Six Profiles of Racists in America

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Sep 25, 2011
63,590
16,756
2,220
These are six people I have known in my life who seem to represent a set of patterns that represent many arch-types of racist.

1. The Raised Racist; knew this guy back in the 60's who was raised in a family with strong ties to the KKK, as in I think all his parents and grandparents were in the KKK. The guy had no chance any more than a Baptist has of growing up and not being a Klansman. He couldnt defend his beliefs, and gave up trying to. In the end he came to believe his racist upbringing was wrong and he renounced it, but the damage had already been done and he had no friends and his own girlfriend broke up with him. Despite his remorse, no one trusted him. He wound up shooting himself, which is not typical, but a self destructive streak is strong with these folks. They feel trapped by their heritage into something that they feel they can no longer change.

2. The Educated Racist; knew this guy who could quote you any kind of statistic that showed blacks were more inclined to criminality than every other racial or ethnic group in the country. He was ready to debate at the drop of a hat. He never seemed to realize that the statistics were irrelevant since one cannot justify using a system of justice to discriminate against people by race, despite it being done today against whites. Last I heard he had married a mail order bride from the Phillipines and moved to Idaho. Seriously.

3. The Instinctive Racist; In the Army I met this Hispanic guy (Puerto Rican) who I had shared a barracks room with for a while. He was a sharp fellow and quick with his fists. He simply detested black people for what he called being 'Jungle bunnies'. He said that no ethnic community is safe from the 'Jungle Bunnies', no matter their race or religion. He thought that it was perfectly acceptable to do whatever one needed to do to protect oneself against blacks and the optics were irrelevant; only resulting safety mattered. He was known for getting into fights with blacks on and off post as he had a way of frequently using the 'N-Word'. I would consider him a mere bigot were it not for his attribution of the negatives stereotypes he held as applying to all blacks without exception. 'Some monkeys can act like people better than other monkeys,' he said.

He claimed to not hate blacks, but simply 'recognized them for the poorly evolved apes that they are.' He did not believe that the Iaw should be discriminating against blacks, but felt the biggest problem was the legal system shielding blacks from the consequences of their poorly evolved state. I converted to Catholicism about that time and asked him if he saw the differences between the Catholic churches teaching and his own views as troublesome in any way. He said only Anglo priests were nonracial and the Hispanic priests still could think clearly and didnt mimic the white nonsense like Anglo priests did. I have no idea if that is in fact true, but he saw no issue with the church on the matter.

4. The Race Baiter; This black guy I knew blamed everything bad that happened to him on the racism of whites. When the bad stuff happened to him from other blacks, well they were just being stooges for whites. I told him several times that it seemed to me that he was the cause of most of his problems since people dont want to be around people with his kind of negativity, which is an amazing thing coming from me, lol. But he couldnt accept that, like a socially awkward Evangelical who cannot accept that his social problem might have anything to do with them, it is all because of their Christianity. He was also very racist in his view of whites, but he would never try to explain it or defend it since I am white and I wouldnt understand. This guy later got dropped from the military, some kind of chapter whose numerical code I dont remember. The dude was just bad for morale, but that wasnt half as bad as he was for his own future.

5. The Race Manipulater; This Phillipino guy I knew was a very cunning and sly fellow who constantly played whites against blacks, and he wasnt always subtle about it either. Once he was getting dressed down by his white NCO and he got him in an argument with his black platoon sergeant with a couple of quotes of the white sergeants. Another time, some guys were calling him a 'Gook' and he said that that word is 'kind of like calling blacks N1ggers, wasnt it?' He said that just in time for about four black guys to hear it and that got them into the argument and as the whites and blacks got to yelling and shoving, the Phillipino guy snuck off, grinning. I asked him about it once, if that kind of thing always worked for him. After denying any such intent, he finally laughed and said 'It always works'.

6. The Condescending Racist; These are the whites who think blacks cannot help themselves, that they are genetically predetermined to be criminals, failures and idiots. These are the people who think that 'Law and Order' is code for anti-black racism since blacks are naturally criminals. They think that cuts to welfare is racist because blacks are lazy and dont want to work. They think that blacks are too stupid to be able to get their own ID cards, so any requirement to get IDs to vote is inherently racist. One of these guys, a Democratic activist in Arkansas I knew, said that the long term goal was to help blacks to survive and adapt to modern society until genetic engineering could bring them up to white standards, or be 'bred out'. He wouldnt explain what 'bred out' meant exactly.

Every racist I have ever met falls into one of these six categories, and I am leaving out the most common category, that of the Bigot, who doesnt have a reflective, systematic belief system that is built on racial identification. They just dont like people that are very different from them, whether it is race, culture, religion or whatever. They dont hate anyone, they just dont want to live around them, 'That is what tourism is for', one told me once.

So there you have it. If this helps in discussing racial issues, great. I think it most helps in identifying and bringing into focus what actual systematic racism is and what it is not.
 
Last edited:
In my experience, there are very few genuine racists, people who hate another race and are willing to treat them differently. In fact, this has always been the case, going back into history as far as you want to go. Racial discrimination has always been perpetrated by a very small minority of people. Most were simply sheep, too afraid to stand up to the system, but did not themselves agree that people should be treated differently based on race. The Left uses racism as a label they can apply to anyone who disagrees with their agenda and it's used so much that it's actually surprising when I encounter real racism, which is rare.
 
In my experience, there are very few genuine racists, people who hate another race and are willing to treat them differently. In fact, this has always been the case, going back into history as far as you want to go. Racial discrimination has always been perpetrated by a very small minority of people. Most were simply sheep, too afraid to stand up to the system, but did not themselves agree that people should be treated differently based on race. The Left uses racism as a label they can apply to anyone who disagrees with their agenda and it's used so much that it's actually surprising when I encounter real racism, which is rare.

I used to agree with that view, but I pretty much dont any more.

When we are talking about racism as a form of ideology where the deliberate discrimination against a group purely on the basis of race is what 'racism' is defined as, it is fairly common.

Like it or not, the most widespread racism today is against white people as the nonwhite perspective is used as the defining perspective in crimes by the system now, and that is inherently discriminatory. If a black person attacks a white person and says the white person called him the N-Word, then the judge/jury is very likely going to excuse the assault, because the perspective of the nonwhite is always used now in such courtroom conflicts of contradictory claims. If the black person called the white person a 'cracker' and the white person attacked him in response, the court would most likely rule against the white person because again it is the nonwhite perspective that is the determining perspective todcay in our courts.

We used to use a 'common person' perspective in deciding if an action warranted a response of one kind or another, but now the minority perspective/view is ALWAYS the one used by the courts, whether it is man vrs woman, black vrs white por anything else. This is one reasons Hispanic leaders are quite OK to have Hispanic whites to be considered as not white.
 
The real issue with "racism" is not about thoughts, but about actions. During the past 50 years, the impact of government-mandated preferences for minorities has greatly exceeded actual discrimination in employment and other commercial activities, yet the allegations of racism continue to increase. Has this become a permanent aspect of the American psyche?
 
The formula to end racism is simple, white people need to get over themselves, get off the red carpet, accept reality and stop making every mf issue in this country about YOU....and racism would end "yesterday'!!!
 
ELLISON v. BRADY | Leagle.com

We believe that a reasonable woman could have had a similar reaction. After receiving the first bizarre note from Gray, a person she barely knew, Ellison asked a co-worker to tell Gray to leave her alone. Despite her request, Gray sent her a long, passionate, disturbing letter. He told her he had been "watching" and "experiencing" her; he made repeated references to sex; he said he would write again. Ellison had no way of knowing what Gray would do next. A reasonable woman could consider Gray's conduct, as alleged by Ellison, sufficiently severe and pervasive to alter a condition of employment and create an abusive working environment.

Sexual harassment is a major problem in the workplace.15 Adopting the victim's perspective ensures that courts will not "sustain ingrained notions of reasonable behavior fashioned by the offenders." [thus all men are offenders?]


The term "reasonable man" as it is used in the law of torts, traditionally refers to the average adult person, regardless of gender, and the conduct that can reasonably be expected of him or her. For the purposes of the legal issues that are being addressed, such a term assumes that it is applicable to all persons. Section 2000e of Title VII presupposes the use of a legal term that can apply to all persons and the impossibility of a more individually tailored standard. It is clear that the authors of the majority opinion intend a difference between the "reasonable woman" and the "reasonable man" in Title VII cases on the assumption that men do not have the same sensibilities as women. This is not necessarily true. A man's response to circumstances faced by women and their effect upon women can be and in given circumstances may be expected to be understood by men.

It takes no stretch of the imagination to envision two complaints emanating from the same workplace regarding the same conditions, one brought by a woman and the other by a man. Application of the "new standard" presents a puzzlement which is born of the assumption that men's eyes do not see what a woman sees through her eyes. I find it surprising that the majority finds no need for evidence on any of these subjects. ...

The creation of the proposed "new standard" which applies only to women will not necessarily come to the aid of all potential victims of the type of misconduct that is at issue in this case. I believe that a gender neutral standard would greatly contribute to the clarity of this and future cases in the same area.
 
Here the EEOC cites the current existing law that throws out the reasonable person perspective as the legal standard and uses an exclusive 'victims perspective' i.e. not a man or not a white person's perspective.

https://www.myazbar.org/AZAttorney/Archives/Aug-Sept00/discrimination.pdf

Whether the workplace constituted a sexually hostile work environment is determined by looking at the totality of the circumstances including “the frequency of the discriminatory conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it unreasonably interferes with the employee’s work performance.” Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 23 (1993). The Ninth Circuit has adopted the “reasonable victim” standard for hostile work environment sexual harassment. Ellison v. Brady, 924 F.2d 872, 880 (9th Cir. 1991). See also Stingley v. Arizona, 796 F.Supp. 424, 428 (D. Ariz. 1992) (applying reasonable person of same race or color standard to racially hostile work environment claim).
 
The formula to end racism is simple, white people need to get over themselves, get off the red carpet, accept reality and stop making every mf issue in this country about YOU....and racism would end "yesterday'!!!
^^^^ the problem ^^^^
Yep, the race baiters on the left will never voluntarily let gfo of their legal and media propaganda advantage. It will likely require a far worse condition for whites to wake up and shake the lies and distracting cob webs from their minds to realize that they have lost control of thier own country.

As Franklin once said 'You have a Republic, if you can keep it.'

Well, we seem to have finally failed in that endeavor, but we can take it back.
 
In my experience, there are very few genuine racists, people who hate another race and are willing to treat them differently. In fact, this has always been the case, going back into history as far as you want to go. Racial discrimination has always been perpetrated by a very small minority of people. Most were simply sheep, too afraid to stand up to the system, but did not themselves agree that people should be treated differently based on race. The Left uses racism as a label they can apply to anyone who disagrees with their agenda and it's used so much that it's actually surprising when I encounter real racism, which is rare.

I used to agree with that view, but I pretty much dont any more.

When we are talking about racism as a form of ideology where the deliberate discrimination against a group purely on the basis of race is what 'racism' is defined as, it is fairly common.

Like it or not, the most widespread racism today is against white people as the nonwhite perspective is used as the defining perspective in crimes by the system now, and that is inherently discriminatory. If a black person attacks a white person and says the white person called him the N-Word, then the judge/jury is very likely going to excuse the assault, because the perspective of the nonwhite is always used now in such courtroom conflicts of contradictory claims. If the black person called the white person a 'cracker' and the white person attacked him in response, the court would most likely rule against the white person because again it is the nonwhite perspective that is the determining perspective todcay in our courts.

We used to use a 'common person' perspective in deciding if an action warranted a response of one kind or another, but now the minority perspective/view is ALWAYS the one used by the courts, whether it is man vrs woman, black vrs white por anything else. This is one reasons Hispanic leaders are quite OK to have Hispanic whites to be considered as not white.
My own experience confirms that racism is more likely to come from minorities. My father moved our family off the reservation when I was very little because he was determined not to raise us in the hopelessness, despair, and high crime of the Indian ghetto. So I grew up among whites and can honestly say I was never discriminated against by any white adult. They were all fair. I only began to face racism when I married my white wife and that racism didn't come from whites, it came from my people. It seems minorities get a pass on this kind of thing, but if a white has a negative view on interracial marriage, he's a BIGOT and the witch hunt commences. My in laws are wonderfully tolerant people and I learned to just stay away from the red skin bigots.
 
My own experience confirms that racism is more likely to come from minorities. My father moved our family off the reservation when I was very little because he was determined not to raise us in the hopelessness, despair, and high crime of the Indian ghetto. So I grew up among whites and can honestly say I was never discriminated against by any white adult. They were all fair. I only began to face racism when I married my white wife and that racism didn't come from whites, it came from my people. It seems minorities get a pass on this kind of thing, but if a white has a negative view on interracial marriage, he's a BIGOT and the witch hunt commences. My in laws are wonderfully tolerant people and I learned to just stay away from the red skin bigots.
You must be mistaken, because the Marxist Media says only white people can be bigots, OK?

/sarc

lol, thank you for your honesty.
 
The formula to end racism is simple, white people need to get over themselves, get off the red carpet, accept reality and stop making every mf issue in this country about YOU....and racism would end "yesterday'!!!
The irony...
 
The formula to end racism is simple, white people need to get over themselves, get off the red carpet, accept reality and stop making every mf issue in this country about YOU....and racism would end "yesterday'!!!
...said the racist.
 

Forum List

Back
Top