**** Elections thread *****

[BananaStand]

That's of course possible, but deeming someone an asshole just because they use a word in any context would qualify as a serious issue in my book.

40,000 words in the english language, I've identified 1 that I think is radioactive.

Nobody's perfect I guess.

C'mon man, just go back re-read the discussion from today. There is no good reason for a non-black person to use that word. Either your'e saying purposefully to cause harm, or you're doing it out of some retarded sense of white-victimhood. Both are just wrong, and we're all better off if we just shut that shit out of the public discourse.

Only a complete ass hole would feel a need to hold on to any kind of 'right' to use that word.

[OngBonga]

What I have a serious issue with is ignorance. Like someone saying "but Dr Dre says it, why can't I?"

This isn't ignorance, not on my part. I already know why Dr Dre can say it but I can't. I just happen to feel that the answer is more racist than simply saying a word.

[Poopadoop]

@Banana

You've oversimplified the issue into the word having a pejorative connotation when any white person uses it regardless of context.

I'm comfortable in using the word 'nigger' when discussing in what context saying 'nigger' is offensive. And since the majority would agree with me that it's not being used offensively when used in a meta-linguistic sense, then I see no reason not to use it.

I also don't have a problem with you not wanting to use it ever; that's your right.

Lastly, I'm indifferent to whether or not you or coco or any other individual thinks I should use it because no one person represents a consensus.

[Poopadoop]

I already know why Dr Dre can say it but I can't. I just happen to feel that the answer is more racist than simply saying a word.

Do you think the word 'nigger' has the same connotation when Dr. Dre says it as when the grand wizard of the KKK says it?

[Poopadoop]

So Ong when you say the word 'pavement' where I would say 'sidewalk' are we both being intolerant of each other's native countries?

And if not, when a black person says 'nigger' where a white person would say 'dude' (or 'mate') how is that racist?

[OngBonga]

Do you think the word 'nigger' has the same connotation when Dr. Dre says it as when the grand wizard of the KKK says it?

No, but the right to say it, or the onus to not say it, is equal.

[OngBonga]

So Ong when you say the word 'pavement' where I would say 'sidewalk' are we both being intolerant of each other's native countries?

And if not, when a black person says 'nigger' where a white person would say 'dude' (or 'mate') how is that racist?

What? How is this analogy even remotely applicable? Are you suggesting it's ok for you to say "sidewalk" but not other people? No, so it's not a fitting analogy.

[Poopadoop]

No, but the right to say it, or the onus to not say it, is equal.

So, if there were a Russian word 'fuckov' that meant 'a book', I should be able to use it in any library or bookstore around the world?

"What would you like sir?' 'Fuckov'. But since I can't do that without offending librarians and booksellers, it proves the world is anti-Russian?

The fact that black people have a different dialect than white people is not evidence of racism any more than two languages having different meanings for words that sound the same is evidence of them being intolerant of each other. The word means different things depending on who's saying it.

[Poopadoop]

What? How is this analogy even remotely applicable? Are you suggesting it's ok for you to say "sidewalk" but not other people? No, so it's not a fitting analogy.

Have you tried saying 'sidewalk' here? It sure seems to bother people.

[Poopadoop]

Also, aren't you the one who gets upset when someone uses American spellings, like 'favor'? I guess that makes you racist.

[OngBonga]

We're not talking about a mistranslation here, or a word that means doggie in one language and cuntingfuckshit in another. We're talking about a word that means the same to both.

If a black person says "hey, what's up my nigger?", and a white person says "hey what's up my nigger", then it means the same thing.

To say that nigger de facto means something else than I intended because I am white, there's your racism, I am being treated differently because of the colour of my skin.

Also, aren't you the one who gets upset when someone uses American spellings, like 'favor'? I guess that makes you racist.

No, I'm xenophobic, not racist. There's a distinct difference between the two. Americans aren't a race of people, are they?

[CoccoBill]

Lastly, I'm indifferent to whether or not you or coco or any other individual thinks I should use it because no one person represents a consensus.

What's the number of people with an opinion to make you care about what they think? 4 billion would be consensus I guess. Is there a place where I can check what the consensus is on this and similar matters?

[Poopadoop]

If a black person says "hey, what's up my nigger?", and a white person says "hey what's up my nigger", then it means the same thing.

