Cultural racism was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 28, 2020). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article was nominated for deletion on August 5 2012. The result of the discussion was delete. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was edited to contain a total or partial translation of Kulturell rasism from the Swedish Wikipedia. Consult the history of the original page to see a list of its authors. (This notice applies to version 660918806 and subsequent versions of this page.) |
It has been proposed that this article be merged with Xenophobia. Cultural racism and xenophobi is not the same thing = CR should have its own article. It is not I who translated it, but there's nothing controversial with the content of the article, and the sources are good. I can put even more sources in if needed (english ones). Dnm ( talk) 17:31, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
To any future reader:
this single edit makes Dnm a clear partial participant on any subject revolving topics like this one.
Nergaal (
talk)
23:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Also, the only accessible reference used VERY clearly does not say what the text here implies. And every 8 of the 9 references used are inaccessible; even if these 8 references were actually correct and well used, it is essentially impossible for anybody (probably even those with access to Swedish language sources) to verify their veracity. In the two years since the article had been recreated, I find it extremely hard to believe that somebody with genuine interest in building an honest, objective article would have not provided some sort of verifiable references.
Nergaal (
talk)
01:34, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
To be truly neutral, this article must discuss the viewpoint that it is not racist or even wrong to view some cultures as superior to others. This article also focusses on the attitudes of white people and not examples of prejudices among POC, for example, the Rwandan genocide. MagicatthemovieS ( talk) 12:50, 14 August 2019 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS
For anyone coming forward as a result of my 3O request, the main issue of contention here is whether the two tags that MagicatthemovieS placed onto the article earlier today are valid and if they should remain in place. The viewpoint of an uninvolved editor well versed in Wikipedia policy would be appreciated. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 19:05, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I am not versed at all in Wikipedia policy but I agree with POV claim. It is hard to see difference with xenophobia and it is even harder to see how Islamophobia can be called racial when Islam is religion to which anyone can convert, seems like a fringe view. Polyison ( talk) 18:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Do you have some examples of text you consider NPOV? I don't have the time to read the entire article at the moment, but I could compare it to the whole later when I have time. I'm also not terribly well versed in Wikipedia policy, but it could help to have it laid out. Just from what you've said, considering there's not really a term (that I'm aware of) to describe discrimination by religion, I believe cultural racism is a term as good as any here. Praefect94 ( talk) 00:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
As far as I can tell religious discrimination is just that religious discrimination. I am very curios to find out how islamophobia and Persecution of Christians in the modern era can be called racial at all? There are white muslims and arabic, indian christians who are discriminated and in extreme cases killed. I fail to see how you can correlate religion with race. Polyison ( talk) 14:54, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: |
I do not believe that the tags are necessary. Neutrality is not always "balance", it is in accurately reflecting the consensus of reliable sources. The burden of an editor who wants to add material, such as has been proposed here, is on the editor who proposes it. MagicatthemovieS, that means you would need to actually say what references you're talking about (beyond a single one), not just handwave that they exist on Google Books. Please list specific sources which support your position, and then what to do with them can be reasonably discussed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC) Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC) |
Xenophobia is indistinct from cultural racism. The two articles should be combined. Make it so that the article says "Xenophobia, also known as cultural racism..." MagicatthemovieS ( talk) 14:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS
While MOS:LEAD doesn't always require the lead to have citations, that is more applicable when the lead is a concise summation without significant controversies. The lead on this article is quite long in comparison to the rest of the article; it is very detailed, and contains material that looks to be the subject of ongoing disputes. Perhaps citing the content, and making the lead more concise, might help with some of the conflicts here. See MOS:LEADCITE. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 20:28, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
I propose islamophobia section from top of article and the body be removed completely. It is a fringe view, moreover this fringe view appears to be in minority or contested at best in UK, and entire section relies on UK perspective. This is not worldwide perspective. Polyison ( talk) 14:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Entire section is only about UK perspective, this is why I question how much widespread racial perspective is since it challenged even there, to me that indicates that perspective has low level of support globally. If there is support from Asia, Africa, Middle East, Americas as well as other European countries I would reconsider my view. Polyison ( talk) 16:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Starting a new thread on this issue. Like previous commentators, I think this article is missing the significant and noteworthy perspective that some cultures are better than others. This idea has a lot of noteworthy adherents. See a few prominent examples of this argument:
I don't think this article can meet the Good Article criteria of completeness or NPOV without including that line of critique. Fiamh ( talk, contribs) 04:55, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
I have seen that Taguieff has been recently introduced in the body of the article, which is good thing (thank you), but he is still underrepresented despite the fact that he is a leading theorist of 'cultural racism' (perhaps 'the' leading theorist with Balibar). Since both Balibar's and Taguieff's books were published in the same year (1988), I would have used the style 'date=1988|edition=1991' and 'date=1988|edition=2001' to avoid confusion. I can help you with Taguieff, I'm familiar with his work and can read the original French if needed. Azerty82 ( talk) 15:38, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
GRECE consciously avoided any conspicuous links with the discredited Fascist or Nazi cultures of the past. In order to return to cultural and political respectability and escape its marginalized status, the revolutionary Right had to abandon its petty infighting and sterile doctrinal disputes of the 1940s and 1950s as well as its violent, excessive tactics inherited from the colonialist and Fascist eras: extreme chauvinism, excessive militarism, the quasi-mystical cult of the leader, the totalitarian one party state, etc. Consequently, several important trends which began under Europe Action in the early 1960s would condition the thinking of GRECE and the ND in the late 1960s: the dumping of the hyper-veneration of the charismatic leader, a “scientific” doctrine of racism, and conditional support for the liberal parliamentary system. In addition, GRECE and the ND borrowed a number of themes inherited from Europe Action: the anti-Christian stance, a marked elitism, the racial notion of a unified Europe, the seeds of a change from biological to cultural definitions of “difference,” and the sophisticated inversion of terms like racism and anti-racism. As a result of the revolutionary Right militancy of some members within Vichy, Fascist, or France’s Organisation de l’armée secrète (OAS – Secret Army Organization) circles in the past, GRECE circulated a confidential internal bulletin to be later destroyed, which contained a warning against the use of outmoded fascist or proto- fascist language: “It is necessary to be very prudent in the conclusions which are drawn in Nouvelle Ecole (GRECE’s official journal). It is equally prudent in the vocabulary used. It is necessary to abandon an outdated language."Azerty82 ( talk) 16:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Race is the only real unit encompassing individual variations. The objective study of history shows that only the European race (white race, caucasian) has continued to progress since its appearance on the rising path of the evolution of the living, unlike races stagnant in their development, therefore in virtual regression [...] The European race does not have absolute superiority. It is only the most capable of progressing in the direction of evolution [...] Racial factors being statistically hereditary, each race has its own psychology. All psychology generates value."He has also endorsed apartheid as the "last outpost of the West" at a time of "decolonisation and international negrification" in 1965.
Segregating any class or race of people apart from the rest of the people kills the progress of the segregated people or makes their growth very slow. Association of races and classes is necessary to destroy racism and classism.Azerty82 ( talk) 21:39, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
You're quite right, Azerty82. This is a misleading sentence. Is anyone aware of any good articles or books dealing with the actual etymology of the term "racism", which could be utilised here in place of Rattansi's statement? Midnightblueowl ( talk) 10:10, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
The use of allegedly deep-seated cultural differences as a justification for hostility and discrimination against newcomers from the Third World in several European countries has led to allegations of a new “cultural racism.” (...) From the historian’s perspective such recent examples of cultural determinism are not in fact unprecedented. They rather represent a reversion to the way that the differences between ethnoracial groups could be made to seem indelible and unbridgeable before the articulation of a scientific or naturalistic conception of race in the eighteenth century. (...) The word “racism” first came into common usage in the 1930s when a new word was required to describe the theories on which the Nazis based their persecution of the Jews.Regards, Azerty82 ( talk) 11:28, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
@ Midnightblueowl: - Balibar (2009) pp1632-4 on etymology of the word racism in French and English. Discussion on first seeming use in English. Perhaps the point is that the term does not become routinely (?) negative until the 1930s and only decisively so from the 1950s.-- Goldsztajn ( talk) 19:02, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cultural insensitivity. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 17:59, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
This article uses the term 'biological racism' 15 times. Scientific racism is used once, in the lead, where it is equated to biological racism. Biological racism is linked in this article, and redirects to Scientific racism, which doesn't mention the term.
I think of biological racism as a narrower term, and specifically about identifying innate, genetically derived differences. Scientific racism is broader, and refers the process of using scientific tools to justify its conclusions. A cultural racist's application of intelligence testing to argue for differences in intelligence between groups is scientific racism, but not necessarily biological racism. The definition of scientific racism here seems to bear out a broader definition of scientific racism, although after a quick search I didn't find a comparison of the two terms. FWIW, here's the Ngram comparison.
Do others agree that these terms are not synonyms, and we should be careful about equating them in the lead? And, how best to address that we link biological racism to an article that doesn't mention it? Pinging @ Goldsztajn, Midnightblueowl, and Azerty82, who were involved in the recent GAN. LaTeeDa ( talk) 13:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
The article uses multiple different definitions of racism within the same paragraph. The following excerpt appears to use multiple different definitions of "racism", some of which are unusual and not supported by the Wikipedia article on "racism":
"Three main arguments as to why beliefs in intrinsic and insurmountable cultural differences should be considered racist have been put forward. One is that hostility on a cultural basis can result in the same discriminatory and harmful practices as belief in intrinsic biological differences, such as exploitation, oppression, or extermination. The second is that beliefs in biological and cultural difference are often interlinked and that biological racists use claims of cultural difference to promote their ideas in contexts where biological racism is considered socially unacceptable. The third argument is that the idea of cultural racism recognises that in many societies, groups like immigrants and Muslims have undergone racialization, coming to be seen as distinct social groups separate from the majority on the basis of their cultural traits."
The first argument seems to be that the belief in inherent cultural differences is racist because it means hostility to different cultures, which leads to discrimination and hateful practices (hateful practices like, it is argued, the belief in existence of biological races).
The second argument seems to be that the belief in inherent cultural differences is racist because it can lead to biological racism (presumably defined as the belief in existence of biological races), it is racist because people who hold that belief are also often biological racists.
The third argument seems to be that the belief in inherent cultural differences is racist because it means believing that some groups have undergone racialization. So it is arguing that acceptance of existence of racialization leads to racism.
1. Racism means hostility to different cultures and discriminatory and harmful practices, such as belief in existence of biological races.
2. The belief is racist because people who believe that there are inherent cultural differences are often also biological racists.
3. Racism means believing in the existence of racialization.
When we go to the article on racism on Wikipedia we can find some support for the first definition ("It may also mean prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against other people because they are of a different race or ethnicity.").
The second definition can be criticised as an example of a guilt by association fallacy, though a more cheritable interpretation would be that the argument is not that everyone who believes there are inherent cultural differences must be a biological racist, but that he is more likely to be a biological racist and there is a correlation between the two.
The third definition however I could find no support for at all in the article for racism, or in any other source. It is a bizarre definition.
There are no references given for the paragraph, in fact there are no references given for the first 4 paragraphs of the article at all. Somebody should add references for the first 4 paragraphs.
185.252.183.159 ( talk) 13:52, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Article reads: "This includes the idea that some cultures are superior to others."
The article should explain how the concept of cultural racism can be of any value when it is contradictory. That is, is a culture that is not culturally racist superior to one that is? If you answer yes, you are being culturally racist. If you answer no, then there is no point to the distinction between being culturally racist and not being culturally racist. 2600:4040:5D38:1600:8898:29E6:EB35:C26F ( talk) 13:58, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Cultural racism was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 28, 2020). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article was nominated for deletion on August 5 2012. The result of the discussion was delete. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was edited to contain a total or partial translation of Kulturell rasism from the Swedish Wikipedia. Consult the history of the original page to see a list of its authors. (This notice applies to version 660918806 and subsequent versions of this page.) |
It has been proposed that this article be merged with Xenophobia. Cultural racism and xenophobi is not the same thing = CR should have its own article. It is not I who translated it, but there's nothing controversial with the content of the article, and the sources are good. I can put even more sources in if needed (english ones). Dnm ( talk) 17:31, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
To any future reader:
this single edit makes Dnm a clear partial participant on any subject revolving topics like this one.
Nergaal (
talk)
23:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Also, the only accessible reference used VERY clearly does not say what the text here implies. And every 8 of the 9 references used are inaccessible; even if these 8 references were actually correct and well used, it is essentially impossible for anybody (probably even those with access to Swedish language sources) to verify their veracity. In the two years since the article had been recreated, I find it extremely hard to believe that somebody with genuine interest in building an honest, objective article would have not provided some sort of verifiable references.
Nergaal (
talk)
01:34, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
To be truly neutral, this article must discuss the viewpoint that it is not racist or even wrong to view some cultures as superior to others. This article also focusses on the attitudes of white people and not examples of prejudices among POC, for example, the Rwandan genocide. MagicatthemovieS ( talk) 12:50, 14 August 2019 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS
For anyone coming forward as a result of my 3O request, the main issue of contention here is whether the two tags that MagicatthemovieS placed onto the article earlier today are valid and if they should remain in place. The viewpoint of an uninvolved editor well versed in Wikipedia policy would be appreciated. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 19:05, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I am not versed at all in Wikipedia policy but I agree with POV claim. It is hard to see difference with xenophobia and it is even harder to see how Islamophobia can be called racial when Islam is religion to which anyone can convert, seems like a fringe view. Polyison ( talk) 18:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Do you have some examples of text you consider NPOV? I don't have the time to read the entire article at the moment, but I could compare it to the whole later when I have time. I'm also not terribly well versed in Wikipedia policy, but it could help to have it laid out. Just from what you've said, considering there's not really a term (that I'm aware of) to describe discrimination by religion, I believe cultural racism is a term as good as any here. Praefect94 ( talk) 00:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
As far as I can tell religious discrimination is just that religious discrimination. I am very curios to find out how islamophobia and Persecution of Christians in the modern era can be called racial at all? There are white muslims and arabic, indian christians who are discriminated and in extreme cases killed. I fail to see how you can correlate religion with race. Polyison ( talk) 14:54, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: |
I do not believe that the tags are necessary. Neutrality is not always "balance", it is in accurately reflecting the consensus of reliable sources. The burden of an editor who wants to add material, such as has been proposed here, is on the editor who proposes it. MagicatthemovieS, that means you would need to actually say what references you're talking about (beyond a single one), not just handwave that they exist on Google Books. Please list specific sources which support your position, and then what to do with them can be reasonably discussed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC) Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC) |
Xenophobia is indistinct from cultural racism. The two articles should be combined. Make it so that the article says "Xenophobia, also known as cultural racism..." MagicatthemovieS ( talk) 14:30, 17 August 2019 (UTC)MagicatthemovieS
While MOS:LEAD doesn't always require the lead to have citations, that is more applicable when the lead is a concise summation without significant controversies. The lead on this article is quite long in comparison to the rest of the article; it is very detailed, and contains material that looks to be the subject of ongoing disputes. Perhaps citing the content, and making the lead more concise, might help with some of the conflicts here. See MOS:LEADCITE. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 20:28, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
I propose islamophobia section from top of article and the body be removed completely. It is a fringe view, moreover this fringe view appears to be in minority or contested at best in UK, and entire section relies on UK perspective. This is not worldwide perspective. Polyison ( talk) 14:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Entire section is only about UK perspective, this is why I question how much widespread racial perspective is since it challenged even there, to me that indicates that perspective has low level of support globally. If there is support from Asia, Africa, Middle East, Americas as well as other European countries I would reconsider my view. Polyison ( talk) 16:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Starting a new thread on this issue. Like previous commentators, I think this article is missing the significant and noteworthy perspective that some cultures are better than others. This idea has a lot of noteworthy adherents. See a few prominent examples of this argument:
I don't think this article can meet the Good Article criteria of completeness or NPOV without including that line of critique. Fiamh ( talk, contribs) 04:55, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
I have seen that Taguieff has been recently introduced in the body of the article, which is good thing (thank you), but he is still underrepresented despite the fact that he is a leading theorist of 'cultural racism' (perhaps 'the' leading theorist with Balibar). Since both Balibar's and Taguieff's books were published in the same year (1988), I would have used the style 'date=1988|edition=1991' and 'date=1988|edition=2001' to avoid confusion. I can help you with Taguieff, I'm familiar with his work and can read the original French if needed. Azerty82 ( talk) 15:38, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
GRECE consciously avoided any conspicuous links with the discredited Fascist or Nazi cultures of the past. In order to return to cultural and political respectability and escape its marginalized status, the revolutionary Right had to abandon its petty infighting and sterile doctrinal disputes of the 1940s and 1950s as well as its violent, excessive tactics inherited from the colonialist and Fascist eras: extreme chauvinism, excessive militarism, the quasi-mystical cult of the leader, the totalitarian one party state, etc. Consequently, several important trends which began under Europe Action in the early 1960s would condition the thinking of GRECE and the ND in the late 1960s: the dumping of the hyper-veneration of the charismatic leader, a “scientific” doctrine of racism, and conditional support for the liberal parliamentary system. In addition, GRECE and the ND borrowed a number of themes inherited from Europe Action: the anti-Christian stance, a marked elitism, the racial notion of a unified Europe, the seeds of a change from biological to cultural definitions of “difference,” and the sophisticated inversion of terms like racism and anti-racism. As a result of the revolutionary Right militancy of some members within Vichy, Fascist, or France’s Organisation de l’armée secrète (OAS – Secret Army Organization) circles in the past, GRECE circulated a confidential internal bulletin to be later destroyed, which contained a warning against the use of outmoded fascist or proto- fascist language: “It is necessary to be very prudent in the conclusions which are drawn in Nouvelle Ecole (GRECE’s official journal). It is equally prudent in the vocabulary used. It is necessary to abandon an outdated language."Azerty82 ( talk) 16:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Race is the only real unit encompassing individual variations. The objective study of history shows that only the European race (white race, caucasian) has continued to progress since its appearance on the rising path of the evolution of the living, unlike races stagnant in their development, therefore in virtual regression [...] The European race does not have absolute superiority. It is only the most capable of progressing in the direction of evolution [...] Racial factors being statistically hereditary, each race has its own psychology. All psychology generates value."He has also endorsed apartheid as the "last outpost of the West" at a time of "decolonisation and international negrification" in 1965.
Segregating any class or race of people apart from the rest of the people kills the progress of the segregated people or makes their growth very slow. Association of races and classes is necessary to destroy racism and classism.Azerty82 ( talk) 21:39, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
You're quite right, Azerty82. This is a misleading sentence. Is anyone aware of any good articles or books dealing with the actual etymology of the term "racism", which could be utilised here in place of Rattansi's statement? Midnightblueowl ( talk) 10:10, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
The use of allegedly deep-seated cultural differences as a justification for hostility and discrimination against newcomers from the Third World in several European countries has led to allegations of a new “cultural racism.” (...) From the historian’s perspective such recent examples of cultural determinism are not in fact unprecedented. They rather represent a reversion to the way that the differences between ethnoracial groups could be made to seem indelible and unbridgeable before the articulation of a scientific or naturalistic conception of race in the eighteenth century. (...) The word “racism” first came into common usage in the 1930s when a new word was required to describe the theories on which the Nazis based their persecution of the Jews.Regards, Azerty82 ( talk) 11:28, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
@ Midnightblueowl: - Balibar (2009) pp1632-4 on etymology of the word racism in French and English. Discussion on first seeming use in English. Perhaps the point is that the term does not become routinely (?) negative until the 1930s and only decisively so from the 1950s.-- Goldsztajn ( talk) 19:02, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cultural insensitivity. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 17:59, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
This article uses the term 'biological racism' 15 times. Scientific racism is used once, in the lead, where it is equated to biological racism. Biological racism is linked in this article, and redirects to Scientific racism, which doesn't mention the term.
I think of biological racism as a narrower term, and specifically about identifying innate, genetically derived differences. Scientific racism is broader, and refers the process of using scientific tools to justify its conclusions. A cultural racist's application of intelligence testing to argue for differences in intelligence between groups is scientific racism, but not necessarily biological racism. The definition of scientific racism here seems to bear out a broader definition of scientific racism, although after a quick search I didn't find a comparison of the two terms. FWIW, here's the Ngram comparison.
Do others agree that these terms are not synonyms, and we should be careful about equating them in the lead? And, how best to address that we link biological racism to an article that doesn't mention it? Pinging @ Goldsztajn, Midnightblueowl, and Azerty82, who were involved in the recent GAN. LaTeeDa ( talk) 13:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
The article uses multiple different definitions of racism within the same paragraph. The following excerpt appears to use multiple different definitions of "racism", some of which are unusual and not supported by the Wikipedia article on "racism":
"Three main arguments as to why beliefs in intrinsic and insurmountable cultural differences should be considered racist have been put forward. One is that hostility on a cultural basis can result in the same discriminatory and harmful practices as belief in intrinsic biological differences, such as exploitation, oppression, or extermination. The second is that beliefs in biological and cultural difference are often interlinked and that biological racists use claims of cultural difference to promote their ideas in contexts where biological racism is considered socially unacceptable. The third argument is that the idea of cultural racism recognises that in many societies, groups like immigrants and Muslims have undergone racialization, coming to be seen as distinct social groups separate from the majority on the basis of their cultural traits."
The first argument seems to be that the belief in inherent cultural differences is racist because it means hostility to different cultures, which leads to discrimination and hateful practices (hateful practices like, it is argued, the belief in existence of biological races).
The second argument seems to be that the belief in inherent cultural differences is racist because it can lead to biological racism (presumably defined as the belief in existence of biological races), it is racist because people who hold that belief are also often biological racists.
The third argument seems to be that the belief in inherent cultural differences is racist because it means believing that some groups have undergone racialization. So it is arguing that acceptance of existence of racialization leads to racism.
1. Racism means hostility to different cultures and discriminatory and harmful practices, such as belief in existence of biological races.
2. The belief is racist because people who believe that there are inherent cultural differences are often also biological racists.
3. Racism means believing in the existence of racialization.
When we go to the article on racism on Wikipedia we can find some support for the first definition ("It may also mean prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against other people because they are of a different race or ethnicity.").
The second definition can be criticised as an example of a guilt by association fallacy, though a more cheritable interpretation would be that the argument is not that everyone who believes there are inherent cultural differences must be a biological racist, but that he is more likely to be a biological racist and there is a correlation between the two.
The third definition however I could find no support for at all in the article for racism, or in any other source. It is a bizarre definition.
There are no references given for the paragraph, in fact there are no references given for the first 4 paragraphs of the article at all. Somebody should add references for the first 4 paragraphs.
185.252.183.159 ( talk) 13:52, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Article reads: "This includes the idea that some cultures are superior to others."
The article should explain how the concept of cultural racism can be of any value when it is contradictory. That is, is a culture that is not culturally racist superior to one that is? If you answer yes, you are being culturally racist. If you answer no, then there is no point to the distinction between being culturally racist and not being culturally racist. 2600:4040:5D38:1600:8898:29E6:EB35:C26F ( talk) 13:58, 4 October 2022 (UTC)