Superficial, Self Deluding GOP Thoughts About Racism, and Who's a Racist.

Over at Lawyers Guns and Money, a teaser about an upcoming essay, The New Racism, by Erik Loomis (a History Professor.)

I find the teaser interesting, and I am sure I will agree with a lot of his points. He does raise in his teaser the definition issue, meaning, how do we define racism in the post Civil Rights Era?* My main point of departure is the UN definition for racial discrimination, and the natural and logical inferences that definition leads to, for a working definition of racism. But what I think is more to the point, particularly when talking about tea baggers and other assorted right wing racists, is how do they (wrongly) define it?

I'll rehash the old, as in have said it many times here before, way of saying it, and then I will add the newer, updated, snazzier version.

Old version.

There are a lot of right wingers out there who's understanding of the issues concerning racism (beyond you can't use certain racist insults anymore,) doesn't go much further than,"Racism = Bad. Being called a racist is bad. I am not bad. Therefore I am not a racist." That's the denial with out self analysis definition that lots of right wingers operate under.

In short, Not Me.

New version (which is not really all that new, but I have been thinking lately that more, if not many many right wingers actually can process the matter at least this far in their definition of what is a racist.)

"See that guy over there? He's way the fuck worse than me. That's racism. He's the racist. I'm not as bad as he is, so I am not a racist."

In short, Not me. Look at that other guy. He's the racist.


(* As an aside that's a truly lousy way to describe it. But yes I know it's a form of short hand for Post Struggle for Civil Rights Leading to Enactment of Federal Civil Rights Laws, Era.)