Scan barcode
youdontsendme's review against another edition
fast-paced
2.5
While the critique of “woke culture” being more about performative internal work than working to materially improve the lives of Black people is valid, I didn’t find that the overarching point of said culture being a religion added much. If anything, it drowned out the few interesting points and concrete suggestions made by the author. Should have spent more time on those than the religion angle.
res_curans's review against another edition
4.0
The premise of this book is that contemporary antiracism, far from helping the situation of black Americans and other people of color, actually hurts them, and what’s more, it has all the earmarks of a fundamentalist religion — namely, a set of metaphysical (and contradictory) doctrines, an opposition to reasoned debate, and an elect class which keeps and defends these doctrines, using fear and intimidation to do so. In drawing parallels between wokeism and other fundamentalist religions, author John McWhorter says some not-too-nice things about religion in general, but his points are well taken. Interestingly, the point of his book isn’t to try to persuade people out of antiracist belief; he doesn’t believe those people can be reasoned with. Rather, he is aiming at people on the fringes who have maybe gone along with it but still sense that there’s something wrong. His goal is to work around the movement and make it just one ideology among many rather than the dominant force it is now. Mostly this takes the form of resisting intimidation tactics of branding people essentially sinners and heretics, seeing the movement for what it is. His tone is sardonic and sometimes bitter, which might turn off some readers/listeners. But he also makes clear his deep concern for black Americans, and all Americans. He deals extensively with potential counterarguments to make his case persuasive. Not perfect, but for sure worth a read, especially for his target audience of anybody who is still on the fence.
asrhoad's review against another edition
2.5
For how it was set up at the onset, one would expect a thoughtful collection of paradigm-shifting ideas. It’s unfortunate it progressed into the very screed the author announced it wouldn’t become.
flukemasterluke's review against another edition
2.0
What a shit book lmao. It intrigued me at the beginning by starting to talk about how a lot of racism can hide behind progressive language and the modern age of white guilt, but then immediately veered into super conservative and frankly outdated rhetoric. I gave it time to come back and finish it to try and get bias out of the way, but dang even a full year later it’s still a crock of shit.
Only reason it ain’t one star is bc it’s still an exploration of racism in America from another black perspective, but the conclusions are half-baked at best, and willfully ignorant at worst
Only reason it ain’t one star is bc it’s still an exploration of racism in America from another black perspective, but the conclusions are half-baked at best, and willfully ignorant at worst
birdley's review against another edition
2.0
This book is actually a protracted essay that lacks depth or any helpful insights. While it started out with a great deal of promise, it failed to offer much insight into why and how whites have highjacked the Black Lives Matter movement, or why some liberal people have developed a self-righteous attitude when it comes to being thoughtful on the question of racism in America.
As a white, progressively minded, atheistic male, and a fan of Prof. McWhorter's ideas and challenges to the "Liberal" mind, I had greater hopes for this work. I was disappointed with his presentation of an otherwise thoughtful and unique perspective on the issue of race and religion in America. The rehashing of the same three points (which blurred into a single "Liberal Evangelicalism") was off-putting, as was the complete absence of the absurdly (indeed, comical) fundamentalist religious underpinnings of the Conservative political beliefs that have plagued America since 1981. I agree with McWhorter's disdain for the aggressive Liberal self-righteousness that is used to shoot down any open and thoughtful dialogue about the issues of race and racism in our country; however, such a discussion cannot ignore the experience or evidence of the blatantly racist and corrupt beliefs at the heart of the Republican agenda.
Personally, this work rings hollow in light of all the lawsuits and trials against Conservative politicians and ring-wing activists. Again, the professor has a point, but I think the misguided actions of a group of self-righteous, moralistic liberal pricks pales in comparison to the actions of the gun-toting, Captial-attacking, racist conservative idiots who are actively trying to tear this country apart.
Point taken, Prof. McWorther, but very poor timing. Please, Professor, let's be honest with ourselves and focus our criticism on the Republican goons trying to destroy our country.
As a white, progressively minded, atheistic male, and a fan of Prof. McWhorter's ideas and challenges to the "Liberal" mind, I had greater hopes for this work. I was disappointed with his presentation of an otherwise thoughtful and unique perspective on the issue of race and religion in America. The rehashing of the same three points (which blurred into a single "Liberal Evangelicalism") was off-putting, as was the complete absence of the absurdly (indeed, comical) fundamentalist religious underpinnings of the Conservative political beliefs that have plagued America since 1981. I agree with McWhorter's disdain for the aggressive Liberal self-righteousness that is used to shoot down any open and thoughtful dialogue about the issues of race and racism in our country; however, such a discussion cannot ignore the experience or evidence of the blatantly racist and corrupt beliefs at the heart of the Republican agenda.
Personally, this work rings hollow in light of all the lawsuits and trials against Conservative politicians and ring-wing activists. Again, the professor has a point, but I think the misguided actions of a group of self-righteous, moralistic liberal pricks pales in comparison to the actions of the gun-toting, Captial-attacking, racist conservative idiots who are actively trying to tear this country apart.
Point taken, Prof. McWorther, but very poor timing. Please, Professor, let's be honest with ourselves and focus our criticism on the Republican goons trying to destroy our country.
t_shaffner's review against another edition
5.0
In addition to just being deeply thought-provoking and useful, McWhorter proposes three things to focus on as pragmatic actions that actually could make a difference against racism, in lieu of the many woke prescriptions that won't. As such I'm writing them here to remind myself; spoilers follow, though that doesn't matter much in this kind of book.
Three proposals:
1. End the war on drugs
2. Teach reading by phonics
3. Create free vocational education
In particular proposal 1 resonated with me; McWhorter's point is that however rightly intentioned, the war on drugs has failed, and that the ending of it would more or less immediately change the incentives particularly for poorer young men in depressed communities in a way that would have rapid, and cumulative, good effects. While I'm normally heavily disposed against drugs in general, and very hesitant about legalization, John's argument here left me thinking for the first time that legalization may in fact be the better choice at this point. My views on the theory haven't changed, but his perspective rightly challenged me on the realities that result from the current situation.
Three proposals:
1. End the war on drugs
2. Teach reading by phonics
3. Create free vocational education
In particular proposal 1 resonated with me; McWhorter's point is that however rightly intentioned, the war on drugs has failed, and that the ending of it would more or less immediately change the incentives particularly for poorer young men in depressed communities in a way that would have rapid, and cumulative, good effects. While I'm normally heavily disposed against drugs in general, and very hesitant about legalization, John's argument here left me thinking for the first time that legalization may in fact be the better choice at this point. My views on the theory haven't changed, but his perspective rightly challenged me on the realities that result from the current situation.
eusteph's review against another edition
challenging
2.5
A very...unique perspective, that's for sure.
Let me preface my review by letting y'all know that even though I am a Black woman I am not Black American nor was I raised around Black American culture. I say this to make it clear that although I have definitely experienced some of the things Black Americans have, my relationship with my race is vastly different due to our cultural backgrounds.
I suppose the best way for me to "review" this book is by making a list of what I liked and what I disliked.
I Liked
- I thought the juxtaposition of radical activism and religion was very interesting and some of the reasoning seems logical to me.
- I too think we need to end the war on drugs.
- I also agree that fake reports of racism can hurt the cause overall.
I Disliked
- I think the primary thing I disliked about this book is the number of people who will weaponize the author's words to perpetuate bigotry.
- I really got "separate the art from the artist" vibes when the author talked about Hamilton and the like.
- There was a passage where the author kind of compares religious differences between two people to a racist person and an antiracist one and I was very ????
- The author minimized the effects of January 6th.
- Even though I did agree with part of the author's opinion on fake reports of racism, I think believing the victim should be the norm. The author made it seem like fake reports surpass the real ones.
- The author advising people to say "I don't think I'm a white supremacist, if you think I am then that's not my problem." I-
- The rants about critical race theory.
I think if I knew then what I know now, I would've passed on reading this book.
Overall, reading this book made me uncomfortable as hell.Maybe that was the author's intent?
Let me preface my review by letting y'all know that even though I am a Black woman I am not Black American nor was I raised around Black American culture. I say this to make it clear that although I have definitely experienced some of the things Black Americans have, my relationship with my race is vastly different due to our cultural backgrounds.
I suppose the best way for me to "review" this book is by making a list of what I liked and what I disliked.
I Liked
- I thought the juxtaposition of radical activism and religion was very interesting and some of the reasoning seems logical to me.
- I too think we need to end the war on drugs.
- I also agree that fake reports of racism can hurt the cause overall.
I Disliked
- I think the primary thing I disliked about this book is the number of people who will weaponize the author's words to perpetuate bigotry.
- I really got "separate the art from the artist" vibes when the author talked about Hamilton and the like.
- There was a passage where the author kind of compares religious differences between two people to a racist person and an antiracist one and I was very ????
- The author minimized the effects of January 6th.
- Even though I did agree with part of the author's opinion on fake reports of racism, I think believing the victim should be the norm. The author made it seem like fake reports surpass the real ones.
- The author advising people to say "I don't think I'm a white supremacist, if you think I am then that's not my problem." I-
- The rants about critical race theory.
I think if I knew then what I know now, I would've passed on reading this book.
Overall, reading this book made me uncomfortable as hell.