Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Let's Talk About Race

By Lovell Estell III, LA Weekly. Posted May 19, 2005.


It's the ultimate epithet. But by blindly attacking people who use the 'N-word' -- like a recently resigned college baseball coach -- are the P.C. police actually accomplishing anything?

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Lovell Estell III

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The resignation of University of Oklahoma baseball coach Larry Cochell for using a racial epithet to describe a black ballplayer places the 65-year-old white coach in an infamous pantheon of sports notables who've choked on their own shoe leather.

Who can forget the great Paul Hornung, who recently said that Notre Dame should lower its standards to snag more black ballplayers? Not that plenty of big-time college programs haven't done exactly that. Or the avuncular Al Campanis, proclaiming on "Nightline" in 1987 that blacks "lack the necessities to be managers or general managers in baseball." All from a man who supposedly was a good friend of the great Jackie Robinson, and who signed many black players. And the venerable pontifex-maximus of Las Vegas oddsmakers, Jimmy "the Greek" Snyder, forthrightly stating -- again on TV -- that "blacks were bred to be better athletes than whites."

Now comes Cochell, who, in an interview with ESPN's Gary Thorne and Kyle Peterson, paid a left-handed compliment to freshman outfielder Joe Dunigan III: "There are honkies and white people and there are niggers and black people. There's no nigger in him."

Many black ballplayers came to Cochell's defense, including the father of the ballplayer he spoke about. But it didn't save Cochell from public opprobrium, and, like Snyder and Campanis, a speedy exile to oblivion.

But let's hang on a minute here. The hypocrisy in America is monumental between what is allowed by our rules of civic discourse and what some white people say when they think the microphones are turned off -- the harsh language of boardrooms, barrooms, even dinner conversations. The same palaver is bruited about quite freely, without fear of exposure by the P.C. police. Let's not get self-righteous. Let's talk about race -- openly, and without getting down on someone with a loose mouth like Cochell's.

It's been called "the most vile of epithet," "the ultimate insult," a word so terrible that it's now standard practice to refer to it as the "N word." I realize that I'm going out on a limb here, but I don't think that any of the above are true. I can think of more lacerating insults than being called a nigger. Maybe it's because most of the people who have called me one haven't been white folks. They've been blacks, and over the years, I've developed a thick skin to such quasi-insults from both whites and blacks.

Cochell is not a card-carrying member of the Ku Klux Klan; I don't believe that he has ever mistreated any of his black ballplayers. Just because he uttered this moth-eaten slur doesn't make him a bigot. At most, he is guilty of bad judgment, and grandiose stupidity. Wouldn't Cochell and the black folks he offended be better served if the coach had called a team meeting with the aggrieved parties and explained himself, offered a needed apology and been allowed to resume his career? Some meaningful dialogue might have taken place.

Honest dialogue is where it starts. It's become standard practice by the praetorians of P.C. to pillory anyone who says something offensive or off-color. But that doesn't do a damn thing to change the feelings or attitudes of the offending party. Nada. White people who refer to blacks as niggers in polite company are legion. And then there are white folks who are generally turned off by it. Instead of raking some white person over the coals because of his bad choice of words, I propose simply ignoring him. I'm calling on my black brothers and sisters to rise above the "vile epithet" and realize that the problem rests not in us but those who feel it necessary to try to demean us.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Lovell Estell III is a research coordinator at LA Weekly.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Huck & "Nigger Jim"
Posted by: dennyduke@earthlink.net on May 19, 2005 2:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am reminded of a furor about use of this and other terms pejorative of Blacks in Twain's classic Huckleberry Finn. There was so much offense taken by people who otherwise didn't give a rat's ass for black people.

Under the cover of claims that it was "encouraging" the use of unacceptable language, it was plain to see the book-burners' true goal: to erase that history told so accurately by Twain. There really was a time when these things happened, people talked like this all the time. That's what the book-burners want snuffed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Huck & "Nigger Jim" Posted by: squattyroo
Excellent article and perspective.
Posted by: Pepper on May 19, 2005 4:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a great writer and thinker. I applaud his analysis. I think this whole thing is like a marriage. There are problems in any relationship and if they are not brought out to the bright light of day then they sit and fester with the end result somewhat bigger than the actual event.

Honest dialogue isn't just for this issue. Lets look at the people who have been destroyed because of an assessment made by an elected official of the power exercised by the Isreali Lobby in Washington DC. I remember clearly a Senator or Congressman from Maryland, I don't remember which, who made the observation that the Isreali lobby was way too powerful and influential in Congress and it was hurting American policy.

Immediately he was vilified. No one discussed his issue or addressed the truth or falsity of the claim, rather they attacked him as a racsist, an anti-semite, etc. I was appalled. I wanted someone to address what he said and to learn the facts of the claim either for or against and not a single commentator said one word about the "issue". Rather the entire discussion was the public villifying & destruction of this elected official. It was frustrating because to this day, I do not know which is the case so I had to make my own decision based on no evidence or objective discussion of the facts. Now I assume he was right because he was so viciously attacked.

I knew then that we were in danger of losing valuable information as citizens for making good decisions in our country. Clearly anyone who made the "wrong" statement was going to be destroyed for it and thus would remain silent rather than speak what could well be the truth. I actually began to see this as manipulation to keep the larger issues from surfacing while directing the attention to the PC issue which carried no sustantial value to our policies and politics. Good article and I vote for open dialogue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nigger
Posted by: mizj on May 19, 2005 5:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's greatly disturbing and a bit frightening when people actually attempt to defend the use of the word "nigger" (or any other racially disparaging epithet for that matter) and those who would be at best ignorant enough to have it as a part of their vocabulary and drop it as quickly as they'd drop the word "water."

What's sadder and even more worrisome is the length people will go to in order to make this word acceptable. Can we please understand that this is a word with possibly the ugliest, vilest history and use of any word in the English language? Can we understand also that wishing this word would disappear from people's hearts, minds, and mouths is not a "PC thing" but a respect and regard for the tragic history and beginnings of an entire race of people in this country thing? Mark Twain's characters used the word "nigger" to reflect what was (and sadly, still is apparently) a common practice among whites, especially southern and rural whites, and anyone who doesn't understand that is being willfully obtuse. But to stretch that and say that the word is so common that it should simply be embraced and absorbed into the mainstream vernacular is beyond outrageous.

In my view, no one is except from the use of this word. That many blacks themselves use the word is no excuse and is an extremely piss-poor argument for acceptance. In fact, as an educator I am especially dismayed at the frequency and ease with wich many of my students, the majority of them African-American like myself, use this word in a supposedly bantering, friendly-fire kind of way. Folks, this word is disgusting, hateful, hurtful, and comes out of an extremely ugly and painful period in our collective past. Pure and simple. There just are no two ways about it. And while those who use the word may not all be inherently racist or evil or even bigoted, absolutely anyone who uses it is at the very least blindly ignorant and perpetuating, not helping, the terrible issue of race prejudice that we as a nation are still, all these many, many years after slavery, laboring under.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nigger Posted by: ealyb
» RE: Nigger Posted by: lavachickie
» RE: Nigger Posted by: Kym525
» Pure and Simple Posted by: mizj
» RE: Nigger Posted by: twerquie
» RE: Nigger Posted by: spyderbaby
» RE: Nigger Posted by: apodapa
» Hmmm. . . Posted by: mizj
WHAT THE...?
Posted by: LMNOP on May 19, 2005 6:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Still, despite these costs, there is much to be gained by allowing people to yank nigger away from white supremacists, to subvert its ugliest denotation, and to convert the 'N word' ... from a negative into positive appellation."

Please explain to me how saying, "…there are niggers and black people. There's no nigger in him" makes the word nigger a positive.

It is impossible for anyone not black to use that word to describe another person without denigrating and hurting that person. The word is always derogatory when applied to an actual person except when used ironically by an African-American in reference to himself or a friend.

I’ll call someone an asshole or a motherfucker. But I never refer to a person as a nigger, a cunt, a kike, a gook, a towel head or any other epithet that castigates someone for an accident of birth. I'll use those words in the abstract as I just did, but only as words, not as names.

I am embarrassed to even think about somebody as a nigger, let alone say it out loud. The difference is that ‘asshole’ doesn’t denigrate anyone but the asshole. And the asshole doesn’t have to be an asshole. Nigger denigrates all black people and is not a personality defect.

Yes, let’s talk about racism, and let’s discuss the word nigger. But make no mistake, nigger means inferior by virtue of race when spoken by a white person. Any other response than loss of a position of authority and leadership by the offender is sure to be interpreted as tolerance for the hate historically associated with such speech.

By the way, I’m a honky, a cracker. But please don't call me that if you're not white.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WHAT THE...? Posted by: ealyb
» RE: WHAT THE...? Posted by: nickbk
» RE: WHAT THE...? Posted by: lamar
mdiehl
Posted by: mdiehl on May 19, 2005 7:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well stated points that can be applied to any PC situation. I've long abhored the fact that honest dialogue cannot occur. The speaker is often automatically labelled as racist or anti-whatever because the hearer - not listener - seemingly doesn't want to work out a solution and improve the situation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm all for middle ground, gray area
Posted by: mviscid on May 19, 2005 7:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And I think that's what the author is trying to get across. As a Mexican American, the term "wetback" has been thrown at me by Anglos more times than I'd like to recall. But at the same time, my relatives and I use the term with each other when we're playing around or just being silly. I see that use as taking the word back. In that way, we're making the word ours, it no longer just belongs to the bigots.

As a writer, word play is something I enjoy and appreciate. Playing with meaning, context and perspective is essential to elucidate the various ideas of a word. When we are able to twist negative meanings into something, anything else, I believe that's a kind of progress. Not that it isn't messy and rife with misunderstanding. I think the author here is asking readers to get outside traditional ways of considering these ideas. The more we broaden our perspective, the more possibilities we allow ourselves for understanding.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

FO' SHIZZLE MY NIZZLE
Posted by: spookywhite on May 19, 2005 7:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An interesting article-thank you for your commentary. I definitely don't think we need to excuse the Coach's actions. What's sad is that the player he referred to and the player's family think in their rose colored glass world, that they aren't viewed as Niggers in a larger context or then maybe they might those types of negroes who don't want to rock the boat because homeboy's future $$$earning potential$$$ as a pro ballplayer might be affected-just tow the line-play it Jim Crow remix style...if anything those comments also illustrate a severe class issue that cuts across colorlines but is especially poignant to black people. Comedian Chris Rock let the cat out of the bag about the blacks and niggas awhile back...but it's true we all have our own personal "nigga in the bag" but it's all about who is defining it. Coach is on a show with other white folks-would he have said the same thing if there were other blacks around? Why is it that all these racial sports gaffes happen always amongst the white boys? Then folks wanna act all self righetous and indignant in castigating their fellow brethern. Also too, it doesn't help that Hip-Hop music has played a hand in making it "seem" cool and culturally revelant to use the N-word. I wish your article would of discussed that dictomy as well. We talk about race til we're blueblack, red in the face but it's ingrained in our social fabric and until this fabric is resewn, it is never gonna go away and a lot of that has to deal with the issues of white privledge and supremacy that is in this society. NOT EVERY WHITE PERSON IS A RACIST , SOME OF MY DEAR FRIENDS ARE WHITE BUT there has to be an awareness of this white privledge one is born into- whether you like it or not, it permeates our culture and as a Black people, we must do our own collective cleansing of the vileness that has been internalized by us as a result of this. The more we discuss it, the more we miscegenate between all races, then race will become less virulent over time...just some thoughts my niggas! PEACE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Buck
Posted by: Sherman1970 on May 19, 2005 7:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I thought it was a fairly well written article, but lacks any perspective on race relations here at the University of Oklahoma, and in Oklahoma in general. Being a current resident I can tell you with no embellishment at all that not only is the "N-word" used in polite, white folks company, but is used on a regular basis by members of the student body here on campus. In Norman, OK blacks are pretty much relegated to living on the "poor" side of town and even though there are quite a few African and African American students at O.U. they don't get too far from campus due to the general feeling of not being welcome in this town. The author forgets that this is an area of only 3 million and mostly made up of whites. Minorities, be they African American, Latino, Asian, or Native American are still expected to know their places and not to be seen in certain places. Unless, of course, you are an athelete, and then the only rule that applies is don't be caught in specific neighborhoods at certain hours of the night.

I would ask the author to come to this state, look around, spend some time here, and then tell me if he still has such a rosy outlook on the use of the "N-word". In this state there are a number of all African American townships which have existed even before the Tulsa Race Riots of the 1920's. I lived near at least four of them as a child and came to realize these folks weren't just living there to be close to one another, but more for security and a feeling of being safe from the white communities. Oklahoma isn't all bad, but racism has never been addressed in any meaningful way in this state, and I am afraid, by the looks of recent events, that it won't be any time soon. Change will happen with a free and open exchange of ideas, but in a state that prides itself on it's ignorance I can't say I hold out too much hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Buck Posted by: juliewine
» RE: Buck Posted by: dlf
Never Acceptable
Posted by: the qsq on May 19, 2005 8:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The writer of this article is sadly mistaken to think it's OK to use the N-word. It's never OK or acceptable to use that word under any circumstances, especially by Black people. If it's going to be used, let its use remain with racist, prejudice, White supremacist, and ignorant others.

As a Black man, Lovell Estell III should not try to make that word acceptable through his position as a writer. That's the worst thing he can do - continue to promote that type of self-hatred. Based on the history of that word, it can not and will never turn into anything POSITIVE. Please truly learn your history before continuing to encourage and soften the blow of the N-word. Once that's done, you will view the usage of the N-word so very differently and won't be rallying for its use. How sad for this writer to try to justify the N-word!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dem Niggers
Posted by: faultroy on May 19, 2005 10:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The writer of this article is taking the first taciturn steps in dealing with and issue that is really starting to come out from
some very dark shadows.
This coach made a comment about a player in a way the player understood. The only racism about the coach's situation is the fact that the players he worked with, sweat with obsessed with and loved with didn't treat him as an equal.
Even these blacks that knew him and knew he didn't have a racist bone in his body didn't have the courage to come out and say this publicly--now that is racist.
Blacks are the most racist group I have ever met. Every interaction with any other race is in terms of race--even with other minorities.
Black writers are the biggest racists of all--everything they write about is in terms of race.
An old black man I once spoke to said to me: "Dem stupid
Niggers, you can take their children, keep em uneducated, keep em strung out on booze and crack, turn their women into whores, charge em twice for a car and more for food--
but dooonnnttt call em a Nigga! Me, you can call anything you want, just give me the money!!!!
Now he was one racist Nigger--and I love him for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dem Niggers Posted by: neosoul
» RE: Dem Niggers Posted by: diosanegra
» RE: Dem Niggers Posted by: dlf
Self-Hatred
Posted by: taritac on May 19, 2005 11:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am so sick of this "movement," led primarily by Black people, to make "nigger" an everyday word. It is nothing more than internalized hatred and a surrender to persistent racism (since we can't change racists, we might as well join 'em!) We don't see Jews gleefully adopting the term "kikes," Vietnamese calling each other "gooks," or Latinos embracing "wetback" as their moniker. Why? Because they haven't given up their self respect or respect for their ethnicity.

Lovell seriously needs to get a clue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Word Roots
Posted by: Selfed on May 19, 2005 11:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The word nigger, though dating back farther beyond empirical days of slave trade in the US, was nonetheless a word demarcated for men and women of African descent by mainstream white society. The more affluent bunch of this mainstream white society, plantation owners, distillers, textiles manufacturers, etc, gave black people another name as well. Usually their last name as a way of identifying slaves and denoting which proprietor they belonged to. For that same reason wouldn’t most people think it just as denigrating to be called by the last name of what was once a slave-holder than to be called a nigger? Perhaps the idea of denouncing your own last name is not the most pragmatic thing to do when dealing with this type of issue, or when trying to find some sort of resolution, but the idea follows a line of logic, why stop at the word nigger? Why stop at spic, and not at Hernandez?

Like anything living, language evolves to fit the current of society. To be considered “chicano” at one time was an insult for the immigrant population in the US. The word equated to calling someone a sellout or “pocho”, what more people would use today. It took a movement to reiterate the word into society as an epithet to be proud of and available for a group of people suffering from issues of identity and self to associate with. My ideas for such language are simple. Let the words evolve. Let them find their proper place in the realm of language, whether it be used in friendly fire conversation or as a racial slur. Disliking the word merely for its connotation will do little to change anything because the word exists, if you like it or not, it is there and will continue to be used. The same way that slave names and last names deriving from “conquista” have been meshed into individual lives, words like nigger and spic etc will follow suite. Let the words evolve like how people have evolved.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reply to Word Roots
Posted by: the qsq on May 19, 2005 12:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some words don't evolve because the core of its problem is just too deep -- and the history of the word "nigger" in America, including 246 years of American slavery, another 100 years of Jim Crowism, and the current state of racism that certainly continues make it too problematic too just "evolve" peacefully. Once America officially apologizes for its history of slavery -- as it did with its other issues concerning Japan and the Holocaust -- then the work can begin on the healing process for better race relations in this country. Until that happens, race and the "nigger" word will ALWAYS be a problem in America. ALWAYS!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dearest Twerquie
Posted by: mizj on May 19, 2005 2:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can I frame your reply to my post? And then can I bottle you and sell you to those who still just don't get it? While I don't blame you or any white person for the sins and ills of your forebearers, and certainly don't want you to feel, as you state, personally "guilt ridden" and responsible, I cannot thank you enough for being willing to do the dirty, bloody work of ripping open your heart and soul and taking a long, deep look inside. We should all be so willing to do this. Some of us are. Others of us never will be.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

onearth
Posted by: onearth on May 19, 2005 5:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It isn't this-word or that-word or even the "N"-word that is the real problem. The real problem is our uncanny ability to objectify another human being to the point that they are no longer viewed as the valid blood relative that they/we all are.

We are all living breathing and feeling people. Ninety-nine.nine percent of our genetics are the same. Whether we care to admit it or not, We need each other to exist. Ideas may vary, beliefs may vary, gender, color, size, shape, or orientation may vary, but we simply are not inferior to one another. You are a perfect you, I am a perfect me. Perfect as made by God.

Differences are not a rationale for objectifying someone, or any other living beings for that matter. Being remote enough to objectify someone or some"thing" out of existence is the domain of sociopaths; an estimated one in twenty-five of us with a heartline disconnect; unconscious; unempathetic; and not to be emulated!

It may be a human characteristic to objectify, but it isn't our healthiest option. Want examples?

Those who look at the earth and don't see a living breathing planet, are missing a basic understanding. They pilfer at will, chop it up into parcels, dismember it for personal gain, and claim more than their share.

Likewise for those who don't, or won't, recognize other cultures as being as valid and imperfect as their own. Their disconnect allows them to pilfer, commit genocide, destroy all the good with their actions against their perceived bad "other".

The words we use to express our views of others in relation to ourselves DO matter. And who exactly died and made you the judge??? The "N"-word, or any other term that objectifies, is fine for you to use to describe yourself, but please, don't think any of us gave you our consent for you to use those words to describe us. Just ask us, we'll share with you who we think we are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RACISM IS AN ARGUMENT FOR EVOLUTION
Posted by: LMNOP on May 19, 2005 5:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Warning: fundamentalists and conservatives should skip this post or be prepared to go ballistic.

The existence of racism is an argument for the evolution of man over the creationist dogma. In animals with simpler brains, analysis and justice are not possible. Survival is based on a natural inclination to be with one’s own kind and to avoid the others. Ducklings that are willing to consort with snakes won’t grow up to become ducks. It's a simple strategy for a simple thought process. Xenophobia in the beasts is appropriate.

We still possess the vestiges of this survival instinct, but in man we call it racism or some other form of inappropriate prejudice. Our xenophobia no longer serves its original constructive purpose. It is destructive and has no place in evolved cultures.

From an evolutionary standpoint, vestigial xenophobia is understandable. With time, it will continue to fade as it has already done until it is extinguished. From the perspective of religion, racism is nothing but pure evil and belies the existence of a loving Creator or that we were created in His image.

Further evidence exists that evolution is associated with reduced xenophobia. Racism manifests most strongly in the least educated and the least culturally evolved among us. Like conservatism and fundamentalism, racism is seen more so among the undereducated and the unsophisticated elements of society. That is why city dwellers are more likely to be unprejudiced, liberal and secular than their country cousins. That is why liberals collect where creative people, intellectuals and sophisticates collect: on the coasts, around the great lakes, in the universities, and in the arts.

I realize that this is inflammatory to conservatives, bigots and the denizens of the red states. Of course they object to being so described, and I am anticipating angry objections to this post. But it doesn’t make it less true just because it is unflattering to some. In fact, this will anger them precisely because they recognize the validity of such a description. If I were to accuse them of something truly ridiculous and unbelievable, such as being aliens from space, they would laugh instead of get angry.

There is no reason to believe that a loving Creator built us this way, especially if we are to believe that we are made in His image. That wouldn't be a very intelligent design, now, would it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

niggah
Posted by: jiveturkey on May 20, 2005 1:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like it or not words "evolve" even words with mean, angry, evil origins.

In contemp america are the phrases "hey nigger, what are you doing?" diff from "what up my niggah?"
do tone and context alter how speech is perceived? and can people please stop referring to the word nigger as the "n-word", in order to discuss something we can't tiptoe around the subject were talking about!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No context Posted by: mizj
Promoting honest dialogue
Posted by: hagwind on May 20, 2005 5:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you so much for this article. I don't believe for a minute that Lovell Estell III is trying to rehabilitate the word "nigger," or any other insulting word. The crux of his essay is here:
"Honest dialogue is where it starts. It's become standard practice by the praetorians of P.C. to pillory anyone who says something offensive or off-color. But that doesn't do a damn thing to change the feelings or attitudes of the offending party."
It also, as at least one respondent above has pointed out, doesn't do anything to further the discussion. People, if you move in mixed circles -- "mixed" by any criterion -- you're going to hear things you don't like, don't agree with, and don't understand. If you want to organize and catalyze change, you have to move in mixed circles. In a great 1981 speech (reprinted in _Home Girls: A Black Feminist Anthology,_ edited by Barbara Smith, published by Kitchen Table Press in 1983), Bernice Johnson Reagon made the distinction between a coalition and a home: home is where you can let it down and be comfortable, home is where you recharge, but "Coalition work is not work done in your home. Coalition work has to be done in the streets. And it is some of the most dangerous work you can do. And you shouldn't look for comfort. . . . You don't get fed a lot in a coalition. In a coalition you have to give, and it is different from your home. You can't stay there all the time."

If you're going to work in coalition (and how are we going to expand the base of the Democratic Party otherwise??), you've got to disconnect the hot buttons. Don't make a fetish of this word or that word, this concept or that concept. You don't know everything worth knowing about a person because they say "nigger" or identify as an evangelical Christian or come from a "red state" or oppose unlimited right to abortion.

Thanks again, Mr. Estell. Your essay is a keeper, and I think I'll be referring to and quoting it often.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My Word
Posted by: RoguebotV on May 20, 2005 11:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Niggardly, a Niggard,
"He was a niggardly man who did not take care of his family."
"That fellow is a niggard, did you see him lying in the gutter drunk when his fields are ready for planting?"
These are the historical uses of the word.
At what point do our current words become so elevated?
Scab, Scrub, Bleachboy, Mook, Mick, Spade, Prick,?
The social wound of Slavery has been used to change many things, look at current enuciation of simple english words in the Black culture.( Let me axe you a question)
It is in the end all about rejecting the Overlords culture no matter what it may be.
Black angst allows them to mutilate our language along with a host of other demands in retribution for our ownership of their forebearers.
The reality that most Black activist are inflaming the wound to promote private desires is overlooked.
Britian has long ago set aside dispute between colors and we will have trouble until we do the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: My Word Posted by: mizj
unacceptable AND if anyone called me that word they are going to get hurt
Posted by: neosoul on May 20, 2005 5:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Totally unacceptable, Black people know not to say that word around me, and anyone else would get only one warning, I can't believe this guy is saying that word has no power. He is either dreaming or living in Bizzaroland, If anybody called me that word they better have a gun or knife or I will kick your butt or worse. I live in the south (florida)and I know excatly what a Cuban, White, or Italian means when he or she says it and you better pray that I don't hurt you or worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

READ THIS BOOK
Posted by: gailnsteve on May 21, 2005 9:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everyone who poseted comments to this should read "Race: A History of an Idea in the West." Race is a politcal notion, not a bilogical one. The idea of race was invented to justify the exercise of power of one race over another. Blame the Europeans, the ones who lived a little over 500 years ago.

Words have power and history that have to be taken into account. But I liked the author's comments about transforming a negative into a positive.

Before the idea of race was invented differences in the outward appearance of human beings were explained by environmental differences, and were thought to be politically and socially meaningless. What the inventors of the idea of race did was, after the fact, read their distorted view back into their own history in order to justify their new idea. This kind of shit happens all the time. Look at current politics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: AD THIS BOOK Posted by: Uncle Sam
Dialogue is Needed; BOSTON's Doing It.
Posted by: cyberdialog on May 21, 2005 1:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever pondered how often the call is issued for “more dialogue” around race but how seldom it takes place? Here in Boston we’ve been doing it for a year and half.

From our materials…
At the heart of the City-Wide Dialogues on Boston's Ethnic & Racial Diversity is the belief that there is no substitute for engaging each other on a personal level to increase understanding, decrease stereotyping and begin to build new trust and relationships. Racial and ethnic issues are something "everybody talks about" but few people talk about in a focused way in mixed groups where it can make a difference.

People often underestimate the value of dialogue. We believe that many who take part in our Dialogues are changed forever. They spend 10 hours in 5 sessions talking explicitly about race and ethnicity guided by careful facilitation and clear ground-rules for dialogue. This is significant – for most it's the first time they've had the opportunity to talk about it in some depth with people who don't look like them. Going forward, they can talk with people from other backgrounds – neighbors, co-workers, etc. - about tough issues. They now possess the "tool of respectful dialogue."

400 Bostonians have participated, in 28 dialogue series in Boston's 20 neighborhoods.

84% said the experience increased understanding of other's attitudes and beliefs; 97% said they would recommend this dialogue program to others; 83% said is it now very likely they would participate in other race-related community activities in their neighborhood.

Over 90 volunteer facilitators have been trained. Each group has two facilitators – one person of color and one white.

SAMPLE QUOTES:
“All my life I've been concerned about issues of race and diversity. When I first saw this mentioned in the Globe I said 'Yes, I want to be part of this."

“In these dialogues what I like and what was useful was the fact that white people were willing to discuss racism and diversity and acknowledge that it exists.”

“I learned more about people, hopes, fears, etc. and found that there's an awful lot of common ground here with people.”

“A chance to talk about race doesn't really happen in daily life, it was good to have activities and structure to focus the talk.”

For more information: www.bostondialogues.org.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Plantation Mentality in Sports
Posted by: diosanegra on May 22, 2005 9:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's face it-the audacity of white coaches and managers to use racist rhetoric smacks of their own white plantation mentality. According to their own words, blacks have a place in sports and that place is not in a position of power. They are "bred" to be good players and nothing else. Using the "n-word" is just one of the many signals given that many whites in positions of power in sports are the modern day slaveowners and overseers. While there are recognizable differences in that sports players are paid, rather handsomely, for their work, the mentality of many whites in sports as well as the hierarchy/chain of command are the latest in the evolution of plantation mentality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Your True Color Is Showing
Posted by: dlf on May 22, 2005 10:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last year I submitted something to Alternet that directly opposes what this writer has written, their response was silence. Apparently if I had written something snappy like, "call me what ya like massa," it would have been accepted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Always takes two to tangle...
Posted by: Sojourner on May 23, 2005 12:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...when it comes to words. I can get sucked into a fight, but I cannot defend that. When I give my power over to someone who wants to start a fight, I cannot deny my complicity. I am almost always free to walk away and keep my own peace.

Words are sounds. If they have power, it is because we give it to them. Any one who insults me is a fool, but I make myself into a fool if I play my part of the nasty game.

Because I was taught to play such nasty games by family and friends, it is a difficult struggle to keep my thoughts straight. No one else is responsible for what I do, at least, not since childhood.

We all need to grow up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Word are like arrows -- can the arrowheads be removed?
Posted by: Doug on May 24, 2005 7:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, as a first-time poster, I would like to say how utterly surprised I was at the quality and thoughtfulness of the comments here. I was expecting just PC diatribes. Wow!

It would be interesting to analyze why the "N-word" has become such a hot-button issue, unlike most other racial epithets. I think some of the posters above have touched on it.

A random observation: look how the Gay movement destroyed the power of the word "Queer" by appropriating it for themselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Willie Lynch Doctrine
Posted by: dlf on May 24, 2005 3:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is a link to the doctrine that was the centerpiece on how to train a black slave. Please read it and then post your thoughts on the word nigger. www.freemaninstitute.com/lynch.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Re: My Word
Posted by: morticia on May 26, 2005 10:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The word "niggard" means "an excessively close, stingy person, a miser." Despite its horribly unfortunate resemblance to a certain other word, it's actually not related at all. The root of "niggard" is "nygg," from the Swedish, meaning "stingy." The other word, as we all know, has a Spanish root meaning "black." Plenty of racist whites don't know the real meaning of the word "niggardly," and will actually use it as a racial slur, a good example of the corruption of language. So even though "niggard" and "niggardly" are actually innocent words in terms of race, the potential for painful misunderstanding is too great, and the word "stingy" can always be used as a substitute.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]