The Hyphenated American

[Skomatth]

I shall try to present these views in my own words, although I was inspired by this blog .

The -ski suffix in my last name suggests that I have Polish ancestors. Yet I hesitate to identify myself as a Polish-American. Sure, I eat Grandma's sweet bread around the holidays, but this isn't sufficient for the Polish-American designation. I am neither bicultural or bilingual. I don't have dual citizenship either.

Using a hyphenated name to designate my ancestry doesn't seem to present a problem. Don't let the particular case fool you. Identifying yourself or another with a group presents loads of problems. Dishonestly you claim identification with the group's success. Unfairly you label other's with the group's faults. Self-identified African Americans do themselves a disservice by accepting a distinct categorization reminiscent of the division between masters and slaves. If another expects me to treat him as an individual, he must not use connotated designations.

The original author said it nicely:

To be an individual is precisely not to be a mere member of a group or a mere instance of a type. And to be a mere member of a group is precisely not to be an individual.

Obviously, the language of groups cannot be completely avoided. Often it provides effective short-hands. I propose a method to distinguish between fair and unfair designations. A designation is fair only if there is documented membership in a formal structure. Even then this designation can only be used for factual purposes, not moral judgments. Criticizing the formal structure is fine, but you cannot judge an individual because of documented membership. The problem with most designations is that they carry implicit moral judgments. This is why identifying yourself conservative for example, even if you are proud of it, should be avoided. Your interlocutor, being a liberal, will cast implicit moral judgments, even if they are untrue.

Fair designation: He's an American citizen. (This is documented. It may however still carry implicit connotations.)

Unfair designation: He's black. (While often documented, race isn't a formal structure)

Fair: He's a Republican. (Documented membership in a political party.)

Unfair: He's conservative. (Not documented.)

[PanzerJaeger]

Interesting points. I dont mind labels if they fit the bill though. Call me a white, right wing, conservative.. it doesnt bother me.

It seems like this rush to avoid labels at all costs is a bit overblown. If someone is of the negroid race, whats wrong with being called a black person? If someone holds predominantly liberal views, whats wrong with being called a liberal?

I think a lot of the people who whine and bemoan labels are a little embarrassed about their own views. Call a spade a spade and stop all this pc-esce stuff.

[AntiochusIII]

Interesting points. I dont mind labels if they fit the bill though. Call me a white, right wing, conservative.. it doesnt bother me.

It seems like this rush to avoid labels at all costs is a bit overblown. If someone is of the negroid race, whats wrong with being called a black person? If someone holds predominantly liberal views, whats wrong with being called a liberal?

I think a lot of the people who whine and bemoan labels are a little embarrassed about their own views. Call a spade a spade and stop all this pc-esce stuff.

On the other hand, the narrow-and-often-hatefully-used labels currently "in place" simply covers a lot of ground about the beliefs of the particular individual labeled, while the truth is that many of the "left" and the "right" simply are individuals with varying personal beliefs. To simply label an average guy "left" because some of his views are being classified as such (often by the "opponents") is rather ugly. The same goes as well for people with shares some beliefs of the "conservatives." Such labels only serve to allow easier personal attacks and unnecessary "polarization."

Besides, a lot of individuals could easily be offended by the stereotypical labeling "standards" of the day. Something like: "oh, this one supports gay marriage. So, he's a leftist weenie" or "this guy supports guns, eh? You right-wing nutjob" is rather unfair.

[Byzantine Prince]

I think a lot of the people who whine and bemoan labels are a little embarrassed about their own views. Call a spade a spade and stop all this pc-esce stuff.

Errr... not exactly. I hate PS as much as you do, but wouldn't, let's say, a person who 25% african mind being called black? The same goes for political affiliations. I don't like it when people call others consevatives or liberals or democrats... etc... because it demeans the conversation. And again I admit I've used those terms, and it was wrong of me to do so, but it does make it really hard people abide to their party's ideology so closy you acn't help but make fun them by labeling them as such.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

I like the rush to avoid identifying criminal suspects on the loose. I have noticed plenty of that in the local news round where I stay in the U.S.
It's like they're thinking "Oh no, we can't mention that the suspect is black because then we'll be seen as racist, let's just say he was male and hope we don't get called sexist".

It also happens on the national news e.g. that native American kid who shot a bunch of people wasn't identified as being a member of that tribe (whose reservation it happened on) until long after the media had been plastering his interest in National Socialism everywhere (which made it sound like a racist white kid had decided to murder a load of "sub-humans"). Again, after those court house shootings in Georgia, the on-the-run suspect was rarely identified as being black by the MSM.

Sometimes these labels might help, such as letting the public know the physical appearance of people that the police are pursuing (I'm sure an early positive ID may reduce the length of some crime sprees).

[bmolsson]

Interesting points. I dont mind labels if they fit the bill though. Call me a white, right wing, conservative.. it doesnt bother me.

It seems like this rush to avoid labels at all costs is a bit overblown. If someone is of the negroid race, whats wrong with being called a black person? If someone holds predominantly liberal views, whats wrong with being called a liberal?

I think a lot of the people who whine and bemoan labels are a little embarrassed about their own views. Call a spade a spade and stop all this pc-esce stuff.

I recall you didn't like to be called Nazi......

[Divinus Arma]

How dare you call me white!

I am a Finnish-Irish-German-French American!!!!!!

And don't even think of calling me European-American cause that won't cut it either.


I like to think of myself as mustachioed-American...

[ichi]

That's the great thing about America, you can call yourself whatever you like, and others can respectfully go along with it or laugh in your face.

Of course, reasonable men can work together, across differences, to solve problems. Name-calling and demonization tend to polarize us, which is only good for the extremists. Call yourself what you like, but be careful what you call others.

ichi

[bmolsson]

I am a Finnish-Irish-German-French American!!!!!!

That must have been a hell of a party you mom was at......

[Al Khalifah]

European-American: Pretty much every white person in America today is a European American.

[Idaho]

It seems like this rush to avoid labels at all costs is a bit overblown. If someone is of the negroid race, whats wrong with being called a black person?

What if their mother had white skin and their father had black. Then they are as much a 'white person' as a 'black person'.

However the racism prevails and you and many others would call them black.

[bmolsson]

What if their mother had white skin and their father had black. Then they are as much a 'white person' as a 'black person'.

Gray ??