This will get ugly: can a non white person be racist?!

[w0nderer]

can a person that is not white be racist?
does 'you are white, therefore a racist' mean that the person uttering it is a racist?

i tend to judge people based on personality or actions, but during a discussion this came up

[Travis_0004]

1. Anybody can be racist.

[Waldorf]

9. +1

[840high]

69. Yes. +1

[Vincardog]

85. Well Duh hu ++1

[greytdemocrat]

96. Correct, +1

[Lizzie Poppet]

2. Presently, yes.

There's a really big effort in some quarters to shift the lexicon a bit: they prefer the more academic definition of "racism" - which is basically "institutional racism" - which renders it inapplicable to whites (in this county and a good few others).

While I certainly appreciate the distinction, unless the lexicographical winds change, I'll be retaining the current definition of "racism, "which can apply to anyone. I'll use the term "institutional racism" when I mean, well...institutional racism.

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. If you benefit from a racist system, are you a racist, even if you

Did not ask for the benefit?

[Shankapotomus]

25. Don't you mean "privileged"?

You can be privileged but not racist.

[Agnosticsherbet]

30. That is something that bothers me.

I think that we are. That us why we have to help change it.

And as to the origins question, racism is the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

Anyone who believes that fits the definition.

[vaberella]

47. Exactly...in the USA the privilege is tipped against minorities and for Whites.

Therefore in the USA non-Whites are not racist. But responding to the ingrained racism they face on a daily basis.

[Agnosticsherbet]

53. We are all immersed in s racist system.

So I do not disagree with you.

The only solution is to fix tbe system.

[AgingAmerican]

75. That is the Sociological definition

Sociology does not deal with individuals however, so that term does not apply to interpersonal/individual racism.

[ileus]

4. We've went over this before....no only white folks can be racist.

[AgingAmerican]

76. Anyone can be A racist

Saying 'only people of a certain skin color can be racists' is racist, IMHO.

[darkangel218]

86. +1

[brush]

130. POCs can be biased but in this country, built from the beginning on white supremacy, . . .

Last edited Mon Nov 30, 2015, 02:25 AM - Edit history (2)

(founding fathers with slaves) racism is in the hands of those who have systemically deployed it over the centuries and maintain it's institutions and continuance. It's about systemic power.

That of course is not all whites but TPTB who maintain it's continuance which in turn maintains their positions of power.

All whites however do benefit from the systemic racism — white privilege, it's all connected.

But that's a whole other thread's worth of discussion.

[Facility Inspector]

95. I take it you've never been to prison

[KamaAina]

5. I dunno. Ask Louis Farrakhan.

I think you'll get your answer.

[840high]

70. ....x10

[ManiacJoe]

6. Of course, a non-white person can be racist. Anyone can.

Is this really the question you wanted to ask?

[Marrah_G]

7. Sure a non white can be racist.

But in the US white people do not suffer vast institutionalized racism and societal oppression. Racism against white people is not a problem in the US. There is a huge difference.

[romanic]

8. Yes they can.

Not in an systematic sense to where they can racially discriminate via law enforcement or the justice system, but yes anybody: black, Asian, Latino, etc, can be racist and hold racist beliefs just like whites.

[Hoyt]

10. I think they can, except they might have a legitmate reason for fearing

a certain race. I find right wingers like to use the stupid argument that anyone who says anything negative about white wingers are bigoted against yahoos. Cracks me up.

[Shandris]

11. Of course.

No one has been able to show me what a white, black, brown, red, yellow, pink, magenta, or burnt sienna person looks like so far, or how to tell when one crosses from one to another. So since all we have are shaded people, it's the height of ignorance to suggest only a certain shade can be 'racist' and, furthermore, I would like to know exactly what a 'race' is. I was laboring under the illusion that they were a social construct...you know, like colors.

[w0nderer]

12. best entry so far

thanks


like i said in orig entry...by personality and actions!

[TlalocW]

13. A basic characterstic of racism

Is when you say a certain ethnic group can't do something.

So if someone says their ethnic group can't be ethnic, or you say a different ethnic group can't be racist, that falls underneath that characteristic, and that pronouncement is, therefore, racist. It doesn't matter if it's positive.

Not meaning to be flippant. Just logical if you accept the original proposition at the top.

TlalocW

[w0nderer]

14. i may be misunderstanding you

but if you mean

by stating 'no' non-whites can't be racist == yes, they can

then yes i get it

*rolls eyes at how i had to explain it*

[TlalocW]

22. Blacks can't handle college

Hispanics can't speak English properly.
White Men Can't Jump

All boils down to:
<this ethnic group> can't <do this activity> or <be this characteristic>.

My premise is that anything that follows this pattern is racist - even ironically when the characteristic is being racist

TlalocW

[pnwmom]

15. When that person is part of the power structure. For example,

in Japan there are people who are as racist toward black people as any white American.

[w0nderer]

16. if i'm not mistaken in japan there are people racist against white people too?

but *nods*

[pnwmom]

18. Yes, against anyone who isn't "pure" Japanese.

http://www.newsweek.com/why-does-no-one-care-japanese-are-openly-racist-364129

The ruling was introduced in a 1984 amendment to define Japan as a jus sanguinis country, one that bases citizenship on blood, not birthplace. This makes it all the more difficult for hafus to strike a balance when embracing their mixed heritage with a Japanese upbringing.

