We are dealing from a state of constant change and he writes like we're standing still. He's got us doing algebra when we should be doing calculus.
The second point I find interesting in this chapter is the advice he offers (from another writer). Some of that advice is good, but some is bizarre. For example we can take to heart "don't make assumptions" or "please don't ask me to speak for my people" -- that is sound advice. But "don't be scared of my anger" assumes that anger is positive and productive. That has never been the case -- anger is negative and sometimes it is necessary, but anger directed at an individual for a societal problem is exactly why people get defensive. Blaming an individual for society is just as stupid as asking somebody to speak for their society.
In my personal life, I can see each of the things he talks about. Some are mistakes people make, some are little things we could do, but sometimes...
The latter is especially sad but I can see myself making mistakes like that.
The question I would ask is why baby steps? The author spends all this time (8 chapters) building motivation and then seems to let people off the hook with small efforts. I understand that small things can sometimes lead to big things, but should not the realization that one is part of a system of privilege and oppression lead to the desire to make significant change. The reader of this book, after all, is going to have to influence dozens of people who have not been exposed to these ideas. Why the small changes? The author should push for big changes to match the rest of the book's
passion and
energy. If privilege and oppression are so bad, don't let anybody off the hook so easily.
