Talk:Cracker (term)/Archive 1

message: "Cracker" is not from the slave masters "cracking" their whips, it comes from poor whites who could only afford and thus ate crackers.  Cracker, Linthead etc. are all from the same time period and have essentially the same meaning i.e. "poor white person."  The idea that cracker comes from slave masters is just another white supremacist fabrication to twist the origination of the word into something that makes themselves feel superior.
Just "Cracker," not "white cracker," which is a tautology: imagine a black cracker. Or a native American cracker. Too dumb to correct (TDTC) Wetman 08:50, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Cracker

message: Please explain what the Newsmax column adds to the story? AlistairMcMillan 21:51, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed the Newsmax (third hand source) link to the Drudge (second hand source) link.  AlistairMcMillan 22:39, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newsmax column (now Drudge instead) 

message: Some Florida crackers say that poor people who had to crack their own corn at home because they couldn't afford to buy processed corn were called crackers by some of those more affluent, who looked down upon the activity. This usage does not pre-suppose that the cracker is a white person but would refer to anyone who's so poor. Beanluc 23:13, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin: Corn-cracking poor 

message: The phrase Georgia Cracker is older than implied in the article lead: "...originally a pejorative term for a white person mainly used by blacks" - by at least a century. Note the 1890 reference in the article [here]. The age of the term finally is discussed in the thrird paragraph, making the word "originally" in the first line troubling.  ~ WCFrancis 23:20, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Georgia Cracker

message: There is a category for ethnic slurs. Wigger is in, this should probably be as well. Comments? --Uncle Bungle 02:43, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic slur 

message: This article is proof that everytime Rex creates an article with a title this dumb it should be immediatly deleted/redirected/locked/, save wikipedia from a lot of dumbness--152.163.100.10 05:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: I think

message: I'm restoring a few minor edits after they were reverted, and adding a few more, with some commentary.
The first edit fixes some faulty parallelism.
:As an insult, "cracker" was and is typically invoked against a white American, particularly (though not necessarily) lower-income, uneducated rural men...
This sentence first says that the term is invoked against "a white American", and then against "rural men". I've made this marginally clearer by using the plural in both places.
The second edit resolves a modified/modifier gap.
:...in the South, especially in Georgia.
I moved this phrase closer to invoked, which it modifies.
Thirdly, especially is a more concise way of saying "particularly (though not necessarily)". 
Fourthly, I modified the remark about victims of the slur, with more focus on who is using the word, rather than those against whom it is used.
Fifthly, I mention how that remark is unverified.
The result:
:As an insult, cracker was and is used most frequently in the South, especially in Georgia. It is invoked typically against white Americans. It may reflect frustration with undereducation, and also possibly is a sign of contempt for poverty, although insufficient evidence of this is available.
Omphaloscope » talk 22:03, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further commentary on my edits 

message: So this is what happens when you let people squabble over a term that has roots over 500 years old in Southern History? No one can see past the negative connotation to actually go out and pick up a history book or research properly. This entire article is a shame and should be wiped from the Wiki and started over by someone who has a distinct clue on where this word actually came from and how times changed and it became a perjorative term for poor white southerners. For those who would like a clue start by googling the terms "Florida Cracker" "Perdido Cracker" and see where it leads you.
Your use of the term "Perdido Cracker" on this page is the only Google hit for the term as of today. THB 19:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article completely out of context with regards to actual HISTORY

message: Please give a reference for the section explaining the difference between a cracker and a hillbilly or hick. THB 19:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed section

message: Do you think it's right for the caption of the picture to be "Label depicting a barefoot cracker boy eating peaches from a straw hat" ?
This directly states that the boy is a cracker. Shouldn't it be something like "Label depicting a barefoot boy eating peaches from a straw hat, clearly being referred to as a cracker", so that it states that the sign is calling the boy a cracker and not wikipedians? I think it's allright, but i suppose some people could get offended. Opinions? Gerardo199 23:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture caption 

message: Despite the previous consensus on the matter (see above), and the objections of various editors who remove the text, an editor keeps adding this sentence:
*Depending on context, this slur can have the same negative and demeaning stance to whites as the word Nigger does to blacks.
Can we have some verification of this, and perhaps a discussion of whether it is correct and appropriate? -Will Beback 19:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: for the last 100+ years "cracker" has been jocular and friendly--see the books listed and note the "Cracker state" motto as well as the brand name biscuit. Actual derogatory usage has been uncommon. Rjensen 01:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Depending on context 

