October 28, 2007
Crossword Clue (Seven Letters): Whites, by Definition
It's been clear that the sort of thought that the Providence Journal editorial board criticizes has been permeating university faculty halls for decades:
The Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic Violence has been making use of a handbook called "dismantling racism 2006" put together by a consultancy called Dismantling Racism Works.Here's a passage:
"Racism = a white supremacy system.
"Racism is different from racial prejudice, hatred, or discrimination. Racism involves one group having the power to carry out systematic discrimination through the major institutions of society. By this definition, only white people can be racist in our society, because only white people as a group have that power." ...
Oh, here's another line from the handbook: "All Europeans did not and do not become white at the same time. . . . Becoming white involves giving up pieces of your original culture in order to get the advantages and privileges of being in the white group. . . . This process continues today."
Race-obsessed academics aren't interested in understanding racism so as to end it. They're interested in mastering its application toward their own ends.
I guess that definition is from the "Racism for Morons" pamphlet. I guess I can understand why they chose to not use the standard Merriam-Webster definition.
1 : 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
2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
By PROPER definition, Affirmative Action is a form of racism. Race-based parameters for getting into a college are a form of racism. Quotas are a form of racism.
And that just doesn't fit into the communist re-definition of society for the sake of political correctness.
Posted by: Greg at October 28, 2007 1:20 PMSetting aside for the moment that such a redefinition is wrong on every level, what are we to take from this? That the predominance of spousal abuse is by a white person of a black person?
I haven't researched the statistics but I doubt it. So then what is the point of their using an erroneous handbook? Once again, as with the RI Community Foundation, an organization that is doing a lot of good is unnecessarily calling into question their motive and/or reputation.
Posted by: Monique at October 28, 2007 10:27 PM-- “"Racism = a white supremacy system.”
MEMO TO THE MORONS: ever heard of Hitler? Ever seen a photo of him? Was he “white”? Of the millions of Jews that he killed, how many were “white”?
-- "Racism is different from racial prejudice, hatred, or discrimination. Racism involves one group having the power to carry out systematic discrimination through the major institutions of society. By this definition, only white people can be racist in our society, because only white people as a group have that power.
MEMO TO THE MORONS II: First you say that racism is different from discrimination, and then say that it is the “power to carry out systemic discrimination.” Your thought processes (if we can call them that) are so clouded with left wing propaganda and resentment that you can’t even maintain a coherent thought sequence.
Also, last time I looked, government was the #1 “major institution of society.” Ever heard of affirmative action? Ever heard of set-asides directing government contracts to “minority” groups? Hmmm, seems to fit into your definition of “racism” – just in complete contradiction of your conclusion(s).
-- "All Europeans did not and do not become white at the same time. . Becoming white involves giving up pieces of your original culture in order to get the advantages and privileges of being in the white group. . This process continues today”
MEMO TO THE MORONS III: So apparently “white” is a function economic status, not of race? So YOU’RE JUST TAKING MARXISM AND APPLYING BLACKFACE TO IT.
Or is this statement just a convenient mechanism for you to shoehorn America’s history of assimilation and upward mobility into your warped theory of “racism,” for that history taken on its merits is “most inconvenient” for your premise, isn’t it now?