How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Hasta Cuando?   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Hasta Cuando?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


25 posted 01-14-2008 05:54 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Mark Twain wouldn't be a suitable comparison

No, Ron, he wouldn't. The only reason I brought him up was because we have two cases where popular writings of our past contain titles offensive to blacks. Three, actually, if you want to throw in LR's Gone With the Wind. I do not believe Mark Twain named his character with the N word as a derrogatory racial insult any more than I believe Stephen Foster did.

There is another comparison. You may claim that the song is ok but not suitable to be a state anthem. Tom Saywer and Huck Finn are classics. If you buy  a set of American classics for your son, they will be included. Don't know about now but, in my time, they were required reading in school. Well, if the song is not suitable to be a state anthem why should they be suitable to be  classics? You may say that, if you read Twain's work you will see that there is nothing racial intended. I contend that,upon reading the words of the song, one would find the same thing. Of the few who have offered to submit the definitions they found for the word darkie, calling it an insulting racial name, a noun informal and offensive. Bob calls it straightforward racist and a terrible insult. Only Hush looked far enough to find that it can also be used in a friendly way, even as a term of endearment. Considering that the song was written in the manner of a black singing to other blacks, which definition would you consider to be more logical? Shouldn't be honored as a suitable representation of the whole state? It's not a representation of anything except for whichever state government at the time decided to choose it. It has been the state song for over a century and no one has had a problem with that. Now,however,that someone wants to make a ruckus over it, all of a sudden it's blasphemous? Please....

Personally, Ron, I could care less what the state song is. I didn't  even know it was the state song and I venture to say that the vast majority of Americans have no idea what their  state song is, either. Stop a few people and ask them what the Michigan state song is and see how many know. If I had to pick a state song for Florida it would be Send in the Clowns.

The state song doesn't bother me...the new hubbub surrounding it does. I find it symptomatic of a much more serious illness. For over half a century many barriers have been broken down with respect to equality.  Yes, we still have a way to go but progress is being made. This state song doesn't break  down any barrier. Neither does my golf game. I say "boy" a lot on the golf course, partially because i am older than many of the people I golf with. I should be able to say "Nice  shot, boy!","Good putt, boy!" with a smile or pat on the back to whoever did it. I can't. I'm now required to subconsciously check the race of the person I'm speaking to first to avoid insulting anyone. That's not breaking down a barrier nor is it promoting equality. It is CREATING a barrier where none need exist. Bob thinks it's good that I consider their sensitivities. Why??? Boy is not an insult. Why should it be taken as one?...because 70 years ago blacks were addressed with it? These are the types of things that damage equality, not strengthen it. With regards to the song, someone (doesn't say who) issued a complaint that the song was racist. Why? Probably because they felt they could get some blacks to claim that they were offended by it and they could also get other people, like ones on this thread to show outrage that that such a racial song to  be a state anthem. There were no mass marches, No Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpeton in town leading marches for it's removal...just someone who felt they could push a few buttons and make people jump....and they were successful. There is no interest in equality here...only controversy. And the state of Florida responded to the puppet-string pull in a properly apologetic way and made it an issue after over a hundred years of existence.

Just for kicks, I asked four black customers of mine today what they thought of it. They laughed, said it sounded like a kindergarten word and one summed it up well by saying, "Who gives a (fill in the blank)?"


Eliminating racial barriers is good. Creating further racial barriers is not. This entire fiasco with the state anthem is indicative of the second.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


26 posted 01-14-2008 06:09 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Wiki also noted that the word 'darkies' is often substituted with 'words like "lordy," "mama," "darling," "brothers" or "dear ones"'.

But do you want a song sung from a former slave's viewpoint in self-depreciating terms as your state song?


Hush! My young friend! The grandaughter I always wanted!!! (you really know how to hurt a guy) Make up your mind.

You show where the words can be endearing also and then call them self-depreciating.  Why do you do that?

Call me unpatriotic but the truth is that i could care less what my state song is....or the bird...or the flower. On my "Important things that Count" list they don't even show up
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


27 posted 01-14-2008 06:39 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

You were upset by this, and it enabled you to attempt to confuse things even further.  
you had seen my attempt to be  respectful as a weakness on my part.


Bob, keep going and you are going to set a record for the amount of times you can be wrong in one reply. If you knew me better you would know you do not have the ability to upset me and I NEVER take a respectful attitude as a weakness. I mean, after all, you called me a squid and it didn't upset me so how much more could you do to me?

You still persist in distorting my comments about Mark Twain.

Bob, I  see no distortion. We have one word in a state song one one hand and Mark Twain's use of the N word on the other. You condemn the song for the use of that one word and give Twain a pass based on his intentions, despite his abundant use of racially-biased language. I find that inconsistent, that's all.

You will not find a more avid devotee of mark Twain than me. As I mentioned before, I am from Missouri. Every summer, beginning when I was in the third grade, I spent two weeks in Hannibal,where my aunt and uncle lived. I went to all the places Tom and Huck spoke of - the cave,lover'sleap, you name it. I ate, drank and breathed Mark Twain and his creations for those two weeks. I WAS Tom Saywer during that time. You don't have to sell me on Mark Twain

Did you expect silent acceptance?

Bob, this is the ALLEY!!!! Silent acceptance doesn't play here. Your sincere thoughts and opinions do. That is what is respected here and you do that well.

I still refuse to believe you have ill intentions.

Well, thank you for that. I may come across as ill at times,but my intentions are not. My reasoning for introducing this thread can be found in my reply to Ron. I will argue until the blue face syndrome sets in but I will always strive not to be disrespectful to anyone.If you ever feel that I cross that line, please let me know and I will cover my face with my eight tentacles and apologize.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


28 posted 01-14-2008 06:55 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
I will cover my face with my eight tentacles and apologize.


Blatant squidism!

Squid have eight arms and only two tentacles, you‘re thinking of them slimy no good octopuses.


Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


29 posted 01-14-2008 07:02 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Heavens Balladeer,

               The subject is racism in the state song of Florida.  You brought the subject up.  As you look progressively more ridiculous, you try harder and harder to change the subject to anything where you can muddy the already disturbing waters.  You are hoping if you say it often enough and loudly enough, people will forget your attempts to drag Mark Twain, Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn into this mess are absolutely baseless.  

     Logic is based on a specific kind of reasoning.  That reasoning is valid when it excludes "logical fallacies."  I mentioned a few contributions back a few of the logical fallacies you persist on dragging into your discussion (the use of red herrings featuring prominently among them) as if the very use of them didn't discredit any pretense to reasoned discussion you might make.

     You ask why, if "Old Folks at Home" is unsuitable as a state anthem, would Huck Finn And Tom Sawyer be suitable as classics?

     Once again, Balladeer, you try to obscure the subject.  You pretend I haven't called you out on this before, and that you don't know that you're using a red herring.  You do know because you've been told.  If you want to talk about why Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer should or should not be thought of as classics—I say "yes," by the way—I would happily talk about it with you.  AFTER we finish this increasingly evasive discussion.

     Simple.  The statement [IF] "Old folks at Home" is a racist song  has no causal relationship with [Then] Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer should or should not be classics.
The two clauses are totally independant of each other and unrelated.  To confuse the two may amuse you for some disturbing reason, but it does not serve to cast any clarity on the discussion at all, only to drag another unhappy andf half-rotted herring across a perfectly straightforward train of reasoning.

     The first and third elements of the syllogism one might suspect you are trying to build are unconnected in the middle.  It is false logic.  It is defunct.  It is no good.  Balladeer, to quote Montey Python. "The parrot is dead!"

     I look forward to your next thrilling installment.  I fully expect to hear how the whole thing was Bill Clinton"s fault.  It won't work either, but at least it will be entertaining and new.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


30 posted 01-14-2008 07:14 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Dear Balladeer,

     Hadn't seen your last reply before I posted the above.  Still on Mark Twain I see.  I had hoped for some change.  Twain's racially charged language was a strong indictment of the people whose mouths he put it in.  

     Apparently you want me to take you one of those people who believe that an author believes every word that he puts into the mouth of every one of his characters.  Perhaps you'd like me proudly to proclaim that Shakespeare said First Kill all the Lawyers, as though that was his personal opinion about all lawyers, and then forget that he put the phrase into the mouth of what was in Shakespeare's time one of the most wretched characters in English history, who then proceeded to follow it up with words to the effect of, then lets kill all the clerks and everybody who can read!

     Oh no.  Twain's use of the word most sharply cut the people he had using it the most.  I do believe you're a good enough reader to be entirely clear on that point.  Or do you believe otherwise?  As I said before, Should you wish to talk about Twain, by all means, let's.  After this increasingly rancorous discussion is over.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


31 posted 01-14-2008 07:40 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Is this the proposition you’re railing against Mike?

All words that can be construed as racist are racist.

