Finally read Lester Spence's Knocking the Hustle: Against the Neoliberal Turn in Black Politics. It's short, provocative, and manages to offer some much needed perspective on Cornel West, the need to reorient or renew black politics, and provides a backdrop to the growth of neoliberalism in the last few decades. Expounding on the prosperity gospel, growing income inequality, anti-neoliberal and progressive solutions and politics, Spence's brief book gives the reader important counterbalance to the proliferation of neoliberal values in much of US and black popular culture and institutions. Unfortunately, much of Spence's critique of West was already hinted at by Adolph Reed as early as 1986, and again in the classic, "What Are the Drums Saying, Booker?" However, one can appreciate Spence for developing a lengthier critique of the dangers of Cornel West's "black nihilism" and emphasis on the "black prophetic tradition" and morality rather than politics itself. And to trace it back to the elitist mindset of the DuBois of "The Talented Tenth" is bound to raise debate! As for the other main target of this work, David Harvey's text on neoliberalism, I think Spence comes up short. Besides reasserting the rather obvious fact that racial discrimination and attitudes still influence public opinion in ways that reinforce privatization, I do not think Spence succeeds in offering anything new or earth-shattering about neoliberalism and race. Of course, I have not read Harvey's book, so there definitely is something I am likely overseeing or missed completely.
As for other issues, Spence's book is perhaps too premature in its praise of Black Lives Matter as an attack on neoliberalism. Sure, in some cases and cities, Black Lives Matter and its crossover with the Fight for Fifteen can be construed as an attack on neoliberalism, but the rise of a younger generation of what Adolph Reed termed the "protest elites" in black politics could be forcing itself into mainstream black politics through non-profit connections, ties to Teach for America, and the progressive rhetoric of the Black Lives Matter network. I certainly hope not, but it is troubling to say the least how TFA connections among leading figures in the incipient movement is left out of any discussion in Spence's final chapter on solutions, despite his strong critiques of the corporate education reform movement. Fortunately, the author's avoids some common traps in political studies on youth, for he acknowledges the limitations of youth organizing and activism, avoiding a dangerous trend Adolph Reed has written about as well.
As for other issues, Spence's book is perhaps too premature in its praise of Black Lives Matter as an attack on neoliberalism. Sure, in some cases and cities, Black Lives Matter and its crossover with the Fight for Fifteen can be construed as an attack on neoliberalism, but the rise of a younger generation of what Adolph Reed termed the "protest elites" in black politics could be forcing itself into mainstream black politics through non-profit connections, ties to Teach for America, and the progressive rhetoric of the Black Lives Matter network. I certainly hope not, but it is troubling to say the least how TFA connections among leading figures in the incipient movement is left out of any discussion in Spence's final chapter on solutions, despite his strong critiques of the corporate education reform movement. Fortunately, the author's avoids some common traps in political studies on youth, for he acknowledges the limitations of youth organizing and activism, avoiding a dangerous trend Adolph Reed has written about as well.
Thanks for reading the book, and thanks for the critique. With a book like this you'd rather it be read (whatever folk think) than not.
ReplyDeleteUsing the video as the backdrop makes sense in a way. In the video I do note that I wanted to write an antidote to RACE MATTERS on the one hand and A BRIEF HISTORY OF NEOLIBERALISM on the other. But the book was never meant to be a book length CRITIQUE of those works. I had no intention of spending even half of the book going in on Cornel West or David Harvey. My first intention was to critique both figures just enough to make my central claim--that neoliberalism had basically infected black politics and was ignored by scholars of racial politics on one hand and scholars of class politics on the other. And then in MAKING that central claim I wanted to see if I could use the form both figures adopted--the short easily read book--"better" than they did.
You're right to turn to Reed's work. I couldn't have written this without Reed. However, it's important to note that while Reed provided the groundwork for some of what I wrote in Knocking the Hustle, Reed never wrote a book or even a paper easily connecting the neoliberal turn to black politics. If he had, I wouldn't have.
Finally, your critique of the last chapter is on point. Because the events of the last couple of years got ahead of the book I had to rewrite that last chapter several times--my original draft was written before the murders of Garner and Brown, much less Freddie Gray. If I were to rewrite it, I'd have been more critical.
P.S. Neoliberalism isn't privatization. Privatization is PART of the neoliberal agenda, but there's a lot more going on. In focusing on racial politics I do more than suggest that public opinion helps "reinforce" privatization. Because you haven't read Harvey's work you don't really have the ability to assess how well I have--in the short space I attempted to do so--critiqued it.
I appreciate the comment, Professor Spence. I'm always surprised when people read and comment on my blog of rants and its rather "wild" or seemingly random topics. I appreciated your work and plan on reading Harvey's work soon. As you say, it's not really possible to assess your work without Harvey.
DeleteEven two books in, I'm still getting used to someone reading the book and thinking enough of it to BE critical in the first place. So thank YOU.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, when you finally take a crack at Harvey, let me know what you think. I love that work, and much of the critical stuff the geographers are doing. But have problems with the way they persistently ignore racial politics.