The term 'race' has been employed throughout Western history as a way to categorize difference in society and to justify exploitation of certain groups by the powerful. Scholars in the field of sociology question the validity of the concept and term 'race' in academic analysis. Miles and Satzewich argue that the use of categories employed by the racists to categorize and oppress, reproduces the myths and fallacies that 'justifies' oppression. As well, since the 1960's there has been a change in the discourse that racializes groups of people. Solomos, find that the discourse of racialization can be powerful even without the explicit use of 'race' and blatant racist remarks. The impact of academic discourse on 'common sense' knowledge and the inconsistency of the meaning associated with the word 'race' challenges sociologists to examine the discourse of racism.
             In "Conceptualizing Racism", Satzewich petitions for the abandonment of the term 'race' in sociological analyses of racism. He challenges the category of 'race' and establishes the elastic mutability of the concept. Maintaining the fallacy of biological base for hierarchy of races, he examines the evolution of the idea of 'race', tracing the variability of the term from difference of class, culture, appearance, language, biology and social construct. The inconsistency of the use of the term infiltrates 20th century academia reproducing the categories of racialization. However, to paraphrase Omi and Wittant, (two prominent sociologists in academic discourse on racism) "How can you not use the concept of race when the category has impacted the history of experience of billions of people?" and "Racial identity is psychologically important to individuals." They contend-- to not use the term is to deny the history of racism and its s...