The End of Racism

Rating:
Summary: Dangerous, ugly, reactionary
Review: There's something distasteful about reviewing a book as unsavory and ill-intentioned as "The End of Racism." No matter how vociferous the critic's cries of condemnation, some readers will be intrigued enough to lay down $30 and prolong the book's stay in the spotlight. But perhaps Dinesh D'Souza's muddled polemic demands more than a quick dismissal. While commentators across the political spectrum found it easy to reject "The Bell Curve"'s rancid resurrection of extinct biological-predestination theories, many on the right will accept "The End of Racism," with its 2,200 footnotes and this-is-the-final-word title. Most important, it represents an important step -- backward -- in race thinking.

Not long ago, neoconservative sociologists acknowledged that whites had spent three centuries digging a hole for African-Americans but said that they should climb out without help. D'Souza takes this a step further. He isn't content to shift responsibility for racial hostility and urban despair onto the black underclass itself. Revising history furiously, he questions whether slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, and employment discrimination bear *any* responsibility for the state of black America. "What do Americans today owe blacks because of slavery?" he asks. "The answer is: probably nothing." D'Souza wants to abolish not white racism but white guilt. If readers are to feel anything about race, it should be disdain for the liberal intellectuals who have insisted on treating blacks like people. Plus, of course, disdain for blacks and their "cultural deficiencies" -- drugs, guns, illegitimacy, and so on. (D'Souza's lengthy lecture on that topic is highlighted by the findings that Afrocentrists are nutty, the NAACP is out of touch, and rap music is crude. Stop the presses!)

African-American deficiencies are key to D'Souza's most revisionist line of discussion, about current-day racism, which, he says, takes the form of "rational discrimination." "Rational discrimination," he explains, "is based on accurate grou! p generalizations that may nevertheless be unfair to particular members of a group." He argues that taxi drivers who pass by black men, store owners who refuse to hire blacks, and women who cross the street at the sight of a black man aren't racists but "amateur statisticians acting on impressionistic but not unreasonable generalizations.... In this context, a bigot is simply a sociologist without credentials." Got that, bigots? No need to give your prejudice a second thought. In fact, traditional racism no longer exists, says D'Souza, who calls for repealing the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Dubbing institutional racism "a nonsense phrase," he says that racism can exist only in individuals' hearts -- and that whites' innate antipathy toward African-Americans has dissipated. This assertion dissolves with one statistic D'Souza cites almost offhandedly: Nearly two-thirds of Americans have "problems" with intermarriage.

Many of D'Souza's arguments are equally problematic, particularly since he hedges his most controversial statements and buries his main points. Under cloying chapter titles and headings ("The Unbearable Whiteness of Being"), D'Souza's Swiss-cheese arguments flounder in a roiling sea of quotes and anecdotes, with fringe and mainstream figures cited interchangeably, as though Khalid Abdul Muhammad headed the Democratic Party. One contorted chapter argues that (because a few Northern blacks owned slaves) the institution of slavery was purely economic and not at all racially charged; D'Souza's use of sources is so nakedly selective that the reader needs no history degree to brush off the line of reasoning.

D'Souza portrays Columbus as a humanitarian, slavery as benevolent, segregation as a system erected to *protect* blacks. "What distinguished Western colonialism was neither occupation nor brutality but a countervailing philosophy of rights that is unique in human history," he writes. Considering white America's beneficence, D'Souza wonders why blacks aren't more grateful. "[I]t seems puzzling that a ! group that is the unquestioned beneficiary of systematized preferences should be doing anything other than celebrating its racial good fortune," he muses.

His concluding policy proposals are familiar social-Darwinist rollbacks, with cursory solutions: "The black problem can be solved only through a program of cultural reconstruction in which society plays a supporting role but which is carried out primarily by African Americans themselves." In other words: Whites -- relax. Say what you want, think what you want, hire who you want. Blacks -- you're on your own.

