Talk:Cracker (pejorative)/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Cracker

"Cracker" is not from the slave masters "cracking" their whips, it comes from poor whites who could only afford and thus ate crackers. Cracker, Linthead etc. are all from the same time period and have essentially the same meaning i.e. "poor white person." The idea that cracker comes from slave masters is just another white supremacist fabrication to twist the origination of the word into something that makes themselves feel superior.

Just "Cracker," not "white cracker," which is a tautology: imagine a black cracker. Or a native American cracker. Too dumb to correct (TDTC) Wetman 08:50, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"Cracker" may exists alone as an insult, but "White cracker", due to being the most (if only) variant in use on any broad scale, is a term in and of itself. Even so, jsut to me safe, I had already added it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 08:56, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Revert of Neutrallity's edit - 04:50, 14 Sep 2004

There were two things reverted

"Nigger" was reverted to "N-word". Both are valid Wiki links. I prefer the softer "N-word". Neutrality ought to justify his change prior to making it again

The citations and text referring to Al Gore's campaign manager (Donna Brazile) calling GWB a "White Cracker" in 2000 was restored. Neutrality's edit summary said he deleted due to "dubious truth".

The original text, which I restored has (2) links as sources and clearly notes that it was not widely reported. I feel that it's incumbent upon Neutrality to defend his deletion here, rather than simply trying to force it on the article.

In addition, the text was clarified to indicate that this statement attributed to Donna Brazile is an allegation, not a unrebuttable fact.

[[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 04:58, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"The N-word" is a preposterous suburban genteelism, like a parlor in a mobile home. If "Nigger" is the word, just say so: it loses none of its repellent shock power by repetition, be assured. Wetman 05:32, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This article is not about the word nigger. Also, as the article states, white cracker is not as harsh of a term as nigger. Therefore, there is no need to use the word nigger for scale. In fact using the term N-word for scale emphasizes the lesser level of severity of white cracker than the word nigger. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 05:51, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

There are some - myself included - who find the word "cracker" to be as insulting as the word "nigger". I have no problem with either being used on the wiki - after all, "the N-word" sounds like a six-year-old tattling to their teacher - but I take great offence to the idea that a black person calling a white person a "cracker" is not as offensive as a white person calling a black person "nigger". That's racism, pure and simple. It's all about the intent behind the word, not the word itself. thefamouseccles 01:39, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

1) Newsmax is not a valid source. 2) "The N word" is an infantile construction. Thanks you. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 14:03, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

1) Neutrality, you are not the sole arbiter of what is and is not a "valid" source"
2) Neutrality, you are not the sole arbiter of what is and is not an "infantile construction"
If you'd like to dialog about this sincerely, that's fine. On the other hand, since you are going around this Wiki referring to me as a "troll" [1], I seriously doubt that you are dealing with me on the level here. Do you have a problem with me as an editor? Would you agree to mediation? Please advise. PS: In the meantime, I have again restored my edits which you keep deleting.

[[User:Rex071404|Rex071404

]] 14:59, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The Drudge link mentions Cindy Adams of the NYPost as being the source. The Newsmax article just repeats the Drudge article, it adds nothing. And the Enos Throop link just has one sentence about this, adding nothing. Surely there are better sources? AlistairMcMillan 15:48, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

3 revert limit has been exceeded by Neutrality 15:11, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neutrality, your 3-revert limit for today 9.14.04, has been exceeded on this article. Please desist from further reverts. I am willing to dialog about this. Please discuss on this page. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 15:11, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

BTW You are aware Rex that you have reverted five times (make that eight now) on this article so far. Right? If you are going to hold everyone else to the 3-revert rule it would help your case if you did the same. AlistairMcMillan 15:51, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It's curious Alistair, that you and Neutrality just happen to appear on this, another of the new articles I have created, wouldn't you say? [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404

]] 16:07, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yep. It's all just a big conspiracy. We are "THE MAN" and we are trying to "KEEP YOU DOWN". :)

All sarcasm aside, you do remember that you yourself pointed me here four days ago. "I have been the proginator of (4) new articles in the two months I have been here" I just didn't want to get into a revert war.

Anyway are you going to answer my query above about the three links? AlistairMcMillan 16:29, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The article makes clear that there were few news reports and that this is an "allegation". It is not however, a groundless allegation and as such is not subject to unilateral tag-team reverts. Also, I am virtually certain this page was started by me after any communications to you. for you to have found this, you must have been looking deliberatly. Why that is, I am not speculating. It is however, curious to me.[[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 17:21, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

What was the phrase you used ""totem pole speculation"?

# Brazile alledgedly tells a gossip columnist for a right wing paper, Cindy Adams (and no-one else).

# Cindy Adams decides not to print the story in her column (I mean it is a gossip column after all, she has standards, she can't go printing anything). So she alledgedly tells Drudge (and no-one else).

# Drudge prints it on his site for all to see.

# A bunch of people with a conservative bias, pick up the story and repeat it. However none (0) of them follow up with Brazile or Adams (or Drudge for that matter). Not even for the good old traditional "Brazile refused to comment" comment.

# No-one follows up or tries to prove the story one way or another for three (3) years.

You're so obviously right in this matter. How could anyone possibly even hint that this might not be a slam-dunk.

BTW About your suspicions. You weren't clear that when I checked out the list of pages you started, I was to do that once and once only. Do I have to apply for permission to check your contrib list first, in triplicate? AlistairMcMillan 21:37, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Reverts by Neutrality on 09.14.04:

[[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 15:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I left a comment for Neutrality about this here and he deleted it. His edit summary refers to my comment as "trolling". [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404

]] 15:44, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I discussed above and in my edit summaries. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 15:17, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Neutrality, as I understand the term discussion it requires that you wait for my reply. As I understand Consensus decision making, it requires that we actually try to come to a jointly acceptable resolution. I'd like to try that here. Are you willing to try? Please advise. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 15:24, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It may be coincidental but if you're implying that I'm Neutrality, you are mistaken. And I was not describing you as "prissy" - I was describing the edit as such. Discussion, incidentally, does not mean that you automatically get your own way, especially when the majority of people on this talk page seem to disagree with you. --195.11.216.59 15:48, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

195.11.216.59, you have a duty to edit towards consensus, not majority rule - please see Consensus decision making [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 15:59, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

And we all have a duty, if you are editing on Wikipedia, to work towards creating an encyclopedia rather than pushing any particular brand of politics, and we should all remember that. Consensus? OK, how about this. We all agree that the article deserves to exist. We all agree that the word can be used as an insult or in a lighter, humorous way. I'm certainly prepared to accept that it's good to have examples of both, and no-one seems concerned about leaving Chef in, but several people seem unhappy about the Bush example. How about we agree to leave that one out, as there are doubts about its validity and it's very controversial during this election period, and look for another example that's not so politically charged? --195.11.216.59 16:21, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

195.11.216.59, in regards to Neutrality, one of the "people" who have been reverting me, he has been a principle editorial foil against me on several Kerry/Bush related articles. So you may want to temper your assessments by taking that into account. Also, other than some (one? two? )simply wanting the Brazile insult against Bush "out" there has not been substantial enough justification for removing it. I have tweaked the text to accomodate certain concerns of others, but I will not sit idly by and allow a deletion of the Brazil/Bush referrence simply because some find it unpleasant. Brazile is noted for insults of this type. Her reputation, along with the links I have provided, make using her comment to illustrate that word, perfectly valid. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404

]] 17:28, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Discussion of Word Selection consensus has been reached on N-word / Nigger

Reasons for using "Nigger":

It is the actual title of the article referenced.
It is the word that actualy has such "power."
It is the actual term, not a euphemism. Although "White cracker" may be less harsh, it is the actual slur and not a euphemism.

Reasons for using "N word":

Some people may be offended by use of the word "Nigger" so its use should be minimized.

Users supporting the use of "Nigger":

L33tminion

As a non-logged-in editor, if this comes down to a vote, my view will not be counted. Be aware as well, L33tminion, that as your only edits so far have been to this article, you may well be accused of being a sockpuppet (indeed, I have some doubts about you myself). Nevertheless, I'm including my voice here in support. --195.11.216.59 16:03, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I really am a new user, but I understand your suspicions. I found this article on the recently edited articles list. Previously, I had edited the article on Olin College, but I had no account at that time.
I can vouch for L33tminion being a new user. I am also a student at Olin and know him personally. --Nertzy

Users supporting the use of "N word":

I prefer the "N-word", but have acquiesced to the group on that point (see article). This is how consensus is built - we all make a best efforts attempt to accomodate each other. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404

]] 16:05, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Newsmax column (now Drudge instead)

Please explain what the Newsmax column adds to the story? AlistairMcMillan 21:51, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Newsmax add a reference to corroborate that the Donna Brazile example is not merely being imagined by us, the Wiki editors. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 22:06, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Changed the Newsmax (third hand source) link to the Drudge (second hand source) link. AlistairMcMillan 22:39, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ok with me. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 ]] 23:02, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Origin: Corn-cracking poor

