A Facinating Read for a Race Rookie
“Race did not give birth to racism. Racism gave birth to race” (1).
This is quite likely the statement that will be most often quoted from Malik’s comprehensive examination of the history and politics of race over the last two centuries. The pithy and memorable statement challenges the current notion of race as ‘fixed’ and racism existing as a result of different races colliding. Instead, Malik argues, race became a necessary justification for the dichotomy that existed between the enlightenment ideals of human equality and universal human rights and the oppressive practices that continued in the White European countries and colonies. Race, Malik writes, was invented to become “the medium through which many of the contradictions of modernity came to be understood” (2). If anything, Malik suggests that identity groups immediately before and after the enlightenment were based more on socioeconomics and class and not so much on race: “Racial divisions had, from the days of colonialism, been created as a means of fracturing the solidarity of people at the bottom of society, and of derailing political and economic opposition” (3). The thread of his argument arrives at, and informs, the current conversation on race and Malik critiques both right and left with the same offence: “The identarian philosophies of both left and right draw from the same well of difference…and so succumb to the same distorted vision of the world” (4). Like Mounk (5), Malik, argues persuasively that identity groups and politics is a dead-end street as it relates to racial reconciliation. Instead, Malik suggests that “To transcend race [and] break the bounds of identity politics, requires us to resurrect radical universalism not as an idea but as a social movement” (5). How, exactly, we go about doing this is noticeably and lamentably missing from the conclusion of the book.
The above is my best attempt to summarize a book that often felt over my head. Admittedly, I have had limited engagement with racial history and even the current contentious debate in the United States related to Critical Race Theory, so I don’t feel very qualified to interact with Malik’s content. It is somewhat like me listening to an astrophysicist give a presentation on the universe—my only reasonable response would be, “Sure…if you say so.”
So, I will be interested to see how my more informed and well-read peers interact with his primary thesis. I would also be curious to further explore how the writing of other contemporary writers would either affirm or challenge Malik’s thesis—voices such as Ibram Kendi (6), Reni Eddo-Lodge (7), George Fredrickson (8), Khalil Gibran Muhammad (9), and Toni Morrison (10).
That said, my primary reflection from Malik’s book is to re-affirm both his and Mounk’s assertion that the universalist perspective of classic liberalism is the more helpful way forward for society than more, and increasingly distinct, identity groups. Groups that we then tend to categorically judge as right or wrong and subsequently align ourselves on the moral high ground of the ‘right group’. I see this happening all the time in my current context. I see it happening online as it relates to the Israel – Hamas war, where a statement about one side or the other is read as a complete endorsement of an entire ideology and meaningful conversation is gone (think The Cancelling of the American Mind [11]). Is it even feasible in today’s culture to nuance a conversation? To share a perspective that names the Jewish people as being both victims and victimizers? That can empathize with the Palestinian people while still holding them accountable for their part in the ongoing conflict and mess? Perhaps we need to re-learn the truth that Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn so poignantly reminded us of half a century ago:
If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere
insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them
from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts
through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece
of his own heart?
This sentiment doesn’t mean people aren’t held to account (We’re all guilty after all!). Nor does it minimize the reality that some groups of people have suffered a disproportionate amount at the hands of others—and correspondingly, some people are more responsible for greater acts of evil than others. That’s all true. What the Solzhenitsyn quote reminds us of is our shared humanity and, within that, our shared capacity to bring both goodness and harm into this world, irrespective of what group we might select or be put in by others. Such a recognition allows us to take responsibility for ourselves, offer grace to the ‘other’ as a fellow image bearer, humbly listen, and work towards the healing and reconciliation this world desperately needs. God, help your people to lead the way.
(1) Kenan Malik, Not So Black and White: A History of Race from White Supremacy to Identity Politics (New York, NY: C. Hurst & Co., 2023). Unfortunately I borrowed my wife’s Kindle for the first time and I have no idea how to determine what page I am reading and quoting from!
(2) Ibid.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Ibid.
(5) Mounk, Yascha. The Identity Trap: A Story of Ideas and Power in Our Time, New York: Penguin Press, 2023,
(6) Kendi, Ibram X. How to Be an Antiracist. New York: One World, 2019.
(7) Eddo-Lodge, Reni. Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race. London: Bloomsbury Circus, 2017.
(8) Fredrickson, George. Racism: A Short History. Original edition published in 2002. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2015.
(9) Muhammad, Khalil Gibran. The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2019.
(10) Morrison, Toni. The Origin of Others. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2017.
(11) Greg Lukianoff and Rikki Schlott, The Canceling of the American Mind, (New York NY: Simon & Schuster, 2023).
(12) Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. The Gulag Archipelago. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.
About the Author
Scott Dickie
4 responses to “A Facinating Read for a Race Rookie”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Scott, I enjoyed your post. I especially like how your concluding thoughts are a good reminder for us to be weary of unintended consequences. My takeaway is a challenge to first be thinking of the consequences of my own actions.
As a leader of a large congregation, how do you think the Church is positioned to mitigate the injustices society is so good at creating while not doing more harm with those unintended consequences?
Hi, Scott,
I’m so glad someone else felt it was a bit over their head…however, you still seemed to interact with the book quite well. The topic in and of itself is so complex on so many fronts. However, I enjoyed how you came back to the thought that we all can be guilty and can help most by taking our own responsibility in the matter.
Thanks for your post!
Hi Scott I enjoyed reading…” If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere
insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them
from the rest of us and destroy them.”
Life is never that simple. Identity seems to be a stew that we stir until the boiling point. I am going to blame Adam (the first one) for the fall and then I am openly questioning God. Was the Tower of Babel at test? or an opportunity. I am afraid he may say BOTH.
The “haves versus have nots” is a tension that has emerged in all nations. All nations have subjugated their weaker neighbors. Asia has been doing it for thousands of years. Europe and the U.S. are still playing catch up.
Some fun U.S. Facts
1. Anti-Coolie Act (1862): Aimed at reducing the competition between Chinese laborers and white laborers by imposing a tax on Chinese workers.
2. Page Act of 1875: Considered one of the earliest immigration laws, it effectively prevented Chinese women from immigrating to the U.S. by classifying them as “undesirable,” targeting those suspected of prostitution or being brought for immoral purposes.
3. Chinese Exclusion Act (1882-1943): This act was the first and only major federal legislation to explicitly suspend immigration for a specific nationality, prohibiting all immigration of Chinese laborers for ten years, which was later extended.
Ending on a high note. I have lived in Germany, Italy, Hungary, Slovakia, Korea, Turkey with sideshows in Iraq. In all these countries I have found the body of Christ. All share the Identity we have in HIM.
Shalom…
I appreciate you stating that you are a rookie at encountering this topic! It can be unsafe to say so, but that is the beginning of movement. I have encountered this topic head on for last 20 years or so, and I still feel like a rookie myself! I also know I have had experiences that deeply inform me and at the same time I must be patient and help those who are “newer” to the topic continue the journey. What I know that doesn’t help is to remain quiet! Thank you for your voice and your encountering of this topic! May God continue to bring all sorts of awareness to you and to us! May we continue to have the courage of acknowledging our inadequacies and yet our tenacious spirit to move forward!