It would only be racist if someone said that it should only be exclusively defined by one ethnicity or one race. Also, aren't there non-Anglo and non-European Americans, like Helen Thomas (of Lebanese Arab descent), who profess themselves to be only just "American" and not "______-Americans" and don't believe in hyphenations because in their view, they consider any terms with "______-Americans" to lead to more divisions of people by race and color in this nation. I heard even a statement from another person of color like Bobby Jindal who does not believe in hyphenated identities either.
It's just a label or tool to keep the racial segregation alive and well in this country. If you are not native to these continents, you are a foreigner. Fighting over who is more "American" is reductive.
What about this quote from Helen Thomas, former correspondent to the White House during the Bush administration?
I don't think it's only just white anglo-saxon protestants or even dudes of western or nordic european descent who dismiss the idea of "hyphenated" identities. The above quote was spoken by an American-born woman of Levantine-Greek Orthodox descent.We were never hyphenated as Arab-Americans. We were American, and I have always rejected the hyphen and I believe all assimilated immigrants should not be designated ethnically. Or separated, of course, by race, or creed either. These are trends that ever try to divide us as a people.
Last edited by Bullet Sniper; 09-09-2016 at 06:21 PM.
Cool strawman fallacy. You seem to be implying that I was endorsing and advocating the controversially default version of the term (which is limiting itself to one race or even one ethnic group) when I was merely pointing out more openly flexible interpretations of what the concept could also extend to.
Not wanting terms and labels that tend to divide citizens of different race, color, and creed to strengthen national unity and identity =/= Not accepting or tolerating people of other race, color, or creed itself to fulfill a rigid criteria of nationhood and citizenship.
Last edited by Bullet Sniper; 09-10-2016 at 06:45 PM.
Wow good analogy. It surely makes sense to compare a word meant to debase or insult someone based on a category they're born with to a word that merely negates and detaches itself from anything different being added to it for various reasons right?.
The thing is the term is more fluid and is not restricted to a single interpretation. You're basically conflating the obviously racist "lol you have to be of anglo-saxon descent or white protestant only" view with the "i just want to consider myself american without any special labels, regardless of what I look like or what background I come from" view, just like one is conflating "I should respect someone's opinion by tolerating their right to express it" with "i should respect someone's opinion and hold it in high honor and praise".
Last edited by Bullet Sniper; 09-10-2016 at 08:48 PM.
The moment you say something "No matter what race or origin I am from" or "Regardless of color", aren't you directly negating the first view? If that that doesn't contradict the first view, I don't know what does. What is the flaw in not wanting people to call other people this and that race/ethnicity/sex/religion/group in relation to being "American" rather than just call others "American". Take this for example, didn't someone say that Colin Powell was the "best black man" in the US Army or something, but then Colin Powell insisted that he was the "best man period".