Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ziq wrote

Does it exist anywhere? I can't think of any examples.

8

An_Old_Big_Tree OP wrote

I can't either; I think the writers were just being cautious.

Whiteness is global, same as capital.

8

JayGrym wrote

I agree mostly with the article. It did, however, feel like their definition of racism is a conglomerate of systemic racism and prejudice rather than a generalized definition. Once I realized what they defined as racism I had to agree. Do yourselves a favor and don't read the comments on that page, racists didn't like the article and guess what they resorted to! That's right! Hate speech! Big surprise.

3

An_Old_Big_Tree OP wrote

What would a generalised definition of racism be?

4

JayGrym wrote

Treating people differently because of their race would be a generalized definition. A more classic definition would be similar to patriotism (I dislike that definition too lol). Holding one's own race as superior to others (usually in the context of white supremacy), and other races as inferior.

From my perspective, us white people are genetically inferior to the groups of indigenous Hunter/gatherers but that's likely another conversation by itself.

4

An_Old_Big_Tree OP wrote

In a racist world, we should expect definitions like 'treating people differently because of their race' because it reduces racism to interactions between individuals and does not address the ways that racism most powerfully functions; as a power structure that expresses itself in many small ways continuously, including in interactions between individuals.

Which is to say, the generalised definition itself is racist because it obscures what is really bad about racism, and the reason it is the generalised definition is just because the world is racist, and not because that's what racism is.

5

JayGrym wrote

That actually makes more sense than the actual definitions. I've always thought about racism as either systemic or individual (likely because of definitions I'm familiar with). Is it safe to assume they should be considered the same?

5

An_Old_Big_Tree OP wrote

I'm not sure what you're asking me. I usually just say that racism is 'structural' to mean that it's built into society - this understands things in terms of systems and how they manifest at individual and other levels. e.g. In terms of laws, in terms of how far away people live from where they work, in terms of how likely they are to get loans, in terms of how seriously doctors take their complaints of pain, in terms of how likely they are to be apprehended by police, how likely artificial intelligence is to discriminate against them; endless things that aren't abstract systems or mere interactions between individuals.

6

JayGrym wrote

You've answered my question perfectly, thanks!

3

rot wrote

I thought about it and anything i could think of was retribution for the actions of white colonizers or racism against groups now considered white

3

fmj77 wrote

Disagree with the article. I have met quite a few blacks over the years who believed they were superior to whites BECAUSE of their skin color. Basically, lack of skin pigmentation is a genetic defect that makes whites inferior.

−6

[deleted] wrote

6

fmj77 wrote

I did read the article and I still disagree. Calling someone inferior because of their skin color is the epitome of racism and I do know some blacks that feel that way about whites. What about if the situation involved a black employer refusing to hire whites based on race? It does indeed happen, though I'm sure not as often.

0