Interesting. It's something a lot of people should know about. That said, there might be one nitpick. Some incidents of prejudice are more harmful than some aspects of racism. Also racism doesn't need an institution to exist, it can be done be a person. I've always held that reverse racism didn't exist because racism is just "racism" and there are no "forward" or "backward" and to imply a "forward" somehow implies that one is somehow above or below or otherwise oriented as primary or perhaps more common (which might be the case but not a better point).
Anyhow, I think it might only be controversial because it might be a deep subject to think about due to our day to day understandings or misunderstandings or blindness to what may exist beneathe our noses. I know there is homophobia-"ism".
Many people reject "isms" altogether as do say the Rastafarians...(whether you agree with them or not...they used to be more Black Supremacy but now are not). So with all these "reversals" of stance and description and new senses of understanding...it is understandable to want to discuss but perhaps not to disagree with some policy that looks well and soundly put forth.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-13 08:11 pm (UTC)Anyhow, I think it might only be controversial because it might be a deep subject to think about due to our day to day understandings or misunderstandings or blindness to what may exist beneathe our noses. I know there is homophobia-"ism".
Many people reject "isms" altogether as do say the Rastafarians...(whether you agree with them or not...they used to be more Black Supremacy but now are not). So with all these "reversals" of stance and description and new senses of understanding...it is understandable to want to discuss but perhaps not to disagree with some policy that looks well and soundly put forth.