Another object lesson to drive home just what is likely to happen when the signifier (be it an arc, the graphic outline of a swirly cone, or a scribbled mark) is removed from its intentional moorings—this time provided by Oliver Willis, in a typically moronic post.
Seizing on Ed Morrisey’s use of the word “articulate” to describe Michael Steele (a Black man), Oliver Willis—who, let’s face it, has never met a white Republican he wouldn’t accuse of some degree of racism—responds
“Aw lawzy! That Michael Steele is sho nuff one of them “articulate†negroes. One of “the good onesâ€Â, you know?”
Typical Oliver stuff, sure—unlike his pudding dish, his analysis is shallow and completely devoid of substance—but his inflammatory remarks interest me less than what they structurally portend.
To wit: in the comments of Oliver’s post, “scratch” throws into sharp relief some of the things we’ve been debating here recently:
“Articulate†is in the same category as “niggardlyâ€Â…best not risk it, no matter how appropriate.
As someone who is invested in language and the dissemination of meaning—and in particular, as someone who’s been long engaged in a meta-analyses that proceeds from the thesis that how we believe language functions has practical, real-world consequences, in that our structural understanding of what constitutes a valid interpretation will necessarily find its way into policy and law and legal precedent—I find scratch’s comment absolutely chilling.
Because what he is arguing here is that, no matter what Ed meant by “articulate” (presumably, Ed intended it to mean just that, articulate, “characterized by the use of clear, expressive language”)—as a signifier, the mark comes so pre-loaded with baggage that it would have behooved Ed simply to choose another word, and in so doing, to tacitly surrender that particular word to people like Oliver who have laid claim to it. White Republicans can no longer deploy the signifier “articulate” to describe a Black person, else they are open to charges of racism, given that this particular set of marks has, in the past, been imbued with signification that, in Ed’s case, he didn’t intend.
Sadly, “scratch” offers a pragmatic response to a postmodern linguistic problem that arrives as the direct result of interpretation having been severed from the moorings of original intent and turned over to the receiver. And Oliver’s response is indicative of what happens when the ground of interpretation is surrendered to the kind of motivated relativism that results from such a linguistic perversion.
****
update: Ace unleashes.
****
update 2: Oliver describes this post as the “usual cackling” from the “cons” and accuses me of calling him racist—a charge that appears nowhere in what I wrote.
Which leads me to believe that either Oliver didn’t read the post—or else he couldn’t get through it because of all the “white” words.
For the record, though, Oliver clearly is a racist—and one who, when he’s called on it, retreats to playing the victim of an organized rightwing smear campaign.
But that’s just silly. Like Oliver. Who, as it happens, is also a racist.
****
Follow-up post here.
You think?
I once read that if you go to Ask Jeeves and type in “Is Jeeves gay?” The answer comes back “Jeeves prefers the word jovial…”
Yet it’s inherently racist, in the end, to treat all compliments as back-door slurs. Eventually saying anything good about one specific Black man will be taken to mean that the quality for praise is present in the target and absent in his fellows.
Sometimes “articulate” just means “articulate,” not “articulate contrary to our lowered expectations for guys like him.”
While I’m waiting for a few more details on Jeff’s educational background and how he can write like this (unless he answered and I missed it–very possible), I do think I actually got this one.
To put it in earthier terms, it looks like you’re raising concerns about the practice of hijacking–or, in honor of the holiday this week, pirating–language.
To carry that last analogy further, the difference between relatively legitimate use of recasting a meme away from original intent and the ridiculous theft of a term for partisan purposes like Willis has done may become something like the difference between piracy and privateering: same practice, only one has a seal of approval. Bad news all around.
The point is, we have no grounds for calling this usurpation “piracy” other than our insistence that it is such: will vs. will. And the reason for this is precisely the kinds of arguments aired in the previous thread: Ed should have known that “articulate” carries with it all sort of “meaning” beyond his intent to signify it in a certain way, and because of this, he is open to charges of deploying a term that, on some levels, is racist <io>per se.</i>
This charge however disappears when the onus is placed on the accuser to suggest that Ed’s intent was such that the racist claim is linguistically coherent.
Which is just to say that, when we focus on original intent as the locus of meaning in an interpretive paradigm, we avoid this precise kind of socially sanctioned semiotic drift.
(My background is as a fiction writer; however, I also studied theory and twice attended the School of Criticism and Theory at Cornell).
So, if I say that Ollie is inarticulate, would he take that to mean I am implying every other black man in the world is magnificently eloquent?
‘Cause, well, compared to Ollie…
Or maybe, in this case, Oliver was being an ass.
Very articulate … for a Jew.
and this is the same guy that taught me kool-aid is racist, right? seems like captain ed isn’t the one with a problem. and i don’t think you put enough emphasis on o’dubs size. (though the pudding reference was a nice touch)
This guy wants the word completely removed from the English language when it comes to Blacks.
And Murel Bailey articulated exactly what I was trying to say, but less articulatedly.
Woops. Shoulda checked first. Murel, are you Black?
Someone using the “call sign” **snatch** suggests that the word **articulate** is loaded?
There’s a heap of irony in that suggestion.
TW: are
As in are you joking?
Let me suggest that any statement that points out that a black man or woman has personal attributes of excellence, intellectual capability, cerebral talent, or dare say, is articulate, will, by definition, be found to be racist. In the world of victimization and group rights, the group members are of one, and in this world together. By making a distinction about one member of a “protected” group, the speaker is also making an unstated observation about the balance of the group–of lacking the particular attribute so pointed out.
I mean, why the hell do you think some folks trumpet diversity, as if is weren’t for the showering of a benefit due to membership in a closed shop or private club, rather than earning benefits associated with merit or excellence.
(Maybe that’ll stir things up, eh Jeff?)
Articulate?? So…that means artsy-fartsy???
Oliver, we “dunno” what you means! Jeez, what a rube! Or is that verboten also?
“snatchâ€Â
Heh. I went over there, and the guys moniker is “scratch”. Got something on your mind, Jeff?
Does this mean that I can’t call a black quarterback “smart”? What happens if I call him “dumb”?
Oy vey….
Daniel, when referring to black QBs, you can’t use the word “overrated.” This implies immediate racism.
HTH
The simple version is, “Should we allow the deconstruction of texts to allow someone to suck out and jettison the intended meaning, insert a meaning chosen by a polemically interested party, and pretend that the speaker rather than the deconstructor is responsible for the new meaning?” I say ‘no.’ If we allow this, we’re at the mercy of deconstructors who are less interested in truth than posturing and (questionable) political agendas. We also give a veto to anyone who cares to feign offense and end up, in the end, with a constricted vocabulary of words and ideas akin to the ultimate reduced NewSpeak Orwell wrote about, in which forbidden ideas were difficult – or impossible – to express for lack of their presence in a lexicon.
Lydia, naw, I ain’t Black. You can accuse me of being articulate and no one will be offended.
Oops.
Was preparing myself to assume the persona of John Bolton’s mustache. You witnessed me overtopping my levee.
Jeff, in a wild bout of seriousness (something I rarely allow mysef), is this the same thing that happened with the Goliath Grouper, which formerly was called a Jew fish?
And I’m still unconvinced the “Crescent of Embrace” is linguistic. No one would buy into “The Swastika Holocaust Memorial” even if the designer swore it was the ’lucky charm‘ version.
I got yelled at for using “rule of thumb” because, unbeknownst to me, one explanation for that phrase is it refers to the diameter of the stick with which a man could beat his wife. The stick could not exceed the diameter of the husband’s thumb.
And the person doing the yelling was a guy.
Boy, was he whipped.
Maybe Oliver can tell me where I can get some Fanta Orange Soda and some KFC.
Bumper…
In Jeff’s parlance, that begs the question:
When did you stop beating your wife?
Well I’m a middle class, white, conservative male who no one has ever accused of being articulate. I think that just reinforces Oliver’s point.
or, put another, more approachable way, Bruce Springsteen didn’t intend for ‘Born in the USA’ to become a Reagan era pro-America anthem.
But, hey, screw him.
Yeah, and the makers of the Hoola Hoop never imagined I’d be using it as a cock ring. So?
