What do you think?
Rate this book
Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race
In 2014, award-winning journalist Reni Eddo-Lodge wrote about her frustration with the way that discussions of race and racism in Britain were being led by those who weren't affected by it. She posted a piece on her blog, entitled: 'Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race' that led to this book.
Exploring issues from eradicated black history to the political purpose of white dominance, whitewashed feminism to the inextricable link between class and race, Reni Eddo-Lodge offers a timely and essential new framework for how to see, acknowledge and counter racism. It is a searing, illuminating, absolutely necessary exploration of what it is to be a person of colour in Britain today.
Exploring issues from eradicated black history to the political purpose of white dominance, whitewashed feminism to the inextricable link between class and race, Reni Eddo-Lodge offers a timely and essential new framework for how to see, acknowledge and counter racism. It is a searing, illuminating, absolutely necessary exploration of what it is to be a person of colour in Britain today.
249 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 2017
About the author
Reni Eddo-Lodge
28 books2,005 followersReni Eddo-Lodge is a British journalist with a focus on feminism and exposing structural racism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 7,996 reviews
October 27, 2020
"White privilege is the fact that if you're white, your race will almost certainly positively impact your life's trajectory in some way. And you probably won't even notice it."
Once again - calm your horses - I'm here to say: every white person needs to read this books. Every one of us.
Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race caught my attention roughly a year ago when I first saw the cover. And it's a good cover. And it's a great title. You were probably taken aback and had to swallow hard. This might have felt like a hit to your usually untouchable whiteness. Of course, this title is here to provoke a discussion. It wants you to listen. Here is what the author has to say:
"When I write about white people in this book, I don't mean every individual white person. I mean whiteness as a political ideology. A school of thought that favours whiteness at the expense of those who aren't."
Reni Eddo-Lodge further explains that she is unwilling to talk to white people who do not want to listen, who do not want to talk, who shut down because a discussion about race feels like a personal threat, not one that wants to spread awareness and acceptance.
So if you do feel upset about this title...read the book anyway. It won't hurt you. It will most likely expand your horizon.
Talking about expanding horizons, it sure as hell expanded mine. I could basically feel it shift. Reni Eddo-Lodge tackles a lot of crucial topics in this book. She talks about what initiated her original blog post with the same title back in 2014 and what led to the publication of this book. She lays out the history of slavery and racism in Britain - a topic that even British students hardly learn about in school, explains structural racism, defines white privilege, raises the feminism question, describes how race and class are intertwined and offers advice on what white people can do to fight racism.
I devoured this book in only two days. I took it everywhere I went, read it at home, in the park, on the tube - and earned a lot of side-glances. What the author talks about in this book is so important and true. It's also frustrating and enraging. It seems almost too trivial to say but the fact that people get hurt and killed for no other reason than the colour of their skin is impossible to put into words. It makes me want to scream and shout and throw stuff around and cry. But most of all it makes me want to talk. Because racism is not only something that actively hurts people. It's not something that you can point at. Racism is sneaky, racism is structural, racism is a political ideology that results in children of colour being adopted on average a year after their white counterparts. It results in teachers automatically downgrading non-white students. It results in wage-gaps and lost job opportunities. It results in an underrepresentation in the media, film and publishing industry:
"When you are used to white being the default, black isn't black until it is clearly pointed out as so."
I learned so many things while reading this book. Most, however, I took away from the chapter on feminism. Mainly that feminism is not about establishing equality between men and women, it is about liberating "all people who have been economically, socially and culturally marginalised by an ideological system that has been designed for them to fail. That means disabled people, black people, trans people, LGB people and working-class people." What Reni means is that a white person should be aware of the structures around them that are in their favour and simultaneously limit other non-white, non-cis-gendered, non-straight, non-male, non-disabled, non-wealthy people. Furthermore, she is aware that these structures will not vanish overnight. They must be pointed-out and fought.
The question is, what can you yourself do to change this system? There is no need to feel guilty for your privileges. Be aware of them, try to deconstruct them and most importantly: talk. Talking will not always be easy, it will most likely be uncomfortable and it might anger and frustrate the people you talk with. But staying silent is not an option. Staying silent means divulging in the privileges you have and enforcing a racist society to strive and grow.
Find more of my books on Instagram
Once again - calm your horses - I'm here to say: every white person needs to read this books. Every one of us.
Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race caught my attention roughly a year ago when I first saw the cover. And it's a good cover. And it's a great title. You were probably taken aback and had to swallow hard. This might have felt like a hit to your usually untouchable whiteness. Of course, this title is here to provoke a discussion. It wants you to listen. Here is what the author has to say:
"When I write about white people in this book, I don't mean every individual white person. I mean whiteness as a political ideology. A school of thought that favours whiteness at the expense of those who aren't."
Reni Eddo-Lodge further explains that she is unwilling to talk to white people who do not want to listen, who do not want to talk, who shut down because a discussion about race feels like a personal threat, not one that wants to spread awareness and acceptance.
So if you do feel upset about this title...read the book anyway. It won't hurt you. It will most likely expand your horizon.
Talking about expanding horizons, it sure as hell expanded mine. I could basically feel it shift. Reni Eddo-Lodge tackles a lot of crucial topics in this book. She talks about what initiated her original blog post with the same title back in 2014 and what led to the publication of this book. She lays out the history of slavery and racism in Britain - a topic that even British students hardly learn about in school, explains structural racism, defines white privilege, raises the feminism question, describes how race and class are intertwined and offers advice on what white people can do to fight racism.
I devoured this book in only two days. I took it everywhere I went, read it at home, in the park, on the tube - and earned a lot of side-glances. What the author talks about in this book is so important and true. It's also frustrating and enraging. It seems almost too trivial to say but the fact that people get hurt and killed for no other reason than the colour of their skin is impossible to put into words. It makes me want to scream and shout and throw stuff around and cry. But most of all it makes me want to talk. Because racism is not only something that actively hurts people. It's not something that you can point at. Racism is sneaky, racism is structural, racism is a political ideology that results in children of colour being adopted on average a year after their white counterparts. It results in teachers automatically downgrading non-white students. It results in wage-gaps and lost job opportunities. It results in an underrepresentation in the media, film and publishing industry:
"When you are used to white being the default, black isn't black until it is clearly pointed out as so."
I learned so many things while reading this book. Most, however, I took away from the chapter on feminism. Mainly that feminism is not about establishing equality between men and women, it is about liberating "all people who have been economically, socially and culturally marginalised by an ideological system that has been designed for them to fail. That means disabled people, black people, trans people, LGB people and working-class people." What Reni means is that a white person should be aware of the structures around them that are in their favour and simultaneously limit other non-white, non-cis-gendered, non-straight, non-male, non-disabled, non-wealthy people. Furthermore, she is aware that these structures will not vanish overnight. They must be pointed-out and fought.
The question is, what can you yourself do to change this system? There is no need to feel guilty for your privileges. Be aware of them, try to deconstruct them and most importantly: talk. Talking will not always be easy, it will most likely be uncomfortable and it might anger and frustrate the people you talk with. But staying silent is not an option. Staying silent means divulging in the privileges you have and enforcing a racist society to strive and grow.
Find more of my books on Instagram
November 29, 2017
"Why I'm No Longer Talking to Black People about Race."
Consider that statement if you want to read this book. Avoid the mental gymnastics of postmodernism. Ask yourself, "does this statement show love and respect to other humans?"
If you answered no, then you are not a moron. Stay that way. Treat people as individuals, not as stereotypes.
Consider that statement if you want to read this book. Avoid the mental gymnastics of postmodernism. Ask yourself, "does this statement show love and respect to other humans?"
If you answered no, then you are not a moron. Stay that way. Treat people as individuals, not as stereotypes.
June 30, 2020
A great primer about Black history in England and why it's important to be intersectional and to think outside of your own experience. Especially as a Canadian it was really interesting to read about the British perspective and specific history. I especially catch myself thinking a lot about Eddo-Lodge's emphasize on making change in our workplaces.
November 29, 2017
Utter crap!
Let me explain why.
My wife is from Bangladesh, we will have been married for twenty years this december and have two wonderful daughters.
My point: I have had more racist abuse from blacks and asians since we have been married and my wife as had almost nothing in comparison. In fact the police found it very funny that my wife phoned them because it was I that was getting the racist abuse at our house not her at the time. It's amazing that they can laugh at white people for getting racist abuse but not the other way round.
I was (many years ago), waiting for a bus in East Ham when a young asian woman with a baby was racialy abused by a black guy, because she was pushing a buggy and going slow he points at her shouting, "Why don't you fuck off back to YOUR own country bitch".
Not being able to let this stand I responded that "She has got as much right to be in MY country as you". The emphasis on "my" was the response to him saying "your". The frustration I felt was because there was no white people involved in the initial altercation it was ignored by everyone around me, but if it was a white guy everyone around me would have exploded.
In the end I was rewarded with a thank you and a smile knowing that not everyones a bastard.
Black and asians are becoming openly racist and the native white population are not supposed to retaliate, the title of the book reflects this very well. If the title had the words black people there would be an outcry.
I am certainly not racist but this book would make me change my mind if not for my wife and daughters.
This book is erratic, poorly researched and without substance and partial truths. The author should not have been allowed to publish this one sided racist argument.
A book that only fans the flames rather than extinguishes them.
Before anyone throws a hissy fit let me point out that to only way for us to marry was if I converted to islam.
PS: We only have one world so shut up and let's all get along, hey...
Shhhh... I still do not tolerate religion.
Let me explain why.
My wife is from Bangladesh, we will have been married for twenty years this december and have two wonderful daughters.
My point: I have had more racist abuse from blacks and asians since we have been married and my wife as had almost nothing in comparison. In fact the police found it very funny that my wife phoned them because it was I that was getting the racist abuse at our house not her at the time. It's amazing that they can laugh at white people for getting racist abuse but not the other way round.
I was (many years ago), waiting for a bus in East Ham when a young asian woman with a baby was racialy abused by a black guy, because she was pushing a buggy and going slow he points at her shouting, "Why don't you fuck off back to YOUR own country bitch".
Not being able to let this stand I responded that "She has got as much right to be in MY country as you". The emphasis on "my" was the response to him saying "your". The frustration I felt was because there was no white people involved in the initial altercation it was ignored by everyone around me, but if it was a white guy everyone around me would have exploded.
In the end I was rewarded with a thank you and a smile knowing that not everyones a bastard.
Black and asians are becoming openly racist and the native white population are not supposed to retaliate, the title of the book reflects this very well. If the title had the words black people there would be an outcry.
I am certainly not racist but this book would make me change my mind if not for my wife and daughters.
This book is erratic, poorly researched and without substance and partial truths. The author should not have been allowed to publish this one sided racist argument.
A book that only fans the flames rather than extinguishes them.
Before anyone throws a hissy fit let me point out that to only way for us to marry was if I converted to islam.
PS: We only have one world so shut up and let's all get along, hey...
Shhhh... I still do not tolerate religion.
December 5, 2017
Reni Eddo-Lodge opens up her provocative and challenging viral blogpost of 2014 into a 224-page (big type) book that has something to say, but says it unbelievably poorly. Eddo-Lodge may be right that ‘structural’ (institutionalised) racism is the biggest problem facing Britain today, she’s definitely right that anti-immigrant narratives are cynically used by those in power to divide the working class, and her early insights into whiteness being the ‘default’ from which everything is forced to deviate (unless it will try to conform) are incisive and valuable. But her narrative voice – which she complains is too often characterised as ‘angry’ because she’s a black woman – is increasingly monotonous, patronising and illogical, with vast leaps between evidence and conclusions, and she repeatedly misrepresents or mischaracterises dissenters and their views (whether socialist commentators or those who opposed Rhodes Must Fall), slinging accusations at them which simply aren’t borne out by the case studies she offers.
Eddo-Lodge isn’t a historian – the selected examples of 20th century British racism are horrific but presented with no real coherent commentary or through-line – she isn’t a particularly good writer, and she seems to lack the rigorousness, contextual aptitude and transmittable empathy to be a decent polemicist. Maybe I’ve been spoiled by James Baldwin, but this haphazard book – containing one isolated piece of council reporting, much re-hashing of Twitterstorms about black Hermione et al, and an exclusive interview with Nick Griffin, the author apparently labouring under the misapprehension that otherwise he can sue her for libel for quoting him on Question Time – is frankly all over the shop. Her overall thesis – that the dice are loaded against black people from the start, that white people unthinkingly benefit from this system and that intersectionality in feminism is essential – is absolutely sound, but a lot of her arguments are conjecture, and a lot of her contentions are nonsense. Like the idea that Britain failed to take the killing of Stephen Lawrence and the purposefully botched investigation seriously. Or that Diane Abbott’s moronic statement after the eventual trial came to entirely dominate the news agenda, scuppering the chance to have a serious debate about the issues involved. She’s right that modern black history should be taught in school, but wrong that it’s entirely kept out of the mainstream: I learnt of the Windrush at university and of the Brixton and Notting Hill riots by reading newspapers. We studied Stephen Lawrence in extraordinary depth in lessons for three different school subjects, and from personal, social and political perspectives.
Every so often she’ll say something that catches you completely off-guard, and causes you to question and interrogate your beliefs, and that’s where the book is valuable. She’s great on the failings of ‘colourblindness’ and at dismantling the argument against quotas, does well at challenging the unions and the Labour Party for their culpability in racism, and (more comfortably) at highlighting conservative hypocrisy in adopting progressive language to further reactionary ends. The personal insights are quite moving at first, but she also engages in some utterly unedifying score-settling (largely aimed at white feminists), and absolutely loses her shit about an acquaintance who failed to believe that Eddo-Lodge definitely failed to get a job due to racism. The author’s evidence for this racism is that she had the same qualifications as the person who got the job, and is sure that it was racism. She’s poor, too, at suggesting how we effect change, tripping herself up with unyielding ideology. She says that racism is a white problem but that white people can’t be at the vanguard of the fight against it, at least not in multi-ethnic spheres, which isn’t only confusing, but also unhelpful and patronising.
It’s incredibly important to listen to diverse voices, but being one of those voices doesn’t excuse you from the basic duties of writing, research and logic. This is a poor polemic: disjointed, misleading and too often repetitive when it should be relentless, its genuine insights lost in a shapeless collection of personal beefs, yellowing Twitterstorms and disparate case studies. Eddo-Lodge doesn’t care how she comes across, which is good for her, as she comes across as someone who’s so intolerant of others that she manages to rub you up the wrong way, despite being in the right.
Eddo-Lodge isn’t a historian – the selected examples of 20th century British racism are horrific but presented with no real coherent commentary or through-line – she isn’t a particularly good writer, and she seems to lack the rigorousness, contextual aptitude and transmittable empathy to be a decent polemicist. Maybe I’ve been spoiled by James Baldwin, but this haphazard book – containing one isolated piece of council reporting, much re-hashing of Twitterstorms about black Hermione et al, and an exclusive interview with Nick Griffin, the author apparently labouring under the misapprehension that otherwise he can sue her for libel for quoting him on Question Time – is frankly all over the shop. Her overall thesis – that the dice are loaded against black people from the start, that white people unthinkingly benefit from this system and that intersectionality in feminism is essential – is absolutely sound, but a lot of her arguments are conjecture, and a lot of her contentions are nonsense. Like the idea that Britain failed to take the killing of Stephen Lawrence and the purposefully botched investigation seriously. Or that Diane Abbott’s moronic statement after the eventual trial came to entirely dominate the news agenda, scuppering the chance to have a serious debate about the issues involved. She’s right that modern black history should be taught in school, but wrong that it’s entirely kept out of the mainstream: I learnt of the Windrush at university and of the Brixton and Notting Hill riots by reading newspapers. We studied Stephen Lawrence in extraordinary depth in lessons for three different school subjects, and from personal, social and political perspectives.
Every so often she’ll say something that catches you completely off-guard, and causes you to question and interrogate your beliefs, and that’s where the book is valuable. She’s great on the failings of ‘colourblindness’ and at dismantling the argument against quotas, does well at challenging the unions and the Labour Party for their culpability in racism, and (more comfortably) at highlighting conservative hypocrisy in adopting progressive language to further reactionary ends. The personal insights are quite moving at first, but she also engages in some utterly unedifying score-settling (largely aimed at white feminists), and absolutely loses her shit about an acquaintance who failed to believe that Eddo-Lodge definitely failed to get a job due to racism. The author’s evidence for this racism is that she had the same qualifications as the person who got the job, and is sure that it was racism. She’s poor, too, at suggesting how we effect change, tripping herself up with unyielding ideology. She says that racism is a white problem but that white people can’t be at the vanguard of the fight against it, at least not in multi-ethnic spheres, which isn’t only confusing, but also unhelpful and patronising.
It’s incredibly important to listen to diverse voices, but being one of those voices doesn’t excuse you from the basic duties of writing, research and logic. This is a poor polemic: disjointed, misleading and too often repetitive when it should be relentless, its genuine insights lost in a shapeless collection of personal beefs, yellowing Twitterstorms and disparate case studies. Eddo-Lodge doesn’t care how she comes across, which is good for her, as she comes across as someone who’s so intolerant of others that she manages to rub you up the wrong way, despite being in the right.
July 7, 2020
i planned on writing a full review of this, but i think all i need to say is:
if you are British and you haven't read this book, change that.
if you are a white feminist and you haven't read this book, change that.
if you think reverse racism is real and you haven't read this book, change that.
if you doubt the worth of affirmative action, if you feel icky about the growing numbers of immigrants in your country, if you are a white person with a Black family member who doesn't understand what that family member needs from you...
i could go on.
this is essential reading.
