Racist* woman gets punched on UK train (tube)

Neapolitan · 01-28-2013, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

Please re-read my post. Thanks.

I've read it. It doesn't make sense because I see it as two different cultures. What happened to the American Indians is not connected with fans of American Football.
I wanted to point out the Irish didn't have it easy through history either, every group of people under go some type of persecution, or loss numbers because epidemics, famines or war.

Edit: Sparky's point about the Fighting Irish didn't make sense either.

**Janszoon** · 01-28-2013, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

I've read it. It doesn't make sense because I see it as two different cultures What happened to the American Indians is not connected with fans of American Football.
I wanted to point out the Irish didn't have it easy through history either, every group of people under go some type of persecution, or loss numbers because epidemics, famines or war.

Good grief. Talk about missing the point.

Neapolitan · 01-28-2013, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

Good grief. Talk about missing the point.

I never said I was the brightest crayon in the box, sorry Jans.

Sparky · 01-28-2013, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

Edit: Sparky's point about the Fighting Irish didn't make sense either.

why not?

Neapolitan · 01-29-2013, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sparky

To play devils advocate you do have a team called the vikings-symbolized with horns, as well as "the fighting irish" both pretty nasty stereotypes in their own right.

not saying one excuses the other but i can kinda understand the comic value in it

I know a lot of Irish-Americans who wear Notre Dame (baseball) caps and sweaters, that has "Fighting Irish" on those items. I don't see how they are subscribing to "pretty nasty stereotypes" as you put it. But then you add it has "comic value," well what is it nasty or comical?

The Batlord · 01-29-2013, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

I've read it. It doesn't make sense because I see it as two different cultures. What happened to the American Indians is not connected with fans of American Football.
I wanted to point out the Irish didn't have it easy through history either, every group of people under go some type of persecution, or loss numbers because epidemics, famines or war.

Edit: Sparky's point about the Fighting Irish didn't make sense either.

It's more offensive because Americans killed the vast majority of the native population either intentionally or through accident and then proceeded to take every piece of land that took our fancy without the slightest consideration for them, except how best to remove them from said land. We were just kinda jerks to the Irish back in the day. And now the Irish are just as integrated into society as any other group, whereas the Native Americans are still **** upon to this very day and are living on reservations with little to no economic opportunities and no natural resources. So yeah, I'd say Americans making light of the suffering of Native Americans is a bit more offensive than doing it to the Irish.

hip hop bunny hop · 01-29-2013, 11:27 AM

le lol, if any of you guys want to read up on the history of Indians/American Indians/Native Americans/First Nation/extras-from-Dances-with-wolves-people, here are some good books on the subject I'd recommend:

White Devil - this is a light read, but it uses enough historical personal anecdotes to put early relations in context

Europe & The People Without History - the touchstone Marxist book on the subject

The Conquest of America - post-modern neologisms appear with alarming frequency, but it is still fairly readable.

I'm feeling rather lazy, but if you want to delve into a free source on the subject the discussions which took place between the American Indian Movement & Marxists/Maoists can be informative.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

It's more offensive because Americans killed the vast majority of the native population either intentionally or through accident and then proceeded to take every piece of land that took our fancy without the slightest consideration for them, except how best to remove them from said land. We were just kinda jerks to the Irish back in the day. And now the Irish are just as integrated into society as any other group, whereas the Native Americans are still **** upon to this very day and are living on reservations with little to no economic opportunities and no natural resources. So yeah, I'd say Americans making light of the suffering of Native Americans is a bit more offensive than doing it to the Irish.

This is one massive pop culture stereotype of both the history of Indians & their current living conditions.

The Batlord · 01-29-2013, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

This is one massive pop culture stereotype of both the history of Indians & their current living conditions.

Either that or you're just a racist twat.

Sparky · 01-29-2013, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

I know a lot of Irish-Americans who wear Notre Dame (baseball) caps and sweaters, that has "Fighting Irish" on those items. I don't see how they are subscribing to "pretty nasty stereotypes" as you put it. But then you add it has "comic value," well what is it nasty or comical?

My point was never focused on the irish(something you seem to dwell on) but rather that cartoon like representations in U.S. sports weren't exclusive to native american's-hence why I mentioned the Vikings as another example.

I said I can see the comedic value in it, not making an objective statement. Some Irish may find the image unsettling, other's may enjoy it for it's comedic value.

hip hop bunny hop · 01-29-2013, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

Either that or you're just a racist twat.

Russel Means said:

Quote:

(You notice I use the term American Indian rather than Native American or Native indigenous people or Amerindian when referring to my people. There has been some controversy about such terms, and frankly, at this point, I find it absurd. Primarily it seems that American Indian is being rejected as European in origin–which is true. But all the above terms are European in origin; the only non-European way is to speak of Lakota–or, more precisely, of Oglala, Brule, etc.–and of the Dineh, the Miccousukee, and all the rest of the several hundred correct tribal names.

link

In otherwords, because many various tribes of the Indians are still existent, to group them all together as "Native Americans" is fallacious because it implies a commonality of history and current circumstance which simply does not exist. It's the implication of this imaginary totality which these terms reference which is problematic, not the terms themselves. This is why your post is problematic, because you're insisting on the reality of the imaginary.