What do you think?
Rate this book
Racial Formation in the United States
Twenty years since the publication of the Second Edition and more than thirty years since the publication of the original book, "Racial Formation in the United States" now arrives with each chapter radically revised and rewritten by authors Michael Omi and Howard Winant, but the overall purpose and vision of this classic remains the same: Omi and Winant provide an account of how concepts of race are created and transformed, how they become the focus of political conflict, and how they come to shape and permeate both identities and institutions. The steady journey of the U.S. toward a majority nonwhite population, the ongoing evisceration of the political legacy of the early post-World War II civil rights movement, the initiation of the 'war on terror' with its attendant Islamophobia, the rise of a mass immigrants rights movement, the formulation of race/class/gender 'intersectionality' theories, and the election and reelection of a black President of the United States are some of the many new racial conditions "Racial Formation" now covers.
344 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1986
64 people are currently reading
2338 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews
March 20, 2012
Another foundational book of racial theory, there is so much to love here. I found it immensely useful in thinking through both race and racism. I loved its focus on how things change, what was successful and what was not of the tremendous movements of the 1960s and 70s, and the how things were shaping up in the 1990s, at the moment when it was written. Such a focus is vital for those committed to action, and there is a lot to think over here in strategizing for lasting changes towards some semblance of social justice.
The opening is indeed a bit slow and it's a bit of work to get through the main threads of racial theory to date. Important work though, because such threads still exist and are part of both grassroots and intellectual movement and mobilization today. For the most part I found it clear, well-argued, and quite readable, but some of the terminology definitely put me off a bit, it wasn't intuitive really, but again, worth thinking through and more than helpful. Still, any book that requires you to know Althusser's concept of overdetermination in advance is going to take some work.
Essentially they argue that ideas of race are constructed through an ongoing political/ideological/cultural struggle, so for example in the 1960s there was an uprising of views coming from the civil rights and black power movement that challenged the dominant views of race, and indeed changed it in ways that continue on today in spite of conservative and neoliberal challenges. Each of these formulations of what race means are what Omi and Winant call a racial project.
A summary of their argument:
The battle is over this 'common-sense' formulation, and the structures it is entwined with. Omi and Winant see the majority of America's history as racial dictatorship, and it is hard to argue they are wrong. From America's founding until the civil war this common-sense (itself constructed over the years) understood non-whites as less than whites, as slaves or barbarians. Reconstruction was a brief opening, but in 1877 it closed to Jim Crow: almost absolute in the South and formidable in the rest of the country. Not until the 1960s was there a new struggle, a new politics, a new common sense.
They use the idea of a trajectory to understand this dialectic of struggle and the defense of white privelege as it plays out over time, which I really like. It allows them to analyze the different forces at work, where gains were made and where they have been lost, or in their terminology assimilated or insulated. The use Gramsci's theory of hegemony to show both how a racial project can become dominant, and yet how at the same time it remains contestable, unstable, capable of being toppled by another formation with enough force behind it.
It is the absence of such a formation that fragmented the movement 50 years ago, and the continuing absence that makes us weak today. I wouldn't mind coming together behind theirs, but I suppose that would have happened if it were going to. But I do like their definition of racism:
They have a fascinating analysis of the rise of the right and how they are rearticulating the idea of race in the US, identifying the new use of 'color-blindness' and the attempts to universalize race and culture, to claim we are all one and undivided.
Highly recommended...
The opening is indeed a bit slow and it's a bit of work to get through the main threads of racial theory to date. Important work though, because such threads still exist and are part of both grassroots and intellectual movement and mobilization today. For the most part I found it clear, well-argued, and quite readable, but some of the terminology definitely put me off a bit, it wasn't intuitive really, but again, worth thinking through and more than helpful. Still, any book that requires you to know Althusser's concept of overdetermination in advance is going to take some work.
Essentially they argue that ideas of race are constructed through an ongoing political/ideological/cultural struggle, so for example in the 1960s there was an uprising of views coming from the civil rights and black power movement that challenged the dominant views of race, and indeed changed it in ways that continue on today in spite of conservative and neoliberal challenges. Each of these formulations of what race means are what Omi and Winant call a racial project.
A summary of their argument:
The theory of racial formation suggests that society is suffused with racial projects, large and small, to which all are subjected. This racial 'subjection' is quintessentially ideological. Everybody learns some combination, some version, of the rules of racial classification, and of her own racial identity, often without obvious teaching or conscious inculcation. Thus we are inserted in a comprehensively racialized social structure. Race becomes "common sense" -- a way of comprehending, explaining, and acting in the world. A vast web of racial projects mediates between the discursive or representational means in which race is identified and signified on the one hand, and the institutional and organizational forms in which it is routinized and standardized on the other. These projects are the heart of the racial formation process.
The battle is over this 'common-sense' formulation, and the structures it is entwined with. Omi and Winant see the majority of America's history as racial dictatorship, and it is hard to argue they are wrong. From America's founding until the civil war this common-sense (itself constructed over the years) understood non-whites as less than whites, as slaves or barbarians. Reconstruction was a brief opening, but in 1877 it closed to Jim Crow: almost absolute in the South and formidable in the rest of the country. Not until the 1960s was there a new struggle, a new politics, a new common sense.
They use the idea of a trajectory to understand this dialectic of struggle and the defense of white privelege as it plays out over time, which I really like. It allows them to analyze the different forces at work, where gains were made and where they have been lost, or in their terminology assimilated or insulated. The use Gramsci's theory of hegemony to show both how a racial project can become dominant, and yet how at the same time it remains contestable, unstable, capable of being toppled by another formation with enough force behind it.
It is the absence of such a formation that fragmented the movement 50 years ago, and the continuing absence that makes us weak today. I wouldn't mind coming together behind theirs, but I suppose that would have happened if it were going to. But I do like their definition of racism:
Racial formation theory allows us to differentiate between race and racism. ... race has no fixed meaning, but is constructed and transformed socio-historically through competing political projects, through the necessary and ineluctable link between the structural and cultural dimensions of race in the U.S. This emphasis on projects allows us to refocus our understanding of racism as well, for racism can now be seen as characterizing some, but not all, racial projects.
A racial project can be defined as racist if and only if it creates or reproduces structures of domination based on essentialist categories of race.
They have a fascinating analysis of the rise of the right and how they are rearticulating the idea of race in the US, identifying the new use of 'color-blindness' and the attempts to universalize race and culture, to claim we are all one and undivided.
Highly recommended...
December 29, 2020
I'm kind of surprised this book is as cited as it is. It doesn't seem to be doing anything mindblowing. Maybe at the time it was more innovative and now it's just kind of famous for being famous. My main critique of the book is that it's too interested in approaching everything from an angle of, "here's why everyone except us is wrong," to the point where I'm not exactly sure what the book's politics are. I can only conclude that the authors are advocating for what might be considered a "moderate" approach that attempts to speak to material issues while centering race, but it's not totally clear what that would look like in practice.
I found their dismissal of Marxist approaches to race rather lazy. They take up one specific Marxist and while they concede the ideas sound good, simply say, "historically speaking," class based approaches, "ha[ve] amounted in practice to an argument that nonwhites give up their racially based demands" (33). Does the author they're looking at say that? No. Is there a rich history of Black Marxist thought going back to at least the early 20th c? Yes. But those things apparently don't matter because sometimes some Marxist thinkers are racist so no need to engage further.
There's also incredibly vague claims about the legitimacy of certain ideologies. For example that there is no "space" (50) for Black nationalism or that white supremacy won't be able to "revive" (117) itself. I can only assume this language means certain ideologies won't become mainstream, but does an ideology need to be mainstream to have an impact? What if an ideology is useful but not popular, do we just abandon it? Is white supremacy alive if a white supremacist becomes President but doesn't win that popular vote?
I don't necessarily think this book is bad; for the most part it has decent insights into race. However it tends to play it rather safe and anytime it does not it seems to trip over itself a bit.
I found their dismissal of Marxist approaches to race rather lazy. They take up one specific Marxist and while they concede the ideas sound good, simply say, "historically speaking," class based approaches, "ha[ve] amounted in practice to an argument that nonwhites give up their racially based demands" (33). Does the author they're looking at say that? No. Is there a rich history of Black Marxist thought going back to at least the early 20th c? Yes. But those things apparently don't matter because sometimes some Marxist thinkers are racist so no need to engage further.
There's also incredibly vague claims about the legitimacy of certain ideologies. For example that there is no "space" (50) for Black nationalism or that white supremacy won't be able to "revive" (117) itself. I can only assume this language means certain ideologies won't become mainstream, but does an ideology need to be mainstream to have an impact? What if an ideology is useful but not popular, do we just abandon it? Is white supremacy alive if a white supremacist becomes President but doesn't win that popular vote?
I don't necessarily think this book is bad; for the most part it has decent insights into race. However it tends to play it rather safe and anytime it does not it seems to trip over itself a bit.
Read
August 21, 2021good stuff
February 20, 2008
The bible of racial theory. Another top five book in terms of changing how I view myself and the world. Ever wondered what "race" is? Read this book.
January 29, 2023
While I have issues with some of the particularities of their formulations of racism, Omi and Winant's overall framework for theorizing race is useful. For them racial formation is "the sociohistorical process by which racial categories are created, inhabited, transformed, and destroyed." This process is constituted by a variety of racial projects "in which human bodies and social structures are represented and organized." These racial projects can either be emancipatory or racist. Those deemed racist are those which "create(s) or reproduce(s) structures of domination based on essentialist categories of race." This understanding of racism, which sees racism as both ideological and structural, emerges from their analysis of the weakness of the Left's formulation of racism within the new social movements. These movements countered the common-sense understanding of racism as merely a prejudice by emphasizing racisms structural dimensions and relegating prejudice as merely one manifestation of the social structure. In their emphasis on the pervasiveness of racism in the very structure of American society, Omi and Winant criticize the radicals for going too far and attributing racism a transhistorical character which bred pessimism into the prospects of overcoming racism in various sites of struggle or in the frame work of America as a whole. It is not entirely clear if Omi and Winant's opposition to this supposed pessimism is based on a different theoretical understanding of racism or if it is based primarily on differences of political outlook. In my reading, it seems to be the latter rather than the former.
Additionally, their understanding of racism, which depends on a rather abstract understanding of domination, seems to be a bit abstract and unhelpful. Later in the section on racism, Omi and Winant describe a hypothetical scenario where Black accountants are organizing. This in of itself is not racist says Omi and Winant. An organizing effort to provide support based on the shared experiences of Black accountants is neither essentialist nor is anyone dominated. But, they continue, if the Black accountants were to organize to raid the clients of white accountants than that would constitute racism. This example while not essentialist does entail a form of "domination". But this logic seems to ignore the fundamentally different structural positions that Black accountants may have in the social structure in relation to white accountants. The raiding of their clients may damage white accountants, but this constitute domination in the structural sense? One is tempted to suggest that Omi and Winant would consider the robbing of rich whites by the poor Black underclass to be its own form of racism as well. If this were true then at least they are consistent, but it does not seem to be helpful for those of us who identify with the abolition of the current order.
What I find more helpful in this book is the deployment of their theory into the history of the United States. For Omi and Winant the United States can be characterized as a racial dictatorship for most of its existence from 1607 to 1865. After which it begins to transform, albeit slowly and unevenly, into a racial democracy. Along with this transition from racial dictatorship to racial democracy, the possibilities for political challenge by subordinate racial groups changes as well. Drawing on Gramsci's conception of hegemony and the concepts of "war of maneuver" contrasted to "war of position," Omi and Winant conceptualize the growth of racial democracy in the United States as providing for greater opportunities in the "war of position" within the structures of the state. This then leads to their theorization of the racial state as a key site of struggle in the history of racial minority-led social movements. These concepts is some ways, despite differences in their periodization, mirror the utilization of the concepts of the United States as a white-Settler nation and the subsequent de-settlerization of the United States in the aftermath of the long sixties. This marking of a qualitative shift in the role of race in the United States is vital for deepening our understanding of race and racial struggles in the United States today.
The other key insight that I found useful is in their detailing of the results of the "Great Transformation" and the resulting reaction by the far right, the new right, and neoconservatives. This discussion is particularly pertinent to us in the 21st century for we still are living in the wake of this dual movement of transformation and reaction. In Omi and Winant's assessment of all the gains of the new social movements--federal policy, social service programs, and the rearticulation of racial identity--it is the transformation of the popular ideological understanding of race and racism that is the most longstanding. This transformation, which occurred both in the thinking of the constituents of the new social movements and of whites is the ground (or unstable equilibrium) from which the diverse currents of the right must operate when attempting to roll back the gains of the sixties. The right, except for the fringe far-right, can no longer articulate race in essentialist terms nor can it advocate overtly for racial inequality as a desired outcome. The right must now couch its language utilizing "code words" or merely advocating for different avenues to racial equality. This new terrain is the one which we still operate on currently and the general contours that Omi and Winant draw out still hold in large part to this day.
Additionally, their understanding of racism, which depends on a rather abstract understanding of domination, seems to be a bit abstract and unhelpful. Later in the section on racism, Omi and Winant describe a hypothetical scenario where Black accountants are organizing. This in of itself is not racist says Omi and Winant. An organizing effort to provide support based on the shared experiences of Black accountants is neither essentialist nor is anyone dominated. But, they continue, if the Black accountants were to organize to raid the clients of white accountants than that would constitute racism. This example while not essentialist does entail a form of "domination". But this logic seems to ignore the fundamentally different structural positions that Black accountants may have in the social structure in relation to white accountants. The raiding of their clients may damage white accountants, but this constitute domination in the structural sense? One is tempted to suggest that Omi and Winant would consider the robbing of rich whites by the poor Black underclass to be its own form of racism as well. If this were true then at least they are consistent, but it does not seem to be helpful for those of us who identify with the abolition of the current order.
What I find more helpful in this book is the deployment of their theory into the history of the United States. For Omi and Winant the United States can be characterized as a racial dictatorship for most of its existence from 1607 to 1865. After which it begins to transform, albeit slowly and unevenly, into a racial democracy. Along with this transition from racial dictatorship to racial democracy, the possibilities for political challenge by subordinate racial groups changes as well. Drawing on Gramsci's conception of hegemony and the concepts of "war of maneuver" contrasted to "war of position," Omi and Winant conceptualize the growth of racial democracy in the United States as providing for greater opportunities in the "war of position" within the structures of the state. This then leads to their theorization of the racial state as a key site of struggle in the history of racial minority-led social movements. These concepts is some ways, despite differences in their periodization, mirror the utilization of the concepts of the United States as a white-Settler nation and the subsequent de-settlerization of the United States in the aftermath of the long sixties. This marking of a qualitative shift in the role of race in the United States is vital for deepening our understanding of race and racial struggles in the United States today.
The other key insight that I found useful is in their detailing of the results of the "Great Transformation" and the resulting reaction by the far right, the new right, and neoconservatives. This discussion is particularly pertinent to us in the 21st century for we still are living in the wake of this dual movement of transformation and reaction. In Omi and Winant's assessment of all the gains of the new social movements--federal policy, social service programs, and the rearticulation of racial identity--it is the transformation of the popular ideological understanding of race and racism that is the most longstanding. This transformation, which occurred both in the thinking of the constituents of the new social movements and of whites is the ground (or unstable equilibrium) from which the diverse currents of the right must operate when attempting to roll back the gains of the sixties. The right, except for the fringe far-right, can no longer articulate race in essentialist terms nor can it advocate overtly for racial inequality as a desired outcome. The right must now couch its language utilizing "code words" or merely advocating for different avenues to racial equality. This new terrain is the one which we still operate on currently and the general contours that Omi and Winant draw out still hold in large part to this day.
July 25, 2022
truly an indispensable monument in racial theory... i'm sorry to have put off reading it for so long lol the writing is also very clear & well organized (and even at times, it's very funny!). the focus on assessing power dynamics & essentialization was a helpful reminder for me and i desperately want an updated version!
