NationStates Jolt Archive

First off, let me say this is out of character, i'm not pretebding to be a gay nazi on this thread. second, lets not be silly the N word obviously really has an I in it not a 1, but i don't even like to write the real word.


Now for the reason for this thread. A regular poster here(i won't mention any names) on another board, used the term to describe a group of african american who he didn't like. he regards himself as a leftist antiracist person, but he doesn't seem to understand the real signifigance of a white person calling any black people n1ggers no matter what the context, especially if its genuinely meant to be a derogatory.

The other posters on this other board have tried to make him understand this without success, and have seemed to begin to give up on him as just a closet racist who has finally come out. I however think he is a genuinely decent kid, who just profoundly doesn't understand the nature of race in american society and the power of this specific word to invoke hate. sure he is racist(i believe all whites are to an extent in the us), but he's not A RACIST. he doesn't want to be part of the problem but his ignorance and obstinance are preventing from realizing his own serious mistake.

Would people here be willing to take a shot at explaining what is really wrong with the word and its use against black people by whites(especially within the american context). maybe someone here can articulate the answer in a way he'll understand.

White people shouldn't use the word simply because they abused the privilege.

Next topic!

Nothing, that's what causes self-segregation.

If they can say it, so can I.
If they can't say it, then nor will I.

Personally the only time I use the word seriously is euphemistically - 'being treated like ****** minstrels'. It appears that I am the only one that actually uses this phrase and I use it to mean being given the short end of the stick in dealings with venues and promotors. Make of that what you will.

I don't feel the need to use the word, whether black people use it or not.

my friend divided it into two groups.

he said "there are balck people, then there are niggers. There are hispanics, then there are wetbacks, there are white people and then there is white trash."

What he was trying to say is that some people in your ethnic group of choice are uneducated and entirely devoted to conforming to their racial sterotype. That's when you use the racial sterotype to refer to them.

As an example: There are seveal African-Americans at the school I attend. It is a provate Catholic all-boys school, so you get the mental image (or sterotype). There are a few out of the group that actually try and better themselves and take advantage of the education oppertunity presented to them.

The vast majority of the others though, they don't try, they don't care, they think being black gives them special privilages over the rest of the student body, and they commit themselves to becoming more 'gangsta'. Then, when they fail out of school, they leave rather than be explelled and claim that the school was racist.

The first group would be 'African American' the second group would be 'niggers'

Nigga is fair game. ******... not a good idea to say that to a black person. But Im still against censoring it. If some douche wants to go around calling blacks niggers just to piss them off in a serious manner (not just doing it i jest), then let him. His fault when he gets jumped.

Nothing, that's what causes self-segregation.

If they can say it, so can I.
If they can't say it, then nor will I.

its sort of the difference between calling yourself an insulting nickname to take away its power and being called that same thing by your enemies or by strangers.

my friend divided it into two groups.

he said "there are balck people, then there are niggers. There are hispanics, then there are wetbacks, there are white people and then there is white trash."

What he was trying to say is that some people in your ethnic group of choice are uneducated and entirely devoted to conforming to their racial sterotype. That's when you use the racial sterotype to refer to them.

As an example: There are seveal African-Americans at the school I attend. It is a provate Catholic all-boys school, so you get the mental image (or sterotype). There are a few out of the group that actually try and better themselves and take advantage of the education oppertunity presented to them.

The vast majority of the others though, they don't try, they don't care, they think being black gives them special privilages over the rest of the student body, and they commit themselves to becoming more 'gangsta'. Then, when they fail out of school, they leave rather than be explelled and claim that the school was racist.

The first group would be 'African American' the second group would be 'niggers'

There we go. Although, I wouldn't neccessarily scorn someone who conforms to a said stereotype. Just if they were asshole douchebags. In fact, I dont mind ebonics at all, some people are funny and such. but yeah.

its sort of the difference between calling yourself an insulting nickname to take away its power and being called that same thing by your enemies or by strangers.

but isnt that the wrong image to promote? I mean all these people are striving for forced racial equality, but you're denoting non-blacks as enemies to whites or strangers?

I see it as no different than I joking around with my kin about being savage red-men ... I do it, we all kid around, and we all have a laugh, and all is well with the world.

When some white dude steps in and jumps on the bandwagon, though, all bets are off.

I've joked around with my mother and called her a "stupid kike" and she giggles and we laugh and have a good time, but when a goy steps in and does it, it's time for the beat down.

We (minorities) often use such things to make light of them and take away some of the burdon of how harsh these words can truly be. If you're not a part of that minority, then you would never understand what's really going on and I suggest, very strongly, that you just avoid it at all costs.

its sort of the difference between calling yourself an insulting nickname to take away its power and being called that same thing by your enemies or by strangers.
They've turned it into a word that people are fearing to use. I don't think they're stripping it of its power.

its sort of the difference between calling yourself an insulting nickname to take away its power and being called that same thing by your enemies or by strangers.

Bingo! You just shot up 1,000 brownie points with me. :) (not that that would matter much, but hey, it's brownie points!)

i believe all whites are (racsit) to an extent in the us

:rolleyes: Wow , you know what you are? That’s right, a racist.

Race in general should be ignored. Who cares?

For some reason I have this image in my head of a black guy calling a redneck a honky- then the redneck saying (all offended like) "Honky is our word- and you cant use it"

my friend divided it into two groups.

he said "there are balck people, then there are niggers. There are hispanics, then there are wetbacks, there are white people and then there is white trash."

What he was trying to say is that some people in your ethnic group of choice are uneducated and entirely devoted to conforming to their racial sterotype. That's when you use the racial sterotype to refer to them.

As an example: There are seveal African-Americans at the school I attend. It is a provate Catholic all-boys school, so you get the mental image (or sterotype). There are a few out of the group that actually try and better themselves and take advantage of the education oppertunity presented to them.

The vast majority of the others though, they don't try, they don't care, they think being black gives them special privilages over the rest of the student body, and they commit themselves to becoming more 'gangsta'. Then, when they fail out of school, they leave rather than be explelled and claim that the school was racist.