---------------
pre-review
allow this title to remind you: it is NEVER the responsibility of Black people to teach you about racism. educate yourself. all the resources are there. do not place the emotional burden of explaining marginalization on the marginalized.
review to come / 4 stars
---
i am spending this month reading books by Black authors. please join me!
book 1: The Stars and the Blackness Between Them
book 2: Homegoing
book 3: Let's Talk about Love
book 4: Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People about Race
if you are British and you haven't read this book, change that.
if you are a white feminist and you haven't read this book, change that.
if you think reverse racism is real and you haven't read this book, change that.
if you doubt the worth of affirmative action, if you feel icky about the growing numbers of immigrants in your country, if you are a white person with a Black family member who doesn't understand what that family member needs from you...
i could go on.
this is essential reading.
---------------
pre-review
allow this title to remind you: it is NEVER the responsibility of Black people to teach you about racism. educate yourself. all the resources are there. do not place the emotional burden of explaining marginalization on the marginalized.
review to come / 4 stars
---
i am spending this month reading books by Black authors. please join me!
book 1: The Stars and the Blackness Between Them
book 2: Homegoing
book 3: Let's Talk about Love
book 4: Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People about Race
January 26, 2019
From the moment I started reading, I could not put this book down. I literally had to start rationing chapters so that I could actually get some uni work done.
This is one of the most eye-opening, thought-provoking, and paradigm-shifting books I have ever read, and I'm so glad I picked it up. The cover and title are, of course, extremely provocative, and it's bold statements like this that prick up our ears and lure us in. If you are a white reader, before you immediately deny your complicity in racism, read a few chapters. Then reassess your judgement.
What I realised is that I had been benefitting from a system my ENTIRE life without even recognising that this was entirely because of the colour of my skin, and reading something this incredible is the catalyst I needed to start making changes. Reni Eddo-Lodge doesn't want you to feel guilty, she wants you to change. And that is exactly what we must do.
This is one of the most eye-opening, thought-provoking, and paradigm-shifting books I have ever read, and I'm so glad I picked it up. The cover and title are, of course, extremely provocative, and it's bold statements like this that prick up our ears and lure us in. If you are a white reader, before you immediately deny your complicity in racism, read a few chapters. Then reassess your judgement.
What I realised is that I had been benefitting from a system my ENTIRE life without even recognising that this was entirely because of the colour of my skin, and reading something this incredible is the catalyst I needed to start making changes. Reni Eddo-Lodge doesn't want you to feel guilty, she wants you to change. And that is exactly what we must do.
August 21, 2017
It was approximately five months ago that my book club was speaking about race since we were discussing Americanah by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. I found myself being the unique reference since I was the only black person in the room. https://browngirlreading.com/2017/08/...
June 25, 2018
One of the best books I have ever read, Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race is essential reading for anyone who cares about social justice, other people, and the state of our society. Reni Eddo-Lodge provides a thorough and incisive history of slavery and racism in Britain, followed by several powerful chapters about white privilege, white-washed feminism, race and class, and more. I want to emulate her writing style: it is assertive and provocative, and every word feels fierce and necessary, with no wasted space in this text at all. She strikes a perfect balance between conveying how entrenched and all-encompassing racism really is, while offering hope that we can fight white supremacy as long as we act. She refuses to coddle whiteness and instead discusses how we should move beyond protecting white fragility. I marked at least a dozen passages, but one I wanted to share about feminism which I absolutely loved:
"Feminism is not about equality, and certainly not about silently slipping into a world of work created by and for men. Feminism, at its best, is a movement that works to liberate all people who have been economically, socially, and culturally marginalised by an ideological system that has been designed for them to fail. That means disabled people, black people, trans people, women and non-binary people, LGB people and working-class people. The idea of campaigning for equality must be complicated if we are to untangle the situation we're in. Feminism will have won when we have ended poverty. It will have won when women are no longer expected to work two jobs (the care and emotional labour for their families as well as their day jobs) by default."
On a personal note, reading this book served as such a cathartic experience for me as a person of color. It is painful to recall and to write about the racism I have experienced, like when a white high school English teacher always made me feel awful about my writing because of my Asian identity, or when a white woman tone-policed me and called me passive-aggressive for pointing out her problematic actions toward Asian Americans. I feel so grateful for Reni Eddo-Lodge for reminding me of the importance of using my voice to advocate for liberation even when it hurts. Her strategies of setting boundaries with defensive white people, of acknowledging her own privilege, and of continuing to speak out all inspired me to be bolder and more thoughtful in my own activism.
Recommended to literally everyone, of course. I am grateful for my handful of white friends who show up for racial justice without seeking praise and special treatment. I hope this book will inspire more to join the cause. I will end this review with a quote about how white people can contribute to the movement:
"I also believe that white people who recognise racism have an incredibly important part to play. That part can't be played while wallowing in guilt. White support looks like financial or administrative assistance to the groups doing vital work. Or intervening when you are needed in bystander situations. Support looks like white advocacy for anti-racist causes in all-white spaces. White people, you need to talk to other white people about race."
"Feminism is not about equality, and certainly not about silently slipping into a world of work created by and for men. Feminism, at its best, is a movement that works to liberate all people who have been economically, socially, and culturally marginalised by an ideological system that has been designed for them to fail. That means disabled people, black people, trans people, women and non-binary people, LGB people and working-class people. The idea of campaigning for equality must be complicated if we are to untangle the situation we're in. Feminism will have won when we have ended poverty. It will have won when women are no longer expected to work two jobs (the care and emotional labour for their families as well as their day jobs) by default."
On a personal note, reading this book served as such a cathartic experience for me as a person of color. It is painful to recall and to write about the racism I have experienced, like when a white high school English teacher always made me feel awful about my writing because of my Asian identity, or when a white woman tone-policed me and called me passive-aggressive for pointing out her problematic actions toward Asian Americans. I feel so grateful for Reni Eddo-Lodge for reminding me of the importance of using my voice to advocate for liberation even when it hurts. Her strategies of setting boundaries with defensive white people, of acknowledging her own privilege, and of continuing to speak out all inspired me to be bolder and more thoughtful in my own activism.
Recommended to literally everyone, of course. I am grateful for my handful of white friends who show up for racial justice without seeking praise and special treatment. I hope this book will inspire more to join the cause. I will end this review with a quote about how white people can contribute to the movement:
"I also believe that white people who recognise racism have an incredibly important part to play. That part can't be played while wallowing in guilt. White support looks like financial or administrative assistance to the groups doing vital work. Or intervening when you are needed in bystander situations. Support looks like white advocacy for anti-racist causes in all-white spaces. White people, you need to talk to other white people about race."
August 2, 2020
Racism is a virus, but as long as well meaning, but terribly mislead mental anti vaxxers keep avoiding changing their worldview, overcoming their subconscious bias and agenda, and aren´t willing to openly debate important topics without being offended, it keeps spreading in sophisticated parts of the population that deem themselves progressive, open minded, and pro equality and emancipation, promoting structural racism trough white fragility.
An example that an idea in a blog can be expanded to a very sharp criticism of self righteous, bigoted arguments, that small steps can accumulate to books changing the perspective for many.
Once again, I don´t get the people hating the truth and its harbingers, their sad, restricted minds would be pitiful, if they and the media and system that made them wouldn´t be so dangerous and destructive. It´s not as if this was a humanities style mind game, it are real, true, hard facts, impossible to ignore if one has just a grain of anti opportunistic thinking inside one´s mind.
I do completely understand and promote the opinion behind the title, because most of the elitist, white population and the average population is blind to the harsh reality for most of the world´s population, unable and unwilling to consume critical and progressive media, read books, have own opinions, and prefer to stay with nothing more than repeating the stupid mantras they hear from whatever apologists they prefer to consume.
Proselytizing misguided activists that are worsening the problem by doing as if no more structural violence and inherent social, political, and economic problems exist, doesn´t work, faith has done its job and lead to total isolation from the willingness to change. Aggression and denial will always be the answer, the longer they´ve been so called activists, social justice warriors, and torchbearers of political correctness, the fewer may overthink what lies behind the easy, happy go lucky, unicorn, fairytale, lies many adults love to tell themselves to keep the self-deceit engine running on high tolerance levels.
They are lost, stranded in a mixture of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogniti...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...
salted with
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaga...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_m...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychol...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychol...
fueled by the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replica...
Average people don´t really have a chance, from history books to news channels, from education to friends, from politics to relationships, a dulling system of wrong harmony and fringe cultural evolution, a doing as if no problems exist anymore, an extremely subtle system of bigotry, has been established to enable an until before unreached dimension of mendacity, duplicity, and misery beyond the gated communities. The whole system brainwashes people do as if they would be living in an enlightened utopia, encouraging them to be active to keep worsening the problem and waste their time, energy, and intelligence with propaganda telling that everything is fine, never mentioning serious topics, always just driveling about anecdotes, personal tragedies, and the one or other deeper going problem in faraway countries, never on the same continent, not to speak in the same country, unimaginable. Because everything is great there because of their altruistic activism, ok, and everything thinking something else is an as….
aspiring, real progressive who wants to help them in overcoming their logical fallacies.
The book reminded me of
DiAngelo Robin´s White Fragility
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
and
Solnit Rebecca´s Men explain things to me
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
The setting is similar and I just can´t realize why privileged, rich, wannabe sophisticated and intellectual people, just don´t get and understand the underlying problem of their own agenda, biases, and blindness and react small children defiant phase style, are hurt, feel discriminated themselves or, favorite option, just ignore anything that doesn´t correspond to their secretly extremely conservative worldview. It´s so ridiculous, people who are rich and privileged because of the consequences of a history of violence, racism, slavery, war, oppression,… are doing as if they are feeling bad, victim rolling around like mad, tweeting sad, because they are confronted with the real world. As soon as one sided ideologies, even seemingly positive, progressive ones, are involved, forget it.
I´ve mentioned some points that fit in this context too in my reviews of this 2 amazing works
White fragility
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
and Men explain things to me.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
I guess I´ve already had some redundancies in these reviews, so instead of repeating myself, I decided to just troll around a bit and give the links instead. Same underlying problem, same manifestations, same lack of solutions.
Subjective resume: After having stopped talking about many no gos, such as meta and macro economics, politics, faith, sports teams, favorite beers, etc., I´ve insted directly tried talking to humans, but what shall I say, there is no state to make with indoctrinated demagogue fan girls and boys. Just invest in the youth, the next generation, the kids, and the very few progressive elder ones and forget the rest. They won´t change and you waste your time interacting with them, could have talked to, and worked with open minded people towards sustainable change instead. The older I get, the more ageism is getting a problem, isn´t it ironic, soon I´ll hate even myself and not just all I´m ranting about. Sad. Shouldn´t I instead begin disliking what the youth does?
A note to my trusty review readers: Guess I am jumping off the depressing, ideology fueled nonfiction train soon here for a while, just a hand full left to read, and it doesn´t really help with being hopeful, positive, or less misanthropic. Saying that it takes energy and motivation would be a bit too pathetic and untrue, because I am pretty cold and hardened, but of course one subconsciously becomes, in an individually very varying extent, the creature of what one does, says, reads, eats, plays, etc. Especially these 3 books showed me the dimension of problems so huge that they leave one hopeless, at least for 1 or 2 other generations, breeding further evolved humans by removing epigenetic issues from the ape domestication and behavior cultivation process just takes time.
Some reading is, as said, still to be done and reviewed, especially
Khan Cullors Patrisse´s When they call you a terrorist A black lives matter memoir
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
Gay Roxana´s Not that bad Dispatches from rape culture
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
Lindy West´s The Witches are coming
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
and
Kantor Jodi´s She Said: Breaking the Sexual Harassment Story That Helped Ignite a Movement
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
but most of what had to be read is read, said, reviewed, inappropriately dark humor satirized, internalized, and hopefully spread as wide as possible.
Certainly, new, world improving works may come, I look forward to more inspiring, solution filled books, but for the moment, I think that it ´s this hand full of a few dozen books I´ve read and listed (ok, these are hundreds) in my social criticism and social progress shelves, hardly anyone reads, that could change society. The thousands of also important works showing all the grievances are of course essential too, but solutions, in a political and societal climate unable to achieve compromises and convergence, are much more expedient.
Spreading the word has alpha priority, I hope I´ve done my tiny, insignificant part, learned a lot on this journey, and I hope I could give the one or other reading inspiration. Devour such books, spread the word, open minds, crush the phantasmagorias of well meaning people that just didn´t have the possibility and literature to understand that they are unwillingly part of the problem instead of the solution.
A wiki walk can be as refreshing to the mind as a walk through nature in this completely overrated real life outside books:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrim...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultura...
An example that an idea in a blog can be expanded to a very sharp criticism of self righteous, bigoted arguments, that small steps can accumulate to books changing the perspective for many.
Once again, I don´t get the people hating the truth and its harbingers, their sad, restricted minds would be pitiful, if they and the media and system that made them wouldn´t be so dangerous and destructive. It´s not as if this was a humanities style mind game, it are real, true, hard facts, impossible to ignore if one has just a grain of anti opportunistic thinking inside one´s mind.
I do completely understand and promote the opinion behind the title, because most of the elitist, white population and the average population is blind to the harsh reality for most of the world´s population, unable and unwilling to consume critical and progressive media, read books, have own opinions, and prefer to stay with nothing more than repeating the stupid mantras they hear from whatever apologists they prefer to consume.
Proselytizing misguided activists that are worsening the problem by doing as if no more structural violence and inherent social, political, and economic problems exist, doesn´t work, faith has done its job and lead to total isolation from the willingness to change. Aggression and denial will always be the answer, the longer they´ve been so called activists, social justice warriors, and torchbearers of political correctness, the fewer may overthink what lies behind the easy, happy go lucky, unicorn, fairytale, lies many adults love to tell themselves to keep the self-deceit engine running on high tolerance levels.
They are lost, stranded in a mixture of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogniti...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...
salted with
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaga...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_m...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychol...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychol...
fueled by the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replica...
Average people don´t really have a chance, from history books to news channels, from education to friends, from politics to relationships, a dulling system of wrong harmony and fringe cultural evolution, a doing as if no problems exist anymore, an extremely subtle system of bigotry, has been established to enable an until before unreached dimension of mendacity, duplicity, and misery beyond the gated communities. The whole system brainwashes people do as if they would be living in an enlightened utopia, encouraging them to be active to keep worsening the problem and waste their time, energy, and intelligence with propaganda telling that everything is fine, never mentioning serious topics, always just driveling about anecdotes, personal tragedies, and the one or other deeper going problem in faraway countries, never on the same continent, not to speak in the same country, unimaginable. Because everything is great there because of their altruistic activism, ok, and everything thinking something else is an as….
aspiring, real progressive who wants to help them in overcoming their logical fallacies.
The book reminded me of
DiAngelo Robin´s White Fragility
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
and
Solnit Rebecca´s Men explain things to me
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
The setting is similar and I just can´t realize why privileged, rich, wannabe sophisticated and intellectual people, just don´t get and understand the underlying problem of their own agenda, biases, and blindness and react small children defiant phase style, are hurt, feel discriminated themselves or, favorite option, just ignore anything that doesn´t correspond to their secretly extremely conservative worldview. It´s so ridiculous, people who are rich and privileged because of the consequences of a history of violence, racism, slavery, war, oppression,… are doing as if they are feeling bad, victim rolling around like mad, tweeting sad, because they are confronted with the real world. As soon as one sided ideologies, even seemingly positive, progressive ones, are involved, forget it.
I´ve mentioned some points that fit in this context too in my reviews of this 2 amazing works
White fragility
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
and Men explain things to me.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
I guess I´ve already had some redundancies in these reviews, so instead of repeating myself, I decided to just troll around a bit and give the links instead. Same underlying problem, same manifestations, same lack of solutions.
Subjective resume: After having stopped talking about many no gos, such as meta and macro economics, politics, faith, sports teams, favorite beers, etc., I´ve insted directly tried talking to humans, but what shall I say, there is no state to make with indoctrinated demagogue fan girls and boys. Just invest in the youth, the next generation, the kids, and the very few progressive elder ones and forget the rest. They won´t change and you waste your time interacting with them, could have talked to, and worked with open minded people towards sustainable change instead. The older I get, the more ageism is getting a problem, isn´t it ironic, soon I´ll hate even myself and not just all I´m ranting about. Sad. Shouldn´t I instead begin disliking what the youth does?
A note to my trusty review readers: Guess I am jumping off the depressing, ideology fueled nonfiction train soon here for a while, just a hand full left to read, and it doesn´t really help with being hopeful, positive, or less misanthropic. Saying that it takes energy and motivation would be a bit too pathetic and untrue, because I am pretty cold and hardened, but of course one subconsciously becomes, in an individually very varying extent, the creature of what one does, says, reads, eats, plays, etc. Especially these 3 books showed me the dimension of problems so huge that they leave one hopeless, at least for 1 or 2 other generations, breeding further evolved humans by removing epigenetic issues from the ape domestication and behavior cultivation process just takes time.
Some reading is, as said, still to be done and reviewed, especially
Khan Cullors Patrisse´s When they call you a terrorist A black lives matter memoir
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
Gay Roxana´s Not that bad Dispatches from rape culture
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
Lindy West´s The Witches are coming
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
and
Kantor Jodi´s She Said: Breaking the Sexual Harassment Story That Helped Ignite a Movement
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4...
but most of what had to be read is read, said, reviewed, inappropriately dark humor satirized, internalized, and hopefully spread as wide as possible.
Certainly, new, world improving works may come, I look forward to more inspiring, solution filled books, but for the moment, I think that it ´s this hand full of a few dozen books I´ve read and listed (ok, these are hundreds) in my social criticism and social progress shelves, hardly anyone reads, that could change society. The thousands of also important works showing all the grievances are of course essential too, but solutions, in a political and societal climate unable to achieve compromises and convergence, are much more expedient.
Spreading the word has alpha priority, I hope I´ve done my tiny, insignificant part, learned a lot on this journey, and I hope I could give the one or other reading inspiration. Devour such books, spread the word, open minds, crush the phantasmagorias of well meaning people that just didn´t have the possibility and literature to understand that they are unwillingly part of the problem instead of the solution.
