Racism is the idea of thinking one race is superior (overall) to another. What it does not mean is what the left is trying to corrupt the term into: that pointing out there are any cultural or statistical differences between the races (cultures), is trying to oppress minorities, or that all differences in cultural outcome are the fault of Social Injustices or Institutional Racism by the white majority. Here's a bunch of articles on Racism. What is and is not racist. 41 items
The ACLU moronically claims that pulling out of the do-nothing Paris Climate Accord was fostering racism, other outlets claim it's the end of civilization (or American leadership). If they could do basic economics, they'd remember that the 400,000 jobs that the billions of dollars to Paris would have cost, would most likely have to come from somewhere, and that's usually those on the bottom end of the employment scales (which are often minorities). Every place that repeated that claim without mocking it, was propagating FakeNews.
Those are the parts I focus on, the myths about Lincoln, the Civil War and Slavery.
How not to impress HR. Of course, if they can't take a joke, then they don't impress me either.
Critical Race Theory is part of broader Marxist/Fascist Critical Theory -- the philosophy that we need government to rule us to create utopia. Different branches of it argue over what is the correct excuse to bring on the same central authority (tyranny), but they have the same ends. So whether they are using racial injustice, gender, sexual identity, class, culture, or other beliefs -- all roads lead to the same ends. And they all use the same excuse to get there. Tear down the systems and history and perception of what is and was good... so that you can sell people on a fiction of a better tomorrow, if you just give the Marxists control over all our lives. Critical race theory just one implementation of that, that says the proper excuse for destroying us as a culture is racial inequality.
Just a list of racist Democrats, their actions, or their supporters. This isn't used for moral equivalence and doesn't excuse Republican/Conservative Racists, but it is a reminder to hypocrites that are always pointing fingers, that they don't have to go so far from home to fix problems. The old mote in thy brothers eye, while ignoring the log in thy own. Democrats (or their leadership) aren't against racism, they are only against Republicans and use racism as a cudgel, or they would address these problems.
Just a list of Democrat, or their supporters, examples of hate. This isn't used for moral equivalence, and wouldn't excuse Republican/Conservative Hate: but it is a reminder to hypocrites that are always pointing fingers, that they don't have to go so far from home to fix problems. The left, DNC (and American progressives) have a long history of being the party of hate. The right was usually opposed to them, or not as bad. That hardly makes Conservatives/Republicans saints, but there is the old mote in thy brothers eye, while ignoring the log in thy own problem, among the left.
The FakeHate grievance industry is so broad, that they are branching out, and have to have multiple divisions. Hey, you get what you incentivize. and the virtue signaling left rewards victimhood -- so people are lining up to join in. This is just the subset of FakeHate that is specifically about fake racial crimes.
Here's a list of some of the Fake Victims: Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman • Alton Sterling • Micah Xavier Johnson • Alfred Olango Shooting • Breonna Taylor • Eric Garner • Henry Louis Gates • Jacob Blake • Keith Lamont Scott • Michael Brown • OJ Simpson • Philando Castile • Rodney King • Sandra Bland • Valerie Plame •
My Grandpa (a WWII veteran, and Goose Hunter), was disgusted by cruelty to animals. Once when talking about bullfighting in Mexico (something he did not approve of) he said, "the Mexican Indians were a dumb race, the Spanish were a cruel race, and you put them together and you have a dumb cruel race". Around the same time (1972) he once gave me the speech about the difference between, "blacks and niggers". Both actions, by today's standards, would be called racist. And the comments certainly weren't racially sensitive (e.g. they were offensive), but was he really a racist? It is a bit more nuanced than what is on the surface.
There's this fallacy invented and propagated by the far left (and part of Black Conspiracy Theology), meant to undermine America, called "Systemic Racism" (aka Institutional Racism): the idea that racism in ingrained into the culture and legal or corporate policies.