Japan’s racial problems extend beyond mixed-race citizens to include discrimination against foreigners as a whole. Earlier this year, members of the Japanese bands Momoiro Clover Z and Rats & Star posed in blackface for a promotional photo for a performance on Fuji TV. The photo went viral after the hashtag “ #StopBlackfaceJapan” was popularized on Twitter, and a Change.org petition pressured the station to stop the performance.

The petition seems to have worked, but the incident is a reflection of Japan’s blindness to its own racism. It’s worth noting that Japan has also had high-profile cases of whiteface, which again shows the distance between Japanese citizens and those seen as foreign.

Japan’s treatment of non-black minorities reflects additional deeply ingrained racist tendencies. In 2013, a group of nationalists led protests expressing their hatred of Koreans and threatened to flatten Tokyo’s Koreatown and replace it with a gas chamber. “Go home and die,” some of the demonstrators yelled. Authorities were aware of the threats, but because Japan does not prohibit hate speech, the discriminatory actions continued unabated.

[AgingAmerican]

73. That is institutional racism

Not individual racism.

[Autumn]

17. Yes a non white person can be racist.

[Yorktown]

19. WP study: most racist countries today: (1-2) India, Jordan (3-5) Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran

Only large scale study I know on the subject

THE LEAST RACIALLY TOLERANT COUNTRIES
40% + (of individuals surveyed would not want a person of another race as a neighbour)
India, Jordan
30 - 39.9%
Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Vietnam, Indonesia, South Korea

THE MOST TOLERANT COUNTRIES
0 to 4.9%
United States, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Guatemala, Britain, Sweden, Norway, Latvia, Australia, New Zealand

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325502/Map-shows-worlds-racist-countries-answers-surprise-you.html#ixzz3sqLGe0Ov

[davidpdx]

33. Thank you for posting this

I actually can attest to how it is in South Korea since I have lived here for 12 years. I've had some great experiences with people I didn't even know talking to me and some looks like I was the plague. People from East Asia are probably treated the worst by Koreans. Koreans see them as inferior to themselves. AA's are for the most part treated less than Caucasians.

It is worth pointing out that the data came from the World Values Survey. Another good source to read about culture is Cultures and Organizations 3rd Ed. by Hofstede, Hofeste, and Minkov.

Here is the link to the actual story in the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/15/a-fascinating-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-racially-tolerant-countries/

[Yorktown]

36. What are AA's?

As for the Koreans, they are the mirror image of the Japanese:

those who feel 'superior' usually are those feeling the most insecure vs foreigners

(less exposure, less interaction, not sure why the West managed success despite faults)

[Travis_0004]

38. I assume they meant African Americans????

Although Im not sure that makes sense, since a majority may not be americans. Maybe they just meant black?

[Yorktown]

41. I doubt it in context

Asians really are very racist vs blacks.

Edit: Asians in Asia

[jberryhill]

129. A majority would likely be Americans

...due to our large military presence there.

[davidpdx]

43. I should have written that out, African Americans

Yes, Koreans and Japanese are very similar when it comes to bloodline though that is changing. In Korea there are 2 million foreigners, some of us are permanent residents others are temporary workers who will leave. The projection for the number of foreigners here in 2050 is 4 million.

The number of international marriages has been going up steadily for years. That means there will be a large increase in the number of children who are of mixed race. Needless to say some here aren't crazy about that. At the same time, many of the international couples are heading home once their child is of the age where they need to go to schools because of a variety of factors. A former co-worker and friend who is from New Zealand went back home to raise her kids. The immigration out of Korea by Koreans and their families may drive down the already low population here.

[Yorktown]

51. True, Japanese/Western couples tend not to stay in Japan.

But if you said AA's are viewed as only slightly below the caucasian westerners, I disagree.
For some reason, the racial prejudice vs blacks is the strongest.

Being American and educated would only reduce that prejudice vs a black person, but only to some extent.

Guess Who's Coming to Dinner would still be relevant with Asian actors (somewhat less in Malaysia/Indonesia as fairer skinned Asians already look down on them)

[davidpdx]

54. I think the only reason I say they are treated slightly worse than Caucasians

is because of how much worse people from East Asia are treated (Filipino, Thai, Vietnamese, etc.). I have heard of and seen pictures of signs posted in businesses here in Korea that say "No Africans allowed" or "No blacks allowed." There is no doubt in my mind that it happens.

As for the guess who's coming to dinner, it really depends on the family. My in-laws were supportive of my wife's decision. One of my co-workers is AA and he is married to a Korean as well. I asked him what his in-law's reaction was and he says he was welcomed into the family. I have heard of really bad stories about Korean parents basically disowning their children because of the choice they made to marry a foreigner. My wife's second cousin married an American guy a few years ago and her father took awhile to come around. My wife's family now has two Americans which I think is quite progressive for Korea.

[Yorktown]

56. Are you an African American?

I know loads of western/Asian couples, and it's usually considered OK by the families in Asia (J, Ch, Sin, HK), but I guess African-American would be harder.

The anti-black prejudice I hear from Asians is really strong.
(reciprocally, in Africa, the Chinese and Japanese are looked up to as martial arts magicians)

[davidpdx]

59. No I'm not

But I've been in Korea long enough to see the things that have happened and talked to many people. I have heard at least one Korean say the "n" word, which is despicable. The AA I know are well-educated, so they could be an exception to the rule.

[SusanCalvin]

40. That is interesting - thank you. nt

[jack_krass]

64. Very interesting thanks for posting this (nt)

[AgingAmerican]

74. I'm amazed the Dominican Republican isn't on that list

Most racist place I have ever been. The government routinely rounds up people who 'look Haitian' and deport them.

They have 'bateys' which are slave labor camps in which people of Haitian descent languish for generations working the corporate sugar cane plantations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batey_(sugar_workers%27_town).

[Yorktown]

84. The Sudanese would be in good racist standing too

Their contempt for the South Sudanese is quite strong.

[loyalsister]

20. Racism cannot be imposed by individuals

It took a power structure and distinct patterns of inequities to create the racism that governs the daily lives of people of color in this country. It took a lot of people to develop it, takes a lot of people to maintain it and it is directed towards all of the non-white minorities in this country. The only way the people who are reflected in the power stucture even notice is if they stop and think about their advantages.

For the sake of clarity, I use bias and bigotry to describe animosity based on race. That can go in any direction.
I defer to the academics when it comes to the word racism, because I am certain that they know more about it than I do. In fact, the people who have lived it knew more about it before they reached adolescence than I will ever be able to comprehend.

[ram2008]

32. I think you're describing systemic racism, not regular racism n/t

[loyalsister]

34. "regular racism"?

Is that a term personally defined by you or would I find it published somewhere?
I am going by what I have been learning from people who actually have experienced both bigortry and racism.

[ram2008]

35. Regular racism is the standard most people think about

It's the non-convoluted, text-book version you'll find published in elementary-college textbooks around the country.

The belief that one race is superior to another or as defined by Google "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."

Any race can do the above.

[loyalsister]

42. Pretending that there has been no scholarly advancement doesn't erase it

Ignoring well established academic language that has been agreed upon through several fields of scholarship, in favor of a personal definition that might be more compatible with one's personal biases may be satisfying, but it doesn't carry dialogue very far.

[ram2008]

46. It's not a personal definition, it is the definition

As defined by the English language. There are multiple studies which agree on this standard, then there are theories about what it entails, what preserves it etc.

Kind of like the word Evolution means a change over time in a species, that is a fact-- Natural Selection is the theory which explains how it happens.

Full Definition of RACISM

1
: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2
: racial prejudice or discrimination

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

If you ask 99% of people on the street what Racism means to them, that is the definition they will give to you. The one that is in the dictionary and the one they've been taught to know is wrong since kindergarten-- our cultural standard. If you ask them about structural racism, then thats where academia comes in.

[loyalsister]

55. If you asked people on the street

you would probably hear a few dozen definitions. That is because it has been polluted in a way that allows people to impose their own meaning. A lot of people you ask might think that reverse racism (language people still use, btw) is something that they are victims of - as if there is an appropriate direction for it.

Nowhere have I seen the word "bigotry" or "personal bias" used to describe systemically perpetrated injustices en masse. Racism as shorthand for institutional racism has been used that way for a very long time. The only way we can work on these things effectively is with refined language. My strategy is to listen to people who know first hand via scholarship and experience.

[ram2008]

57. If we refuse to use language that is the societal standard, then communication breakdowns

Again, the English language standard for racism and the textbook definition is as follows:

: poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race

: the belief that some races of people are better than others

This is what people are talking about when they're talking about Racism. You can call an apple a tomato, but people aren't going to know what you're talking about and if you keep calling it a tomato they'll just ignore you. A bunch of academics who've had their heads stuck in textbooks for years can try and change the meaning of the word, but it doesn't change unless society does.

Now the question remains are POC capable of these two things, which is the current English standard for racism:

--poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race

--the belief that some races of people are better than others

The answer is yes, and it happens almost as much as it does in the white community. Thus, PoC can be racist.

If you want to describe systematically perpetrated injustices en masse, then just tack on a systemic in front of the word racism for clarity.

As far as systemic injustices in mass go, it is certainly possible for a black or a latino neighborhood to "oppress" a white person in a group setting or neighborhood, but society as a whole systemically benefits whites (biggest group with most power) more at the moment so oppression happens disproportionately to people who aren't that group (minorities).

[GummyBearz]

71. You just made a whole lot of good sense

Possibly too much sense. Someone may need a jury to decide whether or not your over load of good sense should be read or not

[loyalsister]

109. Have you ever read laws or bills before they are passed?

The first section defines the language as it will be used in the text that follows. Because meaningful dialogue requires defined and agreed upon language. If someone claims to want to be a part of the solution and serious discussion of race, but refuses to use the language as defined there is no reason to take them seriously. IMO, caring means listening to the voices of the experts.

With racism in the US, the superiority of a particular race is understood as a given by all races because it is embedded in culture. It does not require hate to be a part of that system. In case it is not clear yet, it's a way of acknowledging the experience of racism without calling all white people out as hateful.

Bigotry is something that can potentially be avoided when someone knows what to expect in particular circumstances and\or from specific people. If not avoided, a person can leave a situation. As it stands now, racism is constant, unavoidable, and does not require malicious bad actors. As you pointed out a belief that one race is superior is part of racism. White racial superiority is the culturally accepted norm in the US, and people of all races are aware of that whether they maliciously advance an explicit belief in their own superiority or not.

[ram2008]

110. The agreed upon language is the one in the dictionary

Experts in academia have debates on the theories surrounding race and racism, but the definition of racism is clear. Deferring to the "voice of experts" when the experts all have different opinions and theories doesn't make much sense. Thus we define words by what concepts our society as a whole uses them to describe. Yes, language evolves, but the definition of racism has not. Saying only white people can be racist pretty much shuts down any meaningful dialogue before it starts as it automatically paints every white person as guilty.

By your logic the word "Racist" cannot exist at all because you are describing racism as a system.

But anyway, we can call it whatever word you like but the concept remains, do you believe PoC are capable of the following?

->1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

->2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

If your answer is yes, then you agree with what most people would think of as racism.

[loyalsister]

111. Trying to twist slang usage into meaningful language

only pollutes the dialogue. The USA english dictionary reflects language usage by the least sophisticated USAers.
People are free to enjoy that company and conversation, but I don't take their efforts to have a real dialogue seriously.

[ram2008]

112. You can't be serious

You don't want to have dialogue with people who go by the English standard because that standard is supposedly slang-- by your own definition? Ok you might as well be speaking a different language then, because it's not the one that is being understood. Good luck ever getting dialogue that way... it won't happen.

I'll ask again, do you think PoC are capable of the following actions:

1) poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race

2) the belief that some races of people are better than others

Also what would make someone racist, by your own concept?

If you are interested in having actual dialogue instead of talking about how sophisticated your understanding of race theory is, then it shouldn't be hard to answer that question.

[loyalsister]

113. As I said before I don't view individuals as racist

I'm talking about defining language for a serious dialogue. You clearly do not want to participate in one.

[ram2008]

114. This thread is about individuals

You're trying to have a discussion about a different topic then. We are talking about two different subject I suppose.

[loyalsister]

116. The question was can a nonwhite person be racist

A step towards having that discussion is defining the language. If you don't want to use academic language, don't. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.

[ram2008]

117. You just said individuals cannot be racist

By your own terms...which means that both white and non-white people are incapable of being racist when acting as individuals.

[SpartanDem]

119. You might not the vast majority people do

the systemic only definition is really just that limited to progressive academic/activist circles. Most people would both call someone like Donald Trump and Jim Crow laws racist. More times than I can count I see academic/activist say/write that poc can't be racist and most people react as if was the dumbest statement in the world while they have explain what they really meant. There something to said about not forcing a square peg in a round hole.

[loyalsister]

124. Just like the vast majority of white people

reject the fact that they are a part of racism by embracing, enabling, or tolerating the policies that built it.

[AgingAmerican]

77. Imposed, no. Practiced, yes.

[Warren Stupidity]

100. I was trying to figure out how to explain this clearly and gave up.

Instead I just started reading down thread and got to your post. Thanks.

[Gormy Cuss]

107. Holwever, in the vernacular 'racist' to describe a person is a synonym of 'bigot'

The flame bait "Can POCs be racist?" threads always have an element of trying to dismiss the power-based, systemic or institutional racism definition by pointing out that individual bigots can also be called racists, as if the latter excuses the former.

[lumberjack_jeff]

143. The academics describe racism in three flavors 1) institutional 2) personally-mediated 3) internal

Conservatives deny the existence of the first, DU denies the existence of the latter two.

But they're all real, and the latter two kinds of racism can be manifested by people of any color, in any context.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

21. Depends on how you're using the term, and your 'academic DNA'.

I'm too tired right now to go into all the details, but there are different academic trains of thought on the matter. In some, the answer is simply 'No'. In others, it's 'Not in the US, but in a majority non-white country in which power is held pretty much exclusively by non-whites, yes.'

So there's a distinction made by some academics dealing with the rather unique circumstances of US history, while others define it more generically in terms of power and control of a society.

Instead of using the term 'racist', why not simply go with 'racial bigot'? Anyone can be bigoted against people they perceive as being of other races, and that bigotry does not require or speak to a given place in in the hierarchy of power and privilege.

[uppityperson]

23. It depends on how you use the term. For me, of course, anyone can be a racist

Institutionalized racism is another issue. But if you are talking about a person, yes, they can be racist, no matter their skin tone or heritage.

does 'you are white, therefore a racist' mean that the person uttering it is a racist?
It means they are bigoted, close minded. If they are trying to claim you are one way because of your skin color, yes, that is being racist.

[AZ Progressive]

24. Of course. But it's more damaging and serious from the dominant race

Because the dominant race has unequal power over the other racial groups.

[Rex]

26. Can a race of people discriminate against a different race of people?

Or do individuals discriminate against individuals?

[951-Riverside]

27. Racist against Whites? No.

Being racist against whites would be like walking up to a 700 lb grizzly bear in the wild of Alaska and punching it in nose. Sure doing so will hurt it but it will always have the upper hand and will screw you over so badly or kill you with overwhelming force.

[AgingAmerican]

78. Sure you can

Individually, whites are not grizzly bears. If you hate them individually because of their skin color, you are a racist.

[Bok_Tukalo]

28. The concept of race is anachronistic.

You cannot be racist because there is no such thing as race.

Although, you can be an asshole regardless of your melanin content.

[Warpy]

29. Bigoted, yes. Racist, no, not in the US at present

To be a racist, one must have the means to oppress the other group, deny them full rights of citizens including access to employment and fair pay.

"Bigot" is an equal opportunity character flaw.

[ram2008]

31. It's absolutely possible for non-white people to be racist

A group of Latino's, blacks, etc in a large group or neighborhood could oppress a white individual, 'deny them full rights of citizens'(which is rather vague), and deny them employment and fair pay.

Likewise they can be racist by claiming their race is superior and the other one is inferior, not worthy, etc.

There are racists of every color.

[Warpy]

49. Racism, like all other "isms," is institutional in nature.

Bigotry is what exists between and among individuals.

There is a difference between "racism" and "bigotry" and I just told you what it is.

[ram2008]

50. When people describe racism, they are thinking of the dictionary definition.

As they do with most words in the English language.

Systemic racism describes the institutional version of it.

[kwassa]

63. Some people are, not all.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

88. Dictionaries tend to 'dumb it down'.

Provide 'lowest common denominator' definitions for a lot of more technical words. I'm not surprised they went the 'easy route' on that definition, as they do with so many words that are considered 'jargon' in one academic field or another.

[ram2008]

98. Dumbing down would only make sense if racism started out as a different concept

However it didn't. The definition fits the current usage and the general concept that the word has been used to expressed for decades.

Just because academia expands on an idea doesn't mean the idea or concept doesn't mean the original one doesn't exist. You can't just change the meaning of a word because you have a PhD in sociology, that's not how it works.

If certain parts of academia want to change the meaning of the word racist, then that would require society as a whole to change the underlying concept they are trying to express when using it. As of now, that is not the case, and probably never will be. Because in English language we're trying to convey thoughts effectively and efficiently, bundling racism up with a bunch of academic studies on inequality etc is just a tactic used by some to shut down ideas they don't want to hear or shield themselves from criticism. Just as the idea of Orwellian idea of "safe spaces" is taking hold.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

105. Except the current usage is NOT how the term originated.

It was first used by a fellow named Pratt in 1902, in a very different light.

Segregating any class or race of people apart from the rest of the people kills the progress of the segregated people or makes their growth very slow. Association of races and classes is necessary to destroy racism and classism.

Which sounds sort of PC, except that this was the same guy who said 'The only good Indian is a dead Indian', and the quote above was his excuse for attempting to destroy Native American cultures by forcing Native children into boarding schools where they weren't allowed to use their own languages, and were trained up instead in white culture. For him 'racism' was essentially the notion of actually having separate 'races', and every race would ideally be subsumed into the white European race.

So yeah, 'racism' started out as a far different concept as it's used today, whether in layman's terms or in academia.

(ETA: and, btw, it took on the 'academic' meaning before it ever was morphed into a more generic term by laymen, to describe the views of Hitler and Stalin about superiority of races. It defined a structural outlook and power structure, not individual bigotry. The modern usage is actually a really overly broad redefinition of the existing academic definition, not the other way round.)

[Marr]

115. Nihilism, pessimism, optimism... the suffix 'ism' doesn't denote an institutional status.

It's simply the expression of a trait. Racism can absolutely be an individual characteristic.

[vaberella]

58. And all of those Blacks and Latinos are living in largely poor neighborhoods.

Also they are facing an enormous amount of obstacles...this White has never nor can ever comprehend. Most of the actions of these people are responses. Even I have had to be taken aback by the level of White privilege----let me even rephrase White anglo-saxon heterosexual racism. In addition, if that White individual is walking the street in that neighborhood...the Blacks and Latinos are looked as a criminal and he's given a pass if he even runs the whole operation. So systemic racism dominates any minute social prejudices that are NOT actually common place; like the scenario you mentioned.

[ram2008]

61. Just because it happens disproportionately to minorities, doesn't mean minorities can't be partof it

I agree there are many privileged whites, but there are also many whites who do struggle and it isn't fair to marginalize them all.

That being said, we do know that if you are born a white heterosexual life is certainly easier for you than if you were a lets say a lesbian, african american woman.

BUT, there is also an enormous class factor that goes into privilege.

I grew up as a middle class Hispanic and I have one side of my family who is affluent and one who is not, so I feel like I see it from all sides. And while I did endure some racism every now and then (mostly immature kids, or drunk assholes nowadays) as a whole I don't feel like I'm oppressed. I got into a great school, graduated with great grades, and found a fulfilling career. Not once did I feel society collectively oppressed me on the way. I've never been pulled over, and I've interacted with police once or twice, and both times were cordial. I've never been kicked out of a store, never been told I can't be somewhere for who I am... If I grew up in a poor neighborhood the outcome could be different?

