What do you think?
Rate this book
Considering Hate: Violence, Goodness, and Justice in American Culture and Politics
A provocative book about rethinking hatred and violence in America
Over the centuries American society has been plagued by brutality fueled by disregard for the humanity of systemic violence against Native peoples, black people, and immigrants. More recent examples include the Steubenville rape case and the murders of Matthew Shepard, Jennifer Daugherty, Marcelo Lucero, and Trayvon Martin. Most Americans see such acts as driven by hate. But is this right? Longtime activists and political theorists Kay Whitlock and Michael Bronski boldly assert that American society’s reliance on the framework of hate to explain these acts is wrongheaded, misleading, and ultimately harmful.
All too often Americans choose to believe that terrible cruelty is aberrant, caused primarily by “extremists” and misfits. The inevitable remedy of intensified government-based policing, increased surveillance, and harsher punishments has never worked and does not work now. Stand-your-ground laws; the US prison system; police harassment of people of color, women, and LGBT people; and the so-called war on terror demonstrate that the remedies themselves are forms of institutionalized violence.
Considering Hate challenges easy assumptions and failed solutions, arguing that “hate violence” reflects existing cultural norms. Drawing upon social science, philosophy, theology, film, and literature, the authors examine how hate and common, even ordinary, forms of individual and group violence are excused and normalized in popular culture and political discussion. This massive denial of brutal reality profoundly warps society’s ideas about goodness and justice.
Whitlock and Bronski invite readers to radically reimagine the meaning and structures of justice within a new framework of community wholeness, collective responsibility, and civic goodness.
Over the centuries American society has been plagued by brutality fueled by disregard for the humanity of systemic violence against Native peoples, black people, and immigrants. More recent examples include the Steubenville rape case and the murders of Matthew Shepard, Jennifer Daugherty, Marcelo Lucero, and Trayvon Martin. Most Americans see such acts as driven by hate. But is this right? Longtime activists and political theorists Kay Whitlock and Michael Bronski boldly assert that American society’s reliance on the framework of hate to explain these acts is wrongheaded, misleading, and ultimately harmful.
All too often Americans choose to believe that terrible cruelty is aberrant, caused primarily by “extremists” and misfits. The inevitable remedy of intensified government-based policing, increased surveillance, and harsher punishments has never worked and does not work now. Stand-your-ground laws; the US prison system; police harassment of people of color, women, and LGBT people; and the so-called war on terror demonstrate that the remedies themselves are forms of institutionalized violence.
Considering Hate challenges easy assumptions and failed solutions, arguing that “hate violence” reflects existing cultural norms. Drawing upon social science, philosophy, theology, film, and literature, the authors examine how hate and common, even ordinary, forms of individual and group violence are excused and normalized in popular culture and political discussion. This massive denial of brutal reality profoundly warps society’s ideas about goodness and justice.
Whitlock and Bronski invite readers to radically reimagine the meaning and structures of justice within a new framework of community wholeness, collective responsibility, and civic goodness.
184 pages, Hardcover
First published January 6, 2015
9 people are currently reading
752 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 - 14 of 14 reviews
December 20, 2014
I won this (free) book through a Goodreads giveaway.
To begin, I would like to say that I thoroughly enjoyed this book. The ideas were very well developed, I spotted absolutely no bias, which I expected to find a lot of, and they are issues that not many people are aware of. I have been advocating social justice for a very long time now. Many of the so-called social justice books I have read previously are extremely shallow and it is clear the authors are writing from their little privilege bubble, not being able to see beyond their own problems. This book was different.
Considering Hate is an attempt to see beyond "hate" and dig deeper. Hate exists, yes. It exists in many different shapes and forms and it is a profound part of our world today. Everyone knows that. However, not everybody is aware of the bigger picture. Where does hate come from? According to the authors, Kay Whitlock and Michael Bronski, hate is influenced and manipulated by culture, both contemporary and historical, political differences and even fear. Many different sources, analogies and examples are provided, which makes this book an easy and interesting read.
I think it's extremely important that I explain the reason why I gave it the amount of stars that I did. I gave this book 3/5 stars because I felt that the author's "solution", so to speak, was not good enough. They stressed the importance of collective responsibility. I agree with that. However, hate, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc are institutionalized concepts. In the United States, the focus of this book, that institution is capitalism. It lacked that. I felt the authors should have discussed the United States' foundation. This nation was built on Native American genocide, it continued to "run" on the enslavement of African Americans...slavery still exists today. It might not exist in the same exact form, but it exists in the terrible factory conditions. Who make up most factory employers? Usually ethnic and racial minorities. They are still treated terribly, work long hours, are paid very little. These factory workers are the reason this nation is what it is today, but they are treated the worst. So, yes, history and culture definitely do play a role in hatred. However, you cannot single out those 2 things and completely leave out the fact that the United States' capitalist system makes it extremely hard to be "collectively" responsible for hate.
However, I think this is a wonderful and insightful start for the general public to understand these concepts and their "more than what meets the eye" meanings. I definitely recommend this to every American and I applaud the authors for their great work!
To begin, I would like to say that I thoroughly enjoyed this book. The ideas were very well developed, I spotted absolutely no bias, which I expected to find a lot of, and they are issues that not many people are aware of. I have been advocating social justice for a very long time now. Many of the so-called social justice books I have read previously are extremely shallow and it is clear the authors are writing from their little privilege bubble, not being able to see beyond their own problems. This book was different.
Considering Hate is an attempt to see beyond "hate" and dig deeper. Hate exists, yes. It exists in many different shapes and forms and it is a profound part of our world today. Everyone knows that. However, not everybody is aware of the bigger picture. Where does hate come from? According to the authors, Kay Whitlock and Michael Bronski, hate is influenced and manipulated by culture, both contemporary and historical, political differences and even fear. Many different sources, analogies and examples are provided, which makes this book an easy and interesting read.
I think it's extremely important that I explain the reason why I gave it the amount of stars that I did. I gave this book 3/5 stars because I felt that the author's "solution", so to speak, was not good enough. They stressed the importance of collective responsibility. I agree with that. However, hate, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc are institutionalized concepts. In the United States, the focus of this book, that institution is capitalism. It lacked that. I felt the authors should have discussed the United States' foundation. This nation was built on Native American genocide, it continued to "run" on the enslavement of African Americans...slavery still exists today. It might not exist in the same exact form, but it exists in the terrible factory conditions. Who make up most factory employers? Usually ethnic and racial minorities. They are still treated terribly, work long hours, are paid very little. These factory workers are the reason this nation is what it is today, but they are treated the worst. So, yes, history and culture definitely do play a role in hatred. However, you cannot single out those 2 things and completely leave out the fact that the United States' capitalist system makes it extremely hard to be "collectively" responsible for hate.
However, I think this is a wonderful and insightful start for the general public to understand these concepts and their "more than what meets the eye" meanings. I definitely recommend this to every American and I applaud the authors for their great work!
November 9, 2014
I wish I had this book while I was still in college. I loved the challenges posed to every day thinking and the possibilities of changes presented in this book. I can easily see this book working in a wide variety of Social Science classes and I would highly recommend this for an upper division writing course.
I read the book twice and found myself sharing quotes frequently. Considering Hate makes us all look at ourselves and our institutions with a new lens. While I am not saying you should buy into their ideas completely I do think that taking a different approach to how you look at the world around you is always a worthwhile exercise. The perpetuation of violence is an issue that needs to be tackled on both the large scale and the small.
This book blew my mind and I am happier for it.
I would recommend this book to everyone, but particularly those looking for a read that is thought provoking, well written, and informative in a way that isn't textbook dry. I think the common person could easily read this book as it doesn't feel like it was written for academics.
I read the book twice and found myself sharing quotes frequently. Considering Hate makes us all look at ourselves and our institutions with a new lens. While I am not saying you should buy into their ideas completely I do think that taking a different approach to how you look at the world around you is always a worthwhile exercise. The perpetuation of violence is an issue that needs to be tackled on both the large scale and the small.
This book blew my mind and I am happier for it.
I would recommend this book to everyone, but particularly those looking for a read that is thought provoking, well written, and informative in a way that isn't textbook dry. I think the common person could easily read this book as it doesn't feel like it was written for academics.
February 20, 2015
I won this book through a Goodreads First Reads giveaway. As a reader with a graduate background in political theory, I figured this book sounded like it could easily have been assigned reading for one of my courses, and actually I have read books by these authors for a gender and public policy political theory course. So, I had some idea what to expect.
I liked the central questions in this book, especially the notion of looking beyond hate to find more complex, more approachable roots for hate behavior. I was not entirely convinced about the authors' definitions for goodness and justice, and I was annoyed that hate was never actually defined. Still, this book raises interesting questions for discussion.
My biggest issue with this book is structural. I had the feeling that the authors, and maybe their test readers as well, were so close to their subject that they could supply the thesis sentences for each section out of their own existing knowledge of their subject. Certainly, with enough effort I could put together what the thesis statements ought to be for each section, but quite often throughout this book the text launches into the middle of each argument without actually stating clearly what the point is, let alone restating clearly the primary arguments in each section and chapter as conclusion paragraphs. Since this book also has very few subheadings, and it rambles and babbles along towards its general theme, it is easy to get lost.
In addition, many of the assertions I found most in need of support citations had none, so while the authors did a fair job of balancing the needs of academic readers and the general public, there were quite a few vague generalities and bold but debatable assertions mixed in with the film analyses that bugged me. I found the segment in which the authors attempt to take on 'free-market' ideas and libertarianism particularly bothersome, because from this text it did not seem that the authors understand the difference between free-market libertarianism and crony capitalism, yet the economist they address is a libertarian, while the 'free-markey' capitalist changes they discuss in Chile sound more like some other flavor of pseudo-capitalism. Perhaps the authors could have made their case more convincing, but as it stands I was turned off by this sort of analysis, wanting a bit more precision and evidence of more nuanced understanding.
So, while I had too many issues with this book to rate it a 5, I did like enough of this book to rate it a 4, and I could see how it could be useful for political science and sociology courses. The writing style is decidedly academic, even without more complete in-text citations, so not all reders in the general public will appreciate this book, but most readers could get through this one if they read slower, in chunks, with a pencil in hand to make notes in the margins, and with a dictionary handy.
I liked the central questions in this book, especially the notion of looking beyond hate to find more complex, more approachable roots for hate behavior. I was not entirely convinced about the authors' definitions for goodness and justice, and I was annoyed that hate was never actually defined. Still, this book raises interesting questions for discussion.
My biggest issue with this book is structural. I had the feeling that the authors, and maybe their test readers as well, were so close to their subject that they could supply the thesis sentences for each section out of their own existing knowledge of their subject. Certainly, with enough effort I could put together what the thesis statements ought to be for each section, but quite often throughout this book the text launches into the middle of each argument without actually stating clearly what the point is, let alone restating clearly the primary arguments in each section and chapter as conclusion paragraphs. Since this book also has very few subheadings, and it rambles and babbles along towards its general theme, it is easy to get lost.
In addition, many of the assertions I found most in need of support citations had none, so while the authors did a fair job of balancing the needs of academic readers and the general public, there were quite a few vague generalities and bold but debatable assertions mixed in with the film analyses that bugged me. I found the segment in which the authors attempt to take on 'free-market' ideas and libertarianism particularly bothersome, because from this text it did not seem that the authors understand the difference between free-market libertarianism and crony capitalism, yet the economist they address is a libertarian, while the 'free-markey' capitalist changes they discuss in Chile sound more like some other flavor of pseudo-capitalism. Perhaps the authors could have made their case more convincing, but as it stands I was turned off by this sort of analysis, wanting a bit more precision and evidence of more nuanced understanding.
So, while I had too many issues with this book to rate it a 5, I did like enough of this book to rate it a 4, and I could see how it could be useful for political science and sociology courses. The writing style is decidedly academic, even without more complete in-text citations, so not all reders in the general public will appreciate this book, but most readers could get through this one if they read slower, in chunks, with a pencil in hand to make notes in the margins, and with a dictionary handy.
March 22, 2016
Thought-provoking examination of what we mean by "hate" in this society, especially when we attach this label to certain forms of violence and not others.
Through the lenses of media, pop culture, and social/political history, the authors look at how American notions of "justice" have evolved. They note that while it's popular to condemn certain violent crimes as acts of "hate," such violence flows naturally from our social structures -- structures that privilege some while oppressing others and that discourage radical sharing. As a replacement for the notions of individualism and retributive justice that pervade our culture, the authors offer an alternative set of values and principles: a collective moral commitment to taking responsibility for our neighbors' wellbeing, even if we aren't to blame for their suffering; a radical social vision of communities caring for all their members.
Despite the philosophical depth of this project, the authors establish their points in a way that is accessible, colorful, and grounded in both historical and current events.
Through the lenses of media, pop culture, and social/political history, the authors look at how American notions of "justice" have evolved. They note that while it's popular to condemn certain violent crimes as acts of "hate," such violence flows naturally from our social structures -- structures that privilege some while oppressing others and that discourage radical sharing. As a replacement for the notions of individualism and retributive justice that pervade our culture, the authors offer an alternative set of values and principles: a collective moral commitment to taking responsibility for our neighbors' wellbeing, even if we aren't to blame for their suffering; a radical social vision of communities caring for all their members.
Despite the philosophical depth of this project, the authors establish their points in a way that is accessible, colorful, and grounded in both historical and current events.
