My point was that it's arbitrary. The reason was its whimsical nature. You not understanding the point, doesn't make it magically not exist. You simply didn't understand it.Yeah I don't understand because you didn't even make a point. Also you didn't explain why you think it's a whim
You didn't ask for further explanation, so I assumed there was no issue. Clearly, I was mistaken. Next time you misunderstand an argument, it may be more productive to ask for clarification, as opposed to denying its existence through snark and impertinence.
It comes from whim because there is no basis for such a mindset outside of 'I want to'. What is the reason for simply deigning on your lonesome that majorities should not decide what racism is to minorities? Why make such a distinction at all? Why is it necessary? I doubt there is any sort of logical or ideological coherence to such a position.
Based on the idea you're proposing, my reasoning shouldn't matter. Majorities don't get to decide what it means to me, no?In the police incidence you described you again gave no reason as to why you thought getting pulled over was racist.
For the whole "Majorities shouldn't decide what racism is to minorities" I was talking more about police brutality issues and white people who tell black people how to think about it.
You'll have to be more specific on your last statement. White people who tell black people to think what about police brutality?