The Politics of Racism


Well, here are some my thoughts:

I am a non-White male yet find myself to have a very unique ideological outlook within the non-White community with respect to racism. First, I don’t consider the word “racist” an objective word because everyone has a different subjective definition of it which are not even consistant but change depending on the mood and scenario of the definer.

Second, whenever someone presents a “racist” comment, no one ever uses the rules of logic to respond to them. For example, if person x says something person y considers “racist,” peron y never says “well, let me look at your claims and then make an objective/rational criticism of it.” Rather, they just put forth the emotional outburst “You damn racist!!” and assume that this statement automatically debunks the comments of person “x.” So, I believe whenever anyone of any political persuation put forths their ideas, the proper response should be a rational/objective rebuttal or admitance of agreement, not insults/name-calling.

Another point: I’ve noticed many double standards in the field of racism: When one group does something, it’s called racism, but when another group does it, its considered okey. Consider the movie “White Men Can’t Jump.” What if there was a movie called “Black Men Can’t Do Math”? Numerous double standards exist.

Okey, the above is my opinion, now an opinion of a Professional writer:

What is Racism? by Thomas Jackson

The following article was Originally Published in American Renaissance, Vol 2, No. 8, see

What is Racism?

Everyone talks about “racism” but no one ever defines it.
AR’s assistant editor has given it a try.

by Thomas Jackson

There is surely no nation in the world that holds “racism” in greater horror than does the United States. Compared to other kinds of offenses, it is thought to be somehow more reprehensible. The press and public have become so used to tales of murder, rape, robbery, and arson, that any but the most spectacular crimes are shrugged off as part of the inevitable texture of American life. “Racism” is never shrugged off.

For example, when a white Georgetown Law School student reports that black students are less well qualified than white students, it sets off a booming, national controversy about “racism.” If the student had merely murdered someone he would have attracted far less attention and criticism.

Complete text at

Hey there.

I should have read this post before making my own ‘Double Standards’ thread since you have concisely covered the points i was hoping to make.

In fairness, the type of clarity of thought which you are suggesting (and which i agree with) is unlikely to be adopted by, say, everyone else because of the current intellectual climate.
We are encouraged to believe that we are all born equal, and that with a loving upbringing and enough hard work, we can achieve anything we want.
To indicate that individuals within the same race are intrinsically different and capable of achieving more or less than each other is grudgingly tolerated (but still contraversial).
Taking this to the next logical step and proposing that there may also be significant differences between the abilites of two races (who differ enough in their genetic makeup to look significantly different) is anathema to those who claim to be politcally correct.

What really pisses me off is the way people attempt to rationalise these glaring disparties which are brought to attention by facts such as crime statistics and IQ scores.

We must ask weather these crime statistics and IQ scores are the result of genetic differences. Am i correct in saying that you think they are?

The goal of scientific analysis is to eliminate as many variables as possible. By deducing that this crime and low IQ scores are the result of genetics is to assume that there are no other social variables. But there are. Whites in the United States have been assumed to be, and treated like, a dominant species and have had hundreds of years to take advantage of this for their economic benefit. Non-whites have only been given equal treatment under law (in theory) for some 40 years.

Blacks were forced to attend public schools that were not provided with anywhere near the amount of funding white schools were given. Thus many blacks of that time had a poor educational background. Then their children were born into a newly reformed society where they could attend these schools, but their parents had minimum-wage (or less) labor jobs, and could barely support their family, so as opposed to furthing their education, they had to take jobs to help stay alive. Each generation is born into a slightly better social climate, but all this time while blacks are slowly climing in social status, the wites are on the top, making money, educating their children and buying property and power. Do you honesly believe that 40 years is enough for them to achieve economic equality with whites? If so, why are their so many blacks living in ghettoes and so many whites in the suburbs?

Non-whites have had to fight their way into an economic system where whites, many of them racists (i’m referring to a person who descriminates based on race) have had all of the hiring power.

Economic status is directly related to one’s likelihood to resorting to criminal actions. Economic status relates directly to one’s will to survive, and accomplish and better themselves. Economic status relates directly to availabilty of education. Education relates to IQ scores.

are you suggesting that we let racism be ignored? That we simply assume that because one race enjoys a higher economic status, as a whole,that it is a superior breed of human?

Am i better then you because i am white?

I agree with you here. take this statement for example…
White is beautiful!
Sound racist? What about this one…
Black is beautiful!