AOC pretends to be Southern

Page 3 of 7 [ 108 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

09 Apr 2019, 12:01 pm

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

JohnPowell wrote:

The north went round burning villages, mass murdering and raping women.

It's interesting that people who claim to hate racism call people "crackers", focus on the President's skin color and think black people aren't capable of getting anywhere in life without help. Interesting.

I'm not going to say that there wasn't any atrocities committed by the Union army, because young men with guns and all the power that comes with it very often can behave badly. But a great many northerners also behaved very well. In the case of William Tecumseh Sherman, the destruction caused by his March to the Sea was in fact strategic, not vengeful or wanton, meant to destroy the Confederacy's means of conducting war. What your not mentioning is that the Confederacy had also committed atrocities as well, such as when whole communities of Union loyalists inside the south were massacred, or how Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee had made it policy to kill rather than capture all blacks serving in Union uniforms, and even refusing to end this abhorrent policy when Lincoln told them a prisoner exchange would only be possible if this came to an end.
Contrary to what you conservatives claim, "cracker" isn't a racist term, especially used by another white man (me), but describes purposely ignorant people.
Why shouldn't we have been proud to have elected our first black President after all the terrible history of race hatred in America?
It's not a matter of helping blacks up because they can't do it themselves, but because they had been held down for so long.

A great number of American military personnel and politicians were involved in slavery and genocide from 1776 to 1865. Some are vilified and some are defended according to the prejudice of the individual or group. A Lutheran might condemn a pope or John Calvin or whoever for some atrocity and defend and or excuse atrocities committed by Martin Luther.

Other than ranting in a written statement now and then, Luther didn't have any personal power to commit atrocities. He actually saw to declawing his church due to violence committed by Popes of the past, leaving such power in the hands of secular authorities.
Of course plenty of Americans were involved in slavery and genocide prior to the Civil War. But how does that justify the Confederacy, or negate Lincoln's rightful choice in ending slavery?

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

09 Apr 2019, 12:05 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:

Seems like she's talking down to them.

"It's OK to work a low wage, menial job ... "

DON'T FEEL LIKE A LOSER

Why would there be shame in doing such work? Any shame comes from pompous conservatives who make poor workers feel that they're inferior for what they do to live.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

10 Apr 2019, 2:05 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

JohnPowell wrote:

I recall something about Martin Luther having boiling oil poured on people. But I'll have to research that more.

Quote:

Of course plenty of Americans were involved in slavery and genocide prior to the Civil War. But how does that justify the Confederacy, or negate Lincoln's rightful choice in ending slavery?

It's more a matter selectively of choosing who does and doesn't get vilified for crimes against humanity. How does one justify the genocide that took place after the Civil War. I made a mistake in the timeline I wrote, should have been 1776 to whenever the last of the native population was raped and slaughtered by the Union Army.

Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

10 Apr 2019, 4:29 am

Cracker is a racial slur and is used quite often? I would had thought that would be obvious, shows how people have a blind spot to white targeted racism. I've been called a cracker a lot of times, it was most certainly used in a hateful & racist way. It's the only racist word that is widely accepted to say and it's used quite often, even today. Try watching all the protests all over youtube of BLM groups blocking traffic by standing in the middle of the road, calling white people crackers and hitting there cars, they most certainly use it in a racist way, and even white people use in a racist way. Cracker and honky are the racial slurs for white people?? it's also common to hear in movies and comedy stand ups, I can't believe some people hear haven't heard it since the 70's?? It has not disappeared, it's still commonly used against whites as a racial slur.

Also I would like to add that I have never down played my speech to someone because they are a different race, if you do that it seems you have some kind of inner feeling of superiority. Otherwise you you feel the person you are talking to is capable of understanding your speech just like any other person you may talk to.

cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

10 Apr 2019, 6:44 am

Crimadella wrote:

Cracker is a racial slur and is used quite often? I would had thought that would be obvious, shows how people have a blind spot to white targeted racism. .

Here we go again
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 4acddff535

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

10 Apr 2019, 7:12 am

The liberal media is always going to deney that there is any kind of racism or prejudice of whites. Even though it's clearly obvious cracker ranks with beaner, spic, wop, gook, krout etc. Although I'd say "deplorables" is closer to the N word with the amount of hatred behind it.

Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

10 Apr 2019, 7:30 am

cyberdad wrote:

Crimadella wrote:

Cracker is a racial slur and is used quite often? I would had thought that would be obvious, shows how people have a blind spot to white targeted racism. .

Here we go again
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... 4acddff535

An opinion peace, really. I don’t really care what some radical leftist claims, racist is defined as discrimination on someone based on their race, cracker and honky refer to white people, they are the racial slurs for white people. I see common sense just went out the window with you, being you are trying to site a source to disprove people can be racist against whites. That's one of those regressive-left opinions I've been talking about. So what do you know, we do have a divisive regressive leftist here that cannot comprehend what the definition of racism is.

