If a person ever tells you that they have gone into reading a nonfiction piece of literature with a totally open and unbiased mind, that is highly unlikely to be the case. It is impossible to be totally unbiased, as everybody has particular views and perspectives based on their own experiences. 

Admittedly, I approached this book with a degree of caution and apprehension. The opinions and perspectives of members of my family and mainstream ‘black’ culture from society at large were in direct conflict with my own views, logic and reasoning.

As such, I started reading Black Rednecks and White Liberals (BRWL) not really knowing what to expect, but hoping I could find answers to questions I had been asking myself for a long time by presenting myself with new information. I also wanted to be presented with information that would challenge my incomplete and biased viewpoints as well as forcing myself to ask myself questions about the world in which I live.

The overall message I received from the book is that, to blacks and whites alike, it has less to do with skin colour and everything to do with culture and attitudes towards life. As Sowell will show us, there are certain ways of life, behaviours and attitudes that are demonstrably bad and have negative effects on communities.

BRWL consists of six essays which focus on different aspects of American (and sometimes Western) culture. The first essay, named after the book itself, was a very intriguing read, as it explained the history and context of many attributes – both positive and negative – of the black community  and why there is such division- socioeconomic and culture especially- amongst them on multiple levels which exists to this very day.

The first page alone caught me off-guard and was an indication of what was to come. It started with a quote that, at face value, would be assumed to have been aimed at black people; “these people are creating a terrible problem in our cities. They can’t or won’t hold a job….. they refuse to accommodate themselves to any kind of decent life.”

It was put there deliberately in order to highlight the reader’s potential bias and assumptions. When it was revealed that the quote was not aimed at black people, but poor white Southerners, I knew this would challenge my preconceived ideas. I had never been happier to fall into an intellectual trap before.

In this first essay, Sowell thoroughly and succinctly investigates the origins of the American ‘redneck’. There was a lot of immigration from England and Scotland to the American South, despite the fact that Scotland was improving and progressing significantly in the 18th century, especially regarding hygiene. He explains that many of the same negative attitudes that were part of English and Scottish culture came with them, and as such, a new culture was created.

This culture was made up of things which were unbeneficial to the individual and society at large. These included things like hypermasculinity, an aversion to work, proneness to violence, a neglect of education, promiscuity, drunkenness and a general disregard for human life. Sowell made it clear that unnecessary violence was not only commonplace but had societal approval. This culture and attitude was adopted by many black people, many of whom are still affected by it to this day. 

Public vigilantism was widely accepted, although I questioned the role of vigilantism as there did not seem to be much law enforcement to begin with, nor was there a sense of objective morality. Such was the violent folly and touchiness of the redneck. Sowell quotes a chapter from ‘Cracker Culture’ by Professor McWhiney to demonstrate this:

“When an Englishman, tired of waiting for a Southerner to start working on a house he had contracted to build, hired another man to to the job, the enraged Southerner, who considered himself dishonoured vowed: ‘tomorrow morn, I will come with men, and twenty rifles, and I will have your life, or you shall have mine.’”

This contrasted heavily with Northerners, where a culture of objective morality, wealth growth preservation and educational respect was mainstream and benefitted both blacks and whites alike. It was only when black Southerners moved up to the North and brought their culture with them that race relations between blacks and whites started to break down.

He then challenges the white liberal, arguing that this subculture amongst black people has been highlighted and presented as the ‘authentic’ black culture whilst ignoring the negative consequences of it. He argues that many intellectuals have taken this black redneck culture and transformed into a sacrosanct symbol of racial identity.

By blaming all black issues on white actions, exacerbated by government interference (such as the welfare state) and an attitude of ‘non-judgmentalism’ that absolves black people of responsibility and moral condemnation, is to provide “an excuse for shortcomings and even crimes by blacks”.

In short, he argues that white liberals, who claim to support black people, are actually making the situation worse by infantilising black people and devolving race relations between blacks and whites. Rooting the black identity in a counterproductive culture had social repercussions and excluded those who had advanced beyond it.

One would be forgiven for being ideologically seduced by Sowell’s words. It was quite impressive – and surprising at times – how well and easily his points relate to the next. There is a distinct rhythm to his logic, based on hard evidence, facts and a standard of morality (more on this later).

I also found myself occasionally in disbelief at how much I related to his theories. Sowell made a point that resonated with me in particular, where he explained that many black men feel the need to play down their educational and academic potential in order to fit in with other black men who treat education and culture with contempt and ridicule those who respect them.

Growing up in Hackney, London, and having attended secondary school with other black pupils, it was clear that Sowell’s observations were somewhat correct. Even as a teenager, I noticed that many of my classmates who started off as studious and optimistic devolved into mischievous and sometimes violent young men as time grew older, egged on and encouraged by a distinct group of pupils who seemed determined to disrupt classes whenever they got the chance.

Many of these pupils had hopes and dreams of being rappers, and were already boasting about how much money they had (most likely acquired through drug trade). They had no sense of personal virtues and seemed not to want to integrate into the educational environment, other pupils or teachers. Their lives were ruled by gang culture (called postcode wars in London) and even a level of misogyny. And yet, their charm and charisma allowed them to lead many black pupils astray.

In fact, there were times where I caught myself wanting to be like them. Fortunately, there were circumstances that were in my favour, and I was removed from that environment. From my experience, it was less to do with wanting to ‘fit in’ with them as Sowell hypothesises (although this was certainly a part of it), but more to do with being seduced by a culture and lifestyle that seemed to have no consequences and no hardship.

As I got older and discovered more about the world, I quickly realised nothing could be further from the truth. However, as a naïve teenager, it is easy to fall into that trap. This, in my opinion, is a flaw in Sowell’s work. He makes excellent points, and it is hard to argue with him logically. Nonetheless, there is a human  element that I find to be lacking in his literature. 

It could be a totally different conversation to have, but there is a distinct lack of nuance at certain points. For example, his observation about young black men conforming to dysfunctional culture is true and correct, but he fails to highlight how easily men can be seduced by it. There’s a psychology behind it. It goes further than conforming simply to not get bullied, it is about changing a mindset and outlook on life.

Even as someone who values logic, I can see certain nuances that Sowell does not illustrate. I will acknowledge that he does not blame people for being born into environments but expects them to take personal responsibility. This is important, as I am not accusing Sowell of being snobbish or holier-than-thou.

However, even I will admit that there is also a certain theme of moral superiority implied in his works, unintentionally or not. This is not to make the statement that morality itself is subjective, but rather the description of people who do not fit into that standard. I do not have an issue with calling a person out for their behaviour, but I do question and challenge myself when I find myself condemning the person themself and not their actions.

This could be because of my Christian values and beliefs, but they are valid. Is it anybody’s, Sowell’s or my place to decide, objectively, who a good person is and is not?

Make no mistake: Black Rednecks and White Liberals is a deeply nuanced, informative and thought-provoking piece of literature. It is the literary enemy of the ideologically possessed. There are surprises, hidden twists and logical arguments.