The first group would be 'African American' the second group would be 'niggers'okay that's the context our friend used, he said those people are n1ggers because of certain actions they took. but that is still fundimentally racist. you are saying some black people who act more like white people are genuine human beings, but the rest who conform to your stereotypes are less than human. that's just white supremacism with the possibility of uplift. "yeah we white folk are superior but it you try real hard to be just like us we'll consider you equal. if you behave differently then you're just the inferior N!gger our klansmen grandfather always said you were".

okay that's the context our friend used, he said those people are n1ggers because of certain actions they took. but that is still fundimentally racist. you are saying some black people who act more like white people are genuine human beings, but the rest who conform to your stereotypes are less than human. that's just white supremacism with the possibility of uplift. "yeah we white folk are superior but it you try real hard to be just like us we'll consider you equal. if you behave differently then you're just the inferior N!gger our klansmen grandfather always said you were".

well calling them niggers might be harsh if he's fanatical about it. it would probably be better to call people retards or douchebags. but who knows, PC may turn those terms into sexist or discriminatory words someday.

my friend divided it into two groups.

he said "there are balck people, then there are niggers. There are hispanics, then there are wetbacks, there are white people and then there is white trash."

What he was trying to say is that some people in your ethnic group of choice are uneducated and entirely devoted to conforming to their racial sterotype. That's when you use the racial sterotype to refer to them.

As an example: There are seveal African-Americans at the school I attend. It is a provate Catholic all-boys school, so you get the mental image (or sterotype). There are a few out of the group that actually try and better themselves and take advantage of the education oppertunity presented to them.

The vast majority of the others though, they don't try, they don't care, they think being black gives them special privilages over the rest of the student body, and they commit themselves to becoming more 'gangsta'. Then, when they fail out of school, they leave rather than be explelled and claim that the school was racist.

The first group would be 'African American' the second group would be 'niggers'
Your friend either
A. Is Chris Rock
B. Quoted Chris Rock
C. Got quoted by Chris Rock
D. Has no relation to C.R. whatsoever

Whats up my nigga! :p

well calling them niggers might be harsh if he's fanatical about it. it would probably be better to call people retards or douchebags. but who knows, PC may turn those terms into sexist or discriminatory words someday.
well have worked with people in special education classes in the public school system i would have to say calling people retards is already fairly offensive.

well have worked with people in special education classes in the public school system i would have to say calling people retards is already fairly offensive.

I would offer the term 'wastrel' here, and was going to put it forward in an earlier post, but it doesn't seem to address the particular social conditions of the group under discussion here: it isn't as if they are just all suddenly making the same choice for no real reason. The fact that there are probably actual factors driving them to this decision seems to suggest that a modifier of some form would be needed...

well calling them niggers might be harsh if he's fanatical about it. it would probably be better to call people retards or douchebags. but who knows, PC may turn those terms into sexist or discriminatory words someday.

I'm not too worried about PC. I mean .. have you noticed that the same people who bitch about how PC the world is becoming are the same people who bitch when they're called "homophobic" because they'd rather have a more accurate PC descriptor?

Nutty.

Anyway ... that said ... I prefer to call people, "You dumbass" (go Super Milk Chan!) or "Choad" (go Beavis and Butthead).

well have worked with people in special education classes in the public school system i would have to say calling people retards is already fairly offensive.

damnit. but I don't think it's gotten as serious flak as some other words have.

okay that's the context our friend used, he said those people are n1ggers because of certain actions they took. but that is still fundimentally racist. you are saying some black people who act more like white people are genuine human beings, but the rest who conform to your stereotypes are less than human. that's just white supremacism with the possibility of uplift. "yeah we white folk are superior but it you try real hard to be just like us we'll consider you equal. if you behave differently then you're just the inferior N!gger our klansmen grandfather always said you were".

When it is being used as an insult to designate specifically black people who are acting like a bunch of idiots its not exactly being any more racist than saying "those black dumbasses who behaved like idiots and flunked their classes." Behaving like a "thug" is not a racial issue. Wiggers and Niggers (using the definition provided by blarg there) are both idiots.

Frankly, if you behave like a dumbass and essentially get kicked out of school being insulted has nothing to do with race, it has to do with that fact they're behaving like dumbasses.

Nothing, that's what causes self-segregation.

If they can say it, so can I.
If they can't say it, then nor will I.

What he said.

One of my closest African American friends and I had a discussion about this. He told me that it was acceptable for him to use the term with his black friends, as in "Yo! S'up, mah niggah!" but that it still hurt too much to hear a white man use it. And this was the guy who once told me that he sometimes had to pinch himself to remember that I was a white guy! Heh!

He said that the primary reason many blacks use the term when referring to or greeting each other had at first been an attempt to defuse the impact of hearing whites use it when referring to blacks. After a period of time, it became the black equivalent of calling each other "brother."

Logical? No, but understandable.

Frankly, if you behave like a dumbass and essentially get kicked out of school being insulted has nothing to do with race, it has to do with that fact they're behaving like dumbasses.

If they were Jewish wastrels, would it then by this logic be okay to call them 'lamp shades'?

I would offer the term 'wastrel' here, and was going to put it forward in an earlier post, but it doesn't seem to address the particular social conditions of the group under discussion here: it isn't as if they are just all suddenly making the same choice for no real reason. The fact that there are probably actual factors driving them to this decision seems to suggest that a modifier of some form would be needed...

idiot, moron and imbicile are less offensive as insults against someones intelligence. thwey were once clinical terms for mental impairment, but they've become outdate and are therefore no longer applied to thwe genuinely mentally disabled.

well have worked with people in special education classes in the public school system i would have to say calling people retards is already fairly offensive.

How exactly is the term retard, or retarded, offensive in of itself? When applied to a mentally retarded person it means exactly what it sounds like, the person is mentally retarded. Likewise when you apply it to some who is other normal when they behave like an idiot, or like say, a mentally retarded person, you're stating a truth aren't you? I guess you'd say we should never use the term idiot, stupid, foolish, wrong, unintelligent etc... because they're all offensive?

I'm not too worried about PC. I mean .. have you noticed that the same people who bitch about how PC the world is becoming are the same people who bitch when they're called "homophobic" because they'd rather have a more accurate PC descriptor?


Or maybe, just maybe... they would prefer to have no PC descriptor at all, anyway go figure.

idiot, moron and imbicile are less offensive as insults against someones intelligence. thwey were once clinical terms for mental impairment, but they've become outdate and are therefore no longer applied to thwe genuinely mentally disabled.

