That you should feel guilty for being white, that racism is something only whites can be guilty of, that all whites are guilty of it simply by virtue of being white, and that whites can't be the victims of racism by definition.
Yeah, I understand that feeling. I think the word racist is undergoing the potential for a definitional shift - from applying to an individual to applying to a system. The individual definition is an indictment of a single person and generally reflects on that person being "bad". The systemic definition is an indictment of a system and asks all participants of the system to recognize how that system benefits some and detriments others. I find that many progressive conversations use the systemic definition, and that causes a defensive reaction from those using the individual definition. I also think that's one of the core truths of this video series, while there's a lack of resolution as to the actual definition of racism, people won't know how to talk about it. For me personally, seeing the systemic definition of racism and of white supremacy helped to absolve me of my guilt and allowed me to have much more beneficial conversations about the very real social structures which exist all around me.
You're absolutely correct when you say that there's been an effort on the part of progressives and self-proclaimed anti-racists to redefine racism. I don't see this as a positive development, though. Here's why. Not only is the alternative definition being used to vilify a specific racial group, which in itself is, well, racist; it's also used to justify the dogmatic concept of "white privilege", which is basically a kind of original sin, something you're born with and can't ever get rid of, no matter how much you repent; it also erases the experience of white victims of racially motivated crime, and gives black people moral impunity for those crimes; "systemic racism" is also vaguer than individual racism, which makes it more difficult to talk about in objective terms, and ensures that the identity of the person who's talking matters more than whether his argument makes any sense at all. It seems quite obvious to me that the people advocating for this pernicious definition are doing so purely out of selfishness and self-interest (in the case of black people) or guilt and ideological conviction (in the case of white people). People who are actually anti-racist should reject it as a step backwards for healthy relationships between the various races.
This is true, but I've criticized it before. The prejudice+power definition already has a term: institutional racism. It got the point across and it's clear.
Racism means interpersonal racism to most people, as you said. Replacing this definition with the institutional one when dealing with laymen makes the issues unnecessarily confusing and, in my opinion, works against anti-racists. It allows people to think "are you saying black people can't be racist? That's ridiculous! [Insert anecdote]." It's better, to me, to keep "racism" meaning interpersonal and using "institutional racism" when referring to the systemic type.