Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby Okay Activist Archives topic #22091

Subject: "please define "racist" for me" This topic is locked.
Previous topic | Next topic
iluvmaxy

Thu Aug-24-00 02:46 PM

  
"please define "racist" for me"


          

i was just reading the post about "white" peoples place in hip hop...very entertaining stuff by the way...but it was mentioned that people on the boards (and i'm not quoting here) were closet racists and what not...

now my question is, could someone please define racist for me, because the definition i have been using would not include black people/people of African descent...

and just for anyone who is curious as to what my definition is, it's something like this:

power+prejudice=racism

and when i say power, i don't mean on a micro scale, i'm talking 'bout big power.

so u can see how black folks aren't included in my definition...

can somebody else share what racism means for them?

thank u

peace and blessings

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top


Topic Outline
Subject Author Message Date ID
Simple.....
Aug 25th 2000
1
EXACTLY
Idontmuchcaredo
Aug 27th 2000
2
RE: EXACTLY
Idontmuchcaredo
Aug 28th 2000
8
      RE: EXACTLY
d-Best
Aug 30th 2000
12
not exactly...
KoalaLove
Aug 28th 2000
3
      what about black?
iluvmaxy
Aug 28th 2000
7
           how many times do i have to explain that one
KoalaLove
Aug 29th 2000
9
www.websters.com
black_engineer
Aug 28th 2000
4
www.websters.com (edited)
black_engineer
Aug 28th 2000
5
      what does that mean
KoalaLove
Aug 28th 2000
6
           In other words
Wise_7
Aug 30th 2000
10
           its a little slicker than that
KoalaLove
Aug 30th 2000
11
           RE: what does that mean
d-Best
Aug 30th 2000
13

Oakley
Charter member
7810 posts
Fri Aug-25-00 02:57 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
1. "Simple....."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

Discrimination or judging on the basis of race alone.

Doesn't matter who it is. anyone can be racist!

___________________________________
"WASP of the year: even if he isn�t a WASP, Oakley. Sailing? Check. In a yacht club? Check. Used the term �summer� as a verb instead of a noun? You betcha!" -thejerseytornado

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Idontmuchcaredo

Sun Aug-27-00 09:46 AM

  
2. "EXACTLY"
In response to Reply # 1


          

That IS the definition of racism! I didn't really understand what the post had to do with the comment about "closet racists"!





"Shut the fuck up bitch,Eat a dick bitch,Eat a bowl of shit bitch!"Kurupt
"I'm a throw shade if I can't get paid blow you up to your girl like the Army grenade!"Lil Kim

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Idontmuchcaredo

Mon Aug-28-00 11:50 AM

  
8. "RE: EXACTLY"
In response to Reply # 2


          

That IS the definition of racism!

The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
Discrimination or prejudice based on race.



"Shut the fuck up bitch,Eat a dick bitch,Eat a bowl of shit bitch!"Kurupt
"I'm a throw shade if I can't get paid blow you up to your girl like the Army grenade!"Lil Kim

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
d-Best

Wed Aug-30-00 12:25 PM

  
12. "RE: EXACTLY"
In response to Reply # 8


          

KoalaLove representin' as ALWAYS

"racism" ra-cism, is a term that refers to an ideology. Much like most of these philosophical / psychological terms (ology's, ism's....)

if one believes in "race" then they are racists.

Now on the flip-mode, in any philosophical discussion, we start with definitions. If one wants to use a word to mean something slightly different than it's typical discussion (which Koala rocks), then they make that known at the start of a discussion

OR... if they rock it poetic style, they use metaphor to make it obvious.

In other words, don't jump on cats 'til you know what they're saying.

...then jump on cats.

Racism, still, though, is the belief of race.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
KoalaLove

Mon Aug-28-00 04:13 AM

  
3. "not exactly..."
In response to Reply # 1


          

It is important that the term racist or racism doesnt necessarily regard any prejudiced action or any power which are the usual misconceptions of the term.

To be racist- one need only need to believe in the ideology of race- that which determines that humans can be categorized by race signifiers primarily those that designate "white" people as an exclusive group.

If you believe this in any capacity then you are a racist whether or not you prejusge people based on your beliefs whether or not you act with those beliefs in mind. The term racist only refers to what you are willing to believe- it is an indicator of ideology.

Alot of people around here are closet racists- maybe even you. This is not to characterize anybody as a sinister racist who hides behind hip hop affection and calls us all niggers when we're not lookin- this term more succintly characterizes a growing community of people who are misguided about race ideology and presume that it is true and go about trying to resolve other matters of humanity. The truth is race as we know it and as it is subjected upon this society is a lie.

If you believe you or anybody else is naturally or biologically "white" aside from their perogative to consider themselves that then you are a racist- if you have no idea what im talking about cuz you still believe you are "white" then you are a closet racist.

K

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
iluvmaxy

Mon Aug-28-00 11:26 AM

  
7. "what about black?"
In response to Reply # 3


          

if someone believes they're black
are they a racist too?


>
>If you believe you or anybody
>else is naturally or biologically
>"white" aside from their perogative
>to consider themselves that then
>you are a racist- if
>you have no idea what
>im talking about cuz you
>still believe you are "white"
>then you are a closet
>racist.
>
>K



  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
KoalaLove

Tue Aug-29-00 03:56 AM

  
9. "how many times do i have to explain that one"
In response to Reply # 7


          

When you're regarding race and racial category you can only make determinations for the categories put forth by the ideology. The term "Black" was never offered by race category and to this very day has yet to be accepted officially- would racist ideology ever bestowed upon a supposed sub-species a label that demonstrated equality? No- history clearly demonstrates that "Black" is something that people formerly known as niggers, colored and 3/5 human- a few of them very prominent figures of African American struggle determined to call themselves. Many of them wrote books to further delineate that which made "Blackness"- none of it called upon the pseudo science of race category. Unless they believed in race theory - the idea that "Whites" are further evolved than any other "race" then they arent necessarily racist- and being that the term "Black" has several nationalist tones behind it- Black people would more accurately be described as nationalists.

The truth about race is that there is an actual study of human classification- and while science denounces the idea that humans are stratified in manner of sub-species (which the term race signifies) it is willing to accept that there are a set of common features and corresponding race categories.

These categories are Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongloid.

here's the problem...

These categories were never intended to regard any matter of behavior or culture and they do not signify any presumption of biological and genetic variance which is the widescale presumption that race category encourages. It is only meant to refer to the demonstrated details and commonality of human physical appearance- the idea that anyone is "white" is vague and self-aggrandizing and it is only supported by the ideology of white supremacy.

The term "Caucasoid" not only refers to people of European descent but people of Middle Eastern and North african descent as well. The only science that substantiates the idea that "whites" are an exclusive if not superior class is racist "white" theory. If "Blacks" believed in that theory then they would consider themselves a subspecies- by and large they dont so i wouldnt consider them racist but nonetheless they are suppressed by a society that is and at this point must at least understand the ideology and work through it in order to attack it at its root.

the roots are all of you

K

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

black_engineer

Mon Aug-28-00 04:17 AM

  
4. "www.websters.com"
In response to Reply # 0


          

racism (rszm)
n.

1.The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and
that a particular race is superior to others.
2.Discrimination or prejudice based on race. Carry On.

********************************************************************************

BLACK_ENGINEER

Why you got-ta, act like, nigga, all the time? (C) Common


I hate being cheap, but I hate being broke more. - Fire


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
black_engineer

Mon Aug-28-00 04:19 AM

  
5. " www.websters.com (edited)"
In response to Reply # 4


          

racism (rszm)
n.

1.The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and
that a particular race is superior to others.


2.Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Carry On.

********************************************************************************

BLACK_ENGINEER

Why you got-ta, act like, nigga, all the time? (C) Common


I hate being cheap, but I hate being broke more. - Fire


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
KoalaLove

Mon Aug-28-00 04:51 AM

  
6. "what does that mean"
In response to Reply # 5


          

Ive used this definition many times but still cant find any information on how Webster's presumes that the two definitions correlate. If a person believes in race but doesnt believe in superiority then is he not a racist- well no cuz the race ideology believes still implicitly concludes that superiority.

Secondly if we're regarding discrimination and prejudice several people dont have the power to accomdate such properties so are they not racist?

I think its incorrigible that even the definition of racism points out a blatant miscalcuation in race characterization but wouldnt dare step forward and identify it as false science.

K

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
Wise_7

Wed Aug-30-00 10:41 AM

  
10. "In other words"
In response to Reply # 6


          

"race" doesn't exist.
Well, atleast in people's minds it does.
I see what you are saying, K.
There is no "classification of races
because what determines race?
Color?
Hair?
Language?

Race was made up to separate everybody (upon physical differences) and keep the masses under control (and at each other's throats).

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
KoalaLove

Wed Aug-30-00 10:56 AM

  
11. "its a little slicker than that"
In response to Reply # 10


          

"Race was made up to separate everybody (upon physical differences) and keep the masses under
control (and at each other's throats). "

The study of "racial category" only meant to determine noted observation of the features that separated us. The determinations are still valid in the practical sense- negroes have wide noses, caucasians typically dont; those are fair determinations.

But along came other guys like Darwin, Lyle, and the others that Ive mentioned who hoped to use the determinations of common and variant feautres as a demonstration of evolution in humankind- that was where we went awry.

My point of contention is that race wasnt made to separate people it was only meant to catalog separations that were already obvious- unfortunately only a short while later race would be used not to separate people but to justify that some of them were fitting of widescale domestication and oppression.

Its important to split these hairs because there is validity to the fact that people have noticeably differences of appearance- if youd like to correlate this to the parameters set forth by the study of anthropology and qualified determinations of race- that is a reasonable perogative. Many people read my ish and thinking Im advocating that we disregard the obvious- which couldnt be further from my beliefs- I dont think we should disregard the obvious but in my experience the more obvious things seem the less we take it upon ourselves to find out the truth.

K

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
d-Best

Wed Aug-30-00 12:30 PM

  
13. "RE: what does that mean"
In response to Reply # 6


          

we often award the publishers of dictionaries the authority to determine the meaning of words.

They never had this authority, though.

It's much like we assume anyone who has a published book suddenly knows something (whereas there are thousand of idiots who are published... much like anyone who writes a history book for grade-school kids)

ANYWAY...

Webster's is a dictionary. They are not the authority on words, or the linguistic roots of them.

Lexical definitions (those out of dictionaries) are surface, and for the purpose of explaining basic concepts--they aren't the authority on things.

So if cats want to discuss what they should or should not be doing based on the negativity surrounding a word, then we're in trouble.

Because we should be discussing things based on the idea.

Is predjudice-"racism" foul? no doubt
Is belief in race-"racism" foul? yes,
race was made up by italian biologists

This is not to say that we ignore the racial dynamic in the US. "race" as a concept is NOT REAL. But "race" as an ideology which has damaged our people IS REAL.

So don't jump on me for spitting the real deal, y'all

much love

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Lobby Okay Activist Archives topic #22091 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com