True, but irrelevant. Calling these people idiot/moron/imbecile is making a judgement call on what they are (ie. assuming that they are stupid), whereas a term like 'wastrel' simply describes what they are doing (ie. wasting their opportunities).

damnit. but I don't think it's gotten as serious flak as some other words have.
no but its disturbing to be in a mixed class of students and hear the kids call the special ed. kids retards, that has to hurt in a similar way to african american children being called n1ggers by the white kids or it used as a general term of abuse.

If they were Jewish wastrels, would it then by this logic be okay to call them 'lamp shades'?

Never heard the term "lamp shade" before, but sure go for it. I'm not saying X guy will deck you for using the word, I'm just saying that the words themselves aren't anything but insults with a specific group you wish them towards. Do I run around using them? No. Do I everyone of any group as a stereotype? No. Do I see idiots in all groups? yeah. Would I personally use ****** toward Blacks, chinks toward Asians, spic towards Mexicans etc... ? no. Should those words be seen as horrible disgusting things that should never ever be tolerated and any kind of retaliation can be made against them? No. But for some reason saying "die ******" when you murder someone can get you a longer sentence than had you said "die you horrible person"

How exactly is the term retard, or retarded, offensive in of itself? When applied to a mentally retarded person it means exactly what it sounds like, the person is mentally retarded. Likewise when you apply it to some who is other normal when they behave like an idiot, or like say, a mentally retarded person, you're stating a truth aren't you? I guess you'd say we should never use the term idiot, stupid, foolish, wrong, unintelligent etc... because they're all offensive?
because you are essentually telling a mentally retarded person that what they have been clinically defined as, is something so bad its what you call other people when you want to insult them.

Never heard the term "lamp shade" before, but sure go for it.
i would assume it is a very offensive reference to the fact that the nazis used human skin from jews to make lamp shades in the concentration camps.

If someone is behaving like an asshole, then i think it's perfectly acceptable to call them an asshole. There is no need though to call them a black asshole, or a white asshole, or a hispanic asshole, etc. They are simply an asshole, and most likely the color of their skin has nothing to do with why they are. When you use the color of their skin in the insult though, it implies that it does.

Never heard the term "lamp shade" before, but sure go for it.

What? Am I following you correctly here: if someone does something you think is foolish then they are fair game for racial slurs and invective based on their ethnicity?

because you are essentually telling a mentally retarded person that what they have been clinically defined as, is something so bad its what you call other people when you want to insult them.
*imagines someone going to another saying "HAHA, YOUR AIDS!"*

*imagines someone going to another saying "HAHA, YOUR AIDS!"*

You obviously missed out on that joyous time in the early to mid eighties when 'You're an AIDS victim' and other like phrases were flung around with all the casual glee that people on the internet say things like 'You're so gay' today.

You obviously missed out on that joyous time in the early to mid eighties when 'You're an AIDS victim' and other like phrases were flung around with all the casual glee that people on the internet say things like 'You're so gay' today.

And do you find any problem with the latter phrase? And besides the former doesn't sound fluent.

You obviously missed out on that joyous time in the early to mid eighties when 'You're an AIDS victim' and other like phrases were flung around with all the casual glee that people on the internet say things like 'You're so gay' today.
The insult "You're an AIDS ridden fuck" is still in use in my part of Scotland.

You obviously missed out on that joyous time in the early to mid eighties when 'You're an AIDS victim' and other like phrases were flung around with all the casual glee that people on the internet say things like 'You're so gay' today.
Obviously so

because you are essentually telling a mentally retarded person that what they have been clinically defined as, is something so bad its what you call other people when you want to insult them.

:shrug: Would you want to be mentally retarded? Would you, after not being mentally retarded and then have it forced on you not see it as something horrible?

What? Am I following you correctly here: if someone does something you think is foolish then they are fair game for racial slurs and invective based on their ethnicity?

Why not?

And do you find any problem with the latter phrase? And besides the former doesn't sound fluent.

Do I have a problem with 'you're so gay'? Yes.

Why? Because it means basically 'you are bad/stupid'.

See the correlation I'm not happy with?

Why not?

Possibly because they are not doing it as a result of their race? Possibly because you are in effect saying: 'you are doing something bad, and as such I am given license to not only mock you for your particular race, but also to identify that race as a bad thing in itself'?

Possibly because they are not doing it as a result of their race? Possibly because you are in effect saying: 'you are doing something bad, and as such I am given license to not only mock you for your particular race, but also to identify that race as a bad thing in itself'?

So? Your goal when using any insult is to offend and well frankly, INSULT the person. If you're going to go to the step of calling them a dumbass or an idiot, what is the difference with using ****** instead? Other than being able to insult/offend/piss off the person more there isn't any.

Do I have a problem with 'you're so gay'? Yes.

Why? Because it means basically 'you are bad/stupid'.

See the correlation I'm not happy with?

And when you hear bad/stupid you think about a homosexual? C'mon now.. That meaning of the word has ridden itself of the homosexual connection. It basically means you're lame/stupid. It doesn't even correlate anything about homosexuality. It's really a benign phrase with no need to be offended.

Now for the reason for this thread. A regular poster here(i won't mention any names) on another board, used the term to describe a group of african american who he didn't like. he regards himself as a leftist antiracist person, but he doesn't seem to understand the real signifigance of a white person calling any black people n1ggers no matter what the context, especially if its genuinely meant to be a derogatory.

just saw the thread that this is about. goddamn. i couldn't say it any better than you did, but the person in question seriously needs to think about their use of language, and the racist ideas they are perpetuating.

So? Your goal when using any insult is to offend and well frankly, INSULT the person. If you're going to go to the step of calling them a dumbass or an idiot, what is the difference with using ****** instead? Other than being able to insult/offend/piss off the person more there isn't any.

Exactly. It's meant to intensify the meaning, rather than really target the ethnicity.

Race in general should be ignored. Who cares?
maybe it should be that way but at the present moment there is a strong association between race and culture. you can't just deny people their ethnicity, which, for obvious reasons, tends to group people by race.

just saw the thread that this is about. goddamn. i couldn't say it any better than you did, but the person in question seriously needs to think about their use of language, and the racist ideas they are perpetuating.

How is it racism? I can see why people would THINK it's racism, but really is it? Racism is saying something like, "I hate blacks and hope they get deported" (slightly exaggerated and must be in a serious tone) or "I hope they deport all hispanics" (in a serious tone). Using it jokingly doesn't seem to be racist to me.

How is it racism? I can see why people would THINK it's racism, but really is it? Racism is saying something like, "I hate blacks and hope they get deported" (slightly exaggerated and must be in a serious tone) or "I hope they deport all hispanics" (in a serious tone). Using it jokingly doesn't seem to be racist to me.

calling anyone '******' is precisely equivalent to saying that 'black people who act in ways i don't aprove of become subhuman, and all black people could become this unless they work really hard to avoid it'. you don't even fucking joke about it.

of course, the person in question wasn't joking, so that's not gonna help them anyway even if it could.

calling anyone '******' is precisely equivalent to saying that 'black people who act in ways i don't aprove of become subhuman, and all black people could become this unless they work really hard to avoid it'. you don't even fucking joke about it.

Is it really? Because that's not what I mean when I say it. But hey, eliminating humor must be a fun job. And how is it racist if I don't believe that ludicrous definition?

And another question: would calling someone stupid mean: 'people who are less intelligent than me become subhuman, and all people people could become this unless they work really hard to avoid it'

The insult "You're an AIDS ridden fuck" is still in use in my part of Scotland.

Och Aye the Noo.

Donald where's yer Troosers. :)

Do I have a problem with 'you're so gay'? Yes.

Why? Because it means basically 'you are bad/stupid'.

See the correlation I'm not happy with?

Yeah, but the meaning of words shifts. Gay didn't used to mean homosexual either. And now its starting to mean just "bad".

Then again, I am a shiftless wastrel so what would I know.

But hey, eliminating humor must be a fun job.

eliminating humor? what the fuck are you on about?

Logical? No, but understandable.

Disco ... and that's what it comes down to. We use these words amongst ourselves in order to borrow their strength.

(see my earlier post on this matter)

Now, I'm not saying that there aren't hateful words against white folks. Irish Catholics (well, ok, I kinda see the Irish Catholics as "niggers" on a global scale, so I'm stopping this example) ....

Anyway, yes ... there are hateful terms against white folks. "Cracker" is one. However, I guarantee you that you cannot find in any average white family a person who was called "cracker" while being scourged with a whip that had nails in it. I just feel there's a difference. Maybe I'm wrong.

Being told "You're a stupid ******" while being whipped is lot different than having a casual black friend saying, "Crackah, please!"

Pain is part of the issue.

Och Aye the Noo.

Donald where's yer Troosers. :)
An Aids ridden fuck stole them :(

Maybe people should have better manners?

Also I think it should be left up to the individual. How someone is addressed should be decided by that person, nobody else.

An Aids ridden fuck stole them :(

That's gay.

That's gay.

Watch out, you may get charged with a hate crime for saying that.

Watch out, you may get charged with a hate crime for saying that.


What, for a gay joke?

Yeah, but the meaning of words shifts. Gay didn't used to mean homosexual either. And now its starting to mean just "bad".

Then again, I am a shiftless wastrel so what would I know.

Exactly. Words like ******, spic, whatever.. could all boil down to synoyms for stupid, idiot, asshole, whatever. Or, depending on context, they could mean black person, hispanic, whatever. It all depends on how you use it.

What, for a gay joke?

Yep. Hate speech is a hate crime. And that was hate speech, regardless of what the individual intended it to be.

And let me just say, using ******/spic/whatever racial slur to mean stupid, retard, or whatever isn't the best thing to do. For one, it doesn't flow as smoothly unless used right and even then words like dickface and motherfucker would work better. And two, because the words are still very borderline. But I can understand the viewpoint from people who use it like such.

White people shouldn't use the word simply because they abused the privilege.
If white people can't use it, then black people can't use it. Your race doesn't determine your priviledges.

Exactly. Words like ******, spic, whatever.. could all boil down to synoyms for stupid, idiot, asshole, whatever.

no. they don't. they denote a person's status as being a lesser being. a status that was still legally enforced by the state within living memory. a status that has massive continuing effects across society. use of those terms by people not recognized as being 'in the group' sends the message that they want people of color put back in their place. even if that is not what the speaker intended, that is what the message means to their listeners. so either the user is being stupid, or is being deliberately hateful. and if your 'humor' relies on calling people 'niggers', then that really says more about you than it does about anything else.

no. they don't. they denote a person's status as being a lesser being.

As does any insult. Your point? Wanna ban insults?

a status that was still legally enforced by the state within living memory. a status that has massive continuing effects across society. use of those terms by people not recognized as being 'in the group' sends the message that they want people of color put back in their place.

Okay, first point: woopity-doo. I think we can all agree that segregation sucked and that the KKK are morons. But so what? That's the past, and we aren't condoning it either, unless explicitly stated. Second point: no it doesn't. It's all how YOU interpret it. Really, grow thicker skin on this issue. They're words.

even if that is not what the speaker intended, that is what the message means to their listeners. so either the user is being stupid, or is being deliberately hateful.

Grow thicker skin?

and if your 'humor' relies on calling people 'niggers', then that really says more about you than it does about anything else.

Rebuffed in another post.

And let me just say, using ******/spic/whatever racial slur to mean stupid, retard, or whatever isn't the best thing to do. For one, it doesn't flow as smoothly unless used right and even then words like dickface and motherfucker would work better. And two, because the words are still very borderline. But I can understand the viewpoint from people who use it like such.

And I think I'll be pulling out of this thread before I'm called a racist. Which I'm not, since I think real racists are total dicks.

And I think I'll be pulling out of this thread before I'm called a racist. Which I'm not, since I think real racists are total dicks.
well this goes back to the distinction i was trying to make in my first post. i think you are somewhat racist i.e. you have racist attitutes and assumptions, which you don't realize for what they are. this does not mean you are a racist(racialist), that is to say one who accepts that they believe race should be a major criteria for judging people and valuing them(and a member of the group empowered within your society, not that its good if you are disempowered and hold those opinions just different {maybe you can still be a racialist in that case, the semantics are getting a little obscure here}).

well this goes back to the distinction i was trying to make in my first post. i think you are somewhat racist i.e. you have racist attitutes and assumptions, which you don't realize for what they are. this does not mean you are a racist(racialist), that is to say one who accepts that they believe race should be a major criteria for judging people and valuing them(and a member of the group empowered within your society, not that its good if you are disempowered and hold those opinions just different {maybe you can still be a racialist in that case, the semantics are getting a little obscure here}).

