What is reverse racism?

I was talking to some of my black friends and they mentioned somebody was using reverse racism, any ideas?

I was talking to some of my black friends and they mentioned somebody was using reverse racism, any ideas?

You know damn well that you could get the answer for that from Google. Racism is racism no matter what, but some people like to use it to refer to minorities being racist towards Caucasians.

Is this one of those threads that the definition of the word racism get warped and twisted in way where its impossible to be racist against white people?

Wrong. It refers to the system of oppression that specifically targets non-white minorities, built up to reward white individuals with wages of social superiority in exchange for their complicity in keeping themselves financially oppressed and subservient. It is not something that you are, it is something you participate in. Discrimination can occur against all ethnicities, but racism is a system that was designed to uphold white supremacy.

Really? So if I, as a black man called you a c*****r with the purpose of demeaning you for being white that wouldn't make me a racist?

By the way, Webster disagrees with your definition that states that only white people can be racist. Also, I wouldn't mind your opinion on whether or not you would consider what is happening to white farmers in South Africa as racism.

You know damn well that you could get the answer for that from Google. Racism is racism no matter what, but some people like to use it to refer to minorities being racist towards Caucasians.

Reverse racism sounds like being not a racist? Cause racism is racism, and racism is bad.

Really? So if I, as a black man called you a c*****r with the purpose of demeaning you for being white that wouldn't make me a racist?

By the way, Webster disagrees with your definition that states that only white people can be racist. Also, I wouldn't mind your opinion on whether or not you would consider what is happening to white farmers in South Africa as racism.

It's just racism with the connotation that it's targeted at white people....so it's just racism.

Nope, it would make you a bigot.

Appeal to definition is a fallacy. Course I'm completely used to fallacies coming from conservatives.

And no, I don't consider what's going on in South Africa racism, I consider it justice.

Nope, it would make you a bigot.

Appeal to definition is a fallacy. Course I'm completely used to fallacies coming from conservatives.

And no, I don't consider what's going on in South Africa racism, I consider it justice.

I'm not sure what to say about that opinion. The farmers being discriminated against didn't have anything to do with injustices that happened in the past.

Maybe the best analogy would be to ask you this: do you believe we should punish the children of illegal immigrants due to the actions of their parents? If the answer is no, and you think we should give them all amnesty, then why would you agree with South Africa's position to punish white farmers over the actions of what many of them may not have had anything to do with? Or do you just think that white people as a whole need to suffer to pay for things that happened in the past against minorities and many white people that are around today do not agree with?

I'm not sure what to say about that opinion. The farmers being discriminated against didn't have anything to do with injustices that happened in the past.

Maybe the best analogy would be to ask you this: do you believe we should punish the children of illegal immigrants due to the actions of their parents? If the answer is no, and you think we should give them all amnesty, then why would you agree with South Africa's position to punish white farmers over the actions of what many of them may not have had anything to do with? Or do you just think that white people as a whole need to suffer to pay for things that happened in the past against minorities and many white people that are around today do not agree with?

And the black citizens who are being locked out of South Africa's expanding economy have nothing to do with anything that happened in the past either, but they're still experiencing the consequences. By the way, apartheid in South Africa ended in 1994, so it's not like this is ancient history here. Either way, you can't just end official discrimination and expect the effects of discrimination and the mentality of discrimination to instantly disappear. That's what the term racism is supposed to capture, the dehumanization and continued disenfranchisement of minorities. That's why you calling me a cracker isn't the same thing as me dropping an N-bomb, because I don't have to deal with the effects of being viewed officially for hundreds of years and unofficially thereafter as 3/5ths of a person. I also don't have to worry that I might get turned down for a job offer because my name sounds black or that I won't get into an elite school because I'm black, just like the white farmers never had to worry about losing their wealth or not being accepted into elite circles that would allow them to increase their wealth. It's not punishment, it's restitution, and we wouldn't be here talking about whether or not it's fair for them to pay for their ancestors' crimes if their ancestors had grown some goddamned balls and made their victims whole in the first place. Justice delayed is justice denied.

Nope, it would make you a bigot.

Appeal to definition is a fallacy. Course I'm completely used to fallacies coming from conservatives.

And no, I don't consider what's going on in South Africa racism, I consider it justice.

Your justice sounds more like revenge.

I was talking to some of my black friends and they mentioned somebody was using reverse racism, any ideas?

Wow, something we actually agree on.

