NationStates Jolt Archive

Partially inspired by my own musings, and partially inspired by this thread, looking for new topics and interests, I've been thinking.

As a political board, a lot of our discussions either involve, center around, or have as a peripheral issue, the law. As someone who has a career in the law, I (and not just I, others certainly as well) are sometimes approached to weigh in or clarify some issues.

So what I'm thinking of is creating a series of threads about various issues in the law. Topics I am thinking of, but are not limited to:

1) Miranda warnings, what are they and how do they work?
2) 1st and its limitations
3) 6th amendment right to counsel
4) abortion law as it stands
5) PATRIOT act and FISA

Topics not necessarily to debate the issues of whether such laws are good or not, but rather create threads on those topics for questions as to how they stand now, that can be used as reference in other arguments. I'm willing to throw myself under the bus and be willing to do the writing and research necessary for those types of threads, if there's any interest.

So, thoughts?

I think that's a good idea. If nothing else, it'll teach me a few things.

Well....itll inevitably become a debate/:soap: thread...

So, id enjoy fighting over the ins and outs of all those things, lol..

Partially inspired by my own musings, and partially inspired by this thread, looking for new topics and interests, I've been thinking.

As a political board, a lot of our discussions either involve, center around, or have as a peripheral issue, the law. As someone who has a career in the law, I (and not just I, others certainly as well) are sometimes approached to weigh in or clarify some issues.

So what I'm thinking of is creating a series of threads about various issues in the law. Topics I am thinking of, but are not limited to:

1) Miranda warnings, what are they and how do they work?
2) 1st and its limitations
3) 6th amendment right to council
4) abortion law as it stands
5) PATRIOT act and FISA

Topics not necessarily to debate the issues of whether such laws are good or not, but rather create threads on those topics for questions as to how they stand now, that can be used as reference in other arguments. I'm willing to throw myself under the bus and be willing to do the writing and research necessary for those types of threads, if there's any interest.

So, thoughts?

Not being from the USA I wouldn't have much to add to those, although I'd read them with interest. I would be interested in learning more about extradition and how American law works with the citizens of other countries, but I'm not sure if that's out of the scope of your suggestion.

its an excellent idea but it seems like a lot of work for our lawyers to put in just for the glory.

im also intrigued by the idea of similar topics based on other country's legal systems..."the use of the magna carta in modern british jurisprudence"

Not being from the USA I wouldn't have much to add to those, although I'd read them with interest. I would be interested in learning more about extradition and how American law works with the citizens of other countries, but I'm not sure if that's out of the scope of your suggestion.

sure, I'd be perfectly open to suggestions. How extradition works is something I"m not very familiar on, but hey, nothing says it can't be a learning experience for me too.

I think the First has been twisted out of all recognition, set on fire, tap-danced around, tunneled under and many other prepositional phrases as well. From FISA/wiretap (and the ludicrous telecom immunity for breaking the law, regardless of who asked you to) to school newspaper constraint and censorship, to the expansion of the FCC's powers to include content regulation, the de facto religious test for office (and if you don't think there is one regardless of Article Three and the First, try and run as an atheist or without film of you attending some kind of established church and see how far you get) -- freedoms have been eroding like Atlantic Coast barrier islands for the last two to three decades. That's what I think.

It would also serve as a valuable resource for future debates where the laws in question are relevant...

Sounds interesting to me.

Be we all know the debate will start a few pages in, once the threads are up. =)

I've done something similar for embryonic stem cell research, and I bump that thread occasionally when the topic comes back up. It could be helpful to have something similar with various legal issues.

If you're willing, it might be good to add 2nd amendment issues to the mix. And maybe someone can volunteer for international law (your knowledge will obviously be US-centric).

Or eminent domain. That's one that comes up periodically.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more legal issues I think of - and we couldn't expect you to do too much, so take this post as you will. =)

1) Miranda warnings, what are they and how do they work?
You get them once you've been arrested, and if you're not told what your rights are regarding the courts, then anything you blurt out can't be taken as proper evidence.
2) 1st and its limitations
Too many people being arseholes/"PC", depending on how you look at it.
3) 6th amendment right to council
Counsel, no?
4) abortion law as it stands
"As often as you like" irritates people, and you can get around it, "not at all" means getting illegal abortions, which is a Bad Thing.
5) PATRIOT act and FISA
Utter bullshi- *polis types come in through the window*

REMEMBER ME AS A HERO!

Counsel, no?

Wow, that's horribly embarrassing, stupid spellchecker and my lack of paying attention

Wow, that's horribly embarrassing, stupid spellchecker and my lack of paying attention
Sorry if it sounded smug, am just trying to help :(

I'd read 'em. :)

You get them once you've been arrested, and if you're not told what your rights are regarding the courts, then anything you blurt out can't be taken as proper evidence.

and this, and sorry to use you as an example, would be a good purpose of those threads, because, while that might be what is commonly perceived, it's not actually entirely true.

Partially inspired by my own musings, and partially inspired by this thread, looking for new topics and interests, I've been thinking.

As a political board, a lot of our discussions either involve, center around, or have as a peripheral issue, the law. As someone who has a career in the law, I (and not just I, others certainly as well) are sometimes approached to weigh in or clarify some issues.

So what I'm thinking of is creating a series of threads about various issues in the law. Topics I am thinking of, but are not limited to:

1) Miranda warnings, what are they and how do they work?
2) 1st and its limitations
3) 6th amendment right to counsel
4) abortion law as it stands
5) PATRIOT act and FISA

Topics not necessarily to debate the issues of whether such laws are good or not, but rather create threads on those topics for questions as to how they stand now, that can be used as reference in other arguments. I'm willing to throw myself under the bus and be willing to do the writing and research necessary for those types of threads, if there's any interest.

So, thoughts?

I like the idea specially numbers 1 and 3 which seem different from the norm and intresting to learn about

Sorry if it sounded smug, am just trying to help :(

no no, it's quite fine, it's entirely my fault for not being able to spell my own bloody profession.

and this, and sorry to use you as an example, would be a good purpose of those threads, because, while that might be what is commonly perceived, it's not actually entirely true.
Eh, I just got it off wiki, I'll be honest, I don't know much about US law.

Sounds interesting to me.

Be we all know the debate will start a few pages in, once the threads are up. =)

I've done something similar for embryonic stem cell research, and I bump that thread occasionally when the topic comes back up. It could be helpful to have something similar with various legal issues.

If you're willing, it might be good to add 2nd amendment issues to the mix. And maybe someone can volunteer for international law (your knowledge will obviously be US-centric).

Or eminent domain. That's one that comes up periodically.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more legal issues I think of - and we couldn't expect you to do too much, so take this post as you will. =)

Excellent. I'd add copyright law, too. We're still at what, 1923 and holding for public domain? How fucked is that? 75 years for the heirs and assigns wasn't enough, so now it's 95. I thought we taxed inheritances in this country... ...which would be another good topic. The inheritance tax (pro tax term -- "estate tax" was the neutral term, and "death tax" is the anti term, which is why I'll never use it).

Excellent. I'd add copyright law, too. We're still at what, 1923 and holding for public domain? How fucked is that? 75 years for the heirs and assigns wasn't enough, so now it's 95. I thought we taxed inheritances in this country... ...which would be another good topic. The inheritance tax (pro tax term -- "estate tax" was the neutral term, and "death tax" is the anti term, which is why I'll never use it).

If there is somebody here who knows about British tax law, I am all ears... eyes? um, ya know what I mean :)

<on the idea of creating a set of threads on US law> not necessarily to debate the issues of whether such laws are good or not, but rather create threads on those topics for questions as to how they stand now, that can be used as reference in other arguments. I'm willing to throw myself under the bus and be willing to do the writing and research necessary for those types of threads, if there's any interest.
I'd be interested in reading that sort of thing. I used to learn a lot about US law back in the Usenet days but that was a long time ago, and a refresher is long overdue :)

*snip*

So, thoughts?

Fuck your ridiculous and insular USian law.

You really are bored, aren't you?

Fuck your ridiculous and insular USian law.

I'd suggest doing it for canadian law, but I'm unsure how interesting a legal regime is when 90% of the laws concern either theft of moose, or how to fuck over the natives

You really are bored, aren't you?

I assert my 5th :p

I'd suggest doing it for canadian law, but I'm unsure how interesting a legal regime is when 90% of the laws concern either theft of moose, or how to fuck over the natives

I'd chuckle, but the stolen native moose might get upset.

Actually what I like about all the OTHER common law countries is the way they don't pretend their law is the only law out there. So you can practice law in Australia, and know what is going on in Great Britain or Canada etc...and not only do you get to know, you are supposed to keep track of these changes as they may be persuasive in your own courts.

I assert my 5th :p
You can't.

Fuck your mostly correct and sane American law.

Fixed

Fixed

"Nostly correct"?

The problem is you lack the ability to compare your legal system to that of other common-law countries because of your ridiculous insularity.

Whilst we can mock yours without too much trouble, as we're somewhat familiar with it.

I think it's a great idea.

"Nostly correct"?

It was written that way, and is going to be that way forever. All typos have some divine purpose.

It was written that way, and is going to be that way forever. All typos have some divine purpose.

It's like a blend between 'costly' and 'nose'. It should be the new term for rhinoplasty, since that term makes one erroneously think of horns.

It's like a blend between 'costly' and 'nose'. It should be the new term for rhinoplasty, since that term makes one erroneously think of horns.

Yeah sure.

I think it's a great idea.

Oh shut up.

I knew you'd eventually betray me. You can't help it, can you? Can you, you dirty USian scum?

Yeah sure.

Don't you 'yeah sure' me.

It's like a blend between 'costly' and 'nose'. It should be the new term for rhinoplasty, since that term makes one erroneously think of horns.
Why erroneously? Rhinos are called rhinos because of the 'nose' association in the first place.

Oh shut up.

I knew you'd eventually betray me. You can't help it, can you? Can you, you dirty American scum?

Fix'd.

Can you please stop making that same mistake?

Why erroneously? Rhinos are called rhinos because of the 'nose' association in the first place.

Ok, here's a bucket of shut up.

Ok, here's a bucket of shut up.
Excellent... I'll put it with the others. :salute:

Fix'd.

Can you please stop making that same mistake?

I can't stop making a mistake if I never made it in the first place.

Usian. Citizen of the United States of America. Merkin.

Ok, here's a bucket of shut up.
http://www.justourimages.com/main/images/humor/cup%20of%20shut%20the%20fuck%20up.jpg

Be more subtle, dispense cups :p

Okay but in all seriousness, it would be cool. And it would piss people off, and you could create your own sort of space to get people to say stupid things about the law, so you don't have to go looking for them. I can see how it would appeal to you.

For the record, Neo Art is actually a capable counselor even outside the United States.

Two years ago, I was attending a holocaust deniers conference and singles mixer in Iran, hosted by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Anyway, my luggage included a number of men's fitness and health magazines which the Iranian customs people thought was gay porn. Evidently "Black Inches" magazine doesn't translate well.

Long story short, they were going to hang me as a gay, and I needed a lawyer, and Neo Art, being a Jew, is therefore a brilliant lawyer.

So, I wasn't hung. The judge must've really been convinced of my innocence, because he kept repeating how not hung I was.

