Remember, TheDeamon, there are also different degrees of racism.
You don't have to be a full-fledge KKK member who wants to ship back all the blacks to Africa to be a racist. Just quietly believing that black are less intelligent, less moral, and inferior to you and/or everyone else would also be considered racist. As would turning a blind eye to racist actions by others[/u.
All these types of racism are not equally bad, but they are all forms of racism. You don't have to actively be trying to hurt blacks or others groups to be racist. But that doesn't mean a person is not racist.
I was thinking this needed to be addressed as I was returning to my computer. Sad to see I wasn't wrong, in your world everything can be, and is, potentially racist. Things are being conflated and confused, and it actually ignores the real problem in play. But I'll come back to that later. First to clear out the post backlog.
These are not degrees of racism, you are mixing up your terms. What you are describing include prejudice, stereotyping, and perhaps racism as well, but merely having an improper thought "is not" racism. The far left currently defines it as unequal outcomes, period full stop, which makes racism a systemic statement, not a matter of whether you believe X or Y. That is why the claim "but I do not have negative attitudes towards minorities" is considered to be a non-answer to the charge that one is racist. The sort of prejudice and stereotyping you describe can exist inside a racist system, but also not. Your lingo is 20 years out of date.
What is more ironic is that in their pursuit of "an equal outcome" they're pursuing an agenda which says minority groups
can't operate on an equal playing field unless white males kneel down and accept whatever is thrown their way. If that isn't racist on its face, and people are incapable of acknowledging that
the proposed solution is itself racist, further discourse is pointless on the topic. But we are where we are, the elephant in the room is to be ignored at all costs. Instead you need to distract yourself with all these nice shiny things and acknowledge that two wrongs are somehow going to make a right without acknowledging that a second wrong is being committed to do so.
Remember, TheDeamon, there are also different degrees of racism.
You don't have to be a full-fledge KKK member who wants to ship back all the blacks to Africa to be a racist. Just quietly believing that black are less intelligent, less moral, and inferior to you and/or everyone else would also be considered racist. As would turning a blind eye to racist actions by others.
These are not degrees of racism, you are mixing up your terms. What you are describing include prejudice, stereotyping, and perhaps racism as well
I beg to differ. Having prejudice against blacks and stereotyping them [as inferior] is racism.
So California's legislature seeking to pass ACA-5 to repeal the Equal right protection in their state constitution for the purpose of being able to award millions of dollars worth of contracts to minority and woman owned businesses on the basis of their race, gender, or sexual identity is not racist, sexist, or bigoted in any way shape or form? They decided these people are unable to compete on the basis of those things, so we need to enact special laws "to help them" do so?
Someone who hasn't been confronted with acting on their so-called principles isn't a necessarily reliable witness to their own thoughts and feelings. There is also "the soft bigotry of low expectations," which is how most mainstream racists think and behave.
I'm going to point back to the justifications given by Democrats for the ACA 5 legislation in California.
If someone believes that blacks are inferior, then when they see a black name or a black face applying for a job, they will probably come to the belief that that person would be an inferior worker, whether consciously or not, and not hire them. Similarly, a police officer who believes that blacks are more violent than whites will tend to find a black person's actions more threatening than a white person's, and may react with greater force to the black person's actions, up to and including deadly force.
https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/ucr.asp?table_in=2For 2018, offense and race of the offender arrested:
Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter: All - 11,970 White - 5,280 (44.1%) Black - 6,380 (53.3%)
Robbery: All - 88,130 White - 38,300 (43.5%) Black - 47,750 (54.2%)
Aggravated assault: All - 395,800 White - 245,050 (61.9%) Black - 133,330 (33.7%)
Burglary: All - 178,610 White - 121,570 (68.1%) Black - 52,610 (29.5%)
Simple assault: All - 1,063,540 White - 685,120 (64.4%) Black - 340,410 (32%)
Violent crimes*: All - 495,900 White - 288,620 (58.2%) Black - 187,470 (37.8%)
* The "violent crimes" category includes the offenses of murder, robbery, and aggravated assault and is presented as an alternative to the Violent Crime Index, which is not available as a result of the change to the definition of rape in 2013. In any given year prior to the change in the rape definition, these three offenses accounted for more than 95% of arrests for Violent Crime Index offenses.
