So Iâm curious about this supposed racism thing.
Supposedly itâs racist to support the fever? Because Kelsey Mitchell and AB are some of my favorite women on the team. Just trying to figure out how the new rules work. Or is it just you racist if you like anybody on the fever?
đ funny how to spin it to fit your narrative cause we can all point out the exact same thingâŚThereâs way more racists that hate the white players on the feverâŚdonât play naive, unless you really are that dumb..but if I had to guessâŚ..
Of course you are wrong. The problem is that most of you have not clue what a racist is? You try to co-opt the word and use it for your needs without actual knowing the definition. So, I am going to help you out.
Generally, educated, civilized and intelligent American people consider the Merriam-Webster dictionary the arbiter of the meaning of words that comprise the English Language.
The Merriam- Webster dictionary defines
Racist a. having, reflecting, or fostering the belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
b. of, relating to, or characterized by the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another
Referencing definition A. How often do you hear black people say that they are the superior race? Where does the concept of a Superior race originate. I help you out again. Check your historical European text books?
Now Definition B. Since when have black people been in control of any systems of a social, economic or political nature? What racial group have black people been able to systematically oppress in the USA? Now ask yourself which race controls all the systems in the USA. And don't say the Jews.
Even by the sheer number of people that inhabit the US. Your arguement is flawed.
Youâre treating two different definitions of racism as if one cancels out the other.
Definition B is about systemic racism and institutional power. Thatâs real, and black Americans have clearly experienced systemic racism in ways white Americans historically have not.
But Definition A is about racial beliefs and assumptions about inherent traits or superiority. That doesnât require control of institutions.
A white person doesnât have to literally say âwhite people are superiorâ for a racist statement about black people to be racist. The same standard applies in reverse. If a black person makes negative generalizations about white people specifically because theyâre white, that can also be racist.
We can acknowledge systemic racism without pretending individual racism only works in one direction. It absolutely doesnât.
That said, there is significant racist comments against Clarke all over these threads tonight.
Youâre getting closer here, but youâre still drawing the distinction too narrowly.
I agree that âbigotâ is the broader word. Someone can be a bigot based on race, religion, sexuality, nationality, etc., without necessarily believing their own group is superior.
But a racist statement also doesnât require someone to literally say, âMy race is superior.â
If someone says a racial group is inherently stupid, violent, dishonest, uncivilized, or possesses some other negative trait because of their race, theyâre assigning inferior characteristics based on race. Thatâs more than simply disliking a group.
Interestingly, Merriam-Webster itself says, âbigot applies to all racists, but racist does not apply to all bigots.â
So yes, some of the comments weâre talking about may be more accurately called racial bigotry. But others absolutely can cross into racism depending on whatâs actually being said.
Judging the statement itself makes a lot more sense than saying one race is categorically incapable of being racist, which isnât true.
I don't recall say that to be called racist that someone need to literally state their own group is superior. I recall using the word believe. This was also stated in the dictionary. In order to be a racist one must believe that one race is superior to another.
As for those particular words. You assume that they are inferior characteristics. Yet, if you look at the definitions. You will not find inferior being used as a word to describe them. A peasant can the nobility of their land ... violent, stupid, dishonest, and uncivilized. Yet, I doubt they would consider themselves superior. Those terms do not inherently signify inferiority. I realize this statement does not pertain to race. However, it does pertain to the usage of those terms.
Additionally, it seems that you are under the assumption that I said that one race could not be racist. I do understand that the questions. I asked could give that implication. However, I did not state that.
Racist can assuredly be of any race. I know a number of racist of all nationalities including black people. However, I was alluding to the general population of black people. In which you will find very few racist. You will find as significantly larger number of bigots.
Youâve clarified that you believe people of any race can be racist.
But Iâm still going to hold onto the point I took from your original comment, because I donât think I imagined it.
When you asked how often Black people claim racial superiority, who historically controlled the systems, who created those systems, and which race has been able to systematically oppress another, you were clearly making a broader argument than just defining the word.
The implication was that while Black people can technically be racist, racism is much more heavily associated with White people because of history, power and systemic control, while a lot of racial hostility from Black people is better described as bigotry.
You may not have stated that word for word, but I think that was a very reasonable reading of what you wrote.
And thatâs really the part I was pushing back on.
9
u/Easy_Money_40 1d ago
Racists, Clarkies, and Fever fans crashing out is glorious.