Enigma of Clarence Thomas. As some of you know the kallman center selects 15 fellows a year for a nine month term. Fellows receive an office in the Center Access to our collections and a stipend so they can focus exclusively on their work during their fellowships. The fellows are some of the very best and most promising academics independent scholars poets playwrights journalists dramatists artists and fiction writers at work today. They come here from around the country in the world to use the unparalleled collections housed at this library to write the books of tomorrow. The program was founded in 1899 and to date it has supported the work of gordon 300 fellows. The deadline for applications of next year is friday. [laughter] its free. I encourage you to come back in november for free new exhibition that will open on the third floor of this Building Made at the New York Public Library will feature more than 30 works written right here with the support of this librarys collections, the show will include books by kallman Center Fellows and others who worked here at the stephen a schwartzman building and other research were libraries of the and we ipl system. The series of conversations presents books that followup the kallman center came here to write later in the season also present conversations with novelists tae albrecht and julie orange her and conversations about the new novels that the work done during their fellowship here. Find more details on your rack cards. You will find as a table by the door copies of the enigma of Clarence Thomas for sale. Corey robin has agreed to stay after the conversation to sign them. The enigma of Clarence Thomas has already been called fascinating, brilliant and counterintuitive by book forum and in the National Review of valuable and overdue engagement with the nexus between thomass early life, his black nationalism and his political views. In the review for tomorrows New York Times jennifer aright its a provocative thesis but one of the marvels of robbins razorsharp book is how carefully he marshals his evidence, corey has not heard this review yet. [laughter] he doesnt have to resort to elaborate speculation or armchair psychology relying instead on thomass speeches interviews and Supreme Court opinions. Just as purists make ample use of the written record robin does the same. She continues, the result is rigorous yet readable, frequently startling yet eminently persuasive it is and every day a [laughter] it isnt every day that reading about ideas can be so gratifying and unsettling and robbins incisive and superbly argued book has made me think again. [applause] we are honored that corey will speak tonight with jamal bowie, columnist for the New York Times were the editorial page in the book review do not speak to each other. They really dont. Hes also political analyst for cbs news. He covers campaigns, elections, National Affairs and culture prior to the times, it he was chief Political Correspondent for slate magazine and before that he was a staff writer at the daily beast and fellowships of the american prospect and the nation magazine. Cory robin is the author of the reactionary mind, conservatism from edmund burke to donald trump hailed by the new yorker as the book that predicted trump and fear the history of political idea which won the best first book in political theory award from the american Political Science association. His writings have been translated into 13 languages. He was a fellow at the kallman center last year for 2018 to 2019. If you have questions for mr. Robin or mr. Bowie as the conversation proceeds, please feel welcome to write them down on the note cards that you have received coming in, questions not statements please. A staff member will collect them about and a half hour from now and our guests will get to as many as time allows. We are proud to present corey robin and jamal bowie. Thank you all for coming spending a monday evening talking about Supreme Court justice. Im not sure i would have done it but here we are. [laughter] corey, lets jump into it. We were talking backstage a little bit about the origins of the book. He mentioned that this was ab Clarence Thomas wasnt a person you are necessarily focused on. He did have some rising interest in trying to work through his views so how did this book come about . It began with an invitation two political scientists one of whom taught a class of yours i think he said at uva. Putting together a reader on African American political thought long anthology and there are very few of these actually in my field. The critics the initial reader said we will need something more on black conservativism. You should do something on thomas. They approached me because ive written on conservatism at some length and didnt want to do it i said no several times. I didnt have much of an interest in Clarence Thomas and felt like i was done talking about the right didnt feel like i had much more to say about it. It was strongarmed into it and i was instantaneously corey by this man. Who the way in which his Supreme Court opinions, which you read some of them, they are kind of drive fares but with him its just self that rick leaps off the page. I was really taken with the idea of trying to tell this mans story to his idea through his opinions. So i guess the central claim of the book is that to understand thomas through reference to his youth as a black nationalist someone whos swimming i think thats the verb you used swimming in this intellectual early 60s and 70s black National Black power all these things are very much in the mainstream language of African American life. I think you mentioned how liberal African