Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List

Here is a link to this page:

Dear white people....

1 - 1011 - 18
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 3/11/2019 3:04:59 AM

from an article a sister showed I

"Dear White People, Your “Dictionary Definition” of Racism is Wrong

Racism as an ideology originated from European scientists in the 17th Century during the Atlantic slave trade. They invented it in order to differentiate themselves from those with different skin colors and darker features, creating a racial hierarchy that continues to this day. It would simply be incorrect to deny that the history of racism has been (and continues to be) one of white supremacy as the label “white” has always been an indication of superiority.

However, many of us were taught when we were little that racism is simply disliking someone based on the color of their skin. We were taught that it is a two-way street and that it can happen to anyone. We were taught that racism is simply prejudice toward any race.

This is clearly evident in the defense tactic many people use when defending racism.

As someone with a large online social justice platform, a day does not go by without someone sending me a screenshot of the “definition of racism”, followed up with a paragraph about how I am the real racist for critiquing white supremacy.

For many white people, the “definition of racism” offers them a safeguard so that they no longer feel the need to check their privilege. It acts as a last resort when backed into a corner by logic and reason. It is their final safety measure to ensure that they still win the conversation, even though this is not the type of conversation to be won.

It is for those white people that I have listed below some of the many reasons why the “definition of racism” is wrong.

Dictionaries provide a simplistic view of words.

While dictionaries are a great reference for people who have no prior knowledge on a word, concept or idea, they are not the best for conducting and controlling discussion. Racism is such a complex idea that it would be impossible to describe every aspect of it in a basic 101 way. Dictionaries should instead be used as a starting point for learning, leading to more thorough research and investigation, rather than being a final and definitive argument as to why white people can experience racism.

Dictionaries are written and edited by white men.

The majority of writers for popular and academic dictionaries have been white men. In the western world, as there are systems in place which privilege white people, it is not surprizing to see that the definition of racism put forward by white men is inaccurate. They are socialized to believe that the racism people of color experience is in any way comparable to the “racism” white people experience (i.e. being called out for perpetrating and upholding white supremacy). There is simply no credibility in white people defining racism.

Racism is systemic.

If we look at the word, ‘racism’, we see that it is made up of ‘race’ and the suffix ‘-ism’. This suffix is used to denote a system which, at least in the western world, is a system of white supremacy.

This clearly differentiates racism from prejudice. Anyone can be prejudiced toward anyone else, regardless of their race. People of color can certainly be prejudiced toward white people. However it is not racism because there is no larger system in place which oppresses white people.

These are just some of the reasons why the “dictionary definition of racism” is invalid. If you or someone you know ever feels the need to screenshot the “definition of racism” and use it in an argument, just remember that the definition of ketchup says that it is spicy.

Tags dictionary feminism ketchup RACEracism reverse racism social justice systemicwhite white supremacy"


Messenger: Empress lioness 9 Sent: 3/11/2019 5:15:33 AM

Haile, Garvey Africa
Bless the I for the post.
InI took a class once that taught this information. It would benefit ones and ones to Overstand this material.
Racism, by real definition is and can only be perpetrated by those who hold the power, resources, and privilege within a system. Usually the majority against the minority. We were taught that by this reasoning people's of colour couldn't be racist. And that prejudice or ism, was the act of doing something based on racism. Whereas racism is the system and prejudices are the acts carried out stemming from racism.
InI have tried here without success to clarify this and make the argument that lifting up black people after centuries of oppression and the genetic consequences of prolonged slavery through black supremacy is not the same as white supremacy and does not involve hatred but rationale and an overstanding of how so many years of slavery has left a mess that no amount of denial can fix.
It also does not mean that poor whites and others don't struggle or have a hard go at life.
InI struggle to overstand why black supremacy is so misunderstood. So equated with superiority and hatred.
As the I has stated clearly, no one is better than another one and Jah is the only judge. But to deny centuries of oppression, culture theft, Spiritual theft, and the current status of the black family with regards to resources as well as prison stats and even the mass of available drugs, weapons, unhealthy foods, etc in black communities today is ignorance.
The desire for uprising is not only commendable but necessary and cannot be achieved by seeing all as the same since the game was played unfair so long and the burdens of these racist systems have never been righted.