You do realize that you have essentially said jibberish and there is nothing in that post but a bunch of statements that don't mean anything right?

So he's something of a racist because he has racist attitudes and assumptions (none of which he's revealed in this thread mind you, you're assuming those attitudes and assumptions are there) and then you go on to say this doesn't make him a racist.

Make up your damned mind.

You do realize that you have essentially said jibberish and there is nothing in that post but a bunch of statements that don't mean anything right?

So he's something of a racist because he has racist attitudes and assumptions (none of which he's revealed in this thread mind you, you're assuming those attitudes and assumptions are there) and then you go on to say this doesn't make him a racist.

Make up your damned mind. i said being A racist isn't the same as being racist, and i think his statements on the thread are a pretty clear indication that he is racist.

If white people can't use it, then black people can't use it. Your race doesn't determine your priviledges.
it used to.

First off, let me say this is out of character, i'm not pretebding to be a gay nazi on this thread. second, lets not be silly the N word obviously really has an I in it not a 1, but i don't even like to write the real word.


Now for the reason for this thread. A regular poster here(i won't mention any names) on another board, used the term to describe a group of african american who he didn't like. he regards himself as a leftist antiracist person, but he doesn't seem to understand the real signifigance of a white person calling any black people n1ggers no matter what the context, especially if its genuinely meant to be a derogatory.

The other posters on this other board have tried to make him understand this without success, and have seemed to begin to give up on him as just a closet racist who has finally come out. I however think he is a genuinely decent kid, who just profoundly doesn't understand the nature of race in american society and the power of this specific word to invoke hate. sure he is racist(i believe all whites are to an extent in the us), but he's not A RACIST. he doesn't want to be part of the problem but his ignorance and obstinance are preventing from realizing his own serious mistake.

Would people here be willing to take a shot at explaining what is really wrong with the word and its use against black people by whites(especially within the american context). maybe someone here can articulate the answer in a way he'll understand.

Hmmm . . . Would you clasify this statement as racist? "I believe most American blacks are lazy, shiftless and have a bloated sense of entitlement."

Hmmm . . . Would you clasify this statement as racist? "I believe most American blacks are lazy, shiftless and have a bloated sense of entitlement."
yes, it leans toward being not just racist but a self affirmation of being an active racist/racialist

yes, it leans toward being not just racist but a self affirmation of being an active racist/racialist
I thought you'd agree it is a racist statement. You then are convicted by your own words of being an "active racist/racialist"(?). In your opening post you stated, "(i believe all whites are to an extent in the us)"sic.

I thought you'd agree it is a racist statement. You then are convicted by your own words of being an "active racist/racialist"(?). In your opening post you stated, "(i believe all whites are to an extent in the us)".
it is possible to believe certain things about a group without being a racist/racialist. i believe that the history or systematic and institutional racism in the u.s. and the constant reenforcement of stereotypes by various aspects of society make it impossible for any member of american society to be completely free of racial stereotypes and biases. because they are the ones in power whites biases become racism. i don't think it is a moral flaw, just a psychological imperative based on the culture we live in. its only a moral flaw if you don't attempt to overcome the damage society have done to your perceptions of race. but just as we can never become completely moral, or even completely sane, we can never become completely free from racism within the present context.

If white people can't use it, then black people can't use it. Your race doesn't determine your priviledges.

Ummm ... wrong.

Ummm ... wrong.
It shouldn't. If you say race determines privilege, even in something as small as what words you can use, you are a racist. Someone else said earlier that "it used to." Fine, it did. I would like to think we left that era behind us, but some people, it would seem, would like to ressurect it, in reverse. No, thank you, even if I could benefit from such a state of affairs.

Don't call me a Paddy unless you are Irish or of Irish decent. Oh, and please, please! It is St. Patrick’s Day. Don't call it St. Paddy's day in my presence or I might call you something you don't like.

Don't call me a Paddy unless you are Irish or of Irish decent. Oh, and please, please! It is St. Patrick’s Day. Don't call it St. Paddy's day in my presence or I might call you something you don't like.

Can I call you a stinkin' mick? :D (I'm 1/4 Irish ... family in Omagh and Belfast)

If I want to call a person a ******, then I will, although I have the respect for myself and others to not do so. There is not a word on this earth that should be censored and if people get offended, they need to open their minds a little bit. I've never actually called a black man a '******', but I have a few to a few white people when they have annoyed me. You may disagree with me, but if you want to say something, then you should be allowed to... of course, it deserves to be in moderation and you should prepare for the consequences. Banning people from saying a word - particularly just one group - would be an outrage.

Can I call you a stinkin' mick? :D (I'm 1/4 Irish ... family in Omagh and Belfast)

Yes, you can call me a mick because you are of Irish decent. I don't like the stinking part though. I do take a shower with soap at least once a week. :D

it is possible to believe certain things about a group without being a racist/racialist. i believe that the history or systematic and institutional racism in the u.s. and the constant reenforcement of stereotypes by various aspects of society make it impossible for any member of american society to be completely free of racial stereotypes and biases. because they are the ones in power whites biases become racism. i don't think it is a moral flaw, just a psychological imperative based on the culture we live in. its only a moral flaw if you don't attempt to overcome the damage society have done to your perceptions of race. but just as we can never become completely moral, or even completely sane, we can never become completely free from racism within the present context.
In addition to the sin of generalization, without which your argument falls apart. You have also fallen prey to the most ridiculous argument regarding racism in America, that only whites can be racist. Not all whites are powerful and not all the powerful are white. Not all those who are white are Americans. Heck not all these in power in America are necessarily American. Your views regarding whites in America is an apologistic prejudgment and mistaken. It is also hurtful to the cause of finding an end to the swirling vicious cycle of racism.

When any person makes a judgment regarding another person or group because of their race, it is racism. If a black person rails against those from India and calls them demeaning names it is just as racist as when a white person does the same. When a Hispanic denigrates blacks it is racist. When a Japanese person classifies non Japanese as sub human it is racism. When a white holds hatred toward non whites, it is racism.

My grandmother (a dark skinned Scillian) railed against blacks calling them all the usual names with all the usual vitrol and conviction. Even as a young child I saw it as a meanness of spirit on her part. The problem wasn't the neighbors (lovely & gracious people by any standard) but with my grandmother who held so much prejudgment and hate.

