Good day, deviating away from phones a little. I read the tread on mrrights accusing Chimamanda Adichie to be racist here

Well........

After reading her statement, even before reading mrrights completely, I understood what he meant. But alot of people had hard times really understanding.

I honestly think the comments she made were in fact racial.
Tho this does not exactly say that she is a racist.

I would explain...

According to advanced English dictionary:
Racism is:
1. the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races
2. discriminatory or abusive behaviour towards members of another race

According to Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary:
Racism is:
1. The unfair treatment of people who belong to a different race; violent behaviour towards them.
2. The belief that some races of people are better than others.

It's necessary we understand what Racism is, if you asked an average man what racism is, he might say "believing a race is superior to others" but racism is actually more of an "act" than "believing" that act/verb is called discrimination. again because the definition stated above does not say "when whites discriminates blacks" it purely says "one race to another race"

The point I'm trying to bring out here is black people are not and cannot be the only victim of racism. If a white man is treated badly in the midst of black simply because he is white, the man is a victim of racism. And I hope you understand this. Tho the scenario I cited is very unlikely to happen because majority of racist cases are by whites in their country. At least this is the common belief. But still does not change the fact that it is possible for a white man to be a victim of racism. You have never heard of one does not change the fact too.

So Chimamanda Adichie statement and all those in support of it saying a white man cannot define what racism is only true if in fact the white man (in this case Mr. Emmett) has really never been a victim of racism before. And whether he has or has not been, you sitting in your house or office or school cannot tell. Even chimamanda cannot tell.

Let's do some logic. Read carefully.

Let's assume he hasn't. Now we Nigerians are black. Someone like me(which should also be the case with most of you reading this) who was born in Nigeria, grew up with my own race(black), have black people around, never lived with a white or any other race. I have never experienced racism before first hand. If this is the same case with you, then we as well have not right to define it. But if we should also be sited in the BBC studio, we will be given the right (with chimamanda rule) to define racism because we are blacks. And Mr. Emmett cannot. Because he is white? If you claim he has not experienced it before, then so are we, and if another black man can be given the right to define racism because he is black, this is an unfair treatment to the white man because both the white and the black man are equal In this case and going by the first definition of racism according to oxford, This is in fact racism!

And if you agree that chimamanda statement was being racial then you can as well say that Mr. Emmett was a victim of racism. Which goes back to my point of white people too can also be a victim of racism which shows that even if chimamanda never said that statement, there could possibly be a point in life where Mr. Emmett has been a victim of racism.

Now let's assume he has, that's makes him equal to chimamanda, because he has indeed experienced it and knows what it is to be a victim of racism, and can define it, so again saying he should not speak on it just because he is white is a rude, abusive, and violent behaviour towards him because of his race which again defines racism.

So I believe the right statement Chimamanda was supposed to make is "if you have never been a victim of Racism, then you have no right to define racism"

The example cited by many on men, women pregnancy, is just irrelevant because a man can never be pregnant. So men actually can't define the pain gone through and we don’t want to either. And it's not like it is evil or can be stopped or avoided. It just don’t no fit into racism.

The example of tribalism. I think anybody that exhibit tribalism can be a racist. Because people who are racist descriminate blacks who they look at as all Africans, so a role of where they are from play in racism, which is also tribalism, discrimination of people because of where they are from.

But I don't want to conclude that she is a racist. That depends on your individual opinion. One thing I know is when you speak rudely to someone, the person might be hurt and any opportunity the person has to return the favour to you, the person will, Unless the person is kind hearted. But this might not mean the person is rude. Speaking of chimamanda who has been a victim or racism clearly, speaking out that way to the white man may just be an outburst of what she had gone through. If it was only that once, or she apologised, then she might not be a racist. But if she really meant it and its something she lives with and does everyday, then she is a racist. Whether she is or not. I can't tell.