Built into what you're proposing is the assumption that everyone agrees about what constitutes hate, bigotry and racism. Which is my point: this works when convincing people who already agree with you, but not in today's violently polarized political climate.

Today, if I read an article describing someone as racist, that gets me no closer to understanding them as a person, because I have no idea what the article means by that, or if the author can be trusted to wield that word.

I realize one feels uneasy making long-winded arguments about something that seems so obvious, but that it is necessary is just a consequence of diversity of thought. There are actually people who disagree with your characterization of this order as racist or bigoted who are also sincere and thoughtful.