What happened and is going on in Soth Africa is just the indigenous population taking back their country from invaders who have for decades oppressed and killed them because they had more firepower.

Wrong. It refers to the system of oppression that specifically targets non-white minorities, built up to reward white individuals with wages of social superiority in exchange for their complicity in keeping themselves financially oppressed and subservient. It is not something that you are, it is something you participate in. Discrimination can occur against all ethnicities, but racism is a system that was designed to uphold white supremacy.

False assumption since East and South East Asians can rival whites in average economic participation and income rates .

It's a no surprise that the top GDP countries are white majority and east Asian countries i.e. USA, EU, China, CANZUK (UK, Australia, Canada, NZ incoming "freedom of movement" union, 4th largest GDP), Japan, South Korea.

Both AMD and NVIDIA are lead by Taiwanese Americans.

This is an incredibly stupid yet strangely diffuse argument among leftists.

You don't get to take words that have strong negative connotations associated to them, change their definition to better suit your politics, and then expect the negative connotations to be maintained and blame others for making a fallacious argument against your ridiculous appeal to emotion.

There's absolutely nothing in the definition of racism of the nonsense you spouted (which funnily enough crumbles from inconsistencies even at a shallow glance).

It absolutely does. The guy is a raving lunatic who understands absolutely nothing of the world he lives in.

Your justice sounds more like revenge.

It's when a "minority" uses racism against a non-minority. It's not inherently just simple racism, though it is racism.

For example, if there was a basketball game, and a black player falsely accused a white player of calling him an n-word. That is reverse racism. If the black player called the white player a cracker, that'd be just basic racism.

It's basically a combination of playing the race card--using your minority status relative to the society you belong to to your benefit--and targeted attacks. Or, in a larger sense, it's using people's preconceived notions of race against someone. For example, in the above situation, given the United State's history with racism against black people, people are more likely to believe the black player than the white player because of reverse racism.

It works in other ways, too. If I was married and later divorced, and the woman said something vague and untruthful to her friends like "It was an abusive relationship" that would be reverse-sexism. Being the size of a small bear, socially awkward, and generally walking around with a scowl (that's my neutral face, sorry), I am put at a disadvantage because people would be more inclined to believe my ex-wife and just assume I was abusive. Doubly so in this era of hashtagmetoo.

Aziz Ansari was a victim of reverse sexism, that's a good example.

Any entity's agenda that is not race neutral (i.e. pushing for special treatment/laws/rules for a racial group) is another Jim Crow laws/segregation/apartheid.

To remove racism, just don't talk about skin color.

False assumption since East and South East Asians can rival whites in average economic participation and income rates .

It's a no surprise that the top GDP countries are white majority and east Asian countries i.e. USA, EU, China, CANZUK (UK, Australia, Canada, NZ incoming "freedom of movement" union, 4th largest GDP), Japan, South Korea.

Both AMD and NVIDIA are lead by Taiwanese Americans.

the funny thing is if your a minority you have more chances to get scholarships, handouts etc. yet they blame whites when they work hard and as a result have nice things and money.

Appeal to definition is a fallacy, look it up. And the understanding of words changes all the time, it's not some maniacal plot by "leftists," you paranoid dolt. The word racism didn't even exist until 1902. There's simply a substantive difference between the entrenched inequality and discrimination that our society perpetuates against minorities and not against whites and minor, non-systemic discrimination against whites. That difference is what the definition of racism is meant to capture.

Project much?

Then you need to rethink your definition of revenge. Justice is typically served by making the victim whole, returning land to those who had it stolen from them fits that definition pretty well to me. Besides, white South Africans, who still dominate their country's elite, have had plenty of time to find alternative ways of making things right. Instead, they've hoarded wealth and kept black South Africans out of the circles that lead to greater wealth. This is exactly what happens when oppressors cry about not being able to undo the wrongs of the past instead of making an honest effort to try and correct them. You can't just wish these things away forever.

Actually, kind of the opposite. Racism is always used against minorities, that's what makes it different from discrimination. It's supported by the full weight of systemic discrimination going back to the days when Africans were first brought over as slaves. It's why the theory of wages of whiteness still holds up, it's why police officers still perceive black men to be greater threats than other suspects, it's why even though official discrimination is banned people still feel comfortable discriminating because of other markers of blackness such as hairstyle or name. Minorities can be racist, but they're racist towards other minorities. A good example would be Ben Carson, for instance, suggesting that being a Muslim should invalidate a qualified U.S. citizen from serving on the Supreme Court. If he had suggested that about a Christian then every Christian could just laugh it off because almost every justice in the history of the court has been Christian and any Senator who questioned a nominee's qualifications based on their Christian faith would be signing their political death warrant. A Senator does the same towards Muslims, however, and a good chunk of the country nods their heads in agreement. Picture perfect example of why racism is different than discrimination.

