i was wrong about the level of racism here, and in the US in general,and im sorry.

[Monkie]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by graham4anything (a host of the General Discussion forum).

i was very angry when it was suggested that there was a lot of racism here, both overt and covert, but in the last few days i have begun to realise the scale of this racism and i wish to apologise to you all.

i am shocked by the hatred of the chinese.
i am shocked by the hatred of muslims.
i am shocked by the general hatred of anything foreign.

we have people mocking snowden as "hong-kong eddie", a slur i would expect to see in 1950's propaganda.
we have people calling a nation the US has given "most favoured nation" status the enemy.
we have people equating the press in other nations with the state, and talking to a foreign newspaper with espionage.
we have people laughing at and excusing the war crime of "double-tapping" drone strikes that kill foreign rescue workers.
we have people that dont understand that international law is there to protect the people of all nations in the world against wrongdoing.
we have people that dont understand that foreign nations have laws to protect their citizens, that the US has broken.
we have people expecting that foreign nations will bend or break their laws just because the US tells them too.
we have people raging at foreign nations when they do not bend or break their laws just because the US tells them to.

when one looks in the dictionary to find definitions to explain this one finds words such as racism, jingoism, nationalism, and hate.
it makes me sad to see these opinions being expressed as if they are normal.
i am beginning to understand why african americans in the US believe that there is a lot of work to be done to tackle prejudices. so i am sorry i was angered by the claims that there was racism at work here at DU and in the US in general.

[newfie11]

1. +1. nt

[Catherina]

2. It's what happens when our press collaborates with the government

and starts brainwashing people from a young age. Mom, flags and apple pie.

[Monkie]

4. i know, i understand this, and there are many good people in america who broke this brainwashing

it is something every progressive has to go through? confront the myths that the state you live in tells you.

[cali]

5. we part company.

most of the items listed in the op are not racist. they're stupid, but hey, it's not like stupid is in short supply on any side of any political debate.

[sabrina 1]

95. Sorry, you couldn't be more wrong. The War on Muslims unleashed racism in this country

to an alarming degree. 'Ragheads, 'camel jockeys' etc don't get much of a reaction in this country. 'Collateral damage' is what we call Muslim children.

Muslims have been attacked physically, and angry crowds have lined up to protest and even damage mosques and not much has been done to address the hatred because we NEED that hate to keep up the support for raiding their countries and resources.

And even in Congress, legislators questioned the right of a Muslim American to be a member of Congress. It has been disgraceful.

I'll go with the ACLU's assessment:

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/discrimination

In the wake of 9/11, the FBI and Department of Homeland Security initiated sweeping programs that amount to racial profiling on a federal scale — ranging from suspicionless searches and arbitrary detentions of Arabs and Muslim Americans to counterterrorism financing and material support laws that unfairly target Muslim organizations and charities. No area of American Muslim civil society has been left untouched by discriminatory and illegitimate government action.

Anyone who supports these foreign adventures for profit in my experience has been an overt racist, not even hidden.

Since WW11 all of our wars have been racist. On internet forums where I have interacted with right wingers, during the Bush era, the racism towards Muslims was sickening and anyone who pointed it out, like me, was threatened with death and no, it wasn't isolated, it was systemic. And it still is.

[cali]

117. I don't disagree that there is lot of bigotry against Muslims though

I hardly think that it unleashed racism in this country.

In any case you fail to address the points I made in my initial post in this thread.

The OP is no better than the shit posted by the idiots claiming opposition to President Obama is rooted in racism.

I fucking hate partisan stupid. With a passion.

[sabrina 1]

131. One thing leads to another. I agree with you regarding partisan shit. Either something is wrong

or it isn't. But once someone goes down that road to the extent they have here, people will react.

Rovian tactics are meant to elicit this kind of response, which is why they are used. See Limbaugh, who uses the exact same tactics against Liberals 'THEY are the racists'. He knows well what he is doing, as Rove said 'take the enemies strengths and use them against them'.

They pay money, lots of it, to think up these tactics. And then they are available free of charge to those who imo, have always agreed with them, and now are feeling free to be open about it using the President as an excuse.

So, what is the best response? Ignore them, imo, don't go into their threads, let them die the sad death they deserve. But people abhor lies so that is unlikely to happen.

[dbackjon]

120. Agreed

There could be nationalism involved, but not racism.


Some is definately racist, but I abhor the broad brush applied to the United States

[Catherina]

167. That's ok,

We don't have to agree on everything. Things would be boring if we did. If I were to rewrite this OP, I wouldn't list all the examples under racism and I'd tone down replace the word *hate* with *distrust* in several places but I think the general idea is correct. The OP is European and not writing in his (or her) own language so I cut slack for that. I also cut slack because I know how shocking our focus on race and ethnicity seems to the European Left.

The huge ruckus over the cheerios commercial didn't do us any favors but that's a different issue than was raised in the OP.

You're right that they're not all examples of racism so I see what you meant by sloppy. I'm sure if Monkie ever rewrites that your critique will help him (or her). I don't know about you but I find a lot of the things I wrote sloppy because the conversations move so fast, there's so much to read, and answering people takes time so it's a challenging juggling act. I slip up a lot and cringe when I reread stuff I wrote in a hurry lol so I hope you'll keep me straight too.

[OilemFirchen]

115. I've heard this meme, repeatedly, on Rush Limbaugh's show.

"The mainstream media are stenographers for the Administration."

Not saying, of course, that that you agree with him. Just that it's a comfortable allegation when one is feeling politically alienated.

And utter bullocks, too.

[laundry_queen]

148. Perhaps you've noticed that on the right they are masters of projection. nt

[cali]

3. Yes, there's racism here but you do a piss poor job of making the case with your examples

How is "Hong Kong Eddie" a racial slur? What if people were calling him "Moscow Eddie" or "Red Eddie"? (much better ring to it)

How is this a racial slur? " we have people calling a nation the US has given "most favoured nation" status the enemy."

Or this? we have people equating the press in other nations with the state, and talking to a foreign newspaper with espionage

Post one link to anyone doing this: we have people laughing at and excusing the war crime of "double-tapping" drone strikes that kill foreign rescue workers.

And this is racist? we have people that dont understand that international law is there to protect the people of all nations in the world against wrongdoing.

Or any of these?

we have people that dont understand that foreign nations have laws to protect their citizens, that the US has broken.
we have people expecting that foreign nations will bend or break their laws just because the US tells them too.
we have people raging at foreign nations when they do not bend or break their laws just because the US tells them to.


Btw,racism in England is worse than it is here. Yes, I've spent a lot of time there, particularly in London.

Your post is so bogus, I'm gobsmacked. I have a history here of not tolerating any racist or xenophobic comments. And what's with your bizarro and phony apology?

[Monkie]

8. i understand this angers, you, but this post is not about you at all

the whole idea of world wide conspiracies against "you" by people with a different race creed or religion than "you" is racism.
jingoism and extreme nationalism are forms of racism, the idea that the US is better than other nations or above other nations is textbook racism, i dont understand how i have to explain that to you, you are a intelligent being.
it is simple, and i dont mean you you, because it is obvious to anyone that you are a thinking person.

i could post links to 3-4 people who are very active in protecting the president from accusations of wrongdoing in the NSA scandal who are also apologists for the "double-tapping" drone strikes, including laughing at the idea that it breaks international law and comparing "body counts" between bush and obama to deflect attention from the illegality. i purposely did not post links because i do not want to break any rules and calling out other specific people across threads would seem wrong to me when i am trying to make a general point.

i am extremely disappointed that you would resort to whataboutery, yes there is racism in england, yes there is racism in london, if you wish to discuss racism around the world why not open a topic about that and i would be glad to discuss this with you.
i am against racism of all kinds, not limited to racism and hate of the chinese, muslims, people from anywhere by people from any nation.

[cali]

11. bullshit angers me. sloppy "thinking" angers me. sanctimony angers me.

It has nothing to do with me personally.'

You're casting the net of racism so broadly that you capture virtually everyone in it from every place.

And if you can post the links, do so. Or send me a pm.

Your post presents exactly NO critical thinking.

I'm not even a little disappointed in you. the caliber of your posts leads me to expect this.

[Monkie]

15. post links? and this topic is no reflection on you or anything you have ever said?

im sorry but the whole last week has been one torrent of anti-chinese hate from a certain section of posters here.
if you cant see that then i am sorry.
i thought i was pretty specific as to what i termed as racism, it is no different from the standard definition i was taught, jingoism, extreme nationalism, fear and hate of peoples of other nations, disrespect for their laws, ignoring the fact their laws even exist.
i did not specifically mean to anger you, or anyone who is thoughtful and respectful, as you are, the fact that it angers you is understandable, even if the post and the topic in no way reflects on you or anything you have said.

[cali]

20. aaargh. you don't understand what angers me at all.

that is certainly not the standard definition of racism- whatever you were taught. Jingoism, nationalism, etc are not the same thing as racism. Furthermore, your penchant for hyperbole mars your claims.

Again, my objections to your op are not personal in origin.

Post one link that shows a duer exhibiting hatred of the Chinese people.

[Monkie]

26. i did not want to discuss this with you because you are not "the issue" in any way.

i do understand, or at least i think i do, i was furious when i was indirectly accused of racism for daring to question obama's lies.
i do not wish to post links for a reason, i think i explained that?
but i will explain, when you have the mainstream press in the US as mouthpieces for the 1% and the authorities in this country, when the NYT can sit on a story of bush and the telecoms warrantless wiretapping of americans for 1 year, and across a election cycle, when you had almost the whole US press cheerlead without question the invasion of iraq based on a pack of lies it is then racist for people to turn around and equate the chinese press with the chinese government, its a double standard, its jingoism.
and to then use this as proof that edward snowden is a spy for china is, to me at least, quite disgusting.
do you see what i mean now?

i do not wish to get into a long discussion with you again when you are one of the people i could never have a issue with, can you understand that? even if i might disagree with some points you have, they are you points, you have a right to them, you are polite about it. i have no argument with you.

[MADem]

21. +1,000 !!!!

I suppose he'll construe "Ecuador Eddie"-- or, should he be so lucky "Icelandic Eddie"--to be "slurs" against those people as well.

I think there's an agenda working here, and it involves a big wooden spoon...

[cali]

25. OK, it's early and maybe I need more coffee but I don't get the spoon reference

We disagree on a lot and we tangle sharply, but I will not endorse this kind of shit whether it comes from those claiming that opposing President Obama's policies is rooted in racism or whether it comes from the other side of the divide.

I don't now, nor have I ever, bought my ideas wholesale. I hope never to be so completely one sided that any smear in a storm is OK.

[SidDithers]

28. A big wooden spoon used to stir shit...

Sid

[heaven05]

39. every

pot of shit needs to be stirred, periodically. Even the pots on DU's stove.

[MADem]

42. Sid got it in one.

I've a pic of one somewhere....

[heaven05]

50. ?????

[cali]

66. why not address the points in my post which the poster approved of and which

you clearly don't?

[heaven05]

102. I

did. Spoons are made for stirring, and this particular pot of DU hypocrisy needs stirring. And I can tell by the usual suspects protesting and screaming for links, proof and proffering statements of innocence, that stirred it got. Monkie is shining a light in the dark tunnel of hypocrisy where a lot of DU ugly is. My hat is off to him.

[heaven05]

91. no

no, no! Their racism is not worse! It's just out in the open more. America's racism is smile in your face hidden, but not less. I'm glad for monkies post.

[hfojvt]

151. he apologizes for not understanding what a bunch of racists we really are

Seems to be a popular apology though.

[cali]

6. You know what? this op is the perfect companion piece to all the idiotic craptastic

posts of a few short days ago screaming about how people opposing the President's policies are all racists.

[Monkie]

12. indeed, the perfect companion piece

because this thread was meant to be about that hypocrisy, and the fact that the torrent of anti-foreign sentiment that is flooding this place is disgusting, it is a throwback to the bad days, the 1950's, and as a outsider it stands out to me.

[cali]

14. No, it's quite in the same vein.

Yes, there's a small number of people who are exhibiting xenophobia, but that's hardly flooding the place. And the examples you used to accuse racism, aren't that.

[clydefrand]

7. So who brought back open Racism?

Just check the many comments by Republicans about everyone but White Anglos.
Then, the rest of the repub party just has to believe they should also HATE everyone also.
(Won't say there are not a few Democrats that are racist as well, just not so outspoken about it.)

[Monkie]

10. if you do not see or understand the torrent of anti-foreigner talk that is flooding this place

then i would suggest you do a little soul-searching.

[Demeter]

9. Well, the epithet "Ugly American" wasn't a compliment

and it isn't an anachronism past its sell date, either.

[caseymoz]

123. And your point?

It's not like Americans are realistically going to discriminate against Americans because of it, and nationalism, imperialism, jingoism, exceptionalism and racism are all ugly. It's only when we use a term like, "ugly Texan" or "ugly Southerner" or that bigotry arguably enters into it.

[Puzzledtraveller]

13. I was appalled to see albino mystery-man written here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3070931

[Monkie]

17. as a lilly white man i reject that any white man can complain about racism against them

im sorry but for racism to have any real effect there has to be a element of a power differential in my view, until there is such a power differential i will reject any suggestion that meaningful for racism against white men exists (and yes i excluded women for a reason).

[heaven05]

36. wow

telling truth to people can be hurtful. The usual, post a link to prove your point, crowd is cowed or should be by this post. A lot of closed mind ignorance and racism on this site disguised as 'progressive liberalism'. Your light is shining bright.

[Puzzledtraveller]

112. Actually my objection was not based on race but using Albino as a pejorative

Calling Edward Snowden and Albino is offensive to albinos, highly offensive IMO.

[heaven05]

122. I

Last edited Mon Jun 24, 2013, 10:06 AM - Edit history (1)

agree. But what Monkie explained about power and racism I have used for years. I said the same thing because it is true.

