22-05-2016

​Debates on the word "negro" in Danish politics

Deres Majestæt / Your Majesty!

Your Holiness Pope Francis

Dear Mosaic Faith Society in Denmark

Dear Muslim Faith Society in Denmark

Dear Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen

Dear Minister of Justice Søren Pind

Dear Foreign Minister Kristian Jensen

Dear Minister of Culture and Church Bertel Haarder

Dear Chairman of the Parliament Pia Kjærsgaard

Dear Chairman of Danish People's Party Kristian Thulesen Dahl

Dear Member of Parliament Søren Espersen

Dear Actor and Manuscript Author Anna Neye

Dear President Barack Obama

Dear President Candidate Bernie Sanders

Dear President Candidate Hillary Clinton

Dear President Candidate Donald Trump

The Danish people's Party Member of Parliament Søren Espersen has said that President Obama is the first negro President of the United States, and came into a public discussion about the word "negro" vs. "nigger" because another politician Jeppe Kofod had made a tweet about it in English, where he translated the Danish “neger” (negro) into “nigger”. It is thought-provoking that you need to put a colour label on Africans or African Americans. This requirement has not, however, come out of the blue. Some take the view that Chinese and Japanese people are yellow, but we do not say yellow people about them – today we do not even talk about "the yellow peril"[1], although both Japan, South Korea and China have long been a danger to Western capitalism! Black/negro/nigger is a trade name, a synonym for a slave from Africa, which you could buy and sell, own and put to work. The value of the slave did not lie in his/her humanity, but in market value and in the value as raw labor. When someone therefore claim that negro just refers to the color black, it is a lie, for African Americans recognize it as a derogatory term, as denying them humanity. The slave owners used the word, because they were allowed to, in a totally selfish power universe where the white race is in the centre.

http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/soeren-espersen-about-the word-black-it-is-just-so-fornaermende-be-called-white

The politician Jeppe Kofod translated in a tweet in English negro to nigger, and he is not quite as wrong as Søren Espersen and a number of other politicians will make him. Nigger is of the same strain as negro, just a tad more filled with racial hatred and discrimination. It smells of Ku Kluks Klan, South State mentality. Søren Espersen also claims that it is insulting to be called white, "I'm not white, I'm sunburned". But I myself, who is white, do not feel it insulting to be called white, why would I? -Although I prefer the neutral expression, Americans use "Caucasian". No, negro is the expression of the dominant races self-assumed overlordship, and if we use the word, it is based on the story of the white man's dominion over the Africans.

"When I was a child, I did not care to be called a negro. My mother actually crossed out the word in all our books, and insisted that the word just wasn't okay. But when I asked people to refrain from calling me negro, then it was as if I took a right from them and when I for instance went to the supermarket, then strangers evidently had a right to point at me and call me negro, although I stood right next to them and actually had a name. " - Anna Neye in "Just call me brown", DR K TV 2016.

"You think "negro" is a small thing? Do you know how many people died so that black people should not be called negroes? " Said by an unnamed man in "Just call me brown".

The colonial era in Africa also has its share in the making Africans an object, where a hierarchy was built up, in which the Africans are always the underdogs, which is still the case today.

"But it is also a dream that shows that the way we currently even fantasize about maintaining and protecting this society, is misunderstood. We in the Nordic countries, are currently dreaming of closing our borders, so all these people stop coming to us. What we don't take into account is that we constantly exceed these borders and have done so for centuries. Not just by draining the colonies for values, as we did in a time now gone. "– from the editorial "The dream of coming up North" in newspaper Information 21. may 2016 by (initials) lfk, in which poor Africans’ dreams of settling in Europe is debated.

A place where the colonial era is still alive, is in Greenland. The Inuit have never been slaves to Danes, but they have been exposed to the same kind of supremacy, and Denmark's colonial past here has not been dealt with to the core, nor in relation to the former colony in The West Indies.

Well, you can argue, is it not just your own attitude, that one can't say "negro"? Søren Espersen says that it is to be "skin fixed" to discuss his choice of words. I show that it has to do with culture, history and human respect. So does the language experts in http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/kultur/sprogeksperter-buries-the Negro-always. It is of no use that one's intention by saying "negro" is not discriminatory, when the story of the "negroes" does the opposite. “Negro” will always be linked to exploitation and discrimination, and therefore Søren Espersen can not use it, and he has no reason to feel insulted and stepped on! The article tells that he does not want to use the term African American, which is the neutral ethnic description America uses, so he sticks to discrimination and the disrespect-track!

As a transition to the second part of my post, here's a quote from Søren Espersen from newspaper BT (on the subject of the poster below) - http://www.bt.dk/danmark/soeren-espersen-after-criticism-of-df-campaign-we-could-have-put-a-black-ind

"" I am myself colour blind, so I have no idea what colour they have. That’s not how we are thinking. We could easily have put a negro in, and then what? What difference would it make to anything? I think people in general should get in a summer mood and so be pleased by this "Feel Good" campaign. It is nothing else," he said to TV 2". Here we just have the negro again, and, more generally, Søren Espersen's sarcastic and disrespectful way of talking.

What he is talking about is the Danish people's Party (DP) poster "Our Denmark – there is so much we have to take care of." Many feel that the image of the Danish family of several generations is highly exclusionary because it does not take account of the fact that Denmark is a multicultural and multiethnic society. Many do not feel that they are being represented by the poster.

DP is expressly opposed to multicultural development, and possibly also multi ethnicity. At least the image unambiguously expresses single ethnicity. When the poster says "Our Denmark", the party means the Danish People’s Party’s (DP) Denmark "but the others on the picture are really DP-members, who are with us in this community, as the Danish people's Party also is" Chairman of DP Kristian Thulesen Dahl said on the “Aftenshowet” (The Evening Show) on DR1 TV.

It is at best a very clumsy communication, the poster expresses, for with the address to the public on bus shelters, on railway platforms and where it is now, most probably feel that the poster addresses everyone who sees it. Its approach is a collective "Our", and we naturally perceive it as "you and me", regardless of whether we are DP-members or not. And then many people feel they are not included by the picture. But that is not what the Danish people's Party has meant. They believe that "Our Denmark", it is the Denmark, which the DP values and can identify with. It's probably not very wrong that DP's members mainly are white Danes, and then the picture, of course, is true enough!

http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/video-t-d-to-df-campaign-critics-faa-however-little-sommerhumoer

DR1 TV “The Evening Show” chatted with two taxi drivers of "different ethnicity than Danish", who were sad that on the picture there is no one who looks like them. Chairman Kristian Thulesen Dahl has no empathy for them. First he giggles and then "well get in a little summer mood. Just try to look at the picture, you cannot be sorry from that. It's a bunch of great Danes, who get together because they think there is something we need to be careful of. " A similar arrogance to this, one has go far to find. He directly laughs of those who are sad to feel excluded, and is denying their right to feel that way. It is into this context I have cited Søren Espersen above for saying “We could easily have put a negro in”.

Then we come to the second part of the message the poster conveys "-there is so much we have to take care of." Again the poster has one message, and DP expounds it in a different way. My contention is that the poster conveys the message that we must be careful of Denmark, because all those who do not look like the DPs in the picture, are a threat to us. Kristian Thulesen Dahl's interpretation in “The Tonight Show” is that "there are some dangers lurking-we have had unearthed this spring, that there are some parallel societies, we will have broken down. We do not like it, we will have a Denmark that is coherent, where there is community and cohesiveness, and here there are some people who stand up and espouses for that. " The parallel societies, Thulesen Dahl is talking about, must be some of those that are gathered around the mosques, such as it was displayed in Tv2 's broadcasting series "Mosques behind the veil". When that is the message, it would in any event be excluded that someone in the picture would wear a scarf or be of Middle Eastern ethnicity. But when you look at the picture one naturally comes to the conclusion that it is all refugees and immigrants, who are the danger. That is how Danish people's Party expresses their attitudes toward refugees and immigrants, and that is exactly how exclusionary the message being expressed by the poster is. It is not “Our Denmark”, it is “them” vs. “Our”. That DP see a need of making such a campaign is scary. I wonder which cohesiveness DP is talking about? It seems to be a community just as ethnically coherent as the poster gives an expression of. It is difficult not to be reminded of Germany in the thirties.

Articles I have used in the post

http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/soeren-espersen-about-the word-black-it-is-just-so-fornaermende-be-called-white

http://www.bt.dk/danmark/soeren-espersen-after-criticism-of-df-campaign-we-could-have-put-a-black-ind

http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/video-t-d-to-df-campaign-critics-faa-however-little-sommerhumoer

http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/kultur/sprogeksperter-buries-the Negro-always

I also have had good inspiration for the article in the excellent and very informative broadcast in three parts "Just call me brown" by Anna Neye.

[1] Derived from Prussian Emperor Wilhelm, who in 1895 warned against the Mongols, which he feared would flood the world.

Kind regards, Daniela Skov and Lars Skov Krøgholt.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Folketingsmedlem for Dansk Folkeparti Søren Espersen har sagt, at Barack Obama er den første negerpræsident i USA, og fik sig rodet ud i en offentlig diskussion om ordet ”neger” kontra ”nigger”, fordi en anden politiker, Jeppe Kofod havde udsendt et tweet om det på engelsk, hvor han oversatte ”neger” til ”nigger”. Det er tankevækkende, at man har brug for at sætte en farveetiket på afrikanere eller afroamerikanere. Dette behov er dog ikke opstået ud af det blå. Nogle har den opfattelse, at kinesere og japanere er gule, men vi siger ikke gule mennesker om dem –i dag taler man ikke engang om ”den gule fare”[1], selv om både Japan, Sydkorea og Kina længe har udgjort en fare for den vestlige kapitalisme! Sort/neger/nigger er en varebetegnelse, synonym for en slave fra Afrika, som man kunne købe og sælge, eje og sætte i arbejde. Slavens værdi lå ikke i hans/hendes menneskelighed, men i handelsværdien og i værdien som rå arbejdskraft. Når nogen derfor hævder, at neger bare henviser til farven sort, er det en løgn, for afroamerikanere genkender det som et absolut nedsættende begreb, som frakender dem menneskelighed. Man brugte ordet, fordi man kunne tillade sig det, i et magtfuldkomment selvisk univers, hvor den hvide race er i centrum.

