The Bill of Rights protects citizens from abuse of power. It fries me to think many believe it to be a collection of polite suggestions.

Sorry about getting off topic...

suggesting civics and literacy tests for voting, might appeal to racists


suggesting the woes of ' multiculturalism', might appeal to racists


statements like 'lets take our country back', might appeal to racists


etc...etc....the rhetoric and terms used are similar to those with racist attitudes,,,

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/constitution.html

Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals—that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government—that it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizens’ protection against the government.

So what other beliefs might be interpreted as being racist?

Answers:

Claiming that another person is a member of one's family because the other person's skin color is the same as one's own.

Claiming that some forms of racism are acceptable.

wasn't it you who argued that family and race meant the same thing?

perhaps I am mistaken

family can be any group we feel a connection with

for me, for example, I am a part of many 'families',, women are my sisters because of shared experience as females in this culture

black folks are my family because of shared experiences as black folks in this culture

I am also a part of the 'forty something' family because of similar experiences


,,,if it is 'racism' to see commonality,, I guess it can be racist

Im more concerned with the EXCLUSIVE racism than the INCLUSIVE type,,,,people can be part of more than one kind of family

those who are incapable of seeing that ,, are the type who concern me

Uh, no. It was not me.



So, what one person perceives as being racism may not be perceived as racism by someone else? If that is the case, then whose perception is correct?

Would be an act of racism to claim that only members of one's own race are able to perform a certain task or that members of another particular race are incapable of performing that task?

The answer to my last question is "Yes".

Sadly, all too often, white people are treated as if they are incapable of correctly judging what is or isn't racism, and this treatment is racist in nature.

Well, white people can correctly determine what is or isn't racism.

Also, an act of racism is wrong even if it doesn't personally bother you. (I use the word "you" in a general sense.)

Racists are racists because they believe that certain forms of racism are acceptable.

Passive racists turn a blind to racism if that racism doesn't bother them, if they believe that the racism is in an acceptable form.

Active racists engage in the forms of racism that they believe are acceptable.

for the sake of argument dodo

this is the definition of racism

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


by definition, the 'races' are determined themselves by specific ancestral traits,, so just acknowledging that race exists, is in itself a form of 'harmless' racism,, that doesn't bother me

assuming that 'blacks' do this or that BECAUSE They are black is racist

assuming that 'whites' do this or that BECAUSE they are white is racist


examining TRAITS or tendencies amongst 'blacks' or 'whites' is not racist as long as the determining factor in someones mind isn't their RACE,, but something about their experience or their common culture, or their common geography ,,etc,,,



so, for someone to say to me 'blacks are violent' would be racist if the intent was to imply merely being black lead to violent behavior

for someone to say to me 'blacks are incarcerated more often for violent crimes',,,is more specific, accurate and something that can be examined from a logical and factual basis


,,,,and that is not racist,,but opens up logical discussion

blacks being 'feral' or 'irresponsible',, just opens up a counterdebate to disprove such an inaccurate representation of a whole RACE


southern whites TEND TO BE being less educated doesn't pertain to a whole RACE but a regional subgroup,,,

I could go on and on,, but Im not sure it would even matter

I have argued all americans are 'racist' on some level,, but not all racism is harmful or troublesome or 'bad' in my opinion

and I still believe that to be true,,,

particularly the individual racism of jack and john does who hold no power over the lives of others

racism amongst authority personnel , however, within the 'institution' of education, or justice, or the economy,, is very troublesome,,,,


and of course white people can see racism. although probably not as clearly when they aren't DIRECTLY affected by it

just as black people can see the 'irresponsible' behavior of blacks

whites can also see the racist behavior of whites

HOWEVER,,,about the same percentage of white folks felt racism wasn't a problem in the 1960s as do now,, which says to me at least, they may not be the most PERCEPTIVE group when it comes to racism,,,

Again.
Exactly when did Democrats change their spots and publically claim they were no longer gonna be racist?

In big and bold....I totally agree!!!!!

Racism is alive and well in America…Even though I now believe that, on an individual basis, 21st century black America is more "blatantly" racist than 21st century white America, Harmony has a legit beef, a real concern…On another thread, she insisted institutional racism was a major roadblock to blacks achieving success via economic equality…Her claims were met with protest from all sides…Liberals, conservatives, young and old, male and female….The only obvious commonality the protesters shared was none of them were black…The reason it bothered me so much is because she is right about institutional racism and its effect on black families and communities and she is right in her claim that the majority race, whites, vehemently deny its existence….IMHO everybody, of every race has the capacity to be racist and they exercise that capacity from time to time throughout the course of their lives….It is also my opinion that this will never change and that this type of racism is not the root problem…Because it is fed by its own hand, meaning it is not exclusive to a particular race, it cannot be eradicated, only substantially diminished by taking the focus off of individual racism and placing it on "acknowledging" and ending institutional racism….Sign me white girl running for cover.....

When it comes to institutional racism, its existence isn't being questioned on this site, only its current state of health. It may not be gone, but it isn't anything like it was back during the 20th Century. Instead, it is on life support.

Yet, some people would have us to believe that nothing has changed, because it is easier to cry "institutional racism" than it is to deal with the complex causes of complex problems.

Also, the definition of racism and its morality are being challenged.

To say that some racism is acceptable is, to me at least, appalling at best. Racists are racists because they believe that some racism isn't bad.

To make matters worse, some parties wish to define racism in a way that exempts them from any charge of racism on their part. Well, I reject that sort of thing.

Racism is the act of judging people according to their race regardless of what that judgement is.

Sometimes, racists excuse their racism by claiming that other people are racists, too. Making such an excuse may make racists feel better about themselves, but others see the excuse for what it is - an attempt to rationalize one's own racism by projecting racism into others.

For example, the claim "all Americans are racists" is like the typical response that a child gives when caught doing something wrong: "All of the other kids are doing it!" No, all of the other kids aren't doing it. No, all Americans aren't racists.

[Side Note: If all Americans were racists, then the logical conclusion would be that the Democratic Party is made up of racists and is controlled by racists, which would mean that racists are attracted to the Democratic Party.]

As I said previously, passive racists turn a blind eye to racism that doesn't bother them or that they consider to be acceptable.

There will be no end to racism as long as passive racists keep claiming that not all racism is bad.

Institutional racism has been questioned and denied time and time again on this site...Those posters doing it take the straightforward approach as well as the more subtle, highly ambiguous approach when denying its existence or, as you just did, try to diminish it by saying it is on the decline...It is not on the decline, if anything, it is even more insidious as politicians, businesses, educators, and lenders become more and more skilled at hiding it from the public....Which, I might add, is why so many white Americans deny it as a major contributing factor to crime and poverty rates in black communities throughout America...

I don't know who you are referring to with this statement, "To say that some racism is acceptable is, to me at least, appalling at best. Racists are racists because they believe that some racism isn't bad."....I have not read anything here that would lead me to believe that any of the posters feel racism is acceptable on any level....

The definition of racism is clear and cannot be redefined...Why would people try to define it in a way that exempts them from a charge of being racist??... Posters are not on trial David....Your assumptions about why people say the things they do about racism are of no help in identifying and fixing real problems as they exist today...Leave the bickering about which race is the most racist and why up to Jackson and Sharpton, they love to keep the fires burning....

Let's not forget faiycan and his separatist movement.
He and rev wrong hate dem devil whites and Jews.

Yet, you'll always see bigots defending them and their hate filled ways.

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/racism.html

Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man’s genetic lineage—the notion that a man’s intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collective of ancestors.

Racism claims that the content of a man’s mind (not his cognitive apparatus, but its content) is inherited; that a man’s convictions, values and character are determined before he is born, by physical factors beyond his control. This is the caveman’s version of the doctrine of innate ideas—or of inherited knowledge—which has been thoroughly refuted by philosophy and science. Racism is a doctrine of, by and for brutes. It is a barnyard or stock-farm version of collectivism, appropriate to a mentality that differentiates between various breeds of animals, but not between animals and men.

Like every form of determinism, racism invalidates the specific attribute which distinguishes man from all other living species: his rational faculty. Racism negates two aspects of man’s life: reason and choice, or mind and morality, replacing them with chemical predestination.
__________

A genius is a genius, regardless of the number of morons who belong to the same race—and a moron is a moron, regardless of the number of geniuses who share his racial origin.
_________

Like every other form of collectivism, racism is a quest for the unearned. It is a quest for automatic knowledge—for an automatic evaluation of men’s characters that bypasses the responsibility of exercising rational or moral judgment—and, above all, a quest for an automatic self-esteem (or pseudo-self-esteem).
______________

lol,, been explained about 50 thousand times,,,,

around when the SOUTHERNERS switched from democrat to republican

THIS


Racism is the act of judging people according to their race regardless of what that judgement is.


is YOUR definition,, one of many, and I agree THAT type of racism is 'wrong',, people are individuals and their environment and personal experiences will much more shape them than their RACE

however

because of the deep seated and RACIALLY CHARGED founding and maintaining of THIS COUNTRY

there is a very real racial DIVIDE That was created and maintained as well,, and in terms of the EXPERIENCES, not individual but in general, that blacks or whites or others have had,, we can and should discuss racial discrepancies with caution that the reason for peoples actions or thoughts is never BECAUSE They are of a certain race,,,but often times because of what their experiences as a part of that race IN THIS COUNTRY is likely to have been,,,,,


race is very REAL in this country,, 'racists' who aknowledge and talk about how RACE impacts life in America are NOT the same (to me) as 'racists' who constantly paint everyone in a race with the same brush REGARDLESS of other circumstances like their culture, their experiences,, etc

the RACISTS who are wrong and troublesome are of two types,,

1. the blatantly racist(who are fewer in number than before) who find a way to use every negative individuals exhibit as proof of an absolute characteristic across their race

and

2. the kind who turn the blind eye so long as everything is ok with them and claim racism is not therefore any serious problem, trying to shut down those who wish to explore or approach it with things like

get over it
slavery was long ago
everyone has struggles
we have a black president
I have black friends,,,,etc,,,etc,,,etc,,,

@ Harmony...Stop bumping this thread an say something!

If institutional racism is so hidden like you say, then how is that you know about it? Seriously, you haven't proven your claim. Am I supposed to assume that people are guilty of racism until proven innocent?




Uh, in one of your posts on this page of this thread, you quoted the following statement and agreed with it:



That is the statement that I was responding to.



Excuse me, but words can be redefined and are redefined over time.

For example, the English word "mansion" originally referred to a room or apartment within a house. That is why John 14:2 in the KJV Bible says, "In my Father's house are many mansions." However, Americans redefined "mansion" to mean a large, fancy house.

Likewise, the English word "suffer" originally meant "to allow" which is why Matthew 19:14 of the KJV Bible says, "Suffer little children." Today, the English word "suffer" means something else. The word now refers to a party having a bad experience.

Even the word "family" has been redefined. Farlex Trivia Dictionary says the following:



Originally, "family" was not at all associated with "race", but, nowadays, some people have equated "family" with "race". Since that latter equating doesn't fit the original definition of "family", should I ignore that latter equating?



Once many years ago, a black man wrote to Dear Abby (or Ann Landers - I forget which sister it was) and boldly proclaimed that it was not possible for black Americans to be racists. The man had redefined racism in such a way so as to exempt black Americans from being able to engage in racism. He implied that black Americans were somehow superior because they allegedly couldn't be guilty of racism.



Yeah, if racism were extinct, then they'd lose their ability to profit from race hustling.

Seriously, one reason why racism is such a controversial topic to debate is because parties on one side of the debate insist that they alone can provide a definition of racism.