Racism

A racist person is not merely someone who commits one racist act or acts on a racist motive on a small number of occasions. Motives and attitudes such as bigotry, antipathy and contempt must be embedded in the person's psychological makeup as traits of character. In this sense, being racist is like being hateful, dishonest, or cruel in implying an ingrained pattern of thought and feeling as well as action. "I'm Not a Racist, But...", Lawrence Blum, 2002, p. 14.

Within that framework, it is possible to behave in a racist manner periodically out of ignorance, or tell what amounts to racist joke and still not be a racist by definition. Just like a person can be mean or spiteful on a singular occasion, it's important not to define the person by a few acts or comments.

History - The European history of racism began with the initial vision that Jewish blood was tainted. Although Jews were persecuted for their religion into the late Middle Ages, the idea that they could never be pure began in Spain around the 15th century. That differentiated cultural and religious prejudice from the idea that Jews were permanently inferior by blood and inheritance

African blacks were originally not treated as racial inferiors. However, many Islamic countries that held perhaps the greatest number of slaves in the Middle Ages began to use a higher number of blacks - although there is no indication that was specifically due to skin color. However, as more Christian royalty acquired slaves around the same time, they were less likely to acquire other Christians as slaves. The taking of "heathens" was a better cultural rationalization within the early church. Hence, more blacks began to be acquired as European slaves in the late Middle Ages.

In the 15th century, Spain declared their own very large Jewish and Muslim communities impure and demanded conversion. Simultaneous with that were several Spanish and European exploration discoveries including the New World which added to the initial idea of racial hierarchies. Colonization and labor shortages also fed the need for slavery.

By the time of American colonization, demand was high and African slaves were a convenient surplus for European explorers. The rationalization of skin color hierarchy was now widespread and became ingrained into the religious and cultural fabric of American colonization.

Racism: A Short History, George Fredrickson, 2003

Racism is a presumption that one race is superior over another. It may also presume activity to dominate other races. The original modern definition of the word was established in WWll in Nazi Germany. It is meant to refer to idea that some races were more superior than others and to suggest a racial hierarchy of intelligence. It was about power and dominance. It does not necessarily have anything to do with the "desirability" of a race.

If a real estate agent doesn't show a house to a black man, it does not necessarily fall into the original definition that infers less intelligence. In that example, it merely means that the minority race is steered to live elsewhere because the majority race has expressed a desire to remain separate. Racism may be involved, but that is merely presumption.

The definition of racism changed in the post-Civil Rights environment. The word is now used to include the current meaning of antipathy and hate toward another race. The definition change was never by design. It was because there was no working vocabulary to differentiate any nuance in meaning. Now the word is simply loaded with moral accusatory judgment.

So racism, as it's now perceived, is either defined by inferiority or by the general hatred of another race.

The fact is not every racial problem is a racist problem - no matter which one of the definitions is used. And yet, the word's usage is now so broad that's it's impossible to be precise. It is an incredibly difficult subject in which to have a dialog. The term racism is misused, overused, and suffers from a kind of moral overload all at the same time. The vocabulary in which to discuss problems of race is simply so poor that the word "racist' gets used for nearly every issue involving skin color.

Racial prejudice is not necessarily racism (although it frequently signals motives of racism). Racial prejudice is usually a matter of degree. For instance, you wouldn't refer to a Klan member as simply "prejudiced". That would be stating the obvious and would be too much of an understatement. Nor are stereotypes  inherently racist either. Drunken Indians, blacks eating watermelons, and bad Asian drivers, do not actually fall into either definition of racism. They are stereotypical and sometimes degrading images, but they don't automatically infer either hatred or inferiority.

Until the definitions surrounding race are understood and decided upon, until the vocabulary widens, a conversation about racism needs to be a well-thought out discussion, not an emotional tirade of accusations.

In many cases, the majority race frequently does not recognize "majority privilege." They aren't trained to. Most tests show that the majority race almost never goes through the course of a day thinking about race, where as a minority race will think about it at least every day. As an example, if a white man were to walk up to a sales clerk and say, "I want to see your supervisor" and the person who turned out to be that supervisor is black, nearly every white person will indicate a kind of hidden surprise. The majority not only presumes power, but expects it. That's not racism. It's merely a typical racial bias that the majority takes for granted. But taking it for granted is a privilege the majority race holds every day.

If one is fighting for racial equality, that certainly does not make them racist (just the opposite perhaps). If one is proud of their minority heritage to the extent that they show a racial preference, that is NOT racism. By that example, no one is saying the black race is superior.

That may be racial bias, something every race possesses, but it is not racism.

A "racist" is not an either-or proposition. It's not like being pregnant. People may behave with racist motives at times, and at other times behave differently - just as someone who might act cruel may do so periodically, not all the time. That's why calling someone racist should probably only be reserved for the most consistent racist-based behavior.

There are situational prejudices which are highly complex. Imagine an older white female who does not like young, black males. Yet she spends time in a nursing home with several older black men and women whom she likes very much.  This is not an uncommon case since many whites have a real disdain for the gun-toting, sideways cap, hip-hop culture - even if much of it is media driven and is heavy with stereotypical images.

In such cases, it would be difficult to say that this is really about skin-color. It's a combination of several things (one of which is skin color) that may be an aspect of our general youth culture. Simply put, prejudices are when you have a distorted opinions about people of other races.

Is Racism Prejudice Plus Power?

This is a common debate within sociology. There are some experts who believe that the dominant race must have power to be racist - either in a local setting like a school or large company or in the nation itself. The argument is that you can't be racist unless you are capable of enforcing the racism. I don't believe this, but it's an established argument.

Reactive Racism

When blacks manifest racial hatred toward whites, it sometimes reactive to white racism towards them. This is known as "reactive racism." It is no less racism in my opinion, but there is a difference.

Moral Asymmetry

Racism is morally asymmetrical. That is, an argument frequently given by whites is that whites are made fun of as well with racial slurs as derogatory comments, therefore the two types of racism are equal. However, there is certainly a difference between a black person calling a white person a honky, and a white person calling a black person a "nigger". There is a historical legacy that blacks grow up with (symbols like the Confederate Flag) just as there is a historical legacy of the swastika in relation to the Holocaust. Hatred of blacks against whites is not a primary form of racism, while hatred of whites against blacks is. There is far more moral weight assigned to historical body of evidence. It's no different than a religious group complaining about specific persecutions that history has born out. Racism is learned. It doesn't have to happen to you to be felt.

Other types of moral asymmetry include positional inferiority. That is there is a difference in America between Mexicans, Native Americans, Jews, Asians, and blacks. As victims of injustice each group has a different weighted value - not just among the white majority but among themselves as well (and all the groups generally agree with each other on the scale of which groups have the best and worst positions).

Sometimes that might change. Hispanics, for example, experience much more personal racism than Irish Americans do today. However, there was a time in the 19th century where the opposite was true. Blacks, on the other hand, have always retained the bottom group in terms of positional inferiority. A slur about Norwegians is not likely to be taken very seriously and will likely be seen as a an isolated incident. A slur about blacks or Native Americans, on the other hand, brings on feelings of humiliation that the group has suffered.

Though a white individual is not more racist or more morally evil than in harboring racial prejudice than is a black individual, the moral asymmetry makes the consequences of his prejudices, and the acts of expressing them, worse than those of a black individual. In this sense they are worthy of greater concern.

Moral asymmetry is usually a difficult intellectual hurdle for the dominant race.

Supreme Court Justice, Harry Blackmun, 1978 (a life-long Republican, but eventually with a liberal record)

The Bakke Affirmative Action case: "In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way. And in order to treat some persons equally, we must treat them differently."

This is one of the most difficult hurdles for the majority race. They do not want to acknowledge this. They expect a level playing field regardless of the historical legacy.

Liberal racism

That liberals are paternal in their racism. They believe they need to  take care of other races for them.

But judging someone on the basis of race is not , in itself, racist. It does not necessarily involve racial hatred or a belief in inferiority of the other race.

"Aversion" racism is not racist. Being uncomfortable socializing with a race is not racism.

White privilege is not racist. It can become racist only if one takes advantage of it knowingly. There is frequently a psychic cost to individuals not attaining privilege.

"Race is not just a way of classifying people, or of talking about people; it is not just "discourse." It is a way of thinking about, experiencing, perceiving, and relating to people. I suggest that it is a morally problematic way of doing so, and that our reluctance to go in for racial labeling may well reflect an often unarticulated awareness of it's moral liabilities. "I'm Not a Racist, But..." by Lawrence Blum, p 102

Races are not socially constructed. They simply do not exist. Racialized groups, however, are socially constructed by the process of racialization. There did not have to be racialized groups, just as there did not have to be nations, but there are, they are full "real", and there is a good deal of agreement as to how we determine someone's racialized group.