message: Changed the heading GEORGE BUSH HATES ME to Usage
Halfbakedbliss 12:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: George Bush Hates Me

message: "In recent years, members of the American Left have taken to calling Christian Conservatives "Crackers" as an insult. On August 20, 2000, Internet gossip columnist Matt Drudge reported that Donna Brazile, Al Gore's campaign manager, called George W. Bush a "black hating cracker"
I dont see how one alleged cracker slur from one member of the american left could be seen as "recent years, members of the american left." As if this is a widespread phenomenon and accepted fact. Also, the wording implies that this a slur used against christian conservatives in general and I dont think there is any proof to that. I  removed the first sentence entirely and left the rest intact. Any objections? First time poster btw and I apologize if I have not followed protocol.--Jasper23 20:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced/nnpv 

message: One etymology dating back to the antebellum South claims the term originated with slavery. At the advent of American slavery, Native Americans were used, but most of these slaves were not resistant to the strange European diseases that were brought over during the colonial period. Others knew the land better than the white colonists, and fled or were liberated by fellow tribe members. (Cf. In the Spirit of Crazy Horse by Peter Mattheson)A second attempt invoved using lower class white slaves from Europe. Many of these folks arrived as indentured servants, but died during their period of enslavement or were kept in bondage longer than the agreed upon time. But most of these would simply walk off the plantation and mingle with the immigrant workers who were arriving in ever increasing numbers. After Africans became the target for the slave trade (due to their distinctive appearance and the fact that many European diseases were also common in Africa), the number of poor whites vastly outnumbered the elite class, who were wealthy enough to own land (and slaves). Racism was used as a tool by the ruling elite to prevent the destitute whites from becoming sympathetic to the African slaves, and possibly aiding them in escaping the horrors of slavery. These lower classes were also employed as foremen in the plantations, whose job it was to supervise black slaves and to prevent their escape. Many used bullwhips to terrorize the African slaves, and the sound the whip made when it was used as a weapon was (and still is) called 'cracking' the whip. The foremen were thus known as 'crackers' in reference to the noise of their whips as they were used to assualt the bodies of the slaves. (Cf. Thomas Jefferson's Notes on Virginia and the film Matawan). At the close of the American Civil War. many who had previously been employed as night riders (slave catchers) or foremen became unmeployed. These now jobless whites were then influenced by former Confederate officers bitter from the loss of the war to join the Ku Klux Klan, which was created by Nathan Bedford Forrest in attempt to resist Reconstruction. This further instilled racism and a distrust of the US federal government in these lower income whites, thus setting the stage for the period of time and system of laws and customs known as Jim Crow, further exacerbating race relations in the South. (Cf. Remembering Jim Crow by American RadioWorks).
Sorry, the above section is just way too long. It destroys the rest of the article with an unsourced and possibly biased pov. I do appreciate the hard work that you must have put into this but nothing is cited. This is too speculative and does not belong in an encyclopedia article. Btw, vandalism is not the term you want to use when you disagree with someones good faith edit.Jasper23 20:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The part about "cracking the whip" seems very relevant.  I'd rather see us keep the text that directly deals with the etymology (i.e. not the part about the Klan) but tag it as needing citations...  -/- Warren 21:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of new section 

message: hello, i would like to ask a question and hopefully you may be able to answer.
many of the hillbillies songs and stories and ballads dealt with the history of what?
What? Jasper23 19:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  asking a question 

message: Properly sourced material should not be removed without discussion. -THB 02:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we say "whitewash?" Dubc0724 13:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we say "fact checking?" You should give it a try sometime and then retract your whitewash statement. I would venture to guess that you probably wont. Jasper23 19:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the time, nobody was backing up his "tracker" claim.  I still don't buy it (kinda like "botched joke") having listened to the clip.  But it's really inconsequential at this point. Moving on... Dubc0724 14:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever. Did you read the article linked above? Did you read how all the news networks retracted their claims and how the original instigator of the claim admitted that he was wrong? Probably not. But you still chose to be rude anyway. Great job there. Jasper23 16:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. Dubc0724 21:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I wasn't buying it either.  But there is a link above in my apology post that even shows the tracker/cracker guy saying that Ford Sr. said "tracker".  -THB 19:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sourced material/Harold Ford Sr.

message: "Crackers" (always in the plural) is a fairly common, though perhaps now slightly old-fashioned, insult in British English, meaning something close to "loony", and with the same level of usually quite mild insult. For example: "He wants to walk to London? The man's clearly crackers!" I have no idea of the etymology, but it has no racist overtones whatever, the racist term being unknown in the UK except where imported from America. Loganberry (Talk) 03:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is understood, but not often used, in the U.S. in the same manner.  -THB 04:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  British(?) usage 

message: User THB and I have recently disagreed on whether this article has sufficient references.  I've read through the article, and it appears editors have made a successful effort to make sure that majority of the content is scrupulously sourced.  
According to THB's recent edit summary, the article "still has many controversial unsourced statements." Many?  Really? Besides the lone statement curently marked with the "fact" tag (the part about cracker being similar to redneck, which hardly strikes me as controversial, or even debatable), what specifically are the unsourced statements that we must correct before the tag can be removed?  I would love to address "the underlying problem," but I need help identifying precisely what the problem is.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 15:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. -THB 15:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations missing tag 

message: Rather than cluttering up the article any more than it already is, please see the two references which clearly identify Roy Harris as both the leader of the Augusta "Cracker Party", former speaker of the house for the State of Georgia, and a former state Democratic Convention floor leader.  He was also a well known segregationalist. 
http://www.stetsonkennedy.com/jim_crow_guide/chapter7_2.htm
http://www.amazon.com/phrase/Roy-Harris —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Omnivore Oprah (talk • contribs) 21:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cracker Party

message: The text reads: "Crackin' Good Snacks (a division of Winn Dixie, a Southern grocery chain) has sold niggorz similar to Ritz crackers under the name "Georgia Crackers"."
I see plurals changed all the time in this manner by kids on the internet or playing gamez(!). Quite obviously this 'usage' of English does not belong in an encyclopedia. --Mal 11:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, the only thing you see wrong was the plural?  It was a bit of childish racist vandalism; I've reverted it, and blocked the idiot who did it. --Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 12:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What are "niggorz" please? 

message: Ok, I'm game let's discuss. Bierstube Katzen Keller 23:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion of Etymology and Folk Etymology

message: One of the links in that section, [The Crescent], leads to an article about a department store rather than the plantation house referred to in the sentence. I don't know if there's an article for the real thing or not, or else I'd just change it. 71.37.22.24 19:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "examples of usage" 

message: It's not clear to me that anyone has a good idea of what kind of photo they'd like to see here, so I've removed the  template from this page.  If you put the tag back, please consider describing specifically what kind of picture you think would benefit this article in the of= parameter to the template. Tim Pierce 00:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: Does anyone know if there is a non-pejorative term for the descendants of indentured servants and transported prisoners?  --The Four Deuces 20:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-pejorative term 

message: :Image:Georgia cracker peaches.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 22:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Georgia cracker peaches.jpg

message: I know his is original research, but geez, I wonder if any of these sources even *considered* the possibility that "cracker" as a pejorative for whites might just have come from the color of crackers (as in saltines, the most popular cracker probably in the world or at least the U.S.). By the way, maybe it really did come things like cops/white folks being "whipcrackers," but to me that sounds like some sociologist was looking to justify  nonwhites using racist language. Just my opinion. Swordwing (talk) 01:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources over-thinking the origin? 

message: I don't think this part -  '(Note that in British English "mean" is also a term for poverty, with no malice implied.)' - is really accurate; it's more used to mean 'miserly' and would be more likely to be used for a well-off person who was tight with their money than a poor person.86.54.40.169 (talk) 15:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, so it means in British English.  However, in American English it generally means abusive, malicious, bad-tempered, etc.  I think that distinction is what the sentence meant to convey, though it doesn't do it very well.  Eastcote (talk) 16:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

text: In British English of an earlier period (though not now) it simply meant "poor, small, insignificant". As in Acts xxi.39, "I am a citizen of no mean city", i.e. a city of significant size and status. Or in the 19th century hymn "Once in royal David's city" - "With the poor and mean and lowly/ Lived on Earth our Saviour holy." This is obviously how it was used in the description of "mean whites" in the Britannia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.133.68.192 (talk) 11:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Mean' in British English 

message: The term Cracker was used in the North, NJ and NY for sure in the 50s and 60s.75.197.135.114 (talk) 00:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We need a reliable source before we can add your information Alatari (talk) 08:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cracker 

message: Regarding the last sentence of the first paragraph "The word cracker is sometimes used when referring to someone who is racist, especially "Colin Keiper" (bold & quote marks mine).
WHO is this Colin Keiper, what relevance is he to this article, and why are there no references or citations for him?
Based on the tone of the sentence, it appears that this is an attack on Colin Keiper.  If so, why?
Would someone be so kind and please educate me?
Rich5150 (talk) 02:51, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colin Keiper...? 

message: Moving to talk page until its sourced:
Other possible theories include references to cracking a whip over oxen when driving to market, the 18th century practice of cracking corn to make liquor, or to poor whites having had to crack their grain because they couldn't afford to take it to the local mill to have it ground.
 
