Jump to content

Talk:Cracker (term): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Zimmerman trial statements by 99pporg. Request for dialogue
No edit summary
Line 211: Line 211:
==Zimmerman Trial==
==Zimmerman Trial==
The continued attempts by [[User:99pporg|99pporg]] to insert material related to the current George Zimmerman trial into this article is disruptive for several reasons. Many of the assertions made are unsupported, representing little more than the opinion of the user. Some inserted material lacks objectivity, violating the tenet of neutrality. Other material is simply redundant, having been presented in other sections of the article. Finally, the length of the statements place undue emphasis on the Zimmerman trial, which is not the subject of this article. For those reasons, material inserted by [[User:99pporg|99pporg]] has been repeatedly deleted or reduced by other editors, only to be re-inserted by 99pporg. This statement is placed, (here and at [[User talk:99pporg|talk]]) in the hope that a dialogue can be established to address these concerns. Failing that, the request for a block may be the only recourse. [[User:Gulbenk|Gulbenk ]] ([[User talk:Gulbenk|talk]]) 19:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
The continued attempts by [[User:99pporg|99pporg]] to insert material related to the current George Zimmerman trial into this article is disruptive for several reasons. Many of the assertions made are unsupported, representing little more than the opinion of the user. Some inserted material lacks objectivity, violating the tenet of neutrality. Other material is simply redundant, having been presented in other sections of the article. Finally, the length of the statements place undue emphasis on the Zimmerman trial, which is not the subject of this article. For those reasons, material inserted by [[User:99pporg|99pporg]] has been repeatedly deleted or reduced by other editors, only to be re-inserted by 99pporg. This statement is placed, (here and at [[User talk:99pporg|talk]]) in the hope that a dialogue can be established to address these concerns. Failing that, the request for a block may be the only recourse. [[User:Gulbenk|Gulbenk ]] ([[User talk:Gulbenk|talk]]) 19:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

=='Cracker' as derived from 'cracking' of whips==
The prominence given in this article to the theory that the term 'cracker' derives from the 'cracking' of whips over slaves by white foremen is striking--and indeed disconcerting, when one notes that none of the citations given in the ''Oxford English Dictionary'' seems to support it. The closest, perhaps, is a reference from the 11 June 1887 edition of the Boston ''Beacon'' that alleges that 'cracker' derives from 'cracking' whips, albeit over ''draft animals'', not slaves. I have, accordingly, removed from the article the reference to James S. Buckingham's ''The Slave States of America'', which may have draft animals in mind, too; the original text, which can be found on Google Books, never specifies over ''what'' the 'crackers' crack their whips, but the crackers are, in any case, not figured as slave-foremen but instead as poor, antiquated country folk--the article, as previously written, had seriously distorted the significance of the quotation. [[User:Spurius Furius Fusus|Spurius Furius]] ([[User talk:Spurius Furius Fusus|talk]]) 09:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:29, 17 July 2013

WikiProject iconUnited States Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Old discussion archived

Old discussion has been archived and may be accessed in the box at the right. -THB 20:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced info

Moving to talk page until its sourced:

Other possible theories include references to cracking a whip over oxen when driving to market, the 18th century practice of cracking corn to make liquor, or to poor whites having had to crack their grain because they couldn't afford to take it to the local mill to have it ground.[citation needed]

A popular etymology claims the term cracker originated from piney-woods Georgia and Florida pastoral yeomen's use of whips to drive cattle. The word then came to be associated with the cattlemen of Georgia and Florida. Cattlemen of the state of Florida (and some native born Floridians) take pride in being called "crackers", "Florida Crackers", or "Cracker Cowboys". The Cracker culture included using the bullwhip as a form of communication between cattle drivers, using "Cracks" and pauses to send messages.[citation needed]

A false or folk etymology claims the term dates back to slavery in the antebellum South. Many slaver foremen used bullwhips to terrorize African slaves, and the sound the whip made when it was used as a weapon was called 'cracking' the whip. The foremen who cracked these whips were thus known as 'crackers'. [1]

I'm curious where you would expect to find such evidence of its origins with that meaning given that slaves in the antebellum south were prohibited by law from reading and writing and they for damn sure weren't going to be calling their slave owner a cracker to his face. Every black person I know that uses the term traces its origins back to chattel slavery and to claim that that history is false because it's an oral history is hella racist. 138.238.28.213 (talk) 19:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ThanksJasper23 09:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sourced material/Harold Ford Sr.