Really, why is it so difficult to process for the masses.

And when white people deny involvement in slavery systems while simultaneously denying reparations they are taking part in the continued oppression and miss-overstanding of history's collective and cumulative effects.

Jah love protect us

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 3/11/2019 5:42:55 AM

Exactly sistren.

But certain members of this website will still not learn. And disingenuously act as if InI are being cantankerous by such utterance. When InI know the truth.

I posted this as I too have failed to get this point across on this website yet find this article to put it very succinctly and clear

Black Maafa in the western hemisphere cannot possibly be racist. Despite how many times they claim Garvey and Garveys Africa are so.


Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 3/11/2019 5:57:40 AM

What might help those hard of understanding.
Colourism is different to racism

Taken from an article of Time magazine as even they seem to "get it" more than some a unuh who claim conscious....

"The Difference Between Racism and Colorism

Beacon Press

‘Colorism' is deeply ingrained in the fabric of this nation


October 6th, 2016

Lori L. Tharps is an associate professor of journalism at Temple University and the author of Same Family, Different Colors

Skin color matters because we are a visual species and we respond to one another based on the way we physically present. Add to that the “like belongs with like” beliefs most people harbor, and the race-based prejudices human beings have attached to certain skin colors, and we come to present-day society, where skin color becomes a loaded signifier of identity and value. In the U.S. in particular, where we have an extremely diverse population, race still matters, but color matters, too.

In the 21st century, as America becomes less white and the multiracial community—formed by interracial unions and immigration—continues to expand, color will be even more significant than race in both public and private interactions. Why? Because a person’s skin color is an irrefutable visual fact that is impossible to hide, whereas race is a constructed, quasi-scientific classification that is often only visible on a government form.

The fact is, our limited official racial categories in the U.S.—black, white, American Indian, Asian and Native Hawaiian—are already straining under the weight of our multi-hued, ethnically diverse, phenotypically ambiguous population. (Did somebody forget about Latinos?) A conversation about “race” is no longer sufficient when our first black president has a white mother, and golfer Tiger Woods is a “Cablinasian,” and a white woman named Rachel Dolezal feels justified in claiming a black identity without having any African ancestry. The discussion has to get more nuanced and categories beyond black and white must be introduced.

In the meantime, skin color will continue to serve as the most obvious criterion in determining how a person will be evaluated and judged. In this country, because of deeply entrenched racism, we already know that dark skin is demonized and light skin wins the prize. And that occurs precisely because this country was built on principles of racism. It cannot be overstated that if racism didn’t exist, a discussion about varying skin hues would simply be a conversation about aesthetics. But that’s not the case. The privileging of light skin over dark is at the root of an ill known as colorism.

The funny thing is, the word colorism doesn’t even exist. Not officially. It autocorrects on one’s computer screen. It does not appear in the dictionary. Still, the author and activist Alice Walker is the person most often credited with first using the word colorism, out loud and in print. In an essay that appeared in her 1983 book, In Search of our Mothers’ Gardens, Walker defined colorism as “prejudicial or preferential treatment of same-race people based solely on their color.” Light-skin preference had been common practice in the black community for generations, but Walker gave it a name and marked it as an evil that must be stopped in order for African Americans to progress as a people.

But black Americans are not the only people obsessed with how light or dark a person’s skin is. Colorism is a societal ill felt in many places all around the world, including Latin America, East and Southeast Asia, the Caribbean and Africa. Here in the U.S., because we are such a diverse population with citizens hailing from all corners of the earth, our brand of colorism is both homegrown and imported. And make no mistake, white Americans are just as “colorist” as their brown brothers and sisters.

Shankar Vedantam is the author of the book, The Hidden Brain: How Our Unconscious Minds Elect Presidents, Control Markets, Wage Wars and Save Our Lives. A science reporter for The Washington Post, Vedantam’s research touched on skin color and how even the most liberal-minded progressive thinkers, still display a bias towards light skin. He told the New York Times in 2010: “Dozens of research studies have shown that skin tone and other racial features play powerful roles in who gets ahead and who does not. These factors regularly determine who gets hired, who gets convicted and who gets elected.”

