Thank goodness for Chris Matthews. Every time he opens his mouth, the credibility of liberal commentators takes a nose dive (Although this supposes that liberal commentators have credibility in the first place, which for many of them is a bit of a stretch). Recently, Rush Limbaugh discussed the issue of racism on his radio show and Chris Matthews, predictably, was not happy with Limbaugh’s comments. In an attempt to attack Rush Limbaugh—which for Chris Matthews is like a flea attacking an elephant—Matthews made the following comment: “Well, actually, Rushbo, racism is the belief that one race—whites—should rule all others. Get your definition straight.”

In other words, in the liberal fantasyland Matthews inhabits, only white people are or can be racists. The best response I can give to such an inane statement is to paraphrase Johnny Carson’s Carnac the Magnificent: au contraire misinformed mental midget. Racism exists in every race. Writing for Political outcast, Philip Hodges correctly points out what racism really means (from Merriam Webster’s dictionary): “A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities, and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.” It follows, then, that a racist is a person who believes a given race is superior to all others by dint of genetics.

There are certainly white people who believe that all other races are inferior to theirs. This misguided belief system is known as white supremacy. But Chris Matthews’ bloviating notwithstanding (apologies to Bill O’Reilly), racism is a concept that cuts across all races and all geographic boundaries. There are also Blacks, Asians, Latinos, Arabs, and Jews who believe their race is superior to others. In fact, it would be hard—probably impossible—to find a place on earth where racism does not rear its ugly head.
If you do not believe that racism exists among America’s black population, try this: Google the speeches of Reverend Jeremiah Wright and listen to what he has to say about white people and Jews. For additional enlightenment, Google Louis Farrakhan and consider his pearls of wisdom concerning the black race versus other races. But don’t stop there. Do a little research into racism among Asians, Latinos, and Arabs. There is racism even among Jews—the group that has been the victim of more racial hatred than any other race in history. While you are at it, look into the concept of ethnic cleansing for a lesson in just how heinous the practice of racism can become.

In China there is on-going racial tension between native Chinese and African immigrants who come to China to study in universities. Riots against African students have occurred and been accompanied by charges that the Chinese police blame and punish Africans without bothering to determine who instigated the trouble. Sounds a lot like the old Jim Crow-South in America, does it not? In Hong Kong—that supposed melting pot of the orient—racial discrimination against Nepalese, Indians, Indonesians, Pakistanis, and Filipinos is rampant. Filipino males of any age are often referred to as “Bun Jai” or “boy” just as blacks of any age were in the old South.

While China is practicing racial discrimination against African immigrants, Indonesians are responding in kind against Chinese immigrants. Worse yet Papuans are not just discriminated against in Indonesia, they are often killed in government-sponsored acts of violence. Go to the Middle East and you will find some of the worst racism in the world. In Iran, racial discrimination against Arabs, Kurds, and other ethnic minorities has led to systematic abuse of and armed violence against non-Persian minorities. In Arab nations, Jews are considered an inherently inferior race. Correspondingly, many in Israel believe that Arabs are inferior. One of the reasons the Japanese treated the Chinese, Vietnamese, Koreans, and Filipinos they conquered early in World War II so badly is they considered them to be inferior races, races that did not deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.

I am not sure why Chris Matthews has been able to retain his seat at an anchor desk. His ratings are dismal, and he cannot open his mouth without inserting his foot into it. Apologizing for inappropriate or inaccurate remarks is regular part of the work day for Matthews. But for his network to allow him to go unchallenged when he makes such utterly foolish comments as the one in which he gave such a blatantly inaccurate definition for racism leads one to believe he either has some dirt on his boss or has a relative in high places. What else could explain wasting air time that costs a network thousands of dollars per minute on a commentator few people watch and even fewer think is credible?