The End of Racism

Rating:
Summary: An astonishing concatenation of falsehoods
Review: I endured all the outrageous and demonstrably untrue claims of which this book is composed as long as I could. Some reviewers have already alertly pointed out his errors. I'd like to mention one I haven't seen here.

I lived during the early mid-50's, and there is just no possibility that the private sector wanted desegregation. One restaurateur in Kansas City, Missouri had the courage to get rid of his "We reserve the right. . ." signs and accept all customers. So remarkable was this action that it receives mention in a recent history of KC published by the KC Star. Back in the late 50's, I experienced a conflict of wills with one person in particular, in reference to where black persons could go and what they could do. I assure you that he was in no danger of being a liberal, and he was in the private sector. Those who don't remember those years may be victimized by this book.

The standard belief in the private sector then was that for every dollar of black business you lost, you'd make it back at least a hundredfold if you did not have blacks in your place of business. If you had a restaurant, this was unspoken but absolute gospel.

All this man's claims to find liberals as the cause of racism are such blatant lies that I'm surprised this book ever saw daylight. If I could give it a negative score, I would.

Rating:
Summary: He's a good business man
Review: I have read books like Mr. DeSouza's before and it's the same line, "Black people deserve to be discriminated against because they are inferior, but they can't help it, it's in their genes." Mr. DeSouza is not interested in helping anyone; but what he does do is exploit the history of slavery and current negative views of Blacks in this country to make a quick dollar. I give him an "A" for marketing but an "F" for scholarship. Although the book claims that it is about ending racism he never offers any solutions other than how Blacks need to change their "cultural pathologies". He even goes so far to suggest that we should put in place a society where Whites and Asians are on top, Hispanics are in the middle and Blacks are on the bottom. This may be all fun and games for some; but for me as Black women it is not fun at all. I am the one being discussed and I am the one who has to deal with the people who hold these views about me. It is constant and never relenting. After Mr. DeSouza writes his unscholarly piece he goes home and relaxes, no one treats him in a condescending manner because of his Indian (Asian) heritage, he can go far in life without having to face negative preconceptions about his mental ability. Although I am highly educated and intelligent, I am constantly faced with those less educated and intelligent than me attempting to tell me how inferior I am. Well, unfortunately since Blacks are such a small percentage of the U.S. population we will always be defamed because it is quick easy money. My recommendation is that you read the other reviews on this site, read the book and come to your own conclusion. One thing I have discovered by reading this book is that the perceptions that people have about me (Black person) will never change, and it made me realize how I am seen as not quite human by total strangers.

Rating:
Summary: It's Six Years Later.....
Review: It was six years ago that I purchased my hardcover edition, and I am STILL referring this book to people interested in understanding the subject of race and of "discrimination." My beloved first edition has been loaned to my Mexican American boss, who stuggles to understand some racial issues.

To say this incredible piece of research is merely profound would be to sacrifice it's true nature: to educate. And to see people in this forum still reading and writing about D'Souza six years later is a pure delight to me. I can't wait to see what he writes next...

Rating:
Summary: Don't listen to either side, just read it
Review: It is just as easy- and just as effective- to label someone a racist today as it was to label someone a communist in the 50's. But doing so is not making a review or even a commentary. It is simply uttering your contempt for someone which is better placed elsewhere. D'Souza is not a racist. He sat down and did A LOT of research, some considerable thinking, and came up with a conclusion on a contraversial subject. This clearly does not meet the traditional "racist as ignorant" definition. While it is unfortunate that some who do fit that description will use D'Souza's book for their own ends, demonizing the author is unhelpful. Whatever you think about his conclusions (I agree with some but not all), this book is a good place to start to develop your own opinions on the subject. The abundance of historical information and argumentation in this conservative's book will give something to compare to the evidence the liberal point of view gives you. Make your own decisions from there, but don't let other's blacklisting of the book prevent you from hearing another side to the story. It is worthy of $12 or a library trip.

Rating:
Summary: Very good in parts - less than honest in others
Review: This is an excellent book in parts - its sets the record straight on slavery, Columbus, "multiculturalism," and the vested interests in the American civil rights establishment. The book contains interesting and relevant information about crime, race, occupational patterns, and poverty supported with quotes and anecdotes as well as hard data. D' Souza tackles issues such as welfare dependency, illegitimacy, and relates it to culture, and is able to show that some cultures are "better" than others, in the same way that some civilisations are "better" than others - in their capacity for progress and self sufficiency.

But though I agree with most of his conclusions, I must say that I dont admire D'Souza as a person. On the issue of racial differences he is, frankly, confused and evasive. He presents massive amounts of data that suggest racial differences are genetic, then seems to panic and deny it all, then says that it might be true but is doesn't matter, then says that people who discuss genetic differences should take into account what conculsions it might lead to, then warns (yes) african americans that unless they get their act together, people will start to believe the geneticists. Get the picture?

