On 24 Jun 2003 03:29:52 GMT, FOR7b <for7b@aol.comnxnxnxnx> wrote:

Well, that's not what 2Pac died for. Anyway, I was talking about my friends
in Belgrade, who *are* from Africa (Sudan, Guinea Bisao, Etiopia, Nigeria).

Yeah, I know. That's my point. That's why I wouldn't consider calling black
person a 'nigger' in Belgrade a nasty crime against a human. In the US,
yes, it would be nasty. Which is unfortunate. A 'negro' manss black. The
word that is. So why not call a black person black? That's very
unfortunate. I never minded people calling me yellow. Also, being yellow
does have some advantages and disadvantages that cannot/souldn't be easily
overlooked.



--
Branko

On 25 Jun 2003 00:06:18 GMT, FOR7b <for7b@aol.comnxnxnxnx> wrote:

Yeah, 2Pac. Like "they stole our history..." Like "the black population
should stand up," and not in those exact words...

Well, now I know what's the big deal about this thread. You think I'm
talking about *using* the word, don't you? You might think that I would use
the first chance I get to call a black man 'nigger,' which is absolutely a
pile of crap. Maybe you never seriously looked at anything that I wrote so
far?

I'm talking about the *meaning* and *implication*. Not *using* the word,
but the fact that the word carries such meaning. Not the word as an
incarnation of the meaning, but the meaning itself. In most roman languages
'negro' or any version of it (like 'nero,' or 'nigger') means 'black' (as
black shoe, black car... the coulor). The fact that such a word has come to
have other implication (a 'lowlife,' maybe?) is very unfortunate.

That is, IMO, very far from being undone simply by stopping to use the
word. It will take a lot of apologizing and tons of history lesson for
things to change. The word might not be used anymore, but its meaning is
still there. And, AFAIK, the meaning is incarnated into many new forms that
we might not notice untill someone gets really angry. At least in the UK,
it is highly likely. A black friend from Sudan got rejected in a job
intervew despite his Master's degree, despite his five years of experience,
despite his fluent English -- just because he was living in the black
neighbourhood. When he lied about his address the next time, he got the
job. And that may only be one small part of it.

It is a good idea, OTOH, that people stopped calling a black man a 'nigger'
in the US. But it's unfortunate that someone had to get pissed off about it
first. Get my drift now?

And I say it's good it isn't. But that's not the main point. It really has
to go beyond the words. When some *real* change is made, the words would,
hopefully, even lose their *acquired* meanings. Hopefully. IMO, merely not
using the words is, to say the least, superficial, even though it is a
great progress.

There are still KKK outposts in the US. That's very indicative, IMO. Kinda
like a cancer that's not been removed completely.



--
Branko

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:09:03 +0200, Branko Vukelic <noaddress@bonbon.net>
wrote:

Sorry, forgot about this: http://www.kkk.com/

--
Branko

Ewww...!

What a nasty site... in every sense!

:-)

Pepe
Milano, Italy
PS: this is so FUBAR that's not even funny...



"Branko Vukelic" <noaddress@bonbon.net> ha scritto nel messaggio
newsprrbn9pp2qykehr@news.yubc.net...

What are you trying to prove with that? In any society, especially a free one
you are going to have such groups. I suspect they will always be around.


for7b@aol.com

Oh geez, like a low life former gang banging dead rapper was the collective
voice of blacks in America. Give me a break.



Could it be also that you may need to express and clarify yourself more clearly
then if I am misunderstanding you. Your english is good considering it isn't
your native language but english is my native language and I am merely
interpreting what you are writing.



It is unfortunate when any word or label is used to refer to any group or race
in a derogatory way because of skin color or race or nationality. There are
many words with harmless meanings used by different cultures in derogatory ways
so why should it be surprising to you that "nigger" has negative connotations
considering its past use.



for7b@aol.com

On 25 Jun 2003 18:43:15 GMT, FOR7b <for7b@aol.comnxnxnxnx> wrote:

Well, who else did? Martin Luther King, who's also a dead man.

I know English is not my primary language, but you seem to misinterpret
things in a big way. Actually, I see that you are leaving some very
important parts out when quoting my msgs, which leads me to a conclusion
that you really are merely interpreting what I write. (Kinda like Google
robots.)

I am not at all 'surprised' "that 'nigger' has negative connotations." I
also do not agree that the situation is such *only* due to "its past use."
It is the whole scenario, of which the *words* are just a minor part, that
is really sickening (and also not surprising at all). Words are just words,
until you put them into a context. And the context is what bothers me. You
can always change the words or lose them completely without changing a
thing.

--
Branko

Comparing 2Pac with Martin luther King now? That's funny.


Ofcourse I am interpreting what you are trying to say. We are communicating,
are we not? Interpretation occurs in all communication, especially
communication that is not clear or to the point.

I am also not quoting parts of your message because I am not replying to them.
Why quote something that I am not going to reply to?

I wouldn't worry about it so much. There will always be people that are
prejudice or racist and they will use whatever words that suits the occasion.


for7b@aol.com

On 26 Jun 2003 05:06:04 GMT, FOR7b <for7b@aol.comnxnxnxnx> wrote:

Some of the things they said are similar. Also they are both killed. (Did
not die of old age, that is.) I might add Malcolm X as well. They all
talked about similar stuff and all got killed. That's not funny at all,
IMO.

Well if you don't give a damn, I do. Besides, dangerous is the one that
utters not a word and whose hatred burns violently within.

--
Branko

So if some gang member low life rapper achieves some fame and repeats words
that were already spoken by a peaceful Martin Luther King he then deserves to
be compared to such a man? Nonsense.



Who says I don't "give a damn?" At some point there are things in life that
sometimes get much worse the more you try and fight it. My telling you not to
"worry about it so much" does not necessarily translate into inaction. In an
odd way I would say your comments and attitude do more to spread racism than my
telling anyone not to "worry about it so much." Unlike you I don't look at
black or white people in any unique way. There are great people in this world
and then there are low lives and they come in many different shades of color.
It is really kind of strange that you single out blacks as a group of people
that you envy and then go on to point out why with stereotypical
characteristics. You sound like a Serbian Archie Bunker.







for7b@aol.com

Personally, I really think it is time to wrap this up. I'm sure most of the
group is totally ignoring this thread by now. The things you point out to
Branko have been pointed out to him again and again and he just isn't
capable of seeing it. True enough about the Archie Bunker anaolgy. He used
much of the same reasoning and logic Branko has used, and like Branko,
Archie could never see his own racism. Have fun if you want to continue with
Branko, but like arguing with Archie, it ain't going nowhere.

Fred Doyle

On 26 Jun 2003 18:50:32 GMT, FOR7b <for7b@aol.comnxnxnxnx> wrote:

Well, I would have to recheck his lyrics to give a complete answer this
one.

Tho, I think he had great lines about reuniting of the black people, who
are fighting among themselves instead of fighting the common enemy (racism)
.... things like that. He was a gang banger, that's true. He was far from
being peaceful, that's also true. Hence the 'take up guns' kinda approach.
But I can't entirely agree that he was merely a low-life copycat. It would
be more like "Hate that Gave Birth to Hate." KKK took up guns, why souldn't
the blacks? I think that's 2Pac's idea.

If you get so pissed at what you saw as my opinion on black people, how do
you expect an idealist gang banger to 'stay cool'? It is his goddamn
business, after all.

Goals of M. L. King and 2Pac were the same -- they only had very different
methods of achieving them. 2Pac saw force as the only way, King saw
diplomacy as the prefered weapon. And they both failed.

BTW, given 2Pac's popularity and the poor fate of Malcolm X, I wouldn't
entirely dismiss the posibility that CIA conspired with one of the gangs to
get rid of 2Pac: the same way FBI got rid of Malcolm X using the members of
the Nation of Islam.

Let's see the definition of the word 'discrimination' in Webster's
dictionary (hey, I'm not patronizing: just read on):

Under 2: "the quality or power of finely distinguishing"

Looking at the definition of 'generalization' we see:

Under 3: "the act or process whereby a response is made to a stimulus
similar to but not identical with a reference stimulus"

There's an old stereotype about Japanese (I am one):

"Japanese are hard-working people."

This can be classified as discrimination based on a generalized opinion
about a nation (namely Japanese). In other words, by stating that "Japanese
are hard-working," we distinguish them from other nation based on a number
of Japanese, who are characterized as hard-working. The 'number' in
question must be fairly large in order to form a stereotype: It has to be
able to be expressed in a 'most of' or 'mostly' form -- to the point of
becoming 'almost all of.'

However, there is something in this example very important for 'racism'
debate: discrimination. You, E.T, were probably saying that I promote
racism by making generalized discriminations, right?

First of all, let me assure you that I do not apply generelized ideas in
individual cases. They only serve as a reference point. The accuracy of the
generalized opinions are not high for sure, but I consider them very
reliable since they are mostly proven through time they took to form.

Secondly, I don't agree that discrimination itself is causing racism. In
order to become a full-scale racist you need to believe that the race is
the *only* or "*primary* determinant of human traits and capacities and
that such traits produce *inherent superiority* of a particular race."
(Webster, with my emphasis.) So we can conclude that in order to be a
racist, you need to, first of all discriminate between generalized traits
of races (which is totally natural in all animals, including humans), and
then conclude that some races are superior to others. I might add that
racists also try to exterminate and/or exploit the inferior races.

At this point, I would like to remind you, E.T, about the ethnic cleansing
remark you made. I can't dig it up right now, but it sounded like: "You
Serbs should be bombed. You do ethnic-cleansing." You did not choose
'color' as basis of the argument, but you did choose a 'nation.' IMO, the
exactly same mechanics apply in this case, as well.

In order to prevent racism, one might take at least two courses of action:

1. Stop discriminating and generalizing.

or

2. Oppose the idea of superiority of any race. (Mind you, race is a
fictional idea: it doesn't apply only the skin colour, but to any
particular trait you like).

I chose 2. because I believe that discriminating and generalizing are, *if*
not necessary, then just unavoidable. All animals, mind you, have the
capacity to discriminate and generalize (the latter being the among the
first things they learn). Also, the two processes can point out some
cultural differences that are otherwise viped out. And at last, but not the
least, discrimination and generalization can help us understand different
groups of people as groups. This doesn't rule out individuals, but quite on
the contrary, it helps us see how individuals of a particular group differ
(or relate).

Okay, I definitely agree that I'm making a grater fuss about this than
sensible. It's a curse. Big mouth. Mostly to my disadvantage, admittedly.
So, as Freddy pointed out: time to wrap it up. Please, I would honestly
appreciate the closing argument by For7b. Fred's already written one. So
did I.

--
Branko