http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/soeren-espersen-om-ordet-neger-det-er-lige-saa-fornaermende-blive-kaldt-hvid

Politikeren Jeppe Kofod oversatte i et tweet på engelsk neger til nigger, og han er ikke helt så forkert på den som Søren Espersen og en del andre politikere vil gøre ham til. Nigger er af samme stamme som neger, blot en tand mere fyldt med racehad og diskrimination. Det lugter af Ku Kluks Klan, Sydstatsmentalitet. Søren Espersen hævder, at det også er fornærmende at blive kaldt hvid, ”Jeg er da ikke hvid, jeg er solbrændt”. Men jeg selv, som er hvid, føler det ikke fornærmende at blive kaldt hvid, hvorfor skulle jeg det? - om end jeg foretrække det neutrale udtryk, amerikanerne bruger ”kaukasisk”. Nej, neger er udtryk for den herskende races selvpåtagede overherredømme, og hvis man bruger ordet, bygger man oven på historien om den hvide mands herredømme over afrikanerne.

”Da jeg var barn, brød jeg mig ikke om at blive kaldt for neger. Min mor stregede faktisk ordet ud i alle vores bøger, og insisterede på, at det ord bare ikke var okay. Men når jeg bad folk om at lade være med at kalde mig neger, så var det som om jeg tog en rettighed fra dem, og når jeg f.eks. gik i supermarkedet, så måtte vidt fremmede mennesker åbenbart godt pege ad mig og kalde mig for neger, selv om stod lige ved siden af og faktisk havde et navn.” Anna Neye i ”Kald mig bare brun”, DR K 2016.

”You think “negro” is a small thing? Do you know how many people died so that black people should not be called negroes?” Sagt af unavngivet mand i “Kald mig bare brun”.

Kolonitiden i Afrika har også sin andel i objektgørelsen af afrikanerne, hvor der blev opbygget et hierarki, hvor afrikanerne altid er the underdogs, hvilket stadig er tilfældet i dag.

”Men det er også en drøm, der viser, at den måde, vi for tiden selv fantaserer om at opretholde og beskytte dette samfund på, er misforstået. Vi i norden drømmer for tiden om at lukke vores grænser, så alle disse mennesker holder op med at komme rejsende. Det, vi ikke tager højde for, er, at vi selv konstant overskrider disse grænser og har gjort det i århundreder. Ikke bare ved at lænse kolonierne for værdier, som vi gjorde det i en nu overstået tid.” – fra leder ”Drømmen om at komme nordpå” i Information 21. maj 2016 ved (initialer) lfk, hvor fattige afrikaneres drømme om at bosætte sig i Europa behandles.

Et sted, hvor kolonitiden stadig er i live, er i Grønland. Ganske vist har grønlænderne aldrig været slaver, men de har været udsat for den samme form for overherredømme, og der er ikke gjort op med Danmarks kolonifortid, heller ikke i forhold til den tidligere koloni på De Vestindiske Øer.

Jamen, kan du indvende, er det ikke bare din holdning, at man ikke kan sige ”neger”? Søren Espersen siger, at det er at være ”hudfikseret” at diskutere hans ordvalg. Jeg påviser, at det har med kultur, historie og medmenneskelig respekt at gøre. Det samme gør sprogeksperter i http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/kultur/sprogeksperter-begraver-negeren-altid. Det nytter ikke, at ens intention med at sige ”neger” ikke er diskriminerende, når historien om ”negre” siger det modsatte. Neger vil altid være knyttet sammen med udnyttelse og diskrimination, og derfor kan Søren Espersen ikke bruge det, og han har ingen grund til at føle sig fornærmet og trådt på! Artiklen fortæller, at han ikke vil bruge betegnelsen afroamerikaner, som er den neutrale etniske beskrivelse Amerika benytter, og så har han sat sig fast på diskriminations- og disrespekt-sporet!

Som overgang til anden del af mit indlæg, er her et citat af Søren Espersen fra BT http://www.bt.dk/danmark/soeren-espersen-efter-kritik-af-df-kampagne-vi-kunne-have-sat-en-neger-ind

”»Selv er jeg farveblind, så jeg aner ikke hvad farve de har. Sådan tænker vi ikke. Vi kunne da sagtens have sat en neger ind, og hvad så? Hvad havde det ændret på noget som helst? Jeg synes folk generelt skulle se og komme i sommerhumør og så glæde sig over denne her ”Feel Good”-kampagne. Det er ikke andet,« siger han til TV 2”. Her har vi lige negeren igen, og i det hele taget Søren Espersens spydige og respektløse måde at tale på.