The word racism is rarely used in the correct context these days.

Readers of the debate, I'll keep this brief as I don't have all that many arguments to address at this moment. But shall we begin? My opponent started the debate with the example of the black man and the watermelon. He takes this out and makes it as it was not racist. In fact it is incredibly racist, and even worse it has it's own name: “The watermelon stereotype.” and it is a major symbol in racism against African Americans with roots in slavery. The notion that black people like water melons is not only an absurd statement to make given that only 11% of all watermelon consumption in the US are consumed by African-Americans in the US. It implies that every single black person out there has a taste for watermelons. I'd like my opponent to know where that remark came from. When slavery was still at large in the US slave keepers made it a habit to hold watermelon plants on their property and actively portrayed their black slaves as simple, idiotic minds that where contempt with watermelons and a little rest. The notion that stemmed from this has made it's way into common folk-lore and even if it isn't racist on the surface it is racist because of its origins. Hence it isn't an overuse of the word to use it to describe a notion that has extremely racist roots. In fact a lot of the “common” stereotypes may not be racist on the surface, but they are often racist underneath. Idolizing a stereotype isn't something to be proud of, and as such we should try and avoid it to great lengths. Now, not that I came do debate semantics, but my opponent must remember that it is fully possible to read between lines of the English language to reveal additional meanings to a sentence. Take the racist definition for instance:"the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."What can we read from this sentence?Well, we know that we need to give a certain race some perks that either separate the entire race in a positive or a negative way from all other races. Say: “All blacks run fast.” Here we are giving every black person alive (be it true or not) a trait making it superior to a race that does not run fast. All based on a stereotype that isn't accurate. We cannot possibly expect every black person alive to run fast, so the statement isn't even accurate. This Is a form of racism, it falls under the definition. It's usage can be summed into “All X are Y because they are X.” This may hold in extremely specific situations “All Indians have at some point lived on planet earth” but then the notion is pointless since it can most likely be applied to a lot larger group than just that race. So Racism has a large usage span, wherever you distinguish someone because of their race in a subtle way or not.Now, my opponent next addressed that stating a fact about another race is racist. Isn't it? What facts do other races have that cannot be applied to a larger group without being specifically because of said race? My opponent said that there are a few people that are not truly racist, but I'd like him to back that claim up. I did a little research and found that racism is still at large with disadvantages and the most racist parts of the US being the south where the old cotton fields where. And out of a list of the most racist countries in the world the US somehow managed to jam itself on the top. Meaning that Racism is both a problem inside and outside of the states. Because racism hasn't been defeated we must still keep fighting it with all the strength we have, even if it is using the term a bit more often than we are used to. My opponent concludes by stating that we should not create racism where there was none. This is counter-productive. If we would have moved this think set back to the slave-era, would the slaves ever have gotten freedom? The act of keeping slaves was not considered racist by the slavers, but there was still racism there. We didn't create it, we simply pointed it out. There is a difference. Creating racism is bad, as it usually involves racist acts. But pointing racism out where it already is, that isn't bad. That's the only way we'll move forward.1]http://en.wikipedia.org...2]http://listdose.com...3]http://www.dailymail.co.uk...