Am I Racist?

[Garbarsardar.jr]

Racism is prejudice or discrimination based on the belief that race is the primary factor determining human traits and abilities. Racism includes the belief that genetic or inherited differences produce the inherent superiority or inferiority of one race over another. In the name of protecting their race from "contamination," some racists justify the domination and destruction of races they consider to be either superior or inferior. Institutional racism is racial prejudice supported by institutional power and authority used to the advantage of one race over others.
www.adl.org/children_holocaust/more_resources.asp


A theory which holds that any one or several of the different races of the human family are inherently superior or inferior to any one or several of the others. The teaching denies the essential unity of the human race, the equality and dignity of all persons because of their common possession of the same human nature, and the participation of all in the divine plan of redemption. It is radically opposed to the virtue of justice and the precept of love of neighbor. Differences of superiority and inferiority which do exist are the result of accidental factors operating in a wide variety of circumstances, and are in no way due to essential defects in any one or several of the branches of the one human race. The theory of racism, together with practices related to it, is incompatible with Christian doctrine.
www.osvpublishing.com/catholicalmanac/04c.asp


The assumption and behaviour based on that assumption that one race is always superior to another.
www.socialcareassoc.com/resources/glossary/r.htm


Any communication, action or course of conduct, whether intentional or unintentional, that denies recognition, benefits, rights of access to any person or community on the basis of their membership or perceived membership in a racial, ethnic or cultural community.
collections.ic.gc.ca/pasttopresent/settlement/glossary.html


Racism can express itself in both pre- and post-Darwinian understandings. In the pre-Darwinian scheme of things, based on the idea of the Great Chain of Being the question was this: do the various races occupy different levels on the chain, some higher, some lower, or are they all basically human? In the post-Darwinian scheme of things, based on evolution, the question was: are some of the races more primitive than others, that is, isn't the "obvious superiority" of the white race an indication that it evolved upward out of more primitive races (Gould).To References
alpha.fdu.edu/~jbecker/nature/natureglossary.html


Judging an individual solely on his or her racial affiliation.
highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0072549238/student_view0/glossary.html


attitudes and systems (eg economic, political, cultural) which support and seek to maintain the superiority of one racial group
www.ycc.ac.uk/yc/CHILD/wordglossary pages/cswordglossary_q-z.htm


The stereotypical characterization, usually negative, of members of ethnic groups by the members of other ethnic groups.
canfield.etext.net/glossary.htm


The belief that one race is supreme and all others are innately inferior. (p. 295)
www.mhhe.com/socscience/sociology/schaef/olc/101.htm


a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities, and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
www.americaforamericans.org/definitions.htm


the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn


discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn


As you can see I have collected for your pleasure a variety of definitions about racism.
My questions are the following:
What is racist behaviour? :apart from political correctness can we avoid categorizing people according to ethnic characteristics? e.g. Germans are beer lovers, Italians are loud...etc. Does a positive characterization bear less racist attributes then a negative one?....e.g. Greeks are sneaky, Slovenians are liars.
Is there a limit to be or not to be croosed or we are inherently racist, and the difference lies in politeness and morality?

Please avoid nation bashing or nation defence...I said, please.

 

[Sanaz]

Most of those links are dead ends, the others are definitions. I'm not sure what you are getting at.

To answer your question, I have no idea if you're racist. But it has been proven over and over that specific abilities and skills are not divided along racial lines. Cultural and environmental influences, or the specific genetics of parents, are the biggest factors.

 

[Perfection]

Just as a point of reference we cannot use Darwinism in the case of race for a number of different reasons:
1. It appears that if there is some level of racial superiority it would only be in regional conditions, so there would be no overall superioirty.
2. Races don't exist as functional Darwinian units anymore (assuming they ever did), with the advent of globalization and the increasing comingling of races humanity is losing its racial demarkations and is transforming into a heterogenous ill-defined mixture.
3. The genetic differences between two races is much lower than that between two individual within a race, the genetic difference between races is very small.

 

[cgannon64]

Negative stereotypes are racism.

Positive or harmless stereotypes, or racist jokes that are lighthearted, are not racism.

 

[Ramius75]

Although the physical apperance maybe differ from places to places. but i believe that there are no different in the mind and ability to think between them. just a matter of culture and living condition.

And appearances are only superficial.

Ramius

 

[Immortal]

Most of those definitions fit the label of ethnocentrism nearly as well as racism.

 

[Rika_Heyli]

well.....1 could say the on average Orientals r smarter then most.

 

[WillJ]

It's of course extremely unreasonable to assume that race itself inherently contributes much of anything to anything, or in other words, that there are racial stereotypes that are true 100% of the time.

But racial generalizations are hard to resist, and aren't even that illogical, and anyone who claims race doesn't matter AT ALL to them is probably lying to themselves. The truth is that there are some things that are widely true with certain races, and of course they are socio-econo-cultural, not genetic, but notheless they exist.

For example, let's say someone tells me that one of two people scored a 1500 on their SATs (for those who don't know, that's very good), and if I pick out the one who did so, I'll win 100 dollars. One of the people is Vietnamese and the other is black. If I don't know anything else about them, which one will I pick? The Vietnamese one.

Or let's say an Arab enters an airplane and there is reason to believe he has a bomb. Will I be more worried than if he were a white person? Yes, I would. I would of course also be worried if he were white, but let's face it, the fact that the guy's Arab won't escape any of our minds.

Or let's say we're playing basketball, and I'm chosen as a captian and so I have to pick my teammates. I have to choose between a black person and a white person, of equal height and built. If I know nothing about these people besides appearance, which one will I pick? The black person.

Do those things make me racist? I suppose they do, if by racist you mean assuming things out of race. Of course, if your definition of racist is believing one race is superior to another, then I'm not racist. And am I "evil" for these racist tendencies (if they are indeed racist tendencies)? No, I think not. When racism becomes dangerous is when:

a. You let racial generalizations become racial absolutes, assuming they're always true. You continue to let your racism affect you in spite of evidence suggesting otherwise (for example, picking the black guy in the basketball example after seeing the white guy make 25 free throws in a row and the black guy fail to dribble the ball between his legs). Or,

b. Instead of just generalizations, you think one race is actually "better" than another. Or,

c. You let your racism interefere with other's rights. Or,

d. You rudely let your racism shine through to a person who will probably be offended.

And to actually answer the question, to me "racism" means a lot of things, but when I use it, especially when I label someone a racist, I generally mean letting race enter into your thought process and doing one of the four things listed above.

 

[newfangle]

Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man's genetic lineage - the notion that a man's intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collective of ancestors.

 

[King Alexander]

Most of the modern world's racism comes from the religions: they make their believers hate the "enemy" believers and face them as lower/stupid human beings and as a liers, because they "dare" to claim that their God is the only one a true God-etc,etc,etc.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

well.....1 could say the on average Orientals r smarter then most.

Of course it could be argued that what you speak of is a cultural issue, not a genetic one. People tend to get those confused.

 

[Mise]

I think a comment is only racist if it is said in a malicious way, or if it is taken to be said in a malicious way. Discretion is the key here, on both sides. Unfortunately, I can't really demonstrate that on the internet....

 

[JohnRM]

I think that we shouldn't worry about racism unless it is used to destroy people's lives. Stupid things like "Germans love beer" are not worth the trouble of confronting. Serious things like "Black people are only 3/5ths of a human being" are definitely in need of confrontation.

 

[CurtSibling]

Negative stereotypes are racism.

Positive or harmless stereotypes, or racist jokes that are lighthearted, are not racism.

Depends who you ask.

Watching a 1930's US Warner bros cartoon recently, called 'Coal Black and the seben dwarfs'
really made me realise how racism has became ingrained into the West.

It was an appalling cartoon - That's all I will say.

 

[luiz]

Positive or Neutral stereotypes are not racist at all, even if they are stupid. The Politically Correct Gestapo would say otherwise, but whatever.

Racism, IMO, is only when you use race as mean to offend.

 

[Sanaz]

Positive or Neutral stereotypes are not racist at all, even if they are stupid. The Politically Correct Gestapo would say otherwise, but whatever.

Racism, IMO, is only when you use race as mean to offend.

There's always two sides, and sometimes "positive" stereotypes have a deeper underlying "negative" meaning. For (an American) example, "Blacks are better athletes than "Whites". While it is a positive statement, especially if you admire atheletes and their skills, there is a negative side that plays out. Becuse black people are superior in athletics, white people are assumed to be superior intellects. So you have a disproportionate amount of white people in the thinking/leadership positions - pitching and catching in baseball, quarterback in football, coaching, ownership, etc. Black athletes are "slotted" as the "speed and muscle", and white athletes take the more "responsible" roles.

You end up seeing less black doctors, lawyers, engineers, and more black athletes and comedians/entertainers (and criminals), in proportion to the population for a lot of reasons, but the positive/negative stereotyping plays a defintie role.

This isn't good for either whites or blacks. I agree with the line of thinking that the faster we as a human race can ignore or destroy the stereotypes along racial lines, the better off we'll will be.

Cultural or religious stereotypes are a different thing altogether. In these cases, it's hard to dispute their base in fact, and as long as they are not used as weapons against groups of people, there's not much else to do. Denying their existence is folly, and they do make the world more interesting (or scary if you're on the paranoid side of life).

 

[luiz]

There's always two sides, and sometimes "positive" stereotypes have a deeper underlying "negative" meaning. For (an American) example, "Blacks are better athletes than "Whites". While it is a positive statement, especially if you admire atheletes and their skills, there is a negative side that plays out. Becuse black people are superior in athletics, white people are assumed to be superior intellects. So you have a disproportionate amount of white people in the thinking/leadership positions - pitching and catching in baseball, quarterback in football, coaching, ownership, etc. Black athletes are "slotted" as the "speed and muscle", and white athletes take the more "responsible" roles.

You end up seeing less black doctors, lawyers, engineers, and more black athletes and comedians/entertainers (and criminals), in proportion to the population for a lot of reasons, but the positive/negative stereotyping plays a defintie role.

This isn't good for either whites or blacks. I agree with the line of thinking that the faster we as a human race can ignore or destroy the stereotypes along racial lines, the better off we'll will be.

Cultural or religious stereotypes are a different thing altogether. In these cases, it's hard to dispute their base in fact, and as long as they are not used as weapons against groups of people, there's not much else to do. Denying their existence is folly, and they do make the world more interesting (or scary if you're on the paranoid side of life).

Just by saying that blacks are better athletes(what is only a half-truth), it doesn't mean that blacks have a lower intelect.

I too agree that we should destroy stereotypes based on race, but I don't think "Man, those kenyans ca run!" is a racist statement at all.

 

[Sanaz]

Just by saying that blacks are better athletes(what is only a half-truth), it doesn't mean that blacks have a lower intelect.

I too agree that we should destroy stereotypes based on race, but I don't think "Man, those kenyans ca run!" is a racist statement at all.

Nor do I, they can run! I don't think they've lost a major running event in years. That's different than saying they can run because they are dark skinned or genetically geared that way, which would also dismiss all their hard work and developed skills. As a culture, they value their runners, and take pride in their abilities. In Brazil footballers are highly valued, and young kids with athletic talent are drawn to it, and receive the best support possible in coaching, training, and competition. Brazilians aren't necessarily better footballers genetically, but they are sure better than most in the world at that sport (way of life?).

I don't think you are racist, and you have the ability to distinguish between racist statements and observations. Some people will take an interesting observation (Kenyans seem to win most of the races they enter) and turn it into a racist statement (it's because of their genetics; black people are naturally faster/more athletic than white people but not quite as bright or organized, so if they want to succeed in the world they'd better become athletes).

 

[WillJ]

Nor do I, they can run! I don't think they've lost a major running event in years. That's different than saying they can run because they are dark skinned or genetically geared that way, which would also dismiss all their hard work and developed skills. As a culture, they value their runners, and take pride in their abilities. In Brazil footballers are highly valued, and young kids with athletic talent are drawn to it, and receive the best support possible in coaching, training, and competition. Brazilians aren't necessarily better footballers genetically, but they are sure better than most in the world at that sport (way of life?).

I don't think you are racist, and you have the ability to distinguish between racist statements and observations. Some people will take an interesting observation (Kenyans seem to win most of the races they enter) and turn it into a racist statement (it's because of their genetics; black people are naturally faster/more athletic than white people but not quite as bright or organized, so if they want to succeed in the world they'd better become athletes).

Not sure about this, but I thought it's believed that the main reason Kenyans are so good at distance running is because the air in Kenya is very thin, which gets them used to low amounts of oxygen, which helps them run long distances in places where there is more oxygen. Not exactly genetic, but not cultural either; the people are indeed predisposed to it. Of course, I'm sure there are other factors.

 

[FredLC]

In Brazil footballers are highly valued, and young kids with athletic talent are drawn to it, and receive the best support possible in coaching, training, and competition. Brazilians aren't necessarily better footballers genetically, but they are sure better than most in the world at that sport (way of life?).

You are certainly unaware of the conditions of our football schools. Only rich kids that pay for expensive classes get that; most kids learn to play practising in horrible, horrible conditions.

Why we do well in football? Well, I guess that the answer lyes elsewhere. See, this is a poor nation, and football is a cheap sport that can be played virtually anywhere. Gread alternative for those without money to buil basket or tennis courts.

Also, Brazil is a country which loves one sport only. I mean, we are a major power in Volleyball, Gustavo Kuerten won several Rolland Garros, we have great olympics performance in female basketball, the world best solo in gym with Daiane dos Santos, we had Eder Jofre and now Adelino Popo in boxing, we are now without a great pilot but we had Emmerson Fittipaldi, Nelson Piquet and Ayrton Senna in a row... and still, no victory, title or performance, that grants us any major title in any of these sports, will mobizile the nation 1/10 of what any single game in the upcoming America's Cup - a relatively unimportant tournament that will be played with virtually the second national team - will. We love football, and football only, that is the harsh fact. Talents here virtually aren't drawn to alternatives, it's very, very rare. So, as we are about 190 millions playing non-stop football, we are bound to find 20 or 22 great players and do a good job at the world cup.

Regards .