Dictionary definitions of 'racism' do NOT include any BS about prejudice+power or only whites being racist. Marxists and black racists DON'T get to redefine the English language to suit their own anti white opinions. The dictionary definition stands.
Yes, of course. The whole idea of racism as being solely a "vertical" phenomenon is indeed rather Marxistoid. This perception of racism is dangerous and hampering because; 1.) Blacks and other "Inferiors"(note that this is the Marxist terminology not my own) are forced into a stage of victimhood and stigmatization, although they themselves might not at all feel this way. In extension this preconception result in a situation where other victims of racism are unseen and unheard. 2.) Defining racism as something that can only occur from "top-down" is in fact racist in itself. Which is very funny when you think about it- This definition of "racism" is racist! Not only does it exclude certain groups, but also does it stereotype and forcefully include other groups. 3.) Pulled to its absolute extreme the only ones who can ever be victims of racism or any discrimination would be homosexual, female, transgender, handicapped, unemployed blacks. And again, this intersectionality based definition of "discrimination" becomes discriminatory in itself. PS. Given this Marixistoid definition of racism, where the heck is the so called "white privlege"? Sorry, my English is a little off on Fridays.
The truth is anyone of any race can be racist. Even one race can be racist against sub groups of the same race.
I agree with this. I have encountered advocates of Critical Race Theory who believe that racism is systemic and can only be directed at minorities by the majority who hold the political power to racially discriminate. All other racial discrimination by others is just prejudice, never racism. I've seen Youtube videos where such people argue that Racism = White Supremacy and you can't tell these people any different. Basically only White people can be racist. I believe in systemic racism but not that only White people can be racist. That excuses the actions of the many other hate-mongers out there who harm others with their racism. A Black person can be racist. Anyone can be racist. You can be a self-hating racist. This idea that only Whites can be racist is illogical, dangerous and inconsistent with the dictionary definition of racism. I would caution that people not be fooled though by the "anti-racist = anti-White" rhetoric because that is equally false.
if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks then its probably a duck. The almost total absence of action when whote people are the victims of racism but 'anti racists' certainly indicates that they are 'anti white' or at the very least not the least bit bothered about prejudice against white people which is a racist standpoint,
As an anti-racist/Egalitarian I can say objectively that I am not anti-White and am just as against anti-White racism as I am against any other form. It just so happens that White Supremacists are more vocally racist than other racists.
I do not know exactly how the dictionary spells it out or even if all dictionaries state the same meaning. But if we are basing racism on differences between the races and even sub-races which causes one to be prejudice against that race or sub-race, to me it is all the same. People can play the word game, but in the end it is all the same. Dislikes based on racial or sub-racial traits. I seen it when I served in Southeast Asia. Now is it considered being racist when one is against the conduct of a certain race? Could that be stereotyping instead of being racist? Then is stereotyping a form of racism and or prejudice? An example, the DOJ gave the figures on homicides that between 1980 and 2008 that blacks accounted for 52.5% of homicide offenders while making up only 12.6% of the population. Now calling blacks murderous thugs considering the above official stats, is that racist or just stereotyping? Is there a difference? Then can the term racist be used against a religion? Prejudice perhaps? There are Muslims all over the world, white, black, brown, yellow, Arab, African, Asian, European and American plus probably many, many more. Way too many questions surround the term racist. It has been used to label someone who just disagrees political with President Obama. It has been used to label someone who has a confederate flag, which in my case if that is true, I am a racist. Does one thing or a disagreement on one thing make one a racist? Has the term been so overused that it has lost it sting?
You are just as much against white racism are you? Fine please show me where any anti racist organisation has protested against any of the black porganisations that the SLPAC has designated as hate groups? SHow me where they have actively turned up and opposed the Nation of islam, the Nauwabian nation of Moors or indeed the New Black Panther party, In fact is it not the case that 'anti racists' will turn up at events and happily march alongside these racist hate groups? I am waiting for you to show me that your 'anti racists' are not total hypocrites. When have you opposed these hate groups?
For more than three decades, Asian people had been settled in East Africa. Most were Hindus from Gujarat. Many lived in distinct communities, separate from their British rulers and their African neighbours. Many were successful professional and skilled workers. These communities became increasingly threatened as African governments cast Asians as a scapegoat group. In the face of rising hostility, many Asians decided to leave for Britain: the country whose culture they carried and whose passports they held. In 1972, Idi Amin expelled the Asian community from Uganda and as Uganda was a former British colony, many of these Asians had United Kingdom passports. By the terms of the 1962 immigration laws, British passport holders living in independent commonwealth countries could move freely to Britain. This position changed in 1968 when new controls restricted entry to people with at least one UK-born grandparent. India also closed its doors to those trying to leave Kenya, causing the 'Kenya Asian crisis'. This was followed in 1971 by a more dangerous crisis in Uganda. In 1971, 50,000 Ugandan Asians were harshly expelled from the country by the military dictator, Idi Amin. The urgency of the situation prompted the British government to relax controls, allowing entry to 27,000 of the 50,000 refugees. http://www.20thcenturylondon.org.uk/east-african-asian-crisis-1968-1976
