.
Both can quite easily be true. And usually is. Gypsies in Europe have had a very hard time for a great many years, so many years that there are practically no gypsies left. Not that anybody is saying gypsies are a 'raceial' grouping, but they sure have been profiled that way. You have probably heard of the Nazi mass killings of the Roma, it is less likely that you have heard of Gypsy women being sterilized in addition to being cured when they entered a hospital. It was an official goverment polity in Scandinavian countries for many years. All under flowery pretexts like "To improve the quality of their lives".
It depends upon what you mean by "racist"
It may be true The Donald discriminated against African-Americans in his rental properties for rational economic reasons, because in his experience African-American tenants caused more problems than those in other demographic groups.
It may be true The Donald advocated for harsh punishments against The Central Park Five in the misguided belief that more draconian punishments would act as a deterrent to lower the overall crime rate.
It may be true The Donald spearheaded the "Birther" movement solely for the purpose of drawing media attention to himself, thereby enhancing his fame/popularity and increasing the saleable value of the Trump brand (which is really the only successful business he has: selling his name).
It can simultaneously be true The Donald has no personal animus towards people based upon race/ethnicity/religion/etc. identification and, therefore, does not meet a common definition of what identifies a racist person.
And yet all of his actions taken for completely "non-racist" reasons had the effect of being racist deeds. So, yes, Trump (or anyone else) can simultaneously be both racist and not racist.
You said both can quite easily be true my friend. If that is so the
n how can either be true? They are mutually exclusive. Thank you for your reply JakobA! :)
If one broadens the definition of a word such that it can mean almost anything, then yes; it's possible to be and not be a racist simultaneously. :-)
Unfortunately--inasmuch as I know liberals like to fling this label on anyone who disagrees with them without regard to the word's actual meaning--racism has a very precise definition. Once one strips a word of its definition (as by the inappropriate use or application of same), the word becomes meaning-less. Such is the case with the words 'racist' or 'racism.'
