Exactly. The "racial reckoning" almost entirely focuses on America and specifically white/black racism. And the legacy and legal enforcement of racism, specifically between black and white people, is different (note, I'm not saying worse), to all other countries with the exception of South Africa.

Where you get the idea that all that support will suddenly vanish because people are using the word properly, I have no idea. If you think that these people are only speaking out against racism because they think it means xenophobia, then I'm not sure what to tell you. Nor do I have any idea why you think using English properly is "circling the wagons".

You seem to think this is a club that you're being denied entry to. But we haven't stopped talking about sexism (#metoo anybody?) because we're talkng about racism. Nobody is "hoarding" anything. You said you "find it extremely productive to maintain a broad usage for the word 'racism' and to expand it out in space and time." I don't. The meaning of the word is fine as it is and it describes something important. I also don't think it's productive to redefine it as "privilege plus power" so that only white people can be racist.

Anyway, it feels like we're talking past each other. Even the link you provided supports what I'm saying. As does the origin of the word. As does every available piece of evidence. You're ignoring all of this because of your recollection of a dictionary you read 10 years ago. I don't think there's anything I could possibly say that would change your mind.

More importantly, I have no right and no desire to police how you use this word. Use it however you prefer. You're completely free to ignore me and the rules of the English language. Expand its definition to include nationalism and sexism and anti-semitism and homophobia and anything else you like. It's up to you. All you'll find is that you can't talk about any of them as precisely with other people.