> What do you think "racism is a position of the oppressor who has the power" meant?
She said that right after saying - Black people CANNOT be racist against White people - not before, on Twitter, for everyone to see. Come on...
That was a clear re-definition attempt of the word.
I know where and when that "re-definition" is always used / what its context is. It's designed to de-rail anyone who is pointing out that whites don't hold exclusivity on racism. Every. Single. Time.
Been there. Seen it.
She never said - I have an argument, and let's just use this definition of this word (and throw out the common usage) when we are talking about it. She clearly wants that word to mean one thing and one thing only.
> But it also seems deliberately bull-headed of you to say that "racism" is clearly defined when there are entire academic fields devoted to sussing out what it is. Whole journals. Lotsa books. So, no, let's proceed as though "racism" is not well-defined.
The word is clearly defined. It's the same definition it was 1000 years ago. It's in the dictionary. Just about every one of them.
Please stop pretending that activists with agendas (and PHDs) can re-define words for the rest of us to better suit their personal ideas and projects.
Your redefinition of the word is not a common one and many more disagree with it than agree with it.