Talk:Anti-Palestinian racism

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) Ophyrius (he/him
T • C • G) 08:06, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Anti-Palestinianism → Anti-Palestinian racism – For achieving WP:CONSISTENCY without erasure. Others seem to be mistaking the confusion created by Palestinianism#Edward_Said's_usage_of_the_term's (vaguely named) identification of the (actually existing, compared to another socially constructed race) national ideology, mistakenly violating WP:NOR and ignoring the long-standing history of racism against Palestinians for which a specific term was indeed made. Lumbering in thought (talk) 17:40, 16 August 2025 (UTC) 04:34, 12 September 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:01, 19 September 2025 (UTC) — Relisting.  veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 15:42, 26 September 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 10:41, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Note: this has been reopened this date per nom's request at WP:CR (permalink) by P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 04:34, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Support, as demonstrated by Bogazicili, it's the most common name. The opposition is purely ideological. ProudWatermelon (talk) 00:15, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME arguments made in the previous move discussion. As I mentioned previously, the actual terms used to describe movements and sentiments seeking Palestinian emancipation in one form or another seem to be Palestinian nationalism and Palestinian self-determination, not "Palestinianism". TucanHolmes (talk) 10:18, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
• Comment What do you mean by "actually existing, compared to another socially constructed race"? Metallurgist (talk) 03:54, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
• Support. Google Ngram doesn't seem very helpful. But this source uses "anti-Palestinian racism" .

  In google.com (with the language setting in English)

  • "anti-Palestinian racism" (with quotation marks) has "About 188,000 results".
  • "anti-Palestinian sentiment", with "About 12,200 results".
  • "anti-Palestinianism", with "About 13,500 results"

  Click on Tools tab to see these numbers. "anti-Palestinian racism" also has more hits than the other two in Google scholar. Bogazicili (talk) 18:29, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Update: Looking at Wikipedia:Article titles, WP:CRITERIA again:
    • Reliable sources: see my comment below about google scholar . "Anti-Palestinian Racism" seems to win
    • Recognizability and Naturalness : "anti-Palestinian racism" seems to win based on google search hits above
    • Precision: "anti-Palestinian racism" seems to win based on problematic usage of "Palestinianism" as mentioned by TucanHolmes below: Palestinianism#Palestinianism_as_a_threat_to_Western_civilization. On precision, "anti-Palestinian sentiment" is also better than Anti-Palestinianism
    • Concision: Anti-Palestinianism is more concise but I don't think it's enough to identify the topic. "anti-Palestinian sentiment" is not more concise than "anti-Palestinian racism"
    • Consistency: "anti-Palestinian sentiment" wins here
  • Based on above, I reiterate my support for Anti-Palestinian racism Bogazicili (talk) 21:09, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose Per WP:CONSISTENT, it does not match any of the other pages in Category:Anti-national sentiment, which all use "sentiment". I do realize it could essentially go either way since this is considered both a national identity and ethnic group at the same time, so I believe that being consistent is the more pertinent point here. But since the move to "sentiment" was previously rejected very recently, I don't believe this move would be proper either. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:38, 19 September 2025 (UTC)
• Support As I stated in the previous discussion, Anti-Palestinian racism is the WP:COMMONNAME, in part because systemic/structural racism is a large part of anti-Palestinianism (unlike e.g. anti-German sentiment). There are plenty of other race/ethnicity discrimination pages that don't include the word "sentiment" in the title, including "Anti-Black racism", "Antisemitism", "Racism against Native Americans in the United States", etc. Rainsage (talk) 00:04, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

  Editorializing. Metallurgist (talk) 05:19, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose COMMONNAME is a specious argument here. We would need an evaluation of the reliability and quality of the sources saying that. It could largely be reddit posts and nonRS, of which this topic has much on both sides. The best and most neutral option would have been sentiment, but that proposal was defeated. This is much more neutral and balanced than changing it to racism, which is an absurdity, given Palestinians are multi-racial. Consistency and neutrality are just as important as alleged common name (which isnt even clear here). Metallurgist (talk) 05:24, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

  Which is an absurdity, given Palestinians are multi-racial. I and others have mentioned to you previously that your conception of Palestinians as "multi-racial" in this context is original research (or can you provide a source for the assertion that Palestinians are "multi-racial"?); you are imposing a specific reading and meaning of "race" onto a setting in which it does not apply. Other people have mentioned this at length in the previous move discussion. Furthermore, as Rainsage noted back then, The term “racism” is used for discrimination against ethnic groups as well as “races”, as mentioned in the wikipedia article..