If you think that phrase means the exact same thing regardless of who says it to whom you are mistaken. If you think everyone should speak the same dialect where all the words mean the same thing all the time then you are hawking some weird kind of 1984-ish mentality.

If a black person says 'you sooo bad' and means 'you are really good', but a white person means it as 'you are really bad', then the fact that only a black person can say it as a compliment doesn't prove the existence of racism. It proves the existence of dialects, just like 'sidewalk' vs. 'pavement' does.

[Poopadoop]

What's the number of people with an opinion to make you care about what they think? 4 billion would be consensus I guess. Is there a place where I can check what the consensus is on this and similar matters?

Haha. I don't think about it as if there were a poll being taken. The different meanings of the word 'nigger' and when they are enacted are pretty clearly understood afaik. Though to be fair if it changes any time soon I doubt I will be one of the first to know.

[OngBonga]

If you think that phrase means the exact same thing regardless of who says it to whom you are mistaken.

Of course it doesn't. It can mean one thing when I say it, and something completely different when my brother says it.

You're assuming it means the same to all black people, and something else the same to all white people. You're essentially saying that the colour of one's skin determines the context of the word.

[Poopadoop]

Of course it doesn't. I can mean one thing when I say it, and something completely different when my brother says it.

How the meaning is defined depends on the context, which includes things outside of the colour of the person's skin. Your tone of voice, body language, age, sex, etc., can all contribute to the meaning. As does the interpretation of the listener.

There is a sociocultural understanding of how these things all contribute to language, which is what I mean by a convention. We would all agree, for example, that saying 'fuck off' to a stranger is offensive, regardless of color, tone, body language, etc.

You're assuming it means the same to all black people, and something else the same to all white people. You're essentially saying that the colour of one's skin determines the context of the word.

Never said it has to mean the same to all black people. But my understanding is what I've said before: A black person using that word when speaking to another black person can do so without any implied racism. This is somewhat logical since most people aren't racist against their own race. A white person can use it when speaking to another white person without any implied racism because they are both of the same race and the same reasoning applies. But when a white person says it to a black person then (depending on other elements of the context) it often has a racist connotation.

[Poopadoop]

It's kind of like if you and wuf started calling each other 'cracker' all the time. In the context of two (presumably) white people speaking to each other the word takes on a different meaning than if a black person on here called you 'cracker'. In the context of you and wuf the word 'cracker' would be much closer to 'brother' in meaning than to 'dickhead of another race', since obviously the latter meaning makes no sense when both the speaker and the listener are of the same race.

[OngBonga]

Never said it has to mean the same to all black people. But my understanding is what I've said before: A black person using that word when speaking to another black person can do so without any implied racism. This is somewhat logical since most people aren't racist against their own race. A white person can use it when speaking to another white person without any implied racism because they are both of the same race and the same reasoning applies. But when a white person says it to a black person then (depending on other elements of the context) it often has a racist connotation.

How about if a black person says it to a white person?

[CoccoBill]

It's kind of like if you and wuf started calling each other 'cracker' all the time. In the context of two (presumably) white people speaking to each other the word takes on a different meaning than if a black person on here called you 'cracker'. In the context of you and wuf the word 'cracker' would be much closer to 'brother' in meaning than to 'dickhead of another race', since obviously the latter meaning makes no sense when both the speaker and the listener are of the same race.

Should I, as a white guy, be insulted if they call each other crackers?

[OngBonga]

Should I, as a white guy, be insulted if they call each other crackers?

Only if myself and wuf are both black.

[wufwugy]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...b5X?li=BBnb7Kz

So here's an example of what appears to be a perfectly 'harmless' story. I cringed at this passage though...



While it's now common knowledge that Russia hacked the Podesta and the DNC, any suggestion as to motive, is pure speculation. There isn't a single shred of evidence that says they did it "to help Trump". I don't think it's clear that Putin 'wanted' Trump to win. In fact, such a conclusion defies logic. If you were Putin, would you rather negotiate with Trump, or Hillary? What's more logical, is that Putin simply wanted to weaken an incoming president Clinton.

Yet, this narrative that Putin was on Trump's side keeps getting rolled out there, over and over, in ways that are both overt, and sometimes very subtle.

Science has proven the power of repetitive thought. Constantly beating the drum over and over eventually causes people to believe what they are hearing. So subtly slipping in a suggestion toward a popular opinion, presented as fact, enough times, will eventually shape the nature of people's beliefs and public discourse.

Take the narrative that Trump is racist. Any intelligent person can see that the "mexicans are rapists" line was taken completely out of context. He was a little offsides when he went after the gold-star muslim family and talked about the wife being silent. Trump could have been more diplomatic there, but his comments hardly rise to the level of "racism". Other than that, I'm having a really hard time coming up with something I've heard Trump say, or seen him do that would suggest he believes in white supremacy.

Yet, the "trump is a racist" drumbeat continues, and look how many people believe it!

The thesis of your argument here gets to the final point I want to make on the subject. In a micro sense, a lot of what Surviva says is correct -- the MSM often is not flat out fabricating stories -- therefore they're not "fake news" in that sense. But I think we should also examine them in the macro sense. Here's an example on the macro level that I argue shows they are engaging in fake news:

How many people believe that there is an epidemic of black people being unfairly executed by cops? Many, many millions. And most of them believe it because of how the MSM (and lots of smaller companies) have covered related issues for years. Yet, the whole thing is a scam. It's not true. Black people are not being unjustly killed at greater rates, and the evidence of corruption by the police regarding race is infinitesimal. In the micro sense, CNN et al may be telling the "truth" in each individual story that they report inasmuch as they are relaying things thought to be credible, but they are certainly egregiously misleading their viewers. The fakery of the MSM is systemic, and consumers of their products come away believing things that are fake at alarming rates.

[CoccoBill]

Only if wuf and I are both black.

Somehow I think Poop trying to apply universal morality to this issue is failing. Being offended is a personal experience. I for one am not letting others dictate when I should or shouldn't be offended.

[wufwugy]

Ok fine. Just for the record, I'm with ong and surviva on this one. Words should not be taboo. Words, especially ones with extremely strong historical connotations should be used with extreme care, but context and meaning is what matters, not syntax. A word is just a word, and this circling around using "the n-word" when it's clearly obvious what word we're talking about is ridiculous. Any words can be used offensively, just like they can be used inoffensively. Banning the use of words sounds medieval to me.

Big time.

Tabooing words is one of the most childish and deleterious things adults do.

[OngBonga]

Somehow I think Poop trying to apply universal morality to this issue is failing. Being offended is a personal experience. I for one am not letting others dictate when I should or shouldn't be offended.

Yeah, couldn't agree more.

I mean the world we currently live in, I can't say nigger because I'm white, but I can call a black man a wanker for the simple reason he's black, and so long as noone else knows my motive, it's ok, because I only called him a wanker.

The racism is not the word, it's the motive. Motives are often covert, so the moral crusaders go after the words instead, which are overt, to make them feel somewhat better about the sins of their ancestors.

[wufwugy]

It's 2017, the overwhelming majority of the black population has declared the word categorically offensive.

FWIW this being the case is a bad thing.

We, as a society, shouldn't put up with it, but we do.

[wufwugy]

As long as that trend continues, black people are fucked. And white people can't help them.

The White Savior Complex is half the problem. And it's very racist. The irony is that today's racism is mostly this type of racism, yet those same racists seem to have convinced most people that KKK-type racism is rampant.

[wufwugy]

The best thing that can happen to black people is for the economy to create jobs. That's pretty much Trump's agenda.

Yay economics.

Jobs already exist. We're at a point now where pretty much anybody who wants a job can find one without too much trouble. The issue is that a ton of poor do not have incentive to work due to how much welfare they receive by not working.

If I'm not convincing, maybe Thomas Sowell is. One of his most famous quotes is along the lines of how neither slavery nor Jim Crow destroyed the black family, but welfare did. Most people are not yet ready to accept the claim that welfare has been monumentally destructive to black people*, but facts are facts.

*To everybody, actually, but black communities especially.

[wufwugy]

What you're saying is that it's their inherent qualities that cause their problems. How would you describe racism?

FWIW those types of things aren't inherent to being black but are descriptions regarding the demographic.

[wufwugy]

Another avenue for the fake news claim on the MSM is that they choose to only report a part of the story. Example, their coverage of the riots today are guaranteed to be very different than, say, Cernovich's. I'm not even interested in seeing how the MSM covers it because I've seen this happen hundreds of times before. Because I consume a lot of alternative media, I see a very large quantity of things that the MSM do not cover, and the pattern is always curiously the same (hint: their narrative).

