Will these Nazis ever learn?

[Lord Nikon]

At the end of the day, any laws, guidelines etc which are intended to break down the barriers and xenophobic tendencies would have to be enforceable in both directions in order for them to have any validity and not become part of the problem themselves. It must become unacceptable for ALL people to use the N word, or to refer to people as P**is, for a black person to make slurs towards a white one exactly as it is unacceptable for someone who is white to do the same.
Just trying to highlight the fact that terms used to segregate people promote the continuation of hostile actions by inferring a separation, and that the concept of 'racism' is a double edged sword.

[Richard M]

Seen photos of this dude and he looks like a right ****.
Anyone have his DoB BTW?

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Chris

Quite right. If anything, the BNP are Neo-Nazis.

Flyboy, would you like me to alter the thread title to make it more historically correct?

No need, I think it is already historically correct, given that Bailey's Fuhrer is such a fan of the original Nazi party and its goals. The word "Nazi" is no longer solely adjective of a political party, but of a political doctrine. The BNP's aims, objectives, intentions and ambitions are almost identical to those of the parties which preceded it.

One thing that does stand out, is the probable mental state of the man who is hoping to propel the Fuhrer into parliament:

Mr Bailey, who was said by a doctor last year to have a “possible personality disorder” when he claimed that he was banned from driving because of “conspiracy against the indigenous people”, is responsible for the BNP's London campaign in the general election and borough elections

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

and yet the populace of the Earth is referred to as the Human Race, which is why I say classing subgroups based on ethnicity as 'races' is to imply a separation which does not in fact exist.

It is all within the usage of the word. Gay used to mean happy, then it became a term used to describe homosexuals, then it became an insult.

For the artificial barriers people erect based on evolutionary locations to be demolished, the acceptance of everyone into one genus is necessary, otherwise we end up with more barriers. It is not acceptable to describe one whose country of origin (not necessarily themselves, but ancestrally) is Pakistan as a P**i, (since that is now an insulting term) However it is acceptable to call one whose country of origin is Britain, a 'brit' - both are merely abbreviations of the original country name, yet one found it's meaning routed into that of an insult. I find 'race' comments to be insulting since it implies a biological difference other than that of the attributes bestowed by evolutionary conditions.

It's also called Mankind, but less than half are men.....

I think we accept we are all one species, if you wish to call that a race, that's up to you.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Chris

Quite right. If anything, the BNP are Neo-Nazis.

Flyboy, would you like me to alter the thread title to make it more historically correct?

No need, it's entirely correct.

I think the thread title is entirely correct, as I'm sure you're aware.

Nazi (nät′sē, nat′-)

adjective
designating, of, or characteristic of the German fascist political party (National Socialist German Workers' Party), founded in 1919 and abolished in 1945: under Hitler it seized control of Germany in 1933, systematically eliminated opposition, and initiated a program of nationalism, rearmament, political aggression, and racism, esp. anti-Semitism

Etymology: Ger < Nati(onalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei), party name

noun

1. a member of this party
2.
1. a supporter of this or any similar party; fascist
2. someone who thinks or acts like a Nazi

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

I am fairly sure that whilst people are being treated as second-class citizens and less than others because they are different, that they are not too fussed about the etymology involved.

Anyhoo, the Oxford English Dictionary definition of race is
which seems to differ from your definition.

I think you will find that humans are a species (Homo Sapiens Sapiens), rather than a race......

Indeed, in fact didn't the British Nazi Party challenge the definition in court to prove that the "indigenous" population of the British Isles should considered a race in its own right?

---------- Post added at 21:56 ---------- Previous post was at 21:51 ----------

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

Xenophobic, they fear that which is different to themselves and exhibit that fear in the form of antagonistic or hostile behaviour.

Fear is not automatically related to hate (unless you are Yoda). I fear death, but I don't hate it. What would be the point? Mrs Flyboy fears moths, but she does not hate them. I am sure there are many here who fear many things, but cannot find any logical reason to hate them.

[Lord Nikon]

Since when has antisemitism or xenophobia had a basis in logic?

Originally Posted by danielf

No need, it's entirely correct.

I think the thread title is entirely correct, as I'm sure you're aware.

I'm very well aware of the generic use of the term. I just thought it might be fun to play the pedants at their own game.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

and yet the populace of the Earth is referred to as the Human Race, which is why I say classing subgroups based on ethnicity as 'races' is to imply a separation which does not in fact exist.

It is all within the usage of the word. Gay used to mean happy, then it became a term used to describe homosexuals, then it became an insult.

For the artificial barriers people erect based on evolutionary locations to be demolished, the acceptance of everyone into one genus is necessary, otherwise we end up with more barriers. It is not acceptable to describe one whose country of origin (not necessarily themselves, but ancestrally) is Pakistan as a P**i, (since that is now an insulting term) However it is acceptable to call one whose country of origin is Britain, a 'brit' - both are merely abbreviations of the original country name, yet one found it's meaning routed into that of an insult. I find 'race' comments to be insulting since it implies a biological difference other than that of the attributes bestowed by evolutionary conditions.

No, the Humans of this world are biologically classified as a species, not a race. Homosapiens are taxonomically ranked below the genus of homo, which describes anthropoids. Race, as has already been referred to is below the taxonomic rank of species.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

No, the Humans of this world are biologically classified as a species, not a race. Homosapiens are taxonomically ranked below the genus of homo, which describes anthropoids. Race, as has already been referred to is below the taxonomic rank of species.

So, as such, referring to the Human Race is actually incorrect.. From a biological point of view.

---------- Post added at 23:27 ---------- Previous post was at 23:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

At the end of the day, any laws, guidelines etc which are intended to break down the barriers and xenophobic tendencies would have to be enforceable in both directions in order for them to have any validity and not become part of the problem themselves. It must become unacceptable for ALL people to use the N word, or to refer to people as P**is, for a black person to make slurs towards a white one exactly as it is unacceptable for someone who is white to do the same.
Just trying to highlight the fact that terms used to segregate people promote the continuation of hostile actions by inferring a separation, and that the concept of 'racism' is a double edged sword.

You are missing a little context. The P word you mention is an abbreviation of Pakistani. However, the fact it has been used as an insult (often with violence) means that the term is now tainted, and people consider it an insult even though it is just an abbreviation. If Brit were used as a derogatory term in the same way (even with violence) for long enough, then Brit would also be unacceptable.

The other part of the context you are missing is knowledge of any intent behind the words. Most people will happily accept names that can be quite insulting, as long as the person using them is a friend and they know no hurt is meant. For instance, when I am out with friends, we are known to use names for each other that if I heard someone else use about me, I would get angry, and if they were used on here would almost certainly result in a suspension for the member using them. Yet, because they are friends, I accept the words, as I know that no hurt is meant.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

So if I had posted this would you all be saying the same thing?Because I very nearly did..

I'd have pointed out that he is obviously a fascist, and not a member of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. I'd have done that politely as its possible to have a proper conversation/debate with you. [ADMIN EDIT - personal remarks will not be tolerated]

[Stuart]

Although it is worth noting that the terms "Nazi" and "fascist' are used interchangably by a lot of people (myself included), so lets not be pedantic about it just because we don't like the poster?