I pressed pause on this book on page 256. It's a great book, but I find myself needing a pause on the nonfiction for the moment. Call it pandemic reading syndrome. Hope to get back to it soon. ( )

Such an incredible piece of work, deepening my knowledge in some areas, expanding my awareness in others, and giving me new perspectives on some pre-existing understandings. I highly, highly recommend this book. ( )

Thick with history...but so relevant for today. ( )

This book deserves a full review, which I do not currently have the time to do. Below are my "short" thoughts on this; and in actuality, 2.5 stars, but I think deserving of rounding up, so 3 stars. **EDIT: This is the second or third time I'm doing this. This is getting 2 stars because I realize I consistently bump this kind of review up specifically because a part of me is looking around, fingernails in teeth, worried someone will think I'm racist. This book contains all kinds of problems. I disagree with core chunks of its philosophy. There are significant factual and/or citation issues that I -a lay reader, not even an expert- was able to notice. 2 stars, which afterall (on Goodreads) still means "it was ok."**

Plagued by problems: some theoretical, some of bias (though not racism, in my definition of that word), some of style (it is a very narrative "narrative history"), and some of citation. The last is particularly annoying, in some places, where the citation for a paragraph that contains e.g. 3 quotes totaling 21 words is cited from a secondary source and with page references cover ~25 pages.

There are two main theoretical issues.

(1) is that Dr. Kendi writes as a "strong" cultural relativist (I don't know enough of his other work to judge how "strong" a relativist he is or even if, truly, he is.) This is problematic because he obviously judges cultures that embrace more "antiracism" to be "better." (That sentence is actually circular in his definition since "antiracism" is defined in terms of strong relativism.) The entire book rests on this: how could we prefer an antiracist society otherwise? Was antebellum US Southern culture no worse than any other society? There are ways of interpreting this (e.g. maybe he only applied his relativism withing a certain cultural range?) but nothing in the book gives a hint of this.

(2) is the "assimilationist" grouping (Briefly, Professor Kendi considers "segregationists" and "assimilationists" both to be racist while "antiracists" are the only kind of nonracists.) I think it is worthwhile to consider if there can be such a thing as a "non-anti-racist nonracist"... and it's tricky. As a thought experiment, I guess I could make up an example; but in the real world? Not really. But that also depends a lot on the definitions used... anyway, that sort of gets to the "assimilationist" grouping. In Dr. Kendi's telling, there is a continuous thread from ~1500's Europe through to now of White people trying to "improve" Black people. All of which is undeniable.

However, I'm not sure if wanting to "make Black people into White people" circa 1600 has much to do with criticizing NWA in ~1995 (god, 1995 seems so long ago now...) or John McWhorter wanting kids to stop using "acting white" as an insult, etc. You can argue that NWA was making profound cultural statements and that McWhorter just doesn't know what he's talking about, but that is fundamentally on a different scale... and size matters. I can criticize American culture vs. say Northern European or Asia or Latin American cultures without saying I want to "become" European or Asian or Latin American. Saying that Americans need to learn from the Danes or the Chinese to discard some of their idolization of "individuality" vs. society/the nation or vs. family without being "racist" or even, to use the term even without adopting Prof. Kendi's definition, an assimilationist. Again, as in (1), I don't know Dr. Kendi's views well enough to say "this is what he thinks, booooo!" And I have a hard time believing that is what he thinks... but it is what he says.

Anyway, I could get into other things (the citation thing grinds on me; saying Newton called "white light" "White" because it was the "Chiefest" of lights because it was the best is... that is... that is some "The Moon Landings Were Faked" level shit right there; etc.) ( )

Honestly I don't even know how to review or rate something like this. But I'll give it a shot.

This is an extremely comprehensive and definitive history of racist ideas in America, as the subtitle accurately announces. Spanning 6 centuries from 15th century all the way to present day, this book does not skimp on anything.

It's slow. It's dense. It's long. It's well written, but not entirely enjoyable to read. That being said, I'd recommend it to anyone, because it's incredibly insightful.

It breaks up race relations into 3 main groups across history: segregationists, assimilationists, and anti-racists, and virtually all people, policies, or ideas can be grouped this way. This book made me realize that many beliefs that I used to have were inherently segregationist, or assimilationist, and inherently racist.

It details the myriad of racist policies in America. Time after time, the policies in America kept the black population oppressed, to the point that it is almost unbelievable (I had to Google a few things to confirm, because it was so hard to believe). And any time there were any policies that helped Black Americans, it was done trepidatiously, and only to help White America, or the American Government with regards to foreign policy.
( )