What do you think?
Rate this book
Race Traitor
Race Traitor
Race Traitor brings together voices ranging from tenured university professors to skinheads and prison inmates to discuss the "white question" in America.
Working from the premise that the white race has been socially constructed, Race Traitor is a call for the disruption of white conformity and the formation of a New Abolitionism to dissolve it.
In a time when white supremicist thinking seems to be gaining momentum, Race Traitor brings together voices ranging from tenured university professors to skinheads and prison inmates to discuss the "white question" in America. Through popular culture, current events, history and personal life stories, the essays analyze the forces that hold the white race together--and those that promise to tear it apart. When a critical mass of people come together who, though they look white, have ceased to act white, the white race will undergo fission and former whites will be able to take part in building a new human community.
Working from the premise that the white race has been socially constructed, Race Traitor is a call for the disruption of white conformity and the formation of a New Abolitionism to dissolve it.
In a time when white supremicist thinking seems to be gaining momentum, Race Traitor brings together voices ranging from tenured university professors to skinheads and prison inmates to discuss the "white question" in America. Through popular culture, current events, history and personal life stories, the essays analyze the forces that hold the white race together--and those that promise to tear it apart. When a critical mass of people come together who, though they look white, have ceased to act white, the white race will undergo fission and former whites will be able to take part in building a new human community.
294 pages, Paperback
First published April 28, 1996
10 people are currently reading
644 people want to read
About the author
Noel Ignatiev
30 books75 followersNoel Ignatiev was an American history professor who earned his Ph.D. from Harvard in 1995. As part of a group of social scientists and geneticists that views race distinctions and race itself as a social construct, he is best known for his call to abolish the "white race" (meaning "white privilege and race identity") while being the co-founder of the New Abolitionist Society and co-editor of the journal Race Traitor. His position is positively stated in his website's motto: "Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
June 6, 2007
Possibly the dumbest and most infuriating book I've ever read. Encapsulates everything that is wrong with identity politics for easy digestion.
May 30, 2011
This is a collection of articles from a publication in the early 1990s; the editors were radical socialists who were convinced that reform of society was not only impossible but counterproductive, that revolution (inevitably accompanied by violence) was the only solution. The point that they emphasize in this collection is that of racism as an oppressive construction of oppressive society, and the necessity for "white" revolutionaries to refuse whiteness. Some stories of refusing whiteness in everyday life are offered, and it is also postulated that resisting police, law, and government is an act of treason against whiteness. What startled me a little was that the editors take delight in the right-wing militia movement and neo-nazi groups, saying that opposition to the government is a sign of the breakdown of the Capitalist organization. I would be less convinced, myself, that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," but the editors' commitment to violent resistance makes their approval of Falcon Ridge and Waco, etc., somewhat understandable, along with their criticism of a reformist, less radical Left. Nonetheless, I have spent a certain amount of time with socialists and Progressives in the years since these articles were written, and haven't seen much sign that the message to abandon whiteness bore much fruit of the sort the editors wanted. Sure, Progressives often talk about the need to recognize and abandon white privilege (which may be an advance from earlier times, I don't know), but on a practical level, it doesn't seem to add up to much. What's more, the kind of social change that the editors optimistically saw happening around them is more distant than ever, socialism is ever more marginal and irrelevant.
It may seem odd to nonetheless recommend a book when I think a lot of things in it are naive or worse; but this is a very readable book, which I think people of all backgrounds and ideologies might find interesting. Personally, I found the essay "Crossover Dreams" and Paul Garon's response to it particularly intriguing -- made me want to read Garon's books; and John Garvey, in "Family Matters", eloquently states the argument that decisions made "for the sake of your children" can never be separated from matters of racial justice, and questions just how much of a favor you'd be doing your children by perpetuating their privilege.
It may seem odd to nonetheless recommend a book when I think a lot of things in it are naive or worse; but this is a very readable book, which I think people of all backgrounds and ideologies might find interesting. Personally, I found the essay "Crossover Dreams" and Paul Garon's response to it particularly intriguing -- made me want to read Garon's books; and John Garvey, in "Family Matters", eloquently states the argument that decisions made "for the sake of your children" can never be separated from matters of racial justice, and questions just how much of a favor you'd be doing your children by perpetuating their privilege.
September 3, 2019
i like it. i know a lot of it i'm not suppose to like. i don't think a lot of the theory actually pans out to something very applicable to reality, but i wish these guys weren't the only ones picking apart these ideas. it's a start. and it's refreshing compared to most other things i read when it comes to white people's "role" in anti racist organizing or action.
February 6, 2015
This is a very poorly written book that seems as if it wasn't even proofread before it was published; the kind of sloppiness that one doesn't expect from any author.
The rest of it (content) is sloppy and disappointing too. There is just nothing to learn from it. It's incoherent and a confusing, boring read.
One gets the impression that the writer was desperately looking for attention and a way to make name for himself. He chose to write something that he thought would get him that attention: a white person turning on whites.
Ignatiev says that he is not against white as a skin color. He also says that whites who reap benefits from being white should be eradicated.However - being white according to him is a culture/mindset and not a skin color and those who think that they are 'white' (??) should be eradicated. This theory actually also implies that blacks who are proud of their culture and reap rewards of that positive attitude should also be eradicated - something he conveniently forgot to mention in his effort to get attention.
If not for Race Traitor, nobody would have known Ignatiev ever existed. One could say he did achieve his goal to get attention even if it was with a theory that is nonsensical and that even he doesn't seem to be quite able to explain himself. He could just have said that he dislikes people who achieve because they are proud of their race and culture.
Things become clearer when one reads up on Noel Ignatiev. As a steel mill worker he was fired from his job for damaging a strike breaker's vehicle with a paint bomb. He became a social scientist with a PhD at Harvard without an undergraduate degree. An article that he had written for an encyclopedia was turned down with the comment that it was "litany of errors and distortions of fact." As a tutor at an education institution his contract there was not renewed because of misconduct.
Conclusion: Read this if you have the time to wade through the ramblings of someone who never really makes a point and only wrote it in a desperate attempt to be known for something - even if it was stupidity. If that's not your kind of read - don't torture yourself.
The rest of it (content) is sloppy and disappointing too. There is just nothing to learn from it. It's incoherent and a confusing, boring read.
One gets the impression that the writer was desperately looking for attention and a way to make name for himself. He chose to write something that he thought would get him that attention: a white person turning on whites.
Ignatiev says that he is not against white as a skin color. He also says that whites who reap benefits from being white should be eradicated.However - being white according to him is a culture/mindset and not a skin color and those who think that they are 'white' (??) should be eradicated. This theory actually also implies that blacks who are proud of their culture and reap rewards of that positive attitude should also be eradicated - something he conveniently forgot to mention in his effort to get attention.
If not for Race Traitor, nobody would have known Ignatiev ever existed. One could say he did achieve his goal to get attention even if it was with a theory that is nonsensical and that even he doesn't seem to be quite able to explain himself. He could just have said that he dislikes people who achieve because they are proud of their race and culture.
Things become clearer when one reads up on Noel Ignatiev. As a steel mill worker he was fired from his job for damaging a strike breaker's vehicle with a paint bomb. He became a social scientist with a PhD at Harvard without an undergraduate degree. An article that he had written for an encyclopedia was turned down with the comment that it was "litany of errors and distortions of fact." As a tutor at an education institution his contract there was not renewed because of misconduct.
Conclusion: Read this if you have the time to wade through the ramblings of someone who never really makes a point and only wrote it in a desperate attempt to be known for something - even if it was stupidity. If that's not your kind of read - don't torture yourself.
February 27, 2017
This could have been great if it weren't for a predominance of terrible contributions. There were a few places that were interesting to me (I like the term "crossover fantasy"), but there were way too many articles by white dudes trying to prove that they weren't like other white people. All ego and no substance. Yeesh. DNF.
February 2, 2021
A lot of this is pretty outdated in terms of events referenced but the analysis of whiteness is still dead on. It would be great to see more explicit race traitor analysis today. Something I see lacking in a flood of white guilt, messiah complex, liberal-democracy statecraft apologia.
August 15, 2007
Most of the essays here are poorly written, in most of the ways you'd expect a tiny leftist rag to be poorly written. Some are baffling (the 1992 Los Angeles riots were about environmentalism??) or problematic (lots of white authors demand cookies).
But, it's got one anecdote from the Jim Crow era that made me realize exactly what some fair-skinned anti-racists are trying to do when they say "I'm not white". For that alone, I'm glad I read it.
But, it's got one anecdote from the Jim Crow era that made me realize exactly what some fair-skinned anti-racists are trying to do when they say "I'm not white". For that alone, I'm glad I read it.
January 23, 2009
Rather than read this entire book, I would recommend reading just the first five essays "Police Assisted Homicide," and "Civil War Reenactments." The rest of the essays are not written well enough to really merit attention. They read too much like a drunk 15 year old Keroac who is trying to prove just how much he gets it, man. If you are particularly interested in white appropriation of black music then the "Crossover Dreams" essays might be worth the slog.
February 14, 2008
i don´t have time to review this right now
May 4, 2020
Does a phenomenal job at examining and breaking down whiteness for what it is, how it is constructed, how it operates, as well as offering tools with which it it’s power can be attacked. Some segments are dated, falling into the previously fashionable white radical idea that appropriation of black culture debases whiteness, as opposed to further bolstering its hegemonic power, but the underlying motivation and framework of working to undermine the power of whiteness is still present. One of the most enlightening chapters is on the foundation of the state of Israel and the particular methods used in the creation of a settler state, evident both in the Israel/Palestine conflict and the ongoing colonial project in the United States. Brazen and bold and specific, significant entry in the battle against white supremacy.
August 10, 2021
The Price of Victory on page 73 stood out to me because the bus driver was Black and Gallaudet College’s basketball was all white Deaf team. The racial inequalities dynamics exists because the bus driver wasn’t allowed to pick any foods along with white deaf basketball team. That’s powerful part for me
December 16, 2013
Anyone concerned with the struggle against white skin privilege and white supremacy should read this excellent anthology. In my opinion, ost of the other reviewers here have no clue about what it's all about.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews