To think Jim Davidson is probably not the most enlightening contributor to a programme about political correctness and to want to explain in the most violent terms why the word Paki is not equivalent to the word Brit or Aussie?

[LittleBellaLugosi]

FFS.

Clive James, Radio 4. That moron Jim Davidson has me frothing at the mouth.

For anyone who genuinely doesn't understand why the term "paki" is not equivalent to the term "brit" or "aussie", it is because the term Brit or Aussie is merely a shortening of the words British or Australian, and neither word has ever carried any pejorative meaning.

The word Paki, otoh, was always, always used pejoratively. It was used indiscriminately to describe anyone from the Indian sub-continent - or even, anyone from anywhere east of Italy. If you were an Afghan, an Iraqui, an Indian, a Sri Lankan, you could be called a Paki. Hence, Paki is not merely a shortening of the term "Pakistani", it is a pejorative term for anyone with dark skin who is not of African or Caribbean descent.

OK? Got that? If someone could explain that to Jim Davidson while they're on their travels, I'd be grateful.

I thank you.

OP - I was foaming at the mouth when I heard that programme too (it was Clive Anderson, not Clive James, btw ) but as another poster has said, he was pretty much given enough rope with which to hang himself. He came off sounding like a totally outmoded, uninformed and wilfully stupid dinosaur, which I suspect was the programme-makers' intention.

Still, it didn't half make me swear at the radio!

I see the nuance of what you are trying to say Onager, and yes, 'Paki' would have been just a word where JD and others came from. If Brit was in the vernacular in the 50s then as it was in the context of all that was good and best about the UK after the war - this was the post-war boom - and hence anything not British would necessarily be seen in a lesser light, and so perjoriative. It would be better for JD to say, yes Paki was a word where I came from, it was pejorative, there is no doubt about that. Being brought up in racist communities and even families does not have to always mean that you will henceforth always eb racist - that is cannot see a shared humanity in people of different hues or cultures; of seeing them as lesser beings, lesser deserving of the privledge you might enjoy.

JD is defending his culture - as it his right - just as other cultures defend the undefencable all the time. It's self preservation, and a refusal to adapt - and thinsg that don't adapt become extinct.

Oh Clive Anderson - well that makes sense.

Clive James is a talented and wise man indeed. Anderson is just a woodentop.