That is why, for me these words are as true today as the days they were first uttered,

"But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must ever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone. . . .

. . . I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. "

To judge any other way is racist.

Added after: Granted it takes a bit more thinking and effort, but you seem to be capable of managing that. ;)

I don't really consider myself a racist, but sometimes these things sneak up on you. I sometimes find myself thinking in stereotypes. Such as blacks like rap, Jews are liberals, Asians do better academically and Hispanics have lots of kids. Overall these might be somewhat true, but it's silly to think they apply to everyone in the particuliar group.

I don't really consider myself a racist, but sometimes these things sneak up on you. I sometimes find myself thinking in stereotypes. Such as blacks like rap, Jews are liberals, Asians do better academically and Hispanics have lots of kids. Overall these might be somewhat true, but it's silly to think they apply to everyone in the particuliar group.
My view is any thought can come into our mind. It is what you do with it that determines your true character. Having a stereotypical thought is one thing. Giving creedence to it and accepting it as true is another.

(i believe all whites are racist to an extent in the us)
Everybody is racist to an extent, goddamit - it's a matter of whether or not we can control our impulses to be so.

Why only whites?

While I don't use the word myself (except in a dream I had once, which is irrelevant), or for that matter any other racial slur, I also recognise other people's right to do so. While I don't like it, I'm not going to stop other people from using it.

However, using terms like this as insults is inherently insulting to the group it describes.

As for those people who want to redefine racial slurs to mean things like "stupid" or "fat", I present this alternative: be imaginative, be original. Come up with some completely new insults, you troglodytic jellyfish!

ok im not a racist and i never use the word n1gger but why do blacks call each other n1ggers? then when a white person says it its automatically racist? and why does the black community think the white community and the goverment owes them for what happened to their ancesters hundreds of years ago? i mean isnt 650,000 dead in the civil war enough payment for their freedom? and whats so controversial about the confederate flag i dont know why people take that symbol as a sign of slavery when its really a sign of states-rights of freedom of rebelion and the confederate flag was originally just a battleflag used by the army of northern virginia i also believe if the confederacy had won the war sooner or later the blacks would have been freed

ok im not a racist and i never use the word n1gger but why do blacks call each other n1ggers? then when a white person says it its automatically racist?
Ah, the irony of political correctness

and what did the one guy mean by to an extent all whites are racists thats totally ignorant

Everybody is racist to an extent, goddamit - it's a matter of whether or not we can control our impulses to be so.

Why only whites?
An impulse resisted and dismissed is not incorporated in an individual's character - the resistance to it is.

The "only whites" thinking is a weak defense offered by non-whites to justify their racism. Apologist whites have adopted the thought as dogma.

Me personally? My ancestors came from Ireland & Sicily poor imigrants. They, and their succeeding generations, were not part of enslaving anyone and are not members of the ruling class. In fact, it is an established fact they came here to escape the opression in their homelands.

Nigga is fair game. ******... not a good idea to say that to a black person. But Im still against censoring it. If some douche wants to go around calling blacks niggers just to piss them off in a serious manner (not just doing it i jest), then let him. His fault when he gets jumped.

This is the claim made by black people when they kill non-blacks who use the word '******', then use the same word to refer to themselves. They pronounce the two EXACTLY THE SAME. Apparently, the spelling depends entirely on who uses it.

Race in general should be ignored. Who cares?

This the correct answer.

Race in general should be ignored. Who cares?

This pimp has hit the heeeeezy

This is the claim made by black people when they kill non-blacks who use the word '******', then use the same word to refer to themselves. They pronounce the two EXACTLY THE SAME. Apparently, the spelling depends entirely on who uses it.

Say "ga", now say "ger", now say "nig", now say "nig"+"ga" and now say "nig"+"ger". They get pronounced differently but they sound almost the same, but they're different.

Say "ga", now say "ger", now say "nig", now say "nig"+"ga" and now say "nig"+"ger". They get pronounced differently but they sound almost the same, but they're different.

Well, that may be so.

BUT.

BUT my point is that, when they overhear a white person say '******', they hold a conversation, something to the effect of:

"Yo, nigGA, let's kill that crackah." Note the pronunciation.

"Yo, why, dog?"

"I just heard him say 'nigGA', man!" OH MY GOD! THE EXACT SAME PRONUNCIATION!

Yet he is allowed to use it, but 'whitey' is not.

White people shouldn't use the word simply because they abused the privilege.

Next topic!

everyone needs to quit being stupid and realize its just a word.

I think it's an ugly word and shouldnt be used by anyone, no matter their race.

there are 2 very good reasons not to use "that word"

1) its disrespectful

2) you can get the shit kicked out of you for using it.


when you use it, you are disrepecting MILLIONS of people. like it or not, it is an insult on that scale. it doesnt just refer to the person you are calling that name, it refers to everyone who fits the category "black african descent". maybe you only use it in front of "white" people. bad move. you don't know what "white" person is actually "black" you dont know what "white" person is married to a "black" person, is dating a "black" person, has "black" children, "black" siblings, etc. do you really want to insult people you dont even know well enough to know their real "race"?

if you are SO sure of your right to use it. go up to a group of young black men on the street one day and use it. when you get out of the hospital, maybe you will have come to understand that while its your right, its not WISE to use hateful words.

Well, that may be so.

BUT.

BUT my point is that, when they overhear a white person say '******', they hold a conversation, something to the effect of:

"Yo, nigGA, let's kill that crackah." Note the pronunciation.

"Yo, why, dog?"

"I just heard him say 'nigGA', man!" OH MY GOD! THE EXACT SAME PRONUNCIATION!

Yet he is allowed to use it, but 'whitey' is not.

I think perhaps you just have poor hearing or are assuming something you actually haven't witnessed.

they hold a conversation, something to the effect of:


[my apologies for the paraphrasing]

They? Who's they?

there are 2 very good reasons not to use "that word"

1) its disrespectful

As is any insult

2) you can get the shit kicked out of you for using it.

Just like any other insult

when you use it, you are disrepecting MILLIONS of people. like it or not, it is an insult on that scale. it doesnt just refer to the person you are calling that name, it refers to everyone who fits the category "black african descent". maybe you only use it in front of "white" people. bad move. you don't know what "white" person is actually "black" you dont know what "white" person is married to a "black" person, is dating a "black" person, has "black" children, "black" siblings, etc. do you really want to insult people you dont even know well enough to know their real "race"?

