Earlier quoted context omitted.
'Master' is not counterpart to 'slave', it is counterpart to 'inferior'. 'Master' is "greater" (ex ' magis '), vs "lesser". The most resounding example is fitting: «Amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas». It is an ___extreme___ problem if somebody now thought [I change the tense out of refusal] that the term 'master' should not be used, especially if the perverse excuse were that someone used it in a way that makes s…
You are right, and I agree. However, languages live and the people of the USA are an important determinant of where the English language is headed. They have a particular history involving this word, and that history has not been fully reckoned with. It makes sense that the same word, although in other contexts with a slightly different meaning, would be redefined or removed this way, in order to deal with that histo…
don't you think this way the enemy wins a battle?
Terrorists attempt bending politics through terrorizing: if one is terrorized, is that one not playing their game?
We greet in some sensible way, say, and somebody comes and promotes the greeting as now meaning "short people should stick to accounting": that somebody should not be nobilitated and their """cultural proposal""" accepted as norm: it should be discarded as noise. If the greeting were affected and linked to some unworthy agenda, that would mean empowering said agenda: it should have been impotent, but with your attention, and attributing it legitimacy in the creation of constraints, you made it powerful.
«Languages live», but uprooted they go astray. A rubberband, like that vetting attitude you (yes really you) have been trained to develop, should always there to check validity, vis-a-vis what terms mean, coremost to how they are used. One is supposed not to forget that core.
"Congratulations for having defaced our public square by defecating in the middle: you now get the privilege to do similarly with our sacred vocabulary".
So should not we speak language, as an attempt, instead of «USA [determined] English language» or «natural language»?
And more to the point, should not we avoid acting as resonance chambers amplifying deeds? Some culturally inferior party is not supposed to bend culture with the "strength of inferiority" - that is absurd. It is not a "de facto" bending, it is the "de facto" response to it that gives it power.