History: Racism in America Today.

[Montgomery]

Really?

How do you know that, academically speaking?

I mean, if they're careful not to "openly display their racist feeling", how are you so god-like perceptive to see their "racist feeling" that they've hidden so well?



The much more likely truth is the vast majority of Americans simply aren't racist, obviously.

Close to half of Americans who cared to vote supported Trump, academically speaking. lol
Those Americans supported racism because Trump declared himself to be a racist with his 'birtherism' comments. academically speaking.
If you would care for further academic discussion on the issue of racism in America then I'll be here to oblige you.

And maybe they aren't "acting out violently against Black people" because .. .. they're actually not racist or violent.

I think you've perhaps been reading a lot of leftist troll farm material.

Not academic.

There is no "prevalence of racism in America" to ignore -- it doesn't exist ..

.. Except in the minds of the emotionally weak and susceptible to BLM's conspiracy theory mass hysteria that there is.

But, of course, such fantasies do not reflect reality.

Claiming that racism doesn't exist in America is something that doesn't belong in your academic discussion.

Did you know that the founders of BLM have openly admitted in interviews that they are trained Marxists?

Did you know that BLM's founding philosophy is the communist ideology called critical race theory?

No, I didn't know either claim was made but I'm especially interested in hearing more about your theories.

I've had to cut your comments short but there's nothing I've left out that I didn't find interesting. I've just limited your talking points and deleted much of which was repetitious.

I suspect that in America there is an extreme leftist element fighting against an extreme rightist element but I have no proof of the former.
Fascism is the traditional sworn enemy of communism, and vice versa.

 

[Ontologuy]

Close to half of Americans who cared to vote supported Trump, academically speaking. lol
Those Americans supported racism because Trump declared himself to be a racist with his 'birtherism' comments. academically speaking.
If you would care for further academic discussion on the issue of racism in America then I'll be here to oblige you.

Your premise that "birtherism" equates to "racism" is simply false.

I pointed out your error here to you in the previous post, complete with a link to the accurate definitions of "racism".

You might do well, academically, to read it.

Not academic.

I agree that the leftist troll farm material you've apparently been reading is simply not academic material.

Claiming that racism doesn't exist in America is something that doesn't belong in your academic discussion.

You need to stop beating your wife, as that's irrelevant to your academic discussion.

Or, in other words, you've misquoted/misinterpreted me, clearly and dishonestly on purpose, and your misquoting/misinterpreting of what I said renders your argument, fallacious, facetious, and unworthy of the term "academic".

There's no systemic racism in America. You would again do well, academically, to read that previous link I provided you on the accurate definitions of "racism".

No, I didn't know either claim was made but I'm especially interested in hearing more about your theories.

So what you're saying here is that you don't know that BLM's founders have admitted in interviews that they are trained Marxists. That's surprising, since videos of those interviews were all over the place last year, including at this forum. But, then again, if you don't like what you're seeing, you're ideology can function to deny it out of existence for you. Nevertheless, it's true: they are admitted trained Marxists. It's not a "theory" that they're Marxists -- they've flat out admitted it.

And, yes, also not a "theory" is their admission that the communist ideology critical race theory is BLM's foundational philosophy.

You might do well, academically, to bone up on the relevant facts here. My signature link might be a good place to start.

I've had to cut your comments short but there's nothing I've left out that I didn't find interesting. I've just limited your talking points and deleted much of which was repetitious.

Translation: "I Montgomery, found your comments I omitted here to be anxiety-provokingly accurate, and there simply wasn't anything I could have said to accurately refute them. So I decided not to say anything about them in response.".

I suspect that in America there is an extreme leftist element fighting against an extreme rightist element but I have no proof of the former.
Fascism is the traditional sworn enemy of communism, and vice versa.

From what I've observed in America, there's an extreme leftist ideology, lead by Marxist communist BLM. That you say you have no proof of the existence of avowed Marxist communist BLM is disingenuous. To say that you don't think BLM is extreme leftist (Marxist communist) is simply a denial of obvious reality.

Marxist communism is the sworn enemy of capitalism, not "fascism". Your assumptive dualism that if Marxist communism exists then there must be fascism in existence is ludicrously false and a poor argument that fascism exists and/or exists, by your obvious false assumption "in Trump and all throughout the Republican Party".

Your clear non-academic sophistry here is not even a "nice try".

