> On Jul 21, 2020, at 11:14 PM, Eric Broch <ebr...@whitehorsetc.com> wrote:
>
> We're not the ones melting because someone said, "blacklist," its people like
> you.
>
>
> On 7/21/2020 8:48 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 21, 2020, at 9:25 PM, Loren Wilton <lwil...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> For better or worse, we are at an inflection point in society where
>>>> society as a whole is deliberating the meaning and / or use of the terms
>>>> "white" and "black".
>>> I do strongly wonder whether this is "society" or only "people in the USA".
>>> It should be noted that historically bkacks were enslaved just as little or
>>> much as any other race in other countries, and I don't see those contries
>>> bending over to appease blacks because the Romans and Greeks would enslave
>>> them (as well as anyone else).
>>>
>>> You note that "gay" has a different meaning today. As far as I know, the
>>> words "black" and "white" were not systematically used to refer to skin
>>> colors before about 1963, when a movement was set afoot in the USA to
>>> replace "negro" with "black" and "caucasian" with "white".
>>>
>>> Yes, reference was made to skin colors before, and the English "negro" is
>>> obviously the same word as the Spanish "negro", but in that case, it is
>>> merely the name of a color. So the USA in the 1960s made the decision to
>>> take a word from a non-Latin root and apply that color as a substitute for
>>> a Latin word that denoted a race.
>>>
>>> It therefore bothers me somewhat that we are now using this post-1963
>>> renaming to condem terms like "blacklist" and "blackball" that have existed
>>> for over 2000 years, and "black sheep", which has doubtless existed in
>>> Egyptian for another 6000 years before that, as being racist and somehow
>>> denegrating African Americans specifically.
>> Oh my god, you snowflakes, please just get over yourselves.
>>
>> You are a loud, pedantic, solipsistic minority that is just unwilling to
>> either a) accept this change and move on b) switch to software that doesn’t
>> upend your tiny little worldview c) fork it and take this discussion to your
>> fork’s technical list.
>>
>> Please, there must be somewhere else you can discuss this issue. There’s
>> only like 4 of you, you can do this with a cc: list.
And top-posting too - solipsists can’t help it.
