Can only white people be racist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JHC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think there’s more than one reason for racism…people of the same races…and different races… have fought each other since time immemorial…some of it has to do with some feeling they are culturally superior…some of it has to do with some who think they are technologically and militarily superior…even religion can be used as a racist prop by some…all races are to some degree racist…not all people of all races are racist.
 
JoeFreedom said:
It’s this mentality that everyone…as you say…is implicitly racist…which “everyone” by the way includes black people…that slams the door shut on actual conversation.

I suppose because I’m white I guess I’ll always choose white people when I interview. Sigh…my my inherit racism again. I guess I will sit in the corner and shame myself over my white guilt.
Click to expand...
Remarkable. You COMPLETELY missed my point!

Admitting that everyone is implicitly racist does not shut the door to conversation, it opens it up. How can you have a conversation with someone who denies reality?

And if you realize you tend to favor some ethnic group over another, then you allow for it in situations like interviews for a job. You try to find some objective way to decide between seemingly equal candidates–even if it’s flipping a coin.

I personally don’t buy “white guilt.” A lot of countries around the world are overtly racist–Japan, China, India, etc. It’s in the news all the time. Start with Hutus vs. Tutsis then move on to Burmese vs. Rohingas and countless others. And blacks who call each other “brother” and give little nods to acknowledge another black person they don’t even know…that’s racist too. And not implicitly, explicitly. Treating people the same means exactly that, treating them the same.
 
I was harassed mercilessly by my fellow students as being a “dumb polack” all throughout grammar school.

I could not deeply grasp why I was called names like this up through eighth grade.

Then I grew up and read mein kampf.

Back then, I was failing all my classes anyways, which added to the firestorm of hate and bullying.

I grew up very sensitive to being referred to in any way as “stupid” or “dumb.”

My heroes are anyone who takes me under their wing and mentors me along, being magnanimous and generous in their kindness and patience to teach me, as I have learning disabilities.

It was nothing due to my race after all.
 
Last edited:
I think white to white racism(and it is racism as there are ethnic differences between Poles and Germans example) can be just as bad as white to black racism, what social justice warriors don’t seem to realize is that white people are not a big monolithic group and that there are many different types of white people who don’t happen to enjoy the famed white privilege that they think they all have.
 
Erikaspirit16 said:
If you think you’re not implicitly racist, feel free to take this test:

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html
Click to expand...
I tried, but that test is really, really poorly worded. They should define “groups.” They should distinguish between equality of conditions and equality of opportunity. Everything else is too vaguely worded for me to get through the rest of the quiz.

I agree with the rest of your post.
 
It sounds like racism is one form of prejudice. I would argue that such prejudice can occur at both individual and systemic levels.
 
Well I see black people cant be racist all the time in interviews etc like the one I posted. There are plenty more.

 
Basically, I disagree fundamentally that everyone is racist, so our conversation will be based on two wholly different premises.
 
Yes it certainly can, but many people misuse the term racist when they really mean prejudicial or bigoted.

Deacon Christopher
 
Dictionary definition of racism:
noun
  1. prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.
 
silentwitness said:
As far as i am aware Leftist academia tried to redefine racism as only being possible if you are part of a dominant power structure.
Click to expand...
That sounds like the usual tiresome attack on academia, invariably accompanied by the suggestion that academia is dominated by the left. I’m never even sure what “leftism” even is. It’s just a term people in the right use to describe things they don’t agree with. I honestly don’t think any significant number of reputable scholars ever came up with this definition. No doubt somebody once said it somewhere.

What I would say, in general, is that anyone can be racist on a personal/individual level, but systemic or institutional racism generally favors the majority/dominant race and disadvantages people of minority/subordinate races.
 
It seems possible to just measure an answer to this whole thread in a dispassionate manner.

Some people are defining racism as a more specific kind of thing in order to try and articulate the experience of people who are victims of racial prejudice in combination with a lack of “power.” This is what I understand people to mean when they say certain groups of people can’t be racist—since they do not have the power in the racial prejudice + power = racism equation.