 

[Crakhobarbie]

No, southerners don't want their slaves back and know very well that they couldn't have them back. There was a long period of many years in which the souterners didn't accept that they could keep slaves.
And then I'm suggesting that led to hating and racism of black people.

Compromises needed to be made with southern slave holders to make Union of the country possible.

Southerners accepted that slavery was over. And, they presumably held a grudge over the loss of their way of life. But they had ALWAYS believed they were superior to the black man. It had little to do with no longer being allowed to own them. Also, there was a very clear and wide divide between the southern states and those that forced emancipation of POC upon them. The hatred and racism was there long before the loss to the North.

 

[Luce]

Though the American Civil War was fought for economic reasons (the North couldn't compete with the South's slave labor)

Wrong.

Economics and the Civil War

Economics and the Civil War-the differences between the North and South and how the effected both sides

www.historycentral.com

.

 

[Luce]

Your premise that "birtherism" equates to "racism" is simply false.

It is not false, and your dogwhistling is obvious.

 

[Montgomery]

So what you're saying here is that you don't know that BLM's founders have admitted in interviews that they are trained Marxists.

No, I didn't know that but I'll take your word for it that some BLM founders said they are trained Marxists.
That is, at least until you fail to provide some evidence of such. If you don't provide the evidence then I'll just assume you've invented it.
Take a day or two.

 

[Binary_Digit]

The much more likely truth is the vast majority of Americans simply aren't racist, obviously.

Racist is a relative term. It's a bias, and like all biases, it exists in all different levels. It's not a binary either/or like a light switch, it's a gradient like a volume knob.

Racism in America today manifests mostly in microaggressions and the soft bigotry of lowered expectations. Black Americans tend to receive substandard customer service and medical care, are often challenged by police to prove they live in their own homes and are the owners of their own vehicles, are sometimes followed around stores because the clerk is afraid they might steal something, are often overlooked for job interviews and/or promotions simply because their name is Jamal instead of James, and white people act like they are inherently afraid of them.

I'll never forget a conversation I had with a random old black man in an Oklahoma Whataburger. He told me he was disappointed in his nephew who'd just turned 18 and graduated H.S., but still lived at home and didn't have a job. He said he offered his nephew a job but he turned him down. So I asked what kind of job and he said landscaping. I said I can't blame him for not liking that kind of work, digging ditches in the hot sun, and said maybe he's more cut out to be working at a desk in the air conditioning. I know that's where I'd rather be. The man looked like a ghost had just slapped him in the face. I think he seriously expected me to express worry that his nephew might be on the verge of getting into gangs and/or drugs, and that he should continue pushing his nephew to become a modern-day sharecropper instead of setting his sights higher. I could tell that made his day, maybe even his entire week, and I could sense that he almost wanted to hug me for it.

 

[Montgomery]

Racist is a relative term. It's a bias, and like all biases, it exists in all different levels. It's not a binary either/or like a light switch, it's a gradient like a volume knob.

Racism in America today manifests mostly in microaggressions and the soft bigotry of lowered expectations. Black Americans tend to receive substandard customer service and medical care, are often challenged by police to prove they live in their own homes and are the owners of their own vehicles, are sometimes followed around stores because the clerk is afraid they might steal something, are often overlooked for job interviews and/or promotions simply because their name is Jamal instead of James, and white people act like they are inherently afraid of them.

I'll never forget a conversation I had with a random old black man in an Oklahoma Whataburger. He told me he was disappointed in his nephew who'd just turned 18 and graduated H.S., but still lived at home and didn't have a job. He said he offered his nephew a job but he turned him down. So I asked what kind of job and he said landscaping. I said I can't blame him for not liking that kind of work, digging ditches in the hot sun, and said maybe he's more cut out to be working at a desk in the air conditioning. I know that's where I'd rather be. The man looked like a ghost had just slapped him in the face. I think he seriously expected me to express worry that his nephew might be on the verge of getting into gangs and/or drugs, and that he should continue pushing his nephew to become a modern-day sharecropper instead of setting his sights higher. I could tell that made his day, maybe even his entire week, and I could sense that he almost wanted to hug me for it.

You really do get it! You could also call it a 'race' problem that Americans have created because of attitudes on non-acceptance

 

[Tigerace117]

that sort of nonsense would have resulted in years of guerrilla war by southern military members. Fortunately Lincoln was smarter than that

Gee, you mean like what happened anyway? Jesse James and his ilk were former Confederates still trying to strike a blow against the “damn Yankees“.....and the Klan was an outgrowth of former Confederates as well.

 

[Binary_Digit]

You really do get it! You could also call it a 'race' problem that Americans have created because of attitudes on non-acceptance

White Americans of the past created it, and white Americans of the present continue the tradition by blaming black people for it. The oft-regurgitated crime statistics are a prime example. Inner city ghettos exist solely because white people didn't want to share after the Civil Rights Act told them they had to, so they all moved to the suburbs in an event called White Flight. Now they blame black people for living in inner city ghettos and shooting each other up. Police patrol their neighborhoods actively looking for crime while the white suburbs are left alone, so when more black people than white people are scooped up for crimes, it's used as a means to justify further patrolling of their neighborhoods. Add in the horrible "3 strikes you're out" 1994 Crime Bill and America's prison population swelled by a factor of 7x. And of course, black people are given longer prison sentences when they do get scooped up.

White people rightfully don't want to be blamed for the sins of their fathers, but they also typically don't want to do much to help cure the problems of today either, calling attempts to address it things like "reverse discrimination".

 

[Montgomery]

White Americans of the past created it, and white Americans of the present continue the tradition by blaming black people for it. The oft-regurgitated crime statistics are a prime example. Inner city ghettos exist solely because white people didn't want to share after the Civil Rights Act told them they had to, so they all moved to the suburbs in an event called White Flight. Now they blame black people for living in inner city ghettos and shooting each other up. Police patrol their neighborhoods actively looking for crime while the white suburbs are left alone, so when more black people than white people are scooped up for crimes, it's used as a means to justify further patrolling of their neighborhoods. Add in the horrible "3 strikes you're out" 1994 Crime Bill and America's prison population swelled by a factor of 7x. And of course, black people are given longer prison sentences when they do get scooped up.

White people rightfully don't want to be blamed for the sins of their fathers, but they also typically don't want to do much to help cure the problems of today either, calling attempts to address it things like "reverse discrimination".

If I said to you, lack of acceptance of black people as equals, because of racist attitudes, created a 'race' problem and then that created a bigger racism problem? I hope so because we're certainly on the same page with this.

In any event, the problem is now so big that it's going to be very, very difficult to change. White people would have to relax their racism in order to begin to fix the 'race' problems. In that order because it can't be reversed in my opinion.

 

[Ontologuy]

Wrong.

Economics and the Civil War

Economics and the Civil War-the differences between the North and South and how the effected both sides

www.historycentral.com

.

False.

You presented the link, but then didn't apparently read it well.

Clearly the differences economically were oriented in the cheap slave labor that produced a tariff war between the two that created unfair trade. Though rich business owners in the North were supposedly "happy" with higher foreign tariffs, middle income and poorer northerners were not, obviously.

Were it not for the economic aspects of slavery that caused unfair competition between the North and South, directly or through European markets, the war might not have been fought.

Once Lincoln was elected and the South therefore seceded, foreign countries began to deal directly with the South, and the South's tariff-free cheap textiles, among other products resulted in a cheaper cost to the South, whereas the tariff-high North paid a higher price for the same goods.

Though Northerners still weren't ready to fight, die, and kill to remedy these inequities, Lincoln and others started marketing that "slavery was against God and God wants us Northerners to free the slaves and end the evil of slavery".

This recruitment reality isn't covered in your link's very brief summary that omits many of the economic aspects of why the American Civil War was fought.

 

[Binary_Digit]

If I said to you, lack of acceptance of black people as equals, because of racist attitudes, created a 'race' problem and then that created a bigger racism problem? I hope so because we're certainly on the same page with this.

In any event, the problem is now so big that it's going to be very, very difficult to change. White people would have to relax their racism in order to begin to fix the 'race' problems. In that order because it can't be reversed in my opinion.

Without a doubt I agree with that line of reasoning.

I think one of the first steps has to be acknowledgement and acceptance. If white people are part of the problem, then white people need to be part of the solution, but that can't happen until they can recognize and acknowledge the ways in which they have been part of the problem. Silence and excuse making being two of the most prominent ways.

 

[Ontologuy]

It is not false, and your dogwhistling is obvious.

Your conspiracy theory about dog whistling is simply that and is to be rightly ignored.

The "birther movement" in both etiology and function, everything about it, is simply not racism, obviously.

But, if you think it is, then simply show via the accurate definition of "racism" that it is by accurately pointing to the true details of the "birther movement" and how it thereby conforms to a given definition of "racism". I'll help you out by providing the link that accurately presents the definition of "racism": ACCURATELY Defined Racism and Discrimination -- The Ethical Standard We Should ALL Observe .

I'll be waiting for an attempt by you at an intelligent response.

 

[Montgomery]

Without a doubt I agree with that line of reasoning.

I think one of the first steps has to be acknowledgement and acceptance. If white people are part of the problem, then white people need to be part of the solution, but that can't happen until they can recognize and acknowledge the ways in which they have been part of the problem. Silence and excuse making being two of the most prominent ways.

I'm pleased that we understand each other! I don't think that black people can take the first step, or even want to take it. There is no attitude of them accepting part of the blame, even though that's understandable why they wouldn't. I think the first step black people will take is to exacerbate the problem with more resolve. Surely Kamala represents that resolve to them now. She was the only reason why Biden could be accepted as president.

Biden talks a good line on white people needing to make the first step at least.

I have no solutions beyond what I've already suggested, but those suggestions fall short.

 

[Binary_Digit]

I'm pleased that we understand each other! I don't think that black people can take the first step, or even want to take it. There is no attitude of them accepting part of the blame, even though that's understandable why they wouldn't. I think the first step black people will take is to exacerbate the problem with more resolve. Surely Kamala represents that resolve to them now. She was the only reason why Biden could be accepted as president.

Biden talks a good line on white people needing to make the first step at least.

I have no solutions beyond what I've already suggested, but those suggestions fall short.

Black people have already taken the first 1,000,000 steps, only to be deliberately tripped up at nearly every turn. It's been a long standing tradition for white people to talk a good game but then go back to business as usual and fail to act in a meaningful way. It's long past our turn to step up, and I would start with criminal justice reform. George Floyd needs to be this generation's Emmett Till. So utterly unacceptable that the movement lasts a decade.

 

[Montgomery]

Your conspiracy theory about dog whistling is simply that and is to be rightly ignored.

The "birther movement" in both etiology and function, everything about it, is simply not racism, obviously.

But, if you think it is, then simply show via the accurate definition of "racism" that it is by accurately pointing to the true details of the "birther movement" and how it thereby conforms to a given definition of "racism". I'll help you out by providing the link that accurately presents the definition of "racism": ACCURATELY Defined Racism and Discrimination -- The Ethical Standard We Should ALL Observe .

I'll be waiting for an attempt by you at an intelligent response.

I would give you the racism/birtherism debate to you if it would bring you back down. It was only one example of Trump's use of inherent racism in most Americans.

You might make a good engineer because you have an aptitude for strictly the 'technical' and are mostly bereft of any ability to understand the 'social' component of any debate. I guess all kinds are needed to make the world go round, but yours isn't helpful.

I've given you the debate on birtherism not being racism. I hope some others will be so generous.

 

[Ontologuy]

Racist is a relative term. It's a bias, and like all biases, it exists in all different levels. It's not a binary either/or like a light switch, it's a gradient like a volume knob.

Your statement that "racism" is a relative term is pure sophistry, sophistry by which you then erroneously think you're free to define it as you wish to suit your preconceived ideological mindset.

Here is the accurate definition of "racism": ACCURATELY Defined Racism and Discrimination -- The Ethical Standard We Should ALL Observe .

"Racism" and "bias" are clearly two very different words with clearly very different meanings.

Racism in America today manifests mostly in microaggressions and the soft bigotry of lowered expectations. Black Americans tend to receive substandard customer service and medical care, are often challenged by police to prove they live in their own homes and are the owners of their own vehicles, are sometimes followed around stores because the clerk is afraid they might steal something, are often overlooked for job interviews and/or promotions simply because their name is Jamal instead of James, and white people act like they are inherently afraid of them.

"Microaggression" has been defined by BLM to be racism. But, of course, that doesn't make it so. No matter how much BLM's "cancel culture" mob bullies people into thinking it is, bullying does not make it so.

Accusations of "microaggression", a truly fabricated concept, is simply a BLM excuse at controlling perfectly acceptable non-racist thinking and speaking to suit Marxist communist BLM's obvious purposes.

As to your other cliches, none of these have been accurately qualified and quantified. They're merely a handful of anecdotes that the left has jumped on in the spirit of communist critical race theory, and there's no validation from these "stories" that there's "systemic" racism in America or that "police in America target Black people with brutality".

Both Black and White suspiciously behaving people get followed at times in stores in poor neighborhoods or in more middle class neighborhoods when there poverty dress and suspicious behavior signal to security that the history of such people means the possibility of a theft is higher .. none of which policing is "racist" in any way.

That there is an equity disparity by race in America is not about racism. There are other reasons that people from India have the highest income by race in America, Asians are second, Whites are third, ... and Black-African Americans are last.

If you want more topically relevant information I suggest you read the linked article in the OP post of my signature.

I'll never forget a conversation I had with a random old black man in an Oklahoma Whataburger. He told me he was disappointed in his nephew who'd just turned 18 and graduated H.S., but still lived at home and didn't have a job. He said he offered his nephew a job but he turned him down. So I asked what kind of job and he said landscaping. I said I can't blame him for not liking that kind of work, digging ditches in the hot sun, and said maybe he's more cut out to be working at a desk in the air conditioning. I know that's where I'd rather be. The man looked like a ghost had just slapped him in the face. I think he seriously expected me to express worry that his nephew might be on the verge of getting into gangs and/or drugs, and that he should continue pushing his nephew to become a modern-day sharecropper instead of setting his sights higher. I could tell that made his day, maybe even his entire week, and I could sense that he almost wanted to hug me for it.

Your personal anecdote story does not reflect the existence of "racism". The old Black man's attitude does not reflect the existence of "racism" today, or even in his past, as his attitude could likely not be based on reality but merely on erroneously perceived bias and collective ideology, similar to what binds leftists today.

 

[Montgomery]

Black people have already taken the first 1,000,000 steps, only to be deliberately tripped up at nearly every turn. It's been a long standing tradition for white people to talk a good game but then go back to business as usual and fail to act in a meaningful way. It's long past our turn to step up, and I would start with criminal justice reform. George Floyd needs to be this generation's Emmett Till. So utterly unacceptable that the movement lasts a decade.

Sure, black people have already taken the first million steps. But none of that will be credited to them as America goes forward from here on in. I'm only saying that black people have hardened their resolve to be treated as equals.

Can you agree that Obama exacerbated the problem because of white people making him out to 'BE SO UPPITY AS TO PRESUME HE COULD BE THE PRESIDENT FOR WHITE PEOPLE too?

This is why I keep saying that the problem that exists in America is so utterly impossible to fix. More hardened resolve by black people, even though it is righteous and justifiable, is not a way forward to the solution.
After Trump is forgotten, blacks might have to take the one million and one step. Just look at ontologuy for an example of how the more the younger generation comes up, the worse they get!!

I have nothing more to offer right now but I'll be staying tuned to your posts.

 

[Ontologuy]

No, I didn't know that but I'll take your word for it that some BLM founders said they are trained Marxists

There are only three people, three Black women, who founded the organization Black Lives Matter (BLM).

All of them, not just "some", have admitted in interviews that they are trained Marxists. A Marxist, of course, is a violent communist.

Here is just one of the many interviews previously posted at this forum last year in which a BLM co-founder states they are trained Marxists, this one featuring Patrisse Cullors: Patrisse Cullors Admits She and her BLM Co-Founders are Trained Marxists .

That is, at least until you fail to provide some evidence of such. If you don't provide the evidence then I'll just assume you've invented it.
Take a day or two.

So you'll take my word for it "until" I fail to provide some evidence of it. And of course, you want me to take a day or two so you can jump to an erroneous conclusion that my statement is false.



I did your homework for you this time.

Now that you know that BLM is a Marxist communist organization that is simply using Black people as sacrificial pawns to accomplish their communist purposes of inroads into government control to inject communism, I'd be curious to see if you've actually begun to question how you got BLM so wrong.

 

[Montgomery]

There are only three people, three Black women, who founded the organization Black Lives Matter (BLM).

All of them, not just "some", have admitted in interviews that they are trained Marxists. A Marxist, of course, is a violent communist.

Here is just one of the many interviews previously posted at this forum last year in which a BLM co-founder states they are trained Marxists, this one featuring Patrisse Cullors: Patrisse Cullors Admits She and her BLM Co-Founders are Trained Marxists .



So you'll take my word for it "until" I fail to provide some evidence of it. And of course, you want me to take a day or two so you can jump to an erroneous conclusion that my statement is false.



I did your homework for you this time.

Now that you know that BLM is a Marxist communist organization that is simply using Black people as sacrificial pawns to accomplish their communist purposes of inroads into government control to inject communism, I'd be curious to see if you've actually begun to question how you got BLM so wrong.

No, that doesn't work. Her saying that they are trained Marxists doesn't mean that they are literally 'trained' to be Marxists. It could mean that some of them are very familiar with some of the more familiar positive points on Marxism. That's a good thing, wouldn't you say?

First you have to familiarize yourself with Marx's ideology and not just adopt a kneejerk US interpretation of what constitutes Marxism.

For example, I'm a Canadian who upholds our style of 'socially responsible' capitalism and that borrows from Marx. So there's your homework assignment for today.

 

[Ontologuy]

I would give you the racism/birtherism debate to you if it would bring you back down.

Your "if" clause here is an ad hominem made in lieu of admitting that you were simply in error when you said that the "birther movement" is racist.

It was only one example of Trump's use of inherent racism in most Americans.

Trump was falsely accused of being a racist by BLM, and he was thus accused not because of anything he definitely said or did, but only because he in his visual image is the antithesis of BLM's critical race theory ideology: Trump is White, male, conservative, Christian, and straight. All those combine to make him the leftists' antithesis and thus "worthy" in their eyes of having his character assassinated via false accusations of racism slung at him.

Trump is simply not a racist. He may have been only a CEO, good at economics, international trade, and fighting for American jobs, all Americans' jobs, and though he wasn't a political scientist, politician, or psychologist, and he bungled his presentations like a buffoon on COVID-19 in the name of "avoiding panic" .. he was simply not a racist.

You might make a good engineer because you have an aptitude for strictly the 'technical' and are mostly bereft of any ability to understand the 'social' component of any debate. I guess all kinds are needed to make the world go round, but yours isn't helpful.

Translation: "You, Ontologuy, were right in your presentations and I, Montgomery, was wrong, so I can no longer continue making what I now know are false statements, and that kind of pisses me off, so I'll just attack you with a false fabricated ad hominem here so I don't feel so bad."

I've given you the debate on birtherism not being racism.

But have you "given it", as you say, because you realize you were factually wrong or for some other reason?

I hope some others will be so generous.

Meaningless ad hominem in the form of a patronizing statement.

 

[Ontologuy]

No, that doesn't work. Her saying that they are trained Marxists doesn't mean that they are literally 'trained' to be Marxists.

OMG, Montgomery, could your sophistry be more obvious?! "Trained Marxists" and "trained to be Marxists" is pretty much the same thing here. And BLM's contrived Marxist dualism of oppressed Blacks v. oppressor Whites is clear evidene that BLM's presentation from communist critical race theory is Marxism that they're executing.

It could mean that some of them are very familiar with some of the more familiar positive points on Marxism. That's a good thing, wouldn't you say? First you have to familiarize yourself with Marx's ideology and not just adopt a kneejerk US interpretation of what constitutes Marxism. For example, I'm a Canadian who upholds our style of 'socially responsible' capitalism and that borrows from Marx. So there's your homework assignment for today.

The rest of your post here is simply pure denial -- you've realized that BLM is a communist Marxist organization, founded by communist Marxists, executing Marxist ideology in the framing of their statements .. and yet for some probably ideological reason, or because they've successfully duped you into thinking BLM is all about "anti racism" when that's merely their Marxist Trojan horse, you can't bring yourself to say the obvious, that BLM is indeed a communist Marxist organization .. and such an organization is a bad thing in a capitalist society, obviously.

Why don't you do yourself an edifying favor and read the linked article in the OP of my signature link below. It may be worth it to you.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Your statement that "racism" is a relative term is pure sophistry, sophistry by which you then erroneously think you're free to define it as you wish to suit your preconceived ideological mindset.

Here is the accurate definition of "racism": ACCURATELY Defined Racism and Discrimination -- The Ethical Standard We Should ALL Observe .

"Racism" and "bias" are clearly two very different words with clearly very different meanings.



"Microaggression" has been defined by BLM to be racism. But, of course, that doesn't make it so. No matter how much BLM's "cancel culture" mob bullies people into thinking it is, bullying does not make it so.

Accusations of "microaggression", a truly fabricated concept, is simply a BLM excuse at controlling perfectly acceptable non-racist thinking and speaking to suit Marxist communist BLM's obvious purposes.

As to your other cliches, none of these have been accurately qualified and quantified. They're merely a handful of anecdotes that the left has jumped on in the spirit of communist critical race theory, and there's no validation from these "stories" that there's "systemic" racism in America or that "police in America target Black people with brutality".

Both Black and White suspiciously behaving people get followed at times in stores in poor neighborhoods or in more middle class neighborhoods when there poverty dress and suspicious behavior signal to security that the history of such people means the possibility of a theft is higher .. none of which policing is "racist" in any way.

That there is an equity disparity by race in America is not about racism. There are other reasons that people from India have the highest income by race in America, Asians are second, Whites are third, ... and Black-African Americans are last.

If you want more topically relevant information I suggest you read the linked article in the OP post of my signature.



Your personal anecdote story does not reflect the existence of "racism". The old Black man's attitude does not reflect the existence of "racism" today, or even in his past, as his attitude could likely not be based on reality but merely on erroneously perceived bias and collective ideology, similar to what binds leftists today.

Merriam Webster has a fine definition of what racism is, but I would not consider them to be the final authority on what racism is not. The American Psychological Association, for example, combines the terms when it says racial bias is everywhere but we may not always see it. They also indicate that racism and bias are at least closely related in their own definition of racism here:

Individual racism is a personal belief in the superiority of one’s race over another. It is linked to racial prejudice and discriminatory behaviors, which can be an expression of implicit and explicit bias.

I had said racism is a bias, but perhaps it's more accurate if I say racism leads to bias?

Still, there's a sizable difference in levels of bigotry between burning crosses in their yard versus genuinely wishing them well while subconsciously underestimating their capabilities or qualifications, or only appreciating the ones who "act white." Do you agree?

You may have first heard about the concept of microaggressions from BLM last summer, but Psychology Today talked about it 10 years ago and it involves more than just race.

On equity disparity and systemic racism, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, as of 2003 resumes with black names were 50% less likely to get called for interviews. And here are 26 more examples from BI.

I appreciate the offer for more relevant information on CRT, but my beliefs are not based on CRT and as you can probably see I prefer high quality sources of authority, not so much things like blog posts from BraveNewAmerican. Thanks though!

 

[Ontologuy]

Merriam Webster has a fine definition of what racism is, but I would not consider them to be the final authority on what racism is not.

Of course you wouldn't consider them to be the "final authority" on the definition of racism .. because that way your situational relativism gets to reference any old perhaps likely agenda-biased link and consider it accurate, when it's not.

Bottom line, civilized society has objective standards, and when it comes to word definitions the dictionary people, Merriam-Webster, are the acknowledged "final authority".

They focus on weeding out biased-erroneous contrived descriptions of a word's meaning so that we can all be assured of accuracy.

Any attempt to discredit Merriam-Webster's definition of racism is a debate loser from the start, obviously.

The American Psychological Association, for example, combines the terms when it says racial bias is everywhere but we may not always see it. They also indicate that racism and bias are at least closely related in their own definition of racism here: Individual racism is a personal belief in the superiority of one’s race over another. It is linked to racial prejudice and discriminatory behaviors, which can be an expression of implicit and explicit bias.

You provide here the perfect example as to why we trust Merriam-Webster and not any other organization: organizations can be bought/coerced; the dictionary people, Merriam-Webster, can't.

Your first link here is to an opinion peace by an APA member, and his presentation is clearly biased.

Your second link is illustrated with an apparent BLM rally, and thus it most certainly can't be trusted to tell the defining truth.

The only definitions we can trust as accurate are those provided by those whose reputation is at stake for the definitions themselves that they provide: Merriam-Webster.

The APA's editorials, likely shaped by BLM collusion/coercion, cannot be objectively trusted to be accurate.

I had said racism is a bias, but perhaps it's more accurate if I say racism leads to bias?

It doesn't matter, topically speaking. There is no structural racism in America today. Racism should really not be the unjustifiably huge topic it is today.

The only reason racism has been blown into the erroneous definitions and descriptions of it that exist today from unqualified non-authenticated sources is caused by BLM's conspiracy theory mass hysteria about it.