Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: QT3.14

Liberals should be taught that labels divide people, and I think that we can do with fewer labels, not more.
-George Carlin


20 posted on 03/19/2015 3:13:13 PM PDT by Canedawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: Canedawg
Liberals should be taught that labels divide people, and I think that we can do with fewer labels, not more.

-George Carlin

George Carlin didn't say that. He was a liberal.

Transcript from a video of George Carlin:

George Carlin: “Censorship from the right is to be expected. Censorship from the left took me by surprise. And I’m talking, of course, about what originated as campus speech codes at eastern universities and has come to be called politically correct language. The impulse behind political correctness is a good one, but like most things America falls in love with, it has become grotesquely distorted beyond its usefulness. And I want to take race as an example. Personally, I say black. I say black because I find that most black people say black. I don’t say people of color. People of color sounds like something you might see after some mushrooms. OK? [Audience laughing] And, and it sounds dishonest to me, because it means precisely the same thing as colored people. If you’re not willing to say colored people, you shouldn’t be willing to say people of color. Besides, the whole idea of color is sort of a bullshit idea. What shall we call white people — people of no color? Isn’t pink a color? In fact, white people are not really white at all. They’re different shades of pink and olive and beige. In other words, they’re colored. And black people are rarely black. I see mostly different shades of brown and tan. In fact, some light-skinned black people are lighter than the darkest white people. Look how dark the people in India are. They’re dark brown, but they’re considered white people. May I see the color chart, please? People of color is an awkward phrase that obscures meaning rather than enhancing it. Shall we call fat people, people of size? Personally, personally, I call fat people those persons who are bigger than they need to be. And it seems fair. I also don’t say African-American. I, I simply find it illogical and confusing. Which part of Africa are we talking about — Egypt? Egypt is in Africa. Egyptians aren’t black. They’re like the people in India; they’re dark brown white people. But they’re Africans. So why wouldn’t an Egyptian who becomes an American citizen be an African-American? And the same goes for the Republic of South Africa. Suppose a white racist from South Africa becomes an American citizen. Couldn’t he also be called an African-American? In fact, maybe he might come here and become a citizen just to piss off black people. And what about a black person, a black person born in South Africa who becomes an American citizen? What is he — an African South African-American? Or a South African African-American. So let’s look at this trendy Native American phrase. ‘Cause as far as calling them Americans is concerned, do I even have to point out what an insult this is? We steal their hemisphere, kill 20 million or so, destroy 500 separate cultures, round up the survivors and put them on the worst land we can find, and then we want to name them after ourselves. Haven’t we done enough? Huh? Do we have to degrade them further? [Cheers and applause] And as far as these campus liberals – many of them well-meaning, I assume – who insist on saying Native American are concerned, here’s something they should be told: it’s not up to you to be naming people and telling them what they ought to be called. If you’d leave the campus once in a while, you’d learn that most Americans — most Indians, I’m sorry — are insulted by the term Native American. The American Indian movement will tell you that if you ask them. I did. They told me. You know what the Indians would like to be called? By their real names: Tuscarora, Sioux, Kiowa, Chiricahua, Mescalero, Cherokee, Cheyenne, Mohawk, Seminole, Choctaw, Chickahominy, Comanche, Shoshone, and so on and so on. There were 500 nations, not just one. You’d think it would have been a fairly simple thing for us to come over here to this continent, eliminate the forests, dam up the rivers, build our malls and massage parlors, sell our blenders and whoopee cushions, poison ourselves with chemicals, commit genocide, and let it go at that. But no, no. We have to compound the insult—‘Native Americans.’ I’m glad they have their gambling casinos now. It pleases me that white people are losing their rent money to the Indians. Maybe, maybe, [Cheers and applause] maybe the Indians will get lucky and win their country back. Actually, they wouldn’t want it. Look what we did to it. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.” [Cheers and applause]

29 posted on 03/19/2015 4:02:49 PM PDT by webheart (We are all pretty much living in a fiction.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson