[codygman]

I prefer to go by this definition of racism:

"Racism, however, describes patterns of discrimination that are institutionalized as “normal” throughout an entire culture. It’s based on an ideological belief that one “race” is somehow better than another “race”. It’s not one person discriminating at this point, but a whole population operating in a social structure that actually makes it difficult for a person not to discriminate."

Racial slurs not backed by institutionalized racism are just laughable. For instance if someone called me "Cracker" I'd laugh about it since there isn't a huge past history of people lynching, raping, and harming my race while they chant "Cracker".

You can't say the same about the N-word however.

0: http://racismschool.tumblr.com/Racism:Definitions

[jakub_h]

> It’s based on an ideological belief that one “race” is somehow better than another “race”.

I would actually think that the belief is, or at least used to be, scientific. Note that this is not a statement about the truth value of the claim, but the claim itself was or used to be posed in a way that referred to certain broadly quantifiable phenomena such as intelligence. That in itself is hardly "ideological". "Intelligence is good for a proper society", now that is ideological.

> tumblr.com

Oh my...

[istvan__]

Again, come back to this when you definition made it to the dictionary.

[dang]

Comments like this one and "Your logic is so broken I don't even know where to start" break the HN guidelines. Please read and follow them when commenting here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[istvan__]

Asking somebody to stick to the dictionary definition of words is against HN guidelines??

I am going to take a screenshot and put in on the wall in the office.

Thank you!

[dang]

No, what is against the guidelines are (a) taking swipes at other users, (b) calling names, and (c) posting unsubstantive comments.

[istvan__]

Funny that you never asked the other guys who did the exact same thing to me publicly to stop.

I like how HN just like Reddit is turning into a propaganda machine where you remind everybody who does not support your agenda to follow the rules while all the guys who support your agenda can happily do against the rules, regardless how big lies they are spreading.

Thanks for proving to me that you are no different, double standards for the win!

I guess I will just stick to commenting outside HN.

[dang]

It's not only possible but certain that we don't chastise all violations of the HN guidelines equally, simply because we don't see them all. There are overwhelmingly too many comments for us to read. That doesn't matter in most cases, though, because commenters on HN are required to follow the guidelines even when others are not. Especially when others are not.

There's no agenda that I'm aware of, other than to have HN threads be civil and substantive.