Before I begin, I just have a few housekeeping items. First, as you’ll notice in the byline, my name is now Tris Mamone. Second, don’t let the title throw you off; the article is about how the debate over the “true definition” of racism isn’t doing anything to help solve institutional racism.
Now here are the obligatory intro paragraphs:
Once again, people are debating about whether people of color can be racist towards white people. It depends on how one defines “racism.” One side uses the sociological definition of racism, prejudice plus institutional power, and the other uses the dictionary definition, hatred towards people based on skin color. Which side is right? Does it even matter?
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines racism in three ways: believing one race is superior to all others, a system of oppression based on skin color, and hating someone for the color of their skin. The first and third definitions are the most familiar, and the ones David French of the National Review used in a recent article about Sarah Jeong. “A powerless person’s hate may not harm the powerful,” he writes, “but it is still hate… The essence of bigotry is to look at the color of a person’s skin and, on that basis alone, make malignant judgments about his character or worth.”
Read the rest here.