He spends large parts of the well researched book discussing in great detail 'black culture' and its deficiencies, and the reasons for such a thorough treatment are not explained. It is not always clear exactly what he is getting at. Firstly, I will frankly say that I think the author uses his own racial background (Indian) to discuss black cultural pathologies in a way that no white person could ever do. I do not need to have graphic descriptions of the black underclass to know that it exists; nor do I need a description of murder to know that such crimes can and do frequently occur. Yet he goes into great detail and then leaves it at that. Secondly, his emphasis on culture is distinctly two- edged - again, it enables you to 'plumb the depths,' and because it all cultural, this offers the chance of it all being easy to solve one day (presumably more civics lessons in school? - he offers no suggestions), which justifies the author's hatchet job. To blame culture does not make it easier - if anything it blames people for something they cannot help. He lacks compassion.

In my view, races do differ for genetic reasons in IQ, crime, etc. but blaming culture is not kinder, again because it places blame in the wrong place. Worse, D'Sousa apparently rejects more 'rational' explanations for growth of the underclass - like welfare dependency, the tackling of which really would hold out some hope for improving the lot of the Black underclass (or any other underclass for that matter).

D'Sousa is also defensive, evasive and unconvincing with other issues relating to race. He states, at one point, that Iceland and Scandinavia have contributed little to the West, and comes up with the remark "and this may upset some people" (I can imagine the 2 copies of his book in Iceland upsetting their readers in my mind's eye right now). He may consider his the observation of Thomas Sowell (who he quotes elsewhere) that there is always some natural variation; and more importantly, and perhaps he hasn't been in the west for long enough, no white can every be 'upset' about a remark such as this. It only goes one way.

Rating:
Summary: This book shook me!
Review: There are already many reviews making all the points that I think are important about this book, so let me just say: D'Souza's ideas affected me deeply. After finishing the book, I thought of nothing else for weeks. And for the person who does not find truth in D'Souza'a work, well, I guess you are not a white woman living and working in South Dallas.

Rating:
Summary: A deceptive book that is not about ending racism
Review: This, falsely, titled book claims to have the solutions to the end of the race problem in this country, but that is not the real goal of this book. D'Sousa real goal is to attack white liberal, black leaders, and trying to blame them over the present state of race problems with liberalism as the main cause.

He makes a ridiculous, and unprovable, claim that black leaders and liberals are keeping the spotlight on race problems to push for more federal laws to protect minorities and affirmative action.

Another deceptive claim is that liberals and black leaders continue the Civil Rights push to keep their positions of leadership, and to keep blacks ignorant of the, so-called, fact that race problems are no longer a serious threat.

He uses the term "RATIONAL DISCRIMINATION" to explain away racist pratices in housing loans, getting a taxi, and the criminal justice system. One of the points he makes in defense of the bigoted view that blacks have criminal intent when entered shops and need to be watched is the rational belief, of shop owners, that blacks are more prone to be criminals.

There is a large amount of false information and sloppy research in this book, so I will cover three points D'Sousa made I found to be false or misleading.

1.His claim that blacks is more racist and Anti-Semitic than whites.

According to the F.B.I and the Dept. of Justice statistics on hate crimes for 1995 anti-black hate crime is 2988 and anti-white hate crimes is 1226. In this area alone whites lead three to one in committing hate crime. In addition, the incidents of white hate crime increase in 96' and 97', but dropped the last year of the study in 1998. But they continue to lead in hate crimes. They also could hold the lead in anti-semitic and gay bashing crimes.

2. While pointing out that blacks are 12% of the population D'Sousa claims that blacks comprise 39% of those arrested for assualt, 43% for rape and 55% for murder. He quotes the Annual Uniformed Crime report by the F.B.I and the Justice Dept.

D'Sousa is lying about the figures he quotes. The main reason they are false because he leaves out the overall crime rate for the black crime in this country. Below is the 1998 crime statistics from the book CRIMES IN THE UNITED STATES.

Blacks committed 36.9% of assaults, 39.1% of rapes and 46.% of murders within their total crime rate. The total black crime rate in this country is reported to be 26.0%

Whites committed 60.7% of assualts, 59.0% of rapes and 46.6% murders within the total crime rate. The total crime committed by whites in this country is 71.3%.

What D'Sousa did is distort information and statistics provided to make it sound like blacks are committing half of the crimes reported, overall, in this country.

This tactic is also used by most conservative writers and politicians, while white hate groups quote a, false, high black crime rate with an emphasizes on the rape of white women by blacks.

Regardless of this deceptive views, he supplies, a large majority of blackmen work in a variety of honest careers, and are not interested in knocking over gas stations and convenience stores on their way home.

3. Accusing Margret Sanger, the organizer of Planned Parenthood, of being racist. He uses a quote from a letter Ms. Sanger sent to Clarence J. Gamble in 1939.

"We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro Population."

Ms. Sanger did make this statement, but I read the whole letter on the Planned Parenthood site, which was not about Ms. Sanger's racist beliefs. The letter was about training black doctors to take care of pregnant blackwomen, because of here belief that blackwomen would trust black doctors more than white doctors. This was an accurate observation since racism and segregation was the common pratice at that time.

D'Sousa used a single quote from the letter to make the claim that Ms. sanger being a racist, and did not print the whole letter, which does not come close to the racist claim he made.