March 22, 2015
A really thoughtful examination of the depth to which hatred and violence are encoded in our culture, with a compelling call for a new way of thinking about horrific crimes.
The argument here is that the way we think of "hate crimes" ignores root causes, focuses on individual rather than collective behavior, and reinforces category divisions between people that can easily turn into battle lines: "Everyone has, to varying degrees, an emotional investment in holding on to feelings of fear and hate. Most people use hate in some measure to shape their lives, to establish borders and parameters between their identities and other identities...even when faced with an obvious, avoidable tragedy people tend to rely on their old analyses and replay the scripts they have always used to feel safe."
The authors use the Rosewood massacre as an opening to discuss the problem of social responsibility, which instantly reminded me of what I see on my social media timelines every day: "The most common response to [questions of responsibility for tragedies] entails people proclaiming 'not me,' quickly followed by public displays of outrage, always directed against others."
Great examples throughout of the ways the language of war and violence impacts the way we think of everything, most interestingly law enforcement, racial/national identity, and gender roles. The staggering number of real "hate crimes" discussed makes the point clearly that these activities are embedded in our culture, and that we need to think differently about where and how they arise if there's any hope for real social change.
For such a broad topic this is actually a very fast read (140 pages) and it really reframed my core thinking about this issue. Highly recommended!
Disclaimer: I have a (delightful) email acquaintance with one of the co-authors.
Second disclaimer: I'm writing this on NJTransit, which I kind of hate. Sorry, Kay!
The argument here is that the way we think of "hate crimes" ignores root causes, focuses on individual rather than collective behavior, and reinforces category divisions between people that can easily turn into battle lines: "Everyone has, to varying degrees, an emotional investment in holding on to feelings of fear and hate. Most people use hate in some measure to shape their lives, to establish borders and parameters between their identities and other identities...even when faced with an obvious, avoidable tragedy people tend to rely on their old analyses and replay the scripts they have always used to feel safe."
The authors use the Rosewood massacre as an opening to discuss the problem of social responsibility, which instantly reminded me of what I see on my social media timelines every day: "The most common response to [questions of responsibility for tragedies] entails people proclaiming 'not me,' quickly followed by public displays of outrage, always directed against others."
Great examples throughout of the ways the language of war and violence impacts the way we think of everything, most interestingly law enforcement, racial/national identity, and gender roles. The staggering number of real "hate crimes" discussed makes the point clearly that these activities are embedded in our culture, and that we need to think differently about where and how they arise if there's any hope for real social change.
For such a broad topic this is actually a very fast read (140 pages) and it really reframed my core thinking about this issue. Highly recommended!
Disclaimer: I have a (delightful) email acquaintance with one of the co-authors.
Second disclaimer: I'm writing this on NJTransit, which I kind of hate. Sorry, Kay!
March 11, 2016
(Goodreads Giveaway) - Wow. There is so much here to digest. I could barely read more than a page at a time because I kept putting the book down to think about my life and my attitudes and my contributions to the culture of "hate" the authors describe.
This book is vital. It is much needed in our modern society, and I admit that I needed to read it, too. We hear about another mass shooting on the news more and more often. We see domestic violence in our neighborhoods, abuse in our churches, racism on our streets, and even though we cry out for these things to stop, they don't. This book gets at the heart of why that happens, why nothing changes. To summarize, it is because we pin these events on individuals, usually by saying they are mentally ill, to excuse ourselves from guilt and from really investigating the larger cultural contexts that lead to such atrocities.
It is painful to consider that the rapes in Steubenville, the shootings in Charleston, or the police brutalities in Ferguson are somehow connected to me, even though I've never physically been to any of those places or met any of those individuals. It is hard to think about what role I play in my local, national, and global environments. But these authors argue that it's necessary. I MUST consider my part. We all must if we really and truly want things to change. That's what made this book so powerful and so difficult to read.
My one criticism of the book is that I really would have liked more examples to help me work through some of the concepts. Whenever they talked about specific events or films or books, that helped immensely, but there were many concepts that didn't include those kinds of examples, so I occasionally felt like I was drowning in philosophic ideas. But in the grand scheme of things, it's a minor complaint compared to the overall message of the book.
This book is vital. It is much needed in our modern society, and I admit that I needed to read it, too. We hear about another mass shooting on the news more and more often. We see domestic violence in our neighborhoods, abuse in our churches, racism on our streets, and even though we cry out for these things to stop, they don't. This book gets at the heart of why that happens, why nothing changes. To summarize, it is because we pin these events on individuals, usually by saying they are mentally ill, to excuse ourselves from guilt and from really investigating the larger cultural contexts that lead to such atrocities.
