The Student Room Group

Is reverse racism a thing

Scroll to see replies

Original post by mscaffrey
Most of the time 'reverse racism' is more like xenophobia. The social/political definition of racism is prejudice backed up by power.


define power and on what basis is power a criterion of racism?
surely racism is simply the discrimination of dislike of somebody due to their race? how would power possibly be a factor of that? it's like saying "I can insult whoever I want because I'm inferior to everybody" - it makes no sense - what I say has nothing to do with my character - if someone's racist, they're racist because of what they say, not because of who they or who the other person is
Original post by zippity.doodah
define power and on what basis is power a criterion of racism?
surely racism is simply the discrimination of dislike of somebody due to their race? how would power possibly be a factor of that? it's like saying "I can insult whoever I want because I'm inferior to everybody" - it makes no sense - what I say has nothing to do with my character - if someone's racist, they're racist because of what they say, not because of who they or who the other person is


I don't have time to have a full discussion, and I'm just talking about racism as I've come to understand it as explained by those who have actually been victims of racism (and continue to be victims of racism day in day out just because of how the world is set up), so I'll place some links below that might explain things to anyone interested. And power is more than other people being or thinking they are inferior-it's systematic, put in place by events in history that carry through to today. It's reflected in statistics regarding average wages, as well as statistics surrounding other aspects of society and opportunity (educational opportunities, discrimination by employers/the police etc).

http://revealinghistories.org.uk/legacies-stereotypes-racism-and-the-civil-rights-movement/articles/what-is-racism.html

http://www.unlearningracism.org/writings/definition.htm

Basically those who think of racism with this definition see it as something that is systematic, rather than individual vs individual. Any ism is generally a movement rather than an individual attack/opinion (as I said, that would be better described as xenophobia).
Original post by mscaffrey
I don't have time to have a full discussion, and I'm just talking about racism as I've come to understand it as explained by those who have actually been victims of racism (and continue to be victims of racism day in day out just because of how the world is set up), so I'll place some links below that might explain things to anyone interested. And power is more than other people being or thinking they are inferior-it's systematic, put in place by events in history that carry through to today. It's reflected in statistics regarding average wages, as well as statistics surrounding other aspects of society and opportunity (educational opportunities, discrimination by employers/the police etc).

http://revealinghistories.org.uk/legacies-stereotypes-racism-and-the-civil-rights-movement/articles/what-is-racism.html

http://www.unlearningracism.org/writings/definition.htm

Basically those who think of racism with this definition see it as something that is systematic, rather than individual vs individual. Any ism is generally a movement rather than an individual attack/opinion (as I said, that would be better described as xenophobia).


you still haven't answered my question
and from this description of the term, there's actually no such thing as individual racism
Original post by teenhorrorstory
I don't even like the usage of this term,but here it goes.
Can people of colour be racist towards whites? I say yes,based on my understanding of the world racism. But I've heard arguments that racism is systematic,and that people who are oppressed cannot be racist to whites?

Thoughts?


What about if white people are oppressed by non-white people (like in Zimbabwe)? Surely that's racism, even going by the "power and prejudice" definition that some people like to use?

In my opinion though, racism is simply an outlook on life which views people as being shaped by their race, rather than their individuality as human beings. I don't get the whole "reverse racism" thing because I don't view racism as necessarily oppressive, though it is easy to see how a racist outlook can aid oppression (and genocide).
Original post by zippity.doodah
you still haven't answered my question
and from this description of the term, there's actually no such thing as individual racism


I said I didn't have time to discuss it. I'm not really interested in having this conversation, if I'm honest, I put forward my understanding of racism in response to the OP, and then responded to you. I don't have much more to add, and I don't feel as though I'll change any minds by discussing the topic further. There are plenty of sites/articles/blogs that discuss power and prejudice as well as reverse racism, they can be found with a quick Google search and I'm sure they'll do better than I could with any definitions you're looking for.
Original post by mscaffrey
I said I didn't have time to discuss it. I'm not really interested in having this conversation, if I'm honest, I put forward my understanding of racism in response to the OP, and then responded to you. I don't have much more to add, and I don't feel as though I'll change any minds by discussing the topic further. There are plenty of sites/articles/blogs that discuss power and prejudice as well as reverse racism, they can be found with a quick Google search and I'm sure they'll do better than I could with any definitions you're looking for.


