Good for you. I mean that without sarcasm. I most certainly am not and don’t consider myself Anglo-Saxon in any way although English is my mother tongue. I would consider referring to New Zealand (for example - not my home country) as “Anglo-Saxon” quite insulting to Maori.
But I disagree with your last claim - there most certainly are racial overtones associated with it. Nobody would ever refer to Barack Obama, MLK, Katerina Mataira, Rishi Sunak as Anglo-Saxon simply because having white skin and being off English stock is understood as being implied.
There are definitely racial overtones with the expression "Anglo-Saxon" as used in the US, at least in the last decade or so. This article is an example of some of the discourse around the term - https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/anglo-saxo...
This is from the English Wikipedia. [1] Nowhere in the article is there any hint that the term is perceived as problematic by native English speakers or that it has racial overtonens. If indeed there is a critical mass of people who feel offended by it, you know what you need to do :-)
I honestly don’t know your point anymore. Whether “German” or “Anglo” are equivalent terms makes no difference to the question of whether “Anglo” is a supposedly a slur. As an Anglo, I don’t find it to be a slur and I’m bothered by the fact that people are making such a mountain out of a molehill. The original usage didn’t offend anyone except those seeking out to be offended. Get off your high horse.
Edit: The original poster was obviously criticizing American and British intelligence services. Derailing that criticism with such unimportant linguistic complaints does a disservice to those discussing things that actually matter. Using the term “Anglos” simply isn’t a big deal.
It's partially tied to ethnic affiliation, but that is not an essential aspect of the term. For instance, Trevor Noah's comments on the French football team would definitely be referred to as an anglo-saxon perspective even though the man himself would not be considered as such by anglophones since the term refers almost exclusively to ethnicity in English.
Although the average Frenchman could always stand to learn more about the anglosphere, the usage of the word anglo-saxon in French isn't borne out of ignorance of cultural nuance, but is often invoked and defined in contrast to French or French-inspired values. As such, the term is still popular because it's still highly relevant: whenever there's some kerfuffle about secularism or some other salient clash of values, the anglosphere tends to present the same predictable range of responses whether they are Anglo-Canadians or Irish, POC or WASP, immigrant or Baskerville.
Naturally, people from the anglosphere don't enjoy being conceptually lumped together by outsiders (leading to the misunderstandings mentioned earlier) but in this case it's not just casual prejudice on the part of the French (even though it no doubt plays a role) but a recurrent difference in values that has real consequences. In my view, it is as real a concept as "the West" is for example.
Knowingly or not it's not hard to take the point which is that "Anglo-Saxon" has lost any meaning beyond fair skinned at this point for the vast majority of people. Anyone reading the source knew what the author meant even those who were knew and were annoyed by the incorrectness.
The comparison to "latinx" is apt though - I should see it as a flag but instead it's like nails on a chalkboard because it's everything I don't like about language policing.
The point is that the term, as used in English, was incorrectly appropriated from another language. Moreover use of the term lumps people together that have little in common.
Contrast this against the term Anglo-Saxon used by a group of people to describe themselves.
I'm familiar with it and the context, a mix of political and cultural.
But in France older people still call Indians 'Hindus' despite having the largest Muslim population in the world and other religious groups.
Anglo-Saxon refers to a people that ruled England when they invaded Britain in the Middle Ages, and dominated politically up to the present. The Irish, Welsh, etc in Britain, the many immigrants there and in the US and Australia, would probably find it an outdated term.
WASP is one we use in the US for something similar, referring to cultural and academic institutions and such, but I feel like it's fallen out of favor.
I get a little annoyed when people say that I'm German. I mean, despite my ancestry, I was born in America, and I've never even been to Europe. And I'm a little annoyed other times when people refer to "native Americans" as if I'm not one of those.
Those are little annoyances. I don't believe that the speaker is trying to disrespect me -- certainly not intentionally -- and I take it with a grain of salt.
In other words: this seems like making much to-do over very little.
Were having this discussion on an international forum, online. People are making blanket statements about language without a scrap of distinction as to background or locale, just “white” and “black” and little else. Further back in this thread appears the phrase, Thanks for your assumption that I am an American, I am not.
So yes, the context I’m examining was very much on the table.
I think it’s just that’s the word you’ve been taught to use. It’s divorced from the meaning of its constituent parts, you aren’t saying “an American of African descent” you’re saying “black” but in what was supposed to be some kind of politically correct way.
I cannot imagine even the most daft American using it in the UK and intending that the person is actually American.
While I 100% applaud the effort - and I absolutely love the idea of languages in non-English languages - you should be aware that phonetically (and if you drop the 'h'), the name is a racist term in the UK at least.
I remember a couple decades ago, an "enlightened" fellow college student called one of our British collaborators on a project "African American". Because people around that time started thinking calling someone "black" was offensive.
Lots of this is very English and even US-centric. The lack of awareness and what is effectively an attempt to dominate other cultures in the name of inclusiveness is kinda interesting.
> Do we call these folks African American (they're not from Africa)
My favourite example of this was a black British model, whom an American commentator called "African-American". She was born and grew up in the UK, and was neither African nor American.
But I disagree with your last claim - there most certainly are racial overtones associated with it. Nobody would ever refer to Barack Obama, MLK, Katerina Mataira, Rishi Sunak as Anglo-Saxon simply because having white skin and being off English stock is understood as being implied.
reply