It is painful to consider that the rapes in Steubenville, the shootings in Charleston, or the police brutalities in Ferguson are somehow connected to me, even though I've never physically been to any of those places or met any of those individuals. It is hard to think about what role I play in my local, national, and global environments. But these authors argue that it's necessary. I MUST consider my part. We all must if we really and truly want things to change. That's what made this book so powerful and so difficult to read.
My one criticism of the book is that I really would have liked more examples to help me work through some of the concepts. Whenever they talked about specific events or films or books, that helped immensely, but there were many concepts that didn't include those kinds of examples, so I occasionally felt like I was drowning in philosophic ideas. But in the grand scheme of things, it's a minor complaint compared to the overall message of the book.
September 5, 2015
In a nuanced look at history, hate, and perceptions of hate, Whitlock and Bronski present their case for thinking about changing the way we talk about hate and use the idea of hate, let alone the word, discussing how our use of the idea of hate actually affects our ability to think about and approach issues of crime and violence. Through discussions of everything from famous 'hate crimes' on to discussions of popular culture (particularly film) and changes in socio-political culture, the authors give an unflinching look to what has changed and what hasn't changed, as well as what must change.
Thoughtful readers will find a great deal to admire here, and a great deal which is capable of provoking thought. Whether you disagree or agree with their points, this is one of those books which should be read, and which will provoke discussion. There are, of course, no easy answers in the pages, but there may well be worthwhile suggestions for how we can disrupt the current and seemingly fruitless discussions, and move on to progress real change.
Recommended.
Thoughtful readers will find a great deal to admire here, and a great deal which is capable of provoking thought. Whether you disagree or agree with their points, this is one of those books which should be read, and which will provoke discussion. There are, of course, no easy answers in the pages, but there may well be worthwhile suggestions for how we can disrupt the current and seemingly fruitless discussions, and move on to progress real change.
Recommended.
August 6, 2016
I really wanted to like this book. Violence and hatred are significant problems, and one that I am constantly trying to refine my ability to discuss with my high school students. This book was frustrating because it would begin to discuss a question, but never entered into any real depth. Now, that could be understood as simply part of its genre as an introductory text; however, I would have liked to have seen a more comprehensive bibliography. The very, very short list of recommended books didn't begin to list the materials that I know to be available on the subject.
In sum, this book could be a helpful starting to begin a conversation about violence, racism, and social justice, but it isn't a resource to extend that conversation beyond the most superficial of levels.
In sum, this book could be a helpful starting to begin a conversation about violence, racism, and social justice, but it isn't a resource to extend that conversation beyond the most superficial of levels.
January 2, 2023
Taken awhile to read, but worth it.
This is not a book for the casual reader. More in line with the type of book one would read in college for a political justice course. There are a number of reviews that tell you what you need to know.
It addresses hate, prejudice, and more but as another reviewer said, it doesn't address the Native Americans genocide perpetuated by white men.
I know I need to give this a second read to really get to the meat of the book, but this was my first impression. A good book, addresses some things well, while failing to address other topics equally important to the discussion.
I won this through the Goodreads Giveaway.
This is not a book for the casual reader. More in line with the type of book one would read in college for a political justice course. There are a number of reviews that tell you what you need to know.
It addresses hate, prejudice, and more but as another reviewer said, it doesn't address the Native Americans genocide perpetuated by white men.
I know I need to give this a second read to really get to the meat of the book, but this was my first impression. A good book, addresses some things well, while failing to address other topics equally important to the discussion.
I won this through the Goodreads Giveaway.
January 21, 2015
I am going to start this book tonight. For some reason the cover called me to it. I won this from goodreads and have a few others that I have to get reading. I will update my review as I read. Thanks again Kay Whitlock and Goodreads......Let the journey begin!!.....I have seen a lot of people that say they wish they would of had this book back in school....Not to sound like a broken record but I wish I did....This book is a challenge to anyone if you ask me.
June 15, 2015
This book defied reviewing for me, but I shared some passages that got my neurons firing over at my blog. Check it out!
January 20, 2016
I won this from Goodreads. It is a book about violence, goodness, and justice in our culture. I love that that the message of the book is the embracing of violence is wrongheaded and harmful. It is a very insightful book and stresses we need justice for everyone and bypass hate and discrimination.
December 26, 2014
This book made me think--and would have been perfect for some of my social science classes in undergrad.
February 1, 2016
This is a Goodreads win review. This is an excellent book about hate, goodness and finding justice today in America.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews