Anthropologist Benedict Anderson offers an interesting observation in his book Imagined Communities. Racism does not arise from distorted nationalism, as we are often inclined to believe — and as some even claim outright, treating the two as essentially identical. In reality, racism has nothing to do with nationalism. It emerges from the opposite principles.
At its core, racism is rooted in class thinking. It developed in societies marked by deep class divisions, where people cultivated the belief that human beings were born into different ranks and possessed fundamentally different natures. The point is not merely that one group may contain more foolish people and another more intelligent ones. The point is that these statistical differences are seen as expressions of an inner and essential distinction. An intelligent laborer is still only a laborer. An intelligent black man is still black. An educated laborer is still only a laborer. An educated black man is still black. A moral black man is still black.
Anderson correctly notes that racism was born in aristocratic and imperial societies and then spread naturally wherever those societies expanded — most notably into the colonies. Even before that, darker-skinned people were often regarded less favorably, but only after incorporation into imperial systems governed by aristocracies did this become an organizing principle. People began to be classified, segregated into separate districts, subjected to different legal rights, and treated according to rigid hierarchies. This stands in direct opposition to the idea that “we are all one nation.”
This kind of genuine racism never emerged in the Slavic states. For that reason, we can understand the American debate only partially. When activists shout “racist!” at someone, they often have little idea what they are talking about.