The dictionary definition is not sufficient when the entire subject is about a sociological phenomenon. When she says "Racism" she is talking about systemic racism which is prejudice coupled with power.
Link
Minorities can be prejudiced against other groups but within the context of greater society, one minority doesn't have a far-reaching wide extent of power to oppress another.
How can the textbook definition of racism
not be sufficient? It makes perfect sense to me when I apply it to plenty of occurrences that would be considered racially motivated. Racism is a worldview, specifically a personal view express by a person. Abstract concepts like 'system' or 'society,' inherently cannot express personal views, it's the people within it that are the source of the expression. Racism starts when one person expresses their belief that people with different skin or ethnicity apart from their own are inherently inferior. Taken to its extreme, racism can be enforced by people in positions of authority (what would be considered, power), whether in government, industry or education, that harbor or express themselves in accordance with racist views.
That's specifically
institutional racism. Which for the most part is no longer in effect, at least in the current United States. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 did happen and is still being upheld.
What of the racism expressed by the common person? Are those occurrences not legitimate cases of racism, even though there isn't any sort of institutional power be wielded against the individual being harassed? One individual harassing another on the basis of their skin or ethnicity is arguably the most common form of racism.
It doesn't take an institution to marginalize someone due to aspects beyond their control. All that's required is when an individual ( or a group) discriminates against others, which any human being is capable of.
Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, my experience as a black man gives me a different experience and perspective of society than a white man. My further identity as a bisexual black man gives me a different perspective than a straight black man and even black women.
Why would I have a problem acknowledging that? I'm certain your own experience is different from anyone else's. It makes sense that your sexuality makes you see and experience the world a bit differently from others who are not bisexual, since sexuality influences who we interact within our lives, within certain social or private context.
Naturally, experiences will be different. Just as my experience is different from your own for a myriad of factors. It's essentially why I championed individualism in my original post, so I'm glad you mentioned that. As you said, it gives you a different perspective, not any more or any less perspective than others. Same came be said of any other individual when compared to you or me.
Yes, aspects of ethnicity or sexuality are part of our identity, but they are not ultimately who we are as individuals. Unless one chooses to view themselves in that way.
People are their identity color blindness is a cop-out for choosing to ignore my differences for the sake of comfort. I embrace my blackness. I embrace my bisexuality. These aren't superficial. They come with myriad thoughts, lessons, and experiences that vary due to the way society not only views me but treats me. The intersection of the many different aspects of myself are what make me unique. I'm not just another human being nor am I willing to toss aside my blackness or my bisexuality because these are important and formative parts of my life. My identity as a bisexual black male isn't what creates division and racism. The existence of a society that props up white supremacy and homophobic ideals and the people who buy into those modes of thinking are what create and perpetuate bigotry.
I don't believe that's a fair claim, at least in the way you framed that first statement. People generally aren't actively denying your the right to express yourself or identify as black and bisexual. Certainly, not the government within the United States.
I agree that many aspects of you make you unique, I would also agree that you're not just another human being. I've never said you were, if anything, I maid the claim for the opposite. I'm not asking you to toss aside anything, I don't even know you personally haha.
Although, I don't understand why you continue bringing up your sexuality as if it were being challenged. I never have, nor do I have any interest in doing so. I understand that people belonging to ethnic and sexual minorities have been and continue to face discrimination in this world, but I feel conflating the two issues only makes clearly discussing issues in proper context more difficult.
At this point, I would like to ask what exactly do you mean by "blackness"? Is it simply in relation to how dark one's skin is? Is it in relation to the ethnicity within the United States?
Blackness to me is such a nebulous term, as the definition seems to change depending on context.
If it's the former, then I find it to be ill-defined for everyone within that ethnicity in relation to pigment and the amount of melanin that one has ( or lack thereof.) The majority of black people's skin are varying shades of brown. Anywhere from light browns to very dark browns.
As I've already mentioned, there are also black people that have skin as light as some white people or Asians or Latinos. My point is, that for a visual indicator of one's race based on a single color, blackness is not reflective of the reality that is the unique genetic makeup within this ethnic group.
If it's the latter, then isn't that a cultural argument instead of a racial argument? Which isn't necessarily consistent between all black people. The United States can be considered a multi-cultural nation because of the variety of people from other countries that immigrate to the U.S., which tend to include their cultural customs, language, or religious practice.
There are many people who are considered black in the United States who hail from Caribean countries, African countries, European countries, South American, etc.
Many of these countries have unique cultures apart from one another. They have different languages, customs, cuisine, history, and pop culture.
How can you possibly take all of that, and lump it all together as "blackness?" To me, that diminishes the uniqueness of their cultural identity. I find the same issue with the nebulous term "people of color."
Lastly, I'm not attributing any racism to you personally. I argue against the use of terminology and how we continue to separate each other (and ourselves) into poorly defined, inconsistent and outdated social constructs, such as race.
Which white supremacist groups are being propped up by society? I'm fairly certain that hate groups like the KKK and
legitimate neo-nazis are openly condemned and chastised by most of the society. Homosexuality is now more accepted in society more than it's ever been.
Gay marriage is now legal in The United States, among several other countries. U.S. Citizens that identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual can go to college, or open bank accounts, take out loans, apply for any job with consideration to their skill, education, and experience, just like any other citizen.
That isn't to say there aren't any bigots and ignorant people within society today, but you are being disingenuous by condemning the entirety of society as equally guilty. There has been progression, not only in the United States but in many other countries.
It's by no means a perfect world, there is certainly more progress to be made for as many people in need of it, but it's no longer the same world it was in the 1950's, and that says a lot.
You cannot expect everyone to accept you as a person, just because. That can only come from understanding and education based in universal truths, not misconceptions or bias.
The point of a world without racism is a world where a white man can see me as a black man, know how I differ from him and accept me just the same and celebrate what we have in common as well as what makes us different. That's actual progress. Colorblindness is laziness.
I respectfully disagree. A world without racism is one where we stop seeing each other as opposites. By contrast, white is literally the opposite of black, and vice versa.
See me as an individual, don't assume anything more than that. Judge me by my actions and how I express myself, same as I would with you. Accept and embrace our genetic differences and similarities, just not at the expense of others. Because that is what gives us strength as a species.
That, in essence, is what it means to see beyond color. It's funny because morally, we essentially agree here, but I believe the terms like 'black, white, people of color' play a part in perpetuating racism. At best, they're hardly consistent in their representation, at worst they're are arbitrarily divisive in nature.
Also since you picked out the definition of "racism", I'm surprised you didn't pick out the definition for "people of color" which does exist and is simply a person who is not white or of European heritage. No one claims it's perfect. It's simply shorthand. And it does have its problems such as:
Link
Which is why I refrained from using it to define racism. I'm glad we can at somewhat agree on faults of the term. Personally, I don't see that point in using it. If we're going to do that, why not call all white people in the United States "European Americans?" At least then, it would be more consistent.
Individualism and universalism would be fine if we didn't live in a world where misogyny, racism, homophobia, transphobia. Modern society has already made the judgment call by allowing a status quo that results in people outside its margins, aka straight, white, able-bodied cis males, to have a different experience of the same world. Sure everyone is a unique individual but groups of black people, indigenous people, gay people, trans people, and the disabled assemble to fight for their civil rights in the first place because they do have a parity of experiences within our society. They may not act the same or believe the same thing, yet they are united because society groups them by their shared disenfranchisement for things they cannot change about themselves. You say you see people all as human beings and judge them on an individual basis. Fine. That's all well and good for you. The reality as the member of a marginalized group is that things aren't that simple. Your individualist or universal mindset doesn't help much in the face of monoliths of racist institutions in this country like the school to prison pipeline or gentrification or mass incarceration or the existence of genocidal white supremacist groups or police brutality. It doesn't help with rape culture or the epidemic of transphobic murders. I've mentioned this in a previous post but the reason she mentions that actually communicating and sincerely listening to minorities and marginalized groups, in general, is enriching is because of bigoted institutions only last when the majority chooses to ignore the experience of the minority. Police brutality persists because the experiences of black people are ignored. Cultures of rape and sexual abuse in the workplace continue because the experiences of women are belittled. Gay-bashing and transphobia continue to exist because LGBTQ+ have to continually fight to be treated humanely. There is value to actually listening to the lives of the marginalized. There wouldn't be thousands of books on what it means to be Asian in America or what it means to live in the inner city as a young black man or what it means to grow up gay in a Christian home or what it means to be Muslim post-9/11 if these experiences weren't profound in how they form people and how they can change others. As I've said before, we're actually truly united when 2 people with vastly different life experiences bond not just on common ground but on their differences as well.
Yes, the world far from perfect. There is too much suffering, and still too much inequality in certain parts of the world. That fact does not negate the ideals of individualism or universalism. Becuase the world is
not ideal for everyone, these are ideals that inspire and underpin things like civil rights and freedom of expression within a just society. To disregard them, would be to disregard the very things you claim to be for.
All of these marginalized and minority groups you mentioned deserve civil rights because they are just as human as any majority within that society. It's the affirmation that everyone is equal and has God-given rights as human beings. That is our common ground, and that is what unites together. Their parity is their humanity.
My issue is that you're blaming society for grouping certain people together, yet you're doing just that in your own post right now. You're collectively speaking for so many people at the same time, I couldn't possibly believe you truly understand them as people or know what they all want for themselves, beyond civil rights and equal opportunity.
I'm not sure if you were trying to overwhelm me or prove my argument invalid by bringing up all of these issues at once. You're bringing up so many different issues plaguing society as if the same solution will fix it all. All these issues need to be dealt with proper attention and assessment.
Unfortunately, none of these issues are going to be solved overnight. Although, lumping them all together into one giant super evil will that society must correct tomorrow will only serve to overwhelm you or anyone else that wants to find solutions.
I understand that your heart bleeds for people you feel are marginalized, but you can't expect to solve any of these societal woes without thinking of them critically or objectively. Some of these issues need to be addressed one at a time within the proper context, with pragmatic suggestions in mind. And Having the dialogue with the necessary people in order to bring about a true and just solution.
You can't just make outrageous claims like the school to prison pipeline, or genocidal white supremacist groups without backing up claims with sources. As it weakens any sort of reasonable distance when discussing the issues at hand.
Police brutality and misconduct is very much an issue in The United States. What are your suggestions to what should be done to prevent this from happening as often as it does?
In my honest opinion, police academies need to create more strict and thorough training regiments and cognitive and emotional tests for trainees. They need to be medically examed and deemed fit to work in the field. They need to be better trained in de-escalating conflict without out the immediate need for lethal force.
We cannot paint every single encounter of a police officer shooting someone who isn't white as police brutality. As it only serves to make light of the genuine instances of when a police officer was legally in the wrong and someone civil rights were violated, or when life wrongfully was taken.
To me, the real issue is human nature, specifically the worst parts of human nature. The most I can do to counter the evil and injustice is to call it out for what it is and openly condemn it. Beyond that, I choose to treat people as well as I want to be treated. Help those in need whenever it's within my means to help.
That doesn't just apply to me obviously, as there are others in this world going above and beyond to help others in need and unite each other, and that inspires me and gives me hope. It reaffirms to me that everyone is ultimately human, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, sexuality, or skin pigment.
