Racism only wrong by Whites & racism only right against Whites?

Yes the laws I am talking about are American laws.

Out of curiosity:
In Uzbekistan, is there a concept of "race" and if so, is it the same as America's?

 

yes, that's what I said. race is the visible signal that a certain culture/behaviour may be present. in public, amongst strangers, all we have are visual cues. colour/race is a visual cue.

it really isn't about melanin ... at all. no one cares about that stuff, not genuinely. people do care very much about culture and behaviour, however.

- - - Updated - - -

A heads up, I don't live in Uzbeki. Not sure how that happened ;p

 

no racism doesn't have a dam thing do with political or economic power racism is believing your race is superior to another
this only people in power can be racist is just liberal SJW propaganda bull crap to excuse racism from minorties to let them get away with it not forcing them to play by the same rules you force on others
according to your definition of racism a dirt poor redneck calling Obama the N word doesn't make him a racist, because Obama has more political and economic power over that dirt poor redneck

 

INNCORRECT. Racism is NOT, believing your race is superior to another . THAT IS A RACIST.

ISM means something. Learn it.

RACISM is DESIGNED, to make your race superior.

 

Affirmative Action itself covers veterans. This is what I mean when I say "white men get AA through veterans status AA." Minorities and women are not the only groups covered under AA laws.

Let's set the Veteran's Preference laws aside for a second. I shared one of the codes for AA covering veterans. It is literally titled:

"PART 60-300—AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND NONDISCRIMINATION OBLIGATIONS OF FEDERAL CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS REGARDING DISABLED VETERANS, RECENTLY SEPARATED VETERANS, ACTIVE DUTY WARTIME OR CAMPAIGN BADGE VETERANS, AND ARMED FORCES SERVICE MEDAL VETERANS"

-http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt41.1.60_6300&rgn=div5 (e-CFR data is current as of June 13, 2016)
​

This is another non Veteran's Preference law that requires AA for eligible veterans:

Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974

38 USC Sec. 4212

a.(1) Any contract in the amount of $100,000 or more entered into by any department or agency of the United States for the procurement of personal property and nonpersonal services (including construction) for the United States, shall contain a provision requiring that the party contracting with the United States take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment qualified covered veterans. This section applies to any subcontract in the amount of $100,000 or more entered into by a prime contractor in carrying out any such contract.

(2) In addition to requiring affirmative action to employ such qualified covered veterans under such contracts and subcontracts and in order to promote the implementation of such requirement, the Secretary of Labor shall prescribe regulations requiring that - (A) each such contractor for each such contract shall immediately list all of its employment openings with the appropriate employment service delivery system (as defined in section 4101(7) of this title), and may also list such openings with one-stop career centers under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, other appropriate service delivery points, or America's Job Bank (or any additional or subsequent national electronic job bank established by the Department of Labor), except that the contractor may exclude openings for executive and senior management positions and positions which are to be filled from within the contractor's organization and positions lasting three days or less;
...

(3) In this section:

(A) The term "covered veteran" means any of the following veterans:
(i) Disabled veterans.
(ii) Veterans who served on active duty in the Armed Forces during a war or in a campaign or expedition for which a campaign badge has been authorized.
(iii) Veterans who, while serving on active duty in the Armed Forces, participated in a United States military operation for which an Armed Forces service medal was awarded pursuant to Executive Order No. 12985 (61 Fed. Reg. 1209).
(iv) Recently separated veterans.​

-https://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/statutes/4212.htm
...​

And yes, White people are the biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action. White women through the Womens AA and White men through the Veterans AA .

 

????

Race == skin color/"phenotypes" == perceptions == behaviors in America. When I bring up melanin, it is just me expressing how something no one controls is basically the very thing that gets certain judgments cast against them.

I assumed you were in that foreign country because you are sporting a Uzbekistan flag and none of the things you say apply whatsoever in the country I live in now.

 

Like an example? See screenshot above from a Google Search "Hillary Clinton".

 

Whites are not the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action as a % of their population.

What you also left out is whites are the biggest victims of affirmative action.

 

Per capita arguments don't work well in this topic. Affirmative Action arguments are usually lamentations on how the black guy is stealing seats from the white guy. We need only deal in raw numbers here. Besides, some sources say that the black guy is the least benefitting of AA as other sources point to white women and men as primary beneficiaries through women's and veterans AA.

You've already failed to substantiate how AA laws exclude whites. At what point does it become embarrassing to push old and debunked talking points?

 

So you're not aware that universities discriminate against higher IQ whites and northeast Asians in favor of low IQ blacks and Hispanics?

 

You have some numbers you can share and not that transparently made up stuff right?

 

Higher scoring whites and Asians are disfavored to lower scoring blacks and Hispanics in admission.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States

The group suffering the most from affirmative action are Asians, due to their high test scores.

 

Where exactly is your claim substantiated in this long ass entry? I'll not read this whole damned thing only to find that you are just using the link as fake support in place of you having none at all. Again, where is your claim substantiated here?

 

I have to say that I disagree with the notion that only people with political power can be racist. Before we start talking about the definition of words it must be understood that all words are made up and by their nature arbitrary. The intent of using a word is what gives it meaning. If we look at the etymology of the word racism we see that it was coined around 1936 in reference to Nazi theories but replaced words like racialism and racialist. If we look at the dictionary we see that racism had different definitions some having to do with a belief in racial theories of superiority and others with discrimination that is motivated by those beliefs. I've tried to simplify the definition of racism as I understand it which is that racism is racial bigotry. Racism is discrimination based on race. I don't believe you have to have political power to be a racist. I don't believe you have to believe in racial superiority to be racist. My definition of racism is consistent with some dictionary definitions and in common use. Racists try to trivialize the definition of the word racism to eliminate its power. They say it has no meaning. This is illogical and the motive for doing this is obvious. They don't want to be viewed as immoral so they dismiss the meaning of the word. You can't control how people use a word. You can only control how you react to it. Instead of trying to pretend that racism has no meaning I challenge racists to be intellectually honest about what racism is because it is clearly a problem and it is morally wrong.

Now I firmly believe that anyone can be a racist. Racism takes many forms. You don't have to have political power. Exerting your political power to commit racial injustice the way Segregationists did is institutional racism. But for example if a Black person with no power or position of authority says something negative to a White person about their race that is racism. Calling it bigotry instead of racism is a distinction without a difference. Racism is a form of bigotry. Not only can anyone be racist you can be a self-hating racist. For example if a biracial person with one Black parent and one White parent says that they hate the Black side of their ancestry and doesn't like Black people that is racist (or even if they say they hate the White side). We have to recognize what racism is before we can deal with the problem. Once you start thinking like this about racism it is easy to spot it.

 

Any color can be racist, IFFFFFFFFFFFFF they are believing themselves better than an OFFICIAL RACIAL CATEGORY.

RACISM, is an ISM. THEREFORE, it is a system of discrimination. ISM.

Bigot can be any color. Bigot is ANYONE that singles out a group, for lless than treatment.

words mean things

TRY THIS. CAll someone a racism. Sounds stupid, huh? ISM

racist and racism, are not interchangeable.

You cannot be a self hating racist. BY DEFINITION. You CANNNNNNNNNN be an INSECURE bigot.

 

Obviously it would not be grammatically correct to call someone a racism. Racism is discrimination based on race. A racist is an advocate of racism. I agree that words have meaning and the dictionary is consistent with what I am saying about racism.

Racism = Race + ism

An ism is a suffix denoting a doctrine, theory, system, or practice. Therefore racism is a race doctrine or racial theory which most dictionaries define as the belief that race determines cultural characteristics and that one race is superior to others. But I would caution against using such a rigid definition to define racism because not all people who are racist are racial supremacists and not all forms of racism stem from the belief that your race is superior. For instance if one looks at Scientific Racism whose advocates call their belief system race-realism you will find that many of them do not believe in absolute racial supremacy. Most of them are also White Nationalists and do believe Whites are the best race but they argue that there are racial differences and that no race is superior. They concede athletic superiority to Blacks and intellectual superiority to Asians while claiming that Whites fit neatly in the middle of the racial varieties. If we look at the history of racism we see that it has evolved over the years from traditional racial supremacy (e.g. antebellum slave masters believing in absolute White Supremacy and their right to rule over Blacks) to racial separatism (what most modern White Nationalists believe in and what was enforced by law through Segregation and anti-miscegenation laws). All of this is racism. Blacks can be racist too. For example the Nation of Islam was very racist with their teaching that White people were inherently evil ("the White man is the devil!") and that interracial marriage was wrong. Muhammad Ali and Malcolm X for example were indoctrinated in to these beliefs and you can find video of them expressing racist views. You don't need political power to be racist. Again a racist is an advocate of racism. I'm not saying the words are interchangeable but they are related.

 

Racism knows no boundary as all races have racists within their ranks.

 

I admit it is arcane, but,

RACISM is not necessarily discrimination based on race. A system of discrimination cannot be implemented by an individual unless they have power.

A racist is one who THINKS their race, is superior.

When you act on that belief, you become a bigot.

You are also a bigot, when you discriminate on people NOT in a RACIAL category.

Therefore, people should be yelling bigot, not racist, a lot of the time.

If a member of a minority culture constructed a system of racism, those in the dominant culture would simply tear it all down, due to their having more power.

So you see, you cannot have a SYSTEM of discrimination intended for the majority culture. THIS IS CALLED WHITE PRIVILEGE. In other cultures, they could be other colors.

 

Obviously we are not going to agree. I see racism as a social problem and believe anyone can be a racist just like anyone can be a thief or a murderer. Racism to me is racial bigotry. The dictionary is consistent with what I am saying about racism. Critical race theorists created this concept of racism as a form of White Supremacy which can only be implemented by a person who is a member of the dominant culture, namely White people. I don't have a problem with the concept of White privilege or institutional racism but the idea that racism is can only be committed by White people sets a bad precedent and is a double standard. If a group of Black men go out and beat a White man within an inch of his life all the while using anti-White racial slurs they should be charged with a hate crime and that to me is racism. Again calling such behavior bigotry is a distinction without a difference. There is no universal law mandating that racism must stem from political power. Institutional racism does exist and so does White privilege. They are products of living in a racially stratified society. But if you look at the etymology of the word racism and the dictionary definition there is nothing about the way the word is defined that suggests that only people with political power can practice racism. That idea is a concept that find to be misguided.

 

MY logic dictates that racism stems from power. If a minority said he would discriminate against you, and you were rich, you would giggle.
I have agreed with you multiple times. Any color can be a bigot. Any color can be a racist, IF they think themselves superior.

This needs a VENN diagram.

 

racism and racist aren't entering changeable because one is a noun the other is an adjective and a noun
racism being the noun only makes it so it isn't used properly as an adjective that is the only difference

go to Merriam-Webster's the utmost authority on definitions trusted as one for close to 100 years
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racist

does not even seperatly list racist as a stand alone word deserving its own separate definition. you type it into their search it directs you to racism which it list racist below the defition of racism and calling it a noun/adjective there for declaring it means the same dam thing

now type in bigot and see what you get

a bigot incorporates a wide variety of groups and sub groups and yes you can be bigoted against a race and not be a racist because you can unfairly dislike a race but not think it is inferior


what you attempt in doing is butchering the English language and its meaning of words so to get to make your own definitions to fit your agenda your narrative

 

But what is the basis for saying racism stems from power other than just saying it? There's no rule which dictates that racism stems from power. There is a psychological component to racism where I as a Black man saying something racist to a White person would probably not anger them to the extent that I would be angered if they said something racist to me because of the history of racism. But racism is still racism. Would you agree that a gay person can discriminate against a straight person? Straight people are members of the dominate culture and have most of the political power around the world. If a gay man called me a breeder it wouldn't bother me at all, I would probably laugh it off but if I called him a f@ggot he might want to fight me. That doesn't change the fact that his words are just as valid a form of discrimination as mine. The difference is the psychological effect our discrimination has. The same logic applies to racism. Most White people are not as sensitive to anti-White discrimination as Black people and other minorities are to discrimination against their groups because they do not have a history of racist discrimination against themselves that impacts them psychologically. However racism is still racism. In my opinion it is just as morally wrong for me to discriminate against a White person as them to discriminate against me.

This is important because if you say that certain people can't be racist you run the risk of not addressing the problem of racism. Racism isn't just systemic it comes from an idea and how you use that idea. Racism has been the motivation for some of the worst atrocities in human history which date back to before the word was even invented. Racism is wrong and anyone can be racist. A racist IS an advocate of racism. If a poor Black man went out and committed a crime against a rich White man with racist motivations then what he did was racist. His racism motivated him to commit the crime. It doesn't matter if he is poor and a member of a group that doesn't have political power. Racism is evil and I feel I am correct on this subject. Feel free to disagree. At the end of the day it is just a difference in opinion.

 

Actually any person who is bigoted against a race is a racist. You don't have to believe in the racial inferiority of a group to be racist against them. This logic is consistent with the definitions you provided.

 

not necessary if you are referring to the second given definition
because you can be bigoted (strongly and unfairly dislikes other people) but not act on it there for not being prejudice or discriminatory

 

You don't have to act on prejudice to have a prejudiced belief. If you think in your head "I don't like that person because he is Black" you are being racist.