Scan barcode
aespaldon24's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
2.0
Unfortunately I found this difficult to get through. I expected something different from this book (actionable steps on how to combat racism, as it was titled “how to”) from what I got (a memoir with some definitions and background information, a lot of which was already familiar to me) I also found the narration very grating due to his constant awkward pauses and tone of voice. There was still some enlightening information in here, but overall it wasn’t for me.
ladyphoenixqueen's review against another edition
1.0
Snooze fest. The content was meh, and the author should NOT have been the reader for the audiobook. He definitely should have hired someone else. His awkward pauses in the middle of sentences and weird inflections were really distracting. I only learned a couple of interesting facts - not enough to warrant the amount of time spent listening to the audiobook. Don't waste your time.
mariahistryingtoread's review against another edition
3.0
This was climbing lists last year and I figured why not give it a try?
The basic premise is that being not racist is not enough. A person needs to be an anti racist which means, amongst other things, supporting policies in favor of shortening racial inequities, continuously working on internalized bias, and taking part in real activism over slacktivism. Kendi interweaves his own journey to become an anti-racist throughout the book as a means of providing evidence of his arguments.
This is a solid book. It's got a lot of interesting information on how racism has been so thoroughly embedded in western society. It also offers a perspective I've never considered before on certain aspects; for example, how one of the largest barriers for change is how those in power use manipulative, shifty arguments to push us into fighting each other rather than blaming the real enemy. We all too often are quick to fall into the trap of infighting, oppression Olympics, and a bootstraps mentality instead of taking a look at the systems that allow for such undisputed, macro scale inequity in the first place.
I appreciated how Kendi framed anti-racism as a process. There is always room for growth as long as a person is seriously putting in effort to correct their mistakes and learn. There are mistakes I personally believe can’t be forgiven, but I do believe in the broader sentiment of compassion in the face of genuine ignorance.
That being said I do have some criticisms.
As I stated above, there is some truly investing facts presented in this book. But I had a huge problem with categorization and the communication of his arguments. The specificity in which Kendi divides his topics is unnecessary. A majority of the book is the same basic point repackaged. There are several facets to racism, that's true, yet, I felt like Kendi was arguing over semantics. For example, biological racism, bodily racism and behavioral racism are all separate chapters despite having very marginal differences. Biological racism, bodily racism and behavioral racism all exist, however, I would argue that it makes more sense to say someone is being racist on the basis of someone elses' behavior rather than to seperate it out into its own entity.
Now to be fair, I do agree that terminology is important. For example, the term microaggression wasn't coined until the early 70s - something I learned after reading this - and having this word was helpful because it gave a name to what Black people knew was happening but often couldn't exactly explain. Now microaggressions could be better identified and called out because it had a label people could use. That being said I feel like Kendi's level of specificity crossed into pedantry. It became repetitive over time as he retread the same position simply reworded a little in order to present it as a whole new thing. There was a lot of overlap that could have been avoided by consolidating information.
His prolixity became annoying over time because I felt badgered. He could have conveyed his thesis effectively much faster (I say this as someone who struggles with this) and his excessive rationalization came off as argumentative; like he was trying too hard to convince me he was correct rather than informing me of his thought process and trusting his rationale was sound enough to convince me on its own.
I also just flat out disagree with his assertion that racist policy makers make laws that benefit them and come up with the racist justification afterwards to fit their narrative. This bugged me because I don’t think it’s true nor does it make any sense. While I’m sure slaveholders were delighted to have a labor force that was collectively considered sub-human, the idea that Black people were/are sub-human had to predate the decision to bolster the slave trade because otherwise why would the people in power use Black people in the first place? They felt comfortable stripping Black people of human rights because they were racist. Racism is a series of actions for sure, but it’s also a learned response. Therefore, unless given reason to think differently or a person is predisposed to not immediately assume people that are different are inferior it will be an immediate, subconscious reaction due to a lifetime of subliminal societal conditioning. And from there - conscious or not - is where racist policy is borne.
Kendi also contradicts himself in regards to this topic as at one point he states that white people (white supremacists specifically) value their racism over their own self interest. His examples of this include a large faction of white people being against Obamacare despite it benefitting 43% of White Americans as well as their disapproval of Affirmative Action when white women are the prime beneficiaries. So which is it? Do white people place greed above all else or is it really that their racism blinds them to fact?
Note he supports the latter in one of the early chapters discussing biological racism. When the human genome project concluded in 2000 (the actual project officially finished in 2003) that all human DNA is approximately 99.9% the same, Kendi points out how white supremacists clung to that .1% as evidence that their biology still was superior. Again, this conflicts with his assessment that racist policy comes before the justification for said policy because they are acting illogically based on an emotional response instead of the rational, level headed way he presents their system of behavior originally. Justification goes hand in hand with antiblack sentiment etched onto their consciousness.
Racist white people and racist people very much do use their positions of power to actively sabotage black people and people of color. However, Kendi’s reasoning suggests that it is or has been passive or incidental which implies that racists lack agency in their bigotry or somehow ‘accidentally’ furthered slavery and the disenfranchisement of other races, overall. That is patently untrue. It was a choice because they already devalued Black lives so it made sense to create laws in order to enable this devaluation.
I also disliked how he shifted so much blame onto the system over taking accountability. Has the game been rigged from the beginning? Absolutely. Does that mean that we should not hold each other to a higher standard? Definitely not.
There’s a lot of discussion about assimilationist attitudes pervading anti-racist rhetoric. I agree that white people should not be aspired to as they are not inherently better than any other race. Conversely, I also believe that Black pride should not automatically equal Black acceptance. We are a community. As a community there should be a level that we all aim for not to gain white approval, but for our own sake because we want us, as a group, to succeed. I very much believe we need to redirect more of our energy outward to those in power, but I do not believe that we should cross so totally into the other side of the spectrum where we are permissive in the face of some of the faults of our own people. Basically, I feel that Kendi’s idea that all internal criticism is bad because Black people are at a disadvantage is a defensive extreme course correction. If it comes from a place of awareness, and is intended to uplift rather than moralize I think it is not only alright, but it is necessary to call one another out.
I enjoyed this book. It gave me a lot to think about. I came out the other side feeling like I’d learned something. Ibram X. Kendi is a competent writer who kept me mostly invested. While I did not always see eye to eye with him I appreciate how much passion he clearly has for the subject. It is by no means a bad book; it just didn’t stand out to me in any particular way which is why I gave it an average score.
The basic premise is that being not racist is not enough. A person needs to be an anti racist which means, amongst other things, supporting policies in favor of shortening racial inequities, continuously working on internalized bias, and taking part in real activism over slacktivism. Kendi interweaves his own journey to become an anti-racist throughout the book as a means of providing evidence of his arguments.
This is a solid book. It's got a lot of interesting information on how racism has been so thoroughly embedded in western society. It also offers a perspective I've never considered before on certain aspects; for example, how one of the largest barriers for change is how those in power use manipulative, shifty arguments to push us into fighting each other rather than blaming the real enemy. We all too often are quick to fall into the trap of infighting, oppression Olympics, and a bootstraps mentality instead of taking a look at the systems that allow for such undisputed, macro scale inequity in the first place.
I appreciated how Kendi framed anti-racism as a process. There is always room for growth as long as a person is seriously putting in effort to correct their mistakes and learn. There are mistakes I personally believe can’t be forgiven, but I do believe in the broader sentiment of compassion in the face of genuine ignorance.
That being said I do have some criticisms.
As I stated above, there is some truly investing facts presented in this book. But I had a huge problem with categorization and the communication of his arguments. The specificity in which Kendi divides his topics is unnecessary. A majority of the book is the same basic point repackaged. There are several facets to racism, that's true, yet, I felt like Kendi was arguing over semantics. For example, biological racism, bodily racism and behavioral racism are all separate chapters despite having very marginal differences. Biological racism, bodily racism and behavioral racism all exist, however, I would argue that it makes more sense to say someone is being racist on the basis of someone elses' behavior rather than to seperate it out into its own entity.
Now to be fair, I do agree that terminology is important. For example, the term microaggression wasn't coined until the early 70s - something I learned after reading this - and having this word was helpful because it gave a name to what Black people knew was happening but often couldn't exactly explain. Now microaggressions could be better identified and called out because it had a label people could use. That being said I feel like Kendi's level of specificity crossed into pedantry. It became repetitive over time as he retread the same position simply reworded a little in order to present it as a whole new thing. There was a lot of overlap that could have been avoided by consolidating information.
His prolixity became annoying over time because I felt badgered. He could have conveyed his thesis effectively much faster (I say this as someone who struggles with this) and his excessive rationalization came off as argumentative; like he was trying too hard to convince me he was correct rather than informing me of his thought process and trusting his rationale was sound enough to convince me on its own.
I also just flat out disagree with his assertion that racist policy makers make laws that benefit them and come up with the racist justification afterwards to fit their narrative. This bugged me because I don’t think it’s true nor does it make any sense. While I’m sure slaveholders were delighted to have a labor force that was collectively considered sub-human, the idea that Black people were/are sub-human had to predate the decision to bolster the slave trade because otherwise why would the people in power use Black people in the first place? They felt comfortable stripping Black people of human rights because they were racist. Racism is a series of actions for sure, but it’s also a learned response. Therefore, unless given reason to think differently or a person is predisposed to not immediately assume people that are different are inferior it will be an immediate, subconscious reaction due to a lifetime of subliminal societal conditioning. And from there - conscious or not - is where racist policy is borne.
Kendi also contradicts himself in regards to this topic as at one point he states that white people (white supremacists specifically) value their racism over their own self interest. His examples of this include a large faction of white people being against Obamacare despite it benefitting 43% of White Americans as well as their disapproval of Affirmative Action when white women are the prime beneficiaries. So which is it? Do white people place greed above all else or is it really that their racism blinds them to fact?
Note he supports the latter in one of the early chapters discussing biological racism. When the human genome project concluded in 2000 (the actual project officially finished in 2003) that all human DNA is approximately 99.9% the same, Kendi points out how white supremacists clung to that .1% as evidence that their biology still was superior. Again, this conflicts with his assessment that racist policy comes before the justification for said policy because they are acting illogically based on an emotional response instead of the rational, level headed way he presents their system of behavior originally. Justification goes hand in hand with antiblack sentiment etched onto their consciousness.
Racist white people and racist people very much do use their positions of power to actively sabotage black people and people of color. However, Kendi’s reasoning suggests that it is or has been passive or incidental which implies that racists lack agency in their bigotry or somehow ‘accidentally’ furthered slavery and the disenfranchisement of other races, overall. That is patently untrue. It was a choice because they already devalued Black lives so it made sense to create laws in order to enable this devaluation.
I also disliked how he shifted so much blame onto the system over taking accountability. Has the game been rigged from the beginning? Absolutely. Does that mean that we should not hold each other to a higher standard? Definitely not.
There’s a lot of discussion about assimilationist attitudes pervading anti-racist rhetoric. I agree that white people should not be aspired to as they are not inherently better than any other race. Conversely, I also believe that Black pride should not automatically equal Black acceptance. We are a community. As a community there should be a level that we all aim for not to gain white approval, but for our own sake because we want us, as a group, to succeed. I very much believe we need to redirect more of our energy outward to those in power, but I do not believe that we should cross so totally into the other side of the spectrum where we are permissive in the face of some of the faults of our own people. Basically, I feel that Kendi’s idea that all internal criticism is bad because Black people are at a disadvantage is a defensive extreme course correction. If it comes from a place of awareness, and is intended to uplift rather than moralize I think it is not only alright, but it is necessary to call one another out.
I enjoyed this book. It gave me a lot to think about. I came out the other side feeling like I’d learned something. Ibram X. Kendi is a competent writer who kept me mostly invested. While I did not always see eye to eye with him I appreciate how much passion he clearly has for the subject. It is by no means a bad book; it just didn’t stand out to me in any particular way which is why I gave it an average score.
bookph1le's review against another edition
5.0
I was pretty much in tears by the end of this book.
Anyone who's interested in trying to be a better human being would be well served by reading this book and spending a lot of time reflecting on it. It's not an easy read, not if you do it right, because it will require you to examine your own thoughts and biases--never an easy thing to face.
I hate saying a book is "important" because I feel that somehow belittles the book, but this one is...important. I have no good words for it. Kendi does such a masterful job of tearing away the veil and exposing the historical racism lurking behind so many prevailing beliefs about race and the role it plays in this country. The writing is beautiful and thought-provoking and not easy to digest--and I mean that as a compliment. Everyone needs to read books that make them take a good, hard look at themselves, and that's exactly what this book made me do. If I could give it more than five stars, I would.
Anyone who's interested in trying to be a better human being would be well served by reading this book and spending a lot of time reflecting on it. It's not an easy read, not if you do it right, because it will require you to examine your own thoughts and biases--never an easy thing to face.
I hate saying a book is "important" because I feel that somehow belittles the book, but this one is...important. I have no good words for it. Kendi does such a masterful job of tearing away the veil and exposing the historical racism lurking behind so many prevailing beliefs about race and the role it plays in this country. The writing is beautiful and thought-provoking and not easy to digest--and I mean that as a compliment. Everyone needs to read books that make them take a good, hard look at themselves, and that's exactly what this book made me do. If I could give it more than five stars, I would.
dkadastra's review against another edition
4.0
This was especially helpful in terms of framing anti-racist thinking. There is no such thing as "not racist." It's either racist or anti-racist. I appreciated the clear demarcations and definitions he used, in an area where people can so easily muddle things in order to stop the conversation before it even starts. Highly recommended.
smfrazer's review against another edition
5.0
Dense at times, and not a light read, but so important.
mchshrt's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
3.25
This was just frustrating because I was expecting some tools for anti-racism and it was mostly about defining racism.
cchapple's review against another edition
5.0
Transformative. Ibram X Kendi is an incredible communicator. This book is powerful, and the message is clear. Highly recommended.