10

Rep. Eli Crane used the derogatory phrase in describing his proposed amendment to a military bill. Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty asked that his words be stricken from the record.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Not a native English speaker here. I had to scroll comments to even understand what's the problem. i still don't understand what's that "mega substantial difference" between "colored people" and "people of color". That's like, literally, grammatically the same. Sorry guys you are just trying hard to set yourself apart from that moron.

[-] MicroWave@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It’s really about context and nuances.

“Colored people” is a specific term that was used during the time of racial segregation in America, so it carries a lot of negative connotations beyond its literal dictionary meaning. It’s now considered outdated as well, so it was a bit shocking for a politician, especially one who identifies as white and conservative, to utter it.

[-] btaf45@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

“Colored people” is a specific term that was used during the time of racial segregation in America,

And after segregation up to this very day. It is neither a 'slur' nor 'shocking', merely old fashioned.

NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People.

[-] BURN@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The NAACP predates modern terminology and I believe chose to maintain the name out of historic context.

It’s frequently used as a replacement for the N-word, and ignoring that is just being willfully ignorant.

Old Fashioned is not an excuse for racist language. This isn’t something that a younger person uses by accident. If this was some 80 year old white man I’d maybe believe that he got it mixed up. But it hasn’t been an accepted term for the majority of his lifetime and it’s not wrong to expect our representatives to not use racist language to describe their constituents.

[-] jerdle_lemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's exactly the point. The reason "coloured people" isn't okay is precisely because people like that moron use it.

[-] solstice@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's just very dated and has come to be seen as a non-politically correct slur, even though originally it WAS the politically correct language. I agree with you personally and feel like there are much bigger things to worry about than someone using an outdated politically correct euphemism. There have been so many, it's easy to get confused: negro, colored, minority, people of color, etc. I don't feel strongly about any of this and just say whatever I'm told is acceptable now, so it's not a big deal to me. I do think it would be cool if we could just say black white/asian/hispanic/whatever.

[-] Tigerfishy@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Problem is, when you let people like him slide when he's playing his little games, the games keep getting a little more grand. That's all it is to him. And now he gets to go "What??" When knows damn well semantics matter. He knows the little republican signals matter. They all know what they're doing.

Stand back and stand by

[-] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Yup.

It's really bizarre how we all know what's going on here, but people insist on playing dumb about it.

"Please explain to me why using terminology that brings back memories about segregation is bad when the other terminology refers to the same group of people? I Just don't get it! It's not logical!"

[-] btaf45@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It’s just very dated

Exactly. It used to be the common politically correct terminology. I don't see how it can suddenly be called a "slur" any more than 'black' is a slur.

NAACP - National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People

[-] kewjo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

context matters, a white congress person is using a phrase in Congress that historically was used in Congress to deny people's rights. these politicians want to "make America great again" they want to undo civil rights.

[-] btaf45@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

A word does not deny anybody's rights. "Coloured Person" is just as politically correct as "black" or "African American". In fact "Coloured Person" is the most accurate of the 3 politically correct terms.

[-] Xero@infosec.pub -1 points 1 year ago

You just admitted that English isn't your native language, and you probably aren't an African American. So this is one of those things you are just not going to get. It comes down to more than just the language, it's the shared history that gives those words the weight they carry. And you can choose to privately be insensitive to that history, but publicly you don't have to say everything you think.

[-] solstice@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

The term is POC now you insensitive clod. I have white friends from south africa and black friends from the caribbean so it's inaccurate to call either of them african american. Ever met a black british person? Try calling them african american and you'll get laughed out of the country.

[-] Daisyifyoudo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

He's referring, very specifically, to understanding the difference in the US betweenthe terms poc and colored people.

"You're probably not African American" meaning you're prob not a black person in America descended from slavery directly impacted by this incident and therefore don't understand the exact argument here.

He wasn't saying all black people are African Americans 🙄

[-] Xero@infosec.pub -1 points 1 year ago

Say again.

I was born in London to Jamaican parents. Age of five I moved to Jamaica and lived there for eight years before moving to the States. I am now a black American. You came at the wrong guy with that bullshit Sonny Jim. Plus I get to block your dumb ass.

this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
10 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19097 readers
1920 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS