. . .you think reduced and eliminated are synonyms? If so, please check any decent dictionary.

Wow, I don't get a straight line like this very often. If you want to use dictionary definitions, lets take this one. I'm particularly fond of it, because I wrote it. (and it did pass extensive pure review.) This question was one of my primary philosophical specialties, as it is essential for dealing with certain issues about the relationship between the Brain and the Mind.

(https://sites.google.com/site/minddict/eliminativism

The focus of this definition is these brain/mind relationships, but the principles can still be applied to this issue. A standard dictionary definition won't be of much help, because you need some knowledge of the History of Science to see how reduction and elimination work in the real world. They are best understood as being on a continuum, but both require creating what Paul Churchland calls an "equipotent image" of the original theory. In many cases this image is a detailed explanation of why the theory is wrong. That would be closer to an elimination. In a reduction, there is more focus on what the old theory did get right. My objection to most of your work is that you spend too much time focusing on what current Racism theory gets wrong, and not enough time focusing on how Racism actually works once we reconsider it in terms of class. That's why your work is more eliminative than reductive. The one exception to this is the article of yours on how Racism effects black men and women differently. That's why I praised it so highly.