All Consuming


Definitely an important read, but I have a major concern — 1 year ago

WORTH CONSUMING!

This book makes one think. The intelligence of the authors is apparent, which is why their hackneyed attention on African-Americans troubles me.

The fact remains that the poor, uneducated, and criminal people of this country are mostly white, since whites constitute the vast majority of U.S. citizens. If they had chosen to do so, Levitt and Dubner could have easily and legitimately limited their discussion to “high end whites and low end whites”. There was absolutely no need to place so much emphasis on the black segment, which is such a relatively small percentage of the population. Let’s quit focusing on percentages, anyway, and start dealing with actual numbers.

Out of the 300 million U.S. citizens, over 215 million are white. That is more than 6 times the black population! www.census.gov How can one logically hold these two groups side by side for comparison? Don’t get me wrong, I think it is also irresponsible and irrational when black economists do the same in reverse.

Whether it was intended to or not, this engaging book has serious potential to leave its white readers with very damaging, negative, and skewed views concerning the black people with whom they actually interact throughout their lifetimes. Many of whom are among the middle to upper classes, and among the educated segment of the black population. Let’s face it: whites usually don’t frequent black neighborhoods, and blacks (other than servants) rarely have the opportunity to get up close and personal with whites unless they hold a similar socioeconomic status.

Levitt and Dubner mention more than once that their book has no unifying theme. Well, I was clearly able to identify it: “White=good, smart, rich. Black=bad, ignorant, poor.” And their reference to Ted Kaczynski at the end came across as a sloppy attempt to conceal their theme.

Comments

Emily
Houston

I find it very interesting...

...that out of this entire book, the theme you picked up was, as you put it, “white=good, smart, rich. Black=bad, ignorant poor.”

What about the Romanian dictator and his wife who starved their people? What about the cheating sumo wrestlers in Japan? The online daters? Abortion? Real estate speak? Sudhir Venkatesh, the Indian sociologist?

How about the name that appears exactly two sentences before the Kaczynski reference?

Roland G. Fryer, Jr. Harvard graduate? Economist? Ring any bells?

I’m failing to see how any of this fits into your proposed theme.

Any white reader that closes this book thinking blacks are bad, ignorant, or poor, had these prejudices long before they touched this book, and it’s ludicrous to insinuate otherwise.

You ever notice how when you point a finger at someone, more fingers seem to point back at you? You seem to have some skewed views yourself.

(Servants? Seriously??)



FAQ | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | | Robot Co-op Blog | Copyright © 2004 - 2008 Robot Co-op