there's no such thing as "reverse racism", there's just "racism". racism objectively has nothing to do with power, and you've proved it here if you think it's that difficult to justify arbitrarily tagging on "power imbalances" as its mandatory context
Original post by zippity.doodah
there's no such thing as "reverse racism", there's just "racism". racism objectively has nothing to do with power, and you've proved it here if you think it's that difficult to justify arbitrarily tagging on "power imbalances" as its mandatory context


I don't find it that difficult, I just don't think it's my job to educate you. I'm trying to keep my Internet activities stress free and positive where I can for the sake of my mental health, and I don't feel like engaging in a debate right now. Do you know how long it takes to go into something like racism beyond a dictionary definition of the term? I don't have the time or energy for that kind of discussion.
Original post by mscaffrey
I don't find it that difficult, I just don't think it's my job to educate you. I'm trying to keep my Internet activities stress free and positive where I can for the sake of my mental health, and I don't feel like engaging in a debate right now. Do you know how long it takes to go into something like racism beyond a dictionary definition of the term? I don't have the time or energy for that kind of discussion.


...except it would probably take one sentence to say how it's linked to power by definition. if you think you're correct, surely this will be easy. oh wait.
Original post by zippity.doodah
...except it would probably take one sentence to say how it's linked to power by definition. if you think you're correct, surely this will be easy. oh wait.


What the **** is your problem? If someone says they don't want to discuss something you shouldn't then bug them in further posts. I made the reply you originally quoted 3 days ago, has it occurred to you that my mood might have changed since then and I no longer want to expand energy talking about this? You might have heard about a thing called Ferguson going on right now, it just so happens that I've been in the middle of a lot of race discussions the past few days, my friend is living in the middle of riots unable to go out or to her workplace. But you want to defend the idea that racism is not systematic? Actually, I don't think you so much want to defend the idea as shove it in someone's face until they accept that you are the king of racism definitions.

Racism happens when one race believes and acts as though it is superior to others. Superiority comes with power. It doesn't take one sentence to dismiss your idea of racism, it takes a lot of explaining and education. That doesn't mean 'my' definition is wrong, it means that racism is a complex thing that many many people have spent years thinking about and discussing. People suffer from the effects of racism every day, and those people support this definition. I think I accept their views more than I do yours, and that's why I've worked to understand them. It's up to you whether you do the same.

Thanks for dragging me into this discussion that I didn't want to have tonight. Much appreciated.
Original post by mscaffrey
What the **** is your problem? If someone says they don't want to discuss something you shouldn't then bug them in further posts. I made the reply you originally quoted 3 days ago, has it occurred to you that my mood might have changed since then and I no longer want to expand energy talking about this? You might have heard about a thing called Ferguson going on right now, it just so happens that I've been in the middle of a lot of race discussions the past few days, my friend is living in the middle of riots unable to go out or to her workplace. But you want to defend the idea that racism is not systematic? Actually, I don't think you so much want to defend the idea as shove it in someone's face until they accept that you are the king of racism definitions.

Racism happens when one race believes and acts as though it is superior to others. Superiority comes with power. It doesn't take one sentence to dismiss your idea of racism, it takes a lot of explaining and education. That doesn't mean 'my' definition is wrong, it means that racism is a complex thing that many many people have spent years thinking about and discussing. People suffer from the effects of racism every day, and those people support this definition. I think I accept their views more than I do yours, and that's why I've worked to understand them. It's up to you whether you do the same.

Thanks for dragging me into this discussion that I didn't want to have tonight. Much appreciated.


well you certainly have a funny way of showing you don't have time for a discussion by explaining to me how this is so, as opposed to using this word space for answering me
and secondly, I'll at least refer to your "racism is about power beliefs" statement - if you're saying that racism is about beliefs of power, and thus superiority, you'd have, then, to be suggesting that one race *is* superior, or else there wouldn't be any actual racism. which is either racist or nonsensical in a state where there is no legal discrimination against individuals, and no marketable basis for it economically. socially? okay, but that would open up a pandora's box - many other kinds of character traits are discriminated against, e.g. hair colour, looks/beauty, height, baldness, strength, etc - how is race objectively worse than discriminating on those other grounds when they are all (mostly) biological?
You have to understand that any race living in a country/world where white people have the most opportunities job wise, education wise, safety wise, less likely to be forced into a life of crime-their prejudice against white people, their white people jokes, is a hatred of the people/system who/which is oppressing them. How can you use the same word for the oppressed hating their oppressor as you use for the oppressor continuing to oppress (on purpose or not) the already oppressed?

