Scan barcode
A review by ecruikshank
We Still Here: Pandemic, Policing, Protest, and Possibility by Marc Lamont Hill
5.0
Clear-eyed, concise diagnosis of many interrelated pathologies of modern American life: racism, poverty, policing, incarceration, inadequate access to healthcare, housing insecurity, domestic violence, ableism, rampant capitalism. Hill started with a close-up lens on the racial and class inequities revealed and exacerbated by the pandemic and then gradually zoomed out to explore additional forms of injustice and explain the links between them. The book is thoughtful and complex while still being accessible. It is obviously timely, but it didn’t feel like it was rushed out prematurely to catch the moment.
I didn’t love the Q&A format of the book, which felt contrived. And one point I thought might have been valuable to discuss: While Hill explored the function of violence in protest and explained eloquently that “it is wholly unreasonable to demand unconditional nonviolence from all oppressed people,” I hoped he might address the redefinition of “violence” to include property damage. By labeling a protest “violent” as soon as a window is broken, critics disingenuously draw a false equivalence between the actual deadly oppression sparking an uprising and the responsive actions taken by marginalized communities, characterizing the events as essentially “violence versus violence” in an attempt to discredit the movement. And by including harm to property in our definition of violence, they perpetuate systems that privilege property over human lives. Obviously Hill should address only the topics he chooses, but it felt like he was ceding ground unnecessarily by letting detractors continue to frame the narrative as being about “violent protest.” (Very eager to hear other views on this, and I don’t mean to detract from Hill’s ultimate point about the use of violence.) These are quibbles, of course—this book is excellent.
Pairings: A few that came immediately to mind are Stakes Is High by Mychal Denzel Smith; “Contempt As a Virus” from Zadie Smith’s collection Intimations; Sister Outsider; How We Get Free; and Are Prisons Obsolete?
I didn’t love the Q&A format of the book, which felt contrived. And one point I thought might have been valuable to discuss: While Hill explored the function of violence in protest and explained eloquently that “it is wholly unreasonable to demand unconditional nonviolence from all oppressed people,” I hoped he might address the redefinition of “violence” to include property damage. By labeling a protest “violent” as soon as a window is broken, critics disingenuously draw a false equivalence between the actual deadly oppression sparking an uprising and the responsive actions taken by marginalized communities, characterizing the events as essentially “violence versus violence” in an attempt to discredit the movement. And by including harm to property in our definition of violence, they perpetuate systems that privilege property over human lives. Obviously Hill should address only the topics he chooses, but it felt like he was ceding ground unnecessarily by letting detractors continue to frame the narrative as being about “violent protest.” (Very eager to hear other views on this, and I don’t mean to detract from Hill’s ultimate point about the use of violence.) These are quibbles, of course—this book is excellent.
Pairings: A few that came immediately to mind are Stakes Is High by Mychal Denzel Smith; “Contempt As a Virus” from Zadie Smith’s collection Intimations; Sister Outsider; How We Get Free; and Are Prisons Obsolete?