The Marginalized Majority: Claiming Our Power in a Post-Truth America

by Onnesha Roychoudhuri

“This book is a daring intervention to get us back in the game—and a witty, delightfully personal meditation on collective power.” —Naomi Klein   The energy on the left has never been higher. But because there are so many issues to tackle, each one more urgent and divisive than the next, some say progressives will once again fail to seize the moment and gain real power. But what if we’re getting the story all wrong?   In The Marginalized Majority, Onnesha Roychoudhuri makes the galvanizing case that our plurality of identities is not only our greatest strength, but is also at the indisputable core of successful progressive change throughout history.   From the civil rights movement to the Women’s March, mainstream media to Saturday Night Live, Roychoudhuri illuminates how historical narratives are written and, by holding the myths about our disenfranchisement up to the light, reveals we have far more power than we’re often led to believe. With both clear-eyed hope and electrifying power, she examines our ideas about what’s possible, and what’s necessary—opening up space for action, new realities, and, ultimately, survival.   Now, Roychoudhuri urges us, is the time to fight like the majority we already are.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Social Justice, Audiobook, Feminism, Activism, Race

225 pages, Kindle Edition

Published July 10, 2018

Reviews

[Diane S ☔ · Rating 4 out of 5]

I keep telling myself to quit reading these political based books. They upset me to varying degrees, mostly because I feel there is little I can do to change anything. Writing letters to my congressman seems to have little or no effect. In fact I read that in a recent poll taken, though after the last election I'm not sure these pills are accurate, that forty percent of Americans now classify themselves as Independent. They feel that neither party is representing them as they were elected to do, but are rather following their own agendas with plenty of infighting.

This book speaks up for margsnlized Americans, or anyone who is not a white, male. It shows that we do have choices, options, and that we may not be as powerless as we think, feel. The Womens March, the Occupy Wall Street movement and the Me too movement have all propelled change, though ones not common ky known nor talked about. They are highlighted, talked about in this book. The author has been a journalist, an observer, but the current political situation has turned her into an activist.

She takes on journalist who are not speaking up, nor reporting what they see despite biases, and corporate owned newspapers, television stations. In fact, Dan Rather did just that, spoke up about the summit between Trump and Putin. We need more to do so. I finished this book with a feeling of hope, that things can change, and that we can be part of it no matter how limited our role.

[Pulkit · Rating 1 out of 5]

An uninteresting and breezy read. The book spends a considerable amount of time revisiting the 2016 post-election sentiment and normalization of what is seemingly (and justifiably) unacceptable. However, this is not new and neither are the ideas presented in it; ideas of reclaiming one's own subjectivities and narratives by the majority to reclaim and assert their stories of oppression in the current political sphere. A vague and largely unoriginal concept. There is little structure in support of what is said in dispersed chapters providing anecdotes and examples of ideals without any explication on how they can be grounded in tangible action and reality. The author does suggest activism as a solution and attempts to instill optimism in the idea of it as an effective tool/strategy but apart from giving a few examples of how it has been effective in the past, there is barely an attempt to suggest how effective activism in the current environment can be carried out. There is little to no discussion on the minutae, just general fuzzy ideas.

I would have liked to read how the vast majority of working class or poor people in the states can organize and demand greater rights and protection (in the form of ability to form unions and reform that pushes back against the top 1% which are the primary dominant forces complicit in the destruction of an egalitarian united states). I would have liked to read how the economically underprivileged majority can participate in activism and affect political change when they're living paycheck to paycheck and are largely indoctrinated by the likes of fox news to go against their own self interests in the electoral cycle. There is no attempt made to seriously tackle the insidious issues that come with the systemic problems that arise with capitalism, a compromised and unaccountable media and profit driven basics.

The book is utterly casual, wasteful of words and ultimately just boring due to lack of originality, depth or any interesting insight. Attempts to talk about the oppressed without really understanding oppression and showing an insulting amount of obliviousness to the realities of the poor and the oppressed. This book is the result of the naivety and offensive lack of political awareness of a privileged liberal in an ivory tower who believes that structural issues can be reformed through fickle bourgeois appeals in protests by anyone other than those who're directly subjected to state violence.

[Karel Baloun · Rating 5 out of 5]

“When we act, we create our own reality… All of you, will be left to just study what we do. -Karl Rove” (p59)

A powerful call to reclaim our own truth, the objective truth that a majority can find, and to speak it loudly, including a public protests.