While it is true that Democrat party was founded on Andrew Jackson and his Indian extermination campaigns, and Democrats created a lot of institutional racism with their KKK, Jim Crow laws, Woodrow Wilson, or in the 30's with FDR's New Deal, Social Security, Wagner Act (which excluded as many blacks as possible). Republicans have been trying to wipe it out since before the Civil War, and including the Republican civil rights acts of 1957, 1960 and 1964, the Fair Housing Act of 1968, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972. For my entire lifetime, there's pretty much nowhere for institutional racism to legally hide: every attempt is rooted out and eliminated. There is the exception of Democrats false flag of "affirmative action" (anti-majority racism). But with the exception of anti-white/asian policies, there are no policies (official or unofficial) that allow cops to assault civilians based on the color of their skin.
Despite all recent evidence is that police abuse is actually less common against blacks (relative to murder rates), every time there happens to be a police (or civilian) abuse problem against someone who is black, the old leftist tropes are trotted out in order to divide us for political gain -- while similar assaults against Whites, Latinos or Asians are ignored. Once you get past the surface Fake victims like Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, Michael Brown,. Finally, when an obvious abuse of power video came out (George Floyd) the nation was ready to burn, and the DNC and their operatives were there, flinging matches. The rioters, protestors, DNC operatives and their media all propagated the same lies (1) that this was an institutional problem (not individual) (2) that the officer wouldn't have equally abused a White, Asian, or Latino that was resisting arrest, in the exact same way (3) that justice was already being served against the perpetrator (Officer Derek Chauvin), without any marches, riots or looting necessary in the first place. Americans are united in that we all oppose abuse of power of any individual (Black or White), where the Democrats succeed in dividing us is that many don't believe the lie that this problem is systemically ingrained in our legal code, and that the solution is supporting violent radicals (and rioters). The reason these events are newsworthy is because of how rare they are.
Racism - ray•se•zem. noun: the belief that ALL members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
A: It could be, depending on your motives. If your motive is that you think all latinos are inferior to whites, and that's why you want to keep them out, then it could be racism. When FDR started it, or Bill/Hillary Clinton's campaigned on it (calling it a fence), or Obama demanded better border security, the Democrats didn't call it racism. In order to show it is racism, you'd need to show that Mexicans are a race, and that Trump doesn't like the entire Mexican people. But racists don't usually hire, hug Mexican voters, and celebrate lowering latino unemployment. Anyone who cares, knows that Trump is fine with legal immigrants (though probably less so than I am), just not illegal immigration. So unless you have evidence against the more likely scenarios, assuming the worst shows the bigotry of the accuser more than the accused. But that won't stop/slow the media left from doing it. This article going into some of the hypocrisy and history of "building the wall".
Some dishonest folks (like Robert Reich) tried to make it sound like a black officer, approaching a black suspect, for suspicious activity and waiving around a gun, was a case of racism / police abuse. It's called doing your job.
Make America Great Again is Donald Trump's campaign slogan (MAGA) that had an immediate brand recognition and a strong signal to reverse Obama's slide toward progressive pseudo-socialism, and to free up markets and people. It was also used by Ronald Reagan ("Let's make America great again") to reverse the malaise, stagflation and moral slide under Jimmy Carter. And even Bill Clinton used it in campaign speeches 1992, and Hillary Clinton used it in her 2008 Presidential Primary Campaign. But under Trump, it's racist. The left invented that it was a secret coded language for oppressing minorities and reversing diversity efforts, then used that as an excuse to attack/assault anyone who supports the real meaning of the term, under their guise of "punching a Nazi in the face".
Progressive activist racist eugenicist founded Planned Parenthood to exterminate as many inferior (brown) babies as possible, to advance white protestantism. The party that loves to hate and remove Confederate heroes and statues has no problem worshiping at the feet of their bigots: proving all standards don't apply equally.
These are Meme's about racism.
The NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) is a racist organizations wrapped in the camouflage of civil rights. Of course it wasn't always like that. Founded in 1909, as a follow-on to the 5 year older Niagara Movement, it was created during the Jim Crow era, and meant to help prevent oppression against their constituency based on race. A noble mission. And many things they've done have been net positive for our society and humanity. But that hardly makes them flawless, or means their current mission today matches their original charters. They are devolving into being for racist reparations, racist quotas, fanatical far-left causes, identity politics (supporting black candidates if they're far left, and opposing them or any whites if they're conservative), and becoming something far different than their original intent.
Obama does his impression of a divisive polarizer that splits the community into "us" vs "them", and blames it all on "them" -- based on getting all the facts wrong, but appealing to the ignorance and emotion of his base. In other words, he goes full community organizer, exposing that he was never the racial uniter he promised to be.
A Korean, and Indian and an Iranian went into a bar and were joking about the terms PoC (People of Color) and BiPoC (Black & Indigenous People of Color), and how it doesn't work because people of the same color aren't equally oppressed... low and behold, everything they were mocking, became true within a few weeks. . Now NPR is claiming that "People of Color" is racist, because it treats all minorities as equal victims. When we all know, that some groups deserve more victimhood cred than others. Of course that's racist, but trying to discuss racism with bigots is futile.
Underserving the western half of Detroit, Rashida Tlaib is the daughter of Palestinian immigrants and part of The Squad, and a member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), and who won through impeachment (of Trump) Tourette's but isn't bright enough to answer the question, "what for?". She supports the anti-semitic, anti-Israel and anti-American BDS movement, and uses her Muslim status as part of her entitled victimhood crown.
The left used the big lie, to hide the many problems with Democrat Racism by prestidigitation: look over there, the Republicans are the racists. As long as the media is attacking the Republicans, and the Republicans are defending themselves, then the Democrats (and their media) can hide from all the bad things they've done or are doing.
Who do the bigoted Republicans have as some of the favorite figures?
If Republicans are so White Supremacist, sexist and homophobic, why are they doing it so wrong? If Democrats are so much more sensitive on these matters, why are they so vicious towards women, jews and other minorities that disagree with them?
Could it be that the the Democrats (and their media) perpetuate a lie to distract their base from questioning their moral superiority, and recognizing that their tropes are just political gamesmanship?
Slavery is about racism, but not in the way most people think. It is about attacking America, "whites" and Christians for things they didn't do, and there's a good chance their forefathers didn't do, while ignoring what latino's, blacks, Muslims and others did in wider numbers. In fact, America is the only country in the world to fight a war to free a people that looked different than themselves. A few things to remember, in America, Free blacks owned slaves in higher percentages than free whites. Some of that was because the tax burdens were lower on slaves, so they bought out family members and kept them listed as slaves for tax benefits, but if we accept that as acceptable then we must admit that not all slaves were abused and that's a slippery slope to common sense and understanding the issue for the left. You can tell it's about hate/racism by asking about these other complexities, and watching their knee-jerk reaction accusing you of whataboutism. No one is denying that slavery existed and was bad, but to understand it, you need to understand it in context. Those that can't admit context aren't up for an adult conversation on the topic, and are more about their political agendas, which isn't about getting to the whole truth.
When I was a kid, I'd sometimes get beaten up for various reasons (chief among them was probably my razor sharp wit and willingness to share my opinions with those larger and dumber than me).
Often, after getting beaten up, I'd complain to my mom, and decry some racial slur they threw my way while beating on me: "he called me a towel-head, camel-jockey or sand-nigger" seemed popular for someone of my ethnic background and coloring... though WOP and beaner weren't uncommon for the ethnically confused.
My mom would say with the nurturing/caring concern of Nurse Ratched, 'it's not them, it's you'.
She would go on to elaborate, that if people don't like you, and you keep pissing them off, they will beat and insult you. But it's completely personal. They may or may not hate all towel-heads, but that attack, wasn't against all towel-heads, it was strictly an attack on you. So don't generalize and whine about things you don't know (like they're all racists), accept that they're assholes with anger issues, and you probably deserved it for provoking them with your words.
Ignoring the validity of the last part (since I still don't agree that snotty quips deserve bloody noses), she had a point.
There's an adage, "never attribute to malice that which can be more easily explained by stupidity/incompetence". Well, my variant of that, is, "never attribute to racism, that which is more easily explained by your own actions".
If we knee-jerk assume everything is racism (even insults directed at us as individuals because of OUR actions), then that's probably more a reflection on our biases/paranoia, than any reality. You have no real evidence that person secretly harbors superiority complex of whites, or inferiority complexes of whatever shade you are. There are a lot of jerks in life, there are very few real racists in America -- so Occam's Razor: that which is simplest and most likely, is the better conclusion to jump to.
So that stuck with me, and I shared it with others, to the annoyance of many who had a vested interest in perpetual victimhood and injustice. For a variant of that reply, in a later article, I got physical death threats (with someone looking up my home address and mailing me intimidation/warnings). People are so entrenched in their racial/gender/etc. victim mentality, that they see everything in the world as proof of their view.. And if you disagree with them on that, then you're some hate-filled bigot that goes to parties with bald-tattoo'd and sheet wearing compatriots (thus anything they say or do to you, is justified in their minds). They feel they get to do to you, what they imagine you want to do (or did to them) -- without every questioning whether the conclusions they're leaping to are the correct ones.
I've watched a few things by The Root and this presenter. They're obviously a propaganda outfit (probably funded by the Russians). They do NOT present the FULL facts, though there are a few grains of truth, wrapped in lies and lies of omission. They show how racists see everything as racism, and how the left will prey on the gullible with exaggerations, distortions and half-truths (at best). Which is a shame, if they were more tame and honest, there are valid points buried in there, but they're so covered in bullshit, that their purpose must be to divide, inflame the gullible, and people get dumber for watching them by thinking they know what they're talking about.
Salon ran a stupid race-baiting article by Priscilla Ward, but I know, I repeat myself: it was Salon. Still, her racist polarizing diatribe, made me want to retaliate in kind, re-living a mostly true tales of woe and racism in my past, in a parody of her article. Just to point out there's a whole lot of backstory in others lives that we may not know.
Immigration is a highly complex issue, and not everyone against more of it, is racist or a xenophobe. Being anti-refugee isn't racist. Trumps position is too extreme for me, but protecting Americans of all races against mass immigration (which hurts the people on the bottom of the economy), or reduces migrants from places where they've stated they want to kill us (and we can't properly vet them), isn't racism. You don't have to agree with the policy, but at least admit Americanism/Nationalism isn't racism -- and if it is, the Dems are a lot worse than Trump on this one.
Back in the early 80's, there was an article in the Cal. State Fullerton School Newspaper with a student complaining about racism. He was asian, and complained that while walking down the pathway (not paying attention), he bumped into another guy and knocked the other guys books and papers out of his hands (by accident), and made a mess. As he went to appologize, the guy yelled back, "Maybe if you opened your slant-eyes you wouldn't have run into me".
The Asian kid was shocked and complained about the racism inherent at school. So I penned an unpopular reply that explained that assuming it was racist might be more bigoted than the slur itself.
Look, there's no doubt the response was a racially insensitive, offensive, over-reaction by someone with anger issues. But that's not synonymous with racism, that's synonymous with asshole (and those are not the same thing).
Racism (in common use) is when someone (or an institution) believes that:
Q: What do we know from the incident?
That's a douchey over-reaction to a provocation, and more so to be racially insensitive about it: you should always give another human the benefit of the doubt that bumping into you was accidental. We really have little evidence the person was a racist (and that he thought ALL asians were blind because of their "slanty eye's" -- though he was playing to old stereotypes).
If we use our brains and hypothesize, "what would he have done 'if'", and imagine a black, women, obese person, gay-looking, tall/short, or other obviously distinguishing characteristic had done the same thing? I think the obvious answer is that douchebag would have yelled some equally offensive slur at them about, "black, bitch, fat, tall, fag" or other thing that let the person know, that he was displeased and took the attack on his space and time, very personally (and was reciprocating in kind). Which goes to show he's an asshole, not a racist. Assuming he was a racist, by ignoring all context of his attack, is kind-of as racist (or at least narcissistic/myopic) as the slur itself.
I am tired of the over sensitivity our society has to words. There are legitimate reasons to despise the use of words -- but it is not the words themselves that are offensive. This hiding from the problem doesn't fix anything. We can't integrate by pretending we are not different. We can not hide from our history or the history of the words. But we can change the word meanings, we can become desensitized to the words -- and in so doing, we can neuter the power the words of hate have over us.