Time Traveling: What would you do?

[Troll King]

a) I'm pretty sure that you didn't specify soldiers specifically, though I may be wrong about that;

b) Even if you did clearly say you were describing soldiers, it is still a derogatory term.

[MaGi kOz]

Originally posted by Troll King
a) I'm pretty sure that you didn't specify soldiers specifically, though I may be wrong about that;

b) Even if you did clearly say you were describing soldiers, it is still a derogatory term.

no one was offended so who cares..... other than staff =P

[Troll King]

I found it offensive, but I find it more disturbing that racism is considered alright if you think "no one was offended so who cares?".

[Fit of Rage]

Black people call each other ****** (pardon my french), but when a white person says it, OMFG THEY GET MONDO PISSED OFF. Should I be offended when they call me a cracker? I should think so. I WILL NOT BE REDUCED TO A SALTINE CRACKER, DAMNIT!

[Andy Rooney]

Kraut isn't rascist, unless all of a sudden German is a race. Is calling a vietnamese person a Charlie, racist? Hardly. Prejudice, yeah sure, but hardly racist. Don't brand me. I quote the words of David Cross "You think you know what it is like to be judged. But you don't. You don't."

[ÆNIMA]

Shear, Minority Report has nothing to do with time travel if you actually listen to the movie.

I personally would go back about 18 years and fix the "mistake" that my parents made. -JK


I need sleep.

[Troll King]

So your defense against racism charges is that you are offending a group of people, but not necessarily a "race" as you define it.

Not only does that reduce things to semantics while ignoring the moral issue, it also suggests that your definition of race is sorely limited.

[MaGi kOz]

its only bad cuz we make it bad. =P


“if a bald man has no eyebrows, can he be surprised???”

[Fit of Rage]

Originally posted by ÆNIMA
Shear, Minority Report has nothing to do with time travel if you actually listen to the movie.

I know it has nothing to do with time travel, but someone else brought up the precogs and so I just chimed in. =] I haven't seen it for like 8 months anyway.

[Andy Rooney]

Originally posted by Troll King
So your defense against racism charges is that you are offending a group of people, but not necessarily a "race" as you define it.

Not only does that reduce things to semantics while ignoring the moral issue, it also suggests that your definition of race is sorely limited.

It is absolutely ridiculous for you to argue that there is even such a thing as "race." Race is created by the state. Race making is a strategy for uniting and alienating groups of people. Race is socially constructed. I suggest you read Anthony Marx's "Making Race and Nation." There are no biological differences among "races." By believing in such things as race, you undertake the role of a moral hypocrite. By continuing to believe in these social construct known as race, you are supporting the alienation of mass groups of people who are no different than you.

[Blast]

They did it IN YOUR BROTHER'S BED!!! (supposedly)

[Andy Rooney]

Originally posted by Blast
They did it IN YOUR BROTHER'S BED!!! (supposedly)

You can't be serious. I am totally telling him and he is totally going to kill John Currie. I can't wait. Let the bodies hit the floor.

[Troll King]

Originally posted by Andy Rooney
It is absolutely ridiculous for you to argue that there is even such a thing as "race." Race is created by the state. Race making is a strategy for uniting and alienating groups of people. Race is socially constructed. I suggest you read Anthony Marx's "Making Race and Nation." There are no biological differences among "races." By believing in such things as race, you undertake the role of a moral hypocrite. By continuing to believe in these social construct known as race, you are supporting the alienation of mass groups of people who are no different than you.

Basically, you're saying that "I don't believe in such a thing as race, therefore I cannot be a racist. Since you believe in a concept of race, you must therefore be the racist". That last part was an inference based on your last argument, so I will accept any explanation on your behalf.

Firstly, your use of the term "Kraut" is a product of the same socially construction that you just railed against. Your use fo that word is not just supporting, but is an example of "the alienation of mass groups of people who are no different from you", to use your own words. Secondly, you are arguing that it is alright to use the term Kraut because you do not believe that it is a racialized term. What you seem to ignore though, is the fact that the term is offensive to many people. Regardless of whether one believes in "race", your use fo the word is a derogatory. Your arguments ignored the moral issues and were purely based on semantics, and even so, only loosely. Thirdly, the "there is no such thing as race" argument is highly reliant on the biological aspect of human geneology. The term "race" however, is more than just biological. Race is a social construction, as well as a psychological construction. In this we are in agreement. This line of thought does not dismiss the fact that the idea of a "race" exists, and that discrimination based on this idea of race also exists. Differences exist, whether you are talking about "race" or not. Your argument mentions the social construction aspect, but then ignroes it in relation to your own comments. In effect, you reduce it to a purely biological interpretation, ignoring, dismissing, and contradicting the social construction theory you cited. People following these theories are in agreement that they are not in any way a form of condoning prejudice, and yet that is exactly what you are doing. You are misusing these theories to not only defend your use of a derogatory term, but also to attack your detractors with little regard to morality.

[Andy Rooney]

Originally posted by Troll King
Basically, you're saying that "I don't believe in such a thing as race, therefore I cannot be a racist. Since you believe in a concept of race, you must therefore be the racist". That last part was an inference based on your last argument, so I will accept any explanation on your behalf.

Firstly, your use of the term "Kraut" is a product of the same socially construction that you just railed against. Your use fo that word is not just supporting, but is an example of "the alienation of mass groups of people who are no different from you", to use your own words. Secondly, you are arguing that it is alright to use the term Kraut because you do not believe that it is a racialized term. What you seem to ignore though, is the fact that the term is offensive to many people. Regardless of whether one believes in "race", your use fo the word is a derogatory. Your arguments ignored the moral issues and were purely based on semantics, and even so, only loosely. Thirdly, the "there is no such thing as race" argument is highly reliant on the biological aspect of human geneology. The term "race" however, is more than just biological. Race is a social construction, as well as a psychological construction. In this we are in agreement. This line of thought does not dismiss the fact that the idea of a "race" exists, and that discrimination based on this idea of race also exists. Differences exist, whether you are talking about "race" or not. Your argument mentions the social construction aspect, but then ignroes it in relation to your own comments. In effect, you reduce it to a purely biological interpretation, ignoring, dismissing, and contradicting the social construction theory you cited. People following these theories are in agreement that they are not in any way a form of condoning prejudice, and yet that is exactly what you are doing. You are misusing these theories to not only defend your use of a derogatory term, but also to attack your detractors with little regard to morality.

Ok, you win. All I was trying to say was that I wasn't being rascist. Prejudice, hateful, derogatory, sure. However, I don't think it is racist, considering that if races did exist German wouldn't be classified as a race. There is one race, the human race. Then, there are a bunch of tiny little factions known as ethnicities. So by this logic, anyone who talks ill of another human being is a racist...but that isn't really the point. I don't really know what I am trying to say, but I don't think "kraut" is racist by any means <unless you are following the school of logic that is something like this: humanity being a race, and since my derogatory comment was focused at a mass quantity of humans, thus classifies me as a racist (but only foolhardy radicals really believe this)>. Whatever, I don't even make sense to myself. Good game.

[Blast]

Originally posted by Andy Rooney
Whatever, I don't even make sense to myself.

Or me, either.