If so I think your logic is sound as far as the use of Reductio ad absurdum is concerned, you can legitimately use Mark Twain, Snoop Dogg or even slimy octopuses to show the absurdity of taking the above proposition to the extreme.

I should add, from the safe shelter of the excluded middle I’m clinging to, that logic, even sound logic, doesn’t always guarantee correctness. political or otherwise.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


32 posted 01-14-2008 08:22 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
  You pretend I haven't called you out on this before, and that you don't know that you're using a red herring. You do know because you've been told.

And you, Bob, are the established authority on this because? If I told you that your replies to us were written in Latin and therefore unintelligible to an English-speaking web site, would that make it true? Would you then "know" you had been writing in Latin?

I don't think Mark Twain is a suitable comparison to Steven Foster because of the differences. I do, however, see similarities and accept that comparison is a valid tool for uncovering truth. I think Ringo is horribly wrong to suggest we can't protect anyone if we can't protect everyone, but I also recognize that the foundation for justice is consistency. Inconsistency breeds a sense of injustice, which I honestly feel is the real complaint from both Mike and Ringo, as well as millions more. Unfortunately, while you can demand consistency when trying to change people's actions, it's much more difficult to find when you're trying to change people's feelings. That takes more time.

What I'm trying to suggest, Bob, is that it's much more productive in the Alley to counter arguments than it is to dismiss arguments with a cavalier because-I-said-so gesture. And, trust me on this one, it's REALLY unproductive to tell someone here they (as opposed to their arguments) "look progressively more ridiculous."

Attack the post, not the poster. Please.

Mike (and Ringo), I sense that the real complaint here isn't the symptom being described, but rather, what you perceive to be the malady of political correctness? This thread, to me, seems to be just another in a long line of threads that have run in much the same course. Do we want to talk about darkies? Or do we want to talk about why the profits of political correctness, when driven soley by peer pressure, outweigh the more obvious costs?
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


33 posted 01-14-2008 08:53 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Oh kikes, how my heart grows weary

Oh wops, how my heart grows weary

Oh spics, how my heart grows weary

Oh dagos, how my heart grows weary

Oh wet backs, how my heart grows weary

If the song had any of the above lines Mike - would you think it appropriate for a State government sanctioned official song?  We're talking the State equivalent of an anthem here -- that's the issue (that the State of Florida is dispatching) although I think Ron may be right that what you're complaining about is PC -- or at least a PC that you don't like -- there are many PC's out there -- even Republican PC's -- but I've never heard you complain about the effort to change the name of the Inheritence tax to a "Death" tax?

Tradition is no excuse to hang on to something that is hurtful.  While the first amendment guarantees your right to say darkie, boy, jigaboo, or anything else you want to say -- it may be detrimental to your reputation -- or even your health in some quarters.
hush
Senior Member
since 05-27-2001
Posts 1693
Ohio, USA


34 posted 01-15-2008 12:05 AM       View Profile for hush   Email hush   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for hush

dictionary.com defines 'anthem':

–noun 1. a song, as of praise, devotion, or patriotism: the national anthem of Spain; our college anthem.  
2. a piece of sacred vocal music, usually with words taken from the Scriptures.  
3. a hymn sung alternately by different sections of a choir or congregation.  
–verb (used with object) 4. to celebrate with or in an anthem.  


Do you really want to show praise and devotion or (horrific as this sounds) patriotism with a song that displays the horrendous time in which Americans trapped, imported, and owned fellow human beings? Look, don't get me wrong, I don't know or really care what my state anthem is either. But if someone told me it had the term darkie in it I'd be all for changing it. Do I see value in this song as a folk song? Yes. But if your argument is the use of a racial term among members of the same race as a term of endearment, why not swap the old for the new and throw a 50 cent song in as your anthem?

And do you think it was a black man who picked this song as the anthem?

A comparison to books like Huck Finn (or To Kill a Mockingbird, for that matter) being taught in schools is completely moot- these books are not 'anthems' and I don't know about the teachers you had, but my teachers made us interpret these books. The racists and the slaveowners were not heroes.

