by Duns Scotus
Some of you might be scratching your heads after reading that title, and I wouldn’t blame you. The level of writing and reading in the modern West is not high enough that things are routinely written or read with much precision. But I am being extremely precise when I say that racial epithets are implicitly racist.
Of course, they are explicitly racist. If a White man calls a Black man the N-word, it is regarded as insulting in a collective and racial sort of way, and vice versa if a Black man calls a White man the dreaded C-word.
Actually, it’s not dreaded at all. In fact I don’t need to even use acronymic euphemism C”-word,” do I? I can just come straight out and say “cracker, cracker, cracker…” and even paint it on my picket fence in letters six feet high. It’s no biggie. No biggie at all.
It certainly wasn’t for Michael Che, a Black ‘comedian’ on the NBC show “Saturday Night Live” who called the President a “cheap cracker” in the kind of over-politicised rant that passes for comedy these days. In a piece attempting to criticise Trump for his response to the hurricane damage in Puerto Rico, Che said:
Yes, NBC, a Jewish controlled media corporation that would throw a fit if any White comedian used the N-word, is completely cool with someone on their flagship comedy show calling the President an obvious racial slur. No problemo.
I’m not going to say this is because they hate White people — although, who knows, maybe they do. Instead I believe it is mainly down to the simple fact that racial epithets, in addition to being explicitly racist are also clearly implicitly racist. By that I mean that the category of racial epithets, viewed in total, tend to treat Blacks worse or frame them as inferiors much more than they do to Whites, even though the job of racial epithets in general is to push everyone down.
Saying “cracker,” even with the worst sneer imaginable, is still pretty mild stuff, while saying the N-word, even softly or with a hint of irony, is literally devastating. Why is this? After all, the N-word is merely a derivative of the Latin term for Black. Why is calling a Black man Black therefore considered so terrible?
Of course, it has something to do with the history of the word and also present day associations. But the history of the word is merely the history of what happens when a superior civilisation meets an inferior one — conquest and subjugation.
As for the associations, these are only partly defined by a distant past. Nowadays they have more to do with how Blacks behave in the here and now, and the ways in which they continue to fail. Any word that refers to them, even the most well intended, therefore can’t help but take on negative connotations. God knows we’ve tried. Likewise with White words, but in an opposite sense.
Essentially calling a Black man a Black man can’t help but be an insult it seems, whatever his individual merits may be. While calling a White man a White man — even with a term like “cracker” or “honky” — even embellished with intensifiers like “dumb” or “cheap” and the worst sneer possible — can’t help but be a form of praise.
What is the solution to this? Why equality of course. But not the fake equality that the Left pushes where we all have to pretend that every group is equal, but real equality. Do you have any idea what that would involve? Let’s just face it, world, you couldn’t handle real equality, not ever, not even in a million years. So, let’s just keep a handful of spicy little taboo words and bumble along.
Of course, they are explicitly racist. If a White man calls a Black man the N-word, it is regarded as insulting in a collective and racial sort of way, and vice versa if a Black man calls a White man the dreaded C-word.
Actually, it’s not dreaded at all. In fact I don’t need to even use acronymic euphemism C”-word,” do I? I can just come straight out and say “cracker, cracker, cracker…” and even paint it on my picket fence in letters six feet high. It’s no biggie. No biggie at all.
It certainly wasn’t for Michael Che, a Black ‘comedian’ on the NBC show “Saturday Night Live” who called the President a “cheap cracker” in the kind of over-politicised rant that passes for comedy these days. In a piece attempting to criticise Trump for his response to the hurricane damage in Puerto Rico, Che said:
“This isn’t a complicated issue, man, it’s hurricane relief. You just did this very same thing for white people, twice. So, tell Melania to put on her flood heels, get some bottled water, some food, pack up some extra Atlanta Falcons Super Bowl T-shirts and write them a check with our money, you cheap cracker!”
Yes, NBC, a Jewish controlled media corporation that would throw a fit if any White comedian used the N-word, is completely cool with someone on their flagship comedy show calling the President an obvious racial slur. No problemo.
I’m not going to say this is because they hate White people — although, who knows, maybe they do. Instead I believe it is mainly down to the simple fact that racial epithets, in addition to being explicitly racist are also clearly implicitly racist. By that I mean that the category of racial epithets, viewed in total, tend to treat Blacks worse or frame them as inferiors much more than they do to Whites, even though the job of racial epithets in general is to push everyone down.
Saying “cracker,” even with the worst sneer imaginable, is still pretty mild stuff, while saying the N-word, even softly or with a hint of irony, is literally devastating. Why is this? After all, the N-word is merely a derivative of the Latin term for Black. Why is calling a Black man Black therefore considered so terrible?
Of course, it has something to do with the history of the word and also present day associations. But the history of the word is merely the history of what happens when a superior civilisation meets an inferior one — conquest and subjugation.
As for the associations, these are only partly defined by a distant past. Nowadays they have more to do with how Blacks behave in the here and now, and the ways in which they continue to fail. Any word that refers to them, even the most well intended, therefore can’t help but take on negative connotations. God knows we’ve tried. Likewise with White words, but in an opposite sense.
Essentially calling a Black man a Black man can’t help but be an insult it seems, whatever his individual merits may be. While calling a White man a White man — even with a term like “cracker” or “honky” — even embellished with intensifiers like “dumb” or “cheap” and the worst sneer possible — can’t help but be a form of praise.
What is the solution to this? Why equality of course. But not the fake equality that the Left pushes where we all have to pretend that every group is equal, but real equality. Do you have any idea what that would involve? Let’s just face it, world, you couldn’t handle real equality, not ever, not even in a million years. So, let’s just keep a handful of spicy little taboo words and bumble along.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comment will appear after it has been checked for spam, trolling, and hate speech.