Lol, why cracker doesn't compare to n****, by a leftist. It's the exact same thing, racist words aren't based of of a point score, they are slurs meant to disrespect a particular race, which is exactly what cracker is, a word used to disrespect white people specifically.

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

10 Apr 2019, 9:09 am

"Cracker" was used by both white and black people to mean "poor white person" in the old days.

Nowadays, some angry black people use "cracker" to mean "any white person."

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,953
Location:

10 Apr 2019, 9:24 am

kraftiekortie wrote:

"Cracker" was used by both white and black people to mean "poor white person" in the old days. Nowadays, some angry black people use "cracker" to mean "any white person."

A "Cracker" is neither a slave owner nor an overseer cracking his whip. The term "Cracker" predates the plantation era; and it refers to a farmer who raised only "cracked" products, such as wheat and corn. "Cracker" was a derogatory term applied to these poor farmers from before the American Revolution -- someone who would have been too poor to own slaves.

_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.

Crimadella
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jan 2019
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,644
Location: Warner Robins, Ga

10 Apr 2019, 9:40 am

I have heard that n*gro used to not be a racist word also and I think predates slavery as well....I think. It was based on the word itself, in some languages all it means is black. The evolution of racism words and cuss words is rather odd at times. I heard that FU used to be pluck you, having something to do with a war, and one side cut off the other sides plucking finger so they started saying pluck you? My friend told me about that, I'm not sure if it's true or not?

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

10 Apr 2019, 9:44 am

I believe "f**k" is from a Dutch word which was a euphemism for copulation.

"s**t" has been around in English since the Anglo-Saxon days.

In Chaucer's time, "to swive" meant "to copulate." Think of the "swivel chair."

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,953
Location:

10 Apr 2019, 9:54 am

Crimadella wrote:

I have heard that n*gro used to not be a racist word also and I think predates slavery as well....I think. It was based on the word itself, in some languages all it means is black...

In most of the Spanish languages, yes.

Crimadella wrote:

... I heard that FU used to be pluck you, having something to do with a war, and one side cut off the other sides plucking finger so they started saying pluck you? My friend told me about that, I'm not sure if it's true or not?

According to This Snopes Article, it's false.

Snopes wrote:

... although the precise etymology of the English word f*** is still a matter of debate, it is linguistically nonsensical to maintain that that word entered the language because the "difficult consonant cluster at the beginning" of the phase 'pluck yew' has "gradually changed to a labiodental fricative 'f.'" A labiodental fricative was no less "difficult" for Middle English speakers to pronounce than the aspirated bilabial stop/voiceless lateral combination of 'pl' that the fricative supposedly changed into, nor are there any other examples of such a pronunciation shift occurring in English.

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

10 Apr 2019, 9:57 am

In Trinidad, in the Caribbean, it is not necessarily "racist" to call someone a "negro." It depends on the context.

It is often used merely as a descriptor of a person of African descent----like the use of Indian for one of East Indian descent.

I don't believe it is taken too kindly, though, for a white person in Trinidad to call someone a "negro," unless they are close friends with that person.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,953
Location:

10 Apr 2019, 10:05 am

kraftiekortie wrote:

I believe "f***" is from a Dutch word which was a euphemism for copulation...

It's one of many possible origins -- Wikipedia actually has a page devoted to the word. So, while its origin is obscure, it is usually considered to be first attested to around 1475. The Oxford English Dictionary states that the ultimate etymology is uncertain, but that the word is "probably cognate" with a number of Germanic words with meanings involving striking, rubbing and having sex or is derivative of the Old French word that meant "to f***".

But we're getting WAY off-topic here...

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Apr 2019, 10:17 am

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

EzraS wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

JohnPowell wrote:

I recall something about Martin Luther having boiling oil poured on people. But I'll have to research that more.

Quote:

Of course plenty of Americans were involved in slavery and genocide prior to the Civil War. But how does that justify the Confederacy, or negate Lincoln's rightful choice in ending slavery?

No, he did not. He might have threatened someone with it during one of the many times he had a bee in his bonnet, but his bark was much worse than his bite. Again, Luther had taken the sword out of the hand of his church and gave it to the secular authorities, as he believed the role of the church was one of peace, teaching the Gospel, and caring for those in need.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Apr 2019, 10:20 am

Crimadella wrote:

No one likes to be called names, but seriously, does "cracker" have the same emotional harm behind it that the N word does? Does it really carry anything close to the historical weight of hatred and oppression that the N word carries? I think not.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Page 3 of 7 [ 108 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Jump to:

AOC pretends to be Southern Post Reply New Topic

AOC pretends to be Southern