this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2026
72 points (65.4% liked)

Political Memes

12247 readers
1640 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

1) Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

2) No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

3) Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

4) No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

5) No AI generated content.Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nullspace@lemmy.world 8 points 5 hours ago

This is the exact kind of post racists like to share in their own communities to show how "the woke agenda" victimizes them.

[–] BananaIsABerry@lemmy.zip 15 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Glad to see a lot of the comments denying this idea.

Racism is racism, fuck racists of any kind.

[–] bobbyfiend@retrolemmy.com 7 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, there has been a movement in recent decades to redefine racism, sexism, etc. As only applying to stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination by a person from a dominant group toward people from a marginalized group. To some extent I get that--that is why anyone ever started caring about racism etc.--and language evolves. If we as a society decide that is the only set of valid definitions, I'll go with it, because I care more about the struggle for equality than about the words used in that process.

That said, my issue with this usage is that it is imprecise and bundles some extra judgments. This use of racism requires an extra assessment of the power dynamics between the groups each of the parties belongs to (and sometimes identifying that is a quagmire itself). I'd prefer keeping those judgments separate. For example, maybe responding to this racist troll by saying that some kind of racism cause and deepen harm a lot more than others, and he is ignoring that fact due to his own racism.

[–] Catma@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

What they are talking about is systematic racism, which defines racism + its proximity to power. IE the system cannot be really racist to white people if white people run the system. However its the system not specifically the individuals in the system that are racist.

I believe an example would be something like if you have a white sounding name you are more likely to be interviewed over someone with a non white name all other factors being held the same. At least in say the US.

Idiots like the person responding in the image coopted the definition to apply it to racism as a whole so they could say things like "I am not racist because i do not have systematic power but you are racist simply because of the colour of your skin, even if I am saying far more vile things and judging you based on nothing more than skin colour."

Racism is discrimination based on a persons skin color regardless of what you look like.

Systematic racism is more what the system does to those outside of the agreed upon "norm" inside of a system.

There is and should be distinctions in these definitions but the internet ruins everything.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 15 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I mean sure if you use your own made-up definition of what racism is.

Racism as defined is the belief that one's race is better than another.

It doesn't matter what race you are. As long as you hold that belief you are in fact a racist.

Definition

[–] Hozerkiller@lemmy.ca 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It's basically moving the goal posts. Language is a malleable thing, however when one word is being already actively used by the majority of people for an adjacent meaning then a new word is needed. If people can't use context other than the race of the victim to determine if you mean someone was racist or racist+ then your word sucks.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

But we already have a term for what the user is describing, 'systemic racism'. This is trying to define a common term to mean something more specific to push the same behaviors out of the umbrella depending on the color of the person doing it. Ironic.

[–] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I came here to say that. Systemic racism is exactly what the post was describing.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 46 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

This is a dumb redefinition of the word to have a narrower meaning than it should, confusing the conversation. You can just say "systemic racism".

[–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 10 points 7 hours ago

I'm a big fan of "oppression". Blacks in America are victims of racial oppression.

"Systemic racism" doesn't solve the "this is something that is bad and happens to blacks but not whites" inference while "oppression" is both implicitly bad and not something you can do tp the dominant group.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 25 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

You don't need to be in a position of power to be racist.

Most racist chuds have no power.

[–] Proprietary_Blend@lemmy.world 7 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

True racism had never been tried

[–] Frettchen@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

This is true. The Nazis were just pretending

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 94 points 1 day ago (51 children)

racism noun

  1. prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group

lanzybear is an idiot

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 50 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Exactly, lazybear's take is very close to the moronic thinking making people believe that men can't be raped.

Stop making simple concepts complicated.

[–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

It's not an original thought, but a very publicly taught one. Which was a redefinition made by some well meaning academics and activists who wanted to narrow the focus of civil rights work to the most egregious violations.

(Which would have been a laudable goal except that it makes everyone fight about what "racism" means instead of solving anything and implicitly tells poor whites that their economic oppression doesn't matter.)

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 13 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

I'd say it's less that they are an idiot and more that they don't understand there is systemic racism and interpersonal racism (there is probably a more official term here but interpersonal covers it well enough for a Lemmy comment).

Systemic racism can only be done by the ~~majority~~ group with the power in a given system (usually government but it could be perpetrated in a religion, an institution, club, etc.). Red lining is a great example of that. Segregation as well. Things done by the group in power to the ones not in power of the given system. Throughout the history of the USA, this means white people oppressing other ethnicities but especially black people.

Interpersonally, anyone can be racist. They can hold racist views and hate others without knowing them beyond their appearance.

Edit: strike through on majority. While most commonly it is a majority group in power, it doesn't have to be a majority group, just the group in power.

[–] MumboJumbo@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Systemic racism can only be done by the majority group with the power…

Counter argument: South Africa

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Fair enough, I guess I can drop the majority phrasing and just leave it as group in power.

load more comments (49 replies)
[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 15 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Well, ackshually 🤓

Seriously though, that's not the definition most people use, and you're never going to change minds through pedantry. Also, people like this always seem to be colossal losers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 40 points 1 day ago (14 children)

Hate to be a descriptivist but no, you don’t just get to change what a word means and then get mad because people are using it the correct way.

Racism is discrimination based on race, no matter how many arts majors screech otherwise.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›