Rate this book

White Girl Bleed A Lot (5th Edition): The Return Of Racial Violence And How The Media Ignore It. (2012)

by Colin Flaherty(Favorite Author)

4.27 of 5 Votes: 3

ISBN

1479299022 (ISBN13: 9781479299027)

languge

English

genre

Nonfiction

publisher

CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform

review 1: According to my Kindle, I am 36% of the way through this book. If the other two thirds are like the first third that I've read, I don't know if there's necessarily anymore to really take from this book.This book is mind-numbingly repetitive. Perhaps some readers want to know every little story contained here. I fail to see the point of reading from cover-to-cover if all of the stories all so similar and illustrate roughly the same overarching point in roughly the same way.Another book I recently read about the militarization of police was similarly repetitive when describing numerous incidents of botched SWAT raids, but at least the book provided research and insight around those events and how they correlated to shifts and developments of policy relating to law enforcemen... moret.Flaherty forgoes (seemingly intentionally) any kind of deeper analysis as to why these events are taking place. His anti-liberal bias is very apparent, as he seems to reject common defenses such as the poor socioeconomic status of the communities from which these mobs seem to originate. Fair enough, but rejecting these notions while not putting forth any alternatives deprives the book of the substance it is sorely missing. This lack of substance is largely one of the reasons why I can put it down at the 36% mark and feel like I haven't missed much. At the very least, he could suggest solutions to the problem, but that too would require insight into the problem beyond the mere fact that it exists.Another thing that bothered me was the alleged sizes of at least some of these mobs. One incident allegedly involved "dozens" of people, but when I watched the video, I counted 13 people at most -- and at least a couple of them looked like they could be passersby or merely spectators. That is not to say that a number under 24 makes the ruckus presented more tolerable, or that spectators eagerly watching the chaos unfold are upstanding citizens. However, when "facts" appear to be embellished or lazily assembled, it undermines the veracity of the rest of the book.Another event was described by Flaherty as involving a thousand people. The news article that was cited mentioned about a hundred people. Forum posts about the event that I found using Google mentioned about fifty people causing trouble. 911 calls mention thirty. None of these numbers gives me peace of mind, but an estimate being off by a factor of ten is no small inaccuracy.Some of the incidents supposedly involved "thousands" or even "hundreds of thousands" of people. There are clearly enough violent and destructive individuals in these groups to be a problem, but is the entire group guilty, even if a majority condone such acts or look the other way? I am cautious to paint such a vast number of people with the same brush because their gathering, in its enormity, led to chaos.Many of the linked videos (the ones that weren't deleted) make it difficult to tell precisely who is involved, to what degree. I can't even fathom how head counts of hundreds of people are determined -- a single video couldn't capture that many people unless taken from the roof of a tall building. There is certainly chaos and violence in large amounts. People that are standing around and laughing at the overall commotion, or running in seemingly random directions, might be considered as part of the mob, and their behavior is arguably deplorable, but are they all criminals merely for being there? I'm sure some will argue yes.Flaherty often seems to lament the relatively small number of individuals actually arrested (which is sometimes zero), but it makes me wonder, is he suggesting that everyone present at all be locked up, or just the people actually committing a crime? In some cases, ridiculously large numbers of people (e.g. 100) are claimed to have attacked one individual. This raises a red flag in my head. Unless it's literally a dogpile of people stacked on top of one helpless victim, how can every last member of a violent century simultaneously contribute to attacking or robbing a single person? Should I not hold some level of skepticism?Certain parts of the book even indicate that this kind of violence isn't actually new, so much as it's new to certain communities where such activity isn't common. Residents of the South side of Chicago, for example, indicated that mob violence had been prevalent for years. The mobs simply moved beyond their own hoods and on to more affluent areas, it seems.Flaherty calls certain events "race riots", but I find his use of the term to be fairly lax. Specifically, race riots generally represent an explosion of tension between two or more races over a recent and perceived slight. The fact that the rioters are all of one race to me doesn't equate to a "race riot". Even though one race is rioting, they're not organized against another race or seeking retaliation necessarily.Given that Asians, Jewish people, homosexuals, and other black people have all been victims (as the book outlines), these attacks seem to have more to do with opportunism and perceived vulnerability than a straightforward theme of "kill whitey". This makes the title of the book somewhat disingenuous to me -- but I suppose "Black Mob Violence" wouldn't sell as many copies as a title with "white girl" at the front of it.When the author makes the claim that "racial violence is back", my immediate interpretation is mobs of angry blacks going after white people merely for being white. The KKK, for example, historically intimidated blacks and stifled black progress; I was thinking this book would be about anti-white radicals reversing the roles. Most of the violence described seems far less targeted and far less organized -- predicated more on what can be gotten away with, and little else. The book itself contradicts this oversimplification. Additionally, "racial violence is back" would seem to suggest that it ever ended.Lastly, the writing style itself is uncomfortably informal relative to most non-fiction that I read. Again, I'm sure most readers won't care and just want the dirt in any way it can be consumed, but a pedantic individual like myself finds it off-putting. There's a good amount of editorial snark regarding the actions and words of naysayers, which doesn't make me feel like I'm reading an objective report of a serious problem.Overall, this is an interesting topic that deserves more discussion, and Flaherty deserves recognition for calling it out. However, I found the book itself to be mediocre.
review 2: Ignore this book at your own peril. The MSM is ignoring the reporting of these crimes, fearing recrimination. Colin's writing and reporting is hard-hitting, factual, and backed up with video. Each day the perp's become more brazen, vicious, and willing to out-do each other, just for the sake of "kicks" and peer approval.If sadly, you become a victim of the Knockout Game, or black mob violence, your life will be forever shattered, and trust in your fellow-man will be erased.Let this book provide you with a very stern warning: the mainstream media is not reporting it. A chilling and sad commentary how the media has lost its courage.... and its very soul. less

Download links for: White Girl Bleed a Lot (5th Edition): The return of racial violence and how the media ignore it.

Advertising