Anyway, my gratitude to Neo Art for his brilliant closing argument, which is now taught in legal schools as the "Being a Stupid Racist Putz is Not The Same Thing As Being Gay" Defense.

It was written that way, and is going to be that way forever. All typos have some divine purpose.

I kind of like that. But, in any case...

I think what would be more useful would be a thread about different types of legal systems. I was recently talking to a friend from Venezuela, who was trying to explain the legal system in his country. Being a transplanted American, I was baffled and confused, especially by his explanation of the judicial system. Japan's introduction of the saibanin (lay judges, like a small jury) in severe criminal cases in 2004 was strange to me, as well--I had no idea that juries had not been in use there in recent times. While people seem to be relatively well informed about high court decisions and procedures, they know a lot less about international differences in the type of court situations they would be likely to be effected by in their lifetimes.

I can't stop making a mistake if I never made it in the first place.

Usian. Citizen of the United States of America. Merkin.

American: referfing to people from the United States of America.

Take your PC crap elsewhere.

*blah blah legal pish*
Being a transplanted American
*blah blah legal pish*
:eek:

Which bit of you used to be / is now American that previously wasn't?

*snip*

iEnjoy

American: referfing to people from the United States of America.

Take your PC crap elsewhere.

South Americans are from the USA?

SHOCKING!

Take your geographic illiteracy elsewhere.

For the record, Neo Art is actually a capable counselor even outside the United States.

Two years ago, I was attending a holocaust deniers conference and singles mixer in Iran, hosted by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Anyway, my luggage included a number of men's fitness and health magazines which the Iranian customs people thought was gay porn. Evidently "Black Inches" magazine doesn't translate well.

Long story short, they were going to hang me as a gay, and I needed a lawyer, and Neo Art, being a Jew, is therefore a brilliant lawyer.

So, I wasn't hung. The judge must've really been convinced of my innocence, because he kept repeating how not hung I was.

Anyway, my gratitude to Neo Art for his brilliant closing argument, which is now taught in legal schools as the "Being a Stupid Racist Putz is Not The Same Thing As Being Gay" Defense.

Welcome back. :D

Oh shut up.

I knew you'd eventually betray me. You can't help it, can you? Can you, you dirty USian scum?

USia FTW!

Merkins rule over Milk Bags!

That's my name for y'all up there because I heard that your milk comes in bags.


And yes... I've been waiting to betray you for some time now you dirty Milk Bag.

:eek:

Which bit of you used to be / is now American that previously wasn't?

My liver! :eek:

No, I'm living outside the both of the Americas. (I'm from the United States, and if calling myself 'American' is something that's confusing on this forum, I'll try to specify.) I live in Kobe, Japan on a permanent residency visa.

USia FTW!

Merkins rule over Milk Bags!

That's my name for y'all up there because I heard that your milk comes in bags.


And yes... I've been waiting to betray you for some time now you dirty Milk Bag.
Fine.

See if you can come for sex in Montreal.


(don't cry, of course you can)

South Americans are from the USA?

SHOCKING!

Take your geographic illiteracy elsewhere.

I am not geographicly illterate. South Americans are refered to by what country they are in, or from. For example Columbians and Bolvians.

I find the term "USian" vile and offensive. To me it is like calling a Scotsman, English. Or refering to Canadians as "moose fuckers".

Take your Anti-American bias elsewhere.

Fine.

See if you can come for sex in Montreal.


(don't cry, of course you can)


well how else would you spend the night before your wedding

it's what's made my marriage so strong :fluffle:

I am not geographicly illterate. South Americans are refered to by what country they are in, or from. For example Columbians and Bolvians.

I find the term "USian" vile and offensive. To me it is like calling a Scotsman, English. Or refering to Canadians as "moose fuckers".

Take your Anti-American bias elsewhere.

I could care less that you go to ridiculous and unsupported extremes when applying your own personal connotations to the term USian. That's frankly, your problem.

I've used the term consistently during my time here and will continue to do so. "South American" is a commonly used geographic designation that is just as fine as "European", whatever you might pretend to the contrary.

I am not geographicly illterate. South Americans are refered to by what country they are in, or from. For example Columbians and Bolvians.

I find the term "USian" vile and offensive. To me it is like calling a Scotsman, English. Or refering to Canadians as "moose fuckers".

Take your Anti-American bias elsewhere.

We USians are a proud people Neesika!

Don't mess with Murka!


I personally am not offended by a word that I prefer to use but other people have thin skins and are bothered by silly things so please try to be more PC and consider their feelings.

Welcome back. :D

Back like the plague through Europe, baby...

I could care less that you go to ridiculous and unsupported extremes when applying your own personal connotations to the term USian. That's frankly, your problem.

I've used the term consistently during my time here and will continue to do so. "South American" is a commonly used geographic designation that is just as fine as "European", whatever you might pretend to the contrary.

If some black people aren't offended by the word "******", does that mean it should be okay to use it every time you meet a black person?

well how else would you spend the night before your wedding

it's what's made my marriage so strong :fluffle:

I still think our wedding should be webcast with a link for NSGers :D

If some black people aren't offended by the word "******", does that mean it should be okay to use it every time you meet a black person?

Cry harder please.

You're the one making the effort to be offended.

Comparing USian to ****** is idiotic.

I still think our wedding should be webcast with a link for NSGers :D

Wait, the wedding with Gog or our poly wedding?

If some black people aren't offended by the word "******", does that mean it should be okay to use it every time you meet a black person?

How does that comparison even make sense?

Cry harder please.

You're the one making the effort to be offended.

Comparing USian to ****** is idiotic.

I'm sorry for being offended by racism.

You think its idiotic, I thinks its just as bad.

Wait, the wedding with Gog or our poly wedding?

The one is currently legal, the other might have to wait.

Cry harder please.

You're the one making the effort to be offended.

Comparing USian to ****** is idiotic.

Especially considering that it was brought to NSG by me (a USian) first as far as I know.

It was never considered a slur until Eut got all bent out of shape over it and raised a huge stink.

Until then most people were just saying it sounded dumb, then with Eut they all decided to go that extra mile and declared it derogatory.


Boo hoo.


And to bring this topic back - make a legal thread out of that Art! :cool:

Shouldn't one just post these threads in a sort of step-by-step process, and see how the first one is taken, instead of starting a thread to ask if they should start a thread?

How does that comparison even make sense?

I don't think binary boy is going for sense.

The one is currently legal, the other might have to wait.

Pft - Mrs Goody Play By The Book Two Shoes

Shouldn't one just post these threads in a sort of step-by-step process, and see how the first one is taken, instead of starting a thread to ask if they should start a thread?

In the legal profession, pedantry is praised :D

Pft - Mrs Goody Play By The Book Two Shoes

Let me break him in a bit before I start sharing him, k?

To me it is like calling a Scotsman, English.
*trembles at the mere thought*

I'm sorry for being offended by racism.
How is an abbreviation racism?

The very worst connotation of the term is that *shockgasphorror* you are a citizen of the United States.

In the legal profession, pedantry is praised :D
In Soviet Russia, pedantry praises LEGAL PROFESSION!

In Soviet Russia, pedantry praises LEGAL PROFESSION!

How did I anticipate this?

Am I really that cynical?

Let me break him in a bit before I start sharing him, k?

I know how you are with your new toys. You don't just break them in... you break them. :P

I know how you are with your new toys. You don't just break them in... you break them. :P

Sheesh...it's not like people are vibrators. And four of them in two weeks is hardly a record I'm sure.

*trembles at the mere thought*


How is an abbreviation racism?

The very worst connotation of the term is that *shockgasphorror* you are a citizen of the United States.

Then call us Americans. Are those extra three or four letters really that hard to type, when all it takes is a little compassion?

Sheesh...it's not like people are vibrators. And four of them in two weeks is hardly a record I'm sure.

Men are organic sex toys.

Ask Ifreann. XD

Then call us Americans.
That's often too vague a term, especially on an international forum such as this.

If you think the term is being used to specifically bait you, then by all means complain, but on its own it's simply a useful term for quickly indicating a citizen of the USA.

(Or the United States of America, if you're that sensitive to abbreviation.)

Mountain, meet your father, Molehill.

mountain, Meet Your Father, Molehill.

Qft...

That's often too vague a term, especially on an international forum such as this.

If you think the term is being used to specifically bait you, then by all means complain, but on its own it's simply a useful term for quickly indicating a citizen of the USA.

(Or the United States of America, if you're that sensitive to abbreviation.)

United States of Americans?

USAmericans?

meh. I typically use something like "US citizen", but I'm not going to pretend that "USian" is some horrible awful term.

If some black people aren't offended by the word "******", does that mean it should be okay to use it every time you meet a black person?

The correct rendering is "Nyarlathahotep".

United States of Americans?

USAmericans?
I was talking about the term 'USian', not about 'Americans'.

I'm not going to pretend that "USian" is some horrible awful term.

But grammatically, it doesn't make a lot of sense, and its in general (but of course not always) used in a derogatory fashion, which means you're probably better off not using that term.

In b4 [/threadjack]

But grammatically, it doesn't make a lot of sense,
'USian', as 'of the United States'. Where's the grammatical nonsense?

and its in general (but of course not always) used in a derogatory fashion
News to me.

It tends to be mostly used on here merely to describe someone from the US; recognising that 'American' is too vague a term. I agree with Demi that 'US citizen' is more proper, but there's nothing to worry about in 'USian'.

I was talking about the term 'USian', not about 'Americans'.

I know. I was trying to find something our friend might find acceptable. =)


But grammatically, it doesn't make a lot of sense, and its in general (but of course not always) used in a derogatory fashion, which means you're probably better off not using that term.

Meh, it makes just as much grammatical sense as using the term "Americans" to describe a small subset of people who live on the American continent.

The truth of the matter is that United States of America doesn't really lend itself very well to any of the conventional naming schemes for its people. The part that sets the USA apart from the rest of the continent is the "United States" part, but that's hard to turn into a term for the residents. I suppose "Statesian" or something like that would be more akin to what happens with most nationalities.

And I've not really heard the term used in a derogatory fashion. I've seen people get pissy about the US co-opting the term "Americans" as if we're the only ones on the continent and I've seen people get pissy about the term USians. But I've never gotten the sense that either term is used primarily in a derogatory fashion.

I know. I was trying to find something our friend might find acceptable. =)
Appypolly loggy, mine droog.

I suppose "Statesian" or something like that would be more akin to what happens with most nationalities.
Which is what I have always thought 'USian' represents.

I can't stop making a mistake if I never made it in the first place.

Usian. Citizen of the United States of America. Merkin.

please, if you cant use the proper word use MERKIN. at least it has some humor in it.

'USian', as 'of the United States'. Where's the grammatical nonsense?


Because you're saying United Statesian, which doesn't make any sense. Just like saying 'Peoples Republican' is a silly way of talking about people from the Peoples Republic of China.


News to me.

It tends to be mostly used on here merely to describe someone from the US; recognising that 'American' is too vague a term. I agree with Demi that 'US citizen' is more proper, but there's nothing to worry about in 'USian'.

Well this place is not the only place its used. I heard it quite a lot before it was even used here. And I myself use it specifically to be derogatory and to wind up Americans, if it didn't wind them up, I probably would never use the term.

And I've not really heard the term used in a derogatory fashion.

Then you haven't seen enough of my posts from 2006 then. :D

How did I anticipate this?
In Soviet Russia, tired joke anticipates YOU!
Am I really that cynical?
No.

Well this place is not the only place its used. I heard it quite a lot before it was even used here. And I myself use it specifically to be derogatory and to wind up Americans, if it didn't wind them up, I probably would never use the term.

That's trolling. Trolling is bad. You shouldn't troll. I don't troll.

Anyway, the use of Merkin isn't funny. I knew a guy, a stand up comic, got testicular cancer and had to use a merkin.

Because you're saying United Statesian, which doesn't make any sense.
It makes some sense, but I see your point.

And I myself use it specifically to be derogatory and to wind up Americans, if it didn't wind them up, I probably would never use the term.
*slaps wrist*

That's trolling. Trolling is bad. You shouldn't troll.

Don't worry, I don't use that term any more.


I don't troll.


Sure. :D

Partially inspired by my own musings, and partially inspired by this thread, looking for new topics and interests, I've been thinking.

As a political board, a lot of our discussions either involve, center around, or have as a peripheral issue, the law. As someone who has a career in the law, I (and not just I, others certainly as well) are sometimes approached to weigh in or clarify some issues.

So what I'm thinking of is creating a series of threads about various issues in the law. Topics I am thinking of, but are not limited to:

1) Miranda warnings, what are they and how do they work?
2) 1st and its limitations
3) 6th amendment right to counsel
4) abortion law as it stands
5) PATRIOT act and FISA

Topics not necessarily to debate the issues of whether such laws are good or not, but rather create threads on those topics for questions as to how they stand now, that can be used as reference in other arguments. I'm willing to throw myself under the bus and be willing to do the writing and research necessary for those types of threads, if there's any interest.

So, thoughts?

Why not something really dreary, like the 4th Amendment? A lot of people have the misconception that the exclusionary rule applies everywhere, when it doesn't.

Because you're saying United Statesian, which doesn't make any sense. Just like saying 'Peoples Republican' is a silly way of talking about people from the Peoples Republic of China.

The difference being that the name in the title is "China", while "People's Republic" is descriptive.

In the case of the United States of America, the closest thing to a name is "United States" (although it is also descriptive) while "America" simply denotes where the states are located.

Then you haven't seen enough of my posts from 2006 then.

LOL. Or maybe I just don't get wound up about it and thus didn't notice the intent?

The difference being that the name in the title is "China", while "People's Republic" is descriptive.

In the case of the United States of America, the closest thing to a name is "United States" (although it is also descriptive) while "America" simply denotes where the states are located.


no its not.

we are americans because we have DIBS on the name. we were the first country in the americas so we got first choice of names. maybe there was some hope that other "states" would form and join us, i dunno.

we are americans in the same way that canadians are canandians and not dominionites, that mexicans are not EUistas, that subjects of the united kingdom are not UKers.

no its not.

we are americans because we have DIBS on the name. we were the first country in the americas so we got first choice of names. maybe there was some hope that other "states" would form and join us, i dunno.

we are americans in the same way that canadians are canandians and not dominionites, that mexicans are not EUistas, that subjects of the united kingdom are not UKers.

Canada is a name. Mexico is a name. None of them are descriptors of location - ie. what continent they happen to be on. The founders of the USA may have been hoping that they would eventually take over the entirety of the Americas, but it didn't happen.

So all of those are different from the USA, which doesn't really have a specific name. And it doesn't make sense to say we have dibs on an entire continent because we formed the first nation here (which, by the way, isn't really true. At best, you could say we formed the first breakaway nation from Europe).

Giving the US "dibs" on "American" because we were the first of the modern countries on the continent would be akin to saying that the Chinese are the only "Asians". In fact, calling "dibs" would make more sense with them, since their nation dates back millennia.

Giving the US "dibs" on "American" because we were the first of the modern countries on the continent would be akin to saying that the Chinese are the only "Asians". In fact, calling "dibs" would make more sense with them, since their nation dates back millennia.
I don't really see why, seeing as both the Chinese and Indians have been on Asia, along with countless other kingdoms and countries, and we've had meaningful contact with them for 600 or so years. So calling either Asian will bring up problems.

On the other hand, a newly founded set of colonies, which then turned into a 'proper' country, self-identifying as American without anyone at the time being overly offended means they kinda get dibs on that one.

Canada is a name. Mexico is a name. None of them are descriptors of location - ie. what continent they happen to be on. The founders of the USA may have been hoping that they would eventually take over the entirety of the Americas, but it didn't happen.

So all of those are different from the USA, which doesn't really have a specific name. And it doesn't make sense to say we have dibs on an entire continent because we formed the first nation here (which, by the way, isn't really true. At best, you could say we formed the first breakaway nation from Europe).

Giving the US "dibs" on "American" because we were the first of the modern countries on the continent would be akin to saying that the Chinese are the only "Asians". In fact, calling "dibs" would make more sense with them, since their nation dates back millennia.

no really thats our name.

if we had decided to be the united states of canada, the canadians would have been shit out of luck when they got their independence.

Please. When some says a person is American, they mean from the United States of America. If they someone from the Americas who is from Canada, they say Canadian. If they mean someone from Argentina, they say Argentinian. Eventually common usage wins out over semantics and nitpicking.

Please. When some says a person is American, they mean from the United States of America. If they someone from the Americas who is from Canada, they say Canadian. If they mean someone from Argentina, they say Argentinian. Eventually common usage wins out over semantics and nitpicking.

And language changes.

You understand who we mean when we say USian.

Is it a slur to you? Akin to '******'?

And language changes.
Yes, it does. But "USian" just sounds retarded.

And language changes.

You understand who we mean when we say USian.

Is it a slur to you? Akin to '******'?

to quote DATA from the star trek episode where dr pulaski kept calling him DAHTA--"one is my name and one is not"

Oh my, it has been awhile since a USian threadjack. How I have missed it.

Getting back to the OP, it's a great idea. Possibly a few can be practical matters, like your rights regarding Search and Seizure in a police encounter.

Yes, it does. But "USian" just sounds retarded.

Well I'm not typing out estadounidense or etatsunisien (pardon my lack of accents, I'm being lazy)...it would defeat the purpose of using a good, short term that isn't so general.

I don't really see why, seeing as both the Chinese and Indians have been on Asia, along with countless other kingdoms and countries, and we've had meaningful contact with them for 600 or so years. So calling either Asian will bring up problems.

The idea was "First modern nation there gets dibs on the name based on the entire continent."

China is the oldest modern nation that has existed as a single nation on the Asian continent (I think), so that means that, by that same logic, the Chinese get dibs on "Asian."

On the other hand, a newly founded set of colonies, which then turned into a 'proper' country, self-identifying as American without anyone at the time being overly offended means they kinda get dibs on that one.

The initial founders of the US didn't really self-identify as "American." They generally self-identified as citizens of their state (ie. Georgians, Virginians, etc.)

no really thats our name.

if we had decided to be the united states of canada, the canadians would have been shit out of luck when they got their independence.

If we had decided to be the United States of Canada, we would have been using a name, instead of a geographic descriptor.

But the founders of our nation weren't really interested in giving it a name - probably because the most important thing to them wasn't the national government. The important thing as far as citizenship went was the state governments, and the states already had names.

Well I'm not typing out estadounidense or etatsunisien (pardon my lack of accents, I'm being lazy)...it would defeat the purpose of using a good, short term that isn't so general.

Yank is an excellent short term.

Yank is an excellent short term.

And one I use to mix things up a bit.

If we had decided to be the United States of Canada, we would have been using a name, instead of a geographic descriptor.

But the founders of our nation weren't really interested in giving it a name - probably because the most important thing to them wasn't the national government. The important thing as far as citizenship went was the state governments, and the states already had names.

no REALLY, its our name and has been the way we have been referred to from the beginning (even if we used state references internally)

As one digs deeper into the national character of the Americans, one sees that they have sought the value of everything in this world only in the answer to this single question: how much money will it bring in?


we used it then, we use it now, we use NO OTHER NAME for ourselves. how is it anything but our name?

Yank is an excellent short term.

Yeah, but you piss off Southerners, that way.

I've known people who'd probably punch you in the face if you called them Yanks or Yankees. Of course, that has a lot to do with the fact that they have absolutely no idea that it doesn't mean "someone from the Northern states of the US" to everyone in the world.

to quote DATA from the star trek episode where dr pulaski kept calling him DAHTA--"one is my name and one is not"

Quite true, but Data didn't get to define which one was his name - it was bestowed by others. The same applies here. It really doesn't matter if you want to be called "American" or "The greatest people on earth", or "Those damn Yanks". What matters is what others wish to call you. If we decide that we are going to denominate those that are citizens of the United States of America as Usians (it is an awful lot shorter than "Citizens of the United States of America") then that will be the name that you have for those that so decide. Nothing makes you have to use the name - after all Data could easily have referred to himself as ERNIE, had he so been programmed.

we used it then, we use it now, we use NO OTHER NAME for ourselves. how is it anything but our name?

To be fair, you haven't really showed that we used it. You quoted a French author.

But I'm not really interested in continuing the conversation, so no biggie.

My position on USian is...

I don't use it to be derogatory or to bait people, or to be rude. I'm sorry some of you get so bent out of shape about it...but you aren't going to force me to stop using it as a quicker way of avoiding the term 'American'...you'll note I don't use it alone...I will type out 'citizen of the US' and other variations of such. You might think my reasons for using the term are stupid...but it makes perfect sense to me. USian is a lazy term, one I'd only use in the written form. You know what I mean, it causes no confusion.

So please. Get over it. No one is telling you to call yourself anything but 'Americans'. Well, at least I'm not.

My position on USian is...

I don't use it to be derogatory or to bait people, or to be rude. I'm sorry some of you get so bent out of shape about it...but you aren't going to force me to stop using it as a quicker way of avoiding the term 'American'...you'll note I don't use it alone...I will type out 'citizen of the US' and other variations of such. You might think my reasons for using the term are stupid...but it makes perfect sense to me. USian is a lazy term, one I'd only use in the written form. You know what I mean, it causes no confusion.

So please. Get over it.

I'll use Firstian since it's shorter than typing "First People"

Yes, it does. But "USian" just sounds retarded.

My offer still stands: I will happily refer to my countrymen (and women) as USian as soon as the rest of the world agrees to be called "THEMian."

As for Neo Art's original post, I would be happy to see threads about those subjects. I probably wouldn't post much, but I would enjoy reading someone who actually knows something about the law, e.g., you, discuss it.

I'll use Firstian since it's shorter than typing "First People"

Make sure you explain it to me a few times so I remember what it's supposed to mean.

Though it's "First Nations"...don't know anyone who says "First People".

FNer...we use that actually.

Or NDN :D

Quite true, but Data didn't get to define which one was his name - it was bestowed by others. The same applies here. It really doesn't matter if you want to be called "American" or "The greatest people on earth", or "Those damn Yanks". What matters is what others wish to call you. If we decide that we are going to denominate those that are citizens of the United States of America as Usians (it is an awful lot shorter than "Citizens of the United States of America") then that will be the name that you have for those that so decide. Nothing makes you have to use the name - after all Data could easily have referred to himself as ERNIE, had he so been programmed.

we have had ONE name for our whole existence. we get to decide our name the same way as every other country in the world has done.

to "call us out of our name" is disrespectful.

and incorrect.

To be fair, you haven't really showed that we used it. You quoted a French author.

But I'm not really interested in continuing the conversation, so no biggie.

to be fair, you know it doesnt matter.

Make sure you explain it to me a few times so I remember what it's supposed to mean.

Though it's "First Nations"...don't know anyone who says "First People".

FNer...we use that actually.

Or NDN :D

What about IBY? (In Before You)

to be fair, you know it doesnt matter.

I think it doesn't matter. People have a problem with the typical way US citizens describe themselves? No biggie. I'm not particularly attached to it and I could see how some people might be confused by it or find it insulting to the rest of the nations located on the American continents. So I use a more specific term when discussing things in an international setting.

You seem to see it as some sort of personal insult for someone to prefer a more specific term.

we have had ONE name for our whole existence. we get to decide our name the same way as every other country in the world has done.

to "call us out of our name" is disrespectful.

and incorrect.

Huh? Which countries got to decide on their names? A few nations in Africa and Asia renamed themselves, thus generating new denominations for the people.

Oh and the popular name of your country is what? The US. Hence Usian. Where is the problem?

I am not calling you 'out of your name', I am merely deriving the name for the citizen of the US from the term US that is in very common usage.

I think it doesn't matter. People have a problem with the typical way US citizens describe themselves? No biggie. I'm not particularly attached to it and I could see how some people might be confused by it or find it insulting to the rest of the nations located on the American continents. So I use a more specific term when discussing things in an international setting.

You seem to see it as some sort of personal insult for someone to prefer a more specific term.


The time is near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves.
George Washington


Thomas Paine Quotes
"The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind. Many circumstances hath, and will arise, which are not local, but universal, and through which the principles of all Lovers of Mankind are affected, and in the Event of which, their Affections are interested. The laying a Country desolate with Fire and Sword, declaring War against the natural rights of all Mankind, and extirpating the Defenders thereof from the Face of the Earth, is the Concern of every Man to whom Nature hath given the Power of feeling; of which Class, regardless of Party Censure, is the author."



I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. --thomas jefferson


now we have established that WE used it and it was used to refer to us by others.

as we all already knew was true.

we have no other name for ourselves.

Huh? Which countries got to decide on their names? A few nations in Africa and Asia renamed themselves, thus generating new denominations for the people.

Oh and the popular name of your country is what? The US. Hence Usian. Where is the problem?

I am not calling you 'out of your name', I am merely deriving the name for the citizen of the US from the term US that is in very common usage.

our country is not THE US. it is the united states of america. "the united states" part is the same as the "estado unidos" part of mexico and the "dominion" part of canada. we call ourselves americans the same way people from brazil call themselves brazillians. thats the way it works.

when countries change their name WE USE THAT NAME. i dont know what you are on about. when rhodesia decided to change their name to zimbabwe we stopped calling them rhodesians and started calling them zimbabweans.

as is only right. all people should be called by their preferred name.

we have no other name for ourselves.

US citizen is a name, and an accurate one at that. And it's one that doesn't rely on the assumption that the USA is somehow more important than the rest of the American nations and is thus not seen as insulting by others.

Like I said, I don't see what all the fuss is about.

now we have established that WE used it and it was used to refer to us by others.

as we all already knew was true.

we have no other name for ourselves.

Fine, but we do have another name for you. After all I live in America and am thus American, but I don't live in the United States. You sort it out for yourself. I have sorted it out for me.

our country is not THE US. it is the united states of america. "the united states" part is the same as the "estado unidos" part of mexico and the "dominion" part of canada. we call ourselves americans the same way people from brazil call themselves brazillians. thats the way it works. I don't see you getting all pissy when we call your country the US.

Fine, but we do have another name for you. After all I live in America and am thus American, but I don't live in the United States. You sort it out for yourself. I have sorted it out for me.

This.

when countries change their name WE USE THAT NAME. i dont know what you are on about. when rhodesia decided to change their name to zimbabwe we stopped calling them rhodesians and started calling them zimbabweans.

Actually, we do that if we feel like it. Our government still refers to "Burma" and the "Burmese", for instance.

I don't see you getting all pissy when we call your country the US.

go figure.

we get to choose that kind of thing just like everyone else does.

our country is not THE US. it is the united states of america. "the united states" part is the same as the "estado unidos" part of mexico and the "dominion" part of canada. we call ourselves americans the same way people from brazil call themselves brazillians. thats the way it works.

when countries change their name WE USE THAT NAME. i dont know what you are on about. when rhodesia decided to change their name to zimbabwe we stopped calling them rhodesians and started calling them zimbabweans.

as is only right. all people should be called by their preferred name.

I don't care what the official name of the country is. I care how it is referred to by the vast majority of the English speaking world - That is - The US.

O, by the way people from Brazil do not call themselves Brazilians - that is what you call them. Do you see me getting upset about that - no. You can call us what you like - so long as everyone understands what is being denoted. (People from Brazil call themselves Brasileiros)

This.

you dont live in america you live in NORTH america, he lives in SOUTH america.

go figure.

we get to choose that kind of thing just like everyone else does.

You don't get it do you!

No one gets to decide what they are called by others. The others decide.

you dont live in america you live in NORTH america, he lives in SOUTH america.

No - I live in America - just like you. (Or it would be if you remembered to capitalise it) That you wish to restrict the denomination America to just that small portion of the total land area occupied by the 51 United States of America (and the District of Columbia) is your problem.

you dont live in america you live in NORTH america, he lives in SOUTH america.

We both live in the Americas. Your particular geographic idiosyncrasies notwithstanding.

We both live in the Americas. Your particular geographic idiosyncrasies notwithstanding.

Yeah, and the IBYs were here first...

We both live in the Americas. Your particular geographic idiosyncrasies notwithstanding.

you still have no point. that YOU want to be called american-- and float that one around the world all you want--makes no difference to OUR having been called americans for 232+ years.

its rather like saying that *I* cant be called sally because that is one of your names.

go figure.

we get to choose that kind of thing just like everyone else does.

Um...you just went on a rant about how it's not your country's name....yet you don't actually do that. Rant I mean. When we say "US"...as we always do.

you still have no point. that YOU want to be called american-- and float that one around the world all you want--makes no difference to OUR having been called americans for 232+ years.

its rather like saying that *I* cant be called sally because that is one of your names.

You have no idea what I want to be called, because I'm not going on and on about it.

We have names for you. We use them. Try telling Spanish speakers to call you only Americanos. You'll be laughed at.

That you and I speak the same language does not mean I have to conform to your rules when it comes to which proper noun is used to describe your citizenship.

No - I live in America - just like you. (Or it would be if you remembered to capitalise it) That you wish to restrict the denomination America to just that small portion of the total land area occupied by the 51 United States of America (and the District of Columbia) is your problem.

no, i dont care what you call yourself (and if you want to be called brasileiros, just start asking for it). i care what you call ME. i am an american and americans have been americans for a very long time. making up your own term is as incorrect as me calling a zimbabwean a rhodesian.

no, i dont care what you call yourself (and if you want to be called brasileiros, just start asking for it). i care what you call ME. i am an american and americans have been americans for a very long time. making up your own term is as incorrect as me calling a zimbabwean a rhodesian.

The answer is no.

Period.

You have no idea what I want to be called, because I'm not going on and on about it.

We have names for you. We use them. Try telling Spanish speakers to call you only Americanos. You'll be laughed at.

That you and I speak the same language does not mean I have to conform to your rules when it comes to which proper noun is used to describe your citizenship.

i ask them to call me an american.

although the term norteamericano is sometimes used even by mexicans. im dont know if they are including canadians or not.

The answer is no.

Period.

well there, you put me in MY Place.

and im sure you would say the same thing to an aboriginal canadian who disliked the term "indian"--too bad. period.

No - I live in America - just like you. (Or it would be if you remembered to capitalise it) That you wish to restrict the denomination America to just that small portion of the total land area occupied by the 51 United States of America (and the District of Columbia) is your problem.

ERmm....50 states. Plus DC and some territories. =)


no, i dont care what you call yourself (and if you want to be called brasileiros, just start asking for it). i care what you call ME. i am an american and americans have been americans for a very long time. making up your own term is as incorrect as me calling a zimbabwean a rhodesian.

Now that's overstating it, don't you think? Both of those terms actually refer to something different - they aren't specifically meant to refer to US citizens.

It's more like, say, collard greens. Some people just call them "greens". Some people use the whole name to be more specific. If someone called them "collards", it wouldn't be a problem. But if you called them "apples", that would be an issue because that word already refers to a different food, so it would be confusing.

no, i dont care what you call yourself (and if you want to be called brasileiros, just start asking for it). i care what you call ME. i am an american and americans have been americans for a very long time. making up your own term is as incorrect as me calling a zimbabwean a rhodesian.

And I don't care what you call yourself - so we are quits then. Or do you want to have double standards here.

I call you Ashmoria, not USian - I call the millions collectively that are citizens of the US Usians - you do not speak for them, you speak only for you.

Yes Americans have been Americans for a very long time - there were people here in this region of the world more than 10,000 years ago - there were people denoted as Americans in this region 500 years ago. You are an American yes, but you are also a Usian. The same way that an Englishman is English and European. - You don't have to like it, you don't have any choice - and you should get used to that.

ERmm....50 states. Plus DC and some territories. =)



Now that's overstating it, don't you think? Both of those terms actually refer to something different - they aren't specifically meant to refer to US citizens.

It's more like, say, collard greens. Some people just call them "greens". Some people use the whole name to be more specific. If someone called them "collards", it wouldn't be a problem. But if you called them "apples", that would be an issue because that word already refers to a different food, so it would be confusing.

its never seemed to be a big problem. if clarification is necessary, its done.

And I don't care what you call yourself - so we are quits then. Or do you want to have double standards here.

I call you Ashmoria, not USian - I call the millions collectively that are citizens of the US Usians - you do not speak for them, you speak only for you.

Yes Americans have been Americans for a very long time - there were people here in this region of the world more than 10,000 years ago - there were people denoted as Americans in this region 500 years ago. You are an American yes, but you are also a Usian. The same way that an Englishman is English and European. - You don't have to like it, you don't have any choice - and you should get used to that.

so you feel that its RIGHT to call the citizens of a country by a name that they dont use for themselves?

is there ANY OTHER COUNTRY in the world that you would do this to?

so you feel that its RIGHT to call the citizens of a country by a name that they dont use for themselves?

is there ANY OTHER COUNTRY in the world that you would do this to?

We commonly call some cities in Germany by names that the Germans don't use. And our textbooks say it's the right thing to do.

We commonly call some cities in Germany by names that the Germans don't use. And our textbooks say it's the right thing to do.

yeah we do.

so?

if the germans started requesting that we use the german word, we would.

remember when it was called PEKING instead of beijing?

so you feel that its RIGHT to call the citizens of a country by a name that they dont use for themselves?

is there ANY OTHER COUNTRY in the world that you would do this to?

Nearly all of them. Just like you.

Nearly all of them. Just like you.

oh really. just what country's citizens do you call by a name that you made up?

yeah we do.

so?

if the germans started requesting that we use the german word, we would.

remember when it was called PEKING instead of beijing?

They have, for some time. We don't.

They have, for some time. We don't.

we dont what?

we dont what?

We don't call the cities by their German names.

Munich, for example, is what we call München.

They don't even sound the same. We've never called it by the German name, despite decades of requests.

oh really. just what country's citizens do you call by a name that you made up?

You asked if I used names for other nations that they don't use - I answered yes. This does not mean that I invented that name.

Try some reasoning.

You asked if I used names for other nations that they don't use - I answered yes. This does not mean that I invented that name.

Try some reasoning.

the differences in language are really not the same thing as making up an whole new name for the citizens of another country

is there any other country in the world that you do that with?

We don't call the cities by their German names.

Munich, for example, is what we call München.

They don't even sound the same. We've never called it by the German name, despite decades of requests.

they seem resigned to it since they use the names on their tourism site.

the differences in language are really not the same thing as making up an whole new name for the citizens of another country

is there any other country in the world that you do that with?

Então o mundo quer dizer somente aqueles lugares onde inglês é a linguagem. Neste caso sim - todos.

they seem resigned to it since they use the names on their tourism site.

So we should be resigned to whatever names people want to use for United States citizens.

So we should be resigned to whatever names people want to use for United States citizens.

no we should not.

that THEY have decided to put up with it doesnt mean that anyone else should.

and who else DOES?

no we should not.

that THEY have decided to put up with it doesnt mean that anyone else should.

and who else DOES?

As i keep pointing out, and you keep dismissing as being merely differences in language - everyone.

The difference between American and Usian is merely one of language by the way.

Então o mundo quer dizer somente aqueles lugares onde inglês é a linguagem. Neste caso sim - todos.

as i said before the differences in language are not the same as making up a new word.

so answer my question what other country in the world do you think is OK to use a new made up word to refer to their citizens--one that they havent chosen, dont use to refer to themselves, and dont use to refer to themselves in the language you use?

As i keep pointing out, and you keep dismissing as being merely differences in language - everyone.

The difference between American and Usian is merely one of language by the way.

USian is NOT american in portuguese.

USian is NOT american in portuguese.

Did I say it was - no. I said it is a difference of language - they are different words used to denote the same thing. By definition that is a difference of language.

Oh and Usian is not a made up word. Try doing some research - or are you claiming to know the entire English vocabulary. (Note - English not US)

Let us try quoting Websters - indirectly

Over the years, many other alternatives have also surfaced, but most have long fallen into disuse and obscurity. Merriam Webster's Dictionary of English Usage says, "The list contains [in approximate historical order from 1789 to 1939] such terms as Columbian, Columbard, Fredonian, Frede, Unisian, United Statesian, Colonican, Appalacian, Usian, Washingtonian, Usonian, Uessian, U-S-ian, Uesican, United Stater."

I just logged on after watching the season 5 opener of "Project Runway," which I am confident was a shitload more important than the argument I find going on here, and I have the following comments after reading only the first page and the last two pages:

1) Neo Art's OP idea is terrific and generous. It's more work than I would put in, but if he and the other NSG legal beagles are into, then I will definitely greatly appreciate the effort. Even a handy reference of important citations would be enormously helpful. I thank NA for the offer.

2) I don't understand why some people get bent out of shape by the term "USian." I do understand why some people call Americans that. What I mean is, I understand the rationale they claim for it, and I also understand that most of them really do it just to get under Americans' skins. The internet equivalent of poking us. But I, personally, just don't care. I've been addressed and referred to as "USian" several times here, and I always refer to myself and my fellow US citizens as "Americans" and my country as either "the US(A)" or "America." And I don't care whether it annoys other people any more than I care that they are trying to annoy me with the "USian" thing. The reason I don't care is that I fundamentally do not give a shit about what my country is called. I call it what I like. Other people can call it what they like. We all know what we're talking about, so what difference does it make? I'm not going to pretend I don't know what "USian" means, even if I don't use the term myself. And if there are some people who want to pretend they don't know which America is "America" or what country I'm from if I call myself an "American," then they can play their little game, but not with my cooperation.

Really, what more needs to be said about it? Life's too short to waste on such trivial BS.

Partially inspired by my own musings, and partially inspired by this thread, looking for new topics and interests, I've been thinking.

As a political board, a lot of our discussions either involve, center around, or have as a peripheral issue, the law. As someone who has a career in the law, I (and not just I, others certainly as well) are sometimes approached to weigh in or clarify some issues.

So what I'm thinking of is creating a series of threads about various issues in the law. Topics I am thinking of, but are not limited to:

1) Miranda warnings, what are they and how do they work?
2) 1st and its limitations
3) 6th amendment right to counsel
4) abortion law as it stands
5) PATRIOT act and FISA


I think it would be a good idea. It will give us a reference, and perhaps a better understanding of How It Works.

Really, what more needs to be said about it? Life's too short to waste on such trivial BS.

They're just jealous because they didn't think of doing it themselves, of course.

And, uh, yay law school! Now I can be my own defense!

Then call us Americans. Are those extra three or four letters really that hard to type, when all it takes is a little compassion?

YOU, pleading for compassion? That's ... well, it's laughable.

I'm OK with being called an Australian. You know what? By some fluke of history, our country has it's own name!

Look, during the cold war we didn't want to waste a shirtload of syllables calling the Soviets "citizens of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" ... we just called them Soviets. Perfectly sensible, since it described the political system which made them one entity. "The United States" is just as legitimate -- it describes your political system.

Come up with a name for your country which isn't "America" or "the USA" and we'll use it. Give up on the idea we're going to play along with your parochialism and call you by the name of the continent, not all of which is your nation. It's as ridiculous as China asking to be known as "Asia" or Brazil as "South America."

Accept "USians" or specify something similarly short without imperialist BS built into it. Name yourself already!

YOU, pleading for compassion? That's ... well, it's laughable.

I'm OK with being called an Australian. You know what? By some fluke of history, our country has it's own name!

Look, during the cold war we didn't want to waste a shirtload of syllables calling the Soviets "citizens of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" ... we just called them Soviets. Perfectly sensible, since it described the political system which made them one entity. "The United States" is just as legitimate -- it describes your political system.

Come up with a name for your country which isn't "America" or "the USA" and we'll use it. Give up on the idea we're going to play along with your parochialism and call you by the name of the continent, not all of which is your nation. It's as ridiculous as China asking to be known as "Asia" or Brazil as "South America."

Accept "USians" or specify something similarly short without imperialist BS built into it. Name yourself already!

Whoo! I was afraid you'd all stopped!

I assume it's been pointed out that there is no continent called America, specifically?

EDIT: Removed reply to 1010102. Thread has moved a long way since then.

Damn. :(

Damn. :(

Oh well. I'll put it back then.
It was wrong enough to argue with. Have fun!

============

Whoo! I was afraid you'd all stopped!

I assume it's been pointed out that there is no continent called America, specifically?

"The Americas" would be as close as it gets I suppose.

The presumption that by "American" one of course means "North American but not from Canada" is still wrong and offensive.

I don't actually like the term "USian" because the first two letters have to be sounded out or its ugly and moving away from referring to the U.S. and towards referring to "us".

"Libby" probably refers to Libertarians. But we could take the second syllable of "liberty" instead. Call 'em Berties. ; )

And language changes.

You understand who we mean when we say USian.

Is it a slur to you? Akin to '******'?It doesn't offend me, except in that it's not particuliarly euphonius. And for the Brits on here, imagine being called UKians. Sounds silly, doesn't it?

I've seen the same people on here say you should call people by their prefered handle to avoid offending them. But because the US is all evil, the same thing can't be done. The handle "American" can't be left in their evil hands. You even try to come to a compromise both sides can live with? A lot of "Americans" are offended by "USian", therefore it's the one that must be used.

Wasnt there already a thread for offtopically arguing the pointless term USian?:confused:

Wasnt there already a thread for offtopically arguing the pointless term USian?:confused:
I have no idea. You tell me.

The presumption that by "American" one of course means "North American but not from Canada" is still wrong and offensive.


Well, it's obviously not wrong when it is, in fact, what is meant, right? Also, that's a bizarre way of defining it, especially since there are a lot more countries in North America. The meaning is obviously the same for American (in this scenario) and USian, were just arguing about the appropriateness of the words for that meaning. Who, precisely, is it offending, and how is that worse than those offended by USian?

It doesn't offend me, except in that it's not particuliarly euphonius. And for the Brits on here, imagine being called UKians. Sounds silly, doesn't it?

Yeah, it's worse. Three vowel sounds in a row (ay-ee-eh). We could drop the "S" as well as the "A" ... a single citizen of the US could be a "youer," with the plural "youers" : p

I can think of an example of a country which is an exception to the "call them what they ask to be called" rule. Macedonia. The Greeks objected that they have a province named Macedonia, and that naming the neighbouring country that would constitute a nationalist claim over a part of their nation. Consequently, the Republic of Macedonia was only admitted to the UN with the name "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" (FYROM)

We could have the same problem with Iraqi Kurdistan. If they become an independent nation and want the "Iraqi" taken out of their name, Turkey and others will probably object because it constitutes a claim over part of their nation which is recognized already as ethnically Kurdish.

I can think of an example of a country which is an exception to the "call them what they ask to be called" rule. Macedonia. The Greeks objected that they have a province named Macedonia, and that naming the neighbouring country that would constitute a nationalist claim over a part of their nation. Consequently, the Republic of Macedonia was only admitted to the UN with the name "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" (FYROM)

Fun. So, uh, which countries have formally and arduously objected?

Personally I say let people call themselves "USA" Or "America" or whatever...then we'll SPAM the crap out of them with hate messages about how uncreative and limited they must be to create a name so dull. >=)

Personally I say let people call themselves "USA" Or "America" or whatever...then we'll SPAM the crap out of them with hate messages about how uncreative and limited they must be to create a name so dull. >=)

Because we never get hate mail.

Well, it's obviously not wrong when it is, in fact, what is meant, right?

The simplest way to resolve confusion over disputed uses of the same word is to use some other word.

Have we tried to change the explicit meaning of the word "man" so that we can continue to use this simple, good word in place of "person"? Of course not! We use the clumsier word because it has the explicit meaning we require.

In fact, we tend to read old documents which use "Man" for "Person" as if the author really meant "person" ... but it's a convenient lie. They meant a male person, and if pressed on the meaning would almost certainly have made a different statement concerning women. For instance, did "all men are born equal" mean "all people are born equal"? Hell no, or else that document would have granted women the same rights which it sought to lay out for "men" -- specifically, the vote. We don't like to admit that the great thinkers of days gone by were a bunch of sexists.

Also, that's a bizarre way of defining it, especially since there are a lot more countries in North America.
I wasn't aware of that. I never learnt much Geography in school and still am not very interested. Are you counting the Carribean or Central America?

The meaning is obviously the same for American (in this scenario) and USian, were just arguing about the appropriateness of the words for that meaning. Who, precisely, is it offending, and how is that worse than those offended by USian?

My concern is with accuracy. Whatever term is chosen it should reflect the unification of all USians by a political system.

If you're proposing to identify everyone who might be offended, and strike some bargain with them (eg buying the name off them) you're going a lot further than I would.

I think the real question is...What the hell does any of that shit have to do with the thread?

Its a stupid argument, and its off topic...300 million people dont view this forum, neither do the incalculable number of people who use the term "Americans" for the US of A...:gundge::soap::mad:

The simplest way to resolve confusion over disputed uses of the same word is to use some other word.

What confusion, precisely?

Have we tried to change the explicit meaning of the word "man" so that we can continue to use this simple, good word in place of "person"? Of course not! We use the clumsier word because it has the explicit meaning we require.

In fact, we tend to read old documents which use "Man" for "Person" as if the author really meant "person" ... but it's a convenient lie. They meant a male person, and if pressed on the meaning would almost certainly have made a different statement concerning women. For instance, did "all men are born equal" mean "all people are born equal"? Hell no, or else that document would have granted women the same rights which it sought to lay out for "men" -- specifically, the vote. We don't like to admit that the great thinkers of days gone by were a bunch of sexists.

Um...kay?

I wasn't aware of that. I never learnt much Geography in school and still am not very interested. Are you counting the Carribean or Central America?

As I was taught, yeah, it goes down to Panama.

My concern is with accuracy. Whatever term is chosen it should reflect the unification of all USians by a political system.

Why? That's certainly not a common standard for, uh, demonyms.

If you're proposing to identify everyone who might be offended, and strike some bargain with them (eg buying the name off them) you're going a lot further than I would.

Eh. Just randomly calling it offensive seems a bit unhelpful, is all.

I think the real question is...What the hell does any of that shit have to do with the thread?

Its a stupid argument, and its off topic...300 million people dont view this forum, neither do the incalculable number of people who use the term "Americans" for the US of A...

OK, here's the deal. I drop this hijack ... and you say something substantial about Neo Art's thread idea.

Deal?

well there, you put me in MY Place.

and im sure you would say the same thing to an aboriginal canadian who disliked the term "indian"--too bad. period.

You don't understand.

It may happen that the term USian becomes banned here. That's fine.

I'm still not going to call you an 'American'. Ever.

I can be prevented from doing one thing, but never forced to do the other.

Partially inspired by my own musings, and partially inspired by this thread, looking for new topics and interests, I've been thinking.

As a political board, a lot of our discussions either involve, center around, or have as a peripheral issue, the law. As someone who has a career in the law, I (and not just I, others certainly as well) are sometimes approached to weigh in or clarify some issues.

So what I'm thinking of is creating a series of threads about various issues in the law. Topics I am thinking of, but are not limited to:

1) Miranda warnings, what are they and how do they work?
2) 1st and its limitations
3) 6th amendment right to counsel
4) abortion law as it stands
5) PATRIOT act and FISA

Topics not necessarily to debate the issues of whether such laws are good or not, but rather create threads on those topics for questions as to how they stand now, that can be used as reference in other arguments. I'm willing to throw myself under the bus and be willing to do the writing and research necessary for those types of threads, if there's any interest.

So, thoughts?

I'd be interested in debate on bio-ethics, specifically as it applies to cloning, stem-cell research, and even adjacent areas like artificial intelligence. My time with the Raelians left me with a bit of practical experience on the matter, but I'm current a 1L lawyer-larva, and I'd be interested in a more experienced view.

Oh, yeah, and Neo Art, you're a jew.

OK, here's the deal. I drop this hijack ... and you say something substantial about Neo Art's thread idea.

Deal?

Sure, i said substantial things when it first started...just pissed me onto my soapbox(the one good new smiley, lol) when reading the aforementioned posts...

As I was taught, yeah, it goes down to Panama.



Well you werent taught very well...goes all the way down to Chile/Argentina...

I said i wouldnt do it, but i just couldnt resist a nugget like that, lol...

You don't understand.

It may happen that the term USian becomes banned here. That's fine.

I'm still not going to call you an 'American'. Ever.

I can be prevented from doing one thing, but never forced to do the other.

Sure you can, just have to be tricked into it, like one of those times where you've gotta make something it's name, or say it backwards, et cetera.

Sure, i said substantial things when it first started...just pissed me onto my soapbox(the one good new smiley, lol) when reading the aforementioned posts...

But the post I'm referring to was "waaa, don't talk about that it's off-topic ... oh, and here's my two cents worth on the hijack ... and waaa, don't talk about that."

So no deal.

You don't understand.

It may happen that the term USian becomes banned here. That's fine.

I'm still not going to call you an 'American'. Ever.

I can be prevented from doing one thing, but never forced to do the other.

You have to call Katganistan American. Because, well...

Well, she was an american girl, raised on promises
She couldn't help thinkin that there was a little more to life
Somewhere else, after all it was a great big world
With lots of places to run to, yeah, and if she had to die
Tryin' she had one little promise She was gonna keep

Oh yeah, all right
Take it easy baby
Make it last all night
Kat is an american girl.

But the post I'm referring to was "waaa, don't talk about that it's off-topic ... oh, and here's my two cents worth on the hijack ... and waaa, don't talk about that."

So no deal.

...But, i didnt continue after you offered the deal...What kind of salesman are you? :confused:

the differences in language are really not the same thing as making up an whole new name for the citizens of another country

is there any other country in the world that you do that with?

...

Oh. I see. So the English versions of all the countries in the world aren't just 'made up'?

Wow. Germany sounds SO much like Deutschland. Why, perhaps the French version is closer...Allemange? Hmmm...no...how about Polish? Niemcy. Sheesh! It's like we ALL made up names for their country! And not one of us, rude buggers we are, bother to use the name they call it themselves!

But I guess that's okay cuz it was done a long time ago.

Sure you can, just have to be tricked into it, like one of those times where you've gotta make something it's name, or say it backwards, et cetera.

Mr. Mxyzptlk reference....your kung fu is strong.

Sure you can, just have to be tricked into it, like one of those times where you've gotta make something it's name, or say it backwards, et cetera.

Kebert Xela?

I'd be interested in debate on bio-ethics, specifically as it applies to cloning, stem-cell research, and even adjacent areas like artificial intelligence. My time with the Raelians left me with a bit of practical experience on the matter, but I'm current a 1L lawyer-larva, and I'd be interested in a more experienced view.

Oh, yeah, and Neo Art, you're a jew.

Wait...you're not?

How did you get them to let you into law school?

What confusion, precisely?

"What does American mean?"

Perhaps you could answer that. You seem quite comfortable with using the definition "of the United States" so perhaps you could say whether you mean only citizens or anyone who lives there and considers it "their" country.

...

Oh. I see. So the English versions of all the countries in the world aren't just 'made up'?

Wow. Germany sounds SO much like Deutschland. Why, perhaps the French version is closer...Allemange? Hmmm...no...how about Polish? Niemcy. Sheesh! It's like we ALL made up names for their country! And not one of us, rude buggers we are, bother to use the name they call it themselves!

But I guess that's okay cuz it was done a long time ago.

I kind of prefer calling it Deutschland anyways. Though I never did get why they were all so different. Then again, it's not like we made up a German (wait, Deutsch) word for the country.

"What does American mean?"

Perhaps you could answer that. You seem quite comfortable with using the definition "of the United States" so perhaps you could say whether you mean only citizens or anyone who lives there and considers it "their" country.

*shrug* Why would I mean only citizens? It's a simple adjective, really. American cars, American food, American obesity problem...The law can only say so much about how people define themselves.

But, really, there's no confusion in it's meaning, it has more than one, sure, but that's nowt special.

I kind of prefer calling it Deutschland anyways. Though I never did get why they were all so different. Then again, it's not like we made up a German (wait, Deutsch) word for the country.

I lay claim to my language. As I said, we may both speak English, but you don't get to dictate to me HOW I speak it.

I'll keep the 'u' in colour and labour and neighbour thanks. And it will remain centre, not center.

I don't see why you can't call yourself what you please, and I use the term I am comfortable with and we all stop playing games as though we don't know exactly who is being referred to.

All this self-righteous indignation just makes me stubborn.

Neo Art is going to kick my ass for aiding and abetting this runaway hijack.

so you feel that its RIGHT to call the citizens of a country by a name that they dont use for themselves?

is there ANY OTHER COUNTRY in the world that you would do this to?
Nippon-koku, Deutschland, Zhōngguó, Sverige, Éire, Myanmar, Bhārat... to name a few.

I'm still not going to call you an 'American'. Ever.
Jeebus, people.

Here's me thinking this is an innocuous term...

I'll keep the 'u' in colour and labour and neighbour thanks. And it will remain centre, not center.
Not if Brendan Fraser (http://www.toxicshock.tv/news/wp-content/uploads/journey_to_the_center_of_the_earth_in_3d_poster.jpg) has anything to say about it!

All this self-righteous indignation just makes me stubborn.

Might be the other way about.

Nippon-koku, Deutschland, Zhōngguó, Sverige, Éire, Myanmar, Bhārat... to name a few.


I contest the inclusion of Burma/Myanmar

Wait...you're not?

How did you get them to let you into law school?

I paid a Jew to take my LSAT for me (we used a prosthetic thumb to beat their security measure), and an Asian did my homework for my undergrad stuff.

I contest the inclusion of Burma/Myanmar
Surely a perfect example?

A country which people have politically motivations for calling one name or the other.

This hijacker is coming out with hands above head. I'm sorry, I won't do it again.

Henceforth, I shall use the term "lickspittle lap-dogs of the capitalist imperialists" and everyone will know just who I'm talking about. If I was trying to pick a fight, you all know I'd go after an easier target ... NEW ZEALANDERS!

Surely a perfect example?

A country which people have politically motivations for calling one name or the other.

True, but there are groups -within- the country that seriously contest the name, it's not exactly an 'oppressive foreigner' sort of thing...depending on whom you ask.

True, but there are groups -within- the country that seriously contest the name, it's not exactly an 'oppressive foreigner' sort of thing...depending on whom you ask.
No, I quite agree.

Might be the other way about.

Go back.

I was ordered to stop using the term.

FUCK. THAT.

Go back.

I was ordered to stop using the term.

FUCK. THAT.

Yes, yes, we've heard you get angry. This has surpassed boundaries of stubborn. Can't really play it as a character quirk

sure, I'd be perfectly open to suggestions. How extradition works is something I"m not very familiar on, but hey, nothing says it can't be a learning experience for me too.

Recently I saw a Law&Order rerun that was pretty much based on the Pinochet case. The premise was that this official in the Pinochet regime had had this American (New Yorker) guy murdered. The address of the house where the American was taking refuge in was faxed to the official by a US navy officer from somewhere in New York, and so they were trying the Pinochet official, who was in the US for medical treatment, for conspiracy to murder.

I'm wondering if, in this fictional case that's somewhat based on the RL case of Pinochet himself, whether a conviction would have been possible or whether the court had the jurisdiction necessary.

You don't understand.

It may happen that the term USian becomes banned here. That's fine.

I'm still not going to call you an 'American'. Ever.

I can be prevented from doing one thing, but never forced to do the other.

As far as I'm concerned, "USian" is deliberately insulting. It's the same as the term "gringo," to me. If you don't want to call us "Americans," fine. Call us an insult we've adopted for ourselves (that being Yanks) or something. Or call us by our specific state names.
I'm sure there are things I could call you that would be specific but you would find highly insulting. I don't use them because I think it's bullshit to use an insulting term for someone's nationality when you know it's insulting. I don't call French people "frogs," or Mexicans "spics," or Swedes "squareheads," or Irish people "micks," or Japanese people "Japs." Why? Because that's crap. Some of them save on letters and syllables, but all are things that I do not call people. It's pointlessly insulting and there are other terms I could use that aren't.

As far as I'm concerned, "USian" is deliberately insulting. It's the same as the term "gringo," to me. If you don't want to call us "Americans," fine. Call us an insult we've adopted for ourselves (that being Yanks) or something. Or call us by our specific state names.
I'm sure there are things I could call you that would be specific but you would find highly insulting. I don't use them because I think it's bullshit to use an insulting term for someone's nationality when you know it's insulting. I don't call French people "frogs," or Mexicans "spics," or Swedes "squareheads," or Irish people "micks," or Japanese people "Japs." Why? Because that's crap. Some of them save on letters and syllables, but all are things that I do not call people. It's pointlessly insulting and there are other terms I could use that aren't.

Be fair, your list of quoted terms is largely a result of either racial prejudice or immigrant prejudice. "Spic" isn't a back-formation of "Mexican", "frogs" comes from the French trait of eating odd things (to some) like frog legs, "squareheads" seems fairly straightforward racial profiling, "micks" is probably from either the Scotch-Irish "Mc/Mac" from clan names or for the Irish shortening of "Michael". Some are still insulting because their wartime connotations/stereotypes were made so strongly negative ("Japs"), most are not.

USan is far from insulting or stereotyping, and to try and portray it as such is really disingenuous. It's difficult to legitimately insult those who've done the bulk of the stereotyping, but by all means, keep trying.

While you're at it, I'll ask if you're one of those people who hate the "taking back" of "******" by Black people in popular culture. If so, I'd point you to "Yank" from "Yankee Doodle", which was originally a British song used to portray colonial folk as backwards, provincial hicks. Seems that one was okay to "take back", wasn't it?

In another unrelated but still noteworthy shift, "Jap" has been used as an acronym for "Jewish-American Princess" for quite a while now, and there are rafts of "JAP jokes", which, if heard out of context, could be perceived as horrifyingly racist to Japanese people (who we call Japanese despite the fact that their own name for themselves is Nihongo, but we go along with folks from The Netherlands being called Dutch or the Flemish in Belgium).

The problem is that the sensitivity "gain knob" is turned up so high that people are looking for insults where none exist, just to make sure we're all chronically aware of what language we're supposed to use. Says who?

Sorry, but if using "USan/USian" is banned here, and I risk a ban in using it, let me say my goodbyes now, because I would no longer wish to be part of a forum that couldn't take even THAT gentle of a ribbing.

.

While you're at it, I'll ask if you're one of those people who hate the "taking back" of "******" by Black people in popular culture. If so, I'd point you to "Yank" from "Yankee Doodle", which was originally a British song used to portray colonial folk as backwards, provincial hicks. Seems that one was okay to "take back", wasn't it?

In another unrelated but still noteworthy shift, "Jap" has been used as an acronym for "Jewish-American Princess" for quite a while now, and there are rafts of "JAP jokes", which, if heard out of context, could be perceived as horrifyingly racist to Japanese people (who we call Japanese despite the fact that their own name for themselves is Nihongo, but we go along with folks from The Netherlands being called Dutch or the Flemish in Belgium).


As a proud white nationalist, I'm taking back Yiddish for the Germans. White Power! Its a Mitzvah!

I thought Nihongo was the language, and Nihonjin were the people?

I thought Nihongo was the language, and Nihonjin were the people?

You look good in that Smart-Ass Suit. Almost enough to carry off the Swastika of David on the sleeve :)

You look good in that Smart-Ass Suit. Almost enough to carry off the Swastika of David on the sleeve :)

Dude, seriously, I own one of those, got it from a Raelian friend of mine.

Another Raelian wears his, his friends at work call him the Nazi Jew.

It's like a blend between 'costly' and 'nose'. It should be the new term for rhinoplasty, since that term makes one erroneously think of horns.

Why erroneously? Rhinos are called rhinos because of the 'nose' association in the first place.

Elementary Latin or English Etymology via Latin fixes this. RHIN(o)- = "nose". Hence rhinovirus =/= rhinoceros VD...well...unless a zoologist here talls me it does.

For the record, Neo Art is actually a capable counselor even outside the United States.

Two years ago, I was attending a holocaust deniers conference and singles mixer in Iran, hosted by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Anyway, my luggage included a number of men's fitness and health magazines which the Iranian customs people thought was gay porn. Evidently "Black Inches" magazine doesn't translate well.

Long story short, they were going to hang me as a gay, and I needed a lawyer, and Neo Art, being a Jew, is therefore a brilliant lawyer.

So, I wasn't hung. The judge must've really been convinced of my innocence, because he kept repeating how not hung I was.

Anyway, my gratitude to Neo Art for his brilliant closing argument, which is now taught in legal schools as the "Being a Stupid Racist Putz is Not The Same Thing As Being Gay" Defense.

Welcome back to a man whose mind is not just twisted, but actually sprained. :hail:

My liver! :eek:

No, I'm living outside the both of the Americas. (I'm from the United States, and if calling myself 'American' is something that's confusing on this forum, I'll try to specify.) I live in Kobe, Japan on a permanent residency visa.

I lived there in the summer of 1990 (pre-quake, in Kitasuzurandai). It was a magnificent place.

I am not geographicly illterate. South Americans are refered to by what country they are in, or from. For example Columbians and Bolvians.

I find the term "USian" vile and offensive. To me it is like calling a Scotsman, English. Or refering to Canadians as "moose fuckers".

Take your Anti-American bias elsewhere.

You mean to a site that's not based in the US, like this one? :rolleyes:

And the bolded stuff really rebuts itself nicely. Thank you.

But grammatically, it doesn't make a lot of sense, and its in general (but of course not always) used in a derogatory fashion, which means you're probably better off not using that term.

It's a term based off an abbreviation. Grammar rules are far looser for such constructions.

YOU, pleading for compassion? That's ... well, it's laughable.

You beat me to it. Which is usually better than being beaten with it...of course, that depends on what it is and who's doing the beating. Neesika?

I'm OK with being called an Australian. You know what? By some fluke of history, our country has it's own name!

From it's own continent, be fair.

Look, during the cold war we didn't want to waste a shirtload of syllables calling the Soviets "citizens of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" ... we just called them Soviets. Perfectly sensible, since it described the political system which made them one entity. "The United States" is just as legitimate -- it describes your political system.

Come up with a name for your country which isn't "America" or "the USA" and we'll use it. Give up on the idea we're going to play along with your parochialism and call you by the name of the continent, not all of which is your nation. It's as ridiculous as China asking to be known as "Asia" or Brazil as "South America."

Accept "USians" or specify something similarly short without imperialist BS built into it. Name yourself already!

Agreed! I have always thought that the eastern hemisphere got the cool continent names. What did we get? Directional adjectives? How dull!

Whoo! I was afraid you'd all stopped!

I assume it's been pointed out that there is no continent called America, specifically?

Exactly. Just two unimaginatively and adjectively named places. I don't know how to fix this problem, but I say it needs addressing.

It doesn't offend me, except in that it's not particuliarly euphonius. And for the Brits on here, imagine being called UKians. Sounds silly, doesn't it?

That's just it, though. The United Kingdom (UK) is also known widely as Great Britain (GBR at the Olympics, for example). Guess what term exists, then? British. Hell, Great British for all I care. Point is, they made an effort to determine a collective name AND a separate demonym.

I've seen the same people on here say you should call people by their prefered handle to avoid offending them. But because the US is all evil, the same thing can't be done. The handle "American" can't be left in their evil hands. You even try to come to a compromise both sides can live with? A lot of "Americans" are offended by "USian", therefore it's the one that must be used.

I'll add this: whenever I've gone to Canada (easy to do in both North Dakota and NW Washington), and the border agent asks the one-word question "Citizenship?" -- going both ways, I answer "US". And guess what? Both Canadian and US border guards accept that answer without so much as a twitch. If that's the case, how is "USan/USian" so much of an insult, when it's not even a stretch?

As a proud white nationalist, I'm taking back Yiddish for the Germans. White Power! Its a Mitzvah!

I thought Nihongo was the language, and Nihonjin were the people?

Ah, you're right. I was caught with my obi down there. ありがとう。

Dude, seriously, I own one of those, got it from a Raelian friend of mine.

Another Raelian wears his, his friends at work call him the Nazi Jew.

You kinda scare me. I just made up "Swastika of David" out of the names of the two symbols. Just to make a point, you re-wrote history with this whole Raëlian Church hoo-ha and your imaginary friend Claude Vorilhon, imaginary journalist and seer. And lo, it has the Swastika of David as part of its iconography.

I'm tempted to ask how such a Raëlian could have a job, let alone friends ... but no, I've had my arse whipped by AI's before, decades ago, in the game of Chess. I'll hang onto a shred of my human dignity, thanks.

White Power! Its a Mitzvah!

Slight problem there--"mitzvah" is Hebrew, not Yiddish, from the word for "command."

Edit: Oh, wait, you're joking. Nevermind. Sorry.

Be fair, your list of quoted terms is largely a result of either racial prejudice or immigrant prejudice. "Spic" isn't a back-formation of "Mexican", "frogs" comes from the French trait of eating odd things (to some) like frog legs, "squareheads" seems fairly straightforward racial profiling, "micks" is probably from either the Scotch-Irish "Mc/Mac" from clan names or for the Irish shortening of "Michael". Some are still insulting because their wartime connotations/stereotypes were made so strongly negative ("Japs"), most are not.

USan is far from insulting or stereotyping, and to try and portray it as such is really disingenuous. It's difficult to legitimately insult those who've done the bulk of the stereotyping, but by all means, keep trying.

While you're at it, I'll ask if you're one of those people who hate the "taking back" of "******" by Black people in popular culture. If so, I'd point you to "Yank" from "Yankee Doodle", which was originally a British song used to portray colonial folk as backwards, provincial hicks. Seems that one was okay to "take back", wasn't it?

In another unrelated but still noteworthy shift, "Jap" has been used as an acronym for "Jewish-American Princess" for quite a while now, and there are rafts of "JAP jokes", which, if heard out of context, could be perceived as horrifyingly racist to Japanese people (who we call Japanese despite the fact that their own name for themselves is Nihongo, but we go along with folks from The Netherlands being called Dutch or the Flemish in Belgium).

The problem is that the sensitivity "gain knob" is turned up so high that people are looking for insults where none exist, just to make sure we're all chronically aware of what language we're supposed to use. Says who?

Sorry, but if using "USan/USian" is banned here, and I risk a ban in using it, let me say my goodbyes now, because I would no longer wish to be part of a forum that couldn't take even THAT gentle of a ribbing.

How about Eye-tye or Pollock then?

As for "taking back," I don't oppose black people using the word "******." However, it's not something that anybody else gets to call a black person, and that's fine.

I don't think "USian" should be banned. But then I don't think any other insult should be either. But an insult it is. It seems deliberately done just to annoy people. That's how it's always seemed.

And "mick" is from the Irish/Scottish "Mc" and "Mac," not the name "Michael."

And I already stated I'm fine with "Yanks." It's short, and it's an insult we adopted for ourselves early on and has been in use for quite a while. I see no reason why a new term needs to be invented on an internet forum if "Americans" is so damn objectionable to people.

