Annie-Xmas, I can think of a word that fits

“Fundamentally inferior” has no meaning if it’s not attached to some other negative attribute which is thought to be “fundamental”. It’s only after you’re ascribing some other negative aspect that you can decide that this negative aspect is fundamental. But “fundamentally inferior” can’t exist as a concept on its own.

I can buy the “inferior souls” religious part, although I don’t think it’s relevant in this particular discussion since I don’t think that’s what’s being conjured up by the term “nigger”. But “blackness itself”, no.

I don’t think a lot of in-depth, soul-searching thought is/has been put into this sort of thing by folks who throw around racial slurs (whether in their heads or in conversation). But I think a big part of American racism comes from that extra-oomph needed to justify the extreme brutality of chattel slavery beyond other contemporary forms of racism (segregation, colonialism, etc.), and rubs off on some modern racists, to the point that they instinctively and “naturally” see black people as fundamentally inferior, regardless of their behavior or any other qualities, and they don’t really know why. Just another one of those “that’s just the way it is” beliefs – men are superior to women, whites are superior to blacks, the sexual purity of women is much more important than the sexual purity of men, homosexuality is dangerous and wrong, etc.

I think when talking about people (and racism in particular) “fundamentally inferior” has a very clear meaning. I’m quite sure we’ve seen this phrase, together, on this board many, many times in other discussions, without any need to dig futher. I think a slave-owner wouldn’t have batted an eye if their neighbor had discussed the fundamental inferiority of black people, nor would a modern KKK Grand Wizard. Do you think they’d have any confusion about the concept? Would they need to talk about behaviors? If shown a black person who is clearly superior to the average white person in everything quantifiable, would they have any qualms about labeling this person as still fundamentally inferior to white people?

I’m beginning to think BigT is on to something.

Quite possibly not, but that’s because the associated behaviors and traits would be self-understood.

I’ve addressed this repeatedly.

Well that sounds like a bannable offense you’re talking about, and you’re a moderator. Take a stance here.

If being contrary was a banable offense, this would be a lonely place.

Alright, I’ll stop for now. I think I’ve made my views clear, at least. If Richard Parker gets it, then that’s good enough for me.

It was my understanding that posting things to be contrary while not believing a word of it would constitute trolling. Is this incorrect?

Yep

it’s not just being contrary, is it? It’s taking an opposing view, without saying you are doing so, for the sake of riling people up, to have an argument. What is that called again? Oh yes, trolling.

So this is the point you want to nitpick out of all that? I don’t care and have no opinion on the depth of your sincerity. It does, however, appear that you like to find small issues within a larger context, and proceed debate them beyond all real meaning. That’s “the on to something” bit that is relevant here.

Whether you are sincere, being a contrarian/Devil’s advocate, or actively trolling is a minor point. And I’m not going to play the debate it game.

I don’t know, people seem to take trolling pretty seriously around here. That includes the moderating staff, which has banned numerous people over such behavior. So it’s a bit surprising that you would consider that aspect to be a “nitpick” or “minor point”.

Other than that, I don’t care about your opinion of my posting style. (Actually FWIW, I don’t care much about that either - if I get banned I get banned. I was just curious to see if you would stand by your words or were just running your mouth.) You or anyone else can ignore my posts.

I don’t know anyone here who is doing what you are describing. For myself, I explicitly said that certain blacks would be more likely to be called nigger than other blacks.

As for your Jewish friend, would you come onto this MB and say you consider him to be a Kike although you don’t actually call him that? Because that’s what our Annie did.

Running my mouth?

Wow.

What’s to stand by? I’ve made it clear that I don’t have an opinion on your sincerity. I’m not ignoring it, but I have no opinion. I have made no conclusion as to whether or not you act this way to be a simple contrarian, you are sincere, or take it the extreme of trolling. It can’t be that challenging a concept. If that’s not standing by my words, so be it.

The behavior I do have an opinion on, which is pretty obvious regardless of your posting sincerity, is all the other stuff mentioned in that post. So yeah, the issue of your sincerity is pretty irrelevant.

But hey- way to find the tiny piece to argue and ignore the big issue!

Anyway- like I said, I’m not going to play the “nitpick it to death” game.

No it wouldn’t.

Regards,
Shodan

Probably not, because one couple will have pissed people off, and pissed off people insult others.

Here’s an additional thought experiment: A third couple comes in and behaves like the first couple. How likely are people to call them “niggers”? More likely than they were before the second couple.

Here’s an additional thought experiment: The first couple walks in. They are wearing nice, tidy, clothing. Their hair is neatly trimmed. One of them is wearing glasses. They sit at a table and politely chat with the waitstaff using “proper” English. One of them doesn’t get what they ordered. They point that out, eat their replaced food, leave a nice tip, don’t make a mess, and depart.

How likely is this couple to be called “niggers”? I bet it would be pretty fucking high. I bet it would be pretty fucking high even if no one would think twice about a white couple doing the same thing.

Because that’s how racism and bigotry work. And you’re a fucking fool if you think people earn racial slurs.

SUCH an uppity woman.

Ban the fool!

ISTM that you’re just repeating your earlier post, but at greater length. OK.

Tapatalk weirdness. Ignore.

Not quite, but fine by me.