Read
April 2, 2020please clap
January 27, 2017
Extremely insight theories about race and how it and other social movements have shaped U.S. politics since the end of WWII. This book's organization and use of historical examples demonstrate the different paradigms of race theory such that a student with little or no understanding of race theory can engage with the text and take away valuable and very relevant about race in the United States.
November 5, 2018
Excellent clear and coherent theory of American racial formation. Offers an impressive genealogy of "colorblind" ideology and the creation of contemporary right wing politics (which actually isn't so contemporary). Great "first" book on race for anyone interested.
April 3, 2016
It is very useful to me because it made some stuff clearer about the perception of race in the US.
April 3, 2023
It’s difficult to assess a staple work that has been through several editions and that is a expansive in scope. It gives a great overview of how the concept of race has been conceptualized in the 20th century (through ethnicity, class, and nationalism) and they offer a more capacious alternative (social formation/social construction). They show how various movements throughout the 20th century have tried to grapple with these prior understandings and resist them (largely through Black movement politics). They describe oppositional counter-maneuvers to these resistances (through code words, charges of reverse racism, and then colorblind ideology). The newest chapter evaluates Obama as a left-center moderate and the does a eerily good job tracking the rise of populism that today we would recognize as the core of Trumpism. They didn’t see to anticipate just how powerful this contingent would become and I would be curious to see how they reckon their notion colorblind ideology with [a return? of] fascist, racist, and anti-trans ethno-nationalism in the present. I’ll want to re-read in order to take in the enormous amount of content it covers.
January 4, 2020
Racial Formation in the United States From the 1960’s to the 1990’s by Michael Omi and Howard Winant is a deep, scientific, almost thesis-styled review of the term “race,” it’s understanding, and usage in the U.S. from the 60’s to the 90’s.
They attempt to give concreteness to this nebulous term by defining it from various points. The book is dense at times which can bog down the reader. It’s not really bedtime reading, it is more for studying.
I don’t want to belittle the writers by suggesting that they should have made this book for recreational reading. I delved into it because it was referenced in Michelle Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow.
There are incredible insights in this book as it takes a comprehensive look at race in the United States. Even though it is only 160 pages if you subtract the index and notes, it feels like more due to the content. Even if this isn’t your cup of tea, this makes a great reference book
They attempt to give concreteness to this nebulous term by defining it from various points. The book is dense at times which can bog down the reader. It’s not really bedtime reading, it is more for studying.
I don’t want to belittle the writers by suggesting that they should have made this book for recreational reading. I delved into it because it was referenced in Michelle Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow.
There are incredible insights in this book as it takes a comprehensive look at race in the United States. Even though it is only 160 pages if you subtract the index and notes, it feels like more due to the content. Even if this isn’t your cup of tea, this makes a great reference book
November 19, 2018
Omi and Wynant provide a concise history of racial paradigms during one of the most tumultuous periods in the US as a backdrop to their novel theory of racial formation. Their cited specific examples fit nicely into overarching thematic analyses of ethnicity-based, class-based, and nation-based paradigms of racial thinking. I also appreciated the dialectical alternative that they propose, a paradigm of racial formation in which reactionary conservative politics also come into play. This productive theoretical framework adds important texture to the neoconservative movement culminating in 80's Reaganism.
November 15, 2017
A foundational look at race in America. Not overly technical. Seems like a good introduction to a complicated issue (too often assumed to be a no-brainer). I found the middle section of the book tracing racial ideas since WWII to be very well written and thought out, especially regarding the roots (and weaknesses) of colorblind ideology. Clearly there is a reason there is a 3rd edition of this book published 30 years after the original. Time tests the value of scholarly works, this work has past the test.
July 20, 2020
I read the most recent edition (2014). I could imagine an US social history course being designed around this. The authors do a great job weaving in the dominant paradigms of how ID based difference was studied and is a function of the different war periods, as well as evolving civil rights and immigrant rights legislations.
September 16, 2020
ANOTHER book for school that I only read parts of but this one was for Sociology! I'm going to be honest, at this point they are kinda all blending together but I know this had insightful and valuable information in it, I have just been reading SO many books on race that I can't remember what this one specifically was about and I'm too lazy to take out my notes for it.
January 25, 2025
I honestly found it to be slightly confusing. It gave different versions and it got tangled and hard to understand. They make valuable points though about race and how it's all about how we perceive not how we look. The first thing we notice about someone is their race and we stereotype. It's a human reaction but putting action into the reaction is when we have a problem.
July 1, 2018
Really solid and concise theory book. The overview of the different major conceptions of race (ethnicity, nationality, and class) is phenomenal and the analysis of the racial formation process is strong if somewhat overly abstract in the way it's discussed
December 24, 2019
I Like THIS BOOK Q. HAVE THE WORLD CHANGED AT ALL OR THE PEOPLES. .?...??
June 18, 2020
great informative read
November 28, 2020
So good! The sass and shade. The chapters are written to work as standalone readings so it can get repetitive.
January 22, 2023
An essential text for anyone studying race/ethnicity.
April 17, 2013
Omi and Winant wrote Racial Formation in the United States to outline historical race theories, develop their theory of racial formation in the racial state, and apply their racial formation theory to recent history from the 1960s to the 1990s. The authors argue most racial theories fit into three ideal-type categories of ethnicity, class, and nation (Omi and Winant 1993:11). They describe how ethnicity arose in the 1920s in response to biologisitc conceptions of race. Ethnicity conceptions, of which race was a part, were "understood as the result of a group formation process based on culture and descent" (ibid. 15). Cultural pluralism and assimilationism were two divergent paths within this framework. The ethnicity paradigm held strong until challenged by class and nation conceptions of race in the 1960s. Class theories tended to look at race under economic spheres of exchange, distribution, or production. Nation theories centered on Pan-Africanism, Cultural Nationalism, Marxism, and Internal Colonialism.¬ A re-worked conception of ethnicity rose again the 1970s and 1980s. Each of these race theories "all neglect the specificity of race as an authomous field of social conflict, political organization, and cultural/ideoglocial meaning" (ibid. 48). They state: "race is a concept which signifies and symbolizes social conflicts and interests by referring to different type of human bodies (ibid. 55). They believe: "racial formation is the sociohistorical process by which racial categories are created, inhabited, transformed, and destroyed" (ibid. 55). In the last section of the book, they apply racial formation theory to the racial state. Omi and Winant use Gramscian and Polyanian thought stating organic intellectuals led racial social-movements in the United States leading to the Great Transformation of "racial awareness, racial meaning, and racial subjectivity" resulting in limited racial reforms in the 1960s (ibid. 96). Class and nation paradigms after these limited reforms were not successful because they reduced race to other phenomena (ibid. 97). Omi and Winant pay special attention to re-articulations of race under Reagan, Bush, and Clinton administrations. The 1970s brought economic collapse which the conservative politicians blamed on liberal advances from the 1960s. Even Clinton continued to omit race discussions from politics moving under racial neoliberalism which views race as a dichotomy and downplays racial significance (ibid. 152). Coming from a natural science background with little exposure to race studies, this book provided a good overview of race theories and race relations in the United States. It was sometimes difficult to remember the plethora of theorists described as shaping the field of race studies, but the authors' main points were well taken - race is a social construct embedded in both social and political relations in United States society and a complex view of racial formation has to be understood in the context of history. My primary critique would be that Omi and Winant argue towards the end of the book that one failure of racial neoliberalism is the tendency to view races as a dichotomy (black-white, city-suburb, etc.) (ibid. 152). However, they themselves seemed to focus mostly on black-white relations in the sections on nation-based race theories and in their discussions on social movements in the Great Transformation.
January 8, 2022
Read it for my class and it was so insightful. I genuinely learned so much and used the material for multiple essays outside of that one class. But I mean it was a school book so it’s not the kind of thing you read on vacation or in one setting.