Or here's another example: how many times have you seen the MSM cover mass shootings? Dozens. How many times have you seen the MSM cover thwarted mass shootings by conceal or open carriers? Zero. How many times have likely potential mass shootings been thwarted by those carriers in the last year? Sheeeeiiiiiiiiiiit I've seen maybe a half a dozen stories alone and I don't look for them. The number is very significant. The MSM only covers firearms in a way that fits their narrative about guns. If this doesn't qualify as fake news, I'm a little baffled.

Another example: I have seen what is probably over a hundred instances of violent crime against Trump supporters during this election cycle. What was the MSM reporting on them? Virtually non-existent and totally marginalizing. Some were very big and very violent too.

[wufwugy]

I remember a chick who got her face badly beaten by two thugs that appeared Mexican because she was trying to keep them from vandalizing her Trump yard sign. The coverage by the MSM was very meager even though it has the graphic shit they adore. Could you imagine if this was two hillbilly white men attacking a Mexican woman protecting her Clinton yard sign? Stop the fucking presses. It would have been wall to wall coverage about how evil Trump is and how evil his supporters are for about a week. The story would have entered the national zeitgeist and lingered for years.

This is highly sophisticated fakery. They don't make up stories in the micro, but they make up perceived reality in the macro.

[boost]

It's funny how everyone thinks that fake news is a phenomenon of propaganda being levied against their political ideology (which happens to be the true and right one, of course.)

It's not funny because one side is wrong, it's funny because both sides are right.

[OngBonga]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiHtH0IJids

8.45 > "We heard about the DNC emails that were leaked"

What on Earth does Obama mean by "leaked"?

[Poopadoop]

Somehow I think Poop trying to apply universal morality to this issue is failing. Being offended is a personal experience. I for one am not letting others dictate when I should or shouldn't be offended.

I'm not making any moral judgments or trying to tell anyone if and when they should be offended. I'm simply describing my understanding of what the conventions on word usage are.

Ong is trying to say it's racist that white and black people have different dialects where the word 'nigger' has a different meaning. I'm saying it's not.

[OngBonga]

Ong is trying to say it's racist that white and black people have different dialects where the word 'nigger' has a different meaning. I'm saying it's not.

No, I'm saying that it's racist for white people to have different rules applied to them than black people.

You're arguing the word "nigger" means something different to black people than it does white people. That's not only wrong, it's also racist, because it assumes that the context in which I use the word is irrelevant, and instead the meaning is determined by my skin colour.

[Poopadoop]

Yeah, couldn't agree more.

I mean the world we currently live in, I can't say nigger because I'm white, but I can call a black man a wanker for the simple reason he's black, and so long as noone else knows my motive, it's ok, because I only called him a wanker.

So your argument is that if a person expresses their racism in a way nobody understands as racist, that's a problem with language. Actually, that's a problem with their vocabulary.

The racism is not the word, it's the motive.

This is like saying the problem with an earthquake isn't the word earthquake, it's the ground shaking. Ya of course it is. What's your point?

Motives are often covert, so the moral crusaders go after the words instead, which are overt, to make them feel somewhat better about the sins of their ancestors.

That's your interpretation. It's more likely in my eyes that the word becomes offensive for the simple reason that it's hurtful. It's the same reason calling a woman a 'cunt' is deemed offensive.

[OngBonga]

This is like saying the problem with an earthquake isn't the word earthquake, it's the ground shaking. Ya of course it is. What's your point?

Your anologies are worse than mine.

[Poopadoop]

No, I'm saying that it's racist for white people to have different rules applied to them than black people.

You're arguing the word "nigger" means something different to black people than it does white people. That's not only wrong, it's also racist, because it assumes that the context in which I use the word is irrelevant, and instead the meaning is determined by my skin colour.

The only way your system would work is if we abolished race as a linguistic concept altogether. That way no race could have its own dialect and words would mean the same thing regardless of the speaker. But then we'd be back to the issue of assimilation which is itself racist.

[Poopadoop]

Your anologies are worse than mine.

That was your point?

[OngBonga]

This has fuck all to do with dialect. If you truly believe that "nigger" means something different to black people than it does white people, then I really don't know what to say. Especially considering that you fail to understand that such a position is racist.

[Poopadoop]

Should I, as a white guy, be insulted if they call each other crackers?

That's up to you to decide. It's not my place to tell you if and when and why you should be offended.

[Poopadoop]

This has fuck all to do with dialect. If you truly believe that "nigger" means something different to black people than it does white people, then I really don't know what to say. Especially considering that you fail to understand that such a position is racist.

So you think when a black person calls another black person 'nigger', they're using it as an insult?

[OngBonga]

So you think when a black person calls another black person 'nigger', they're using it as an insult?

Does the word "nigger" mean "a contemptuous term for a black or dark-skinned person" to the black person, or does it have a different definition?

[Poopadoop]

Does the word "nigger" mean "a contemptuous term for a black or dark-skinned person" to the black person, or does it have a different definition?

So that's a yes?

[OngBonga]

Further, if the word means "comrade" to a black person, does that then mean I am respecting their culture and dialect if I use the word in the same context, espeically in the company of black people?

[OngBonga]

So that's a yes?

You're really good at missing the point.

[Poopadoop]

You're really good at missing the point.

I asked a question and you replied with a different question. What is your answer to my question?

[Poopadoop]

Further, if the word means "comrade" to a black person, does that then mean I am respecting their culture and dialect if I use the word in the same context, espeically in the company of black people?

We're talking about black people, not communists.

My translation of the word 'nigger' in the black dialect is 'person of my same colour'. So no, you couldn't use it and mean the same thing if you're white.

[OngBonga]

I asked a question and you replied with a different question. What is your answer to my question?

So you think when a black person calls another black person 'nigger', they're using it as an insult?

How can I know what a black person means when he uses the word? Am I to assume it means the same to all black people? Furthermore, if it is not intended as an insult, then why is it not ok for me to use the word to not insult a black person?

[OngBonga]

We're talking about black people, not communists.

My translation of the word 'nigger' in the black dialect is 'person of my same colour'. So no, you couldn't use it and mean the same thing if you're white.

lol nice

So nigger means "person of the same colour" to a black person, but "person of darker colour" to a white person.

Bravo, that's check fucking mate that is.

[OngBonga]

Right, so poop, my honkey, I hope the next time you hear a black person say honkey you point out that only white people can use that word.

[Poopadoop]

It's not a trick argument, it's fairly simple really.

1. If you're ok with the idea in principle that black people have their own dialect where a word can take on a different meaning when spoken to another black person (ebonics),

2. Then you should be ok with them having their own meaning for 'nigger'.

3. And you should be ok with that meaning not being offensive when spoken between two black people.

[Poopadoop]

Right, so poop, my honkey, I hope the next time you hear a black person say honkey you point out that only white people can use that word.

First, I'm mixed White/Native American so I'll take your words as a misunderstanding.

Second, I'm not going to bother trying to explain dialects to a racist.

[OngBonga]

First, I'm mixed White/Native American so I'll take your words as a misunderstanding.

Second, I'm not going to bother trying to explain dialects to a racist.

Ok, so why am I racist? Where am I discriminating, or demonstrating prejudice? Where do I suggest one race is superior to another?

I have shown that you are discriminating against me when you say that I can't say a certain word without it being offensive, while others of a different race can. Now show me why I'm being racist.

[Poopadoop]

Ok, so why am I racist? Where am I discriminating, or demonstrating prejudice? Where do I suggest one race is superior to another?

I have shown that you are discriminating against me when you say that I can't say a certain word without it being offensive, while others of a different race can. Now show me why I'm being racist.

I'm not saying you are racist, just that you are conflating the existence of race-based dialects with the issue of fair and equal treatment.

It's racist to say a racial group cannot have their own dialect and assign different meanings to words when spoken to another member of the group, even if that word were generally understood as racist in most other contexts. It's for them to decide if any given word in their dialect is offensive, not us. We don't get to apply a universal rule to certain words and tell other people they have to construct their dialect around it.

[Poopadoop]

IOW, you can't satisfy every criteria of 'fair and equal' by making the usage of all words equal to everyone, because this impinges on the fair and equal right of groups of people to have their own dialects. The two ideas are mutually incompatible; you can only have one or the other be true at a time, not both.

In that case, unless there is a compelling argument to be made for one idea having a much greater moral value than the other, the simplest thing is to maintain the status quo.

[OngBonga]

There's a lot of "us and them" going on here. That is the root cause of racism, not words. That's the point I've made several times, which you dismiss as anaologous to earthquakes and ground shaking.