Dinesh D'Sousa continues the tradition of conservatives like Rush limbaugh, Ken hamblins, Walter williams, Larry elders, Thomas sowell, Robert bork and William bennett of writing books, articles and columns that claim solutions, but in reality they are more interested in attacking liberals with a ignorant blame game of the state of the country and moral values.

They also distort and downplay serious race problems, while creating a fantasized version of this country that is not accurate by its own history.

D'Sousa offers no real solution for race problems with this book and he had no intention in doing so. He did accomplish his goal of giving false information and distortions about race and liberalism. All of D'Sousa books follow a pattern of blaming and vilifying liberals, blackleaders and blacks with nothing positive said about them.

Rating:
Summary: Reactionary critics.
Review: Take an ugly-sounding passage, divest it of context, ignore the reams of footnotes that accompany the work, and VOILA! You have an angry denunciation of a 'reactionary' work! The definition to the words "reactionary" and "irony" can both be found at dictionary.com. For those of you interested in the mechanics of misinformation as it pertains to public opinion in light of documented fact, perform a search on the term "Goebbels" on your favorite search engine. The nazis had to fight tons of contrary empiric evidence in order to create and propagate a popular myth. If you hate this book on the grounds that it is at odds with your political ideology, take my advice before you post your review.

Rating:
Summary: Fa: A Long Way to Run
Review: While reading this book, I was constantly reminded of how seriously the author has allowed values--or lack of it--to colour scholarship. Was racism created in the US? Or is racism a far reacing phenomenon? For anyone who is keeping abreast present scholarship, the answer would be obvious. Racism, or discrimination (a wider term), is a global phenomenon. Go to any part of the world where people of different ethnic origins are living together. You will see racism!

I hope the author travels out of his cacoon before he attempts to write another book. From Bosnia to Malaysia to Srilanka, racism is rife in one form or the other. In some societies, the racial tension is so grievous that the parties have taken arms against each other. In that sense the US is a fortunate place. Much of the racial discrimination has been openly debated, and those who are deemed racist have been accorded their proper place in society.

It is indeed true that the very act that attempts to eradicate racism is racist in a way; but even a child knows that it is a necessary evil, that once the society is strong enough to sustain itself, when people of lesser intelligence--but nevertheless are in positions of power--cannot discriminate others based on creed, complexion or sex, affirmative action would have worn itself out.

The author may not be a racist; but he will be a friend of many who are. Those of us who are unfortunate enough to read this flawed book, can only feel sorry, and muse on the distance we still have to travel to make the world a better place--for all...

Rating:
Summary: Read things you won't see elsewhere
Review: As I recently finished this book, I said to myself that the only reason D'Souza could possibly have written this book and not damaged his career is because he is of Indian descent. A white who wrote this book would have been pilloried.

_The End of Racism_ is so comprehensive it is hard to write a review that will do it justice. So many themes are examined and so many sources were used that the bibliography alone is almost two hundred pages in length. I guess the overriding themes are the examination of "racism" a concept that D'Souza defines as being a rejection of a culture based on scientific findings, and "liberal antiracism," which was a 20th century response to scientific racism. D'Souza names the most prominent racists of the 19th century, such as Josiah Nott and Samuel Morton. They used science to determine the inferiority of various races, with special emphasis on the Black. Liberal antiracism was developed in the early 20th century by a cadre of Jews led by Franz Boas. Margaret Mead, Otto Klineberg and Ashley Montagu (Israel Ehrenberg) were all adherents of this new school of thought. Liberal antiracism sought to reject scientific racism by postulating that all races are equal, and that any differences between races are not hereditary, but due to oppression or enviroment. One can immediately see the implications of this idea, and D'Souza bases his subsequent discussions on the fallacy of this idea. It is liberal antiracism that is responsible for the pathologies of black culture, the rejection of all standardized tests to measure ability, and the rejection of supposed "Eurocentric" ideas. All government "giveaway" scams are a direct result of Boasian ideology. If all races are equal, but blacks are still lagging behind whites, then it must be oppression that is causing this. So whites must pay for it with tax dollars and lower standards. Whites must also kowtow to affirmative action, one of biggest frauds ever perpetrated on the American public. Ultimately, D'Souza comes to believe that black culture must change to fit the majority culture. D'Souza points out that while racism once was prevalent, blacks have made so many gains in the last couple of generations that their lagging is inexcusable. Black civil rights activists are revealed as scam artists out to protect their jobs and their paychecks by exploiting this lagging black underclass.

The biggest problem I have with this treatise is that D'Souza never really gives an adequate explanation of how liberal antiracism was able to spread so quickly and infect so many minds. He does mention that Boas' acolytes quickly assumed positions in the Universities. I guess we are supposed to assume that this was how the antiracist ideas were spread. If this was the way it was spread, they sure worked fast.

D'Souza really says it like it is, and the reader can almost hear the crybaby, warm and fuzzy liberal ideals smashing into shards as D'Souza demolishes their entire platform of thought. The best part is when D'Souza gives us an in-depth look at "Afrocentrism," a process in which blacks try and take total credit for everything whites have done in human history. Blacks never even had a written language or used the wheel, for Pete's sake! Every leftist in the country should be forced to read this book--again and again.