Deciding What Racism Is, And Who Qualifies

WHAT, EXACTLY, IS "RACISM"? Technically, it is nothing other than the arbitrary division of humanity into categories based on skin pigmentation, called "races". It would be as if the species were divided into categories based on eye color, hair color, height, or weight. Like all categories, racism is a suspect convention intended to simplify and render convenient and comprehensible the real world of infinite varieties of unique forms. It may be that every human who has ever lived has a slightly different and unique skin tone. An interesting experiment is to place your forearm next to those of as many other people as possible, and compare color. Most likely you will never find a perfect match, even within members of your own "race". Another definition of racism is that it exists when people who accept these broad categories, as everyone seems to, and then place importance on them. Or, when someone, after deciding to give race importance, arbitrarily decides that one race is superior to another. At least one of these three definitions could probably be applied to everyone, meaning that everyone is, in one way or another, a "racist". Nobody, or very few, admits to being a racist, but it could be argued to everyone is.1)Races exist, 2)races are important,3) races are of differing value. Three definitions of racism. The third definition is the one which we seem to agree on. It can never be proven that anyone is a racist, according to the third definition. We can't read minds, we have to take people's word for it, or we can decide for ourselves whether someone in particular is a racist by analyzing their words and actions. Consider, for example, this so called "alt right" movement. Unless I'm mistaken, this" organization" claims not to be racist. They claim to merely be interested in retaining their identity as white Americans of European descent, and preserving and protecting that identity. Clearly, they qualify as racists under the first two definitions. they clearly believe that races exist, and that categorical racial distinctions are important. What about the third definition? Part of their platform is that there should be a location where members of the white race can live separately from all other races, in order to associate with like people, and to further their aim of preserving and protecting their perceived racial identity. What about the third definition, that races are of differing value? Insistently they proclaim that they do not meet this definition, that their ideology has nothing to do with whether one race is superior to another, but only that different races, especially black and white, do not associate well with each other, and should be allowed and even encouraged to live apart. Are they being honest? Are they putting all this effort into building their all right movement even though they do not consider their own race to be in any way superior to any other race? That's for you to decide.