August 23, 2016
For anyone seeking to understand the role that race and racism has played in the cultural and political life of the US this book is a must. After discussing previous theories of how race was believed to interact with other demographic factors (ethnicity, class and nation), the authors ( actually read the 1986 edition by Omi and Winant) put forth their theory that contends that social, economic and political factors determine the content and importance of racial categories, and have shaped the meaning of race in the current era. Their analysis is very strong, and shows how race has been and continues to be a major determining factor for economic, social and political opportunity and justice in our society
August 2016: The Third edition of this book (published 2015) greatly expands the discussion of what race as a social construction means. Racism is not just seen as interpersonal hate or acted prejudice but something that is embedded in political, cultural and social structures, policies and laws which require radical structural change. The authors review the ebb and flow of anti-racism projects and see the current state of racism being characterized by the hegemonic ideology of color blindness. They review the policies of presidential administration from Nixon thru Obama and how they either reinforced or challenge the embedded racist ideology. They also make a strong case for the marriage of colorblind ideology and the rise of neoliberalism.
August 2016: The Third edition of this book (published 2015) greatly expands the discussion of what race as a social construction means. Racism is not just seen as interpersonal hate or acted prejudice but something that is embedded in political, cultural and social structures, policies and laws which require radical structural change. The authors review the ebb and flow of anti-racism projects and see the current state of racism being characterized by the hegemonic ideology of color blindness. They review the policies of presidential administration from Nixon thru Obama and how they either reinforced or challenge the embedded racist ideology. They also make a strong case for the marriage of colorblind ideology and the rise of neoliberalism.
September 27, 2008
I am not convinced this was written well. Interesting historical perspective that pops up, but their interpretation of Gramsci's hegemony seems a bit confused and muddled, which while an abstract concept shouldn't be as hard to describe as they have made it. I do appreciate them trying though. I'm also not convinced entirely by their critique of Nation, and also think it would have helped to (de)complicate the model of race, ethnicity, class and nation in regards to hegemony by using a more ecological approach. I felt a bit lost after reading this, and uncertain exactly where it was headed (the political aims feel a bit half hearted, or at least as a second thought). It is however valuable, I think!
January 11, 2015
this is a review of the original, first edition - although i sort of wish i'd realized that they'd published a third edition before i started reading the first one. doh! regardless, this book rings incredibly true even nearly 30 years later - truly a classic text that argues why/how race is a fundamental organizing construct of US american political and social life. particularly appropriate/interesting to read in the context of the current racial climate, ferguson protests, etc. this book offers useful language/concepts for understanding the media's and politicians' responses to the protests - for example, their use of strategies of "absorption" and "isolation" amidst an ongoing battle to re-articulate the meaning of race in the US.
January 19, 2011
This book may have been a valuable contribution to critical race theory when it was first written, what with the Reagan farce fresh in everyone's minds, but I fail to see what all the fuss is about. O&M's argument is basically this: Race is both real and disucrsive because it shapes socio-political environs as well as being shaped by them, and the neoliberal/conservative emphasis on striving for a "color-blind" American society is a regression in racial policy that will continue to reinforce discrimination. Which of course is true. But their "racial formation" theory is under-explored, and a thinking person's reaction to it will be something like, duh!
July 29, 2008
This is a really amazing book. I have read articles and sections of it in several of my classes at UofO. These authors/professors write with great insight into these subjects. I can't wait to read the entire book from cover to cover.
OK so now that I am done reading the entire book...it was pretty good. I found it somewhat redundant, and I felt also that it left out some important aspect of racial theory. It was great however, as a reference book for this class to really compare it with other more contemporary theories to discern what I did and didn't like about it.
OK so now that I am done reading the entire book...it was pretty good. I found it somewhat redundant, and I felt also that it left out some important aspect of racial theory. It was great however, as a reference book for this class to really compare it with other more contemporary theories to discern what I did and didn't like about it.
January 15, 2009
I'll have more in a bit but I'm reading this for a class on the history of education in the United States; I find it important, opinionated, dense, extremely analytical, objective, critical, and a little piercing (like the issue of race itself). I think the argument here is meant to teach the reader that race is much more than we think and the issue of racism is something that still dwells within us. We strive for equality and we get there through active work and an active consciousness. That's what I see, at least.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews