The Definition of Racism

[Invincible Summer]

So one of my sociology profs presented us with this equation:

Racism = Discrimination + Prejudice + Power


She argued that the state and majority groups can be racist, as they have power to alter the institutions in society in order to discriminate against minority groups; however, minorities cannot be racist (although they can be discriminatory or prejudiced) due to this lack of structural power.


Thoughts?

[TheCagedLion]

So one of my sociology profs presented us with this equation:

Racism = Discrimination + Prejudice + Power


She argued that the state and majority groups can be racist, as they have power to alter the institutions in society in order to discriminate against minority groups; however, minorities cannot be racist (although they can be discriminatory or prejudiced) due to this lack of structural power.


Thoughts?

Isn't this just a case of the misunderstanding of what racism actually is? (EDIT: Not meant as "a go" at your teacher)

According to "www dot dictionary dot com" racism is defined as


1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
She is correct if we assume racism only is definition #2, but seeing as racism constitutes all three of these, she is only partially correct.

You can still have the opinion that the 1st and 3rd apply, without necesarily being the majority.

[Black Dagger]

Yup yup, i came across a very similar argument a few years ago on this site 'american pictures' (a huge photo essay about poverty and racism in the US):




What is oppression?
To suppress the natural self-expression and emotions of others.



http://www.american-pictures.com/gallery/usa/mediums/usa-00450.jpg (http://www.american-pictures.com/gallery/usa/pages/usa-00450.htm)



How is racism, sexism, homophobia etc defined?
The shortest definition I use is: prejudice combined with social power to exert it on others. It is human and natural to have prejudice, but dangerous when whites in the USA, men everywhere, heterosexuals everywhere, gentiles most places, natives in Europe. etc. have the power to oppress others with it.


Can blacks be racists, women be sexists etc?
No, nowhere do they have the social power to be able to turn the power structure of the whites (or the men) upside down (not even in pockets where blacks hold political power such as in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia).
Example from the USA: if all blacks hated whites, how would it affect whites? Only emotionally - through fear. The whites usually solve this problem by moving further out into suburbia or by going to a shrink.
If on the contrary all whites entertain negative feelings toward blacks, how does it affect blacks? In their access to jobs, health, education, housing etc. All tangible things they have to go to the whites to get.
So blacks in the USA (or Muslim immigrants in Europe) cannot be racists since they have no power be able to discriminate against whites in any significant way.
(But they certainly can have prejudice and anger, which is quite another thing!)



http://www.american-pictures.com/gallery/usa/mediums/usa-00204.jpg (http://www.american-pictures.com/gallery/usa/pages/usa-00204.htm)



How does racism manifest itself?
The small racism which only a few suffer from (such as the Ku Klux Klan and the Nazis) can manifest itself in violent ways - usually, in my experience, because it originate from a strong mistreatment in childhood. It resembles the dominative racism of the past through the declared desire to hold down the target groups.
Yet, these hate-groups have no social power to be able to significantly hurt blacks as a group (or the Muslim immigrants) although rare cases of random fire bombings certainly have caused individual pain.
The big racism, which most of us suffer from, is on the other hand evasive in its manifestations. The pathological picture is usually a close-knit pattern of guilt and fear. We sincerely wish to live up to our lofty democratic ideals about equality and freedom for all, but choose in reality situations, schools and living areas, where we will have as little as possible to do with the target group.
Incapable of living up to our own ideals, we are stricken by strong guilt in the company of the target group, we lower our eyes when we meet them in our work place, we tremble in our voice when we talk about "the race problem" (US) or "the refugee problem" (Europe) in school classes with members from the target group listening etc.
Through such evasive behavior we in the US created the biggest ghettos the world has ever seen - just as we are now creating similar Muslim ghettos in Europe.
Guilt and fear in the oppressor generate anger- and hostility patterns in the oppressed. These can lead to irrational behavior, which further creates fear in the oppressor. This again increases our guilt since we don't like to face the fact that we fear human beings whom we actually wish to regard as equals.
All of it helps to increase the anger- and hostility patterns in the oppressed, who as a result of their sense of total rejection often begin to strike out in self-destructive patterns. The oppressor and the oppressed thus constantly create each other and both end up as victims, yet only the oppressor possess reel power to change this "system."
We, who are the oppressors, try to disclaim all responsibility by looking for the cause of this sad "system" in a few extreme losers such as the "Ku Klux Klan," "skinheads" etc, who feel just as shut out from "the American Dream" as blacks and have no social power to hurt the oppressed.
In Europe we always turn things upside down by calling the racism of such losers "the big racism" and rather than giving them help to get out of their distress patterns, we frequently join associations, which legitimize violent agitation (witch hunts) against them.
In reality the great decent-thinking majority among us are not only oppressors of American blacks and European immigrants, but also of the most hurt whites, who are also ghettoized into despair and hatred. And thus the vicious cycle of oppression goes on and on through human history.


More here (http://www.american-pictures.com/english/racism/frequent.htm)


------------
Like i said, i think it's a good argument but i think its a hard to communicate sometimes. The idea that Black folks can't be 'racist' seems wrong on the face of it - 'surely anyone can be racist' (as most people define racism simply as say racist things rather than something related to social power). For this reason the argument is not always the best one to lead with in a debate about racism, certainly when it is not explained carefully (it sounds sensationalist because people won't understand that 'racism' is being employed in a more precise way than usual).


But yeah, that said - i think it's very useful to talk about racism in this way. It gives people a better understanding of the most tangible face of racism and oppression - structural inequality - without sensationalising racist violence and making this the main focus (though certainly there are contexts when it should be). But speaking more generally, 'banal racism' is much more common and has a much deeper impact on people in the long term.

[Invincible Summer]

I might get flamed for saying this, but I think that racism on a large scale (institutional racism) is pretty uncommon in modern times. Black people don't get hired, not because "the system" won't let them, but because the guy at the company is racist.

Of course, racism still occurs in micro-scale social relations (as the existence of our friends at Stormfront demonstrates :rolleyes:) but I believe it's exacerbated by capitalism's focus on competition - surveys and polls on quality of life, work, etc often rank/rate participants according to demographics, creating more ethnic/racial "competition."

Although First Nations people in Canada still demand self-goverment (in the sense that they want their traditional ways of life, treaties, land rights, traditional rights, etc respected and upheld, not in the sense that they want a separate nation), the reasons why the Canadian state does not grant this to them is not a matter of racist ideology, in my opinion, but rather a bourgeois-capitalist one. They do not want the First Nations to become nearly autonomous of the state so they can tax them (the ones that do not work on a reserve anyway) and/or leave them dependent on the state. This can be said about many disadvantaged groups.


Micro-scale racism is a by-product of the inequalities that capitalism produces.

[Mujer Libre]

I think that definition of racism is a very particular sociological one, distinct from the way the term is generally used.

As Black Dagger said, it's a concept that probably will need explanation before use because I can imagine that it would promote some strong knee-jerk reactions and accusations of "anti-white racism" or something similar...

But it definitely is a useful concept in that it explains the differences between prejudice from people of colour and white people. It goes much further than the liberal idea of individual prejudice (like destructicon appears to buy into...) towards explaining the deep structural inequalities in society.

So I think it's a great concept to use- with caution,

[Invincible Summer]

I think that definition of racism is a very particular sociological one, distinct from the way the term is generally used.

As Black Dagger said, it's a concept that probably will need explanation before use because I can imagine that it would promote some strong knee-jerk reactions and accusations of "anti-white racism" or something similar...

But it definitely is a useful concept in that it explains the differences between prejudice from people of colour and white people. It goes much further than the liberal idea of individual prejudice (like destructicon appears to buy into...) towards explaining the deep structural inequalities in society.

So I think it's a great concept to use- with caution,


Well, to be fair, I have yet to give the sociological definition a lot of thought as to its application in society. Being a social sciences student where I'm expected to remember 20 new concepts a week doesn't give me a lot of time :glare:

[Black Dagger]

Isn't this just a case of the misunderstanding of what racism actually is? (EDIT: Not meant as "a go" at your teacher)

According to "www dot dictionary dot com" racism is defined as

I completey disagree.

I think this is a case of the dictionary being amongst the worst (!) possible sources for information on large and complex social issues.

Quoting the dictionary definition of a concept like 'racism' in order to contest a sociological explanation of racism is like whipping out a highschool physics textbook to prepare for a debate with Stephen Hawking.

The dictionary is necessarily short on details, analysis or any kind of critical thought - it's useful for the definition of words (most of the time, though it really depends on the dictionary) but not concepts.



She is correct if we assume racism only is definition #2, but seeing as racism constitutes all three of these, she is only partially correct.

Why is the dictionary the supreme arbiter of the 'correct' analysis of racism? That is a massive claim that needs to be justified.



You can still have the opinion that the 1st and 3rd apply, without necesarily being the majority.

Did you read the quoted content i posted which expands upon the analysis presented in the topic post?


It goes much further than the liberal idea of individual prejudice (like destructicon appears to buy into...) towards explaining the deep structural inequalities in society.

Exactly. It shifts the focus of the discussion away from inter-personal racism (as you say, the preoccupation of liberals) towards a conception of racism that takes into account class and other differences in social power.

[Rangi]

Did you hear the one about the Jew, the Negro and the Irishman?

...anyhow. I think that racism is many things. I think it can be defined as seeing a person as a race rather than that of another human being. I think it is also the belief that other races are inferior to your own.

[Merces]

So one of my sociology profs presented us with this equation:

Racism = Discrimination + Prejudice + Power


She argued that the state and majority groups can be racist, as they have power to alter the institutions in society in order to discriminate against minority groups; however, minorities cannot be racist (although they can be discriminatory or prejudiced) due to this lack of structural power.


Thoughts?

well obama's in power now so its gonna be even more tougher for all non whites not to be labeled as non racist if they make racist remarks.

[Lynx]

Institutionalized discrimination is a useful concept with regard to societal change, but people have a right to be treated as individuals, and expect their actions to be judged as such.

[Invincible Summer]

well obama's in power now so its gonna be even more tougher for all non whites not to be labeled as non racist if they make racist remarks.

Your double negatives are bewildering.

[Madvillainy]

Well then is it possible for working class whites to be racist in this concept of racism? They dont possess any more of that institutional power than black ppl.

[Black Dagger]

The base of this argument is a conception of social power - the vast majority of working class folks are not in positions that enable them to exert their social power (in the form of discrimination) over other workers. That does not discount it from happening on an individual level, but i would say that within the frame of this argument working class whites are less capable of 'racism' than non-WC whites. Prejudice is of course another matter entirely - something anyone is capable of.

[StalinFanboy]

I would say that yes, black people can be racist. I define racism as a prejudice based on one someone's ethnicity.

Is a black man's racism a problem? Yes. Is it as a big of a problem as a white man's racism? It's no where close.