You're assuming "nigger" means the same to all black people, while meaning something else to white people. That's the problem with your position. You're saying it's part of THEIR dialect. No, it isn't, it's part of OUR dialect, as in English speaking people, and it has a meaning that is generally considered offensive to ALL.

If it's merely part of their dialect, and isn't offensive in the context they use it, is it ok for black children to call each other niggers?

The crazy thing is, if you actually went and asked black people if they found the use of the word offensive, even when exchanged between fellow black people, I am confident that a healthy majority would say yes, it is offensive, and black people should not use the word. So your idea that it is purely dialect is not accurate.

[Poopadoop]

There's a lot of "us and them" going on here. That is the root cause of racism, not words. That's the point I've made several times, which you dismiss as anaologous to earthquakes and ground shaking.

I agree life would be better if no such concept of race existed. But it does and I use words like 'us' and 'them' linguistically as a shorthand for different groups of people. That is not racist imho.

You're assuming "nigger" means the same to all black people, while meaning something else to white people. That's the problem with your position.

I don't pretend to be a linguist; I just assume that the fact that black people seem to use it with each other without anyone getting offended suggests it has a different meaning to them.

it has a meaning that is generally considered offensive to ALL.

And by extension of what I just said, this argument would be patently false.

If it's merely part of their dialect, and isn't offensive in the context they use it, is it ok for black children to call each other niggers?

That's for them to decide, not me or you.

The crazy thing is, if you actually went and asked black people if they found the use of the word offensive, even when exchanged between fellow black people, I am confident that a healthy majority would say yes, it is offensive, and black people should not use the word.

Depends on where you drew your sample from, which just proves my point about dialects.

[OngBonga]

I agree life would be better if no such concept of race existed. But it does and I use words like 'us' and 'them' linguistically as a shorthand for different groups of people. That is not racist imho.

Granted, it's hard to not use words like "us" and "them" when having this discussion, and I don't actually think you're being racist because I don't for one minute think you have prejudice against any given race.

Depends on where you drew your sample from, which just proves my point about dialects.

I think you're being disingenuous here. I think you understand fully that a majority of black people find the word offensive, regardless of who is using it. This is not an issue of dialect, this isn't a faggot/bummer discussion.

[Poopadoop]

Let me give you an example from personal experience to illustrate my point of view. Where I grew up there was a lot of anti-Native American sentiment. During the summer months my skin would turn a coppery colour. During the summer I would also occasionally be stopped by police for what I can only assume was being over the legal limit of N.A. blood. Just walking down the street mmob, get stopped and asked questions for several minutes. "Where are you going?" "Where are you coming from?" "Can I see your ID?" "Do you have a receipt for that cd player?" Just driving down the street, get stopped, same routine. This was hugely offensive to me.

So I've experience racism on a personal level. This is why I have more sympathy with black people's rights to have their own dialect and decide on their own meanings of words than on white people complaining that 'they' get to use the word and 'we' don't. In my view, black people have taken that word as theirs, and given the history they have every right to do so.

I understand that you're attacking the issue from a different level, but to me you're still kinda arguing that it's more important we all use words in the same way than it is to let them have their own culture with its own dialect.

[Poopadoop]

I think you're being disingenuous here. I think you understand fully that a majority of black people find the word offensive, regardless of who is using it. This is not an issue of dialect, this isn't a faggot/bummer discussion.

I honestly don't believe that, but I accept the notion it may be true. If that's the case then probably black people shouldn't use it either outside of certain circles.

[OngBonga]

I understand that you're attacking the issue from a different level, but to me you're still kinda arguing that it's more important we all use words in the same way than it is to let them have their own culture with its own dialect.

I don't disagree with this, I just really don't see this issue as a question of dialect. There is no confusion on the meaning of the word. It doesn't mean "person of same colour" or whatever throwaway definition you tried to give it. Black people know what the word means, some black people don't care and use it anyway. That's the basic gist of this. If all black people used the word, or even all black people in a given region, then yes, it would be a question of dialect. But when it's used by rappers and hoodlums, and not by most members of their racial group, then it is not a question of dialect. Perhaps it's cultural, but it's not dialect. The word doesn't mean something different just because it's being used in a non-racist context by black people.

If you heard a Pakistani say "I'm off to the paki shop, do you need anything?", would you think that's merely a question of dialect? That it's ok for him to say it but not a white guy?

[OngBonga]

If that's the case then probably black people shouldn't use it either outside of certain circles.

Now we're in agreement. The rules are now equally applied. White people shouldn't use the word outside of certain circles either.

[Poopadoop]

The word doesn't mean something different just because it's being used in a non-racist context by black people.

It does to them. Just like you can call your white friend 'nigger' with (presumably) no racist overtones, so can they.

If you heard a Pakistani say "I'm off to the paki shop, do you need anything?", would you think that's merely a question of dialect? That it's ok for him to say it but not a white guy?

If they said it to another Pakistani, I would think it was pretty funny. I'd also assume it had nothing to do with them being against their own race.

[Poopadoop]

Now we're in agreement. The rules are now equally applied. White people shouldn't use the word outside of certain circles either.

Well I'm saying [I]if[I] that's true. I don't believe it is. We've already established that the same word has different connotations depending on who says it in what context.

And I don't believe rappers or other blacks who use it are trying to be racist against blacks. Other black people might hate the word for their own reasons and never want to hear it, but if they were the majority I don't think Dre or Snoop would sell as many albums as they do.

[OngBonga]

And I don't believe rappers or other blacks who use it are trying to be racist against blacks.

I'm not suggesting that they are being racist, but they are certainly being ignorant, and if they then demand white people don't say it, they are being hypocrites, and now they are also being racist.

[Poopadoop]

Here's another tack:

In Canada the word 'tosser' is never used. If it were it would mean 'someone who tosses things'. So a Canadian could use it to another Canadian without any offensive connotation. Not true in the UK, where it means 'one who masturbates'.

By your logic, this dialectic difference in how and when a word is considered offensive proves the existence of xenophobia.

[Poopadoop]

I'm not suggesting that they are being racist, but they are certainly being ignorant,

Well you're the one showing an ignorance of their culture and dialect by assuming your standard usage of the word applies universally.

and if they then demand white people don't say it, they are being hypocrites, and now they are also being racist.

'My rules apply to everyone' is not an argument. If you demand I can't say 'tosser' in Canada to another Canadian because it's offensive here, and I said 'ya sure i can it means nothing offensive there, but you can't say it to me here', then I'm not a hypocrite, I just have an understanding of different dialects that you're ignoring.

[OngBonga]

You're providing examples of words that actually mean different things.

If you're trying to tell me that "nigger" does not mean "a derogatory term for black people" to black people, then you're full of shit.

[OngBonga]

If I call a Canadian a tosser, he will be confused, and think "but what have I tossed?". That's because the Canadian doesn't know what the word means.

Are you trying to tell me that there are black people out there who use the word nigger without knowing what it means to the rest of the world?

[Poopadoop]

If you're trying to tell me that "nigger" does not mean "a derogatory term for black people" to black people, then you're full of shit.

No, you don't understand American black culture.

Are you aware of the existence of ebonics?

[OngBonga]

Are you aware of the existence of ebonics?

No. Is that what this is? Does "nigger" mean something else in Ebonics?

[Poopadoop]

If I call a Canadian a tosser, he will be confused, and think "but what have I tossed?". That's because the Canadian doesn't know what the word means.

Sure he does, he knows in his dialect it means 'someone who tosses things'. Could be someone making a salad for example. But you're right he would be confused because it's not a name-calling thing.

Are you trying to tell me that there are black people out there who use the word nigger without knowing what it means to the rest of the world?

Obviously not. That's the beauty of language. You can call your friend a 'fuckwit' without it meaning he's an idiot, while still understanding the rest of the world generally accepts that as the meaning.

[Poopadoop]

No. Is that what this is?

Ebonics is the name given to American Black English. An analogy closer to home would be cockney slang.

Does "nigger" mean something else in Ebonics?

My understanding is that the answer is 'yes' in certain contexts.

[OngBonga]

Obviously not. That's the beauty of language. You can call your friend a 'fuckwit' without it meaning he's an idiot, while still understanding the rest of the world generally accepts that as the meaning.

That's fine. But I'm not saying people of a given race cannot say "fuckwit" while I use the word on a regular basis.

[Poopadoop]

I don't see why it's a big deal really. It's just one word. Are you really being put out by not being able to say it to a black person while another black person can? Do you think black people thus are being granted some huge advantage, and are now much better able to express themselves by having a word that they can use and you can't?

If you do, then you should also morally object to the Canadian use of the word 'tosser' as being inoffensive, since this proves language is xenophobic.