Race Crazy

BLM, 1619, and the Progressive Racism Movement

De: Charles Love

Narrado por: Charles Love

Duración: 8 h y 16 m

Resumen del Editor

When did America become obsessed with racial differences? After decades of progress healing real-world prejudices and anger, we suddenly live in an America where we’re expected to view every single thing through the lens of race.

Children are taught the politics of racial resentment and fear in schools. Films, novels, and even comic books are judged by the color of their protagonists — and their adherence to the latest “woke” messaging. Corporate America has universally adopted the slogan “Black Lives Matter” in every piece of marketing, those words serving as a talisman to protect them from Twitter mobs and outraged activists. And the 1619 Project and similar pieces of academic propaganda seek to redefine and undermine the very notion of America as a unified and great nation.

Meanwhile, organized BLM advances a radical and dangerous political agenda which, if enacted, would mean the end of the American experiment as we know it. The nation faces a pivotal moment: Will we reject the Race Crazies, or let them destroy us?

PLEASE NOTE: When you purchase this title, the accompanying PDF will be available in your Audible Library along with the audio.

©2021 Charles Love (P)2021 Blackstone Publishing

An interesting and well thought out alternative perspective on race relations in America

After reading the 1619 project I wanted to better understand a different perspective. Race Crazy is laser focused on facts, fact finding and an honest assessment of where attention should be focused to move America, and our relationship with our next door neighbors, forward.

Foundation For Our Future

An important counter narrative to the illiberalism currently dominating the ethos. Once again America is at a crossroad. We can choose to focus on what divides us or what unites us. The next generation will face unrivaled competition, and our failure to properly educate them will be the demise of their quality of life, if not liberty itself.

Yes

The left is nuts and hate the facts. thanks for the words of wisdom

Great information

I love the sensible perspective of Mr. Love as well as his recommendations for how to fight the lunacy.

Too well researched to be disputed

I loved it. It is intelligent conversation and thought provoking. Listen, learn, and share

Hard-hitting and factual

This the most comprehensive critique of Black Lives Matter, The Movement For Black Lives, and the 1619 Project I have read. Charles Love goes through what each organization says on its website or in its documents and analyzes each key point. Eye-opening.

What's wrong with BLM

Starts with calling the other side “lunacy” and then putting forth multiple straw-men arguments meant to characterize BLM as extreme and unreasonable and bent on "destroying" American values, natch.

The author spends most of the book dissecting cherry-picked lines from a BLM website. He begins by telling us that the BLM website has changed from its inception and implies there is a shadowy and nefarious reason for that, that rather than updating and evolving the presentation of their messages, they are hiding the real truth. Exactly who "they" are is unclear and remain unnamed by the author.

This website is meant to stand-in for the reality of all BLM supporters, their thoughts and actions everywhere.

The author takes issue with several doctrinal statements on the site, but the thing about doctrinal statements is that is all they are: they don’t provide explanations, justifications, context, nor do they present cases. Minus all of that, they are bare statements that can be construed and interpreted any number of ways— our author interprets them according to his agenda and to the detriment of BLM, all of it worse-case scenario "thinking."

Conspicuously absent from his trenchant (2. Caustic; cutting) criticism is any interaction on his part with a single human being purporting to represent BLM— that’s some weak sauce. He isn’t seeking understanding or clarity. Rather, he believes he is being scrupulously logical in his takedown but based on how he defines the arguments and the terms he imposes on his subject. This is not intellectual rigor, nor is it honest. He imagines he is clever and right, but he has it all his own way and misses the mark by a mile.

As for his critique of 1619 Project, he may have legitimate points to make (that others have made elsewhere), but by the time he gets to them, he has disqualified himself as a mind worth taking seriously-- because he hasn't played fair, intellectually speaking, up to that point. Front-loading his book with obvious straw-men arguments was a big self-disqualifier.