In the U.S., it has been repeatedly proven that skin tone plays a role in who gets ahead and who does not. Despite the fact that the word colorism doesn’t exist, researchers and scholars are now systematically tracking its existence. A 2006 University of Georgia study found that employers of any race prefer light-skinned black men to dark skinned men regardless of their qualifications. Sociologist Margaret Hunter writes in her book, Race, Gender and the Politics of Skin Tone that Mexican Americans with light skin “earn more money, complete more years of education, live in more integrated neighborhoods and have better mental health than do darker skinned …Mexican Americans.” In 2013, researchers Lance Hannon, Robert DeFina and Sarah Bruch found that black female students with dark skin were three times more likely to be suspended at school than their light-skinned African-American counterparts.

Suffice it to say, one’s health, wealth and opportunity for success in this country will be impacted by the color of one’s skin, sometimes irrespective of one’s racial background. Even darker-hued white people have different experiences than their lighter-hued Caucasian counterparts when it comes to access and resources. Colorism is so deeply ingrained in the fabric of this nation that we are all implicated and infected by its presence. And the sad thing is, for many people the lessons of color bias begin in the home.

In black families, Latino families, Asian-American families and obviously interracial ones, too, skin colors can vary in microscopic gradients or in obvious shades of difference. Luckily many parents are able to create a safe-space in the home where skin color differences only matter when it is time to buy sunscreen for the beach. But too often, the pervasiveness of a color hierarchy in the outside world seeps into the household and becomes part of the implicit and explicit teachings of parenting.

That is not to say that the solution to solving our color problem as a country lies in the home, but that is precisely where the conversation should begin. From day one, parents of every color should begin to celebrate color differences in the human spectrum instead of praising one over the other or even worse, pretending we’re all the same. Then, we could have a more public facing, cross-cultural dialogue about the more global problem of colorism and plot its necessary demise."

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 3/11/2019 6:01:36 AM

"Recently, I have been asked to stop using the term race and racism. The rationale is that there is only one human race and the use of the term race and racism perpetuates the problem. It was suggested that we would make significant movement in eliminating the problems of prejudice and discrimination if used the terms color and colorism instead.

I reject the proposition.

The use of term race and racism does not perpetuate prejudice and discrimination because the concept racism is not embodied in the words race. The impact of white privilege will continue to exist - whether you call it colorism or racism.

Of course, there is only one human race. Let me make myself clear. THERE IS ONLY ONE HUMAN RACE. But saying that is about as meaningful as saying there is only one world. Countries are geopolitical, social construction that have meaning and consequences even if there is no geographic reality that make countries.

Similarly, the social construction of race exist even if there is no biological reality. The problem of racism is focused on one group (whites) thinking that their privilege and power is inherent in their race/color.  The feeling of superiority continues without regard to how you label it.  Eliminating the word races will not result in less discrimination, prejudice against persons of different race/color.

A look at human history shows that intolerance and hate is as fundamental to human nature as is love and that no matter how you label it people will categorize "THE OTHER" as different and inferior whether it is race, or religion, or sexual orientation or national origin or color or  something that we haven't thought of yet.

The reason "race" or "colorism" endures is because the basis "skin color" is something that cannot be "hidden". "THE OTHER" cannot assimilate. Case in point, the Europeans don't have"races" as we define them. They don't collect data about "race". When I was lobbying at the World Conference Against Racism to have data collected about discrimination in health care based on "race",the response was - "that it was impossible to collect such data because there was only one human race". Nevetheless, I met African Descendants from all over Europe who told story after story of discrimination against them "as a group". I met European health care providers who talked about the discrimination in health care.

Of course, categorizing those that are different into the "THE OTHER" category and then maintaining a belief of superioity over the "THE OTHER" is fundamental to human nature. It is a fundamental survival instinct. It is a way of maintaining privilege and power.  We do it in so many ways on a daily basis with very few exceptions - race/color is just one. The fundamental problem is how to change the basic human nature to discriminate against those that are different.

I respect attempts to impact racism by any means and I encourage everyone to take up the fight in whatever way they think is appropriate. However, I refused to be drawn into the "One human race" approach.

My concern with the "one human race" response, is that it allows people to think that if they reject the concept of race, they have rejected the concept of white privilege and power, rejected racism (or colorism if you will) merely because the expouse a belief in "one human race".  In my opinion, instiutional racism will continue undaunted.  Some people (in my opinion many) will be happy to adopt the new language without making any significant (or any) change in their fundamental belief system. While maintaining that they can't be racist or colorist because they believe in only one human race. Look at Brazil.

Changing terminology - from race to color - from racism to colorism; will have negligible, if any, impact on white privilege and power; negligible, if any, impact on discrimination and prejudice. I really cannot see, how talking about blacks, browns, reds, whites, and yellows and talking about colorism will cause people to categorize less, stereotype less, discriminate less. I can not see how talking about colorism will lessen white privilege and power. The fundamental construct - "you are different (color), my people are better remains". 

Thats why I will not engage my efforts in attempting to change terminology and will continue to use the words race and racism."

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 3/11/2019 6:02:19 AM


Colourism - prejudice based on the shade of ones skin tone present in ALL societies

Racism - SYSTEMATIC (key difference) originating from historical white supremacy

For many people the term racism is a shorthanded misnomer and the correct term is 'Racism-White Supremacy' as not to cause confusion

If you are not already familiar with the works of Neely Fuller.... you need to be before even entering into this reasoning as your opinion will be formless and useless. Otherwise just listen... as Dr Clarke put it 'my peers I debate and all others I teach'

Messenger: The BANNED -- Hemphill Sent: 3/11/2019 6:35:40 AM

The inherent tyranny of redefining terms is evident within the liberal sphere that this is cut from. This rhetoric is pushed from the top down. These same ones differentiate between sex and gender to try to make room for 'transgender' within science. They make up new terms like 'intersectionality' and many others to create a tyranny of P.C. culture and censorship.

Literally this is to say that even using the term 'white' is supremacist, yet they say white this white that. To them, everything is 'white supremacy' and or 'patriarchy'. Lol Its all designed to create a permanent VICTIM CLASS and fundamental suppression of speech.. Saying that white people and especially white men can not even speak because we redefined terms and within our 'social justice' P.C. rules and you cant even open your mouth you fucking white person. This plays put on every major college campus and classroom in USA and europe.

It is fashionable to hate white people, and to keep the 'moral high ground' they redefine simple terms to justify the hatred.

Now that is speaking generally of course, but this BS echoes the exact same rhetoric.

Racism might play out on a larger scale, but this in no way means that it doesnt exist individually and across all races.. But what this liberal rhetoric says is that ONLY white people can be racist and that its 'social justice' and fashionable to hate and kill white people simply for being white. -- see South African white farmers (who had NOTHING to do with apartheid, yet are being systematically executed, and denied refugee status for the color of their skin).

Lol even the title here screams blue haired leftist SJW soyboy. Oh yeah, thats right.. Its a full on babylon TV show.. 'Dear white people'.. Pure fukkery

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 3/11/2019 6:58:25 AM


Messenger: The BANNED -- Hemphill Sent: 3/11/2019 8:05:33 AM

You didnt try very hard... Just a little bit of critical thought exposes this rhetoric for exactly what it is..

Here is list that might put it into perspective.

Progressives have a stranglehold on higher education in the United States, and they are training future generations of leaders to think just like them.

Young America’s Foundation has just released their yearly report on the craziest college courses in America, and I pulled some examples out of that report that demonstrate how bad things have gotten.

The following are 50 actual college course titles that prove that America’s universities are literally training our college students to be socialists…

#1 Harvard University: FRSEMR 62O—Who is a Fascist? Culture and Politics on the Radical Right

#2 Princeton University: FRS 139—Marx in the 21st Century

#3 Yale University: AMST 469a—Progressivism: Theory and Practice

#4 University of Alabama: SW 351—Oppression & Social Justice

#5 University of Florida: WST 3349—Ecofeminism

#6 University of Florida: POT 4053—Great Political Thinkers: Machiavelli to Marx

#7 University of Kentucky: SOC 235—Inequalities in Society

#8 University of Missouri: PSYCH 4984—Promoting Social Justice, Diversity, and Inclusion Capstone

#9 Middlebury College: AMST 0269—Beyond Intersectionality: Developing Anti-Racist and Anti-Capitalist Feminisms

#10 Middlebury College: ECON 0405—Economics of Discrimination

#11 University of Minnesota: AFRO 1917—Inequality and the American Dream

#12 University of Minnesota: SOC 3507—Immigration to the United States: Beyond Walls

#13 University of Minnesota: CSCL 3405—Marx for Today

#14 University of Minnesota: CI 5137—Multicultural Gender-Fair Curriculum

#15 University of Iowa: GWSS 1005—Introduction to Social Justice

#16 University of Iowa: GWSS 2045—Working for Social Justice

#17 University of Illinois: GWS 337—Interrogating Masculinities

#18 Indiana University: GNDR-G 330—Looking Like a Feminist: Visual Culture and Critical Theory

#19 University of Maryland: WMST 300—Feminist Reconceptualizations of Knowledge

#20 University of Michigan: WOMENSTD 434—Eco/Queer/Feminist Art Practices

#21 Michigan State University: ANP 859—Gender, Justice, and Environmental Change: Methods and Application

#22 Ohio State University: WGSST 3200—Breaking the Law: An Introduction to Gender Justice

#23 Penn State University: AFAM 147—The Life and Thought of Malcolm X

#24 Purdue University: OLS 45400—Gender And Diversity In Management

#25 University of Wisconsin: HISTORY 346—Trans/Gender in Historical Perspective

#26 University of Wisconsin: GEN&WS 536—Queering Sexuality Education

#27 University of Wisconsin: AFRICAN 233—Global HipHop and Social Justice

#28 Williams College: AFR 342—Racial Capitalism

#29 Williams College: AMST 219—Understanding Social Class

#30 Williams College: ENVI 103—Global Warming and Environmental Change

#31 Amherst College: POSC 407—Contemporary Debates: Gender and Right-Wing Populism

#32 Amherst College: SWAG 351—From Birth to Death: LGBTQ Life Trajectories

#33 Swarthmore College: ENVS 043—Race, Gender, Class and Environment

#34 Swarthmore College: RELG 032—Queering God: Feminist and Queer Theology

#35 Swarthmore College: RELG 033—Queering the Bible

#36 Wellesley College: AMST 281—Rainbow Republic: American Queer Culture from Walt Whitman to Lady Gaga

#37 Wellesley College: SOC 205—Modern Families and Social Inequalities

#38 Carleton College: POSC 275—Black Radical Political Thought

#39 Pomona College: AFRI144A—Black Women Feminism(s) and Social Change

#40 Pomona College: GWS142—Queering Childhood

#41 Claremont McKenna College: GOVT113—Inequality, Politics, and Public Policy: Class, Race, and Gender

#42 Davidson College: SOC 356—Feminization of Poverty

#43 Butler University: RI379—The Problem of God

#44 Creighton University: ANT 178—Global Citizenship

#45 DePaul University: LGQ 338—Sexual Justice: Lesbians, Gays and the Law

#46 Georgetown University: WGST 250—The Breast: Image, Myth, Legend

#47 Providence College: SOC 418—Globalization and Social Justice

#48 St. John’s University: SOC 1170—Inequality; Race, Class and Gender

#49 University of Pennsylvania: RELS 110—American Jesus

#50 University of Pennsylvania: URBS 050—Womanism and Identity Politics in the Realm of Hip-Hop

This system of “higher education” has produced Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and millions of young radical leftists just like her...

Notice the reoccurring theme here?? 'Social justice' 'racial politics' 'feminism' 'queering of children'.. Atheism is pushed, homosexuality is pushed, anti-white is pushed.. On and on...

This fake 'wokeness' is vile.

What you posted here is just more and more of the same

Messenger: RastaGoddess Sent: 3/11/2019 8:07:09 AM

Good reasonings @ Garveys and Empress

1 - 1011 - 18

Return to Reasoning List

Haile Selassie I