I'm quite certain this is not the correct definition, but since I'm white, I'm obviously biased under this definition and my opinion is irrelevant. This is however the definition provided by some universities. This would explain the ease with which it is claimed when it doesn't actually exist, or at least the misapplication of the term.
|1.||a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.|
|2.||a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.|
|3.||hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.|
People need to learn the difference between prejudices or stereotypes and actual racism. One is stupid, the other is merely ignorant. I had this discussion yesterday with the concept that blacks like fried chicken. 'Everybody' who eats chicken likes fried chicken. Where does skin color enter the equation? Or hip-hop/jazz music. The top consumers of gangsta rap were suburban white kids. But the stereotype says black people. Jazz was popular with just about anybody at its height and it's often claimed to be one of America's top cultural achievements internationally (read: by white Europeans/Americans). I'm pretty sure this is ignorance and some blank stupidity at work. Racism on the other hand, that's just rank stupidity. It's often very well informed, albeit from a one-sided dimension that nobody else lives in. But still, it'd be nice if we could use terms in a way that actually proscribes with their definition rather than create these blanket proclamation (patriotism is another one that's losing out).