4 ms·
You answered your own question. There’s been a stipulative, activist semantic expansion (or outright replacement) of the word “racism”. It really blew up fast b
by elefanten 6y ago
You answered your own question. There’s been a stipulative, activist semantic expansion (or outright replacement) of the word “racism”. It really blew up fast but most prople haven’t consciously learned and internalized this, so a lot of (un)intentional equivocation takes place. Lots of miscommunication, misunderstanding and talking past each other. Classic human stuff.
My opinion: putting aside the discussion of the new definitions merits and shortcomings, we can still easily call DiAngelo presumptuous, essentialist and nontrivially bigoted.
- rhino369 6y agoA tiny group of academics don't get to redefine commonly used words for rhetorical purposes (at least outside the circles of their field). Everyone knows what Rayiner meant when he said racist. That's what the word means.