Ever notice how even racists don't want to say they're racist?
You'd think there were no racists in America.
And if by "racist" we mean only those dozen or so losers who show up at a Klan rally to wear silly robes and carry about Nazi, Confederate and obscure White Nationalist flags, then yeah, I suppose racism is dead in America. By that standard, the one where a person genuinely wants all minorities to be killed, enslaved or deported, and loudly and proudly says so, then there are an insignificant number of racists in America.
But if by "racist" we mean those who consistently espouse views, ideologies, beliefs and positions that consistently have a negative effect principally upon minorities, then I assert that racists are a vast percent of the white population of America. As in at least half.
How do you tell a racist by that standard?
Well, don't look for them to go about saying "Hitler was right". But do look for how they come down on a variety of issues pertaining in the main to minorities.
Almost any issue can effect minorities, and one can hold some positions that might harm a minority without necessarily being racist, but when all the positions held harm minorities, then yes, it is safe to say the person is racist.
How many positions must one hold that hurt minorities to be a racist? Only each of us can judge that. Certainly holding "none" of the positions that would harm minorities would tend to have us all agree that the person is not racist. And certainly holding "all" of the positions that would harm minorities would tend to have us all agree that they are racist. Well, all of us but the conservatives who hold an alarming number of positions that hurt minorities.
Where's the cut off? Again, each of us must decide. But oddly enough, one of the surest indicators of a person being racist would be the person who is already saying, "You can hold all those positions that might harm minorities and still not be a racist!"
Immigration. One is for more people coming in or not. When those who are not in favor of more coming in principally speak about those south of our borders, as opposed to all those who come from the north, east and west, then yes, that is a possible sign they are racist. Not enough by itself, but it is one position in which they are espousing a position that harms minorities.
Affirmative Action/Quotas. One is in favor of it or not. If one is not, then like with immigration and all other issues listed, they'll have great reasons for it, but that side of the position is still harmful to minorities.
Voter ID. One is for something that tends to disenfranchise minority voters or one is not. No good reason for being "for" this changes the fact that it does harm minorities.
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing/Three Strikes. One is for it or not. That it hurts minorities disproportionately is a fact whichever side they take. If they are for it, they may cite good reasons. But it hurt minorities all the same.
Death Penalty. One is for a system that disproportionately executes African Americans or one is not. I actually get that this one issue could have non-racist supporters. But they need to educate themselves to the fact that the death penalty is destructive of minorities all the same.
Black Lives Matter. Does the person support Cliven Bundy using guns to occupy a Federal facility but go on and on about unarmed black kids blocking traffic? Does he love memes about running over protesters with cars? Well, he may have a book worth of explanations to give you, but that stance still hurts minorities.
Law Enforcement Officers. Is every shooting a justified shooting? If one thinks so, then maybe they were raised by cops and married a cop and are a cop. But it still is a stance that harms minorities.
Prosecutorial discretion. Does the person see nothing wrong in every black man being charged if he fired a gun, even in obvious cases of self defense? And nothing wrong in almost no policeman ever being charged or indicted for firing a gun, even in the most outrageous of cases? Then no matter what he then says about "worse" things like "black on black" crime, his position still harms minorities.
Sports Teams. In a nation that for the most part names it's teams after animals, does the person you're talking to think that naming a team after Native Americans is a sign of respect?
Minority Concerns. Does a person label every minority concern "PC" or "reverse racism" or "entitlement"? Is there never a minority concern that has any validity? It should make one wonder.
Welfare. Is this a person who believes that you can never spend too many billions of tax dollars on Veterans, the Elderly, Wall Street bankers and CEOs, but is furious at how food stamps and Aid to Families with Dependent Children and Section 8 housing is bankrupting America with godless socialism? One might respect the conscience of any who simply advocate "no government spending on anyone", but when it just happens that the only stuff that is "evil socialism" is used by a lot of minorities, then it can be suspect.
Socialism. Is every program for them - street lights, college loans, social security, VA bennies, and such "earned", but every program that aids minorities "welfare"? Closely related to the welfare example, but distinguished by this "I earned it"/"You mooched it" dichotomy.
Confederate Statues. Is this person long on speaking about the importance of preserving "heritage" - but also long on why statues of slaves and Underground Railroad operators and such are "PC crap"? Are they the first to scream about the darker skinned Muslim officer Nidal Hassan who killed 13 people at Ft. Hood, but the first to defend America's greatest traitor, Colonel Robert E. Lee who was responsible for killing 600,000 plus Americans? Then that might indicate some racism.
If by "might" I mean "does".
Crime. Which crimes are they speaking of, in conversation and on social media? If it is always about some minority doing this or some Muslim doing that, but never a word of any white or white collar criminals, then yes, that could be a sign of they being racist. And if they think they're making a triumphant intellectual point by pointing out that the faith of predominantly brown and black nations is not a "race", then yeah, that's a racist.
Politics. Are they in a party that at least pays lip service to helping the disadvantaged and downtrodden who - for obvious reasons - include many minorities, or are they in a party that pretends that we've had a level playing field here since either 1865 or 1964? It does not mean that they might not be in the more minority harming party for reasons of the old ideals that such a party might once have had, but it is another indicator.
Civil War. Do they believe - and love to bore you with - how the war was over "State's Rights", while deliberately not understanding which "right" those State's were fighting to have? A very sure sign. Do they look blankly at you when you point out that the southern states had NOT supported the right of northern states to fail to return runaway slaves? Then they're an ignorant racist.
Just sayin'. Are they self-avowedly not racist, but always "just sayin'"? And then trotting out something that lets all know why they'd have to preface their comment with the "You know I'm not racist, but..." intro? A very sure sign.
Protests. Do they boldly proclaim that they'd have marched with the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, but now they never see a single protest that they don't find to be over the top wrong, offensive or inappropriate? Maybe they think that bent knees truly harm the apparently very delicate American flag, or that it somehow gives disrespect to the troops, 33% of which are black, but more likely, that they always find fault with another race protesting, no matter what, makes them...racist.
Language. Are the same code words being used as were in the 1920s during the height of the Klan? America First, diseased foreigners, dirty immigrants, criminally minded, illiterate hordes and such? One might charitably assume a terrible coincidence in characterizing those outside our borders - and some within - with such dehumanizing language. Or one could assume the obvious - that the same types speak the same ways.
Presidents. Could a black President do no right, even when he was pursuing to the letter the goals of the previous White Republican President? Was the black President's rather middle of the road eight year administration over-sold as the "worst in history"? Was his good and decent Christian wife of decades called names, and accused of being everything from a transsexual man to a monkey? All in good humor, of course? Then that is a real sign of a racist.
This Article. Is the person who read this mad as this is "really just describing conservatives" while missing the point that it's also describing a variety of positions that do - in every case - harm minorities no matter what the good reasons stated? Then that says a lot. Especially as conservatism as it is today is NOTHING like it's roots, and that the author of this article is more conservative - pre-Goldwater - than any alive today who claim the name are. Most who couldn't tell you who Goldwater was to save their lives.
The N-Word. Can the person say, "If President Trump used the n-word, then he was disgustingly racist and wrong" or will they say anything else but that? Will they treat you to a lecture on what rap singers say, or will they simply say it was wrong? Will they say it should never be used, or wish to hear more of the "context"? If they can't just say that it was wrong if it was used, then yes, that speaks to being racist.
Trump. Enough said. It's an "indicator", not sufficient by itself, but it sure gets you a long way down the road.
Antifa vs. Nazi Flag wavers. Do they always defend one as free speech with some outside agitators making it violent? And which one is that they always defend? A no-brainer here. For while both groups have their issues, the defense or condemnation of one and not the other is damning.
Religion. Do they support prayer in schools but hate the idea of kids learning about Islam? One could defend both, and one could oppose both, but supporting one without the other is of concern.
Tally this list up. Take your own score. And if you're a conservative, and don't like the score you got, then I suggest you discover the Libertarian Party. It's a lot more like old fashioned conservatism than the racist vomit that passes for it today.
