Why is any criticism of a culture considered racist?

Do you know what the definition of racism is, Mame? If you did, you would know you are wrong. I defy you to get a dictionary definition of Racism and post it. Of course, if your mind is closed, you won't do so.

...or, another option is she won't post an answer to you because its more productive to spit into the wind.

The definition of racism clearly implies that a race has certain characteristics which are thiers be virtue of their belonging to a certain race.

The concept of racism has been discarded by most in the USA and it is clear that people acquire certain characteristics by virtue of the culture in which they belong.

For example, Many Asians are very good scholars.Some of the main reasons for their scholarship is that they revere Education and are usually closely monitored by parents who demand a high level of scholarship.

Asian Americans have SAT scores which are higher than Caucasian SAT scores and much higher than Black and Hispanic SAT scores. Indeed, there is evidence to show that Asians from a low Socio-Economic level score a good deal higher in the SAT Math Section than Blacks and Hispanics on a higher Socio-Economic level.

Indeed, Many Asians belong to what some call the "model minority" and their educational efforts should be copied by Caucasians, Blacks and Hispanics alike.

Unfortunately, we find that many of our young people care for little except MTV, some pot, and easy sex. Blacks appear to be worst off
in this regard since they have been so demoralized by race merchants like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton whose interests are furthered when they insist that young blacks are victims or racism and therefore cannot proceed on a level playing field.

Turns out, R5, that you are right, dictionary-wise. However, when I said "racist", I was saying it in the same context of ageist or sexist or any other ist, whereby a person is identified by their age, race, or gender. That is to say that I might say, "My neighbour, you know, the old Chinese guy who lives in the blue house", identifying him as being old, Chinese and living in the blue house. If he weren't Chinese, I would have said, "The old guy who blah blah...". It's discriminatory in a small way because some of these descriptives may not be necessary (as in, perhaps he is the only Old Guy, or only Chinese Guy, or only Blue House, etc)...but we say them anyway, and it's good to look at why.

When I said what I said in my last post, I was certainly not referring to behaviour such as calling someone a "spick" which is something no enlightened individual would do.

Is this making any sense?

Am I going to get slimed? Should I get a towel?

Stuh, I didn't want to address it in PM and I told you so. You persisted, I brought it here. I am the one who is annoyingly pointing out that arguing parties are usually working with different definitions for key terms involved in the argument. I think it's futile to argue points when they aren't first clearly defined. It was in that way of thinking that I made my post to you. I had no intention to call you racist or even call what you were saying racist. I was trying to define terms (the way I understand them through years of education on the subject).

I did not want to engage you in PM because I was offended that you would jump to the conclusions you'd jumped to.