[malaise]

79. Lots of people confuse prejudice with racism

I can dislike someone of another race but it is only when I can prevent them from participating as my equal in social, economic and political terms that it becomes racism.

[Puzzledtraveller]

116. You missed the nature of my disgust entirely.

[Monkie]

158. sorry i realise that now

there is no doubt that there is discrimination against our albino brothers and sisters.

[malaise]

16. I don't accept the racism here part but

the parts about the US versus sovereign states is correct

[RKP5637]

37. "... the parts about the US versus sovereign states is correct" Yep, this is the part

that really concerns me ... more and more the US implying it's ruler of earth ... implicitly or explicitly implied ... US versus sovereign states ...

[malaise]

76. We need a balance of power on this planet

I remember Bushco demanding that governments in the Caribbean sign off on not arresting US officials involved in their illegal war even before they started torturing people,

That frightened me

http://www.iccnow.org/documents/FS-BIAs_Q&A_current.pdf

[Progressive dog]

18. Is calling him Hong Kong Eddie rascism against Hong Kong or against Eddie

I never thought of looking for explanations in a dictionary.
"when one looks in the dictionary to find definitions to explain this one finds words such as racism, jingoism, nationalism, and hate"
That was a very special dictionary.
You might want to look up nationalism in a real dictionary before using it pejorative way against people on an American political discussion board.

[RC]

111. Hong Kong Eddie is along the same vain Tokyo Rose.

It is just demonizing a person, suggesting that they are collaborating with the "enemy".

[Progressive dog]

119. It is just demonizing a person

so it wasn't racism when I used it. If he's going to be in Ecuador now, any suggestions for how to demonize him there are welcome. Quito Eddie doesn't have quite the same bounce off the tongue.

[dbackjon]

125. So you would object to Tokyo Rose?

Call that racist?

Call her a hero?


Confused as to your point

[RC]

135. It is a Psychology point.

Take some well known historical figure with a negative connotation and compare the person you wish to put down to that historical figure.
Sorry, didn't mean to confuse you.

[MADem]

19. Why is Hong Kong Eddie a slur? I think that's a bit of a stretch to claim that.

The fugitive fled to Hong Kong, associating him with the city is entirely appropriate and has nothing to do with race and everything to do with locality.

[zeemike]

27. And neither is "Baghdad Bob" I guess.

As long as it is just associating him with a city it's OK.
Justifying things is such fun.

[MADem]

34. Bob was actually FROM Baghdad. His name wasn't Bob, though--it was simply alliterative.

His real name was Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf, and he was probably the best comic relief of that entire unfortunate imbroglio. His insistence, in Sheen-like fashion, that they were WINNING as the bombs burst in air behind him was beyond anything I've ever seen in Modern Day Bullshittery.

If you have problems with anything in Baghdad Bob's moniker, it would be the "Bob" bit--since he wasn't named Robert and it's unlikely that was his actual nickname. But not the locality.

Sort of like complaining that Minnesota Fats is a slur because of the "Minnesota," and not the "Fats" bit.

Running Eddie is named Edward, and he did run TO Hong Kong. If he ran to Pyongyang, he'd be Pyongyang Eddie. If he ran to Teheran, he'd be Teheran Eddie.

The OP's attempt to find something racist in that term is just a bridge too far. However, it's also a discernable pattern.

[zeemike]

40. Yep it can all be rationalized.

But the truth is that Hong Kong Eddie or Running Eddie is a pejorative term intended to diminish or demonize someone...and that fact makes no difference to me if it against a bad guy or a good guy...something you may not understand or even care to. So I will not attempt to explain it.

But I guess it is justified in some peoples mind because he told our secrets that we spy on are own people....how dare he.

[MADem]

48. Of course it's intended to diminish (not demonize--"Traitor Eddie" would work better if that is

your goal) but the poster is trying to imply that there's something racist about it.

No one is saying you can't call the guy names--he's not a member here, certainly not a Democrat, we can call him Trotting Eddie just as we can call Bush Skeered-a-Horsies Dumbya.

You don't have to like it, but you can't--as the OP is doing--put a racist bent on it, when all it's doing is calling him some version of The Skeedaddle Kid.

[zeemike]

60. Well sarcasm and irony is lost on some people.

and if you think that tagging people with names like that why are you upset at the OP?
If it is OK with you for one, why not all?...if it is right for you it is right for the OP.

[MADem]

63. It's important to tell it like it is, though. The OP doesn't do that.

If I show you a fig and tell you it's a baseball, that doesn't make that fig a baseball.

If you tell me that an insult is "racial" when it's simply a pejorative designed to denigrate a person's character, that's a huge difference in emphasis and meaning. And of course, it's all in aid of keeping the other race-based threads alive in people's memories--can't let that die down, now, can we?

[zeemike]

65. And why should they let it die down?

Those restrictions are not placed on those that wanted to call decent racism.
They started the fire....so don't complain when smoke gets in your eyes.

[MADem]

70. I am afraid I don't understand what your first sentence is saying.

Decent racism? What racism is decent?

Bottom line--remarking on where Eddie ran isn't racism. Trying to pretend it is, solely for the purpose of shit-stirring, is a bridge too far.

[zeemike]

81. Perhaps I can explain it.

Those that supported Snowden and decried the pissing on the forth amendment by this administration were called racist...because it was not about the forth amendment it was because they hated a black president....remember that?

And his name is Edward...you don't know him well enough to give him a nickname....but it is to further turn him into a marginalized person.

[MADem]

128. There was more to it than that.

Greenwald playing the MLK and OJ Simpson 'white bronco' cards didn't help that situation.

And if people stuck to the 4th Amendment they probably wouldn't have had too much trouble.

The point, again, is that no one is denying that denigration is the PURPOSE here. Of course Eddie is a nickname, and it is a diminutive one. The whole idea in using a diminutive is to diminish, to insult. It's the goal.

The link between denigrating the guy as a runner, as a small fellow who ran and gave away secrets, who didn't take his case to the American people but instead took it to the Chinese government...and then the Russian government...has nothing to do with racism. The link just isn't there. That's the big fail with this OP. Insulting Eddie? Sure. All the live long day. Trying to imply racism because he went to Hong Kong? I'd say that's more about the people who are having creepy feelings about Hong Kong, for whatever reason. Like I said, HK is my old stomping ground. It's crowded, the air is foul many days, but it's easy to get around if you don't mind constant company. It's not an "other" to me, but if it is to you or anyone else on this thread, then the racist feelings are closer to home than some might want to acknowledge.

[zeemike]

136. Well then the other side of this issue

should have stuck to the forth amendment too...but they did not. probably because they could not defend the actions by this administration.

But now you want to make up some new rules that racism cannot be used....sorry but that is hypocrisy pure and simple....And I think many see that.

[MADem]

142. Racism most certainly can be used.

Who said it couldn't? There are consequences to playing that card, as we well know. But, hey, eyes open, go for it.

