Why its hard to Talk about Racism

[icanthearyou 4,463]

I think you can call a single person a thug. However, if you label all of the members of a race as, thugs, whether you know it or not, you are a racist. You can call a single person a criminal but, if you propose that a race is predisposed to crime, then whether you know it or not, you are a racist.

A history of oppression, poverty, and inferior educational opportunity leads to criminal behavior, not the color of one's skin. If you believe otherwise, whether you accept it or not, you are an ignorant racist.

can you call a couple of dozen idiots pouncing and throwing rocks and bricks at a police car thugs?

It is only my opinion but, in this case, I don't think so. I think it would be not only wrong but, also foolish. Is there an element of "thugishness"? I think so but, there is also an element of legitimate protest. I think it wise not to allow one to minimize the other.

not a damn thing legitimate about that. But let's see what else you will legitimize. Burning 144 cars. Buildings. Crowbarring into retail businesses and looting is this legitimate protest to you?

That is exactly what I am talking about. Don't lump the two together.

so you draw a clear line between looting, arson bad, but destroying a police car is ok.

What?

I have drawn a line between legitimate protesters and, a group who is using the protest as cover for criminal behavior. The two may be in physical proximity, however, it is important not to confuse them, intentionally or, unintentionally.

[aubfaninga 16]

I see the problem now. It has nothing to do with race. It's you dang "young folks" and your devil music.

Yep. Now, if you'll excuse us, we will now proceed to get off your lawn.

No no no. I think he needs a heavier dose of Slayer.

"Dude", if you have a working cassette deck I know I can find some Powermad 2000. Surefire way to annoy anyone.

Oh great. Here comes another one. I gave you hooligans a chance to get out my yard. Now, I'm calling the authorities.

Where is augolf and his youtube video of black and white(by MJ) when you need him?

[WarTim 3,457]

I think you can call a single person a thug. However, if you label all of the members of a race as, thugs, whether you know it or not, you are a racist. You can call a single person a criminal but, if you propose that a race is predisposed to crime, then whether you know it or not, you are a racist.

A history of oppression, poverty, and inferior educational opportunity leads to criminal behavior, not the color of one's skin. If you believe otherwise, whether you accept it or not, you are an ignorant racist.

There were some white thugs looting too.

[homersapien 11,455]

It is hard to talk about it because if you are honest you are the problem. If you use words like " thug " you are racist. You have to excuse crime or you are racist. You can't call a spade a spade, so yes it is hard.

You're better than that, alexava.

i appreciate the compliment ben but how am i wrong? I am not being argumentative. Serious question.

Those were clearly specious inferences intended to beg the question.

[alexava 6,973]

It is hard to talk about it because if you are honest you are the problem. If you use words like " thug " you are racist. You have to excuse crime or you are racist. You can't call a spade a spade, so yes it is hard.

You're better than that, alexava.

i appreciate the compliment ben but how am i wrong? I am not being argumentative. Serious question.

Those were clearly specious inferences intended to beg the question.

ok then where do we start?

[homersapien 11,455]

It is hard to talk about it because if you are honest you are the problem. If you use words like " thug " you are racist. You have to excuse crime or you are racist. You can't call a spade a spade, so yes it is hard.

You're better than that, alexava.

i appreciate the compliment ben but how am i wrong? I am not being argumentative. Serious question.

Those were clearly specious inferences intended to beg the question.

ok then where do we start?

Well, lets start with being objective instead of defensive. No one has said - or implied - if you use the term "thug" you are necessarily racist, etc.

The racism connotation is a theory introduced by someone who studies this sort of thing. I don't really see it so clearly, but I do understand the point.

For example, some tried to portray Trayvon Martin a "thug". That was presumptuous, possibly reflecting a stereotype. On the other hand, I would certainly agree the behavior of Michael Brown when stealing those cigars as thuggish.

So bottom line, it's not that simple. I do have a sense it's applied to blacks more frequently that whites. But it's just a sense. There's no harm in researching it.

[alexava 6,973]

It is hard to talk about it because if you are honest you are the problem. If you use words like " thug " you are racist. You have to excuse crime or you are racist. You can't call a spade a spade, so yes it is hard.

You're better than that, alexava.

i appreciate the compliment ben but how am i wrong? I am not being argumentative. Serious question.

Those were clearly specious inferences intended to beg the question.

ok then where do we start?

Well, lets start with being objective instead of defensive. No one has said - or implied - if you use the term "thug" you are necessarily racist, etc.

The racism connotation is a theory introduced by someone who studies this sort of thing. I don't really see it so clearly, but I do understand the point.

For example, some tried to portray Trayvon Martin a "thug". That was presumptuous, possibly reflecting a stereotype. On the other hand, I would certainly agree the behavior of Michael Brown when stealing those cigars as thuggish.

So bottom line, it's not that simple. I do have a sense it's applied to blacks more frequently that whites. But it's just a sense. There's no harm in researching it.

homer, i was referring to the claim both in media and social media(friends) claiming that "thug" is the new "N-word". to me that implies using the word is racism. i appreciate your input. But no one refers to to Obama or Holder or even Sharpton as thugs, even though they hate them and in many cases they are hated because they are black. Yet arrest records that get into double digits, videos of people destroying a patrol car or looting a business or burning buldings are thugs no matter their race.

[autigeremt 6,717]

Lose-lose conversation right now. Very toxic and way to many apologists on both sides. Open minds are an allusion as long as we have emotions and the past as the driver of the discussion.

Good luck, though! I'd love to put it all to bed.....forever.

[cole256 17,084]

It's hard to talk about racism because one side can be quick to call things racism that may not be and the other side are so set on it's not my fault or I'm not responsible for things 60 years ago that they will automatically dismiss all racism.

Then you have both sides do the oh you know it's racist or the oh you know this happened because his hat was on backward stuff to dismiss actual racism.

Also you have the agenda people, this recent shooting of the cops was posted so the where's Sharpton stuff can be said. Not too long ago the people who killed a black dude because he was black and they got minimum sentences just happened in Mississippi as well and nobody posted about it and Sharpton wasn't there.

Or this stupid girl that worked at subway got all this attention when all over Twitter you had people saying stuff about every national case of a black person being killed and nobody said anything.

Lastly people just label people. CT has called me Sharpton MANY times but when I ask him what have I said about race that was radical or he disagrees with nothing. Next he hit me with the oh everybody is holding you back stereotype, I haven't ever said anything like that. Actually there are a few people that put the race label on me and if anything I've argued about crooked policemen...but I am black so if a guy is killed by a policeman and be happens to be black and I question the policeman then I'm Sharpton.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

Admittedly, I attended an event at Good People tonight but, I am seriously struggling with who's on first?

[alexava 6,973]

Admittedly, I attended an event at Good People tonight but, I am seriously struggling with who's on first?

i have always struggled with that.

[cptau 169]

It is hard to talk about it because if you are honest you are the problem. If you use words like " thug " you are racist. You have to excuse crime or you are racist. You can't call a spade a spade, so yes it is hard.

You're better than that, alexava.

i appreciate the compliment ben but how am i wrong? I am not being argumentative. Serious question.

Those were clearly specious inferences intended to beg the question.

ok then where do we start?

Well, lets start with being objective instead of defensive. No one has said - or implied - if you use the term "thug" you are necessarily racist, etc.

The racism connotation is a theory introduced by someone who studies this sort of thing. I don't really see it so clearly, but I do understand the point.

For example, some tried to portray Trayvon Martin a "thug". That was presumptuous, possibly reflecting a stereotype. On the other hand, I would certainly agree the behavior of Michael Brown when stealing those cigars as thuggish.

So bottom line, it's not that simple. I do have a sense it's applied to blacks more frequently that whites. But it's just a sense. There's no harm in researching it.

homer, i was referring to the claim both in media and social media(friends) claiming that "thug" is the new "N-word". to me that implies using the word is racism. i appreciate your input. But no one refers to to Obama or Holder or even Sharpton as thugs, even though they hate them and in many cases they are hated because they are black. Yet arrest records that get into double digits, videos of people destroying a patrol car or looting a business or burning buldings are thugs no matter their race.

Interesting that the word "Thug" comes from bands of murdering robbers in India who joined caravans of travelers and then strangled everyone to rob them, Thuggees operated there from the 14th to the 19th century and may have killed 1 to 2 million people. Ironically the original Thuggees were Moslems but later Hindu worshipers of Kali became Thuggees. The British eradicated them and then brought the word Thug into the English language to describe vicious robbers or murderers............

[AUFAN78 3,926]

It is hard to talk about it because if you are honest you are the problem. If you use words like " thug " you are racist. You have to excuse crime or you are racist. You can't call a spade a spade, so yes it is hard.

You're better than that, alexava.

i appreciate the compliment ben but how am i wrong? I am not being argumentative. Serious question.

Those were clearly specious inferences intended to beg the question.

ok then where do we start?

Well, lets start with being objective instead of defensive. No one has said - or implied - if you use the term "thug" you are necessarily racist, etc.

The racism connotation is a theory introduced by someone who studies this sort of thing. I don't really see it so clearly, but I do understand the point.

For example, some tried to portray Trayvon Martin a "thug". That was presumptuous, possibly reflecting a stereotype. On the other hand, I would certainly agree the behavior of Michael Brown when stealing those cigars as thuggish.

So bottom line, it's not that simple. I do have a sense it's applied to blacks more frequently that whites. But it's just a sense. There's no harm in researching it.

homer, i was referring to the claim both in media and social media(friends) claiming that "thug" is the new "N-word". to me that implies using the word is racism. i appreciate your input. But no one refers to to Obama or Holder or even Sharpton as thugs, even though they hate them and in many cases they are hated because they are black. Yet arrest records that get into double digits, videos of people destroying a patrol car or looting a business or burning buldings are thugs no matter their race.

Interesting that the word "Thug" comes from bands of murdering robbers in India who joined caravans of travelers and then strangled everyone to rob them, Thuggees operated there from the 14th to the 19th century and may have killed 1 to 2 million people. Ironically the original Thuggees were Moslems but later Hindu worshipers of Kali became Thuggees. The British eradicated them and then brought the word Thug into the English language to describe vicious robbers or murderers............

Stop! You are ruining the narrative.

[AUDub 11,184]

It is hard to talk about it because if you are honest you are the problem. If you use words like " thug " you are racist. You have to excuse crime or you are racist. You can't call a spade a spade, so yes it is hard.

You're better than that, alexava.

i appreciate the compliment ben but how am i wrong? I am not being argumentative. Serious question.

Those were clearly specious inferences intended to beg the question.

ok then where do we start?

Well, lets start with being objective instead of defensive. No one has said - or implied - if you use the term "thug" you are necessarily racist, etc.

The racism connotation is a theory introduced by someone who studies this sort of thing. I don't really see it so clearly, but I do understand the point.

For example, some tried to portray Trayvon Martin a "thug". That was presumptuous, possibly reflecting a stereotype. On the other hand, I would certainly agree the behavior of Michael Brown when stealing those cigars as thuggish.

So bottom line, it's not that simple. I do have a sense it's applied to blacks more frequently that whites. But it's just a sense. There's no harm in researching it.

homer, i was referring to the claim both in media and social media(friends) claiming that "thug" is the new "N-word". to me that implies using the word is racism. i appreciate your input. But no one refers to to Obama or Holder or even Sharpton as thugs, even though they hate them and in many cases they are hated because they are black. Yet arrest records that get into double digits, videos of people destroying a patrol car or looting a business or burning buldings are thugs no matter their race.

Interesting that the word "Thug" comes from bands of murdering robbers in India who joined caravans of travelers and then strangled everyone to rob them, Thuggees operated there from the 14th to the 19th century and may have killed 1 to 2 million people. Ironically the original Thuggees were Moslems but later Hindu worshipers of Kali became Thuggees. The British eradicated them and then brought the word Thug into the English language to describe vicious robbers or murderers............

Stop! You are ruining the narrative.

We've discussed this recently:

This is the thing about language, guys. If people start using a word as a racial slur, it becomes a racial slur irrespective of its previous meanings or connotations.

Thug has been migrating in the direction of the black brute stereotype for several years now. Having a perfectly good word ruined by bigots sucks, but there are enough people who use thug in a racially-loaded manner that the newfound connotations can't be ignored.

[cptau 169]

This is the thing about language, guys. If people start using a word as a racial slur, it becomes a racial slur irrespective of its previous meanings or connotations.

Thug has been migrating in the direction of the black brute stereotype for several years now. Having a perfectly good word ruined by bigots sucks, but there are enough people who use thug in a racially-loaded manner that the newfound connotations can't be ignored.

Perhaps the use of thug has been so used by some, but I see it used universally. As you refer to black brute (brute meaning beast like person), we can start saying black thug or white thug to keep everyone happy or unhappy.

[cole256 17,084]

And right on time...joke it off

[Mims44 1,890]

It's only too easy to tell the context of a word. I would like to think if I played two audio clips, and gave no information about the speakers on the audio clips that people could tell the difference between one having Tupac use the "N" word or "thug" and the other having a KKK member using the same buzz words.

Another problem with discussing racism is everyone seems to have slightly different definitions of the word.

[alexava 6,973]

And right on time...joke it off

certainly not a joke to me. Imo it is over sensitivity.

[AUDub 11,184]

And right on time...joke it off

certainly not a joke to me. Imo it is over sensitivity.

That's a subjective standard.

[alexava 6,973]

And right on time...joke it off

certainly not a joke to me. Imo it is over sensitivity.

That's a subjective standard.

i realize that.

[Mims44 1,890]

And right on time...joke it off

certainly not a joke to me. Imo it is over sensitivity.

That's a subjective standard.

Does no one else find this funny? BigBen, you do this a lot and no one else finds it hilarious.

Random poster: I like PEANUTS!

BigBen immediate response: Peanuts are not nuts, they are legumes.

Random poster: Yeah, but I like peanuts!

BigBen response: That is your opinion and is not relative to the prime objective.

[AUDub 11,184]

This is the thing about language, guys. If people start using a word as a racial slur, it becomes a racial slur irrespective of its previous meanings or connotations.

Thug has been migrating in the direction of the black brute stereotype for several years now. Having a perfectly good word ruined by bigots sucks, but there are enough people who use thug in a racially-loaded manner that the newfound connotations can't be ignored.

Perhaps the use of thug has been so used by some, but I see it used universally. As you refer to black brute (brute meaning beast like person), we can start saying black thug or white thug to keep everyone happy or unhappy.

Don't think that will ever happen.

I agree that it can be directed at anyone who really is a thug, black or white, without the racial animus, but I t seems the term has generally ended up being used too broadly. That is, as an unwarranted a priori assumption of the character of one particular large class of people rather than a particular set of attitudes and actions.

[AUDub 11,184]

And right on time...joke it off

certainly not a joke to me. Imo it is over sensitivity.

That's a subjective standard.

Does no one else find this funny? BigBen, you do this a lot and no one else finds it hilarious.

Random poster: I like PEANUTS!

BigBen immediate response: Peanuts are not nuts, they are legumes.

Random poster: Yeah, but I like peanuts!

BigBen response: That is your opinion and is not relative to the prime objective.

[WarTim 3,457]

This is the thing about language, guys. If people start using a word as a racial slur, it becomes a racial slur irrespective of its previous meanings or connotations.

Thug has been migrating in the direction of the black brute stereotype for several years now. Having a perfectly good word ruined by bigots sucks, but there are enough people who use thug in a racially-loaded manner that the newfound connotations can't be ignored.

Perhaps the use of thug has been so used by some, but I see it used universally. As you refer to black brute (brute meaning beast like person), we can start saying black thug or white thug to keep everyone happy or unhappy.

Why should I be concerned about their happiness or lack of same? I will not allow PC morons to edit my vocabulary.......

[AUDub 11,184]

This is the thing about language, guys. If people start using a word as a racial slur, it becomes a racial slur irrespective of its previous meanings or connotations.

Thug has been migrating in the direction of the black brute stereotype for several years now. Having a perfectly good word ruined by bigots sucks, but there are enough people who use thug in a racially-loaded manner that the newfound connotations can't be ignored.

Perhaps the use of thug has been so used by some, but I see it used universally. As you refer to black brute (brute meaning beast like person), we can start saying black thug or white thug to keep everyone happy or unhappy.

Why should I be concerned about their happiness or lack of same? I will not allow PC morons to edit my vocabulary.......

I want to see how far you're willing to carry this concept.

I want to see you reenact that scene from Die Hard with a Vengeance in the West End of Birmingham.