American activists usually in bonds of the world were also speaking the language which is what it was the way people engaged with black politics. This is a much more foundational thing for thomas then we tend to acknowledge or even talk about in his jurisprudence. Thomas moves to the north in 1968 he goes to holy cross which is a college outside of boston and hes radicalized in part by the assassination of Martin Luther king and Bobby Kennedy like many other people. The realization he came to was nobodys going to do anything for us. But as he needs black people and nobody he really means white people. Theres a really strong foundational experience of black selfhelp, black Self Organization and black autonomous organizations. Thomas was not just a kind of intellectual drifter. He was an activist. I run into people, not often but every once in a while josc told him im writing about this and they say, i was in the new left in the 60s and we all knew about thomas in the boston area. He was a figure. He derived the foundational commitments to black autonomy, black Self Organization very foundational critique of integration and a belief in racial separatism at its heart and racial Self Organization. Whats interesting is that though he has a very strong migration to the right, he doesnt lose a lot of the foundational commitments. They are the seabed and which is conservativism grows. What is the path to that conservativism . How does he make the move. In his early life he subscribed to this highly patriarchal might even call misogynist view of women. You can make a case it still exists in the present day. The emphasis on self autonomy and nationalism can very easily become very reactionary rejection of the idea of constructional constraints of individuals. What drives thomas to the right . I think the biggest thing to remember about thomas is the moment and when he is politicized. The late 1960s and the early 1970s for many black activists that period is a moment of recognition with defeat. There is a real sense that black political possibilities are essentially either over or whittling down. Thomas really takes a measure of the and takes it quite seriously and theres a real sense of political defeatism and political pessimism that whether your model is social movements in the streets, revolutionary Self Organization or mainstream electoral politics, any of those models of politics are no longer a path. Thats one part of it that i think hangs very heavily over his right turn. The second part of it, this was something that really came as a revelation to me. On monday many black nationalist in this moment and black power activists the flipside of this political defeatism is a sense of experimentation with the institutions of capitalism. There is wonderful new scholarship thats come out in the last 5 to 10 years about all the ways in which black power activists were looking toward creating black entrepreneurs, separate black economy, blackowned business, more black higher income of the whole variety of forms but the central animating idea behind a lot of this is that the political pathways are closed so what you have to do is explore the economic pathways. I think this sort of change is our sense of a lot of black power movements which we associate with the left and socialism but as Charles Hamilton is the coauthor with strictly carmichael and black power puts it in the afterword which comes out years later he said, the logical end run of a ablack power wasnt necessarily socialism or social democracy owes what maximum acts said which was black self ownership, independent block business and things like that. Those two things the sense that politics is just closed off to black people on the one hand and that the economy and particularly a capitalist economy may offer possibility and niche for black Self Development and Self Organization i think really becomes the pincers that start moving in slowly to the right. Does other biographical questions like thomas joined the Reagan Administration and makes his way into the legal role but i think this is a good place to turn toward jurisprudence a little bit. The book you sent out thomas has two visions of the constitution black constitution and a white constitution and they both transmit very different messages but thomas reconciles his overarching vision of abi will let you describe it. [laughter] so lets talk about those visions of the constitution what is thomases black constitution, what is is what constitution, what does it mean for his jurisprudence. Am going to try to keep this not too weedy as they say and technical. Most constitutional scholars believe that there is the original constitution was ratified in 1789 and then a second constitution that was created through the struggle over emancipation and slavery. Fundamentally embody the 13th, 14th, 15th amendment what we call the reconstruction amendments. Thomas is what we call, he says it is an originalist he believes you should interpret the constitution as it was understood at the moment of its adoption. Unlike many originalists, thomas takes very seriously the second constitution that was created through the struggle to the black freedom struggle of emancipation. There is very technical aspects of that which i get into in the book but at the heart of that black constitution for thomas and this is where i think it starts reconciling with some conservatism amongst the many charters of liberties and freedoms created by the 13th and 14th and 15th amendment at the heart of those freedoms for thomas is the right to bear arms. This is essential to the experience of black construction for black freedmen. And thomas in his opinion on this