The term African-American.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I don't understand why we use the term African-American when they are more American than African. American culture has a lot of "Black" influence, from our music to our history, followed by one of the most famous American dishes: Fried Chicken, Hashpuppies, and Cornbread.

They are no more or less American than a "Mixed Race" or a "White" American. The United States is a melting pot, so we should stop being obsessed with a person's race and instead actually act like we're a melting pot.

The reason the term exists is because it's actually politically important. They're the largest minority in the US, and the one with the most history of being oppressed.

It's debatable who has the most history of being oppressed.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Eh you're thing about some of the others are a bit off too.... many who have been born here, even multiple generations get called or billed as "Mexican American" for example. Gabriel Iglesias even had to joke about it saying he had to travel all the way to the middle east to get called an "American" comedian as opposed to a "Mexican American" Comedian.

It pretty much seems that if you're not white you tend to get a hyphenated (whatever)-American.

I dislike it myself. If you were not born somewhere else and immigrated here, then you're American"....

There are some conversations where "American" is not the best way to get your meaning across. This sometimes applies to white people as well as other races.

Like here^

The white people I was talking about are American, but if I said "Americans" instead of "white people" it wouldn't make sense.

Or we can just all start doing it:
I'm a Native-French-Irish-English-American

Me too. We rock!

[Shaggai]

The reason the term exists is because it's actually politically important. They're the largest minority in the US, and the one with the most history of being oppressed.

It's debatable who has the most history of being oppressed.

True. The racial minority with major political influence that has the most history of being oppressed. Better? The only racial minorities with more of a history of being oppressed don't have as much political power.

[Nazi Flower Power]

It's debatable who has the most history of being oppressed.

True. The racial minority with major political influence that has the most history of being oppressed. Better? The only racial minorities with more of a history of being oppressed don't have as much political power.

That is true.

[Neuereland]

I generally feel that black is an appropriate term but in the case of being formal african-american is probably better. African-American is used to identify black people because it is somehow less offense and more vague.

[The 93rd Coalition]

It's just used to identify them in a region-specific situation. Not racist.

[Draica]

As a black person, I am offended by the term "African American".

I am an AMERICAN. I was born here, I've never even been to Africa.

[Imperial Nilfgaard]

Okay people of NationStates, here's a point I would like to bring up for discussion. Recently I've been thinking, why are African-Americans called such a name and not just Americans? What is the need for that prefix? (The people who were unwillingly brought through the slave trade, just to clarify) I read a different thread and it said once you've been in America after 3 generations the prefix of where ever you're from (Mexican-American, Chinese-American, etc) is no longer used and your just American. So why, are African- Americans still called such when they've been here for 400 years? And why are White people not called European-American, or German-American etc? Its just another way to separate them from the rest and makes it easier to outcast them. Do these people, after 400 years of separation and a lack of resources to re-connect to Africa, really have any connection to the continent ( which is in it self very culturally diverse) at all? What's your take on this, NSG?

***And why are North Africans considered white?****

Honestly terms don't always need to be consistent. As long as they are socially accepted then you use them.
If African Americans want to be called that, then thats what you call them.
If Indians want to be called Indians instead of Native Americans, then call them Indians.

It's not really an important issue considering many other issues that exist in the USA.

As for North Africans being white. Well thats kinda a tangent but I suppose it's because some of them do look white. Perhaps most that come here are Berbers who are well known to have light skin.

Tho at the end of the day, people in the MENA region can look like anything.

[Nomadic sister of shawnas north africa]

Yea everywhere I go people think I'm Ethiopian or Somalis? Then I tell them touareg mix Egyptian they say what? Lol. The Africans make corn bread we call it hibiscus? Style biscuits or Dura breads there several ways with flour and mill In Africa corn flour is popular and in demand In several African countries, all African or African deccents well 30% love rice because In Afrika its custom to eat rice?,


What about An African In America?

A lot of Africans complaint that the north Africans are world standard as ethnic. White Mediterranean And the central and southern Africans are considered African American when get citizenship In the u.s.?some say Ethiopians are not black because of there fair skin? And not all Somalia are dark skin if you've see one Or know one.

[Great Zavi]

The reason the term exists is because it's actually politically important. They're the largest minority in the US, and the one with the most history of being oppressed.

It's debatable who has the most history of being oppressed.

Really? Just really?

[Sun Wukong]

It's debatable who has the most history of being oppressed.

Really? Just really?

Yes.

What, you think the American Indians had such a great time of it?

[Great Zavi]

Really? Just really?

Yes.

What, you think the American Indians had such a great time of it?

I don't the idea of arguing who was the most oppressed. The topic is senseless.

Oppression of a people is bad, period.

[Sun Wukong]

Yes.

What, you think the American Indians had such a great time of it?

I don't the idea of arguing who was the most oppressed. The topic is senseless.

Oppression of a people is bad, period.

I don't the idea either.

All that was said is that it is debatable. In response to a positive claim made by someone else. Your outrage is unwarranted.

[Great Zavi]

I don't the idea of arguing who was the most oppressed. The topic is senseless.

Oppression of a people is bad, period.

I don't the idea either.

All that was said is that it is debatable. In response to a positive claim made by someone else. Your outrage is unwarranted.

No one is outraged, unless you are.
You say you don't like debating it, but you just did so.
Nevertheless, It's safe to say both people were oppressed and Black people keep having their name changed regardless of how accurate it may be.

[Sun Wukong]

I don't the idea either.

All that was said is that it is debatable. In response to a positive claim made by someone else. Your outrage is unwarranted.

No one is outraged, unless you are.
You say you don't like debating it, but you just did so.
Nevertheless, It's safe to say both people were oppressed and Black people keep having their name changed regardless of how accurate it may be.

