How to be an Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi succeeds in nearly every way--the most important of which, or so it seems to me, being making the reader think. There are more than a few passages and notions here that challenge the reader, and while some of the notions are more well-developed and convincing than others, on the whole, the book belongs on the bookshelves (or, preferably, in the hands and minds) of those who want to examine racism in the United States today.
The book is a clever and often moving mixture of personal memoir and social essay, tracing Mr. Kendi's upbringing and growth with the evolution of his theories and attitudes towards race, gender, and class. I found the mixture to add to the book's sincerity and humanity: if the book had eliminated the personal narrative, I feel it would have been too bloodless, too distant to be as effective as it was. This is at its heart a human book, despite Mr. Kendi's insistence that policy not people are at the heart of racial inequality in America.
The central thesis of the book is essentially twofold (though other readers may find more than two theses here): first, that there is no such thing as "non-racist." Mr. Kendi spends virtually the whole book explaining and supporting this notion in various permutations, but at its core, the thesis is that one cannot stake out a middle ground in the arena of race (or gender or class, but these are subsidiary points). If one is not actively fighting racism--which he terms being an "antiracist,"--then one is, by definition, perpetuating the racist policies inherent in the United States. This first thesis seems to be the one that most critics of the book have latched onto in their condemnation of Mr. Kendi's work. He does engage in some hyperbole, it's true: he claims that these mythical "non-racists" are more dangerous than people like white supremacists, which on the surface seems like a ludicrous comment. But like most difficult books, his notion requires interpretation. Mr. Kendi is not, of course, saying that an individual Black person has more to fear on a day-to-day basis from his or her kindly "non-racist" White neighbor than from an avowed, armed, unstable White supremacist--he is stating that the massive "middle" of White "non-racists" who vote for racist policies (even in ignorance of those policies) do more collective damage to the body politic than an individual Klansman might. I would admit that Mr. Kendi does not spend a great deal of time making this clear, but in my opinion, only a deliberately dishonest misreading of his text could lead one to the false conclusions most critics seem to have adopted. In other words, if one goes into the book looking to find ways to misrepresent it, one can definitely find those ways. Ironically, however, in a later chapter, Mr. Kendi faults antiracist movements themselves for audiences' misunderstanding of their messages and demands those movements get better at messaging. Perhaps Mr. Kendi could follow his own advice here, though I do not fault him for dishonest takes on his book.
His second thesis is that racism primarily exists in racist policy as opposed to individual acts of racism by individuals. He does not deny that individual people can be racist (and does not excuse Blacks from racism, either) but maintains his position that what's to blame and what needs fixing are policies and institutions. It's the difference between saying "that police officer is a racist" and "the way we police in America is racist." Kendi goes out of his way to make this point abundantly--perhaps redundantly--clear, and backs it up with endnotes (in the Kindle edition I have, the endnotes are not indexed to their respective places in the text, which makes for a maddening read). Mr. Kendi takes this point and applies it to all kinds of discrimination and power imbalances, but maintains his central focus on race.
The book is remarkably disciplined in its focus, notwithstanding the autobiographical sections, and stays on these two theses for its entire length. At times, this can become redundant and maybe a little tiresome--more than a few times, I found myself saying, "I get it," while he continued to hammer a syllogistic point home. In that, the book is actually smaller than it seems. It is not grand in scope, but what it does say it says well.
Are there inconsistencies in the book? Yes. Mr. Kendi would seem to make a point in one section only to contradict it by example in the next. I found that refreshing rather than annoying--his autobiographical sections showed in great detail how his attitudes on race and other social issues have evolved over time, and that in many ways he is still evolving. I am reminded of the Walt Whitman quote about contradictions: "I am large, I contain multitudes."
My main objection involves Kendi's dismissal of education as a starting point. He is an activist in the purest sense of the word, and has come down to the conclusion that deeds come first, attitudes second. In other words, we must change to antiracist policies first, then as these new antiracist policies take hold and become "normal," it will be possible to change attitudes. My resistance to that involves young people. Young people have a more limited ability to change policy (not NO ability, but until they reach voting age and adulthood, their facility to enact policy change is of course more limited) but are much, much more open to education. I feel education among the young is a critical first step in becoming an activist later. Even Mr. Kendi, despite his words, seems to acknowledge that in his autobiographical sections--they largely concern his education.
If you're looking for a thoughtful treatise on race, you would do well to pick this up. If you're looking to see what the fuss over CRT is about, this is a good starting point. If, on the other hand, you're looking to misread a text and cherry-pick quotes to fuel your indignant White grievance, don't bother.
Be seeing you!
The book is a clever and often moving mixture of personal memoir and social essay, tracing Mr. Kendi's upbringing and growth with the evolution of his theories and attitudes towards race, gender, and class. I found the mixture to add to the book's sincerity and humanity: if the book had eliminated the personal narrative, I feel it would have been too bloodless, too distant to be as effective as it was. This is at its heart a human book, despite Mr. Kendi's insistence that policy not people are at the heart of racial inequality in America.
The central thesis of the book is essentially twofold (though other readers may find more than two theses here): first, that there is no such thing as "non-racist." Mr. Kendi spends virtually the whole book explaining and supporting this notion in various permutations, but at its core, the thesis is that one cannot stake out a middle ground in the arena of race (or gender or class, but these are subsidiary points). If one is not actively fighting racism--which he terms being an "antiracist,"--then one is, by definition, perpetuating the racist policies inherent in the United States. This first thesis seems to be the one that most critics of the book have latched onto in their condemnation of Mr. Kendi's work. He does engage in some hyperbole, it's true: he claims that these mythical "non-racists" are more dangerous than people like white supremacists, which on the surface seems like a ludicrous comment. But like most difficult books, his notion requires interpretation. Mr. Kendi is not, of course, saying that an individual Black person has more to fear on a day-to-day basis from his or her kindly "non-racist" White neighbor than from an avowed, armed, unstable White supremacist--he is stating that the massive "middle" of White "non-racists" who vote for racist policies (even in ignorance of those policies) do more collective damage to the body politic than an individual Klansman might. I would admit that Mr. Kendi does not spend a great deal of time making this clear, but in my opinion, only a deliberately dishonest misreading of his text could lead one to the false conclusions most critics seem to have adopted. In other words, if one goes into the book looking to find ways to misrepresent it, one can definitely find those ways. Ironically, however, in a later chapter, Mr. Kendi faults antiracist movements themselves for audiences' misunderstanding of their messages and demands those movements get better at messaging. Perhaps Mr. Kendi could follow his own advice here, though I do not fault him for dishonest takes on his book.
His second thesis is that racism primarily exists in racist policy as opposed to individual acts of racism by individuals. He does not deny that individual people can be racist (and does not excuse Blacks from racism, either) but maintains his position that what's to blame and what needs fixing are policies and institutions. It's the difference between saying "that police officer is a racist" and "the way we police in America is racist." Kendi goes out of his way to make this point abundantly--perhaps redundantly--clear, and backs it up with endnotes (in the Kindle edition I have, the endnotes are not indexed to their respective places in the text, which makes for a maddening read). Mr. Kendi takes this point and applies it to all kinds of discrimination and power imbalances, but maintains his central focus on race.
The book is remarkably disciplined in its focus, notwithstanding the autobiographical sections, and stays on these two theses for its entire length. At times, this can become redundant and maybe a little tiresome--more than a few times, I found myself saying, "I get it," while he continued to hammer a syllogistic point home. In that, the book is actually smaller than it seems. It is not grand in scope, but what it does say it says well.
Are there inconsistencies in the book? Yes. Mr. Kendi would seem to make a point in one section only to contradict it by example in the next. I found that refreshing rather than annoying--his autobiographical sections showed in great detail how his attitudes on race and other social issues have evolved over time, and that in many ways he is still evolving. I am reminded of the Walt Whitman quote about contradictions: "I am large, I contain multitudes."
My main objection involves Kendi's dismissal of education as a starting point. He is an activist in the purest sense of the word, and has come down to the conclusion that deeds come first, attitudes second. In other words, we must change to antiracist policies first, then as these new antiracist policies take hold and become "normal," it will be possible to change attitudes. My resistance to that involves young people. Young people have a more limited ability to change policy (not NO ability, but until they reach voting age and adulthood, their facility to enact policy change is of course more limited) but are much, much more open to education. I feel education among the young is a critical first step in becoming an activist later. Even Mr. Kendi, despite his words, seems to acknowledge that in his autobiographical sections--they largely concern his education.
If you're looking for a thoughtful treatise on race, you would do well to pick this up. If you're looking to see what the fuss over CRT is about, this is a good starting point. If, on the other hand, you're looking to misread a text and cherry-pick quotes to fuel your indignant White grievance, don't bother.
Be seeing you!
RSS Feed