Thanks @coneheadthebar1 for the kind invitation to simplify my language and use less jargon to @ScottAdamsSays 's "systemic racism" challenge.
The example of "systemic racism" that @ScottAdamsSays will like is an obvious one. npr.org/2019/10/01/730…
"explaining" is sort of like "proving". It has to be received and therefore subject to all sorts of other games. 
Most people believe that only people can be "racist." A virus isn't racist. Can you dog be racist? That gets tougher. They default to the first of three common definitions or racism: motivational racism. Since "systems" aren't people they can't be racist.
People who charge "systemic racism" usually point to unequal outcomes and say "the system is racist". But many people only see racism as motivational. So people charge others with consequence racism and insinuate that it is motivated. This is rhetoric
But don't we believe systems do have a degree of agency? @ScottAdamsSays has made a career pointing out stupid bureaucracy tricks. The stupidity of the system might not come from some source person, the system expressed it.
Darwin's big point was that blind systems express selection and look to us like agency. We talk about "Uncle Sam". Uncle Sam has agency. If Uncle Sam does something that someone sees as racist, Uncle Sam the system is racist. @coneheadthebar1 is that clearer?
@threadreaderapp unroll please
