Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to Whom do you hate?
Gome
LOL!
posted by
ariel70
on January 3, 2007 at 3:38 PM
| link to this | reply
ariel70 - it sounds a lot like the self defense course being taught by the
Monty Python crew.
During the early 70's kung fu craze they did a skit about a self defence technique called "Lap Goche" (if I recall). The basic premise was that the best means of self defence was to attack someone before the thought of attacking you had even entered their mind. . . hating everyone is fair, at least no one can claim that they are being discriminated against.
posted by
gomedome
on January 3, 2007 at 3:33 PM
| link to this | reply
Gome
It's much easier to hate everyone on sight ; saves a lot of hassle.
posted by
ariel70
on January 3, 2007 at 3:21 PM
| link to this | reply
arGee - I know who Jackson and Sharpton are but in Canada their minor
influence is solely due to their respective celebrity status.
Like how can someone not know who they are? . . they seem to show up on TV in the news every week. The dynamics of racial inequity are also decidedly different in Canada, our African American community is very small in comparison to all other ethnic or visible minorities, there are actually more black folks that have immigrated in recent years from the Carribean islands than there are those who are descendents of North American slaves in Canada. Where these peoples ultimately all were forcibly migrated to this hemisphere as slaves in past centuries, there is a different attitude amongst those who immigrate of their own free will to another country. Though many of the same racial undertones still exist. These problems seem to be inherent amongst humans everywhere.
posted by
gomedome
on January 3, 2007 at 1:13 PM
| link to this | reply
I like calling a spade a spade, Gome...
If a word is widely understood, is not designed to offend, and clearly communicates, then I like it. I often rile against silly, unnecessary political correctness in speech and manner. Typically, Indians down here who have not been poisoned by liberal correct-speak insist on being called Indian. It's actually a matter of pride.
Jackson and Sharpton are black "Ministers" who always seem to show up in any situation where they can effectively play the "race card," whether or not it is appropriate. A Google search will tell you more than you wanted to know.
posted by
arGee
on January 3, 2007 at 12:15 PM
| link to this | reply
Do you know Larry Elder, Talion?
Here is a link to his site. Larry calls himself a "Republitarian." He is a black attorney/talk show host who has a large following among "right thinking people" here in the Los Angeles area, and across the nation.
You and he may have things in common that matter. Check him out.
posted by
arGee
on January 3, 2007 at 12:10 PM
| link to this | reply
gomedome
There's definitely that feeling. The whole us versus them thing resurfaces often. You should hear some of the things said when no white people are around.
One of the reasons it's relatively easy (for someone my age at least) to not outright hate the KKK is because I never encounter them. Not once in my life have I seen an identifiable Klansman in person. I met an ex Klansman once, but that's about it. They're like whales. I know they exist. I've read about them in books and seen the pictures, but I've never laid eyes on one personally.
posted by
Talion
on January 3, 2007 at 11:55 AM
| link to this | reply
arGee - "extremists" more or less encompasses those whom I am describing
Except that there are those who are extreme in their views who are harmless to others. Appreciate that the figures you use as examples of reverse discrimination, in Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, are foreign to me. Their influence in my country is miniscule but this is not to say that we do not have similar dynamics here in Canada. The French speaking province of Quebec perpetually tries to write into law, rules that are discriminative towards all non French speaking people.
posted by
gomedome
on January 3, 2007 at 11:48 AM
| link to this | reply
arGee - addressing your last comment - I'm torn on that one
Some of my Native American friends insist on being referred to as "Native Americans" while others insist on "Indians" as long as it is not slurred into "Injuns". Looking to official channels to determine what is proper doesn't help much either. I have an associate that works for the: "The Southern Council of Native Americans" (Southern here is relative to the North Pole) while another associate works for an outfit entitled; "The Indian Status Administration office" . . . I have found through practical application that the use of "Native Americans" is the safest route. It may demonstrate that I am just a stupid white man who is not up to date with the latest PC term but it also demonstrates an attempt at respect.
posted by
gomedome
on January 3, 2007 at 11:40 AM
| link to this | reply
cpklapper - I'm familiar with the song and ain't it the truth
But there are some values to be gleaned even from an effort that is as superficial as the song lyrics descibe. The effort itself instills a mind set that; even if we are asked to consider those of other races for only one week, there are some residual benefits from this practice. Open discriminatory practices are driven underground, while not accomplishing a cure for these societal ills, they are nonetheless removed from public domain. This idea, or the reasons why National Brotherhood Week exists in the first place, eventually mature as a prevailing societal attitude over time.. . the unfortunate truth being the length of time.
posted by
gomedome
on January 3, 2007 at 11:31 AM
| link to this | reply
Wait a second, Gome...
I was born here, so I'm a "Native American." I recently attended a festival at the American Heritage Museum here in Los Angeles. The festival was put on by American Indians – and they all insisted on being called that: "Indians."
posted by
arGee
on January 3, 2007 at 11:29 AM
| link to this | reply
Talion - that surprises me a bit, I thought it was mandatory for all
African Americans to hate the KKK.
Sort of like all native Americans hating John Wayne . . cause of all the Indians he killed in the movies. Is there not a natural partisanship or a sense of inclusion when a person is a member of a community that another group has declared a hatred for?
posted by
gomedome
on January 3, 2007 at 11:23 AM
| link to this | reply
It's kind of like the guy with a headache...
Who insists on pounding his head against the wall to make it go away.
posted by
arGee
on January 3, 2007 at 11:22 AM
| link to this | reply
strat - I don't hold any contempt for anyone holding a belief in something
that is outdated, ridiculous or absurd.
My contempt for them picks up at the point where they are insistent that I suscribe to the same things based entirely on what they believe, without consideration for what I or others may believe. I am constantly amazed at how many perpetual screw ups walk the face of this planet, who are insistent that they know what is right for me and you to believe.
posted by
gomedome
on January 3, 2007 at 11:17 AM
| link to this | reply
You seem to be talking about extremists, Gome...
As objects of your hatred, but you are already equivocating – it appears – when it comes to whether or not such people are worth the effort of hating. You might want to add to your list the purveyors of reverse racism: the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons.
For myself, I reserve my most focused dislike for those who knowingly and purposefully distort facts in order to support their misbegotten agendas (there was no Holocaust; humans cause global warming; nuclear power is inherently dangerous; cloning is biologically dangerous, etc. – not the silly people who "preach the gospel," but the cynical bastards who knowingly distort scientific fact to support doctrine (religious or political).
posted by
arGee
on January 3, 2007 at 11:15 AM
| link to this | reply
Xeno-x - ignoring them is all fine and good until it is your life they mess
with.
Ultimately anyone promotng hatred for any group is doing just that. It matters not if you or I are the subject of their hatred, the simple fact remains that this globe we live on has become far too small for any person or group to promote hatred against others.
posted by
gomedome
on January 3, 2007 at 11:12 AM
| link to this | reply
Listen to "National Brotherhood Week" by Tom Lehrer
Trust me, you'll enjoy it.
posted by
cpklapper
on January 3, 2007 at 10:58 AM
| link to this | reply
gomedome
There are certainly a few individuals I've encountered over the course of my life that I hate for reasons too lengthy to mention in a comment. You can throw child molesters on the list. Serial killers like that BTK guy too, who kill randomly. I can't honestly say I hate the KKK types. I don't feel anything towards them. It's hard to explain. It's like not feeling anything for grass as it's being mowed or not feeling anything for a fly as it's being swatted. Whether they live or die or even exist is completely inconsequential. In some ways, I think this is even worse than hatred.
posted by
Talion
on January 3, 2007 at 10:48 AM
| link to this | reply
I think the right word is, in fact, contempt.
There's a difference. I have an awful lot of contempt for an awful lot of folks, most of which stems from their stupidity, close-mindedness, and blind allegiance to absurd dogmas of all ilks.
But I REALLY hate their leaders for perpetuating the situation.
posted by
strat
on January 3, 2007 at 10:45 AM
| link to this | reply
it's "WHOM" do you hate
usually it's not groups its persons
i know of two guys who probably should have had a bullet through their heads 20 years ago seeing the damage they have wrought in the lives of others.
but I just pass it all up -- let them live their miserable lives and make others' lives miserable.
that's what life is about anyway isn't it? -- billions of people living miserable lives and making others' lives miserable -- these guys aren't that different after all are they?
posted by
Xeno-x
on January 3, 2007 at 10:33 AM
| link to this | reply