I understand you are not a “mulatto”, so to me, your opinion about the word carries far less weight than does the opinion of someone who has a significant mix of black and white ancestry.
When I wish to know the effect of a racial slur, I prefer to listen to the opinions of those the term is targeted at.
[quote=“Chris”]
First of all, the Nazis were agents of racism, not recipients of it. A very different thing from calling someone a racial slur. [/quote[
But calling a contemporary person a Nazi, unless they really are, trivializes the experiences of holocaust survivors that actually suffered under the regime or their families that had to listen to stories of such experiences.
Stalin did the same thing. He invaded Finland. He tortured numerous people, including many of the people he rose to power with, and he spied on his own citizens constantly. Is he extremely right wing? :no-no: He was the biggest local thug socialist of all with Mao in there as well.
The Nazis biggest electoral success in the early 30s was because they were able to gain the SPD (left-wing) vote. Without the SPD swing vote in '33, the Nazis would never had the clout to force their way into power. It was mostly conservative Catholics and aristocrats that were against him from the beginning. Hitler was a vegetarian, totally anti-smoking, and anti-religion. Sounds to me, as the world National Socialism suggests, to be an extreme left wing ideology.
Unprovoked invasion of Iraq? You mean flouting international law and gassing your own citizens doesn’t count as a provocation? Torture? How many waterboarding cases exactly? 2? What government doesn’t spy on its citizens in some form? Are they all fascist? Do they all deserve to be called Nazis by posters? Again comparing 2 to 5 million trivialized the people that actually experienced the horrors of anti-Semtism.
[quote] I understand you are not a “mulatto”, so to me, your opinion about the word carries far less weight than does the opinion of someone who has a significant mix of black and white ancestry.
When I wish to know the effect of a racial slur, I prefer to listen to the opinions of those the term is targeted at. [/quote]
If people use the word correctly according to its Arabic root, it means outsider, so I have been an outsider in Arabic society. As someone who has travelled extensively in Egypt, Jordan, and Syria (all Arabic speaking countries), I’ve definitely been an outsider in these countries.
I understand the negative connotations with the word and would never dream of calling someone a mulatto. However, it’s not nearly as bad as calling someone a Nazi or a proponent of such a racial-based ideology. If you’re going to ban someone for 2 weeks for calling a politician a mulatto (as Screaming Jesus did), then surely you should ban someone for the same or a longer period for calling another politician a Nazi. But this didn’t happen.
Nice, Chewy.
in the 14th century meaning of the word.
Chewy, you know nothing and yet you continue talking out of your ass. Please show me the thread where I detail the reasons I suspend or ban people’s accounts. You can’t because in most cases I refuse to do so. :loco:
Your commentary in this thread is just idle, uninformed speculation. :aiyo:
Yet they don’t. They use it as a demeaning racial term. That’s the reality.
Would you use the same argument about the N-word? After all, it entered English through Spanish, and if used according to its actual Latinate root, it means nothing more than the harmless word “black” (the English word “black”, by the way, comes from the same root as “flagrant” and “conflagration” do–“bhlag-”, meaning “burn”). Tracing back even further to Indo-European, the Latin word niger is probably derived from the same root that the harmless word “night” is.
Does this make the N-word any less offensive? I don’t think you would take that position. It’s what a term means to people now that counts.
Chewy, you know nothing and yet you continue talking out of your ass. Please show me the thread where I detail the reasons I suspend or ban people’s accounts. You can’t because in most cases I refuse to do so. :loco:
Your commentary in this thread is just idle, uninformed speculation. :aiyo:[/quote]
I’m taking Screaming Jesus at his word. He mentions in this thread that he was suspended for calling Obama a mulatto. I’m just asking why Vorkosigan wasn’t suspended a year ago for calling Bush a Nazi. In my opinion, the latter slur is much, much worse than the former, although both are not nice as the majority of people on this thread have mentioned.
[quote=“Chris”]
Would you use the same argument about the N-word? After all, it entered English through Spanish, and if used according to its actual Latinate root, it means nothing more than the harmless word “black” (the English word “black”, by the way, comes from the same root as “flagrant” and “conflagration” do–“bhlag-”, meaning “burn”). Tracing back even further to Indo-European, the Latin word niger is probably derived from the same root that the harmless word “night” is. [/quote]
It’s also a word that is used these days as a term of affection between two people from the same Afro ethnicity. It’s all about context, right? Between two white Caucasians—sure it is not appropriate, although these days ironically, it is often used by White people that idolize ghetto culture. I’ve never said that using the word mulatto is appropriate. I’ve certainly never admitted as much. I’ve said its root word in Arabic was harmless (when another poster mentioned incorrectly mentioned that it was solely derived from a Spanish word with much nastier mule connotations).
All I’ve said all along is that if Screaming Jesus was indeed suspended or banned for using such a term, it was probably a miscarriage of moderating justice because a lot worse is allowed to remain, especially during the Bush years when rants occured pretty much daily. 
Yes indeed… about as far to the right as you can get when it comes to his means of governance, despite his purported economic stance.
Opinions differ among African-Americans about this: Bill Cosby condemns the practice, for example. But in reality, yes, it is often used in certain African-American social groups as a term of affection, but if you’re not black, you simply do not have social license use it in this way. If you (that’s the generic “you” here) are not black, you can’t call someone that word without it reflecting extremely poorly on yourself.
This extends to any term used as a means to denigrate (interesting word etymologically speaking, is it not?) a member of a historically oppressed group.
Yes indeed… about as far to the right as you can get when it comes to his means of governance, despite his purported economic stance.[/quote]
Then your knowledge of Soviet history is piss weak. He was a nationalistic practical-minded moderate within the Party and not a purist or an idealogue such as Trotsky or a lawyer such as Lenin. He despised people that had entrenched positions and just cared solely about screwing women (in his early years), enjoying extravagent lifestyles, and climbing to power by any means possible.
He was the financier, bank robber, pimp, and street politician of the Bolsheviks in the early years. Extreme right wing? Extreme left wing? Moderate? None IMHO. All he cared about was socialism and power.
Back to Hitler. Hitler’s traits were just as socialist as they were fascist. Again, real conservatives in pre-war Germany were against Hitler from the very beginning. Just as Southern conservatives were the first group of politicos in the US against McCarthy (even before Northern Liberals). It’s usually conservative believers in democracy that oppose extreme authoritarianism of the left or right.
At first. But later… well, you know what happened. Murderous, autocratic, oppressive.
All he cared about was power. “Socialism” was merely a tool he used to ensure popular support, much like Hitler did (even though Hitler railed against the Communists).
Both were autocratic despots who cared only about power. They were both opponents of the liberal ideals of democracy and human rights, but had no qualms about using democracy to secure their positions.
Toasty -
Well said.
Except for the ‘mulatto/mulatta’ bit. There are rather large parts of the world where this term is used to describe exactly what it means and is used without rancor or insult.
I personally do not think its applicable to Barack Hussein Obama as his Father has been noted as of Arabic lineage and his Mother from a long line of whites (Caucasians). Perhaps Chweys definitions are most appropo for that reason alone.
Side note:
I have an old acquaintance who wrote a lovely song about a mulatta, I wish I could remember its name. “Mulatta” was in the title. A jazz tune with an Afro-Caribbean beat. He was quite successful with it in the Caribbean/Island/ Central/South American market. His recording sold very well and he toured for quite a time of the strength of it.
This was about 25 yrs ago…pre-pc days.
IMO, what you have here regarding this term is in imposition of todays pc standards on something that far precedes todays imposed standards of censorship.
As to ‘negro’ - yeah, that can carry some baggage. But, IMO, it can be used without intended insult.
Nazi - could be used as an accurate descriptor. If used as an epithet, yeah, its an insult. No one wants to be identified with that left-wing National Socialist unless they’re wearing the uniform and doing the duck-walk.
[quote=“Chaon”][quote=“Chewycorns”]
But comments equating Bush with Nazis (and the associated racial connotations) count as valid opinions? If you’re going to ban someone for two weeks for calling Obama a mulatto (the etymology of which is based on a harmless Arabic word meaning outsider) shouldn’t you also ban someone for two weeks for calling Bush a Nazi (and the associated racial connotations that are associated with that label)? [/quote]
Chewy is on target here. If you are serious about keeping the discussion civil, ban for both. Or even better, just delete the posts. No Temp, no Flame, just kill 'em.
And since I have not stood on this particular soapbox in a year or so, let me say that if’in I was moderator of I.P., I’d have deleted these threads as soon as they went up:
Good Example of Why American-Style Capitalism is Bad
Texas GOP Platform…rightwingers, please defend it.
Dem Sen. Ted Kennedy’s KGB Correspondence
More Self-Loathing Hypocritical Blowhardery from the Right
Israel as a state headed for fascism
Republicans Need Cuckoo part II
Why the Left is Better
These titles are crap, and none of them are conducive to a serious exchange of ideas.[/quote]
But it’s the closest thing we have to a Men’s Forum! (No offense to Cars and Motorcycles or Sports fans.)
Here’s the latest:
[quote=“Charlie Jack”][quote=“Chaon”][quote=“Chewycorns”]
But comments equating Bush with Nazis (and the associated racial connotations) count as valid opinions? If you’re going to ban someone for two weeks for calling Obama a mulatto (the etymology of which is based on a harmless Arabic word meaning outsider) shouldn’t you also ban someone for two weeks for calling Bush a Nazi (and the associated racial connotations that are associated with that label)? [/quote]
Chewy is on target here. If you are serious about keeping the discussion civil, ban for both. Or even better, just delete the posts. No Temp, no Flame, just kill 'em.
And since I have not stood on this particular soapbox in a year or so, let me say that if’in I was moderator of I.P., I’d have deleted these threads as soon as they went up:
Good Example of Why American-Style Capitalism is Bad
Texas GOP Platform…rightwingers, please defend it.
Dem Sen. Ted Kennedy’s KGB Correspondence
More Self-Loathing Hypocritical Blowhardery from the Right
Israel as a state headed for fascism
Republicans Need Cuckoo part II
Why the Left is Better
These titles are crap, and none of them are conducive to a serious exchange of ideas.[/quote]
But it’s the closest thing we have to a Men’s Forum! (No offense to Cars and Motorcycles or Sports fans.)
Here’s the latest:
[Evil or Stupid?
Interesting that this thread can continue, but you apply the same generalizations to overseas people and it gets moved to Temp. Posters can stereotype Americans as dumb, but when you mention that people in Taiwan that criticize this self-created demographic in the US often don’t have the same quality of life or standard of living levels, such posts are removed. That’s rather one sided, isn’t it. 
Makes me think the foreign community the website claims to represent is really the liberal overseas expat community in Taiwan. If people are going to mock the intelligence of Americans, why can’t we mock the intelligence of a great majority of expats in Taiwan?
[quote=“Chaon”][quote=“Chewycorns”]
But comments equating Bush with Nazis (and the associated racial connotations) count as valid opinions? If you’re going to ban someone for two weeks for calling Obama a mulatto (the etymology of which is based on a harmless Arabic word meaning outsider) shouldn’t you also ban someone for two weeks for calling Bush a Nazi (and the associated racial connotations that are associated with that label)? [/quote]
Chewy is on target here. If you are serious about keeping the discussion civil, ban for both. Or even better, just delete the posts. No Temp, no Flame, just kill 'em.
And since I have not stood on this particular soapbox in a year or so, let me say that if’in I was moderator of I.P., I’d have deleted these threads as soon as they went up:
Good Example of Why American-Style Capitalism is Bad
Texas GOP Platform…rightwingers, please defend it.
Dem Sen. Ted Kennedy’s KGB Correspondence
More Self-Loathing Hypocritical Blowhardery from the Right
Israel as a state headed for fascism
Republicans Need Cuckoo part II
Why the Left is Better
These titles are crap, and none of them are conducive to a serious exchange of ideas.[/quote]
thanks, a few of those are my threads, sorry I didn’t conform to your ultra-bland view of how a forum should be, but some of us like to have a laugh once and a while or as my Limier (is that derogatory? lol) cousins like to say: ‘Take the piss’.
People need to get off their fucking high horse, this is a boutique expat forum that caters to a an expat community whose best days are firmly in the past, it isn’t the UN, nor is it a place for high brow discussion. It is populated (read polluted) with half-knowledgeable nit wits (myself very much included) who fancy themselves know-it-alls. This is what makes this place interesting and fun.
I say less modding and less butt-hurt whinging and we’ll all be better off.
[quote=“Deuce Dropper”]
a few of those are my threads [/quote]
You’re allowed to have THREADS? 
[quote=“Deuce Dropper”]
I say less modding and we’ll all be better off.[/quote]
In this case, I agree with you. I don’t think my post in the Dumb Americans thread should have been Temped. If posters can stereotype large percentage of Americans as dumb, I can’t with the Taiwan foreign expat demographic. Open game as far as I’m concerned. Either apply both evenly or allow people to make similar comments to other demographics. Even with my comments (before they were Temped) the majority of the thread is still dissing Americans.
[quote=“jimipresley”][quote=“Deuce Dropper”]
a few of those are my threads [/quote]
You’re allowed to have THREADS? [/quote]
my threads rule, you know this Elvis H.
[quote=“Deuce Dropper”][quote=“Chaon”][quote=“Chewycorns”]
But comments equating Bush with Nazis (and the associated racial connotations) count as valid opinions? If you’re going to ban someone for two weeks for calling Obama a mulatto (the etymology of which is based on a harmless Arabic word meaning outsider) shouldn’t you also ban someone for two weeks for calling Bush a Nazi (and the associated racial connotations that are associated with that label)? [/quote]
Chewy is on target here. If you are serious about keeping the discussion civil, ban for both. Or even better, just delete the posts. No Temp, no Flame, just kill 'em.
And since I have not stood on this particular soapbox in a year or so, let me say that if’in I was moderator of I.P., I’d have deleted these threads as soon as they went up:
Good Example of Why American-Style Capitalism is Bad
Texas GOP Platform…rightwingers, please defend it.
Dem Sen. Ted Kennedy’s KGB Correspondence
More Self-Loathing Hypocritical Blowhardery from the Right
Israel as a state headed for fascism
Republicans Need Cuckoo part II
Why the Left is Better
These titles are crap, and none of them are conducive to a serious exchange of ideas.[/quote]
thanks, a few of those are my threads, sorry I didn’t conform to your ultra-bland view of how a forum should be, but some of us like to have a laugh once and a while or as my Limier (is that derogatory? lol) cousins like to say: ‘Take the piss’.
People need to get off their fucking high horse, this is a boutique expat forum that caters to a an expat community whose best days are firmly in the past, it isn’t the UN, nor is it a place for high brow discussion. It is populated (read polluted) with half-knowledgeable nit wits (myself very much included) who fancy themselves know-it-alls. This is what makes this place interesting and fun.
I say less modding and less butt-hurt whinging and we’ll all be better off.[/quote]
You all seriously can’t tell the difference in claiming that the Right or Left is crap - or even Nazilike - and calling W a mulatto? Or is this just posturing?
I posted at least one of those (the first one) and I fail to see why the topic is either not representative of the arguments I put forward - whether you agree with them or not - or why it’s somehow personally offensive. So what if the title is one-sided, that was the intention and literally the topic of the thread. “Israel is a state headed for fascism” is inappropriate? At least there’s an discussion to be had. “Why the left is better”? Have you read some of those topics? There’s a lot of “serious exchange of ideas”. If you don’t like it, just leave the kitchen, don’t visit IP.
I happen to like spending some time debating the merits of capitalism or religion or whatever with a whole bunch of people of different backgrounds, and livin in Outland now, the frogs and binlang girls just don’t quite provide that level of discussion.