What do you think?
Rate this book
Racist America: Roots, Current Realities, and Future Reparations
Despite the apparent advances since the civil rights era, America remains fundamentally racist, argues award-winning author Joe Feagin. Racist America is a bold, thoughtful exploration of the ubiquity of race in contemporary life. From a black New Jersey dentist stopped by police more than 100 times for driving to work in an expensive car to the labourer who must defend his promotion against charges of undeserved affirmative action, Feagin lays bare the economic, ideologic, and political structure of American racism. In doing so he develops an antiracist theory rooted not only in the latest empirical data but also in the current reality of racism in the U.S.
320 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2000
29 people are currently reading
487 people want to read
About the author
Joe R. Feagin
74 books36 followersJoe R. Feagin is a U.S. sociologist and social theorist who has conducted extensive research on racial and gender issues, especially in regard to the United States. He is currently the Ella C. McFadden and Distinguished Professor at Texas A&M University. Feagin has taught at the University of Massachusetts (Boston), University of California (Riverside), University of Texas (Austin), University of Florida, and Texas A&M University.
Feagin has done much research work on race and ethnic relations and has served as the scholar in residence at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. He has written over 60 books, one of which (Ghetto Revolts) was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. He is the 2006 recipient of a Harvard Alumni Association achievement award and was the 1999-2000 president of the American Sociological Association.
Feagin has done much research work on race and ethnic relations and has served as the scholar in residence at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. He has written over 60 books, one of which (Ghetto Revolts) was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. He is the 2006 recipient of a Harvard Alumni Association achievement award and was the 1999-2000 president of the American Sociological Association.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
June 11, 2010
As you may guess, a depressing read about the state of race relations in America. Feagin takes a historical approach and basically argues that the US' current economic success is built on slavery (an unpaid workforce producing the US' most profitable crop = white Southern plantation owners get rich and powerful, whites in the area benefit by working for the plantation owners, and Northerners trade and mill the cotton, also getting rich, while the slaves get nothing for their work but horrifying abuse). By going through history, he reminds us that the slaves have only been free for 140 years (so slavery was not "hundreds and hundreds of years ago"), but even since that time, African-Americans have been systematically denied opportunities at every turn. While they were supposed to get 40 acres and a mule after being freed by the Emancipation Proclamation to give them something to earn their livelihood with, most former slaves did not receive this land--or had it reappropriated by violent white Southerners--and thus became "re-enslaved" as sharecroppers. They were hired in jobs much fewer numbers than whites and were usually the first fired, and, of course, lived in heavily-segregated worlds up until the 1960s, which was only 40 years ago (meaning many of the people who murdered and lynched civil rights activists--white and black--are likely still alive today).
All of this basically boils down to the idea that most wealth in the US is passed down through the family, so African-Americans face the barrier of having their ancestors literally start out with nothing (including no education, because they weren't allowed to learn to read) after being freed from slavery, in contrast to their most white counterparts who likely had at least something to their name, and that wealth disparity continues throughout the generations, perpetuated by discrimination, growing to the point that Brandeis released a report this year that the wealth gap between whites and blacks quadrupled between 1984-2007, with white middle-income households owning far more wealth than even high-income African-Americans.
Feagin works to explode the myth that America is a meritocracy by showing how, because we have supposedly achieved equality, American schools are more segregated now than in the 1970s because many have discontinued their desegregation policies and whites tend to move out of a neighborhood once there are more than 20% African-Americans there, so it's a "voting with your feet" kind of segregation. Although there is affirmative action, contrary to popular belief, affirmative action never mandated any sort of quota for minorities (women, people of color, veterans, and disabled people). He shows the statistics for how jobs move out of heavily African-American areas along with white flight so that it's more difficult for people to find employment, and when they do interview, whites with the same credentials are hired more often than African Americans are, especially higher up on the ladder. White men are 39% of the population, but hold the majority of leadership positions in US institutions, and make up 83% of the wealthiest Americans (the majority of whom have inherited, not earned, their riches).