Also this:

Scott Woods

On his blog, Scott Woods Makes Lists, poet Woods posted:
“The problem is that white people see racism as conscious hate, when racism is bigger than that. Racism is a complex system of social and political levers and pulleys set up generations ago to continue working on the behalf of whites at other people’s expense, whether whites know/like it or not. Racism is an insidious cultural disease. It is so insidious that it doesn’t care if you are a white person who likes Black people; it’s still going to find a way to infect how you deal with people who don’t look like you.
“Yes, racism looks like hate, but hate is just one manifestation. Privilege is another. Access is another. Ignorance is another. Apathy is another, and so on. So while I agree with people who say no one is born racist, it remains a powerful system that we’re immediately born into. It’s like being born into air: you take it in as soon as you breathe.
“It’s not a cold that you can get over. There is no anti-racist certification class. It’s a set of socioeconomic traps and cultural values that are fired up every time we interact with the world. It is a thing you have to keep scooping out of the boat of your life to keep from drowning in it. I know it’s hard work, but it’s the price you pay for owning everything.”


Original post by zippity.doodah
well you certainly have a funny way of showing you don't have time for a discussion by explaining to me how this is so, as opposed to using this word space for answering me
and secondly, I'll at least refer to your "racism is about power beliefs" statement - if you're saying that racism is about beliefs of power, and thus superiority, you'd have, then, to be suggesting that one race *is* superior, or else there wouldn't be any actual racism. which is either racist or nonsensical in a state where there is no legal discrimination against individuals, and no marketable basis for it economically. socially? okay, but that would open up a pandora's box - many other kinds of character traits are discriminated against, e.g. hair colour, looks/beauty, height, baldness, strength, etc - how is race objectively worse than discriminating on those other grounds when they are all (mostly) biological?


No, I'm saying that one race believed itself to be superior in the past (when whites took over the Americas, slavery, laws against black people doing all kinds of things) and that feeling of superiority, and the action we took based on that feeling of superiority is still present in the world today. There may not be legal discrimination against any race in the UK and various other countries, but that doesn't mean there isn't discrimination. It's in the statistics as I've already stated-there are statistics to show that certain races are discriminated at the job interview stage of a job, some studies have even shown that certain names (that hint at a certain race) leads to discrimination. And white people are not the biggest proportion of people stopped by airport security/police (or shot at in the case of the US). Do you see the systemised racism and why other races may have the right to be pissed off at us without us having the nerve to call it racism?

Last time I checked no one was sold into slavery for being bald or having ginger hair. And I don't think there's a study that shows less opportunities in general based on aesthetics. Of course there are other forms of discrimination-based on gender, disabilities, etc which have also been written into law in the past and which are therefore still ingrained in society at a certain level now.

And I spent that time telling you why I wasn't in the mood for a discussion because you angered me by keep responding to me. I hope in the future you respect when someone tells you that they're either not in the mood for a certain discussion or they're trying to protect their mental health by not engaging in one at that particular time. I tried to be polite at first, but it really irritates me when someone on a student forum seems to think that someone owes them a debate/explanation/definition.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 52
Original post by Dandaman1
I don't really buy that comic's message. There are poor, downtrodden white people, and there are rich, powerful black people. The comic implies that all white people managed to benefit form slavery and are living the good life, whereas all black people continue to suffer for it and are living in the gutter, which isn't true. Not every individual deserves a 'leg up' or a 'knock down' simply because they are a certain race -- we all have very different socio-economic backgrounds, family histories, etc.


This is a brief description of what reverse racism is meant to be.

Reverse racism - is a condition in which discrimination, sometimes officially sanctioned, against a dominant (or formerly dominant) racial or other group representative of the majority in a particular society takes place, for a variety of reasons, often as an attempt at redressing past wrongs.

As for as I am aware, the majority of white people do fall in to this description. Which is what the OP mentioned.

There are always exceptions to the rule, but, you almost come across that like that is justification enough.

It is the case as slavery has had a negative affect and still continues to, to this very day on the black community.

All you have to do is watch the news. It's not even about racism, it's more about power.
People do make baseless generalisations about whites because of their race. Two common ones are that whites can't dance or play basketball well.
Original post by teenhorrorstory
I don't even like the usage of this term,but here it goes.
Can people of colour be racist towards whites? I say yes,based on my understanding of the world racism. But I've heard arguments that racism is systematic,and that people who are oppressed cannot be racist to whites?

Thoughts?


It happens far more often than most people would want to admit to.

It is becoming more and more prevalent these days too especially in Asia and also in the traditionally White countries.
Original post by NHM713
This is a brief description of what reverse racism is meant to be.