A wiki walk can be as refreshing to the mind as a walk through nature in this completely overrated real life outside books:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrim...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultura...
April 2, 2019
This book was prompted by the viral response that resulted from the posting of
this message
on the author's blog. I think the message is worth reading because it provides an excellent articulation of the near impossibility of communicating the fact of structural racism to white people who happen to be unwitting beneficiaries of it.
Below I've listed the main terms defined, explored and discussed in this book. The definitions are as I understand them to be from reading the book. My definitions are my own translation of the author's narrative and are no substitute for reading the book:
• Racism is prejudice with power. That means that minorities without power can't be racist.
• Structural racism is the summation of expectations, associations, and social forces that are assumed to be the norm in daily life. Their presence is so pervasive that their existence is often not recognized.
• White privilege is "absence of the consequences of racism."
• White feminism refers to the campaign for women's rights while continuing to be blind to racism.
• Class is often used as a code word for racist views (e.g. white working class).
The history, social conditions and current events described in this book are focused on Great Britain, the author's native country. My first thought was that it was unfortunate that this sort of message wasn't focused on my own country, the USA. But on second thought I decided this book's message may be able to reach white Americans by allowing them to be less defensive about its message because it's about another country. If white Americans can comprehend racism in Britain they may be a step closer to understanding it at home.
I was attracted to the book because 0f its title. Even though I'm white (and implicitly beneficiary of white privilege), I believe I share some of the same frustration that the title conveys. For a number of years I've noticed that the most racist people I know are the ones who preface their pontifications with the phrase, "I'm not a racist but ..."
Talking to people like that about racism is the equivalent of talking to a brick wall, and if they have a disposition to be angry and threatened their words in reply can become the equivalent of thrown bricks. Thus, when I saw the title that expressed the futility of taking to white people about racism, I thought I understood the sentiment.
According to this book if you claim to be color blind regarding race, you may be participating in the promotion of white privilege. Being color blind often makes people blind to the consequences of past wrongs and thus blind to structural racism today.
This book says that racism is a problem for whites to solve because the power to do so resides with them. It is a problem that "reveals the anxieties, hypocrisies and double standards of whiteness. It is a problem in the psyche of whiteness that white people must take responsibility to solve."
Toward the end of the book the author says that white people often ask her what they can do about racism—people of color ask how to cope with it. Among her suggestions for white people is that they speak to unsympathetic white people—exactly the LAST THING that I want to do. Well, maybe I can simply suggest they read this book.
I want to also mention that the audio version of this book is narrated by the author, Reni Eddo-Lodge, and she does a good job. The emotion pent-up behind the book's text really comes through.
__________
Link to article by the author from The Guardian (Thu 28 Mar 2019):
https://www.theguardian.com/commentis...
Below I've listed the main terms defined, explored and discussed in this book. The definitions are as I understand them to be from reading the book. My definitions are my own translation of the author's narrative and are no substitute for reading the book:
• Racism is prejudice with power. That means that minorities without power can't be racist.
• Structural racism is the summation of expectations, associations, and social forces that are assumed to be the norm in daily life. Their presence is so pervasive that their existence is often not recognized.
• White privilege is "absence of the consequences of racism."
• White feminism refers to the campaign for women's rights while continuing to be blind to racism.
• Class is often used as a code word for racist views (e.g. white working class).
The history, social conditions and current events described in this book are focused on Great Britain, the author's native country. My first thought was that it was unfortunate that this sort of message wasn't focused on my own country, the USA. But on second thought I decided this book's message may be able to reach white Americans by allowing them to be less defensive about its message because it's about another country. If white Americans can comprehend racism in Britain they may be a step closer to understanding it at home.
I was attracted to the book because 0f its title. Even though I'm white (and implicitly beneficiary of white privilege), I believe I share some of the same frustration that the title conveys. For a number of years I've noticed that the most racist people I know are the ones who preface their pontifications with the phrase, "I'm not a racist but ..."
Talking to people like that about racism is the equivalent of talking to a brick wall, and if they have a disposition to be angry and threatened their words in reply can become the equivalent of thrown bricks. Thus, when I saw the title that expressed the futility of taking to white people about racism, I thought I understood the sentiment.
According to this book if you claim to be color blind regarding race, you may be participating in the promotion of white privilege. Being color blind often makes people blind to the consequences of past wrongs and thus blind to structural racism today.
This book says that racism is a problem for whites to solve because the power to do so resides with them. It is a problem that "reveals the anxieties, hypocrisies and double standards of whiteness. It is a problem in the psyche of whiteness that white people must take responsibility to solve."
Toward the end of the book the author says that white people often ask her what they can do about racism—people of color ask how to cope with it. Among her suggestions for white people is that they speak to unsympathetic white people—exactly the LAST THING that I want to do. Well, maybe I can simply suggest they read this book.
I want to also mention that the audio version of this book is narrated by the author, Reni Eddo-Lodge, and she does a good job. The emotion pent-up behind the book's text really comes through.
__________
Link to article by the author from The Guardian (Thu 28 Mar 2019):
https://www.theguardian.com/commentis...
September 12, 2020
Race and racism in the UK. Readable, powerful, persuasive, informative, important.
I like to think of myself as a nice woolly liberal (BrE, which is tantamount to “socialist” in AmE), an ally of minorities and the oppressed. I’m conscious of my privilege as white, middle-class, straight, and able-bodied, and have rarely felt disadvantaged by the patriarchy despite (or because of?) working in a male-dominated field. But there are few people of colour in places I’ve lived, studied, or worked, and my knowledge of black history and culture is skimpy.
The anti-apartheid movement was a hot-button issue when I was at university, and with the growing profile of Black Lives Matter in recent years, I’ve learned more about African-American history and current US race issues. But I knew very little of black British history and experience. This book was an excellent start to remedying that.
It opens with a long, readable, and revelatory chapter of black British history. Subsequent chapters explore white privilege, fear of a black planet, the specific causes and manifestations of systemic racism (broader than institutional racism), and the intersections of race, feminism, and class. It ends with a short, but oddly non-specific, call to angry action.
Image: A black and a white hand, clasped (Source.)
This book matters
“There is a difference between ignorance and malice.”
This book won't cure malice (racists are unlikely to read it anyway), but it has made me more informed, more aware, more understanding of what it's like to be a person of colour in the UK (and why), and hopefully a better ally. A good start.
The first two chapters (nearly half the book) were easily 5* and I recommend them to all British people, though they’re also good for non-Brits who want to understand our country. The later chapters used personal incidents to make more generic and familiar points. In those chapters, the tone was angrier, some relevant issues weren’t mentioned, and ultimately, it wasn’t much practical help. (Those last two points reflect my wants and expectations more than a fault in the book itself.)
We’re not the good guys
“While the black British story is starved of oxygen, the US struggle against racism is globalised… so much so that we convince ourselves that Britain has never had a problem with race.”
Almost no one wants to think of themselves as racist. We want to be the good guys, or at least, not the bad guys. Many of us were explicitly taught that Britain was and is a force for good in the world. Sure, we had an empire, but the supposed gift of civilisation is considered mitigation for atrocities - the worst of which are never mentioned anyway.
There were no slaves toiling in the fields of England’s green and pleasant land (though a few slaves were brought here).
“British people saw the money without the blood.”
Our history teachers proudly tell us that we led the global abolition of slavery, but rarely note that slave owners were handsomely compensated, while the slaves themselves were given no statutory assistance to build free lives.
We never had legal segregation or apartheid on our shores - but we ignored or even supported it in other countries, and landlords and employers could legally reject people on the basis of colour until the 1960s. We may not have been the worst, but we were not the best. We still have a long way to go.
Image: Banksy’s suggestion for what to do with the statue of slave-trader, Edward Colston, that protestors recently pulled down and rolled into Bristol docks: put it in a museum, with added protestors (Source.)
Big and small
“The bar of racism has been set by the easily condemnable activity of white extremists and white nationalism… We tell ourselves that good people can’t be racists… that racism is about moral values, when instead it’s about the survival strategy of systemic power.”
This book shines a light on covert racism, microaggressions, and the cumulative effects of bias that are easy to miss if you’re a white person who is not consciously, let alone overtly, racist. It also covers infamous injustices such as “suss laws” (stop and search) and the Stephen Lawrence case, as well uprisings (race riots).
DO see colour
“Insisting that we don’t see race is tantamount to compulsory assimilation…
In order to dismantle unjust, racist structures, we must see race.”
Saying you don’t see colour and that you treat everyone the same sounds open-minded and positive, but like “All lives matter”, it ignores current reality and dismisses the pain and disadvantage caused by racial inequality.
Since the start of the millennium, mixed race has been the fastest growing ethnic group in this country. That is a positive measure of acceptance, inclusiveness, and progress - if you’re a privileged white liberal like me. For mixed race families, it’s not so simple, and the many complexities are sensitively dissected in ways I’d never fully appreciated. It’s especially important that such families DO see race - even if one parent is hurt that their child identifies as the other parent’s race.
I’m not sure how colour-blind casting on stage and screen fits with this, as it is not mentioned. It’s explicitly not seeing colour, and forcing the audience to attempt the same (except where it’s deliberately applying a racial lens to a story), but it’s usually hailed as good and inclusive, and it certainly makes more roles available for people of colour. Sometimes it refreshes a familiar work, but other times, it’s distractingly unrealistic, which surely benefits no one. The 2019 version of The Personal History of David Copperfield is quirky, brings out the humour, and is worth seeing, but it’s the casting that is instantly notable. Dev Patel (British Asian) as David was excellent and you can either ignore his colour or read it as an extra layer of how he’s treated, but no one batting an eyelid at wealthy white Steerforth having a black mother was, literally, incredible.
Image: Some of the 2019 cast of David Copperfield (but neither of the Steerforths) (Source.)
• Cath Clarke wrote about colour-blind casting in relation to Copperfield, HERE.
• Dalya Alberge spoke to people including Debra Ann Byrd, founder of Harlem Shakespeare Festival, who argues that there is no such thing as colour-blind casting because everyone sees colour, HERE.
White privilege
“The idea of white privilege forces white people who aren't actively racist to confront their own complicity in its continued existence. White privilege is dull, grinding complacency.”
White people don’t necessarily notice their privilege; many don’t even think of themselves as having a racial identity, just a national identity. People of colour are aware of their racial identity before they understand it, and their national identity will always be open to question.
“White privilege is an absence of the negative consequences of racism.”
People who are white but also poor, disabled, or otherwise disadvantaged don’t feel privileged in the general sense. Understanding that is useful, but what to do about it when mentioning their white privilege can kindle the resentment that fuels UKIP, The British National Party (BNP), and worse?
Cancel culture
“Free speech doesn’t mean the right to say what you want without rebuttal.”
This is topical and important (it mentions false equivalence used in arguments and of giving equal air-time/column-inches to unequal sources etc), but no great revelations, imo. The most interesting element is the transcript of Eddo-Lodge interviewing Nick Griffin, former leader of the BNP, coupled with her doubts about giving him a platform. I think it’s to her credit and readers’ benefit that she did.
Black and white, but not brown
This is specifically about black and white, and the discussion of mixed race people is black/white. It's not really for Eddo-Lodge to explain the experience of people of Asian (= Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, and Sri Lankan), Chinese, Japanese, and SE Asian, let alone Jewish heritage, but it would be good if the likely similarities and differences were at least mentioned, perhaps with links to other sources.
Intersectionality
“My blackness was as much a part of me as my womanhood, and I couldn’t separate them.”
Eddo-Lodge was a feminist before she was an anti-racist, and she was shocked and angry to discover that many white feminists were uninterested in the issues faced by black women specifically. Perhaps another factor is familiarity: everyone has men and women in their family, but many families are monoracial.
There’s tension when different factors overlap: race, gender, sexuality (oddly omitted from the book), and class, but they compound each other. There’s a fear of diluting or fracturing one of the causes, but it makes no sense to campaign for one minority group and ignore others. And if you do pick one, what does that imply? Others criticise intersectionality as “minority Top Trumps”.
People of colour are more likely to be poor, so she criticises the phrase “white working class” as suggesting two separate disadvantages that are in direct competition with each other, when their disadvantage comes from the advantages of the middle and upper class, not from people of colour. But sometimes it’s necessary to identify different groups, especially after the exhortations to see colour, and she suggests no alternative term.
Consider
• Racism is more than prejudice: it has power behind it, the power to discriminate to the disadvantage of people of colour.
• “Non-white” suggests something is missing and reinforces the idea of white as the norm and therefore everything else as… not.
• “Institutional racism [is] a form of collective behaviour, a workplace culture, supported by a structural status quo, and a consensus - often excused and ignored by authorities.”
• “The modesty expectation is just as limiting and judgemental as the compulsory bikini-body.”
• “There’s an old saying that the straight man’s homophobia is rooted in a fear that gay men will treat him as he treats women. This [racism] is no different.”
• “If, as they say, racism doesn’t exist, and black people have nothing to complain about, why are they so afraid of white people becoming the new minority?”
Image: See colour. (Source.)
How it started
This book arose from a blog post of the same title. The book goes way beyond the themes of that, but if you don't have time for the book just now, at least read the blog post, HERE.
I like to think of myself as a nice woolly liberal (BrE, which is tantamount to “socialist” in AmE), an ally of minorities and the oppressed. I’m conscious of my privilege as white, middle-class, straight, and able-bodied, and have rarely felt disadvantaged by the patriarchy despite (or because of?) working in a male-dominated field. But there are few people of colour in places I’ve lived, studied, or worked, and my knowledge of black history and culture is skimpy.
The anti-apartheid movement was a hot-button issue when I was at university, and with the growing profile of Black Lives Matter in recent years, I’ve learned more about African-American history and current US race issues. But I knew very little of black British history and experience. This book was an excellent start to remedying that.
It opens with a long, readable, and revelatory chapter of black British history. Subsequent chapters explore white privilege, fear of a black planet, the specific causes and manifestations of systemic racism (broader than institutional racism), and the intersections of race, feminism, and class. It ends with a short, but oddly non-specific, call to angry action.
Image: A black and a white hand, clasped (Source.)
This book matters
“There is a difference between ignorance and malice.”
This book won't cure malice (racists are unlikely to read it anyway), but it has made me more informed, more aware, more understanding of what it's like to be a person of colour in the UK (and why), and hopefully a better ally. A good start.
The first two chapters (nearly half the book) were easily 5* and I recommend them to all British people, though they’re also good for non-Brits who want to understand our country. The later chapters used personal incidents to make more generic and familiar points. In those chapters, the tone was angrier, some relevant issues weren’t mentioned, and ultimately, it wasn’t much practical help. (Those last two points reflect my wants and expectations more than a fault in the book itself.)
We’re not the good guys
“While the black British story is starved of oxygen, the US struggle against racism is globalised… so much so that we convince ourselves that Britain has never had a problem with race.”
Almost no one wants to think of themselves as racist. We want to be the good guys, or at least, not the bad guys. Many of us were explicitly taught that Britain was and is a force for good in the world. Sure, we had an empire, but the supposed gift of civilisation is considered mitigation for atrocities - the worst of which are never mentioned anyway.
There were no slaves toiling in the fields of England’s green and pleasant land (though a few slaves were brought here).
“British people saw the money without the blood.”
Our history teachers proudly tell us that we led the global abolition of slavery, but rarely note that slave owners were handsomely compensated, while the slaves themselves were given no statutory assistance to build free lives.
We never had legal segregation or apartheid on our shores - but we ignored or even supported it in other countries, and landlords and employers could legally reject people on the basis of colour until the 1960s. We may not have been the worst, but we were not the best. We still have a long way to go.
Image: Banksy’s suggestion for what to do with the statue of slave-trader, Edward Colston, that protestors recently pulled down and rolled into Bristol docks: put it in a museum, with added protestors (Source.)
Big and small
“The bar of racism has been set by the easily condemnable activity of white extremists and white nationalism… We tell ourselves that good people can’t be racists… that racism is about moral values, when instead it’s about the survival strategy of systemic power.”
This book shines a light on covert racism, microaggressions, and the cumulative effects of bias that are easy to miss if you’re a white person who is not consciously, let alone overtly, racist. It also covers infamous injustices such as “suss laws” (stop and search) and the Stephen Lawrence case, as well uprisings (race riots).
DO see colour
“Insisting that we don’t see race is tantamount to compulsory assimilation…
In order to dismantle unjust, racist structures, we must see race.”
Saying you don’t see colour and that you treat everyone the same sounds open-minded and positive, but like “All lives matter”, it ignores current reality and dismisses the pain and disadvantage caused by racial inequality.
Since the start of the millennium, mixed race has been the fastest growing ethnic group in this country. That is a positive measure of acceptance, inclusiveness, and progress - if you’re a privileged white liberal like me. For mixed race families, it’s not so simple, and the many complexities are sensitively dissected in ways I’d never fully appreciated. It’s especially important that such families DO see race - even if one parent is hurt that their child identifies as the other parent’s race.
I’m not sure how colour-blind casting on stage and screen fits with this, as it is not mentioned. It’s explicitly not seeing colour, and forcing the audience to attempt the same (except where it’s deliberately applying a racial lens to a story), but it’s usually hailed as good and inclusive, and it certainly makes more roles available for people of colour. Sometimes it refreshes a familiar work, but other times, it’s distractingly unrealistic, which surely benefits no one. The 2019 version of The Personal History of David Copperfield is quirky, brings out the humour, and is worth seeing, but it’s the casting that is instantly notable. Dev Patel (British Asian) as David was excellent and you can either ignore his colour or read it as an extra layer of how he’s treated, but no one batting an eyelid at wealthy white Steerforth having a black mother was, literally, incredible.
Image: Some of the 2019 cast of David Copperfield (but neither of the Steerforths) (Source.)
• Cath Clarke wrote about colour-blind casting in relation to Copperfield, HERE.
• Dalya Alberge spoke to people including Debra Ann Byrd, founder of Harlem Shakespeare Festival, who argues that there is no such thing as colour-blind casting because everyone sees colour, HERE.
White privilege
“The idea of white privilege forces white people who aren't actively racist to confront their own complicity in its continued existence. White privilege is dull, grinding complacency.”
White people don’t necessarily notice their privilege; many don’t even think of themselves as having a racial identity, just a national identity. People of colour are aware of their racial identity before they understand it, and their national identity will always be open to question.
“White privilege is an absence of the negative consequences of racism.”
People who are white but also poor, disabled, or otherwise disadvantaged don’t feel privileged in the general sense. Understanding that is useful, but what to do about it when mentioning their white privilege can kindle the resentment that fuels UKIP, The British National Party (BNP), and worse?
Cancel culture
“Free speech doesn’t mean the right to say what you want without rebuttal.”
This is topical and important (it mentions false equivalence used in arguments and of giving equal air-time/column-inches to unequal sources etc), but no great revelations, imo. The most interesting element is the transcript of Eddo-Lodge interviewing Nick Griffin, former leader of the BNP, coupled with her doubts about giving him a platform. I think it’s to her credit and readers’ benefit that she did.
Black and white, but not brown
This is specifically about black and white, and the discussion of mixed race people is black/white. It's not really for Eddo-Lodge to explain the experience of people of Asian (= Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, and Sri Lankan), Chinese, Japanese, and SE Asian, let alone Jewish heritage, but it would be good if the likely similarities and differences were at least mentioned, perhaps with links to other sources.
Intersectionality
“My blackness was as much a part of me as my womanhood, and I couldn’t separate them.”
Eddo-Lodge was a feminist before she was an anti-racist, and she was shocked and angry to discover that many white feminists were uninterested in the issues faced by black women specifically. Perhaps another factor is familiarity: everyone has men and women in their family, but many families are monoracial.
There’s tension when different factors overlap: race, gender, sexuality (oddly omitted from the book), and class, but they compound each other. There’s a fear of diluting or fracturing one of the causes, but it makes no sense to campaign for one minority group and ignore others. And if you do pick one, what does that imply? Others criticise intersectionality as “minority Top Trumps”.
People of colour are more likely to be poor, so she criticises the phrase “white working class” as suggesting two separate disadvantages that are in direct competition with each other, when their disadvantage comes from the advantages of the middle and upper class, not from people of colour. But sometimes it’s necessary to identify different groups, especially after the exhortations to see colour, and she suggests no alternative term.
Consider
• Racism is more than prejudice: it has power behind it, the power to discriminate to the disadvantage of people of colour.
• “Non-white” suggests something is missing and reinforces the idea of white as the norm and therefore everything else as… not.
• “Institutional racism [is] a form of collective behaviour, a workplace culture, supported by a structural status quo, and a consensus - often excused and ignored by authorities.”
• “The modesty expectation is just as limiting and judgemental as the compulsory bikini-body.”
• “There’s an old saying that the straight man’s homophobia is rooted in a fear that gay men will treat him as he treats women. This [racism] is no different.”
• “If, as they say, racism doesn’t exist, and black people have nothing to complain about, why are they so afraid of white people becoming the new minority?”
Image: See colour. (Source.)
How it started
This book arose from a blog post of the same title. The book goes way beyond the themes of that, but if you don't have time for the book just now, at least read the blog post, HERE.
June 5, 2020
The Centrality of Race
Eddo-Lodge’s concern is not with prejudice, the irrational bias by white people against people of colour. It is with what she calls ‘structural racism’ for which overt racial prejudice is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition. Structural racism is what is left after all the explicit legal, technical and other formal constraints on the developmental possibilities available for people of colour have been largely removed. Structural racism is cultural; it is invisible; and it, not the rules and regulations, has always been the source of the ‘racial problem’ - not only in Britain but throughout that part of the world dominated by European culture.
Structural racism is the result of unrecognised presumptions by white people - and also by ‘assimilated’ black people - that are psychologically ingrained and sociologically enforced to mistrust, malign, demean, dismiss, and discount the abilities and competence of black people. And because white people hold the power to hire, fire, reward, punish, recognise or ignore black people, these presumptions become racism. The effects of these presumptions are rarely dramatic or even discourteous: “White privilege is dull, grinding complacency.”
The presumptions involved need not be consciously held. They are in fact most powerful when they are unrealised and unexpressed. The central presumption is one that is held not by the overt racist but by the self-designated anti-racist: that race does not matter. This is the only presumption necessary, that race does not exist, for racism to flourish. Whiteness is not a neutral characteristic which can be ignored in order to nullify its effects, its entitlement, its privilege. It represents an absence of all the existential conditions for those who are the victims of racism.
Like it or not, in today’s society, to be white is a sufficient condition for being racist. This is precisely Eddo-Lodge’s experience: “The claim to not see race is tantamount to compulsory assimilation. My blackness has been politicised against my will, but I don’t want it wilfully ignored in an effort to instil some sort of precarious, false harmony. And, though many placate themselves with the colour-blindness lie, the... drastic differences in life chances along race lines show that while it might be being preached by our institutions, it’s not being practised.”
The cure for this inherent racism is not to examine oneself for residual prejudices; this may produce guilt but not effective action. Rather the essential therapy, if I understand Eddo-Lodge correctly, is to develop an appreciation of what it is to be black in a white man’s world, to understand the range of intended or incidental slights, suspicions, exclusions, and denigrations which a black person endures as a matter of course. This is of course extremely difficult to accomplish. Among other things it demands that one be constantly open to education - mostly from black people - about when, where and how these apparently trivial, but cumulatively profound, events occur.
This is a bitter pill for those who consider themselves the allies of anti-racism and she knows it. “Who really wants to be alerted,” Eddo-Lodge says, “to a structural system that benefits them at the expense of others?” And she knows that it simply is not easy to see what’s missing: “In culture particularly, the positive affirmations of whiteness are so widespread that the average white person doesn’t even notice them.” The essence of white privilege is its diffuse ubiquity: “White privilege manifests itself in everyone and no one. Everyone is complicit, but no one wants to take on responsibility.” Overcoming white privilege is intimately personal and non-political, and for just those reasons extremely difficult.
“Seeing race is essential to changing the system,” she says. Attacking racism therefore implies seeing the absence of people of colour on television and in film; the absence of memorials to the victims of slavery; the absence of the history of exploitation of black people by white people in school textbooks and popular history documentaries; the absence of criticism of those white cultural heroes like the founding fathers in America and the pillars of British society who participated in this exploitation. Without this sort of positive, painful, persistent empathy, structural racism will continue to exist for generations and centuries to come.
Whether one agrees with her or not, Eddo-Lodge has to be taken seriously for what she has accomplished: the articulation of a devastating, factual description of the world from inside black skin. That experience she summarises as a “manipulative, suffocating blanket of power that envelops everything we know, like a snowy day.” I don’t see how this can be gainsaid as anything but truth.
Eddo-Lodge’s concern is not with prejudice, the irrational bias by white people against people of colour. It is with what she calls ‘structural racism’ for which overt racial prejudice is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition. Structural racism is what is left after all the explicit legal, technical and other formal constraints on the developmental possibilities available for people of colour have been largely removed. Structural racism is cultural; it is invisible; and it, not the rules and regulations, has always been the source of the ‘racial problem’ - not only in Britain but throughout that part of the world dominated by European culture.
Structural racism is the result of unrecognised presumptions by white people - and also by ‘assimilated’ black people - that are psychologically ingrained and sociologically enforced to mistrust, malign, demean, dismiss, and discount the abilities and competence of black people. And because white people hold the power to hire, fire, reward, punish, recognise or ignore black people, these presumptions become racism. The effects of these presumptions are rarely dramatic or even discourteous: “White privilege is dull, grinding complacency.”
The presumptions involved need not be consciously held. They are in fact most powerful when they are unrealised and unexpressed. The central presumption is one that is held not by the overt racist but by the self-designated anti-racist: that race does not matter. This is the only presumption necessary, that race does not exist, for racism to flourish. Whiteness is not a neutral characteristic which can be ignored in order to nullify its effects, its entitlement, its privilege. It represents an absence of all the existential conditions for those who are the victims of racism.
Like it or not, in today’s society, to be white is a sufficient condition for being racist. This is precisely Eddo-Lodge’s experience: “The claim to not see race is tantamount to compulsory assimilation. My blackness has been politicised against my will, but I don’t want it wilfully ignored in an effort to instil some sort of precarious, false harmony. And, though many placate themselves with the colour-blindness lie, the... drastic differences in life chances along race lines show that while it might be being preached by our institutions, it’s not being practised.”
The cure for this inherent racism is not to examine oneself for residual prejudices; this may produce guilt but not effective action. Rather the essential therapy, if I understand Eddo-Lodge correctly, is to develop an appreciation of what it is to be black in a white man’s world, to understand the range of intended or incidental slights, suspicions, exclusions, and denigrations which a black person endures as a matter of course. This is of course extremely difficult to accomplish. Among other things it demands that one be constantly open to education - mostly from black people - about when, where and how these apparently trivial, but cumulatively profound, events occur.
This is a bitter pill for those who consider themselves the allies of anti-racism and she knows it. “Who really wants to be alerted,” Eddo-Lodge says, “to a structural system that benefits them at the expense of others?” And she knows that it simply is not easy to see what’s missing: “In culture particularly, the positive affirmations of whiteness are so widespread that the average white person doesn’t even notice them.” The essence of white privilege is its diffuse ubiquity: “White privilege manifests itself in everyone and no one. Everyone is complicit, but no one wants to take on responsibility.” Overcoming white privilege is intimately personal and non-political, and for just those reasons extremely difficult.
“Seeing race is essential to changing the system,” she says. Attacking racism therefore implies seeing the absence of people of colour on television and in film; the absence of memorials to the victims of slavery; the absence of the history of exploitation of black people by white people in school textbooks and popular history documentaries; the absence of criticism of those white cultural heroes like the founding fathers in America and the pillars of British society who participated in this exploitation. Without this sort of positive, painful, persistent empathy, structural racism will continue to exist for generations and centuries to come.
Whether one agrees with her or not, Eddo-Lodge has to be taken seriously for what she has accomplished: the articulation of a devastating, factual description of the world from inside black skin. That experience she summarises as a “manipulative, suffocating blanket of power that envelops everything we know, like a snowy day.” I don’t see how this can be gainsaid as anything but truth.
May 25, 2023
Reni Eddo-Lodge's telling of the mostly untold or purposefully downplayed history of the Black and Brown people in the UK over 100s of years, from the massively outrageous compensating the slave owners, and not the slaves, when slavery was abolished to the murder of Stephen Lawrence and beyond was just the opening salvo in this utter work of genius that lies behind the rationale for why Eddo-Lodge first wrote her blog 'Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race'.
This book really talks about race. And I mean REALLY; breaking down the systemic racism in society; beautifully explaining exactly what White privilege is; exposing the 'fear of Black planet' (ir)rationale and how it actually exposes White privilege; shows how 'feminism' only represents few women and actively works against non-White, non-hetero etc. voices; even takes a detailed look into the race vs class debate; even explodes the 'angry Black woman' tool used to silence voices. The genius of this book is that it's not even angry, it's just honest and direct and utterly based on facts - all indexed in the Notes at the end of the book. But here's my question, who's the book for? Who's the target audience?
You know what, I think, the people that most need to read this, really need to read it, are all those people 'that don't see colour', all those people that have any people of colour in their family, all those people that 'campaign' for race equality and/or say they are allies; and of course all people of colour as on top of everything else, this book has answers to all the racist rubbish being spewed out at the moment from the bizarre anger at any fictional character being cast as non-White through to the systemic racism that prevents economic growth in non-White communities. As the back of the book blurb says. this really is 'the essential handbook for anyone who wants to understand racism in Britain today'. A sure-fire 11 out of 12 Five Star read.
2023 read
This book really talks about race. And I mean REALLY; breaking down the systemic racism in society; beautifully explaining exactly what White privilege is; exposing the 'fear of Black planet' (ir)rationale and how it actually exposes White privilege; shows how 'feminism' only represents few women and actively works against non-White, non-hetero etc. voices; even takes a detailed look into the race vs class debate; even explodes the 'angry Black woman' tool used to silence voices. The genius of this book is that it's not even angry, it's just honest and direct and utterly based on facts - all indexed in the Notes at the end of the book. But here's my question, who's the book for? Who's the target audience?
You know what, I think, the people that most need to read this, really need to read it, are all those people 'that don't see colour', all those people that have any people of colour in their family, all those people that 'campaign' for race equality and/or say they are allies; and of course all people of colour as on top of everything else, this book has answers to all the racist rubbish being spewed out at the moment from the bizarre anger at any fictional character being cast as non-White through to the systemic racism that prevents economic growth in non-White communities. As the back of the book blurb says. this really is 'the essential handbook for anyone who wants to understand racism in Britain today'. A sure-fire 11 out of 12 Five Star read.
2023 read
June 17, 2020
I realise that this is an extremely popular book, and my low rating in no way reflects the importance of the topic. On the contrary, I'm half-Indian and have experienced racism, so the topic is close to my heart. My rating comes from four perspectives: a reader, a nonfiction book editor, a and a bi-racial person, and a feminist, all of which I am.
As a reader, I agree wholeheartedly with Eddo-Lodge on the vast majority of points: that history taught in schools only tells part of the picture, the "white version of history". That structural racism is subconsciously lurking in job interviews and promotions, preventing people of colour from accessing jobs and education. That large parts of the media stir racist attitudes, often subconsciously (such as the focus on colour and race when someone arrested isn't white), and that many people—especially in the Brexit debate—argued that they want “their England back” with strong undercurrents of racism, hatred for immigrants, and seeing people as "the other".
However, I wanted specific guidance on what I (and other readers) should actually do moving forward to make change happen. Eddo-Lodge does a fantastic job of building the reader’s motivation and making them see their white privilege, but there is little practical, directive guidance on what to do with that motivation, especially for white people who want to create change. Being motivated to create change doesn’t mean that most people know how to. I kept thinking "Please, please tell us what we can do to help. Give us clear, specific direction."
As a book editor, I found that the book covered so many topics that it felt overstretched. Some topics were covered in too much depth, others too shallow. Too much airtime was given to one individual’s experiences or one case example, where hard facts and data would have been more effective. For example, that Nick Griffin is openly racist is no surprise to anyone—we don't need a lengthy interview to see this. I wanted less anecdotal experience and more stats, less coverage and more depth.
As a mixed-race person, I was frustrated and disappointed by the limited, one-sided view of what it’s like to be mixed-race. Eddo-Lodge covers this huge, complex topic in a mere eight pages, four of which are about one woman’s experience—where the white side of her family is the problem—out of the millions of mixed-race people in the UK. From this one case study and a broad-brush statement with no supporting evidence that this is "the norm", she generalises about the experience of all mixed-race people as being looked down on by the white side of their family.
I wouldn’t write a book on being mixed-race, then include a few pages on what it’s like to be black, white, or any other race based on one person's experience. Yes, we need to talk about race, but if the complex issue of being mixed-race only gets eight pages and one person's opinion, then I'd really rather she left the topic alone.
The racism and rejection I’ve experienced has been from the non-white side of my family, who refuse to accept me because I’m half-white, not because my white ancestors enslaved their ancestors, but because they see themselves as superior and me as "impure". Yet Eddo-Lodge says that “racism doesn't happen both ways”, that it only occurs in power + privilege situations, and that prejudice isn't racism.
By definition, racism is "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized" and "the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another."
So, while prejudice might not be as pervasive or damaging as structural racism in the author's opinion, it is a type of racism. Structural or institutional racism is not the only kind of racism. In fact, by bringing the mixed-race issue into discussion, Eddo-Lodge takes racism down to a familial, not structural, level, where power is not the issue. In families, racism does happen both ways. Try telling a little mixed-race girl who gets called “the white b*****d” by one side of her family that racism doesn’t happen both ways—that it’s just “prejudice”.
Until we see racism in all of its forms and admit that it can be directed to anyone so long as there is hatred, prejudice, and a feeling of superiority/inferiority involved, then we will not end racism for all. Once we've removed structural racism, we will be left with the parts of racism that we tried to brush under the rug. If we're going to fight racism, which we are, then let's fight all of it.
As a feminist, I found the feminism chapter muddled and overly focused on Eddo Lodge's experience of BBC Women’s Hour. While there is of course an intersection between race and feminism where such issues can occur, this experience was generalised to feminism overall. The upshot was that to “win”, feminism should fight against all forms of inequality—race, class, poverty, LGBTQ, etc.
In an ideal world, we could all fight every injustice, but in reality, humans are limited in time, focus, resources, energy, and ability. If we try to accomplish everything at once, we fail. If we try to fight every injustice at once, we become overstretched. Should feminists become Jackies of all injustices, mistresses of none?
Moreover, why the focus on feminism to fight all battles—not any other group fighting their own injustices? This is key, because the same men fighting for racial equality may be guilty of sexism. If feminism must fight all battles, shouldn't the racial equality movement also be fighting for women's rights?
On balance, this book is an important read and I agree thoroughly with the notion that we must stand up and fight rather than being "indifferent". That we should look inside ourselves to find the situations where we have benefitted from our privilege, whatever kind. That we should better educate ourselves and our children on the real history of race. That structural racism is pervasive and needs big changes. However, the sections on feminism and being mixed-race were frustrating, and the denial of prejudice and superiority as a form of racism is not helpful. I wanted more stats, more guidance, and less detail on individual cases. And I want us to really talk about race and racism in all of its forms.
As a reader, I agree wholeheartedly with Eddo-Lodge on the vast majority of points: that history taught in schools only tells part of the picture, the "white version of history". That structural racism is subconsciously lurking in job interviews and promotions, preventing people of colour from accessing jobs and education. That large parts of the media stir racist attitudes, often subconsciously (such as the focus on colour and race when someone arrested isn't white), and that many people—especially in the Brexit debate—argued that they want “their England back” with strong undercurrents of racism, hatred for immigrants, and seeing people as "the other".
However, I wanted specific guidance on what I (and other readers) should actually do moving forward to make change happen. Eddo-Lodge does a fantastic job of building the reader’s motivation and making them see their white privilege, but there is little practical, directive guidance on what to do with that motivation, especially for white people who want to create change. Being motivated to create change doesn’t mean that most people know how to. I kept thinking "Please, please tell us what we can do to help. Give us clear, specific direction."
As a book editor, I found that the book covered so many topics that it felt overstretched. Some topics were covered in too much depth, others too shallow. Too much airtime was given to one individual’s experiences or one case example, where hard facts and data would have been more effective. For example, that Nick Griffin is openly racist is no surprise to anyone—we don't need a lengthy interview to see this. I wanted less anecdotal experience and more stats, less coverage and more depth.
As a mixed-race person, I was frustrated and disappointed by the limited, one-sided view of what it’s like to be mixed-race. Eddo-Lodge covers this huge, complex topic in a mere eight pages, four of which are about one woman’s experience—where the white side of her family is the problem—out of the millions of mixed-race people in the UK. From this one case study and a broad-brush statement with no supporting evidence that this is "the norm", she generalises about the experience of all mixed-race people as being looked down on by the white side of their family.
I wouldn’t write a book on being mixed-race, then include a few pages on what it’s like to be black, white, or any other race based on one person's experience. Yes, we need to talk about race, but if the complex issue of being mixed-race only gets eight pages and one person's opinion, then I'd really rather she left the topic alone.
The racism and rejection I’ve experienced has been from the non-white side of my family, who refuse to accept me because I’m half-white, not because my white ancestors enslaved their ancestors, but because they see themselves as superior and me as "impure". Yet Eddo-Lodge says that “racism doesn't happen both ways”, that it only occurs in power + privilege situations, and that prejudice isn't racism.
By definition, racism is "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized" and "the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another."
So, while prejudice might not be as pervasive or damaging as structural racism in the author's opinion, it is a type of racism. Structural or institutional racism is not the only kind of racism. In fact, by bringing the mixed-race issue into discussion, Eddo-Lodge takes racism down to a familial, not structural, level, where power is not the issue. In families, racism does happen both ways. Try telling a little mixed-race girl who gets called “the white b*****d” by one side of her family that racism doesn’t happen both ways—that it’s just “prejudice”.
Until we see racism in all of its forms and admit that it can be directed to anyone so long as there is hatred, prejudice, and a feeling of superiority/inferiority involved, then we will not end racism for all. Once we've removed structural racism, we will be left with the parts of racism that we tried to brush under the rug. If we're going to fight racism, which we are, then let's fight all of it.
As a feminist, I found the feminism chapter muddled and overly focused on Eddo Lodge's experience of BBC Women’s Hour. While there is of course an intersection between race and feminism where such issues can occur, this experience was generalised to feminism overall. The upshot was that to “win”, feminism should fight against all forms of inequality—race, class, poverty, LGBTQ, etc.
In an ideal world, we could all fight every injustice, but in reality, humans are limited in time, focus, resources, energy, and ability. If we try to accomplish everything at once, we fail. If we try to fight every injustice at once, we become overstretched. Should feminists become Jackies of all injustices, mistresses of none?
Moreover, why the focus on feminism to fight all battles—not any other group fighting their own injustices? This is key, because the same men fighting for racial equality may be guilty of sexism. If feminism must fight all battles, shouldn't the racial equality movement also be fighting for women's rights?
On balance, this book is an important read and I agree thoroughly with the notion that we must stand up and fight rather than being "indifferent". That we should look inside ourselves to find the situations where we have benefitted from our privilege, whatever kind. That we should better educate ourselves and our children on the real history of race. That structural racism is pervasive and needs big changes. However, the sections on feminism and being mixed-race were frustrating, and the denial of prejudice and superiority as a form of racism is not helpful. I wanted more stats, more guidance, and less detail on individual cases. And I want us to really talk about race and racism in all of its forms.
February 1, 2022
This has such a loaded title, and it has offended a lot of white people. Ironically, these same people are the ones that need to read the book the most. Case in point, just look at the second highest rated review on Goodreads.
It actually made me cringe.
When Eddo-Lodge says “I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race” she is not closing the conversation, as she has been often accused. Instead, she is opening it; she is challenging people to understand her frustration when dealing with ignorance. The problem is, as a black feminist, she was constantly faced with a viewpoint that completely excluded, downplayed and was deaf to her own ideas and experience. It’s easier to deny the suffrage of others than admit you may be part of the problem and cause. The title is a strong indictment, and white people need to make the effort to understand it.
So, there are two issues at play here which Eddo-Lodge presents eloquently. There is the race issue and then there is the feminist issue. The legacy of slavery is still apparent today. This is a fact. History cannot be erased nor can systemic racial prejudices that do, indeed, linger (despite the denial whites often display.) The biggest problem here is this strong (almost offended) denial by whites and the shutting-down of black voices not to mention a complete ignorance about the truth of black British (and American) history. Eddo-Lodge has completely got to the heart of the matter here. Speaking as a white male, we need to listen and we need to do so much better.
The feminist issue is two pronged and more complex. Within a social justice movement fighting for women’s rights, Eddo-Lodge found herself faced with white activists who only represented and cared about some women’s rights. Within organisations, there was a clear disparity about which women were being liberated from the yoke of misogyny. And this is problematic. Here was an example of an unintended, yet still blatant and inexcusable, structural form of racism. Simply put, this is white privilege.
This absence is down to a matter of perspective and a lack of understanding, empathy and thought about the perspective of others. It’s easy to deny what we haven’t experienced. It’s easy to ignore a problem we are causing. And this is something we all need to come to terms with fully. This isn’t an issue that can be brushed off. It’s something that needs to be tackled full on. The only way to do that is through education, through learning where the problems originated from, how they persist and then from there we can work towards removing them.
My point here is that Eddo-Lodge is a fantastic educator. As with Edward’s Said’s Orientalism this is mandatory reading for everybody in our modern world and especially for those that wish to understand race relations (which should be everybody.)
__________________________________
You can connect with me on social media via My Linktree.
__________________________________
It actually made me cringe.
When Eddo-Lodge says “I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race” she is not closing the conversation, as she has been often accused. Instead, she is opening it; she is challenging people to understand her frustration when dealing with ignorance. The problem is, as a black feminist, she was constantly faced with a viewpoint that completely excluded, downplayed and was deaf to her own ideas and experience. It’s easier to deny the suffrage of others than admit you may be part of the problem and cause. The title is a strong indictment, and white people need to make the effort to understand it.
“Every voice raised against racism chips away at its power. We can't afford to stay silent.”
So, there are two issues at play here which Eddo-Lodge presents eloquently. There is the race issue and then there is the feminist issue. The legacy of slavery is still apparent today. This is a fact. History cannot be erased nor can systemic racial prejudices that do, indeed, linger (despite the denial whites often display.) The biggest problem here is this strong (almost offended) denial by whites and the shutting-down of black voices not to mention a complete ignorance about the truth of black British (and American) history. Eddo-Lodge has completely got to the heart of the matter here. Speaking as a white male, we need to listen and we need to do so much better.
The feminist issue is two pronged and more complex. Within a social justice movement fighting for women’s rights, Eddo-Lodge found herself faced with white activists who only represented and cared about some women’s rights. Within organisations, there was a clear disparity about which women were being liberated from the yoke of misogyny. And this is problematic. Here was an example of an unintended, yet still blatant and inexcusable, structural form of racism. Simply put, this is white privilege.
“White privilege is an absence of the consequences of racism. An absence of structural discrimination, an absence of your race being viewed as a problem first and foremost.”
This absence is down to a matter of perspective and a lack of understanding, empathy and thought about the perspective of others. It’s easy to deny what we haven’t experienced. It’s easy to ignore a problem we are causing. And this is something we all need to come to terms with fully. This isn’t an issue that can be brushed off. It’s something that needs to be tackled full on. The only way to do that is through education, through learning where the problems originated from, how they persist and then from there we can work towards removing them.
My point here is that Eddo-Lodge is a fantastic educator. As with Edward’s Said’s Orientalism this is mandatory reading for everybody in our modern world and especially for those that wish to understand race relations (which should be everybody.)
__________________________________
You can connect with me on social media via My Linktree.
__________________________________
September 27, 2017
Although I do believe many points she made are valid, I have a hard time with how a lot of the book makes generalities and doesn't back up what it's claiming.
September 9, 2019
5 ★★★★★
This book was an eye-opener in so many ways, especially so, because the author is a woman of colour reflecting on and illustrating her experiences of racism in Britain. And of course, as a white person, you never reach a point where you should not educate yourself. I am very glad I picked up this book. It encouraged me to educate myself more about intersectional Feminism. I have been aware of this topic and tried to practice the principles. Naturally, the book revealed the many areas which require work on my part and this is where I want to start.
The book is structured as follows:
1 Histories
2 The System
3 What is White Privilege
4 Fear of a Black Planet
5 The Feminism Question
6 Race and Class
7 There is no justice, There's Just Us
Aftermath
I encourage everybody to read this book.
⤐ If you think the title actually reflects the content of the book - wrong. Although it does to some extent, there is so much more to this manifesto. Read this book.
⤐ If you think racism doesn't concern you - wrong. Read this book.
⤐ If you are white and believe you "overcame" racist behaviour - wrong. Read this book.
⤐ If you feel alone or abandoned in your struggle against day-to-day-racism or the racist system - wrong. Read this book.
⤐ If you are actively educating yourself about racism - read this book.
As a simple summary will do no good here, I would just like to give some of the quotes that resonated with me or made me think over my own behaviour.
This book was an eye-opener in so many ways, especially so, because the author is a woman of colour reflecting on and illustrating her experiences of racism in Britain. And of course, as a white person, you never reach a point where you should not educate yourself. I am very glad I picked up this book. It encouraged me to educate myself more about intersectional Feminism. I have been aware of this topic and tried to practice the principles. Naturally, the book revealed the many areas which require work on my part and this is where I want to start.
The book is structured as follows:
1 Histories
2 The System
3 What is White Privilege
4 Fear of a Black Planet
5 The Feminism Question
6 Race and Class
7 There is no justice, There's Just Us
Aftermath
I encourage everybody to read this book.
⤐ If you think the title actually reflects the content of the book - wrong. Although it does to some extent, there is so much more to this manifesto. Read this book.
⤐ If you think racism doesn't concern you - wrong. Read this book.
⤐ If you are white and believe you "overcame" racist behaviour - wrong. Read this book.
⤐ If you feel alone or abandoned in your struggle against day-to-day-racism or the racist system - wrong. Read this book.
⤐ If you are actively educating yourself about racism - read this book.
As a simple summary will do no good here, I would just like to give some of the quotes that resonated with me or made me think over my own behaviour.
⤐ To some, every time a new curry house opens, every Polski sklep that opens, and every time Sainsbury's expands its ethnic food aisle, it's a symbol that white Brits are sleepwalking into new minority status. Some start boycotting halal meat on cruelty grounds, as though there are varying degrees of acceptable animal death they'll withstand for the benefit of eating their burgers. Fear of a black planet is a fear of loss.
⤐ Online, a debate was raging over whether a black Bond [Idris Elba] could ever be legitimate. That there was such uproar about James Bond, the epitome of slick, suave Britishness, possibly being tainted with just a hint of black, proved again the demarcation lines of what it means to be British.
⤐ When we tell ourselves that misogyny is simply an import from overseas, we are saying that it's just not a problem here. David Cameron probably shouldn't be too quick to insinuate that extreme misogyny is a foreign import to the British Isles. When the Office of National Statistics shows that, on average, seven women a month in England and Wales are murdered by a current or former partner, and 85,000 women are raped in England and Wales alone every ear, we know that this is simply not the case. Misogyny is not a problem that can be solved with closed borders, nor a crash course in Received Pronunciation. It exists in the psyche of what it means to be a man in every country.
⤐ The perverse thing about our current racial structure is that it has always fallen on the shoulders of those at the bottom to change it. Yet racism is a white problem. It reveals the anxieties, hypocrisies and double standards of whiteness. It is a problem in the psyche of whiteness that white people must take responsibility to solve. You can only do so much from the outside.
January 10, 2019
When you release a book with a title as provocative as this, you have to expect that there are going to be challenges and arguments sent your way. If you go down the road of making large sweeping statements regarding society’s systematic racism and sexism, you also have to be ready for people to want you to show how you reached your conclusion. Frankly, making assertions that a race or gender is a problem is not enough. This book was a case of great frustration to me but, as a straight cisgender white male, it’s likely that any criticisms that I have relating to this book will be dismissed owing to my “white privilege”.
In reviewing this book I want to make it crystal clear that any criticisms of the book are specifically of the book, and the author’s assertions. This sentiment is something I’m finding myself having to echo repeatedly but it’s the only way to make clear that you’re judging the book and not the characteristic of the author. In no way is my review arguing that racism doesn’t exist, or that black people do not face discrimination. It would be naïve, and frankly a consequence of selectively avoiding stats, to suggest that racism is not apparent in the word today. I think there are very few, even racist people themselves, who would argue otherwise, after all the racist people either admit that they have a problem with the race or admit that they consider themselves the superior race.
In her opening section of the book, the author makes abundantly clear that she will not have a conversation with people that do not already concede with her point. This, aside from being a bad way of starting the book, is intellectual dishonesty and will do very little to engage potential allies in dealing with racism. Maybe the antagonism works to rally people up who already agree with you, but I’m far more likely to believe there’s more to be understood if you invite me to the conversation, not tell me that I have to agree with you to learn. This is the exact same reason that I am an Atheist.
The author here also can’t seem to make up her mind. One of the chapters is about feminism and the issue specifically of “white feminism”. Of course white feminism isn’t about race… but it is… but it isn’t… but it is… but it isn’t. It’s argued by the author that whiteness is a political position, and there is no explanation as to how far this goes. For a better examination of feminism vs. feminism I’d direct you to Gloria Steinem’s The Trouble with Rich Women which far better looks into why feminism is not simply a monolith and that there is a divide due to various characteristics.
I will commend the author for doing a good bit of research into the history of the slave trade and for covering aspects that many either overlook or skim past. However, the author’s clearly effortful research into this did not extend to other aspects. Very few of the large statements are backed up and those that are seem to be backed up by the author’s own beliefs.
Let’s take objectification for example. Aside from the fact that I don’t think the author would be satisfied in any event, she talks about how there were no black page 3 models and that white people probably didn’t consider them worthy enough to be objectified. I was never someone who paid attention to page 3 (I grew up with the internet, buying a paper I didn’t want to read just to see naked women was behind the times), but considering how many markets play on the exotic nature of beauty in different races there is likely more to be discussed. Admittedly I’ve not gone too much research into the world of Page 3 history but there are indeed questions from the brief search that I have done as to the large absence of black models. The issue is that the author has cherry picked an example and used that to demonstrate racism. Let’s say that the roles were changed and there were predominantly black page 3 models, would that fix the problem? No, because you know full well the author would use that to suggest that it proves black people are seen as property.
I speak as someone who has a strong attraction to East Asian women but I appreciate that anecdotal evidence doesn’t make for good arguments. If the author had simply looked at the Disney films she would see that clearly the princesses that are more sexualised are Jasmine and Pocahontas. Cartoon characters yes, but let’s not forget that characters being animated is hardly something to stop sexual fantasies for some.
One of the debates that I’ve had with friends on multiple occasions is about discrimination: is a difference in numbers for representation a sign of racism, sexism or discrimination based on any other characteristic? Consider a hypothetical Law Firm: it has 50 solicitors and only one is black. Is this racism? My answer is “not inherently” as there are far more questions that you need to ask before reaching the conclusion. Are the remaining 49 solicitors white or are their other ethnicities represented? Did many black people apply for the job? Those are 2 of just many questions that I’d want answered.
It may well be that black people have been deliberately kept out of the jobs either by not being able to apply, or their applications being dismissed based on their race. However, it may also be the case that of the people who interviewed for the roles, white people interviewed better. You would have to look into the circumstances to see what the cause is. Judging by the book I’m reviewing, I suspect that my answer would be explained as being a privileged member of the white patriarchy.
Or, we can token hire people. The minute you do that though, you open the floodgates. Let’s say that you have a quota that 10% of the employees have to be black. What’s the quota from Asian countries? Do we factor in gender too? Disabilities? Religions? As a Pastafarian I want to make sure that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is fairly represented. Or, perhaps we should do what we can to remove any institutional barriers. Getting back to race though, let’s say you hire every single black applicant but there is still an absence for the quota. Are you going to force black people into roles they don’t want to be in? If yes, isn’t that itself a system of oppression?
However the biggest frustration is the author’s repeated attempts to infer things into statements. Time after time she will take what someone has said and say “clearly this was referring to black women”. What she’ll also do is read racism into something that has been written. Truth be told I imagine that if I called her attractive she would infer that I was suggesting that she’s attractive… for a black woman.
Naomi Campbell gets brought up and the fact that she was called out for being, rightly or wrongly, antagonistic and always angry. Instead of considering that regardless of race Campbell is a controversial figure, the author exclusively blames this perception on the angry black woman trope. It’s frustrating as a genuine concern is being misrepresented. Consequently if people do apply the concern correctly, it’s likely to be dismissed as something that gets thrown around too much.