My thoughts exactly. It speaks volumes on ODub’s mindset that he sees what sure seems like a compliment to my eyes- I certainly wouldn’t mind being labeled articulate – as not only insulting, but racially charged. His view of white folk is so poisoned that he actually believes we are not capable of genuinely complimenting the speaking/writing prowess of a black person. How perverse! In fact, I see little room for doubt that his comment is a clear portrayal of his personal racist views.
Plus, y’know, he’s fat…which is a way of complimenting all those lithe, shapely, athletic types out there!
Ed did not say that Mr. Steele was articulate for a black man. But Oliver sure did.
“And Oliver’s response is indicative of what happens when the ground of interpretation is surrendered to the kind of motivated relativism that results from such a linguistic perversion.”
Jeff, you’re a terrific writer because, among other things, you think clearly but the above makes me go “Ugh”.
Okay, so I can’t carry your pencil box but still…
SMG
Uh, Jeff, that’s called a washer. It’s used as a spacer in the coupling for your garden hose.
This symbolism and resignifying discussion has gotten way out of hand, so to speak.
I can rephrase that if you’d like, Steve:
Oliver is able to accuse Ed of racism because it no longer matters that Ed didn’t mean to be racist. Instead, what matters is that someone somewhere used “articulate” as a slight against a black, which, in Oliver’s opportunistic mind, means he is allowed to bring that up as a potential motive for using the word whenever a white Republican uses it to describe a black man.
And he can do that with impugnity, because where intent no longer matters, words mean anything and everything they’ve ever meant, and we are responsible all of those potentialities.
Sharp as a marble:
I’ve tried bringing that up too, but nobody appreciates my genius. So I will appreciate yours.
I do think Captain Ed could have been more sensitive in his description of Steele. Rather than “articulate” he could have gone with “house slave”.
That apparently has the seal of approval.
There is a strategy to it all. Gather as many words to your side as possible, like playing pieces in a game of Risk. The more words you control, the more you control the debate. Without, you know, actually having to debate.
I never thought of it that way, but it makes sense.
Query: If one was loathe to use the word “articulate” to describe a black person who was, you know…..articulate. What word does Oliver think a white Republican should use?
If he is taking “ownership” of that word, what word do we get?
Not the “rule of thumb” fiasco! Feminism hijacked a good carpentry term with a hoax:
http://www.debunker.com/texts/ruleofthumb.html
See, also: Chris Rock, from whom Ollie stole this bit.
The. Irony.
We don’t get any words. It no longer matters what you say or what you mean. The listener is free to interpret what someone says in any way s/he wants and to assign motive to the speaker based upon that interpretation. Thus, as all conservatives/Republicans/whites are racists, everything they say, no matter how innocuous or well-intentioned, can be shown to be proof of that racism.
Ascribing a good quality to a member of a protected group is bad, because the implication is that the rest of the group are deficient. Ascribing a bad quality to a member is bad because it implies the other members of the group share that quality. Ignoring the group is proof that one is a racist and doesn’t care.
Let the beatings begin.
Thanks, Joan … at the time I simply laughed at him and pointed out that the suffix ‘man’ was gender neutral (really!)so that a term like ‘chairman’ is not sexist.
I tend to think of these language issues more in terms of ‘linguistic allergies’. Some people are more allergic to certain terms or phrases than other people.
The question is the degree to which other people are obligated to consider that sensitivity when choosing their words and also the responsibility that person has to disclose any relatively uncommon sensitivities.
ODubs, touting his street cred, mentions that ‘stuck on stupid’ and shows a google search. The first several pages having listings *after* General Honore made his statement. So I clicked to Page 10 and found this – excerpt.
I would point out to MilkShaka Zulu that this excerpt also came after General Honore’s remarks.
Blacks who are prepared to be self-reliant in an emergency.
My god.
What hath Bush wrought?
“I keep a flashlight, important papers, drinking water and food handy in my home at all times,†says Long. “We need to be able to survive on our own for at least several days in the event of a disaster. We can’t rely on others to help us.â€Â
For Chrissake! That’s what EVERYONE is supposed to do. It’s on the FEMA webpage…
I thought it was indicative of Oliver’s being a bigoted ass.
Inherent in the presupposition of racism in such comments is the intellectual gatekeeping which keeps up from considering the reality that an erudite and well-spoken gentleman of color might not only genuinely BE an anachronism, but something actively derided within certain black communities!
