Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jmaygarden 4339 days ago
The references for that Wikipedia statement are both from the last five years. One reference is an article titled "Only white people can be racist." That's hardly an unbiased definition of a much older term.

Since 1933, the definition of racism according to Merriam-Webster has been "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."

Why the more recent trend of redefining a clear term to include results of racism when institutionalized by those in power? That seems disingenuous and counterproductive.

2 comments

I wouldn't look to 1933 white people to define racism. Yes, the Merriam-Webster definition stinks. Go with the US Civil Rights Commission's definition. They are more researched and sensitive to the issue. Here is the Civil Rights Commission's definition again:

"Is any action or attitude, conscious or unconscious, that subordinates an individual or group based on skin colour or race. It can be enacted individually or institutionally."

In case you think I'm making a non sequitur again, the power component comes from the word "subordinates."

What?!!! How the hell were schools in the U.S. South desegregated in the early 60's but with force of troops.
Huh? What does that have to do with changing the meaning of words?
Racism Is any action or attitude, conscious or unconscious, that subordinates an individual or group based on skin colour or race. It can be enacted individually or institutionally.

Source: US Civil Rights Commission

How is a white person subordinated and controlled in the U.S. based on race to where that white person does not have recourse to the the law, the courts, the police, them finding another job, or just avoiding the offending person? If you have a problem with a person you avoid them or address the law. Racially oppressed people don't escape the situation so easily hence why racism is debilitating.

Nobody said that white people are oppressed. There is some kind of communication breakdown going on because you keep accusing myself and other individuals of claiming that we as white men are afraid of being oppressed. No one under my comment you responded to said that, so please stop acting like we did.
Why are you not seeing the word "subordinates" in the US Civil Rights Commission definition of racism. People are subordinated when the law fails to protect them. The law can fail to protect you due to corruption, bad management, or institutional racism. If you are white and the law fails you I'm saying it is not institutional racism.
The difference here is one of degree, not kind, as institutional racism is built out of a whole lot of individual racism.

Anyone who mistreats someone because of the color of their skin or defends the practice is doing wrong and I see no value in defending that. Standing against individual racism is a necessary part of standing against institutional racism and I don't think a reasonable person can condemn one but not the other.

I think we're being trolled. This moo character is a master of non sequitur.
Oppress is a synonym for subordinate as used by the US Civil Rights Commission. So why don't you people calling me a troll use the word oppress for your white condition instead of pulling out magical meanings for racism.
I'm sorry, to those accusing me of non sequitur because I'm making too large of jumps in logical reasoning. I'll try to remember, "baby steps, baby steps."