The attempt to redefine racism away from the dictionary definition into the "systemic privilege" one is, imo, an attempt to remove the intensely horrible associations with actual racism, to minimize its harms, and to provide a socially acceptable avenue for its practice.
Conversation
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
The only reason white people enslaved back people was because they had the opportunity. Does that make it okay? Absolutely not. Does this absolve us of trying to make it right? Absolutely not.
But also white people historically have not had a monopoly on racism and slavery.
7
4
77
Replying to
Do you think the intentions are truly to enable discrimination against a different group?
6
5
Replying to
This is really hard to answer because 'intention' is a murky pit and saying that other people consciously have negative intention is very bad. But I do think to some extent yes? At least they have narratives that are doing discrimination but reframing it as good.
4
16
Show replies
Replying to
it also pulls into its wake a lot of much more harmful outcomes of capital, but restricts the solution space to a minority
e.g. reparations vs UBI
2
Replying to
This is half wrong. The effects are accurately described, but this is not the "attempt" the redefiners are making. They actually want to *intensify* the harms and lasting effects, believing our culture has inexcusably minimized them.
1
1
Replying to
I agree with this idea, and Rwanda seems like the most dramatic example:
Hutus were the oppressed class. According to many leftists their hatred should have been trivialized as "not racism" up until what point:
The moment when they began perpetrating genocide?
7