If you believe the author’s generalisations, none of the white people in positions of power are qualified; black people have no power whatsoever in society; positive discrimination is in fact a positive for everyone and needs to be done. You need to apply nuance to your criticisms!! Some of the white people in positions of power may well be unqualified for the roles and therefore shouldn’t be in them. That we will agree on, but that has to be dealt with individually not making a sweeping assertion.
I didn’t like this book at all. I was tempted to give it a 2 star review, but considering the horrible assertions and failure to demonstrate nuance, I can’t bring myself to do it. Books like this are more damaging to the cause. Criticism of a book such as this is not a denial that there is racism in the world. As a society we still have ways to go before we reach a society that is entirely Egalitarian. I believe however that the best thing we can do is actually tackle the problems that are holding or groups down regardless as to whether it is individual or systemic. If someone feels they are being oppressed we do indeed need to listen to them. If there are aspects of society that are oppressing them we can look at solutions. Making sweeping assertions and being intellectually dishonest is only going to push people who aren’t racist into being racist.
In reviewing this book I want to make it crystal clear that any criticisms of the book are specifically of the book, and the author’s assertions. This sentiment is something I’m finding myself having to echo repeatedly but it’s the only way to make clear that you’re judging the book and not the characteristic of the author. In no way is my review arguing that racism doesn’t exist, or that black people do not face discrimination. It would be naïve, and frankly a consequence of selectively avoiding stats, to suggest that racism is not apparent in the word today. I think there are very few, even racist people themselves, who would argue otherwise, after all the racist people either admit that they have a problem with the race or admit that they consider themselves the superior race.
In her opening section of the book, the author makes abundantly clear that she will not have a conversation with people that do not already concede with her point. This, aside from being a bad way of starting the book, is intellectual dishonesty and will do very little to engage potential allies in dealing with racism. Maybe the antagonism works to rally people up who already agree with you, but I’m far more likely to believe there’s more to be understood if you invite me to the conversation, not tell me that I have to agree with you to learn. This is the exact same reason that I am an Atheist.
The author here also can’t seem to make up her mind. One of the chapters is about feminism and the issue specifically of “white feminism”. Of course white feminism isn’t about race… but it is… but it isn’t… but it is… but it isn’t. It’s argued by the author that whiteness is a political position, and there is no explanation as to how far this goes. For a better examination of feminism vs. feminism I’d direct you to Gloria Steinem’s The Trouble with Rich Women which far better looks into why feminism is not simply a monolith and that there is a divide due to various characteristics.
I will commend the author for doing a good bit of research into the history of the slave trade and for covering aspects that many either overlook or skim past. However, the author’s clearly effortful research into this did not extend to other aspects. Very few of the large statements are backed up and those that are seem to be backed up by the author’s own beliefs.
Let’s take objectification for example. Aside from the fact that I don’t think the author would be satisfied in any event, she talks about how there were no black page 3 models and that white people probably didn’t consider them worthy enough to be objectified. I was never someone who paid attention to page 3 (I grew up with the internet, buying a paper I didn’t want to read just to see naked women was behind the times), but considering how many markets play on the exotic nature of beauty in different races there is likely more to be discussed. Admittedly I’ve not gone too much research into the world of Page 3 history but there are indeed questions from the brief search that I have done as to the large absence of black models. The issue is that the author has cherry picked an example and used that to demonstrate racism. Let’s say that the roles were changed and there were predominantly black page 3 models, would that fix the problem? No, because you know full well the author would use that to suggest that it proves black people are seen as property.
I speak as someone who has a strong attraction to East Asian women but I appreciate that anecdotal evidence doesn’t make for good arguments. If the author had simply looked at the Disney films she would see that clearly the princesses that are more sexualised are Jasmine and Pocahontas. Cartoon characters yes, but let’s not forget that characters being animated is hardly something to stop sexual fantasies for some.
One of the debates that I’ve had with friends on multiple occasions is about discrimination: is a difference in numbers for representation a sign of racism, sexism or discrimination based on any other characteristic? Consider a hypothetical Law Firm: it has 50 solicitors and only one is black. Is this racism? My answer is “not inherently” as there are far more questions that you need to ask before reaching the conclusion. Are the remaining 49 solicitors white or are their other ethnicities represented? Did many black people apply for the job? Those are 2 of just many questions that I’d want answered.
It may well be that black people have been deliberately kept out of the jobs either by not being able to apply, or their applications being dismissed based on their race. However, it may also be the case that of the people who interviewed for the roles, white people interviewed better. You would have to look into the circumstances to see what the cause is. Judging by the book I’m reviewing, I suspect that my answer would be explained as being a privileged member of the white patriarchy.
Or, we can token hire people. The minute you do that though, you open the floodgates. Let’s say that you have a quota that 10% of the employees have to be black. What’s the quota from Asian countries? Do we factor in gender too? Disabilities? Religions? As a Pastafarian I want to make sure that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is fairly represented. Or, perhaps we should do what we can to remove any institutional barriers. Getting back to race though, let’s say you hire every single black applicant but there is still an absence for the quota. Are you going to force black people into roles they don’t want to be in? If yes, isn’t that itself a system of oppression?
However the biggest frustration is the author’s repeated attempts to infer things into statements. Time after time she will take what someone has said and say “clearly this was referring to black women”. What she’ll also do is read racism into something that has been written. Truth be told I imagine that if I called her attractive she would infer that I was suggesting that she’s attractive… for a black woman.
Naomi Campbell gets brought up and the fact that she was called out for being, rightly or wrongly, antagonistic and always angry. Instead of considering that regardless of race Campbell is a controversial figure, the author exclusively blames this perception on the angry black woman trope. It’s frustrating as a genuine concern is being misrepresented. Consequently if people do apply the concern correctly, it’s likely to be dismissed as something that gets thrown around too much.
If you believe the author’s generalisations, none of the white people in positions of power are qualified; black people have no power whatsoever in society; positive discrimination is in fact a positive for everyone and needs to be done. You need to apply nuance to your criticisms!! Some of the white people in positions of power may well be unqualified for the roles and therefore shouldn’t be in them. That we will agree on, but that has to be dealt with individually not making a sweeping assertion.
I didn’t like this book at all. I was tempted to give it a 2 star review, but considering the horrible assertions and failure to demonstrate nuance, I can’t bring myself to do it. Books like this are more damaging to the cause. Criticism of a book such as this is not a denial that there is racism in the world. As a society we still have ways to go before we reach a society that is entirely Egalitarian. I believe however that the best thing we can do is actually tackle the problems that are holding or groups down regardless as to whether it is individual or systemic. If someone feels they are being oppressed we do indeed need to listen to them. If there are aspects of society that are oppressing them we can look at solutions. Making sweeping assertions and being intellectually dishonest is only going to push people who aren’t racist into being racist.
June 7, 2020
I read Why I'm No Longer Talking To White People About Race based upon the recommendation of Yamini. So make sure to check out her review.
On 22 February 2014, Reni Eddo-Lodge published a post on her blog entitled Why I'm No Longer Talking To White People About Race. She wrote about the fact that she can no longer engage with the gulf of an emotional disconnect that white people display when a person of colour articulates their experience, and that she can't have a conversation with them about the details of a problem if they don't even recognise that the problem exists.
These are sentiments that most black people can probably relate to. Discussions about race, whether on- or offline, can be damn frustrating and emotionally draining. Oftentimes, one has the feeling that white people don't even want to listen, they just want to prove you wrong.
It's really refreshing that Reni doesn't feel like she owes white people anything. She puts herself first – self-care and self-preservation are her top priority, and if talking to white people about race wasn't a give and take for her, but just a give, I'm glad she put a halt to that.
She starts her examination by looking at Britain's history with racism. Slavery as a British institution existed for much longer than it has currently been abolished. The damage is still to be undone.
She distinguishes between simple discrimination and discrimination + power. Only the latter should be called racism. She states that structural racism is an impenetrably white workplace culture set by those people, where anyone who falls outside the culture must conform or face failure. It is the kind of racism that has the power to drastically impact people's life chances. It doesn't manifest itself in spitting at strangers in the street. Instead, it lies in an apologetic smile while explaining to an unlucky soul that they didn't get a job.
I think that distinction is very important, and, sadly, something that most white people still don't get. I will never understand why they see the fact that one can't be racist towards them as an insult? As if being racially targeted was somehow desireable?
I also highly appreciated that Reni proved her statements with recent studies. Research indicates that a black schoolboy is three times more likely to be permanently excluded compared to the whole school population. He will also be systematically marked down by his own teachers. Researchers found that applicants with white-sounding names were called to interview far more often than those with African- or Asian-sounding names.
A 2013 British report revealed that black people are twice as likely to be charged with drugs possession, despite lower rates of drug use. A 2003 NHS England report confirmed that people of African or African Carribean backgrounds are more at risk than any other ethnic group in England to be admitted to psychiatric hospitals under the compulsory powers of the Mental Health Act. In 2015, just 7 percent of judges across courts and tribunals were black or from an ethnic minority background.
We don't live in a meritocracy and to pretend that simple hard work will elevate all to success is an exercise of willful ignorance.
One of the best sections in the book is where she dissects white privilege. She defines it as 'an absence of the consequences of racism. White privilege is the fact that if you're white, your race will almost certainly positively impact your life's trajectory in some way.'
I also highly appreciated that she, as the kids say, checked her own privilege, by admitting that she is university-educated and able-bodied – factors which bolster her own voice above others. I think it's very important to be aware of the fact that you can be privileged in some areas and not in others.
Another excellent section is her dissection of the feminism question, and in particular the problem of 'white feminism'. She asks herself the important questions: Can you be feminist and be anti-choice? Can you be a feminist and be wilfully ignorant on racism? Spoilert alert: The answer to both is NO.
Shutting up about racism creates the sort of silence that requires some to suffer so that others are comfortable.And it's definitely a book that I, myself, will start recommending to people. Reni Eddo-Lodge has a very distinct and clear voice. I liked that she displayed her thoughts in such a structured way, and didn't try to sound academic or elaborate. This book is really for the average person trying to educate themselves. You don't need a degree in Gender of African Studies to understand it, and that's why I appreciate it so much.
On 22 February 2014, Reni Eddo-Lodge published a post on her blog entitled Why I'm No Longer Talking To White People About Race. She wrote about the fact that she can no longer engage with the gulf of an emotional disconnect that white people display when a person of colour articulates their experience, and that she can't have a conversation with them about the details of a problem if they don't even recognise that the problem exists.
These are sentiments that most black people can probably relate to. Discussions about race, whether on- or offline, can be damn frustrating and emotionally draining. Oftentimes, one has the feeling that white people don't even want to listen, they just want to prove you wrong.
It's really refreshing that Reni doesn't feel like she owes white people anything. She puts herself first – self-care and self-preservation are her top priority, and if talking to white people about race wasn't a give and take for her, but just a give, I'm glad she put a halt to that.
She starts her examination by looking at Britain's history with racism. Slavery as a British institution existed for much longer than it has currently been abolished. The damage is still to be undone.
She distinguishes between simple discrimination and discrimination + power. Only the latter should be called racism. She states that structural racism is an impenetrably white workplace culture set by those people, where anyone who falls outside the culture must conform or face failure. It is the kind of racism that has the power to drastically impact people's life chances. It doesn't manifest itself in spitting at strangers in the street. Instead, it lies in an apologetic smile while explaining to an unlucky soul that they didn't get a job.
I think that distinction is very important, and, sadly, something that most white people still don't get. I will never understand why they see the fact that one can't be racist towards them as an insult? As if being racially targeted was somehow desireable?
I also highly appreciated that Reni proved her statements with recent studies. Research indicates that a black schoolboy is three times more likely to be permanently excluded compared to the whole school population. He will also be systematically marked down by his own teachers. Researchers found that applicants with white-sounding names were called to interview far more often than those with African- or Asian-sounding names.
A 2013 British report revealed that black people are twice as likely to be charged with drugs possession, despite lower rates of drug use. A 2003 NHS England report confirmed that people of African or African Carribean backgrounds are more at risk than any other ethnic group in England to be admitted to psychiatric hospitals under the compulsory powers of the Mental Health Act. In 2015, just 7 percent of judges across courts and tribunals were black or from an ethnic minority background.
We don't live in a meritocracy and to pretend that simple hard work will elevate all to success is an exercise of willful ignorance.
One of the best sections in the book is where she dissects white privilege. She defines it as 'an absence of the consequences of racism. White privilege is the fact that if you're white, your race will almost certainly positively impact your life's trajectory in some way.'
I also highly appreciated that she, as the kids say, checked her own privilege, by admitting that she is university-educated and able-bodied – factors which bolster her own voice above others. I think it's very important to be aware of the fact that you can be privileged in some areas and not in others.
Another excellent section is her dissection of the feminism question, and in particular the problem of 'white feminism'. She asks herself the important questions: Can you be feminist and be anti-choice? Can you be a feminist and be wilfully ignorant on racism? Spoilert alert: The answer to both is NO.
I fear that, although white feminism is palatable to those in power, when it has won, things will look very much the same. Injustice will thrive, but there will be more women in charge of it.As bleak as some of the statistics and facts may be, Reni ends on a hopeful note: The mess we live in is a deliberate one. If it was created by people, it can be dismantled by people. We must work together to dismantle the fucked up system we live in, we must work together on calling out the injustices that we witness. We can use our anger for good!
September 5, 2018
“When do you think we’ll get to an end point?”
“There is no end point in sight,’ I reply. ‘You can’t skip to the resolution without having the difficult, messy conversation first. We’re still in the hard bit.”
In 2014, Reni Eddo-Lodge made a blog post, from where emerges the book title, about why she does not want to talk to white people about race. The response was overwhelming, both from whites and people of color. Motivated by the response, she decided to continue the conversation in this book in an attempt to bridge the gap that exists in a discourse about race.
This book is personal, it’s not about grander ideas of life and history. She does discuss politics and history but they are reflected upon from her perspective. Her dissatisfaction with conversations about race are reflected loud and clear in this book. This is one of the reasons why I’d recommend this to everyone. White, brown, blue, green, whatever your skin color is, you should read this book. In any conversation about race, Eddo-Lodge’s experience is important to listen to.
Eddo-Lodge’s words hit many cords with me. There are cases where I could too easily relate to the frustrations she expresses. One instance of this is when she brings up the subject of the ‘good’ racist (or the moderate white person who is often the greater threat, the ‘non-racist’) as opposed to the ones who are explicitly malicious. Another is when she talks about the superficiality of the left’s aghast at Jeremy Corbyn’s win in UK elections (easily relatable to the US version of Corbyn in 2016). The 2016 election exposed American Democrats in a way that hadn’t been expected before. Let us not be fooled, even during the Women’s March in January 2017, a lot of racist white women came out to rally in the name of feminism after having voted to gut the rights of marginalized communities.
In her chapter on defining and understanding white privilege, Eddo-Lodge states, “white privilege is an absence of the consequences of racism…White privilege is dull, grinding complacency.” I certainly agree, however, her approach to the topic made me interested to see how white people would define it today (if they consider it a thing at all, that is). Another surprising tidbit she reveals here was that the term ‘white privilege’ was created by a white man. Isn’t that something?
On the topic of feminism, we also have to address the battle between feminism and intersectional feminism. Being that intersectional has to precede the term ‘feminism’ in order to include the ‘other’, which the default feminism often dismisses, herein emerges an issue of class where one or more persons might not even be able to define intersectionality to understand what intersectional feminism stands for. It sounds rather silly at first but upon consideration, is it truly? Why must intersectional have to precede feminism in order for us to address the problems with privileged (white) feminism?
But again, her argument echoes mine when it comes to feminism as a whole. That is, “When feminists can see the problem with all-male panels, but can’t see the problem with all-white television programmes, it’s worth questioning who they’re really fighting for.”
I don’t agree with Eddo-Lodge 100% of the time obviously, nor can I always relate, but this is still a voice worth listening. Right or wrong, agree or disagree, I can still love the book for what it is even when I’m not always in sync with the author.
Buy this book, read it, and then pass it on to your friends and family.
January 14, 2018
Reni Eddo-Lodge no longer wants to talk to white people about race because white people always manage to make the conversation about themselves. Isn’t this the original definition of a bore? This would actually be funny if it didn’t have such deadly consequences for people of color everywhere.
Eddo-Lodge divides her commentary on the subject of race into seven chapters, the first of which, “Histories,” details her awakening to the realization that she knew very little about black British history until her second year at university. That moment of awakening, the moment Ta-Nehisi Coates also details in his own book, Between the World and Me, is a thrilling one in the life of an writer/activist. After that moment comes the hard work of study and making connections.
“Discussing racism is not the same thing as discussing ‘black identity.’ Discussing racism is about discussing white identity. It’s about white anxiety.”Eddo-Lodge is British and this book evolved from an explosive blogpost of the same title that she wrote in 2014 and which is reproduced in full in the Preface to this volume. Contrary to her explicit desire to stop talking to white people about race, she has become a national and international spokesperson and spends most of her time talking to white people about race. Is there a lesson here?
Eddo-Lodge divides her commentary on the subject of race into seven chapters, the first of which, “Histories,” details her awakening to the realization that she knew very little about black British history until her second year at university. That moment of awakening, the moment Ta-Nehisi Coates also details in his own book, Between the World and Me, is a thrilling one in the life of an writer/activist. After that moment comes the hard work of study and making connections.
“We tell ourselves that good people can’t be racist…We tell ourselves that racism is about moral values, when instead it is about the survival strategy of systemic power.”Chapter 2, “The System,” tries to describe the way racism looks today from the point of view of those discriminated against in Britain, and the excuses made to paper over any actual discussion of the problems. This is where the insistence upon merit and the way the conversation always turns to white anxiety is most apparent. Chapter 3, “What is White Privilege?” surprises us with the assertion that
“White privilege is never more pronounced than in our intimate relationships, our close friendships and our families… Race consciousness is not contagious, nor is it inherited. If anything, an increase in mixed-race families and mixed-race children brings those difficult conversations about race and whiteness and privilege close to home (literally) than ever before.”I’d always assumed that mixed race families had the advantages of understanding around issues of race, but Eddo-Lodge tells us that many families are not having the conversations they need to have, difficult and raw though they may be. Of course.
