I notice that many people seem to get wrong the definition of what racism really is. I have noticed it on this board as well as in real life. There is this ignorance of either saying or doing things that are considered racist by others or even the opposite of calling something racist which really isn’t.
Now is your opportunity to define racism to me.
This is a great question, because the definition has changed over the years.
“Racists” once were the supporters of slavery.
After slavery was abolished, “racists” were the KKK, the supporters of Jim Crow, the segregation advocates.
Since Jim Crow ended, “racists” include those who object to living next door to other races or those who object to their children marrying people of other races.
Unfortunately, today the term is used for power. Jesse Jackson accuses a corporation of “racism” and they give him millions of dollars to go away. Fuzzy Zoeller makes a mild ethic joke about his good friend Tiger Woods and loses his lucrative job. Senator Robert Byrd uses the word “nigger” on television, and nothing happens to him, because he’s a Democrat. David Horowitz argues against slavery reparations, so he gets prevented from speaking on some campuses because he’s a “racist.”
Surely it was always ‘discriminating against someone for no other reason than the colour of their skin (or the size of their nose etc)’
No, they were slavers. Or do you think that black tribal chiefs (who sold their black subjects to white slavers) were ‘racist’?
You seem very worked up about these examples. Could you give more details?
In the above quote, you imply:
the corporation wasn’t racist at all; Jesse Jackson just ‘blackmailed’ them
the joke was not offensive enough to cost a commentator his job
saying ‘nigger’ on TV should be enough to get you sacked, but the Democrats are the only crooked political party in the USA
there are no campuses that will ban speakers on any subject, other than ‘racism’
I think there are several other issues involved here.
Certainly all sorts of people hijack all sorts of words. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t strive to reach a fair and just society.
I’ve got an idea deb2woprld. Why don’t you give us your definition first? You say people seem to, in your eyes, “get wrong” the definition, and then you invite us Dopers to define it for you. I don’t get it. Why don’t you go first, and tell us what your definition of racism is, and then we can discuss it from there.
*Originally posted by glee *
"Racists" once were the supporters of slavery.
No, they were slavers. Or do you think that black tribal chiefs (who sold their black subjects to white slavers) were ‘racist’?
Good point, glee. I was thinking of abolitionists, who very actively fought against slavery. However, some of them didn’t consider Blacks equal to Caucasians, so they would be looked upon as racists by today’s standards.
You seem very worked up about these examples. Could you give more details?
Not here. I don’t want to hijack this important thread.
Surely it was always 'discriminating against someone for no other reason than the colour of their skin (or the size of their nose etc)
That sounds generally reasonable, although the the 19th century American and British abolitionists do not fit that definition.
I appreciate glee’s definition. However, after several hours, none of the other **brilliant, moral **and imaginative people who populate the SDMB have offered their definitions. Why not? Is the question too tough?
No the question is not too tough. I wasn’t going to answer because it seems quite obvious to me, but since I’ve been challenged. . .
A racist is a person who feels that a certain combination of surface traits defines the whole person.
See? Easy.
Yes, but I think you can be against slavery, yet for racism.
Recently I set myself the distasteful task of looking at the KKK website. They are certainly racist, but try to be ‘law-abiding’ otherwise.
Perhaps it’s too easy!
OK PatrickM I will give you my definition. I really didn’t want to start it off but rather hear what others have to say cause I asked to learn.
My definition:
Racism is an action that is meant to degrade someone based on their external appearance and heritage. This action is at worse as practiced by the KKK and Nazis which would have all other races either dead or kept in subservient roles. The worse racism IMO is when someone is denied a job, ability to live in the neighborhood of their choice, join an organization, etc. based on skin color.
In today’s society the definition of racism has evolved into allowing races the freedom to define the descriptive words for their race and heritage. This is where alot of people get into trouble since the correct term has changed over the years.
I actually go a step further and say you are racist if you are not treating everyone the same no matter what their appearance is. You are also racist if you allow your friends or co-workers to make racist statements/actions and don’t call them on it.
My skin crawls when I hear someone say how inter-racial marriages are wrong. A person has the right to marry whomever they want and I feel the world would be a healthier place, genetically, if we were more mixed.
What IS NOT racism: When an advertiser targets a specific racial group to buy their product. Using the skin color to give a description of someone. Using the heritage/culture to describe someone.
I’m not too sure how you know what someone’s heritage is.
No, the worst racism is when you kill or torture people. Listen, I realise your heart is in the right place, so don’t take any comments here personally. I’m a teacher. :eek:
No, the definition of racism has nothing to do with changing such names. You try to avoid discrimination, or perpetuating historical unpleasantness by using a preferred name, such as gay instead of queer. Peking has changed to Beijing, but that’s not racist either.
In an ideal world, we would indeed always call attention to such poor behaviour. (Don’t try it with a gang of drunks hurling abuse late at night - call the police.) But failing to stop racist remarks is not ‘racist’ - it might better be called ‘cowardice’.
No, don’t try to complicate things. If I advertise something by saying ‘This is so good, only Whites can use it’ that would be racist.
If I say ‘The worst mass murderer in history was White’, it would be racist.
Glee - I have to admit you’ve thrown me somewhat there…
I have to agree with most of what you posted, except for the last comment. WHy is that statement (“the worst mass murderer in history was White”) racist? Given the appropriate definition (worst in numbers actually killed etc…), I can’t see how a specific statement can be construed as racist. I’ve always thought a statement required some sort of generalisation for it to be racist.
Or is the problem with the epiphet “White”?
Hmmm. So if, for example, I see a person at the mall (for argument’s sake, let’s say she is “white”) who is shriekingly loud, uses obscene language and pokes fun at passersby, and I conclude that this person is inconsiderate, vulgar and stupid, am I then racist?
I’d thought racism basically had to do with perceiving oneself as superior based on one’s race, and/or denying rights/opportunities to others based on their race.
vorfod,
I hope I can justify it - I was in a hurry by that point!
I meant that mentioning skin colour, when it had no relevance (except prejudice), was racist.
There have been some appalling examples of genocide in the Soviet Union, Cambodia and Rwanda. I don’t think it matters what colour the skin of these murderers was.
Of course the Rwandan tragedy involved discrimination by tribe, but you could give examples of violence through different religious beliefs to show that the violence is ‘justified’ by all sorts of spurious reasons.
Hi, Biggirl - I like your posts!
I think you meant to say surface physical characteristics, since Jackmannii is quite right in his example.
I’m not convinced that in Jackmanii’s example, those are really “surface traits”. Nor am I convinced that you are judging the “whole person”. You merely seem to be concluding that the person is inconsiderate, vulgar and stupid based on the fact that they are behaving in an inconsiderate, vulgar and stupid manner. This doesn’t violate Biggirl’s definition at all.
pan
A definition of race is not available in any empirically valid form. However, if we allow race to be construed as a set of cultural and genetic inheritances, then we can begin a definition that is useful.
I find that the two following definitions are useful:
‘Racialism’ is a set of stereotypical assumptions by an individual or group, about a person or group of persons, based on their apparent race alone, not on their individual attributes as a person or a group.
‘Racism’ is the use of racialism from a position of power within a social structure.
This split definition allows people to admit that they do discriminate perceptually and conceptually on the grounds of apparent race (which almost everybody does) without having to force people to admit that they harm people by these views. This is very important in race awareness training.
Kabbes is right. Jackmanni’s example is of an individual’s actions, not surface features.
My Definition:
To me, racism runs along the lines of a first impression. If you see someone whose exterior is different from yours: different hair color or texture, different eye shape, different skin color, different shaped facial features, (you get the idea) and you treat that individual differently based solely on those external differences in appearance, that difference in treatment is racist behavior. Racism doesn’t care about what you do or say, only that you Appear Different, and are Therefore Inferior.
A Corollary Thought:
Of course, people can and do think differently about different groups of people, but as long as they keep it to themselves no one can call them on it (and they don’t spread their racism to impressionable people like their children). Only as an adult did I discover that my father is a racist, because he kept his opinions to himself and allowed me to form my own.
For me there are two types of racism: overt and covert.
Overt racism is open discrimination in an socio-economic and political context against people who self-identify with a certain culture that the discriminator views is inferior to his/her own. Classic examples include the enslavement of peoples of African descent; the near genocide of the American Indian; Jim Crow segregation laws; the amendment to the US Constitution that otherwise states that “all men are created equal” claiming that black people are “3/5 of a human being”; the lynching and raping of black people by members of the KKK and other people who may not have been affiliated with the KKK; the historical denial of legal redress in a court of law for black people (for a long time black people could not serve as jurors nor could they effectively have prosecuted those people who stole property from, raped, or murdered blacks). I could go on.
Covert racism is much more difficult to define because like sexual harassment it boils down to one person’s word against another. It deals with body language, voice intonation, and just generally a manner of interacting with minorities in a social, economic, or political context that minorities perceive to be offensive. The discriminator may at times be unaware that his/her actions are offensive to minorities. Covert racism can be as simple as the disrespectful way someone addresses you. For example in a work setting, if a supervisor addresses employees as “Ms. Smith” or “Mr. Williams,” but refers to a minority employee as “Bob,” rather than “Mr. Green,” then that’s racist. Or if co-workers take it upon themselves to “test” the newly hired minority, asking them to explain basic or complex aspects of the job they were hired to do to see if they really know what they are doing or were they just hired to fill a quota, when they would not think to ask these questions of a white person who was newly hired. I could go on.
I’m a little confused. By Biggirl’s definition “blondes are dumb” is racist? Considering people with sloped foreheads to be mentally diminished is racist?
I just don’t see that as racist, judgmental, unfair, and ignorant definitely, but not racist.
Hibbins - to the extent that genetically it makes as much sense to refer to blondes as a “race” as any other group of people identifiable only by exterior characteristics, that comment could indeed be thought of as “racist”.
pan
Celestina
Isn’t it more relevant that the discriminator identifies them with that culture?
**
Are you basing this assumption on her surface traits or on her actions?
If you think she’s inconsiderate, vulgar and stupid because she is white then you are a racist.