This is a smart, short, true, thoughtful book. It should be read, it should be important. It feels almost like prescient historical take on this current unbelievable political nightmare, and what it says about the deplorable 1/4 of America. (Primarily the aristocratic civil war losers and all they stood for)

Distractions like the Kardashian’s, reality TV, sports, games, Netflix, it all remove us from political discourse. We even find our own objective realities becoming hazy in our memory.

I’m guilty of pursuing comfort over truth, and I feel bad about that. I haven’t been fighting, and I don’t know whether I can.

This book challenged me most in its last third, where it skewered Lilla with a passionate defense of identity politics. I don’t like Lilla, but I have not been a fan of identity politics, because I feel that they also justify/empower white supremacy. Tough complex topic, very effectively argued.
“What if the much-maligned identity politics were not by default viewed as divisive? What if instead, we looked to identity politics as a rich resource, one that contains the seeds of a powerful vision for true economic and social justice.” (p129)

I disagree with the author over the existence of objective reality, which she says has just been a proxy for a white male reality. America needs some level of shared reality, otherwise we will just fall apart fighting each other. I agree it should not just be the white male perspective, But some facts and data should be found which takes us beyond perspective! To be fair, this super smart author knows this, but says that the marginalized experience of Americans is a preview of what Trump is doing to everyone(p131)... I not convinced yet.

Roychoudhuri’s deeply personal, emotional and honest conclusion adds tremendous credibility.. yet also shows that she doesn’t have all the answers, that no one does. It may show that she only has an empowering idea, and should remain unsure of it. She and I share an admiration for Eric Liu and the hard risky work of activism.

The essential contradiction remains (p143): “it is necessary to recognize and acknowledge the realities of the moment we are in. Yet and equally necessary part of survival is not starting with adaptation to the world as it is now, but pushing beyond it to lay claim to the world as it should and must be.” How can marginalized subjective perspectives do this, while preventing Trump and white nationalists from claiming the same right! Because that would make a better world…

[Brittany · Rating 3 out of 5]

"I put so much energy into trying to be viewed by him solely as a disembodied brain - an attempt to escape the behaviors I had seen him display with other women, from compliments on outfits to a predilection for starting conversations about their sex lives. The idea of him even being aware that I possessed a body, or a sexuality of any kind, was terrifying to me."

"I also try, particularly in political writing, to make it extremely clear in advance exactly where I stand so that readers can make judgments accordingly. The idea of neutral objectivity is at best misleading and often fraudulent." - Chomsky

"I watched women move - their hips in dresses, their lips on glasses, their breasts heaving. All of it offered up to me, to enjoy, to consume."

"Coming of age in particular constitutes a jarring emergence of double-consciousness - of being forced to see yourself through the eyes of others even as you're still trying to form a sense of self."

"It's a way in which being 'realistic' or 'pragmatic' can look a lot like cynicism. At what point does this convenient crutch (I hate it, but that's just how it is) serve as a protective veil for our own latent bigotry and misogyny?"

"We learn early on to adapt our narratives based on the people in the room. How much of myself can I share? At what point will what I share become ammunition used against me? So we soften our particularities - and as soon as we do, we give something up."

System justification theory

[Robin · Rating 3 out of 5]

A brief examination of the dangers of self-censorship and following crowds. Roychoudhuri emphasizes the need to speak freely and thoughtfully against injustices and corruption on micro and macro levels. A predictable but well-synthesized read.

[Nate Krenkel · Rating 5 out of 5]

bought at Hello Hello Books in Rockland

[Bookworm · Rating 2 out of 5]

For some reason I thought the book would be speaking about the fact that Trump did not win a majority of voters and that is now manifesting itself in various ways: protests and movements, candidates who are running for office, the general sentiment, etc. Instead it seems to be a series of essays that touch on a variety of topics (including what I mentioned above) but also talking a bit about historical context, why "failures" matter, why criticism that often comes from the right about these protests, movements, approaches, etc. are wrong.

That pretty much sums it up. Ultimately it was a disappointment: although the information was useful (such as reminding the reader that Rosa Parks did not come out of nowhere), there are many instances where it does feel like Roychouduri is rehashing the 2016 election (which is important for context and may be an issue of me having read so many of these types of books).

I honestly also felt there were also many "reaches" or framing that just made me view the book skeptically. The book feels disorganized and I'm not sure what the author's "overall" message was, although many parts of the individual chapters were useful. I'm not completely sure who she identifies as the "marginalized majority" although one can certainly glean from the essays. It just seems a bit there's focus more on some groups but not on others that isn't helped by the disorganization.

This book will certainly speak to a lot of people but it wasn't for me.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

one of the best books on current politics in the US. the author discusses activism under Trump

[Colin Cox · Rating 4 out of 5]

Despite what the title suggests, Onnesha Roychoudhuri's The Marginalized Majority is not a polemic peppered with grievance politics about a shrinking white majority. Nor is The Marginalized Majority about labor movements and the exploitative dynamics between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Here, a reader will not find a Marxist examination of capitalist labor exploitation. Such explorations interrogate how labor practices as an extension of capitalist ideology create the conditions for, or lack thereof, political engagement.

Instead, The Marginalized Majority investigates the intersection of narrative and politics. That is to say, the stories we tell, who tells our stories, and how those stories create the conditions for political potentialities are of great importance to Roychoudhuri. Consider, for example, Chapter 7. This chapter examines comedy, comic personalities like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, and cynicism. Roychoudhuri argues that cynicism today is a bastardized version of what it once was. According to Roychoudhuri, classic cynicism prized a radical engagement with society and the narratives society tells. To be cynical meant engaging with one's society, and most importantly, the narratives and ideological underpinnings of one's society. In summation, cynics eschewed any impulse to retreat.

By contrast, cynicism today is nothing more than a shoulder-shrug. Today, cynicism accepts dominant narratives and ideologies as insurmountable. Cynicism is a retreat, whether that retreat assumes the form of a shoulder shrug or a nauseating phrase like "it is what it is." Formulated differently, when someone says in response to an abhorrent statement or policy proposal, "well, what did you expect?" they signify the insidiousness of contemporary cynicism. To say "well, what did you expect?" forcloses the possibility of alternative narratives because such a statement assumes, for example, the inevitability of a disgusting, racist statement from figures like Donald Trump. Roychoudhuri rejects the gaslighting inherent to contemporary cynicism. Instead, she believes new narratives and social formations are achievable so long as we reject the impulse to foreclose their possibility.

Along this line, Roychoudhuri explores the limits of objectivity, in particular journalistic objectivity relative to politics. Roychoudhuri asserts in agreement with modern sociology, psychology, and even psychoanalysis that objectivity is functionally impossible. But what is most interesting is how she connects pushes for objectivity to white hegemony. As an example, she describes Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court confirmation hearing. In that hearing, Sotomayor explored the connections between the personal and the political, which is to say, she explored the inevitability of subjectivity. In response, Senator Jeff Sessions balked. He suggested her line of thinking was too subjective and "activist." He demurred at the possibility that someone's race, ethnicity, and background could inform their jurisprudence. He ended by declaring he rejected this notion, and Americans did too. Here, Roychoudhuri emphasizes the slip Sessions makes. At that moment, he envelops his perspective with the majority's perspective.

Furthermore, Sessions fails to articulate how one achieves objectivity. By contrast, Sotomayor suggests we arrive at something approximating objectivity by moving through the subjective. That is to say, we should embrace an intersectional understanding of subjective experience instead of searching for the ever-elusive objective. This matters for Roychoudhuri because calls for objectivity prevent those in positions to inform and educate (i.e., journalists) from calling a spade a spade. Adopting an objective posture means one cannot call Donald Trump, for example, "a liar," "a racist," or "a misogynist." Ironically, objectivity trades not in truths but euphemisms.

The Marginalized Majority reminds me of a book I read earlier this year, The Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson. In Robinson's book, he explores alternatives paths for the ever-worsening climate crisis. The Ministry for the Future is a surprisingly optimistic novel; it assumes that we can, in fact, change the future, but to do so, we must change our narratives first. I have the sense Roychoudhuri would agree.

[Clare · Rating 3 out of 5]

Do you ever read a book and you're like "That was pretty good; not sure I got much out of it"? That's essentially how I feel about Onnesha Roychoudhuri's The Marginalized Majority: Claiming Our Power in a Post-Truth America. I feel a bit bad about that, since it's a well-written book that makes a lot of smart arguments about identity, media, people power, and other sorts of things that are very relevant to my interests. But it's also very definitely pitched towards the sort of politically informed-but-uninvolved left-liberal that I was three or four years ago, so I feel like most of what I got out of the book was perhaps some improved ability to talk about things like popular misconceptions about protests that might come in handy next time I need to persuade well-meaning left-liberals to stop reading the New York Times and go find some activism to do.

This feeling, to me, seems like a bit of a disservice to the book, precisely because a lot of the stuff that I feel I already know I learned in left spaces, and this book does a really excellent job of pitching some of that knowledge to liberals in terms that mainstream progressives are fairly comfortable with. Like, I think there's probably a lot of people that really need to hear this sort of breakdown of why most media reporting on whether or not protests are "successful" is 110% hot stinking garbage, who unfortunately might not listen to it coming from grassroots socialist or anarchist organizers because they think we're just a bunch of scruffy radicals. The book reads like it's coming from a few degrees to the right of Naomi Klein, but there were certain bits where I wondered if perhaps the author was pitching things a little more lib than where she really is coming from--especially when she discussed her time working for an abusive publication that, to me, sounded just like the revelations about AlterNet that came out in 2017, which I remember Sarah Jaffe posting about on Twitter. I looked it up and it turns out that a) Roychoudhuri did, in fact, write for AlterNet and b) AlterNet is entirely behind a paywall these days.

Anyway, it's a pretty good, quick read if you're interested in issues of media failure and public mythmaking, and also probably if you're a sad liberal who watches SNL and then despairs about how that doesn't seem to have made anything better. In which case, I recommend reading this book and then joining an organization, like find a City Council campaign to volunteer on or check out your local SURJ chapter or something.

Originally posted at Turn off the TV and get in the streets.

[Sofia Chang · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book- I really did. The most interesting points were indeed not the most original (there are many books where I have that sort of a-ha moment that I didn't really get with this one), but they were very engaging and did make me feel a sense of outrage. When the author talks about the Thanksgiving dinner she went to, during which her friend's white male friends were debating whether women or men are funnier, I felt the same outrage and fury that she seems to exhibit in the book. One of her points that I found particularly interesting was her point that she was "raised to be a white man."

“Like most Americans, I was raised to be a white man. I read William Faulkner and Ernest Hemingway. I read F. Scott Fitzgerald and Charles Bukowski. I came to identify with the emotionally disengaged characters, the staccato sentences, the irreverent dirty old man voice. The books I read asked me to imagine the power I might have. I got a woman pregnant and then worried that they wouldn't get an abortion, tying me down forever when all I wanted to do was continue experiencing my freedom. I wrote poems about the absurdity of writing poems, enjoying the decadence of imagining my readers drinking in my disregard for them. Being likable, explaining myself to others were not prerequisites of protaganism. I watched women move, their hips and dresses, their lips on glasses, their breasts heaving, all that offered up to me to enjoy, to consume. The fact that I was a brown woman was not something that seemed immediately relevant when I was younger. I moved through the world with the sense that I would have the same kind of power as the protagonists I read and movies I watched.”

This point really clicked for me- I was raised to be a white man as well. There's a sense of privilege that she discusses that many white men have- this sense to believe that their privilege is the same as everyone else's, that their views are the views of the rest of their country's. She discusses how politicians tend to claim that the questions they ask and the answers they pose are "for the American people" "this is what the American people want" etc etc.

Her personal stories really sparked something in me as well- telling about how she would attempt to conceal her form at her publication office so her boss wouldn't see her as a woman, her experiences in an activist group, etc. I really appreciated this book.

[Ma'Belle · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars
Though I agree with most of the sentiments in this collection of essays, I found it to be unfocused, overly broad, and lacking in its main thesis and title. I was under the impression it would make a case for the fact that marginalized people, when combined, make up the majority of the American population and then go into strategies of how we might make our revolutionary dreams happen. The audiobook is only about 4 hours, but Roychoudhuri's writing is all over the place.

The best parts of the book were when she's quoting James Baldwin. I mistakenly thought The Marginalized Majority had been written and published post-2020, but it is very much stuck in 2018. Roychoudhuri states that things are getting so much better for trans people, based on some of us becoming elected officials. Little did she know the past couple years (from 2020-2022) marked the highest recorded rate of trans people (mostly BIPOC femmes) being murdered - while Joe Biden was president, not even Trump.

Her numerous descriptions of male celebrities being called out publicly during 2017's #metoo movement never acknowledges the origin of that slogan, Tarana Burke, nor does she address the problems with punitive justice. It is implied that she simply thinks firing and imprisoning perpetrators and alleged perpetrators equals success.

[Catherine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Oooh, this book got me so fired up. In the best of ways. Around the time of the women’s march, I was utterly disgusted with the anti-protest sentiments I heard around me. But I didn’t have the vocabulary for my outrage. This sentence slayed me with it’s perfection... “To believe that non-violent protest is unnecessary, pointless, over-the-top, or reflective of an unreasonable impatience, presupposes that your day-to-day existence is tolerable and acceptable.” God, I wish everyone would read this. It’s my wish. If only more people took the time to educate themselves! This book touches on the civil rights movement, BLM movement, OWS movement, #MeToo movement, Standing Rock movement, climate change activism, and so much more. What the author does is gives us hope, urges us to keep up the good fight, and reminds us that it’s NOT in vain. Well written. Inspiring. And totally a breeze to read in one day.

[Judy · Rating 5 out of 5]

I devoured this book and recommended it to others. This book was written during the first Trump administration. She does not sugar coat how awful he is, but she pushes the reader to not be complacent , cynical or complicit. She gives both current and historical examples of how we have been conditioned to become numb, blame ourselves, become marginalized and manipulated. She encourages us to rewrite our own stories and our power both individually and collectively!
Powerful book that I needed right now in what has been less than a month of Trump’s second term.

[Milo · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really needed to read this right now. A surprisingly hopeful commentary on our current situation, mixed with a substantial amount of personal anecdotes. Very accessible and easy to read. I conveniently agreed with the majority of the points; several times Roychoudhuri put into words things I have been struggling to articulate lately. I would definitely recommend this to anyone who is unhappy with the current political climate.

[Tanya]

DNF at 36pgs

I really want to finish this book, but I just can't seem to get into it. It might be though because I agree with the author? Her arguments are protests, and similar type things, are actually useful and make a difference. But it just seems like she is still trying to convince me 36 pgs in, and I'm just 'I know, what next?' So maybe I'll try again later, I think this book has a good message and I wouldn't discourage anyone from reading it.

[Denise · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not too long ago, I was pretty sure I was done reading books about the pitiful state of US politics in the Trump era, how it came to it and how to resist it... and then this book caught my eye and I figured, hey, why not, another one can't hurt. Roychoudhuri makes some excellent points in this short but engaging volume, and I frequently found myself nodding along with her reasoning. Hers is the kind of voice needed to effect some actual change in the right direction.

[Kelly Fitzpatrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think this is a really good book to give to your friends who struggle with racism and white fragility. Maybe it will change people's minds? I feel like you could also gift this to those who are afraid to have to have conversations about marginalization and micro aggressions! Let's have conversations so progress can be made.

[Alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is fine. The writing is breezy and accessible. Probably a good read for the core audience of disaffected folks with justified anger at their lack of representation in politics but who aren't politically active currently. There just aren't much in the way of revelations here and a lot that has been said many times before.

[Jennifer Darci · Rating 5 out of 5]

I learned very much reading this book. Helpful in understanding. Helpful in thinking about my own experiences as well as the experiences of others. Also, big help when facing the question of "but what to DO about it".

[Sam · Rating 5 out of 5]

Empowering call to use our power and our stories to build a new version of politics in this current age.

[Ietrio · Rating 1 out of 5]

The comparison with Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's We Should All Be Feminists is simply dishonest.

[Debby · Rating 3 out of 5]

3- If you’re short on time or attention, just read the introduction. Read my full review here.

[Sarah · Rating 2 out of 5]

It was fine, I personally just didn't get much out of it.

[Vannah Jones · Rating 5 out of 5]

This has gotta be one of the best opinion pieces Ive read in a while. It was inspiring and pretty and put together really well. It's one of those rallying cries that gives you so much hope.

[Nate Campbell · Rating 3 out of 5]

Decent book that's basically a liberal scream against Trump. I agree with most of her points, and it's fairly well written, but very much a victimhood call to activism.

[Samantha]

Really changed my way of thinking about direct action and what is even possible in this current political climate.