And as far as being mad about thinking blacks get 'special' treatment... I'll play devil's advocate here: if your entire race has been owned, beaten down, lynched, and discriminated to even to this day, then... Yes. Your family has not had the same opportunities my family had. Maybe your grandpa could only get a job peddling newspapers because my grandpa and his white friends got all the good jobs, so maybe your family was a lot poorer than mine because (at least in part) of racial disparities. Maybe peoples that have been downtrodden by the dominant race (Yep that's right- white folks) should ahve a hand extended to help them up from their forced second-class citizenry. So shoot me for sying it. Will I be mad at someone if they call me a cracker? Yeah... but everyone here knows that the term cracker does not have the same weight as the 'n' word, because white people were never the underdogs, not in America at least. A black man didn't own my ancestor. And I can't, for the life of me, see why some white people get so mad about the people that were oppressed for so long getting a leg up in life.

As far as the American Indian (or native American, or whatever other equally misleading name you'd like to use) they were unfortunetly not all that useful as slaves, so instead of breeding them like cattle like black people were (thus giving them a big enough population to eventually stand up to the status quo of racism) we gave them blankets with smallpox and sent the few that remain to drink themselves to death in their defeat on reservations. So, the few that are left... just don't have the strength to fight their repressed status quo.

My two cents for now.
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


35 posted 01-15-2008 12:15 AM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

I take the song-changing as a good intention and a kind of mending though smart politician does take advantage of it.  Black people of young generation may not care about it. And I am sure that most black people 100 years later will laugh at it. But do you agree that some does want to fly the Confederate Flag again? Government should have a proper attitude and sensitivity.

I don't call this a PC

this is a  PC www.adversity.net/special/******.htm    

And my child of 7 yr patted on the shoulder  of a black girl and wanted to talk to her when stood in line for lunch. She reported to teacher that my child hit her. So I got a call from Principal who told me that she knew my kid well (meant he would not hit somebody) but she had to handle it very carefully. I understood well because that little girl was bused in from inner city and  she must be very nervous. I had no complain. I tried to understand.
Black people and other minorities have suffered in this country. Never heard of Japaneses concentration camp?  http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/poets/g_l/haiku/haiku.htm
never heard of glass ceiling?

I told my child that every girl was a tiger so don't touch them because they bite.

I think that It is the sensitivity and understanding. or just a topic to talk about between golfing.        

I try my best to be your BEST FRIEND to listen to you carefully but I DO JUDGE YOU

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


36 posted 01-15-2008 04:53 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Dear Ron,

         Yes, If somebody told me I was talking Latin, pointed it out to me, gave me examples, showed me how the grammar was different than English, I certainly would believe them.  Especially if the evidence was clear.

     Have you checked back to see the number of times I pointed out Red Herrings in Balladeers' postings,Ron?  Have you checked to see the number of times I offered to discuss them with him?  Do you understand the comments I made about why I thought these comments were red herrings?  Did you see my attempts to be clear about them?

     I didn't actually see Balladeer respond directly to the meat of any of them.  He did twist them, change the subject and try to take them off on a different tangent several times, but he didn't respond to them, did he?

     Nobody made me the world's authority, Ron.  I simply cited the standard authority for rational discussion in civilized discussion commonly accepted for the last 2500 years.  Aristotle's Logic and his Rhetoric.  These are the same rules Alexander the Great, The Church Fathers and the founders of the country accepted.  I simply signed on at the end of a longest line of commonly accepted authority I could find.  I know better than to try to walk into an argument with no rules, or one where the winner is the one with the cutest face.

     If discussion that enourages the use of logical fallacies is considered as valid in this arena as discussion that attempts to use  logic, I should be happy to learn of it.  I would have a better idea of how to value these discussions.   And so should you, shouldn't you?

     A red herring is a red herring, Ron.  Does it matter a lot who points it out?  Do you disagree that any of the examples of red herrings I identified, other that the one that I acknowledged was a mistake and took back, as was my responsibility, was other than what I claimed?

     If a man is going to make the kind of statement that Balladeer did to open this thread of discussion, I certainly feel not simply the right but an obligation to make it absolutely clear exactly how outrageous he is being.  I respect the man's talent, but in this case I think he is not taking responsibility for his political provocativeness.

     This is not a matter of one person versus another, Ron.
If that were the case, I would not be trying to stay within the accepted bounds of reasonable discourse.  I would feel free to change the subject, not apologise for my mistakes or even admit them, restate errors without dealing with attempts by the other to address them, etc.

     Should you care to go back through the threads and pick up places where I have been remiss in these obligations, I will be happy to either account for my lapses or apologise for them and try to make them right.