A popular etymology claims the term cracker originated from piney-woods Georgia and Florida pastoral yeomen's use of whips to drive cattle. The word then came to be associated with the cattlemen of Georgia and Florida. Cattlemen of the state of Florida (and some native born Floridians) take pride in being called "crackers", "Florida Crackers", or "Cracker Cowboys". The Cracker culture included using the bullwhip as a form of communication between cattle drivers, using "Cracks"  and pauses to send messages.
A false or folk etymology claims the term dates back to slavery in the antebellum South.  Many slaver foremen used bullwhips to terrorize African slaves, and the sound the whip made when it was used as a weapon was called 'cracking' the whip. The foremen who cracked these whips were thus known as 'crackers'.  
:I'm curious where you would expect to find such evidence of its origins with that meaning given that slaves in the antebellum south were prohibited by law from reading and writing and they for damn sure weren't going to be calling their slave owner a cracker to his face.  Every black person I know that uses the term traces its origins back to chattel slavery and to claim that that history is false because it's an oral history is hella racist. 138.238.28.213 (talk) 19:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced info 

message: I am thinking about removing the pop-culture section as an non-encyclopedic section. It is also unsourced. What do other people think?Turtlescrubber 21:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. If someone uses the term in passing without it generating any controversy or comment then the usage is non-notable.  If there are cultural uses of the term that are significant and sourced we can add them to the main body of the article.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 22:30, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a pop culture section is a good idea actually. Like with the honky article, there were shows (ie. The Jeffersons) which popularized the word and wouldn't be difficult to source. (George Jefferson calling white people "honky" and "cracker".) It was used in other forms of media and television shows, and would help expand the article beyond it's history of the word. In addition, as mentioned above, I think mentioning the double-standard of blacks calling whites this word and it being acceptable, should be briefly referenced. It may take time, but one day, this word could be considered as bad as nigger is. Just never know, considering the past of our human race and the current age of being "pc" (politically correct). Might as well nip-it-in-the-bud. 64.134.54.102 (talk) 03:39, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It should probably be brought back since the Trayvon martin case is just thrown in to the etymology section, and causes this page to be very messy all of the sudden. 12.130.161.101 (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Culture section removal

message: The continued attempts by 99pporg to insert material related to the current George Zimmerman trial into this article is disruptive for several reasons. Many of the assertions made are unsupported, representing little more than the opinion of the user. Some inserted material lacks objectivity, violating the tenet of neutrality. Other material is simply redundant, having been presented in other sections of the article. Finally, the length of the statements place undue emphasis on the Zimmerman trial, which is not the subject of this article. For those reasons, material inserted by 99pporg has been repeatedly deleted or reduced by other editors, only to be re-inserted by 99pporg. This statement is placed, (here and at talk) in the hope that a dialogue can be established to address these concerns. Failing that, the request for a block may be the only recourse. Gulbenk  (talk) 19:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Zimmerman Trial