Some Florida crackers say that poor people who had to crack their own corn at home because they couldn't afford to buy processed corn were called crackers by some of those more affluent, who looked down upon the activity. This usage does not pre-suppose that the cracker is a white person but would refer to anyone who's so poor. Beanluc 23:13, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've heard that story told by J.J. Gray of the Florida Panhandle soul-rock band Mofro, in live performance as a preamble to his song "dirtfloorcracka". I think the above paragraph is worth including in the Origins discussion in the article, and that it would be worth making Origins a section of its own instead of a single paragraph. Anyone agree? Beanluc 23:13, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Offtopic aside: Interestingly, the notion of poor people distastefully having to crack stuff for food has a life in the North too: While I don't think the epithet "cracker" was ever used up there, it could have been. Only the poorest people in Maine used to eat lobster becauser it was such dirt-cheap trashy food. It's said they would bury the shells in the yard instead of be seen putting their "crackins" on the trashheap. They say there was once a prison riot in Maine over the inmates' being fed lobster too frequently. Beanluc 23:30, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Georgia Cracker

The phrase Georgia Cracker is older than implied in the article lead: "...originally a pejorative term for a white person mainly used by blacks" - by at least a century. Note the 1890 reference in the article [here]. The age of the term finally is discussed in the thrird paragraph, making the word "originally" in the first line troubling. ~ WCFrancis 23:20, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Ethnic slur

There is a category for ethnic slurs. Wigger is in, this should probably be as well. Comments? --Uncle Bungle 02:43, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

I think

This article is proof that everytime Rex creates an article with a title this dumb it should be immediatly deleted/redirected/locked/, save wikipedia from a lot of dumbness--152.163.100.10 05:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Further commentary on my edits

I'm restoring a few minor edits after they were reverted, and adding a few more, with some commentary.

The first edit fixes some faulty parallelism.

As an insult, "cracker" was and is typically invoked against a white American, particularly (though not necessarily) lower-income, uneducated rural men...

This sentence first says that the term is invoked against "a white American", and then against "rural men". I've made this marginally clearer by using the plural in both places.

The second edit resolves a modified/modifier gap.

...in the South, especially in Georgia.

I moved this phrase closer to invoked, which it modifies.

Thirdly, especially is a more concise way of saying "particularly (though not necessarily)".

Fourthly, I modified the remark about victims of the slur, with more focus on who is using the word, rather than those against whom it is used.

Fifthly, I mention how that remark is unverified.

The result:

As an insult, cracker was and is used most frequently in the South, especially in Georgia. It is invoked typically against white Americans. It may reflect frustration with undereducation, and also possibly is a sign of contempt for poverty, although insufficient evidence of this is available.

Omphaloscope » talk 22:03, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Article completely out of context with regards to actual HISTORY

So this is what happens when you let people squabble over a term that has roots over 500 years old in Southern History? No one can see past the negative connotation to actually go out and pick up a history book or research properly. This entire article is a shame and should be wiped from the Wiki and started over by someone who has a distinct clue on where this word actually came from and how times changed and it became a perjorative term for poor white southerners. For those who would like a clue start by googling the terms "Florida Cracker" "Perdido Cracker" and see where it leads you.

Your use of the term "Perdido Cracker" on this page is the only Google hit for the term as of today. THB 19:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Disputed section

Please give a reference for the section explaining the difference between a cracker and a hillbilly or hick. THB 19:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC) You may want to read about "Craker Cowboys" that used whips to drive cattle. This is where the term came from.

Etymology

The etymology tracing the term back to the Gaelic craic is well established and documented. The other etymologies which do not have no similar documentation, if so noted, can all be listed together as lesser and/or unsubstantiated theories. There is no scholarly reason to call out one specific etymology for scorn by stating "It has no basis in fact".

While the word has similarities in to carraig, unless there is an etymology in which carraig is cited, there is no reason for that entry to exist. It could just as easily be stated that it has similarities to Old English cracian, the root of crack. The entry on Carraig adds bulk with no substance.

Lastly, the quotation of cracker in Darwin's The Origin of Species is a supporting subset definition of the already established cracker definition given to the Lord of Dartmouth, as lawless Scots-Irish who inhabit many areas including Virginia. It is not a seperate etymology.

Etymology2

The entire etymology was pulled out of someone ass, without one refernce besides the first sentence

Picture caption

Do you think it's right for the caption of the picture to be "Label depicting a barefoot cracker boy eating peaches from a straw hat" ? This directly states that the boy is a cracker. Shouldn't it be something like "Label depicting a barefoot boy eating peaches from a straw hat, clearly being referred to as a cracker", so that it states that the sign is calling the boy a cracker and not wikipedians? I think it's allright, but i suppose some people could get offended. Opinions? Gerardo199 23:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Depending on context

Despite the previous consensus on the matter (see above), and the objections of various editors who remove the text, an editor keeps adding this sentence:

Depending on context, this slur can have the same negative and demeaning stance to whites as the word Nigger does to blacks.

Can we have some verification of this, and perhaps a discussion of whether it is correct and appropriate? -Will Beback 19:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

for the last 100+ years "cracker" has been jocular and friendly--see the books listed and note the "Cracker state" motto as well as the brand name biscuit. Actual derogatory usage has been uncommon. Rjensen 01:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

George Bush Hates Me

Changed the heading GEORGE BUSH HATES ME to Usage Halfbakedbliss 12:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The Donna Brazile section needs a reference.

Unsourced/nnpv

"In recent years, members of the American Left have taken to calling Christian Conservatives "Crackers" as an insult. On August 20, 2000, Internet gossip columnist Matt Drudge reported that Donna Brazile, Al Gore's campaign manager, called George W. Bush a "black hating cracker"

I dont see how one alleged cracker slur from one member of the american left could be seen as "recent years, members of the american left." As if this is a widespread phenomenon and accepted fact. Also, the wording implies that this a slur used against christian conservatives in general and I dont think there is any proof to that. I removed the first sentence entirely and left the rest intact. Any objections? First time poster btw and I apologize if I have not followed protocol.--Jasper23 20:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Took out NPOV and Un-encyclopedic material

Here it is:

The first part is obvious:

"In recent years, members of the American Left have taken to calling Christian Conservatives "Crackers" as an insult."

"On August 20, 2000, Internet gossip columnist Matt Drudge reported that Donna Brazile, Al Gore's campaign manager, called George W. Bush a "black hating cracker" while talking to New York Post gossip columnist Cindy Adams at the 2000 Democratic National Convention."

This part is an unsourced claim by Matt Drudge with no corroboration. Not worthy of an encyclopedia article.

I feel like we should take out the whole politics section. Discussion? Disagreement? Comments?

Removal of new section

One etymology dating back to the antebellum South claims the term originated with slavery. At the advent of American slavery, Native Americans were used, but most of these slaves were not resistant to the strange European diseases that were brought over during the colonial period. Others knew the land better than the white colonists, and fled or were liberated by fellow tribe members. (Cf. In the Spirit of Crazy Horse by Peter Mattheson)A second attempt invoved using lower class white slaves from Europe. Many of these folks arrived as indentured servants, but died during their period of enslavement or were kept in bondage longer than the agreed upon time. But most of these would simply walk off the plantation and mingle with the immigrant workers who were arriving in ever increasing numbers. After Africans became the target for the slave trade (due to their distinctive appearance and the fact that many European diseases were also common in Africa), the number of poor whites vastly outnumbered the elite class, who were wealthy enough to own land (and slaves). Racism was used as a tool by the ruling elite to prevent the destitute whites from becoming sympathetic to the African slaves, and possibly aiding them in escaping the horrors of slavery. These lower classes were also employed as foremen in the plantations, whose job it was to supervise black slaves and to prevent their escape. Many used bullwhips to terrorize the African slaves, and the sound the whip made when it was used as a weapon was (and still is) called 'cracking' the whip. The foremen were thus known as 'crackers' in reference to the noise of their whips as they were used to assualt the bodies of the slaves. (Cf. Thomas Jefferson's Notes on Virginia and the film Matawan). At the close of the American Civil War. many who had previously been employed as night riders (slave catchers) or foremen became unmeployed. These now jobless whites were then influenced by former Confederate officers bitter from the loss of the war to join the Ku Klux Klan, which was created by Nathan Bedford Forrest in attempt to resist Reconstruction. This further instilled racism and a distrust of the US federal government in these lower income whites, thus setting the stage for the period of time and system of laws and customs known as Jim Crow, further exacerbating race relations in the South. (Cf. Remembering Jim Crow by American RadioWorks).

Sorry, the above section is just way too long. It destroys the rest of the article with an unsourced and possibly biased pov. I do appreciate the hard work that you must have put into this but nothing is cited. This is too speculative and does not belong in an encyclopedia article. Btw, vandalism is not the term you want to use when you disagree with someones good faith edit.Jasper23 20:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The part about "cracking the whip" seems very relevant. I'd rather see us keep the text that directly deals with the etymology (i.e. not the part about the Klan) but tag it as needing citations... -/- Warren 21:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree that some parts of this should be kept...but I would prefer to see sources to check the validity of all this. If you look at the top of this talk page, this etymology is attributed to white supremacist groups. I would like to see it go in as it is sourced.Jasper23 21:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

i would like to ask a question about hillbillies and hopefully you can answer it. many of thier stories songs and ballads delat with the history of what?

asking a question

hello, i would like to ask a question and hopefully you may be able to answer. many of the hillbillies songs and stories and ballads dealt with the history of what?

What? Jasper23 19:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)