Official anti-racist discourse conveys racism through disclaimers and negative other-presentation.

Evidence

Self-control and public exposure prohibits, for instance, explicit forms of derogation or lexical selection that is obviously biased. This means that such official discourse will seldom appear very racist. On the contrary, tolerance and understanding may be extensively topicalized. But we have seen that this may also be a move, a disclaimer that introduces more negative topics. And in order to legitimate immigration restrictions, thus, speakers need to spell out why immigrants or immigration are bad for Us, and such an overall statement can only be conveyed by the general strategy, implemented at all levels of discourse, of negative other-presentation. — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1119

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to vault-wide claims about how modern racism operates through coded, colorblind discourse rather than overt derogation. — connects to: Norwegian anti-racism as defined identity forecloses acknowledgment of actual racism. — Sherene Razack, Casting Out: The Eviction of Muslims…, 278; Official antiracist response is structurally complicit with the racist violence it condemns — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1413

Broader Connections

• Norwegian anti-racism as defined identity forecloses acknowledgment of actual racism. #expands (0.85) — Sherene Razack, Casting Out, 278
• Official antiracist response is structurally complicit with the racist violence it condemns #expands (0.80) — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1413