controversial view: there's widespread discrimination but not widespread racism

whites might be less likely to hire blacks or place them in housing, or whatever. i would call that discrimination. not racism

...N.B. The above comments are designed only to represent current and observable Western trends.....But could be applied globally to represent all instances where discrimination based upon perceivable difference occurs.

it's discrimination because the factor that is being used to make a decision is skin color, not the content of the person's character. but i dont think it's prejudicial in an unreasonable way.

RACISM is "discrimination based upon race or ethnicity."  Since you have agreed it is discrimination based upon race, you have described racism by definition.

Since it's impossible to see someone's birthplace or their parent's birthplace, "racism" (as you've defined it) is impossible.

It's actually pretty racist to deny housing or employment due to skin color. 

Since it's impossible to see someone's birthplace or their parent's birthplace, "racism" (as you've defined it) is impossible.

Racism is a mentality. There is nothing about it that requires the person holding discriminatory views to be factually correct.

i think white people are open minded towards black people. it's just that there's a lotta baggage with black culture. so, they whites might be less likely to hire blacks or place them in housing, or whatever. i would call that discrimination. not racism. it's discrimination because the factor that is being used to make a decision is skin color, not the content of the person's character. but i dont think it's prejudicial in an unreasonable way. white people are only human and often fear blacks, and it's understandable that whites dont want to associate with much of black culture given there's so much toxicity included often times. 

i think it's reasonable to say if there's discrimination there has to be racism as if they're one and the same. i just dont like to say there's so much racism given how open minded whites are. i can even understand if someone thought my distinction between discrimination and racism was a stupid distinction. 

Racism is not a fallacy. You're confusing the presumption of what someone's race or ethnicity is with how one feels about it. Racism is the latter.

because it is possible to reject someone's culture

Two problems though. One is that reasonable does not = right. We all at some point in our lives have been treated a certain way because of something that had nothing to do with us. So even in the case where a given stereotype is mostly accurate, if you believe we should all be treated as individuals and held to account based on our actions/decisions then it’s easy to see why the potential reasonableness of a discriminatory attitude must take a back seat. And it might not always be easy, but anyone who cares at all about being a good person should work to try and rid themselves of these attitudes.

The other is that many of these cases are not actual lived experiences, it’s the result of cherry picking that goes on when people share stories of things that happened to them or things they saw on Instagram. No one shares the story of the guy who helped them with their groceries, so if this is where you’re getting your information from of course it’s just going to reinforce whatever stereotype you already accept. Most people are good, it’s just easy for us to accept those negative stereotypes because we often don’t spend enough of our time in the spaces of those we tend to discriminate against.

WHY DOES SOMEONE DISLIKE SOMEONE BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR ?

THE ONLY REASON TO DO SO IS BECAUSE OF THE BROAD-BRUSH.

YOU'RE LITERALLY DESCRIBING AND THEN RE-DESCRIBING THE BROAD-BRUSH FALLACY.

A person’s attitude or feelings about someone can be based on a logical fallacy, that does not make said attitudes or feelings… a fallacy.

And yet no one who points to someone claiming them to be a racist is talking about logic, so this is all completely irrelevant to racism. What is your point?

And yet no one who points to someone claiming them to be a racist is talking about logic, so this is all completely irrelevant to racism. What is your point?

This conversation started because you equate racism (a negative emotional reaction to ones conclusion about another’s race) to a logical fallacy (an error in arriving at a conclusion from a given set of premises). You have yet to explain how these entirely separate things… are the same.

It seems, and I'm actually asking you, it seems like you believe that a "logical fallacy" is only, and can only be a "logical fallacy" in some sort of formal setting, like in a debate, or as a specifically formatted claim, like a syllogism.

Is this what you're suggesting ?

Logical fallacies occur before the conclusion. Racism starts after the conclusion. There is no overlap, which is why I have been pointing out that they’re irrelevant to each other.