Talk About Tennis 2.0

The debate about Anglo-Saxon is irrelevant to this issue. Agree, it's not a dog whistle, it's a loudspeaker. You can just substitute Aryan (which is also a term with a revised history) in their wording.

I am still confused. So a term that has not held racial implications in the past and was used to solely designate a population becomes racist simply because a group wrongly starts using it?

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:18 pm I am still confused. So a term that has not held racial implications in the past and was used to solely designate a population becomes racist simply because a group wrongly starts using it?

Off Topic

I have always been fascinated by the American fixation with "roots". So many people want to be identified with their roots: the Irish, Italians, Mexicans, Cubans, etc. Nobody seems to want to be simply "American". The exception? The Germans, who identify themselves as simply that, while there are a lot of them in the USA.
Maybe if people were to stop looking at from where their fifth-great-grandparents came from would there be more homogeneity?

Haven't seen that exception play out, those with German heritage seem to be just as proud. There is an area of Texas near Austin with lots of descendants of people who were recruited to move to Texas from Germany. You can't drive a mile there without hitting a biergarten. Also witnesses someone tell my German friend (who is from Germany), "I'm German too! By great-grandfather was German AND! I was an assistant manager at Aldi!"


And yes, terms that are usurped for the purposes of discrimination can become an insult but I don't think "Anglo-Saxon" is an example of that. A more common example of "dog whistle" is, for example, is using the word "urban" to mean "black."

No one here remembers the term WASP?

Sure. I always felt that one was ingenious. A quick way to refer to a group of people with a group of characteristics.

Sorry Floridians but you know what's coming.

So you can have a riot inside a car?

There is no transition to a "green economy" unless you have some form of social program for the millions of workers that will be left without a job (uhm) and which should mostly consist of re-training and mandatory hiring.
And it would mean worldwide. No way you flip and switch tomorrow and turn every coal power plant into a "sustainable" power source and mayhem does not ensue in, at a minimum, twelve countries in the world. The entire Middle East, Russia, Nigeria, and plenty of sub-divisions of many other countries.
Venezuela would be basically reduced to drug trafficking.

It will be a slow process taking a decade or two. In any case this "green economy" doesn't run on fairy dust. Still requires lots of mining and manufacturing, just much less oil. Countries with lithium, cobalt, rare earth metals deposits will benefit.

You know my position. Without major and publicly funded environmental projects (reforestation and cleaning up the oceans) everything else will not be nearly enough.

WTH is wrong with these people?!

People get fired in the real world for stuff like this. In the industry, triggering a false alarm is basically a request for termination.