Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

I have a book about the USA, which was originally written in 1958 or so but got re-edited over the years. My edition is from 1978. It was written by one of the most respected French journalists, Raymond Cartier, longtime chief editor of Paris Match, certainly not a racist.

Yet his book about America, which in its time was considered one of the best and most accurate books about the USA, would be considered racist, if you showed it to someone who grew up in our times of political correctness.

For example the word "negro" is used all throughout the book, together with terms like "negro habits" or "negro problems" and he isn't very prissy about naming those problems, where today you would always add an understanding apodosis to not hurt minorities. He considers black people not only victims of the white man but also names the errors they did and where they did or do things wrong.

The book would be a scandal today and I have to ask myself: Have we become better people or was racism just covered up in a friendlier language?
 
Last edited:
We have become better people because a condescending term like "negro" is no longer accepted as proper language. Language defines the categories we think in, thus the question which words we use is important.
 
The whole "what do we call people who are not white" argument bothers me as there is no correct answer. Not so long ago calling somebody "black" was considerably more offensive than calling them a "negro" and now the table has turned full circle.

I mean the term "negro" is still essentially the word "black" in a different language, it's just fallen out of use because of usage of the name in the past. It's only problem is that it was commonly used in an era when black people were seen as not being equal to whites on a mass scale. It's not like the world itself is racist it doesn't translate to "slave" or "person I really don't like because he's a funny colour", it just means "black", which is seemingly an acceptable term now (?).

How long before we revert the other way because nobody alive remembers when "negro" was used and that "coloured" and "black" are looked on as terms that were used condescendingly back in the early 21st century.


It's like how we have "little people", because being called a "midget" is apparently condescending. It makes no sense at all, the people who are condescending towards people with small stature aren't going to stop being condescending because they are using a different name. It solves nothing.
It's just burying the actually problem by trying to make it less obvious...
 
There is a really interesting example from Germany. "To each his own" comes from the old Greek (Platon, if I'm not mistaken) and is a very common term in justice. Books and stage plays have been written with that title, movies have been made with that name, etc.

Then, in 1996, a novel was released with that name, written by Trutz Hardo, which contains the thesis, that the Holocaust was just fulfilling of the "Karma law" and that the jews just got what they deserved. The author was sued and sentenced for sedition and the book was forbidden. But from then on the term "To each his own", "Jedem das Seine" in German, has become a taboo. Because as it happens, it was also used as the motto at the gate of the Buchenwald concentration camp. "Jedem das Seine" was mounted inwards on the main gate.

From 1945 to 1996 nobody (not even the Jews) bothered about using that ancient Greek term in any innocent context but suddenly it was considered anti-semitic, because somebody used it as a name for an anti-semitic book. Some companies had the idea to use it in an advertising campaign but recieved an outcry from the Jewish community each time (who didn't bother with the term before 1996).
It is one of the absurdities of language in modern Germany, to be honest, and a perfect example of how political correctness should not work.

Because today only a few people dare to use the term "Jedem das Seine" anymore. Well, at least as long as it is written in German. Because the motto is still written on on the ceiling of each courthouse thoughout Germany and is also on the insignias of the German military police -- but in its Latin version: "suum cuique".

Because in Latin nobody understands the meaning and therefore it is harmless and not anti-semitic. Any questions? :rolleyes:
 
We have become better people because a condescending term like "negro" is no longer accepted as proper language. Language defines the categories we think in, thus the question which words we use is important.

In this case, I think captain_70s is more on the spot: the term is a sign that shows us what kind of category the other person is using. But it's not error-proof. We assume the other person is using the same set of categories we use. We project our categorization on other people, and we assume the other people is not faking and is using exactly the word that defines his thought. What if the other person use a different set, but can not express himself properly, or if the word is voluntarily avoided because of social pushes, like in this case? You can't know anymore what other people think. The proof is in foreign people and their difficulty to understand what's going on with "uncomfortable" words. They (we) have to ask for clues or explanations, and learn by heart what is what and what is allowed or not in the new language, rather then guessing it through experience, like they would for concepts like "tomato" or "newspaper". Because they can not guess the social implications.
 
Last edited:
The whole "what do we call people who are not white" argument bothers me as there is no correct answer. Not so long ago calling somebody "black" was considerably more offensive than calling them a "negro" and now the table has turned full circle.

I mean the term "negro" is still essentially the word "black" in a different language, it's just fallen out of use because of usage of the name in the past. It's only problem is that it was commonly used in an era when black people were seen as not being equal to whites on a mass scale. It's not like the world itself is racist it doesn't translate to "slave" or "person I really don't like because he's a funny colour", it just means "black", which is seemingly an acceptable term now (?).

How long before we revert the other way because nobody alive remembers when "negro" was used and that "coloured" and "black" are looked on as terms that were used condescendingly back in the early 21st century.


It's like how we have "little people", because being called a "midget" is apparently condescending. It makes no sense at all, the people who are condescending towards people with small stature aren't going to stop being condescending because they are using a different name. It solves nothing.
It's just burying the actually problem by trying to make it less obvious...
When I grew up all black people were West Indians (at that time there were very few African people living in the country.)

South Asian people were universally known as Pakistanis, again most South Asians were indeed Pakistanis around where I lived, even Sikhs with Turbans were called Pakistanis, East Asians were Chinese. It was as the vale of ignorance was lifted over a period that the more correct terms were used.

What was a bit of a surprise when I first encountered it was the dislike of one group of immigrants for another; you would think that they would stick together. In a way we are lucky we have such a spread of immigrants as opposed to America where they are nearly all from one language group. All ours have to learn English even to talk to other immigrants.

However there were diminutives of the original terms which look derogatory, some of which are still used in certain circles, don't worry though we have derogatory terms for the French, Chinese, Germans, Irish, Spanish and any one of a Mediterranean background, Americans; the German one was borrowed from the Americans during WWII. Oh, and each other.

One surprising thing was when people turned up from ex-colonial countries that were not ours, loads of people from ex-French colonies have pitched up, I would have thought that France was a better bet as they already spoke the language.
 
Last edited:
Symbolism is king.

Nasjonal_Samling_insignia.svg


The sun cross was a symbol of great importance (it would seem) for christians in Norway in earlier time. It was used pretty seamlessly until Nasjonal Samling, our local example of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiderpartei, took it on as a symbol.

As for the swastika, it's no longer a symbol of peace and contemplation in the east, or whatever it was it symbolised.

We may not like it, but that's the nature of, ehm, human nature.
 
History can leave us with weird things.

Here the name Benito is no longer used, but it was widespread before... that one... , ancient romans in films try to greet people as less as possible, and the song "la camisa negra", (the black shirt) by Juanes, has generated a bit of noise among people, before they translated the lyrics and discovered it doesn't speak about that at all. And yet it still sounds a bit strange.
 
Most people probably know and understand the term Quisling. Well, his first name was Vidkunn. I have NEVER met a Vidkunn younger than 75. Used to be a somewhat common name..

There are four people called Vidkunn in Norway today.
 
History can leave us with weird things.

Here the name Benito is no longer used, but it was widespread before... that one... , ancient romans in films try to greet people as less as possible, and the song "la camisa negra", (the black shirt) by Juanes, has generated a bit of noise among people, before they translated the lyrics and discovered it doesn't speak about that at all. And yet it still sounds a bit strange.

Most people probably know and understand the term Quisling. Well, his first name was Vidkunn. I have NEVER met a Vidkunn younger than 75. Used to be a somewhat common name..

There are four people called Vidkunn in Norway today.

Very understandable in these two cases, Benito and Vidkunn are no longer used as names. (Was not aware of the Black Shirt name stigma, but that makes sense too.)

First names are a feature of "the time" and fashions and in those cases additionally, notoriety.

* * *

Unrelated, sort of:

Quisling is now an adopted word in the English language for a collaborator.
(I know you know this already nomix, because your English is so good.)

During WW2 a very famous South African figher Ace was called Sailor Malan, his actual first name was Adolf.
 
Yes, well, I did point out the connotation of 'quisling' in English in my last post. :p
 
Yes, well, I did point out the connotation of 'quisling' in English in my last post. :p

True, it didn't register with me at the time. Doh!

I do wonder if the term has reached into American English, common usage.

More random thinks, any room / interest / need for a history & politics thread?

:think:
 
Last edited:
I do not know of anyone called Oswald, sort of went out of fashion (was it ever in fashion) after Sir Oswald Moseley - leader of the British Black Shirts (aka Fascists) lost support in WWII.
 
True, it didn't register with me at the time. Doh!

I do wonder if the term has reached into American English, common usage.

More random thinks, any room / interest / need for a history & politics thread?

:think:
I do know the term 'Quisling' was used back during the war when some congressional assholes were talking about Norway welcoming the Germans, citing Quisling. Led to FDR's "look to Norway" speech, eventually.

I do not know of anyone called Oswald, sort of went out of fashion (was it ever in fashion) after Sir Oswald Moseley - leader of the British Black Shirts (aka Fascists) lost support in WWII.
The BUF really wasn't all that popular before the war either. Heck, they were able to hold rallies, having fun at the seafront, not to mention

Hurrah for the
Blackshirts


But in the end, the BUF was not popular enough to manage anything other than messing up the east end and walking together. They never became what could even closely resemble a force to be reconed with in British midwar politics.
 
I hope they never reveal a single piece of secret US information. To someone who's giving them a pricey superb vacation. Wouldn't that be.. espionage?

Anyhow. Congress needs to get out of the palm of AIPAC. It's rediculous.
 
My adopted country is so sorely fucked up that I want to beat its politically-correct-and-enabling-ass raw.

We have a fucking province that for years has managed to convince the Feds they deserve distinct language laws, and their own rules for social programs, yet the rest of the country has to help pay for these goddamn provincial programs. AND they want to secede. AND they want to keep our currency if/when they do it.

AND we somehow tolerate this behaviour like a parent would an out-of-control petulant child without actually punishing it.

Oh, and if any of you are reading this and are a) French-Canadian, and b) offended, know that so am I, and French is my first language. And fuck you if you think Quebec deserves any sympathy. Canada has more than one official language. In fact, it now has three: English, Punjabi, and Cantonese. French should be studied because people genuinely want to, not because the "law" requires it for either a job in Soviet Quebeckistan, OR for any federal position.
 
Hasn't Quebec tried to succeed several times?
They've never succeeded. At anything.
If you mean, secede.... that haven't succeeded at that, either. :p

The last time they tried was with a big referendum in 1995... it all boiled down to a yes/no vote. The rest of Canada (myself included) had a far more positive viewpoint of keeping our French culture back then, and we trucked in boatloads of Non-Quebeckers into the province to vote "No", and the Nos had it... 51 to 49 percent. The fallout was spectacular. The Parti Quebecois (provincial party always trying to get Quebec to separate) leader, Jacques Parizeau, got drunk, and made a speech blaming all the "foreigners" for the reason they lost. He wasn't talking about the non-Quebec Canadians, by the way. He was referring to legitimate immigrants (mostly from the Middle East, and north Africa) whom his party didn't consider to be "equal" to Quebeckers.... and his party subsequently flamed out.
 
Top