It is interesting how intolerant and stereotypical you are of people that you don't agree with. It is also interesting how generalizing a group of people redneck is somehow better than generalizing a group of people based on their race, creed or religion of country of national origin.

Interesting that race isn't mentioned in any of those definitions.

Whatchu talking about willis? Water is always wet. Are you referring to ice?

It might get my ass kicked but that wont change the fact that the baby is ugly. It was obviously meant to be a joke. I can understand why you would consider it rude. Context is difficult when reading forum posts.

Redneck equals racist. Saying that it doesn't over and over doesn't make it any less incorrect. You are better than this.




Have you also taken the time to scold the other person who pointed it out? Why did you feel it necessary to say it has already been pointed out? Seems like an odd comment but whatever.


As i stated above. The guy in the video is a racist. Those who agree with backwards way of thinking are too. You can scroll up and page flip to figure out why i am referring to.


"A good bit of the blame"? IMO America holds none of the blame for Hitler. They may have stood by/waited to react for whatever reason but that is a different subject.

America may hold some blame but it was the Germans who ushered Hitler in to power in the first place. American would have had no issue with choosing Germans and their ability to pay a bond vs the slaughtering of Jews (and others) at the hand of Hitler.

America has done plenty to be blamed for all on their own. Please don't assign blame for things they are not responsible for. We have enough to apologize for.

I know what happened in Germany. I monster started spouting garbage and a few joined him and a few more and a few more and viola. Nazi Germany. Those who stood against him kept their mouth shut until it was too late.


Never. Its a very simple answer. It only becomes complex when someone wishes to be offensive and wants and excuse for being that way. Offensive behavior should not be tolerated and its perfectly acceptable to discriminate against it. A racist is a terrible thing. It is okay to discriminate against someone for being a racist. (replace racist with rapist murderer etc)

A Muslim is someone who chooses to participate in a specific religion. Discriminating against someone for being a Muslim would be like discriminating against someone for being a Jew, Christian or Branch Davidian. The hilarious part is that those who discriminate against one religion are proud members of another. I wonder which God is more powerful?

I dont wish to get into the whole "Jew isnt just a religion" or "Muslim is a specific kind of Arab" nonsense. Its 2011 and insanely ridiculous. Jews and Arabs share ancestors. Religion is the man made phenomenon they use to individualize themselves with.

We can split hairs here all day. You can say a racist isnt a bigot or a bigot isnt a redneck. I grow very tired of this sort of "i am in intellectual so i have to analyze everything around in circles" thing. Call them whatever you want or don't. But don't try and tell me there is a difference. I can spot a monster from a mile away. The guy in the OP video... Racist.

It sure is. White.

But... I personally don't believe in race. I think its a silly ideology from 500- years ago that modern day human beings are still blindly holding on to.

Same species. White & Black are not even the correct color in terms of visual appearance. What a joke. If you want to use color as a skin color indicator try pink and brown.

Words, actions, phrases at the end of the day how has the CRA changed the real problem, the way one thinks?

Since that is the real problem isn't everything else treating the symptoms versus curing the disease?

As some else stated that that creates a very slippery slope of who dictates the way someone should think.

Isn't it possible that the curing the symptoms may be worse than the disease? Isn't that what Clockwork Orange was about?

Nazi's<--- I hate them. I dont care why they think they should have been allowed to exist.

Racists<--- I hate them. I dont care why they think they should be allowed to exist.

Redneck<--- I hate them. I dont care why they think they should be allowed to exist.

I am generalizing/calling them rednecks... the group of people who make statements like the guy in the video in the original post and those who agree with him. If you are a racist and think its okay to be racist then Yes. I am calling you a racist.

Now... if i were like the guy in the video and said "I think all Christians in Texas are rednecks" then you could justifiably be upset with me. What i am saying is "all christians in texas who are racists" and "anyone else from any religion or state who is a racist" is a redneck. The being christian or jew part isnt what i discriminate against. Its the being a racist part. Again... we are supposed to discriminate racism. Duh.

If you are thinking things like "my religion is better" or "my race is better" then you're a redneck.

Sorry there is no mention of a redneck being racists. Since we are all the same, your example of DNA, the definition you quoted is racist. So does that make you a racist?

It doesn't change how you think. It will never change how you think. Its purpose is not to change how you think.

