Am I A Racist ?

No, but...

Introduction

I affirm that:

1. There exist many perfectly intelligible and useful biological conceptions of race. I personally affirm a form of racial population naturalism, the position in the ontology of race which argues that there are biologically significant populations that can be meaningfully called races. These groupings are non-essentialist and non-discrete, much like biological species, which are also not separated by strict genetic boundaries but remain scientifically useful.

2. There are differences between races in terms of IQ, crime, athletic performances, and other traits.
   2.1. I affirm, as a consequence, that some races can be said to be better than others with respect to those characteristics.

3. The origin of the differences in those traits is very likely at least partly due to genetic differences.
   3.1. I affirm, as a consequence, that some races can be said to be intrinsically better than others with respect to the characteristics mentioned in point 2.

My Concept of Racism

Do I consider myself a racist for holding these beliefs?

No, because my conception of racism is the following: someone is a racist if they consider race, in itself, to be a morally relevant criterion. None of the beliefs (1–3) that I affirm implies anything of that kind.

To illustrate this, consider two different kinds of behavior. Slapping someone in the face simply because they are white would clearly be racist, since it treats race itself as morally relevant.

By contrast, imagine a police investigation in which the suspect has been convicted of tax evasion. If statistical evidence shows that white individuals are more likely to commit this crime, then narrowing the search to white individuals is simply the rational use of available information. Similarly, a person who feels more worried walking past Black men than Asian men on the streets of Chicago may be responding to statistical patterns of street aggression, not to race in itself.

These examples highlight a broader point: I do not consider the use of race as a statistical proxy to be racist. On the contrary, it is a legitimate form of reasoning, one that is accepted in countless other contexts.

Superiority

I also want to stress the following: the belief that some races are superior or inferior to others does not necessarily constitute racism. Two possibilities arise. Either one does not specify what “superiority” means, in which case the claim cannot really be evaluated; or one specifies it clearly — for example, superiority in a certain sport, in mathematics, or in treatment of women or homosexuals. In the latter case, one may arrive at the belief that a given race is generally speaking superior or inferior, intrinsically or not, in a purely descriptive sense. Such a belief may, in certain cases, be perfectly reasonable, and again, it would not amount to racism.

Why You Should Prefer My Concept of Racism

Finally, I would add this: I think that, upon reflection, my concept of racism would appeal to most people. After serious introspection, I strongly suspect most would want the concept of racism to capture something normative. We want racism to describe something that we consider to be bad. At the same time, I think the vast majority would also agree that simply holding honest, descriptive, and sometimes true beliefs about the world is not normatively bad. Yet, under many mainstream definitions, such as the one from the english wikipedia on racism which defines racism as

“the belief that groups of humans possess different behavioral traits corresponding to inherited attributes and can be divided based on the superiority of one race or ethnicity over another.”

one could hold honest, purely descriptive and sometimes true beliefs and still be labeled “racist.” That, I believe, is a problem — and one that, upon reflection, most people would also want to avoid. So again, I would argue that my concept of racism, i.e considering that race in itself is a morally relevant criteria, is better and should be adopted.

Side point :

I define speciesism and sexism in the same way as I define racism and I also think those definitions are superior than the ones often used in mainstream discourses. I define speciesism as considering that species in itself is a morally relevant criteria and sexism as considering that sex in itself is a morally relevant criteria.