• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Another question about race

Is it wrong to refer to themselves as any of the following?

  • No, its fine to be refered to as listed

    Votes: 14 53.8%

  • Yes, its wrong to be refered to as listed

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No, I have neve expressed disapproval toward these designations

    Votes: 4 15.4%

  • Yes, I have expressed disapproval toward these designations

    Votes: 6 23.1%

  • No, I'm fine "-American" in these cases

    Votes: 6 23.1%

  • Yes, its wrong to add "-American" in these cases

    Votes: 2 7.7%
  • Total voters
    26
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I don't think it's wrong, but I don't think it helps anything.

Yes, language does have an extremely profound impact on perception. Language is the main tool of social and neural building for human beings. To say that these kinds of qualifiers have no impact on social cohesion, I think, is naive.

"American" is not an ethnicity, and adding your ethnicity into it suggests that you wish to be set apart from just "American." Perhaps you don't wish it, but even then, that is how it goes into other people's brains.

I won't say it's by any means the sole cause of the sharp racial divides we have in this country, but it is certain it reinforces it.

I think this is more detrimental than purely ideological based divisions, because it basically forces an entire artificial framework that isn't actually based on any shared character or belief, and in the absence of any logical explanation for otherising yourself, it's inevitable illogical explanations will arise. That does nothing but deepen the stereotype the races.

I am not going to call anyone out for doing it. I don't think it's "wrong." But I don't think it's helpful, and the fact that people feel such a need to include it even when people can readily see what color they are is a symptom and perhaps a contributor to bad racial relations.
Click to expand...

So what do you think Identity politics does to cohesiveness?
Identity politics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
US Conservative said:
Thats a shame. How do jews elsewhere in the world see israel?
Click to expand...
Hard for me to talk about it. Because my mother was Jew. And I have a reverent attitude toward the Jews. Even been 2 times in Israel. But the fact that American Jews get up, Franken, Bloomberg, Weinstein, Fainshteyn, Emanuel, Lerner ... For me, it's just disgusting. Especially because I know very well, that made ​​liberal Jews in Russia, at the beginning of the last century.
 
Smeagol said:
Do you there anything unpatriotic, divisive or otherwise wrong for Americans to refer to themselves as any of the following with respect to ethic heritage?

- Italian
- Indian
- Chinese
- Irish
- Jewish
- German
- Arab

If you do consider it unpatriotic, divisive or otherwise wrong; have you ever in your life expressed disapproval of the specific references listed?

To clear up any confusion that ethnicity is being discussed and not nationality of which the person is a patriotic citizen of America; is it unpatriotic, divisive or otherwise wrong for Americans to add "-American" in that reference?
Click to expand...

Is it so bad that you have to wonder about appearing 'unpatriotic'?
Damn. It's become a religion, hasn't it. Careful what you say or you'll be accused of blasphemy.
 
US Conservative said:
So what do you think Identity politics does to cohesiveness?
Identity politics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

It is rarely distinctly positive, but at times, it is necessary, if the broader society is willing to accept or encourage marginalization of a group -- which is them establishing otherness, not necessarily the group itself.

Where I think racial identity politics can become uniquely corrosive is that racial lines don't fall neatly along cultural lines, so a racial division is not always reflective of a cultural division. This is especially true of people from settled families in the US (been here multiple generations).

Like I said, in a lot of cases identities are reflective of some cohesive thing. For example, all people of a given religion have certain traditions in their interest. All people of a given sex have certain medical needs they are likely to utilize at some point.

But there is nothing that can be said of all people from any given race. There isn't a single consistent factor among them. But to keep the divide strong, people on either side of it will simply invent things in order to justify its existence, and this is where it gets nasty.
 
You're all English anyway. :2razz:

I mean English as a language and an identity.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
It is rarely distinctly positive, but at times, it is necessary, if the broader society is willing to accept or encourage marginalization of a group -- which is them establishing otherness, not necessarily the group itself.

Where I think racial identity politics can become uniquely corrosive is that racial lines don't fall neatly along cultural lines, so a racial division is not always reflective of a cultural division. This is especially true of people from settled families in the US (been here multiple generations).

Like I said, in a lot of cases identities are reflective of some cohesive thing. For example, all people of a given religion have certain traditions in their interest. All people of a given sex have certain medical needs they are likely to utilize at some point.

But there is nothing that can be said of all people from any given race. There isn't a single consistent factor among them. But to keep the divide strong, people on either side of it will simply invent things in order to justify its existence, and this is where it gets nasty.
Click to expand...

Who on the right does this?
 
US Conservative said:
Who on the right does this?
Click to expand...

Well, your old-school separatists tend to be mostly conservative. The classic American-style racist is also usually conservative. However, there are endless permutations of how to be a racist that tend to present in different political belief systems.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Well, your old-school separatists tend to be mostly conservative. The classic American-style racist is also usually conservative. However, there are endless permutations of how to be a racist that tend to present in different political belief systems.
Click to expand...

Im not talking about Selma in the 50's.

Im talking about now, as a matter of politics (hence identity politics).
 
US Conservative said:
Im not talking about Selma in the 50's.

Im talking about now, as a matter of politics (hence identity politics).
Click to expand...

Uh, these things don't just magically go poof once they stop getting significant air time. Selma from the 1950's is still alive, and she probably had kids, and while her kids probably aren't as racist as her, they probably are more racist than the generation after them will be.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Uh, these things don't just magically go poof once they stop getting significant air time. Selma from the 1950's is still alive, and she probably had kids, and while her kids probably aren't as racist as her, they probably are more racist than the generation after them will be.
Click to expand...

Its a minor issue, besides those racist southern democrats from the 50's are pretty much gone.

In any case, they aren't the ones pushing identity politics in the contemporary era. Womens studies, ethnic studies, and so on, who's pushing that?
 
US Conservative said:
Its a minor issue, besides those racist southern democrats from the 50's are pretty much gone.

In any case, they aren't the ones pushing identity politics in the contemporary era. Womens studies, ethnic studies, and so on, who's pushing that?
Click to expand...

They aren't gone at all. It's at least 50% of the reasons identity politics exist to the extent they do. It isn't like these people are just talking to themselves.

It probably is a minor issue relative to 50 years ago. Who ever said otherwise?

Was this the only reason you asked? So you could throw out a hack attempt at the blue team and claim there's no such thing as a conservative racist? Get a hobby. :roll:
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
They aren't gone at all. It's at least 50% of the reasons identity politics exist to the extent they do. It isn't like these people are just talking to themselves.

It probably is a minor issue relative to 50 years ago. Who ever said otherwise?

Was this the only reason you asked? So you could throw out a hack attempt at the blue team and claim there's no such thing as a conservative racist? Get a hobby. :roll:
Click to expand...

It IS a minor issue relative to 50 years ago, and yet here we are with the studies YOU ADMIT ARE DIVISIVE. Its why so many feel the left is racist. And classist.

Im not trying at ALL to hate on you, but I dont know that you grasp what the real issues are in the nation. Black on black violence is a real problem. Black on ANYONE violence is a real problem. And Asians make more than anyone in the US-and I am cool with that, because its not based on race-its based on achievement. I fly into mexico to provide medical care to migrant workers, and north of the border I provide primary care, and 911 care to the same demo-while I learn spanish. I live in southern Ca, how about you?
 
US Conservative said:
It IS a minor issue relative to 50 years ago, and yet here we are with the studies YOU ADMIT ARE DIVISIVE. Its why so many feel the left is racist. And classist.

Im not trying at ALL to hate on you, but I dont know that you grasp what the real issues are in the nation. Black on black violence is a real problem. Black on ANYONE violence is a real problem. And Asians make more than anyone in the US-and I am cool with that, because its not based on race-its based on achievement. I fly into mexico to provide medical care to migrant workers, and north of the border I provide primary care, and 911 care to the same demo-while I learn spanish. I live in southern Ca, how about you?
Click to expand...

What on earth are you going on about?

Seriously. I'm lost about where this whole thing came from -- this out-pour of trying to prove you're not racist or something. Who are you trying to prove stuff to?

What's going on in your head, dude?
 
It seems the majority of those who take exception to Americans referring to themselves as Italian, German, etc., focus on THEIR interpretation of what the speaker meant and are dismissing the intent of the speaker as having any validity. This of course, is completely backwards, with respect to understanding the rules of communications. If it is to be accurately understood, a stamement always means what the speaker intended it to mean, not what the hearer thinks they meant or what the hearer would have meant if they'd made a similar statement. Intellectual honesty does not allow us to impose our definitions on other people's wording if we know our definitions are not what they meant to imply.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
What on earth are you going on about?

Seriously. I'm lost about where this whole thing came from -- this out-pour of trying to prove you're not racist or something. Who are you trying to prove stuff to?

What's going on in your head, dude?
Click to expand...

My entire point (read back) is that identity politics are not helping ANYONE.
 
Smeagol said:
It seems the majority of those who take exception to Americans referring to themselves as Italian, German, etc., focus on THEIR interpretation of what the speaker meant and are dismissing the intent of the speaker as having any validity. This of course, is completely backwards, with respect to understanding the rules of communications. If it is to be accurately understood, a stamement always means what the speaker intended it to mean, not what the hearer thinks they meant or what the hearer would have meant if they'd made a similar statement. Intellectual honesty does not allow us to impose our definitions on other people's wording if we know our definitions are not what they meant to imply.
Click to expand...

The fact that such a huge portion of people all understand it the same way really negates that. Words mean things. I mean, I suppose you could ask someone to define how they're using each word each time they speak, but really, if someone is using words in a way no one understands them, that's more their issue than anyone else's.
 
US Conservative said:
My entire point (read back) is that identity politics are not helping ANYONE.
Click to expand...

I think you just had an entire conversation in your head, because nothing you said was a response to anything I said. :lol:

The hard push to prove you're not a racist at the end -- using identity politics -- was really fun too.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I think you just had an entire conversation in your head, because nothing you said was a response to anything I said. :lol:

The hard push to prove you're not a racist at the end -- using identity politics -- was really fun too.
Click to expand...

Thats because I dont know you-but in itself that is an artifact of leftism-anyone who opposes tenets of the left (like identity politics) is considered a DEFAULT RACIST. Thats f'd up.
 
I dont see any problem with people self identifying any way they want to, just so they are good citizens, and even if they arent, dont break any laws. I will go back and read the thread now.
 
mak2 said:
I dont see any problem with people self identifying any way they want to, just so they are good citizens, and even if they arent, dont break any laws. I will go back and read the thread now.
Click to expand...

Please read up on identity politics and note that its not intent but outcomes that matter.
 
US Conservative said:
Jewish is an ethnicity as well.
Click to expand...

As I said to another poster it is a ethnicity since ethnicity is a general and broad term . I did not say it was not , but since its a religious distinction it should not have America at the end .
 
APACHERAT said:
When I read books, newspapers and personal journals and diaries pre WW ll and going back to the early 1800's, Germans who were Jews were just referred to as German-Jews. But never saw German-Catholic or German-Lutheran ever being being used.

Until the mid 1970's only first generation Americans used the hyphenated-American when referring to themselves. The next generation were just Americans.
Click to expand...

I don't see the point its still not a indicator of origin . 1970 is when people would use the terms since it was politically correct at the time to refer to people as Blank Americans . I'm not one to speak about Germany since this is a thread about hyphenation in America ( This thread has been derailed enough already ).
 
Gardener said:
Such ignorance. Are you still in high school or something?

Post diaspora Jewish communities kept to themselves for the most part, did not proselytize to gain converts,and dna studies have revealed the entire Jewish community to be very closely linked genetically.They are an ethicity in every sense of the word unlike various other religions which spread through various ethnicities by converts.

You should be embarrassed to be saying such idiotic things.
Click to expand...

I did say it was a ethnicity thanks again for replacing and adding to what I said and misrepresenting my original post and taking no forethought in the fact it is about America's hyphenated use of the word :roll: . Of course they are since as said before it is a general and broad term .
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
The fact that such a huge portion of people all understand it the same way really negates that. Words mean things. I mean, I suppose you could ask someone to define how they're using each word each time they speak, but really, if someone is using words in a way no one understands them, that's more their issue than anyone else's.
Click to expand...

Words do not always mean the same the exact same thing to the same people. People split hairs over "exact" meanings of words all the time. I remember as kids my cousin and I got into a debate over the difference between a movie and a show. If I MEANT movie, just because technically show better applies a live theatrical performance doesn't change what I meant. Likewise, someone calling themselves Indian or even Indian-American within the context of a discussion on their South Asian ethnicity doesn't mean they intended to in some way minimize their American citizenship, only they it might sound like it to English majors or people on a PC kick who probably know thats not what they meant to imply anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom