View Full Version : racist?
Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk
27th April 2011, 09:50
some asshat called me a 'cracker' in a neg rep he gave me. is he racist, or just a general fuckwit?
southernmissfan
27th April 2011, 10:51
some asshat called me a 'cracker' in a neg rep he gave me. is he racist, or just a general fuckwit?
If it's who I think it is, just hope he gets banned/restricted soon. He's been called out for various things multiple times.
Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk
27th April 2011, 11:18
yeah i'm not one to grass people up, but this dude is a shitbag and needs to stop throwing slurs like this around. its not on.
some asshat called me a 'cracker' in a neg rep he gave me. is he racist, or just a general fuckwit?
the latter, along with everyone else who "neg reps". what post was it, out of curiosity?
Magón
27th April 2011, 17:11
Fuck you cracker!
just kidding people
Kuppo Shakur
27th April 2011, 17:40
Rep is serious business.
The Douche
27th April 2011, 17:58
Why do euros think cracker is such a big deal? It has to be some kind of cultural thing.
Pirate Utopian
27th April 2011, 18:17
I dont think it's a big deal. Crackers need to get over themself.
praxis1966
27th April 2011, 18:20
Cracker, please...
Jazzratt
27th April 2011, 18:49
Why do euros think cracker is such a big deal? It has to be some kind of cultural thing. It seems that this time everyone getting bent out of shape about the term is european but I'm fairly sure the last big argument about it was sparked off when I called a yank a cracker. Then again he was a guy that believed feminism oppressed men or some bullshit so it's not like he was representative of american members in general.
The Douche
27th April 2011, 19:10
It seems that this time everyone getting bent out of shape about the term is european but I'm fairly sure the last big argument about it was sparked off when I called a yank a cracker. Then again he was a guy that believed feminism oppressed men or some bullshit so it's not like he was representative of american members in general.
I was particularly suprised to see people upset about the term, as I mentioned in the thread, the only people I know who actually view it as a racial slur, are reactionaries.
I can't involve myself in the discussion cause I just can't even concieve of people taking that word seriously, much less being offended by it.
praxis1966
27th April 2011, 20:19
I was particularly suprised to see people upset about the term, as I mentioned in the thread, the only people I know who actually view it as a racial slur, are reactionaries.
I can't involve myself in the discussion cause I just can't even concieve of people taking that word seriously, much less being offended by it.
These are important points, actually. It's a pretty good illustration of how much a one way street racism really is. The g/f, who's Latina, once asked me if there was any word that a person of color could call me that I would be seriously offended by. After thinking about it, I had to say there wasn't. For that reason, I have to believe that anybody who would act seriously offended by an anti-white slur really is a closet racist. Feigning offense at something like that is, to me, a subtle way of trying to exert white supremacy by attempting to censor the language of racial-ethnic minorities.
Rusty Shackleford
27th April 2011, 20:27
call me a cracker, i dont care. i know im not a reactionary whip-wielding oppressor.
The Red Next Door
27th April 2011, 20:42
These are important points, actually. It's a pretty good illustration of how much a one way street racism really is. The g/f, who's Latina, once asked me if there was any word that a person of color could call me that I would be seriously offended by. After thinking about it, I had to say there wasn't. For that reason, I have to believe that anybody who would act seriously offended by an anti-white slur really is a closet racist. Feigning offense at something like that is, to me, a subtle way of trying to exert white supremacy by attempting to censor the language of racial-ethnic minorities.
There is a point to be made, Those offended are really racist
The Douche
27th April 2011, 20:58
These are important points, actually. It's a pretty good illustration of how much a one way street racism really is. The g/f, who's Latina, once asked me if there was any word that a person of color could call me that I would be seriously offended by. After thinking about it, I had to say there wasn't. For that reason, I have to believe that anybody who would act seriously offended by an anti-white slur really is a closet racist. Feigning offense at something like that is, to me, a subtle way of trying to exert white supremacy by attempting to censor the language of racial-ethnic minorities.
I'm inclined to agree.
southernmissfan
27th April 2011, 22:55
I don't think it's that people on here are actually offended by the word (I would hope not), it's that certain members use it, along with other inflammatory language, in every post. "U fuckin crackers r reactionaries1!!!!"
It gets old. And embarrassing.
Magón
27th April 2011, 23:34
These are important points, actually. It's a pretty good illustration of how much a one way street racism really is. The g/f, who's Latina, once asked me if there was any word that a person of color could call me that I would be seriously offended by. After thinking about it, I had to say there wasn't. For that reason, I have to believe that anybody who would act seriously offended by an anti-white slur really is a closet racist. Feigning offense at something like that is, to me, a subtle way of trying to exert white supremacy by attempting to censor the language of racial-ethnic minorities.
Yeah, I have to agree. There was this guy I saw one time, who exploded in rage at this black guy, who called him a cracker apparently. And I mean, just exploded into this huge fit of rage. I would probably compared his rage at the guy, to any of my hispanic (myself included)/black friends reactions to being called a "spic" or "nigger".
I never understood how cracker could be compared or held the same, to either of those?
Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk
8th May 2011, 15:42
i just expect better from revleft posters. he called me a cracker as an insult because i disagreed with some bullshit post he made. i'm guessing he's not white, what business does he have calling me a cracker (a slave-owner who cracked whips) because i disagreed with him? why does he need to lump me into the shitty category of slave-owners because he doesn't have the stones to argue properly? its principles, on principle revolutionary leftists don't use terms with historical racial connotations to insult one another, assuming that they don't have the balls to argue without bringing insults into it. i've had neg rep that didn't have to resort to racial slurs and that was fine and dandy.
also i don't think its anywhere near as bad as calling someone a nigger, but its still out of order and people should think before they speak.
Manic Impressive
8th May 2011, 16:05
I guess us crazy europeans think that using an insult based on the colour of someone's skin is wrong. inorite crazy idea:rolleyes:
Pirate Utopian
8th May 2011, 16:08
Fuck crackers.
Robespierre Richard
8th May 2011, 18:00
biscuits 4 lyf
El Rojo
8th May 2011, 20:44
What the fuck is a cracker? I thought you spread cheese on them :confused:
Pirate Utopian
8th May 2011, 21:08
Yeah fuck those things.
PhoenixAsh
8th May 2011, 21:09
Everybody who uses devisive language based on skin colour...no matter the intent...is using racial slur and there is no other way about it. It does not matter if the language is offensive, if the target thinks it is offensive or if the user thinks it is offensive....as soon as it targets skin colour, etnicity or anything which is a genetic expression or labels a phenotype is becomes racial slur and something to be avoided. Period.
Pirate Utopian
8th May 2011, 21:35
I eat bread and throw away crackers.
praxis1966
8th May 2011, 21:39
What the fuck is a cracker? I thought you spread cheese on them :confused:
I honestly can't tell whether this is serious or just a really bad joke.:confused:
Os Cangaceiros
8th May 2011, 21:44
I laugh everytime I hear the word "cracker" used as a racial epithet.
gorillafuck
8th May 2011, 21:47
I laugh everytime I hear the word "cracker" used as a racial epithet.Same.
Everybody who uses devisive language based on skin colour...no matter the intent...is using racial slur and there is no other way about it
Wrong
I think a racial slur sort of loses its power and inherent oppressiveness when directed at a group of people that have never been oppressed in the same way pretty much all other races have.
Il Medico
8th May 2011, 23:59
What the fuck is a cracker? I thought you spread cheese on them :confused:
A white person or a person from Florida. I wouldn't be surprised if the latter meaning was considered offensive. :lol:
The Man
9th May 2011, 01:20
I prefer saltines.
RedSunRising
9th May 2011, 01:45
Poor The Red Next Door got banned for over using it.
HURR DURR CRACKERS THAT'S A KIND OF FOOD SO I'M GONNA MAKE A JOKE THAT REFERS TO THE FOODSTUFF RATHER THAN THE EPITHET AIN'T I A FUCKING LAUGH AND A HALF
You motherfuckers sure are dumb and unfunny
Poor The Red Next Door got banned for over using it.
he was a troll anyway
RedSunRising
9th May 2011, 01:55
he was a troll anyway
Looking over his posts there was a trollish descent, that I can accept, but where did it come from? In some ways it was a legitimate reaction.
My "waters" tell me that he is basically a very sweet kid.
Pirate Utopian
9th May 2011, 02:44
You motherfuckers sure are dumb and unfunny
I wasnt referring to food. I eat white people.
PhoenixAsh
9th May 2011, 08:57
I think a racial slur sort of loses its power and inherent oppressiveness when directed at a group of people that have never been oppressed in the same way pretty much all other races have.
I think that is somewhat correct but hardly the point.
Racial slurs categorise based on skincolour. They designate traits on an induvidual based on that skincolour...not on the induvidual. Race is used as a label and maintained as a social construct.
PhoenixAsh
9th May 2011, 08:59
Wrong
Yes...you indeed are.
Chambered Word
9th May 2011, 12:21
Looking over his posts there was a trollish descent, that I can accept, but where did it come from? In some ways it was a legitimate reaction.
My "waters" tell me that he is basically a very sweet kid.
seemed like a cool kid who really wanted to learn when he was known as social/MidwestAnarcho and then he met up with the PSL lol
Yes...you indeed are.
Congratulations on perhaps the worst ever comeback i've seen on this forum.
IndependentCitizen
9th May 2011, 13:41
Wrong
Well, could you expand on this please, rather than stating it's wrong then leaving it there.
ZeroNowhere
9th May 2011, 14:33
Well, could you expand on this please, rather than stating it's wrong then leaving it there.This is a thread in Chit-Chat started to snipe at a user in response to a negrep. It is not the place for detailed discussion of subjects which are in any case incredibly hackneyed here.
Well, could you expand on this please, rather than stating it's wrong then leaving it there.
I'll leave this quote from another thread here:
"There is anti-white prejudice but minorities don't have the political or economic power to exercise this. Racism is not the act of an individual it is a system created by a power structure. That is why there is no such thing as non-white racism
http://www.revleft.com/vb/edl-supporter-here-t136030/index12.html
PhoenixAsh
9th May 2011, 17:15
Congratulations on perhaps the worst ever comeback i've seen on this forum.
There had better be a trophy.
Manic Impressive
9th May 2011, 17:24
So attitudinal racism is justified just because it's not systemic?:confused:
PhoenixAsh
9th May 2011, 17:24
It is dumb to even suggest the only form of racism is the institutionalised form or suggesting it is not also an induvidual act.
It is an induvidual act of basing opinions on a categorisation of genetic elements into phenotypes and ascribing, based on that, behaviour, attitudes, positive and negative traits to induviduals and groups, and basing ones own behaviour, thoughts and lingual constructs on its very assumptions towards these induviduals and groups.
It is there were racism begins and, if gaining enough support and repetition...becomes institutionalised.
Denying that denies the history of man and the social development of racism and how it became and becomes institutionalised.
The argument brought forth is already disproven by history....and only serves to pardon ones own inherrited inability to outgrow the social construct of race and the inherrently racist practice of categorising supposed phenotypes.
Sam_b
10th May 2011, 00:22
I expected leftists to know better than this very liberalised and simplistic definition of racism (just because you say something is 'wrong' does not make it true, and neither is a counter-definition rather than lack of argument). Of course, the 'proving by history' is subsequently lacking here.
To believe that racism is something purely genetic and surfaced ignores the real sociological reasonings behind its entrenchment.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.