Sincerely yours, BobK.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


37 posted 01-15-2008 05:02 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Dear Folks,

         I know you're all writing to express your own opinions, but I wanted to say, that I was incredibly relieved at the amount of heartfelt and sensible stuff I see out there, even when it doesn't agree with me, and even when I start to fly off the handle a bit.  It's nice to see that everybody really does more mean well than anything else.  Bless you all, Bob     Ps:  Certainly, Grinch, you're right about logic and anything critical you have to say about me.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


38 posted 01-15-2008 11:31 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Have you checked back to see the number of times I pointed out Red Herrings in Balladeers' postings,Ron?  Have you checked to see the number of times I offered to discuss them with him?  Do you understand the comments I made about why I thought these comments were red herrings?  Did you see my attempts to be clear about them?

Yea, Bob, I read what you said. Saying it doesn't make it so, however, and saying it a lot doesn't increase the odds of being right. Even Aristotle would have to do more than call something irrelevant to make it irrelevant. At the very least, before moving on to a "that's settled" status and calling the argument won, we would expect a consensus. Maybe not from everyone. But likely from more than just one person?

quote:
Do you disagree that any of the examples of red herrings I identified, other that the one that I acknowledged was a mistake and took back, as was my responsibility, was other than what I claimed?

Yea, Bob, I do disagree. I thought I said that? A red herring, by common definition, is something irrelevant; a comparison of two writers using similar language isn't necessarily irrelevant, even if it is, perhaps, flawed when the wrong things are being compared. Comparisons are an important tool for reaching conclusions. They are important clues to what someone thinks. They can certainly be faulty, and indeed frequently are, but only rarely will be they be irrelevant.

You can, of course, disagree. You can even disagree strenuously. Just don't stoop to call me ridiculous in the process. Not here, in these forums, at any rate. It's not how we try to do things. Okay?


Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


39 posted 01-15-2008 01:58 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Dear Ron,

         I identified and pointed out the undistributed middle in Baladeer's syllogistic reasoning, Ron.  First and third legs were unconnected.  Since you read the discussion, you understand this can only be disputed by a response that addresses the formal flaw in the reasoning, q.e.d.  Unlike legal reasoning, which Aristotle distinguishes, I believe, as an inferior type, defects in formal reasoning must be repaired, like bridges, before traffic is driven across them.  

     In formal reasoning, disagreements of the kind you cite as acceptable are in fact not acceptable.  That is why appeals to emotion such as the one you are making are permitted in, say, a court of law, or a public address, but are excluded in philosophical or scientic debate. Changing the subject "a little bit" is still considered a red herring.  Looking for deeper motives for changing the subject doesn't do anything to repair the damage in the syllogism that's been offered.  Until the syllogism has been repaired, any attempt to put traffic over it is a failure.

     Ron, I have no position of power here.  Zip.  Zero, nada, none.  The only appeal I can make is to reason.  I have no pretty face.  I have limited toleration for what I consider to be racial impoliteness, and I will not back down in the face of it.  I have a limited set of shoddy but time honored tools to use.  I try to use them with as much politeness and respect as I can muster.  

     For any personal sense of arrogance I project, I am sorry.  I am flawed this way.  If I slip into it again from time to time, I will willingly acknowledge the flaw again and again, and try to correct it.  I will not pretend to believe that this sort of provocative discussion should be allowed to proceed without being shown up for the  logical sham and travesty that it is however.  I will not pretend that attempts to cover up the flaws in the argument with loud throat clearings and Deus ex Machina
appearances from authorities on high (Ron), repair the tatty workmanship of the premises.  Not to my eye they don't.

     Once we can decide how sound the actual argument is, without constantly trying to shift the basis or subject of it, it may actually be possible to settle it on the basis of actual reasoned discussion rather than pointless shouting.
I think that would be nice.  I don't actually like opening myself up to the possibility of being shown to be wrong, as actual reasoned argument might show, but that possibility is there, you know.  If we actually take the discussion point by point and look at it and work it through, both balladeer and I as representatives of two distinct points of view might actually learn something.  

     I do not say the points that balladeer raises are right or wrong, though I think them wrong.  I haven't had a chance to examine them because they have been raised in an out of order fashion, and block the examination of the pieces of the argument that both of us SEEM to feel are most important.  Dealt with in this way, these side issues are in fact red herrings, not simply because they are a change in subject and prevent the forwarding of the argument, but because the main discussion prevents a solid discussion of these other interesting points as well.

     There are reasons for syllogistic, step by step reasoning.  It is solid, it can be examined, its flaws can be discoved and worked through.  

     Of course I want to be right here.  I have an ego and probably too much of one.  I have a good solid element of blowhard to me; perhaps there's one of you who might claim they didn't  (I myself, by the way would nominate TomMark, who actually doesn't seem to be a blowhard).

But thank goodness there actually other parts of me as well, difficult as they might be to find from time to time.
I actually want to understand as much about this seemingly un-understandable thing as I can.  To do so means I have to risk feeling, looking like and occasionally being a fool.  I think it's in a good cause.

     As a post script, Ron, I may have called you riduculous at some point, but don't remember doing so.  I think I'd be more likely to call myself ridiculous, whom I actually know well enough to be able to make a solid call on.  I am often ridiculous, as are many of the people I value highly.  I've frequently found many of the insults people use for each other something of a puzzle.  But no, I don't believe I do find you ridiculous, actually.  Enjoyably prickly at this point, I think, but I don't have much sense of your core.  Certainly a lot of determination, there, though, and a driving sense of values and a settled sense of self.  Probably be nice to have about three cups of coffee and a long discussion with you about poetry and the world sometime.  Oh yes, Did I mention loyalty to friends?  I should have mentioned loyalty to friends.  Ridiculous, though? not that I can tell, though I suppose I can always hope.  My best, BobK.  
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


40 posted 01-15-2008 02:07 PM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

yet if I don't use the phrase African American, then I am insensitive and racist..and there is no inconsistency. Anyhow... enough about that.
This is not true. Media or many think the white is default, you know default. So other colored has to have a title to make clear that "YOU ARE NOT WHITE". To label Americans by racial groups  by Government is already providing a chance of discrimination though  It does have significant   medical and judicial reasons.  It narrows down the target. esp today when light changes.

but I also recognize that the foundation for justice is consistency. Inconsistency breeds a sense of injustice, which I honestly feel is the real complaint from both Mike and Ringo, as well as millions more.
?
By creation and evolution, we would be still dirt if you were for consistency.
shall we change for better as human are such fallible being?

and
It one says that who cares that "this words or that words" I shall say that many are hurt by that and esp when in Childhood.  Last year when I took a walk in park, twice, men (Hispanic) of 60+yrs chatted with me. Two minutes into the talk, they were talking about their childhood. about how they were discriminated and how they have done well later in life out of those human "curse". This touched me deeply. No matter all the good life of adult, they still remember the hurt of dignity.... Being criticized, bad mouthed and name called for something that they could not change.  

To one it is merely a matter of teacake between talks. To other it is life long fighting and death for gaining  social justice...Can human achieve it ?let along one or many refuse to change...If it does not benefit me why I have to change? yea, why I have to change?

Dear Bob K,  I pretend that I had been well tamed by zoo keeper.      

[This message has been edited by TomMark (01-15-2008 04:36 PM).]

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


41 posted 01-15-2008 03:04 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Hey, Hush!

I really haven't said anything about blacks getting special treatment at all. Even this topic does not deal with blacks in general. As I said there was no mass protest to change the song. People didn't write in demanding one. This was simplya case of one  man, one representative in the legislature claiming that the song was offensive,demanding change, and having the state doing anything to placate him....that's about it.

As far as the Indians are concerned (wherever they popped up from in this topic) ther is no doubt that how they were treated is one of the most shameful parts of American history....but it is history. I did not declare war on the Indians. I did not send them to reservations or infect them with smallpox. Why  should I assume the guilt of those who did? SHould I feel ashamed for the actions of people a century and a half  ago? Sorry, but I don't. Actually, there are many of us who donate money to the Indians every day...darn those casinos!

Would being called a whitey, a cracker or a honky bother me? Not in the slightest. I am a firm believer in the Elenor Roosevelt quote.."No one can make you feel inferior without your permission."
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


42 posted 01-15-2008 03:22 PM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

darn those casinos!

what would you say about Las Vegas? what a wonderful city.. the whole world is donating  money. I learned a person from a friend that the person donates 200,000.00$ each time he goes and he goes there weekly and fly international flight in first class.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


43 posted 01-15-2008 03:30 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Rebel,

You could have a very good point there if any of those words you substituted also denoted terms of endearment when used by members of the same race, such as Hush pointed out darkies does. At any rate, you and ron are correct in the belief that this is more about PC than anything else.

btw,congratulations!  I know from past experiences, of course, how you like to get politics and political comments in whenever possible but you have outdone yourself here. In one of the few threads I have initiated which has NO bearing on politics and/or political parties, you still managed to work a reference in to Democrats, Republicans and political bias. Such talent should not go unrecognized.
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


44 posted 01-15-2008 03:43 PM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Would being called a whitey, a cracker or a honky bother me? Not in the slightest
someone was not as CALM as you because he twice got into fight and got disciplined  by mom.