He talks about all of these things to show how racism is a system that quietly perpetuates inequalities by just continuing on the status quo, controlled by the white elite (*swelling conspiracy music*) who create the racist ideology that the rest of white society--unified by race instead of class--follows along with. In this way, racism is not just the individual actions of a few crazies that we'd all like to ignore. This system is based on not only antiblack racism, but also white privilege. He points out that whites rarely consider their "whiteness" because that is considered the norm in society (giving the example of the news, where people of different ethnicities are listed as such, but when talking about whites, their ethnicity is rarely mentioned unless it is in contrast with someone else's). There is a lot of self-interest in not recognizing the benefits we get from whiteness, because then we might feel like we have to do something about it, so it is more convenient to believe that everyone is equal now (or even that whites are being discriminated against now, but just look at enrollment in college by race and you'll see a different story); to blame African-Americans for problems that whites historically created for them; and to overlook how we distance ourselves from people who are black, try to avoid touching black cashiers in checkout lines, hire people who "feel more comfortable" to us because they are similar to us ethnically, and continually recycle images of African-Americans as criminals (posting their pictures on the news where as white criminals' tend not to be; ignoring how most crime is white-on-white or black-on-black; and executing blacks who kill whites at a much higher rate than blacks who kill blacks).
Feagin does have a chapter on other races (mainly discussing Native Americans, Asians, and Latinos, and completely omitting people who are Arabic, which shocked me since this is the 2010 version and you'd think he'd say something about the backlash after 9/11... could be because many people who are Arabic are still "technically" considered white, although there's a movement in which they're advocating to be considered Arabic). He doesn't swerve from his white-black paradigm, though, and basically proposes that other racial groups are placed somewhere along the black-white spectrum (with Asians, for example, now being placed closer towards "white," whereas when the US was encouraging Chinese immigration in the 1800s, Chinese immigrants were closer to "black", even being called n*****s). I can see where his reasoning is here, but I can't help but feel that he's giving short shrift to the concerns of other ethnic groups and trivializing them, in a way, by seemingly saying, "oh, well, your situation's bad sometimes, but it's not as bad as African-Americans, so you should ally yourself with the African-American cause rather than trying to pass as white someday."
His last chapter deals with potential solutions, and brings up the always-controversial idea of reparations (pointing out that the US is being a little hypocritical when it demands that Germany's current goverment pay restitution to Jews who survived the Holocaust, even though the modern leaders aren't directly responsible for the Holocaust, but refuses to pay back the billions of dollars of back wages it owes to slaves). He doesn't propose specifically how this would work, hinting that maybe the money would go to local, state, and national agencies/organizations that would work to improve the living, health, psychological, political, and educational status of African-Americans (without specifying from whom or how it would be collected). Other ideas are rewriting the Constitution based on the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights with a group that accurately represents who lives in our country (as opposed to the initial all white land-owning male group), allying with other anti-oppression causes and with antiracist whites, and aggressively enforcing civil rights laws, which he argues are on the books but take too long to resolve through all the bureaucratic tape and often are very weakly enforced.
A somewhat plodding, repetitive read that maintains its worth by bringing up very salient--and hidden in that elephant-in-the-room kind of way--issues; loaded with statistics, but light on anecdotes that might have livened the book up more, and awkward-feeling (to me) since Feagin appears to be white (from his photos, at least; I can't find information about what his background is anywhere), but never openly deals with that in the book, instead opting for a third-person, academic voice. I'd recommend it for a better understanding of US society and race relations, and for even self-understanding within that framework (I was definitely convicted by it, and am trying to think of how I should respond). I wish that it was written more engagingly, though, since it reads like a research report with slightly angry undertones. Still, important, and I think the US would be a better place if many of the injustices Feagin brings to light were common knowledge.
All of this basically boils down to the idea that most wealth in the US is passed down through the family, so African-Americans face the barrier of having their ancestors literally start out with nothing (including no education, because they weren't allowed to learn to read) after being freed from slavery, in contrast to their most white counterparts who likely had at least something to their name, and that wealth disparity continues throughout the generations, perpetuated by discrimination, growing to the point that Brandeis released a report this year that the wealth gap between whites and blacks quadrupled between 1984-2007, with white middle-income households owning far more wealth than even high-income African-Americans.
Feagin works to explode the myth that America is a meritocracy by showing how, because we have supposedly achieved equality, American schools are more segregated now than in the 1970s because many have discontinued their desegregation policies and whites tend to move out of a neighborhood once there are more than 20% African-Americans there, so it's a "voting with your feet" kind of segregation. Although there is affirmative action, contrary to popular belief, affirmative action never mandated any sort of quota for minorities (women, people of color, veterans, and disabled people). He shows the statistics for how jobs move out of heavily African-American areas along with white flight so that it's more difficult for people to find employment, and when they do interview, whites with the same credentials are hired more often than African Americans are, especially higher up on the ladder. White men are 39% of the population, but hold the majority of leadership positions in US institutions, and make up 83% of the wealthiest Americans (the majority of whom have inherited, not earned, their riches).
He talks about all of these things to show how racism is a system that quietly perpetuates inequalities by just continuing on the status quo, controlled by the white elite (*swelling conspiracy music*) who create the racist ideology that the rest of white society--unified by race instead of class--follows along with. In this way, racism is not just the individual actions of a few crazies that we'd all like to ignore. This system is based on not only antiblack racism, but also white privilege. He points out that whites rarely consider their "whiteness" because that is considered the norm in society (giving the example of the news, where people of different ethnicities are listed as such, but when talking about whites, their ethnicity is rarely mentioned unless it is in contrast with someone else's). There is a lot of self-interest in not recognizing the benefits we get from whiteness, because then we might feel like we have to do something about it, so it is more convenient to believe that everyone is equal now (or even that whites are being discriminated against now, but just look at enrollment in college by race and you'll see a different story); to blame African-Americans for problems that whites historically created for them; and to overlook how we distance ourselves from people who are black, try to avoid touching black cashiers in checkout lines, hire people who "feel more comfortable" to us because they are similar to us ethnically, and continually recycle images of African-Americans as criminals (posting their pictures on the news where as white criminals' tend not to be; ignoring how most crime is white-on-white or black-on-black; and executing blacks who kill whites at a much higher rate than blacks who kill blacks).
Feagin does have a chapter on other races (mainly discussing Native Americans, Asians, and Latinos, and completely omitting people who are Arabic, which shocked me since this is the 2010 version and you'd think he'd say something about the backlash after 9/11... could be because many people who are Arabic are still "technically" considered white, although there's a movement in which they're advocating to be considered Arabic). He doesn't swerve from his white-black paradigm, though, and basically proposes that other racial groups are placed somewhere along the black-white spectrum (with Asians, for example, now being placed closer towards "white," whereas when the US was encouraging Chinese immigration in the 1800s, Chinese immigrants were closer to "black", even being called n*****s). I can see where his reasoning is here, but I can't help but feel that he's giving short shrift to the concerns of other ethnic groups and trivializing them, in a way, by seemingly saying, "oh, well, your situation's bad sometimes, but it's not as bad as African-Americans, so you should ally yourself with the African-American cause rather than trying to pass as white someday."
His last chapter deals with potential solutions, and brings up the always-controversial idea of reparations (pointing out that the US is being a little hypocritical when it demands that Germany's current goverment pay restitution to Jews who survived the Holocaust, even though the modern leaders aren't directly responsible for the Holocaust, but refuses to pay back the billions of dollars of back wages it owes to slaves). He doesn't propose specifically how this would work, hinting that maybe the money would go to local, state, and national agencies/organizations that would work to improve the living, health, psychological, political, and educational status of African-Americans (without specifying from whom or how it would be collected). Other ideas are rewriting the Constitution based on the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights with a group that accurately represents who lives in our country (as opposed to the initial all white land-owning male group), allying with other anti-oppression causes and with antiracist whites, and aggressively enforcing civil rights laws, which he argues are on the books but take too long to resolve through all the bureaucratic tape and often are very weakly enforced.
A somewhat plodding, repetitive read that maintains its worth by bringing up very salient--and hidden in that elephant-in-the-room kind of way--issues; loaded with statistics, but light on anecdotes that might have livened the book up more, and awkward-feeling (to me) since Feagin appears to be white (from his photos, at least; I can't find information about what his background is anywhere), but never openly deals with that in the book, instead opting for a third-person, academic voice. I'd recommend it for a better understanding of US society and race relations, and for even self-understanding within that framework (I was definitely convicted by it, and am trying to think of how I should respond). I wish that it was written more engagingly, though, since it reads like a research report with slightly angry undertones. Still, important, and I think the US would be a better place if many of the injustices Feagin brings to light were common knowledge.
June 12, 2018
First, I want to say that this book is an excellent introduction to systemic racism for an undergrad level classroom, even though I only gave this 3 stars. In this since, Feagin's contribution--that is, the notion of "systemic racism"--is crucial to any remedial understanding of race relations in the US. I think this would be a bit more palatable (read: White people friendly) to White readers than other race books I've read.
On a personal and/or theoretical level, I did not get much out of this book except for a few ideas for citations. Overall, despite Feagin utilizing tons of psychology research, I think the book does a decent job of steering readers away from the idea of "the racist person" toward the place where racism really reproduces itself: within institutions and knowledge/rationality systems.
On a personal and/or theoretical level, I did not get much out of this book except for a few ideas for citations. Overall, despite Feagin utilizing tons of psychology research, I think the book does a decent job of steering readers away from the idea of "the racist person" toward the place where racism really reproduces itself: within institutions and knowledge/rationality systems.
April 8, 2022
A comprehensive if dry account, this book is full of statistics, citations, and summaries of studies related to (mostly anti-Black) racism in the US. As other reviewers have pointed out, this reliance on stats, while useful for researchers and students of racial justice, makes the book more of a slog than it would have had the authors included more anecdotes or illustrative examples. See Kendi's Stamped from the Beginning or Tisby's The Color of Compromise for books that are more readable summaries of racism in US history. More a work of sociological summary than history, I nonetheless appreciated Feagin and Ducey's inclusion of history alongside their contemporary analysis and summaries. It's a long and somewhat dry book, but it's indispensable for scholars and activists who need evidence-based citations for anti-racism work.
January 28, 2019
Warped history, spurious theory, bad style: this is certainly a book with a mission. Sure, social studies are not science - they will and even must, to be relevant, reflect our concerns and values. But it is mistake to believe, with Marx, that it means little if 'philosophy' helps us understand the world, if it's not also a force for change. At some point the desire to understand and the urge for change just don't go together. An all-consuming longing for change will lead scholars to disregard the standards of fairness and coherence demanded by academic discipline.
Lack of balance will rob their work of all value. Which is precisely what happens here. Feagin, a white man with a background in theology, delivers a thunderous sermon against racism, but his discours is always moral, not intellectual. He has no time to consider historical motivations or weigh results, and no wish to look for evidence not supporting his theoretical constructs. This is social study conducted in a grand theological style: the truth is a given, what really concerns the author is sin and retribution.
This is bad history, bad sociology, and, most likely, bad politics.
Lack of balance will rob their work of all value. Which is precisely what happens here. Feagin, a white man with a background in theology, delivers a thunderous sermon against racism, but his discours is always moral, not intellectual. He has no time to consider historical motivations or weigh results, and no wish to look for evidence not supporting his theoretical constructs. This is social study conducted in a grand theological style: the truth is a given, what really concerns the author is sin and retribution.
This is bad history, bad sociology, and, most likely, bad politics.
July 11, 2021
So sad that after 20+ years this book is still relevant; even sadder that our situation is actually worse than the one described here.
September 16, 2023
Likely the most accessible and incisive articulation of this argument (that the U.S. is founded on the premise of racism and white supremacy) that I've read. Should be a must-read for all undergrads.
February 3, 2026
read for class last quarter!
January 22, 2008
The basic motive behind reparations is that the U.S. government must take action to pay for the "damage" done to minorities over the course of America's history. I would like to raise a few observations first. Thomas Jefferson, in response to the issue of slavery, once stated, "we have the wolf by its ears, we can neither hold on nor let go." Slavery was an institution inherited from a time when the American colonies existed under English rule and in 1776 the economy of the new American nation was heavily dependant on it. This was a serious issue for the new nation that based its existence on the premise that all men are created equal and that all are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. It is these facts that Jefferson had in mind when he said those words. While slavery is a very unfortunate event in America's past, I do not believe that the U.S. government should pass measures to "repair the damage".
The vast majority of blacks in America exist today due to the gene pool created by bringing slaves to America. Slaves reproduced with other slaves whom they would never have met if they were not brought to America. Some other slaves would not have bore children sired by their slave owners. These genes were just the beginning in creating today's black community of America. In other words, had slavery never occurred very few of the black people in America demanding reparations and affirmative action would be alive to do so.
Culture had much to do with the mistreatment and attitude towards blacks in the past. This is terrible. However, why should white people today (who did not exist during the time of slavery) pay for the historic actions of whites living in a different culture and time? Likewise, the modern U.S. government is no more responsible. The individuals in today's government, while just as corrupt, are not the same individuals in the 19th century government. The oppression of peoples is something that has occurred since the dawn of human history. Should the United Nations run a historical investigation to see if, and how, everyone alive has been effected (good or bad) as the result of the actions of everyone else’s ancestors and then demand that reparations be paid? In other words, should the descendants of the Huns be found and forced to pay reparations to the descendants of Romans? Should the descendants of Romans be forced to pay reparations to the descendants of the barbarians of Germania? Should American Protestants be forced to pay reparations to American-Irish Catholics?
Should Joe be able to receive reparations from Bob, whose great great grandfather had beaten and robbed the Joe’s great great grandfather if that beating led to his handicapping and on to a negative chain of events over the course of the next few generations? No. Should the descendants of Aaron Burr be forced to pay reparations to the descendants of Alexander Hamilton? The answer to all these questions is obviously, no! Reparations is a policy so utterly and painfully ridiculous it's almost comic. What is definitely comic is that many, if not a majority, of black people today are descendants of white slave owners. So, to be fair, the majority of blacks in America should have to pay reparations to themselves and other blacks as well. That's just math.
The real problem lies in the fact that the American people continue to permit the government to abuse its power in favoring some over others. As Ayn Rand used to say, "the greatest minority is the individual." I believe that the American people need to hold the government accountable to that ideal. If not, men and women of every race and/or sexual orientation have more to fear in their government.
"How soon we forget history....Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force. And, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." - George Washington
"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government" - Thomas Jefferson.
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurptations" - James Madison.
The vast majority of blacks in America exist today due to the gene pool created by bringing slaves to America. Slaves reproduced with other slaves whom they would never have met if they were not brought to America. Some other slaves would not have bore children sired by their slave owners. These genes were just the beginning in creating today's black community of America. In other words, had slavery never occurred very few of the black people in America demanding reparations and affirmative action would be alive to do so.
Culture had much to do with the mistreatment and attitude towards blacks in the past. This is terrible. However, why should white people today (who did not exist during the time of slavery) pay for the historic actions of whites living in a different culture and time? Likewise, the modern U.S. government is no more responsible. The individuals in today's government, while just as corrupt, are not the same individuals in the 19th century government. The oppression of peoples is something that has occurred since the dawn of human history. Should the United Nations run a historical investigation to see if, and how, everyone alive has been effected (good or bad) as the result of the actions of everyone else’s ancestors and then demand that reparations be paid? In other words, should the descendants of the Huns be found and forced to pay reparations to the descendants of Romans? Should the descendants of Romans be forced to pay reparations to the descendants of the barbarians of Germania? Should American Protestants be forced to pay reparations to American-Irish Catholics?
Should Joe be able to receive reparations from Bob, whose great great grandfather had beaten and robbed the Joe’s great great grandfather if that beating led to his handicapping and on to a negative chain of events over the course of the next few generations? No. Should the descendants of Aaron Burr be forced to pay reparations to the descendants of Alexander Hamilton? The answer to all these questions is obviously, no! Reparations is a policy so utterly and painfully ridiculous it's almost comic. What is definitely comic is that many, if not a majority, of black people today are descendants of white slave owners. So, to be fair, the majority of blacks in America should have to pay reparations to themselves and other blacks as well. That's just math.
The real problem lies in the fact that the American people continue to permit the government to abuse its power in favoring some over others. As Ayn Rand used to say, "the greatest minority is the individual." I believe that the American people need to hold the government accountable to that ideal. If not, men and women of every race and/or sexual orientation have more to fear in their government.
"How soon we forget history....Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force. And, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." - George Washington
"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government" - Thomas Jefferson.
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurptations" - James Madison.
January 11, 2021
This book expands the discussion and data on social science concepts such as intersectionality and gendered racism, as well as the concepts of the white racial frame, systemic racism, and the elite-white-male dominance system from research studies by Joe Feagin and his colleagues. I picked this one up to get a better sense of the "lefts" view on systemic racism recommended by a friend, i can't say i agree much with it. However i am a firm believer in reading as much about a subject as you can to know what you truly feel and think.
March 14, 2010
Very extensive overview of systemic racism in the US. I would have liked it more if it had a strong theoretical position.
March 28, 2011
One of the most thought provoking and shocking books I've ever read. Beautifully written from a dark and hateful topic. A must read book for our generation.
June 8, 2012
Very hard to read in entirety. I had a hard time following most of his premises, and I found I did not agree with many of his conclusions.
March 28, 2015
A very interesting and thought-provoking book. It deals in depth with the historical, political and economic foundations of racism and white supremacy.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews