Narveen Aryaputri Writes for Georgia Weekly Post
In Sanskrit - the oldest and most pure language on this earth - the term Hapshi is used to describe a person without any cultural refinement whatsoever.
A Hapshi is a person who has no control on their base instincts. For instance: If they begin to eat, they cannot stop eating. The same goes for sex or other human instincts that are usually kept in check through civilization.
Today, Hapsi or Hapshi has grown to mean a person of black skin, NOT because of the skin, but because of the behavior of the person.
Today, in India, the sentence "those people are Hapsi.." Or " All these Hapshi coming in are creating a big problem," would be a sentence in common use.
However, in the culture and scriptural texts of India, the color of the skin has no prejudice, good or bad. All of the ancient statutes representing god-heads are jet black in color because they ABSORB all sorrow, all negativities. “Jaganatha,” from which the English word ‘ jaggernaught’ was derived, is jet black with two white eyes, like stars. ‘That is the cosmos,’ you are told should you question to ask why the statue is black. ‘The cosmos is jet black, and absorbs all’ you are told. Also, The Black Madonna of Eastern Europe has great significance but is kept hidden because of the color of the image-icon.
The French, in their colonization, tried to control people by defining humans according to skin color and physical attributes. They put humans in three categories: Caucasians, Negroid and Mongoloid. This was in the 1600s. These categories have been out-of-date for many centuries. Over the years, Anthropology merged into Culture merged into Prejudice, into discrimination. And discrimination that is based on skin color is far, far removed from the basic component of Humanity: the Human Being and what it means to be Human.
This three race formula has crippled human society. It went from the 3 race to the 7 race because the 3 race did not fit anymore, to 12 race, ridiculous as it sounds, and back to 3 race and 7 race again. Forms for applications and governmental assistance programs to this day insist on discrimination or ‘counting‘ by physical categories, using the 7 or 12 race division, Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Native Hawaiian, Black American African or Negro, White, Mexican, Cuban, Chicano.
In spite of the fact that today, in our modern culture, people are in the habit of birthing children in and out of wedlock and across any physical racial division. Therefore, none of these race category divisions are accurate. Nor do they apply.
I propose we begin defining a person according to behavior. All behavior is according to a person’s culture and civilization. The culture may be refined or otherwise.
By using this defining word Hapsi, Bernie Madoff, who made-off with our money, would be a Hapshi. As would the woman who lied about seeing Michael Brown shot. As would Michael Brown, himself.
It's not the color of the skin, it's the behavior, that matters.
Words are coined, borrowed, and adopted all the time. It's a mark of a living language, especially in the American language, one of the most vibrant and alive languages in the world today.
Languages that are dying out in the world today are categorized by three facts: a) there are no new words introduced; b) there is no pop ‘growing’ culture reflecting the young and creative people in the language: no new poetry or rock music or songs, and no expression of emotion that is new, no cuss words, no new expression of rage, or love making or other such emotions with new words; and c) no new literatures or art expressed in the language.
Dead languages don't change. They continue to use the words that had been used when the language came into being originally, often centuries ago.
We all know how, in our high schools children find it cool to invent new words almost every two weeks. It's the cutting edge of speech and communication. Partly, I believe, to culturally keep their parents out of the loop, as it were. Partly, to be very very 'cool’ using an ‘inner' language of power.
This is the 21st Century of the Gregorian calendar, and we are still arguing about the black and white skin color prejudice. It stands to reason that, had we wanted to, we would have come up with a term to denote sub-standard behavior. Outside of 'illegal' of course.
There has got to be another reason. The anthropological divisions of the original French categories are not an explanation any longer.
Sure, Martin Luther King has his famous concept about a world seeing character over color of the skin. As have others before and after him. But there is no WORD in the colloquial lingo that refers to substandard behavior. We have the word 'Nigger,' now outlawed. And the word 'Negro' now, almost outlawed and replaced, impossibly, with the word 'black' which is, in effect, the exact same word as Negro. Or, even worse, the euphemism African, which is a different way of saying Black. This is truly baseless, since there are many in Africa who are Caucasians, or Asian, much like there are in America. So replacing the word Negro with African does not work to replace the unwanted reference to the color of the skin.
In reference to a person: how about saying: American. Plain and simple. NO hyphenated anything. I, for one, am vehemently against any hyphenated country origin, since immediately, the frame of reference becomes the country other than America. Usually the other country is mentioned first. So you think of the other country first. Then you think of America. That is UnAmerican.
Instead: say American: You are in America. You are an American. You speak American. No complication there. It's simple, cut and dried, and honest. Plus it's clear where your loyalties lie.
My explanation about the persistent use of the words black and white, in reference to human beings despite the obvious advance of language and civilization, does not show a pretty picture.
I believe: It is to the financial advantage of some in power to keep categories split between white and black.
It is, additionally, to a certain political advantage.
F.A. Hayak, in his "Road to Serfdom" talks extensively about the danger of a "common enemy" in the process of dictatorship or for developing fascism. This danger is calculated and enforced by the ones who want to see the dictatorship develop.
This developing of a 'common enemy' is the undercurrent force which I highlight in this article.
Now that we are aware of the undercurrent force, let us work at eliminating the danger of the “common enemy “ to our Beloved America.
Is it possible to adapt the word ‘Hapsi’ to refer to sub-human behavior?
By the way: this ‘black and white’ thinking, as an expression of culture, as a mind-set and as a reflection of thought, is very occidental - to use an old-fashioned term for a region and culture: It is a product of British, German, French and Spanish culture. It does NOT exist in the indigenous culture of the Americas.
Today: It still does not exist in the culture of the original Americans or the indigenous people.
I call this ‘ black and white’ thinking the “Victor-Vanquished” psychology. Everything of the culture of the Victor is MADE to be superior by design and pre-meditated thought and action. The Vanquished are the people who were defeated by the Victor. They imitate everything the Victor does and says.
I have a challenge to you, Dear Reader:
Can you spend ONE day without using the word black and/or white while defining people? Except for law enforcement. They still use anthropological categories unfortunately. It's part of law enforcement to use an anthropological category.
Should you accept the challenge, slowly that one day will turn to two days and the days will extend. And you, as a member of a refined society, will begin to call a person by their name, and not by the color of their skin.
Should this happen, that would be our individual and personal step forward in breaking skin color prejudice. One step at a time.
To see the totally unwieldy attempts at categorizing human beings, a review of a small smattering of the following categories is below, going from 5 races to 7 races and then the ridiculous 12 races.
A: The U.S. Integrated Post Secondary Education Data System has the following race categories:
1) Non-Resident Alien
2) Race and Ethnicity unknown
3) Black, non-Hispanic
4) American Indian/Alaskan Native
5) Asian/Pacific Islander
7) White, non-Hispanic
1) Non-resident Alien
2) Race and Ethnicity unknown
3) Hispanics of any race
For non-Hispanics only:
4) American Indian or Alaska Native
6) Black or African American
7) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
9) Two or more races
B: The US 2000 Census form had a choice of 5 categories:
White; Black or African American; American Indian and Alaska Native; Asian; and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. A separate question on Hispanic origin preceded the race question.
C: Race and Ethic Standards for FEDERAL Statistics and reporting:
(as adopted on May 12, 1977)
The basic racial and ethnic categories for Federal statistics and program administrative reporting are defined as follows:
a. American Indian or Alaskan Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North America, and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliations or community recognition.
b. Asian or Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands. This area includes, for example, China, India, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands, and Samoa
c. Black. A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.
d. Hispanic. A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
e. White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle east.
New U.S. Department of Education Race and Ethnicity Education Race and Ethnicity Data Standards December 2009 Data Collection and Reporting Changes Starting School Year 2010 Starting School Year 2010 -11
States will be required to use seven (7) mutually exclusive categories to report aggregate data to exclusive categories to the federal government: 1. Hispanic/Latino and, for individuals who are non-Hispanic/Latino. 2. American Indian or Alaska Native, 3. Asian, 4. Black or African American, 5. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 6. White, and 7. Two or more races.