Wikipedia's Leftist Bias: There's No Reverse Racism

LOOOOL
   How much racism against whites is there actually in the U.S.? I don't know...but I know enough to know that this is loathsomely shitty and dishonest:

There is little to no empirical evidence to support the idea of reverse racism.

First, note the sneaky wording: not: there's little to no empirical evidence to support the existence of reverse racism...but, rather: "there's little to no empirical evidence to support the idea of reverse racism" (my emphasis). As if the very concept needed the nod of "scholars" or "experts."

   But the idea doesn't need the nod of scholars. (I mean, there's a merely technical objection to the idea that goes like this: reverse racism is just racism...so one might argue that there's no "reverse" of it. But that's a quibble among sane people on the non-left. It needn't bother us.) So it's a fine concept. But is it non-empty? That is: is there any reverse racism? Of course--there's no even vaguely serious doubt of that. I've experienced some myself--though damn little of it to the best of my knowledge. But there are probably thousands of incidents of anti-white racism in the U.S. every day--and God knows how many in the world. In the States it undoubtedly pales in comparison to anti-black racism--but that's not important for our purposes here.
   [Note also that the above conclusion more-or-less follows from the leftish idea that "everyone's a little bit racist." I'm not sure that idea is true...but they accept it. And if it's true, then the conclusion that there's anti-white / "reverse" racism is unavoidable, barring some kind of miracle.]

   Note how the entry simply assumes the bullshit leftist re-definition of the term in the first section: racism isn't racism if the racist doesn't have more "power and authority" than the object of his racism. Utter nonsense, of course: racism is, roughly, disliking someone or thinking less of them illegitimately on the basis of their race. It has nothing to do with "power and authority." A racist with "power and authority" over the object of his racism is a more effective and harmful racist--but without the "power and authority," he's still a racist. Which is, of course, exactly why the left is trying to redefine the term--they want it to be impossible for non-whites to be racist, and impossible for whites to be victims of racism.

   Two more quick points:

   First, note that the entry focuses almost exclusively on the U.S...probably because, were it to look elsewhere, even the bullshit "power and authority" re-definition could not stave off the irrefutable evidence for anti-white racism.

   Second, note how the left operates: it takes over academic disciplines, installs its theories and jargon, then appeals to itself to referee disputes. Here, on the talk page, someone points out that there's bullshit afoot...an editor just says that the opinion of "scholars" is what matters. The left controls Wikipedia and academia...and that's convenient when someone questions its propaganda on Wikipedia. 

   Oh and, of course, as if it needed to be said: where Wikipedia speaks on any topic of interest to the left, it simply cannot be trusted.