It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is racism a scam?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by eaglewingz

Originally posted by MasterJedi
Why is honky and cracker never included when referring to racist terms? I mean why are those more acceptable than any of the others?


Exactly. Why do you think Michael Richards went over the top using the word "'n-word'" during his comedy club rant?

He was being heckled with racial terms. But you don't see that on the videos of the event.




Couple of things wrong here...1) Michael Richards was not being heckled with Racist terms, when he did his routine. What really happened was a group of people many of who were African American were there for a birthday party and were talking loud of enough that Richards could here, so instead of Richards telling them the group to quiet down he starts on his rant about Nword, Nword so on and how African american people were hung on trees years ago.

2) and I hope people can understand this, no one uttered one racial epiteth towards him until everyone was already leaving his act after being disgusted by what Richards had just said. Calling Richards a "cracker" only softened the blow of what offended so many people black and white.

Think about really...if one guy is an idiot and another a moron do you let the other guy call you an idiot without calling him back a moron.





[edit on 31-12-2006 by Revelmonk]




posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Well, all of these terms should be,first of all, removed from the english vocabulary. There is no use for them. Especially terms such as "'n-word'" and "spic," as well as "cracker." To me, they are in the same category as calling a smart, loner a "nerd." It's very insulting and there is no real meaning behind them to begin with.

What the hell is a "nerd" or "geek" anyway.. I have never quite understood the significance of these terms. "Spic" and "'n-word'" are the same way. What exactly is the use of these words other than to insult? There is no other use for them really.



[edit on 31-12-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Not being a racist, and never been, I have a bit of trouble realising these things in real life; most people I know are'nt even close to being offensive to "non-native" people (I don't have english as my first language), and I still use ''n-word'' as a word for black people. I've never had anything towards them, and still don't have - It's just the word I've grown up with! When I was a child, I had a book with 'n-word' in its title (Can't remember it's name, sorry), and it was one of my favorites, because it was foreign!

It learned me about the world, and it is still a role-model for me. It defines people for me, and I can still look back to it, and smile. "Neger" ("Nigger") has just been banned in Norway in a story, almost the same, and I really despise it; because it has been rejected politically and not formally.

If this does'nt make sense I apologise, I'm pretty drunk but driven to the PTS (Ya ya..)... :/

[edit on 31/12/06 by Thain Esh Kelch]



posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
Why are there laws on hate? Makes no sense at all, all that matters is that you did the crime...not why you did it.


Exactly! Personally, I think it's ridiculous that a governing body can tell me that I'm not allowed to hate something. The definition of hate is: to dislike intensely or passionately. That's an emotion. Am I being told I'm not allowed to feel emotion? If I choose to hate something isn't that my own business? It's when hate turns to hostility that it becomes a problem. But if one chooses to hate or dislike something without being hostile toward it where is the harm? If one decides to hate another group of people what right does anyone have to tell him he can't?



posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by MasterJedi
Why is honky and cracker never included when referring to racist terms? I mean why are those more acceptable than any of the others?


It's called the Great Racial Double Standard.
Meaning: I can call you whatever I want, but you're not allowed to call me anything.



posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 11:44 PM
link   
It is called respect for other people. I know a lot of people who does'nt feel assure towards foreign people.. Unfortunate for them, they can't meet new people and like them for what they are; they always dislike them for their religion or their geographic region (edit: or their looks).

Unfortunate, but that is life, and I still love my friends because that is how they were brought up, and I like people for who they are, not in what they belief in.

[edit on 31/12/06 by Thain Esh Kelch]

[edit on 31/12/06 by Thain Esh Kelch]



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 03:23 AM
link   
I'll let everyone in on something they may already know, but its something i figured out a long time ago. Racism is something that will never be completley erradicated, even if there are world wide sanctions on the words and people who use the words are put to death, Racism will survive.

Im not advicating racism, but you have to realize if there was no racism to divide ourselves we would find a new way to separate our selves, its in our nature to prove we are better than someone else. Some try to prove they are better by attacking other races, others attack religions or level of wealth and body types ("fat" and "skinny") those are just a few that i can think of off the top of my head. but im sure if some day in the future we were all turned one color, we would still be divided somehow.



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Ask Ron Goldman's or Nicole Simpson's family if they think it's a scam.

Respectable people like David Duke, Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton think it's real; who are lessor minds to argue?



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 01:27 PM
link   
I definitely think it's used as a weapon to divide people and to the poster above, the O.J. Simpson murders were not racially motivated..bad reference and no, David Duke is not respectable.

When this country reaches the breaking point and has to deal with the corrupt U.S. when the dollar falls and we're forced to accept the 'Amero' and North American Union dissolving what we thought was a sovereign nation...lines in the sand will be drawn. Instead of fighting together to rid ourselves of the international banking puppet masters we'll be too distracted by the veil of political corectness that vanishes in its chaos.



posted on Jan, 1 2007 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
Why are there laws on hate? Makes no sense at all, all that matters is that you did the crime...not why you did it.


Exactly! Personally, I think it's ridiculous that a governing body can tell me that I'm not allowed to hate something. The definition of hate is: to dislike intensely or passionately. That's an emotion. Am I being told I'm not allowed to feel emotion? If I choose to hate something isn't that my own business? It's when hate turns to hostility that it becomes a problem. But if one chooses to hate or dislike something without being hostile toward it where is the harm? If one decides to hate another group of people what right does anyone have to tell him he can't?


There is no law about "hating" someone ... there are special consequences for commiting a crime based on hatred towards religious or racial groups. You can hate any group as much as you want ... you can write articles demeaning them and calling them every name in the book ... you can have marches like the KKK. But when you go and burn someone's house down or vandalize their property based on a hatred then there will be an additional penalty to be responsible for.

Think of this along the lines of the differences between 1st/2nd/3rd degree murder and manslaughter ... each of the underlying crimes are the same but the motivations and planning involved in the crime are extremely different.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by aaaaa
Ask Ron Goldman's or Nicole Simpson's family if they think it's a scam.

Respectable people like David Duke, Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton think it's real; who are lessor minds to argue?



Their respectability is questionable at best, and I don't believe that too many of us are lesser in any fashion. And as far as I know, Ron goldman and Nicole Simpsons murder were not racially motivated.

Someone else posted asking for examples where cracker and honky are more acceptable than any of the other terms listed... all my response is... Watch any big named black comedien. Let a white guy get up and say 'n-word' or spade as much as Chris Rock says cracker and honky... He'd be crucified!

But oh well... thats what comes from feminizing and africanizing a society. The only wrong position to take is that of a strong white male in this day and age.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll
It's called the Great Racial Double Standard.
Meaning: I can call you whatever I want, but you're not allowed to call me anything.


no, wrong
honky and cracker were made for one reason only
COMEDY in the face of ENSLAVEMENT
well, actually, honky was invented in the face of degredation
but cracker was a term that came from the "crack" of a whip

honky, well i'm pretty sure that was made famous by the jeffersons, but it seems to draw back to the jim crowe era

but anyway, there is no racism behind those words
merely historical words harking back to a time when people were oppressed

the other terms were coined by majorities to degrade minorities



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Regardless of their origins, their meaning is what is now concidered a racial slur. Noone uses those terms as positive cannotations... it'd be like justifying the use of the word darkie, simply becasue it is only based on the fact that they are of darker skin than us.

Honky and cracker are meant to be offensive, only most whites don't have the cajones to hit back at blacks for fear of being labeled a racist...



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 08:16 PM
link   
I saw a great comedy skit on TV that spoke volumes - dinner party guests imitating/lampooning various nationalities & accents, and the reactions that followed. The German, Sth African, Dutch, US, UK, French, Italian & Australian parodies all went down a treat. But one guy kept picking the wrong races to make fun of (African, Indian, Asian, Aust. aboriginal, etc ) which were of course greeted with shock, horror, disgust & invitations to leave. Nothing new, I know, but it illustrated the double standard beautifully - attacking 'white people' is just not regarded as racism, regardless of the exact words used.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I've been called a "cracker" derogatorily, and I've never cracked a whip in my life. So I'm not deserving of the name and I resent it. In fact, I wish I could send the NAAWP after the N-word that called me it, but "oops" that would be racist. Double standard again. In fact, the creation of the NAAWP would be racist wouldn't it..........but only if you're non-white. What's gonna happen one day when non-whites outnumber whites in America? Since whites would be in the minority would they be allowed to establish the NAAWP, or would it still be racist? Time changes all.....nobody should be treated more special than anyone else, regardless of your past history. People need to stop living in the past and holding grudges........ and blaming other races for their own shortcomings in the present.

I can't wait till "N-word" becomes the next thing no one is allowed to say.

[edit on 2-1-2007 by rocknroll]



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
but anyway, there is no racism behind those words
merely historical words harking back to a time when people were oppressed

the other terms were coined by majorities to degrade minorities


And in your mind this gives the minority the right to degrade the majority without the majority allowed to respond?
Get a grip.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Making the words that represent something forbidden, makes the people and objects they represent to be feared more. The taboos around sex are maintanied largely by the fact that words used to describe sexuality cannot be mentioned. For example, in the 1950's when sex was really taboo, Lucile ball mentioning the word "pregnant" actually caused controvery. By making terms like 'n-word' taboo, society increases its fears of 'n-word's. (Hold on now, let me explain.)

Most people would like to think of themselves as not being racist. They may know people of different races and they like and respect those people. Most Americans do have a preprogramed fear or prejudice of Black people and other minorities. For they consciously or subconsciously grip their purse a bit tighter when a Black person approaches. This fear is exploited to make profits. People are willing to move dozens of miles away to avoid the "drugs and crime" of the inner city which is just a thinly veiled way of saying they are avoiding Black people. This white flight benefits home builders and petroleum companies (people buy more fuel to commute longer distances) among others.

This fear of Black people is helped by making the word 'n-word' taboo. My making the word 'n-word' taboo, peoples thoughts, feelings and fears of the stereotypical criminal Black person (a 'n-word') are supressed and only allowed to grow like a malignant tumor. If people could use the word 'n-word' and discuss what the word meant freely, they would fear the stereotype less and view things more rationally.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Making the words that represent something forbidden, makes the people and objects they represent to be feared more. The taboos around sex are maintanied largely by the fact that words used to describe sexuality cannot be mentioned. For example, in the 1950's when sex was really taboo, Lucile ball mentioning the word "pregnant" actually caused controvery. By making terms like 'n-word' taboo, society increases its fears of 'n-word's. (Hold on now, let me explain.)

Most people would like to think of themselves as not being racist. They may know people of different races and they like and respect those people. Most Americans do have a preprogramed fear or prejudice of Black people and other minorities. For they consciously or subconsciously grip their purse a bit tighter when a Black person approaches. This fear is exploited to make profits. People are willing to move dozens of miles away to avoid the "drugs and crime" of the inner city which is just a thinly veiled way of saying they are avoiding Black people. This white flight benefits home builders and petroleum companies (people buy more fuel to commute longer distances) among others.

This fear of Black people is helped by making the word 'n-word' taboo. My making the word 'n-word' taboo, peoples thoughts, feelings and fears of the stereotypical criminal Black person (a 'n-word') are supressed and only allowed to grow like a malignant tumor. If people could use the word 'n-word' and discuss what the word meant freely, they would fear the stereotype less and view things more rationally.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Making the words that represent something forbidden, makes the people and objects they represent to be feared more. The taboos around sex are maintanied largely by the fact that words used to describe sexuality cannot be mentioned. For example, in the 1950's when sex was really taboo, Lucile ball mentioning the word "pregnant" actually caused controvery. By making terms like 'n-word' taboo, society increases its fears of 'n-word's. (Hold on now, let me explain.)

Most people would like to think of themselves as not being racist. They may know people of different races and they like and respect those people. Most Americans do have a preprogramed fear or prejudice of Black people and other minorities. For they consciously or subconsciously grip their purse a bit tighter when a Black person approaches. This fear is exploited to make profits. People are willing to move dozens of miles away to avoid the "drugs and crime" of the inner city which is just a thinly veiled way of saying they are avoiding Black people. This white flight benefits home builders and petroleum companies (people buy more fuel to commute longer distances) among others.

This fear of Black people is helped by making the word 'n-word' taboo. My making the word 'n-word' taboo, peoples thoughts, feelings and fears of the stereotypical criminal Black person (a 'n-word') are supressed and only allowed to grow like a malignant tumor. If people could use the word 'n-word' and discuss what the word meant freely, they would fear the stereotype less and view things more rationally.


I tend to avoid young black men at night because I have been robbed by them twice, both times quite violently and resulting in serious injury. While I understand the social and economic issues that lead to this type of behavior, I have no intention of subjecting myself to it again. What should I believe, my own experience or some social engineers psycobabble on the subject? There are reasons for 'white flight' that are based squarely on reality, just as there are those that are media created.

Prefering your own race/culture over those with which you are unfamiliar is normal and to be expected. The solution to racism is familiarizing yourself with others, and so realizing that the similarities always out way the differences. Of course to do so you must overcome the globalist attempt to use race as part of their divide and conquer scheme.

Words are just words in the end. It is your actions that define you.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Words aren't just words, sorry. Any linguist will tell you that words are symbols, whether spoken or written. That's why words can harm, heal, kill or give hope.

Because we use these symbols to simplify our ways of communication. These symbols have a meaning to us. For me, "turtle eggs" has no meaning. In chinese, it's the symbol used for what Germans call Scheisse, French merde or English s**t - an exclamation to indicate you're not feeling 100% happy with something.

I feel sorta "proud" when my dark-skinned friends from Africa and Brooklyn with hip hop culture background greet me saying "greetings, 'n-word'" - because I'm caucasian and metal head. They show I'm a "bro". It's a sign of respect. Of course, my calling them "'n-word's" is not an issue.

But I'd never call any stranger "'n-word'". It wouldn't feel right. And I'd never relate to my "'n-word's" as "Neger" (German "'n-word'") in a conversation with someone else. Because "Neger" now has the same reputation as "'n-word'" - it's offensive.

Older people, like my grandmother, have no problem with that, because they don't feel "Neger" is offensive. It's just their way to relate to a black person from Africa. There's even an old, famous children's song called "Zehn kleine Negerlein" - ten little 'n-word's. A German tobacco brand called "Schwarzer Krauser" has the silouhette of an African on it, and until last year, there was a little inscription that read "Der mit den Negerlein" - "the one with the 'n-word's". It's gone now.

So I think governments should not regulate the use of words. It's always a matter of context and intent that fills these symbols with meaning. There's a joke, I hope it works in English...

"Officer, may I call an officer 'pig'?" - "Of course not!" - "But I may call a pig 'officer'?" - "If the pig doesn't object..." - "Well, thank you and good bye, officer..."

[edit on 5-1-2007 by Akareyon]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join