Properly sourced material should not be removed without discussion. -THB 02:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first source is from an opinion page. Sure, whatever. Put someones opinion in as a cite. However, the you tube cite just wont fly. Its more than likely that he said tracker and not cracker. Otherwise its original research and pov. This is an attack on a living person without substantiated proof, just conjecture.

In October 2006, a Fox news camera captured Harold Ford, Sr. using the term on a cellphone outside the Senatorial campaign headquarters of his son, Harold Ford, Jr. (Video)

Jasper23 02:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, you are correct and I apologize. Even the man he said it to said he said "tracker". The two videos are here: [2] -THB 02:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can we say "whitewash?" Dubc0724 13:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can we say "fact checking?" You should give it a try sometime and then retract your whitewash statement. I would venture to guess that you probably wont. Jasper23 19:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At the time, nobody was backing up his "tracker" claim. I still don't buy it (kinda like "botched joke") having listened to the clip. But it's really inconsequential at this point. Moving on... Dubc0724 14:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever. Did you read the article linked above? Did you read how all the news networks retracted their claims and how the original instigator of the claim admitted that he was wrong? Probably not. But you still chose to be rude anyway. Great job there. Jasper23 16:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Dubc0724 21:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't buying it either. But there is a link above in my apology post that even shows the tracker/cracker guy saying that Ford Sr. said "tracker". -THB 19:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

British(?) usage

"Crackers" (always in the plural) is a fairly common, though perhaps now slightly old-fashioned, insult in British English, meaning something close to "loony", and with the same level of usually quite mild insult. For example: "He wants to walk to London? The man's clearly crackers!" I have no idea of the etymology, but it has no racist overtones whatever, the racist term being unknown in the UK except where imported from America. Loganberry (Talk) 03:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is understood, but not often used, in the U.S. in the same manner. -THB 04:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citations missing tag

User THB and I have recently disagreed on whether this article has sufficient references. I've read through the article, and it appears editors have made a successful effort to make sure that majority of the content is scrupulously sourced.

According to THB's recent edit summary, the article "still has many controversial unsourced statements." Many? Really? Besides the lone statement curently marked with the "fact" tag (the part about cracker being similar to redneck, which hardly strikes me as controversial, or even debatable), what specifically are the unsourced statements that we must correct before the tag can be removed? I would love to address "the underlying problem," but I need help identifying precisely what the problem is.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 15:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -THB 15:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cracker Party

Rather than cluttering up the article any more than it already is, please see the two references which clearly identify Roy Harris as both the leader of the Augusta "Cracker Party", former speaker of the house for the State of Georgia, and a former state Democratic Convention floor leader. He was also a well known segregationalist.

http://www.stetsonkennedy.com/jim_crow_guide/chapter7_2.htm

http://www.amazon.com/phrase/Roy-Harris —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Omnivore Oprah (talkcontribs) 21:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You have violated the 3rr rule and will be reported. Your argument on the talk page makes little sense. Jasper23 21:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It only fails to make sense to you. --REMOVED PERSONAL ATTACK-- Omnivore Oprah 21:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was very rude. Jasper23 21:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


What are "niggorz" please?

The text reads: "Crackin' Good Snacks (a division of Winn Dixie, a Southern grocery chain) has sold niggorz similar to Ritz crackers under the name "Georgia Crackers"."

I see plurals changed all the time in this manner by kids on the internet or playing gamez(!). Quite obviously this 'usage' of English does not belong in an encyclopedia. --Mal 11:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Er, the only thing you see wrong was the plural? It was a bit of childish racist vandalism; I've reverted it, and blocked the idiot who did it. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought...