“It makes sense that interracial couples might not want to burden themselves with the depressing weight of racial history when planning their lives together, but a color-blind approach makes life difficult for children who do not deserve this carelessness.”There is so much in this short book that I have to urge everyone to get their own copy. The insights come fast and furious from this point on. For some white people, Eddo-Lodge asserts, “being accused of racism is far worse than actual racism.” That resonates in today’s America, and could as easily be said about sexism. We need to humble ourselves enough to learn new lessons. When addressing feminism and racism in Chapter 5, "The Feminism Question," Eddo-Lodge may present her most eloquent arguments, including a discussion about the need for black feminists to meet separately:
that [white gaze] “does so much to silence you...And there's an element of just speaking the truth of what it means to be a black woman in the UK that it would be ridiculous, as a white person, to not read that as implicating you."In direct relationship to the cogency of her arguments, her shortest chapters are the most fluent, insightful, and well-argued. At the end, Eddo-Lodge uses a Terry Pratchett statement as her final chapter heading: "There is No Justice, There is Just Us.” In this chapter she reflects our questions right back out at her audience.
“White people, you need to talk to other white people about race….white people who recognize racism have an incredibly important part to play. That part can’t be played while wallowing in guilt.”Apropos of this exhortation, a racial justice educator based in Boston, Debby Irving, wrote a book on race primarily for white people, called Waking Up White, detailing her experiences waking up to an unconscious racism. I agree with her that we need to learn to speak this new vocabulary of race if we want to enjoy the benefits of diversity. Eddo-Lodge, despite her exhaustion talking about race with white people, is doing her part.
November 12, 2020
If you read one book this year: make it this one.
January 7, 2022
It’s more important and necessary than ever to actively fight racism at every perceivable level, and to support Black people; loudly, unerringly, unflinchingly. I haven’t read non-fiction books on racism in a while, since turning to articles, essays, and other online resources, but no matter the medium through with you decide to educate yourself—please, please remember that this is a marathon, not a race.
Let’s keep educating ourselves, and others, and work together to make this world a better place.
*
Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race is incredibly thought-provoking, eye-opening, educational, and insightful. I usually rate books based on my enjoyment first and foremost, but this one … I really can’t say that I enjoyed reading it.
I believe that the majority of us don’t particularly like to think, read, or talk about the issue of racism, and how it is still pervasive in our society, even to this day. I know I don’t. It’s a delicate subject (though it really shouldn’t be), and raising it, as well as discussing it, is not likely to make you very many friends—more likely, it’s going to cost you ones.
If I had to venture a guess as to the reason of that, I’d say that white people don’t like it, because they don’t want to be accused of being racist, profiting from racism, or made to feel privileged—and who would? I certainly wouldn’t like to feel as if my accomplishments have to do with anything other than my hard work, and applying myself.
No matter our personal feelings, however, all this doesn’t subtract from the reality that racism is still very, very real, and tangible, and just as important as the issue of our current patriarchy. Reni Eddo-Lodge pushes aside many misconceptions with these words:
I, as a person of color, though not black, don’t particularly like to talk about it, because I don’t like talking about myself—and feeling—as if I’m a victim. I don’t like talking about, and being reminded of, having been put at a disadvantage because of my ethnicity, which somehow feels worse than actually being discriminated, strange as it may sound.
But what’s more, I hate having my accomplishments assigned to it, as if being a straight-A student, or good at math is “because she’s Asian!!”, or how being a bad driver as an Asian (which, thankfully, I’m not) will unerringly result in someone saying “ohh, well, Asian people are just bad at driving”. (Which is not only racist, but stereotyping of the worst kind.)
Next to constantly being asked where we (people of color) actually come from—and failing to recognize that there is a difference between nationality, race, and ethnicity—when the question is returned, usually the subject all of a sudden isn’t all that interesting anymore? “Why don’t white people think they have a racial identity?”
Most importantly, going back to my earlier assertion, I don’t like the feeling that arises when I’m reminded of the fact that my ethnicity will most likely (and statistics prove that in our current climate that’s going to be a reality for me) be my detriment (or has already been).
Eddo-Lodge said, when she refused to accept affirmative action on her behalf: “If I’m going to compete against my white peers, I’m going to do [it] on a level playing ground.” And I relate to where she’s coming from completely.
But racism isn’t merely about these “little” things, these everyday grievances that we people of color have to face. It’s not about the person on the street giving you a hateful glare, telling you to go back to your country (which happened to my parents all too often), or the surprise in people’s eyes, when you don’t fit into their metaphorical pre-ordained box they were planning on putting you in. It’s about the big picture—structural racism.
That’s the reality we’re all facing today, no matter our personal opinions or feelings. I wish I had as powerful words as Reni Eddo-Lodge, but until I do, I’m immensely thankful for her bravery to speak out, raise her voice, and make a difference. What I really want to say with my review is this: please educate yourself on the issue of racism, and please read this book.
Let’s keep educating ourselves, and others, and work together to make this world a better place.
*
“We tell ourselves that good people can’t be racist. We seem to think that true racism only exists in the hearts of evil people. We tell ourselves that racism is about moral values, when instead it is about survival strategies and systemic power.”
Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race is incredibly thought-provoking, eye-opening, educational, and insightful. I usually rate books based on my enjoyment first and foremost, but this one … I really can’t say that I enjoyed reading it.
I believe that the majority of us don’t particularly like to think, read, or talk about the issue of racism, and how it is still pervasive in our society, even to this day. I know I don’t. It’s a delicate subject (though it really shouldn’t be), and raising it, as well as discussing it, is not likely to make you very many friends—more likely, it’s going to cost you ones.
If I had to venture a guess as to the reason of that, I’d say that white people don’t like it, because they don’t want to be accused of being racist, profiting from racism, or made to feel privileged—and who would? I certainly wouldn’t like to feel as if my accomplishments have to do with anything other than my hard work, and applying myself.
No matter our personal feelings, however, all this doesn’t subtract from the reality that racism is still very, very real, and tangible, and just as important as the issue of our current patriarchy. Reni Eddo-Lodge pushes aside many misconceptions with these words:
When I talk about white privilege, I don’t mean that white people have it easy, that they’ve never struggled, or that they’ve never lived in poverty. [White privilege] is the fact, that if you’re white, your race will almost certainly positively impact your life’s trajectory in some way. And you probably won’t even notice it.
I, as a person of color, though not black, don’t particularly like to talk about it, because I don’t like talking about myself—and feeling—as if I’m a victim. I don’t like talking about, and being reminded of, having been put at a disadvantage because of my ethnicity, which somehow feels worse than actually being discriminated, strange as it may sound.
But what’s more, I hate having my accomplishments assigned to it, as if being a straight-A student, or good at math is “because she’s Asian!!”, or how being a bad driver as an Asian (which, thankfully, I’m not) will unerringly result in someone saying “ohh, well, Asian people are just bad at driving”. (Which is not only racist, but stereotyping of the worst kind.)
Next to constantly being asked where we (people of color) actually come from—and failing to recognize that there is a difference between nationality, race, and ethnicity—when the question is returned, usually the subject all of a sudden isn’t all that interesting anymore? “Why don’t white people think they have a racial identity?”
Most importantly, going back to my earlier assertion, I don’t like the feeling that arises when I’m reminded of the fact that my ethnicity will most likely (and statistics prove that in our current climate that’s going to be a reality for me) be my detriment (or has already been).
Eddo-Lodge said, when she refused to accept affirmative action on her behalf: “If I’m going to compete against my white peers, I’m going to do [it] on a level playing ground.” And I relate to where she’s coming from completely.
But racism isn’t merely about these “little” things, these everyday grievances that we people of color have to face. It’s not about the person on the street giving you a hateful glare, telling you to go back to your country (which happened to my parents all too often), or the surprise in people’s eyes, when you don’t fit into their metaphorical pre-ordained box they were planning on putting you in. It’s about the big picture—structural racism.
This is what structural racism looks like: it’s not just about personal prejudice, but collective effects of bias.
That’s the reality we’re all facing today, no matter our personal opinions or feelings. I wish I had as powerful words as Reni Eddo-Lodge, but until I do, I’m immensely thankful for her bravery to speak out, raise her voice, and make a difference. What I really want to say with my review is this: please educate yourself on the issue of racism, and please read this book.
“Every voice raised against racism chips away at its power. We can’t afford to stay silent.”
September 22, 2020
A very interesting read.
It's a relatively short book that talks about racism, its history, and its structure in Britain, focusing mostly on African-British or Caribbean-British societies. It's written in a clear and consice tone and I think reading it can be a mental exercise as the discourse around racism gains more momentum in today's world.
- My Personal Background and its Effect on the Reading Experience:
I am Iranian, and I don't fit in the main target audience of this book. I don't want to 'appropriate' a book that's not about me (it's about Black British people) but I think my background plays an important part in how I understand this book, so I want to mention it here. Reading anything about racism is uniquely challenging and interesting for me, as I loosely fit into both "sides" of the general discourse around racism (if you want to call it that). As a non-white person (and from the middle-east) I have been and still am on the receiving end of racism. I can notice patterns of overt and subtle racism, remarks and prejudices from time to time. So I can consider myself someone who can, to some extent, sympathize with Eddo-Lodge's experiences.
At the same time in Iran, I am from the ethnic majority, the group that ignores the systemic discrimination and oppression practiced against minorities and immigrants living here and the atrocities of their lives. Iran is a racist country in every sense, with many many different groups of oppressed ethnic peoples, each experiencing racism in a different way. The "Persian/Fars" majority actively or passively participates in the discrimination of other ethnic groups and I want to resist that.
So while as a person of color I'm concerned about white supremacy and how I could be disadvantaged in many situations, I am also concerned about ways I've been complicit in the structural racism that's going on in my own country. So, as a person reading this in the uncomfortable position of the oppressed minority AND the privileged majority, I can safely say that the book has a lot to offer for both groups.
- About the book itself:
The author is British, so unlike similar books that discuss racism against black people in America, this one talks about the equally ugly history of racism in the UK. Across seven chapters, Reni Eddo-Lodge presents some case studies of anti-black crimes during the 20th century in, talks about white privilege, feminism (and intersectionality), the question of class (and why discussions about class hierarchy should take race into account), tokenism, mainstream media, culture and entertainment, housing strategies in the UK, and concludes by writing her opinions on the concept of justice (her conclusion is that "there's no justice, there's just us") and why we need to do the work ourselves and rely on ourselves instead of waiting for an abstract utopia of justice or "endpoint" to come to save us all. Basically, she says that we cannot fast forward or skip to the part where racism doesn't exist anymore without first going through the hard and uncomfortable part of standing up to it.
Disclaimers:
I have to give a disclaimer that I know little to nothing about contemporary British history, and even less about London geography, so the specific parts that discuss housing in London and reference historical figures were completely new to me. I didn't personally fact-check all the data presented in the book.
I recognize that the author is not a historian so I won't take her word for fact. Please do not consider History chapter in this book as a British Racism History 101 course. Similarly, the chapter on Class is not meant to be a Socialism 101 course, and the Feminism chapter is definitely not a Feminism 101 course. The chapter on feminism is aimed at people who already identify as or agree with feminist politics but fail to recognize the issue of racism within feminist circles.
At the end, this book is not an all-encompassing encyclopedia of racism in Britain and nor does it claim to be. But I find the author's insights engaging and interesting, so I would recommend it to people who are curious to read about racism.
فکر میکنم ما در ایران به اندازه کافی در مورد نژادپرستی حرف نمیزنیم و نمیدونیم. این کتاب به روایت سیاهپوستان بریتانیا پرداخته ولی ما هم میتونیم درسهایی ازش برداریم. الگوهای نژادپرستی در ایران و همه جای دنیا اونقدری شباهت دارن که بشه از چنین کتابی که مستقیم به ما نمیپردازه، چیزهای زیادی یاد گرفت. جامعه ما نژادپرسته. خیلی زیاد. و اگه قراره این مسئله رو تغییر بدیم، باید اول متوجه بشیم نژادپرستی چیه و چجوری در همه ابعاد زندگیمون رسوخ میکنه. مطالعه در موردش شروع خوبیه و چون منابع فارسی کمن، اگر کسی دوست داره و میتونه انگلیسی بخونه، یکی از منابع خارجی خوبی که میشه بهش مراجعه کرد و ازش یاد گرفت همین کتابه. من این کتاب رو توصیه اکید میکنم به همه.
البته این رو هم بگم که بخش مربوط به فمینیسمش، اگر با فمینیسم (و مخصوصاً با فمینیسم اینترسکشنال) آشنایی زیادی نداشته باشید براتون عجیب خواهد بود. فصل فمینیسمِ این کتاب، مخاطب اصلیش خودِ ما فمینیستهاییم* و کسانی که هنوز با فمینیسم عناد دارن ممکنه از سر و تهش برداشت گیجکنندهای داشته باشن. در این صورت هم همچنان از بخشهای دیگهی کتاب میتونید استفاده کنید و یاد بگیرید.
* در واقع، مخاطب اصلیِ اون فصل، بریتانیاییهای لیبرال و پروگرسیویان که مدت هاست با مباحث فمینیسم (بیشتر لیبرال فمینیسم) آشنان، قبولش دارن و در فرهنگ و اخبار و خواستههای سیاسیشون به کارش میگیرن. منتها خواستههای فمینیستیشون اکثراً زنان رنگین پوست رو نادیده میگیره. در نتیجه مخاطب اون فصل، کسیه که خودش رو فمینیست میدونه ولی هنوز متوجه نژاد پرستیِ حاضر در جمعهای فمینیستی نشده. انتقاد نویسنده به فمینیسم، به خاطر جو سفیدسالاریِ ��البشه، نه خود مسئله فمینیسم، چون خود نویسنده هم فمینیسته اصولا. خلاصه که اون فصلِ این کتاب رو به عنوان مقدمهای بر فمینیسم در نظر نگیرید. بقیه قسمتهای کتاب که مستقیمتر به نژادپرستی پرداخته هم جالب و خواندنین.
It's a relatively short book that talks about racism, its history, and its structure in Britain, focusing mostly on African-British or Caribbean-British societies. It's written in a clear and consice tone and I think reading it can be a mental exercise as the discourse around racism gains more momentum in today's world.
- My Personal Background and its Effect on the Reading Experience:
I am Iranian, and I don't fit in the main target audience of this book. I don't want to 'appropriate' a book that's not about me (it's about Black British people) but I think my background plays an important part in how I understand this book, so I want to mention it here. Reading anything about racism is uniquely challenging and interesting for me, as I loosely fit into both "sides" of the general discourse around racism (if you want to call it that). As a non-white person (and from the middle-east) I have been and still am on the receiving end of racism. I can notice patterns of overt and subtle racism, remarks and prejudices from time to time. So I can consider myself someone who can, to some extent, sympathize with Eddo-Lodge's experiences.
At the same time in Iran, I am from the ethnic majority, the group that ignores the systemic discrimination and oppression practiced against minorities and immigrants living here and the atrocities of their lives. Iran is a racist country in every sense, with many many different groups of oppressed ethnic peoples, each experiencing racism in a different way. The "Persian/Fars" majority actively or passively participates in the discrimination of other ethnic groups and I want to resist that.
So while as a person of color I'm concerned about white supremacy and how I could be disadvantaged in many situations, I am also concerned about ways I've been complicit in the structural racism that's going on in my own country. So, as a person reading this in the uncomfortable position of the oppressed minority AND the privileged majority, I can safely say that the book has a lot to offer for both groups.
- About the book itself:
The author is British, so unlike similar books that discuss racism against black people in America, this one talks about the equally ugly history of racism in the UK. Across seven chapters, Reni Eddo-Lodge presents some case studies of anti-black crimes during the 20th century in, talks about white privilege, feminism (and intersectionality), the question of class (and why discussions about class hierarchy should take race into account), tokenism, mainstream media, culture and entertainment, housing strategies in the UK, and concludes by writing her opinions on the concept of justice (her conclusion is that "there's no justice, there's just us") and why we need to do the work ourselves and rely on ourselves instead of waiting for an abstract utopia of justice or "endpoint" to come to save us all. Basically, she says that we cannot fast forward or skip to the part where racism doesn't exist anymore without first going through the hard and uncomfortable part of standing up to it.
Disclaimers:
I have to give a disclaimer that I know little to nothing about contemporary British history, and even less about London geography, so the specific parts that discuss housing in London and reference historical figures were completely new to me. I didn't personally fact-check all the data presented in the book.
I recognize that the author is not a historian so I won't take her word for fact. Please do not consider History chapter in this book as a British Racism History 101 course. Similarly, the chapter on Class is not meant to be a Socialism 101 course, and the Feminism chapter is definitely not a Feminism 101 course. The chapter on feminism is aimed at people who already identify as or agree with feminist politics but fail to recognize the issue of racism within feminist circles.
At the end, this book is not an all-encompassing encyclopedia of racism in Britain and nor does it claim to be. But I find the author's insights engaging and interesting, so I would recommend it to people who are curious to read about racism.
فکر میکنم ما در ایران به اندازه کافی در مورد نژادپرستی حرف نمیزنیم و نمیدونیم. این کتاب به روایت سیاهپوستان بریتانیا پرداخته ولی ما هم میتونیم درسهایی ازش برداریم. الگوهای نژادپرستی در ایران و همه جای دنیا اونقدری شباهت دارن که بشه از چنین کتابی که مستقیم به ما نمیپردازه، چیزهای زیادی یاد گرفت. جامعه ما نژادپرسته. خیلی زیاد. و اگه قراره این مسئله رو تغییر بدیم، باید اول متوجه بشیم نژادپرستی چیه و چجوری در همه ابعاد زندگیمون رسوخ میکنه. مطالعه در موردش شروع خوبیه و چون منابع فارسی کمن، اگر کسی دوست داره و میتونه انگلیسی بخونه، یکی از منابع خارجی خوبی که میشه بهش مراجعه کرد و ازش یاد گرفت همین کتابه. من این کتاب رو توصیه اکید میکنم به همه.
