Total Posts:330|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

"Black People"

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why is it socially acceptable to call African Americans "Black people"? The African Americans themselves even accept the term and use it to describe each other. We can't claim that it's simply a factual description, because no human being on the planet has "black" skin. Black is an intrinsically heavy, bungled word with the stain of often ineffable negative associations. Black is the essence of darkness and evil. Black is the essence of a void, the characterization of a gutter or some kind of poison. When we decide to affix this term unto human beings, I'm not saying that all of those feelings will carry over in a conscious way, but I am saying that a slight cloud of unwitting degradation is released. I've never heard of an African American that's offended by this, but I make it a point not to say "black people" often because I'm certain something is wrong with that description.

White on the other hand, while I can't say I support the term, does not carry those kind of nuances. White is associated with something gentle and innocent, like snow or heaven. Even the phonetics of both words contribute to this feeling. Consider the ease with which "white" is pronounced - it's pleasant. And then consider the way black is pronounced - it's harsh.

I don't want you to receive this argument as just the stray ramblings of a liberal. I just want everone to treat the "white" and "black" people as we would the asians, europeans, hispanics, latinos etc. Since we've functioned pretty well without having to call indians "light brown people" or asians "yellow people", I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 4:49:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is it socially acceptable to call African Americans "Black people"? The African Americans themselves even accept the term and use it to describe each other. We can't claim that it's simply a factual description, because no human being on the planet has "black" skin. Black is an intrinsically heavy, bungled word with the stain of often ineffable negative associations. Black is the essence of darkness and evil. Black is the essence of a void, the characterization of a gutter or some kind of poison. When we decide to affix this term unto human beings, I'm not saying that all of those feelings will carry over in a conscious way, but I am saying that a slight cloud of unwitting degradation is released. I've never heard of an African American that's offended by this, but I make it a point not to say "black people" often because I'm certain something is wrong with that description.

White on the other hand, while I can't say I support the term, does not carry those kind of nuances. White is associated with something gentle and innocent, like snow or heaven. Even the phonetics of both words contribute to this feeling. Consider the ease with which "white" is pronounced - it's pleasant. And then consider the way black is pronounced - it's harsh.

I don't want you to receive this argument as just the stray ramblings of a liberal. I just want everone to treat the "white" and "black" people as we would the asians, europeans, hispanics, latinos etc. Since we've functioned pretty well without having to call indians "light brown people" or asians "yellow people", I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

Agreed. 100%.

Super truth, in fact.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 4:59:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is it socially acceptable to call African Americans "Black people"? The African Americans themselves even accept the term and use it to describe each other. We can't claim that it's simply a factual description, because no human being on the planet has "black" skin. Black is an intrinsically heavy, bungled word with the stain of often ineffable negative associations. Black is the essence of darkness and evil. Black is the essence of a void, the characterization of a gutter or some kind of poison. When we decide to affix this term unto human beings, I'm not saying that all of those feelings will carry over in a conscious way, but I am saying that a slight cloud of unwitting degradation is released. I've never heard of an African American that's offended by this, but I make it a point not to say "black people" often because I'm certain something is wrong with that description.

White on the other hand, while I can't say I support the term, does not carry those kind of nuances. White is associated with something gentle and innocent, like snow or heaven. Even the phonetics of both words contribute to this feeling. Consider the ease with which "white" is pronounced - it's pleasant. And then consider the way black is pronounced - it's harsh.

I don't want you to receive this argument as just the stray ramblings of a liberal. I just want everone to treat the "white" and "black" people as we would the asians, europeans, hispanics, latinos etc. Since we've functioned pretty well without having to call indians "light brown people" or asians "yellow people", I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

Hide this before the NAACP notices
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:15:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is it socially acceptable to call African Americans "Black people"? The African Americans themselves even accept the term and use it to describe each other. We can't claim that it's simply a factual description, because no human being on the planet has "black" skin. Black is an intrinsically heavy, bungled word with the stain of often ineffable negative associations. Black is the essence of darkness and evil. Black is the essence of a void, the characterization of a gutter or some kind of poison. When we decide to affix this term unto human beings, I'm not saying that all of those feelings will carry over in a conscious way, but I am saying that a slight cloud of unwitting degradation is released. I've never heard of an African American that's offended by this, but I make it a point not to say "black people" often because I'm certain something is wrong with that description.


White on the other hand, while I can't say I support the term, does not carry those kind of nuances. White is associated with something gentle and innocent, like snow or heaven. Even the phonetics of both words contribute to this feeling. Consider the ease with which "white" is pronounced - it's pleasant. And then consider the way black is pronounced - it's harsh.


I don't want you to receive this argument as just the stray ramblings of a liberal. I just want everone to treat the "white" and "black" people as we would the asians, europeans, hispanics, latinos etc. Since we've functioned pretty well without having to call indians "light brown people" or asians "yellow people", I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

Two reasons:
It is quicker to type.
It is more factual.
Is it fair to call a man who is a third-generation resident of Detroit, who has never been to Africa, African? What is African about him? His origin, that is all.

I do not refer to whites as European, as I am white with Polish/Czech and I don't identify as such. So, don't call me that. I also refrain from calling Latinos Mexicans, as they don't necessarily hail from Mexico, nor Asian Chinese. If I can identify a sub-class, and its relevent, I use it, like saying Koreans or Irish to distinguish between the broader asian or white term. Same with Americans, if I am referring to a sub-set of them, like how Africans are more likely to be on welfare. (Now, am I referring to immigrants, refugees, "african americans", or some combination...)
My work here is, finally, done.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:16:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why do we even have to identify with race at all? Like, why am I forced to identify as Indian? When I go to India, I claim that my race is "American".
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:23:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:16:36 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Why do we even have to identify with race at all? Like, why am I forced to identify as Indian? When I go to India, I claim that my race is "American".

That's a nationality, not a "race."

But, then again, there is only the "human race."

So... yeah.

It's all just stupid and sad. In reality, I would rather just appreciate 000ike for who and what he is, rather than his appearance, since he isn't sharing that with us, anyway.

But, then again, I'd be lying if I didn't appreciate the fact that he's so intelligent, and thus, acts as such a positive representation of "black people" on this website, which is still an inevitable acknowledgement, fallacious or not.

Sigh. Such a quandary. If only people made sense.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:23:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 4:59:35 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is it socially acceptable to call African Americans "Black people"? The African Americans themselves even accept the term and use it to describe each other. We can't claim that it's simply a factual description, because no human being on the planet has "black" skin. Black is an intrinsically heavy, bungled word with the stain of often ineffable negative associations. Black is the essence of darkness and evil. Black is the essence of a void, the characterization of a gutter or some kind of poison. When we decide to affix this term unto human beings, I'm not saying that all of those feelings will carry over in a conscious way, but I am saying that a slight cloud of unwitting degradation is released. I've never heard of an African American that's offended by this, but I make it a point not to say "black people" often because I'm certain something is wrong with that description.

White on the other hand, while I can't say I support the term, does not carry those kind of nuances. White is associated with something gentle and innocent, like snow or heaven. Even the phonetics of both words contribute to this feeling. Consider the ease with which "white" is pronounced - it's pleasant. And then consider the way black is pronounced - it's harsh.

I don't want you to receive this argument as just the stray ramblings of a liberal. I just want everone to treat the "white" and "black" people as we would the asians, europeans, hispanics, latinos etc. Since we've functioned pretty well without having to call indians "light brown people" or asians "yellow people", I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

Hide this before the NAACP notices

That was an idiotic response.

Just saying.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:25:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:23:03 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/8/2013 5:16:36 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Why do we even have to identify with race at all? Like, why am I forced to identify as Indian? When I go to India, I claim that my race is "American".

That's a nationality, not a "race."

But, then again, there is only the "human race."

So... yeah.

It's all just stupid and sad. In reality, I would rather just appreciate 000ike for who and what he is, rather than his appearance, since he isn't sharing that with us, anyway.

But, then again, I'd be lying if I didn't appreciate the fact that he's so intelligent, and thus, acts as such a positive representation of "black people" on this website, which is still an inevitable acknowledgement, fallacious or not.

Sigh. Such a quandary. If only people made sense.

Ike is Caucasian, not African American.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:26:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:15:19 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:

Two reasons:
It is quicker to type.
It is more factual.
Is it fair to call a man who is a third-generation resident of Detroit, who has never been to Africa, African? What is African about him? His origin, that is all.

That's kind of why I said,...and I quote "African American, African, or just American." Did you read this part?

I do not refer to whites as European, as I am white with Polish/Czech and I don't identify as such. So, don't call me that.

That's actually not what I was arguing. If you were born in America and are a citizen of the United States, you are American.

I also refrain from calling Latinos Mexicans, as they don't necessarily hail from Mexico, nor Asian Chinese. If I can identify a sub-class, and its relevent, I use it, like saying Koreans or Irish to distinguish between the broader asian or white term. Same with Americans, if I am referring to a sub-set of them, like how Africans are more likely to be on welfare. (Now, am I referring to immigrants, refugees, "african americans", or some combination...)

The only conceivable need for the word Black would be to distinguish between African immigrants and native-born "black" Americans. Which can be easily accomplished with African and African American respectively.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:32:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The issue is that we need a term to identify folks.

If you want to know which person in the room is my friend Steve, it's helpful for me to say "He's the only black guy in there".

African-American has deficiencies, as has been noted.

What would be best is for a whole new classification to spring up, that gives each race a neutral, short descriptor.

We don't have that, though, and it's unlikely to happen; in the meantime, we generally use the shortest and least offensive word that conveys the meaning that we want.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:36:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:26:35 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 2/8/2013 5:15:19 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:

Two reasons:
It is quicker to type.
It is more factual.
Is it fair to call a man who is a third-generation resident of Detroit, who has never been to Africa, African? What is African about him? His origin, that is all.

That's kind of why I said,...and I quote "African American, African, or just American." Did you read this part?

I do not refer to whites as European, as I am white with Polish/Czech and I don't identify as such. So, don't call me that.

That's actually not what I was arguing. If you were born in America and are a citizen of the United States, you are American.

And if I need to break down demographics of Americans...
Again, why should I refer to someone as African, if no one in their family has been to that continent for 100 years.

I also refrain from calling Latinos Mexicans, as they don't necessarily hail from Mexico, nor Asian Chinese. If I can identify a sub-class, and its relevent, I use it, like saying Koreans or Irish to distinguish between the broader asian or white term. Same with Americans, if I am referring to a sub-set of them, like how Africans are more likely to be on welfare. (Now, am I referring to immigrants, refugees, "african americans", or some combination...)

The only conceivable need for the word Black would be to distinguish between African immigrants and native-born "black" Americans. Which can be easily accomplished with African and African American respectively.

Aren't natuarlized immigrants American? What if these black people's ancestry was from Asia minor, or some tropical island? Aren't there white people from Africa, as well?

I don't know many African Americans, but those that I have known have not had an issue being called black. In fact, a few of them had an issue with the term African American, as they knew nothing about Africa, and thought it was a disclaimer, like an astrisk, labeling them as a not true American. It implies that there is a true American, and it's obviously not Africans.

After all, we don't call whites European Americans, and I doubt they do either.
My work here is, finally, done.
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:39:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:25:04 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 2/8/2013 5:23:03 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/8/2013 5:16:36 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Why do we even have to identify with race at all? Like, why am I forced to identify as Indian? When I go to India, I claim that my race is "American".

That's a nationality, not a "race."

But, then again, there is only the "human race."

So... yeah.

It's all just stupid and sad. In reality, I would rather just appreciate 000ike for who and what he is, rather than his appearance, since he isn't sharing that with us, anyway.

But, then again, I'd be lying if I didn't appreciate the fact that he's so intelligent, and thus, acts as such a positive representation of "black people" on this website, which is still an inevitable acknowledgement, fallacious or not.

Sigh. Such a quandary. If only people made sense.

Ike is Caucasian, not African American.

Really?

Ike, really?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:45:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:36:32 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 2/8/2013 5:26:35 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 2/8/2013 5:15:19 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:

Two reasons:
It is quicker to type.
It is more factual.
Is it fair to call a man who is a third-generation resident of Detroit, who has never been to Africa, African? What is African about him? His origin, that is all.

That's kind of why I said,...and I quote "African American, African, or just American." Did you read this part?

I do not refer to whites as European, as I am white with Polish/Czech and I don't identify as such. So, don't call me that.

That's actually not what I was arguing. If you were born in America and are a citizen of the United States, you are American.

And if I need to break down demographics of Americans...
Again, why should I refer to someone as African, if no one in their family has been to that continent for 100 years.

I also refrain from calling Latinos Mexicans, as they don't necessarily hail from Mexico, nor Asian Chinese. If I can identify a sub-class, and its relevent, I use it, like saying Koreans or Irish to distinguish between the broader asian or white term. Same with Americans, if I am referring to a sub-set of them, like how Africans are more likely to be on welfare. (Now, am I referring to immigrants, refugees, "african americans", or some combination...)

The only conceivable need for the word Black would be to distinguish between African immigrants and native-born "black" Americans. Which can be easily accomplished with African and African American respectively.

Aren't natuarlized immigrants American? What if these black people's ancestry was from Asia minor, or some tropical island? Aren't there white people from Africa, as well?

I don't know many African Americans, but those that I have known have not had an issue being called black. In fact, a few of them had an issue with the term African American, as they knew nothing about Africa, and thought it was a disclaimer, like an astrisk, labeling them as a not true American. It implies that there is a true American, and it's obviously not Africans.

After all, we don't call whites European Americans, and I doubt they do either.

At this point it would probably be a good idea for members of the sociological community to come up with a completely new term like bladerunner suggested. Really, these changes are only a small fraction of my argument. I'm actually more concerned with just pointing out that the negativity inherent in the word, and also with pointing out how simplistic color-based epithets reduce people to just 1 aspect of the their appearance which often leaves the door open for broad based stereotyping, kind of like calling people with blonde hair "the blondes".
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:45:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:39:54 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
I am almost certain I've seen "black" listed on his profile once.

I'm not black, and have never put that on my profile. Maybe you assumed I was because of my arguments with jimtimmy
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:46:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:45:48 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 2/8/2013 5:39:54 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
I am almost certain I've seen "black" listed on his profile once.

I'm not black, and have never put that on my profile. Maybe you assumed I was because of my arguments with jimtimmy

Nope, definitely saw that on your profile.

I don't just make assumptions like that.

But, whatever, it really doesn't matter.

You're a smart dude. I like you a lot. I wish I could play chess like you. ^_^
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:46:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:45:54 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:


Yup... Pretty much this
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:47:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 5:23:38 PM, Franz_Reynard wrote:
At 2/8/2013 4:59:35 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is it socially acceptable to call African Americans "Black people"? The African Americans themselves even accept the term and use it to describe each other. We can't claim that it's simply a factual description, because no human being on the planet has "black" skin. Black is an intrinsically heavy, bungled word with the stain of often ineffable negative associations. Black is the essence of darkness and evil. Black is the essence of a void, the characterization of a gutter or some kind of poison. When we decide to affix this term unto human beings, I'm not saying that all of those feelings will carry over in a conscious way, but I am saying that a slight cloud of unwitting degradation is released. I've never heard of an African American that's offended by this, but I make it a point not to say "black people" often because I'm certain something is wrong with that description.

White on the other hand, while I can't say I support the term, does not carry those kind of nuances. White is associated with something gentle and innocent, like snow or heaven. Even the phonetics of both words contribute to this feeling. Consider the ease with which "white" is pronounced - it's pleasant. And then consider the way black is pronounced - it's harsh.

I don't want you to receive this argument as just the stray ramblings of a liberal. I just want everone to treat the "white" and "black" people as we would the asians, europeans, hispanics, latinos etc. Since we've functioned pretty well without having to call indians "light brown people" or asians "yellow people", I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

Hide this before the NAACP notices

That was an idiotic response.

Just saying.

The NAACP is known for ludicrous lawsuits and outcries, this is not an idiotic response.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 5:53:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I've always thought that 'black' was a misnomer as well. I grew up in pretty much the most lily-white environment possible, and I still remember going to Disney world with my family. My sister was a toddler, and the first thing she exclaimed, loudly, upon entering the park was "Mommy, mommy, look at all the brown people". It was a face-palm moment, but it made me think about how silly the word 'black' is. I still use it though, for a simple reason: it's the only term which seems to universally not offend Americans of African Decent (TM). I was taught 'African American' in school, but ended up running into people who were offended by it in college. And while it would be nice to call everyone 'Americans' and treat them as equals, the fact remains that our melanin-rich neighbors all to often find themselves at the receiving end of all sorts of nastiness due to their skin color. We can't talk about this and work to remedy it if we don't use some sort of general term to refer to general groups.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
tulle
Posts: 4,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 6:02:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

What would you call people who don't fit those descriptions, like Jamaicans living in England? You would still call them African-American, African, or American?

I don't get this at all.
yang.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 6:03:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 6:02:25 PM, tulle wrote:
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

What would you call people who don't fit those descriptions, like Jamaicans living in England? You would still call them African-American, African, or American?

I don't get this at all.

What's wrong with calling Jamaicans living in England, jamaicans?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Franz_Reynard
Posts: 1,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 6:32:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 6:03:36 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 2/8/2013 6:02:25 PM, tulle wrote:
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

What would you call people who don't fit those descriptions, like Jamaicans living in England? You would still call them African-American, African, or American?

I don't get this at all.

What's wrong with calling Jamaicans living in England, jamaicans?

They're from England.
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 8:17:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is it socially acceptable to call African Americans "Black people"? The African Americans themselves even accept the term and use it to describe each other. We can't claim that it's simply a factual description, because no human being on the planet has "black" skin. Black is an intrinsically heavy, bungled word with the stain of often ineffable negative associations. Black is the essence of darkness and evil. Black is the essence of a void, the characterization of a gutter or some kind of poison. When we decide to affix this term unto human beings, I'm not saying that all of those feelings will carry over in a conscious way, but I am saying that a slight cloud of unwitting degradation is released. I've never heard of an African American that's offended by this, but I make it a point not to say "black people" often because I'm certain something is wrong with that description.

White on the other hand, while I can't say I support the term, does not carry those kind of nuances. White is associated with something gentle and innocent, like snow or heaven. Even the phonetics of both words contribute to this feeling. Consider the ease with which "white" is pronounced - it's pleasant. And then consider the way black is pronounced - it's harsh.

I don't want you to receive this argument as just the stray ramblings of a liberal. I just want everone to treat the "white" and "black" people as we would the asians, europeans, hispanics, latinos etc. Since we've functioned pretty well without having to call indians "light brown people" or asians "yellow people", I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

You are right, I agree, we should all be on level playing ground.

So once on a job application it lists 'Whites' (that is what they call me) as "European Americans", I will respect your view.

I think our society is afraid to offend minorities, but now it perfectly fine with offending the majority.

Isn't this racist in it's own rite?
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 10:04:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is it socially acceptable to call African Americans "Black people"?

http://www.nbc.com...

This is a big reason why
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 10:11:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
african isn't too long to say. We call asians asians and nobody complains about this even if they weren't born in asia. We don't call them yellow. Caucaisian is kind of too long to say, so i think white is more appropriate.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 10:56:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
1. Liberalism has gotten so extreme that despite connotations of words like black and white, whites have become demonized by the racist Left to the point where they say all whites are racist. That's racist. MSNBC calls white people crackers. MSNBC also posted Zimmerman to be a white racist for killing a black teen, yet Zimmerman is Mexican.

2. I agree that "black" is not the appropriate term, in fact the term "colored" is the true word that is appropriate and once accepted by African Americans. But the racists made "black" the norm and demonized the word "color." Since when is color traditionally a bad word. Colorful, colors, etc. usually have positive connotations.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2013 11:13:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 10:56:49 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
1. Liberalism has gotten so extreme that despite connotations of words like black and white, whites have become demonized by the racist Left to the point where they say all whites are racist. That's racist. MSNBC calls white people crackers. MSNBC also posted Zimmerman to be a white racist for killing a black teen, yet Zimmerman is Mexican.

2. I agree that "black" is not the appropriate term, in fact the term "colored" is the true word that is appropriate and once accepted by African Americans. But the racists made "black" the norm and demonized the word "color." Since when is color traditionally a bad word. Colorful, colors, etc. usually have positive connotations.

Black people made black the norm. If someone is a recent immigrant from Africa, like Charlize Theron or Dikembe Mutombo, they're African American. Otherwise there has been so much mixing with former slave masters and through integration that black people only resemble Africans in skin tone, and even then, with blacks like Jason Kidd, just barely.

PS - Indians wan to be called Indian again (actually, they prefer to associate with their specific nation, but since that's near impossible, Indian will do...or in a pinch, "chief")

PPS - black is the absence of all color. If anyone is "colored", it's white folk.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
tulle
Posts: 4,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2013 12:59:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/8/2013 6:03:36 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 2/8/2013 6:02:25 PM, tulle wrote:
At 2/8/2013 4:48:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
I think we can bear to refer to the "blacks" as African Americans, Africans, or just Americans. We can do without those short simplistic epithets that accomplish nothing but reduce whole people to nothing but their most salient characteristic.

What would you call people who don't fit those descriptions, like Jamaicans living in England? You would still call them African-American, African, or American?

I don't get this at all.

What's wrong with calling Jamaicans living in England, jamaicans?

How do you know the difference between a Jamaican, St. Lucian, Trinidadian, Grenadian, or any African? I get "Jamaican" all the time. I'd rather be called "black" then have someone mistakingly refer to me as Jamaican. Do you call white people living in the US European or get specific about which country they originated from?
yang.