Honestly, I’d be really fine with a complete derail of the “calling Native Americans savages is cool, so long as it’s the original ones” thread at this point.
I’m are of both of those word origins.
That isn’t what I am saying, but thanks for trying.
Okay @Mister44, you’ve (puts on sunglasses) covered your ass.
4 Likes
But in context, it certainly is a racial slur, and just because it was commonly used for Africans as well doesn’t change that – in that context, it’s also a racial slur, because as in the context under discussion, it’s used to distinguish indigenous peoples from white people.
Your dodge here consists of a decontextualizing, irrelevant focus on denotative rather than connotative meanings of the word. “Savage” was (and as our merry white squatters demonstrate, still is) used to connote Indian brutality and the supposedly inherent capacity for it, and not European/European American brutality. As I’m sure you well know, a quantitative search of the uses of the term as a noun for people (and as an adverb or adjective for their actions) would show that over the past few hundred years, the term has been used far, far, FAR more often to describe the former than the latter.
Another convincing example (not that I think it would convince a white supremacy apologist like you) – let’s just imagine how long ago the Washington football team would have changed its name had it been the Savages instead of what it is. Yes, a long time ago, because “savage” in reference to an Indian is an even worse racial slur than “redskin.”
Maybe not in your mind. Maybe. At any rate, how close for you does this “weight” have to be?
10 Likes
Is this relating back to the dildos thing?
5 Likes
Well, let’s just say there are a LOT of uses for those things. I sure as hell wouldn’t sweep (nor throw) a bunch of free ones off the table.
4 Likes
And hence, my aversion to the word hysteria.
5 Likes
I think there are some things you are probably not understanding about archaeology.
0%
I mostly agree with most of what you say in this thread but about this here: what the actual fuck?
5 Likes
Given that the most well funded archeology tends to be “salvage archeology”, possibly not.
1 Like
Made my day 
1 Like
Good News Everyone!
The Bundys have reinforcements!
7 Likes
Maybe the plan is to lure ALL of these assclowns into one place, then nuke it from orbit?
One reserve for all of them? Good deal?
7 Likes
Alternatively, does Mars One still need candidates?
Could we send these rootin-tootin self-reliant freedom loving patriots off to go liberate Mars?
6 Likes
Hume showed there can be no empirical evidence for an ethical statement.
3 Likes
Even if I take Hume’s word for it (I will definitely read that link later, thanks!), it really doesn’t even need to be an ethical statement. What I mean is that the social phenomenon of perceived human exceptionism is a result of human’s own demonstrable cognitive bias. Not that it is ethically wrong or right.
3 Likes
It’s a complicated topic, and I certainly didn’t do it any justice.
There have been plenty of attempts to define humans as exceptional by means of tests, which have become increasingly convoluted as one animal or another passed each one. “Okay, every species that can make tools raise your ha-- oh. Okay, every species that can make tools that make tools raise your hand!” It’s hard not to suspect that the outcome was always preordained.
I think still think humans are exceptional, notwithstanding the above. I think the enterobacteria phage T4 virus is exceptional (because just look at that capsid, I mean, just look at it.) Everyone can pick the set of criteria they want, and there’s no justification, or possibility of, for any of them.
3 Likes
no no, just let the burn the big effigy guy. Huge catharsis. Then they will clean up after themselves.
Oh, this isn’t the Burning Man thread. sorry!
4 Likes
Could you two get a phone booth (start a new thread) or return to the topic? Or be funny? Or should I bust out some Kierkegaard and we can all snooze on the overnight derail to Denver?
2 Likes
