Against Civility: The Hidden Racism in Our Obsession with Civility

by Alex Zamalin

The first history of racial injustice to examine how civility and white supremacy are linked, and a call for citizens who care about social justice to abandon civility and practice civic radicalism

The idea and practice of civility has always been wielded to silence dissent, repress political participation, and justify violence upon people of color. Although many progressives today are told that we need to be more polite and thoughtful, less rancorous and angry, when we talk about race in America, civility maintains rather than disrupts racial injustice.

Spanning two hundred years, Zamalin’s accessible blend of intellectual history, political biography, and contemporary political criticism shows that civility has never been neutral in its political uses and impacts. The best way to tackle racial inequality is through “civic radicalism,” an alternative to civility found in the actions of Black radical leaders including Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Ida B. Wells, Martin Luther King Jr., James Baldwin, Malcolm X, and Audre Lorde. Civic radicals shock and provoke people. They name injustice and who is responsible for it. They protest, march, strike, boycott, and mobilize collectively rather than form alliances with those who fundamentally oppose them.

In Against Civility , citizens who care deeply about racial and socioeconomic equality will see that they need to abandon this concept of discreet politeness when it comes to racial justice and instead more fully support disruptive actions and calls for liberation, which have already begun with movements like #MeToo, the Dakota Access Pipeline protests, and Black Lives Matter.

Genres: Nonfiction, Social Justice, History, Race, Politics, Audiobook, Theory

184 pages, Hardcover

First published February 2, 2021

Reviews

[Sahitya · Rating 4 out of 5]

This wasn’t a book that was on my radar but I just noticed it while browsing on Edelweiss and decided to pick it up. And now when I read it, it feels so prescient.

We all have seen the political discourse for the past five years where many moderates/centrists have lamented the loss of civility in politics than the authoritarian tendencies of an openly law breaking president and his administration. So, it wasn’t a surprise that we got to read many such calls for bipartisan compromise and democrats to reach out to their right wing counterparts, after the 2020 election. But the farce that has been playing out since then, with a party and the president trying all they can to disenfranchise a complete section of voters and overturn a democratically elected next President - it clearly shows that calls for civility and compromise have no place in our politics anymore, because we can’t be civil with people who will usurp our rights at any given chance so that they can maintain their white supremacist power.

And the author shows through his writing - tracing back such calls for civility and morality from the days of slavery to civil war to reconstruction to Jim Crow to the civil rights movement to BLM - that anytime a group of civic minded people come together to create a movement that tries to disrupt the status quo and fights for rights like equitable justice, eradication of poverty, antiracist and anti discrimination policies, climate action etc, all the elite who benefit from the status quo try to undermine the movement through calls for civility. Strongly worded speeches, protests, sit-ins, boycotts - these are legitimate forms of nonviolent action that have the power to energize people to fight more proactively for their rights, and that’s what scares the beneficiaries of this racist inequitable system and they try to frame all the protests in terms of a law and order issue, diverging from the core narrative of what the activists are fighting for. The author rightly points out that being civil has never worked out for any of the progressive movements before, and only disruptive activism has led to some systemic changes.

But the work is still a lot incomplete, which is even more glaringly obvious after the results of this election and it is the duty of every civic minded person to unfailingly question the inequities of our society and the role government plays in perpetuating them; while not heeding to the voices of those who call for moderation and incremental changes instead of radical progress.

From the author’s own words — Inequality and exclusion have always been evident in American culture, and these conditions have always been maintained through violence. The plea for activists to be civil—in the past, now, and always—subverts this reality and implies that things can’t really be that bad. After all, how can one even call for civility if catastrophe is staring one in the face? Isn’t the call to civility a product of a smug insistence that individual moral virtue will magically fix an ailing society? It can’t and it hasn’t.

In conclusion, though this book looks back at lots of important movements through American history, it is much more relevant to our current political reality and I would definitely encourage anyone to pick it up. Learning from the past is very important, especially when our country is going through turmoil - and history teaches us that progress happens only after a prolonged collective fight for it, not by being silent or civil individuals.

[Kim Bakos · Rating 2 out of 5]

I found the history of race relations and resistance in the book to be quite interesting. I learned a lot about political figures and movements I hadn't known about before.
As far as the call to end civility, I have mixed feelings about that. The author never really says how far is acceptable to go outside of civility to bring about change. I do think that disruption of the status quo is necessary to bring change. Any disruption will be called uncivil by those who are threatened by the desired change. However, there is a difference between being uncivil and uncivilized. The BLM protests were, for the most part, quite civil. Most of the speeches and signs were actually civil, even if one didn't agree with it. However, the riots, looting and destruction were uncivilized. I think there is a fine line to hold to - when it turned into violence, I think it has the opposite effect that is desired. It simply reinforces the negative stereotypes and turns people off and provides a justification for continued racism.
There was one section I found quite disturbing - the author states that black-on-black violence is because of segregated neighborhoods. Does this mean the blacks should instead be killing whites in desegregated neighborhoods? I looked up the statistics and black-on-black violence is only slightly higher than white-on-white violence. But more integrated neighborhoods don't solve the problem. In fact, black-on-white violence is double that of white-on-black violence.

[Alicea · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I found much of the content interesting, the tone of this book reads more like a manifesto than a researched nonfiction book (which is what I thought/hoped it was).

The main point of Against Civility is that historically activists striving for change whether it be to benefit the disenfranchised people of color, marginalized LGBTQ+ groups, women, or all of the above have been cautioned to approach agents of change with a civil tongue. And this hasn't worked to anyone's benefit for meaningful systemic change. Civility washes over real issues and keeps the oppressed people under the heel of the elites which have always been rich, white, and ma!e. Therefore, the answer is to be uncivil and unapologetic.

Each chapter focused on a different activist from history with a variety of critical or congratulatory comments about their particular approach to standing up for what they believed in and fighting for change. This was interesting but I found myself feeling annoyed at how bombastic the author sounded...which I guess was deliberate based on the subject matter. However, I expected a more academic look at this topic which would have been delivered more objectively and that is not what this particular book does.

[Rowen H. · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Good manners don't change bad policies."

This book is a compact and readable introduction to the ways that calls for civility and general both sides-isms obstruct progress. I think it could have done more with the topic, but it was well worth the read.

[Victoria Weinstein · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a tight little book, focused and brief at 140 pages. The author spoke at our local library recently (via Zoom) and several of my parishioners recommended that I read the book. I did and found very good preachable material that led to a sermon that I hope was meaningful and persuasive (visit uucgl.org and look for the sermon of May 2, 2021 to judge for yourself).

I appreciated the many examples from American history that Zamalin invokes to support his thesis that civility is constantly and strategically weaponized against Black liberation movements. He obviously has another book in him about the particular evils of the Tr*** regime, and I hope he will write it.

[Ed Barton · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book gets a five-star review for the telling of the history of racism and anti-racist movements in the United States over the past 150 years. I consider myself a student of history, and I learned a ton in this short well-written book. Where the book falls short is also where many movements also fall short - making a great case for change, but failing to provide a framework for that change. Forgive my civility - which the author notes is the enemy of effective change - as I note that the successful revolutions provide not only a common enemy but a shared post-revolutionary vision that is embraced by the broad populace. There's a call to revolution, but not a vision of what the revolution will bring forth. That piece of the book is the 2 or 3-star component that falls short. Interesting history but falling short as a manifesto for change.

[Tiffany Talley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lots of thought-provoking information and points, but can be really dry.

[Jenny Webb · Rating 3 out of 5]

Written for a popular rather than academic audience, and a bit uneven as a result. The core argument—that a reliance of civility has allowed for the perpetuation of systemic injustices and that protest is most effective when freed from normative expectations of civility—is worth thinking through. I’m not entirely convinced, but that’s mainly because I felt like the other half of the equation is missing: incivility in speaking out needs to be joined to an increased compassion for those who have been previously silenced one way or another.

[Corvus · Rating 4 out of 5]

I listened to this knowing I'd likely agree with the thesis. But, I learned some cool bits of history I didn't yet know about. It focuses almost solely on racial Justice movements and has some iffy comments about nonviolence, but overall was a decent overview of why civility reinforces oppressive structures much of the time.

[Ashish Vyas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tone policing is a tool, knowingly or unknowingly used. Civility is often touted as virtue in suppressing the dissent. So called neutral or moderate person who fail to raise concern in light of clear injustice, so as not to disturb the decorum is a problem, and often the useful ally of tormenter. Author has made the point clear. A good read!

[Melody · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book makes the argument that the call for civility and both-sidesism is a tool weaponized to suppress demands for racial justice and economic justice. Zamalin pieces together a page-turning narrative of characters and moments from slavery to present day — many that we know and many more you've probably never heard of — that illustrate how insidious the racism within the call for civility is and how white racists and liberals alike (as well as neoliberal and conservative people of color) have used civility to stall systemic progress for human rights, in particular for Black people, people of color, and poor people of all races.

I really appreciated the history lessons contained in this book and how they were woven together to tell a story. I expected a more academic book given the author is a university professor, but I appreciate that it appears intentional that this book was written for a more general audience, which is essential to the message. Zamalin's ability to take you into specific historical moments and analyze the social components as if you were there is wonderful. It felt like "reading a documentary" and I could see this book being turned into one. I learned so much about activists, freedom fighters, and artists I had never heard of and learned more about those, like Dr. King, Malcom X, Ida B. Wells, Ella Baker, James Baldwin, and W.E.B Du Bois that I already deeply admire.

My one gripe about the book is that the last chapter lacks the pace and structure of the previous ones. It felt rushed and jumped around a lot. I might easily attribute that to the fact that this chapter, unlike the others, deals with the last 20 years or so of political action and injustice that I have lived to witness.

I also wish Zamalin had done more to discuss the impact of violent direct action rooted in justice on progress and change and the calls for civility that condemn those actions. He condemns violent acts like John Brown's murder of racist settlers and remarks that violence for violence sake is no way to raise awareness about a cause and later remarks on the positive impact of the violence and property damage done in the wake of George Floyd's murder. Violence has always been the wheel by which racism operates and the violence of racists is rarely considered uncivil. So in a way, he condemns "when they go low, we go high" mentality, but also suggests there are some kinds of civic radicalism that are inappropriate, despite their effect. 

Reading this book after the 2024 election (where Kamala Harris shut down justified criticism about the Biden administration's support of the genocide in Gaza when disrupted at speeches by exclaiming "I'm speaking" – a moment met with support by liberals who also derided the disruptors for their incivility) and in the aftermath of the shooting of the United Healthcare CEO — another instance where violence spurred some corporate action and raised awareness but was also met with calls for civility, makes this book as timely as ever, despite that the narrative ends in 2021. It will be hard not to notice now all the ways in which the call for civility is used regularly to slow progress and uphold white supremacy.

[David Anderson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Frederick Douglas famously said "If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will."

This Douglas quote is perhaps the most concise response to those centrists and conservatives who trot out the old "civility" bromide whenever progressive forces rise-up in peaceful protest and non-violent direct action. Zamalin's book provides concrete examples of the truth of Douglas's statement from the history of anti-racist struggle in the U.S. A tight little volume that I think will be of most value to neophytes to progressive struggles; anyone with any movement experience will know all this, but at only 140 pages, it is a quick read. Three-and-a-half to four stars.

[(a)lyss(a) · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received a copy of this book through the Amazon Vine program in exchange for an honest review.

This is a great book!

It's a somewhat short but engaging read on the idea of civility and tone policing in disagreements and how it relates to racial justice movements. This book highlights how the idea of civility has been used to maintain the status quo and portray calls for change as uncivilized as a way to avoid the content of a message. We read about leaders who are considered civil, like Martin Luther King Jr., and what made their messages palatable to the general public compared to others. This book also takes a critical look at the Obama administration and the then-president's statements regarding the Black Lives Matter movement and protests.

It's a thoughtful and interesting read.

[Patti · Rating 5 out of 5]

This compact book covers lots of territory - the Black Codes, Plessy v. Ferguson, Jim Crow era, Black Wall Street massacre, New Deal, right up to the current movement to limit voting rights. Zamalin makes a strong case that "Civility is deployed as democratic movements are ascending and reactionaries are on the ropes." He also brings home the fact that civility is the tool of the reactionary, not the activist. Structural change requires stridency.

[Melinda Manning · Rating 2 out of 5]

My main issue with this book is the author’s definitions of civility and incivility. He equates any form of protest as incivility. I think that we all can agree that Gandhi, MLK, Rev. Barber and others were/are fierce advocates for dismantling systems of oppression but didn’t/don’t do it through name-calling, dehumanizing others etc.

[Tyler · Rating 1 out of 5]

The basic premise of this book is faulty. The reason that you're polite to someone, or a group of people that you are trying to win over on something, is to be polite to them. Someone is much more likely to come over to your side of thinking when addressed with respect.

[Andréa]

Note: I accessed a digital review copy of this book through Edelweiss.

[Zosia · Rating 3 out of 5]

I loved the message (as the title describes) and some of the history was compelling, but this was so meandering & loose that I hesitate to recommend it. Read the books the author references instead.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great read on the time line of civil rights. I learned a lot reading this book.

[Catherine · Rating 4 out of 5]

one of my favorite reads of the year for sure. the last chapter + epilogue seemed a little out of nowhere though

[Mary Tarro · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thought provoking. Sobering. Recommend.