african american whaaaaa??????

[MrFun]

Like anything taken to the extreme, it usually does not mesh well with reality.

[Lorizael]

It does not mesh well with the shared reality perceived by the human species, yes. But there's more to the world than what we see. This thread isn't about metaphysics, though, so I'll stop.

[MrFun]

you weird

[Lorizael]

You know you're the first person to ever say that to me, MrFun. Everyone else just thinks I fit right in.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MrFun
Lorizael -- you take deconstructionism to an extreme level.

It wasn't 'till I was away from the PC that I realized that he was spouting Post Mod BS. Congrats for catching it, MF.

His arguement stems largely from the idea that consciousness creates reality, the whole, labels are limiting BS. If I tell you this is a 3/16" spanner, that does not limit it to being a 3/16" spanner. If you try and imagine it to be something else, like a 5/16" spanner, it ain't gonna work. That's because reality is limiting. Reality determines the labels we put on things, not the other way around.

Social reality, however, has more feedback. Consciousness does have quite a bit of influence on our constructed realities. Nationality, ethnicity, religion are all products of the mind and exist only in our minds. It doesn't make it any less real for human beings (which Lorizael refuses to call himself, thus opening his entire line of reasoning up to ridicule), however.

I have very little choice over whether or not I am an American. I could become an ex-pat and go somewhere and say I'm not an American, but others would scoff at me. My mannerisms are American. My speech patterns are American. The very way I think is American. These are things that cannot be easily changed. It is not my label that limits me, but the social reality in which I grew that limits me. The label comes after the fact, not before.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
agree white is a construction, but im not sure about your chronology. White as a category was defined by the dominant old stock protestants, NOT by the immigrant groups - its part of northern and southern mainstream discourse pre-1860, when Irish are still marginalized. Certainly the Irish took advantage of it to enter the 'white' category, but they didnt invent the labels. And Italians were not "white" till much later

There is a book titled, How the Irish Became White. Irish and Italians did not invent whiteness, as you so correctly point out. As far as me and my Italian cousins go, some still don't consider us "white." Part of Bunnygrrl's family thinks of Italians as fellow Blacks, and they aren't alone. Since I am a mutt, however, you cannot tell I'm of Mediterranian stock from appearances, so I can pass for white.

[Lorizael]

And yet there are people that grow up in America who do not act like Americans.

Btw, I do not think that it is only labels that are limiting. Any complex construct that is a result of the working of the laws of physics is limiting in some way. Thus, the spanner can only be one thing at once.

But as human beings who create labels, we have the power to use them as we please. We cannot control the laws of physics, but we can control those things which are a product of ourselves.

Also, I am not spouting post modern bull****. No one has ever even adequately explained to me what post modernism is. What I say might sound like it, but I've also been accused of sounding like a racist, a rebuplican, a communist, a transphobic, a ******, and a host of other things.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Lorizael
And yet there are people that grow up in America who do not act like Americans.

Because not all of us grow up in the same social realities. I didn't grow up being hated or alternatively made invisible for the color of my skin, the sound of my accent, etc. I didn't have police start ****ing with me until I was a late teen, and then only for a few years.

But as human beings who create labels, we have the power to use them as we please. We cannot control the laws of physics, but we can control those things which are a product of ourselves.

The constraints placed upon us (or lack thereof) are what make the label, not the other way around. As social creatures, we need group acceptance. It is something programmed into our genes. If you are segregated from one group, you will create a group of your own or try and join another one if allowed. It is a biological imperative.

By attacking the label the group has created for itself, however, you are attacking the group. You are saying that who they are isn't good enough for you. Your group is the superior group (yet again), and they should be part of it and abandon their own. Do you not understand how deeply offensive that is?

Also, I am not spouting post modern bull****.

Oh yes you are. You may not understand it or realize it, and you may be spouting a crude version of it, but it exactly what you are doing. PM, in a very brief definition, is the idea that language constructs our reality. We are limited by what words we use and we can not know anything that has not come from the way of thinking in which we exist. Whether or not there is a objective reality beyond our consciousness is irrelevent. This whole "labeling limits me" BS is very much a PM idea.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


It wasn't 'till I was away from the PC that I realized that he was spouting Post Mod BS. Congrats for catching it, MF.

I have learned a lot from historiography -- about post modernism in the study of history but post modernism is applicable to other areas as well.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Because not all of us grow up in the same social realities. I didn't grow up being hated or alternatively made invisible for the color of my skin, the sound of my accent, etc. I didn't have police start ****ing with me until I was a late teen, and then only for a few years.

*sigh* And then there are people who simply decide for themselves that they don't want to live like an American.

The constraints placed upon us (or lack thereof) are what make the label, not the other way around. As social creatures, we need group acceptance. It is something programmed into our genes. If you are segregated from one group, you will create a group of your own or try and join another one if allowed. It is a biological imperative.

Humans are social creatures, certainly, but that doesn't mean we have to act on that inclination. After all, humans are omnivorous, yet there are those that are vegetarian. Compared to most species, humans have very few hardwired instincts, and as such we are much more free in our actions.

By attacking the label the group has created for itself, however, you are attacking the group. You are saying that who they are isn't good enough for you. Your group is the superior group (yet again), and they should be part of it and abandon their own. Do you not understand how deeply offensive that is?

Only if I claim that they should then join my group. But if I do not claim to belong to any group, then I am not claiming anything as being superior. Stop making assumptions.

Oh yes you are. You may not understand it or realize it, and you may be spouting a crude version of it, but it exactly what you are doing. PM, in a very brief definition, is the idea that language constructs our reality. We are limited by what words we use and we can not know anything that has not come from the way of thinking in which we exist. Whether or not there is a objective reality beyond our consciousness is irrelevent. This whole "labeling limits me" BS is very much a PM idea.

Okay, language constructs reality. Yah. That's definitely not a part of my belief system. Okay. Thanks for clarifying that point for me.

As I said, labels, because they are part of a complex system, are inherently limiting. But labels are not the only thing that limits us, and their is nothing unique in language save the fact that we can control the language we use.

[Japher]

their is nothing unique in language save the fact that we can control the language we use

Interesting statement, 'cept for the spelling error

Still, no matter what label you or others ultimately end up using, it most be acknowledged that those labels are needed, and that no matter what that word or label is it WILL eventually aquire a connoation that some one, somewhere, will find a problem with.

Change for the sake of change, or for the sake of protection from FEELINGS, is BS IMO. I could understand "don't call me a **** it's retarded" or "don't call me white I'm caucasion" or "don't call me black I am colored"... whatever. THe only stipulation I put on it is don't change it every 10 years!

Sh1t, it's like they're chaning the name of their race (whatever) because they are embaressed by it... THink Boddingtons

[Lorizael]

Eek. I really hate that one. Their and there. I think I'm going to go beat myself now. Ack. Ew.

[MrFun]

Did I mention that I strongly disagree with most of the position of post-modernists?

[Pax]

Originally posted by Albert Speer
MrFun:

first of all, one's political beliefs are up to his discretion, so unlike one's race, one can have problems with another's beliefs.

secondly, the liberal agenda is one of systematic oppression. Abortion has killed tens of millions of blacks and hispanics. the liberal culture of sex has retarded the growth of millions of young women by causing them to have children in their teens. liberals like Jesse Jackson have only escalated racial tension and misdirected the energies of many blacks into blaming whitey or the government for their problems and not lifting themselves up economically.

I think this is why I usually disagree with you. There is some truth in your statement but you seem to feel that the way to make things better is to take away the nets. How abouyt keeping the liberal agendas and adding education and jobs to help minorities integrate into society and give them more things to do than make babies. That's just one suggestion.

African-American, Black American, Black are all interchangeable and do not suffer the same negative connotation as colored and are not rooted in the past like Negro.

Black Americans and Black Africans have enough differences to make them distinct groups. In fact, Gambians and Senegalese have enough differences to make them distinct groups and they are right next to each other. Africans also divide themselves along tribal lines. You could be a Senegalese French Speaking member of the Wolof tribe or even a Gambian English Speaking member of the Wolof tribe. African Americans have indeed lost their heritage. We don't know where we came from. We don't know what foods our Ancestors ate. Their dances. History. NOTHING. African Americans are obviously different from European Americans. We are a seperate group due to the circumstances of our arrival. Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Jamaicans, Brazillians, and etc have a closer connection with their African heritage. Blacks in the U.S. have to search for their roots as if it were forbidden knowledge because in the past it was.

I personally believe that the salad bowl idea is a better one for america. It allows all groups to maintain their identity and still be a part of a greater group.

[Winston]

Found this to have some truth in it.