Rating:
Summary: A voice of reason in a world of confusion.
Review: After listening to Mr.Dsouza argue his case for the end of affirmative action during a Brown University debate, I thought I had just witnessed the messiah. I then decided to buy his book, The End of Racism(at amazon.com). In this refreshing and scholarly book Mr. D'Souza outlines the history of the black race and their origins in the United States. He effectively portrays an accurate description of American slavery by using numerous primary sources and historical journals of the time. One of his most important conclusions about slavery is the fact that Western Society was the first society to end slavery, first in England and then followed by the United States. It was quite the accomplishment, ending a brutal practice which at that time was embedded in almost every culture in the world. D'Souza also traces the roots of the Civil Rights Movement and staunchly defends its founder, Martin Luther King. In addition, the myth of affirmative action is dispelled using Martin King's vision of a colorblind society where men are judged on the content of their character, not the color of their skin. D'Souza doesn't just complain about the current race debate in America, he offers a bold initiative to end it. I'll stop now and let you find the rest out for yourself.

Rating:
Summary: "Essential reading for all Americans"
Review: D'Souza's remedy for racism is perhaps the most critical element of the book. We as a society must embrace the classical distinction between civilization and barbarism. To do this we must first reject the flawed assumptions of cultural relativism. If not, race issues and racism will always be an inapproachable taboo.

Rating:
Summary: Everything you ever needed to know about racism and slavery
Review: Finally, something about race between the two extremes. Those extremes are the bigotry expressed only in small groups about "those people" and the starry eyed civics lesson that "we just need to hug and get along - then all will be wonderful." The history of slavery and racism is well done and fascinating. The analysis of racism and discrimination issues is sensitive yet appears to be VERY scientific and objective. Maybe too objective for some. You should be able to win any argument about racial issues with the referenced studies after reading this book. The weakness of the book is its lack of solutions for our racial problems. Perhaps that is another message - maybe another book.

Rating:
Summary: A Reactionary View of Race in Society
Review: This book is a right-wing diatribe to enable conservative whites to rationalize their own racial bigotry and discrimination. The book examines so-called black pathology without ever examining its root cause - white pathology (slavery, legalized racial discrimination, segregation, white violence against blacks, etc.). Plagued by shoddy scholarship, generalizations, and historial inaccuracies this is a work of academic fraud. This book can only appeal to readers who believe, deep in their hearts, that blacks in America are an intellectually and morally inferior class. If you read this book, don't buy it - get it through the library. Don't make the mistake that I did by contributing to D'Souza's bottom line.

Rating:
Summary: One of the best books about racism ever written
Review: One of my friends recommended this book to me and I read it. A couple of days later, we both raved about how D'Souza traced the path from the slave trade to Mead and the Boasian world view to today's black culture (a far cry from Duke Ellington and the Harlem Renaissance). Also, The End of Racism carries an very extensive list of sources to read further. This tome affirmed the hope that all people will look at one another and see not their color but their character. He who buys this book will not be disappointed.

Rating:
Summary: Simply Awesome! Let's End Racism
Review: Simply awesome! One of the best, most accurate books on race relations I have ever read. D'Souza (himself a minority from India) uses his unique perspective and unique honesty, which add credence to his passionate thesis that racism need not be an intractable problem in 21st century America. Most noteable is D'Souza's condemnation of the "destructive elements" that are engendered into black culture and embraced by blacks (particularly male youths) in a way that serves to alienate them from society. Also fascinating is D'Souza's defense of "rational discrimination," which is a term that embraces the idea that, although morally reprehensable in its potential effects, much of everyday racism perpetrated by whites against blacks is "rational." Probably one of the most controversial aspects of the book by "skimming reviewers," his concept of "rational discrimination" is thought provoking and original, yet hardly a justification for arbitrary racism. Overall, D'Souza is at his lucid and heart-felt best in this book. D'Souza tells why liberal policies haven't and won't work will offering his own convictions of how, as the title suggest, to END RACISM