I thought the term came from the fact that white people's skins was similar in color to saltines, hence the name crackers. Adamv88 02:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly what I was taught. I'll have to look for some sources before including it in the article. Alatari (talk) 03:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of Etymology and Folk Etymology

Ok, I'm game let's discuss. Bierstube Katzen Keller 23:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whipping

I highly doubt the term cracker has anythign to do with whipping. Does it really make sense to insult someone by calling them something that still puts you in an inferior position? That defies all the rules of name calling, insulting and hatred. Historically, it refers to poor whites in the south who could only afford to eat crackers. Same as lintheads or clay-eaters. Rich whites used cracker as well as blacks who were in a better economic position than the poor whites. I will look into those 3 seemingly bogus references listed because I HIGHLY doubt that slavemaster stuff is the correct etymology. research time! --Yellowfiver 09:09, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that after posting this you must have found issue with the references, because you deleted large passages of the text. For reference, here are the passages from the books used as reference there:
  • Smitherman: "possibly derived from the sound of the master's whip during enslavement."
  • Herbst: "It has been said to derive ... from the whip-cracking done by slaveholders."
  • Major: "..a reference to the whip-cracking slaveholder..
How did you find these lacking to support the existence of this theory? - O^O 23:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure, there just seems to be an inherent contradiction in that etymology of the word. I'm at my school's library so I'll check these sources. If they match up, I guess i won't have a case. I had always been under the impression lintheads, clayeaters, and crackers were from around the same time period. --Yellowfiver 02:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One thing I didn't write above; this doesn't appear to be a case where the etymology is known with certainty, instead there are multiple theories. I want to make sure that section represents all the theories, I'm not claiming that one in particular is correct. - O^O 05:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Has anyone found any evidence to support or refute the "whip-cracker" theory? Though I doubt the likelihood of this origin, it is certainly plausible. The use of the rhetorical "inferior" position to demean the "superior" is found throughout history from ancient greece to Shakespeare to the more recent; eg: "the master race", "the chosen ones", "New England elite", etc. - Porterlu (talk) 06:22, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


It doesnt take much effort to figure out how "whipping" could be the source of the expression "cracker"... at least in terms of its use as a pejorative. It was originally an expression used by slaves in reference to the hated slave masters... and thus the word had a negative meaning to them. It started as a nickname of sorts for a specific person/profession... Then grew to take on a more general and negative useage over time.

The "n-word", as we now call it, did not start as an insult. It grew into that over time. Its origin is in Latin, was not an insult, and simply meant the color black. Look up the history of the word in Wikipedia... It wasnt until later that it grew into an insult, and even that happened in degrees over time. One could sit decades from now and say its ridiculous to get upset over a word whose origin simply means "the color black"... But we all know its not ridiculous... Its what the word has grown to become that matters.

You are stuck in what historians call "presentism" - you are examining the topic from your own modern day mindset and coming to a conclusion based only on that. You are applying your own present day rationale to a single part of a long sequence, and doing so from your own interpretation alone - that of someone not connected to the topic at all. "Cracker" was an expression/nickname for the slave overseer... He was naturally someone hated... in time the word and its usage grew to become an insulting expression used in a more general sense with wider application.

Its not a word that puts the user in an inferior position... only a white man would see it that way, looking at it in a detached, present day way. Black people using the word in the past didnt see the man with the whip as their superior... They saw him as the hated abuser. 74.89.29.124 (talk) 04:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

____

The figurative sense of "crack a whip" didn't occur until the 1940's. This whole thing about "cracker" being derived from the whip of a slave master is ridiculous, dreamed up by folks set on making the term as offensive as possible. The phrase obviously has its origin in Elizabethan times, where it meant "to make a loud noise", and refers to someone who is boisterous to the point of being perceived as obnoxious. Anyone continuing to propose this "slave master" theory as anything other than a folk-etymology proposed by Black Southerners is using Wikipedia to vent their own anger at Southern Whites. Typical. 84.75.168.38 (talk) 09:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ironic

I wish we could say something in here about how blacks take offense at someone even uttering the word "nigger", even if used in a non-offensive way, yet white people are considered "easily offended" or "sensitive" if they take offense to the word "cracker" in modern America, thus forming a searious double standard. DurotarLord 13:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We can say something about that if someone else has said something about that in a reliable source. We're just here to report. -Will Beback · · 20:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to type the same thing, that it's totally "acceptable" for comedians or media to say "cracker" (and honky on television shows), but nigger is off limits. Even though black people use it, and the nigger article mentions being called that word by whites, there is no mentioning of how it's used in pop culture and seemingly "laughed at/off" by whites nor any "double-standard" text about blacks calling whites this word. Maybe the point is, whites aren't really sensitive about it, which is why whites don't stand up against it or let it bother them. If nigger is a bad word, so is honky/cracker, etc. These are all racial slurs. For that matter, blacks/slaves called whites/owners (bosses or masters and/or home-providers in many cases) "cracker" and other names. So the name-calling went both ways. Nigger has taken an ugly twist in society, from what it really used to mean, to what it is considered now (hate speech). With all due respect, these names should also be excluded from the mouths of the minority in public. I think what has actually happened, is that whites are the real minority. Especially white straight men. At any rate, I'll have to look for sources, I'm sure they exist. Should I find a reference, I'll add it here first for review. Just my contribution to this topic. Thanks and have a great day! 64.134.54.102 (talk) 03:27, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"examples of usage"

One of the links in that section, [The Crescent], leads to an article about a department store rather than the plantation house referred to in the sentence. I don't know if there's an article for the real thing or not, or else I'd just change it. 71.37.22.24 19:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking about removing the pop-culture section as an non-encyclopedic section. It is also unsourced. What do other people think?Turtlescrubber 21:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. If someone uses the term in passing without it generating any controversy or comment then the usage is non-notable. If there are cultural uses of the term that are significant and sourced we can add them to the main body of the article. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think a pop culture section is a good idea actually. Like with the honky article, there were shows (ie. The Jeffersons) which popularized the word and wouldn't be difficult to source. (George Jefferson calling white people "honky" and "cracker".) It was used in other forms of media and television shows, and would help expand the article beyond it's history of the word. In addition, as mentioned above, I think mentioning the double-standard of blacks calling whites this word and it being acceptable, should be briefly referenced. It may take time, but one day, this word could be considered as bad as nigger is. Just never know, considering the past of our human race and the current age of being "pc" (politically correct). Might as well nip-it-in-the-bud. 64.134.54.102 (talk) 03:39, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It should probably be brought back since the Trayvon martin case is just thrown in to the etymology section, and causes this page to be very messy all of the sudden. 12.130.161.101 (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

It's not clear to me that anyone has a good idea of what kind of photo they'd like to see here, so I've removed the {{reqphoto}} template from this page. If you put the tag back, please consider describing specifically what kind of picture you think would benefit this article in the of= parameter to the template. Tim Pierce 00:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-pejorative term

Does anyone know if there is a non-pejorative term for the descendants of indentured servants and transported prisoners? --The Four Deuces 20:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Georgia cracker peaches.jpg

Image:Georgia cracker peaches.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Sources over-thinking the origin?

I know his is original research, but geez, I wonder if any of these sources even *considered* the possibility that "cracker" as a pejorative for whites might just have come from the color of crackers (as in saltines, the most popular cracker probably in the world or at least the U.S.). By the way, maybe it really did come things like cops/white folks being "whipcrackers," but to me that sounds like some sociologist was looking to justify nonwhites using racist language. Just my opinion. Swordwing (talk) 01:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Mean' in British English

I don't think this part - '(Note that in British English "mean" is also a term for poverty, with no malice implied.)' - is really accurate; it's more used to mean 'miserly' and would be more likely to be used for a well-off person who was tight with their money than a poor person.86.54.40.169 (talk) 15:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, so it means in British English. However, in American English it generally means abusive, malicious, bad-tempered, etc. I think that distinction is what the sentence meant to convey, though it doesn't do it very well. Eastcote (talk) 16:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In British English of an earlier period (though not now) it simply meant "poor, small, insignificant". As in Acts xxi.39, "I am a citizen of no mean city", i.e. a city of significant size and status. Or in the 19th century hymn "Once in royal David's city" - "With the poor and mean and lowly/ Lived on Earth our Saviour holy." This is obviously how it was used in the description of "mean whites" in the Britannia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.133.68.192 (talk) 11:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cracker

The term Cracker was used in the North, NJ and NY for sure in the 50s and 60s.75.197.135.114 (talk) 00:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: It was used against all white people by those now referred to as Blacks, African Americans, and so forth. Please update your database. If people could get away from using the terms Blacks, Caucausian, Asian, and continously reinventing new names the racie issue would subside a great deal. As long as people keep getting it shoved in their faces will it continue to exist.

We need a reliable source before we can add your information Alatari (talk) 08:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems there is a great disconnect between the way this term was used as a pejorative against whites in the NY/NJ region (among others) in the '70s and the provided etymologies of Florida cowboys and poor Georgia whites. Where is the link in these usages? Is the 'poor' connotation being presumed to be the pejorative context? Trying to understand the linkage here between the etymology and the modern/recent usages as it is not clear at all. I suspect they are actually completely different usages, but need to research further.75.119.241.249 (talk) 19:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

booboo

why do jamaicans call africans booboo/booboos as an ethnic slur —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.9.144.165 (talk) 00:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamhorney (talkcontribs) 05:19, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To get to the other side! Ba dump bump. Seriously, 94.9.144.165, maybe this question is for a relevant page rather than for the cracker page. --76.102.243.117 (talk) 23:46, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Colin Keiper...?

Regarding the last sentence of the first paragraph "The word cracker is sometimes used when referring to someone who is racist, especially "Colin Keiper" (bold & quote marks mine).

WHO is this Colin Keiper, what relevance is he to this article, and why are there no references or citations for him?

Based on the tone of the sentence, it appears that this is an attack on Colin Keiper. If so, why?

Would someone be so kind and please educate me?

Rich5150 (talk) 02:51, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Who ever he is, he is not important enough to have a Wikipedia page. 67.166.155.113 (talk) 06:08, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Cited Material

The slavery-whipping text has been removed for months, perhaps as long as a year, because there is no historical evidence to support this usage. The source provided is a book a century after the fact, which supplies no sources for the statement. It is irresponsible for wikipedia editors to continue to post this RACE BAITING material. 140.194.140.31 (talk) 16:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The material in question is supported with citations from five separate books dating from 1842 to 2000. If you have citations from Identifying reliable sources that provide additional information regarding the etymology of this phrase then it can certainly be added to the article as well. - Hoplon (talk) 21:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Someone deleted the slave-whipping text and replace the text with the following.

The term cracka comes from the Cherokee word which means "gouge" or "to gouge." It was a common practice among Scottish settlers to get drunk and fight whereby a lot lost eyes by gouging. The Cherokees observed this practice and referred to these people by this term which sounds like "cracka." That is the origin of cracka. The idea of whipping slaves with bull whips is from history revisionist minds.


However, there was no cite. Please discuss. Good health. Geraldshields11 (talk) 14:42, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Zimmerman Trial

The continued attempts by 99pporg to insert material related to the current George Zimmerman trial into this article is disruptive for several reasons. Many of the assertions made are unsupported, representing little more than the opinion of the user. Some inserted material lacks objectivity, violating the tenet of neutrality. Other material is simply redundant, having been presented in other sections of the article. Finally, the length of the statements place undue emphasis on the Zimmerman trial, which is not the subject of this article. For those reasons, material inserted by 99pporg has been repeatedly deleted or reduced by other editors, only to be re-inserted by 99pporg. This statement is placed, (here and at talk) in the hope that a dialogue can be established to address these concerns. Failing that, the request for a block may be the only recourse. Gulbenk (talk) 19:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

'Cracker' as derived from 'cracking' of whips

The prominence given in this article to the theory that the term 'cracker' derives from the 'cracking' of whips over slaves by white foremen is striking--and indeed disconcerting, when one notes that none of the citations given in the Oxford English Dictionary seems to support it. The closest, perhaps, is a reference from the 11 June 1887 edition of the Boston Beacon that alleges that 'cracker' derives from 'cracking' whips, albeit over draft animals, not slaves. I have, accordingly, removed from the article the reference to James S. Buckingham's The Slave States of America, which may have draft animals in mind, too; the original text, which can be found on Google Books, never specifies over what the 'crackers' crack their whips, but the crackers are, in any case, not figured as slave-foremen but instead as poor, antiquated country folk--the article, as previously written, had seriously distorted the significance of the quotation. Spurius Furius (talk) 09:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)