Blood of patriots

Post Reply New Topic

I think you can go ahead and cross him off the science and logic list.

Obviously though, being agnostic or atheist does not make you a moral person, just as adopting a particular religion does not make you a moral person. I have my own morality, which is likely much closer to yours than his.

@ Zerooftheday

Now I know what you are on about.

Quotes save a lot of confusion

Yeah, I'm not 100% on how all formatting works on this board, or how to quote bits of several pages of posts.

Should have made it more specific, but I was pretty much in shock.

If I'm going to multi-quote, which is a word I just made up to describe what you're talking about, I open the reply window in a new tab. Then it's copy-paste time.

Hit the quote button to open the quote tag, paste in the text, and hit the quote button again to close the quote tag. The quote button is....




...right there.

This is not to defend ruveyn nor endorse any of his somewhat insane bloodthirsty policies but he and I are roughly of then same generation and his racial terminology was common language during and after WWII so he may not be as sensitive as people today to the acceptable language. Racism has always played a large part in US history and it is still very evident in many quarters. Many of my good friends were and are from all racial varieties and I had close friendly relationships with people originally from Japan and Germany even during WWII and still do today. I learned to fly a plane from a black instructor in the late 1940's well before black people gained some of the acceptance they have today (and I don't by any means think it is complete). Probably a good deal of his free use of terms now considered insulting are mere insensitivity and bad habit rather than deep racialism.

Insensitivity and schadenfreude are two of my hobbies.

ruveyn

To my eyes they are rather nasty hobbies but better that than they become professions.

While that may be true, it's no excuse (just a really bad euphemism). You can change. Racism, even in the "cute old person racism" sort of way is still racism. So stop.

Generally, history should be ignored unless we are making an empirical claim, and even there it ought to be used carefully and with discretion in the context of a well reasoned argument. Using an analogy for moral weight is a fallacy of wrong direction. Using the analogy emotionally is poor form.

I frankly don't care what Godwin actually thought, because the term Reductio ad Hitlerum has been in use (with a connotation of ridicule) for upwards of 50 years. I will use that in the future if it pleases you.

I beg the differ. An over used analogy is bereft of credibility and adds nothing that could not be accomplished better by other means. There are analogies which have the potential to shed new light on an issue, there are analogies which provoke new and interesting thoughts among one's readers. And then there are Nazi analogies.


On the subject of the word "Jap"...

I have met older individuals who bear no great animosity to the people of Japan who still use this term, and I am inclined to agree with the above.

It is very simple. The Japanese who lived in Japan and its territories -at that time- (circa 1940) were called Japs or Nips.

The Japanese of today are called Japanese.

One shot or bombed Japs and Nips. One has diplomatic relations or business relations with the Japanese.

Get it?

ruveyn

I stand corrected.

No, they are the same people.

I understand the whole "we have to dehumanize our enemies by enforcing racial stereotypes and applying racial slurs" thing. It's not right, is what I'm saying.

It is irrelevant that the word was considered mainstream 60 some years ago. What is relevant is that you choose to use the term today, when there is absolutely no reason to. If your goal was to have lofty ideas and possibly change minds, you must recognize how using this language hurts you. If your goal was to offend people, or be risque, I don't get that.

Well, I get risque a bit, but at least with some creativity.

The are the same people in the biological sense, but not in the political or cultural sense.

Japanese politics and society were completely reformed after their defeat in 1945.

1. The Emperor ceased to be a god, by his own declaration.
2. The Japanese Parliement renounced war and conquest, and still does to this day.
3. Japan (at gunpoint) adopted a constitution the recognizes the rule of law and the rights of people.

The Japan the emerged from the War renounced War and set out on the path of peaceful production and trade. In doing so they, at times, ate our lunch in the market place. Japanese automobiles are better than anything the Big Three Make or have made since 1950.

In a wayh the outcome of the War destroyed the Japan that raped and used China as their footstool and labor pool. A new Japan arose from the ashes. And I call the members of this new Japan, Japanese, not Japs or Nips.

ruveyn

I absolutely understand the historical differences. I'm aware that the Japan of the past had elements that both of us would disagree with.

However, that is still no justification for using this term. I'm not saying you should absolutely never say it, but it should only be in the context of "racial slurs used against the Japanese during WWII included 'jap' and 'nip'", or in some other factual sense.

I see no reason why you can't just refer to the Japanese, both during the war and after the war, as Japanese. It takes absolutely nothing away from the content of your historical contrasting.

I will tell you why. Some Jap bastards killed one of my uncles in the Pacific. That is why. Those sneaky beggars bombed Pearl Harbor without warning and slew nearly 3000 of my countrymen, that is why. I will always think of the Japanese that lived at that time as Jap Bastard Nips. My only regret is the more of them were not killed. If we had killed the whole lot of them I would not have shed a single tear.

I hold my grudges very close.

ruveyn

Last edited by ruveyn on 30 Mar 2009, 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

There are some things, as horrible as they are, that you should just let go. It is your way of thinking that represents why human history is composed of never-ending conflict. Humans need to learn to move on and try and build a better world for everyone.