Race And Culture: A World View

Cultures #1

by Thomas Sowell

Encompassing more than a decade of research around the globe, this book shows that cultural capital has far more impact than politics, prejudice, or genetics on the social and economic fates of minorities, nations, and civilization.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, Economics, Sociology, Race, Cultural

352 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1995

About the author

Thomas Sowell is an American economist, social philosopher, and political commentator. He is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. With widely published commentary and books—and as a guest on TV and radio—he became a well-known voice in the American conservative movement as a prominent black conservative. He was a recipient of the National Humanities Medal from President George W. Bush in 2002.
Sowell was born in Gastonia, North Carolina and grew up in Harlem, New York City. Due to poverty and difficulties at home, he dropped out of Stuyvesant High School and worked various odd jobs, eventually serving in the United States Marine Corps during the Korean War. Afterward, he took night classes at Howard University and then attended Harvard University, where he graduated magna cum laude in 1958. He earned a master's degree in economics from Columbia University the next year and a doctorate in economics from the University of Chicago in 1968. In his academic career, he held professorships at Cornell University, Brandeis University, and the University of California, Los Angeles. He has also worked at think tanks including the Urban Institute. Since 1977, he has worked at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, where he is the Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy.
Sowell was an important figure to the conservative movement during the Reagan era, influencing fellow economist Walter E. Williams and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. He was offered a position as Federal Trade Commissioner in the Ford administration, and was considered for posts including U.S. Secretary of Education in the Reagan administration, but declined both times.
Sowell is the author of more than 45 books (including revised and new editions) on a variety of subjects including politics, economics, education and race, and he has been a syndicated columnist in more than 150 newspapers. His views are described as conservative, especially on social issues; libertarian, especially on economics; or libertarian-conservative. He has said he may be best labeled as a libertarian, though he disagrees with the "libertarian movement" on some issues, such as national defense.

Reviews

[Ted Heitz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Why the help couldn't we get Sowell as the first black president 15 years ago? He gets it, without having to mince words or speak with ambiguity as to not offend anyone...if everyone understood world issues this way, we would be far better off. He describes how simple economic history has developed world diversity as we know it. great great work.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent book, very well researched and intensely practical as a worldview. The only fault is that is often dry and technical due to the voluminous research reported within it. Sowell uses a wide array of evidence from around the globe and across the human timeline to ensure his observations are transcendent over contemporary hot-button issues, yet simultaneously applicable to them.

The final pages, where Sowell, bears down on the judgments and implications of his work, are piercing with their insight. Perhaps the most salient message to 21st century social justice types is, "The same approach which treats sins common to the human race as peculiarities of "our society" often also makes the fatal error of confusing victimhood with virtue, by lining up on the side of the victim, instead of lining up on the side of a moral principle." (Sowell, 250). The book backs up this statement with facts from world history.

It is particularly important for today's compassion peddlers to recognize the larger realities of our contemporary issues. We will perpetuate the dysfunctions by pandering to them. Western civilization is under siege from members of its own who have proven Sowell's claim, and made the correlated mistakes of assuming 'our society' is to blame for basic human flaws and preferring victim politics to principled policies in the public square. Everyone who shares an interest or concern about racial issues needs to read this book in order to set our thinking on productive tracks toward overcoming racial and cultural tensions that commonly exist among different people groups.

[Ebookwormy1 · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was fantastic. Sowell does an admirable job of teasing out the differences between race (which are minimal) and culture (which are huge) through a study of world history.

The chapters on slavery and migration particularly stand out in my mind, though the discussion of intelligence was also notable.

Unfortunately, I read this heavily academic work during a time when life got crazy. Though I finished it, I sincerely want to re-read and write a full review. Highly recommended.

This work is part of a three book series by Sowell, which I would like to read in it's entirety. The next title is....
Migrations & Cultures: A World View, Sowell, 1996
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Cultural Diversity: A World View
In December of 1990, Thomas Sowell was honored as the recipient of the American Enterprise Institute’s Francis Boyer Award. Sowell addressed the American Enterprise Institute about the importance of cultural diversity in America and the world. He titled his talk "Cultural Diversity: A World View." In this lecture you can hear some of his early thinking/ research that he expanded upon in Race and Culture, which was published 5 years later in 1995. You can watch on video here:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?15253-1...
Someone has provided mostly accurate transcript that you can print/ read along with here:
https://www.tsowell.com/spcultur.html

[Rob Price · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thomas Sowell is a skilled writer with a powerful ability to combine historical, social science and free-market perspectives. He cuts through the noise and doesn’t mince his words on the sensitive topics of race and culture.

In Race and Culture Sowell argues against two common social science doctrines: 1) that all races are equal and 2) that races are purely an outcome of their environment. Environment is admittedly important but there are also skills, habits and characteristics that make certain cultures successful at something for a period of time. That success must imply a degree of inequality.

An example of cultural inequality is Arabic numerals, which are indisputably superior to Roman numerals and used across the world as a result. The fact that paper is used across the world today implies that the Chinese race and culture was superior relative to others in the sphere of paper technology. This doesn’t imply that China was a superior race but it highlights that local superiority can exist. Examples, where cultures are able to adapt foreign technologies quickly, advance these and move forward must surely also indicate a level of relative progress or superiority. Cultural relativists deny inequality but sometimes differences or inferiority are the starting point for subsequent achievements and define that culture thereafter. The Meji reformers in Japan, for example. Admission of inequalities can be a critical step towards overcoming them.

I particularly loved how Sowell described a group of people he calls “middlemen minorities”. Jews, Lebanese, Chinese, Indians, etc, at various points in history, in various locations displayed very similar characteristics. These groups emigrated in relatively small groups, had very few possessions when they arrived, held very close family bonds and maintained culturally conservative values. Generally, these groups were very frugal, prioritising saving to buy small businesses as soon as possible after arrival. They would differentiate themselves from the local population by working uncomfortably long hours, made possible by living in their business premises, employing all members of the family to secure the business and ensure that all the meagre profits were ploughed back into the business. Parents kept close watch over their children’s value system and could even become negative about the less conservative values within the majority population. Over time businesses would scale and the middlemen minorities would often expand into the lending business, charging more appropriate interest rates because they knew the local community and risk profiles better than the banks. Sometimes these middlemen were highly respected in the community for the differentiated services they provided but they could also be stigmatised. Both the minorities and majorities could become fearful/jealous/condescending towards cultures different to their own, particularly during times of economic stress.

The extensive chapter on slavery was also enlightening. Sowell comments that the most distinguishing feature of western slavery was not that it existed, slavery existed in numerous countries both before and after western slavery, but that the Western nations brought global slavery to an end in such a short period of time. Sowell’s free market application to the economics of slavery is fascinating. He logically shows how economic progress was a major factor that brought slavery to its knees. Slave owners had strong incentive to relax typical slave laws to uncover the talents of slaves that were covered by the initial occupation of slave labour. Child rearing, education, art, etc were all skills that required slave owners to grant greater liberties and frequently offer freedom in order to generate the desired productivity outcomes. As soon as some owners began to relax these rules the knowledge transfer between slaves increased, leading to amplified agitation and provided weight for the movement towards freedom.

While a vehement critic of relativism, Sowell also explains why environment matters. For example, thousands of years ago humans could not properly sustain life in the cold and early human life centred on the tropics and humans were concentrated in the tropics as a result. As clothing and shelter technology advanced people could move into colder territories and take advantage of the change in landscape. One the advantages of a colder climate was fewer tropical diseases, which still plague African countries today. Africa also has few navigable rivers, which is seen as a defining feature of human development over the years (The Nile is one of the rare navigable rivers and it fostered the development of Egypt). It can be dramatically cheaper to transport goods and people over water than land and most of the world’s major cities are situated on waterways as a result. In Roman times the Empire in Southern Europe flourished because it was close to the differentiated cultural influence of the Middle East, had easy transport over the calm Mediterranean and the relatively warm weather supported bigger more concentrated populations. In Northern European societies were initially much smaller than Southern but eventually learnt to take advantage of longer winters and greater time indoors. The rough Atlantic Ocean held back seafaring development in North Western Europe at first but the experience in these waters later allowed the British, Dutch, French, Spanish and Portuguese to capitalise on their superior skills by expanding empires across the globe whereas Italy and Greece were left behind. This brief story shows how environment can matter but it can also have different influences in different time periods depending on the technologies available and preeminent goals of society.

Education provides another pertinent observation. Educational is universally accepted as a good social outcome but there are underappreciated differences in what is perceived as good/bad education. For example, developing countries persistently over-invest in liberal arts and underinvest in science, maths and engineering despite the high returns from these professions. Government employment often becomes the goal for social scientists further perpetuating economic problems in developing nations as society becomes ideologically dependent on government for employment, welfare and strategic direction rather than the individual. Sowell also notes that formal education creates a sense of entitlement and can sow the seeds of social instability and thereby reduce productivity by creating expectation divergences.

[Eugene Kernes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Overview:
Different environments create different cultures as people find different responses to their environmental context. But even with migration, there is still a transmission of ancestral values, skills, and other cultural heritage aspects even though the values come from a different time and place. Modifying to the changing social, environmental, economic, and technological context. Cultures go beyond political boundaries. Cultures transmit their beliefs, biases, decisions making, and internal problems. With different ways of understanding, cultural differences can cause friction. Politics is a mechanism that can either resolve differences among groups, or it can generate and magnify conflict. Race as a social construct is a powerful force for uniting and dividing people.

History makes painfully purchased experiences available for everyone for the price of attention and reflection. History can illuminate fallacies that would otherwise exacerbate the situation. As the world has become more mixed, many racial and cultural distinctiveness have been eroded, but also many that have persisted.

Cultural features are not simply a label, they serve a social purpose which can be of dire importance. Although appearance change, the same cultural values are applied to the choices being made. Different groups have different value sets, attributing some purposes of economic and social life as higher or lower. Utilizing their particular skill and ways for engaging in economic and social life. Cultural aspects spread to other groups when they interact via trade, migration, or conquest.

Political activism is not necessary for prosperity as numerous groups have become prosperous because their culture inculcates skills and behaviors that facilities economic and social betterment. There are groups that have been discriminated against, which were powerless and persecuted minorities, but were still able to be prominent in prosperous occupations. Actions of others have reverberating effects, but do not completely control the fates of peoples. Whether minority groups or conquered nations, their fates are shaped by their own policies.

Race has a biological aspect, but it is a social reality. Many indicators have been imposed on racial groups because there are often no biological indications of the difference. Discrimination directed at a racial or ethnic group does not require a belief of them being inferior. When power is assumed to be part of racism, then those who verbally or physically assault others are exempt from condemnation as racism.

There were many times in history when groups that had skills and behavior which fostered economic progress, had claims that their prosperity came at the expense of others. Nations that removed these groups incurred economic losses. Discrimination it terrible when skilled individuals do not get into positions because of group affiliation, but that form of discrimination does fully explain below average incomes for the group.

Cultures aspects are not only shared by the conquerors to the conquered, as many conquerors borrowed from more advanced cultures they subjugated. Availability of resources, information, or technology is not going to be helpful to a people if they are not receptive to them. Access does not mean usage of the resources.

There are many positive and negative contributions of immigrants of which neither should be dismissed. Even if most people in a group have no animosity towards another group, it takes only few individuals to create massive conflict between the groups. There are many times in which different cultures are prone to conflict with others, increased the costs of having a mixed groups. Exaggerated identity of a group can have dire consequences as copying others can be considered treason. An inability to borrow cultural features from others prevents accessing opportunities for advancement.

Government’s resource is power which it uses to constrain the options of people and organizations. Tending to constrain the options of the ethnic and racial minorities more that the majority. Nations that are active in making policies that control group participation, have tended to result in more intergroup conflict than those countries less active. Democracy can facilitate desirable goals of freedom and dignity, but it can also do the opposite.

Problems?
Although generally pretty clear and easy to read, it is sometimes hard to grasp the full implication of a claim. Sowell at times critiques certain claims, without providing much info on the originating claim, making it difficult to understand why others think differently. This book is more about culture than race, although race has a lot of implications for cultures.

The focus is also on the positive contributions of cultures, but there are examples and cases of negative contributions of cultures. This leaves the reader of the question of cultural traits. As in, what kind of traits produce the cultures that benefit the group. Some examples are given, but a few pages detailing the traits rather than discussing them in a general manner would have helped.

[Chrisanne · Rating 4 out of 5]

I like Sowell because he asks questions a lot of people don't really ask and he likes to take the broad view. He also typically does not get emotionally involved. That doesn't mean that I agree with him 100%, though.

Because he doesn't really do emotions, he doesn't really take emotions from other people into account (he's hardcore into facts, which I can appreciate, but the definition for others may vary). And you miss a lot of potential data when you do. It's one of his older ones, but I appreciated his caveats for IQ measurements.

I did lose track of the thesis, almost from the beginning. And I think any one who read's Sowell's economic opinions should also read Morality: Restoring the Common Good in Divided Times---which has some valid points that Thomas Sowell may not have considered(obvs because this predates it, but I don't think he considers it now either).

[Omar Alshaker · Rating 5 out of 5]

An utterly mind-blowing, shocking and informative goldmine of revelatory insights.

This is one of the books which leave you wondering how you made it this far without reading them. How you ever formed a socioeconomic opinion without learning what this book has to offer.

It's written without any noticeable regard for human emotions, including the author's. He never hesitates to state a fact no matter how uncomfortable it might get. He uses outrageous terms, he never says "luckily", "fortunately", or "unfortunately" after the most devastating or wholesome facts. He tries his very best to hand you the facts with the maximum absence of his stance on them.

Throughout the book, you'll feel that the author is holding a sledgehammer and destroying what you thought was the reality. He makes every point with numbers, evidence and logical reasoning with a clear effort not to make political points out of it.

The book is decorated with around 60 pages (out of 352) of references and citations. Every data point mentioned is well-referenced and supported.

I really wish every one of my friends reads this book, especially left-leaning ones.

An easy 5 stars.

[Cav · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Much as history has to contribute to understanding such social phenomena as wealth creation, history has itself become a target of desperate attack by those for whom the truth threatens devastating consequences to their visions, their egos, or their projects. A whole new class of intellectuals has arisen to supply a history geared to what people currently wish to believe, rather than to the record of the past. There are, of course, honest differences in the interpretation of history. But there are also dishonest differences. To allow those with a purely instrumental view of history to erase the national memory, or to record over it the ideological fashions of the day, is to discard an anchor in reality, and to set sail with light ballast and a reckless optimism..."

Race and culture are among the most hotly debated topics there are. What is the takeaway here? As is par for the course for a book from Thomas Sowell: It's complicated...
[WARNING: This review includes quite a few quotes from the book, mostly for my own future reference. Feel free to skip on by if you're not interested in reading them.]

Author Thomas Sowell is an American economist, social theorist, and senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution.

Thomas Sowell:


Race And Culture is Part 1 of Sowell's "Culture" series. I look forward to reading Parts 2 and 3 shortly. This is my third from the author, after his 2009 book Intellectuals and Society, and his 2018 book Discrimination and Disparities; both of which I enjoyed. Thomas Sowell is one of the most formidable contrarian thinkers in the world today, IMHO.

The writing here is typical Sowell; his analysis is super-thoughtful and masterfully nuanced. Sowell's writing is remarkably clear and concise; and the book is very informationally dense, despite its modest length of ~350 pages. Sowell mentions in the preface that: "This book challenges many dogmas of so-called "social science," as well as many underlying assumptions about racial issues and cultural differences. This challenge is based on more than a decade of research for this book, which in turn represents the culmination of more than twenty years of research and writing on issues of race and ethnicity in general."

The book contains many excellent quotes, and super-insightful writing. In a world that is becoming more and more politically polarized, Sowell's careful analysis is a breath of fresh air. He writes on the dangers of identity politics here with great clarity:

"The problem of putting leverage in the hands of extremists is the greater immediate danger, though cultural provincialism can take a heavy toll in the long run. Even if 90 percent of both group A and group B consist of well-meaning people with no real animosity toward the other group, the way that they respond to clashes between their respective hostile fringes can differ greatly according to the degree of group identity and solidarity within each group. Where identity and solidarity are at fever pitch, every such clash can be seen as a sign of a larger threat by one group as a whole against the other group as a whole, whereas in quieter times both groups might see the same episodes as the work of hooligans or demagogues whom most members of both groups disdain. The social cost of exaggerated identity can be very high to the groups involved and to the whole society.
The long-run costs of exaggerated "identity" can be especially high to groups lagging behind their contemporaries in education, income, and all the social consequences that flow from these. Throughout history, one of the great sources of cultural achievement, both for groups and for nations and even civilizations, has been a borrowing of cultural features from others who happened to be more advanced in given fields at a given time."

The formatting of the book was also very well done. It is broken into broad chapters; and each chapter into segmented writing with relevant headers at the top. The chapters are:

Preface
Chapter 1 A WORLD VIEW
Chapter 2 MIGRATION AND CULTURE
Chapter 3 CONQUEST AND CULTURE
Chapter 4 RACE AND ECONOMICS
Chapter 5 RACE AND POLITICS
Chapter 6 RACE AND INTELLIGENCE
Chapter 7 RACE AND SLAVERY
Chapter 8 RACE AND HISTORY

Sowell's writing here takes a deep data-driven and historical look into many central as well as tangentially related topics to race and culture. Some of what he covers here includes:
* Cultural relativism.
* Transfers of culture between occupying and occupier groups.
* Group differences.
* Stereotypes.
* Cultural identity.
* Africa; Colonial and post-colonial.
* Housing segregation.
* Law and Order.
* Ideological Visions.

Sowell talks about disparate outcomes here:

"Around the world, initial conditions are repeatedly confounded with end results by the use of words like "advantage" and "privilege," or "opportunity" and "access," to describe situations in which there are different performances. Negative words and phrases like "discrimination" and "denial" of "access" are likewise defined to include end results. Groups are said to be denied "access" to educational institutions, for example, when they simply fail to meet the same performance standards applied to others. Whenever group A outperforms group B, in any given set of circumstances, those circumstances are said to "favor" group A, according to the prevailing ideological vocabulary. Discussions of colonial Malaya, for example, abound in statements that British policy there "favored" the Chinese, who in fact had fewer rights and less government-provided education available than did the Malays. The issue here is not facts, about which there is little dispute, but rather about the ideological vocabulary in which facts are conveyed— or obscured and distorted beyond recognition.
Only one step removed from this purely definitional obscuring of performance differences is the practice of explaining differential business success by saying that one group had greater "access" to credit than another. When the probability of repayment differs, whether between individuals or groups, those who are better credit risks receive more credit on better terms. To call this better "access" is again to confuse an end result with an initial condition, ignoring intervening differences in behavior."

And redressing historical wrongs here:

"Misplaced specificity has likewise plagued attempts to understand the sources of many intergroup conflicts. The hatred and contempt often found in history between peoples of different skin color have been found as well between groups physically indistinguishable from one another, but deeply divided by religious bigotry or national animosities. To those caught up in racial hostility, skin color may indeed be crucial. But to an observer, historian, or analyst, such patterns of behavior may differ in no essential way from the behavior of those motivated by differences of creed, nationality, caste, or any of the other divisions of the human race.
The oppressions, harassments, and humiliations visited on Jews in parts of the Middle East are all too similar to the treatment of the untouchables in India or of blacks in the worst parts of the American South during the worst periods of American history.
It is difficult to survey the history of racial or ethnic relations without being appalled by the inhumanity, brutality, and viciousness of it all.
There is no more humane or moral wish than the wish that this could all be set right somehow. But there are no more futile or dangerous efforts than attempts to redress the wrongs of history. These wrongs are not to be denied. Wrongs in fact constitute a major part of history, in countries around the world. But while the victims of these wrongs may live on forever as symbols, most have long ago died as flesh-and-blood human beings. So have their persecutors, who are as much beyond the reach of our vengeance as the victims are beyond our help. This may be frustrating and galling, but that is no justification for taking out those frustrations on living human beings—or for generating new strife by creating privileges for those who are contemporary reminders of historical guilt..."

As mentioned at the start of this review, there is no clear takeaway from this book, other than things are not as simple as they might appear upon a cursory glance. As Antony Beevor says: "History is never tidy..." Indeed, history, economics, social sciences, and most other fields of inquiry are rarely (if ever) black and white.
Unfortunately, people are not innately wired for nuanced analysis. Part of our inborn wiring leads us to dichotomize other people, events, and the world in general into broadly black or white, "good" or "bad" narratives and categories.
One of Sowell's fortés is bringing the necessary nuance to bear on these complex issues; of which many in the general public, and even the intelligentsia tend to paint in black or white terms.

****************

Race And Culture: A World View was another exceptionally well reasoned, argued, edited, and presented work from Thomas Sowell. I really enjoyed listening to the author lay out his thoughts here, and I found his arguments very compelling.
I would definitely recommend this one to anyone interested.
5 stars, and another one of Sowell's books that I'll add to my "favorites" shelf.

[Mel Foster · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book. The most important achievement of Sowell in this book is asking questions others assume they already know the answers to--bold questions such as was the use of slavery a net national economic gain? Are subsistence workers incapable of social mobility? Do prosperous minorities prosper at the cost of the majority? and so much more. Written a quarter of a century ago but still very timely and relevant. I will be returning to this book again for quotes and ideas.
I often collect quotes when reading, but found myself wanting to quote about 2/3 of this book. Here is a quote on the integrity of history: "For history to contribute to human understanding, its own integrity as history must be respected. A history that is essentially a projection into the past of current theories and assumptions cannot be a test of those theories and assumptions. A search of the past for group image-enhancement cannot be called history either, nor can a record of the past purged of whatever may be currently embarrassing or whatever is vetoed by contemporary group spokesmen, for whatever reason. "
Thought-provoking from cover to cover.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

In his book Race and Culture: A World View, author Thomas Sowell tackles the issues of why certain groups become more advanced than others although these relative positions are not often permanent. As with any books by this author, it was thoroughly researched and well written with plenty of examples from history to make it easy for readers to understand the points he makes. I've read several of his books and have never been disappointed or bored. While I feel there is often some overlap when he addresses similar topics focused on different aspects of issues whether culture, economics, race, etc, I'm also am always learning something. In this book he dispells the myths around the politically correct view that all races and cultures are equal; sort of like the currently popular participation trophies given out in youth sports competitions so everyone feels like a success or not keeping score in a game for the same reason. While relative success and accomplishments tend to come from the more advanced societies of any particular time, who the advanced societies are can also change. Excellent read, I've already started my next Thomas Sowell reading experience.

[Joel Wentz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding, clear-eyed synthesis of data and research. Sowell does not mince words, but he also doesn't shoe-horn an agenda into his argument. The chapters on "economics" and "slavery" are particularly good here.

One of Sowell's strengths is simply the massive historical and global scope of his research. This is how he is able to clearly place social issues in perspective, and ratchet down the "temperature" of some of the most divisive issues (the chapter on "intelligence" in this book is a great example of that). He puts forward a very strong and compelling case here, and even if you aren't as conservative/libertarian on government issues as he is (I'm certainly not), there is a ton to gain from his careful work here. I wish more people read Sowell, and I wish he wasn't weaponized so frequently by shallow conservative talking heads.

He is an intellectual force, and I wish his voice was part of more conversations in our current rhetorical climate. Highly recommended for anyone who wants a deeply informed perspective on race, the development of cultures and our history.

[Gebo · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an absolutely fascinating book about the intersection of race and culture in a global context. The author argues that focusing on specific places and times ignores the rich interconnection of race and culture and how they function in society. Really good book to read simultaneously with a book like Race Matters by Cornel West. I believe Sowell would argue that West is overly focused on WASP/BASP ideology in an American context and that reading overemphasizes the uniquely American aspects of race and culture and misses what is a larger, more dynamic picture. Sowell suggests you start the story in act one not act three. Regardless of agreement with his positions, a really unique perspective to put into dialogue with other thinkers.

[Elisabeth Zguta · Rating 5 out of 5]

A legend, economic genius, and our social conscious, Thomas Sowell delves into the details and exposes truths that leads those open-minded readers to see the real world. We are all human, we all seek a better future, and we are all individuals within our cultures and mores. This book is a great philosophic read based on factual observations.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thomas Sowell is really one of the better writers to read when it comes to the intersection between race, culture, economics, and politics, and in this book, he clears up many common misconceptions that have to do with the history and the racial situation in the world. He draws from a vast amount of historical events from all around the world, and takes us through many history lessons. The only thing about this book that is slightly negative is that, even if it is partly very engaging, it is so full of facts that it becomes a bit tedious to read. I was thinking it works better as a lexicon of the topic, to get the argument and political points straight before going into debates with false presumptions.

[Relstuart · Rating 4 out of 5]

Despite being nearly thirty years old this book didn't feel outdated.

[Nathan Albright · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you have read as many of the books of the author as I have, then there is a lot about this book that will be very familiar.  This is not too surprising, as while it is true that Sowell is an enjoyable writer to read, at the same time he is someone who tends to repeat his points and perspectives often.  This is not at all a bad thing; Sowell's perspective is consistent, and so when he writes about similar subjects he tends to say the same sort of thing, even if it is arranged differently than it is elsewhere in his works.  This consistency of approach is something that makes Sowell comfortable to read if one is in sympathy with his worldview and perspective, as I am.  Those who are hostile or not sympathetic to the author's worldview are likely not going to enjoy reading his material as much as I do, and it does not take very long in the course of reading the author's work until one realizes whether or not the author is one whose insights one can appreciate.  In this particular book we can read Sowell's statements about the tangled relationship between race and culture as an extended critique against both racist views of racial determination as well as the views of the book Why Nations Fail, which the author comments on quite a few times over the course of the book.

This particular book is about 250 pages of core material along with a preface, acknowledgments, notes, and an index, and it deals thoughtfully with the questions of race and culture, beginning with a description of the author's worldview and his firm (and empirical) belief that human beings are not a blank slate upon which teachers and authorities can mold us into whatever image they wish, but rather includes the heavy influence of cultural patterns that persist over many generations and that limit the flexibility of human behavior within those deep ruts (1).  After that the author discusses the issue of migration and culture, showing how culture is persistent even when peoples have traveled to very distant areas (2), and the issue of conquest and culture, where conquering peoples often find themselves poorer off because the wealth they gain through conquest cannot be held by diligence and self-command (3).  The rest of the book is then spent by the author looking at the relationship (or not) between race and economics (4), politics (5), intelligence (6), slavery (7), and history (8), pointing out the flaws of anti-Western bias and the problems that identity politics brings to societies that are unable to engage in necessary and important cultural change.

Ultimately, this is a book that deals with a small set of deeply interesting concerns.  For one, human beings come onto this earth with qualities that lead them to claim various identities and seek their own personal success as well as their belonging with others.  Additionally, they carry with them cultural attitudes that are difficult to change and that have a strong effect on life.  Moreover, these cultural attitudes are ones we may not be willing to admit because it seems illegitimate to us that the past should weigh us down and that other people should be blessed with cultural attitudes that bring them success while our own bring us less achievement.  The author's discussion of the importance of cultural attitudes towards work and education and politics to the problems of identity and identity politics all over the world reminds us of the tragedy of what happens when the politics of envy and resentment are used as a balm to cultures whose suffering is the result of their own inability to wrestle with cultural attitudes that hinder achievement and success.  When we ultimately have no one to blame but ourselves but we insist on scapegoating others, the results are both predictable and lamentable.

[Son Tung · Rating 5 out of 5]

Bits and pieces of historical knowledge i picked up from others book related to conquests, clash of civilizations and cultures certainly help me going through this one without much effort. However, what Thomas Sowell said about the importance of "History" really put my scattered thoughts into order. High rating for this one because of its importance as i wish it was the one to be read as an introductory book to the topic of today's identity crisises among different nations and ethics.

"History is not destiny. Much of it consists of mistakes need which not be repeated and crimes which not be tolerated. History of mankind is painfully purchased experiences. Now available free, fore merely the price of attention and reflection.

History shows patterns, even though its not providing formulas. Its facts are especially needed when dealing with racial beliefs and issues where powerful emotions reign, and where prejudices and biases often have been the norm.

History can not solve immediate problems but it offers understanding. It can expose fallacies which make matter worse or make resolutions harder to achieve or see. History provides understanding, not psychological but clear psychic view of reality, its limitations and its possibilities. "

[Douglas · Rating 4 out of 5]

For some time now I have been an unabashed admirer of the writing of Thomas Sowell. Admittedly, in some of his more politically charged writing he can lay on the partisan bias a bit thick. In this fascinating book, however, he tones down the acerbic wit to produce a work that introduces and expands upon many of the ideas of Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel" (GGS), even while predating that book's publication by three years. Not only does Sowell beat Diamond to the punch, I would argue that in most respects "Race and Culture" is the superior of "GGS". Unfortunately, Sowell is not merely a libertarian-conservative thinker who is unafraid to kick the hornet's nest, but a black one at that.* Thus, while "GGS" met with international acclaim and sold enormous numbers of copies - it has 227,000 ratings on Goodreads - Sowell is little read outside of intellectually-oriented conservative circles (almost a contradiction in terms these days); his "Race and Culture" has been rated all of 521 times on this platform.

"Race and Culture" is a slightly inadequate title, for this book goes beyond that. Rather, he is concerned here with examining the factors that have caused different ethnic groups to have such widely varied levels of success in societies around the world. In particular, he is interested with challenging dogmas that hold that racism alone accounts for such differences, or even a majority of them. It has become somewhat in vogue of late to criticize "eurocentric" approaches to history and other fields (and, to be sure, such criticisms are often justified), but Sowell's approach unexpectedly inverts this criticism to reveal that parochial worldviews can also cause those so impaired to draw erroneous conclusions about the causes and effects of various problems relating to ethnicity. It can also result in Western civilization being selectively demonized for evils that were prevalent everywhere.

Each of the book's eight chapters has a rather different theme, and work almost as standalone essays. "Race and Culture", the book's titular essay written in the spirit of the work of Max Weber, examines the concept of human capital to reveal how historical experiences and other factors have caused some groups to develop skills and values that allow them to outcompete other groups. The Jews, whose religion uniquely did not prevent them from lending money with interest during the middle ages, allowed them to develop the skills and networks needed achieve incredible international success in the fields of finance and business - even after other religions dropped their opposition to usury. This is the classic example (see, for example, Arendt's discussion in "The Origins of Totalitarianism") which - in a theme recurrent in this book - bred resentment among those who were simply outcompeted by those with superior skills. Sowell provides other examples, including the Chinese in Southeast Asia, Lebanese businessmen in West Africa, Indians in East Africa, and Germans in Russia and the United States. I leave it to you, the reader, to further explore Sowell's argumentation yourselves.

"Migration and Culture" and "Conquest and Culture" are two closely related chapters the examine what happens when two cultures come into competition, highlighting in particular the contributions of immigrants to host countries. "Race and Economics" uses economic analysis to delve into this concept of human capital in greater detail. "Race and Slavery" is nothing short of a triumph: a worldwide survey of systems of slavery, including an analysis of its forms, its effects, its ending, and implications for understanding today's ethnic conflict, particularly as it pertains to the United States. The book's final essay, "Race and History", provides the geographic arguments of GGS in capsule form. Despite this much briefer treatment of another book which I'm familiar with, it still packs some surprises. Sowell also discusses the nature and uses of history, cautioning against using it to stir up resentments.

Weaker but still interesting is Chapter 5, "Race and Politics". Here, true to form as a small-government conservative, Sowell argues that political organization has proven neither consistently necessary nor even especially beneficial to the advancement of various underachieving ethnicities. He is still insightful, but I found him constrained by his emphasis on economic advancement; considerations of whether political advancement could bring about improvements in the basic humane treatment of various minorities seemed rather underdeveloped to me. The book's main weakness, an over-reliance on specific examples rather than systematic comparison, is most prominent here.

Unfortunately, Chapter 6, "Race and Intelligence" is a real stinker. While the very title of the essay will raise red flags for some readers, it is important to (1) remember that Sowell is himself black and (2) rest assured that Sowell quickly dismisses the pseudoscience that suggests there are genetic differences in intelligence. Still, Sowell seems to engage in his pseudoscience of his own, and as an economist, not a cognitive scientist, his thinking is very muddled. Of course, the field of cognitive science has also advanced a great deal since 1994, but I'm still not willing to let him off the hook. He is not trained in the field, regularly criticizes others for commenting outside of their areas of expertise, and this is a bad essay. I'll be honest, though: I only quickly skim-read this chapter once I realized what I was into. Happily, this essay really has no bearing on the rest of the book; it is only referenced once or twice anywhere else, and is in no way important to understanding his thesis. It's quite puzzling that it was included at all, really.

Anyways, since this chapter is so easily skipped, despite the fact that it caused me to drop my star I still have no problem giving this a strong recommendation. Other reviewers praise, or at least highlight, the "non-PC" nature of Sowell's work, and while that assessment is accurate (much as I despise the acronym which only further underscores how cliche that term has become) I realize that it will cause some prospective readers to fear that they are about to embark upon a work of the sort of conservative blowhard that blames "political correctness" for every fact that contradicts their own opinion - often given with racist undertones. Sowell is not that man. He is a highly successful, extraordinarily well-educated academic who simply follows the evidence and makes his conclusions, highlighting that which is supported by prevailing political orthodoxy and that which does not. He is attune to nuance, and is unafraid to say those all-important words of intellectual honesty: "it depends". "Race and Culture" is a fearless work of genius, and whatever the political leanings of the author, it deserves to be widely read.

4.5/5

*In fairness, Sowell also famously disdains self-promotion, and there is little in this book's marketing to encourage sales.

[Nishant Deshpande · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best book on the subject I have read so far.

Especially relevant today given the issues at the center of political discussions.

The central thesis is that culture matters a lot. Not culture in some broad ambiguous sense, but as it drives things people do every day, the choices they make, their priorities. Like, who spends on education vs a bigger house.

He doesn't rely on WEIRD undergrad pizza motivated studies, but looks at history and wide ranging statistics.

He uses examples of immigrant populations all over the world (Chinese in east asia, Indians in East Africa, Jews, Germans in South America,...) and looks at how they are successful, in what, and that they likely brought nothing but their culture.

The geographical breadth of his analysis and knowledge is impressive and strikes me as close to reality.

He also has a interesting and nuanced view on race and intelligence. He doesn't just dwell on the US centric questions around black / white IQ differences and reasons, but a host of other differences and how they changed over time.

A must read for all interested in Race and Culture and current issues.

[Jon Webber · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very non-PC, international, historical and well researched book. It made me think differently about several topics including the history of slavery and cultural differences and values. I would definetly recommend it.

[Rod · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another broad and deep work from America's most important living author. Shows that when we talk about race we really should be discussing culture.

[Laine · Rating 5 out of 5]

But of course this is exceptional. Satisfying in every way. I must say (although Sowell would not approve) there is nothing more seductive than critical analysis that finds the truth.

[Josiah · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was amazing. Truly a five-star book and worth the long read.

[. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Книгата беше като въведение в темата. Основните му аргументи съм ги чувал от негови интервюта. Определено цялата му трилогия ще се прочете поне още веднъж.

[Dr.J.G.]

Prior to the horrors exposed post wwii that were committed in the name of of a superior race and culture, it was not only assumed that the two were inextricably joined at the pale colours level but widely so practiced by the said pale colour populace in the world. Post the exposure of the logically correct (but horror at a humanitarian level of concerns of course) extreme of this practice in the camps run by nazis, this theory of race and culture superiority fell into a ditch of disrepute, where it was taboo to speak of this but only acceptable to attack a practice of this in the world when the practitioners were not actually of the races assumed superior due to the said pale set of colours.

A double standard emerged where a European ancestry was silently assumed to be superior in any case and was given a better treatment of every sort and at every level in the world, but the rest of the world was lumped together and admonished, wherever possible, about such assumptions and practices. Since the phrase "wherever possible" is of key importance here, a hierarchy emerged silently, with pale colours European ancestry at the top; Oriental (Chinese, Japanese chiefly) and Mid-oriental (Mediterraenean, west Asian, Central Asian - mainly Islamic) but also others (southeast Europe was low in world hierarchy, west and north being above) at the undefined middle, Africa excluding Egypt and other north African parts undoubtedly at the lowest rung, regions such as southeast Asia or Pacific islands or Caribbeans or natives of Americas and most Latin Americans either forgotten or used and forgotten - and India of course at the receiving end of an ever battering ram of accusations of inequality in various names, chiefly due a strong resistance to conversion without accompanying violence of the sort that would erupt if a conversionist faith attempts such practices and escalations of conversion in a land where another conversionist faith is the rule with options really not allowed.

During the era that this was happening, much of other parallel theory and practices came up, such as lack of rigour in education in name of liberal freedom with values scrapped in name of ideals of individual but really no real progress for individual student, resulting inevitably in low levels of literacy and accomplishments in public schools through US and a low regard for teachers, which in turn resulted in an exodus of intelligent and well read, well educated men and women from teaching profession unless they could quickly get a tenure in a university - well, who in their right minds would like to be at the receiving end of a battering ram of accusations and disrespect and occasional violence after giving a life to caring for young of other people unless they lacked any opportunity elsewhere!

All this did nothing to improve a racial equality, while the lowering of requirements in schools merely resulted in a bullies rule until it came to job market. Culture became a dubious word best limited to ballet, opera, classical music et al, playground of rich and hobby of intelligentsia, while masses stayed away happily and watched sports on television (tickets were easier for corporates and other rich) while drinking beer and eating chips and ordering more food from the kitchen as wives fumed silently - they were not allowed to join the male buddies on the couch as often as not, since loosening of discipline made a buddy goggling a wife possible without reprimand for him and sometimes a bad end for the wife.

Naturally, obesity followed resulting in a good thing for economy what with dieting industry, pills and so forth, surgery, gyms and spas to make up for the travails, a higher end for the well to do and other facilities for those that could afford that much. Walking to the market to shop has been not merely unfashionable but physically nearly impossible in US and increasingly elsewhere too last half a century or so. Some places have a pharmacy one can walk to, others not even that, so emergencies require driving as well. Unless one is ok with far more expensive alternatives.

While all this proliferated with the world generally aping cultures of races and nations of European ancestry, the politically correct stance was to give a mouthing to environment being all theory of culture and progress and opportunity, while in reality most downtrodden people of whatever race had little access to these vehicles of rising above poverty and other ills of the sort - and no possiblity was envisioned where culture, education, hygiene, knowledge et al were not necessarily associated to an abundance of all latest toys sold for profit, although it was right before everyone's eyes blinkered shut tightly.
..........................................................


Truth is, the two factors of genome and environment do not battle necessarily, they co-operate as well, and affect one another in striving for evolution. Thus children of intelligent parents do inherit intelligence to varying degrees - since genome is complex and a guarantee would require a high level of intelligence in all relatives of ancestors of the baby - but an intelligent and educated mother enhances the level of intelligence of the child of an intelligent and educated father. This inheritance is true of many traits that can be learned in environment as well, such as hygiene practices or aspiration to knowledge.

But a confusion is made when race and culture or other facets of human achievement are linked in that it is assumed that such a link is necessarily racist, and this is due to the fact that an assumption of superiority of pale colouring races persists as much as one of superiority of European ancestry. This assumption is due to the simple fact of everyone being able to see a set of colouring inherited - blue or green eyes, red or yellow hair, pink or sallow or pale cheeks - while a perceived intelligence arouses animosity of the most vicious sort unless accompanied by the right set of colours and gender, preferably accompanied by European ancestry as well.

As a community interacts they swap and share genes, traits, habits, food, hygiene, information, likes and dislikes, knowledge, and more - forming a race simultaneously with an interlinked set of intangibles we name culture, and the two are interlinked. What is not seem immediately is that a visible similarity of two people does not immediately make for a similar level of intelligence or culture, since other factors affect everything as well, and there are different communities within every given race, sometimes stratified by money-defined class as in US, sometimes by social stratification by caste as in Europe (royalty, aristocracy, landed gentry, traders, professionals ...), and sometimes by a multitude of complex factors including a differently defined caste (based on ancestral set of professions and work, rather than monarch bestowed titles and lands as in Europe). And within a community which is usually a part of a race and not whole of it, culture and intelligence and other traits are as similar as they might be within a set of relatives gathered at a wedding.

Yes, there is a link - and yes, it is all affected by environment and vice versa as well, and genome is as affected by learning as vice versa - and it is not about pale colours up, monochrome down, sepia in between, with almond eyes an exotic over the next hill level. It is far more complex than that.

And this is true of gap across gender as well. Mothers affect children positively and daughters specially, and infant daughters of educated mother and an aspiring grandmother are known to be far more attached to books and learning and capable of dealing with electric wires than daughters of conventional mothers, while an ease about gender roles in environment and ancestry (the two are interlinked in a family of course) is known to have produced much beloved sons who are far more interested in playing with dolls than their sisters with storytelling of high complexity, going on to not literature for a career necessarily but to electrical engineering and finance.

Give the children all you can, let them have all you can of the good things others around can provide by example and teaching, and you help cultural evolution of humanity within your own little circle of race, community, family. It is only a little different from money - those that have money may lose it fast but culture slowly, and those that aspire to have either or both can, with generations doing better than ancestors. That is evolution.
......................................................................................................


And while we are at it, poverty has as little to do with lack of culture, hygiene or learning and knowledge, let alone intelligence, as pale colourings do. Millennia of unwed priests has made Europe forget that learning need not be associated with riches, since poor had to toil for living and church personnel was given the leisure and almost monopoly over knowledge (inquisition being very useful in weeding out any counterexamples effectively for present and future by burning and fear respectively) while rich alone could indulge in bathing, clean clothes, and other time consuming activities that needed assurance of not needing to make a living. But then with Anglican church emerged a class that was both poor and educated, namely the Vicar's family, including daughters, who had to be exemplery in every way - hygiene, learning, clean clothes - and cultured as well. This however did not stop from the phrases like "unwashed poor" being exported to colonies, where observed facts might have contradicted the phrase (Braahman are and were always poor - until the opening of migration and subsequent IT revolution that included everybody who could - but nevertheless bound to set examples in learning and knowledge and hygiene by very definition of their status, and others are bound equally to follow within the boundaries of their work needs), if only the need to look down on the ruled never mind how superior they were in any field did not make blinding a need for the rulers.

Poverty is as unrelated to intelligence, culture, learning, hygiene and knowledge as are gender and colour of any body parts. Community one grows up within, including family and neighbourhood and school and relatives and nation, do form an essential part of contributing factors. Then it is up to oneself.

[Rod Pierce · Rating 5 out of 5]

I appreciate that sowell states he can’t offer solutions. I also appreciate Sowell’s clear writing and his exhaustive examples, statistics, and data supporting his arguments. My issue is he views the world strictly through economics - thus he’ll advocate for things like group discrimination bc it’s economically efficient even at the expense of individuals who don’t fit that group stereotype. He may be correct in a world where you are only judged on financial productivity, but that’s not reality. Nonetheless he provides the best conservative voice with minimum propaganda and forces a deeper discussion. This book and the distinction between race and culture fundamentally shifted my view on the race and subsequent disparities.

My takeaways:
- Race is social, less biological. Culture is the beliefs and assumptions passed down from people of ancestorly similar areas. Sowell believes culture is primary determinant of outcome and disparity. Liberal view is culture is constant, all have same potential, but the external environment / discrimination —> outcome and disparity. Sowell thinks when race/ethnicity constant across different environments = cultural, when differs depending on environment = environmental. Taking sides of the victim vs the side of the moral indignation (not blacks fault, fault of slavery - not Jews, fault of holocaust).
- certain cultures more influenced by local environment and political policies have strong influence over the people, while others are ingrained, and similarities are found across different countries and regions regardless of local policy (gujaratis = entrepreneurial in India, east Africa, US - Jews = merchants and textiles all over world). When a group outcompetes the dominant majority, often their cultural skills translate well in that environment to economic productivity (Chinese in Jamaica, Indians in east Africa, Jews in Germany, Germans in Russia) they are seen as threat. Culture related to 1) education (how much sacrifice endured to obtain high value degree, usually STEM) 2) business (some cultures more entrepreneurial, including immigrants and why some eventually outcompete dominant culture) 3) labor (manual labor viewed menial, extreme aversion especially as education increases).
- Migration and culture: immigrant mentality may start with menial work, over time, through generations —> become elite/high class through sustained cultural value systems that establish wealth (Chinese in south east Asia, German farmers, Indians in east Africa). Assimilation of immigrants into host culture depends on compatibility of immigrant and host culture (Asians rarely assimilate into middle eastern culture, Germans rarely assimilate into Russian culture - both assimilated more easily into US culture). Immigrants fleeing persecution or injustice tend to be both sexes, those that come for economic reasons tend to be male. Small business minded immigrants (Chinese, Jews, etc) come in with immigrant mentality to outside countries, work hard, long hours, leverage infra and international business connections, don’t incorporate natives into their business (cultural and trust incompatibility) and over generations become high in business sector - many are eventually persecuted and leave (Jews all throughout history for ex), often political lefts despite being capitalists. Encapsulated immigrants (isolated cultural minorities who don’t change with native culture and stay same - Germans in Russia, Indians in western hemispheres)
- Conquest & culture: culture spreads via conquest, but not always (Germans didn’t impact French culture post WW2). If conquerers culture has advantages in local/global system, then conquered culture way of life may like the conquered Roman lands by (including British). Opposite occurs where conquerors adopt the conquered culture as Mongols’ did in China and Middle East. Cultural receptivity needed for either to happen - religion often a barrier (ottomans didn’t adapt European culture bc Islam vs Christianity). When imperialist loses colonial revolution, colony often able to sustain itself vs when it’s strategic political withdrawal (us independence vs African independence - not sure I agree with that, I mean all defeat is political even us independence).
- Race and economics: 1) jobs - inefficient to pay someone different rate for same job and economic output. Racial discrimination it’s often little access to higher paying jobs vs differential pay for same job (paying blacks less for same job & efficiency would then no one would hire whites), more efficient to hire homogeneously (less variability and can plan), individuals get discriminated from group stereotypes (strong black applicant won’t get job bc on average, blacks don’t do job well), political artificial control of market lowers economic output and efficiency (true for socialism and hard racism policies) 2) housing - politically controlled housing market increases cost and inefficiency (personal choice, priority, reducing values, etc). People self sort for many reasons, artificial control disrupts bc cannot capture the cultural reasons of self assortment 3) goods/services: monopoly/exploitation, artificial control of market assumes homogeneity and reasons for monopoly are oversimplified - when you price fix it often hurts those the policies were supposed to protect, original observations based on incredibly complex web of reasons.
- Race and politics: Politics along race/ethnicity lines only relevant when race/ethnicity supersedes all other issues and vote won’t be split along racial lines (money, class, etc) - ex in nigeria & India where parties dig into race/ethnicity politics and divide. Military race politics common when higher ranking military minorities officers exert influence over lower ranking majority - esp when political majority flipped (African civil wars). Homeland politics interaction with foreign home (Jews in us and Israeli politics). Majority often expel highly productive minorities, blaming them for woes (Indian/Asians in Uganda and Kenya).
- Race and intelligence: differences exist, extent of nature (genetics vs culture) vs nurture (environment, ses, bias) driving differences unclear, lower SES Asians outperform higher SES blacks/latinx. Low groups tend to do worse on abstract tests (verbal exams) - across racial lines. Environment is important as there’s been a steep rise in IQ among certain ethic groups over century (Jews, Russians, Italians, polish). Blacks have not risen much - those raised by white have higher scores. Black women > black men, but disappears when raised by white families - suggesting environmental / nurture. Japanese have highest iq test scores in world (post WW2). Racial differences on tests blamed on bias and claims that “tests dont predict success” but it does predict academic performance in school, and is near impossible to design study that assesses success later in life based on standardized exams bc too many uncontrolled variables. No way to create “bias free” exam. But you do see Asians do better in exams and better in ses later in life - so maybe there is a prediction of success. Sowell thinks there are real racial/ethnic differences but are more malleable/environmental/cultural than fixed/predetermined in nature - and just bc one race (Asians) excel in some facets, they don’t excel in all, and cannot be used to say they are a superior race. Blacks for ex dominate bball, football, jazz and other things that are not just physical, but require making quick decisions under extreme duress - and are attributes that make all the diff at professional level (beyond physical giftedness).
- Race and slavery: slavery existed in many forms throughout civilization and across the world - not unique to US. Usually slaves are from more vulnerable people/nations/caste. Hard to extract from nation states, African slaves easier to take people left vulnerable without centralized power structures. Slavery very costly for slaves and owners - trying to prevent rebellion costly, slavery economically inefficient (constant monitoring, only used in very low skilled work which limited to picking cotton for ex, and cannot unlock potential through monetary benefits so slaves with extraordinary skills weren’t being used to full potential since you’d risk educating and facilitating escape or revolt) - slavery was moving towards economic incentives vs pure force as had been done in other societies prior to civil war (this why poor whites in south needed the laws and brutality of slavery to exist cause they couldn’t provide these economic incentives). UK in 18th century led moral crusade against slavery, ending first in west then later in Africa, Asia and last in Islamic Middle East.
- Race & History: how much history and current circumstances of people are external (systemic/environmental) vs internal (cultural / hereditary) is neverending debate and reality both factors influence outcomes. These influence cultural development of different areas which include race/ethnic cultures 1) size cultural universe 2) geographical influence - access to navigable waterways (#ports, rapids, waterfalls, distance to ocean etc), land fertility, mountains all facilitate (or prevent) cultural exchange 3) modern world - world culture now established with globalization that never existed prior

[S.M.Y Kayseri · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thomas Sowell's Race and Culture is a dense, scholarly and blessed with his no-nonsense prose and iron-steel logic. This kind of writing, I believe, is what we need in sensitive realms such as this. It has been too long that this matter belonged under the realm of sophists, demagogues and politicians, rather than an honest intellectual. Sowell decided to take the mantle to elaborate in this matter with clarity.

Definitions. We can really see how he won't let himself bogged under definitions, concepts and such. That belonged to the rhetorician. He used the word race as in the broad social meaning of the world, rather than the scientific connotations normally prescribed on it, for reason that humankind has been intermingling for centuries.

Theses. His project was mainly this; differences between groups are real and inherent and cannot be explained in terms of cultural relativity or even the dogma that people are created by their environment. He seek to prove his points by exploring the relation between race and important functions such as culture, economies and intelligence.

It is an incredible book, its writing are driven by its clarity and facts rather than rhetoric. He is persistent in insisting that most of the questions must be answered under the frame of empiricism, rather than intention. He again and again showed how policies framed under the guise of intentions (which really perhaps driven by the embarrassment of the policy makers in what he sees in the more unfortunate groups) really backfired. How the policy of raising of minimum wage only cause the problem of "underrepresentation" to be worsen, as the increase costs naturally requires the employer to become more selective in his workforce et cetera.

In the other hand, he brilliantly pointed out that even all these so-called barriers are dismantled, nothing would be changed until every unit in the group started to realise the first thing they should do is to drop the "...omnipotent excuses for failure: prejudice". Abandoned Western plants in Africa showed that it is not merely a problem of access, but something more. Facts also pointed out that different groups has different degree of cultural receptivity. An example would be that one of the first education system to be introduced in Nigeria were opened by the Christian minorities, which resulted to a lesser educated Muslim North in compared with the better-learned Christian South.

But, as Bertrand Russel shown, how much of empirical data is enough? And the usage of rational rules in the problem of economic is at best abysmal. He stated that discriminating and selecting workforce would only incur extra costs to the employer due to the longer vacant period for that posts, but time again and again proved to us that certain employers are willing to shoulder those extra costs in favor of workforce selection.

There are of course, many more pearls offered in this book, which proved to be extremely refreshing amidst all of recent rhetoricians' works. This is a good start in reading the relation between races and other functions for everybody.

[Chuk's Book Reviews · Rating 3 out of 5]

Follow/Subscribe: YouTube, Patreon, Instagram

- As Sowell is an economist, this book is very economic in nature. As one would expect. But this book is at its weakest when this occurs. Because things boil down to value etc etc. Now, I don’t expect Sowell to analyse things any other way. He even has a thing about intellectuals analysing things beyond the scope of their expertise. But Sowell doesn’t or won’t concede that there may be more significant factors at play that are better than an economic outlook.

- Additionally, Sowell, throughout the book will make a claim without going into it. He at times uses this claim to round off the history lesson he has provided about a certain thing. I was disappointed whenever this happened, because it felt pretty weird. I think Sowell may have done this to try and be as objective as possible but it does make for a slightly frustrating read at times.

- I appreciate good history lessons, which is what this book is primarily for in my opinion. Sowell doesn’t argue that one race or culture is better than another. He does what is on the title. He takes a world view of race and culture in different areas: from slavery, to immigration, to education.

- The biggest takeaway from this book is that everyone is the same.

‘The values of a culture are revealed by the choices actually made – and the sacrifices endured – in pursuing some desired goals at the expense of other desired goals.’

‘Vast differences between the economic productivity of peoples from different cultures do not imply that these differences are permanent, much less hereditary.’

‘Throughout history, one of the great sources of cultural achievement, both for groups and for nations and even civilisations, has been a borrowing of cultural features from others who happened to be more advanced in given fields at a given time.’

‘Few mixtures are more volatile than race and politics.’

‘Political systems, like economic systems, need to be examined in terms of the incentives they create, rather than simply the goals they pursue or the philosophies or ideologies which shape those goals.’

‘History is mankind’s painfully purchased experience, now available for free or merely for the price of attention and reflection.’

‘A history which spans thousands of years, encompassing the rise and fall of empires and of peoples, makes it difficult – if not impossible – to believe in the permanent superiority of any race or culture.’

[Matthew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another 5 Star work by Thomas Sowell.

This book is part of another loose trilogy. (Race and Culture, Migrations and Culture, and Conquests of Culture). According to the author's preface, the works were not intended that way at the start, and I do not yet know if they need to be read in order. (I'm currently part way through book 2 as I write this review.) I suspect that you do not need to have read one volume before the next - especially since the covers, titles, and volumes themselves do not clearly indicate that they are even part of a trilogy!

Despite having initially been published in 1995, it is nearly impossible to overstate its ongoing relevance (this review is written in 2025). This itself remains a testament to the quality of the research, writing, and insights of the author - but it also represents a shameful tragedy that the book was not more widely known and discussed over the past decade.

The entire book is filled with history and empirical observations that have been absent from recent discussions of the topic, but that are wholly pertinent and directly relevant. Given the subject overall has become a national obsession of sorts in recent years, the book should be required reading on that account alone. Although historical, the content within is likely to be entirely new - to those whose only exposure has been the talking points of the past decade. Yet another reason the book deserves a renaissance.

The final chapters are some of the best, but the entire book is engaging, well written, and worthwhile.

[Todd Benschneider · Rating 5 out of 5]

Life changing perspective, a must read for all. Read this book back in 1999, the author logically and successfully ties behavioral tendancies to genetics. This book inspired a futuree interst in Hofstede Cultural Values Analysis and Evolutionary Psychology. If you currently believe in nurture over nature, Sowell's research will cause you to rethink your perspective. Nearly 20 years after reading "Race and Culture" my perspective on the interactions of teams of people is still influenced by Sowell's belief that behavior is influenced by genetics, if you combine Hofstede's view on cultural influence with Sowell's view on genetic's influence. You can draw some predictable conclusions of organizational behavior, using examples that Sowell provides where we tend to recreate our source culture even seen in children who were adopted into other cultures as infants, the concept will give you a revolutionary but logical perspective on human organizational psychology. Must read for everyone in education, government and management. Some readers will surely be turned off by the concept of behavior being so heavily influenced by DNA, based on the fears that the belief will result in stereotypes, racism ect... but; it would benefit everyone to understand why some indivuduals struggle to adapt to cultural influences outside of their genetic predisposition.