The trouble comes in when “racism” just means racial prejudice to someone. Lately people have taken on this attitude of just speaking to each other in an exasperated manner. One side knows they aren’t racist as they define it and the other side is trying to make a more general point about our culture and society. Instead of having actual discussions about how we might agree or disagree on the more meta level discussion of societal ills we get stuck on speaking past each other.
 
Last edited:
mary15 said:
Blacks, too, judge each other by the color of their skin. How sick is that?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say it’s “sick,” it’s normal. Let’s take India as an example. There are all sorts of “races” in India; some have blue eyes; some are very, very black. In their magazines (yes, I subscribe) there are always several ads for “skin-lightening” cream. If you look at their matrimonial sites, skin tone is almost always mentioned (“light skinned,” etc.) If you watch their movies (I do) the villain is almost always the blackest black (unless he is English, of course!) and the hero/heroine is always fair skinned. And of course we can go back to the caste system and untouchables (always black). None of this is “sick,” it’s the way things have been for thousands of years. It’s now changing, but slowly.

But that’s just India. Look at Brazil–very multi-racial, but (as with all of Latin America) a definite social hierarchy based on lightness of skin. Or if you want to turn to Europe, you have the N. Italians vs. the darker S. Italians. It’s universal.

Again, my point is simply to recognize this inherent preference for people who look like you and to try and compensate for it. Just like someone who knows they have a tendency to drink too much can avoid bars and wild parties. After all, we all have free will.
 
do_justly_love_mercy said:
That sounds like the usual tiresome attack on academia, invariably accompanied by the suggestion that academia is dominated by the left. I’m never even sure what “leftism” even is. It’s just a term people in the right use to describe things they don’t agree with. I honestly don’t think any significant number of reputable scholars ever came up with this definition. No doubt somebody once said it somewhere.
Click to expand...
Happy to explain to you what Leftism is, all you have to do is ask. It actually is a well defined term and has a clear historical genesis.

Perhaps you are tired of hearing people criticising the Leftist takeover of academia and its retarding of intellectual pursuit but i can assure you the people criticising it, are anything but tired.
 
Last edited:
The academic definition of “racism” is (shorthand) “prejudice plus power.” That’s the definition people are using when they say that.

Obviously, anyone can be racially prejudiced or even hateful, and might act on it on an individual level. But the idea is that minorities (whatever those are in the local culture) don’t have the entire machinery of society and however many centuries of history that can turn their individual prejudices into something systemic – and indeed, continues to function whether or not individual members of the majority are personally prejudiced.
 
JHC said:
I keep hearing that only white people can be racist. Is that true?
Click to expand...
If you believe I original sin, yes…anyone can be a bigot, a racist, a supremest, a vegan hater, homophobe and any other ailment of the human condition…

Or as Jesus said, we all basically have a heart condition, one that hardens the the arteries of human genteelness and kindness…

Why do you suppose He said…Love your neighbor as yourself…not just love only those who believe exactly as I do…

Anyone can be your neighbor…

The parable of the Good Samaritan is a great example, as is Jesus at the well with the woman…

Look towards the great G.K…

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
dcs6f4 said:
The trouble comes in when “racism” just means racial prejudice to someone. Lately people have taken on this attitude of just speaking to each other in an exasperated manner. One side knows they aren’t racist as they define it and the other side is trying to make a more general point about our culture and society. Instead of having actual discussions about how we might agree or disagree on the more meta level discussion of societal ills we get stuck on speaking past each other.
Click to expand...
The argument from my side is that the redefinition of many words including this one is a deliberate attack on western history and culture. There is a malevolent reason for attempting to usurp a common word and force others to accept the new definition for political reasons.

I would say we are not misunderstanding the other side, we know exactly what is going on and we are rejecting the argument by rejecting the attempted redefinition.

There is a reason why people of a certain side of politics are not creating new words for new concepts but using existing emotional ones. That is dishonest and manipulative.

If they think they have new insights that are helpful then it makes sense to use new words to describe the new insights. What is happening is that these are not insights nor helpful but political posturing that is attempted to be snuck in under the radar by using existing words that have already an acceptance in society.

If they used new words for these new concepts people would just rightly say ‘that’s crap’, By using existing words there is a cover of ambiguity where bad ideas can be gradually rolled out to the populace by academia and media.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top