  I also don't follow how you tie this reasoning into consistency requirements; as others have noted, there are plenty of articles dealing with similar topics which don't follow the "-sentiment" scheme. Regarding neutrality: Why should we use "Anti-Palestinianism", if that is definitely not the most common name? The previous move discussion already established that the use of "Anti-Palestinian racism" exceeds that of "Anti-Palestinian sentiment", both in normal search results and on Google Scholar, indicating that this is a pattern across non-reliable and reliable sources. If anything, we run the risk of false balance by using a more obscure term (especially since, as mentioned previously, "Palestinianism" itself seems to be a term mostly used by opponents of Palestinian self-determination, and therefore has dubious and non-neutral connotations). TucanHolmes (talk) 10:08, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

your conception of Palestinians as "multi-racial" in this context is original research WP:OR only forbids original research in article space. talk space OR is perfectly applicable for decisions on how to apply policy. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 14:23, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Not in the context of evaluating sources, their quality, content and relative prominence. In this context, the opinion that Palestinians are "multi-racial" is a fringe position. TucanHolmes (talk) 08:40, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

@TucanHolmes I assume you are aware of the existence of Afro-Palestinians. I'm confused by the idea that Palestinians are not a multi-racial population. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 07:54, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

"Race", as you are construing it here, does not work like that; not in that part of the world, or in general. It is a social construct, and you cannot just transplant a social construct from its context to another context like that. This is also beside the point, since, as was mentioned before on this talk page, The term “racism” is used for discrimination against ethnic groups as well as “races”, as mentioned in the wikipedia article.; so, it doesn't matter whether Palestinians are "multi-racial", as you would describe it, or not. TucanHolmes (talk) 09:07, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

See Google scholar results quoted above: "Anti-Palestinian racism" (421) than either "Anti-Palestinianism" (104) or "Anti-Palestinian sentiment" (157). Bogazicili (talk) 20:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

American Bar Association

Vox (WP:POLYGON)

I found one article on Google Scholar with "Anti-Palestinianism" in the title , a book with no citations. In contrast, I found 8 on the first page of Google Scholar ; all but one were cited by other scholarship.

This doesn't even take into account the fact that anti-Palestinian racism is the term used by Palestinian advocates (hence why there is a website ). Katzrockso (talk) 07:28, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

That adds to the argument that Anti-Palestinian racism is a POV term and not neutral. The original discussion was about the current title vs. changing it to the more neutral Anti-Palestinian sentiment, altho anti-Palestinianism is acceptable. I am starting to think this should have been a multi-option RFC, as there may be a compromise consensus option that binary considerations wont determine effectively. Metallurgist (talk) 06:12, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

The move to anti-Palestinian sentiment was rejected before.

Per WP:POVNAMING, "Thus, if a name is widely used in reliable sources (particularly those written in English) and is therefore likely to be well recognized by readers, it may be used even though some could regard it as biased". Similarly per WP:POVNAME, "When the subject of an article is referred to mainly by a single common name, as evidenced through usage in a significant majority of English-language sources, Wikipedia generally follows the sources and uses that name as its article title". Katzrockso (talk) 07:42, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose as the current title is both broad enough to cover the subject matter needed, but specific enough that it accurately conveys what a lay reader would be looking to learn from this article. We need to be as WP:PRECISE as possible, but not so much that we'd need to then do a WP:POVFORK. Iljhgtn (talk) 06:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

