1. “but since you appear unwilling to believe that a woman might be talking sense”
This is disingenuous. I made specific remarks about Joy’s (who is one woman) specific arguments in this thread. Nowhere did I suggest that she’s unable to talk sense in general. And nowhere did I evince an “unwilling[ness] to believe that a woman might be talking sense.” If I had such a belief I wouldn’t waste my time arguing with one.

2. “You have now been told that “Coloured People” is a specific subset of “People of Colour” and is therefore not contiguous with or equivalent to that term. This alone should disprove your challenge.”
I confess that I didn’t get what Joy was on about, but having read your response, and having reread her original posts I think she’s saying something like this: POC can be racist (if certain social conditions exists) but Coloured people (in South Africa) can’t be racist, because for them those social conditions don’t exist.
I usually quote by copying and pasting. I could have made the substitution in error, in which case I apologise to Joy, and to you SnowDrop (for wasting your blogging time.) Or it could be that I quoted correctly, and Joy followed up on the promise of her October 22 posting: “I never said that POC can’t ever be racist. If my writing implied that, then I’ll do a post update. (emphasis mine)” (And let’s hope that THAT isn’t post-updated. It’s for reasons such as this that I follow the practise of leaving even egregious error on my blog after I’ve posted.) But to be clear, my apology to you and Joy stands, and I do now see the distinction that you’re labouring.

3. “Racism = prejudice + power.” In this paragraph you accurately rehash Joy’s argument. So my earlier remarks (read them by scrolling up) pertain. If they’re not enough I’d like to refer you to Eusebious McKaiser’s article on racism in which he lands a left-hook on the crazy notion that racism is defined in terms of power. Before you dis, let it be known that set-theoretically McKaiser is a member of the intersection of the sets POC and CPSA (“Coloured People in South Africa.”) – although I don’t think he’s in the SACP, or the SPCA.

4. McKaiser aside (though I’d urge you to read him), three spooky things happen in the argument you and Joy cling to:

SpookyThingNumber1: Quoting SnowDropExplodes: “The class of people who have darker skin (POC, or “Coloured People”) lack the power to impose their prejudices on the world”
Remember that Joy believes it’s possible for POC to be racist! (please read her original reply to me – before she “post updates” it. It’s downright spooky to drift immediately away from something you’ve only just defended deftly.

SpookyThingNumber2: “Thus, Coloured People cannot as a class be racist but describing them as such absolves White people from guilt associated with misuse of power.”
Absolves?! Really?! That’s kinda like saying that if I prove that you’re a marshmallow addict, then I can’t myself be one. As if moral failures (and sweety-dependence) are somehow mutually exclusive. The obvious retort to a White (or POC, or Coloured, or…) racist who tries to slink off the hook with that line is to haul out the two-wrongs-make-no-right rejoinder. Just because we have Coloured racists (which, from decades living in Cape Town I know we do) doesn’t mean that we don’t also have White racists. Or POC ones. Or…
Don’t get so caught in the rigors of redefinition that you allow obvious ruses through the front door. That’s spooky neglect.

SpookyThingNumber3:
Blinded by the gleam of your redefinition, you forget or overlook facts. I’ve spent more than three decades in Cape Town, shrouded in a darker-than-dark skin (there’s a deprecated word starting in “K,” which Capetonians have generally found more pronounceable than my name.) Let me assure you that Coloured People (in South Africa) are perfectly capable of “impos[ing] their prejudices on the world.” Of course, this doesn’t make the class/set of Coloured People racist (anymore that the cumulative weight of our history makes the “class” of White people racist.)

Thank you. I was starting to feel like an alien

Also, the way are describing the definition of racism makes sense to me too. That’s also how I’ve heard it explained in academic settings too, so it’s not too much of an outrageous or crazt idea, to me

Thank you.

neil:

I don’t wish to speak for anyone else or put words into anyone else’s mouth, but since you appear unwilling to believe that a woman might be talking sense, I’ll have a go instead (with all my white male privilege). I’ll leave this as it is and leave it for those whose words I may be misinterpreting to correct me and speak for themselves if need be.

As I understand it, you claim that:

“Coloured People can be prejudiced but they can’t be racist” and “There are many people who’ll argue that POC and minorities can’t ever be racist. I say that’s not true.” are directly contradictory, because POC = Coloured People. (Oh, yes, I checked and your claim that there was no substitution is absolutely false – see, I’ve quoted the exact text in each case. )

You have now been told that “Coloured People” is a specific subset of “People of Colour” and is therefore not contiguous with or equivalent to that term. This alone should disprove your challenge.

But the logic goes even further. If I understand things correctly, the argument goes like this:

Racism = prejudice + power. The class of people who have darker skin (POC, or “Coloured People”) lack the power to impose their prejudices on the world, whereas those with pale skin (Whites) do have that power. Thus, Coloured People cannot as a class be racist but describing them as such absolves White people from guilt associated with misuse of power.

Individual POC who attain power may act in ways that form a part of the White racism, but their racist actions (and prejudices) are not proof that “POC are racist too!” but only that a POC who has been granted power by those who have greater power, exhibits the same qualities as those who have granted her/him power. Certainly that person no longer, in social terms, belongs as a member of the class “Coloured People”, or even “POC”. As far as those terms are socially defined, they have joined the ruling class of White, and serve to uphold it. (That they are not biologically White would still expose them to the prejudice of their White peers and superiors in the power structure, of course, if they stepped out of line.)

Q.E.D.

“Instead you ‘quote’ me but substitute coloured people for POC” That’s a blatent untruth. ll you have to do so read your blog post to see that there’s no substitution.

“and you leave out certain parts of the quote.” True. But I’ve made no relevant ommisions, and the full text is available on the blog. I’d rather you showed some competence in dealing with the (smaller, more managable) quoted portion before digesting the bigger bits.

“End of discussion.” How sad – it didn’t even get started…

I’ve tried to make you understand but you refuse. Instead you ‘quote’ me but substitute coloured people for POC and you leave out certain parts of the quote.

End of discussion.