On March 12, 2006, The Denver Post ran a front page article entitled “The N-Word”. They begin with a definition from Websters New World College Dictionary, 4th edition:
Nigger – originally simply a dialectal variant of Negro, the term nigger is today acceptable only in black English; in all other contexts it is now generally regarded as virtually taboo because of the legacy of racial hatred that underlies the history of it use among whites, and its continuing use among a minority of speakers as a viciously hostile epithet.
The article continues “It has been called the nuclear bomb of racial epithets. The filthiest, dirtiest, nastiest word in the English language. A word that has an undisputed pedigree of hate. The word? Nigger.”
Let’s first start with the definition. “…acceptable only in black English…” Think about that statement. If nigger is simply a racist epithet for “black”, then isn’t their definition rather circular? Other than intent, isn’t it exactly the same as saying that the word nigger is “… acceptable only in nigger English..” What in gods name is black English?! Isn’t this definition incredibly racist? Please define black English for me in a way that isn’t completely circular.
And of course Websters continues their racist folly by noting its “use among whites”. I guess the word means peace and harmony when uttered by anyone who isn’t “white” (whatever that means). But the Denver Post article is about someone whose last name is Martinez (with only 40 prior arrests) uttering this word while punching a “black” college student in the face. At least he wasn’t “white” while sucker-punching the poor student!
When will this insanity end? We had a long and wandering discussion about race here not that long ago. If you take time to read it you will see that I ask for someone to provide definitions of these various races — my point being if they are real, factual, things — then give me the definition. Most refused the challenge. Those that attempted spoke about genetics and various ways people can be grouped. But I asked them for a definition that includes the way these terms are used in everyday language.
I’m still waiting. Instead we get “black” x, y or z is “black” because “black” people do it. Asian, Hispanic (which didn’t even exist until the 1970 US census), I’m at a loss. Other than speaking of those few times when we are discussing where our most recent ancestors came from, they all seem simply racist. Acceptable in polite society, but racist just the same.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
John, I'm going to start this off.
Your approach is all wrong. A man cannot deny who he is just because everyone around him has contempt for him. That is elemental dishonesty to himself.
Let's start with me. I'm a Jew. I used to meet people who would say "the Jewish" or some other circumlocution because in their minds, the word "Jew" is/was a curse. In Spanish, the word "judio" is a curse. Spanish speakers will refer to me as "un hebreo." In Russian "Zhid" is a curse. Russians will say "Yevréi."
But no matter how much the Germans, Russians or Spaniards may hate me, I'm still a Jew. Reality doesn't walk out the door because it is ugly. And the ugly fact is that Jews are hated throughout Europe. The languages there are filled with words to demonstrate the point - "to jew down" is just one example in English.
Gewrman Jews tried hard to get around that hatred in the early years of the 20th Century. "There are no Jews!", they proclaimed, "Germans of the Mosaic persuasion", they called themselves. It didn't help them get out of the gas chambers. Mind you, these people didn't have distinctive pigmentation or other features as do blacks or Asians. They looked like the people around them.
A black man shouldn't say he is black because a lot of other people who hate blacks think "nigger"? What kind of self hatred is that? There is such a thing as Black English. It is a distinctive dialect spoken among blacks in America. You can't wish these things away because many whites hate blacks. You can't deny they are not there the way one would say "the Jewish" in an awkward attempt not to insult.
There is hatred of blacks by whites in your country. There is hatred of whites by blacks as well. Denying that there is such a thing as race does not erase the hatred.
2 - RedTard
"Reality doesn't walk out the door because it is ugly."
Very true. This nonsense is fine for an internet chatroom, the scary thing is his bio indicates he works at a non-profit to bring 'science and fact based' education to the classroom. He wants to indoctrinate schoolkids with this politically correct garbage posing as science.
3 - RedTard
JC,
From your 'fact based' website.
"There is no race gene."
Why do you continue to ignore science? DNA tests are over 99% accurate in identifying an individual's race. If you live in the US and you view yourself as black, white, asian, or hispanic, tests will validate that 99.6% of the time. You claim over and over that no one has provided proof of race when the reality is there, you simply choose to ignore it. If you ignore any evidence that goes against your theory you are more like the one claiming the earth is flat than I.
To deny race is to deny ancestry. Even if you successfully brainwashed everyone, some inquisitive mind would notice that people of African ancestry have dark skin, etc. When that happened we would be back at square one.
4 - John Conlin
Ah, Ruvy and Redtard again.
Ruvy, “I am a Jew”, what does that mean? Please define that for me. Also please define “black English” in some manner that is not circular.
Self-hate " something you say I’m pushing because people refuse to accept “who they are”. Can’t you see your circular reasoning here too? I challenge the concept of who they are. You start with “who they are” and then use this as a defense of your idea " if anyone refuses to accept “who they are” they are practicing self-hate.
Redtard continues with the PC slur " a simplistic method to end discussion. You continue to fight a losing battle. You defend the concept of the race " even though we’ve gone through a multitude of experts in genetics who at most say the concept is elastic and without much real meaning. But then you use the concept of race to define a whole set of your (and perhaps societies) biases about these races. All whites are what? All blacks are what? Asians are what? Hispanic is an ethnic concept, not racial at all. And ethnicity is UNIVERSALLY defined as being a social construct.
It is truly that difficult to comprehend that each person is both genetically and behaviorally a cornucopia. Each is an individual. To say I am white has absolutely no meaning of any sort (other than I’m therefore not black or …) None are DEFINED by some simplistic, archaic method of classification.
5 - chantal stone
there was an article last month about the "N-word" and the discussion that followed was rather interesting.
whether or not the concept of "race" is scientifically factual or not, the fact remains that stigma still exists with the usage of certain words.
until EVERYONE accepts that race does not truly exist the way we currently understand it, stigmatized words will still remain hurtful and painful, and racism will still be a part of society.
6 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
John,
I see you're big on definitions. In simple English, a Jew is the child of a Jewish mother. That may seem circular to you, but that is the definition. Push the definition back far enough in time, you get to Mordekhai the Jew of the tribe of Benyamin. Meaning to say, that he is of the Children of Israel, of the tribe of Benyamin, but his ancestors had lived in the Kingdom of Yehuda. Push the definition further, you get a Child of Israel (Jacob) who traces his dsescent through that son of Jacob named Yehuda. That is who a Jew is. Now, comes the question. Am I of the tribe of Benyamín, Shim'ón or Yehudá. And the answer - I haven't got a clue. But everyone says I'm a Jew - except the Spanish, Russian, French, Italian and other speakers who can't bear to, and who call me "Hebrew". To them, judío, Zhid, juive, etc, are all the "j" word. Capisce?
Black English is a dialect of English spoken by blacks in America. It has some of general characteristics of English as spoken in the southern states of the US, but beyond that, I cannot go. A definition of a ball is also circular.
You are missing the point here, John. Race, as a biolgical phenomenon among humans, is relatively unimportant. There are certain genetic issues like the kinds of diseases that are prevalent in certain racial and ethnic groups that are important. To that extent, and that extent alone, race is important.
The issue here is the sick culture of the United States (and perhaps Canada), a culture shot through with hatred based on skin color and racial traits, like the epicanthic folds around the eyes of Asians... These are cultural issues. No screaming in the hallways that "there is no such thing as race" will lighten the skin of a black youth so that whites do not view him as a threat - or vice versa for a white youth. Nor will it lessen the hatreds.
Your idea would be nice in Brazil - if that country was not already undergoing the waves of racial consciousness brought in from the United States - waves which increase racial hatred.
You need to deal with the cultural issues of racial hatred that bring abut use of the "n" word in the first place. If you live in America, that is an issue you cannot duck - no matter how hard you try.
7 - chantal stone
"Black English is a dialect of English spoken by blacks in America."
that statement should read "...spoken by SOME blacks in America".
not everyone speaks the same way, and i personally get offended by the idea that "speaking black" or "speaking white" actually means something.
what is "black English" anyway? how would you write it? sure there are different dialects across the country, regional dialects. but to define it by a person's skin color is ignorant. and sadly, many black Americans perpetuate this stereotype also.
the only language i speak is AMERICAN English. since when does language have a color?
8 - John Conlin
Now Ruvy,
You are being VERY disingenuous. You state “I am a Jew” and then quote me some biologic basis. But your very statement implies much more than whom your mother was " and you are well aware of it. When you state “I am a Jew” you are making a statement about a whole range of behaviors, ideas, beliefs, etc. Are you not?
Or do you simply find the need to tell every person you meet about your mother’s genetic background " seems rather strange if this is the case.
So I ask again, you state “I am a Jew” please define this statement. And for logic 101 " it is not valid to use a concept in defining the same concept " that is circular reasoning and it is invalid " or are we going to argue about logic now? I suggest you read Bertrand Russell if you have a problem with this.
“Black English is a dialect of English spoken by blacks in America” Really? Condi Rice speaks black English? She is “black” isn’t she? Can I, a poor white boy speak black English? Would it still be black English? Read Thomas Sowell’s great book “Black Rednecks and White Liberals” " he piece by piece destroys this whole concept.
“The issue here is the sick culture of the United States (and perhaps Canada), a culture shot through with hatred based on skin color and racial traits” My god, did you really say this?! Look out your window! Glad no Israelis or Palestinians hate anyone based on racial traits. And of course no Jew would EVER discriminate or hold negative views against non-Jew! That would be unheard of!
As for you last point about me attempting to ‘duck the issue”. I’ll type slowly so perhaps you can understand me " I challenge the entire paradigm your (and other’s) thoughts are based on. Understand? I challenge the paradigm that “I am a Jew” has any meaning " other than perhaps who your mother was " but wait, there are many other definitions of Jew. Which is correct from a science view-point? None. Whatever traits you think “I am a Jew” defines, I can easily come up with enough exceptions to make your definition meaningless. My paradigm again, it is not science and fact you regurgitate, but rather beliefs from the past which you continue to propagate.
9 - John Conlin
Chantal,
"Since when does language have a color"? God bless you.
10 - RedTard
"then you use the concept of race to define a whole set of your (and perhaps societies) biases about these races."
I do nothing of the sort. Race is a very good indicator of where your ancestors came from. That is a fact that you may not like, but it is true.
"Redtard continues with the PC slur - a simplistic method to end discussion."
And you continue saying averyone that disagrees with you is a racist. You have absolutely nothing to prove your point with other than fear of being ostracized.
The fact that you want to go into schoolhouses to indoctrinate our kids with this garbage shows how low the PC police are willing to stoop. You can't get logical adults to imagine that skin color and other physical characteristics don't correspond to ancestry, but perhaps you can sell your lies to a 5 year old.
11 - RedTard
"what is 'black English' anyway?"
Good point. Take it even farther. What is the English language? What is Spanish? Are they not social contructs?
Only a foolish person would imagine that languages aren't 'real'
12 - chantal stone
"The fact that you want to go into schoolhouses..."
at least JC is on the right path for spreading racial and ethnic tolerance.
racism is learned at home. when i was in 3rd grade and a fellow 3rd grader called me a "nigger", it wasn't because of something he had learned in school...and in the late 70's, early 80's, racial tolerance, or any kind of tolerance, wasn't even a thought in school curriculums. that boy learned that that particular word can be hurtful at HOME.
teaching racial, cultural, and ethnic equality and tolerance in school is not just PC, its necessary if we want to live in an equal and tolerant society...but maybe you don't want that.
13 - chantal stone
"Only a foolish person would imagine that languages aren't 'real'"
RedTard, stop being ignorant. if you don't want people to think that you are a racist, stop trying to defend inherently racist ideas.
14 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Chantal,
You are right. My definition should have read "some blacks." My error, and I apologize. No insult intended, not that you didn't feel the insult anyway.
John,
You finally reach the nub of the issue. It is not on the basis of "science" that Jews are hated, it is not on the basis of science that blacks or whites are hated.
It is on the basis of culture - a culture of hate based on abomination for those of a different skin color. Race is a convenient term to sum the issue up, but race, as a determining factor is irrelevant, at least from the point of view of science. But that does not negate its existence or the differences in skin color between you and Chantal for example. Unfortunately, it doesn't negate the hatred in your society bacd on race either.
Biologically, it is irrelevant that some of Chantal's ancestors are not black. Listen to the good lady as she chastises me over my error.
"what is "black English" anyway? how would you write it? sure there are different dialects across the country, regional dialects. but to define it by a person's skin color is ignorant. and sadly, many black Americans perpetuate this stereotype also."
Were there no hatred in your society based on race, these issues would not arise, and my mistake - yes I did make that error - would be irrelevant. A slip of the fingers, so to speak.
Finbally, as to the Middle East.
No.
I'm not bringing the Middle East and its religious conflicts into this conversation - good try. I was raised in the States and this is an issue that is properly dealt with as an American issue.
With the help of G-d, the racial hatred that you Americans have inflicted on each other will not spread to the Israelis who live here. Thousands of Ethiopian Jews have come home from a land where they are called "falasha" - stranger. My home - Israel - is their home also. They deserve to live under their own fig tree with none to make them afraid. "Strange fruit" shall not grow in this land!
15 - chantal stone
Ruvy...no apology necessary, i know your intent was not to offend. it's just the idea of blacks speaking differently that offends me, the assumption that because i LOOK a certain way, that i should sound a certain way.
"Were there no hatred in your society based on race, these issues would not arise..."
a good point, and a sad fact.
16 - RedTard
"teaching racial, cultural, and ethnic equality and tolerance in school is not just PC, its necessary"
Teaching tolerance is fine, teaching that race, culture, and ethnicity do not exist is another matter.
"if you don't want people to think that you are a racist, stop trying to defend inherently racist ideas."
Thank you for proving my point, that is the sum total of how this idea is spread, anyone that disagrees is called a racist. I'm going to side with logic and science and not with emotion and fear.
17 - John Conlin
Redtard,
Let’s do this one more time. “Race is a very good indicator of where your ancestors came from” Really? So since I am “white” where did my most recent ancestors come from? Please elaborate.
So when you talk about “black” and “white” you only mean ancestry? Nothing more? If it has no more meaning than that " which you disingenuously claim " then why is it mentioned any time other than those few instances when we are discussing our genealogy? Please elaborate here too.
As for everyone that disagrees with me being a racist " please follow, I’m typing slowly. I challenge the paradigm race is built on. I do believe that the present paradigm is based on racist thinking (I’m not insulting anyone here, I am making a scientific and logical conclusion) " there is no moral aspect to this statement. When I read that this many black, or whites or Hispanics do something, I believe the very grouping of these individuals under this concept is racist. Not hatefully so, it just is.
Since you like my web site so much please read on " here are some of our other crazed ideas:
• We evolved on this planet and everything we are, every belief we have must fit into an evolutionarily constrained world. This forces us to accept that there is reality, there is truth. This idea has already transformed the hard sciences; it is now beginning to transform all other areas of our lives " i.e. the paradigm shift. Your idiocy regarding PC is somewhat correct; PC thinking does not stand up to rational debate.
• our lives are a gift, from either God or evolution but a gift nonetheless and we should treat each one as a very precious thing. There are only individuals " abstractions by definition do not exist in the real world, they are of our making.
• because our lives are a gift, they are ours and ours alone to do with what we want (within a broad outline of laws to protect everyone’s rights)
• therefore we believe in freedom in all its forms " political, economic, social
• This forces one to be for limited government, some form of constitutional democracy/republic. A free market economy, etc.
• And guess what " the economic and political results from the past 500 years supports every one of these.
Yep, that’s the crazed, insane beliefs we plan to teach our students. Please send your’s to the local public school.
18 - chantal stone
"...that is the sum total of how this idea is spread, anyone that disagrees is called a racist..."
RedTard...i'm not implying that anyone needs to agree with what JC is proposing about the lack of scientific evidence for race....what i'm saying is with your refusal to even CONSIDER what he is saying as truth, you appear to be defending the ideas from which racism stems.
let me ask you this....why does the simple idea of the non-existence of race bother you so much? is it because it threatens the very source of your so-called "racist" or narrow-minded opinions? why does "political correctness" seem to offend you so much?
"Teaching tolerance is fine, teaching that race, culture, and ethnicity do not exist is another matter."
no one is suggesting that culture and ethnicity do not exist. that would be stupid.
19 - John Conlin
Ruvy,
Good god why can’t you see that you agree with me? (or I with you if it makes it better). You fight yet agree with my point " IT IS NOT SCIENCE. IT IS NOT REALITY. IT IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT BASED ON PAST BELIEFS.
I challenge those beliefs " you fight yet you agree. Please don’t tell me how it’s culture and it will never change, etc. Really? With thinking like that slavery around the world would still be in place. Women would still be treated one step above a goat. Should I go on? You supposedly don’t agree with these beliefs yet you propagate them " you disagree yet you believe them.
And you dodged my request " “I am a Jew” Only about your mother’s genetic background? How strange that you tell everyone this. Yes I like definitions " it helps one have a rational discussion based on facts. In science things can be clearly defined. If not, they probably don’t really exist. Yet you and Redtard continually refuse to define these concepts that you freely toss around.
It is quite simple " there is only one person on the planet that you can control " yourself. I simply ask people to consider a new paradigm and it they agree, to discard their old ways of thinking. Will the entire 6 billion people on the planet magically change their minds overnight? When have they in the past? But you can. Simply do it. And your actions will perhaps change those around you.
Thus the schools of E.I.C. I realize changing you and Redtard’s minds may be difficult if not impossible " far too much of “who you are” may be wrapped up in these past beliefs. So be it. If you want to change the world (and I do) start with the children " which I am.
There Redtard, I’ve opened up a place that you can tell me that I’m like Hitler (yeah, me and Bush)
20 - RedTard
"So since I am "white" where did my most recent ancestors come from? Please elaborate."
I'd bet every dime I have that in the year 1300 the majority of your ancestors were living in Europe, just as I would bet that Spike Lee ancestors were in Africa and Jackie Chan's were in Asia.
Would you like to dispute that?
21 - RedTard
"no one is suggesting that culture and ethnicity do not exist. that would be stupid."
Strongly agree with the second sentence. The Illusion of Ethnicity - John Conlin
22 - John Conlin
Redtard,
You may have missed this from the E.I.C. website:
There is reality; there is truth. It is there for us to discover. If one accepts evolution, one must accept the concept of reality. We agree with Bertrand Russell:
“… minds do not create truth or falsehood. They create beliefs, but when once the beliefs are created, the mind cannot make them true or false... What makes a belief true is a fact, and this fact does not… in any way involve the mind of the person who has the belief.
The problem we are having is that you and Ruvy mistakenly think your beliefs define facts rather than the other way around.
23 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
John,
If I agreed with you, I would have just given you a pat on the back for a nice article and moved on.
Let us look at what you nearly shout at me across the aether.
"IT IS NOT SCIENCE. IT IS NOT REALITY. IT IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT BASED ON PAST BELIEFS."
I'm sorry to tell you this but the universe is more than just science. Race is not a social construct, and it does have some biological significance. Getting the appropriate cells from the appropriate aggregate of racial instructions packed in the appropriate person can save someone else's life. To this degree, race is very important.
But social constructs are real also. They determine, for example, that you discuss with me and RedTard this issue instead of sending a squad of goons to shoot us because we disagree with you.
The issue of "who is a Jew" is also a social construct. And social constructs do change.
But if you wish to change the present social construct, you must first recognize that it is real to those who live it. This is something that you appear not to want to do. My initial comment was that your approach is all wrong - not necessarily your solution to the problem. I believe that you need to rethink the approach.
IMHO, you must give race its due first, in order to lessen its importance as a factor in abominating another individual. Given that it is there, you need to emphasize its importance and thereby control how it is defined. Having done this, you can then approach the greater problem: how do you all get along?
24 - RedTard
"The problem we are having is that you and Ruvy mistakenly think your beliefs define facts rather than the other way around."
No, the fact that race and ancestry correlate strongly indicates that it does have some meaning. That's a fact that you repeatedly ignore. Sadly, instead of having a rational debate and settling the matter you choose to go indoctrinate my children.
25 - John Conlin
Redtard
Having a somewhat linear discussion with you is quite difficult. You jump from here to there, not answering much but popping up with some re-hash of your previous statement.
My gosh, in the year 1300 my ancestors were in Europe! You are a clever one. How would you define Europe (you see words are abstractions, they are not real so we need to know what reality you are discussing).
But the basis of your thinking is still disingenuous. Suppose you are correct, my most recent ancestors where from Europe. Other than genealogy what does this mean? How does this in anyway define "who I am"? Once again you act as though race is simply genealogy yet you earlier claimed that of course there was black English. Which is it? Genealogy - if so, why the fascination with it if it that is all there is to it? Or is it more, yet you refuse to tell use what this "more" is. But it is lurking behind every one of your statements. Or am I again mistaken?
As for your comment to Chantal on ethnicity. The American Medical Association states it rather clearly "ethnicity is universally recognized as being socially defined."
. Do you know what that means? Please do re-read my piece on "Who you are - the Illusion of Ethnicity"
Of course we all have ancestors. You did not just appear on the planet one day. And of course your ancestors had to live some place. And of course we are genetically more like our more recent ancestors than our more distant ancestors. We are not talking rocket science here.
But are you defined by your ancestors? Is it they that define who you are? Why does it matter that some of my ancestors can be traced back to counties we now call Ireland and Germany? These countries, as they are now understood, have only existed for a millisecond on the cosmic clock. What is so special about this small piece of time that we use it to define who we are. The honest answer is it does not. It is simply a historical artifact.
The bottom line is that I am an individual with literally thousands of traits. I am not defined by any ancestor. My beliefs and actions determine "who I am". Where some of my most recent human ancestors lived has absolutely no basis on who I am. Royalty or thieving, lying cowards; it makes no difference. One can of course have pride in one's ancestors but that is a personal issue - for good or for bad it is meaningless in defining who you are.
Who you are is an individual. Who your human ancestors are and where they happened to live is an entirely different question and one does not influence the other. This requires a significant paradigm shift in our thinking, often accepting the truth does.
There is some of it. Would you like to argue about any of those quotes too? Oh wait, you're simply into genealogy and race and ethnicity don't have any other meaning - as least none you care to share with us.