Is it Racist if it's true?

Just because it’s easy, I grabbed Wikipedia’s definition of “racism,” which is pretty close to the definition I groove to: “Racism has many definitions, the most common and widely accepted being the belief that humans are divided into more than one race, with members of some races being intrinsically superior or inferior to members of other races.”
Is it Racist if it’s True?

Note that that definition doesn’t have anything to do with whether the belief is ACCURATE or not. Of course, if you believe something, you think it’s accurate. And because we’ve been conditioned to believe that “racism” is bad, there is a bit of cognitive dissonance when we harbor a negative attitude toward a particular ethnic or racial group.

It is a plea for bigotry. “Blacks just aren’t as smart” “Mexicans are lazy” “white people are evil” “Asians are sneaky.” Whatever.

I’m not going to let people off that hook. If you have a global, negative opinion of a group, that’s your business. If it’s true, it might be important to broadcast said opinion. But if your opinion is self-serving (it puts you and your group above the other) and self-labeled (based on observations and measurements devised and administered by your group) and ESPECIALLY if it excuses or justifies present or past violence or oppression of that “other” group, I’m going to be rather skeptical. There is absolutely nothing more common than members of group “A” saying they’re better than members of group “B.”

That said, it is a bit unfortunate that the connotative definition of “racist” or “racism” has to do with the accuracy or honesty of the perception. Personally, a person can think the average black is less intelligent, but if that person is a gentleman I would consider them “racist” but not necessarily what I call a “bigot.” That would depend on whether they evaluate each person separately, as best they can.

I can’t look at something that is damned near universal (us-themism) and consider people who feel or think that way to be “below average” in ethics or morality. Pretty much by definition, they ARE the average. Rather, I’d say that someone who ACTS on such beliefs (spreading lies they know to be lies, instigating violence, etc.) to be BELOW average, and those who (and yes, this is self-serving as hell) think the way I do about this to be ABOVE average in this regard.

Almost every person I’ve met who had “racist” beliefs was given the foundation for those beliefs in childhood. I’ve met far fewer people who STARTED by thinking people were pretty much equal, and down the road somewhere became bigots. That one’s a rarity to me. I’m sure it happens, though.
##
Oh...and on the question of an Obama candidacy and black sexual images in film...both questions spring from the same core, one of unconscious negative assumptions and associations regarding blackness. I think that Obama, like Will Smith and Oprah, has transcended race as few human beings ever manage to. In one sense, were he white, he'd be a shoe-in. In another sense, the fact that he's half-Kenyan is a fantastic visual metaphor for the possibility of America, and for genuine change. I think that people are 80% reacting to him DESPITE his race. But one thing I've seen over the course of my life is that if you manage to struggle to excellence despite the obstacles, even bigots seem to understand you have done something extraordinary, and give you a certain respect. It's odd, but seems to be true.
##
So...I would have bet that the movie thing would happen first. And I'm still betting that way. My guess is that 2008 is the year. We'll see.