How do you define racism?

Have you ever heard someone say that black people cannot be racist to white people? I have and this idea worries me. The explanation is that racism equals power plus prejudice. In the USA, only white people are in power so only white people can be racist. Racism used to mean hate of another race. Now racism means only systemic racism of which only white people are capable. A black person could hate all white people and this is not racism, it’s “prejudice”. This looks like a distinction with no difference to me. Is being prejudiced not as bad as being racist?

There are other problems. In the USA whites are the most powerful but there are other countries where whites are a minority. If I went to China and started hating Chinese people am I racist or prejudiced? If I went to Sudan and started hating Sudanese people am I racist or prejudiced?

There is another related idea: All white people are racist. Does this make sense? The idea here is that all whites are complicit in white supremacy embedded in American culture, therefore all are racist. My objection here is that if I am racist because I am white then there is no way for me to not be racist. Who is racist and who is not is who is white and who is not. Imagine if I said something racist and someone said I was racist for saying that. What do you mean? I could respond. Even if I did not say said racist thing then I would still be racist because I am white.

So, how do you define racism?

That’s typical of the way the meaning of words is distorted for political and ideological reasons.

Racism is not a system of power, it is in ideology used to justify a system of power !

What is an ideology ? It is a system of ideas used to represent reality. Liberalism is an ideology as is religion.

What are the ideas of the racist ideology ? Humanity is divided in races, according some more or less evident characteristics, as skin colors, religion or whatever. and their is a hierarchy of theses races. Some races are superior, some are inferior.

It is allowed to hate and to despise the members of inferior races and to dominate and exploit them.

Racism goes beyond prejudice.

And yes, a black man or a Jewish can be racists.

[Marcus Garvey - Wikipedia]

I will go beyond. a dominated person can be a racist, he/she can believe that he is a member of a superior race and hate members of other races.

In fact, it is the perfect way for those in power to divert the anger of the dominated.

Do you really think that in 1933 in Germany, the Jewish were dominant and in power? The nazis denounced them as such, hating them and mass murdered them.


Fundamentally it is a natural survival mechanisms in the competition for available resources. But when there is an abundance of resources there is no need for competition and cooperation can be beneficial to both sides.

A symbiotic relationship has always benefitted both partners.

1 Like

I think morgankane01 said it well. I really can’t add much more except derogatory statements and stereotypes, as well as fallacies about other human being are much a part of racism too.

1 Like

This a good point, but the more common notion is that all Whites benefit from White Supremacy even if they aren’t racist.

The outcome is the same, though. Whites still always benefit no matter what.

When one defines a whole race as having a certain stereotypical belief or behavior, they are being ‘racist’. It should not matter if the stereotype is ‘positive’ because the flaw in reasoning is about stereotyping.

To assert that the benefactors of a subset of a whole ARE the whole is thus also itself ‘racist’.

The reasoning behind the veil of WHY many ‘liberal’ sided opinions are so apparently anti-White (and anti-male) relates to the fact that those who ARE relatively well off DUE to their own inheritance and heritage; They are people in dominant power attempting to ‘apologize’ but in a way that they can transfer their own debt of guilt upon the larger superset of their own racist subset.

Here in Canada, for instance, we invented this mentality. It arose out of the fact that Canada was formed accidentally out of two major divisive groups: the arrogant English loyalists who concentrated in Ontario (“Upper Canada” at its origin) and the French Catholics of Quebec (“Lower Canada” originally). Our politicians recognized that our modern populations were no longer predominantly Catholic, and of Quebec’s general population was voluntarily becoming more and more integrated as ‘English’. So they wanted a constitution that permitted a biased right of these two major cults. But to make such a consitution requires finding some means to justify the clear discrimination and bias for these two major groups, both of whom are predominantly of the belief in segregated rights. This is ‘racist’ in that they believe that there is a corresponding GENETIC link of one’s race to some specific culture identity, an ENVIRONMENTAL factor.

