If you’re reading this, you’re probably white. As a self-help tool, this book is largely for you…
To a person of colour, it’s been described to me as more of a crystallisation into words of what was already clear, and a very lived experience. Its value to white people is proportional to the number who are willing to read it, and to consider its message deeply and thoughtfully – especially those in positions of authority and leadership.
You will learn things from this book that you probably never knew – evidence in its own right of a bias in our upbringing, of education and history lessons, and in opportunity throughout education and employment, all of which either still exist today or still influence the way we live, see and treat each other.
Premise
Part dissection, part polemic, arising from an original blog post by author Reni Eddo-Lodge, the book is borne of a frustration at the failure of white society to comprehend the insidiousness of racism. It analyses the roots and branches of racism in Britain today, and the persistent, often instinctive, measures we take to muzzle any rational and honest analysis of it.
When I hear people of colour challenge structural racism, it is rare for them to be popularly heeded and supported by their white peers.
Eddo-Lodge explains that we have a simplified view, defined by far-right extremism and offensive vocabulary, but something much more insidious is at play if we only opened our eyes to it: “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… that it is about moral values, when instead it is about the survival strategy of systemic power.”
Our profession is largely full of good people, but that doesn’t absolve us of our responsibilities to our colleagues.
She goes on to explain: “When swathes of the population vote for politicians and political efforts that explicitly use racism as a campaigning tool, we tell ourselves that huge sections of our electorate simply cannot be racist, as that would render them heartless monsters. But this isn’t about good and bad people.”
Not just about colour
Racism goes deeper than the colours we see – or claim not to see – and condensing the issue into interpersonal discrimination or nothing avoids more insidious problems. Eddo-Lodge illustrates this with evidence from research in the fields of education and employment.
In one example, a study by the Department for Work and Pensions in 2009 showed that applicants with the same qualifications and skills, but with Asian or African-sounding names, were called to interview far less often than those sounding more Anglo-Saxon or white.
Strive for diversity
Many reasons exist as to why diverse workplaces – and therefore professions – are beneficial, and ours should reflect the society whose animals we treat, so we must strive to achieve more diversity.
The demographics of our country and our profession will continue to change, yet if barriers like these remain unchallenged, we will remain predominantly white.
To make our profession – and indeed our nation – fairer, we need to share rational discourse about racism, and we need to listen, avoid responding with offence, aggression, tears and decrying limitations on our freedom of speech with accusations such as reverse racism.
Pathway for change
This is not a book without hope. Eddo-Lodge offers a pathway for change by listening, intervening when we see injustices, addressing inequality and accepting responsibility for our role in propping up the status quo.
Striving to treat others more fairly and dismantling barriers does not create barriers for ourselves; we are the majority, and are already well catered for.
Starting point
You may feel that the path to navigate these issues is too tricky. Phrases like “walking on eggshells”, “can’t say right for saying wrong”, “political correctness gone mad” – all weak excuses for allowing injustice to remain unchecked safe in our position of privilege, because it is easier than reading this book for some insight, for example.
There is much to learn, but learn we should, and this book is a good starting point.
It may not be comfortable reading, and as a white person you may feel slighted at times – but that’s your privilege crying out, and evidence that your learning is justified.
Comments
8 responses to “REVIEW: Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race”
Well you can’t really win against an argument like that can you? Even by arguing the point I must simply be a white racist, is that right?
By perpetuating the idea that skin colour or cultural heritage can be defined as “race”, you only serve to enshrine and endorse the false concept that “we are different but should get along”.
The “privilege” in the UK is not about “whiteness”, it’s about access to education, land ownership, political favours. I see no evidence of better outcomes for the “poor white trash” than for “non-whites”, except perhaps the insults are different?
What you consistently describe as “racism” is in many cases “xenophobia” – an evolutionary behaviour common to all animals (and plants). In a country which was historically northern european in population, the “xeno” is typically dark-skinned. In China, the “xeno” would be european. In Rwanda in the 1990s, the “xeno” for a Hutu was a Tutsi.
Of course this trait is highly undesirable in modern society, but it exists nevertheless. “Treatment” will require understanding not chastisement, and constantly telling “white” people that they are fundamentally the only ones at fault, and irredeemably racist, is as ignorant as it is ill-advised.
Hi Charles, thanks for the feedback. It’s predictable that your first instinct is to want to argue the point, which is the essence of this book, which I encourage you to read. Rather than listen to and accommodate the feelings and lived experiences of people of colour, we seem to want to ‘argue the point’ despite having had no experience of it ourselves.
I am struggling to find common ground with you on your next assertion, which is that “we are different but should get along” is a ‘false concept’. I think it’s an entirely true and appropriate humanist concept for any civilised society and the humans therein. I’d hate to think of you as a lost cause, but if that’s genuinely your feeling then we may struggle. You make a similiar assertion by claiming that all behaviour which exists in the animal kingdom is acceptable for us. Xenophobia and the racism which it feeds into may exist in nature, but then so does infanticide, coprophagia and incest, but again, as a civilised race we strive for better and your case in point, Rwanda, only serves to highlight why ‘xeno’phobia should be an ‘instinct’ we work hard to overcome.
Your final point has simply come from your internal wranglings and not from this book or my discussion of it. White people are not unique in their propensity to discriminate but they do however overwhelmingly control the political and cultural status quo, and therefore bear a higher level of responsibility for ensuring that it is as fair as possible. Reading this book with an open mind, without resorting to defensive contortions is a good place to start. Nobody is irredeemable Charles. All the best.
Sorry Alistair, I’m sorry you feel some form of guilt for what your recent ancestors may or may not have done, or your sense of “white privilege”. I have no such qualms, because I have only ever recognised Pan sapiens, a fairly simple-minded species available in a variety of historic environmental physical adaptations, but emotionally, behavioural and intellectually comparable, i.e. we are not different. It is your view that we are different but should get along that is the racist one.
Recognising something exists is not to argue that is acceptable, it is just to say that it exists. Get off your high moral horse, I don’t seek your approval. You won’t cure xenophobia with bullying any more than you cure bullying by bullying.
The point of my responses is not to persuade you of anything, nor to change anything, any more than these articles in VT are much more than woke virtue-signalling. Rather, I will continue to challenge those who jump on the bandwagon of George Floyd’s tragic murder and attempt to exploit it for book sales or a political philosophy, or the November US elections, or Brexit.
I will also challenge those who argue that being Charles Cullen has opened more doors or exposed me to less discrimination than being […]. What has opened doors has been my education, fluent English, my British passport, bloody-minded stubbornness and an intolerance of demagogues.
This book is 3 years old, and the original blog 8 years old. The examples, whilst undoubtedly true, do not inform, nor instruct. The “cure” for Xenophobia is for something or someone to no longer seem “different”.- this book has nothing to offer by affirming the concept of race nor solutions beyond the platitudes we hear from establishment.
The veterinary industry is disintegrating, as will much of society over the next few years. Don’t blame the 50% drop-out at 6 years post-Uni as being due to “people like me”, as the BVA/RCVS like to do.
I await the wave of further woke sentiment.
For statistics and research information about evidence of racism in terms of the potential for worse outcomes in comparison to “poor white trash”, there is some in this book, but I also recommend ” Natives, Race and Class in the Ruins of Empire” by Akala which discusses the juxtaposition of race and class which you allude to. No doubt poor white people are underprivileged and we ought work hard as a society to help, nobody is saying that equality of opportunity for POC ought to come at the expense of white people. In fact poor white people are likely, in many ways, to have more in common with POC than their wealthy establishment white counterparts, and yet the irony is that the white establishment has worked hard to direct much of the blame for white working class deprivation towards the BAME community. But white people in this country will not face discrimination or be deprived of opportunity because of the colour of their skin, but people of colour face that directly and insidiously throughout life, as this book and others can help you appreciate. That was kind of the synopsis of the review!
I already said that to both of you. You both predictably miss the point, but then the article is only written to trigger “my kind” of response. Why do assume I am not “BAME”, though I won’t identify with such a repulsive term myself?
One could argue, and I think Charles was trying to, that nobody faces discrimination because of the colour of their skin, they face it because of class (or perceptions of). Eg, most middle and upper-class white people in this country would have no problem living next door to an Indian neurosurgeon and his family, or a black lawyer. However, if a white working class family, or Irish Travellers moved in next door, they would be less impressed. A black man and a white man who have both attended Oxbridge have much more in common than either does with ‘white-van-man’.
I’ve read it Alistair, and much like it. My point is what is your point? You offer no explanation or context, and I consider these articles pointless. Read what I said again, properly
I’m sorry my piece has caused you so much anguish and annoyance. I hope it doesn’t ruin your weekend.