Someone of 6 years old thrown a rock at me (8 years old) with name calling and bled my nose. I did not say a thing. His sister was kind enough to took me to her home and washed my face. Should I keep silent for the third time? no, absolutely not.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


45 posted 01-15-2008 04:02 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

BobK,

You just don't seem to get it. The point we are at now, and which ron is referring to, is not the topic, it's how we discuss topics here.  You may believe you are exactly right. You may lay out your reasoning, quote Aristotle, or do whatever and that's fine. I may not agree with you or believe that my comments and responses are in order. I have that right. You may feel that, if the conversations are not conducted in the way you specify, they are a sham. Go ahead and feel that way if you like. I don't have a problem with it.

I will not pretend to believe that this sort of provocative discussion should be allowed to proceed without being shown up for the  logical sham and travesty that it is however.

And you are the self--appointed person to show it up, I assume? Well, it WILL proceed whether it meets you expectations or definitions of what it should be or not. You can either participate in the right way or stay out of it and save yourself the mental aggravation.

I have a limited set of shoddy but time honored tools to use.  I try to use them with as much politeness and respect as I can muster.  

preceded by...

As you look progressively more ridiculous

you persist on dragging into your discussion (the use of red herrings featuring prominently among them) as if the very use of them didn't discredit any pretense to reasoned discussion you might make.

To confuse the two may amuse you for some disturbing reason

only to drag another unhappy andf half-rotted herring across a perfectly straightforward train of reasoning.

I fully expect to hear how the whole thing was Bill Clinton"s fault.


Well, if that's as much politeness and respect that you can muster,  I'd buy a new muster machine.

As a post script, Ron, I may have called you riduculous at some point, but don't remember doing so

You don't get it, sir. Ron was speaking figuratively, not literally.  We don't condone calling ANYONE ridiculous here (no, not even me). We present views, we argue,  we work in a little sarcasm if it is humorous, we banter, we attack each other's views....we do NOT directly insult anyone on a personal level. That is not what this site is all about and that is a rule that is expected to be followed.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


46 posted 01-15-2008 04:03 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Tom, that's an excellent example between sticks and stones and words
TomMark
Member Elite
since 07-27-2007
Posts 2111
LA,CA


47 posted 01-15-2008 04:29 PM       View Profile for TomMark   Email TomMark   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for TomMark

Would being called a whitey, a cracker or a honky bother me? Not in the slightest

I thought that it is your philosophy of endurance. So, it is not. Someone shall throw a stone at you to test your true self.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


48 posted 01-15-2008 04:33 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
In formal reasoning, disagreements of the kind you cite as acceptable are in fact not acceptable. That is why appeals to emotion such as the one you are making are permitted in, say, a court of law, or a public address, but are excluded in philosophical or scientic debate.

And which of those, Bob, scientific or philosophical, would you expect to see in the Alley?

quote:
Once we can decide how sound the actual argument is, without constantly trying to shift the basis or subject of it, it may actually be possible to settle it on the basis of actual reasoned discussion rather than pointless shouting.

Bob, I think that's precisely where you're going wrong here. You've skipped that important first step of agreeing WHAT the actual argument is. In an earlier post, you said, "The subject is racism in the state song of Florida." While I admire your attempt at minimalism, I don't think that's the subject at all. At best, it's a symptom of the subject.

Unilaterally defining the subject makes it easier, I suppose, to define what is and isn't relevant. By your definition, Bob, the state song in Michigan would also be irrelevant, would also be a red herring, because it is after all a change in subject. You have defined the subject the way you see it, very narrowly, and I certainly won't deny you the right to do so. You shouldn't be so surprised, however, to find everyone else deviating from the strait path you've set.

This isn't formal debate, Bob. If it were, the originating topics would in fact be called resolutions and would all have to be much more stringently defined. This, instead, is discussion. Give and take. That necessarily means there are rarely (if ever) winners or losers, but what we lose in finality I think we gain in potential understanding. I don't care if Mike is right or wrong. I don't care if you are, Bob. I do care how each of you think and feel about what I consider a very important topic in this country.

quote:
As a post script, Ron, I may have called you riduculous at some point, but don't remember doing so.

