Hello.
In the article:
Cecil totally forgot that brainwashing of people is quite possible if you start from young age. Like they remind you today: No-one is born a racist.
To become racist one needs carefull brainwashing starting from as early age as possible and the result is guaranteed.
That isn’t “brainwashing”, that is “a child being exposed to ideas you don’t agree with.”
What is the difference between this and indoctrination?
The same argument can be made against religions.
I think we probably now have a better idea of how to go about deliberately implating false memories than we did in 2005. This might not take us an closer to the Manchurian candidate, but it would take us closer to the mindless zombies:
The mind is designed to design reality from sensory input. So yes it seems it will adapt to the situation one is in and set it to ‘normal’.
Not “design”-interpret.
I don’t buy this idea that “People can’t be born racist” any more than the notion that people can’t be born as serial killers, or born with a mean streak, or born psychopathic, etc.
Why is it that society insists that gay people are born gay, for instance, and that sexual orientation isn’t a matter of choice, but brain wiring from and before birth, yet somehow if someone is racist they can’t possibly have been born with that sort of brain? (Not that I’m saying that being gay = being racist or a born bully or serial killer, but you get my point.) It’s like these folks want to pick and choose which traits people are born with and which people aren’t.
For one thing ‘race’ is not a biologically meaningful term. I suppose you mean that people might be born as xenophobic, bigoted, or otherwise intolerant of differences in people, and I think that can certainly be true.
This bugged me for a long time when I joined this board, (and continues to a certain extent). The terms ‘race’ and racist’ as used here and on other American sources, don’t have anything to do with biology at all, (and are only loosely connected to colour.)
So it comes as a surprise to see someone sugesting a link between ‘racist’ and ‘biologically’
FWIW, I don’t see that the term ~phobic is an improvement. The suggestion that dislike is indicitive of fear is mostly a meaningless insult, even though it was at one time associated with a discredited understanding of the mind.
It would be nice if we could all agree on terms. However, the folks who are “racist” tend to believe that there are distinct racial groups that are biologically distinct. However, you are correct that we often use “racist” to apply to bigotry against groups that are defined by characteristics other than biology, or use groups that have a label that is not strictly about race but can function as a shorthand for biological groups, e.g. Mexicans.
The difference, por favor? kanicbird’s “The mind is designed to design reality from sensory input,” is accurate, as design is also an interpretation of inputs. You’re not an engineer, I see. 
Like it or not, no matter how phoney “race” is, in this place and time it’s a political reality.