Talk:Racialist

message: I think it is important to keep in mind the distiction this word makes. The clarifying point is that a racialist isn't trying to hurt anyone, he simply has his opinion, feeling that races are different, and chooses to make decisions based apon that. But he claims that he is no more superior than any other race, and that he is not by this term specifically advocating ill towards another race. In literature I have seen on the subject they always maintain an opposition to jews, and almost all race mixing, but whilst calling themselves racialists they never advocate violence or other ill treatment towards "MUD" people, as they call the majority of racial groups. Sam Spade 05:52, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC
Sam, this is a very weak racial appologist argument. Racialism has prejudicial and discriminatory attitudes towards other races. Racism does not by definition advocate violence. In fact, as has been pointed out they are the same term. There is not some middle ground term you can invent here. Racialism and racism are synonimous-once again racialism n : discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race [syn: racism]. Thats the dictionary definition. Calling others "mud" people is a racist term, there are racist who are pascifists. "Seperate but equal" is a racist/racialist argument. Sorry no dice. GrazingshipIV 05:58, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)
: All of those meanings are covered by racism, so the answer to my question would seem to be no, there is no ideology implied by racialism which is not covered by racism. These words are not like white separatist and white supremacist, where two similar and sometimes-overlapping terms reflect, when applied honestly, a real difference in ideologies—racialism and racism are completely-overlapping terms with no significant differences. If the former is just a less-likely-to-offend euphemism for the latter, then we note that in the racism article; a separate page is not necessary.  —No-One Jones 06:05, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You may also find the Britannica intro instructive: "Racism, also called racialism. . . ." —No-One Jones 06:07, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: racist/racialist

message: ::O.K. I retire the debate until someone else brings it back up then ;) Sam Spade 06:09, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad we could come to a reasonable consensus on this—now it remains to be seen what will happen when Vogel or one of his ilk finds this page . . . I have a feeling we'll discover that the term racism is only used by Jewish-Marxist-PC-atheists with "SSEE" in order to besmirch the reputations of honorable racialists like Dr. William Pierce. :-/ —No-One Jones 06:21, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Shut up, you. Sam Spade 03:46, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: Racialism was created over a year ago; if there were to be a separate article (which I don't think is necessary) it probably ought to be at that title at any rate. - Hephaestos|§ 06:25, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a handful of '-ist' articles, like supremacist and White separatist. Sam Spade 03:46, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: I moved those pages, so thats a start, I spose. Sam Spade 03:53, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

text: See above. Sam Spade 07:09, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: surrender

message: The article is reinstated, albeit at Racialism so as to parallel Racism. Short form - the term is used, the concept exists. The article should make clear the belief that the concept is a sham, but ignoring it is just wrong. NPOV, NPOV, NPOV. If someone is trying to find out about the difference between racism and racialism, and they type in racialism and get redriected to racism, they're being misled. They're not identical. One may be a disguise for the other - indeed, I think racialism is very thinly veiled racism. But if we're going to push for PC terminology on other things, which is convention, we should also pay heed to what groups we find despicable wish to be called. Snowspinner 20:47, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Here we go again