PDA

View Full Version : When afffirmative action was White by Ira Katznels



DickLeonard
09-29-2005, 07:56 AM
Ira Katznelson a Professor of Political Science and History at Columbia has written a Book outlining how the Programs of Roosevelt and Harry Truman discriminated against Blacks but actually contributed to the widening the gap between whites and blacks in this country. Arguing for the continuance of Affirmative Action today. He contends that
policy makers and the Judicary previously failed to consider just how unfairly blacks have been treated by the federal government in the 30 years before the civil rights revolution. Southern Politicians shaped the programs in discrimatory ways as their price for the supporting them. Black Women who worked as Chamber maids were excluded from the minimun wages at the resort where Roosevelt frequented in Warm Springs, Georgia. Most blacks were employed in agriculture or as domestic household workers. Members of Congress in the Deep South demande that those jobs be excluded from the minimun wage,social security ,unemployment insurance,and workmens compensation . Katznelson contends this was to safeguard the racist economic and social order known as the Southern way of life.

He reserves the Harshest Criticism for the G.I. Bill of Rights. Written under Southern Auspices the La was delibertly designed to accomodate Jim Crow. Sothern Congress made certain that the programs were direwcted not by Washington but by local white officals,businessman,bankers and college administraters who would honor past practices. As a rsult thousands of Black Veterans in the South and the North as well were denied Housing and business loans as well as admission to White Only Colleges and Universities. They were also denied job training for careers in promising new fields like radio and electric work,commercial photography mechanics. Instead most blacks were channeled toward traditional low paying jobs or small black colleges ill equipped to meet the needs of a surging enrollment of returning soldiers.

The statistics on disparate treatment are staggering. By October 1946 6500 former soldiers had been placed in non farm jobs by the employment service. 86% were filled by whites,92% of the unskilled jobs by the blacks. In New York and New Jersey fewer than one hundred of the 67,000 mortgages insured by the GI Bill supported home purchases by non-wites. The University of Pennsylvania along with Columbia enrolled only 46 black students in its student body
of 9600 students.

We must understand a Reality: the insidious and recurrent racial bias in the history of American Public Life.

DickLeonard
09-29-2005, 08:15 AM
This was gathered from the New York Times Book Review of Aug 28.####

DickLeonard
09-30-2005, 06:46 AM
I am still waiting for all you racist Southerners to reply to the facts that Blacks have been Screwed for ever. That is why they didn't have the means to escape Katrina or Poverty.####

DickLeonard
10-03-2005, 06:23 AM
Still Waiting for a reply from anybody below the Mason Dixon Line.####

Chopstick
10-03-2005, 07:07 AM
Ok ####. I'll talk to ya. I don't understand a whole lot about this subject but I have lived in the south all my life. I'll try and keep up.

I heard on TV that we have spent five trillion dollars on Affirmative Action so far. My question is, where'd the money go? I really don't see any result, white or black. Maybe I just don't know where to look.

As far as what this guy says, I ain't buying it. I know from first hand experience that what he said about the GI bill is nonsense. I had a bunch of black friends that used it.

Aside from this article I would like to discuss Affirmative Action. I would like to learn more about it.

DickLeonard
10-03-2005, 09:16 AM
Chopstick the only comment I can make if we spent 5 billion on it 4 billion was stolen by the Adminstrators of the Bill.####

Deeman3
10-03-2005, 09:29 AM
Dick,

I am not a racist and never have been. I believe your article is pointing out the biggest problems in N.J. and Pennyslvania despite your accertion this was the doing of only southerners. In fact, most of the political power in the south did not rest with traditional southern people for long after the civil war. Many who held offices were carpetbaggers and their decendents who took over much of the ecconomic and property rights of the old south. Recently Michigan was cited as the least race friendly state. I know Baltimore has more ratial tension than any southern city I have seen in recent years.

I know the south has had a bad history in the past. I think we have come quite a distance in recent decades. While there is always more to do in creating equity in opportunities, I think people north of the Mason-Dixon line had better look for the moat in their own eye every once in a while.

I think everyone is better served by trying to correct unfair situations rather than just stir up old wounds.

Deeman

pooltchr
10-03-2005, 09:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> I think everyone is better served by trying to correct unfair situations rather than just stir up old wounds.

Deeman
<hr /></blockquote>

Great point. We can't un-do what was done in the past. Reparations are stupid, since none of the parties involved are still around. Why should I pay someone for something someone else did to someone else before I was even born?
We need to stay focused on the present, and work toward eliminating problems that exist today...not trying to correct something that was done years ago.
Steve

Drop1
10-03-2005, 07:38 PM
Ok,now that we have our history straight,and we all agree that Black people have been screwed from the get go,through out the Country,including California,where a Black man was sold in San Francisco,and even in Mexico,where at one time 150,000 Blacks were sold into slavery for the sugar cane industry,I would like to know what Dick Leonard would suggest we do.

DickLeonard
10-04-2005, 05:58 AM
Drop1 I have always maintained that the Blacks of this Country have a Class Action Law Suit against this Country. After 200 years of Slavery we declared them free. Now were going to spend Billions to provide them a better swimming pool. Just give them the money to get the Hell out of There.####

Big_Jon
10-04-2005, 11:38 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Now were going to spend Billions to provide them a better swimming pool. Just give them the money to get the Hell out of There.#### <hr /></blockquote>
Sure...
This has been the Liberal "solution" forever.
Throw federal money at a problem.
Gee... that'll fix it.

dbankjr
10-04-2005, 09:54 PM
Your continuos rant is proving you to be more of a bigot than anyone or anything at which you point your finger. If this country hasn't proven to be a blessing to a society or group in the long run I propose a one way ticket back to their country of origin and we'll see just how good their luck is there...
wanna take a ride?....I didn't think so. I suppose we shouldn't give a thought that their hardship brought those to follow a better life,,even if it was government cheese and a domicile which they turned to ruins six months after turned over to them..even one of their own..Bill Cosby, told them to pull their head out and was left with BOOOO's...There are fine people of every race on this Earth..then there are those who just want to stir for the sake of it. No problem figuring out which is which.

Alfie
10-05-2005, 02:02 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dbankjr:</font><hr> I propose a one way ticket back to their country of origin and we'll see just how good their luck is there...<hr /></blockquote>and this goes for all you european and asian turkeys too, by god

Deeman3
10-05-2005, 03:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Alfie:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dbankjr:</font><hr> I propose a one way ticket back to their country of origin and we'll see just how good their luck is there...<hr /></blockquote>and this goes for all you european and asian turkeys too, by god <hr /></blockquote> <font color="blue"> Guys, If we do by this there's going to be a lot of native Americans standing around smiling as the boats leave.... </font color>

Deeman

eg8r
10-06-2005, 03:50 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Guys, If we do by this there's going to be a lot of native Americans standing around smiling as the boats leave....
<hr /></blockquote> I don't think so. The casino industry would fall flat, and our new countries would be forced by the left to give all our money to help them. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

DickLeonard
10-06-2005, 05:56 AM
DBAnkJr, I would have no problem going to Dublin I would just have to learn Snooker, I already love Guinness.####

DickLeonard
10-06-2005, 06:01 AM
Deeman, I was just pointing out how the poor blacks who were attacked on this Board for not leaving New Orleans. Had a reason for not leaving that is much deeper than Lake Ponchatrain. ####r

DickLeonard
10-06-2005, 06:10 AM
Big Jon nice to see you dropped your ad. This Adm took the levee money and sent it to Iraq. A couple of hundred million dollars would have fixed the problem, now they have to spend 60+ Billion to fix the problem of which billions will be stolen by the same contractors who stole the money in Iraq.

It is better to have Right wing Connected Corporation steal the money than have left wingers give the poor the money.####

eg8r
10-06-2005, 07:06 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Big Jon nice to see you dropped your ad. This Adm took the levee money and sent it to Iraq. <hr /></blockquote> If your intent is to lie , then just state it. The Adm did not send the levee money anywhere except NO. The NO levee commission (or whatever they call themselves) misused the money.

eg8r

DickLeonard
10-06-2005, 08:01 AM
Eg8r I didn't mean to lie, I had read that somewhere, I will research that lie and give my source. I don't lie but I am still searching for Weapons of Mass Destruction. As Jesse Ventura said when Martha Stewart lied she went to jail. When the government lied we went to War.####

DickLeonard
10-06-2005, 08:08 AM
I would rather give our money to the Indians than the welfare state of Texas. Remember that for every dollar they send to Washington they get back 2 1/2 dollars. Pretty nice arrangement for a Conservative State. ####

eg8r
10-06-2005, 11:01 AM
[ QUOTE ]
...I will research that lie and give my source. I don't lie but I am still searching for Weapons of Mass Destruction. <hr /></blockquote> Thanks. Oh, while you are researching maybe you will run across the reports of WMDs that were found. I agree we did not find warehouses full of the stuff, but I don't remember hearing anyone outside of the media that said we would.

eg8r

Big_Jon
10-06-2005, 06:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Big Jon nice to see you dropped your ad. This Adm took the levee money and sent it to Iraq. A couple of hundred million dollars would have fixed the problem, now they have to spend 60+ Billion to fix the problem of which billions will be stolen by the same contractors who stole the money in Iraq.

It is better to have Right wing Connected Corporation steal the money than have left wingers give the poor the money.#### <hr /></blockquote>
Dick,

What Ad?
It's an avatar.
It doesn't advertise anything.

I see eg8r already corrected you on this post, so i don't have to. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Qtec
10-07-2005, 02:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
...I will research that lie and give my source. I don't lie but I am still searching for Weapons of Mass Destruction. <hr /></blockquote> Thanks. Oh, while you are researching maybe you will run across the reports of WMDs that were found. I agree we did not find warehouses full of the stuff, but I don't remember hearing anyone outside of the media that said we would.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>


Thats total BS and you know it. Is this what you call 'revisionism'?
Dont you remember Rumy saying, "he,s got them".?

[ QUOTE ]
Invasion defended
In October, Duelfer released a preliminary report finding that in March 2003 -- the month of the invasion -- Saddam did not have any WMD stockpiles and had not started any program to produce them.

The Iraq Survey Group report said that Iraq's WMD program was essentially destroyed in 1991 and Saddam ended the country's nuclear program after the Persian Gulf War in 1991.

The report found that Iraq worked hard to cheat on United Nations-imposed sanctions and retain the capability to resume production of weapons of mass destruction at some time in the future. (Full story)

"[Saddam] wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction when sanctions were lifted," a summary of the report said.

After Duelfer delivered his Iraq Survey Group's report to the Senate, Bush acknowledged that Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction at the time he ordered the invasion but said Saddam was "systematically gaming the system" and that the world is safer because he is no longer in power.

The preliminary report indicated that Saddam hoped to restart his weapons programs primarily for defense against Iran.

At the same time, the report said that "the former regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the revival of WMD after the sanctions."

The report found that Iraq's "ability to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program progressively decayed" after 1991 -- and a nuclear weapon would have been years away.

<hr /></blockquote>

The WMD? that they found was 1 shell, yes, ONE shell that was almost 20 yrs old.
Show me one quote from any member of Saddams Govt that ever threatened the USA.

Q....just like Rush, you continually make that same false claims even after they have been disproven.

eg8r
10-07-2005, 03:13 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Thats total BS and you know it. Is this what you call 'revisionism'?
<hr /></blockquote> No it is not. There were WMDs found, just not in the quantity you wanted/expected to see. The fact that what was found could kill many thousands of people is not enough evidence for you because you never wanted any WMDs to be found. You have an agenda and your tunnel vision does not allow you to be strayed into the seeing the truth.

eg8r

hondo
10-07-2005, 06:04 AM
The WMD's were found in Orlando in your head.
As far as thousands being killed, it happened
anyway. Oh, wait, I forgot. Iraquis don't count.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Thats total BS and you know it. Is this what you call 'revisionism'?
<hr /></blockquote> No it is not. There were WMDs found, just not in the quantity you wanted/expected to see. The fact that what was found could kill many thousands of people is not enough evidence for you because you never wanted any WMDs to be found. You have an agenda and your tunnel vision does not allow you to be strayed into the seeing the truth.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

Qtec
10-07-2005, 06:05 AM
GW and Co have already admitted they were wrong. Why cant you accept that?

[ QUOTE ]
" I agree we did not find warehouses full of the stuff, but I don't remember hearing anyone outside of the media that said we would.

eg8r"

[ QUOTE ]
20 Jan 2003 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares: "Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons... His regime is paying a high price to pursue weapons of mass destruction -- giving up billions of dollars in oil revenue. His regime has large, unaccounted for stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons -- including VX, sarin, cyclosarin and mustard gas; anthrax, botulism, and possibly smallpox -- and he has an active program to acquire and develop nuclear weapons." <hr /></blockquote> <hr /></blockquote>

Well?
Doesnt Rumy specifically mention stockpiles?

My argument has aways been that there was no evidence to support the claims that GW was making. Guess what, I was right!

Q

eg8r
10-07-2005, 08:44 AM
[ QUOTE ]
GW and Co have already admitted they were wrong. Why cant you accept that? <hr /></blockquote> What they admitted to is not finding the stockpiles. They did not admit to not finding any WMDs. Why can't you accept that. WMDs were found in Iraq, you just choose to keep those blinders on.

You don't believe a word the man says until he utters something that closely resembles what you want to hear.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
10-07-2005, 07:04 PM
Hey Q, don't forget me...WE were right! NO WMD's ...AND...ah'hem, ...and also, ...the insurgency is not in its LAST THROES, as Cheney claimed, and also, there is only ONE Batallion in Iraq capable of fighting independently, that is after over two years, and two thousand U.S. soldiers dead, and over fifteen thousand injured, now let's see, how many more dead soldiers, and billions of dollars, and injuries will it take to get another five Iraqi batallions together to fight for their own democracy? Let's see now, how many Iraqis are in a batallion....

Also...There was no yellow cake purchased in Iraq by Saddam, and no link between Sadam and bin Ladden...

Oh, and Dick, I'm working on a new book, "How to avoid talking to conservatives, AND YOU MUST ! ! !

by, Iread Books... /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Hey, I swore off reading Eg8tr's posts, but sometimes I slip...there is no value in reasoning with unreasonable, ill informed people who deny reality....he's hopeless

Gayle in Md.

DickLeonard
10-08-2005, 09:58 AM
Gayle that book will be a best seller. Have it in two sections the first part for conservatives. No word can be longer than 5 letters, making it easy for first graders to understand.

The second part would be for the people who can read and separate the bull from the Truth.####

Chopstick
10-10-2005, 06:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote hondo:</font><hr> The WMD's were found in Orlando in your head.
<hr /></blockquote>


Actually, they were found in Orlando and they wern't imaginary. They were out back in the parking lot inside a chain link fence. I don't know what kind of missles they were but a company had stored them there, outside, in the lightning capitol of the world, in the middle of town. The city caught them and made them move them somewhere else.

A while back at Martin Marietta some guys in uniforms showed at the front gate with a truck saying they were there to repair the ATM machine. They got in there, worked a while, then said they would have to take it back to the shop. They hauled it off and were never heard from again. The ATM company never heard of them either.

On the other hand if you feed the water turtle in the pond in back of the cafeteria, some bread from your lunch you'll have security all over you because he's protected. This stupid turtle actually walked up to a guy and grabbed his lucnch bag. The guy got in trouble for it. If we could get the tree huggers to be as serious about national defense we wouldn't have any problems.

DickLeonard
10-10-2005, 12:31 PM
Gayle, Eg8r is just a spoiled little brat, everything is just how he sees it. He like me gets off on taking the other side. If everyone agreed what good would this section of the board be.####

TomBrooklyn
10-12-2005, 07:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> your tunnel vision does not allow you to be strayed into the seeing the truth.<hr /></blockquote>
Have you ever read any of Quran?

Gayle in MD
10-13-2005, 06:54 AM
I agree Dick, on the world being more interesting, and the CCB, atleast to thinking people, but the problem with Ed is that when he doesn't agree, he goes around calling other people Liars, kind of funny when you think he is supporting the biggest liar to ever occupy the White House, don't you think? He posts things that are so obviously not true, things that even the administration has had to acknowledge were untrue, and then he appoints himself the Post Police, accusing people who ARE well infomed, of being liars. Ever notice, he NEVER posts anything to back up what he lies about, but is constantly demanding that others post proof of things they write about, things which are common knowledge.

Ed will have to be the subject of my first paragraph in the book. He is so hopelessly biased, he doesn't even care that George Bush has mortgaged the future of his own little girl. George Bush has never vetoed a spending bill, and has spent more on domestic non-descretionary, non defense, spending than any other president, twice as much as Bill Clinton, BTW. As Noonan said, when their serving up Port on the Hill, Bush says, "Pass the barbeque sauce"

When they haul off Frist, Delay, Libby and Rove, Ed will be the first one here to balme Bill Clinton for their legal problems LMAO!!!! Fox News spreads nothing but lies on the airwaves, and the righties never investigate their reports, hence, they remain ill informed.

Valarie Plame WAS under cover, in spite of what Fox News reports, BTW, and it was the CIA itself, which asked for this investigation by the Federal Prosecutor, which I am sure they wouldn't have done had she not been top secret-under cover. The right doesn't even care if Bush and his cronies commit treason, as long as Little Bushy and the Bushyetts can continue to rob the poor to give to the rich.

Gayle in Md.

eg8r
10-13-2005, 11:26 AM
C'mon Gayle, talk to me. If the two of you want to chit about me, do it in a PM. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Even if you did not believe I supported my arguments, why do you think it is alright for yourself to follow suit. Just for a second, will you look at what you type and see how ridiculous it sounds.

I have stated more than once that I don't agree with Bush's spending policies. I have stated more than once that he does not turn anything back and his spending is out of control. Your post is a good example that you have no desire to hear the truth. I have stated these things plenty of times and you still say, [ QUOTE ]
Ed will have to be the subject of my first paragraph in the book. He is so hopelessly biased, he doesn't even care that George Bush has mortgaged the future of his own little girl. <hr /></blockquote> I hope this does not offend you, but what a stupid statement to make. The biggest criticism I have had about Bush, IS HIS SPENDING! If you could just fall off your soapbox for one second and actually READ what is being posted on this board instead allowing your mouth (fingers) to get in the way of sound thought. Maybe then you might learn something. The least it would do would help you refrain from stating such blatant lies.

eg8r

PQQLK9
10-25-2005, 04:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> I am still waiting for all you racist Southerners to reply to the facts that Blacks have been Screwed for ever. That is why they didn't have the means to escape Katrina or Poverty.#### <hr /></blockquote>

Hey Dick, read this story./ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif
web page (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/20/AR2005102001715.html)
Darkness on the Edge of Town
A bold book argues that thousands of American towns were deliberately kept whites-only.

Reviewed by Laura Wexler
Sunday, October 23, 2005; BW03

SUNDOWN TOWNS

A Hidden Dimension of American Racism

By James W. Loewen

New Press. 562 pp. $29.95

In Oct. 2001, James W. Loewen stopped at a convenience store in the small Illinois town of Anna -- a name that, as a store clerk confirmed, stands for "Ain't No Niggers Allowed."

On Nov. 8, 1909, nearly a century before Loewen stepped into the store, a mob of angry white citizens drove out Anna's 40 or so black families following the lynching in a nearby town of a black man accused of raping a white woman. Anna became all-white literally overnight, Loewen reports, and embraced racial exclusiveness for the long haul. According to the 2000 census, just one family with a black member lives among Anna's 7,000 residents.

Anna is far from unique, as Loewen, a sociologist, argues in his powerful and important new book, Sundown Towns . On the contrary, Loewen reports that -- beginning in roughly 1890 with the end of Reconstruction and continuing until the fair-housing legislation of the late 1960s -- whites in America created thousands of whites-only towns, commonly known as "sundown towns" owing to the signs often posted at their city limits that warned, as one did in Hawthorne, Calif., in the 1930s: "Nigger, Don't Let The Sun Set On YOU In Hawthorne." In fact, Loewen claims that, during that 70-year period, outside the traditional South, "probably a majority of all incorporated places [in the United States] kept out African Americans."

Such a bold claim would seem to require an exact count of sundown towns to back it up. But Loewen admits that the challenges of uncovering and confirming the existence of each sundown town -- when everything from census figures to local histories proved misleading -- limited his ability to nail down an exact figure. Instead, he writes, "I believe at least 3,000 and perhaps as many as 15,000 independent towns went sundown in the United States, mostly between 1890 and about 1930."

This vagueness, along with Loewen's almost evangelical passion for his material, raises questions of credibility -- or at least of potential overstatement. But Loewen expertly dodges those accusations. He devotes almost an entire chapter to explaining his research -- detailing his rationale for defining sundown towns, laying out his statistical methods and revealing how he triangulated oral history, written sources and census data to arrive at a "confirmation." So when he reports that he's personally verified the existence of roughly 1,000 sundown towns between 1890 and 1930, you believe him. And because he pairs that finding with an analysis of the history, causes and patterns of sundown towns that shows that they were, in many ways, as logical -- and often as violent -- an outgrowth of American racism as lynching, he ultimately makes a strong case that sundown towns were a significant feature of the American landscape. As is often the case when the subject is race, the relative lack of hard evidence ultimately becomes part of the story, rather than a hindrance to it.

As in Anna, whites in about 50 towns used mob violence to expel and keep out African Americans, and many more relied on the threat of violence, Loewen reports. Some towns, he writes, passed "legal" ordinances banning hiring blacks or renting or selling them homes; others relied on citizens to pay informal visits to warn visiting African Americans that they "must not remain in the town." In 1960, the press reported that realtors in Grosse Pointe, Mich., had conceived of an altogether more clinical way to insure racial exclusivity: a "point system" used to assess a potential buyer's eligibility that included a rating for swarthiness.

Often, Sundown Towns argues, a community used a variety of methods in order to remain all-white through the years. To demonstrate this, Loewen charts the course of segregation in Wyandotte, Mich.: In the early 1870s, whites there drove out a black barber; in 1881 and 1888, they expelled the town's black hotel workers; in 1907, four white men beat and robbed a black man at the train station; nine years later, a mob of white townspeople "bombarded" a boardinghouse, driving out all the African Americans and killing one. "In the 1940s," Loewen writes, "police arrested or warned African Americans for 'loitering suspiciously in the business district' or being in the park, and white children stoned African American children in front of Roosevelt High School." In the early 1950s, a University of Pennsylvania professor who grew up in Wyandotte told him, all the members of a black family who moved into town ended up dead.

If Loewen's first priority is to unveil what he calls the "hidden history" of sundown towns, his second is to debunk the widely held idea that when the issue is race, the South is always "the scene of the crime," as James Baldwin famously wrote. The incidence of sundown communities in the South, Loewen reports, was actually far lower than it was in a Midwestern state such as Illinois, in which roughly 70 percent of towns were sundown towns in 1970. "This does not make whites in the traditional South less racist than [those] in . . . other regions of the country," he suggests.

With the rise of the automobile, among other things, came the birth of sundown suburbs. In 1909, Loewen reports, Chevy Chase, Md., became one of the nation's first after the owner of the Chevy Chase Land Company sued a developer to whom it had sold a parcel of land because of rumors that he planned to build affordable housing for African American workers. The company ultimately prevented the development, and the land sat vacant for decades before becoming home to Saks Fifth Avenue, its current resident. No doubt, the owner of the Chevy Chase Land Company would approve of the suburb's current racial makeup; in 2000, Loewen writes, "its 6,183 residents included just 18 people living in families with at least one African American householder." But even that isn't white enough anymore, Loewen charges: Whites are increasingly fleeing nearly all-white suburbs for lily-white exurbs, adding sprawl to the already numerous economic, psychological and sociological tolls of residential segregation.

Much has been written about the history of segregation within American cities, but this is the first full-length study of places that sought to exclude African Americans entirely. Loewen's desire to be exhaustive is therefore understandable. But in this case, exhaustive sometimes means exhausting. The book would have been more enjoyable to read had Loewen focused in depth on a few representative sundown towns, teasing out the history and sociology of the phenomenon in a more narrative, less textbook-like form.

That said, for its meticulous research and passionate chronicling of the complex and often shocking history of whites-only communities, Sundown Towns deserves to become an instant classic in the fields of American race relations, urban studies and cultural geography. After reading it, you'll view your own community, and the whole of the American landscape, more suspiciously -- and rightly so.

Laura Wexler is the author of "Fire in a Canebrake: The Last Mass Lynching in America."