It’s super common for opponents to the power prejudice definition of racism to insist that it is false and that racism is only the Merriam Webster definition from the first page of google or any other definition that does not include power . Part of the logic behind this is that not everyone who is accused of being racist feels like they have power. This is a legitimate flaw that the power prejudice crowd usually explains through power being structural and systematic and as a result racism being pervasive throughout society. However the bland whole wheat version of the definition of racism belief in inferiority of other races is extremely narrow and difficult to demonstrate outside of a few historical examples Nazis, Southern American whites before the 1960s, POC who accuse whites of being racist ? . Try actually proving another person’s belief without them literally telling you, that’s what proof of racism would consist of with the “belief only” definition. No context just deeply contained thoughts of superiority. The controversy over definitions is basically an attempt to invalidate the possibility and responsibility of racism on both sides. The systems folks are attempting to show that you can be racist without knowing it and the belief folks think that racist are only people that know admit and act on their racist beliefs. The other part of this is that people don’t always mean what they say and certainly don’t strictly abide by one given definition in all instances. The “your racist for calling me racist” example could be either personal belief or unawareness of an embedded power dynamic based on race. Or none of these definitions honestly. We are not to the point where the term has no meaning but adhering to one definition only does not contribute to a better understanding of what racism is of can be.
Strict adherence to any one definition of racism is unrealistic