It just has to be used appropriately. It's not appropriate to use it when it doesn't make any damn sense.

Last time I checked, Snowden was a very, very, very white dude. White, white, white. Blue eyed, too. One of the "privileged class."

If you want to go racist on him, I suppose you could call him a "roundeye" or a "white devil" and see how that goes over.

[zeemike]

159. And who decides when it is apppropiate?

And whether it makes any sense?
It seems there are always deciders out there to tell us what is and what is not....which is the same as censorship but does not sound as bad.

But no one is going racist on him...just on those that dare to support him....which is clearly to chill support for him.
And when that tactic of chilling is used by the other side suddenly they get all moral on us and want it to stop.

[MADem]

160. You take your chances.

If it's a dumbass construct, people will tell you so. The "chilling" hyperbole just doesn't cut it. You need rhino hide up in here. If so little will "chill" you, go get a blanket.

No one is stopping anyone from saying anything. But no one gets to give the Sermon on the Mount without hearing a review from the assembled multitudes.

That's just how DU rolls.

[zeemike]

166. And it rolls both ways.

Which is why I am defending this OP.

The great thing about DU is that chilling don't work to well here on many of us...in fact it makes us more active not less.

[MADem]

168. You're welcome to do that.

You're not making a sale with me, but I'm not "chilled" either. Anyone who gets "chilled" because someone, a complete stranger, doesn't "agree" with them on the damned internet has serious woes that go beyond the issues of the day.

A cure for that is to get out more, warm those cold bones in the bright sunshine. Maybe get off the computer, have some fun, talk to real people. Being "active" on a discussion board doesn't translate to being "active" IRL.

It's just a discussion board, not life-n-death.

[zeemike]

170. Fortunately I don't need anyone's permission to do that.

and thanks for the advice on spending time on the net....but looks like you are about 7 times more active on it than me...Is that advice from personal experience?

[MADem]

176. I am retired. I have lots of free time. I've had my day in the sun....

....and I don't get "chilled" easily, either!

Tomorrow, I'm off to drive geezers-like-me to the polls to vote for Ed Markey. That might not be "sexy activism" but it produces a tangible result.

[marions ghost]

71. Agree--"Hong King Eddie"

was certainly intended as pejorative. Those who put it out there should own it as a slur, a racist dog whistle that brings up Asian stereotypes from old TV serials...

[MADem]

74. How do you explain that "Eddie" doesn't look like that?

Sorry--big fail.

You just wanted to post that picture, though, didn't you? Get the stir working!

[marions ghost]

82. I'm talking about the mental image

conjured up by the pejorative label "Hong Kong Eddie." Not a literal resemblance (duh).

At least you need to own that the label is pejorative and comes straight out of the unenlightened 1950's.

The stir's already working pretty good I'd say....I don't need to lift a finger.

[MADem]

93. You're the one who came up with that gratuitously racist "mental image." You put it out there.

Hong Kong Eddie looked like this in my mind:





I don't know why you'd want to muddy the waters by tossing that out there and lighting it on fire; it's just an offensive picture and not apropos of anything at all...

[marions ghost]

114. Another poster had my same thought independently:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3081701

I posted the picture because that is what it conjures up. Regardless of how you meant it. We all revert to subconscious stereotypes at times. At least you could own it, since it touched a nerve and precipitated an immediate pounce.

Don't agree with me?--ask an Asian.

[MADem]

138. I wonder how much time that poster spent in Asian nations?

I think whoever smelt it, dealt it. If you're comfortable in the environment, you don't regard Asian people as "others." You certainly don't see racist imagery when you hear the city of Hong Kong associated with someone's name.

People whose first thought is a denigrating picture when they hear the term "Hong Kong Eddie" in reference to Snowden have internal issues that predated Snowden's arrival in HK.

[marions ghost]

149. Not at all

I'm just sensitive to racist pejoratives re. Asians (for reasons that are irrelevant here). You also supported the label at the time with other trashings of Snowden re. the Chinese, too numerous to list.

In spite of your put-downs of me, the association of label and mental image is not lost on others (and I doubt it really is lost on you, though I think you probably coined it unconsciously in your zeal to denigrate Snowden).

Own it. That's all. Please--ask an Asian friend who might be old enough to remember these images and labels. Don't believe me.

Cya. time for a snack

[MADem]

157. I am closer to the grave than the cradle, and I've "asked an Asian friend or relation"

and the point was not taken.

Sorry, that white dude with the four laptops does not equal a stereotypical insulting photo of a pseudo- Japanese guy from a popular mid-20th Century film.

[SidDithers]

86. Yup...nt

Sid

[JustAnotherGen]

130. That image is actually

From the movie Breakfast At Tiffany's.

[marions ghost]

139. And your point is...?

Breakfast at Tiffany's was out in 1961--essentially a product of the fifties. Things didn't suddenly change that quick.
But maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.

My point is that this is a classic portrayal of Asians at that time. And it is what the dog whistle "Hong Kong Eddie" smacks of, when used as a pejorative--as it is, in this case.

Thanks for comment.

[JustAnotherGen]

152. Sorry

I'm a huge Audrey Hepburn fan - like obsessive. I met her when I was a little girl and she stayed in my heart ever since.


She did her best with that one .. . . They traded off Holly's HEAVY use of the word "Nigger* by having Mickey Rooney (a white man) portray the Asian character. People fail to forget sometimes that Capote was a Southerner, Holly was based on his mother's behavior - and most likely her language and perception of the world and non whites. When you read the novella - you will find Mr. Yunioshi is written as a caricature - just as the Africans (not Americans - Africans) are. What added insult to injury is they had a white man play him.


Anyways - you had said 'television serials' and it wasn't - it was an Iconic movie and that depiction has been debated for years amongst both Capote and Hepburn fans. That image is/was the Tragic Mulatto and Mammy/Sambo of it's time for Asians.

It was not what jumped into my head regarding that guy. We all know he is young, caucasian blonde haired and blue eyed male.

[marions ghost]

162. Thanks for clarifying

--interesting background about the movie & book. The bad stereotype was there in both TV serials and movies I believe. Very hurtful, yes. We're in agreement on that.

Understand that I'm making a connection between the words "Hong Kong Eddie" and the mental image of these old characters (and I wasn't the only one around here it occurred to). It was IMO a gaff on the part of the people who promoted it recently, not a deliberate thing but more subconscious. Their purpose was to suggest that Snowden is a Chinese toady and the stereotypes run deep in the collective memory, hence the association. I didn't mean that Snowden literally looks Chinese. I meant that the people promoting the label were using the term negatively in order to smear him & marginalize him. Whistle blowers are marginalized just as much as any racial minority group ever was.

[JustAnotherGen]

164. I do understand that

It's why to this day Black Americans - we STILL have to teach our young children that you MUST work five times as hard to get half as far as the white guy.

Every black child must still be taught that in America.

Every single one. The more the lesson was 'learned' - the higher someone rises economically and in society at large (outside of entertainers and musicians).

But regardless of how high you rise - any white guy can still come along and 'take you out'.

[marions ghost]

171. That's the truth

there is still an unfair advantage and an unspoken "otherizing" that goes on. Part of it is that America is so freaking competitive that people will use any advantage they can get away with.

One day this will all be gone--maybe it will not take too many generations. I take hope from the younger ones today.

You might like the work of this artist that I admire very much. She is talking about these labels and stereotypes that remain buried in the fabric of America, re. Black experience (& are similar to Asian stereotypes and images).

So Google Kara Walker if you don't know about her. And thanks for the dialogue. We need to be vocal about these things. In spite of the urge of some to shut this thread down, I appreciate the OP's opening it.

[BeyondGeography]

29. Does that mean Broadway Joe was, er, homophobic?

I mean the guy did wear pantyhose once.

It's all so confusing.

[MADem]

38. Ha--I remember that...that was around the time that whatsisface did the naked centerfold for Cosmo..

Dinah Shore's old boyfriend...Burt Reynolds, that's the fellah...!

[Bluenorthwest]

43. Do you think gay men wear pantyhouse? What the fuck sort of crap is that?

Confusing is not surprising, ignorance will leave a person confused.

[BeyondGeography]

46. Well, at least the person I was responding to got it

[Bluenorthwest]

49. A joke that bats 50/50 could use a rewrite. Lots of homophobia around here and your

comment is based on an ignorant presumption, if you were mocking the presumption you did not do it well. Some areas of humor take skills above the pay grade of straight snarkers on the internet. Your straight pal thought it was funny too. See how it works.

[BeyondGeography]

52. I was poking fun at the presumption

That makes it a joke...get it?

[Bluenorthwest]

59. That means your objective was to make a joke. I do not agree that you did so.

Poorly executed attempt if you ask me. Not funny. Wrong set, wrong setting, wrong dynamic, lacking in any signal of your own point of view....
People fail at wise cracks all the time, it's no big deal.

[MADem]

68. I took it as the poster making fun of people who have stereotypical views of gay people, to

include "mandated cross dressing" as a requirement for "joining the club."

I did not take the poster's words as being an "endorsement" of that attitude, but rather, mocking that sort of simplistic and false characterization.

This kind of POV/attitude was VERY common in the Namath era--if you watch old ALL IN THE FAMILY episodes, they say things that wouldn't pass muster on network TV today--simply because people might not get the nuance that the characters are insulting people who hold those views, not endorsing them.

Maybe it's an age thing, but I got the "Norman Lear" vibe from the comment.

[Bluenorthwest]

84. Darling I was present at tapings of All In the Family and other Lear shows.

That joke, told by a straight guy, adored by another heterosexual who is very sure teh gay does not understand why it is sooo very funny.
Maybe it is an age thing, but i note you can not explain to me why that joke is funny to you. It is not funny to me. At all. Poorly written, filled with presumption and the teller commands status for himself,not for the guy in hose.
I don't think you or the other poster have any idea how jokes work. You think it is funny to say 'gays in hose' which is what that joke was, pure and simple.

[BeyondGeography]

89. Humor lessons

Not sure you're qualified.

[Bluenorthwest]

105. It's how my bread gets buttered. What i do.

You made a joke. You made it poorly. You have a few folks from the majority group, the group with high status telling you how funny the joke about gays in hose was. You have a gay person suggesting to you that your joke could have been less ugly and far funnier.
Good luck going forward.

[BeyondGeography]

107. The daft thing is

you thought I was actually confused. Now that is funny.

[Bluenorthwest]

121. You thought that was a funny joke, you are confused.

nt

[MADem]

109. First--it wasn't a "joke." It was an observation of a prevailing POV back in the day.

A joke has a set up, a delivery, a punch line. That comment the poster made was simply an observation about perspectives during a specific era.

If you were indeed present at tapings, you know what I'm talking about even if you struggling to remain obtuse as to my point.

It's not all about it being "Oooooh so funny"--it's about expressing amazement/disbelief/look-back-in-curiosity at an attitude that was common, that one knew it when one saw it.

There's a difference between "laughing at" and "recognizing." No one is laughing, but I sure as hell am recognizing.

I do know how jokes work--and that wasn't a joke. It was a point being made, an evocation of a moment in time. Maybe you're the one who needs to go back to joke school, if you thought that a "joke" was all that was going on there. There was absolutely no "endorsement" happening, and you're trying to insinuate the very opposite.

[Bluenorthwest]

126. Shitty wise cracks by straights for straights.

That low brow shit amuses you because you fail to understand the harm done. It amused you, the teller and Sid Dithers. Good stuff. Be happy. The target audience was amused.
When you do humor you either get a laugh or you don't. You can not lecture people into thinking some backhanded bullshit is funny. It was not funny. It was mean, and based on the special status that you straight folks demand at all times.

[MADem]

129. You are making assumptions not in evidence, but whatever.

It's not "low brow shit" that amuses, it's recognition of a prevailing attitude that astounds in retrospect.

I've figured out, though, that you are DETERMINED to take offense, and that there is nothing that will soothe your umbrage.

Sorry I can't make it sufficiently clear to you. I have tried, but you just don't want to hear.

And speaking of lectures, you might want to take your own advice.

We're done, here. Have a nice day.

[Bluenorthwest]

134. Mean jokes for straight folks.

'We're done here'!!!!
yes,the straights have to make a display of control and status shows. That's why your jokes fail.

[MADem]

144. Yep, we're done here. Most def.

Keep yelling at me if it makes you feel special. It just rolls off my back.

This is a message board, you know....not real life. You might benefit from some perspective.

[SidDithers]

67. Namath famously did a pantyhose commercial...

Sid

[Bluenorthwest]

88. Everyone knows that Sid. Still does not make the joke funny, well crafted or lacking in

if not prejudice, presumptions. Who finds it funny? Three straights out to claim that calling people 'Hong Kong Whatever' is a charming thing to do. That should be a tip off.
The joke sucks.

[Bluenorthwest]

45. I assume it was a play on the 70's cartoon series Hong Kong Phooey

Hanna Barbara, voice by Scatman Carouthers.

[MADem]

61. I was a little long in the tooth for cartoons back then (I like them today, though...Family Guy,

Cleveland, etc.) but I don't ever remember Scatman as being terribly Asian in demeanor or features...?

Did the show employ Chinese stereotypes? Did Scatman play "Phooey" and was "Phooey" even a person?


Hmmm...I went to YOUTUBE and it would appear (from watching about two minutes of the cartoon) that HKP is a dog with martial arts skills who is something of a superhero, who, in his superhero persona, associates himself with Asian accoutrements. The program doesn't seem to be set in Asia (there is a stereotypical fat Irish cop named Flynn, and a "commissioner&quot , a "dumb blonde" secretary/phone operator/lady cop, and the dog, who is a janitor. I can't get into it more than that....plenty of stereotypes for everyone, I would imagine.

