Critical Race Feminism: A Reader Book

What a mixed bag but in truth; better than expected.  This book was first published and has been on my shelf since 2009.  At first print, Obama had been elected the first African-American President in history but had not yet begun "Presidenting".  Benjamin shares his journey through several white enclaves (>90% white) which he call "Whitopias" in various places in the US.  I was a bit put off initially by Benjamin's intro in which he says "I am black. Let me warn you by saying: The "black-white race divide" bores me. [sic] This journey is about our nation's future, not about how white and black people are getting along. Hello! That is ostensibly what this book was supposed to be about. But he also shows some self awareness of his position when he says about himself "I am what whites call a "no-demand black"'my company is not predicated on whites' having to let go an ugly stereotype, untangle a stubborn view, or something like that." Benjamin is an articulate, short, very slight, amiable, dark-skinned but unimposing black person. His whole persona is cultivated to present a inoffensive, person of color so that people will feel comfortable talking with him honestly. He largely succeeded.  Well sort of…
 
This book is really about the willful re-segregation of majority/minority multicultural populations.  Specifically, small segments of white population choosing to separate to live with like-minded folks.  In other words, they seek to be around folks that are just like them…reminiscent of the Borg in STNG.  Benjamin travels to 4 enclaves all around the country (Utah, Idaho, Georgia and NYC).  As one would expect, most of these folks are very conservative, very wealthy, and/or very religious.  He finds an exception in Manhattan where wealth is the ruling force.  Most of the residents in that neighborhood are Democrats who fully supported Obama, but live in a neighborhood that is 92% white non-Hispanic.  The self-segregation is in the form of a boundary of staggering wealth and/or acceptance in a Co-op (which is clearly where the "self-segregation" comes from).  Most of the book is a sort of glib validation of things most people would anticipate.  The people described in the book are racist.  Some of them know it and some are blissfully unaware.  There is also the fomentation of resentment and fear of the "other".  There is a selfish protection of privilege.  There is some religious bigotry at play. Most of all there seems to be some grand feats of self delusion . "Alice says that many Californian transplants to Idaho are not racist, but "want to stick to their kind."

Rampant racism, sexism and maintenance of the white male patriarchy along with some interesting insights. For example, his defining golf in terms of self esteem: "On this landscaped haven within a haven, away from the cacophony of politics and the feminization of American culture'including the touchy-feely demands of her homes'white men can fortify their male friendships, their competitive drive, their free will, and their self-worth." Self-fulfilling prophecies: "Americans associate a homogenous white neighborhood with higher property values, friendliness, orderliness, hospitability, cleanliness, safety, and comfort. These seemingly race-neutral qualities are subconsciously inseparable from race and class in many whites' minds." Stunning cognitive dissonence: "Jim added "It's the same thing that happened in the black community. A lot of young men are like, 'I don't want to have the fool's job flipping burgers at Burger King.' You dig what I'm saying? We're gonna have a buildup of a criminal underclass, 'cause it ain't cool to be a tomato picker or a hamburger flipper." Ole Jim cannot imagine anyone but blacks flipping burgers and picking tomatoes and doesn't understand why they don't value an honest job. And a surprising bit of recent history of immigration legislation that has gone forgotten in 10 short years and the existence of "Numbers USA "a NRA like organization (except its concern was with illegal immigration) that owns politicians: "Numbers USA belongs to a "network of hate groups," which are "connected to each other through their staffs, boards of directors, and ideology," contends Janet Murguía, president and CEO of the National Council of La Raza, the largest national Latino civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States. "We passed an immigration reform through the U.S. Senate in 2006. But in 2007 we lost sixteen votes in the Senate on immigration reform that was not terribly different from the previous bill. Numbers USA generated those phone calls which stopped the Senate's effort to reform immigration. Behind the scenes, some senators were honest with us, and said, 'This vote was not about public policy, it's about racism.' What they meant was that they were getting very ugly phone calls'enough to shut down the Capitol switchboard'and while those calls were often unreasonable and even offensive, they were enough to provoke a response and change votes." Remember this book was written pre-Obama. Interesting that the rhetoric hasn't changed in 15 years. "Decades in the running, a right-wing drumbeat continues warning Americans that "government is on your back," "you should keep your own money," "let the market take care of it." This political outlook feeds existing resentment over race, including "high taxes" for public services (assumed to be wasted on minorities). This stubborn, pervasive mind-set sows doubts about the viability of "one nation for all" and continually fertilizes popular Republican and corporate myths explaining economic hardship (too much government regulation, high taxes, and wasteful spending). It remains to be seen whether Democratic political victories in 2006 and 2008 and a bruising economic downturn will shake America loose from its thirty-year love affair with conservative dogma. "Deregulation." (Blush.) "Privatization." (Wink.) "Rising tides lift all boats." (Smile.) Even with a Democratic President and Congress, "regulation" still remains a pejorative word. Ummm, the answer is nope it didn't shake it at all. Benjamin also mentions several things about politics 10 years ago that are frighteningly familiar and prescient: "The geography of opportunity'or, the geography of homogeneity'is becoming frighteningly entrenched. Such geography forecasts trouble for our democracy."
"The rest of America, beware: Politics in Whitopia may transform its voters' hobbyhorses'school "choice," taxpayer and private property rights, gated communities, and "color-blind" indifference'into sacred cows."
"This brand of racial centrism disguises the conservative tenor of the new white flight. This outlook champions taxpayer rights, subdivisions and gated communities, and children's school choice, while granting ordinary whites, and the pols who pursue them, the license to deny that race is a factor in their decision-making and to minimize it in public debate. Out of idealism and self-interest, marshmallow centrists prefer "color-blind" perspectives, policies, and politicians."
"Here's the rub: Many Whitopians willfully buck the American social contract. With the exception of military service and symbolic patriotism, they vocally question their responsibility to our government and claim to expect no benefit from it, or so-called "interference." Characteristically, few red-state conservatives understand or acknowledge how handsomely and disproportionately the federal government subsidizes them and their states." He left out "states rights" Benjamin also brings up the wealth gap which in his view leads even more to segregation by color than racism. His point is made in his example of NYC enclave where wealth provides a vehicle for weeding out people of color. Benjamin was talking about the wealth gap before it became popular. "My journey through Whitopia reveals how increasing social inequality in America, even among whites, is not the casual result of "free markets," but the product of deliberate political choices that cater to rich people's interests and general partisanship."
"In terms of wealth, America is now the most unequal country in the industrialized world."

Benjamin does say some questionable things in an effort to be fair: "It's common to have racism without "racists." It is impossible to have racism without racists. What Benjamin is doing here is playing fast and loose with the definition of racist presumably to make the book more appealing to a target audience. Implicit forgiveness for the paranoia and self-serving need to preserve white privilege. For example, people can live in neighborhoods with racist bylaws; but that doesn't mean they actively support them or that they would have actively supported their passing. For me, silence is tacit acceptance (the whole "I'm not racist, but I'm ok with racist policies on the books that don't affect me or my family"). If you see something, say something! Another questionable quote: "Neither you're-on-your-own conservative indifference nor ill-conceived multiculturalism, "sensitivity," and asymmetrical concessions help our integration ordeal." At no point in the book does Benjamin discuss multiculturalism, "sensitivity and asymmetrical concessions". It isn't what the book is about. This book showcases "white" asymmetry and in my view demonstrates no sensitivity towards multiculturalism within the communities explored in the book. In short, he hasn't supported this statement. Smacks of both-siderism.

In the end, I really liked this book. It was written as social commentary, but reading it 10 years later turns it into a bit of history. Benjamin's accounts are by no means scientific or realistically representative of anything. It is a snapshot of time across communities where he interacted with the most willingly vocal. The true believers. In some cases, I can imagine some of his interviewees thinking their commentary was ill advised. But maybe not. They appeared to be honest accounts and in my experience people don't change much. In other words, I can imagine that most of the people in the book would be Trump supporters…especially the anti-immigration Utah bunch. Most of these people also think they are good people and of good character. In my world they are horrible people. It's an interesting dichotomy. Benjamin works hard to be as unbiased as he can be (he is a dark-skinned black man in the middle of wealthy, white enclaves in the rock bed of conservatism). He doesn't have any illusions, but I did get the impression that overall, he liked many of the people he talked with (as long as they stayed away from the subject of race). For me this was a worthwhile journey.

4 Stars

I have a hardcover edition but read a kindle copy from library.