  Why would we need to do a POV fork? This is not obvious from your statement. TucanHolmes (talk) 09:25, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:CONCISE إيان (talk) 22:13, 29 September 2025 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CRITERIA. "Anti-Palestinianism" fails the "Recognizability" section, as Palestinianism is an idiosyncratic term used largely in academic scholarship. It also fails "precision", as anti-Palestinianism introduces an ambiguity between "opposition to Palestinianism", the concept identified by Edward Said, and the bigoted sentiments the article is actually about. WP:CONCISE is irrelevant here as "Anti-Palestinianism" doesn't provide sufficient information as to the content of the article - does the average person know what "Palestinianism" means?Katzrockso (talk) 07:22, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

  After doing some more research, I would like to add WP:NPOVTITLE to the list of criteria the current title fails: Despite the usage of the term by Said and scholarship connected to his ideas, today, "Palestinianism" seems to be a term used mainly by conspiracy theorists and pro-Zionist or Islamophobic ideologues (examples can be found at Palestinianism § Palestinianism as a threat to Western civilization and Palestinianism § Modern usage). This usage (by opponents of Palestinian emancipation) seems to have overtaken the more neutral/academic usage.

  Modern usage of "Palestinianism" by these groups seems to be entirely derogatory, insinuating that Palestinian national sentiment is somehow questionable/constructed/fake/a smokescreen/fictional/per se antisemitic/not genuine. This can hardly be interpreted as a neutral term, and this also extends to the antonym, "anti-Palestinianism". No wonder many scholars seem to prefer "anti-Palestinian racism", as "anti-Palestinianism" still transports the connotations of artificiality and denigration of "Palestinianism". Newsflash: All nations/nationalisms are to some extent fictional and artificial. In this context – and only in this context – did I find current usage of the term "anti-Palestinianism", and only by one author (Peter Beinart). TucanHolmes (talk) 09:24, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

  Anti-Palestinianism is comparable to Anti-Semitism in this respect, it does not mean anti (to) Palestinianism (however you want to define that). I think most people could pick up that Anti-Palestinianism means anti-Palestinian sentiment. Palestinianism is a quite obscure concept. Semitism is a word, but its archaic to rare. No one would think Anti-Semitism means people are against an ideology of Semitism. Metallurgist (talk) 06:15, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

  I agree with this comparison to antisemitism, only because it exposes the issues with using the term "anti-Palestinianism". Antisemitism is very overwhelmingly the common name for the terminology, even if anti-Jewish racism is a term that some people use .

  WP:CONCISE states "The goal of concision is to balance brevity with sufficient information to identify the topic to a person familiar with the general subject area."

  The term anti-Palestinianism does not provide sufficient information to identify the topic to a person familiar with the general subject area, as it does not seem likely that the majority of people who are familiar with disputes on Israel-Palestine know the term "anti-Palestinianism".

  Once again per WP:PRECISE. If Palestinianism has this specific meaning "denote either the national political movement or identity of the Palestinian people", the term anti-Palestinianism produces ambiguity between 3 different possible meanings: "prejudice, collective hatred, and discrimination directed at the Palestinian people for any variety of reasons", opposition to the national political movement of the Palestinian people, opposition to the identity of the Palestinian people. These are all reasonable interpretations of the term anti-Palestinianism that a reader might take. I consider myself fairly aware of disputes around Israel-Palestine and I was unaware of the term anti-Palestinianism until I saw this article.

  In contrast, anti-Palestinian racism has only one possible meaning and produces no ambiguity. Katzrockso (talk) 07:56, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

  I would actually support changing that to anti-Jewish sentiment, but I dont expect to win that, altho it would be interesting to see how people would respond to that. I dont like the term anti-semitism for a number of reasons, among them "X are semites too", but its also imprecise. I dont think anyone would really interpret anti-Palestinianism as anything other than sentiment against Palestinians. How would you feel about "anti Palestinian sentiment" or perhaps "anti Palestinian discrimination"? The former was the original proposal. Metallurgist (talk) 03:16, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

  If you support changing Antisemitism to "anti-Jewish sentiment", despite the fact that there is so much literature on antisemitism, using the term "antisemitism", that is a clear sign that you don't understand many of the WP:PAGs such as Wikipedia:Article titles and WP:COMMONNAME.

  WP:V beats Consistency in WP:CRITERIA. Consistency is just one criteria among several. Bogazicili (talk) 20:39, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

• Comment As the person who created the article with the original title of "Anti-Palestinian sentiment", I avoided commenting for weeks due to my general indifference. But as the discussion has lingered, I will overcome my indifference enough to say that "Anti-Palestinian sentiment" was fine all along. The attempt to move the title to "anti-Palestinian racism" is obviously meant to advance a certain pro-Palestinian perspective. It's also not a completely outrageous proposal, as anti-Palestinian sentiment is institutionalized in Israel. That said, the general pattern for anti-national prejudices is to use sentiment. EG, anti-Italian sentiment, anti-Greek sentiment, anti-Indian sentiment, etc. Anti-Kurdish and anti-Armenian sentiment are institutionalized in Turkey, yet those articles are not referred to as anti-Kurdish racism or anti-Armenian racism. I'm not sure why Palestine is different. So while I'm not vociferously opposed to the proposed new name, I think consistency suggests we should use sentiment. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 10:59, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

  I strenuously reject these WP:ASPERSIONS that editors are WP:POVPUSH or not engaging in good faith by attempting to enforce Wikipedia's Manual of Style (MOS). Recall it is a Wikipedia guideline to assume good faith WP:AGF.

  The argument proposed is about the WP:COMMONNAME , which states that "Wikipedia ... generally prefers the name that is most commonly used". As demonstrated in both MR, the name that is most commonly removed is anti-Palestinian racism. If the term most commonly used in the English corpus were "anti-Palestinian sentiment", I would have no issue if the article were moved to this title. Why it is the case that anti-Palestine racism is used more by reliable sources than anti-Palestinian sentiment, I'm not sure. I think it is because terms like "anti-national category sentiment" are usually not actual derived from linguistic practice, but constructed concepts to describe various

  Your argument relates to WP:CONSISTENT, which states that "[t]o the extent that it is practical, titles should be consistent among articles covering similar topics". You provide a list of prejudices, but fail to acknowledge another consistency argument, that the proposed target "anti-Palestinian racism" is consistent with other articles such as Anti-Black racism, Anti-White racism, kinda Racism against Asians. One can note that the actual conduct described in the vast majority of the "anti-sentiment" articles does not match the level of conducted in Anti-Palestinianism. Katzrockso (talk) 18:58, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

  For those interested, I opened a MR for redacted because it is inconsistent with MOS. Katzrockso (talk) 19:13, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

  This may be canvassing. Metallurgist (talk) 02:55, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

  That was not the intent, so I will strike that. I thought that people in a request to move might also be interested in similar request to move. Katzrockso (talk) 20:34, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

  Thats why I said might. I hedge against doing such things just to be sure. Metallurgist (talk) 21:33, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

  @Bohemian Baltimore That was my original intention to make all the nationality discrimination pages consistent. I also initiated RMs for Italians, Mongolians, and Portuguese. All had no opposition. The discussion here was then hijacked by those who wanted to change it to this non-neutral title. The argument that a preponderance of sources uses the proposed term falls on its face because said sources have not been evaluated for their reliability. Thus, a neutral term is necessary. The other problem with COMMONNAME here is the extent to which this is an issue. Sources documenting it are going to be more likely to term it "racism", whereas many sources that might use a more general term do not document it beyond its notability. Really, racism is a loaded nonPOV term that should not be used in any article title. Perhaps a multi option RFC would have been better than these binary choices, but there doesnt seem to be any consensus. And the reason Palestine is different is the inverse of the so-called Palestine exception where Palestine issues have far more documentation and sourcing than really any comparable conflict in history. Not to mention how the conflict is treated starkly different than any other in history. One can draw their own interpretations as to why that is the case. Metallurgist (talk) 03:12, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

  The attempt to move the title to "anti-Palestinian racism" is obviously meant to advance a certain pro-Palestinian perspective.

  I disagree. This implicitly assumes that (a) either "Anti-Palestinianism" or "Anti-Palestinian sentiment" would be more neutral alternatives (which is not the case), that (b) this is the only article which deviates from a consistent naming scheme (which, as was repeatedly pointed out, is not the case), that (c) consistency trumps recognizability (which would be a new argument to me) and (d) ignores actual usage in (reliable) sources. One of the primary reasons for rejecting a move to "Anti-Palestinian sentiment" was exactly this WP:COMMONNAME argument.

  I'm not sure why Palestine is different. Palestine is different because Palestine is different, apparently. This is reflected in the terminology employed in (reliable) sources, and, absent reasons to disqualify those sources, what reason would justify a deviation from that usage in this case, other than the personal preference of some editors? Why should we, if most sources use "Anti-Palestinian racism", use "Anti-Palestinianism" or "Anti-Palestinian sentiment"? The reason cannot be WP:CONSISTENCY alone, because other articles also deviate from this pattern. TucanHolmes (talk) 12:16, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

  Sentiment is unambiguously a neutral term. Racism is a charged and POV term with excessive negative associations. That other articles deviate isnt entirely relevant. While OSE is primarily an AFD argument, it can be made as a point here. However, I would say there is an argument to change even those exceptions to sentiment as well. Heck, I wouldnt even be opposed to anti X discrimination as long as it was a mass move. We still have yet to evaluate the quality of the sources used as the basis for the COMMONNAME argument. The fact of the matter is anti Palestinian sentiment may have more consensus than anti Palestinian racism, which is why I suggested a broader RFC, but we both seem to be hesitant to try this again for awhile and it may be best to leave the preceding consensus in place.

  The fact that it is treated differently is where the reliability of sources ought to be questioned more, as there is an immense bias in favor of Palestine and Palestinians by sources. The conflict is hyperdocumented vis a vis pretty much every other conflict in the past 80 years. But thats a whole RFC for another talk page. Metallurgist (talk) 01:47, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

  Sentiment is unambiguously a neutral term. That remains to be determined by consensus. Especially, since, as you also note, Racism is a charged and POV term with excessive negative associations. – Yes, because racism or discriminatory sentiments / systems are bad (evil, some might say). It turns out that bad things get called bad, or "negative" words. Why should we downplay this in an encyclopedia, or use a more "neutral" term? To me, false balance seems to be the greater risk here.

  Regarding WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS (OSE), I would argue that WP:CONSISTENCY is the one place where it is definitely not applicable, since consistency is precisely about "other stuff". You want to enforce a premeditated, "consistent" scheme ("anti-X sentiment", or "anti-X discrimination"), but arguing for that becomes more onerous if there is in fact no such consistent naming scheme in the first place. You want to impose such a scheme, but there might be good reasons for deviating from it, documented in reliable sources even. Reasons why some things are primarily called 'sentiment', others 'discrimination', and others again 'racism'. Some reasons which immediately come to mind: History, severity, prevalence, context. (Also, OSE usually pertains to deletion discussions, as you have mentioned.) Consistency needs to be balanced against recognizability, naturalness, concision and neutrality. I do not agree that a more benign-sounding term is automatically more neutral, nor that consistency or neutrality should automatically trump recognizability and naturality (see WP:POVTITLE).

  We still have yet to evaluate the quality of the sources used as the basis for the COMMONNAME argument. Many sources are already cited in the article, and the preference seems to be unequivocal. The onus would be on those who want to disqualify sources to provide reasons for that.

  The fact that it is treated differently is where the reliability of sources ought to be questioned more, as there is an immense bias in favor of Palestine and Palestinians by sources.^{[citation needed]} It might appear to you like that, and yet, in many sources, a documented anti-Palestinian bias is more prevalent. This argument would carry more weight if anti-Palestinian racism where the only topic where sources prefer a different term to "anti-X sentiment", but as others have pointed out, that is not the case.

  The conflict is hyperdocumented vis a vis pretty much every other conflict in the past 80 years. Yes, but you are overly narrow in putting the focus just on the conflict. Discrimination and racism against Palestinians has taken on a life of its own and is a broader topic, which also includes discrimination against Palestinians in other Middle Eastern, and Western countries. (Germany for example: Segments of German society have invented a new racial epithet for Palestinians, "Palis", and unlike other forms of racism, that is completely normalized and acceptable in "polite" society. ) TucanHolmes (talk) 09:57, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

  We are not here to opine on whether or not reliable sources have some hypothetical bias in favor or against Palestinians, but to judge whether or not it is the predominant term in usage. WP:NPOVNAME states that "Wikipedia generally follows the sources and uses that name as its article title (subject to the other naming criteria). Sometimes that common name includes non-neutral words that Wikipedia normally avoids". Katzrockso (talk) 20:40, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and arguments made by TucanHolmes and Katzrockso. Paprikaiser (talk) 21:04, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
• Support as per nomination, common name, and above. Yacàwotçã (talk) 22:42, 12 October 2025 (UTC)
• Comment
  • Google scholar results update: "Anti-Palestinian racism": 472 hits; "Anti-Palestinian sentiment": 160 hits; "Anti-Palestinianism": 108 hits. I also get Did you mean this (with suggested correction for "anti-Palestinians") for "Anti-Palestinianism"
    • I only looked at the first page in Google scholar, ranked by relevance. Sources with the title "Anti-Palestinian racism" include:
      • Anti‐Palestinian racism and racial gaslighting
      • Anti-Palestinian racism and the criminalisation of international solidarity in Europe
      • Anti-Palestinian racism, antisemitism, and solidarity: considerations towards an analytic of praxis
      • Recognizing Islamophobia, Anti-Palestinian Racism, and Antisemitism
    • Only one source with the title "Anti-Palestinianism", Palestinian Refugee Women From Syria to Jordan: Gender, Displacement and Geopolitics of Anti-Palestinianism. No source with title "Anti-Palestinian sentiment"
  • Race and the Question of Palestine, Stanford University Press, 2025 This source uses both "Anti-Palestinian racism" and "Anti-Palestinianism", but "Anti-Palestinian racism" seems to be the main one used throughout the section called "Race and Racism in Palestinian Society". Starting from the beginning of the section:

    Recent years have seen growing use of the term "anti-Palestinian racism" by activists, scholars, and civil society organizations.156 The concept has been conceived in intersectional, rather than exceptionalist, terms, recognizing its entwinement with anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia. ... Mezna Qato defines "Anti-Palestinianism (noun)" as ... As the concept of anti-Palestinian racism continues to gain traction in academic work and in activism, ...

    The index section of the book has "anti-Palestinian racism, 6-7, 11, 27-28, 138, 147, 255-56" but no "anti-Palestinianism"
• Bogazicili (talk) 20:34, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

  Without getting too bogged (lol) down into this, looking at Google Scholar myself, "anti-Palestinian" while removing -racism -bias -discrimination -sentiment yields 749 results. "Anti-Palestinian" itself yields 3,510 results. Racism as an appendation is far from the most common usage. Metallurgist (talk) 22:04, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

  That's not surprising. The sources may include "anti-Palestinian attitudes", "anti-Palestinian behavior", "anti-Palestinian protests", "anti-Palestinian slogans", "anti-Palestinian reactions" etc. For example, I found 37 google scholar hits for "anti-Palestinian attitudes".

  But we need a proper article title for this article, and "anti-Palestinian racism" seems to be the best per Wikipedia:Article titles Bogazicili (talk) 22:12, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, but the question is what term is used describe the animosity towards Palestinians. It obviously is not "sentiment", and per the analysis @Bogazicili gave above, "racism" is the most common in academic usage.

  If we searched "anti-black" vs "anti-black racism" we would find lower results, because "anti-black" is a broader adjective, while "anti-black racism" is a more specific noun. Katzrockso (talk) 22:14, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

  Any 2 ngrams will be more common than a 3 ngram that begins with that particular 2 ngram. Bogazicili (talk) 22:26, 13 October 2025 (UTC)