................ somebody recently stated that racisim can only apllied to somebody in power......................
I have heard that before , I always thought it silly.
A person out of power today might be in power tomorrow and out of power next week.
Does his racism appear and disappear with his level of clout?
Adolf Hitler was a nationalist and a racist and several other things, that he used to ride from a position of little power to a position of great power.
The KKK rose rapidly , fell and rose again and have fallen even further into ineffectiveness presently, does their present ridiculous level of influence relive them of their racism? If they manage to rise into major power again it will be because the nation wants some more racism in the future as it wants less presently.
I just would not define racism that way.
If a person uses the categorization of race as a primary means of evaluating people and situation then that person is exhibiting strong racism.
If a person uses race as a secondary or tertiary means of separating and evaluating people and situations then he is exhibiting a weaker form of racism.
The difference is a matter of degree, I think the number of persons that are descendants of Gingus Khan is interesting , but I would consider this information less important than the personal history of an individual that I was going to accept as a customer or supplier or employee or employer.
Someone who thought this ancestry more important to know than anything specific to the individual would be exhibiting a strong , unreasoned and I think harmful racism.
Just as unhelpful for an employer as an employee? Perhaps not , the amount of power does influence the outward expression and effect of the racism , all else being (ironically) equal.
This time we are talking about the people of the public and the persons of the police, who is whose servant? On which side would a racist attitude be harmless?