Racism

[PLAYER57832]

No, and abso-fucking-lutely yes.

If they get offended by "nigger", they're cretins unworthy of the privelidge of voting. I get funny abuse for being french all the time. Do I have right to squeal "wacist1!!!11" if I get called a continental wog, or a froggy? Of course not.

Besdies, semantically, "gooks" referred specifically to the NVA and VC for veterans of that conflict. Frankly, I've never heard "gooks" used in anything but war-films referencing the Indochinese war. It's nothing like "nigger".

Again you miss the point... completely; are you truly so naive Nappy? do you wish to be educated or will you remain obtuse to serve the purpose of your argument?

Again you refuse to address the point...completely. Are you truly so naive Jiminsky? Do you wish to gain an IQ or will you remain to appear retarded because you can't construct an argument?

I would say you both are missing the point that there is a HUGE difference between intelligent discussion and back and forth idiotic slurs.

You denegrate BOTH your positions by failing to keep that in mind.

[Napoleon Ier]

My God...just when I thought Penos_ridan had been a trough in the intellectual level I'd encounter on this forum, what should crawl from underneath retarded rock but Jiminski and his extra chromosome...

Tell me Jiminski, are you a qualified psychometrist? And did you know that the mainstream view amongst qualified people, who've been and studied this area of psychlogy, is that it s 80% genetically determined, as an overall percentage? You do understand the concept behind taking averages, and behind using statistics? I mean, just to take basic example, so as not to be responsible for your cerebral meltdown, when a study says that a societal certain group earns 5% more than others, you do understand that's an average, a central tendancy, or expected value, for a given statistical set? That not every single member of said group (say, college graduates) earns 5% more than the rest of the general population? Jah? Verstehen wir?

come on Nipper... resorting to the 'IQ tool' is just a basic and blunt weapon. It is not the incise panacea which you seem to think it is.

And when did I claim this? Care to provide evidence? Oh! You are just building a strawman to mask your embarrassing lack of substantive argument...my mistake.





no matter how you brush it up the "you are stupider than me, i win argument' does not always work... sometimes yes! but not always.

It wasn't an argument so much as a simple constate.

McCain is a Nazi.

.....and as ever Jiminski, the dignified level of response and quality of the intellectual content of your posts positively oozes through the proverbial synapses of the internet. I'm sure that of allowed to conduuct substansive analysis of McCain's policies, you would produce a superb article of economic and socio-political study.

[jiminski]

if not completely excusable, not te same as someone using the term "nigger"

why becuase Asian men are smaller than black men and don't shout as loud?

I am being Inflammatory but there is truth in it, I would say that 'gook' has great resonance and if you were to ask any Asian about it, they would find it hugely inappropriate and be astonished that a potential US President used it in office.

Anyway the point is still being missed.

do i believe he is entitled to his hate? yeap no doubt! do i respect the man for coming out the other side? of course i do!

Do Americans want a man who will use that term after a 30 year break; showing a 'weakness' in the matter and a fundamental disregard for anyone else's perception of him in this matter?
By using the term (which may have been hijacked by racists as a generic, derogatory term for Asians but it is one none-the-less) by using it he says: " Screw you.. i will use that term if i want, I was there and i don't care about how my use of this word is understood!"

He is entitled to ownership of the word! yes I would think so but we are talking about the US President. this is not about smoking pot at University or being a member of the Communist party..(these have both been deemed acceptable by the American people. ) it is a glimpse into something which festers within him... In his case it is far worse than a random racist using the term 'Nigger' which you would not accept! for him it is laden with a world of hate and meaning. for the Red-neck, 'Nigger' is a throw-away line which he does not perhaps even quantify.

Regardless of intended connotation, justifiable ire or anything by which we would forgive an average Veteran in the same situation using the same language.... this, i will say it again, this is the US President. That office is measured by a different scale.

I am not even talking about my moral judgement i am talking about intellectual deftness and i am taking a view in a relatively pragmatic sense based upon others perceptions.

I am not, as Nipper is doing, basing my view upon my intellectual prejudice; founded in my belief in 'Whities' racial superiority and right to bad-mouth any other race without reprisal! *little wink for you there Nipper*

[Napoleon Ier]

OK, so McCain and I are both racist Nazis plotting to exterminate all Asians. That's right jiminski...and I presume you're going down t'pub now to discuss 9/11 with Xtra?

[Snorri1234]

Because, quite clearly, he only applied the term to the more distasteful elements of the NVA circa, 1970, not to all Asian people across the globe.

By using a term that is a racial slur for asian people since quite some time...

Anyone intelligent knows full well the intent and extent of "gooks" as used in McCain's, or any other veteran of the second Indochinese conflict's, vocabulary, that is, to denigrate the Communist enemy of US forces.

HAHAHA!!AHAHHAHA

HAHAH!!

HAHA!

I still love how your fantasy-world isn't crowded with moronic politicians and where the people in charge are always the fairminded and reasonable people they should be.

Intent is clearly not irrelevant. But here comes the old "words have absolute immutable meanings" twaddle again...how many times does need to be made clear to you that words do not have objective, set definitions, but exist in a seperate plane of semantical flux?

Well you can repeat it untill your ears pop but the fact of the matter is that it isn't actually true in the real world.

You're confusing "Immutable meaning" with "actual real-world meaning at the moment". It doesn't matter McCain used the old meaning, because it's the new meaning that people notice. Gook is now a racist slur (not that it wasn't already), you can't deny that.

[Snorri1234]

But to get back to McCain. The real truth is that everyone has a few thorns. Its called being human. We don't elect leaders because they are perfect, but because they represent the best choice amongst other imperfections. Some people get caught up in labels. But, look what labels got us in the last election. One of the prime reasons George W. Bush was elected was his claim to Christianity.

Oh I don't dismiss his election solely because of this issue, I do however weigh it in my thoughts.

Also, most of this discussion is centered around the fact Nappy doesn't understand it's a racist term..

[jiminski]

OK, so McCain and I are both racist Nazis plotting to exterminate all Asians. That's right jiminski...and I presume you're going down t'pub now to discuss 9/11 with Xtra?

ooh breezey Nipper.. i like your change in style!

In answer to your little nip that i have been scouring the internet... hehe do you think i am in overdrive or something?
Not a word of my posts have come from anywhere other than the dank recesses of my own mind Nipper (mores the pity i am sure) ... I have no desire to scour the Web for 50 year old, discredited documents formulated to offer comfort to failing supremacists... I can talk my own trite crap quite happily... but i do take the compliment that my thoughts may be based upon accredited, extraneous sources.

[jiminski]

You denegrate BOTH your positions by failing to keep that in mind.

don't be so pompous Player Debate can take many forms... and if you missed the hidden intent of my post then shame on you!

[PLAYER57832]

if not completely excusable, not te same as someone using the term "nigger"

why becuase Asian men are smaller than black men and don't shout as loud?

Apparently you did not read my comment. It is different because it WAS used in a different way. During Vietnahm, and by some vets afterward, it was used to refer specifically to the ENEMY. It was NOT always used to refer to all Asians. This is historical truth.

Is it used that way now? Yes. BUT, McCain comes from the older generation. And, while I don't say it is the best of terms, I DO say that you have to take his history into account, that is all.

I am being Inflammatory but there is truth in it, I would say that 'gook' has great resonance and if you were to ask any Asian about it, they would find it hugely inappropriate and be astonished that a potential US President used it in office.
*

Funny, but you seem to have missed the point that I HAVE and DO speak with folks of all races. And, did you ever stop to think that your statement is pretty racist in itself... as if EVERY Asian spoke with the same voice.

Anyway the point is still being missed.

do i believe he is entitled to his hate? yeap no doubt! do i respect the man for coming out the other side? of course i do!

Do Americans want a man who will use that term after a 30 year break; showing a 'weakness' in the matter and a fundamental disregard for anyone else's perception of him in this matter?
By using the term (which may have been hijacked by racists as a generic, derogatory term for Asians but it is one none-the-less) by using it he says: " Screw you.. i will use that term if i want, I was there and i don't care about how my use of this word is understood!"

He is entitled to ownership of the word! yes I would think so but we are talking about the US President. this is not about smoking pot at University or being a member of the Communist party..(these have both been deemed acceptable by the American people. ) it is a glimpse into something which festers within him... In his case it is far worse than a random racist using the term 'Nigger' which you would not accept! for him it is laden with a world of hate and meaning. for the Red-neck, 'Nigger' is a throw-away line which he does not perhaps even quantify.

Regardless of intended connotation, justifiable ire or anything by which we would forgive an average Veteran in the same situation using the same language.... this, i will say it again, this is the US President. That office is measured by a different scale.

And I say again, I look at the WHOLE person, not single off-hand (albiet stupid) remarks made a few years ago. I look at the ACTIONS, not the rhetoric -- either by the person, his cronies or his opponents.

I am not even talking about my moral judgement i am talking about intellectual deftness and i am taking a view in a relatively pragmatic sense based upon others perceptions.

No, you are most definitely talking morality.

And, you nicely corroborate a point/question I made earlier. For some reason, we will dismiss ANY idiotic comments, ANY idiotic act ... EXCEPT when it comes to race. AND, (I know this is going to open a can of worms) PRIMARILY if yoy are white. Folks of color, for some reason are often allowed to make comments that would be completely dissallowed if you exchanged, say "black" for "white" and vice-versa.

Anyway the point is still being missed.

do i believe he is entitled to his hate? yeap no doubt! do i respect the man for coming out the other side? of course i do!

Do Americans want a man who will use that term after a 30 year break; showing a 'weakness' in the matter and a fundamental disregard for anyone else's perception of him in this matter?
By using the term (which may have been hijacked by racists as a generic, derogatory term for Asians but it is one none-the-less) by using it he says: " Screw you.. i will use that term if i want, I was there and i don't care about how my use of this word is understood!"

He is entitled to ownership of the word! yes I would think so but we are talking about the US President. this is not about smoking pot at University or being a member of the Communist party..(these have both been deemed acceptable by the American people. ) it is a glimpse into something which festers within him... In his case it is far worse than a random racist using the term 'Nigger' which you would not accept! for him it is laden with a world of hate and meaning. for the Red-neck, 'Nigger' is a throw-away line which he does not perhaps even quantify.

Regardless of intended connotation, justifiable ire or anything by which we would forgive an average Veteran in the same situation using the same language.... this, i will say it again, this is the US President. That office is measured by a different scale.

I am not even talking about my moral judgement i am talking about intellectual deftness and i am taking a view in a relatively pragmatic sense based upon others perceptions.


I am not, as Nipper is doing, basing my view upon my intellectual prejudice; founded in my belief in 'Whities' racial superiority and right to bad-mouth any other race without reprisal! *little wink for you there Nipper

[/quote]

In this last post, you did make a reasonable case of argument ... one with which I disagree, but reasonable. Too many of BOTH your previous posts have done neither.

You denegrate BOTH your positions by failing to keep that in mind.

don't be so pompous Player Debate can take many forms... and if you missed the hidden intent of my post then shame on you!

Except, your intent was not precisely "hidden" ... and a mark of truly skilled debate has been to learn to tread the line between criticism and outright insult.

[jiminski]

Pompous.. you may debate with me if you wish Player ... but you may not lecture me on the style of my debate.
Although i would add that you could be a little less pompous.

[PLAYER57832]

But to get back to McCain. The real truth is that everyone has a few thorns. Its called being human. We don't elect leaders because they are perfect, but because they represent the best choice amongst other imperfections. Some people get caught up in labels. But, look what labels got us in the last election. One of the prime reasons George W. Bush was elected was his claim to Christianity.

Oh I don't dismiss his election solely because of this issue, I do however weigh it in my thoughts.

Also, most of this discussion is centered around the fact Nappy doesn't understand it's a racist term..

I am afraid I am one of those who said it wasn't always a racist term. I am old enough to remember its use by Vietnahm vets very specifically to refer to the enemy.

I never have used the term, don't like it. But, I grew up in northern CA and encountered a lot of "politically correct" "police" who were anything BUT really tolerant people. So, though it is perhaps ironic, I sometimes actually champion the rights of folks to say, well idiotic things.

Tolerance, to me, means universal tolerance. Sometimes, it matters only a little if you are slurring someone with the epitath "you flaming h." ... "you n." .. or "you racist". They can ALL be terms of hatred.

[Snorri1234]

I am afraid I am one of those who said it wasn't always a racist term. I am old enough to remember its use by Vietnahm vets very specifically to refer to the enemy.

I wasn't saying it always was, though I'm pretty certain it was sorta racist even back then. Gook has not merely been used to refer to the vietcong enemy, but also to any enemy that was asian in american wars.

But hell, military forces always have that, and it's not very important.

However, it's very racist now and I think a future president of the united states should really be a little more up to date.

[Snorri1234]

I am not even talking about my moral judgement i am talking about intellectual deftness and i am taking a view in a relatively pragmatic sense based upon others perceptions.

No, you are most definitely talking morality.

Actually, I think you're sort of missing the point then.

It's not about whether McCain is a racist or not, hell I don't think he's one myself.

It's the fact that he was so careless to insult an entire ethnic portion of the population and didn't even notice it. We are talking about President of The United States, not some random profession.

[PLAYER57832]

It's not about whether McCain is a racist or not, hell I don't think he's one myself.

It's the fact that he was so careless to insult an entire ethnic portion of the population and didn't even notice it. We are talking about President of The United States, not some random profession.

In many ways, I actually agree.

My point is that we have a tendency to make race somehow a sacrosanct subject... forbidden territory, at least if you are white. We will dismiss a whole range of pretty awful comments, but let someone make one stupid race remark in their entire career, and they are NEVER allowed to forget it.

As I think I said earlier, I grew up in CA and so am pretty well versed in "politically correct" language. The thing is, often time I found those very "PC police" to be some of the most BIGOTED individuals ever. They might have used all the "correct" terms, but try to introduce any sort of opinion that differed from their own, on ANY grounds and you might as well talk to a brick wall. They already felt they knew everything.

As a result, I sometimes find myself taking the ironic stand of actually championing those who express quite distasteful opinions, use words I dislike. It is not that I agree, it is just that I dislike hypocrasy even more.

[jonesthecurl]

I have a question.
Who says what a "race" is?
And oops, this is a second question, who decides what a race is called?

[jonesthecurl]

So for instance, if I used the word "Asian" to describe somebody when I lived in the UK, I would have meant "Somebody from India, Tibet, Pakistan, Bangla Desh, Etc.).

[jonesthecurl]

But to the U.S.A., the word "asian" means Chinese/Japnese/Vietnames/Korean etc.

[Neoteny]

source on the 80%?

And that still leaves 20% to be influenced by other factors, like education, upbringing, what example ones parents set, and aren't blacks usually less wealthy and consequently less well educated than the average of the population in western countries due to some unfortunate historical developments?

Anyway, Dinosaur comics has summed it up.

Dinosaur Comics deserves more recognition than it received.

[jiminski]

But to the U.S.A., the word "asian" means Chinese/Japnese/Vietnames/Korean etc.

yeah i know what you mean.. but the term Asia does not really describe a race for me (i think the term race is not actually of any use scientifically and is only really used at all in discussions about Racism on internet forums)

But Racial terms change based on the latest fad.. When i refer to an Asian I mean anyone who comes from Asia and generally qualify it with context or a country name...
Saying that, I subconsciously omit Caucasian Russians from the general description of Asian.... i suppose it is because when we describe another person, we do it from the basis of differentiation based upon oursleves...
It is also probably due to the grey area which the Soviet Union created for so long, what with much of it being part Europe.

Anyway 'Racial' terms Change with the wind due to the boundaries being at best very shaky.

[jiminski]

I am not even talking about my moral judgement i am talking about intellectual deftness and i am taking a view in a relatively pragmatic sense based upon others perceptions.

No, you are most definitely talking morality.

Actually, I think you're sort of missing the point then.

It's not about whether McCain is a racist or not, hell I don't think he's one myself.

It's the fact that he was so careless to insult an entire ethnic portion of the population and didn't even notice it. We are talking about President of The United States, not some random profession.

exactly Snorri.

[jonesthecurl]

Also, I saw a Hispanic comic doing a whole ironic segment on how sorry he feels for white people, they can't make racist jokes in standup comedy, whereas anyone else can...

So: are Spaniards Hispanic? (if not its a silly name) and not "white"? How many people of European origin aren't considered "white" in the US? Now there's plenty of dislike of foreigners in Britain, and plenty of abusive names for other European nationalities. But I don't think it's been suggested they aren't "white". (and yes, obviously there are Europeans of other colours etc but I hope you can get the point of the question).

[suggs]

They have slightly different pigmentation- you can see they are not from Norway for example. But mostly its a cultural thing. They are a distinct community.

[PLAYER57832]

Definition of "race" is as more culture than biological differences .. both in who is defined as what race and who is doing the defining.

In the US, we often speak of 4 races -- black, white, red and yellow, but then get sort of confused when it comes to placing black Indians (as in from India), Pacific Islanders ... etc.

I saw a Eurpean text that showed Irish as a disctinct "race". Asians, on the other hand, tend to draw greater distinctions between Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Malaysian, etc. than we in the US generally do.

Biologically, it is now generally understood that there is no real clear definition of race, though there are those who try to claim otherwise.

This is, by-the way, part of what complicated racial IQ assessments. So much of race is actually cultural, it can be fairly self-defining. That is, if I set the standard as what a typical white male will do, and see, as an example, Native Americans as inferior, then I will either overtly or inadvertantly set the questions to distinguish white male traits from Native American traits.

Not, as Bradley earlier suggested "spear throwing", but the way we analyze data. The classic example is to look at the difference between the way an Engineer and an artist. More recently, we have come to realize these divisions are rarely truly clear. A musician, for example has to have a very precise sense of time and rythm. Children taught music early on tend to be better in math later because these skills are related. Yet, the ability to play music very well (at the hig master level) is much, much more than simply being able to precisely replicate scales and notes. If you ever get the chance to listen to TRUE masters playing the same piece , you will notice differences in how they play that can be profound. It is that ephemeral "extra" that distinguishes the true master from the merely very good. And, the ability to compose is yet another skill. Very often those adept at composing are only proficient in playing. (this is not always true, in part because both composing and playing are generally taught together, but often it is true).

We now talk of "fuzzy logic", "chaos mathematics", etc etc. .... All of these EXTREMELY powerful tools are essentially overlooked or neglected in most classic IQ tests. In fact, the whole idea of a single "IQ" has been largely dismissed .. though it is, ironically still used as a "reference" by many educational institutions and studies because it does, at least, provide a point of reference.

[suggs]

Mostly waffle.

[PLAYER57832]

Mostly waffle.

When it comes to race that's all there is ... there IS no clear definition.

Except that race only exists as an arbitrary cultural assessment.