Its purpose is to change how someone with racist thoughts (for example) interacts with the rest of the population.

What happens when you let people do whatever you want? African Americans get lynched for dating a white woman. Gay men get tied to trucks and dragged around until they die.


You can't make someone stop being a racist. The idea of race is so ridiculous to me that i really can't begin to comprehend how anyone could take this ridiculous out dated notion and use it to inspire hate in their own minds. I am obviously in the minority on this one though.

While you cant legislate thought, you can legislate action. Thats what the civil rights act is all about.


No one is trying to dictate thought. Whoever mentioned it being a slippery slope must be confused about this.


I don't have a comment for this. The disease is racism and IMO no one can cure anothers racism. They either snap out of it on their own or they don't. You can counsel them until the cows come home but at the end of the day they have to decide. Just like a pedophile. And just like a pedophile... i may not be able to cure them but i can sure as hell lock them away while they try and sort it out themselves.

I quoted the dictionary reference to show that the term redneck is a derogatory comment not a term of endearment that someone should be proud of. The point of posting it was to show that when i say redneck i am not talking about those who lovingly call themselves rednecks.

I also made several posts with my own definition of the word redneck describing how and why i use it to describe a racist.

I use this derogatory comment in a derogatory way to describe the evil doers. Thats why its okay for me to say it.

You should do some research on the term redneck not just rely on the definition. Making definitions of your own can and will lead people down that slippery slope I referred to, eg Hitler and his definition of what it meant to be Aryan or be a Jew. You should do some research on the term.

Hitler was a bad guy skewing definitions to fit his bad guy agenda.

Aryan isn't a term used to describe evil men who want to cleanse the earth of anyone not like them. Hitlers use of the word was incorrect. I did some research on the term. It was 20 years ago but im sure it hasn't changed.

Redneck is not a term of endearment. Those who think otherwise are incorrect. It was created specifically to be a derogatory comment about people who act a certain way. Like being a racist. I am using this term within the parameters of its definition. IMO its perfectly acceptable to use a negative term to describe people who are behaving negatively.

The people of Germany didn't think so. The neo-Nazis of today don't think so. How is your skewing of the definition any different?



Actually it was first uses use was in reference to a particular group of people in India.


Since you won't

"There is an archaic historic usage.

Scottish Covenanter usage

In Scotland in the 1640s, the Covenanters rejected rule by bishops, often signing manifestos using their own blood. Some wore red cloth around their neck to signify their position, and were called rednecks by the Scottish ruling class to denote that they were the rebels in what came to be known as The Bishop's War that preceded the rise of Cromwell.[21][22] Eventually, the term began to mean simply "Presbyterian", especially in communities along the Scottish border. Because of the large number of Scottish immigrants in the pre-revolutionary American south, some historians have suggested that this may be the origin of the term in the United States.[23]

Dictionaries document the earliest American citation of the term's use for Presbyterians in 1830, as "a name bestowed upon the Presbyterians of Fayetteville [North Carolina]".

It first use was discriminatory and it still is. It is a generalization/stereotype no different than what being racist is based on.

Interesting read. Here is my take on some of the issues being "discussed" in this thread.

1) We can not legislate thought. If we could, no one would think any bad things. It seems most of us agree on this point. However, most of you think you can legislate "actions". This is completely false. We have laws against commiting murder, and yet we still murder. We have laws against robbery, and yet we still rob. We have laws against beating each other up, yet we still have violence in our societies. Our laws are punitive, rather than preventive. Punishing someone for their actions does not prevent them, or anyone else from commiting the same actions. It also does not make the victim whole again, for that matter. A human being might be dead by another's hand. Putting his killer to death, or in jail does not make that human live again. The punitive laws we use, are designed to make US feel better. Not the victim.

2) Very few people have common sense. If a club excludes you, and it's member's don't want you, why on earth would you want to associate with the members of that club? This applies to country clubs, social clubs, and street clubs. If I were a rich man, and wore lots of jewelry, nice clothes, and drove a fancy car, in other words, flaunting my wealth, and I walk through a known rough neighborhood, what outcome should I expect? The law says I have a right to do this, but common sense tells me I might be assaulted, robbed, or killed. To do this, I am causing harm to myself, and punishment to those who would assault me. In other words, if I walk into a lion's den, is the lion wrong to maul me? Or is it my fault for antagonizing the lion?

3) Race, and genitics, and DNA are funny things. There are obvious physical differences between "races" which can be linked to our genes, and our DNA. We are NOT all the same. Over time, our genetic similarities have multiplied, due to the intermingling, and interbreeding of these "races". Global travel, and mixing of different populations have made us more alike than different. However, our differences have not declined as a real number. As a ratio to our similarities, it has shrunk...but not as a separate number. Genetics have not reliably been linked to behavior. Being from one race or another does not predispose an individual to commit crimes against humanity. These tendencies are linked to social and economic disparities. We talk a certain dialect or accent, because those around us do. We like or dislike other groups because those around us do. We behave within the rules of society, or we don't, because those around us do or don't.

4) I am not a good "quoter". A few posts back, some people got on the subject of smoker's rights, vs non smoker's rights. No one's rights out weigh some one elses. If I'm a business owner, (restauratuer) and I want to allow smoking in my establishment, it is my right. You have the right to stay out of my restaurant, and have your dinner in one that does not allow smoking. Currently, most states do not have legislation preventing smoking outdoors. If you are at a sporting event, and someone comes up to you to talk, and lights up, you have the right to move away from that person. Take matters into your own hands, and move to a location more preferable to you. Don't expect the law to protect you, or more appropiately, to limit MY rights!

5) Using words to correctly or incorrectly describe a person, such as racist, homophobe, xenophobe, redneck etc. over and over again does not change the meaning of the word. This applies to EVERYONE!

Summing up, it seems most of us agree that the man in texas from the original post has the right to think as he does. Where we fall apart is in the argument that he does not have the right to take action on his thoughts. Maybe he does, and maybe he doesn't. Having the CRA in place did not prevent him from making his radio ad proving that you can not legislate actions. If I were of a race, ethnic origin, political affiliation, or religion he is railing against, I would not patronize his business, and I certainly would not try to sign up for the lessons, putting myself in a position likely to cause confrontation. If I don't belong to any of those races, ethnic origins, political affiliations, or religions, it is up to me to decide if I will patronize his business or not. The free market will decide whether or not he remains in business. (Assuming a free market actually exists, as has been argued in previous posts)

I am a registered Republican, but I have more conservative views than most. I believe in personal responsibility, not government control. Our government has become more socialist over the years, to the point that you can not realistically tell the difference between a Republican or a Democrat. Most conservatives and liberals lean more to the center, than they will admit.

This argument proves that we can not overcome tribal thinking, and it also proves that most of us want to live in a Nanny State. I fear we as a country and as human beings are doomed! I will not post again in this thread. Flame on.....or off.

It seems we agree more than disagree but are stuck on a specific part. I think the guy is a racist (which is not illegal) but think he is exposed on racial discrimination. Maybe not as exposed as being discriminatory with regards to religious or political affiliations, but it is conscionable that charges could brought up specifically on race.

Or not. They may choose to go after him only on religion or political affiliations deeming it a stronger case. They would focus in on the term 'non-Christian Arab' as I have.

But moving beyond that to your question, it is interesting. It seems the general practice of 'discrimination' in all of it's meanings is being defended here in this thread. The act of discrimination is not being challenged. It is legal to discriminate: it is illegal to discriminate for specifc reasons. It seems some think that it should be legal to discriminate for any reason at all, or based on religous or political affiliations, or even race. Well, I think that's wrong. And there are laws against it.

There are various situations where we as a society discriminate, some socially acceptable and some legally defendable. Or maybe not, but nobody chooses to do anything about it. But the act of discrimination in it's basic non-specific form is not illegal in any way. I don't see anybody saying it should be.

Who cares what they thought/think. Hitler was a bad guy. Are you saying that you think Hitler was a good guy? Talking about something being skewed.


Good to know. Now what does that have to do with Hitler using the word incorrectly?


Did you know that Bad can now mean Good? It's 2011. I don't know where the term came from but i have always heard it used/used it myself to describe anyone who hates other races, homosexuals etc. Redneck makes it easier to describe someone who just hates everyone else. It saves me like 30 minutes of typing. I guess i could research all the different terms for all the different moronic behaviors of the guy in the OP video. Or i can just call him what he is. A redneck.