What is offensive language?

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by rogue

He was born in Trinidad. He was not an African-American,

Originally Posted by ewmayer

My dad was a white European, but happened to be born on banana plantation his parents ran in the 1930s, before the war, while Cameroon was still a German colony. We emigrated to the US in the 70s and he later became a naturalized citizen. Does that make him African-American?

I have friend that was born and raised from Barbados, she refers to herself as Caribbean-American and won't stand for being refered to by the other term.
Another friend is white skinned, at least the second generation of his family born and raised in South Africa (left during the 80's, see this post why http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpos...7&postcount=17 ). He refers to himself as a 'son of Africa' and would not have a problem being described as African-American.

Where one is born and raised does not say anything about the genetic, racial, ethnic, or even cultural identity. Those from Cape Verde defy others trying to categorize them.

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

My dad was a white European, but happened to be born on banana plantation his parents ran in the 1930s, before the war, while Cameroon was still a German colony. We emigrated to the US in the 70s and he later became a naturalized citizen. Does that make him African-American?

I would say no, but let me explain.

I went to the (name of school) African Students Union* and was interested to learn their take on this. They clearly distinguished between African students (those who came from Africa, or perhaps had parents who did) and African-American students (those who were descendants of Africans but whose families had been in America for, say, 200 years). I don't know what cutoff they used, but they all seemed to feel this was an important distinction.

So they -- and, I suppose, I -- would call your dad African (and American) but not African-American.

* N.B., this is distinct from (name of school) African-American Students Union.

[Calvin Culus]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

[...]I would also suggest that game theory is an extremely poor model for human discourse and social interaction

Quite the contrary: it is an excellent model for social interaction. Rational egoists cooperate!

Originally Posted by Brian-E

[...]because game theory assumes that you want to win at the expense of everyone else. I'm curious: is that your approach to life in general? It certainly isn't mine.

Apparently your approach to life is to be as ignorant as possible so you can jump to the wrong conclusions. Game theory does *not* assume that all games are zero-sum.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

For the benefit of those not from the U.S., let me just say that this view of our culture is, to say the least, relatively intolerant, uneducated, hypocritical, and the view of only a small minority. For the most part, we Americans get along with each other even if we disagree with one another and we don't view each other's beliefs in such a bigoted way.

Please note that the above was posted by one of our resident religious
fruitcakes who has shown his extremist religious views in past posts.

Contrary to the claim of my intolerance: it is an accurate portrayal of
reality. Read the journal articles that I posted. Evidence is everywhere of
religious extremism in the red states. Their low level of education is a documented fact. Their promotion of HATRED towards others who do not
share their views is well known within the U.S. Just look at what the
Mormon Church (i.e. Utah) did in its campaign to get California (outside their
jurisdiction!) to overturn court decisions allowing equal rights for gays.


In blue states, you don't find (just to cite some examples):


Churches such as the Kansas Baptist Church that goes to military
funerals and spews hatred toward gays.

The Ku Klux Klan (!!!!!!!!)

Mormon polygamists who force young girls to marry against their will
and openly flaunt laws against polygamy.

Branch Davidian type cults.

Jim Jones type cults who induce their members to commit suicide by
cyanide.

White extremist military hate groups.

States who pass laws requiring that nonsensical alternatives to evolution
(based purely on their religious dogma) be taught in schools.

States that pass laws promoting prayer in schools. High school football
teams who have teacher led Christian prayers before practice and games.

States who fly the confederate flag as part of their government.

Religious leaders who get caught embezzling (J. Baker), stealing, committing
adultery, calling for heads of other countries to be murdered. Now I don't
expect religious leaders to be saints. But these same people claim to
have the moral high ground.

Imbeciles such as Sarah Palin (who thinks she can see Russia from her
house and who flunked out of multiple colleges before finally getting her
degree) getting elected as governor.

People who dress in Nazi uniforms who run for congress.

Do you want more??? Watch the movie "Religulous". Do you want more?
I can post more examples.

Read the Vanity Fair articles. They are factually correct and convey
the differences between Blue and Red states quite well.

[CRGreathouse]

I agree with Zeta-Flux here. It seems that Silverman is letting himself get carried away with the zeal he criticizes.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by rogue

I wrote the sentence without intending to attack the religious right, but then did so (in my last paragraph) without removing the statement. Mine was shorter (based upon perspective), but you took the time to provide some evidence of your stance.

I think that it is clear from both of our posts that we are frustrated with religious conservatives who want to tell everyone else how to live their lives.

Read the reply from Zeta-flux (someone who has shown himself to be a
religious nutcase in many prior posts) regarding my characterization of
the difference between red and blue states. This characterization was
well supported by the Vanity Fair articles that I posted.

It seems that I gored his ox.

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

It seems that I gored his ox.

Or perhaps it is possible that your skewed viewpoint is shared by at least one other person.

I wouldn't normally get involved on this point, but I'm somewhat concerned that those who haven't been to the US will get an inaccurate portrait of life here. I'm sorry for whatever experiences you've had that so colored your view, but they're not typical.

[only_human]

Originally Posted by CRGreathouse

I agree with Zeta-Flux here. It seems that Silverman is letting himself get carried away with the zeal he criticizes.

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

For the benefit of those not from the U.S., let me just say that this view of our culture is, to say the least, relatively intolerant, uneducated, hypocritical, and the view of only a small minority. For the most part, we Americans get along with each other even if we disagree with one another and we don't view each other's beliefs in such a bigoted way.

I was cheering while I read R.D. Silverman's characterization of red vs. blue states. I feel that Zeta-Flux statement has some value but severely understates the significant polarization found in America today. I wouldn't characterize bigotry in america as "only a small minority" Fox News turns my stomach. People are getting elected who are actually talking about taking arms against government and undoing civil rights. I remember in my youth (a period of reconciliation after the 60's and after Viet Nam) as a time of consideration and courtesy where reason and rules of order were ideals often achieved but not so much these days. Also lost is the concept of separation of church and state.

Where Silverman goes too far is only in the small hyperboles like describing Sara Palin as one who actually believes Russia could be seen from her house (this was a Saturday Night Live lampooning of a more innocuous remark). My objection is that these slight excesses weaken a powerful contrast of two Americas that resonates strongly.

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by only_human

I was cheering while I read R.D. Silverman's characterization of red vs. blue states. I feel that Zeta-Flux statement has some value but severely understates the significant polarization found in America today.

I think you understate the polarization of America in the past! Historically this amount of polarization is typical or even low. Look at Johnson's presidency, for example, or Jackson's! I trust the example of Lincoln's pre-presidency and presidency is too obvious?

I highly recommend you find campaign material from the early US and see how scandalous and factitious politics was then and compare to how it is now.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by CRGreathouse

Or perhaps it is possible that your skewed viewpoint is shared by at least one other person.

I wouldn't normally get involved on this point, but I'm somewhat concerned that those who haven't been to the US will get an inaccurate portrait of life here. I'm sorry for whatever experiences you've had that so colored your view, but they're not typical.

I have posted FACTS and cited examples of the kinds of religious extremism
that is prevalent in red states. My portrayal of the differences between
the read & blue states is very accurate and backed by facts. All you have done is gainsay.

And I had firsthand experience of what the South is like. I lived in Houston
for several years where my teachers complained that I was a discipline
problem in class because I kept interrupting with questions. One of them
actually said "I don't know where y'all are from, but down here students
shut up and do as they are told. We don't want smartass Yankee Jews
interrupting our classes with questions". When I first moved to Houston,
in my first day of class the first thing they did was recite the Lord's Prayer.
I did not know it and had no idea what it was. When I asked my parents
about it they protested to the school that I was Jewish and that I was
not required to go along with this prayer service. My parents were told that
I had no choice but to do as everyone else was doing. They told me not
to participate. I was constantly harassed by other students for my non-
particiption. The school admins did nothing.

This typifies the red states. There is a religious extremism that pervades
these states and the people who live there think it is perfectly OK to
force their religion on everyone else. I am not intolerant; I am PUSHING
BACK by presenting real facts. Reread the Vanity Fair articles.

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by only_human

Also lost is the concept of separation of church and state.

I'm curious about that one. If you find a good scientific comparison of this over time I'd be interested in reading it.