You didn't, Bob. But when you mount a personal attack on anyone in these forums, you'll likely find me standing nearby. And that doesn't have anything to do with loyalty to friends, either. My loyalty is to a process that has worked for almost a decade now. Everything else is (drum roll, please) just a red herring.

quote:
By creation and evolution, we would be still dirt if you were for consistency.

No, TM, we would have very consistently followed the same path that led to where we are right now. Don't confuse consistency with lack of change.

quote:
This was simplya case of one  man, one representative in the legislature claiming that the song was offensive,demanding change, and having the state doing anything to placate him....that's about it.

Note the word I emphasized, Mike? Perhaps you'd like to rephrase this part of your complaint?

quote:
As far as the Indians are concerned (wherever they popped up from in this topic) ther is no doubt that how they were treated is one of the most shameful parts of American history....but it is history. I did not declare war on the Indians. I did not send them to reservations or infect them with smallpox. Why  should I assume the guilt of those who did?

I'm not sure guilt is the word I would choose to use, Mike. Responsibility, perhaps?

Why? Because even though a lot of the bad stuff happened several hundreds years ago, so too did a lot of the good stuff. You know, the good stuff you accept every day and even take some pride in. The freedom. The economy. A good education. Enlightened values. I'm not sure it's fair for anyone to accept the benefits of being an American today without also accepting responsibility for how those benefits were sometimes purchased yesterday. No, you didn't declare war on the Indians, Mike. Neither did I. I do, however, live on the land that resulted from those wars and broken treaties. I can't change what happened, but neither can I pretend I don't share responsibility for what others before me did. Unless I'm willing to reject everything they did, I can't reject just the parts I don't like.


Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


49 posted 01-15-2008 09:26 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Ringo said,

quote:

90% of the "African Americans" in this country have never been outside the country, much less have been to Africa. 99% of them are not African Immigrants. The majority of them are decendants of men and women who (forcably) immigrated here at least a century and change ago. If I ask to be called a British American, according to my heritage, then people's minds short circuitbecause they can't understand what I am talking about, yet if I don't use the phrase African American, then I am insensitive and racist..and there is no inconsistency. Anyhow... enough about that.



I'm just going to guess Bradley, that you've never been to the Caucasus mountains either -- you may have been though -- it is just a guess after all   .  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

I understand your frustration though because words are absurd.  

quote:

Another term, "negro," is erroneously used and is degrading in the eyes of
informed and self-respecting persons of African heritage. It denotes
stereotyped and debased traits of character and classifies a whole segment
of humanity on the basis of false information. From all intelligent
viewpoints, it is a badge of slavery and helps to prolong and perpetuate
oppression and discrimination.

Persons who recognize the emotional thrust and plain show of disrespect in
the Southerner's use of "nigra" and the general use of "[n-word-deleted-from-quote]" must also
realize that all three words are essentially the same. The other two:
"nigra" and "[n-word-deleted-from-quote]" are blunt and undeceptive. The one representing
respectability, "negro," is merely the Same substance in a polished package
and spelled with a capital letter. This refinement is added so that a
degrading terminology can be legitimately used in general literature and
"polite" conversation without embarrassment.

The term "negro" developed from a word in the Spanish langnage which is
actually an adjective (describing word) meaning "black," that is, the color
black. In plain English, if someone said or was called a "black" or a
"dark," even a young child would very naturally question. "A black what?" or
"A dark what?" because adjectives do not name, they describe. Please take
note that in order to make use of this mechanism, a word was transferred
from another language and deceptively changed in function from an adjective
to a noun, which is a naming word. Its application in the nominative
(naming) sense was intentionally used to portray persons in a position of
objects or "things." It stamps the article as being "all alike and all the
same." It denotes: a "darkie," a slave, a subhuman, an ex-slave, a "negro."

Afro-Americans must reanalyze and particularly question our own use of this
term, keeping in mind all the facts. In light of the historical meanings and
current implications, all intelligent and informed Afro-Americans and
Africans continue to reject its use in the noun form as well as a proper
adjective. Its usage shall continue to be considered as unenlightened and
objectionable or deliberately offensive whether in speech or writing.

We accept the use of Afro-American, African, and Black man in reference to
persons of African heritage. To every other part of mankind goes this
measure of just respect. We do not desire more nor shall we accept less.


http://www.africanamericans.com/OrgAfroAmericanUnity.htm

Just as a test -- what race do we call the people who eminate from South Eastern Asia?  Um... Asian?

Words are absurd.

[This message has been edited by Ron (01-16-2008 06:03 AM).]

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Hasta Cuando?   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors