Audiobook
$0.00
with membership trial

Hardcover
$18.59

$14.99 with 50 percent savings

Print List Price: $30.00

Promotions apply when you purchase

Sold by Penguin Group (USA) LLC. Price set by seller.

Add an

audiobook with Audible narration for $12.99

Audiobook Price: $13.78

Save: $0.79 (6%)

Read with our free app

You've subscribed to ! We will preorder your items within 24 hours of when they become available. When new books are released, we'll charge your default payment method for the lowest price available during the pre-order period.

Update your device or payment method, cancel individual pre-orders or your subscription at
Your Memberships & Subscriptions

There was an error. We were unable to process your subscription due to an error. Please refresh and try again.

Image Unavailable

Image not available for
Color:

To view this video download Flash Player

Follow the author

Coleman Hughes

Follow

The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America Kindle Edition

by Coleman Hughes (Author) Format: Kindle Edition

4.7 661 ratings

See all formats and editions

An exciting new voice makes the case for a colorblind approach to politics and culture, warning that the so-called ‘anti-racist’ movement is driving us—ironically—toward a new kind of racism.

As one of the few black students in his philosophy program at Columbia University years ago, Coleman Hughes wondered why his peers seemed more pessimistic about the state of American race relations than his own grandparents–who lived through segregation. The End of Race Politics is the culmination of his years-long search for an answer.

Contemplative yet audacious, The End of Race Politics is necessary reading for anyone who questions the race orthodoxies of our time. Hughes argues for a return to the ideals that inspired the American Civil Rights movement, showing how our departure from the colorblind ideal has ushered in a new era of fear, paranoia, and resentment marked by draconian interpersonal etiquette, failed corporate diversity and inclusion efforts, and poisonous race-based policies that hurt the very people they intend to help. Hughes exposes the harmful side effects of Kendi-DiAngelo style antiracism, from programs that distribute emergency aid on the basis of race to revisionist versions of American history that hide the truth from the public.

Through careful argument, Hughes dismantles harmful beliefs about race, proving that reverse racism will not atone for past wrongs and showing why race-based policies will lead only to the illusion of racial equity. By fixating on race, we lose sight of what it really means to be anti-racist. A racially just, colorblind society is possible. Hughes gives us the intellectual tools to make it happen.

Editorial Reviews

Review

“Humans have dignity and rights because of their ability to flourish and suffer, not their pigmentation. The affirmation of that moral principle here is humane, judicious, eloquent, and timely.”–STEVEN PINKER, professor at Harvard University and author of Enlightenment Now

“No one gives me greater hope that we will one day come to our senses about race than Coleman Hughes. He is the living example of our future sanity.” –SAM HARRIS, New York Times bestselling author of Waking Up

“When I started writing on race twenty-five years ago, I hoped young people would read me and be assured that being melodramatic, tribal, and pessimistic on race issues is not higher wisdom. Coleman Hughes is exactly what I hoped would happen, and this book is spun gold from start to finish.” –JOHN McWHORTER, associate professor of linguistics at Columbia University and New York Times bestselling author of Woke Racism

“[Hughes’s] thesis ought to become required reading for students of all races on every college campus in America.” –GLENN LOURY, professor of economics at Brown University

“With unusual clarity, [Hughes] offers not merely a damning critique of all the ways the all-American skin game has failed us—he provides a compelling, positive vision of the heights we could reach together were we to finally stop playing.” –THOMAS CHATTERTON WILLIAMS, author of Self-Portrait in Black and White: Unlearning Race

"Contrarian and pointedly provocative, with arguments worth discussion on campus and beyond."– Kirkus Reviews

About the Author

Coleman Hughes is a writer, podcaster and opinion columnist who specialises in issues related to race, public policy and applied ethics. Coleman’s writing has been featured in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, National Review, Quillette, The City Journal and The Spectator. He appeared on Forbes' 30 Under 30 list in 2021.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

1

Race, Anti-racism, and Neoracism

For most of my life, I saw my mother as neither black nor white. Her Puerto Rican father was darker-skinned than me and her Puerto Rican mother was as light-skinned as any white American I knew. My mother emerged a perfect blend of the two: a light-brown hue that suggested neither blackness nor whiteness-at least not to my mind. Nor did I view her as "Hispanic," a word she hated due to its association with Spanish conquest, or even as "Latina"-though she would certainly have checked that box on a census.

She would sometimes describe herself as "of color." But whenever she really cared to show her identity, she would say she was Puerto Rican, and more specifically NewYorican-a person who grew up in one of the Puerto Rican enclaves of New York City. Just as important, she would say that she was from the Bronx, and more specifically the South Bronx. Had you asked me what "race" my mother belonged to as a child or adolescent, that would have been my long-winded answer: she was a Puerto Rican/NewYorican from the South Bronx. The words "black" and "white" would not have even occurred to me.

My mother died of cancer when I was eighteen. In the wake of her passing, I took every opportunity to talk about her with anyone who remembered her. I was surprised one time to hear a friend of mine describe her simply as "a black woman." "You saw my mom as black?" I asked him. "Well, sure. She was, wasn't she?" I had never considered that the outside world might have perceived her differently. In the case of my friend, I wrote this off as a misperception born of not knowing her very well.

So it came as an even greater shock when my father, who knew her as well as anyone, agreed with my friend. "Your mother was a black woman," he told me years after she died. I was shocked. I had never seen her as black and I never heard her describe herself that way. I had seen her as an immigrant outside the American black-white binary. Yet many people saw her simply as a light-skinned black American woman.

I am tempted to insist that my memory of her identity is accurate, and that others' perceptions of her are simply mistaken. But what would it even mean for their perceptions to be "mistaken"? What does it mean to belong to one race or another? Is it a matter of scientific fact, self-identification, perception by others, cultural background, or arbitrary social convention?

What Is Race?

I've been using the word "race" without defining it. Indeed, most of us use it all the time without thinking about what it is. Yet we are constantly arguing about it. For a moment, forget that you ever learned the word "race." Let's begin at the most basic level.

The Concept of Race

We humans use concepts to make sense of the world. Some concepts are natural and others are socially constructed.

In science, for instance, our goal is to describe nature. So we develop concepts and categories that map onto nature as closely as possible, such as the concept of a tree or the concept of mass in physics. These are natural concepts-concepts that map onto nature with great precision. If for some reason these concepts disappeared from our minds, we'd be forced by logic and our senses to reinvent them in much the same way. Natural concepts carve reality at the joints.

Other times, our goal is not to describe nature but to create a desirable outcome in society. For example, if we're trying to count time, we may invent the concept of a week-a unit of time that's equal to the sun rising and setting seven times-so that everyone can be on the same page about when to do things.

The seven-day week doesn't exist in nature. We could've decided that a week equals six days or eight days. Or we could have no weeks at all-counting time only by days. We invented the concept of a week to achieve an important goal: ease of coordination with others. And if our minds were suddenly wiped clean of the concept of a week, we might not reinvent it in exactly the same way. This concept, in other words, is a social construct.

The concept of race falls into a third category. It's neither completely natural nor completely socially constructed. It's a social construct inspired by a natural phenomenon.

To take a simple example, consider the concept of a month. Months don't exist in nature; they don't track anything in the natural world. Nothing in the cosmos begins when February does or ends when March does. We could just as easily end March a day later and give April an extra day. Or we could get rid of March altogether and distribute its days among the remaining eleven months.

On the other hand, months are clearly inspired by something that does exist in nature: the lunar cycle. It is no accident that months are similar in length to the lunar cycle, which averages 29.5 days. (The words "moon" and "month" even derive from the same root.) So what is a month? It's not a natural phenomenon because it doesn't track anything in the natural world with precision. Therefore, it must be a social construct. Yet unlike most social constructs, it owes its very existence and basic characteristics to a natural phenomenon. It is thus a kind of hybrid: a social construct inspired by a natural phenomenon.

The concept of race is similar to the concept of a month. It too is a social construct inspired by a natural phenomenon. What natural phenomenon is the concept of race inspired by?

Tens of thousands of years ago, several large populations of humans migrated out of Africa, where all humans first evolved (Africans, of course, remained in Africa). Once out of Africa, these populations remained isolated from one another-separated by mountains, oceans, or great distances. As a result of living and reproducing in unique environments for tens of thousands of years, each group's gene pool evolved in response to the unique selection pressures of its environment.

