leaders that can integrate these stories we will only see limited progress. Yes to social justice and yes to personal responsibility - anyone claiming that these concepts are mutually exclusive is missing the point.

[@kellysybesma9973]

John Wood Jr. is such a leader. I would vote for him for President!

[@susu0224]

That's a GREAT POINT Bob Woodson...IF ALL white people left for Europe then what would be the excuse then for all the brown & black people's negative behaviors?

[@banjax80]

Sounds like Hawk would really be supportive of charter schools and school vouchers. He should call Trump and Republicans and offer his support. His comment about a racist cop killing George Floyd didn't age well. Watch the body cam video and rethink the racist narrative.

[@andrepack]

Tony Timpa

[@playlist55]

It's good Hawk's soul is not for sale. No one would want to buy it, if he even has one. Hat's off to Bob Woodson, he seems to know what he's talking about. Hawk Newsome? He reminds me of a Booker T. Washington quote: "There is another class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs -- partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs." And that is indeed how Newsome makes a living.

[@dedmo79]

Hawk at 43:30 “the Republicans are a bunch of racists.” Hawk at 43:40 “dont broad-stroke us”

[@valeriehunn913]

Not the best of these debates that I have listened to, but it did get me to think in surprising ways. As a BLM supporter, I expected to side with Gavin Newsom but ended up really interested in what Bob Woodson had to say. Gavin did not represent well. Systemic racism is real but we all have to take personal responsibility.

[@nelsma292]

This discussion deserves more views.

[@markz.5891]

Great job by the host,thank you.

[@SpaceCowboy2071]

I think I agree with Bob more, but really appreciated Hawk's prespective as he did make some excellent points. He was a bit emotional in spots, but from where he sits who wouldn't be? This was a good conversation!

[@MisterMonsterMan]

Hawk Newsome isnt at this level and shouldnt be in discussions with these types of people. His inclusion does a dis-service to what this channel is trying to do.

[@questelohim...]

To hell with the victim mentality...‼️

[@otamaanna4729]

Hawk? What does personal responsibility mean to you?

[@henrys2403]

Thanks for hosting this John. I have been looking for some source to see these two "schools" of thought to engage and you facilitated it beautifully. We need more of this. Second thanks to Bret Weinstein for the referral.

[@robsaunders7993]

A young man who is not very bright being educated by a highly intelligent elderly gentleman

[@nickgoesvestmode]

Hawk constantly says the same thing twice in a row as if, this might seem silly the first time I say it but if I say it twice in a row it will become true.

[@TomPerkinsCountry]

Thank you for doing this man, and hope there is further dialog. This is so rare and so needed.

[@yinoveryang4246]

First time watching. Hawk. .. 1. Talks in the third person. 2. Advises the older gentleman not to speak publicly with any criticism of “the community”. Generally believes in limiting debate and information 3. Comes across primarily as judgmental.

[@pebblepod30]

I hope one day Hawk considers if maybe he has been taught some bad lessons by those he mistakenly looked up to.

[@williamerdman4888]

That's unlikely to happen until he gets some serious counseling.

[@calfborg]

Hawk isn’t saying much original outside the BLM narrative. He’s dismissing positivity and minimizing progress that’s been made. Bob is trying to acknowledge progress and critique pain points, while Hawk is pushing entitlement and making demands.

[@swingshift.]

We need to stop relying on the government to fix things to save us, that's what Bob is saying we need to fix thing and save ourselves after we do that things can and will change

[@kathleankeesler1639]

Hawk - Thank you for your integrity, courage, compassion and determination. Please read 1978 Robert Kennedy and His Times by Arthur M Schlesinger. Specifically chapters 14, 33, 34, 35 and 36. Many blessings to you and yours.

[@farcenter]

Seriously, was Hawk drunk? Honestly that would make him look a bit better

[@otamaanna4729]

How disappointing that Hawk couldn't be a bit more open minded and humble towards Bob

[@Myhandleismyhandle]

racism isnt the problem its the black folks that we dont hold accountable hawk just proves that you can get caught up ion something like race and never can navigate out of it

[@ladyj3173]

I just started listening at 15 minutes (I did see Hawk on Candace Owens previously and elsewhere, so Im already familiar with him) I feel like from the get hes already attributing the normal change in perception people have when you change your clothes and activities to racism. I suspect he sees racism in everything. For example when he talks about his lawyer colleagues thinking he was from a bad side of town when they saw him in his hoodie with his Rottweiler - and uses that as an example of racism.. that frustrates me and makes me feel like he is either paranoid of racism or a gifter. As a person from a very welfare/low income/ghetto background, I dont want my neighbors in the upper middle class neighborhood I live in now to see me in my Cookie Monster pajama pants smoking a cigarette outside in the morning; because I know they will think I look trashy, and we're both white.

[@ginamero]

I thought Hawks little antecdote was a giant lie...I don't trust his racist heart...he's just a Lefty with the same talking points - the main one being, "It's not my fault, I don't need to take responsibility, it's everyone else that does this not me....blah blah blah same old tropes as before and the kids are still in shit schools.

[@blakeray9856]

Wow, Bob has a copy of Fowler's Modern English Usage on his shelf! A great book! Just one thought about the discussion: I do get the point that Hawk makes about crime statistics within the Black community being irrelevant to the discussion at hand, and this topic comes up over and over when talking about police killings. Why can't anyone state clearly, that yes, these are not the same issue, but doesn't the magnitude of the one problem put the other problem in some kind of meaningful perspective? Why is that perspective missing, and what forces are in play that keep that perspective from being grasped? Also, Bob misspoke when he mentioned the number of lynchings. He said 48,000, but he should have said 4,800. I wish that had been corrected by the moderator. But, really, John Wood is doing great work.

[@ShawnWi]

I made the same point about the lynchings--it's 4800. I think he also tied this to the number of black ppl killed in 9 months by other blk ppl. The moderator definitely should have caught one of those two. I concluded this wrong number was due to a lifetime of experiences, facts, and meaningful conversations looking to push through during a one hour conversation on an important topic.

[@williamerdman4888]

Blake, I can't agree that the "crime statistics within the Black community being irrelevant to the discussion at hand," it seems to me that this is incredibly relevant? Can you explain further?

[@blakeray9856]

@@williamerdman4888 according to Hawk, in this discussion the "issue" is one of police conduct and accountability. According to some people I have heard talk about this, a murder on the street results in an investigation, trial, conviction, incarceration, etc., but when a law enforcement officer kills someone, rarely are criminal charges ever made, and if they are, they are usually dropped. So yes, high crime rates are bad, but at least there is a law enforcement and legal system that addresses it, but in the case of police killings, there is at least the perception that this is not so. Many people within the black community view this as unfair, that, in effect, our laws enable a corrupt institution to kill black people without legal repercussions. From my personal point of view, I believe that this conception of the problem is more often than not grossly oversimplified, key common sense factors are glossed over or overlooked, and there is nothing left but the raw impression that, on a regular basis, cops kill black people and never have to go to jail for it. My point was that I understand this distinction, that there is a difference between murders, versus state-sanctioned "murders" that are never prosecuted (or at least very rarely are), and yet I also believe the wildly disparate numbers in these two classes of killings, ought to provide one at least some measure of perspective, of some sense of the extreme low probability of getting killed by a police officer.

[@shettywap]

I think the debate started off pretty much evenly contested, but around the 34:00 mark and on, it seemed like Hawk lost quite a bit of direction and poise in his expression. Either way, I appreciate this conversation, and both of these gentleman. I'm going to venture out and check out their other interviews. Thanks again, John!

[@ShawnWi]

37:20 Woodson is wrong on the lynching numbers. He’s off by a factor of 10. He said 48,000, but the recorded number is more like 4,800.

[@newmediarules]

Oh. This is going to be fun =)

[@ckahlquist2129]

Principled positions vs. Passionate pleas