Why is it not considered racist when an African-American calls a Caucasian-American a "cracker"?

[Carlan]

or we could just both agree to not use highly offensive words and discourage others from doing so. That would be the best course of action to take.

amen and amen!

 

[Deltadeliquent]

I grew up in the South and always considered the term Cracker pretty mild. More indiciive of annoyance than hatred.

I thought it came from an early baseball team in Georgia. They were called the Crackers referring to the sound of the bat hitting the ball. The players were, of course, all white.

Edit: from Wikipedia…

The term “cracker” was in use during Elizabethan times to describe braggarts. The original root of this is the Middle English word crack meaning “entertaining conversation” (One may be said to “crack” a joke; a witty remark is a “wisecrack”). This term and the Gaelic spelling “craic” are still in use in Ireland and Scotland.

Learn something everyday!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The prosecution was trying to say that Zimmerman provoked Martin to attack him because Zimmerman followed Martin. The Zimmerman defense argued that someone following you isn’t justification for physically attacking them. So the prosecution, in trying to make a case out of Zimmerman following and arguing that that was the reason for Trayvon attacking him, they were admitting that Trayvon was the one who initiated the physical attack. I was watching the court coverage as it played on the news. The defense tried to make Zimmerman out to be a racist just because he uttered a few cuss words. But, unlike Trayvon calling Zimmerman a “creepy cracker”, Zimmerman’s cuss words were not racial slurs.

So you’ve chosen to accept one side as truth before the trial is completed, as well as accept one’s name calling as racist, but not the other?

 

[Ridgerunner]

I think that definition is already outdated, at least as far as the college scene is concerned. Based on the mailings my kids get, while students of Hispanic origin are also considered “people of color” for purposes of certain student organizations and scholarships.

If, however, one is of Arabic origin, one is just a “white person” officially, regardless of skin tone, and if one is a blonde, blue-eyed Urugauyan with a Spanish name, one is still a “person of color” according to the mailings to which you refer.

Lots of craziness attends all of this.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

If, however, one is of Arabic origin, one is just a “white person” officially, regardless of skin tone, and if one is a blonde, blue-eyed Urugauyan with a Spanish name, one is still a “person of color” according to the mailings to which you refer.

Lots of craziness attends all of this.

I got a lot of stuff from HBCUs. My mom and I decided that it had to do with my name. It didn’t bother me and I didn’t fuss about it.

 

[Nimzovik]

So you’ve chosen to accept one side as truth before the trial is completed, as well as accept one’s name calling as racist, but not the other?

Methinks the intent was to highlight a mechanism under discussion that is present and is thread title related as opposed to justifying a possible wrong by the other side.

 

[Nimzovik]

I grew up in the South and always considered the term Cracker pretty mild. More indiciive of annoyance than hatred.

I thought it came from an early baseball team in Georgia. They were called the Crackers referring to the sound of the bat hitting the ball. The players were, of course, all white.

Edit: from Wikipedia…

The term “cracker” was in use during Elizabethan times to describe braggarts. The original root of this is the Middle English word crack meaning “entertaining conversation” (One may be said to “crack” a joke; a witty remark is a “wisecrack”). This term and the Gaelic spelling “craic” are still in use in Ireland and Scotland.

Learn something everyday!

And of course there is the English slang of “He’s gone Crackers” meaning a person has gone crazy.

However I think we are not addressing the real issue regarding all the topic untoward definitions of ‘cracker’ variants. Methinks the OP’s central issue here is- why is there not reciprocity? The thread title is obviously focusing on the use of the term ‘Cracker’ as an* insult.* The OP is indicating that the term that is being employed is utilized in a racist manner. Hence the question (Why is it not considered racist…) embedded in the title. In other words, why does not PC work** both** ways?

A rather valid* concern* methinks.

 

[LongingSoul]

And of course there is the English slang of “He’s gone Crackers” meaning a person has gone crazy.

However I think we are not addressing the real issue regarding all the topic untoward definitions of ‘cracker’ variants. Methinks the OP’s central issue here is- why is there not reciprocity? The thread title is obviously focusing on the use of the term ‘Cracker’ as an* insult.* The OP is indicating that the term that is being employed is utilized in a racist manner. Hence the question (Why is it not considered racist…) embedded in the title. In other words, why does not PC work** both** ways?

A rather valid* concern* methinks.

I’d say because the racial playing field is still not even. I was just reading in connection with the 3 girls who’d been kidnapped in Conneticut, that while half of all women who go missing are black, the media gives 80 percent of its coverage to missing white women. Other crime statistics also reflect a racial heirarchy in coverage.

Hence if a white person calls a black person the n word, it invokes a powerful spirit of white dominance and racial power. When a black person calls a white person a ‘cracker’, it’s just an insult that doesn’t carry the same power to invoke a spirit of racial dominance. I can easily see the massive difference in the quality of the racial slurs.

 

[Nimzovik]

Surely you jest?

A person offended by a racial slur is indeed,* offended.*

I should think that all in America are equal and have an equal right to claim their pain is** just as valid**. Yes? Some are not ‘more equal’ than others, I would hope.

 

[livingwordunity]

So you’ve chosen to accept one side as truth before the trial is completed, as well as accept one’s name calling as racist, but not the other?

“Craker” is race specific. “A” word and “punk” is not. And me giving my opinion before the trial is nothing like the President of the United States, the most powerful man on earth (according to Forbes). If the President of the United States giving his opinion before the trial isn’t an obstruction of justice then nothing is. Tell me when the last time was that the mainstream media had a news story about what livingwordunity on CAF had to say.

 

[Corki]

Hence if a white person calls a black person the n word, it invokes a powerful spirit of white dominance and racial power. When a black person calls a white person a ‘cracker’, it’s just an insult that doesn’t carry the same power to invoke a spirit of racial dominance. I can easily see the massive difference in the quality of the racial slurs.

That doesn’t make it any less racist or any less offensive. It just means there is a different sociological significance. From a personal level, as the one being insulted and offended, the terms are equal or very close.

 

[LegoGE1947]

“Craker” is race specific. “A” word and “punk” is not. And me giving my opinion before the trial is nothing like the President of the United States, the most powerful man on earth (according to Forbes). If the President of the United States giving his opinion before the trial isn’t an obstruction of justice then nothing is. Tell me when the last time was that the mainstream media had a news story about what livingwordunity on CAF had to say.

Well, anyone who is not an extremely liberal “Catholic?” The media always seems to be all over what they have to say on social issues, for example. You’d think that there wasn’t a conservative anywhere that the media could ask, except of course if the media outlet happens to be conservative itself! (Think EWTN, CAF, churchmilitant.tv, FoxNews, etc).

 

[Burt_Macklin]

It isn’t considered racist because most white folk aren’t going to take offense if you call them a cracker. Most people I know would just take it as a compliment kind of like “cold a** honky”

Unfortunately there isn’t a word in English that produces the same visceral, gut wrenching reaction from white people as n***er does with blacks. I’d say the closest word we have to refer to a trashy white person that would actually upset them would be wigger.

 

[livingwordunity]

It isn’t considered racist because most white folk aren’t going to take offense if you call them a cracker. Most people I know would just take it as a compliment kind of like “cold a** honky”

Unfortunately there isn’t a word in English that produces the same visceral, gut wrenching reaction from white people as n***er does with blacks. I’d say the closest word we have to refer to a trashy white person that would actually upset them would be wigger.

Whether someone is a racist has to do with the intention of the racist, not whether or not the target was offended by the racist word. As some others have pointed out, the origin of calling a random white person a “cracker” is a way of calling all white people slave masters. I think if whites knew that this was what they were being called they would be very offended. In the case of the Zimmerman trial, the prosecution is grasping at straws to try to get people to believe that the “A” word and the word “punk” are somehow racist words even though these words are commonly applied to people of every race while ignoring that Trayvon Martin called Zimmerman a “creepy cracker” which is clearly a race specific word that is only intended to be derogatory to whites.

 

[LongingSoul]

Surely you jest?

A person offended by a racial slur is indeed,* offended.*

I should think that all in America are equal and have an equal right to claim their pain is** just as valid**. Yes? Some are not ‘more equal’ than others, I would hope.

I disagree. When there is a history of supremacism as there is in America (as in Australia and other colonised regions), these is an inheritance that comes with your colour for generations afterwards. Think about the dynamic where a child calls his parent ‘stupid’ or a parent calls his child ‘stupid’. The impact is much greater for the child being the weaker dominated party who relies on the parent for his life and wellbeing, than it is for the parent who holds the life of the child in his power. The impact of being called ‘stupid’ can stay with a child well into his adulthood and invoke the same dehumanising feeling within him even though his long past the helpless childhood stage. In this example the word ‘stupid’ invokes an old dynamic in both parties, that actually doesn’t reflect the present situation where both are autonomous adults.

 

[LongingSoul]

That doesn’t make it any less racist or any less offensive. It just means there is a different sociological significance. From a personal level, as the one being insulted and offended, the terms are equal or very close.

But cracker has no historical meaning for a white person. Even on the thread here no one seems to know it’s origins. It can’t invoke any deeper significance if it has no roots inside the white person. The n word on the other hand means I’m invoking the dynamic of supremacy over you with this word.

 

[Nimzovik]

Well, anyone who is not an extremely liberal “Catholic?” The media always seems to be all over what they have to say on social issues, for example. You’d think that there wasn’t a conservative anywhere that the media could ask, except of course if the media outlet happens to be conservative itself! (Think EWTN, CAF, churchmilitant.tv, FoxNews, etc).

I, for the life of me, can not translate the sentiment here…

 

[Nimzovik]

It isn’t considered racist because most white folk aren’t going to take offense if you call them a cracker. Most people I know would just take it as a compliment kind of like “cold a** honky”

Unfortunately there isn’t a word in English that produces the same visceral, gut wrenching reaction from white people as n***er does with blacks. I’d say the closest word we have to refer to a trashy white person that would actually upset them would be wigger.

Bolding MIne:

Oh my… Oh my, oh* my. *

"It isn’t considered racist because most white folk aren’t going to take offense if you call them a cracker."

You just said that? I can not even begin to express just how insufferable this statement is.

 

[Nimzovik]

Whether someone is a racist has to do with the intention of the racist, not whether or not the target was offended by the racist word. As some others have pointed out, the origin of calling a random white person a “cracker” is a way of calling all white people slave masters. I think if whites knew that this was what they were being called they would be very offended. In the case of the Zimmerman trial, the prosecution is grasping at straws to try to get people to believe that the “A” word and the word “punk” are somehow racist words even though these words are commonly applied to people of every race while ignoring that Trayvon Martin called Zimmerman a “creepy cracker” which is clearly a race specific word that is only intended to be derogatory to whites.

A remarkably astute posting. Racism is indeed hateful. Hate is painful.

This paragraph here *really *bangs the hammer on the head of nail of the issue:

" In the case of the Zimmerman trial, the prosecution is grasping at straws to try to get people to believe that the “A” word and the word “punk” are somehow racist words even though these words are commonly applied to people of every race while ignoring that Trayvon Martin called Zimmerman a “creepy cracker” which is clearly a race specific word that is only intended to be derogatory to whites"

It is a horrific thing to see such race baiting tactics used by officers of the court :bigyikes: in such a high tech manner that just may end up incarcerating a man for life, solely based on a decision that may be emotionally induced by the prosecution, is a clear abuse of the Justice System.

Why on earth* any* Caucasian person would willingly allow the Liberal Media to implicitly paint a target on the back of the entire Caucasian race that has such far reaching, dangerous ramifications is a subject for those that study insanity.

Good grief!!

So. To call some one a cracker is not meant with deadly intent eh? So. It is not equally racially derogatory eh?

I just do not think so.

 

[LongingSoul]

Bolding MIne:

Oh my… Oh my, oh* my. *

"It isn’t considered racist because most white folk aren’t going to take offense if you call them a cracker."

You just said that? I can not even begin to express just how insufferable this statement is.

But psychologically, there is a sort of faux offense that bullies have (not calling everyone a bully in general of course as each situation should be judged on its specific merits). It goes ‘well if I can’t do it to you, you can’t do it to me!’ It’s a sense of offense that’s meant to put someone in their place rather than give them the regard they’re due as a human being.