We all use labels when dealing with other people, good, bad, pleasant, unpleasant etc. It’s only when we stray into racial descriptions that we can find ourselves in a minefield of artificial politically correct terminology where words and meanings are often enough at variance with each other, even to the point where it’s ok for one group to use a descriptive noun about themselves but not for an outsider to do so.
For instance Nigger/Nigga if I were to use that word in conversation with colleagues here at work I suspect I’d be up before the boss and on my way out of employment fairly quickly, such is the way offence can be taken even by proxy. Yet in many cases it’s perfectly ok for those of that persuasion to use it amongst themselves. Same with Paki, often taken as offensive yet used by many (young) Pakistanis as part of a greeting term, yet you don’t see such a reaction to the term Brit.
Those are just 2 examples of the more “hypocritical” use and denial of words and meanings, it’s often claimed that they are reclaiming the word, yet it strikes me that they’ve only reclaimed it for themselves whilst still claiming it to be insulting if used by anyone else. For instance if a teacher or professor heard a black person call a white person cracker, they wouldn’t care (yet it’s the equivalent term to nigger for a white person in the USA), but if a white person called a black person nigger, you possibly would be arrested depending on where you did it, it’s against the law after all.
However it’s the subtleties of language selection that interest me at times, where the use of a description is to avoid an issue rather than descriptive in and of itself, take the term Asian. Often used by the MSM to characterise someone from the Indian sub continent, though certainly not a term they’d use for themselves, similarly you can take Asian to mean anyone from the Asian continent and that includes 2 billion Chinese and you’d suspect that they’d have first dibs on the term, they certainly do in the USA where the term Asian often enough means Oriental.
Yet the UK press insist on using the term Asian to describe what could be one of up to 90 different sub types depending on their roots, religion and caste. Yet we all know these days that when describing Asians in a certain way, the MSM inevitably mean Pakistani or Bangladeshi Muslims, not Bengali or Cholan Indians, not Sikhs, not Buddhists, not Brahmins, not Jains.
Andrew Goodram, 31, suffered a punctured lung and two broken ribs after the gang of four yobs shouted: “white bastard” at him before subjecting him to a vicious assault.
During the beating Mr Goodram, a labourer, was repeatedly kicked in the head, face and body. One of his attackers then stood over him and stamped on his chest causing was police described as “significant injuries.”
The assault at Queens Park in Bolton, Greater Manchester was called off when one of the thugs said they should leave and they all ran off in different directions.
Mr Goodram, a father of two managed to stagger home after the assault where he alerted relatives. He spent six days in hospital.
The incident occurred after Mr Goodram was taking a shortcut through the park when he encountered the group of four Asian men – who were with four friends.
As he walked past them one said: “what did you say you white bastard?” before launching an attack.
People however aren’t fooled and as the same story is reported in the Daily Mail the comments allowed there are quite illuminating. Though why the commenter’s can say what the problem is but the Mail and Telegraph insist on using the catch all term Asian I simply do not know, it’s fairly obvious they weren’t Sikhs or Buddhist or even Tamils.
There seems to be a deliberate cover up by use of language for certain crimes committed by a certain group in the UK, or at least an avoidance by those in authority to call a spade a spade (no pun intended) few are fooled though and instead of an honest dialogue we have the ever growing tensions amongst the majority who can see what is going on yet are denied the openings to say what they think as political correctness has closed down dialogue for them whilst leaving it wide open for the minorities.
Unless this hypocrisy ends, I foresee big trouble, you cannot oppress a majority for too long, nor deny them a voice. Words are dangerous, but not as dangerous as denying their use or meaning to hide a serious problem.