Rating:
Summary: A compelling read
Review: As usual, Mr. D'Souza provides readers with the kind of inciteful, well-documented detail which has become his hallmark. This book is a compelling read which exposes the societal havoc created by crass politicians and willy-nilly business leaders. Because so much of what we know about the causes of deteriorating race relations comes from a liberal-slanted press, Mr. D'Souza's expose of the surrender of common sense, law and political leadership is a must read. Paul J. Walkowski, Co-Author, "From Trial Court to the United States Supreme Court"

Rating:
Summary: Disagree with this scary book
Review: I thought "End of Racism" would be about how to *end* the very real phenomena of racism that is based on the inexistent concept of 'race' (see any encyclopaedia). Instead, the book seems to continue the disease, but in a new form. For what? So it can take us another few centuries to identify the problem in its mutated form before we actually try to solve it? As for stupid and dangerous ideas like different peoples being more inferior/superior than others - what nonsense! Such lies leave an awful taste in my mouth. I find that the book just perpetuates ignorance and it might do worse if taken seriously: cause new troubles.

I have never lived in or visited America, and must ascribe my knowledge of its social situations to just the local TV. But I feel the situation of African Americans to some extent has parallels in the unhappy state other peoples find themselves in: Native Americans, the Maori people of New Zealand, the indigenous peoples of South Africa, the Australian Aboriginals, the Gypsies etc. Although the symptoms are different in each case (in some communities, the reaction is violence or breaking the law, in others it is drinking or an unwillingness to conform), the causes might be similar. These are all peoples who have been been separated from their traditions, cultures, etc., most often in very violent and oppressive ways. Other cultures, foreign to theirs, have been imposed on them.

Isn't it possible, that like a grown-up still dealing with trauma endured in childhood, a community as a whole can be going through the same thing? Having only studied about the terrible centuries of slavery, I can but imagine its impact in making a community feel devalued. It can hardly be surprising that the past affects the present, the grown-up still trying to come to terms with his unfortunate youth. Different communities in such countries might live in the same present, but their pasts are different, and can be very influential in how each copes with current situations. Removing the centuries-long traumatic effects of slavery or other oppression in what is still a very short time would be hard. This would be even more difficult, if not impossible, if the wrong methods were used to try to heal the effects of past wrongs. As for positive discrimination, I don't see it working in most cases. Of course, I like the idea of special scholarships, funding and extra help in unfamiliar territory like `getting a job' for those who just finished school. But not positive discrimination on one side and pushing back the previously-favoured on the other. This only segregates current generations, and can lead to future resentment.

It would be good to look into whether the cause for present difficulties in these cases is *because of* human communities having been separated from their original cultures. In many countries, people have been robbed of their millennia-old wisdom and traditions, and so are now unable to go back to the teachings of their communities. Having their pasts erased, a feeling of not belonging or even resentment is only natural.
Once they were allowed to go back to their traditions, Maori in New Zealand have become much more accepting of and comfortable in the present society. They also have a better overall well-being, because of the support given by being part of their own ancestral form of society. Maybe in America, this could be the case as well? As more Native Americans go back to their spiritual roots and spend time in their communities, their overall well-being could also increase. They might not have the feeling of loss, of a robbed past, because they have a living present and future. And perhaps if there are African-Americans wishing to investigate their animist roots, they might find a peace and hope in their ancient philosophical beliefs and myths. I can very much believe that it is when people's traditions have been forcibly stolen, their past erased, their original communities violently disbanded, that they lose any chance of happiness and do not really have the ability to truly live for a future. (Unless they've found some other culture to replace it with, which they think equally-acceptable).
With former-colonies, it's slightly different. In my own country of India, people have been mistreated and oppressed for centuries. Eg. According to British records, 25 million Indians died between 1800 and 1900 (this is only a portion of the time that they were in charge), without the British caring much. Many of the deaths were because of famine, induced by the Crown taking away desperately needed provisions or hiking prices so that people couldn't afford them. India's people were able to move on after Independence, even if only just, because they were able to fall back on culture: they had managed to hang on to it. It's a slow process of healing, and one day we'll be fine.

