Re: Ebonics

> Yeah, Matt, in a free society I wouldn't have to "speak Ebonics."
> 
> (Personally, I interviewed several folks while I was at Intel who could
not
> speak standard English. I recommended against their hiring, and they in
> fact did not get invites to be interviewed at the main facilities. So
much
> for their jive talk habits.)
> 
> Understand, I have nothing against the colored people speaking "Ebonics"
to
> each other, or to anyone who'll listen. But I don't have to deal with
this
> nonsense, nor do I have to hire them.
> 
> (Until the People's Republic of Political Correctness demands that I
> "justify" why not speaking standard English is a "valid job requirement,"
> and refuses to take my "Because I say it is" as a valid answer. Not
> surprisingly, the Clintonistas have decided to enter the Proposition 209
> challenge on the side of the pro-discrimination side.)
> 
> If I were designing a genocidal program to destroy the colored race, I
> would be pushing for Ebonics, for encouraging coloreds to study "Human
> Potential" and "African History" instead of math, science, and
engineering,
> and pushing for hiring quotas.
> 
There are several problems with your argument:
	* You are making glaring generalizations regarding all members of an
ethnic body; you don't seem to realize that intellect is based not on color
or how you talk but on your brain (which has the same color and other basic
properties in all humans, I believe)
	* You are completely forgetting the other "non-English" group in America;
the so-called White Trash or heavy Southern accents, which are violate just
as many prissy and stuck up rules of grammar as Ebonics
	* You don't have to speak ebonics. You also don't have to speak with a
Southern twang (or whatever the politically correct name for that is)

	I also think that you are forgetting about the human aspect of your
discrimination. For a second, put yourself in the place of a really smart
black guy applying for a job at Intel. He is overqualified for the job. You
turn him down. Have you ever wondered what it does to a person to be turned
down not on the basis of their moral character or intellect but by their
skin? For someone to be told that they are stupid and are not competent to
do this job? You don't realize that you are crushing _human_ lives, people
who have feelings. If you would just put yourself in their place, you would
realize the hurt that your are inflicting.
	Out of curiousity, do you refuse from hiring people with Southern Accents?
Or people who have heavy "asian" accents? I'm very surprised that a smart
person like you, who believes in the power of strong cryptography, one of
the greatest equalizing forces in the world, actively discriminates against
other people who don't look or talk like you.

Mark Rosen
FireSoft - http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2690
Mark Eats AOL - http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/6660

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, Mark Rosen wrote:

> There are several problems with your argument:
> 	* You are making glaring generalizations regarding all members of an
> ethnic body; you don't seem to realize that intellect is based not on color
> or how you talk but on your brain (which has the same color and other basic
> properties in all humans, I believe)

That would be your generalization.  Nowhere did anyone ever say that _all_
black people speak "Ebonics".  I don't see why someone should hire someone if
they can't even understand what that person is saying.  Besides, I would
suspect that a reasonably intelligent person would know how to speak correct
English or at least make an attempt to do so.

> 	* You are completely forgetting the other "non-English" group in America;
> the so-called White Trash or heavy Southern accents, which are violate just
> as many prissy and stuck up rules of grammar as Ebonics

No mention was made of "White Trash".  You're drawing an invalid conclusion.

> 	* You don't have to speak ebonics. You also don't have to speak with a
> Southern twang (or whatever the politically correct name for that is)

One also shouldn't have to hire such people either.

> 	I also think that you are forgetting about the human aspect of your
> discrimination. For a second, put yourself in the place of a really smart
> black guy applying for a job at Intel. He is overqualified for the job. You

There is a logical correlation between intelligence and being able to follow
English grammatical rules.

> turn him down. Have you ever wondered what it does to a person to be turned
> down not on the basis of their moral character or intellect but by their
> skin? For someone to be told that they are stupid and are not competent to
> do this job? You don't realize that you are crushing _human_ lives, people
> who have feelings. If you would just put yourself in their place, you would
> realize the hurt that your are inflicting.

This has nothing to do with race.  You are drawing another invalid conclusion.
It has to do with dealing with people who will speak in a language that one can
understand.  English grammar is not simple, but an intelligent person would
be able to at least grasp some of the basics of grammar and speak in a
comprehensible language.

> 	Out of curiousity, do you refuse from hiring people with Southern Accents?
> Or people who have heavy "asian" accents? I'm very surprised that a smart
> person like you, who believes in the power of strong cryptography, one of
> the greatest equalizing forces in the world, actively discriminates against
> other people who don't look or talk like you.

Crypto will allow people to actively discriminate against whomever they wish.
It will also allow those who would be discriminated against to protect
information about themselves to prevent discrimination.  I don't support
discrimination based on race, but language is a completely different matter.

P.S. Spelling and grammar flames will be ignored.

Mark
- -- 
finger -l for PGP key
PGP encrypted mail prefered.
0xf9b22ba5 now revoked

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMrxCJyzIPc7jvyFpAQFm2gf/dqdYTicQskfQN2UVnBGs/BK5YD7+ylID
gk25Ki5ccPq08VhGCcoMRifWiJB3vauX+0dbhAVu5wkEUW9n2hAgpK3r3nuFH7r2
MAvPmMlRb0ro4Kd2EKoUHiRL2jzeJd5ztmuVRkBJ9A6Sp74xxM1JmMZMIFSS042m
GY4rMXpNL+Pg5u3DGLpXtFHJvber35tsEx1C5PTcLHhHnJF0bDCPE/i+wGM72kJ8
DpuVnnRHLT/vhm7nRoRIePvdXcYgkR5/1epQ9sefBn0eaQYCCqjtu26ASnhtPf6l
RjWH8neB7vGUqf9yxOhLnKOdTK8tfuQzkbfizYoncdzsKFbd1NRdVQ==
=F+mv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mark M. wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, Mark Rosen wrote:
> > There are several problems with your argument:[snippo]
> > * You are completely forgetting the other "non-English" group in America;
> > the so-called White Trash or heavy Southern accents, which are violate just
> > as many prissy and stuck up rules of grammar as Ebonics
> > * You don't have to speak ebonics. You also don't have to speak with a
> > Southern twang (or whatever the politically correct name for that is)

Just saying someone has a Southern "accent" is prejudicial and ignorant.
It's true that anyone, Southern or otherwise, can slur words so they're
not clear, but on averages, Southerners who speak clearly with their
native inflections and pronunciations are easier to understand than your
typical Yankees, whose speech is generally thin, nasal and rather pinched-
sounding.

People talked about hate in the South in the 1960's.  What a crock.
Apartheid, sure, no doubt about that.  But hate, well, I grew up in
the North and I lived for a few years in the deep South, and the people
in the South don't hate like the Yankees do, on average.

If you want to see how hate works, look how the big-media organizations
have descended on Southern radio and TV and have been telling them that
they speak wrongly, and that Southern "accents" are something to be
ashamed of.

There's a story about the Confederate officer who, following the War For
Southern Independence (not a true Civil War BTW), walked up the steps of
the veterans' club and saw a Union man sitting with a tin cup, looking
absolutely miserable with all sorts of injuries, etc.  The Southern man
tossed a dollar into the cup, at which point the astonished Union soldier
exclaimed "thank you, sir".  The next week at the club, the same thing
happened, and the soldier asked "Excuse me sir, but why would a Southern
officer such as yourself be showing so much sympathy to a Union man like
myself?"  To which the Southern officer replied "Actually it's not that,
it's just that you're the first Yankee I've seen that's been shot up
to my specifications".

Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net> wrote:

>There's a story about the Confederate officer who, following the War For
>Southern Independence (not a true Civil War BTW), walked up the steps of
>the veterans' club and saw a Union man sitting with a tin cup, looking
>absolutely miserable with all sorts of injuries, etc.  The Southern man
>tossed a dollar into the cup, at which point the astonished Union soldier
>exclaimed "thank you, sir".  The next week at the club, the same thing
>happened, and the soldier asked "Excuse me sir, but why would a Southern
>officer such as yourself be showing so much sympathy to a Union man like
>myself?"  To which the Southern officer replied "Actually it's not that,
>it's just that you're the first Yankee I've seen that's been shot up
>to my specifications".

A minor nit on an otherwise excellent post:
I am of the understanding the proper name is "The War of Northern
Aggression". :)

Jamie Lawrence wrote:
> At 7:17 PM -0800 on 12/21/96, Dale Thorn wrote:
> > > > Southern twang (or whatever the politically correct name for that is)
> > Just saying someone has a Southern "accent" is prejudicial and ignorant.

> Bullshit.
> I was born and raised in Ohio. I went to middle and high school in
> Tennessee.  (This isn't a qualification, per se, for asserting what
> I'm about to assert, as any trained ape could probably defensibly
> argue. I state it only to demonstrate some first hand knowledge about
> the topic I'm at hand. As my mother has drifted from speaking "Yankee
> english" to "Rebel English" over the years, examples of which I have
> on tape, I believe I can assert some knowledge on the matter.)

Bullshit yourself.  I was born and raised (mostly) in Ohio too.  You
didn't say what part of Tennessee, and there's a helluva difference
between Memphis, Nashville, and Chattanooga.  Just like you hear an
*enormous* difference in dialect between Akron and (for example)
Parkersburg, WVa, a mere 150 miles away.

You talk about "standard" English in the U.S., as though the U.S. spoke
*true* English.  More bullshit.  Be that as it may, the principal agents
of the early United States (Presidents, etc.) were Virginians, hence
Southerners. Sure, the barbarian hordes followed from Europe and settled
into Northern manufacturing and so on, and from them you establish that
that represents "standard" English?

You would know, if you had read some of the suppressed history of the
U.S., that barbarians who "speak Northern" have propagated tremendous
amounts of disinformation, including setting up speaking exhibits of
U.S. Presidents, where even the Southern Presidents "speak Northern or
Midwestern", i.e. a ficticious history.

If you read my complete post, you would note that I made a distinction
between "twang" (i.e., slurring words) and "accent" (something that
sounds "different" but is nonetheless clear), a distinction that you
have not grasped.

Next thing you'll say (probably) is that since the White Man killed off
the Indians, then the Indians must have been the True Savages.  Just
like it says in the Declaration Of Independence (yeah, it says that).
Now don't tell me that Thomas Jefferson was wrong, but you are right.
Read more, talk less.

[snip remainder]

Carl Johnson wrote:
> > Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net> wrote:
> > the War For Southern Independence (not a true Civil War BTW)

>   Care to enlighten an unknowing Canuck as to why this is so?

Pardon me for adding to list, but everyone really wants to know, yes?

A true Civil War is two factions fighting for control of the same
government or taxable land area.  One could argue that the North and
South were both fighting for control of the South, but that would be
a specious argument.  If the South had intended in their declarations
of separation to free up the Northern states as well, then that would
add weight to the argument.

BTW, the fact that there were incursions into the North by the South
is no more evidence of Civil War than Chechens incursing into Moscow.

Also, the "provocation" at Ft. Sumter should no more be considered the
South starting the war than, say, the Gulf of Tonkin incident starting
the Vietnam war.

Gemini Thunder wrote:
> Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net> wrote:
> >There's a story about the Confederate officer who, following the War For
> >Southern Independence (not a true Civil War BTW), walked up the steps of
> >the veterans' club and saw a Union man sitting with a tin cup, looking
> >absolutely miserable with all sorts of injuries, etc.  The Southern man
> >tossed a dollar into the cup, at which point the astonished Union soldier
> >exclaimed "thank you, sir".  The next week at the club, the same thing
> >happened, and the soldier asked "Excuse me sir, but why would a Southern
> >officer such as yourself be showing so much sympathy to a Union man like
> >myself?"  To which the Southern officer replied "Actually it's not that,
> >it's just that you're the first Yankee I've seen that's been shot up
> >to my specifications".