My main objection to USian, is actually that when said aloud, it sounds incredibly stupid. It's intended to be. Hell, I wouldn't even mind United Stater or United Stateser or something. Or we could be referred to by our specific state names.

Use the olive-branch. The olive-branch is the mightiest weapon, greater than the pen, when wielded by the humble, righteous, the manifestly superior.

As the gun is the mightiest weapon, wielded by the resigned, the defeated, the suicidal.

US, step away from the gun. We don't know your intentions, you inarticulate unpredictable teenager you. Don't die young. Step away from the gun.

Slight problem there--"mitzvah" is Hebrew, not Yiddish, from the word for "command."

Edit: Oh, wait, you're joking. Nevermind. Sorry.

Well, I should still try to joke correctly, so I accept your correction!

White Power! It won't leave you verklempt!

I'm still not going to call you an 'American'. Ever.


But that's the whole problem, don't you think? When using that term, I can understand why Americans find it insulting, because it immediately implies that you're all pissy about calling them American (which creates this aura of just 'one other thing to hate Americans about'). It's a strong negative connotation it caries because this hatred for the term is seemingly quite arbitrary (most people will not see why there is such a huge problem with the idea of a word having more than one meaning) and thus for many Americans may weakly imply that its based more on a general bias against them (I'm not saying that is actually the case with you). So if it doesn't make grammatical sense to use the term, and it doesn't make pragmatic sense to use the term (just look at the reaction it caused in this thread), then in what sense is it a good idea to use the term (other than to wind Americans up of course)?

I've given my reasons, as has AB, as has Gift-of-God and any number of people here who don't use the term as an insult.

But those reasons don't matter to people who just want to get pissy.

It's quicker than saying 'citizen of the US' or 'product of the USA'. And it's entirely appropriate on an international forum.

So go on. Find another term we can all agree on.

And back to the OP, what the hell, lawyers get time off? I expected ten threads from Neo Art by now. I'm sorely disappointed.

"USian" isn't a real word, which is one of the things that makes it incredibly annoying to me.

Yes, I know there are actual words in other languages that have the same general meaning. But we're not talking about those languages or those words. We're talking about the half-aborted mewling spawn called "USian." Note the first two letters capitalized, followed by three uncapitalized letters. Note the way it's essentially unpronounceable, unless you say "You Essian," which is only as likely as reading "Usian" sorta like "Asian." It's ugly, incorrect, and fucking lame. If you want to humiliate yourself by insisting on using this term and no other, that's your own ugly, incorrect and fucking lame decision!

However, the fact that you like to refer to people in this way, even when they explicitly ask you not to and clearly have an objection to it, strikes me as being more an issue with your right to be an asshole and less to do with semantics or propriety at all. Yes, you have the right to call me whatever silly name you can think of. No one is interfering with your "rights" and trying to "oppress" you and "censor" you and it's not fucking 1984 and you're not a brutalized peasantry cowering under the iron-fist rule of "People who don't like the term 'USian."" Get some perspective and quit acting like your country is being invaded and occupied by me.

Unless of course you're from Iraq or Afghanistan, in which case it is, but if that's the case I'm going to guess you could give less than a shit about what terms you call us. And the terms you're likely to come up with would be a lot less charitable than the silly "USian." But you're not from those places, most likely. Most likely, you're from a country that's either gone along with our invasion and occupation, or did nothing effectual to prevent us from it. I'm looking at you, Canada and Britian!

So, thoughts? good idea. but I would also like to learn more about the legal side of other countries and NOT just the USA.

after all, this is supposed to be an International Political Forum.

and how many threads have there been about the American legal system.

"USian" isn't a real word

Yes, it is. People use it. That makes it real.

... I thought debates about the use of the word "USian" were forbidden here.

Yes, it is. People use it. That makes it real.

Sorry, I meant a real word in the context of proper English, which I'm glad to see you're finally divorcing yourself from. Maybe you'll be less of a grammar Nazi when someone next uses a "real" spelling of a word that, is 'real' on the basis that people (mis) use it.

... I thought debates about the use of the word "USian" were forbidden here.

I think you're right. But watching people go mental just because a different word has been used for their nationality IS quite funny though :(.

I think you're right. But watching people go mental just because a different word has been used for their nationality IS quite funny though :(.

yet to persist in the discussion would only get a thread locked.

Partially inspired by my own musings, and partially inspired by this thread, looking for new topics and interests, I've been thinking.

As a political board, a lot of our discussions either involve, center around, or have as a peripheral issue, the law. As someone who has a career in the law, I (and not just I, others certainly as well) are sometimes approached to weigh in or clarify some issues.

So what I'm thinking of is creating a series of threads about various issues in the law. Topics I am thinking of, but are not limited to:

1) Miranda warnings, what are they and how do they work?
2) 1st and its limitations
3) 6th amendment right to counsel
4) abortion law as it stands
5) PATRIOT act and FISA

Topics not necessarily to debate the issues of whether such laws are good or not, but rather create threads on those topics for questions as to how they stand now, that can be used as reference in other arguments. I'm willing to throw myself under the bus and be willing to do the writing and research necessary for those types of threads, if there's any interest.

So, thoughts?

Although I studied each of the above items in law school, with the exception of FISA, I have not really addressed any of those issues since I began practicing. I think I had a first amendment issue once but that is it. I would love to review your research on these topics.

How about Eye-tye or Pollock then?

Being a Polack, I couldn't care less. "Eye-tie" is basically a corruption of the first two syllables of "Italian", so no problem there, either. People seem to forget that we all have the ability and capacity to look at words a simply decide to not get worked up about them. Then again, that requires a certain finessing of the revenge reflex, and that's never easy the first few times you attempt it.

As for "taking back," I don't oppose black people using the word "******." However, it's not something that anybody else gets to call a black person, and that's fine.

Okay, so where's the problem with any slur then?

I don't think "USian" should be banned. But then I don't think any other insult should be either. But an insult it is. It seems deliberately done just to annoy people. That's how it's always seemed.

No one here has yet to successfully argue that "USian (USan? USAn?)" is, in fact an insult to anything but an overdeveloped sense of nationalism or patriotism. Patriotism is the belief that your country is the greatest simply by virtue of your having been born there. There's no really good reason for people to get upset about this, and yet they do. The patriot doth protest too much, methinks. A true greatness of spirit would not be so petty.

And "mick" is from the Irish/Scottish "Mc" and "Mac," not the name "Michael."

Nope. It's both, at least in some parts of the world -- that's why I posted both explanations.

Mack, Mick, Mickey, Mickey Finn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_slur)

a. (Britain, Commonwealth and U.S.) an Irish person or a person of Irish descent. Mick is considered more offensive in the U.K. and U.S. From the prefix "Mc"/"Mac" meaning "son of" that is commonly found in Irish surnames.

b. (Australia) a Roman Catholic [19th century on, from Michael].

Any Roman Catholics in Ireland?

And I already stated I'm fine with "Yanks." It's short, and it's an insult we adopted for ourselves early on and has been in use for quite a while. I see no reason why a new term needs to be invented on an internet forum if "Americans" is so damn objectionable to people.

And if Yank can be assimilated -- and I don't think your assertion would fly too well in the US South -- surely anything else can, too. The problem is the whole petty playground mentality I'm noticing with names. Do new terms need reasons to be invented? I've not heard that before. Coinages happen as much out of boredom as they do out of necessity.

My main objection to USian, is actually that when said aloud, it sounds incredibly stupid. It's intended to be. Hell, I wouldn't even mind United Stater or United Stateser or something. Or we could be referred to by our specific state names.

Well, lots of names sound incredibly stupid out loud. I've been a public school teacher an substitute -- I've seen me some stupid names. That's not even close to a valid reason for them not to exist.

"USian" isn't a real word, which is one of the things that makes it incredibly annoying to me.

And pray tell, what is the definition of a "real word". All words are coinages or neologisms at some point.

Yes, I know there are actual words in other languages that have the same general meaning. But we're not talking about those languages or those words. We're talking about the half-aborted mewling spawn called "USian." Note the first two letters capitalized, followed by three uncapitalized letters. Note the way it's essentially unpronounceable, unless you say "You Essian," which is only as likely as reading "Usian" sorta like "Asian." It's ugly, incorrect, and fucking lame. If you want to humiliate yourself by insisting on using this term and no other, that's your own ugly, incorrect and fucking lame decision!

I'll use whatever terms I wish, thank you very much, your raving opinions have no bearing on that decision. I've always thought that "Bangladeshi" is a weird sounding adjective for a people, but the people of the former East Pakistan haven't complained, and it doesn't matter what I think anyway. Hell, some folks from Bosnia and Herzegovina actually call themselves "Bosanci i Hercegovci", which seems ridiculously long to me, but it doesn't matter what I think. We don't get to decide on exonyms -- that's why they're called exonyms.

However, the fact that you like to refer to people in this way, even when they explicitly ask you not to and clearly have an objection to it, strikes me as being more an issue with your right to be an asshole and less to do with semantics or propriety at all. Yes, you have the right to call me whatever silly name you can think of. No one is interfering with your "rights" and trying to "oppress" you and "censor" you and it's not fucking 1984 and you're not a brutalized peasantry cowering under the iron-fist rule of "People who don't like the term 'USian."" Get some perspective and quit acting like your country is being invaded and occupied by me.

I don't think anyone is acting like you're invading. That seemed like an expression of some kind of odd reverse-persecution complex, but that's another matter. You don't have the right to censor anyone's speech in a public forum. Sorry. Now, if you and I were speaking alone and you asked me not to use a certain term to describe you, I'd be only pleased to oblige. That's politeness. But since we're typing, and USan is shorter than American, let alone [noun] of the US, your objections are the ones that seem petty. In other words, the marketplace of ideas will bear out the provenance of USan...or are free markets something you oppose?

Unless of course you're from Iraq or Afghanistan, in which case it is, but if that's the case I'm going to guess you could give less than a shit about what terms you call us. And the terms you're likely to come up with would be a lot less charitable than the silly "USian." But you're not from those places, most likely. Most likely, you're from a country that's either gone along with our invasion and occupation, or did nothing effectual to prevent us from it. I'm looking at you, Canada and Britian!

All I can see proven is that the term is unwieldy from an aesthetic standpoint. Nobody has (or really can) demonstrate how the term is insulting beyond the typical "we're the greatest so don't fuck with us AT ALL" no-sense-of-humor mentality. Nobody's insisting that it become the world standard, and the reason for its use is typing efficiency.

I don't see where the opposition has a leg to stand on or a vessel that holds water.

I'll use whatever terms I wish, thank you very much, your raving opinions have no bearing on that decision. I've always thought that "Bangladeshi" is a weird sounding adjective for a people, but the people of the former East Pakistan haven't complained, and it doesn't matter what I think anyway.

From what I've seen, this very often gets shortened to Deshi.

=)

From what I've seen, this very often gets shortened to Deshi.

=)

Oh, as in ABCD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-Born_Confused_Desi)...?

Oh, as in ABCD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-Born_Confused_Desi)...?

No, I've never seen that before, but it is funny.

I've only seen "Deshi" specifically applied to people from Bangladesh. It would be seen as insulting to use it to refer to other nationalities, I think.