Reverse racism - is a condition in which discrimination, sometimes officially sanctioned, against a dominant (or formerly dominant) racial or other group representative of the majority in a particular society takes place, for a variety of reasons, often as an attempt at redressing past wrongs.

As for as I am aware, the majority of white people do fall in to this description. Which is what the OP mentioned.

There are always exceptions to the rule, but, you almost come across that like that is justification enough.

It is the case as slavery has had a negative affect and still continues to, to this very day on the black community.

All you have to do is watch the news. It's not even about racism, it's more about power.


My point is you cannot make such broad assumptions about somebody and their background based solely on their race. The majority of white people have little power or wealth whatsoever. Therefore it is unfair--and wrong--to discriminate against a person on the assumption that they are less deserving of something or that their rights and liberties may be overruled in favour of someone else assumed to be less fortunate or at a disadvantage, again, based solely on their skin colour. Wronging more people in this sense does not make it right. If we all play by the same rules then the effects of the past will correct themselves with time and we won't contradict ourselves in the process.
Reply 56
Original post by Dandaman1
My point is you cannot make such broad assumptions about somebody and their background based solely on their race. The majority of white people have little power or wealth whatsoever. Therefore it is unfair--and wrong--to discriminate against a person on the assumption that they are less deserving of something or that their rights and liberties may be overruled in favour of someone else assumed to be less fortunate or at a disadvantage, again, based solely on their skin colour. Wronging more people in this sense does not make it right. If we all play by the same rules then the effects of the past will correct themselves with time and we won't contradict ourselves in the process.


I'm not making assumptions, I'm making a specific subject that has been highlighted by 1. the OP and 2. the cartoon.

We are talking about the people that have been affected.

I believe in a fair and just society; racism of any kind does not settle well with me. People have been affected by this and you can't deny that. the cartoon is not based on fiction. If you believe in an equal society, then make things equal, by taking appropriate action i.e. helping those that need it most.

If someone stole something from you, wouldn't you want them to give it back to you? an apology and saying they won't do it again isn't enough. no matter how good natured and nice a person you are, it just is not enough and it's fair.
Original post by NHM713
I'm not making assumptions, I'm making a specific subject that has been highlighted by 1. the OP and 2. the cartoon.

We are talking about the people that have been affected.

I believe in a fair and just society; racism of any kind does not settle well with me. People have been affected by this and you can't deny that. the cartoon is not based on fiction. If you believe in an equal society, then make things equal, by taking appropriate action i.e. helping those that need it most.

If someone stole something from you, wouldn't you want them to give it back to you? an apology and saying they won't do it again isn't enough. no matter how good natured and nice a person you are, it just is not enough and it's fair.


I don't know what else to do here other than say: "please re-read my previous response."

Although it might help be reiterating my point that everybody comes from their own unique individual backgrounds. To lump white people together and black people together into two singular collectives and then say (for example) "One stole from the other, therefore we should correct that by treating every white person as though they have stolen and every black person as though they have been stolen from," is thus a flawed way of thinking and one of the core problems with the concept of racial collectivism. You simply can't fairly represent such a large and diverse group of people with one caricature and then use that to justify an argument for how we should treat each individual, which is what the cartoon attempts to do.
Reply 58
Original post by Dandaman1
I don't know what else to do here other than say: "please re-read my previous response."

Although it might help be reiterating my point that everybody comes from their own unique individual backgrounds. To lump white people together and black people together into two singular collectives and then say (for example) "One stole from the other, therefore we should correct that by treating every white person as though they have stolen and every black person as though they have been stolen from," is thus a flawed way of thinking and one of the core problems with the concept of racial collectivism. You simply can't fairly represent such a large and diverse group of people with one caricature and then use that to justify an argument for how we should treat each individual, which is what the cartoon attempts to do.


I'm not saying bung every white person who's ancestors had slaves in prison and give every black person who's ancestors were slaves a fat wodge of cash.

I want things to be equal for everyone, and for that to happen certain matters have to be taken, that is education, taxes etc.

Your saying leave things as they are and they will sort themselves out....not everything workout like that.
Reply 59
I think you mean "can white people suffer" racism.

And I would answer depends on the definition. Is it the general definition, or is it a sociological definition, UN definition? What country are we in here?

There is the relatively innocuous ideological racism/prejudice based on race, in which anyone everyone including whites can suffer.

And then there's systematic racism, which is sometimes regarded as white privilege in western countries. Which is considerably more harmful.

Quick Reply