Now what does that make me? Am I privileged? I don't know. I think I'm more privileged than lets say a white-rural dude who grew up in a trailer park and less privileged than a White dude from Boston whose parents graduated from Harvard. The point is there are different degrees. I don't think it's fair to say you're either privileged or oppressed solely based on skin color.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

89. Privilege is not a one horse town. There's intersectionality of privilege across any existing

line. Race, gender, religion, sexual identity, wealth/class, and on and on.

In the prevalent culture in the US, men are more privileged than women. People who look 'white' more privileged than those who look 'darker'. Heterosexuals more privileged than homosexuals. People who are wealthy more privileged than the poor.

Privilege comes down to where you placed in the genetic lottery, whose kid you were born, how many of the 'privilege' checkboxes you hit simply by being born. So sure, there are probably some 'white-rural dudes' you have more total intersectional privilege than, in large part because you're 'close enough' that you're not getting hit with the full treatment often meted out to darker folks.

I've been followed in a few stores myself - not because I'm black, but because I'm rather scruffy looking outside of workplace settings. I dress for comfort, not for looks. Heck, I've seen some homeless folks with fewer holes in their clothes, especially on days I've been working in the garden. But if I ever go mad dog killer, I can guess that the cops will try to take me alive, even after I've shot a few of them, rather than just gun me down, or set fire to the building I'm in so they can shoot me if I try to escape the flames.

Privilege isn't just what's happened to you, but what doesn't happen to you, and what might or might not happen to you in the future.

[Travis_0004]

39. By that standard. . . .

An unemployed white person has no power and can not be racist, yet a black CEO has tremendous power and the ability to be racist.

[Warpy]

48. Only in the CEO's office or home

Otherwise, that unemployed poor white still has white privilege and that's oppression.

The problem with privilege is that most people don't notice it unless they don't have it.

[randys1]

104. Like this guy says

Appears several people here need to watch this and THINK about it, not you of course..

[cabot]

106. Like this?

A St. Louis Circuit Court jury has awarded a former Harris-Stowe State University instructor $4.85 million after finding that the historically black university discriminated against the instructor because she is white.

The suit, filed in 2012, zeroes in on one particular administrator, accusing her of subscribing to the “Black Power” mantra and working systematically to purge Harris-Stowe’s College of Education of white faculty.

The Missouri attorney general’s office, which represented Harris-Stowe, declined to comment on the verdict.



http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/instructor-at-harris-stowe-gets-almost-million-in-racial-discrimination/article_a72e6120-e535-597b-b5e8-dedaa64386bf.html

People in positions of power can be racist - no matter what their pigment happens to be. When insecure, angry people get any power, they immediately take it out on those who are the "other."

[mythology]

37. Yes

Anybody can feel that another racial group (or even their own) is lesser or more prone to violence etc.

That isn't to say that it impacts everybody the same. As a white guy, I'm a lot less likely to have somebody assume I'm lesser.

If you mean institutional racism, then as a larger society, then it is largely effectively limited to white people in this country, but not entirely and if you go to a country like Zimbabwe, the power structure is heavily biased against white people. That said, there are some environments where it could be that the structures of local power are with a minority group.

I dislike conflating institutional racism and individual racism as I think that they can be changed separately, and probably the institutional racism will lag behind changes in the level of individual racism.

[Snow Leopard]

44. Of course they can, and demonstrably are..

SJW's views notwithstanding

[vaberella]

45. Anyone can be racist as long as they are the DOMINANT race in a particular country!

Therefore, if we go to Zimbabwe and there are Black racists there, they are racist because they have power backing their racism.

However in the USA, a non-White person cannot be racist. Because we have absolutely no power to marginalize a White person. This nonsense of reverse racism, is nonsense. Since racism is institutionalized in America ---and the odds are against the minorities, not for them.

[Katashi_itto]

52. BS. Anyone can be a racist.

It just happens to have a larger % here that happens to be white.

[darkangel218]

79. +1

I agree.

[TheSarcastinator]

94. it must be exhausting for you

trying to determine which people on which continents are racist and which are merely bigots.

[Iggo]

60. The system is racist. People are bigots.

[melman]

62. Of course they can

People who want to make up new definitions for words should just go ahead and make up a whole new language. I'll stick with English.

[valerief]

65. Only the race in the position of power, in the position to oppress, can be racist. nt

[w0nderer]

66. so in africa only black can be racist, in asia only asians and in middle east...?n/t

[valerief]

67. I'll bet whites are running the IMF. nt

[TheSarcastinator]

93. Horse manure

You don't get to change or alter definitions.

rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/Submit
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
"a program to combat racism"
synonyms: racial discrimination, racialism, racial prejudice, xenophobia, chauvinism, bigotry, casteism
"Aborigines are the main victims of racism in Australia"

[valerief]

101. Wrong. Goodbye.

[kwassa]

135. Definitions are altered all the time. Language is dynamic, not static.

The idea of racism involving power will be in those dictionaries soon.

Isn't that awful?

Awful: Awful things used to be “worthy of awe” for a variety of reasons, which is how we get expressions like “the awful majesty of God.”

http://ideas.ted.com/20-words-that-once-meant-something-very-different/

[ericson00]

102. you sound like a communist

[Lizzie Poppet]

108. That academic definition hasn't made it very far into general use.

And the lexicon reflects general use. The "systemic racism" definition may eventually replace the more general meaning in the broader lexicon, but it hasn't yet.

Personally, I hope it never does. "Systemic" or "institutional" as more-specific qualifiers of "racism" works perfectly well to differentiate the meanings.

[6000eliot]

68. No. Anyone can be prejudiced,

but racism requires power.

[Travis_0004]

97. So I a white person is unemployed what power does he have?

Therefore, an unemployed white person, can not be racist, but a black CEO can?

[6000eliot]

118. Your mistake is thinking about this as an individual.

Racism is an institution.

[Travis_0004]

138. So is a KKK member just as racist as a normal white guy?

[6000eliot]

142. Why would that be a question?

What is a "normal white guy" anyway?

[YoungDemCA]

125. I would encourage you to look at the percentage of CEOs who are black

and compare it to the percentage of CEOs who are white. Likewise, look at unemployment figures by race.

Also, even at the individual level, racism affects all black people - regardless of an individual black person's socioeconomic, educational, or political power/status/achievements (just look at how much President Obama has been mistreated, obstructed by Congress, and verbally abused by much of white America ).

Consider the reality that for the vast majority of our country's history, black people lived - have lived, and continue to live to a certain extent - in the fear of racial terrorism from whites. A racial terrorism, by the way, that has (often and for much of our country's history) been legally, politically, and socially sanctioned by the dominant white culture. Hell, this country was founded to a significant extent on the enslavement and unpaid, forced labor of men and women, parents and children - human beings who were kidnapped, sold into slavery, and forced to submit completely to their colonial European (and later, white American) owners. They were nonpersons. They were property. They were treated like animals - no, worse than animals.

Furthermore, once slavery was over, black men, women, and children lived with various forms of official (i.e. Jim Crow) and unofficial discrimination, marginalization, and yes, continued racial terrorism from whites - which amplified in the decades after the Civil War. This reality was true for all black people in the US, whether they were poor or affluent, Southern or non-Southern. Many thousands of black people were beaten, tortured, and/or murdered by whites over those decades; in fact, many lynchings in the Jim Crow South attracted large crowds. People brought their families to them. Pretty sick/sadistic.

Even after FDR's New Deal (which in many ways, systematically excluded agricultural and domestic workers, who were mostly black - a concession to the Solid Democratic South) had been enacted, black Americans continued to be legally discriminated against by the white power structure, at all levels. It wasn't until the aftermath of WWII, where segregated black military units had demonstrated incredible courage and patriotism ( in spite of all the discrimination, prejudice, and racial terrorism that they faced at home) that (legal) segregation really started to be softened. And even then, there was resistance, especially (but not exclusively) from the South. "Massive" resistance. For crying out loud, the civil rights movement fractured the whole damn Democratic Party. The Republican Party of Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon, and Ronald Reagan readily exploited that split among Democrats; to this day, Southern whites have become extremely Republican.

However, let's not underestimate the ability of non-Southern white America to be racist against black people, as well. Think of the backlash to busing in Boston, Chicago, Detroit, and elsewhere, for one. For another, think of the anger and venomous hatred which was spewed by whites every time a black person moved into a lily-white middle-class (or working-class, for that matter) suburban neighborhood. "White flight" happened for a reason, and the reason is racism - and all of the historical legacy that that encompasses.

The point I am trying to make here is that this painful, often-horrific and downright cruel history has affected - and continues to affect - ALL black Americans, regardless of their economic or social status. And conversely, racism/white supremacy has also affected ALL white Americans, in the realms of insidious, often-unconscious prejudices and unearned, often-subtle and un-quantifiable benefits. Unless more white Americans can admit and own up to this, and be willing to do the hard work of breaking down the barriers (that us white Americans created!) that separate us from our fellow human beings, our brothers and sisters of color, this will continue to be the norm and the reality in which we live.

[philosslayer]

137. You still have inherent white privilege

[AgingAmerican]

72. Of course, anyone can

Though many are in deep denial. Hate is hate.

[darkangel218]

80. Anyone can be racist. nt

[ZombieHorde]

81. Depends on your definition of racism and your geographical location.

If racism means prejudice based upon perceived race(s), then anyone can be racist.

If racism means a system that oppresses perceived races, then only those who belong to the perceived race that hold majority power can be racist. For example, in the US, those who are perceived as white hold the majority of power, and therefore only white people can be racist in the US.

In my opinion, both definitions do a poor job of reflecting reality--if there is such as thing--because of the limitations of communication and the extreme diversity of human experience.

[Recursion]

82. Depends on where that person lives.

In Africa? Sure. In India? Definitely. In most communities in the US? No.

Note that anyone can be racially prejudiced or bigoted, but that's a different question.

[Scootaloo]

83. This OP now comes in graphic novel form

[Skidmore]

87. I have seen this notion tossed around

social media a bit lately by people claiming to be liberals and who are white. I have come to the conclusion that this election season has really brought to the surface the need to protect the investment that even some on the left have made in in a biased system. It is easier to do this when one can deflect their prejudices onto the other and use it as an excuse to not to change.

[MichMan]

90. What about majority minority cities?

I have seen the concept of institutional racism vs dictionary racism, vs bigotry debated multiple times here at DU again and again.

While minorities can be subject to institutional racism, in particular areas of the country they are a majority. Take Detroit for instance; the power base of the city including city government, police, judicial system & elected officials have been African American for decades. Before someone says that the current mayor is white, he was elected less than a couple years ago and is the first non AA mayor in decades. The residents were so disgusted with the previous occupant who was convicted of bribery and corruption that there was a backlash against the old political guard.

Could it be possible that institutional racism is not exclusively against POC in all instances?

[TheSarcastinator]

91. only racists believe non-white people cannot be racist

It's a foolish and quixotic attempt at creating newspeak.

[polly7]

92. Of course they can. nt.

[petronius]

99. During one of the past "what is racism?" discussions, I found an article that was useful to me

Here's a link, FWIW:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7341874

Generally speaking, I don't really care what definitions people are using for racism, bigotry, prejudice, privilege as long I understand what they mean, and as long as they make a reasonable effort to communicate clearly...

[Duckhunter935]

103. Yes and I have seen it on DU

Several times and those sick racist comments are allowed to stand

[darkangel218]

123. Yep. nt

[B Calm]

144. I've seen it too!

[Initech]

120. Anyone need some butter?

[MrScorpio]

121. First thing you need to understand is how do we apply racism in this country…

And in America, racism is only applied on a basis of group affiliation and through a process of systemic white supremacy.

This is a system was created by the white majority, for the white majority and for the singular benefit of the white majority, which classifies non-whites as inherently inferior. It extends a status of whiteness as the standard of normality and the unearned privileges that go along with that normality, by which all other non-white group affiliations are classified as inferior.

Now, it's possible for whites to be non-racist, even though they are automatically benefited by such a system. Whites will have to practice non-racism on a conscious level and with as much self-awareness as possible. Unless they do this, since we're all living in a country defined by systemic white supremacy, the default position for whites is racist, as only whites benefit from such a system through unearned privilege.

Now, if you're asking if non-whites can be racist, unless there's a prevailing system of privileges for non-whites that relegate whites to the defaulted inferior position, the answer is no. Non-whites can't be racist in a system dominated by systemic white supremacy. Non-whites have no control over such a system and derive no privileges from it, unless they're granted by white people.

Basically, this makes racism an exclusively white problem in this country. Only whites can do anything about it.

If non-whites have no control over the prevailing system of white supremacy, derive no privileges under the system unless they're granted by the white majority, are not the standard by which whites are classified as normal, then how can non-whites be racist?

One particular kind of response I've noticed to your question, especially by white respondents, who are have been raised in system by which only their opinions matter, is that they believe that they can extend their own normality on that of others. A lot of white people in this country seem unaware of the fact that not everyone in this country benefits from the system of unearned privileges that have been granted to all whites under white supremacy. Non-whites don't live in a world of white normality in this country, because we all have our own. Unless you're conscious of this and choose to apply that consciousness, you're only going to refer to what you know and nothing more.

Now, if you're asking if non-whites can hate whites… Then the answer is absolutely yes. But it's not like we're in a country where non-white group affiliations have the power to do anything about it.

[YoungDemCA]

122. Very well said.

Your post needs to be read and understood by many here.

[TeddyR]

128. That's ridiculous

Anyone of any ethnicity can be racist. It doesn't take the state's backing for racism to exist. Are whites in Appalachia who grew up in poverty "benefitted" by this system that you believes exists across the United States? When do we expect people to take personal responsibility for their own well-being? Do they have to live in a community that is primarily a single race, or a city, or a state?

[MrScorpio]

131. Some resources here would seen instructive…

http://www.thefrisky.com/2014-06-12/18-things-white-people-should-knowdo-before-discussing-racism/

http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/07/8-things-white-people-race/

http://www.salon.com/2015/04/10/white_americas_racial_illiteracy_why_our_national_conversation_is_poisoned_from_the_start_partner/

Hope that helps you out.

[orpupilofnature57]

126. Anyone who makes a decision about a person based on Race, is a racist .

[Mike Nelson]

127. I don't believe in "races" of people...

...but I've met bigots of all shades.

[truebrit71]

132. Absolutely.

...

[hopemountain]

133. we ALL have biases

with other cultures and colors of people. for example, i have never been so disrespected and treated with such despicable dislike as i was by a refugee family owned business while on a recent trip. their attitude and behavior toward me with all of it's assumptions and prejudices was insulting. it is going to take me awhile to reason it out and not apply how offensive they were toward me to other people of their culture. i am a person of color, as they were, too.

[WinkyDink]

134. Any human can be. That would seem elementary.

[cemaphonic]

136. Oh, it's this thread again.

As you've seen in this thread, "racism" in certain activist/academic circles is much more narrowly defined than it is in the vernacular. If you go by the activist definition, then no, since that definition of racism includes a power structure dominated by the racial majority.

If you are asking, "Can a non-white person be guilty of race-based bigotry, prejudice, or hatred?" then the answer is obviously yes.

[George II]

139. I don't understand the point of your OP.

[JCMach1]

140. Of course they can... absolutely

Check the FOR HIRE ads in Dubai... they are openly racist. They will even say what nationality they want to hire.

Or spend enough time in any African country and discover the racist joys of tribalism.