> A minor nit on an otherwise excellent post: I am of the understanding
> the proper name is "The War of Northern Aggression". :)

Yes. We use both terms, and perhaps others as well. As to the Northern
Aggression, the avalanche of propaganda after the war (and continuing
with Ken Burns' disonfo on PBS TV) was intended to "persuade" the public
that the South started the War, having "attacked" Ft. Sumter (their own
property), and having had the temerity to withdraw from the Union (their
right as free states), not to mention holding slaves (an act not made
"illegal" until 1862, i.e., a year after the war started).

Dale again demonstrates his amazing tact and rhetorical skill
by posting private mail and then debating only the portions of
my message he doesn't reproduce, batting at straw men all the
while. I should have known better than to even try.

If anyone cares, I 'll send you my original message to Dale
privately. This all is so far off topic (I was bored) and Dale
is such a twit that it simply doesn't bear more discussion here.

-j

--
"I'm about to, or I am going to, die. Either expression is used."
                - Last words of Dominique Bouhours, Grammarian, 1702
____________________________________________________________________
Jamie Lawrence                                     foodie@netcom.com

At 10:38 AM -0800 12/22/96, Dale Thorn wrote:
>Gemini Thunder wrote:
...
>> A minor nit on an otherwise excellent post: I am of the understanding
>> the proper name is "The War of Northern Aggression". :)
>
>Yes. We use both terms, and perhaps others as well. As to the Northern
>Aggression, the avalanche of propaganda after the war (and continuing
...

And I recall from my history classes that the _official_ name of that war
was "The War of the Rebellion," which of course comes closer to Dale's
point about the war being about an attempted secession, which no serious
scholar doubts it was about. (Another common name: The War Between the
States. The "Civil War" is far and away the most common name, but is, as
Dale notes, highly misleading. The winner gets to write the history books,
though.)

(Oh, it was "about" lots of things, things we all studied in high school.
Cotten, tariffs, and the right not to have to teach children in Ebonics.)

By the way, I'll be off the list for a while, for the usual seasonal
reasaons. Ignore the usual Vulis remarks about how my silence means he has
succeeded in driving me off the list, or that I'm in a tryst with Gilmore
and Hughes.

As to subjects discussed on the list, it's interesting that my very much
"on-topic" post on extortion and untraceable payments, a very long post,
has generated not a single response, while the "Ebonics" thread be cookin
and jivin. I be dissed by dis shit.

(Anyone who claims only crypto- or digicash-related sorts of posts are what
the list should talk about should note the dynamics of these threads.)

By the way, both Jesse Jackson and famed poetess Maya Angelou have
denounced the Oakland School Board's adoption of "Ebonics" as shameful and
a travesty. Jackson said black children should not be encouraged to speak
"garbage."

--Tim May

Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

On Sun, 22 Dec 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:

> By the way, both Jesse Jackson and famed poetess Maya Angelou have
> denounced the Oakland School Board's adoption of "Ebonics" as shameful
> and a travesty. Jackson said black children should not be encouraged to
> speak "garbage."

Isn't that what Farrakan (sp?) has been saying from the start of
his political career? I thaught he was the Man nowadays (but I
don't live in the US and could have gotten it backwards).

Asgaard

Asgaard wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Dec 1996, Timothy C. May wrote:
> > By the way, both Jesse Jackson and famed poetess Maya Angelou have
> > denounced the Oakland School Board's adoption of "Ebonics" as shameful
> > and a travesty. Jackson said black children should not be encouraged to
> > speak "garbage."

If I remember correctly, the head of the NAACP a few years ago said
(in response to having to say 7 syllables instead of 1, i.e., African-
American instead of Black), "we were better off when it was just plain
Colored".  (Quote approximate).

Timmy C. May <tcmay@got.net> farted:
> By the way, I'll be off the list for a while, for the usual seasonal
> reasaons. Ignore the usual Vulis remarks about how my silence means he has
> succeeded in driving me off the list, or that I'm in a tryst with Gilmore
> and Hughes.

A romantic threesome?

Anyway, good riddance.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

Timothy C. May wrote:

> By the way, I'll be off the list for a while, for the usual seasonal
> reasaons. I'm in a tryst with Gilmore and Hughes, extortion and untraceable payments, cookin and jivin--shameful "garbage."
> --Tim May

Tim,
  While your message came through somewhat garbled, it made it clear
that the holiday season there in big city has lost its original
innocence.
   Damn, and I'm stuck here in butt-fuck Saskatchewan (no pun intended).

Toto

On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, Mark Rosen wrote:

> 	* You are making glaring generalizations regarding all members of an
> ethnic body; you don't seem to realize that intellect is based not on color
> or how you talk but on your brain (which has the same color and other basic
> properties in all humans, I believe)

That's not what was said.  He said he would not hire on the basis of a
person's inability to speak the English language.  That has nothing
whatsoever to do with color.    If you can't communicate with your
co-workers, how can you expect to get any work done?

> 	* You are completely forgetting the other "non-English" group in America;
> the so-called White Trash or heavy Southern accents, which are violate just
> as many prissy and stuck up rules of grammar as Ebonics

(In my thickest Southern Accent) Fuck you.  Speaking with an accent and
speaking proper english are not mutually exclusive. Ebonics and like notions
are an insult.

> 	I also think that you are forgetting about the human aspect of your
> discrimination. For a second, put yourself in the place of a really smart
> black guy applying for a job at Intel. He is overqualified for the job. You
> turn him down. Have you ever wondered what it does to a person to be turned
> down not on the basis of their moral character or intellect but by their
> skin? For someone to be told that they are stupid and are not competent to
> do this job? You don't realize that you are crushing _human_ lives, people
> who have feelings. If you would just put yourself in their place, you would
> realize the hurt that your are inflicting.

How did you get this out of the previous post?  If the person is indeed
overqualified, chances are he/she can and will speak English rather than
(let's face it) slang in a job interview.

> 	Out of curiousity, do you refuse from hiring people with Southern Accents?
> Or people who have heavy "asian" accents? I'm very surprised that a smart
> person like you, who believes in the power of strong cryptography, one of
> the greatest equalizing forces in the world, actively discriminates against
> other people who don't look or talk like you.

As has been pointed out in the past, crypto and technology can also be used
to enforce discriminatory practices.  Take off your rosen colored glasses.
Furthermore, there is a great difference between a heavy "asian" accent and
ebonics.  A person who struggles with the English language because it is not
his native tongue, I respect.  The notion that "black English" is a
separate language is absurd.  It is slang. 

me
off to eat my grits and learn me sum perl.
_______________________________________________________________
 Omegaman <mailto:omega@bigeasy.com> 
  PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2
                        59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 
 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" 
 field to get a copy of my public key
_______________________________________________________________

Omegaman <omega@bigeasy.com> writes:

> On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, Mark Rosen wrote:
>
> > 	* You are making glaring generalizations regarding all members of an
> > ethnic body; you don't seem to realize that intellect is based not on color
> > or how you talk but on your brain (which has the same color and other basic
> > properties in all humans, I believe)
>
> That's not what was said.  He said he would not hire on the basis of a
> person's inability to speak the English language.  That has nothing
> whatsoever to do with color.    If you can't communicate with your
> co-workers, how can you expect to get any work done?

In this case you're right - ability to communicate is a bona fide occupational
qualification. But he should be able to refuse to hire them if he doesn't like
the color of their skin. Fuck the gubmint interference.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps