|
Mel Mudkiper posted:It genuinely reads like a complete reflection of lifetime's struggles with race more than a specific treatise to any particular group or goal. That's how I read the book, too. Just about every situation he depicts to his son, he inevitably frames it within this constant battle. Even something as simple as a family trip abroad.
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Jan 19, 2026 15:20 |
|
|
sajobi posted:I am really suffering from the lack of delivery, loving cz, so I will start reading in a week or so, hope it's as interesting as you guys say. I found it really enlightening myself, actually. The really distinct and explicist primary discourse-type narrative helped a lot in making the message sound clear, IMO. Hope you enjoy it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
It feels like I was kind of in an advantage, because though not being black, I read it from a point of view so far removed from America that I didn't need to get incredibly offended at the thought that someone either insulted The American Dream or The Founding Fathers or whatever. And because of that I didn't have to be so completely blinded that I missed the actual message instead of these trivial hang-ups that this Brooks and other people like him got. I was about to say it seems like a common discourse on race relations in the US, but to be honest it's exactly like that over here as well. For every minority speaking up about their experiences, there's three people from the majority ready to defend the sacred honour of the local parallel to "The White Man".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
opposition to slavery wasn't magically invented at the end of the 1800s.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 09:56
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Right but we are not talking the morality of people, we are talking the morality of nations. Was a person who fought to end slavery doing a moral action? Absolutely. But you cannot consider the actions of moral people going against the immorality of their own culture as a credit to the culture itself. Oh no, I wasn't arguing against that. I was just commenting on the dumb idea of "judging the past by todays morals". Because there were nations who abolished slavery a whole 100 years before the US, for example. (And also lol at the idea in general, following that logic, we shouldn't say that what Hitler, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot etc. was doing wasn't objectively terrible)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2015 22:15
|
|