The legacy of these genetic differences is still visible and measurable today. Although each of us is genetically unique (barring identical twins), each of us also belongs to clusters of similar genomes whose similarity stems from the major out-of-Africa migrations that occurred tens of thousands of years ago. These clusters are not sharply separated from one another. They overlap a great deal, and therefore the boundaries between them are blurry. Using standard statistical tools, the strength of these genome clusters can be measured. The visible correlates of these genetically similar clusters are the underlying natural phenomena that inspired the concept of race. (See Appendix A for more details.)

But as with the concept of a month, the social construct has been untethered from the natural phenomenon that inspired it. If tomorrow astronomers discovered that the lunar cycle was really 35 days instead of 29.5, that discovery would have no bearing at all on the length of a calendar month. Likewise, whatever population geneticists discover about the clustering of similar genomes-for instance, if they were to discover something that completely upends our current understanding of population genetics-that would have no bearing on the concept of race that we use socially and in public policy. The social construct of race has flown the perch of the natural phenomenon that inspired it.

The Arbitrariness of Race

As we will see in chapter three, many of today's anti-racists are adamant on implementing race-based policies throughout every sector of society. One problem with this approach is that it's impossible to draw neat lines between races. And the lines that we end up drawing are not based on science nor reason but on a variety of absurd factors. President Barack Obama is the son of a white mother and a black father, so we categorize Obama as black. But why? His parentage is equal parts "black" and "white," so on what basis do we categorize him as black rather than white or mixed? The answer, it seems, is that American culture still observes the old "one-drop rule"-whereby anyone with one drop of "black blood" is considered fully black. In other words, we choose to delineate race using an arbitrary rule that was originally developed to uphold racial apartheid.

Similarly, our society decided how to answer the question "Who is Asian?" during the Chinese Exclusion Act-a racist law that existed to define a group of people to exclude. Decades later, the Eisenhower administration needed to come up with race categories to implement its policies and decided on a perfunctory list. But it was the Carter administration that finally decided on the canonical list of five categories we use today: Black, Hispanic, White, Asian/Pacific Islander, Native American/Alaska Native.

Population geneticists were not consulted to help create these categories (nor could they have spoken with real authority prior to the sequencing of the genome). These categories were created based upon a vague mix of intuitions about racial difference and political lobbyists attempting to sway the categorization in one direction or another. To qualify for certain government programs, for instance, someone needs to have one-fourth Native American ancestry. Why one-fourth? Why not one-half? Why not one-eighth? Why not one-sixteenth? The answer is that administering social programs requires drawing sharp lines that don't exist in nature, so they simply decided to draw it at the one-fourth mark.

The Asian American category includes people from India and Pakistan but not from Afghanistan. Again, the reason has nothing to do with science and everything to do with the race-based social policy that could not be administered without a crisp definition of who fits into which race.

Think likewise of the Hispanic category. "Hispanic" describes anyone with ancestry from a Spanish-speaking country, but sometimes it's treated as a race, other times as an ethnicity. You can be categorized as either black Hispanic or white Hispanic, but for many practical purposes (for college admissions, say) either designation qualifies as a preferred racial category. In some cases, Spanish Europeans and Indigenous Peruvians are considered in the same category, because they're both from Spanish-speaking nations. Yet Brazilians are also sometimes counted as Hispanic. It is also worth noting that unlike "black" and "white," "Hispanic" and "Asian" are not terms that belonged to the self-concept of the people in those categories when they were created. Few Hispanic people understood themselves to be "Hispanic" when the term was first widely used in the 1970s. A recent survey found that only 30 percent of "Asian Americans" thought of themselves as "Asian." Most thought of themselves as belonging to a specific ethnic group, such as "Korean" or "Pakistani."

David E. Bernstein describes a case that illustrates the arbitrariness of using race categories to distribute social benefits:

Christine Combs and Steve Lynn applied to the Small Business Administration (SBA) to have their respective businesses certified as Hispanic-owned and therefore eligible for minority business enterprise preferences. Combs's maternal grandparents were born in Spain, she grew up in a bilingual family, was fluent in Spanish, and acted as an interpreter for Mexican and Spanish customers. Lynn's sole claim to Hispanic status was that he was a Sephardic Jew whose ancestors had fled Spain centuries earlier.

The SBA ultimately decided that Lynn qualified as Hispanic, but Combs did not. Combs's SBA hearing officer declared that Combs could not claim Hispanic status . . . because she presented no evidence that she had faced discrimination because she is Hispanic. The officer noted that neither Combs's maiden name nor her married name was recognizably Spanish, and her blond hair and blue eyes did not give her a noticeably Hispanic appearance. On appeal, a judge found that the hearing officer had "reason to question Ms. Combs' status as a Hispanic." The judge therefore upheld the denial of Combs's petition.

An SBA hearing officer also initially denied Lynn's claim to Hispanic status because Lynn had not shown that he had been discriminated against as a Hispanic. But when Lynn appealed, the judge noted that the underlying law defined Hispanic as including anyone of Spanish origin or culture, which includes Sephardic Jews. The judge concluded that once Lynn showed that he had Spanish ancestry, the hearing officer should not have required him to also provide evidence that he had faced discrimination because of that ancestry.

Another example of the arbitrariness of race categories comes from Kao Lee Yang, a doctoral student in neuroscience at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is Hmong, a group of people indigenous to Southeast Asia. The Hmong people are an Asian ethnic group that is, on average, low-income and very underrepresented in American higher education. Because of this, her university nominated her to apply for a fellowship aimed at supporting underrepresented groups in science. But her nomination was rejected on the grounds that she was not, in fact, underrepresented. For them she was not categorized as Hmong specifically but in the more generic "Asian" category-a group that is overrepresented in American higher education.

The Asian category comprises an extremely broad range of people-so broad that the Pew Research Center found wider income inequality within that category than within any other racial group: the top-earning Asians earn 10.7 times as much as the lowest-earning Asians. By comparison, the top-earning blacks earn 9.8 times as much as the lowest-earning blacks, and the top-earning whites and Hispanics earn 7.8 times as much as the lowest-earning whites and Hispanics. Disparities in income levels among Asians are matched by disparities in education levels. In 2015, 72 percent of Indians over 25 had at least a bachelor's degree. Yet only 9 percent of Bhutanese did.

All of the foregoing examples illustrate that the race categories we've created are arbitrary-not only with respect to science but also with respect to the social policy objectives they are used for. Yet despite that arbitrariness, these categories have a huge impact on people's lives. Whether you're eligible for a scholarship, admission to a prestigious school, government funding to help your small business, or a variety of other societal benefits depends on whether you land on one side or the other of a nonsensical racial line. These racial distinctions are bound to unfairly advantage or disadvantage certain people. They constitute a textbook case of injustice.

The arbitrariness of race is not a fixable problem. It's built into the very act of classifying people by race. In apartheid South Africa, government officials would run a pencil through people's hair to determine their race. If the pencil went through, you were legally white. If it didn't, you were legally colored. However more enlightened we believe ourselves to be (and we are in many ways), our methods of classifying people by race are equally absurd. We just can't see it because we take our conventions for granted. We cringe when we hear old recordings of people describe Asians as "yellow" and Native Americans as "red," then we proceed to talk about "black," "brown," and "white" people with a straight face-as if the generations past were simpletons with respect to racial classification, but we are far superior.

Product details

ASIN ‏ : ‎ B0C4J8QL8M
Publisher ‏ : ‎ Thesis (February 6, 2024)
Publication date ‏ : ‎ February 6, 2024
Language ‏ : ‎ English
File size ‏ : ‎ 3.9 MB
Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
X-Ray ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Enabled
Print length ‏ : ‎ 254 pages

Best Sellers Rank: #206,842 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- #109 in Discrimination & Racism Studies
- #284 in Ideologies & Doctrines
- #544 in Political Commentary & Opinion

Customer Reviews:
4.7 661 ratings

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.

Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Videos

Help others learn more about this product by uploading a video!

Upload your video

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.

Coleman Hughes

Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.

Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read book recommendations and more.

Customer reviews

661 global ratings

How customer reviews and ratings work

Review this product

Write a customer review

Customers say

Customers find the book easy to read and well-written. They appreciate the author's insightful and observant writing style that challenges their views. The book provides factual information to support its ideas, which resonate with most readers.

AI-generated from the text of customer reviews

Select to learn more

Readability Insight

46 customers mention "Readability"46 positive0 negative

Customers find the book readable and interesting. They appreciate the clear writing and arguments on a complex topic. The book is described as an easy read with simple, direct, and reasonable arguments. Readers mention it's a must-read for those interested in diversity and anti-racism.

"This readable book is interesting on several grounds. First, it is a compendium...." Read more

"This was a great read. I enjoyed a different perspective on race issues...." Read more

"...general arguments with a few bits of convincing data, but the book really takes off and becomes almost electrifying when he starts laying out the..." Read more

"Still well written and make one think" Read more

42 customers mention "Insight"42 positive0 negative

Customers find the book insightful and challenging. They appreciate the factual information and well-researched arguments that make sense and provide a reasonable perspective on a complex issue.

"...that surprised me. Key statistics are marshalled..." Read more

"...I enjoyed a different perspective on race issues. This book contains facts to reveal how the experiments that are sited for racism against one group..." Read more

"...This book is passionate but calm, not a simpleminded rant...." Read more

"...can only hope that this book is widely read, because his arguments will resonate with most, if not all reasonable people who recognize out common..." Read more

Reviews with images

See all photos

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Michael A. Cavanaugh
Racialism meets Rapier
Reviewed in the United States on February 12, 2024
Verified Purchase

This readable book is interesting on several grounds.
First, it is a compendium. Coleman Hughes’ book concerning colorblindness as the antidote to neoracism – defined as “racism in anti-racist clothing” (p. 154) -- organizes within two covers some major events of what John McWhorter previously has identified as the “woke racism” of recent decades. Personally I have read, from a sense of duty, more of the literature on this topic (including Loury, Steele, Chatterton Williams, Reed, Fields & Fields, and Sowell) than the likes of myself might have if just left to his own devices. Even so, I found a few events discussed here (e.g., a psychiatrist holding forth at Yale on “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind,” pp. 74-75; e.g., pandemic relief for farmers and restaurant owners explicitly excluding whites, pp. 68-72; e.g., a dauntingly rigorous process for selecting and retaining air traffic controllers replaced by a biographical questionnaire, in the interests of increasing minority figures among that workforce, pp. 118-119) that surprised me. Key statistics are marshalled (for example, the common perception, including among les bien-pensants, that American police killings of Blacks run into four digits annually when in fact the figure is barely into two digits, p. 98). Taken together, the result is a big picture, and specifically one that otherwise might be less well in focus, even by people knowledgeable on the topic. I found this aspect very useful.
Second, it is full of analysis. The author cuts through a lot of fog to hone in, in short order, on the core claims of neoracists like DiAngelo, Kendi, Crenshaw, Coates, and Hannah-Jones. In particular, ch. 5, “The Neoracist Narrative,” works through a table of current fallacies. The central claim of Hughes’ analysis is that old racism has shot its bolt; post-racism is neither feasible nor desirable; what passes for “anti-racism” turns out to be neoracism; but there remains a choice between neoracism and colorblindness. Having tried to dismantle the intellectual credibility of neoracism in chs. 1-5, he goes on in ch. 6 to contemplate a colorblind way forward. (Colorblind would mean “class-based rather than race-based policies;” p. 154.)
Third, it is a model of argumentation. For one thing (and most glaringly) Hughes offers arguments, where his neoracist foils tend to settle for assertion ex cathedra. For another, he pays attention to what conditions would be required to sustain argument (for example, the need to show that racial disparities 1] are malignant not benign and that 2] any malignant ones can only be attributable to racism; p. 108ff). In addition, Hughes makes deft use of analogy to puncture cant and deflate sophistry and special pleading. (Does talking more about race help eliminate racism? Would making baseball central to the curriculum decrease or increase animosities between Yankee and Sox fans? pp. 98-100; Or: suppose your friend Tom calls himself an atheist; but everything he does believe turns out coincidentally to align literally with the King James Version. Is Tom believable? pp 23-24.)
One could argue with Hughes’ arguments. (For example, I wonder if those who hold to what he calls “The Myth of No Progress” [i.e., after slavery, Jim Crow or the Civil Rights movement] would rest content with his examples like the [uncatastrophizing] fact that the KKK is about the same size as the Flat Earth Society, or that the Blacksonian museum on the Mall has had to turn away overflow crowds [pp. 127ff], rather than push back with examples about Red state legislatures wishing to ban Critical Race Theory.) But opponents are free to seek refutation because he does make arguments. In any case he does play a lot of Devil’s Advocate in anticipating counter-arguments.
For this reason, apart from being a book on its particular topic, I could see this being assigned not only in logic class but also in speech and rhetoric. It is an exemplar.
Nit-picking little quibble (and it is merely rhetorical): spot on to highlight the “racism” in “neoracism.” “Reverse racism,” pp. 59-60, undermines this. (As if racism were heritably white, such that neoracism is illegitimately a kind of cultural appropriation?) Otherwise, a very fine book, a good read, and a welcome addition.
Ibram X. Kendi has refused to debate Hughes on the grounds that 1) he has not been awarded a doctorate and 2) he does not hold a professorship. Hughes recently earned a BA in Philosophy at Columbia. I invite the potential reader to judge whether or not this book goes to show what a rigorous undergraduate liberal education can do for a person, compared with the puffery and credentialism of Dr Kendi & co.

Read more

156 people found this helpful

Helpful

Report
kk
Intellectually stimulating
Reviewed in the United States on January 17, 2025
Verified Purchase
This was a great read. I enjoyed a different perspective on race issues. This book contains facts to reveal how the experiments that are sited for racism against one group over another were flawed and inaccurate. I'm all for treating people with kindness regardless of their skin color or any other factor. This book brings into the light the deception that has been used to keep people in constant conflict over race.

Read more

2 people found this helpful

Helpful

Report
Robert Potter
Quick, Easy, Inspiring Read
Reviewed in the United States on February 25, 2024
Verified Purchase
Coleman Hughes, I have observed, is often dismissed as just another right wing person complaining about cancel culture or wokeism.
So, let me just start by saying, I am not a right winger, I’m disgusted by most of the right wing today, and Coleman is a fair-minded person who has not himself embraced the word conservative anywhere I’ve seen. And for the record, he has said publicly that he has mostly voted for Democrats for national office, and he has not voted for Trump. Same goes for me.
This short book takes a little while to get really meaty, but it sure does. What I mean is maybe the first half of the book is somewhat general arguments with a few bits of convincing data, but the book really takes off and becomes almost electrifying when he starts laying out the multi-point argument tearing down the tenets of today’s “anti-racism,” which Coleman calls neoracism. Im sure opponents will accuse him of creating strawman arguments during this part of the book, but he regularly offers anticipatory responses to these criticisms, and he is, again, fair-minded as he does this. This book is passionate but calm, not a simpleminded rant.
I had a few annoying moments reading. There was one argument he made early on that I thought was unfair (about people judging content and words differently depending on who is saying them), and there were a few repetitive phrases that I felt should have been caught by an editor. It made this very well written book seem a little less professional at times.
But those are small complaints. I completely loved the book from start to finish. I hope it is part of a movement that creates a bit of a swing back on the path of all of us trying to treat people as individuals, and not as representations of groups—and thus being better able to deal with racism and other kinds of discrimination when they happen.

Read more

59 people found this helpful

Helpful

Report
Clear Lake Man
May not fully agree
Reviewed in the United States on July 23, 2024
Verified Purchase
Still well written and make one think

Read more

Helpful

Report
Bryan John Zawikowski
Coleman Hughes’ Aspirational Future is one we should all agree on.
Reviewed in the United States on July 8, 2024
Verified Purchase
Thank you to Coleman Hughes for writing a very concise, well-researched and poignant book on one of the most important issues of our time. I can only hope that this book is widely read, because his arguments will resonate with most, if not all reasonable people who recognize out common humanity and do not wish to live in a world where all we see is race. The ignorance of the counter-arguments (“neoracism” as he accurately calls it) is exposed and the premises of those shoddy arguments are thoroughly debunked. I now understand why Mr. Kendi & Ms. DiAngelo refuse to debate him. He would (kindly as is Coleman’s style) skewer every argument they could raise. I have been a long-time listener of Coleman’s podcast and have been disappointed that they stopped a while back, but I now understand why. Coleman needs to get the word out about this book so that the masses can read it and absorb it. It would be great if high school age children would read this before they left for college. Thank you again, Coleman. This is a masterpiece.

Read more

17 people found this helpful

Helpful

Report

Top reviews from other countries

Translate all reviews to English

Avid Reader
A concise yet erstwhile defense of colourblindness
Reviewed in Canada on June 25, 2024
Verified Purchase

Coleman takes the reader on a journey through all the ways in which neoracists, as he calls them, have missed the mark on being truly anti racist. The main argument throughout is that rather than an endless cycle of racial strife and discriminatory policies, what is needed is a state of affairs where one’s race has no bearing on the rights, freedoms, or opportunities afforded to them. This book is long enough to develop a complete exposition of the argument, but short enough to keep the reader engaged. Highly recommend!

Read more
Report
RitchieV
Must read these days
Reviewed in France on January 9, 2025
Verified Purchase
Great book by Coleman Hughes. 100% recommended to everyone wanting to read a fresh, nuanced, and brave approach to race politics.

Read more
Report
George Selwyn
Important, must-read book for those who drive the DEI industry
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 27, 2024
Verified Purchase
This is a thoughtful, well-researched book that systematically dismantles many of the shibboleths associated with the contemporary DEI and 'anti-racism' industries. No one can read this book and come away thinking that what they see all around them in contemporary Western society, in this respect, is either good or truthful. It is a giant sham, and Hughes is meticulous is demonstrating exactly how. The account is entirely convincing, yet depressing and hopeful in equal measure: depressing for the way it describes how quickly and easily hollow and baseless mantras relating to 'anti-racism' inexplicably gained such purchase in society; hopeful in the sense that such intelligent, articulate, and clear-thinking young people such as Hughes are here to critique it and to expose it for exactly what it is - just another form of racism. This is a brilliant book that puts the likes of DiAngelo and Kendi not only on the back foot, but firmly on the ropes - well done Coleman Hughes!

Read more
Report
itagaki_unlucky
☆*: .｡. o(≧▽≦)o .｡.:*☆
Reviewed in Japan on December 17, 2024
Verified Purchase
あ、この本は面白いです。読み応え十分！
最近アメリカの反差別運動で使われるアイデンティティ政治を拒否し、キング牧師直系のcolor blind（肌の色ではなく中身で判断せよ）に帰るように諭す本。

Read more
Report
Translate review to English
Christopher Dainton
The antidote to White Fragility
Reviewed in Canada on February 28, 2024
Verified Purchase
Having read and been deeply frustrated by the ideas presented in Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility, I was thrilled to see that Coleman Hughes had produced a compelling, well written book that counters this vision for the future of race relations. Well organized and well argued, I'd recommend it to anyone who has listened to Coleman before (although it reiterates many arguments he has made before) and to those who are new to his intellect.

Read more
Report

Follow the author

The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America Kindle Edition

Customers who bought this item also bought

Editorial Reviews

Review

About the Author

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

Product details

Videos

About the author

Coleman Hughes

Customer reviews

Review this product

Customers say

Select to learn more

Images in this review

Reviews with images

A Breath of Fresh Air

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

5.0 out of 5 stars Racialism meets Rapier

5.0 out of 5 stars Intellectually stimulating

5.0 out of 5 stars Quick, Easy, Inspiring Read

4.0 out of 5 stars May not fully agree

5.0 out of 5 stars Coleman Hughes’ Aspirational Future is one we should all agree on.

Top reviews from other countries

5.0 out of 5 stars A concise yet erstwhile defense of colourblindness

5.0 out of 5 stars Must read these days

5.0 out of 5 stars Important, must-read book for those who drive the DEI industry

5.0 out of 5 stars ☆*: .｡. o(≧▽≦)o .｡.:*☆

5.0 out of 5 stars The antidote to White Fragility

Report an issue

Racialism meets Rapier

Intellectually stimulating

Quick, Easy, Inspiring Read

May not fully agree

Coleman Hughes’ Aspirational Future is one we should all agree on.

A concise yet erstwhile defense of colourblindness

Must read these days

Important, must-read book for those who drive the DEI industry

☆: .｡. o(≧▽≦)o .｡.:☆

The antidote to White Fragility