Zone1 What is Racism?

IM2

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Mar 11, 2015
77,073
34,261
2,330
I do believe a concrete definition of racism is required here at USMB. This is because we have a segment of the membership here who have created a definition based on things thsat don't meet the standard. This section of the forum is titled race and racism, meaning issues about race and racism are the topics to be discussed. Yet if some members here present issues of race, they are personally attacked, their threads are hijacked and closed while other threads that are openly racist don't get touched.

Racism: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Notice what the definition does not say. It does not say that racism is the mere discussion of race. It does not say that racism is the mention of a persons skin color or race. It does not say that the mention of public plicy, laws or past racist actions by a specific group is racist. Only when such things are stated in a way that infers racial superiority to an ENTIRE RACE, not a subgroup within a race, are those things racist.

So, for example, a white member of the forum stating that blacks in Baltimore commit more violent crimes than blacks elsewhere is not a racist statement. But what happens here is that white members start talking about black crime as evidence t the entire black race is accused of being violent criminals. Never do we see a description of a particular portion of the black community. The same goes with welfare. Then we have the all blacks who vote democrat stuff, which implie that blacks are too stupid to think for ourselves, while white liberals are so much more intelligent based on them being white that we must rely on them for knowledge,that is racist.

Contrast this to pointing out white republican racism, which does not imply that the ENTIRE WHITE RACE is racist, and this is what gets called racism in this forum, primarily by white republicans who make the type of broadbrushing comments about blacks that I posted in the prior paragraph.

So my suggested solution is this, why don't we go by the Websters dictionary definition of racism to evalute what is racist and not the grievance industry defntion?
 
I do believe a concrete definition of racism is required here at USMB. This is because we have a segment of the membership here who have created a definition based on things thsat don't meet the standard. This section of the forum is titled race and racism, meaning issues about race and racism are the topics to be discussed. Yet if some members here present issues of race, they are personally attacked, their threads are hijacked and closed while other threads that are openly racist don't get touched.

Racism: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Notice what the definition does not say. It does not say that racism is the mere discussion of race. It does not say that racism is the mention of a persons skin color or race. It does not say that the mention of public plicy, laws or past racist actions by a specific group is racist. Only when such things are stated in a way that infers racial superiority to an ENTIRE RACE, not a subgroup within a race, are those things racist.

So, for example, a white member of the forum stating that blacks in Baltimore commit more violent crimes than blacks elsewhere is not a racist statement. But what happens here is that white members start talking about black crime as evidence t the entire black race is accused of being violent criminals. Never do we see a description of a particular portion of the black community. The same goes with welfare. Then we have the all blacks who vote democrat stuff, which implie that blacks are too stupid to think for ourselves, while white liberals are so much more intelligent based on them being white that we must rely on them for knowledge,that is racist.

Contrast this to pointing out white republican racism, which does not imply that the ENTIRE WHITE RACE is racist, and this is what gets called racism in this forum, primarily by white republicans who make the type of broadbrushing comments about blacks that I posted in the prior paragraph.

So my suggested solution is this, why don't we go by the Websters dictionary definition of racism to evalute what is racist and not the grievance industry defntion?
You clearly believe that race is the only determinant
of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
Nobody gives a damn that all you post about is race and race-related issues. It is your antagonism toward white folks that shines through. You clearly believe you’re superior and on the basis of race.

Carry on.
 
Racism - To favor or disfavor a group of people based ONLY on their race.

So to dislike blacks because they are violent is not racist because it's not based on their race...it's based on their piss poor behavior.
 
Let’s give some examples of statements, with NR meaning not racist and R meaning racist.

1) Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime: NR
2) Any black person wearing an expensive necklace must have stolen it: R

1) Blacks have a high out-of-wedlock rate, which correlates with poverty: NR
2) Blacks are too impulsive to use birth control: R

1) Obama was a destructive president: NR
2) No black is capable of the presidency: R

1) Tim Scott is an example of what blacks can achieve, despite impoverished beginnings and racism, if they are motivated and disciplined: NR
2) Tim Scott is an Uncle Tom: R
 
I do believe a concrete definition of racism is required here at USMB. This is because we have a segment of the membership here who have created a definition based on things thsat don't meet the standard. This section of the forum is titled race and racism, meaning issues about race and racism are the topics to be discussed. Yet if some members here present issues of race, they are personally attacked, their threads are hijacked and closed while other threads that are openly racist don't get touched.

Racism: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.

Notice what the definition does not say. It does not say that racism is the mere discussion of race. It does not say that racism is the mention of a persons skin color or race. It does not say that the mention of public plicy, laws or past racist actions by a specific group is racist. Only when such things are stated in a way that infers racial superiority to an ENTIRE RACE, not a subgroup within a race, are those things racist.

So, for example, a white member of the forum stating that blacks in Baltimore commit more violent crimes than blacks elsewhere is not a racist statement. But what happens here is that white members start talking about black crime as evidence t the entire black race is accused of being violent criminals. Never do we see a description of a particular portion of the black community. The same goes with welfare. Then we have the all blacks who vote democrat stuff, which implie that blacks are too stupid to think for ourselves, while white liberals are so much more intelligent based on them being white that we must rely on them for knowledge,that is racist.
Read your own posts. You are hands down the most Racist person on this board and for many years.
 
A lame social construct used for manipulation and control of blacks.

plantation.jpg
 
Wow, they changed the definition to meet the narrative.

Racism is a fundamental belief held by a person that a race is superior or inferior solely based on skin color.

That IS the definition of racism.
 
Racism - To favor or disfavor a group of people based ONLY on their race.

So to dislike blacks because they are violent is not racist because it's not based on their race...it's based on their piss poor behavior.
No that's not the definition. Again, you don't get to make up the definition. Websters has defined it, not thunk. Because me not liking whites because they are racist is not racism according to you, it's based on their poor behavior.
 
No that's not the definition. Again, you don't get to make up the defibition. Websters has defined it, not thunk. Because me not liking whites because they are racist is not racism according to you, it's based on their poor behavior.
.




Nor do you.




.
 
Wow, they changed the definition to meet the narrative.

Racism is a fundamental belief held by a person that a race is superior or inferior solely based on skin color.

That IS the definition of racism.
No, the Webster definition has been what I posted for years. So again, you don't get to make the definition, and neither do I. Websters definition is the one we're using.
 
No, the Webster definition has been what I posted for years. So again, you don't get to make the definition, and neither do I. Websters definition is the one we're using.
Why is Websters the definition we are using? Because you said so?

Websters is not the be all and end all of definitions, especially now that it has caved to woke activists. You should see their new definition of the word ”female”! (Hint: it’s someone who identifies as female.)

 
Right now, I am listening to Thomas Sowell on the Mark Levine show. At 93, he still has every brain cell fully operating, and seems a decade younger than Biden.

Born into the segregated South to an impoverished family, he graduated from Harvard magna cum laude, and then got a masters from Columbia and a Ph.D. from the University or Chicago. He has written 45 books, and is a brilliant and accomplished man.

As I type, we are on a commercial break, but in the next segment, Dr. Sowell will speak about race. I suggest IM2 turn to FOX News and listen to what he has to say. He should be a role model for all blacks.
 
No that's not the definition. Again, you don't get to make up the definition. Websters has defined it, not thunk.

Has webster ever changed the definition of words according to the almighty leftists?

Yes they have.

So Thunks definition is every bit as valid as websters! Not to mention...a 30 year old websters dictionary would give the same answer Thunk does.

Especially for the word MARRIAGE!
 
Right now, I am listening to Thomas Sowell on the Mark Levine show. At 93, he still has every brain cell fully operating, and seems a decade younger than Biden.

Born into the segregated South to an impoverished family, he graduated from Harvard magna cum laude, and then got a masters from Columbia and a Ph.D. from the University or Chicago. He has written 45 books, and is a brilliant and accomplished man.

As I type, we are on a commercial break, but in the next segment, Dr. Sowell will speak about race. I suggest IM2 turn to FOX News and listen to what he has to say. He should be a role model for all blacks.
im2 calls him an uncle tom- only uncles leave the plantation.
 
To borrow from Justice Potter Stewart:

I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it...

We should know, of course, that Stewart was not talking about racism, but the quote works here, for me.
 
I do believe a concrete definition of racism is required here at USMB. This is because we have a segment of the membership here who have created a definition based on things thsat don't meet the standard. This section of the forum is titled race and racism, meaning issues about race and racism are the topics to be discussed. Yet if some members here present issues of race, they are personally attacked, their threads are hijacked and closed while other threads that are openly racist don't get touched.

Racism: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
I do not believe that race is fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities. I believe that race correlates with human traits and capacities that are important to the creation of successful societies and civilizations. The most important of these are intelligence, obedience to the law, and monogamy. I believe that these differ between the races because of different population pressures lasting for thousands of years. Cold climates select genetically for intelligence and monogamy. Civilization selects genetically for intelligence and obedience to the law.

I do not care if anyone calls me a racist. A more accurate term for what I believe is race realism. Race realists believe that each race contains those who are stupid, promiscuous criminals and that each race contains those who are intelligent, monogamous people who obey the law, But that the percentages of these people vary between between the races. Orientals tend to be more intelligent, obedient to the law, and monogamous than whites, who tend to be more intelligent, obedient to the law than Negroes.

Race realism is not a movement, like white nationalism is. It is a number of testable hypotheses. Those that cannot be tested now will be testable in the future when more is learned about human genetics. and human pre history.

An excellent explanation of race realism is "Race, Evolution, and Behavior," by Professor J. Philippe Rushton:

Race, Evolution, and Behavior:

If I taught civics in high school I would want to assign my class to read this essay. If I taught political science in college I would want to assign my class to read Professor Rushton's book by this name.
 
Last edited:
im2 calls him an uncle tom- only uncles leave the plantation.
In other words IM2 uses name calling, which is the lowest form of discourse, because he cannot Thomas Sowell's opinions. I can refute a few of Sowell's economic opinions, but I agree with him on race.
 

Forum List

Back
Top