Thicker than blood : how racial statistics lie /
Tukufu Zuberi.
Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press, c2001.
xxii, 193 p.
0816639086 (acid-free paper)
More Details
Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press, c2001.
0816639086 (acid-free paper)
catalogue key
Includes bibliographical references and index.
A Look Inside
Full Text Reviews
Appeared in Choice on 2002-04-01:
This slim volume has three major sections. The first briefly reviews the history of the emergence of racial classification as an ideological justification for Western-style racial stratification and domination. Part 2 examines the history of racial statistics and presents a fascinating journey through the successive attempts by social scientists, biologists, statisticians, and the ill-fated eugenicists to do statistical analyses of any kind, and to use such analyses to establish and "measure" racial differences. Along the way, Zuberi (sociology, Univ. of Pennsylvania) convincingly argues that all attempts to treat racial classifications as causes are fundamentally flawed and therefore doomed to failure. Part 3 explores viable and logically defensible ways to examine and ameliorate social problems stemming from systems of racial stratification. The book exhibits a slight tendency toward repetition, but this may be justifiable given how deeply the idea of race as a bona fide biological difference separating humans into genotypically distinct groups is so deeply ingrained in our collective global consciousness. The author's pragmatic goal is to use racial statistics to eliminate racial inequality and therewith introduce an era of racial blindness. Upper-division undergraduate students and above. W. P. Nye Hollins University
This item was reviewed in:
Choice, April 2002
To find out how to look for other reviews, please see our guides to finding book reviews in the Sciences or Social Sciences and Humanities.
Publisher Fact Sheet
A polemical look at the intersections of statistical measurement & racism.

This information is provided by a service that aggregates data from review sources and other sources that are often consulted by libraries, and readers. The University does not edit this information and merely includes it as a convenience for users. It does not warrant that reviews are accurate. As with any review users should approach reviews critically and where deemed necessary should consult multiple review sources. Any concerns or questions about particular reviews should be directed to the reviewer and/or publisher.

  link to old catalogue

Report a problem