[Bluenorthwest]

78. I bet Scatman was older than you at that time.

Let me ask you this. The name 'Hong Kong Phooey'. Does that sound culturally attuned to you? Of course not.
The backstory of the cartoon is not the point, the point is the title, which seems to be part of the Hong Kong Eddie trip. The character is a dog in a world of humans, name of Penrod Pooch who turns into superhero named 'Hong Kong Phooey'. Phooey is still a dog. The only dog in the show.

[MADem]

90. I don't leap to assume insult. Hong Kong Phooey sounds silly to me, not racist.

It's as meaningless as New York Noodgy or San Francisco Floopy or Los Angeles Loopy.

I used to go in and out of HK a lot. It's not "foreign" to me. I don't have to "attune" my culture because I knew my way around both the HK and Kowloon sides pretty well back in the day. I think people who are getting creeped out by a reference to Hong Kong maybe haven't been there lately...or at all...and are the ones who are regarding the residents of that enclave as "others." In other words, it's a "smelt it/dealt it" thing going on.

So, you're saying the dog is like Underdog? Or Brian Griffin? The ONLY dog in a cartoon full of humans? And that's racist? Because the dog is a martial arts superhero...or because he's voiced by a black man?

I think it's way too big a stretch for you to insist that people find a related cultural reference in a phrase because of a children's cartoon from thirty years ago, that I never heard of until moments ago.

If the dog in the cartoon was named "Eddie" you might have a point. But it is characteristic to associate people with localities--e.g. The Crawford Cowboy--and that's down to where they're hiding out, not down to race.

[Bluenorthwest]

118. The back story of the cartoon is moot to the point.

The backstory of the Hanna Barabara show is beside the point entirely. And I did not 'insist that people find' anything, I said my assumption for ME is that the term plays on the old cartoon. No one has to agree, dear. No one is 'insisting' a thing.
I suggest that such a title would not be on air today. Do you think it would be acceptable? it would not.
The reference reminded me of the cartoon. I don't give a shit what you think about it. It reminded me of the cartoon. Sue me if that is bothersome to you. Why it makes your rave on and on that I was reminded of a show with a similar name I have no idea. Do you think you can convince me that I am not reminded of the title by the term in question? You insist that my brain stop remembering that show, to please you?

[MADem]

132. I am starting to get the very strong feeling that you are in need of a vigorous argument,

and you've decided to target me.

I'm not in the mood. Sorry.

No one demands that your brain "stop," but you shouldn't have so much hubris that you believe that your experiences are the touchstones for the rest of the universe. A cartoon that was on for a brief period of time is not recognized by persons from eight to eighty, sorry to disappoint you--how nice that you remember it, I even took the time to go look it up and watch a bit of it, in order to do due diligence, and I'm just not moved.

I'm off to find coffee.

[Buzz Clik]

22. Are you apologizing for underestimating the level of racism at DU?

[canoeist52]

23. I think a more descriptive word for this is "ethrocentricity" -but with a twist of snark.

We all call barbarous anything that is contrary to our own habits. Indeed we seem to have no other criterion of truth and reason than the type and kind of opinions and customs current in the land where we live. There we always see the perfect religion, the perfect political system, the perfect and most accomplished way of doing everything.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/on-ethnocentrism/?_r=0

[Monkie]

35. that is quite a incredible article, exactly, but to me they are all sides of the same coin

The observations shared by the native Brazilians have a certain comical quality. Because they looked on French society with such fresh eyes, their observations make the familiar seem absurd. But they are also morally revealing. First, the Brazilians expressed surprise that “so many tall, bearded men, all strong and well armed” (i.e., the king’s guard) were willing to take orders from a small child: something that would have been unthinkable in their own society. And second, the Brazilians were shocked by the severe inequality of French citizens, commenting on how some men “were gorged to the full with things of every sort” while others “were beggars at their doors, emaciated with hunger and poverty.” Since the Brazilians saw all human beings “as halves of one another… they found it strange that these poverty-stricken halves should suffer such injustice, and that they did not take the others by the throat or set fire to their houses.”

Montaigne records these observations in an essay entitled, “Des Cannibales.” Well ahead of its time, the essay challenges the haughty denigration of cannibals that was so common among Montaigne’s contemporaries, but not by arguing that cannibalism itself is a morally acceptable practice. Instead, Montaigne makes the more provocative claim that, as barbaric as these Brazilian cannibals may be, they are not nearly as barbaric as 16th-century Europeans themselves.

thankyou for posting this, i am not as eloquent as the author of this piece, or montaigne of course, and perhaps a little more confrontational when i attempt to challenge the preconceptions of some, but this is the point i was making. and making as someone who also has to confront this myself, it is common in all the nations of the west, not just the US.
i raise my metaphorical hat to you, sir or ma'am.

[zeemike]

24. Hey it worked in the 50s

And it will work now, especially sense they own the media and journalism has been lost.

And we see the same intimidation as there was then...if you decent you are now a racist or a traitor....and so you should STFU.
Things have not changed all that much.

[heaven05]

30. you

are shedding light where none will be appreciated. Thank you for your candor and truth. Don't mind the usual, "oh we're not" people. But I think by your posts, you wouldn't.

[Sunlei]

31. We have to face our true history in order to be free

[cali]

32. The recs given to this abysmal op

point out that partisanship is in ample supply on DU and it isn't just about being a party partisan but about being ideologically partisan.

This isn't any better than the for shit posts about how those of us opposing President Obama's policy do so largely, or in part, out of racism.

It's made up and exaggerated to the point of parody.

[Monkie]

56. i challenge you then, 24 hours of replacing china/foreign/commie with jew/african/black

if you can do this with every post you read on DU, replace every mention of whatever nation snowden is connected with in any way, or any mention of communism, or any mention of foreign or foreigner, with the words jew or black or african, and the names of cities with names of cities such as jerusalem or Johannesburg, and then return to me and tell me i was wrong i will reconsider my position.
bonus if you do the same with the news on the mainstream media. if you can then say this thread is exaggerated to the point of parody i will reconsider my position.

i used to be meek and gentle in discourse, careful and detailed reasoning beyond any reproach, only to be met by empty one liners, slurs and evasions, year in, year out, from a certain section of society, both online and off, until i had had enough, so now i fight fire with fire, i use their methods and words against them, i refuse to pull punches or bow down before their emptiness, i understand why it offends your sensibilities, it is a credit to you, and reflects on the thick skin i have developed. i make no claim to innocence or purity.
but i will not bow down before their attacks on what is right and just.

i suspect the people that gave this a rec understand where i am coming from, from my point of view this has nothing to do with partisanship, it is the opposite in fact.

[cali]

77. say what?

gad. could your critical thinking skills lapse any farther into mush?

Nations are not the same kind of entity as an ethnicity. Substituting Jew for China is an idiotic exercise. I don't play idiot games.

I suspect that the people who recced this did so out of the same lame partisanship that results in almost all recs here. Yeah, that goes for my ops too.

And no you have no clue as to why I find your op so silly.

[noamnety]

33. I was surprised by the posts

defending intercepting our personal communications by saying "they aren't collecting domestic ones without a warrant, only foreign ones."

As if all foreigners are potential terrorists, as if everyone except a US citizen deserves to have no privacy in phone calls. As if it's a gross personal violation if our calls are all listened in on, but not for those other people.

Those same people would be outraged, I'd guess, to find out that foreign governments are listening in on all our private conversations - and would demand an end to it.

[laundry_queen]

154. Spot on. nt

[SidDithers]

41. You still are wrong...nt

Sid

[Monkie]

44. i say what i think, i dont insinuate with one liners and empty posts

which is also precisely the reason i feel no need to pull punches when even the most thought out questioning of preconceptions and wrongs is met by empty one-liners or slurs when people have no answers to the real and important questions before us, sir.

[heaven05]

47. +1

[Bluenorthwest]

54. Well said.

nt

[SidDithers]

58. "pull no punches". Don't make me laugh...

Your "High crimes and misdemeanors" thread was nothing but "pulling punches". You were calling for Obama's impeachment, without having the courage to actually say it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023067693

Posting privileges before principles. That's you.

Sid

[Bluenorthwest]

69. You almost never post about your opinion of issues, just about other posters. This is no

exception. When I have asked you what you think or why you have interest in an issue, you post emoticons and Meh and such. The only poster to do so.
You are here, it seems, to make snotty comments about other people, when asked to join the actual discussions you say 'Meh' and post one of your wee emoticons.
You are what you are Sid.

[SidDithers]

73. Some DUers are worth the time to compose a reply to...nt

Sid

[Bluenorthwest]

98. Again, a petty personal comment about other DUers not about the issues

Proves my point. Your posts are like xerox copies one of the other. 'Sid tells a DUer they are not worth responding to, ironically in a post to that DUer'.
Amazing.

[SidDithers]

104. Pot. Kettle...

And I didn't say "responding to", I said "compose a reply to".

Did you intentionally misread that, or do you not understand the difference?

Sid

[Bluenorthwest]

133. Yeah, Sid, it is not 'pot and kettle' just 'cause you type that it is

Sid, this post you imply I don't read English well. Each post of yours is a personal insult without any other content. This one is no different. Mean without meaning.

[SidDithers]

146. Two comments in one reply...

See that word "And" at the beginning of the comment about your reading comprehension?

Jeebus.

Sid

[Monkie]

75. A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both

i do not quite understand your meaning to this "Posting privileges before principles" code i have seen you post before.
one of the things i do know is, i care not for privileges, they mean nothing to me.
at least i see you post something that is more than just a empty one-liner for a change..
i guess i touched a nerve with this topic about your jingoistic bedfellows.

[SidDithers]

80. You're more concerned with retaining your posting privileges at DU...

than plainly stating what you believe. You'd rather use weasel language and obfuscation than clearly post your opinion.

You think Obama should be impeached, but don't have the courage of your convictions to come out and say it. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023067693

You value your posting privileges at DU more than your principles.

So your "pull no punches" horseshit is pretty fucking hilarious.

Sid

[graham4anything]

87. +1

[ucrdem]

92. Don't miss this gem from Friday:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3061947

DUzy!

[SidDithers]

97. Shocked. Shocked I am...nt

Sid

[Monkie]

96. the difference between rights and privileges and principles, and wow, actual words in a sid post

i explained clearly in that post where i normally draw a line in commenting on the internal affairs of other nations, i did cross that personal line that one time for a reason, that does not mean i feel i have a right to bulldozer my personal convictions.
if i where banned from this place tomorrow it would not affect my life on this planet in any way, it is quite weak of you to suggest that i would fear stating my mind for being banned on a forum on the internet.
i am normally quite good in instinctively understanding where lines of decency lay, so rarely have problems caused by me breaking the rules of forums on the internet.
it does seem i have hit a nerve with you, and this thread i started is hitting a little too close to home for you, this is one of the first times i have seen you reply with more than a one liner, a empty nothingness, or the last refuge of someone with no argument, the posting of large image files.

[SidDithers]

99. And I stand by the words in my alert on your hidden impeachment thread...nt

Sid

[Monkie]

156. hypocrisy alert? so you tried to get me banned from the site behind my back?

what was it you said about privileges and principles?
so why did you not dare to accuse me to my face of being a "fucking troll" and saying i should be banned?
then i could of debated those baseless accusations with you.
can you actually debate topics that are uncomfortable for you or can you only attack people behind their back or post one liners or huge pictures?

this is why it is so good to make small minded people mad, they just cant help exposing themselves...

[SidDithers]

165. Do I think someone calling for Obama's impeachment at DU should be banned?...

Abso-fucking-lutely.

Were you calling for Obama's impeachment with this thread?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023067693

Damn fucking right you were.

One of us has been exposed, that's for sure.

Sid

[zappaman]

169. Thank you for that link!

I thought this was DU?
Seems like some people are confused...

[Monkie]

175. i said that obama had committed war crimes resulting in the death of a protected person

as specified by the first geneva convention.
he is the commander in chief?
it is his kill list?
it is a fact that a war crime that results in the death of a protected person is a federal crime?
why not address that?

you said i am a "fucking troll" that should be banned in a private alert, i now know you did this because you have no said this is so, while at the same time you do not dare say that to my face, you also make weird accusations with your coded "privileges before principles", while secretly breaking that "code".
so are you going to call me a "fucking troll" to my face?
will you actually address the content instead of what i say instead of tearing down straw men?

[SidDithers]

180. Bye bye, troll...

Sid

[zappaman]

181. About time.

Funny how we have many posters here that agree with that troll.
Weird, eh?

[zappaman]

137. +1

So transparent.

[heaven05]

110. Oh

you got the usual suspects going! You are on it, and did I say your original post was correct. A light in a very dark and long tunnel of hypocrisy and bullshit. Here's to you.

[Monkie]

113. hihi

thank you.

[Sand Wind]

51. Racism is not great, but in my experience, US is not

More racist than other countries I visit.

In countries where there is still big family alliances, they can't even stand the next town. Never a stranger will be accepted there even as a real human, it's like if you are polluting the place by your own presence.

In South America, there is a lot of place that if you are not a Christian they will never trust you for anything.

And I can go on about Asia...

Human mediocrity is equally distribute on this planet.

[heaven05]

127. ????

Last edited Mon Jun 24, 2013, 10:25 AM - Edit history (3)

our last election cycle showed me everything about amerikkkas overt and covert racist tendencies and the virulent widespread scope of it.

[still_one]

53. There is a difference between racism, and a country working against another countries interests.

You may not like it, but there is a distinction between the Chinese government and the Chinese people. The same with most inter nation relations. That is not racism to be opposed to a particular government or its policies.

The fact is there are NOT the freedoms in China, and most Muslim countries that there are in other countries throughout the world.

Because people criticize Snowden fro running China to escape is NOT racism. The fact remains the freedoms that he is professing are not associated with China, in fact just the opposite, especially spying on its own people. Criticizing that contradiction IS NOT racism.

