"Racist": Morphing in Meaning?

My little theory of etymology: The thoughtless and loose throwing about of the term "racist" nowadays is perhaps leading to a change in the word's meaning.  That, by the way, is what makes a language a "living" one: it evolves over time.  In our lifetime, for example, we've seen the meaning of "gay" change.  As I read Ayn Rand's 1950s "Atlas Shrugged", I occasionally smile to myself as the author uses "gay" in her novel ... it makes for some slightly humorous lines (e.g. 'he gayly smiled').  Another example is from old English -- "awful" used to mean "full of awe", just like "wonderful" today still means "full of wonder."  But, note how different "awful" is in meaning today compared to back in Shakespeare's time.

I propose that if today's epithet of "racist" continues to be relentlessly and carelessly thrown on any individual who, rather than really being a person who hates another race but rather, is simply standing up against an ideal or individual based on his ideals, "racist" might very well morph into a different meaning.  Are we, indeed, witnessing the actual evolution of the meaning of "racist?"

Sadly -- and dangerously -- "racist" is improperly bantied about these days in an obvious attempt to silence an individual or shut down a debate. It seems that the term "racist" gets caluminously slapped on an individual who expresses disagreement with a person or entity despite a lack of evidence that the disagreement is based on race.  It reminds me of magician Penn Jillette, appearing on Larry King Live back in April, when some actors had charged Tea Party members with racism.  Jillette criticized the actors, saying:

"Well, that's the magic word. Once you say ‘racism,’ the other side loses automatically. And I don't think we have very much evidence that that's what it is. Don't they have to be doing racist things besides you just saying that they're racist?"

So, how is "racist" changing in meaning?  It seems to be used as a label for anyone who, I propose, "thinks outside the box", "goes against the flow," or is an "independent thinker" that does not merely go along with the crowd.  

 

Some examples of the current misuse of the term "racist" in its classical sense, but perhaps showing its evolving "morphed" meaning:

- if you don't like President Obama's agenda or policies: What if you're Black, by the way, and disagree with Obama?  Can such an individual be racist?  But, if a White person disagrees, why is that person automatically suspected of being racist?  Could an Asian be similarly charged if he doesn't support Obama?

- if you oppose Big Government and disdain the current culture of entitlements: I wonder if those who label the Founding Fathers as a "bunch of old White men" might not be racist (in its true sense of the word);

- if you support upholding immigration laws: What if, by the way, you're Latino and support obeying the laws of the land? What if you're a Latino cop having to make arrests of other Latinos?  Are you a racist?  I guess such an individual gets labeled a  "coconut."  (FYI: "coconut" is a slam against Latinos similar to "oreo" being used against Blacks.)  For that matter, what if you're a Black cop arresting another minority?

I believe there is a grave danger in the overuse and outright misuse of the term "racist":  we have the proverbial "boy-that-cried-wolf" situation.  People will become desensitized to the word and, tragically, when there is an actual case of racism, it may very well be overlooked.

I wonder if I'll be labeled as "racist" for even posting these ponderings about the word?  Probably ...