Final paper

P a ge |1

Racism
What if the majority of were not self-claiming there are not racist but very active how
would the world would be today? How would the world co-exist in with each other because
Racism is something we've all witnessed? Many people fail to believe that race isnt a biological
category, but an artificial classification of people with no scientifically variable facts. In other
words, the distinction we make between races has nothing to do with genetic characteristics.
Race was created socially, primarily by how people perceive ideas and faces we are not quite
used to. The definition of race all depends on where and when the word is being used. In U.S.
history, the meaning of the label white has changed over time, eventually adding groups like
the Italians, Irish and Jews. Other groups, mainly African, Latino, American Indian, Pacific
Islander, and Asian descendants have found the path for worldwide social acceptance much more
difficult. The irregular border of ethnicities touches educational and economic opportunity,
political representation, as well as income, health and social mobility of people of color.
What is racism? Before you answer the question with the definition of the word racism, I
want you to think and define racism in your own words. This question has been discussed in the
human history for quite some time. No one has been able to define the word racism satisfactory
and be able to explain why this word is important to these 50 states we call home. What has this
word impacted? The list of question can go for days. Defining the word racism can be easy to
some people because defining a word is basically said what the word means to you.

Final paper

P a ge |2

Frankly, there is no correct way defining a word correctly is the way someone interprets for most
and this can change from person to person. Racism is defined as people who are both prejudice
and discriminating based on a social perception of biological differences between peoples. It
often takes the form of social actions, practices or beliefs, or political systems that consider
different races to be ranked as inherently superior or inferior to one another, based on presumed
shared inheritable traits, abilities, or qualities. It may also hold that members of different races
should be treated differently.
Among the questions about how to define racism, Its the question of whether to include;
forms of discrimination as unintentional, such as making assumptions about preferences or
abilities of others based on racial stereotypes; whether to include symbolic or institutionalized
forms of discrimination such as the circulation of ethnic stereotypes through the media; and
whether to include the socio-political dynamics of social stratification that sometimes have a
racial component.
Although we live in the 21 st century, our perception of race and ethnicity is still
considered to be separate phenomena in social science. The two terms have a long history of
popular usage and negative usage surrounding the word racism. Other terms Individuals
believed and misuse is Racism and racial discrimination. These two terms are often described as
discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis. Pointing out the difference between each ethnic
and cultural basis can be consider as racial comment or bold racism. However, there is no
distinction between the terms racial discrimination and ethnic discrimination. Superiority is the
base on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and

Final paper

P a ge |3

dangerous, and that there is no justification for racial discrimination, in theory or in practice,
anywhere.

Racial discrimination was practice in certain parts of the states with the Jim Crow laws.
The Jim Crow law is a law that mandated the segregation of public schools, public places and
public transportation, and the segregation of restrooms, restaurants and drinking fountains for
whites and blacks. Not only the public places were a part of the segregation but the U.S. military
was also segregated. These Jim Crow laws followed human race from the early 1800 to 1866.
Segregation of public schools was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United
States in 1954 in Brown v. Board of Education. Generally, the remaining Jim Crow laws were
overruled by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Years of action
and court challenges were needed to unravel numerous means of institutional discrimination. All
this could have been avoid with equal rights all from the beginning.

The idea of racial discrimination in the southern states was against the constitution and
the civil rights were being violated. In theory, Civil Rights are individual rights to equal
protection and service, privacy, freedom of thought, freedom of expression, freedom of speech,
freedom of assembly, freedom to travel, freedom of worship, protection of civil liberties, the
right to vote, and the right to freely share ideas and opinions through all forms of communication
and media. Because of racial discrimination, rights were being taken away from People who
were motivated to make their life better but could not because their freedom as American
Citizens was being suppressed. These rights and liberties included in the The Jim Crow laws
were racial segregation through state and local laws enacted after the Reconstruction period in
Southern United States. This continued in force until 1965 mandating de jure racial segregation

Final paper

P a ge |4

in all public facilities in Southern U.S. states (of the former Confederacy). 1890 started the
"separate but equal" status for African Americans. Conditions for African Americans were
consistently inferior and underfunded compared to those provided for white Americans. This
decision was not only affected by African Americans but it affected other as well. De jure
segregation was mainly applied to the Southern United States, while Northern segregation was
generally de facto which is defined as patterns of segregation in housing enforced by covenants,
bank lending practices, and job discrimination, including discriminatory union practices for
decades. Civil rights leader understood what racism meant. Now Im starting to I understand
what racism means to me.

A major reason racism existed was because of the struggle for power. The term power
means the possession of control, authority, or influence over others. This is basically what
racism is psychology about. The power to own or govern someones actions, dictate their
successes was the attraction to keep racism live. Only one group would have power.
Racism/power is the ultimate goal and I believe the one who people obtain the power of racism
obtain the free world and that racism meant to some people.

Final paper

P a ge |5

After doing research on the topic racism, I found myself to understand the words mean to
me with a different prospective. What does the word racism means to me and what kind of
passion is found behind these reasons? I look over all of my reasons and I came up with
multiple reasons why I dont support racism.

Racism caused a lot of damage to people in the civil right movement. All because
someone could not stand the sight of another person skin tone that was different than theirs.
However communities were filled with people who opened their minds to the false realization
that the world they live in is filled with promotion and give false hope of political freedom and
civil liberties and rights. I believe this is absolutely the wrong way of thinking. This is why I
agree with what Martin Luther king and what civil right leaders did in the past, marching the
streets with protests and speeches. Civil right leaders are very influential in ways that impacted
many. This was not what civil rights leader believed in. They believed in working to protect
individuals and groups rights from political repression and discrimination force upon many by
the governments and private organizations. They sought to ensure everyone has the ability to be
an active member and participant to this world we call a society.

Many Civil rights leaders and martin Luther King Jr both believed that an individual
should not be judge by the color of their skin but by their character and the action one performs.
They had visions of the nation coming together as one to solve a better cause and work along the
side of someone of the opposite skin color in every state and every city. The struggle and pain
was for a good cause and I believe that it is true. Without people like Martin Luther king Jr. and
other civil right leader, I would not be able to sit in a classroom with white or any otherrace at
that. I would not be presented with the same chance to learn as everyone else.

Final paper

P a ge |6

Section four use the characteristic of racism to support my position on the topic
The supporting details I have reached for racism thus far indicate that racial pride and
recognition do not necessarily have to be malicious and do not imply racism. There may be quite
a bit of good in having a positive attitude toward a race. It may help to develop feelings of
kinship and self-esteem in groups who have suffered discrimination, neglect, and abuse, and it
may facilitate their struggle against social structures that negatively affect them. But this claim
needs to be examined further in view of the notion of stereotyping. For if all racial attitudes are
based on stereotypes and stereotypes are false, as some claim, then the presumed benefits of
racial pride and recognition are voided. Indeed, it looks as if it would be best to eliminate all
racial attitudes after all, and become "racially blind." In short, we would be back at the point
where we started in this article in spite of the conclusion that negative and positive racisms do
not imply each other.
This argument could be formulated as all forms of racism are based on stereotypes so far
as they assume that all, or most, members of racial groups share certain properties. Negative
racism is based on the stereotypes, for example: Latinos are thought to keep to the maana
philosophy; "Blacks" are thought to be lazy; the Irish are thought to be drunks; and Jews are
thought to be greedy. Positive racism are in favor of Asians is based on the stereotype that they
are thrifty, of "Whites" that they are smart, of the French that they are sophisticated, and of
Germans that they are hardworking. But in fact, so the argument goes, the stereotypes on which
these forms of racism are based are in turn founded on false generalizations because these groups
of peoples do not in fact share any properties at all. Because of this, these stereotypes do not
support the negative and positive forms of racism to which they give rise. In short, we must give
up all racism, including racial pride and recognition.

Final paper

P a ge |7

In ordinary discourse the term 'racist' is used to refer to groups, societies, institutions, and
cultures in addition to individual persons, and it is often reserved for the negative phenomenon.
A positive attitude toward members of a racial group, or the racial group itself, held merely in
virtue of racial considerations, on the other hand, is often called racial pride or kinship, when the
attitude belongs to the members of the racial group in question. There is no name in general use
for persons who have this positive attitude with respect to members of racial groups, or to racial
groups considered as wholes, to which they do not belong. Although there are expressions of this
sort for particular racial groups, usually pejorative and used primarily by those who have a
negative racist attitude toward the group. This has been one of the reasons many object to the use
of 'racism' for any kind of positive racial attitude.
Regardless of the position you take on this topic, the argument can still be made that a
positive attitude. A negative attitude toward some other race, and vice versa. This means that
even what appears to be a positive attitude involves a negative one, and what appears to be a
negative attitude involves a positive one. there is not much of negative and positive attitudes
toward races. In logical terms, the concept of "positive racism" involve the concept of "negative
racism," and vice versa. This is important because if they are so tied, then the benefits of a
positive attitude may be undermined and positive racism could, as some have suggested, amount
to a form of negative racism. And, since negative racism is generally considered to be morally
objectionable, then positive racism likewise would have to be thought so. It is also important
because the harm of negative racism would open the door to benefits for the racist, making its
immorality even more perverse. For the moment I continue to use 'racism' for both negative and
positive attitudes to facilitate the discussion,

Final paper

P a ge |8

Does being positively racist toward members of a race imply also a negative attitude
toward the members of another race? Does having a positive attitude toward "Blacks" imply a
negative racial attitude toward, say, "Whites"? This does not seem to be necessary. That one
likes blue does not entail that one does not like red, even though red is one of those colors that is
not blue. That one appreciates the value of mercy does not mean that one does not appreciate the
value of temperance, even though both are virtues and temperance is one of the virtues that is a
member of the class of things that are not mercy. The same seems applicable to race: to have a
positive attitude toward a particular race does not entail having a negative attitude toward any
other particular race. I can have a positive attitude toward being "Black" and yet not have a
negative attitude toward being "White." This is very much like what happens with a family. I can
have a positive attitude toward my family, or members of my family, and this does not entail that
I have a negative attitude toward any other particular family or its members, or toward all
families that are not my own or their members

These conclusions are by no means generally accepted among those who discuss racism.
David Theo Goldberg, for example, argues that a stereotype is racist simply in virtue of the fact
that it concerns a historically oppressed group. For him, racism does not depend on the facts of
the case or the motivation behind the judgment deemed racist, but rather on the group to which it
applies. This view has been criticized by others, and I agree that it is too broad in that it extends
racism to many phenomena that have nothing to do with race, such as oppression on the basis of
sexual preference, nationality, or religion. In addition, not all stereotypes of oppressed groups are

Final paper

P a ge |9

related to their oppression and therefore it would be difficult to argue that they are racist indeed, the stereotype that "Blacks" are for the most part physically gifted is not a reason why
they are oppressed. Finally, this position opens the doors to a certain intellectual control that
could have deleterious consequences insofar as any stereotype of an oppressed group becomes
morally objectionable and therefore a candidate for eradication