Racism is racism. I think the sentiment they were trying to convey was likely: “one group of people doesn’t get to tell another group of people what they should feel is racist.” That itself is an imperfect and imprecise phrasing however- the complicating factor through much of the West- and especially America- is that traditionally culture and law were dictated by “white” groups and there is a strong history of systematic racism. If America was a company- the named partners, most of the board and all the CEO’s except one for 200 years would be white. It’s much more noticeable and impactful on daily life when the CEO or HR or management decide they don’t like your department than when the security guy for the parking lot doesn’t like you.
In other words- white actors make up between 80-90% of lead roles in Hollywood. White executives and politicians and police are all on average- the majority of their fields. In recent decades there have been strong shifts- but traditionally, a person in power was statistically likely to be white. So- not ALL or even most white people are powerful or rich, but most powerful rich folks are white. That means the people we are most likely to see, and the people that will likely effect the largest number of people of have their racism seen by the largest number of people- are white people.
It isn’t even a case where we could say that any given white person is more likely to be racist than any other type of person- it is that traditionally there has been racism involved in power and money, generational racism, and so those people who have the most power for their views to be heard or to effect others tend to be white.
It depends on which definition of racism is being used. They change every five goddamn years because sociology, like any science, changes as more data changes theories.
Comments