البته این رو هم بگم که بخش مربوط به فمینیسمش، اگر با فمینیسم (و مخصوصاً با فمینیسم اینترسکشنال) آشنایی زیادی نداشته باشید براتون عجیب خواهد بود. فصل فمینیسمِ این کتاب، مخاطب اصلیش خودِ ما فمینیستهاییم* و کسانی که هنوز با فمینیسم عناد دارن ممکنه از سر و تهش برداشت گیجکنندهای داشته باشن. در این صورت هم همچنان از بخشهای دیگهی کتاب میتونید استفاده کنید و یاد بگیرید.
* در واقع، مخاطب اصلیِ اون فصل، بریتانیاییهای لیبرال و پروگرسیویان که مدت هاست با مباحث فمینیسم (بیشتر لیبرال فمینیسم) آشنان، قبولش دارن و در فرهنگ و اخبار و خواستههای سیاسیشون به کارش میگیرن. منتها خواستههای فمینیستیشون اکثراً زنان رنگین پوست رو نادیده میگیره. در نتیجه مخاطب اون فصل، کسیه که خودش رو فمینیست میدونه ولی هنوز متوجه نژاد پرستیِ حاضر در جمعهای فمینیستی نشده. انتقاد نویسنده به فمینیسم، به خاطر جو سفیدسالاریِ ��البشه، نه خود مسئله فمینیسم، چون خود نویسنده هم فمینیسته اصولا. خلاصه که اون فصلِ این کتاب رو به عنوان مقدمهای بر فمینیسم در نظر نگیرید. بقیه قسمتهای کتاب که مستقیمتر به نژادپرستی پرداخته هم جالب و خواندنین.
June 16, 2020
4****
Structural racism dozens, or hundreds, or thousands of people with the same biases joining together to make up one organisation, and acting accordingly. Structural racism is an impenetrably white workplace culture set by those people, where anyone who falls outside of the culture must conform of face failure.
Each time I read this I grab and absorb a bit more information. This is an important and essential read for beginning to understand race relations and structural racism in the UK.
Reni Eddo-Lodge covers many subjects of race relations in the UK: UK’s black history; institutional racism and how this works; white privilege; class; “fear of a black planet”: and the issue of feminism. I was particularly interested in the history, as like Reni Eddo-Lodge, I grew up in the English school system where race isn’t really discussed in the educational system (race among other important topics are not part of the curriculum which is very sad indeed). And, if race was discussed, this was usually in context of US history and not the UK. Understanding the black UK history would’ve paved the way for understanding how structural racism is the way it is today.
Reni Eddo-Lodge gives key concise information of how structural racism works and institutional racism (especially within the police and politics). How people are made to fear a “black planet” and “suicide of the white race” despite statistics on demographic makeup not supporting this. I also enjoyed her delve into race, classism and feminism.
Overall this is a great read of an introduction of race within the UK. This is well-referenced, with case studies and statistics to back up points, and very informative. While some points I was already aware about, this is a great way to educate yourself and start to unpick how white privilege has benefitted me as a person, to look more closely at the structures of society and it’s racism that is employed.
For those who identify as a feminist, but have never questioned what it means to be white, it is likely the phrase white feminism applies.
In order to dismantle unjust, racist structures, we must see race. We must see who benefits from their race, who is disproportionally impacted by negative stereotypes about their race, and to who power and privilege is bestowed upon- earned or not- because of their race, their class, and their gender. Seeing race is essential to changing the system.
Structural racism dozens, or hundreds, or thousands of people with the same biases joining together to make up one organisation, and acting accordingly. Structural racism is an impenetrably white workplace culture set by those people, where anyone who falls outside of the culture must conform of face failure.
Each time I read this I grab and absorb a bit more information. This is an important and essential read for beginning to understand race relations and structural racism in the UK.
Reni Eddo-Lodge covers many subjects of race relations in the UK: UK’s black history; institutional racism and how this works; white privilege; class; “fear of a black planet”: and the issue of feminism. I was particularly interested in the history, as like Reni Eddo-Lodge, I grew up in the English school system where race isn’t really discussed in the educational system (race among other important topics are not part of the curriculum which is very sad indeed). And, if race was discussed, this was usually in context of US history and not the UK. Understanding the black UK history would’ve paved the way for understanding how structural racism is the way it is today.
Reni Eddo-Lodge gives key concise information of how structural racism works and institutional racism (especially within the police and politics). How people are made to fear a “black planet” and “suicide of the white race” despite statistics on demographic makeup not supporting this. I also enjoyed her delve into race, classism and feminism.
Overall this is a great read of an introduction of race within the UK. This is well-referenced, with case studies and statistics to back up points, and very informative. While some points I was already aware about, this is a great way to educate yourself and start to unpick how white privilege has benefitted me as a person, to look more closely at the structures of society and it’s racism that is employed.
For those who identify as a feminist, but have never questioned what it means to be white, it is likely the phrase white feminism applies.
In order to dismantle unjust, racist structures, we must see race. We must see who benefits from their race, who is disproportionally impacted by negative stereotypes about their race, and to who power and privilege is bestowed upon- earned or not- because of their race, their class, and their gender. Seeing race is essential to changing the system.
April 15, 2018
"Discussing racism is about discussing white identity. It's about white anxiety. It's about asking why whiteness has this reflexive need to define itself against immigrant bogey monsters in order to feel comfortable, safe and secure."
This book discusses structural racism, with focus on Britain, at length. I recognize most of the issues, it's precisely the same as what is being said here in Norway.
"You can't hear English (Norwegian) on the bus anymore."
"In year xxxx, us whites will be the minority because immigrant women are having more children."
It seems that white people have a need to deny that racism exists and that that white is considered the norm. The heroes in movies white. The characters of books are white, unless explicitly told that they are something else.
"Racism goes both ways." Huh, really? But in Europe, it's a white elite establishment against what everything is measured anyway.
"How old were you when you realized that you were white?" A question from the book. Apparently this is a pertinent question.
I was two. I have known I was white for as long as I have been able to think. I grew up in a remote village in south eastern Asia, where skin bleaching was and is a thing. With my white-blond hair, milky skin and green eyes, I was a fascinating anomaly. My cheeks were pinched and my hair was pulled. My skin tone was what everyone wanted. So my entire life I have known that I was at the receiving end of positive discrimination. I became, as I grew up, aware that I had bought into the hierarchy of whites - local majority - hill tribe.
I am an immigrant, having moved from my passport country for many reasons - but also for work. I am not discriminated against. Although I speak with an accent, it's still the "right" one. I am obviously Nordic and thus perfectly acceptable. I know this is not the same for immigrant workers from further away. I have never been told to "go home" and unless I speak it is presumed that I am native, even though I grew up across the globe.
I somehow lived under the impression that racial discrimination in the UK was virtually non-existent, particularly compared to the United States. This book stripped me of that belief. The UK has the same issues as most of the rest of Europe.
What can I do to reduce structural racism? I am not free of bias either, but at least I am conscious of it and can try to mitigate it along the way - as well as pluck at others' assumptions. I have a lot to consider.
This book discusses structural racism, with focus on Britain, at length. I recognize most of the issues, it's precisely the same as what is being said here in Norway.
"You can't hear English (Norwegian) on the bus anymore."
"In year xxxx, us whites will be the minority because immigrant women are having more children."
It seems that white people have a need to deny that racism exists and that that white is considered the norm. The heroes in movies white. The characters of books are white, unless explicitly told that they are something else.
"Racism goes both ways." Huh, really? But in Europe, it's a white elite establishment against what everything is measured anyway.
"How old were you when you realized that you were white?" A question from the book. Apparently this is a pertinent question.
I was two. I have known I was white for as long as I have been able to think. I grew up in a remote village in south eastern Asia, where skin bleaching was and is a thing. With my white-blond hair, milky skin and green eyes, I was a fascinating anomaly. My cheeks were pinched and my hair was pulled. My skin tone was what everyone wanted. So my entire life I have known that I was at the receiving end of positive discrimination. I became, as I grew up, aware that I had bought into the hierarchy of whites - local majority - hill tribe.
I am an immigrant, having moved from my passport country for many reasons - but also for work. I am not discriminated against. Although I speak with an accent, it's still the "right" one. I am obviously Nordic and thus perfectly acceptable. I know this is not the same for immigrant workers from further away. I have never been told to "go home" and unless I speak it is presumed that I am native, even though I grew up across the globe.
I somehow lived under the impression that racial discrimination in the UK was virtually non-existent, particularly compared to the United States. This book stripped me of that belief. The UK has the same issues as most of the rest of Europe.
What can I do to reduce structural racism? I am not free of bias either, but at least I am conscious of it and can try to mitigate it along the way - as well as pluck at others' assumptions. I have a lot to consider.
May 27, 2020
"It must be a strange life, always having permission to speak and feeling indignant when you’re finally asked to listen."
Listen. That's what white people, myself included, need to either start doing or doing a lot more of. Thankfully there are many books available to let us do just that, to educate ourselves and to learn from. We must listen before we can hope to change an entire system and worldview and we must look honestly at ourselves first in order to learn where we, each white person, are complicit in racism.
Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People about Race is one such book from which to learn. Author Reni Eddo-Lodge clearly and concisely shows how racism is built into the fabric of society and points out why it's so difficult to get white people to acknowledge this. This book is different from other books I've read on structural/institutional racism in that the author points out explicitly racism in the UK.
While I know racism is a problem in the entire Western world, I didn't know the extent to which people of colour are impacted by racism in the UK. I also knew next to nothing about Black history in the UK and so one of my favourite chapters was the one in which Ms. Eddo-Lodge explores it.
Much of the rest of the book is similar to other books I've read on race and racism but it's always good to be encouraged to look deeper into oneself, to analyze and see where I too am complicit in upholding a white superiority worldview and how I benefit from white privilege. To root out racist ideas deep in my own psyche. It's a process that we must always work on, because racism is the foundation upon which our world is built.
I was impressed by the author's knowledge and understanding because of her young age -- when I was in my 20s, I don't think I was aware of many issues in the world. Of course, racism did not directly affect me and so I could turn a blind eye to it.
Ms. Eddo-Lodge tells why it was that she decided to stop talking to white people about race, even though that ended up with her talking more about race. I admire her optimism with which she concludes the book ("I think the side of anti-racist progress is winning."). I fear I have grown too cynical and have a difficult time sharing her optimism but hopefully it is well-deserved and she is able to see things I don't.
The author also addresses feminism and immigration though I found her essays on racism to be the strongest.
I am glad to have the Kindle version because I made so many highlights while reading this book! I will share a few in the hopes that it will encourage you too to read this book.
---"When I talk about white privilege, I don’t mean that white people have it easy, that they’ve never struggled, or that they’ve never lived in poverty. But white privilege is the fact that if you’re white, your race will almost certainly positively impact your life’s trajectory in some way. And you probably won’t even notice it."
---"Discussing racism is not the same thing as discussing ‘black identity’. Discussing racism is about discussing white identity. It’s about white anxiety."
---"It seems there is a belief among some white people that being accused of racism is far worse than actual racism.""
---"White people, you need to talk to other white people about race. Yes, you may be written off as a radical, but you have much less to lose."
---"In order to dismantle unjust, racist structures, we must see race. We must see who benefits from their race, who is disproportionately impacted by negative stereotypes about their race, and to who power and privilege is bestowed upon – earned or not – because of their race... Seeing race is essential to changing the system."
There are so many more I could share but I'll leave it with those! It was difficult to pick just five.
If you would like to read Reni's eponymous blog post that inspired this book, just click here. And if you find it helpful, inspirational, educational, or anything else, be sure to read this book.
Listen. That's what white people, myself included, need to either start doing or doing a lot more of. Thankfully there are many books available to let us do just that, to educate ourselves and to learn from. We must listen before we can hope to change an entire system and worldview and we must look honestly at ourselves first in order to learn where we, each white person, are complicit in racism.
Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People about Race is one such book from which to learn. Author Reni Eddo-Lodge clearly and concisely shows how racism is built into the fabric of society and points out why it's so difficult to get white people to acknowledge this. This book is different from other books I've read on structural/institutional racism in that the author points out explicitly racism in the UK.
While I know racism is a problem in the entire Western world, I didn't know the extent to which people of colour are impacted by racism in the UK. I also knew next to nothing about Black history in the UK and so one of my favourite chapters was the one in which Ms. Eddo-Lodge explores it.
Much of the rest of the book is similar to other books I've read on race and racism but it's always good to be encouraged to look deeper into oneself, to analyze and see where I too am complicit in upholding a white superiority worldview and how I benefit from white privilege. To root out racist ideas deep in my own psyche. It's a process that we must always work on, because racism is the foundation upon which our world is built.
I was impressed by the author's knowledge and understanding because of her young age -- when I was in my 20s, I don't think I was aware of many issues in the world. Of course, racism did not directly affect me and so I could turn a blind eye to it.
Ms. Eddo-Lodge tells why it was that she decided to stop talking to white people about race, even though that ended up with her talking more about race. I admire her optimism with which she concludes the book ("I think the side of anti-racist progress is winning."). I fear I have grown too cynical and have a difficult time sharing her optimism but hopefully it is well-deserved and she is able to see things I don't.
The author also addresses feminism and immigration though I found her essays on racism to be the strongest.
I am glad to have the Kindle version because I made so many highlights while reading this book! I will share a few in the hopes that it will encourage you too to read this book.
---"When I talk about white privilege, I don’t mean that white people have it easy, that they’ve never struggled, or that they’ve never lived in poverty. But white privilege is the fact that if you’re white, your race will almost certainly positively impact your life’s trajectory in some way. And you probably won’t even notice it."
---"Discussing racism is not the same thing as discussing ‘black identity’. Discussing racism is about discussing white identity. It’s about white anxiety."
---"It seems there is a belief among some white people that being accused of racism is far worse than actual racism.""
---"White people, you need to talk to other white people about race. Yes, you may be written off as a radical, but you have much less to lose."
---"In order to dismantle unjust, racist structures, we must see race. We must see who benefits from their race, who is disproportionately impacted by negative stereotypes about their race, and to who power and privilege is bestowed upon – earned or not – because of their race... Seeing race is essential to changing the system."
There are so many more I could share but I'll leave it with those! It was difficult to pick just five.
If you would like to read Reni's eponymous blog post that inspired this book, just click here. And if you find it helpful, inspirational, educational, or anything else, be sure to read this book.
May 25, 2021
*Thanks to "Bloomsbury Publishing" and "Our Shared Shelf" for a copy*
My mind is so full of thoughts, of the author's and of my own.
I liked how this book talked about racism of different classes all around the world and presented the insight of these situations.
But I do not agree with all the statements of the author. For example:
Laboriously, I explained,'Yes, but you can grow out your short hair if you want to. I can't change the colour of my skin to fit this beauty standard.'
The author talked about the division of feminists in this book extensively, about white feminists not understanding black feminists' situation. But ironically, she, I think, missed the whole point here. This conversation was not supposed to be about whether the incapability to match beauty standard are permanent or temporary, it's about the whole damn existence of this beauty standard.
And I really don't support the stereotype that being feminine and being feminist are mutually exclusive.
This book was biased at points. But I think experiences are supposed to be biased.
And I won't deny the anger, frustration and pain of being treated indifferently that caused the author to write this book.
All in all it was a good book about racism, but not as good about feminism.
August 5, 2018
My thoughts on this are slightly complicated. This book is incredibly important, impeccably researched, stringently argued – but possibly not quite for me. I spend an awful lot of time reading feminist texts, both academically and in my private life. I have been following the discourse closely for a few years (ever since I realized how white my formal academic background is I felt the need to remedy that) and I think the most important work in recent feminism has been done by intersectional feminists (and here especially black woman). This book gives a comprehensive overview – and it cannot be overstated how brilliantly argued and researched it is – but for me there was very little new. Then again, that seems like an unfair baseline for any work, so take my rating with a grain of salt. Because I do think everybody should read this.
For me, the chapter that was most important was the one on feminism itself – here I found a lot to mull over. Reni Eddo-Lodge shows the structures of privilege and the way these spaces that should be inclusive can end up being the opposite.
The chapters that read more like text-book entries (for example on White Privilege) are equally stringently argued but for me those did not quite work – as I said, I do think I am fairly well-read in this area. I can still see why it is important to include the bases of one’s theories in a book like this, that is not written with me in mind. It gives women of colour the tools to talk about everyday occurences and gives white people a perspective they might not have considered. And Reni Eddo-Lodge’s measured and thoughtful approach is definitely a needed one.
On a final note: I just cannot get over how brilliant the cover is. Clever, stunning, evocative.
You can find this review and other thoughts on books on my blog.
For me, the chapter that was most important was the one on feminism itself – here I found a lot to mull over. Reni Eddo-Lodge shows the structures of privilege and the way these spaces that should be inclusive can end up being the opposite.
The chapters that read more like text-book entries (for example on White Privilege) are equally stringently argued but for me those did not quite work – as I said, I do think I am fairly well-read in this area. I can still see why it is important to include the bases of one’s theories in a book like this, that is not written with me in mind. It gives women of colour the tools to talk about everyday occurences and gives white people a perspective they might not have considered. And Reni Eddo-Lodge’s measured and thoughtful approach is definitely a needed one.
On a final note: I just cannot get over how brilliant the cover is. Clever, stunning, evocative.
You can find this review and other thoughts on books on my blog.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 7,996 reviews