It is the one anti-racists are using, so if one is trying to understand the term, that's the right place to start.
I get that people disagree both on whether it should be ended and if so, what the right tactics are. My goal here is not to have that incredibly deep and nuanced conversation, but just to clear up this particular point.
Racists are calling themselves anti-racist.
It's branding, not an actual descriptor. It's an effective political technique to present it as the opposite.
Yeah totally agreed, it's important to call out the definitions of terms used in any context.
The main thrust of my post was similarly to point out that if you're using definition X, you may justify some action which doesn't conform to definition Y.
In the same vein as "Patriot Act" or "People's Republic", good branding on the part of "anti-racism" can help nip naysayers in the bud. (Are you anti-patriot? Are you against the people or democracy? Are you pro-racist?)
Knowing who means what when they use terms, and being willing to differ from someone else's definition clearly, is pretty much the only way I know of to have these deep conversations with civility.
Or in your terms of branding, it shouldn't be a shock that the dominant racial group would have established a definition of "racism" that is one more convenient to them than to the dominated groups, because that branding serves to prevent challenges to their power.
This is a definition of racism, and the one currently in vogue, but just want to point out that it's not the only one. Racism can also denote individually held prejudices, or isolated discrimination based on race.
> Anti-racism seeks to end that system.
This is indeed the stated goal, but (at least to me) seems to be self-defeatist. For instance, when reading through Ibram X Kendi's work, a number of ideas that seem flat-out wrong popped out:
* Racism against a group in power can't exist (because the redefined version of racism requires group power), as if racial power exists in a monolith.
* The only cure for past discrimination is present discrimination. (!)
* Thedesire for race neutrality is racist (not just its flawed applications)
* The idea that biology influences behavior is racist (not just the standard racist claims that some groups are inferior biologically)
I realize that these terms can mean a lot of things to a lot of people, but the above ideas of "anti-racism" definitely lead to more stifling of discussion and outright acceptance of discrimination than I've otherwise experienced.