Originally Posted by Edvinsson
The term "Racism" is too broad, because human races are too undefined for us to be able to use it correctly.
Colour is just the simplest way to determine differences/similarities between people.
Slavs aren't a race, they're an ethnic group. Races and ethnicities aren't the same thing, and its hard to discern what a race is. Technically, we are all of the "Human Race".
Colour is the most simple way yes, but that doesnt mean it is the correct way. Colour is just the most obvious visual diffrence. Id say its way too simple.
In political studies we dont use the term 'race' anymore really, in Scandinavia anyway. It was more common pre 1990. Ethnicity has taken its place, although some people use the two words for the same thing.
For example, Norwegians is a ethnic group, a part of the group that is north-germanians. You can often tell a Scandinavian apart from a British person, for example, and you can easily tell them apart from east-europeans and south-europeans, partly because we are more pale.
There are diffrent ways of using the term, you can say europeans are one race and that there are sub-races under that and then ethnic groups.
But even so, racism is not based on skin colour only. You can still be racist towards a ethnic group even if they look similar to urself, since genes are not purely visual things, and racism is about genes/blood. Racism focused on skincolour is just the most simple way of racism.
You can use the term xenophobia, but that is more commonly used towards people who fear foreign cultures in their own country, more focused on immigration and culture and not so much at race/ethnicity.
(Similar to the counter-term Etnophobia, which describes a person who fear or dislike a majority culture or a homogenized culture and people.)
How these terms are used varies from country to country to some degree though, there is no clear rule. But you can be jailed for being highly racist towards east-europeans, in England, just to state a example.