So much of our contemporary discussion of racism is really about propriety, insensitivity, symbolism and insults. Lost in the media tumult over incidents like those at UCSD is a sensible definition of racism. To my mind, it is, in essence, the assumption or belief that an individual is intellectually or morally inferior by virtue of his genetic makeup. Particularly when held by authority figures -- teachers, police or employers -- it can limit the life choices and mobility of the people who must endure it.
Sometimes racism is linked to hostility or antipathy, but not always. You can think and act on the idea that someone is inferior without hating him or her. For that matter, you can hate someone without feeling superior. Although the latter is harmful to society, it's not as insidious and difficult to identify as true attitudes of racial superiority. Personally, I'd rather know that someone hates me outright for my background than suffer the treacly dishonesty of racial condescension.
Insidious racism is a good phrase. In many aspects, the welfare state is insidious racism. The strategy of Planned Parenthood is insidious racism.
Liberals practice insidious racism by making exceptions for minorities, thus effecting a belief into practice that people are incapable of achievement because of their race. I am not speaking of affirmative action, but of practices like lowering standards on testing for racial minorities. If you want to dedicate your resources to programs that address any inequalities that may cause an obstacle to such people meeting the standards, great - but one idea I recall, was to change school testing into "Ebonics", and frankly the whole thought of Ebonics is insidious racism.