Population estimates, July 1, 2019, (V2019)
White alone, percent 76.3%
Black or African American alone, percent(a) 13.4%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone, percent(a) 1.3%
Asian alone, percent(a) 5.9%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, percent(a) 0.2%
Two or More Races, percent 2.8%
Hispanic or Latino, percent(b) 18.5%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino, percent 60.1%
So the US Census estimates Blacks on July 1, 2019 accounted for somewhere between 13.4% and 16.2% of the population.
But they account for 53% of all murder arrests, 54% of all robbery arrests, nearly 34% of all aggravated assault arrests, and 32% of all simple assault arrests. I wonder why police might be more on edge when dealing with a black person if they've been looking at statistics like the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquent Prevention provided above.
It is racist after a fashion, by every definition of the word, but it is not racist for reasons that many people would like to believe, it's because that is what the data indicates. Blacks are very disproportionately likely to be linked to criminal activity and violent acts than their share of the population would otherwise indicate should be the case. Even in simple assaults which was their "best showing" in the offenses I listed, 32% of all arrests is nearly double the census estimate of between 13.4% and 16.2% (variability is due to persons of mixed race--not all of them will be mixed with blacks)
Prejudice, bigotry, and such are all part of racism, if only by being the underlying causes. That makes them no less racist than overt, conscious actions.
Except racism isn't the underlying cause, it's a symptom of something else.
Now, admittedly, we cannot completely control our thoughts. And I do believe that, at least subconsciously, everyone is racist in one way or another. But there are those who try to mitigate their own racism. There are others who deny it, ignore it, or even embrace it. And I think we can all agree that Trump does not try to mitigate his own racism. Nor acknowledge it. And while he may not have embraced it to the point of taking direct, overt action on it, I don't think anyone could say that his behavior shows anything better than denial. And even a person who denies he is a racist can be a racist.
Most of what you're wanting to call racism isn't racism at all. It is more correctly called
tribalism where "tribe" can be a very ephemeral thing.
And the big thing about tribalism is
people want to feel empowered, and they'll often seek that empowerment by means of
identifying with a tribe.
After their tribe has been defined, that search for empowerment takes the next step. They seek to denigrate and degrade those of any opposing tribe they can identify.
Racism is simply the simplest expression of tribalism because skin color and other physical characteristics are not easily changed. But it isn't the only form that tribalism can take.
Modern day hate groups in the United States don't operate along racial lines anymore. They now operate along ideological ones. And there is plenty of historical precedent for that. Just ask any Mormon, Catholic, or Jew about that just that.
Hate groups at their core only care about one thing: Power. Which brings us back to people wanting "to feel empowered." Those groups do that, they'll give a nice song and dance about how your life sucks because (insert other tribal group here) is doing horrible things and rigging the system against them. If the system hadn't been rigged against you, your life could have been sunshine, rainbows, and unicorns. So it isn't your fault your life sucks, blame that other tribe for it, and help us punish them for them misdeeds. (because people also don't like to take responsibility for their own mistakes -- Just look at Donald Trump, he's ample proof of that, its always the fault of somebody else)
Today's populist hate groups ironically call themselves anti-hate groups. Many of them show all the hallmarks, high rhetoric, lots of assertions of "it's not your fault, you're a victim of the system too." Very vague assertions about what to do, non-falsifiable claims, and calls for you to "take action" by helping them tear down the existing system so they give you sunshine, rainbows and unicorns.
Only they won't do that. They're only as inclusive as they are so long as they think they need people to support their cause. As they start feeling their power, they'll become more selective in who their favored peoples are. After all, it is all about power, and if everybody is equal, nobody has any power. So they'll start targeting their own ranks for purging.
In fact, if they follow the Soviet, Fascist, and Moaist playbook, the first ones to go will be the ones who helped organize things in the first place, they're the biggest threat in possibly countering what they want to do.
