Scan barcode
A review by yoteach87
White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide by Carol Anderson
4.0
Anderson's "White Rage" has a well-intentioned premise: point to the historical reasons for the disenfranchisement of American blacks. And for the most part the book delivers on that promise. The chapter on the blunders of the Reconstruction was incredibly interesting and should be required reading for American history courses. Anderson meticulously detailed information about President Andrew Johnson as well as the missteps America took with Brown v. Board of Education. So thorough is Anderson that nearly ninety pages of the book include notes and sources to back up her claims.
However, this also serves as her downfall in the later chapters. Many of the statements she makes in the lats chapter are a leap of faith to draw the same conclusion Anderson did from a particular source. Whereas earlier chapters contained fairly damming evidence to make a point (i.e. "President Johnson called any civil rights 'a terrible thing' that he would not stand for"), later chapters would male far more suppositions (i.e. A certain bill was passed because the bill's sponsor once donated to an organization that at one point in history could be seen as racist, so therefore the bill and the sponsor must be rasict and have the worst intentions in mind. Clearly telling, the fourth chapter has 168 cited sources while the fifth chapter (largely composed of assumptions) has fewer than 100.
That is not to say "White Rage" should not be read, it should. It definitely should. If only to bring light on oft-covered areas of American history that rarely have shed light on the disenfranchised blacks in the 19th and 20th centuries.
However, this also serves as her downfall in the later chapters. Many of the statements she makes in the lats chapter are a leap of faith to draw the same conclusion Anderson did from a particular source. Whereas earlier chapters contained fairly damming evidence to make a point (i.e. "President Johnson called any civil rights 'a terrible thing' that he would not stand for"), later chapters would male far more suppositions (i.e. A certain bill was passed because the bill's sponsor once donated to an organization that at one point in history could be seen as racist, so therefore the bill and the sponsor must be rasict and have the worst intentions in mind. Clearly telling, the fourth chapter has 168 cited sources while the fifth chapter (largely composed of assumptions) has fewer than 100.
That is not to say "White Rage" should not be read, it should. It definitely should. If only to bring light on oft-covered areas of American history that rarely have shed light on the disenfranchised blacks in the 19th and 20th centuries.