If any other peoples had undergone the slavery and torments that African-American people suffered, the former would be in the plight that the latter are now in. As it is, I wonder that African-Americans have been diligently trying, and often succeeding, to reconcile the past with the present - in spite of past wrongs. I do believe that the solution to current difficulties lies in their hands themselves (although everyone else can help if so willing and able). They have to search for what kind of culture they need that can help them in the present, what kind of community they require to rebuild their confidence and support them with exorcising the difficulties they had faced. I don't mean a new form of segregation keeping sub-communities of America separate, I just mean a culture or traditions African-Americans can turn to for guidance, that understands them uniquely. Perhaps looking to their roots in African animism might provide starting points. Celebrating their far-off past, but also their current identity as Americans.

Unfortunately, in Africa at least, the end of racism is not in sight. Around the start of the 20th century, 80% of Africa was still animistic. In the 1980s/90s, this was only 30%. I shudder to guess what it might be now. Soon people with African ancestry can't even look back with love, admiration and pride at where they came from, what their ancestors knew, their heritage. No longer will *anyone* be able to look for inspiration at what had been there relatively unchanged for millennia.

And as for Sudan, for a long while now - much longer than the news has informed the masses of, a deadly war has been raging. Here, one religion is using unspeakable violence to punish 'incorrectly practising' followers and to force-convert the rest of the population. And another is using bribing and blackmail to get converts. The few animists remaining have the worst end of the deal.
The destruction of the ancient and peaceful animistic belief systems of the continent are just a perpetuation of that old disease of racism.

I wish to remark on Manish Gyawali's review from 9 Oct 2004. His review stated quote (1) "Rakshas, the demon, is almost always black" and (2) "every Indian comes to this country <America> expecting to have a run-in with an armed black guy who wants his money":

About (1) Rakshasas had long ago been translated as demons in English, but this is not appropriate as some are good and others bad. They come in a huge range of colours (which have nothing to do with their `good- or badness') incl. green, blue, yellow, purple, grey, black, white. These last 2 refer to the *actual* colours black and white, not any human shades. Rakshasas are *not* humans, but are seen as mythical antagonists to humans, and have magical powers. Indian Gods and other Hindu mythical beings also come in different colours. Eg. Indra is gold, Kali is black and her husband Rudra is white and as Shiva he is violet or ash-grey. Rama and Krishna are different shades of blue, Lakshmi is Pink, Meenakshi is green, etc. Many of these change colours or have different colours in different (versions of) stories. Also, the various Hindu characters and Gods, including Rakshasas, often have non-human numbers of arms, legs, heads and other parts. Some are huge giants and others are animals or mountains etc. in their natural state, but able to take on more human-like forms - with a few excessive limbs. Last time I checked, no human I've seen matched any or all of these criteria.
Christian schools in India, like the one I attended for a year, tend to teach selectively. So I've heard the `bad Rakshasa is black' and `good Deva is white' propaganda before. It's their way to divide and convert - sorry, conquer.
It doesn't occur to modern man that people from long ago *literally meant* different coloured non-human characters when they wrote/told their interesting myths by the fireside. Is it too hard to conceive that our human ancestors had an imagination and used it to make their tales more interesting and colourful by inventing new creatures? According to the way people nowadays dissect the workings of the minds of ancients, it would seem all the people living millennia back had little intelligence and no creativity
I visited a Marae, a set of spiritual community houses of the Maori people of New Zealand. One large wall had paintings that depicted Maori Gods who, like in Hindu mythology, were different coloured (green, black, blue, white, etc.) and giants. This also occurs in religions all over the world. Are we to accuse all of them of racism? Oh, please.
My parents, who are teachers, took me to Africa for 2 years to document some of the peoples' original religions and traditions. They later taught what they learnt to the children at the schools back in India. We stayed in a number of animist communities, all of which were very loving and accepting of us. Several of these animist traditions also had Gods that vary greatly in appearance (including Gods in various colours) and fascinatingly interesting myths concerning these. Will conversion-centric religions go and tell their children that their ancestors were racist too? Or maybe that's an honour reserved purely for Indians, because people from different parts of India look superficially different (with external forces hoping to create division based on appearance).

About (2) One can hardly speak for every Indian. The children at the interconnected set of Hindu schools (all over India) that my parents teach at, learn about many indigenous peoples and cultures of the world and are taught to see the unifying commonality in this interesting diversity. These children learn to appreciate differences in appearance and culture, as have their parents and communities who often studied at the same schools. That accounts for over 100,000 non-bigotted Indians over the last few decades who I can speak for.
My cousin went to work in the US. The only thing he was warned about was to check that all the food he bought was beef-free. The only impressions of America that the average Indian can gain comes from the American programming available in India. For instance, US police dramas at times stereotype, often showing African-Americans as using guns or committing crime. But I'd sooner blame the biased foreign programming, where this nonsense originates, than Indian society itself.

Rating:
Summary: A slanderous book, even if does have a few good insights
Review: Having come from a culture not very different from D'Souza's, I can understand and empathize with him. There is no doubt in my mind that for me the United States is the best country in the world to live in. I have a degree of freedom I never had in my old country. But how well do I know this country? I've never lived in some crumbling project in the Bronx and I've never had to work minimum wage in multiple deadbeat jobs just so I could earn enough to send my kids to college. I look at America from the perspective of an outsider, considering the things it gives me as much more than I could expect back home, but can I be sure that the same opportunities are afforded to everyone?

But on the question of racism, I think I understand his mind. Indian society is quite racist, and blacks are viewed pretty much as subhuman. Every Indian comes to this country expecting to have a run-in with an armed black guy who wants his money. Call it tradition, culture if you will. In Hindu mythology the Rakshas, the demon, is almost always black. D' Souza may be a Christian, but a rakshas is something every South Asian understands.

And South Asians have carried their prejudices into the New World with even more vigor.Indian immigrants are perhaps the least likely people to venture into black neighborhoods, because you are told back home to avoid those areas as much as you can. Stories of blacks going about with infected HIV syringes and attacking white people are not uncommon in South Asia.But while most of his fellow immigrants from that part of the world are content to experess their racism by merely avoiding contact with blacks or noting how worthless they are in the security of their homes, D'Souza has decided to address the issue openly.

So yes, he does come from a certain cultural background that makes racism relatively easy to indulge in. As for blacks so to for whites however. The cultural legacy of the British in India makes it easy for many Indians to believe that Europeans are simply superior to other races. Many Indians look at the chaos and unpredictability of modern India and wonder if it really was a good thing their country was de-colonized so early. Of course India is a supremely complex country and there are infinite points of view but it is a fact that Anglophiles are still quite common there.

There are many immigrant South Asians who sympathize with blacks however. Many feel a kinship with a people that was subject to domination just like they were. Many come to the United States knowing that while it offers much, it has not always been fair to everyone. Many realize that their cultural upbringing does not have to be taken too literally and projected into a country they really do not know much about. Many realize that they can make a good living without slandering a whole race. And most important, many realize that they are simply ignorant of what America really is to make unqualified assumptions. None of these people would want to live anywhere else, but they wouldn't assume that everybody felt the same way either.

I should have given this book one star, given the ugly racism displayed in it, but since there were some pretty good counterarguments, I give it two. Or maybe the extra star is on account of his being a South Asian and I wouldn't want to squash anyone who comes from my part of the world, no matter how repulsive his views are.