No. I really didn't. Let me replay this entire conversation for you:

The reason the term exists is because it's actually politically important. They're the largest minority in the US, and the one with the most history of being oppressed.

Makes a positive claim. Wouldn't bother to object to it myself, but there it is.

It's debatable who has the most history of being oppressed.

Points out positive claim may be inaccurate. Doesn't argue it is, just acknowledges the possibility.

Really? Just really?

You respond with massive scorn and incredulity to a statement that is probably axiomatically true, and also fairly reasonable. This is stupid.

Yes.

What, you think the American Indians had such a great time of it?

Points out that stupidity by providing a single example of a group that was also very heavily oppressed. My assumption was that you just hadn't thought about it, because if you had you would have realized that you were being silly.

I don't the idea of arguing who was the most oppressed. The topic is senseless.

Oppression of a people is bad, period.

You respond by stating that you don't [like] the idea of arguing who was the most oppressed, which, so far, only Shaggai (the person you didn't respond with and eyebrown and facepalm to) had done. You then proceeded to state that oppression is bad, as though anyone were arguing otherwise.

I don't the idea either.

All that was said is that it is debatable. In response to a positive claim made by someone else. Your outrage is unwarranted.

I mocked a small grammatical error on your part for comic effect (unappreciated), and pointed out that your post fails on several levels. I also criticized your use of emoticons. Forgive me for assuming that equates to outrage.

Kindly point out when I argued "who was the most oppressed?"

[Great Zavi]

No one is outraged, unless you are.
You say you don't like debating it, but you just did so.
Nevertheless, It's safe to say both people were oppressed and Black people keep having their name changed regardless of how accurate it may be.

No. I really didn't. Let me replay this entire conversation for you:

The reason the term exists is because it's actually politically important. They're the largest minority in the US, and the one with the most history of being oppressed.

Makes a positive claim. Wouldn't bother to object to it myself, but there it is.

It's debatable who has the most history of being oppressed.

Points out positive claim may be inaccurate. Doesn't argue it is, just acknowledges the possibility.

Really? Just really?

You respond with massive scorn and incredulity to a statement that is probably axiomatically true, and also fairly reasonable. This is stupid.

Yes.

What, you think the American Indians had such a great time of it?

Points out that stupidity by providing a single example of a group that was also very heavily oppressed. My assumption was that you just hadn't thought about it, because if you had you would have realized that you were being silly.

I don't the idea of arguing who was the most oppressed. The topic is senseless.

Oppression of a people is bad, period.

You respond by stating that you don't [like] the idea of arguing who was the most oppressed, which, so far, only Shaggai (the person you didn't respond with and eyebrown and facepalm to) had done. You then proceeded to state that oppression is bad, as though anyone were arguing otherwise.

I don't the idea either.

All that was said is that it is debatable. In response to a positive claim made by someone else. Your outrage is unwarranted.

I mocked a small grammatical error on your part for comic effect (unappreciated), and pointed out that your post fails on several levels. I also criticized your use of emoticons. Forgive me for assuming that equates to outrage.

Kindly point out when I argued "who was the most oppressed?"

Your forgiven for your wrong assumption.
& "acknowledging" the possibility of another argument is arguing.
<---that means i'm clapping. Specifically for your ability to wrongly interpret what I say.

[Great Zavi]

I generally feel that black is an appropriate term but in the case of being formal african-american is probably better. African-American is used to identify black people because it is somehow less offense and more vague.

I don't know anyone who was e ever offended by the term black.

[Geilinor]

I don't the idea either.

All that was said is that it is debatable. In response to a positive claim made by someone else. Your outrage is unwarranted.

Nevertheless, It's safe to say both people were oppressed and Black people keep having their name changed regardless of how accurate it may be.

Their name has not been changed without permission. Black and African-American are used interchangeably by the government.

[Great Zavi]

Nevertheless, It's safe to say both people were oppressed and Black people keep having their name changed regardless of how accurate it may be.

Their name has not been changed without permission. Black and African-American are used interchangeably by the government.

I never said it was without permission.
And who would you go to for permission?
Who decides these terms?

[Nervium]

Their name has not been changed without permission. Black and African-American are used interchangeably by the government.

I never said it was without permission.
And who would you go to for permission?
Who decides these terms?

Society, one would guess. And pressure from African-Americans too.

[Sun Wukong]

No. I really didn't. Let me replay this entire conversation for you:



Makes a positive claim. Wouldn't bother to object to it myself, but there it is.



Points out positive claim may be inaccurate. Doesn't argue it is, just acknowledges the possibility.



You respond with massive scorn and incredulity to a statement that is probably axiomatically true, and also fairly reasonable. This is stupid.



Points out that stupidity by providing a single example of a group that was also very heavily oppressed. My assumption was that you just hadn't thought about it, because if you had you would have realized that you were being silly.



You respond by stating that you don't [like] the idea of arguing who was the most oppressed, which, so far, only Shaggai (the person you didn't respond with and eyebrown and facepalm to) had done. You then proceeded to state that oppression is bad, as though anyone were arguing otherwise.



I mocked a small grammatical error on your part for comic effect (unappreciated), and pointed out that your post fails on several levels. I also criticized your use of emoticons. Forgive me for assuming that equates to outrage.

Kindly point out when I argued "who was the most oppressed?"

Your forgiven for your wrong assumption.
& "acknowledging" the possibility of another argument is arguing.
<---that means i'm clapping. Specifically for your ability to wrongly interpret what I say.

I admire your ability to twist reality to suit your desires.

[Great Zavi]

I never said it was without permission.
And who would you go to for permission?
Who decides these terms?

Society, one would guess. And pressure from African-Americans too.

Society, to me, seems so abstract.
Its hard for me to blame anything on it.