audaciouskay's review
2.0
I have seen people raving about this book and Professor Kendi for about a year now. Professor Kendi recently joined the faculty of Boston University, and since his arrival in Boston his work has been widely hailed as essential reading, unwavering and visionary. I have been invited to more virtual workshops and conferences and trainings which feature Professor Kendi as a headline than I can count. More than this, I have had countless white people or white adjacent folks rave about how enlightening and transformative it has been for them. This feedback make me skeptical and hesitant to read the book, quite frankly. But, after receiving a free copy of the book in conjunction with my attendance at an event hosted a Black philanthropic organization in Boston - Professor Kendi was the featured guest - I decided to read it. My thoughts about the book follow.
- This book is written for a white and white adjacent audiences. It certainly is not written with any Black audience in mind (despite the fact that he spends a lot of time focusing on Black people's behavior and ideas and whether we can be racist or not). There's no escaping this fact. One of several "tells" is the level of detail that Kendi uses describe very mundane aspects of Black American life from a certain era. The clothes we wore. Our popular music. Even the unnecessary translation of of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) phrases and words into standard American English. This book is intended to be palatable to white people, first and foremost.
- The message of this book is essentially that Black people can be racist too. Fret not white people, you are not the only ones that can be racist! is the pervasive theme here. Not only is this an irrelevant premise, and not even practical in the U.S. context, it completely dilutes the connection between American racism and the power structure, and this is one of THE most important connective tissues. The issue at hand in this country is not that all human beings or groups have the capacity to be racist or that Black people can be racist too. The issue is that a very specific type of racism and white supremacy are pervasive in the U.S. and that every American institution and nearly every American policy is inherently racist and white supremacist. That is the actual issue.
- There is a chapter on ethnicity where Professor Kendi says that white slavers preferred to enslave Africans from certain ethnic groups based on who they thought would be most subservient, that slavers thought some Africans were born to serve or were faithful to serve. Nowhere does he mention that slavers were intentional about selecting Africans for very important skills in building empires. Metalworking. Architectural and design expertise. Irrigation knowledge. Rice growing and other agricultural techniques. To omit the very real fact that white slavers were familiar with the expertise of various groups of Africans and chose to plunder their expertise seems like a tremendous oversight for someone who is steeped in the history. It also perpetuates the racist notion that Africans were only brought here because they were good laborers and not because of their intellectual skill. The Europeans knew what they were doing when they stole all of that talent to build their shit. This omission in the book annoyed me a great damn deal.
- Kendi's definition of segregationist seems narrow and white-focused. I'm not saying that his definition is wrong but it's a very narrow way of defining what it means to be segregationist and to have segregationist views. There is a point in the book where he says that segregationists believe that other racial groups cannot reach their superior cultural standards. But he doesn't seem to consider, for example, Black segregationists who do not strive to achieve white standards or that Black segregationists think assimilation is detrimental to the well-being of Black people. This is a very different view of what it can mean to be segregationist.
- Kendi says that every time someone racializes behavior and, for example, describes something as Black behavior, they are expressing a racist idea. The converse - describing something as white behavior - is also racist. But racism and racist ideas are based on things that aren't true. If how racism and whiteness plays out in the world is real, then it is not racist to racialize behaviors that white people exhibit when defining those behaviors and knowing how to identify and navigate them is literally a matter of life and death for Black people. White people expressing false ideas about Black people's sexual drives or propensity for violence are expressions of racist ideas. Black people describing white fragility and the other ways that white people behave that threaten Black lives is pointing out facts.
- There is no treatment of race within the Latinx community which includes Black people. In fact, there is a point in the book where Kendi says, "Latinx people are a race." They are not, in fact, a race. The Latinx community is neither a racial group nor an ethnic group. The community consists of various racial and ethnic groups, including Black people. In 2020 (or 2019 when the book was published) it's unacceptable for any race scholar to not comprehend and communicate clearly that Latinx is not a race and that Black Latinx people are, in fact, Black.
- He uses the term Black on Black criminals several times to describe Black people who have anti-Black racist views. On maybe one occasion he gives a weak example of White on White criminals. Given that most of the history he calls out in the book are illustrations of white led racism I'd expect him to offer up way more examples of White on White criminals. There are plenty. Far more examples than black on Black criminals, that's for sure.
- Dinesh D'Souze, an utter and completely irrelevant loser, is quoted in the book at least twice.
The best aspects of this book are Kendi's personal journey. He's very open, and he details his own anti-racist journey. It can't be easy to lay bare your own racist (and other harmful ideas) as he does in this book. And yes, we all have them (although we don't all have the power to act on our racist ideas in ways that cause systemic harm). And it's clear that he does believe that we are not condemned to being a racist society if we're willing to do the hard work. I commend his efforts.
My gripe is that he overlays his personal journey onto a historical and social and political context in a way that essentially conflates his individual and familial experiences - which are also rooted in a certain kind of religiosity and respectability which complicates things - with what it means to be Black and the recipient of racism in America. This book is less "how to be an anti-racist" and more "Professor Kendi's personal journey to becoming less anti-Black". Or something like that.
If a book about racism is going to be written primarily with a white audience in mind, and if the book is going to be elevated by academic and literary power structures and hailed as an essential work, there is a level of caution that needs to be exercised when communicating ideas and theories and guidance about what racism is and is not, who can and cannot be racist, and what can be done to eradicate racism. I don't believe that this work exhibits the right amount of caution, and I'm really disappointed.
Racism is not pleasant. There is no way to make an honest book about racism, particularly one that targets a white audience, and simultaneously make it palatable. No one could write an book about sexual violence against women that was geared toward men in a way that was palatable and be taken seriously, so why is it ok to do this with racism?
I really hope that people read this book with a critical eye before they start recommending it as a must-read and putting all of their white friends and colleagues on to this book as if it's the end-all be-all. I don't want anymore white people or white adjacents telling me about how amazing this book is. I see it potentially doing some unintended harm.
- This book is written for a white and white adjacent audiences. It certainly is not written with any Black audience in mind (despite the fact that he spends a lot of time focusing on Black people's behavior and ideas and whether we can be racist or not). There's no escaping this fact. One of several "tells" is the level of detail that Kendi uses describe very mundane aspects of Black American life from a certain era. The clothes we wore. Our popular music. Even the unnecessary translation of of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) phrases and words into standard American English. This book is intended to be palatable to white people, first and foremost.
- The message of this book is essentially that Black people can be racist too. Fret not white people, you are not the only ones that can be racist! is the pervasive theme here. Not only is this an irrelevant premise, and not even practical in the U.S. context, it completely dilutes the connection between American racism and the power structure, and this is one of THE most important connective tissues. The issue at hand in this country is not that all human beings or groups have the capacity to be racist or that Black people can be racist too. The issue is that a very specific type of racism and white supremacy are pervasive in the U.S. and that every American institution and nearly every American policy is inherently racist and white supremacist. That is the actual issue.
- There is a chapter on ethnicity where Professor Kendi says that white slavers preferred to enslave Africans from certain ethnic groups based on who they thought would be most subservient, that slavers thought some Africans were born to serve or were faithful to serve. Nowhere does he mention that slavers were intentional about selecting Africans for very important skills in building empires. Metalworking. Architectural and design expertise. Irrigation knowledge. Rice growing and other agricultural techniques. To omit the very real fact that white slavers were familiar with the expertise of various groups of Africans and chose to plunder their expertise seems like a tremendous oversight for someone who is steeped in the history. It also perpetuates the racist notion that Africans were only brought here because they were good laborers and not because of their intellectual skill. The Europeans knew what they were doing when they stole all of that talent to build their shit. This omission in the book annoyed me a great damn deal.
- Kendi's definition of segregationist seems narrow and white-focused. I'm not saying that his definition is wrong but it's a very narrow way of defining what it means to be segregationist and to have segregationist views. There is a point in the book where he says that segregationists believe that other racial groups cannot reach their superior cultural standards. But he doesn't seem to consider, for example, Black segregationists who do not strive to achieve white standards or that Black segregationists think assimilation is detrimental to the well-being of Black people. This is a very different view of what it can mean to be segregationist.
- Kendi says that every time someone racializes behavior and, for example, describes something as Black behavior, they are expressing a racist idea. The converse - describing something as white behavior - is also racist. But racism and racist ideas are based on things that aren't true. If how racism and whiteness plays out in the world is real, then it is not racist to racialize behaviors that white people exhibit when defining those behaviors and knowing how to identify and navigate them is literally a matter of life and death for Black people. White people expressing false ideas about Black people's sexual drives or propensity for violence are expressions of racist ideas. Black people describing white fragility and the other ways that white people behave that threaten Black lives is pointing out facts.
- There is no treatment of race within the Latinx community which includes Black people. In fact, there is a point in the book where Kendi says, "Latinx people are a race." They are not, in fact, a race. The Latinx community is neither a racial group nor an ethnic group. The community consists of various racial and ethnic groups, including Black people. In 2020 (or 2019 when the book was published) it's unacceptable for any race scholar to not comprehend and communicate clearly that Latinx is not a race and that Black Latinx people are, in fact, Black.
- He uses the term Black on Black criminals several times to describe Black people who have anti-Black racist views. On maybe one occasion he gives a weak example of White on White criminals. Given that most of the history he calls out in the book are illustrations of white led racism I'd expect him to offer up way more examples of White on White criminals. There are plenty. Far more examples than black on Black criminals, that's for sure.
- Dinesh D'Souze, an utter and completely irrelevant loser, is quoted in the book at least twice.
The best aspects of this book are Kendi's personal journey. He's very open, and he details his own anti-racist journey. It can't be easy to lay bare your own racist (and other harmful ideas) as he does in this book. And yes, we all have them (although we don't all have the power to act on our racist ideas in ways that cause systemic harm). And it's clear that he does believe that we are not condemned to being a racist society if we're willing to do the hard work. I commend his efforts.
My gripe is that he overlays his personal journey onto a historical and social and political context in a way that essentially conflates his individual and familial experiences - which are also rooted in a certain kind of religiosity and respectability which complicates things - with what it means to be Black and the recipient of racism in America. This book is less "how to be an anti-racist" and more "Professor Kendi's personal journey to becoming less anti-Black". Or something like that.
If a book about racism is going to be written primarily with a white audience in mind, and if the book is going to be elevated by academic and literary power structures and hailed as an essential work, there is a level of caution that needs to be exercised when communicating ideas and theories and guidance about what racism is and is not, who can and cannot be racist, and what can be done to eradicate racism. I don't believe that this work exhibits the right amount of caution, and I'm really disappointed.
Racism is not pleasant. There is no way to make an honest book about racism, particularly one that targets a white audience, and simultaneously make it palatable. No one could write an book about sexual violence against women that was geared toward men in a way that was palatable and be taken seriously, so why is it ok to do this with racism?
I really hope that people read this book with a critical eye before they start recommending it as a must-read and putting all of their white friends and colleagues on to this book as if it's the end-all be-all. I don't want anymore white people or white adjacents telling me about how amazing this book is. I see it potentially doing some unintended harm.
courthompson's review
4.0
Of all the books being socialized on this topic in recent months (and of the ones I've read so far), I enjoyed this the most as it included historical context, felt grounded in a more realistic interpretation of our current moment, and addressed a lot of nuance in language and perception. I didn't agree with every single point and conclusion, but in general appreciated the way that he presented his own continuing journey to an antiracist frame of mind. The basic premise behind the idea of antiracism is that individuals do not represent groups and discriminatory group stereotypes should not exist and do not define individuals.
In particular, I appreciated the following:
- His argument against the powerless defense
- The nuances between desegregation, integration, and racial solidarity
- The nuances between assimilationist, segregationist, and antiracist
- Differentiating having an issue with ideas and policies vs. people
- A shift in the source of racism (self-interest and power vs. ignorance and immorality)
- The historical context of and argument against a cultural standard (and also the importance of embracing culture and cultural differences)
In particular, I appreciated the following:
- His argument against the powerless defense
- The nuances between desegregation, integration, and racial solidarity
- The nuances between assimilationist, segregationist, and antiracist
- Differentiating having an issue with ideas and policies vs. people
- A shift in the source of racism (self-interest and power vs. ignorance and immorality)
- The historical context of and argument against a cultural standard (and also the importance of embracing culture and cultural differences)
...the powerless defense underestimates Black people and overestimates White people. It erases the small amount of Black power and expands the already expansive reach of White power. The powerless defense does not consider people at all levels of power, from policymakers like politicians and executives who have the power to institute and eliminate racist and antiracist policies...The powerless defense strips Black policymakers and managers of all their power.
Antiracist strategy fuses desegregation with a form of integration and racial solidarity...To be antiracist is to support the voluntary integration of bodies attracted by cultural difference, a shared humanity...To be an antiracist is to champion resource equity by challenging the racist policies that produce resource inequity...To be antiracist is to equate and nurture difference among racial groups.
They had a problem with homophobia, not with heterosexuals. They had a problem with patriarchy, not with men.
The source of racist ideas was not ignorance and hate, but self-interest.
spacebeyonce's review
I can't find the time to sit and focus 😠I'll borrow it again and finish it another time. The book was really informative so far!Â
hgunsch's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
5.0
peteradamson's review
4.0
Kendi lays it all out so convincingly and with such rhetorical lucidity that you wonder why we are still dealing with this shit. Recommended you listen to it in his voice in lieu of reading it.
areaderintime's review
I really enjoyed what I learned from this book but it personally was not a new favorite nonfiction for me.
I feel like the audiobook hindered my enjoyment of this. The way the author narrated this was not my favorite and it made it difficult for me to comprehend what he was saying sometimes. I think the content of this is very important but the listening experience was maybe not the best route for this book.
Overall, I highly recommend this for those wishing to know more about being anti-racsit and what that means and entails. Definitely important but maybe not my favorite that I have read.
I feel like the audiobook hindered my enjoyment of this. The way the author narrated this was not my favorite and it made it difficult for me to comprehend what he was saying sometimes. I think the content of this is very important but the listening experience was maybe not the best route for this book.
Overall, I highly recommend this for those wishing to know more about being anti-racsit and what that means and entails. Definitely important but maybe not my favorite that I have read.
jae_the_rogue's review
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.5
This book presented a lot of ideas about racism and anti racism that I as a white person really appreciated. The way Kendi talks about how people tip toe around using the word racism or racist abuse really resonated with me, as did the way he talks about how people can oscillate between expressing/doing racist things and antiracist things. It's a reminder to always look at your thoughts, reactions, feelings, and words and evaluate them and question them. Self reflection is so important when deconstructing ones own racist ideas, and it was really inspiring to see Kendi lay out his internal and external growth in that regard. It's a very difficult thing to do, admitting to yourself your own racism. Opening up about it on such a large scale and the path he took to get where he is now I think is very important for people to read about and think about.Â
Like a lot of reviews, I did find this book lacking in the LGBTQ+ intersectionality sections, and I did not necessarily agree with the idea of black on white racism being a thing specifically. There are pockets of black power trying to or believing they should subjugate white power in the way that white power has done to black power, but it is nowhere near the scale of the hold white power has over post colonial countries. I think more clarity and nuance in that discussion would help make the point he's trying to make there more understandable. I don't think I've ever felt or experienced any type of reverse racism. I also found it somewhat paradoxical that while Kendi points the blame at racist policy for the persistence of racist ideas, I think there is more to it than that. He says himself that self interest is the main driving factor of racism-- wouldn't that then mean that racist ideas first formed from self interested white people who then made racist policies to uphold their racist ideas and self interest? I wish there was more real world examples and explainations for this in the book to further back and clarify his point on this.Â
Also as a person very educated about psychology I flatly disliked the way Kendi spoke about implicit bias. Perhaps if he elaborated more I could come to see his view but the text seems to imply that implicit bias exists only in the mind and only effects the mind and saying someone has implicit bias of racist origins means their racism is intangible. I am extremely averse to that idea, if that is what is being argued. Implicit biases can highly influence explicit actions, and can harbor racist ideas in a person's mind and make that person more susceptible to expressing racist ideas, opinions, and backing racist policy if left unquestioned and unchallenged. Kendi has even expressed his own implicit biases, aka impulsive racist ideas and judgements, against other black people and minority groups in this very book. A few pages later even! I am having a very hard time understanding what he was trying to get at with this passage, however small it was.
Despite any questions I have or disagreements with the author I had, on the whole I found this book incredibly eye opening, and especially appreciated the sections speaking about Kendi's own experiences growing up black and the ideas he and many other black people internalize about themselves due to growing up surrounded by racism. I also loved the message he ended on-- "What gives me hope is a simple truism. Once we lose hope, we are guaranteed to lose. But if we ignore the odds and fight to create an antiracist world, then we give humanity a chance to one day survive, a chance to live in communion, a chance to be forever free."Â
Like a lot of reviews, I did find this book lacking in the LGBTQ+ intersectionality sections, and I did not necessarily agree with the idea of black on white racism being a thing specifically. There are pockets of black power trying to or believing they should subjugate white power in the way that white power has done to black power, but it is nowhere near the scale of the hold white power has over post colonial countries. I think more clarity and nuance in that discussion would help make the point he's trying to make there more understandable. I don't think I've ever felt or experienced any type of reverse racism. I also found it somewhat paradoxical that while Kendi points the blame at racist policy for the persistence of racist ideas, I think there is more to it than that. He says himself that self interest is the main driving factor of racism-- wouldn't that then mean that racist ideas first formed from self interested white people who then made racist policies to uphold their racist ideas and self interest? I wish there was more real world examples and explainations for this in the book to further back and clarify his point on this.Â
Also as a person very educated about psychology I flatly disliked the way Kendi spoke about implicit bias. Perhaps if he elaborated more I could come to see his view but the text seems to imply that implicit bias exists only in the mind and only effects the mind and saying someone has implicit bias of racist origins means their racism is intangible. I am extremely averse to that idea, if that is what is being argued. Implicit biases can highly influence explicit actions, and can harbor racist ideas in a person's mind and make that person more susceptible to expressing racist ideas, opinions, and backing racist policy if left unquestioned and unchallenged. Kendi has even expressed his own implicit biases, aka impulsive racist ideas and judgements, against other black people and minority groups in this very book. A few pages later even! I am having a very hard time understanding what he was trying to get at with this passage, however small it was.
Despite any questions I have or disagreements with the author I had, on the whole I found this book incredibly eye opening, and especially appreciated the sections speaking about Kendi's own experiences growing up black and the ideas he and many other black people internalize about themselves due to growing up surrounded by racism. I also loved the message he ended on-- "What gives me hope is a simple truism. Once we lose hope, we are guaranteed to lose. But if we ignore the odds and fight to create an antiracist world, then we give humanity a chance to one day survive, a chance to live in communion, a chance to be forever free."Â
beartha's review against another edition
DNF bc I only have a visual copy and my ability to read visually has decreased to nearly non-existent lately and I need to finally admit that and set this aside until I get a new format.