Right, and conveniently that also means we never have to talk about making restitution for past crimes against minorities, or about ending ongoing discrimination. Tell me when you get enough of that magical fairy dust to make all of the world's problems go away.

First off, that Asians make as much money as whites has nothing to do with anything. If anything, it shows that they've been helped by "positive" stereotypes, while other races are harmed by persistent negative stereotypes. Second, the next part of your post is pure, unabashed racism. You're attributing economic success to racial and cultural factors, you are a textbook racist.

First off, nobody is blaming whites for working hard. The problem is when white people don't acknowledge that there's more to their success than just hard work. There are plenty of minorities who work just as hard as rich white people, maybe harder, wind up with less, and then get called lazy when they point out the real disadvantages they face being part of a minority. Second, minorities still face an uphill battle getting into elite schools. Why because there parents can't afford it, there are just as many whites who can't, there's no rules saying they can't enter. There's a perception that they're just getting handed free rides left and right, but that's really not the case. If you really want to do away with affirmative action, I'd suggest fixing the education system so that minorities aren't stuck in under-performing schools. Why because the majority of them are in bad neighbor hoods which lead to bad schooling because of their actions. and fixing college admissions Like what's going on now where Ivy league schools are using a diversity quota http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3083757/Asian-groups-file-complaint-Harvard-admission-practices.html so that getting into elite schools isn't dependent on being a part of a very closed, very white social circle.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/24/us/affirmative-action.html

@theone86: Racism isn’t only used on minorities. You have a warped sense of reality.

As someone who has experienced "real" racism, like having people tell me my children and I should be slaughter because we are mix. Things like this are a stupid when they are just looking for handouts they should put there effort in to real racism issues. Which are almost extinct these days. But as N64DD said you've got a wrap sense or reality.

Do you have an actual rebuttal?

Well, first off, if you're mixed then you're generally considered a minority thanks to the whole one-drop rule, yet another example of how white supremacy was used officially and unofficially to privilege whites at the expense of minorities. If someone's telling you that you should be slaughtered because you have black ancestry that's racist. What's also pretty racist is insinuating that minorities are all just looking for handouts. Like I keep saying, what minorities want is a level playing field but, again, thanks to the tilting of the playing field in favor or whites, that's not going to happen anytime soon.

And racism is not extinct. Like I said, apartheid in Africa only ended in 1994, Jim Crow laws only ended in 1964, voting discrimination officially ended in 1965, school busing didn't end until the eighties and is actually still in limited use to fight desegregation today, redlining didn't end until 1975. Do you know why we have ghettos in the U.S.? A big reason is because when white soldiers came back from the war and got money to buy a house they were sold houses by realtors, but black soldiers were only sold houses in run-down communities. Those white home buyers used their equity to send their kids to college, while the black home buyers had to work and work and work just to stay afloat because their homes didn't have any equity because of their race. That puts today's African Americans at a distinct disadvantage to today's white Americans, all because of racist practices whose effects were never fully addressed. It's not like the white home buyers I spoke of became filthy rich, but they got a leg up on minorities because of their race. That is how racism works. That's not to even mention the problems facing current minorities like housing discrimination, job discrimination, lack of access to good schools, to good food, unjust policing practices, voter suppression, mass incarceration, etc. These are all areas where minorities generally and African Americans specifically are disproportionately targeted and burdened. Just because you don't see racism doesn't mean it's not there.

And no, affordability is not the biggest deterrent to getting into an elite school. The best way to get into an elite school, bar none, is to be connected to an alumnus. Since elite schools have historically been overwhelmingly white, not to mention officially all-white for a time, this process overwhelmingly favors white candidates. This doesn't even get into the racial disparity on SAT and ACT scores or the favoring of extracurricular activities which are more available to whites. Elite schools are fueled by elite circles which are primarily white. And yes, most whites are shut out of those circles as well, but this just demonstrates the idiocy of getting mad at the small handful of minorities that manages to get admission rather than the white gatekeepers who decided to open their gates just little so as to not appear to be so blatantly racist. It's the textbook definition of pitting the masses against each other, and one of the reasons why racism isn't anti-white in the first place. Did you know that in early American colonies there were beginnings of a revolution against slavers and landowners? Enslaved Native Americans, African chattel slaves, and white indentured servants had been talking and organizing amongst each other. To head this off, white indentured servants were given the ability to work their way out of servitude, while chattel slaves and Native American prisoners were enslaved for life. This was explained away due to the "inherent inferiority" of Native Americans and Africans to white people, with Native Americans being called slightly more civilized and Africans the lowest of all. This is the beginning of wages of whiteness, it's pitting poor whites against poor minorities by telling them that they're superior and minorities are just looking to tear them down, and you're doing the exact same thing right now in 2018. That's what racism is all about.

You need to get laid.

You need to get laid. He does

I was talking to some of my black friends and they mentioned somebody was using reverse racism, any ideas?

Yes, these practices have ended. No, that doesn't mean their effects are gone. I already stated this, so thank you for either ignoring or failing to understand the substance of my argument. If someone breaks into your house, steals all of your property, sells it off, and spends all the money before getting arrested, does his getting arrested make things right with you? No, because you now have absolutely no property and no possible way to get all of your possessions back. What you are essentially arguing is that even though we have ways of making minorities whole again by attempting to combat ongoing discrimination and right the wrongs of the past, we shouldn't because the past is the past and everyone should just forget about it because reasons.im not sayingwe shouldforget but we should move on, and stop playing victims for how our lifes turn out because "white privilege" holds us back, its nonsense This is like arguing that the person who robbed you shouldn't even be sent to jail because you can't get all your stuff back, and if you can't get all of your stuff back why even make an attempt at restitution in the first place. In other words, it's a bad argument. It's saying that even though white people did and continue to do bad things in the name of white superiority, there should be absolutely no attempt to right those wrongs because they happened in the past. What exactly is the statute of limitations on cultural genocide, pray tell? move on my people where slaughted by the dutch but im not going to blame the dutch for 2 reasons, its not their fault for how my life turns out nor are the people directly involved are alive. Even if they stole a whole plantation that my family worked hard for. Anyway, your argument is itself a form of racism as it attempts to completely absolve anyone capable of addressing ongoing racial injustice of any responsibility. It is an attempt to excuse oppressing minorities because you don't want to be bothered with confronting your own dark history, a history created by white individuals asserting dominance over minorities. so if your father kills someone and dies, you should go prision for that crime using your logic.

And yes, the consequences of the last generation absolutely do affect this generation. The fact that so many minorities live in bad neighborhoods is a direct result of anti-black discrimination. This leads to a lack of access to services, a lack of good policing, increased violence, a lack of access to good food, to good schools. Redlining was a practice where black homes were systemically devalued in comparison to white homes. That means a lack of access to equity, which equates to wealth, which means that it's harder for black families to go to college and that some families are just now being able to send their kids to college where white families in the same situation are in the second or third generation of college-goers. That means they have had more time to build and pass on wealth, and hold a distinct economic advantage over black families in similar situations as them. That is racism. This stuff doesn't just go away once official discrimination is done away with, it festers and affects families for generations. so its whites faults theres more black crime, instead of them being responsible for their own actions.

It doesn't matter that there are poor whites. Racism never precluded whites from being poor, racism made it far more likely that minorities would turn out poor. That there are successful black people also does not indicate that racism is dead. It can indicate progress, but there are still racial disparities, there are still communities reeling from racial discrimination, there is still widespread disenfranchisement and discrimination. the racial equality movement didn't stop with the Emancipation Proclamation, it didn't stop with earning the right to vote, it didn't stop with MLK, and it's not going to stop with Obama and deGrasse Tyson becoming influential public figures. If you can't deal with that, then oh well. Find a safe space or something. me find a safe space? thats why im willing to forgive and your wanting to play victim

A. your link is from 2015. B. it's the Daily Mail, so 99% BS C.https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/6/27/17509140/admissions-bias-personalities-harvard-affirmative-action

You said minorities were looking for handouts, that's implying that they can't compete with whites on a level playing field and tapping into racist animosity towards minorities that has been going for centuries. Further, the whole argument about Africans selling Africans into slavery is HUGELY racist for a whole slew of reasons, but mostly it's just a really classless attempt at victim blaming and acting like minorities are responsible for their own disenfranchisement in an attempt to shift the blame off of the people who actually disenfranchised them.how is it racist to tell the truth that their greed was part of the reasons of slavery. is it because you think its all white peoples fault, Oh, and thanks for trying to use my sex life against me in an argument, guess that's what you gotta do when you have no legitimate argument. Good to know you're a complete douchebag and not just a partial one.