[ananda]

55. Remembering the big red scare stuff.

Then it was the Russians; now it's the Chinese and the Muslims.

The best antidote is to take a personal look at the lives of the majority of the people. That's what Steinbeck in his book on the Russians, A Russian Journal (1948), and that helped a lot.

Most people are just people, just like us. We're just as good as they are, in every way.

[Monkie]

57. Most people are just people, just like us. We're just as good as they are, in every way

thank you.

[marble falls]

62. Raw, honest, and on the money.

[Dustlawyer]

64. Try being a white man married to a black woman in Texas!

You would not have been surprised. There are a lot of small minded people, not just in the South. People naturally group themselves to race, religion, and other interests and want to proclaim that there groups are the best ... It's human nature!

[Mr Dixon]

72. IMO

I agree with your statement just a little confused to the length of time it took you to reach this conclusion. ROFL, know worries just hang in there you will find a few bright spots here and there.

[nineteen50]

83. and we have people claiming Americans exceptional because the rest

of the world is not good enough.

[graham4anything]

85. George Wallace, David Duke, Ron and Rand Paul have a 100% history of being racists.

matters little what party. Two above are democRats, and two are 100% bonafide republicans.

All four are what they are.

Let's not miss that point

and the TOS of this site says NO PAULITES. (Paul being Ron and Rand. Ites being those that stand with them).

and we should 100% all be in agreement that Zimmerman is guilty and Paula Deen is making money (and most likely herself)
off of racism. It is not the N word, it is HER ACTIONS.

Let's all agree with the above. group hug to all who do.

[Monkie]

108. i have a 300% record for opposing all racism

i oppose racism against those of african origin.
i oppose racism against those of arab origin.
i oppose racism against those of asian origin.

zimmerman and deen are horrible excuses for human beings and

i have never been and will never be a paulite, the only thing i can agree with any libertarian about is that the US should stop sticking their nose in the affairs of other nations and stop overthrowing the democratically elected governments of other nations, and stop droning innocent muslims, and stop supporting the coups by generals in other nations.
if you want to label me i would consider myself a social democrat in the european sense of the word, i am not against "big government", i love paying taxes for good public services and for the oversight of commercial activities.
and i believe all men and women are created equal regardless of...

[Gidney N Cloyd]

94. God, this site is a mess.

[cali]

100. one of its periodic lows. they come and go.

[abelenkpe]

124. +1000 nt

[Beacool]

101. What does opposition to Snowden's running off to Hong Kong have to do with racism?

This is not about their race. This is about a guy who spills state secrets and then runs to a country that is a Chinese dominion. The Chinese government knows plenty about repression, spying and hacking. The Chinese have been trying to hack into our military intelligence sites for years. The Chinese have also conducted industrial espionage against American companies. The Russians have done the same and ditto for several other nations. Who gives a crap about their race????

Gee...........

[cali]

141. I agree that whatever else it is, the Snowden case is not about race

and the examples used in the OP don't come any closer to making the case for racist duer running amok than the nonsense about criticism of the President's policies being rooted in racism did.

and that's all we agree on about Snowden.

Snowden brought to the forefront what legal whistleblowers like Binney could not; the exponential growth of the massive surveillance being conducted both here on Americans and abroad. That is the issue.

And frankly, I think there's abundant evidence that the activities of China and Russia pale in comparison to those of the U.S. when it comes to espionage- not to mention wreaking havoc on the international stage. As far as I know neither the Chinese or the Russians, for example, are conducting illegal drone bombings in sovereign nations.

[kirby]

103. Welcome to reality...

When I first signed up here in 2007, I was naive. I felt that Progressives were some sort of enlightened beings and that the discussions would be great intellectual debates. It didn't take long for me to become disillusioned.

This Snowden thing in particular is saddening because to me the reaction on here screams 'party loyalty'. In other words, the only reason most people are opposed to it is because Obama is President. Had this been revealed under Bush (even though these programs started under previous Presidents), I believe the tone of the messages would be 180 degrees, and that is sad.

[carolinayellowdog]

172. almost as if TPTB deliberately chose a national spokesmodel that would insulate them from criticism

from people of color and liberals

[AtheistCrusader]

106. The anonymity of the internet makes everyone an asshole.

Sorry...

For what it's worth, I never post anything here I wouldn't say in front of the whole world, starting with my mother.

It is not in me to abuse people based on some knee-jerk socially trained reaction.

[Eleanors38]

147. Well, you got that right. At least we moved from the NRA to the NSA.

[MADem]

178. Maybe we can piss and moan about basketball next, and move on to the NBA! nt

[JoeyT]

140. I'm going to assume this is parody of the

"OMFG racists!" posts where huge leaps in logic were required to pretend people were racists.

We've seen red baiting and ridiculous amounts of jingoism, but not racism on this issue. The people that have been hateful toward Muslims are the ones that are always that way and find a way to work it into any issue under discussion.

[cali]

143. Exactly. Thanks for putting that so pithily. Spot on.

[great white snark]

145. Laughable. You do a disservice to actual racism.

Just like you did for actual acts worthy of impeachment.

[HardTimes99]

150. I really wish you could see the cafeteria of Santa Monica City College. I think

you might revise your opinion somewhat, as the place is the physical manifestation of a 'melting pot' (or as close as anyone will ever see). It really is an incredible sight, seeing Latinos, Asians, Blacks and Whites sitting around studying, eating and laughing together. (My wife was taking a course there and I sat in the cafeteria waiting for her to drive her home.) The younger generation, based on what I've seen with my own eyes, has pretty much completely shed the racial hangups of the older generations.

OTOH, I agree with you 100% about the China-bashing I've seen here over the past few days. Really off-putting, especially when one remembers that we supported Chiang and the Nationalists for over 30 years.

[G_j]

153. it's the same people who

are calling others racists. go figure....

[cali]

155. Reviewing your posts, I'm beginning to buy into the wooden spoon theory

about you and think there's a fair amount of evidence that you may be a common internet entity that I'm not allowed to call you.

[geek tragedy]

161. How is your effort to see Obama impeached, convicted, and put to death going?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023067693

[Monkie]

173. dont post lies about me i wont accept that, do you support the committing of war crimes?

i specifically said i oppose the death penalty.
i do not make the laws that state that committing a war crime which results in the death of a protected person is a federal offense for which the death penalty applies.
do you support the committing of war crimes?

[geek tragedy]

174. I reject your wackadoodle accusations against Obama. Toodles, nt

[Monkie]

177. i see, the no topic answer, you can point to no law, no fact to deny what i say is true

so you can only resort to baseless insults, post untruths and make strawman attacks on me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

163. You know...you got it

Thankfully I cannot see a lot of those posts.

That does not mean I am blind to it

Americans will be in a world of hurt when the empire falls and the central national myth shatters, American exceptionalism. Won't be pretty.

And the American version of jingoism depends heavily on it.

[we can do it]

179. Especially here of all places (and it's sexism and homophobia, too)