No you are not disrespecting millions of people. You are disrespecting the sole person you are directing the comment at. Period. Just like any other insult.

if you are SO sure of your right to use it. go up to a group of young black men on the street one day and use it. when you get out of the hospital, maybe you will have come to understand that while its your right, its not WISE to use hateful words.

And since when did might make right? Tell you what, I'll walk up to a group of young black men while carrying two uzis. Then when I call them niggers I don't think I'll have to worry about ending up in a hospital.

IE, Appealing to the fact that people will attack you for using a word when they are in numerical superiorty has no bearing on this discussion.

[my apologies for the paraphrasing]

They? Who's they?

Given the context of this thread and the multiple references to black people and the fact that he's responded to me responding to him talking about black people I don't think there is anything there for you to complain about.

My ancestors came from Ireland & Sicily poor imigrants. They, and their succeeding generations, were not part of enslaving anyone and are not members of the ruling class. In fact, it is an established fact they came here to escape the opression in their homelands.
Same here with my ancestors (mostly Central/Eastern Europe).

As is any insult



Just like any other insult



No you are not disrespecting millions of people. You are disrespecting the sole person you are directing the comment at. Period. Just like any other insult.



no really, you are insulting EVERY person of black african descent. just as you are insulting EVERY mentally handicapped person when you use the word retard, you are insulting EVERY undereducated white southerner when you use the word cracker, you are insulting EVERY perons of any category when you use an offensive word that insults them. thats what those words MEAN. "everyone in your group is worthless"

your intent might not be to insult everyone in that group, but you DO.


And since when did might make right? Tell you what, I'll walk up to a group of young black men while carrying two uzis. Then when I call them niggers I don't think I'll have to worry about ending up in a hospital.

IE, Appealing to the fact that people will attack you for using a word when they are in numerical superiorty has no bearing on this discussion.

im not saying its RIGHT. im not saying that every last person in that group woudlnt deserve some prison time for it. im saying that insulting people can have a bad effect in your life and you would be wise to take reality into consideration no matter what the discussion is. you ARENT going to take uzis around with you. if you are so unwise as to use hateful words carelessly the reality is that you can end up hurt for it.

no really, you are insulting EVERY person of black african descent. just as you are insulting EVERY mentally handicapped person when you use the word retard, you are insulting EVERY undereducated white southerner when you use the word cracker, you are insulting EVERY perons of any category when you use an offensive word that insults them. thats what those words MEAN. "everyone in your group is worthless"

No you don't, you insult the single person you are directing the comment at. "You, right there at *insert GPS postion* are a no good ******." That insult there would mean that the person at *insert GPS postion* is being called a no good black guy who fits the sterotype of the word ******. Frankly if that means I would be insulting everyone out there who fits the sterotype of what a ****** is then I wouldn't feel bad at all about insulting all of them because everyone who fits the sterotype of the word ****** would deserve the insult.

your intent might not be to insult everyone in that group, but you DO.

Really? Because not all black people would be niggers. Using your logic I would be insulting all people who are niggers, but not all black people. And seeing as I would see the word ****** as an insult why should I care if I am insulting everyone who fits the sterotype of the word?



im not saying its RIGHT. im not saying that every last person in that group woudlnt deserve some prison time for it. im saying that insulting people can have a bad effect in your life and you would be wise to take reality into consideration no matter what the discussion is. you ARENT going to take uzis around with you. if you are so unwise as to use hateful words carelessly the reality is that you can end up hurt for it.

No really? Oh my god you've opened my eyes up to the light of reason and intelligence and I will forever change my ways... :rolleyes:

Aside from that actually I do always carry a knife on my person and when I finally leave california and move to a more gun liberal state I will generally have a pistol within reach.

No you don't, you insult the single person you are directing the comment at. "You, right there at *insert GPS postion* are a no good ******." That insult there would mean that the person at *insert GPS postion* is being called a no good black guy who fits the sterotype of the word ******. Frankly if that means I would be insulting everyone out there who fits the sterotype of what a ****** is then I wouldn't feel bad at all about insulting all of them because everyone who fits the sterotype of the word ****** would deserve the insult.



Really? Because not all black people would be niggers. Using your logic I would be insulting all people who are niggers, but not all black people. And seeing as I would see the word ****** as an insult why should I care if I am insulting everyone who fits the sterotype of the word?





No really? Oh my god you've opened my eyes up to the light of reason and intelligence and I will forever change my ways... :rolleyes:

Aside from that actually I do always carry a knife on my person and when I finally leave california and move to a more gun liberal state I will generally have a pistol within reach.

if you are in a public place and you call ONE person that name, everyone who hears it makes a judgement about you. everyone who is of black african descent who hears it is insulted by it no matter if you use it towards them. everyone who has a loved one of black african descent is insulted by it. thats what the word IS and what the word MEANS no matter what YOUR definition is. no one is going to care what your intention is. they will only hear your words and judge you accordingly.


it is always your choice to ignore your personal safety. its is your right to choose words that insult people unintentionally. its LEGAL. if your logic leads you to need to ignore reality, that is also your right. go ahead. its not going to lead you to many good things in your life.

actually whether only the empowered group in society(in the united states people of european descent) can be racist and others can only be racial prejudiced is a semantic argument, and one i don't think is really that important.

an empowered group has much more of an ability to impose its views on race upon a disempowered group than vice versa, whether this power is a fundimental aspect of what racism is or not is a matter of definition. there is certainly something different about the institutional and systematic nature of white racism over a long historical period than the much less powerful racial biases of blacks back toward whites or from one less empowered group to another. it is a difference that must be is some way acknowledged in the understanding and discussion of the subject.

whether you want to say only whites are racist and others are something less than racist, or all people can be racist but when its backed up with so much power it becomes something more, what's important is to understand that there are differences caused by that power dynamic.

excellent point. ernst

kinda like a 25 year old man and a 10 year old boy in a fist fight. they can both throw punches but one causes much more damage than the other.

if you are in a public place and you call ONE person that name, everyone who hears it makes a judgement about you. everyone who is of black african descent who hears it is insulted by it no matter if you use it towards them. everyone who has a loved one of black african descent is insulted by it. thats what the word IS and what the word MEANS no matter what YOUR definition is. no one is going to care what your intention is. they will only hear your words and judge you accordingly.

That’s according to you anyway. Perhaps you've never thought that you were wrong?

it is always your choice to ignore your personal safety. its is your right to choose words that insult people unintentionally. its LEGAL. if your logic leads you to need to ignore reality, that is also your right. go ahead. its not going to lead you to many good things in your life.

You are really not capable of understanding you are not making ground breaking revelations are you? I am well aware of the affect the word ****** has. I'm well aware of the utter stupidity it would be to walk into say a black church and shout it out at them etc...

Hell you are not even capable of reading this entire thread and taking note of the things I've already said.

actually whether only the empowered group in society(in the united states people of european descent) can be racist and others can only be racial prejudiced is a semantic argument, and one i don't think is really that important.

Right, because you know, a group of purple racists couldn't go around and murder green people.

an empowered group has much more of an ability to impose its views on race upon a disempowered group than vice versa, whether this power is a fundimental aspect of what racism is or not is a matter of definition. there is certainly something different about the institutional and systematic nature of white racism over a long historical period than the much less powerful racial biases of blacks back toward whites or from one less empowered group to another. it is a difference that must be is some way acknowledged in the understanding and discussion of the subject.

Which makes the foolish assumption that whites, or any other racial group, behave as a group. Seeing as whites do not behave as a racial group to try and create for themselves a racial superiority, you are being really quite stupid in trying to make some distinction between one group or another having power when the group you are trying to talk about isn't even a group anyway.


whether you want to say only whites are racist and others are something less than racist, or all people can be racist but when its backed up with so much power it becomes something more, what's important is to understand that there are differences caused by that power dynamic.

A dynamic that does not exist. Using teh 25 vs 10 year old example. Its like a "team" of 25 ten year olds fighting another team of 10 ten year olds. However both "teams" of 10 years disagree internally and fracture off into 7 equal groups of 5 and duke it out.

You are really not capable of understanding you are not making ground breaking revelations are you? I am well aware of the affect the word ****** has. I'm well aware of the utter stupidity it would be to walk into say a black church and shout it out at them etc...

Hell you are not even capable of reading this entire thread and taking note of the things I've already said.
well with so many posts its hard to remember exactly who said what

why didnt you just SAY you agreed with me?

well with so many posts its hard to remember exactly who said what

why didnt you just SAY you agreed with me?

Because I don't. When you start throwing public situations into it the situation changes. Take one black guy and one white guy and then have the white guy call the black guy a ******. Its just an insult that only affects that one black guy because there is no one else around. Period.

besides, there are only 3 pages.

Right, because you know, a group of purple racists couldn't go around and murder green people.



Which makes the foolish assumption that whites, or any other racial group, behave as a group. Seeing as whites do not behave as a racial group to try and create for themselves a racial superiority, you are being really quite stupid in trying to make some distinction between one group or another having power when the group you are trying to talk about isn't even a group anyway.




no. people are both individuals and parts of groups and trying to ignore that some groups have more structural power in society and focusing only on people as individuals fails to understand how society works. i am perhaps not articulate enough to convince you of this point, but i am sure that there is a difference in the impact of an individuals actions based on how empowered they are within society. perhaps not on the individuals involved(though it can sometimes be different on this level), but definitely in how it impacts on larger segments of society.

no. people are both individuals and parts of groups and trying to ignore that some groups have more structural power in society and focusing only on people as individuals fails to understand how society works. i am perhaps not articulate enough to convince you of this point, but i am sure that there is a difference in the impact of an individuals actions based on how empowered they are within society. perhaps not on the individuals involved(though it can sometimes be different on this level), but definitely in how it impacts on larger segments of society.

What you have just reveals your complete and total racist attitude.

Whites, do make up a political group. Germans do not make up a political group. Italians do not make up a political group. About the only race that makes up a political group is blacks.

Whites therefor, are not as a group in power. Multiple groups of white people are in power. Being a member of the multiple racial groups that come from Europe does not (and didn't) play a role in whether or not you are racist or if you would support racist policies against blacks.

Whites as a group do not have a larger impact on society than blacks because whites do not function as one group. Groups of people, who happen to be white, have power in society and other groups of people, who also happen to be white, have power in society and they disagree with the other white group.

Being white does not make one racist, and it does not give one power in society and Whites as a group do not make policies.

What you have just reveals your complete and total racist attitude.

Whites, do make up a political group. Germans do not make up a political group. Italians do not make up a political group. About the only race that makes up a political group is blacks.

Whites therefor, are not as a group in power. Multiple groups of white people are in power. Being a member of the multiple racial groups that come from Europe does not (and didn't) play a role in whether or not you are racist or if you would support racist policies against blacks.

Whites as a group do not have a larger impact on society than blacks because whites do not function as one group. Groups of people, who happen to be white, have power in society and other groups of people, who also happen to be white, have power in society and they disagree with the other white group.

Being white does not make one racist, and it does not give one power in society and Whites as a group do not make policies.

i'm sorry i disagree with your post so fundimentally i don't think we even have a frame of reference to communicate on this issue.

i'll just say that i never said whites were a political group, and i certainly don't think that they(or more accurately we) are monolithic, but to deny that racial and ethnic groupings have any social or cultural or even political signifigance is to be willfully oblivious of history and your own society(assuming you are american, certainly this might be less obvious to an observer from another country with more of a monoculture).

i'm sorry i disagree with your post so fundimentally i don't think we even have a frame of reference to communicate on this issue.

Yes, because you are racist. And think that race actually plays a huge role in how people think. It doesn't. The culture you were in does, not the race.

i'll just say that i never said whites were a political group, and i certainly don't think that they(or more accurately we) are monolithic, but to deny that racial and ethnic groupings have any social or cultural or even political signifigance is to be willfully oblivious of history and your own society(assuming you are american, certainly this might be less obvious to an observer from another country with more of a monoculture).

Which explains why whites fought on both sides of the Civil war. Why whites fought on both sides of the federal government vs state power debates. Which explains why whites fought on both sides of civil liberities for women, blacks, indians etc...

IE, you ARE talking about whites as if they are monolithic in thier thinkings and actions. Being white doesn't dictate your view on anything or how you see members of other races.

ie, You are acting as if because some white people are in charge they will automatically be racist and anti-black. That's so patently untrue its ludicrous.