This post pertains to the political theory of Prejudice Plus Power, a.k.a. R = P + P, which redefines the word "racism" as "prejudice plus power," meaning, among other things, that only whites can be racist-- by definition-- in the United States. The doctrine was promoted by the United States Department of Health during a conference held in 1973. Here is a link to the action manual they used.
The document as written clearly focused solely on the relationship between white Americans and black Americans; while prejudice could exist in other pairings, racism is reserved for institutional oppression such as slavery.
The text contains no instances of the word "Asian" or the phrase "person of color," although it does contain the word "Orientals" twice. "Hispanic" and "Mexican" are not used either, although they appear in the bibliography section many times. It is not clear why the literature was cited but not mentioned. Overall, the action manual appears to be silent on the issue of third party minorities, and whether they can be racist, or whether whites can be racist toward them.
My question is-- according to the latest R = P + P doctrine, as evidenced by the extant Sociology or Political Science literature-- can a white be racist toward an Asian? Can a Mexican be racist toward a white? Can all of them be racist toward African-Americans, or only whites? How exactly do these "third party" races fit into the theory?
The following answers will not be accepted and will be downvoted.
- Do not post your opinion about whether P + P = R applies to third party races. I am looking for references in critical theory literature, authoritative sources, or at least the opinions of influential figures.
- Do not post your opinion about whether P + P = R is valid. PPR is a stipulative definition and is therefore not falsifiable.
I am looking for an objective answer that describes the the definition of the concept, not anyone's judgment on its soundness.