In my world I like to judge people by their character, I have and will always REFUSE to play their games.
It amazes me that the NAACP has used the word “colored people” for all of these years…..sad isn’t it how some people/organizations love to wallow and stir up hate for God’s people.
Good column. Same theory applies to the sports mascot re-brands. The left doesn't actually care about the feelings of American Indians. They just enjoy the flex of taking traditional names and renaming them. Even when polls of American Indians showed majorities weren't offended by Indian mascots, the left still move(d) forward with their renaming crusade.
Re-working language is just about displaying who is currently in power.
> The left doesn't actually care about the feelings of American Indians.
Correct—and the left proved this themselves by pushing the change from "American Indian" to "Native American"—a label that the actual indigenous tribes of the U.S. never wanted and still don't use. The Federally recognized American Indian tribes all still use the label "Indian" for themselves, for all of their officialdom (like the CDIB = tribal member ID), and for their inter-tribal organizations (like the NCAI, ncai.org).
Anti-racism is racism. And, if you happen to be of that ilk, then you miss out on our rich history, our shared history. A history that honors struggle, and valor, and courage. A history that separates the American Experiment, from the typical nation state, a journey unlike any other.
These free men served with honor, the 9th & 10th Cavalry, and the 24th & 25th Infantry Regiment… https://youtu.be/LSAkRV2Tbis
There's an actual history-based logic behind this one.
The adjective "colored" is now considered a slur with regard to American Black people, because it was so heavily associated with segregation and Jim Crow. (That one Life magazine photo of the drinking fountains labeled "WHITE" and "COLORED" that literally every single American has seen at some point, encapsulates the pervasiveness of that word in drawing and enforcing segregationist boundaries.) It's the combination of that sordid history together with the fact that, in the U.S., "colored" has alws been an externally imposed other-ing label—one which Black people never chose or wanted ••for themselves•• at any point in American history.
"Colo[u]red" doesn't have that same valence anywhere outside the United States. In some countries it's just a catch-all descriptor for all non-White people, like "people of color" in the U.S. or "global majority" in the UK.
In South Africa specifically, "coloured" is a self-chosen identity label used with pride by the biracial/mulatto people known as the Cape Coloureds.
In my world I like to judge people by their character, I have and will always REFUSE to play their games.
It amazes me that the NAACP has used the word “colored people” for all of these years…..sad isn’t it how some people/organizations love to wallow and stir up hate for God’s people.
Good column. Same theory applies to the sports mascot re-brands. The left doesn't actually care about the feelings of American Indians. They just enjoy the flex of taking traditional names and renaming them. Even when polls of American Indians showed majorities weren't offended by Indian mascots, the left still move(d) forward with their renaming crusade.
Re-working language is just about displaying who is currently in power.
> The left doesn't actually care about the feelings of American Indians.
Correct—and the left proved this themselves by pushing the change from "American Indian" to "Native American"—a label that the actual indigenous tribes of the U.S. never wanted and still don't use. The Federally recognized American Indian tribes all still use the label "Indian" for themselves, for all of their officialdom (like the CDIB = tribal member ID), and for their inter-tribal organizations (like the NCAI, ncai.org).
Foil of aluminum or aluminum foil?
And how would 'tin foil' fit into this foil naming paradigm. Would it be viewed as an outdated slur?
I guess that makes white people "people of white" or "people of whiteness".
We have come a long way from 1995…
https://youtu.be/eU_TzwcMZpo
Anti-racism is racism. And, if you happen to be of that ilk, then you miss out on our rich history, our shared history. A history that honors struggle, and valor, and courage. A history that separates the American Experiment, from the typical nation state, a journey unlike any other.
These free men served with honor, the 9th & 10th Cavalry, and the 24th & 25th Infantry Regiment… https://youtu.be/LSAkRV2Tbis
There's an actual history-based logic behind this one.
The adjective "colored" is now considered a slur with regard to American Black people, because it was so heavily associated with segregation and Jim Crow. (That one Life magazine photo of the drinking fountains labeled "WHITE" and "COLORED" that literally every single American has seen at some point, encapsulates the pervasiveness of that word in drawing and enforcing segregationist boundaries.) It's the combination of that sordid history together with the fact that, in the U.S., "colored" has alws been an externally imposed other-ing label—one which Black people never chose or wanted ••for themselves•• at any point in American history.
"Colo[u]red" doesn't have that same valence anywhere outside the United States. In some countries it's just a catch-all descriptor for all non-White people, like "people of color" in the U.S. or "global majority" in the UK.
In South Africa specifically, "coloured" is a self-chosen identity label used with pride by the biracial/mulatto people known as the Cape Coloureds.