The prevelance of Eubonics and the active promotion of gutter slang and gansta “cultcha” rests in an almost militant effort of many blacks to distance “their” culture from that seen as being “white” culture , i.e.- “articulate”. Intelligent blacks who seek out higher education and succeed at gainnig erudition are seen as “sell outs” and are actively ostracised with many sub-groups (especially with inner cities).
Jumpin’ up and screamin’ “racist” and shit anytime a homey don’t say “birfday” instead of “birthday” be all about keeping the dirty little secret that in many instances you’d be hard pressed to understand an inner city black teenager without a friggin’ translator. And shit.
Perhaps Mr. Willis will advise us if the other adjectives are also verboten?
knowledgeable,
passionate,
humorous
Also, note articulate in this sentence refers to his Reaganesque communication skills – is Oliver saying Reagan was the first black president? Bubba Clinton will turn green!
Apparently in Ollieland (just south of the Big Rock Candy Mountain), “articulate” is a word to be avoided in describing a black man, but “filthy” is entirely appropriate for describing a Jewish man.
Or perhaps not, since you can’t get that post from his site anymore. (TW: airbrush)
I mention it only BECAUSE OF THE HYPOCRISY!
I think that Oliver just illustrates something that I’ve been noticing since my early twenties (many, many moons ago). There have always been people who look for the absolute worst interpretation of a word or phrase, and then pounce on that interpretation – even though it’s obvious that the speaker (or writer) meant no such thing.
I have been noticing lately that the number of people who do this is increasing at an alarming rate. I have also noticed that most of these people sit on the left side of the political spectrum. Ollie is only the latest in a long line.
This is certainly a big surprise to me, as the people on the left (for the most part) have always been noted for their hunger for truth, and strict adherence to facts (I’m trying not to laugh, here).
My best friend, who is a life-long buddy, is a brilliant and (dare I say it?) articulate man. He is also quite far to the left politically. Here are some of the things that he rests his arguments on.
The surplus was cash in the bank, and not a projection based on the last year’s GDP.
There is no way W. has a masters degree unless his daddy bought it for him.
The war in Iraq is about oil, and making Bush’s buddies rich.
Bush hates the poor, and is busily giving all of their money to his rich friends.
There is a big, but finite, pile of money somewhere that the Republicans are guarding and raiding at will so that the poor cannot get any of the “moolah”. Money is a zero sum game.
And finally, that anything a Republican says is to be interperetted with the absolute worst meaning possible.
I’ve been seeing this “appropriation of meaning” all my life, but it seems to have settled pretty heavily on the left ever since Bullshit (the law is for suckers) Bill became our president. It’s funny that Ollie has claimed ownership to “stuck on stupid”, because that’s exactly what he and the rest of the left are.
HILLARY IN ‘08
STUCK ON STUPID
Glad you caught that as well, Jeff… I commented on his site and within 15 minutes he’d deleted my post. He’s such a dork. (Oooops! Does that have racial undertones to it?)
Regards,
St Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy
Mr. Willis is just jerking on a leash to determine who is wearing a choke chain. The fact that “articulate” is now considered to be the same as “he is a credit to his race” is an example of how far the white guilt bar has moved.
I say get over it. In the world of ideas, many folks allow themselves to be intimidated by the race card. Fudge it. Fudge it in the arse. Any moderation of language (except common law vulgarity) is a surrender to the thought police.
The thought police, as Jeff implied through the links, do not believe in rights that are granted to man by something or someone superior to man.
Never give an inch to that spit. A couple millimeters is OK, but not one bloody inch.
I gather it is safe to assume that Oliver will never, never, ever be accused of being articulate here. But it won’t matter since racism is in the bile of the beholder.
Turing word: cause, ‘cause of the hypocrisy!
It’s truly astounding that for those who wear ‘victim-colored glasses’, everything is construed as hate speech—even a simple compliment. How very strange and discomforting it would be to live in such a world; much like it must feel to live with serious mental illness.
Bush Derangement Syndrome: it’s not much fun, but at least you’re certain you have all the answers.
[EVERYTHING is Bush’s fault, obviously!]
Oh, and if you are a Republican, don’t get caught calling Hispanics “Amigos”. According to the minority leader of the House, this is an unforgivable sin, to be punished by disqualification for the Supreme Court of these United States.
I’m glad we’ve got that cleared up.
Yeah, but El Jeffe, language is more resilient than you than you give it credit for, and ever has been since it’s invention. The real power is with the neologists, not the nihilists.
Language, unlike, say territory, is not so susceptible to Berlin Walls and the like…
Oliver Willis? That jerkoff is still around? I guess the Redskins winning a couple has got him strutting around like a fighting cock at the Camptown Races.
Oh. Wait. Did I just go all racsist?
Damn. Hate it when that happens.
And what’s the deal with the McRib??
Allah, you broke the “no linking to the pudgy idiot” pledge…
Funny, when Ed described Steele as “Articulate, knowledgeable, passionate, and humorous, he embodies the communication skills of a Ronald Reagan with a keen grasp of policy”, I thought he was expressing admiration. Foolish me…I guess he was really just being condescending because Steele is black.
As a totally gratuitous aside, has anyone else noticed how much more grotesquely obese Willis has become?
I just saw two white homeless guys on TV. They sleep on the beach near Galveston and knew nothing about their impending doom.
Man! If you’re white and homeless, you’re just lazy!
Willis’ reaction reminds me of the Eddie Murphy bit where he’s at the airport and a porter offers to take his bag. Murphy’s outraged statement was, “Whatsamatta?! A black man can’t have a SUITCASE?!?”
The perpetually outraged can’t help it.
Jeff’s last few posts make me wish I’d actually paid attention during my lit-crit classes, instead of writing, “Derrida sucks big green donkey dick: signify THAT” in the textbook before selling it back to the bookstore.
Ye Gods
ODubs may be ri … r…riiieeeeee….r. rrrriiiiiiii..nope, can’t say it … ODubs may not be incorrect in his initial observation.
Black Talk: Words and Phrases from the Hood to the Amen Corner (Paperback)
by Geneva Smitherman-Donaldson, Geneva Smitherman
Published 1994
–
customer review:
The Round Mound of Redound’s subsequent argument though is tango-uniform.
Which is mil-slang.
Like it or not, “articulate” has been used in the past as a codeword for “doesn’t sound black.” In the political arena, making a political statement about a political figure, the use of that word to describe a black person is a poor choice because it WILL be seized upon by the opposition, as Oliver demonstrated. It doesn’t make the speaker racist, but it does suggest at least a minor lapse in political savvy.
I claim a permanent, complete lapse in political savvy, which frees me to say pretty much whatever the fuck I please.
Apropos of nothing, I overheard a couple of conversations in the convenience store the other day that were overtly racist in the other direction. But that’s excusable, because, you know, there’s an imbalance to make up. One fellow had the audacity to suggest to the cashier that he only had to prepay because he was black. Either he’s a liar, or it was his first visit there. Another customer, a woman, suggested to the cashier that she was in fact racist for carrying out this policy on black people, whereupon the cashier explained that the policy applied equally to everyone, and furthermore her children are black, which makes the racist accusation a bit silly. The rocket scientist in question shot over her shoulder as she was leaving: “How can you have black children when you white?”
Maybe not too many brain cells firing at that particular moment; I told her I have Asian children and I’m pretty obviously not Asian; figure it out. She didn’t. Stupidity knows no race.
TW: fire in the hole!
“Aw lawzy! That Larry David is sho nuff one of them “liberal†Jews. One of “the good onesâ€Â, you know?”
Or better yet:
“Aw lawzy! That Markos Moulitsas is sho nuff one of them “liberal†whites. One of “the good onesâ€Â, you know?”
Has anyone else noticed that black Republicans tend to be much more articulate than black Democrats?
And is it racist to suggest a correlation between political affiliation and how articulate someone is?
Hey scratch-
What does black sound like?
Scratch – Oliver once called a Jew “the filthy Wolfowitz.” Is that:
a) racist
b) indicative of a lack of political acumen
c) just plain dumb
I voted for C, myself.
TallDave,
There are no black Republicans. A person may be black or Republican but can’t be both.
Ollie’s actions are intended to be a misdirect.
Chuck Schumers staffers ran a character assassination attempt on Michael Steele. The staffer’s in question obtained his credit report illegally by pretending to be him using his social security card number.
Interestingly enough, the woman who did this Katie Barge who was a co-worker of O dub at media matters.
Personally I think O-dub did this to draw off attention to his org.
Willis is a hack trying to score partisan points. capt joe is right…pulling a credit report on a black man for oppo research IS blatantly racist. But Ollie can’t call out his guilt-laden patrons for a true transgression, it could slow the flow of donuts.
Willis is a character right out of Dickens, and thus difficult to ignore.
There are those who lead the mob in order to avoid being chased by it, but a few do it for the power, perilous and fleeting, pathetically impotent, but power nonetheless, that such leadership implies but somehow never really delivers.
To become drunk on such power – that takes rare talent.
Wow. Seems like someone is channeling the spirit of S.I. Hayakawa. I understand that if you are wearing a plaid tam o’shanter, your reception improves by 100%.
MayBee…
What does black sound like?
You’ve slightly misinterpreted the words in quotes. The question should be, “What does a black person sound like?”
The answer is, it depends on who is talking. What does a Frenchman sound like, for that matter? It depends on many factors, the most important being where and from whom he learned to speak.
2 responses immediately come to mind:
1. Like it or not, scratch, “faggot” used to mean a bundle of sticks, but I wouldn’t recommend a public figure remarking that “We only have a couple more faggots to go on the fire.”
2. Would someone kindly organize a guide for all of us latently racist whiteys to tell us which “codewords” to avoid? Sure would help us out. I tried the racial slur database, but to no avail. I struggled not to be overwhelmed by its magnitude, as it lists all the phrases from the obvious to the obscure, that are insensitive to all different races (white, too, btw), but by the time I got down to the “obsolete farm equipment” entry, I gave up.
TW: “waiting”
for some folks to get a clue
(oops, is “folks” racist too?)
BoDiddly…
Interestingly, though you don’t seem to agree with my position, your first point is precisely what I myself would say on the matter. I could easily substitute what you said for my original comment. Would you call the unfortunate person who made such a statement a homophobe? Probably not. But if you were writing a speech for him, you just might strike out that phrase in the early drafts, because you understand the subtle nuances of the word “faggot.”
scratch:
OK, so what if its Steele, and what if he sounds articulate?
You are the one talking about code words. But if articulate is a code word for not sounding black…do you really mean to say it is a code word for sounding like an individual?
I’m not twisting your words. You tell me what a codeword for not sounding black means.
It is interesting that Oliver would even attempt something this stupid. In order to even try to make this claim, he has to first extract one word from the sentence in order to be able to use it in a way that was clearly NOT intended by the author. Why? To change the subject? To paint a strong ideologically opposed voice as a racist in hopes that it will silence that voice? To claim ownership over another word?
I’m betting it’s just because he’s a moron, and an ass. No way to switch the context in that sentence Odub, and it also happens to be true.
Maybee…
I don’t mean to shock you, but many white Americans are surprised and impressed when a black American speaks the same type of Enlish they do. Many of these white Americans will express their admiration for these black Americans by describing them as “articulate.” While it might be true and it might be a compliment, the unspoken meaning that goes with it says to many listeners, “He speaks well for a black person.”
Many black Americans are surprised when a white guy comes by and doesn’t take their money/invent crack to keep them down/fail to help them in times of need. They call these people “nice,” but what they really mean is nice for a white guy.
*Sigh*
That’s the whole deal, Scratch. It’s true, it’s a compliment, but we can’t say it because of the “unspoken meaning.” Why can’t we say it because of the “unspoken meaning?” Because the Oliver Willises of the world freak out over the “unspoken meaning.”
Oliver is the problem here. Not Ed, and certainly not the word “articulate.”
Arc, my post was disappeared, too. What a weasel.
How many is ‘many’ in a country of almost 300 million scratch? WTF does that have to do with the fact that Odub had to purposefully and dishonestly choose ONE positive word and then imbue it with evil intent which somehow overrides the other positive words.
Its what a stupid hack would do. Even a black one. Many stupid people would see it as reasonable.
comment, that is…
I’m flabbergasted that we’re even having this discussion. “Articulate” in my dictionary is defined as “Capable of, speaking in, or characterized by clear expressive language.”
How that can be construed as a racist epithet is beyond me. Its use is gender and race-free and I’m confident I could find examples of it used thoughout history to describe people of every race, creed, and gender.
So how Ollie can claim it as ‘his’ and then take offense shows far more about Ollie than it does anything else. And to claim, as some in his comments have, that its use is redundant as applied to a politician, and thus somehow derogatory, I’d say you haven’t listened to many politicians, have you? They’re mostly blessed with a gift for blather which is not the same thing at all—an overabundance of meaningless noise to cover how little they actually know about a given subject.
“Articulate” is a compliment and I’m not willing to give up this word to any stupid or racist definitions. In other words, Oliver, I refute you and don’t accept your re-defining this word to mean anything other than what it has always meant.
And in Britain, fag is slang for cigarette.
Gay used to mean happy.
Somewhere along the way, obese women became (at least to themselves) BBWs.
It seems to me that if someone is trying to change the way we speak our languange, it’s almost a certain bet that they’re a member of some ideologic group that wants to change how everyone else thinks about them or their pet cause by changing the nature of the language we speak.
Ridiculous, especially if someone like ODub thinks he has the moral or intellectual right to determine how I”m going to use the english language.
Oliver is total defeatist material. do you have his contact info?
word.
the world is but a “stage”
Back when I was in the military (many years ago) one of the black members of our unit, apparently trying to shock me and thus reveal my racism, askled me, “What would you do if your sister married a black man?”
My answer (which was true), “She already did, great guy, we’re looking forward to kids!”
He looked at me with a puzzled look on his face and just walked away.
nobody important…
Maybe the folks offended by “articulate” would like to wrestle with the Marine Corps’ slang for a black Marine: “dark green,” as in, “He’s a dark green Marine.” It’s a term widely used by all races.
My comment also never made it out of moderation over at Oliver’s site, so I wrote a post, and of course Jeff maliciously deleted the trackbacks (kidding). This is a manual trackback.
I know it’s also not appropriate to say, “some of my best friends are black” as that indicates some level of condescension, that one would deign to allow blacks (some, perhaps the articulate ones) to be your friend.
However, my best friends were black, inasmuch as I grew up in a poor white family with alcoholic parents who always settled in poor urban areas. Most of the people who lived there were black. I never knew it was unusual for a white kid to have black friends unitl other white kids would call me “n****r-lover”. To me they were just my friends.
Comedian: Yo, check this out: black guys drive a car like this. [Leans back, as though his elbow were on the windowsill] Do, do, ch. Do-be-do, do-be-do-be-do. Yeah, but white guys, see, they drive a car like this. [Hunches forward, talks nasally] Dee-da-dee,-dee-da-dee-da-dee-da-dee.
Homer: Ah ha ha, it’s true, it’s true! We’re so lame!
Also, when I was a kid, I learned that whites weren’t allowed to have a black dog.
One night after returning from the Rialto theatre in Roslindale neighborhood of Boston, my brother, me and two friends were cutting through Franklin Park. It was dark and we were already scared. Suddenly we heard someone shout, “What are you white boys doin’ with a black dog?”
Realizing that they weren’t expecting an answer, my brother says under his breath, “When I say run, run.”
“RUN”
And off we took! Being the smallest, I couldn’t keep up with the others and I could hear the gang of black kids chasing us. I ran for the nearest fence, and in a remarkable adrenaline fueled feat, leaped onto the chain-link fence, grabbed an overhanging branch and vaulted over.
A couple of seconds later, the black kids were at the fence, swearing and shouting, “You little white m****r-f****r, we’re gonna kick your ass!”. And other such endearments. I picked up some stones and hurled them at the black kids, ran across the street and dissappeared into the neighborhood. A close call!
Calling a black articulate is racist because blacks aren’t articulate.
Did anyone notice that Filet-’O-Fish referenced the PARODY site, blackpeopleloveus.com, as an example of white guilt?
Scratch: In re. “dark green Marine”. The context of this moniker is that all Marines are green, no black, white, brown ,red or yellow. Some Marines are just darker or lighter shades of green.
This helps reduce some of the natural racial tension that can compound an otherwise high tension-testosterone fueled environment.
It’s time for you to celebrate diversity and share a Newport with a brother.
When were you in the Corp?
Horst…
I was on active duty from 1989-1999.
In my little corner of the Marine Corps (aviation,) I never saw any racial tension of any sort. Obviously it exists here and there just like in any other society.
Dang, now you made me miss it again.
Scratch, I was on active duty, Marines, also aviation (mostly I MAW, Iwakuni Japan), from 71-77. I never heard the term “dark green”, but there was some – mostly minor, and probably less than in society in general – racial tension.
The last of the draftees were getting out then. The military in general was recovering from Vietnam and trying to deal with the druggies and the losers they had taken in during Vietnam. God help us if we ever go to war with draftees again.
I have witnessed some Black Marines get shafted by the UCMJ (one got a harsher sentence for drug posession than the white Marines selling it.) I’ve also got to say that most of the violent crimes were committed by Black Marines. (Like murder of a prostitute, and anal rape involving hot sauce.) I can’t seem to work “articulate” into this paragraph, Oliver.
In the staff NCO and officer ranks, my experience was that most were truly professional and treated each other that way.
I miss the good parts, too, still.
Mark…
I did two 6-month deployments to Iwakuni. Most of the rest of my time was in Cherry Point, except for 3 years of training and a deployment to Italy.
I don’t doubt that things were very different in the seventies, both because of Vietnam and society in general. The nineties saw big, positive changes…it was a great place to live and work.
Mark and Scratch: ‘81-86 a hollywood reservist in the wing… very light-weight as the Corp goes. Racial tension was low in part due to the “we are all green” mantra. I bet that was a response to previous problems. I can still hit a pie-plate off-hand at 200m, but can’t do 20 pull ups to save my life.
Horst…
And even while active I couldn’t break a 21-minute three-mile to save my life, but I once had to have my pistol target replaced in the middle of the course of fire because there was no black left in the center. I told myself the latter would save me from the former.
frameone drools
Only interesting to the other clueless dweebs out there, frameone.
Amazing that there are creatures with powers greater than single-celled organisms who actually buy into this bullshit.
News flash, bunkie: Captain Ed is a wonderful guy, is well-educated, articulate (heh!), and has excellent control over his language system. I’ve been following his work for a year, now, have communicated (electronically) with him, and have a pretty good grasp of whence he comes.
The above-mentioned articulation (and perspicacity) is why he’s publishing articles in The Weekly Standard, and providing interviews in the national media, while you’re still wanking off to pretentious, disposable cinema, while “working on” a PhD…
Before I forget, mister “I’m working on a PhD, and my shit don’t stink:” please, for God’s sake, learn to use a spell-checker, and some freaking BASIC page formatting… You know, things like paragraphs and such.
One would expect such a master of language to display a defter touch…
Scratch,
The derogatory use of “articulate” to which you refer is a historical fact, but it is a historical fact that affects a fairly small percentage of the population; and you and Willis both grossly overestimate the responsibility of a speaker to cater to the hypersensitivities of special-interest groups (however understandable their hypersensitivity might historically be), while completely ignoring the responsibility of listeners to make any effort whatsoever to understand the speaker’s original intent. I’d go on at much more length about the responsibility of speakers and listeners, and how those responsibilities change as the intended audience gets more and more diverse, and how Willis’s complaint about the Captain’s alleged racism is as stupid as Ann Althouse’s complaint about John Roberts’s alleged sexism…but it would be a very rudely long comment. So I just blogged it.
[…] and “authenticity”; a repudiation of individualism; a willingness to invert the concept of “free speech” until it becomes state-sanctioned speech; the re-framing of “tolerance” as punitive […]
[…] intentionalism (which I’ve noted is simply the natural order of things) not just idiots like Oliver Willis or the folks at Think Progress, but also Bill Kristol, the White House, and many on the […]
[…] is doing. And I have done this when the subject was [someone other than me, as well]: Tony Snow, or Captain Ed, or Larry Summers, or Bill Bennett, and on and on and on. THAT is the way I oppose such behavior, […]
[…] to Patterico that, in allowing that it is reasonable to take offense in the first place, he is perpetuating and enabling an idea of language that puts the speaker always at the mercy of the “interpreter†— who Patterico isn’t even […]
[…] is what provides the out — just as it did with Oliver Willis and co., back when they went after Ed Morrisey for his use of the term […]