The Clarkson Racist Row

[Suff]

As I understood it, Slope is a generalistic term for Asian people who have slightly slanted eyes.

It is a term that people can immediately recognise and associate with. That's what these terms are. It is, however INTENT which causes tension.

As someone who is currently (finally), trying to better his French, I'm finding that I'm also having to analyse my own language to understand how it is used and how it translates to another. English is incredibly flexible, which other languages are not.

So

S/He's just a

Is a phrase almost universally used with distain. Add an expletive and it's used with aggressive disdain.

So let's see if we can remove some other words from the vocabulary by making them ists.

He's jus an effing

Vegetarian
Green
Bachelor
Misogynist
Loner

The list can go on forever and if we use them enough, enough people will become "enraged" at the use that they can call for it to be stopped.

Maybe if we do this enough, the PC idiots will come to their senses and realise it's not the words themselves, but the way in which they are being used. For instance the word Damnation from the bible becomes Damned which becomes an expletive. Which is then bad and must be removed from our language. In fact we can make an expletive out of almost any word in the language, because in English, it is the structure, intent and delivery of words which make them what they are. Rarely are the words themselves a problem except for specific words already known as expletives. And expletives allow us to express extreme anger, distrust, pain etc....

One of the reasons that Esperanto never made it out of a group of dedicated academics is the almost complete inability to express anger or disgust. No expletives.

It's time we stopped kidding ourselves that words or phrases designed to generalise a community of anything is bad in and of itself. It is the meaning and intent behind the words which is the problem.

Of course, then you would have to prove, in a court of law, that someone was defaming you. Wordism allows for quick and clear cut court decisions. Almost always against people who never intended to defame those being referenced to, only poke a bit of fun at some idiots. Or even a culture like the US.

On the darker side, this drives true and real racism or racial derived slurs underground and into the very flexibility of English. Lack of promotion. Use of every day phrases with a sneer or even a laugh. The clever abuser will never be directly caught out or have a clear cut case against them.

The less clever in society, using the phrases they were brought up with, will always be punished for offences they never gave, by the precedent of wordism.

I'm becoming more and more sure that I don't actually want to come back from France. My home country has become infected with insanity and stupidity in equal proportions and now the lunatics are running the newly created asylum.

Common Purpose V Common Sense.... Common Sense is losing because actions with a Purpose do not always have to have sense.

The old saying, "Never argue with an idiot because he will just drag you down to his level and beat you with experience" is truer then ever today. Most of us just thought that the courts and the government would never become idiots. Interesting what an ideological world we live in isn't it.

Democracy is not something which grows on it's own. It has to be nurtured, it has to be husbanded and, above all, it has to be guarded with a rigid and ferocious stance. Otherwise those who choose to use it for their own evil ends will pervert it and twist it.

The guardians are gone, the perversions and twisting are in full flow.

I'm out. It's up to the rest of you to fix your own mess.

Or perhaps people actually like it??

[cromwell]

I always said when Tony Blair was in power that sooner or later, it will become a criminal offence to dislike anybody, for any reason.

I don't know if it is that people don't care any more Suff; maybe it is the fact that every political party hold more or less the exact same beliefs on what people should not be allowed to say that makes people think that the increasing of restrictions on freedom of speech is inevitable?

[moondancer]

What annoys me intensely is that some hate speech is against the law, and some seems to be quite acceptable.

Unless an offensive term is used in an offensive way, like "that bloody Paki" for example, then I can't see the harm.

We had a corner shop where we used to live run by Pakistani brothers, who were delightful.

As a joke, and because absolutely everyone called it that, they put up a sign saying "Paki Shop"; they were made to take it down and threatened with arrest !!!

You can call people "You fat bastard" or "Speccy four eyes", and no one seems to be bothered at all.

It's ridiculous.

[Workingman]

You have to laugh at the BBC, the most PC organisation in the UK.

It sacked a DJ in Devon because he played a 1932 version of "The Sun has got his hat on", which, unknown to him, contained a naughty word. One member of the professionally offended brigade in the audience rang in and complained and that was that.

The story broke in the press and the BBC was getting a rough ride, so it felt that it had to make a statement.....

Today its website caries the news that the BBC handled the issue badly and that the DJ has been offered his job back, but in defence of its original position it printed this:

The second verse of the song, recorded by the UK dance band Ambrose and his Orchestra, features the line: "He's been tanning [n-word] out in Timbuktu, now he's coming back to do the same to you."

If you didn't know what the naughty word, was you do now.

I bet hat there are millions of us out there who know:

The sun has got his hat on
Hip hip hip hooray
The sun has got his hat on and is coming out to play

and not a word more: not one. Well, thanks to the PC BBC we do now, and every time we hear the tune from now on that naughty word will stick.

Talk about unintended consequences.

[pederito1]

I suppose it is alright to have the naughty "n" word in recordings like they recently played an episode of TW3 in which Millicent Martin sang "Mississippi Mud" which contained something about them hanging from poplar trees.

[Paddypix]

Are they still allowed to screen The Dam Busters with Richard Todd as Guy Gibson? Gibson's dog was called n****r and I'm sure it was on TV not all that long ago and it wasn't edited out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgePEO7GUtE

I think I'll take offence and sur Youtube for as much as I can get. Nowadays I fully accept that it would be extremely offensive to call a dog by that name but to impose current conventions on historical ones is just pointless and silly, like pressuring a present day POTUS to apologise for nineteenth century slavery.

[Suff]

I'm sure that until someone has managed to spin our great victory in WW2 into some antagonistic aggression over the "not so bad" Germans; then our WW2 stories like the Dam Busters can be aired even if they have the odd offensive word. The "professionally offended" brigade have a harder time attacking our stories of great victories then they will attacking, for instance, Mark Twain books. Of course once they have managed to change the history of WW2, then all bets are off....

It must be quite profitable, this taking offense then being paid obscene sums of money to "smooth the ruffled feathers"......

We need a few million indigenous people in the UK to take out a class action lawsuit against the government for applying racists laws against the White, indigenous, majority.... Sort of Apartheid against Whites. After all, having quota's for minority positions in government and policing, having quota's for minority positions in civilian jobs is just that, isn't it? Apartheid by any other name? OK we get to go to the same shops and the same cinema's/restaurants, but how long will it be before those start being closed to the oppressed?

I mean if they only paid in £10, that should fund it perfectly.....

Should cause a nice little legal crisis in the UK.