If Paki is racist, is Pak?

Times of India
Pak singer Rahat Fateh Ali Khan deported from Hyderabad
Times of India – ‎5 hours ago‎
Acclaimed Pakistani singer Ustad Rahat Fateh Ali Khan was in for a rude shock on Thursday morning when he touched down at the city’s Rajiv Gandhi International Airport (RGIA).

47 thoughts on “If Paki is racist, is Pak?”

  1. “Paki” isn’t racist anyway, because “Pakis” aren’t a race. It can be (and nowadays mostly is) used in a derogatory manner, but that’s not the same thing as racism.

    And if I’m wrong, the pols in Islamabad should change their country’s name to Asianstan.

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    What Theo says. Twice I have agreed with him this week.

    Although “Pak” means “pure” so I don’t see why they would object.

    Anyway, the real question is did this involve the acclaimed Pakistani singer Ustad Rahat Fateh Ali Khan or his uncle, the acclaimed Pakistani singer Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan or his father the acclaimed Pakistani singer Ustad Farrukh Fateh Ali Khan or his grandfather the acclaimed Pakistani singer Ustad Fateh Ali Khan?

    At least one of these I have actually paid good money to see sing. Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan I think. Meh. Probably it is better with more hash. Sufis.

  3. BiW

    Indeed. But, to SJW’s, what matters is who says something, not the word used. Whitey cannot use certain words because whitey is privileged, powerful, imperialist and racist. The oppressed can use the same term, because empowerment, victimhood, irony… or something.

  4. BiW,

    My Sikh mate uses it all the time when referring to Pakistanis, because yes, it’s shorter. What else he says about them I won’t print here, but that’s not the point.

  5. Don’ know if he still does, but the Pakistani High Commisioner used to Roller around town with PAK1 on his plates. Far as I’m concerned, they’re officially Pakis, and that’ s how I refer to them.

  6. It always amuses me how words and phrases that people trip over themselves to avoid saying in the UK, to avoid appearing racist, are commonplace among the Indians themselves in India.

  7. To answer Tim’s question: it is not *racist* – in India “Pak” or “Paki” does not indicate race – it indicates religion. A very significant minority of Pakistanis are religious refugees (OK, mostly their descendants) from other parts of the Raj.

  8. Simple really, or at least it really should be. Of someone objects to being referred to by a certain name, word or term then you stop using it. If you don’t then you are evidently a twat. And if you then try to split hairs over whether the term is racist or generally bigoted or just fucking obnoxious then you are a twat with delusions of intelligence.

  9. Questions from Tim we can answer: No.

    I’m old enough for “Paki” to have been a playground insult (directed at myself). I guess it’s fallen out of fashion more recently. Even though I’m not actually a Paki, it’s (was then) unequivocally an extremely degrading insult with intent to display ones prejudice against those of a different skin colour. It’s the intention behind a word that gives it power, not the word itself, and “Paki” is as closely associated with its association with the intent to cause racial offence as “Nigger”. If anything there are even fewer contexts in which “Paki” is not offensive than “Nigger”.

    And you can forget all the sophisticated, semantic bullshit about “X isn’t a race, it’s a nation” or whatever other pathetic excuse you wish to defend your pleasure at hurling slurs at others for being different. Any of you who can’t see that need to spend more time with non-white people.

    For our esteemed host’s erudition, “Pak” is a widely-used contraction of “Pakistan” in Indian media. I’ve never known anyone to take offence at it.

  10. The question of whether Pak is racist depends on whether it refers to a breeder or a protector

    Personally, I feel the Protectors have been falling down on the job lately, but I guess they’re stuck on that bloody stupid Ringworld.

  11. In this case it seems to be a sub-editor’s headline contraction; note they use the full term in the actual article.

    But it may still have been used with offensive intent; the two countries don’t get on very well.

  12. Pak is used as a short form in Indian media – it is not meant to be disrespectful or insulting. They sometimes say desi as well for someone who is from the Indian subcontinent. I don’t remember ever seeing the word Paki in any newspaper, it’s always Pak. Even if they used the word Paki, it would not have the same negative connotations the word does in the UK.

  13. … speaking of somantic bullshit: where do we stand with playground insults, speccie-four-eyes, fatty, gingernut, skinny, lofty, spotty, goofy, swat, teacher’s pet?

    Why are people of dusky or sable hue such wilting weeds?

    Why is Paki such a terrible insult to a ‘non-white’ but their Government flogging or stoning people quite proper and Whites should not be offended by that because its ‘our culture’.

    Better that people use words to wound rather than guns and suicide vests.

  14. Better that people use words to wound rather than guns and suicide vests.

    That’s a patronising imperialist attitude to take. Report to Nurse for re-education.

    Just because it is New Year, there’s no excuse for forgetting your moral relativism.

  15. Ironman:
    “[I]f someone objects to being referred to by a certain name, word or term then you stop using it. If you don’t then you are evidently a twat.”

    Was that an attempt at ironi?

  16. Bloke no Longer in Austria

    Coming from South London (70s & 80s) “Paki” was always used as an insult or at least in a derogatory way (especially amongst the Asians themselves).

    The registration code for the German city of Passau is PA followed by two letters. The photo I had of one such offending numberplate on the motorway alas didn’t come out 🙁

    I was once given a real telling off for using the term “Abos” for Australian Aborigines. Apparently the defence “But that’s what they use to say in Skippy!” Is not sufficient.

  17. “Better that people use words to wound rather than guns and suicide vests.”

    Absurd logic. Abusive language in support of irrational prejudice and international terrorism: two unconnected absolute concepts.

  18. Notorious BiG –

    It’s the intention behind a word that gives it power, not the word itself

    Sure.

    and “Paki” is as closely associated with its association with the intent to cause racial offence as “Nigger”.

    Nah.

    If anything there are even fewer contexts in which “Paki” is not offensive than “Nigger”.

    Definitely not. Not even close. You couldn’t be more wrong if your name was Jeremy Corbyn.

    And you can forget all the sophisticated, semantic bullshit about “X isn’t a race, it’s a nation” or whatever other pathetic excuse you wish to defend your pleasure at hurling slurs at others for being different.

    Don’t think anybody has indicated they want to go around shouting “paki!”. It was considered an acceptable contraction for Pakistani when I was a lad, but it’s now seen as a slur, and it’s good manners not to gratuitously insult people.

    Words have meanings. Racism has a specific meaning. “Paki”, though clearly offensive in modern usage, is nonetheless not racist. Cuntish, perhaps, but not racialist.

    Any of you who can’t see that need to spend more time with non-white people.

    Why? What’s in it for Steve?

  19. ‘Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.’

    Pakis, niggers and SJWs: please note the above, and remember that there should be no right not to be offended, and such words should not be banned except where they are used as a direct incitement to violence.

  20. By this logic we also mustn’t use Afgani, Azeari, Hindi, Kazaki, Kurdi, Kyrgyzi, Tajiki, Turkmeni, Uzbeki.

  21. you can see from the comments why the white west is dying. Such sensitive flowers. Is there anything that you might stand up for -right or wrong?

  22. Semantics. Sorry guys but the contemporary use of Paki as a reference point is purely derogatory. Whilst I too used to refer to the corner shop as Paki Pete’s, these days the lad’s name is Pete. Much the same way Cian is no longer a mick or Winston a chalkie.

  23. I’m as bad as the next man for derogatory labels. However, when you’ve been around long enough, one morning you wake up and realise your extended family, friends and associates includes just about everyone, from almost every race, creed and sexual deviation – even lads from Anfield. And as I’m reluctant to offend…

  24. So Much For Subtlety

    Ironman – “Simple really, or at least it really should be. Of someone objects to being referred to by a certain name, word or term then you stop using it. If you don’t then you are evidently a twat.”

    Well it is not that simple. For a start do they object? It may be a tad racist to say so, but I expect that most don’t care as long as we buy a packet of cigarettes and a carton of milk from their shop.

    What we have here is a small group of Trots who use an even smaller group of ethnic minority radicals to bully the rest of us. It is the usual PC ploy – they can try to abolish Right Wing politics by banning the language is uses. They are especially fond of calling everything racist. Naturally as a fellow Leftist you are fine with this and support them. But why should the rest of us?

    We can see how sincere they are in this by testing how sensitive they are to their own language. Do they, for instance, refuse to call people Fascists? No. Do they refuse to call people racists? Well that is one you are particularly fond of. Precisely because it causes offense. Even though you know it is untrue. So you are not merely a twat of the first order, you are a hypocrite too.

    But let’s assume your fellow Leftists have more moral integrity. I find calling Winston Churchill a racist and an Imperialist objectionable. I look forward to you all ceasing and desisting. In fact the British Empire was the best thing ever so would you please tell your fellow Trots to stop slagging it off?

  25. So Much For Subtlety

    Ironman – “Absurd logic. Abusive language in support of irrational prejudice and international terrorism: two unconnected absolute concepts.”

    Not at all. Why do second generation Muslims hate us so much? Well probably because the education system and the BBC are run by people like you. People who think Britain and the British are irredeemably evil because of Imperialism, Racism and Sexism. People who think Islam is just peachy. Naturally young BMEs grow up with contempt for the rest of us.

    You and the rest of the Guardianistas, basically, are the root cause.

    If, in fact, we told young people that the world is full of not very nice people but Britain is one of the best places in this Vale of Tears, an objective fact that cannot be disputed, they might grow up being thankful they got to be born here.

  26. “Well it is not that simple. For a start do they object? It may be a tad racist to say so, but I expect that most don’t care as long as we buy a packet of cigarettes and a carton of milk from their shop.”

    Bloke in Germany is a British Asian who told us directly that, yes, they do object! Of course they object you complete fucking cretin.

  27. What is it with people on this blog that a complete idiot like SMFS gets treated as if he has anything to say that’s worth hearing?

  28. He actually wonders if.Asoans object to being called Paki.
    And then opines that maybe, just maybe, suggesting they all work in corner shops and are fine with it as long as you buy their fags is a “tad racist”. What an arsehole.

  29. So Much For Subtlety

    Ironman – “Bloke in Germany is a British Asian who told us directly that, yes, they do object! Of course they object you complete fucking cretin.”

    1. No he didn’t. That is not what he said. 2. It is irrelevant.

    The Trots have always had a small number of fellow BME radicals with them on this. They have always hidden behind some sort of “community spokesman”. Doesn’t mean they actually speak for the community.

    Second, read what he said. He said it was not the word, but the intent. Which is more or less obvious. The Indian newspaper probably does not have the intent, although it may. Whether a White British person using it has the intent is also open to question. What BiG said is that usually the people who used it had a nasty vicious intent. Which I am sure we can all agree on.

    The Trots want to blur that distinction so we go from people with nasty thoughts to people who say a word associated with those nasty thoughts to all people who are too pallid and vote Tory. I do not see why we should agree to that.

    And, as I said, I don’t think most Asians in Britain give a flying monkey’s. They have better things to do. Although they would probably rather other people didn’t hate them so much.

  30. So Much For Subtlety

    Ironman – “What is it with people on this blog that a complete idiot like SMFS gets treated as if he has anything to say that’s worth hearing?”

    The lack of quality in the arguments opposed to mine? I don’t know. What I do know is that you passed up any attempt at making a sensible comment about any of the substantive issues I mentioned – especially your on going support for the general loathing of Britain that feeds into terrorism – for your usual spittle-flecked obscenity-rich fact-free rant.

    Maybe that should have been your first clue?

  31. So Much For Subtlety

    Kevin B – “The question of whether Pak is racist depends on whether it refers to a breeder or a protector”

    +1 for the Niven reference.

    Personally I think we are being let down by the Kzinti. I think my new political platform will be “Let the Cats Win!”

  32. Bloke in North Dorset

    “What is it with people on this blog that a complete idiot like SMFS gets treated as if he has anything to say that’s worth hearing?”

    I befriended the first non-white student at the Grammar school I went to in Huddersfield, he was of West Indian descent. I’d met him in hospital before he started in the year below me.

    I spent 6 months in Zimbabwe straight after independence integrating blacks and whites in to the new army (signals). I got to know many blacks who’d fought on both sides and many who hadn’t fought fought, as well as whites in the mixed class I taught. Their judgment of me was that they wanted me to stay on and I would have gone to live there if I’d believed Mugabe would have allowed free and fair elections.

    I spent 6 months in South Africa working on a bid for a mobile phone license for a bunch for former MK fighters. If they’d won the license they wanted me to stay on as their operations director.

    I’ve also worked in India, China, Venezuela, Philippines amongst other countries and never once had a problem dealing with the locals.

    So, who the fuck are you to tell me what I can and cannot read and decide that I’m incapable of making up my own mind whether someone is writing racist, bigoted, bollocks or making an interesting point, even if I disagree with it? I’d rather read his contributions on most subjects than yours, at least he tries to structure an argument rather getting all shouty and abusive when he doesn’t like something.

    On the subject to hand, I now live in a generally white area without any Pakistanis and I’ve no idea if the term is or isn’t a general term of abuse. I do know that when I lived in Dewsbury and Huddersfield in the ’60s it most definitely was in most of the cases I heard it being used, usually preceding “bastards” or succeeding “fuck off”, most often sandwiched between the two. I wouldn’t use it but I can see that in some cases it could be used without meaning to cause offence and non being taken. Like all words, context is everything.

  33. What is it with people on this blog that a complete idiot like SMFS gets treated as if he has anything to say that’s worth hearing?

    Because, sometimes but not all of the time, he does.

    Like most of the rest of us.

    Even Arnald has managed some on-point actual contributions to the debate. Very rare, admittedly, but he has done it.

  34. Those who mention context:

    Many eons ago, a corner shop being loosely described by some as the local Paki shop usually had no ill feeling associated with it (quite often the opposite, as unlike other shops at the time it would be open, out of hours), it was simply part of the language, based on an ability to observe rather than anything more sinister.

  35. What PF said – and it was more often Indian or Bangladeshi than Pakistani. Ugandan Asians ran a disproportionate number of corner shops.

  36. Actually, I’m trying to work out who is taking offence here. If it’s Pakistanis for being called Paki, it’s a shortened version of where they come from. Like Brit or Aussie. I’ ve heard enough of them use the expression themselves. Could it be non- Pakistani Asians? Is it that they don’t like being lumped in with Pakistanis,the same way Caribbean go apeshit if you suggest they’re Jamaican? In which case, is it racists calling others racists? Because you reslly regard it an insult unless you think there’s something wrong with being Pakistani.

  37. Still really, really simple, as described to me by a neighbour who is a PC working in a unit dealing with hate crimes: racist shits call Asians ‘Paki’ and don’t stop to ask whether their heritage is Pakistani or Bangladeshi or from any other region. Those British Asian recognise it for the insult it is and detest it.

    There is nothing to “work out”.

  38. So you’re saying Indians & Bangladeshis object to being mistaken for Pakistanis? I suppose one might respect their opinions. But it’s a bit had to see why Pakistanis would object to being called Pakistanis. It’s not ss if they’re Americans being called Yanks,is it? And “Irish” hss been a term of abuse for generations but they haven’t insisted on being rensmed People of Ireland.
    Couldn’t just have been proto SJW’s latching on to & trying to remove a perfectly reasonable contraction from the language or anything?

  39. Indians, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis (and just about everyone else), primarily object to you behaving towards them like the obnoxious, insolent, small-minded, smartarsed cunt you and so many others are.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *