Replying to Zenny's "The new Racism" post that was closed. :/
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/11046/the-new-racism
Given the nature of the topic it is difficult to support the topic if you don't understand debate fallacies.
As OP of this post I will keep the debate under rational control.


"What is the reason behind this acceptance of blatant racism?"
Good question and I can explain it in detail.
I will use my fundamental philosophy to break down and explain:

What we see as a result of racism can be a physical/verbal attack, explicit discriminative treatment or implicit towards a race.

Break those down and we have:
Physical/verbal attack that is influenced by immoral behaviour.
Explicit discrimination to judge someone because of their ethnicity.
Implicit discrimination to influence judgement on a subconcious level.
The word race which on observation is classified as a social group.

Then simplfy them to establish fundamentals to racism:
We have "judge", "Influence", "behaviour" and "observation" that can be described as a person's way of thinking or "Judgement".
Given that this is immoral behaviour, research into law shows there are levels of murder not just the singular level; as such the terms; implicit, explicit, and attack can be a measure of immoral behaviour, since we are using the context of social groups the word "Culture" is needed.
Then we have "Social group which was explained in the previous paragraph.

Inspecting the fundamentals:
As philosopher's we know about our fair share of debating skills, as such "Judgement" can be inspected.
Looking at fallacies we see many logical flaws: Bandwagon, Genetic, Personal incredulity and Ad Hominem fallacies depending on the scenario.

Then there is "Culture", for good or for bad a culture is the accumilation of experiences, influences, traditions and other historical teachings to an identifying social group. (or an individual if they wish to change their culture)

A "Social Group" can range from the whole of humanity to an individual and his friend, it is the identity of a group of more than one person.

Bias evaluation:
From observation we see that flawed judgement can influence a "Culture" or "Social Group" bias, the influence of social bias can be seen as: Political, Religious, Sport, Country and many others that influence a "us vs them ideology".
When you accept an ideology without considering the other ideologies it can become a implicit/explicit bias.

Conclusions: (the answer to OP's post)
So if a social group was influenced by social bias in a accepting way it can lead to an influence in their culture, then when the next generation in that group is raised they are also raised with the same ideology.
This would create social bias tendencies towards other social groups, the outcome of which depends on their "Judgement". (or can be how accepting of immoral behaviour they were raised to accept)

This can create a paradox of accusations
If you have two social groups accusing each other of racism or social bias that is based on culturally biased influenced assumptions, you end up with one side assuming they are socially biased/racist and another the same when they are both blind to their own cultural biases.

There is three solutions to sovle this paradox:
Religious education:
Pro's; reducing social assumptions of another social group.
Con's; will reduce the assumptions of a specific social group only.

Cultural interaction:
Pro's; interacting with other social groups can reduce the assumptions of other social groups.
Con's; Will reduce the assumptions of only those social groups you have met.

Awareness of cultural/social bias itself:
Pro's; An understanding of your own culture and how it is influenced by social bias can give you awareness to the judgement you make explicity and in time implicitly. (creating good habits)
Con's; It can be difficult to teach others as it requires a certain level of open mindedness/will power.