books_ergo_sum's Reviews (933)

A controversial review, maybe? Most people would say that this book is about one idea. But I want to say that it’s about two—

The first idea? A great one, very thoroughly explored, very well expressed:
✨that the opposite of racist isn’t ‘not racist’—it’s antiracist

So if an idea, policy, action, etc isn’t specifically antiracist—racially equitable in its effects—then it’s racist (ethical ontology: utilitarianism, tho). This was all well explained and compelling to read. And as a card carrying member of the trying to be “not-racist” club, it challenged me in a good way.

The second idea in here? Also a good idea—but not at all thoroughly explored, not well expressed:
✨ that racist policies create racism, not the other way around

To be fair, this idea is explored in his earlier book, Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America. But, about the tour for that book, he wrote in here:
👉 “I talked about racist policies leading to racist ideas, not the other way around, as we have commonly thought. I talked about eliminating racist policies if we ever hope to eliminate racist ideas. I talked and talked, unaware of my new hypocrisy, which readers and attendees picked up on. ‘What are you doing to change policy?’ they kept asking me in public and private.”

Yet this hypocrisy remained completely unresolved (and was perhaps further undermined by the memoir-ish structure of this book?). Because this was all sidelined and he moved on to another topic one paragraph later.

A part of me wants to say “Amanda, don’t be harsh—just recommend Kendi’s book along with a book that tackles racist policy (like Abolition Democracy: Beyond Prisons, Torture, and Empire or White Poverty: How Exposing Myths About Race and Class Can Reconstruct American Democracy). It’s fine!”

Another part of me wonders if Kendi’s book is to racial justice what recycling is to environmentalism—which sounds harsh, but! By focusing on his personal choices and the individual actions and ideas of others without a more structural macro-political analysis….

The liberal individualism was liberal individualism-ing a bit too hard in here, for me.

Edited to add:
There’s a Jacobin interview with Catherine Liu (POC Marxist academic) about why Kendi’s ideas are popular with elites and other university educated types, that kinda kicked me in the butt while reading this. Liu pointed out that it requires a certain amount of privilege to find Kendi convincing because a personal antiracist journey is about an individual being “perfect in a bad world”—focusing on personal growth instead of materially improving that bad world. Even though Kendi himself acknowledges that this ‘bad world’ generates racism and you can’t antiracism your way out of it without addressing that badness…. that idea is almost entirely pushed out of frame in this book. And I can’t understand why he would diagnose a problem and then ignore it so thoroughly.

I loved three things about this novella—
✨ its bonkers premise: a ‘marry her or die’ mistaken identity + ‘ruined’ heroine, all while they’re trapped on a train?!
✨ its 1856 atmosphere: from a critique of the Crimean war (with Florence Nightingale and Mary Seacole) to their names (I feel like only this author can make me love an MMC named Dennis 😆), the mid-19th century vibes were vibing
✨ its super zoomed-in 24h timeline: I have such a weakness for a story that takes place over one day—very Before Sunrise, the movie.

Both of these characters were great and made you want to root for them. I just wish we’d just gotten a bit more on how these two specifically brought out the best in each other—not that I doubt they do, I just wanted to see more of it.

MMCs—written by Ursa Dax specifically—who are SO DUMB yet SO ARROGANT are my second favourite type of MMC (after MMCs written by Ursa Dax who feel big feelings about not deserving the FMC lol).

What can I say? Ursa Dax writes MMCs I love to laugh at. She makes them say the dumbest things. I love her FMCs too. And I love rooting for their love stories.

The only thing I wanted was either more alien vibes or more orc vibes (though we did have size difference and lots of fluids) because I wanted more human-alien/orc culture clash. Still lots of fun, though!

This 2014 book has been so successful in popularizing the idea that capitalism and environmentalism are totally unreconcilable—that the question is no longer, “is the premise of this book right or not?” (because it is). The question is, “is this worth reading, 10 years later?”

And… Yes and No?

For a “Yes”: (and I mean this in the most ‘no shade’ way possible) if you’re someone who thinks environmentalism is possible within a capitalist framework; ie. buying organic, electric cars, going on vacation by train rather than plane, buying solar panels etc etc. This book deeply challenges that mindset and you’ll find it really rewarding.

But if you’re in the “Nope, we need to regulate the crap out of these sectors, nationalize energy and transportation industries, and massively redistribute wealth” camp (hello, Comrade) then it could be more of a “No.” Because a) the environmental strategy still felt too piecemeal in this one (lobbying Obama here, backing Indigenous land claims there). And b) there was a bit of lingering naïveté to Klein’s hope in mainstream leftwing parties.

This book needed more of that ‘Greta Thunberg calling a 2021 climate summit Blah Blah Blah’™️ energy. More cynicism. More anger. And a more comprehensive/collective liberation oriented environmental strategy.

This book is pretty iconic, ngl. I read this after finishing (and being ever-so-slightly disappointed by) This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate.

It delivered on all the things I'd wished This Changes Everything had had:
-that Greta Thunberg cut-the-crap energy I'd wanted, no more naïveté
-a comprehensive/collective liberation oriented environmental strategy, a Green New Deal that began as Klein’s own Leap Manifesto in Canada.

It seems that developing the Leap Manifesto grounded her activism. I particularly appreciated how each chapter had been written in chronological order with the date at the top because I could witness that grounding taking place.

And I truly think she’s onto something for one simple reason: the Canadian government tried to shut her down so hard. They even brought out Brian Mulroney to oppose her (Canada’s 80s-era neo-con; our Thatcher or Reagan). Who I totally thought had been not alive for decades 😅

This wasn’t an abstract environmentalism book. It felt mature and concrete—and all the more radical for that.

On the one hand, this was a fun road trip historical romance novella between our heroine and the guy who was supposed to be driving her to her wedding—to another guy. Oops 😆 She was an American heiress Bluestocking. He was equal parts wanting to protect her and wanting to eff her brains out. Also he was super brawny. So much one bed trope.

On the other hand, it all felt a bit rushed. I wish their class difference had played more of a role in the story (any class difference drama was pushed to the side). And if it had been longer, then maybe their (fairly complex) personalities and backstories could have been more show, less tell.

The big book on inequality. From our favourite French economist. 1,100+ pages, 49 hours of audiobook. And more graphs and confidence intervals than this little philosophy grad thought she could handle.

And three ideas that I can’t stop thinking about—
✨ the “Brahmin Left” aka why I’m the drama
✨ Piketty’s alternative the the left-right political spectrum
✨ how we solve inequality

💖 The “Brahmin Left”: Piketty dropped a bombshell in here—voting left (in every country) used to be correlated with the lowest levels of education. Now, voting left is correlated with the highest. Voting left also used to be correlated with reducing inequality (no matter which party was in power). Now it’s not. So I *am* the drama. Assuming you want to promote equality and improve the lives of the most marginalized, the data shows (and hoo boy there was data) that if you went to university and vote left, you’re the villain.

💖 Piketty’s alternative to the left-right political spectrum: quadrants. Specifically, a socialist (progressive taxation and equality) versus pro-rich (regressive taxation and trickle down economics) axis and an internationalist (pro-immigrant and intra-country federations) versus a nativist (anti-immigrant and My Country First) axis. It made so much sense that I’ve completely replaced my old left-right way of thinking with Piketty’s alternative.

And of course, our dude thinks the socialist internationalist quadrant is the best at tackling inequality. With an explanation more linked to taxation and fiscal dumping that I was personally used to hearing 😆

💖 And what gave me hope: we can honestly just… change things. The bulk of this book was a detailed exploration of “inequality regimes” in every country that had data on it (in Europe, North America, China, Japan, India, Brazil etc) going back as far as possible (like we’re talking Middle Ages). It was SUPER demystifying. And he concluded that:
⭐️ inequality persists because our social milieu (I refuse to use the word ideology here 😆) actively justifies it—and this social milieu is always in flux,
⭐️ inequality is maintained by very specific, unassuming, and easily changed legislation (about taxation, education access, property law, etc)

The book was hella long. And sometimes we were so deep in the data-trenches that I was just like, ‘Piketty, throw me a freaking bone here—where are we going with all this??’ (hence the 4⭐️ not 5⭐️)

Yet I appreciated a lot of the little things in here: how many non-Western sources there were; how much we talked bout slavery and colonialism; how varied the sources were (using literature like Jane Austen, for example); that we factored in things like racism, patriarchy, and climate change; and that I got clued into some super important information (like how much wealth is held by the top centile and how little wealth is held by governments—even how the US and the UK have NEGATIVE wealth 🤯).

This book was so chalked full of information that I borrowed it from the library 5 separate times and eventually just bought my own copy.

“Now you understand how people like us work?”
“I believe so.”
“Tell me.”
“You work in horrible conditions and—”
“No! We work in our graves.”

Are blood batteries the new blood diamonds? This was such a good introduction to what’s going on in the Democratic Republic of Congo! Its first person, almost journal-entry writing style painted a vivid picture.

And the working conditions of miners for battery-making resources? Absolutely horrific.
▪️ child labour,
▪️ extreme exploitation,
▪️ mining with their hands (forget safety equipment—these miners don’t have the most basic tools),
▪️ adults and children routinely buried alive,
▪️ ore itself so toxic to humans that even mosquitoes don’t bite them,
▪️ conflict, famine, environmental destruction, human trafficking, sexual assault…

… all to make the batteries in our phones, electric vehicles, and anything else we recharge. I knew next to nothing about all this. And I’m grateful that this book exists. Because companies like Apple, Samsung, and Tesla, etc are straight up lying about where they get their materials. And this is all too “cost effective” to end without pressure from us.

That said, I wish this book had been equally critical of China and the United State’s exploitative ‘soft imperialism’ in the DRC. Right now, the bulk of the exploitation is due to Chinese mining and exporting companies (and upstream electronics manufacturers) with a few international companies in the supply chain too.

And our author—rather uncritically, I thought—included condemnations by American diplomats without also criticizing the US very much. But US politicians don’t want to protect Congolese people, they’re just jealous—they wish it was American companies who were doing the exploiting (and manufacturing American-made electronics) instead. I expect the US will be increasingly trying to "facilitate trade" between themselves and the DRC moving forward. With similarly unethical results.

Magical realism short stories in a book with this little pink cover by a Japanese author famous for their ‘off-beat’ fiction? I thought this could be fun and cute…

But I truly hated it. These weren’t even ‘short stories’—36 different stories in a book that was only 120 pages?! They were just a handful of paragraphs each. And they became seriously monotonous.

And the tone was—I’m just going to say it—unbearably obnoxious to me. The narrator was giving Holden Caulfield from Catcher in the Rye vibes and I couldn’t handle it. The titular people in this girl’s neighbourhood felt too much like caricatures and I just couldn’t bring myself to chuckle at all their misfortunes. I couldn’t chuckle at their SA, either.

I’m intrigued! I think I’m a sucker for a graphic novel that begins with the end and then goes back in time (like the Remarried Empress).

In this one, our heroine married an absolute scum bag and she got sent back in time to—Groundhog Day style—convince him to marry her frenemy instead. And maybe get with that hotty we were introduced to? 👀

Crossing my fingers that these characters don’t get too cartoonish. I’m finding that my favourite graphic novels lean into character nuance.