I would like to begin with what I refer to as "Blackism". At this point if you're immediately equating this term with the "racial" concept of "black", then indeed you're correct. To cite the "wise" words of Dr. Zaius from the film "Planet of the Apes", "It's a question of simian survival" that this observation be identified, called out and laid bare for what it is. And if you're wincing now (I hope you are), either by the fear of a possible trip-up on my part in using "black-listed" words, or my blatant insensitive quotation of a movie character from a film that played on the fear of the "blacks", then I'll take that as an affirmation of its priority.
Blackism - In the context of the USA, to be labelled a "black" person is a loaded term with a long history of exploitation and dehumanization by the so-called "white" people, and it invokes uncomfortable emotions to many who identify with such characterizations. Historically to be called "black" meant that you were a pariah in "white" society and that you were a second class citizen. Since the black civil rights movement of the 1960's, the term had undergone a revision of sorts. For a while it had become a word that encompassed any who self-identifies as being descendants of the slaves brought from Africa to the USA. With increased immigration and relaxed social stigmatization (including in romantic affairs), the term was extended to include any who "looked the part". The "one drop" rule was applied most effectively to "keep the race pure and segregated". Alas such lines of thought were not constrained to the past but persist in contemporary society. But strangely enough, today there are many who have no discernible semblance of African heritage from a phenotypical point of view but none the less insist that they are "black". Perhaps the "one drop" rule is still in effect but it has now taken a new dimension and perform a new function. There are also many who have no affinity, relation, or inclination to associate with the African slave identity but choose either willingly or by social pressure to adopt it in order to fit the social mold. In essence they are all willing and unwilling participants of blackism, a form of identification of being "black" that no longer has the same meaning as it once had. So what is blackism? To put it bluntly, it's being "not white". It's the rejection of identifying oneself as "white", which can be for many reasons, both voluntary and involuntary, and which does not actually necessitate that one has recent African admixture in their genes. In other words, it is now socially acceptable to be "black" by choice, regardless of the person's ancestry. As we shall see later, this choice of "racial" characterization is applicable for other groups as well. But first, what does being "not white" mean? To adequately answer this, we must examine what I refer to as, "whiteism".
Whiteism - The term "white" used to be constrained to western Europeans and those who exclusively descended from them. In the context of a large melting pot such as the USA, the term "white" became a way of nullifying the ethnic diversity of the European immigrants, allowing them to adopt a new identity of "white Americans" and shed their old allegiances and customs. To unite the people to be "white", this new type of grouping needed contrast, namely the opposite - the "black" people. In essence, "white" people could not exist without setting them apart from the "black" people. Today, many so called "white" people range in ethnicity derived from western Europe extending across half of Eurasia, well into Persia. Many are in fact so mixed that they're not even aware of their genetic origins and have no choice but to refer to each other as "white". That's OK because after all, the white club is the best club with all the perks and you don't want to be labelled as anything else if you can help it. Or so it seemed for a long time. Similar to "blackism", now there are "white" people who prefer to characterize themselves as mixed or as belonging to other "racial" characterizations. In other words, being "white" is now a choice and people are recognizing the inadequacy of labeling individuals along lines of historically hateful divisions. Or perhaps they see advantages in identifying using other "racial" characterizations or for other personal reasons. In any case, what this boils down to is that "whiteism" is defined as the desire and the strong preference to be labelled "white" and not to be labelled as any other "race". It's a socially inherited bigotry that perpetuates the thought that it is not OK to be anything but be "white" and hence is fundamentally and blatantly "racist" and antiquated.
So that covers what "blackism" and "whiteism" are and what they mean in the context of the American societal thought. But where does that leave other groups such as "Asians" and "Hispanics" etc.? Frankly the cultural dissolution hadn't happened to such an extent in these groups and hence there's no strong sense of collective unity among them. For example, an Ecuadorian does not have a unifying relationship with a Brazilian, nor a Sri Lankan with a Taiwanese. Therefore there are no equivalents such as "Asianism" and "Hispanicism" in the context of a "racial" divide in the USA. Although as a side note, there is a possible "Asianism" in the context of east Asian countries in the Sinosphere, perhaps something that might grow out of cultural Sinocentricism. But that likely isn't going to happen any time soon as many Asian nations are historically Sinophobic and are wary of Chinese imperial influence. The structure itself however is an example of what is commonly referred to as pan-nationalism. This term too is "racist" in its fundamental form, and I contend that this entire notion of a "race" is outdated and only serves to perpetuate old bigotry and as a social distraction to be taken advantage of. Race is a pseudo-scientific characterization and wholly inadequate in the context of a meltingpot population descended from immigrants. To borrow the lyrics of a famous transracial "king of pop", "It don't matter if you're blackist or whiteist". Or if you prefer, according to an iconic speech by MLK, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." Indeed to perpetuate the relevance of characterizing people by color or in "racial" terms is itself the definition of a "racist" view. The abandonment of this view is the path out of racial bigotry and these blackist and whiteist identities must be allowed to fade into complete irrelevance as they were supposed to. Besides, human bigotry will find other ways of manifesting. This much is certain.