I'm starting this because of drift in this thread.
Well, I think there is. There are the traditional racists, the white supremacists and skin heads, and then there are the neo-racists, the Zionists, the Christian Right, and MSM in the guise of fighting "terrists". But I suppose it all flows from the same fountain, I guess you're right.
but i do question the absolutes in FM's statement. all zionists are racist all msm are raicst.
I thought we were not allowed to paint an enitire group with one brush stroke so to speak.
FM, lots of times individual racism is talked about as a continuum, in terms of behaviour. At one end are the folks you mentioned, and at the other end are active anti-racist allies trying to disrupt ways they are given individual power through racist society. Most are in the middle somewhere.
Neo implies, to me, that racism went away and came back. I think neo means for you folks who are overt and/or extreme with racist behaviour as compared with folks at the other end of the continuum who are more aware of the racism they enact, and who recognize that racism is a bad thing.
And to be clear, if we're talking about a continuum for individual behaviour, in the Canadian context, only white folks, or folks with light-skinned privilege are on it. Please see Racism 101 and What is Racism? if anyone has a problem with this concept.
jpj, I will address the MSM point. The zionist question/dissertation/saga has been done over and over, and there is no twain meeting, if you get my drift. I will say that there is a difference between pointing to an institution and pointing to members or practitioners. However, I feel I've just touched on the essence of the never-to-be-resolved terminology debate on "zionism". If you all want to talk about that, please start a new thread.
The MSM, or the corporate media, are institutions. And institutions can most definitely be "racist" or "sexist" or "anti-poor" and any manner of other oppressive ways. Some people may feel this is a broad brush stroke, but the truth is, institutional power is enacted in brush strokes and jack hammers and with the might and power that they have as, well, institutions. When does the corporate media ever take an anti-oppression perspective? I think it's safe to say "never". All the stories about Suaad Hagi Mohamud don't speak of institutional and systemic racism: at the consulate level, at the federal government level, etc. It's just a bunch of mix ups, oh oops, etc.
If, and this happens rarely, an incident is so obviouly racist, the corporate media gets around using the word "racist" and instead uses the word "racial", have you noticed this? It makes me laugh until I cry.