@npiet1:

Racism is racism. It doesn't just mean a few hateful words.

And the black citizens who are being locked out of South Africa's expanding economy have nothing to do with anything that happened in the past either, but they're still experiencing the consequences. By the way, apartheid in South Africa ended in 1994, so it's not like this is ancient history here. Either way, you can't just end official discrimination and expect the effects of discrimination and the mentality of discrimination to instantly disappear. That's what the term racism is supposed to capture, the dehumanization and continued disenfranchisement of minorities. That's why you calling me a cracker isn't the same thing as me dropping an N-bomb, because I don't have to deal with the effects of being viewed officially for hundreds of years and unofficially thereafter as 3/5ths of a person. I also don't have to worry that I might get turned down for a job offer because my name sounds black or that I won't get into an elite school because I'm black, just like the white farmers never had to worry about losing their wealth or not being accepted into elite circles that would allow them to increase their wealth. It's not punishment, it's restitution, and we wouldn't be here talking about whether or not it's fair for them to pay for their ancestors' crimes if their ancestors had grown some goddamned balls and made their victims whole in the first place. Justice delayed is justice denied.

Regardless of how you try to justify it, you are pretty much advocating that white people of today are made to pay for the sins of white people from the past, even though in many cases those actions happened long before anybody currently alive on this planet was even born.

Yes, you could bring up that apartheid in South Africa didn't end until 1994, which is a far cry from slavery in the United States ending over 150 years ago. However, you are still saying that it's perfectly okay punishing those white farmers, many of whom had nothing to do with apartheid, because of the discrimination of several decades ago by other people that had the same skin color as them.

Which brings me back to my previous question you avoided answering: are you okay with the children of illegal immigrants being punished for the actions of their parents? The children didn't break the law like their parents did, but they are still directly benefiting from it (especially if they were born on US soil sometime after their parent entered the country illegally or entered the country on a visa they overstayed on), just like some white people of today may be benefiting from the racist actions of their ancestors.

While racial-related discrimination and illegal immigration are two different subjects, you seem to be okay with us punishing white people of 2018 for the actions of white people decades or even centuries ago, but I doubt you would be okay with us punishing children of illegal immigrants in 2018 (regardless of the child's current legal status) for the actions of their immediate parents.

It's not nonsense and calling it nonsense doesn't make it nonsense. I'm the one in this conversation actually substantiating my argument, not you.

Congratulations, you're owed a plantation. Do you know how white supremacy works? When white people come to an "undiscovered" land and claim it as their own, dispossessing whoever was there before, they never have to answer for it. It's always "in the past," or "not my fault." If you were to take back what was yours, in the exact same manner that it was taken from your ancestors, you'd be held fully accountable in a court of law. One standard for white theft, a different standard for black theft. White supremacy.

That's not my logic, that's a strawman argument. My argument is that white society bears a responsibility to end persistent discrimination against minorities and redress previous injustices to the best that it can. Saying that it ended is not enough. That does not create an equal society, that does not create a harmonious society. If it burdens white citizens that's a small price to pay compared to the price that's been inflicted upon minorities over the years, and speaking as a white man it's worth it to pay it not because it's comparatively cheap but because the true value of connecting with other human beings and learning how to really understand and coexist with each other is incalculable.

You obviously need a safe space if you can't take hearing the idea that discrimination and its effects didn't magically end in 1865.

I already told you how it's racist, because regardless of what other Africans did, Europeans still did something deeply immoral for centuries and were under no duress to do it. Bringing up African slavery in a conversation about white supremacy is an obvious attempt to shift the blame and excuse white slavers. It's victim blaming and it's repulsive. Besides that, African slavery was not the same thing as chattel slavery. African slaves were housed in the same homes as their masters, ate food with them, and were part of their families. There were strict taboos against abusing them, and separating them from their families would have been unthinkable to them. Europeans raped them, treated them as disposable cargo, beat them sometimes to death, worked them all day in horrid conditions, killed them when they ran away, separated families, and put them into a system of mass human trafficking. To compare that to a system where servants were treated with respect is a false equivalence, and to do it in order to take attention away from the wrongs committed by chattel slavers is abominable. It's racist, everyone knows it's racist, and you're being told it's racist.