Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Rap of Nanking took place in 1937-1938, after Hilter took power in Germany (1933) made laws against jews and killing them, not on massive scale as what took place in the 1940's but all the same. Hilter spoke about the eradication of jews in his book as early as 1925..
Hitler was a complete unknown in 1925. You can stop spinning your wheels now. You know the score, and it's obvious to everyone.
Back on semi-topic, EVERY race has been guilty of committing atrocities. NONE is innocent or exempt - including whites. Now, I've said that for about the 5th time. Is that sufficient?
Hitler was a complete unknown in 1925. You can stop spinning your wheels now. You know the score, and it's obvious to everyone.
Back on semi-topic, EVERY race has been guilty of committing atrocities. NONE is innocent or exempt - including whites. Now, I've said that for about the 5th time. Is that sufficient?
Spinning of the wheels? I think not.. Hitler may have been an unknown back in 1925, but surely Japan studied up on Hilter when he quickly took hold of Germany and started to make laws against in Jews in 1933.
I'm glad you finally decided to admit that Whites aren't as innocent as you make them to be.
That is not my definition. It is the definition adopted by this country's top African American scholars. Fire away if you care to.
Not meaning to "fire away", really...just an intellectual rebuttal. Your definition is as good as any, but it's still so 'vague' I fail to see how you'd ever 'enforce' it. Both Louis Farrakhan, for example, and Colin Powell..different though they may be..are BOTH the descendants of Caribbean immigrants....yet BOTH are what most people would call 'textbook examples' of African Americans. Your definition excludes them. How would the 'average' party make such distinctions...short of knowing an individual's personal history?
Not meaning to 'pick on you' personally...I've just found ALL attempts to categorize people extremely inexact, even in the best of circumstances. Your definition of African Americans rests on how people "see themselves"....which is pretty much impossible to determine, unless one announces it.
A short time ago, on another thread, we got into a 'flap' over whether Tiger Woods "self-identifies" as black...my question then, as now, was "how do we KNOW how Mr. Woods identifies himself, unless he tells us ?....and since he has SEVERAL racial strains in his background, how should he 'identify' anyway?".....
Spinning of the wheels? I think not.. Hitler may have been an unknown back in 1925, but surely Japan studied up on Hilter when he quickly took hold of Germany and started to make laws against in Jews in 1933.
I'm glad you finally decided to admit that Whites aren't as innocent as you make them to be.
How many times do I have to say it? That was a REPEAT.
And give it up, regarding your little argument that Japan was emulating Germany. You're wrong. Flat-out wrong. Japanese Imperialism began in the late 1800s, after the Meiji Restoration. The Rape of Nanking was simply the climax. It had nothing to do with Hitler.
Not meaning to "fire away", really...just an intellectual rebuttal. Your definition is as good as any, but it's still so 'vague' I fail to see how you'd ever 'enforce' it. Both Louis Farrakhan, for example, and Colin Powell..different though they may be..are BOTH the descendants of Caribbean immigrants....yet BOTH are what most people would call 'textbook examples' of African Americans. Your definition excludes them. How would the 'average' party make such distinctions...short of knowing an individual's personal history?
No problem, thanks for responding. I actually did cover people such as Farrakhan and Powell in my definition; both men are of West Indian origin but overtly identify with the established African American culture. Therefore, they are African American. No exclusion there on my part.
Quote:
Not meaning to 'pick on you' personally...I've just found ALL attempts to categorize people extremely inexact, even in the best of circumstances.
One is either American or not. Actually, even if naturalized, one must swear to DROP all other nationalities. Like someone else said: You are either American or not.
Maybe somebody should have told that to that guy who ran for President in 1980 and identified himself as an Irishman
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Redneckistan
11,078 posts, read 15,078,355 times
Reputation: 3937
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980
Who cares? If a person wants to be called African-American, that is their prerogative... I usually just call them "Black," and that has never offended anyone, so I don't even think they care. But if I were corrected and asked to use African-American, that doesn't bother me either. I work in a heavily African-American neighborhood, and generally use that term for the purpose of being professional. But when I'm referring to my Black brother or friends, it's just too clunky to use A.A. This is mostly for census purposes anyway, and I don't think the average person is too concerned.
As for myself, I am a Ukrainian-Polish-Jewish-American, and you can call me any or all of that.
SOOOO....If stereo types held true,you would LOVE vodka,horde money,but then be to dumb to remember where you hid it.And I,as a Scots/Irishman would break into your house through the front door while you were home ,drink your vodka,find your money,fight everyone in the house and then fall down the stairs on my way out and break my own neck and then blame you for it (it's ALWAYS the jews fault for everything dontcha know) and all of this while wearing a "Dropkick Murphy's" T-shirt and a kilt with no underwear on(I mean me with the kilt,not you.YOU would have overalls on ...backwards,ya pole lak)
Last edited by Swampmonster; 01-04-2009 at 05:54 AM..
Yet there are many Arabs who live(d) in Africa. So really, an Ethiopian refugee would rightly be called an African-American.
Life gets kind of complicated when everyone is determined to tout their ethnic heritage above everything else.
I guess, this my previous simplification wasn't simple enough.
If the person can tell you that he/she is from Ethiopia then they are not African Americans, they are Ethiopians, or Ethiopian Americans or even Americans of African descent if they so chose.
African Americans are African Americans because they CAN NOT identify their country of origin, just the continent.
Why is this such a hard concept to understand, surely European Americans are brighter than this!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
