You THINK they're racists.
I know Al Sharpton, Malik Shabazz, and Louis Farrakhan are racists. They make absolutely no bones about hating white people simply because they're white.
You also said it made her either insensitive or ignorant.
I'd suggest sophisticated people can discern between the use of words in different contexts.
Non-Blacks cannot be expected to know what is going to bother Black people. Particularly when Black people aren't all bothered by the same thing.
Are you Black? Or, African-American? Can I call you Negro or Colored?
Does any of this make sense?
Surprising the same white martyrs whining about their lot in life. Its amazing how you guys complain about an action and then in the same breath do the same yourselves.
You only have to look at congressional redistricting to see racist policy making.
You've hit on an interesting point.
According to dictionary.com racism is defined as:
"a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others."
While not a desirable trait, being insensitive and by extension usually ignorant of other cultures isn't quite the same thing as racism although in a way it is assuming that your culture is inherently better than all the others. It's definitely possible that Bachmann falls under this category.
Yes and no. I could be wrong but it sounds like you're phrasing this as someone who's never had to live as a minority. Weren't people still contending with the KKK as recently as the 60s? I'm not African American so it's not an experience I can relate to either age-wise or ancestry-wise, but that would mean that there's people still alive today who can remember those times.
I agree with you that people can and do take things too far and that there's way too much PC-ness in society today. That being said, I don't think race relations are where they should be. A large part of "getting along" is showing common decency to other people and walking a mile in their shoes.
It honestly sounds to me like you're going based off of what you've seen of the more militant do-gooder types as opposed to the real people who have lived through these things.
There are self-absorbed and limited people of all races. What's your point?
Why would you use people like that as your example though? They may get media attention but it's probably not correct for you to be holding up those guys as an offhand litmus test of how most black people feel about whites and race relations as a whole. You'll find gullible followers in all ethnic groups so please don't use the rallies and meetings to prove your point.
Sure there are some people who hate white people because they're white, but a lot of that is due to a lack of exposure more than anything else. Similar to how there are plenty who look down on black people consciously/subconsciously because they haven't really been around too many of them but are constantly seeing negative messages concerning them.
No kidding. I'm as conservative as they come so I should have more in common with these guys but the underlying mentalities I'm seeing here are *really* disturbing. I'm not sure why I keep getting into these threads though. It's such a draining proposition.
I'll be quite honest, I have never heard this term and would have never known it to be racist without this thread.
Drachen, ever heard of "jungle bunnies"?
I'd suggest that she is not sophisticated if she doesn't know what a bad idea using that phrase is, and neither is anyone trying to defend its use.
Bachmann knows her extreme right wing "Christian", aka racist, supporters well, and knew exactly (she's (guvmint) lawyer), what the racist connotations of her tar baby dog-whistle are.
The only context I've ever heard the term Tar Baby used was to describe the State of US before the '08 election. For instance, the Republicans wanted to pass the Tar Baby to Obama to look good in '12.
good points, cracker.
from a poster- a tar baby is a phrase that continues to refer to problems of an intractable nature worsened by intervention.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/...148148675.html
Her use of the term "tar baby" has become a tar baby for Bachmann.
Your intervention is worsening it.
I have heard of "Jungle Boogie".
I may have missed something, but did she say that she used that phrase knowing it was a racist phrase? Or are you saying that she is unsophisticated because she is unaware of all of the racist phrases in existence?
The latter.
"Tar baby" is a pretty easy one to figure out.
well I would say that it is decidedly sophisticated to be unaware of all of the racial slurs and their variants. Ignorant? yes. unsophisticated? no.
On a side not, I hate that I feel like I am defending MB.
don't apologize for using your brain.
LOL...
That post is good:
Hey every idiot out there that is up in arms about the "disgracefulness" of Bachmann's comments, why don't you actually try to correctly interpret that to which she was referring. In circles of educated people that have in fact read at least one book within their lifetimes, as well as in every other region of the world, a tar baby is a phrase that continues to refer to problems of an intractable nature worsened by intervention. It is unmistakably obvious that for those of you who are convinced of tar baby's status as a slur, you are only arriving at that conclusion through your myopic belief that it SOUNDS like a racial slur - to which you are ultimately the racist by bridging the properties of tar to the color of one's skin and its associated ethnicity.
Says the person who is constantly claiming he's misunderstood.
LOL....
This has some truth to it, but at least I'm not crying racism.
You constantly call out other posters on this board for deliberately misunderstanding you. Is that not the other side of the coin?
Using your logic, if other posters AREN'T deliberately trying to misunderstand you, they should be offended. In fact, if that happened multiple times, they would be justified in deliberately misunderstanding you in the future.
Sorry, I don't see it as the same thing.
Huh?
Maybe I had too much to drink already, but I think I failed to follow that paragraph.
If you mean the times I have said someone is either intentionally misunderstanding me, or stupid, yes. I have said such things. But only after a few attempts of getting my point across, and after they reply with a misrepresentation of what I said.
LnGrrrR...
Would you agree that part of a civil debate would be to attempt for clarification of what someone means when they indicate they are being misunderstood? Shouldn't the conversation be questions in an attempt to have proper communications, instead of constantly attacking a point that is said not to be represented correctly?
Agreed, but you often accuse the people you debate with of arguing in bad faith.
By contrast, how are we supposed to react when you constantly think that those who debate with you are arguing in bad faith?
I disagree, or at least you are using a bad example. I have numerous times been called a racist, have repeatedly explained my point of view, and keep getting called a racist. From personal experience, I can see so many others being as sick and tired of this as I am.
Have a better example?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