So the first step was to preamble (condition) our Constitution (1982) to declare that what follows within it is in light of recognizing the supremacy of God and the Rule of Law. That is, it preconditions what appears to assert us having equality of rights BUT adds later the very racist inclusion of protecting those French and English who have historical roots along with the wealth they passed onto their own children into perpetuity.

But, given that the English Anglicans and the French Catholics are ‘distinct’ and unlikely able to convince ALL Canadians to adapt for being hypocritically biased, they were forced to give equal credence to our Indigenous popultations. Thus, they have enhanced a form of Multi-National Socialists. Given they cannot appeal to demanding specific favor without buying the stronger pluralities out, we became “Multicultural” in a misleading way that has INFECTED the United States’ present drive to embrace this counter-racist ideology.

That is, given that our traditional historically related groups cannot now offer guilt directly without losing power, they ‘apologize’ as the larger class that both the French and English catholics are a part of rather than to their specific fault: the whole White race. Thus it is the literal wealthy established Whites who are controlling the dialogue by blaming ALL people as being at fault so as to lay the liability onto the scapegoated WEAKER Whites.

This in turn pushes those whites who are being penalized indirectly to either shut up or join the rival extreme.

The racism in the U.S. is just an extension of this. Given the world is deluded into thinking Canada is a tame lovable group of people, others see how this CON can work effectively elsewhere.

There definitely are systemic factors in play but those in control are falsely using this to justify permitting a ‘flip’ in which cults get the power rather than fixing the problem. So instead of seeking ‘equality’ as a resolution, they are seeking a reversed empowerment of the stereotype: If Particular cults are at fault for prior racism or sexism, instead of defeating the religious beliefs OF these particular cults, the present paradigm is not to STOP racism/sexism but to permit a kind of ‘equality of being racist or sexist’ instead.

Its fucked up but a very clever means of assuring those whites most guilty to be able to make out like THEY are the good guys by admitting guilt, yet being able to successfully pass on the debt to innocent scapegoats. It’s a win-win strategy BUT is also WHY we had those like Trump succeed. We also now have this very mentality being recognized by the Russians and WHY THEY ARE BEHAVING THE WAY THEY ARE NOW.

So ‘systematically’ this very confusion is leading our world into chaos. Racism is being promoted on the Left now as a form of Multi-National-Socialism versus whichever more consolidated National-Socialism that the Right normally embrace. Thus, we have proven to the world that all people are hopelessly racist and sexist. So we get a Putin who recognizes the rising Nationalism of Ukraine as a threat and thus embracing their own extreme counter Nationalism.

If no one is willing to recognize this, so be it. We are going to end up in a third world war…all because of the stupidity and arrogance of those dictating that our physical appearances suffice in defining one as being victim or perpetrators with specific distinction.

1 Like

Racism is at the far end of a spectrum:

Influence → Bias → Prejudice → Racist

Seems to me that, as much as greed is an extension of the hoarding instinct, racism is an extension of the herd instinct.

In effect, both are an extension of the survival instinct.

The survival instinct has always been reinforced by evolution via natural selection.

In essence, yes. It is fear and an expression of the fight or flight instinct.

What is the greatest complaint? They will work for less wages and take all the jobs away.
And that was fine as long as colored minorities worked for free (slavery), but now that colored minorities are able to earn the same as whites at the non-management level, they have become a threat.
The concept of equality is very fragile in RW practice.

Note that veteran soldiers often have true brotherhood because they have shared hell, whereas in the civil world they are in competition for resources.

So you’re saying that greedy, racist people haven’t evolved to current societal norms.?

Have you looked at Ukraine lately?

Humans are biological organisms. There is no such thing as biological race. Racism is a social construct.

1 Like

Heard this morning on radio:

Generally speaking, harassers and persecutors are fool !

It is highly true of racists.

I don’t, I ask a black person.