Bad arguments often are the result of using the same term in two different senses. These arguments typically use a weak (trivial) definition to prove the argument, and then they substitute the strong (substantive) definition to give the argument import. Welcome to critical race theory and systemic racism.
Their strong thesis is: Racism is evil. Is this true? Yes, racism is evil when, and only when, you advocate or act to deny someone their individual rights purely on the basis of race. Is this evil racism pervasive? No, evil racism is actually very rare these days.
Their weak thesis is: Racism is all-pervasive. Can they define racism so as to prove it is ubiquitous? Certainly, they can define racism any way they want. They can label every awareness of race as racism, but there is nothing morally wrong with making observations about race. It only becomes evil when you seek to reduce someone’s humanity.
The CRT/systemic racism proponents can prove that an innocuous form of racism is everywhere. They mistakenly claim to have proven evil racism is everywhere. This is a grotesque non sequitur.
CRT/systemic racism proponents are politically dishonest and intellectually vapid. Don’t take my word for it; prove it for yourself. Demand a coherent and consistent definition of racism.
Arthur Moeller
New Florence