What do you think?
Rate this book
Ethnic Chauvinism
Decries the inherent tribalism and segregationist tendencies of current arguments for ethnic pluralism and the integrity of ethnic neighborhoods and calls for a celebration of universally shared values and creative individualism rather than group differences and individual conformity
- GenresAnthropology
Hardcover
First published November 1, 1977
1 person is currently reading
49 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
April 19, 2020
Patterson's writing is keen, lucid, and thoroughly supported with references to a large concourse of influential thinkers, writers, theologians, social scientists & philosophers. His method in analyzing realities often asks the reader to see a thing or an issue in two or more ways. A plethora of -isms! Hebraism versus pristine Christianity, or normative versus causative (these are inaccurate examples of what Patterson actually compared, by the way).
I struggled for lack of familiarity with such major names as Kant, Pelagius, Schopenhauer, et al and it was regularly frustrating because Patterson launches so many of his missile-like meanings from the given understanding (and world acceptance) of their works. Thus we, as readers, are invited into forums wherein Patterson is telling us where so-and-so failed in seeing this or that. In other words, and in plain speech, the major thinker over there sitting at that table wrote this philosophical canon that led to such-and-such schools of thought & governance that are now affecting the world in such degenerative wise, but that major thinker is wrong for having failed to see x-y-&z. The author digs deep to expose inconsistencies in logic and reasoning of influential thinkers. As a reader I felt a bit like I was out in deep waters and wanted to hang near the shore where the curious, merely interested bystanders observe the battleship skirmish of social scientists. I have no dog in the fight, so to speak. Patterson's a fighter, an intellectual grappler, prodding and picking at men's stances, challenging them to articulate their allegiances. He makes for an enriching piece of study the minutiae of the microeconomics of peoples, persons, and groups.
My first and only other read from Patterson is "Ritual of Blood" and I found that book sobering for its subject on lynching, human sacrifice, cultic veneration, and systemic stigmatizing of Afro-Americans. The way in which Patterson endows every sentence or chapter with sincere reaction leads me to follow his framework for erecting sound analytical structures wherewith to better perceive the causes and effects of societal ills. He sees things in twos or threes, then sees further those critical subdivisions. The book is rife with juxtapositions: Sephardic Jews, Celtic Irish, the movements in England, France, and the U.S., he mentions Tanzania, Japan, and courses through Greek and Roman knowledge with sweeping fluency, while retaining the impressed fruit that was the Enlightenment, and the Romanticism, and the Americanism, and all those bad -isms in the go-between such as Nazism and fascism, or the malformed symbiosis in South Africa.
I'd recommend the book for students interested in analyzing (and, hopefully, solving) the plight of any nation experiencing animosity or tension between its differing groups of peoples. It's a bit heavy, this is my second book of Patterson's and I've all the reason to read more; this book requires thoughtful reflection and is not so easy to skim or speed through. It's specific to Afro-Americans. Patterson also inserts much of himself in this rather objective study. He makes clear where he thinks a certain person or figure is in error yet does so with scholarly respect, almost in the spirit of apologetics. There are some chapters that might be too esoteric for some. Patterson knows the ins and outs of every philosopher and social scientist. Sometimes I felt like a mere spectator observing a dance I knew not. But the tune, melodies & phrases I know.
I struggled for lack of familiarity with such major names as Kant, Pelagius, Schopenhauer, et al and it was regularly frustrating because Patterson launches so many of his missile-like meanings from the given understanding (and world acceptance) of their works. Thus we, as readers, are invited into forums wherein Patterson is telling us where so-and-so failed in seeing this or that. In other words, and in plain speech, the major thinker over there sitting at that table wrote this philosophical canon that led to such-and-such schools of thought & governance that are now affecting the world in such degenerative wise, but that major thinker is wrong for having failed to see x-y-&z. The author digs deep to expose inconsistencies in logic and reasoning of influential thinkers. As a reader I felt a bit like I was out in deep waters and wanted to hang near the shore where the curious, merely interested bystanders observe the battleship skirmish of social scientists. I have no dog in the fight, so to speak. Patterson's a fighter, an intellectual grappler, prodding and picking at men's stances, challenging them to articulate their allegiances. He makes for an enriching piece of study the minutiae of the microeconomics of peoples, persons, and groups.
My first and only other read from Patterson is "Ritual of Blood" and I found that book sobering for its subject on lynching, human sacrifice, cultic veneration, and systemic stigmatizing of Afro-Americans. The way in which Patterson endows every sentence or chapter with sincere reaction leads me to follow his framework for erecting sound analytical structures wherewith to better perceive the causes and effects of societal ills. He sees things in twos or threes, then sees further those critical subdivisions. The book is rife with juxtapositions: Sephardic Jews, Celtic Irish, the movements in England, France, and the U.S., he mentions Tanzania, Japan, and courses through Greek and Roman knowledge with sweeping fluency, while retaining the impressed fruit that was the Enlightenment, and the Romanticism, and the Americanism, and all those bad -isms in the go-between such as Nazism and fascism, or the malformed symbiosis in South Africa.
I'd recommend the book for students interested in analyzing (and, hopefully, solving) the plight of any nation experiencing animosity or tension between its differing groups of peoples. It's a bit heavy, this is my second book of Patterson's and I've all the reason to read more; this book requires thoughtful reflection and is not so easy to skim or speed through. It's specific to Afro-Americans. Patterson also inserts much of himself in this rather objective study. He makes clear where he thinks a certain person or figure is in error yet does so with scholarly respect, almost in the spirit of apologetics. There are some chapters that might be too esoteric for some. Patterson knows the ins and outs of every philosopher and social scientist. Sometimes I felt like a mere spectator observing a dance I knew not. But the tune, melodies & phrases I know.
Displaying 1 of 1 review