The former is quite plausible to quantify; we can take all kinds of measurements to see where real socioeconomic inequality exists, and determine that a broad situation is racist in its impact. But how can you reasonably quantify racism within the individuals who make up these institutions?

As in your example, how can you draw the line between a genuine belief in one’s racial superiority and mere ignorance to someone else’s social conditions?

 I find that if you show up to the argument referring to another person as racist, the dialogue is basically over. Very few people believe that they are, so they intuitively feel that you must be wrong. However, it is much more fair and constructive when you can identify the racism embedded in certain ideas, or the way that relatively banal notions contribute to a racist system, without claiming some ability to define someone’s character in a single word.

The racial discrimination that continues to permeate every pore of our sociaty is a HUGE factor in the lives of all people of color, but mostly black people.

“Do you support laws banning interracial marriage?”
“No.”
“What if your daughter married a black man?”
“Well…”

So many reasons why these questions are problematic…

In America Africans were property so they wanted to keep them separate (which didn’t stop them sexually exploiting their slaves btw. If inter-racial relationships are evidence of anti -racism, good news, there never was any racism!) but other races had different roles and were defined to suit different needs. Eg- Indigenous people, whites wanted to decrease their numbers so inter-marriage was used to force assimilation and destroy their cultures and societies. It wasn’t a sign of enlightenment that the 1 drop rule never applied to Indigenous people. African Americans are no longer required as a source of disposable labour so now they are targeted for assimilation too, it isn’t anti-racist.