question extensively quotes from herbert as tuckers book on flavor favorables. Tollbooths takes this very seriously. This experience of black arms really forms the heart of his vision of the black constitution and its not just a fetish for black arms because in that vision of black self arm he sees a vision of black manhood and black patriarchy. Black men being able to protect their families and their communities and theres a very resonant image he closes out one of his Second Amendment opinions he quotes from a memory of his son a memory from his father sometime in the 1880s remembering his father standing at the doorway with a rifle or some kind of gun holding off white supremacist terrorists. Thomas said Something Like its an emblem i cant remember the exact phrase, emblem of salvation or freedom. Once you start looking at the black radical tradition this is very foundational this idea of black men arming themselves and protecting themselves and not just being a mode of production but an emblem of freedom. Thats at the heart of his black constitution. I can now talk about his walkway constitution which is a very ultimately both are unsettling visions. His white constitution harkens back to that original constitution which is much more centered in the power of states as opposed to the National Government and at the heart of that white constitution is what we call the car sold state. Prisons, police, judges, juries, the whole apparatus that prosecutes and convicts people. This is something that whenever you say thomas is a black nationalist or has these meetings people find it hard to reconcile with his kind of ab there is no other word for it but grisly and brutal endorsement of the power of the penal state. There is no proof of it, he faces it full on. The reason i think that white penal state is so powerful to thomas, he believes it is the closest thing to creating the conditions, recreating the conditions of jim crow which he thinks are golden age of renaissance moment for black america. That was the moment in his mind when black men really rose to their full power of the most horrifying adversity and oppression which thomas does not in any way deny. He sees it like a disciplining function it forces black americans and modes of behavior. Exactly. And disciplinary tutelage really to educational brutal pedagogy what it means to be a full self. Thats what he thinks the penal state does when he goes through many ways in which he sees this happening. One of which is to create he believes it creates men, particularly men, who can be market actors who can develop habits and virtues of thrift and savings and responsibility and all the rest of it. But really this notion that adversity is essential for the full flourishing and development of black people. The minute that slackens and gets too easy to minute rights are granted becomes a moment of tremendous peril in his mind. I think thats really at the heart of his idea of the white constitution. So jurisprudence on Voting Rights there is no contradiction in opposing or allowing states to put tighter restrictions on Voting Rights. This is something that will help push africanamerican communities out the political realm hes not sure theyre ready for the kinds of responsibilities it entails and into the market. Everett know if he would say theyre not ready for the responsibility. I dont think thats the claim. But you are right, he definitely is quite hostile to Voting Rights. He doesnt really think abi think the foundation of that hostility for African Americans is that he believes that the electoral rules fear is stacked against African Americans. He gives us very famous interview to Juan Williams back in one williams was quite a serious journalist in the 1980s 1987, everyone can watch the shade. [laughter] he says, just imagine if we were to empower black people in the electoral realm and give semblance of collective rights he said just stack it up where we come out . He says we will always come out at the bottom. The only one may be worse are american indians. Lose a sense that the electoral space but to the combination of white racism the power of the white majority, the fact of the white majority means that African Americans will systemically lose and its essentially a fools aired to be investing ones hope in voting and part of this is he sees not just racism as an intractable part of American Society but that even liberal whites integrationists whites are not sincere he doesnt trust them and trust their motives. He thinks in part of experiences in the north that liberal whites there black allies are best way to describe it traps for black people that theres no real avenue of progression with those groups. I should say there is a long tradition in this and black nationalism. Marcus garvey thought the klansman was in some ways the best friend of the black men because he was honest and knew exactly where he stood. Malcom x uses, the fox and the wolf my animal imagery is not so great. Whichever the one is the sneakier one who pretends to be your friend versus the one who bears his teeth the white person who bears his teeth and reveals who he is. Its the same kind of imagery that thomas really values his working in the Reagan Administration in the 1980 he said at least they are honest and one of his favorite songs is the Smiling Faces tell lies the 1971 song he says the Reagan Administration he used to live listen to it all the time he says people in the Reagan Administration dont smile at you. I think this notion of racial candor knowing where you stand is very important. One last thing because i mentioned garvey on the vote but was also garveys idea of the vote that it was also