That's exactly what _systemic_ sexism and racism mean.

No, that's not really the case. It doesn't matter if something is done on the basis of race or sex. If the end result hurts those groups disproportionately it's racist/sexist.

I guess this just may be a difference in definitions, but I think when most people are talking about racism/sexism on a macro level, they are using this definition.

You're right, the broader issue is worker's rights, but it's definitely worth pointing out that among workers with the least rights, minorities are overrepresented at Amazon.

You're basically identifying the difference between institutionalized racism and individual racists.

Getting pedantic here. Folks can 'see' race and not be racist. The Census taker for instance. Or the affirmative-action recruiter.

To be meaningful, conventional racism has to include damage. Its an old debate technique for racists to complain that affirmative action is 'reverse racism'. Because, you see, it sees race and takes action.

it is. you guys just keep contorting the definition to avoid any critiques

I guess there must be some agreement to talk meaningfully.

"you guys"?

No, that is absurd. That is not what sexism and racism means.

I think it does matter if you want to address the root cause of the problem.

If the problem in this case is a lack of warehouse worker bargaining power vs profit motive, then solutions to a prejudice problem will not be helpful to the workers.