4 ms·

> But if you want to also call that "racist" then what term do you use for something like Jim Crow laws in the US or apartheid South Africa where racism was tru

by effie 6y ago

> But if you want to also call that "racist" then what term do you use for something like Jim Crow laws in the US or apartheid South Africa where racism was truly and without doubt systemic? Being racist has nothing to do with laws or power structure. It is believing that people of some other race are inferior. Racism supported by laws/government is called ultra-right-wing state, nationalism, segregation, apartheid.

dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
> It is believing that people of some other race are inferior. I think this is a view from the 90s. Today's view is that the're not inferior but different, and that race itself is a social construct.
- effie 6y ago
  It is a view from the colonial era at least and probably much older.
eesmith 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism : > Today, some scholars of racism prefer to use the concept in the plural racisms, in order to emphasize its many different forms that do not easily fall under a single definition. ... > Garner (2009: p. 11) summarizes different existing definitions of racism and identifies three common elements contained in those definitions of racism. First, a historical, hierarchical power relationship between groups; second, a set of ideas (an ideology) about racial differences; and, third, discriminatory actions (practices). Your "believing that people of some other race are inferior" falls under the second of those three. But compare your "nothing to do with laws or power structure" with "historical, hierarchical power relationship". Clearly there are different definitions. On the same page: > Scholars also commonly define racism not only in terms of individual prejudice, but also in terms of a power structure that protects the interests of the dominant culture and actively discriminates against ethnic minorities. From this perspective, while members of ethnic minorities may be prejudiced against members of the dominant culture, they lack the political and economic power to actively oppress them, and they are therefore not practicing "racism". Which leads us back to the reason I joined this thread in the first place - that perspective was dismissively summarized earlier as the '"you can't be racist towards white people" mantra.'
- effie 6y ago
  The quote says there are different existing definitions of racism. I agree with that statement. I don't agree that your definition of racism is useful to discussion. It is a redefinition that confuses people into false and harmful beliefs, such as the idea that "people of oppressed minority race cannot be racial oppresors" or the idea that "an action/belief against white majority cannot be racist".
  - eesmith 6y ago
    While you don't agree with the quote about how the scholarly definition requires an imbalanced power structure. What are the false and harmful beliefs? More specifically, what are some examples of an oppressed minority race becoming racial oppressors while still being subordinate in the power structure? How are they able to oppress with little political and economic power to do the oppression? What are examples of where it's important to say that an action against a white majority is "racist" when we cannot equally well say it's "racially discriminatory" or "racially bigoted" or other terms? Yes, there are many terms with differing definitions. We need only look at the differing definitions and understanding of what "rape" means. (Or the "evolution is only a theory" crowd.) But that doesn't mean (going way back to how I entered this thread) that it's correct to describe this more scholarly-based interpretation as 'the good old "you can't be racist towards white people" mantra'.
    - effie 6y ago
      > what are some examples of an oppressed minority race becoming racial oppressors while still being subordinate in the power structure? If minority is a requirement, then some examples are: 1) Jewish Nazi collaborators killing Jews, 2) Black gangsters killing black people 3) black/latin-american SJW agents manipulating authorities for more discrimination and cancelling of their white enemies. > How are they able to oppress with little political and economic power to do the oppression? In cases 1),3) by having elevated power granted and supported by even more powerful groups. In case 2) they are organized violent people with guns - they have substantial power.

by effie 6y ago

dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago

> It is believing that people of some other race are inferior. I think this is a view from the 90s. Today's view is that the're not inferior but different, and that race itself is a social construct.

effie 6y ago
It is a view from the colonial era at least and probably much older.

eesmith 6y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism : > Today, some scholars of racism prefer to use the concept in the plural racisms, in order to emphasize its many different forms that do not easily fall under a single definition. ... > Garner (2009: p. 11) summarizes different existing definitions of racism and identifies three common elements contained in those definitions of racism. First, a historical, hierarchical power relationship between groups; second, a set of ideas (an ideology) about racial differences; and, third, discriminatory actions (practices). Your "believing that people of some other race are inferior" falls under the second of those three. But compare your "nothing to do with laws or power structure" with "historical, hierarchical power relationship". Clearly there are different definitions. On the same page: > Scholars also commonly define racism not only in terms of individual prejudice, but also in terms of a power structure that protects the interests of the dominant culture and actively discriminates against ethnic minorities. From this perspective, while members of ethnic minorities may be prejudiced against members of the dominant culture, they lack the political and economic power to actively oppress them, and they are therefore not practicing "racism". Which leads us back to the reason I joined this thread in the first place - that perspective was dismissively summarized earlier as the '"you can't be racist towards white people" mantra.'

effie 6y ago
The quote says there are different existing definitions of racism. I agree with that statement. I don't agree that your definition of racism is useful to discussion. It is a redefinition that confuses people into false and harmful beliefs, such as the idea that "people of oppressed minority race cannot be racial oppresors" or the idea that "an action/belief against white majority cannot be racist".
- eesmith 6y ago
  While you don't agree with the quote about how the scholarly definition requires an imbalanced power structure. What are the false and harmful beliefs? More specifically, what are some examples of an oppressed minority race becoming racial oppressors while still being subordinate in the power structure? How are they able to oppress with little political and economic power to do the oppression? What are examples of where it's important to say that an action against a white majority is "racist" when we cannot equally well say it's "racially discriminatory" or "racially bigoted" or other terms? Yes, there are many terms with differing definitions. We need only look at the differing definitions and understanding of what "rape" means. (Or the "evolution is only a theory" crowd.) But that doesn't mean (going way back to how I entered this thread) that it's correct to describe this more scholarly-based interpretation as 'the good old "you can't be racist towards white people" mantra'.
  - effie 6y ago
    > what are some examples of an oppressed minority race becoming racial oppressors while still being subordinate in the power structure? If minority is a requirement, then some examples are: 1) Jewish Nazi collaborators killing Jews, 2) Black gangsters killing black people 3) black/latin-american SJW agents manipulating authorities for more discrimination and cancelling of their white enemies. > How are they able to oppress with little political and economic power to do the oppression? In cases 1),3) by having elevated power granted and supported by even more powerful groups. In case 2) they are organized violent people with guns - they have substantial power.