Members of the Academy are Racists?

[Animavore]

I was recently reading an article from a black group which argued that because Caucasians and Asians had Neanderthal DNA; Africans are the only group who were 100% human and weren't subject to Darwinian evolution. This type of racial purity rhetoric is synonymous with Nazim and I can't see how it can legitimately be said to be not racist.

[laklak]

I've also heard white racists claim blacks never evolved.

[Forty Two]

Not in Newspeak.

Yes, bellyfeel. Goodthink, not crimethink.

[Forty Two]

I was recently reading an article from a black group which argued that because Caucasians and Asians had Neanderthal DNA; Africans are the only group who were 100% human and weren't subject to Darwinian evolution. This type of racial purity rhetoric is synonymous with Nazim and I can't see how it can legitimately be said to be not racist.

What if Caucasions and Asians are more human than human?

[Animavore]

I was recently reading an article from a black group which argued that because Caucasians and Asians had Neanderthal DNA; Africans are the only group who were 100% human and weren't subject to Darwinian evolution. This type of racial purity rhetoric is synonymous with Nazim and I can't see how it can legitimately be said to be not racist.

What if Caucasions and Asians are more human than human?

Well a main flaw in the argument is that Neanderthals were already 100% human, they're just a different type of human.
Evolutionary biology, like with Nazis, wasn't their strong point.

[pErvinalia]

There's a reason why it is actually pretty moronic to claim that blacks can be racist to white people. Just look at what she is claiming. That sums it up right there.

You think black people can't be racist against white people?

When you define racism simplistically, sure they can. But when you look at what the concept of racism means, the more oppressed a group is the less they can actually be bigoted towards their oppressors. Look at an extreme example to see what I mean: In a racist country 95% of the population was white and 5% black, would it really make sense to say that blacks could be racist to whites in such a society? That's basically Australia. Can Aborigines be realistically racist towards white Australians? Or what about apartheid South Africa. Would it really make sense to claim that blacks could be racist to whites in that society?

[Seth]

There's a reason why it is actually pretty moronic to claim that blacks can be racist to white people. Just look at what she is claiming. That sums it up right there.

You think black people can't be racist against white people?

When you define racism simplistically, sure they can.

There is only one definition of "racism":

racism
[rey-siz-uh m]

noun
1.
a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
2.
a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3.
hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

But when you look at what the concept of racism means, the more oppressed a group is the less they can actually be bigoted towards their oppressors.

Revisionist doublespeak nonsense.

Look at an extreme example to see what I mean: In a racist country 95% of the population was white and 5% black, would it really make sense to say that blacks could be racist to whites in such a society?

Absolutely. If a black person in such a society holds the belief that blacks are superior and whites are inferior as a function of the race of the others, that is by definition "racism."

That's basically Australia. Can Aborigines be realistically racist towards white Australians?

Absolutely they can.

Or what about apartheid South Africa. Would it really make sense to claim that blacks could be racist to whites in that society?

Why don't you ask the white folks in South Africa and Zimbabwe who have been brutally murdered by blacks for no other reason that that they are white what they think about it?

Oh, wait, you can't because they were murdered by black racists.

So were several police officers in the United States in recent months, among many other incidents of black racist behavior.

Racism is as racism does and the race of the individual committing the racist act is utterly irrelevant if the act is motivated by feelings of race superiority or racial bigotry.

That you would like to redefine the word so that whites can be discriminated against based on their race because you think they deserve it is just you making an idiotic, biased, racist argument.

[pErvinalia]

There's a reason why it is actually pretty moronic to claim that blacks can be racist to white people. Just look at what she is claiming. That sums it up right there.

You think black people can't be racist against white people?

When you define racism simplistically, sure they can.

There is only one definition of "racism":

Wrong.

[Seth]

There's a reason why it is actually pretty moronic to claim that blacks can be racist to white people. Just look at what she is claiming. That sums it up right there.

You think black people can't be racist against white people?

When you define racism simplistically, sure they can.

There is only one definition of "racism":

Wrong.

Wrong. I cited the relevant definition. Anything you make up is, well, a "made up definition."

[pErvinalia]

First link in google:

In sociology and psychology, some definitions include only consciously malignant forms of discrimination.[4][5] Other definitions also include discriminatory behaviors and beliefs based on cultural, national, ethnic, caste, or religious stereotypes.[2][6] One view holds that racism is best understood as 'prejudice plus power' because without the support of political or economic power, prejudice would not be able to manifest as a pervasive cultural, institutional or social phenomenon.[7][8][9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

[Seth]

First link in google:

In sociology and psychology, some definitions include only consciously malignant forms of discrimination.[4][5] Other definitions also include discriminatory behaviors and beliefs based on cultural, national, ethnic, caste, or religious stereotypes.[2][6] One view holds that racism is best understood as 'prejudice plus power' because without the support of political or economic power, prejudice would not be able to manifest as a pervasive cultural, institutional or social phenomenon.[7][8][9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

Wikipedia doesn't mean anything because anyone can put anything they want up there.

In any event, none of the above vitiates the fact that blacks can be racists.

[pErvinalia]

It proves that yet again you were wrong in your claim.

You do know there's links to references in wiki articles, that you can check yourself, right??

[JimC]

First link in google:

In sociology and psychology, some definitions include only consciously malignant forms of discrimination.[4][5] Other definitions also include discriminatory behaviors and beliefs based on cultural, national, ethnic, caste, or religious stereotypes.[2][6] One view holds that racism is best understood as 'prejudice plus power' because without the support of political or economic power, prejudice would not be able to manifest as a pervasive cultural, institutional or social phenomenon.[7][8][9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

Wikipedia doesn't mean anything because anyone can put anything they want up there.

In any event, none of the above vitiates the fact that blacks can be racists.

Of course, in a given context they can be.

That doesn't change the fact that the examples rEv quoted show the inherent asymmetry in racism, given a context of a group with power, and a group without. Aborigines in Australia are the subjects of racism (from, hopefully, a smaller and smaller proportion of the white population), not the initiators. Blacks in apartheid era South Africa were clearly the subject of white racism, not the reverse (anger against those oppressing you does not count as racism).

Sure, you can find examples where blacks are racist, or asians are racist, or whatever, and it would be absurd to claim that white people can never be the subject of racism, but more often than not, they aren't.

[Seth]

It proves that yet again you were wrong in your claim.

You do know there's links to references in wiki articles, that you can check yourself, right??

You do know there's links to the dictionary definition of "racism" that you can check yourself, right?

You, or Wikipedia can be as philosophical and revisionist as you like, but that doesn't change the actual definition of the word nor does it mean that black people, or any other minority, can't be racist. I know you (and the BLM crew) would LIKE to doublespeak your way to a free pass for blacks to be racists without being called racists, but that's not going to happen because racism is as racism does, and that's pretty much it.

[Seth]

In any event, none of the above vitiates the fact that blacks can be racists.

Of course, in a given context they can be.

That doesn't change the fact that the examples rEv quoted show the inherent asymmetry in racism, given a context of a group with power, and a group without.

There is no asymmetry in racism. Racism is racism is racism. It means what it means and the dictionary defines what it means, and that meaning is applied to the relevant behaviors and beliefs no matter who hold or expresses them. Nobody gets a free pass to be racist, especially not oppressed minorities. To suggest that "reverse racism" is justifiable as a form of institutionalized revenge or retribution is not only entirely irrational but socially destructive as well.

The wrongdoing of racism is to judge and treat others as if they are inferior solely by virtue of their race or ethnicity. While it may be intellectually attractive to think that oppressed minorities who have been subjected to racist treatment can get some manner of redress by treating others as they have been treated, its simply not true and it maligns and demeans those of the now-targeted race who have never believed or done anything racist in their lives by tarring them with the same brush that was used against the oppressed minority. And you should reflect on the meaning of "tarred with the same brush" in this specific context of racism against blacks in particular and go look up "tarred and feathered" for information on why doing such things is morally abhorrent and repugnant.

Then there's the whole "ancestral guilt" thing I've discussed before, which I resoundingly and absolutely reject and disclaim. "White privilege" is merely a made up attempt at claiming moral superiority by virtue of one's race being oppressed at some time in the past by, and to, people now long dead.

Aborigines in Australia are the subjects of racism (from, hopefully, a smaller and smaller proportion of the white population), not the initiators.

And Maori in NZ are the perpetrators of racism on occasion when they attack whites merely for being white. That Aborigines in Australia might not perpetrate racism (which I actually doubt is universally true) it does not mean that they are incapable of doing so by definition.

Blacks in apartheid era South Africa were clearly the subject of white racism, not the reverse (anger against those oppressing you does not count as racism).

Correct. But racist acts against those who ARE NOT oppressing you merely because of their race, or for that matter banding together with others of one's own race while perpetrating racism against others, be they members of the oppressing race or otherwise, is racism, and nothing else.

Sure, you can find examples where blacks are racist, or asians are racist, or whatever, and it would be absurd to claim that white people can never be the subject of racism, but more often than not, they aren't.

I think that depends largely on who the majority is. Asians are well known for being virulent racists when it comes to gwai-lo, for example. And then there's the incredibly violent Middle-Eastern racists who are chopping people's heads off these days.