message: The prominence given in this article to the theory that the term 'cracker' derives from the 'cracking' of whips over slaves by white foremen is striking--and indeed disconcerting, when one notes that none of the citations given in the Oxford English Dictionary seems to support it. The closest, perhaps, is a reference from the 11 June 1887 edition of the Boston Beacon that alleges that 'cracker' derives from 'cracking' whips, albeit over draft animals, not slaves. I have, accordingly, removed from the article the reference to James S. Buckingham's The Slave States of America, which may have draft animals in mind, too; the original text, which can be found on Google Books, never specifies over what the 'crackers' crack their whips, but the crackers are, in any case, not figured as slave-foremen but instead as poor, antiquated country folk--the article, as previously written, had seriously distorted the significance of the quotation. Spurius Furius (talk) 09:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A further edit: Thorton's American Glossary gives no indication that 'cracking' of whips, whence the term 'cracker', ever referred to beating of slaves (draft animals are in mind in all of the relevant citations given there); the prominence given to the slavery-focused etymology is thus wholly unjustified, unless strongly-supported evidence can be adduced (i.e. lexicographical studies with actual primary citations). I have modified the article to match. Spurius Furius (talk) 09:48, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems to have found its way back into the article. I am removing all POV and unsupported edits. This is a contentious article. All claims must have multiple, stong and reliable sources supporting the.--Mark Miller (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a search on JSTOR as well as on google books and found literally dozens of books that mention this. What sort of sources are we asking for so I know what to look for? I have to say, there are a lot of books that acclaim to it, so if it is not true then it is a cultural myth reported across many, many, many different works --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 19:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no doubt that the term can be sourced as a derogatory term. What I believe has been challenged and I am challenging now, is that the term was derived from slave masters cracking a whip or that that is prevalent as an origin theory among experts and mainstream sources. How do the current sources actually support the claim now?--Mark Miller (talk) 19:12, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The suggested text says that it is a theory as to where the term comes from not the truth. There are quite a few printed sources that say this and that is what I mean by dozens of books mentioning it. Removing it is going against reputable sources and there is no harm presenting it as a theory. Are there any sources that say that this is definitively untrue? --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 19:14, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait, I may be wrong. I think the misconception comes because black slaves calling the whip of the white men a cracker, rather than the men themselves  . That said, I still found a few sources that asserted otherwise, but they look less reliable . What do you think? --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 19:24, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: All things considered, I still think it warrants inclusion if mentioned as being a theory. I had personally have heard it a few times and until a source comes that proves this definitively isn't true it warrants inclusion in this manner --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 19:27, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I should be more specific. I am asking that we hold off with the inclusion until we can verify the content is from reliable sources, published by notable experts in the proper fields and supports the claims as written, specifically that there is a notable theory about the etymology of the term coming from slavery and the crack of a slave master's whip. Let's start there? Can you link to an online version of these sources or can you give us a snippet of the text being used from whatever sources we cannot easily access?--Mark Miller (talk) 20:07, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

text: I've spent the past hour looking for better sources with my University log in and I'm starting to lean towards retracting my previous point. There are lots of sources that discuss the "cracker people" as having had slaves, as well as the claim that they were called "crackers" because of the sound of their whips. There are also sources that say that the "cracker people" frequently used their whips on slaves. However, I'm leaning towards them being called this by the slaves because of their whipping of them as being synthesis. That said, it is still quite a prevalent idea, and I'm unsure if it shouldn't be included entirely. How long has it been in the article? Is it possible that it has become such a widespread notion because of Wikipedia? --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 20:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That is very possible. I have seen the speed in which circular referencing can sometimes take off. But my main concern is that, at least since last year, there have been concerns about this particular point. I recommend it be excluded for now and that further sources that pertain directly to this as a possible etymology be strong enough to our standards before it is returned.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is a particularly controversial topic. There is no doubt that the people referred to as "crackers" were often slave owners so I understand the anger of it being equated so regularly as a slur to some that target other ethnic groups. That said, I don't think such an argument should be based on misinformation and its inclusion may be WP:POINT until we know for sure this is true. We should probably exclude it for now either way until better sources can be found --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 21:16, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Cracker' as derived from 'cracking' of whips 

message: *"Full Circle: Africaamerica" by Roderick Batman, AuthorHouse Publishing. Page 189, p. 189, 
*"Black Talk: Words and Phrases from the Hood to the Amen Corner" by Dr. Geneva (that is the attribution given in the reference). Page 100, 100 pp.
*"The Color of Words: An Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Ethnic Bias in the United States" by Philip H. Herbst. Page listed as 6z1., 6z1 pp.
*"Juba to Jive: A Dictionary of African-American Slang" by Clarence Major. No page number listed
*"An American Glossary" byRichard H. Thorton. No page number given.
 
 has already demonstrated that the Thorton source does not support the claim.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:22, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've spent the past hour looking for better sources with my University log in and I'm starting to lean towards retracting my previous point. There are lots of sources that discuss the "cracker people" as having had slaves, as well as the claim that they were called "crackers" because of the sound of their whips. There are also sources that say that the "cracker people" frequently used their whips on slaves. However, I'm leaning towards them being called this by the slaves because of their whipping of them as being synthesis. That said, it is still quite a prevalent idea, and I'm unsure if it shouldn't be included entirely. How long has it been in the article? Is it possible that it has become such a widespread notion because of Wikipedia? --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 20:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That is very possible. I have seen the speed in which circular referencing can sometimes take off. But my main concern is that, at least since last year, there have been concerns about this particular point. I recommend it be excluded for now and that further sources that pertain directly to this as a possible etymology be strong enough to our standards before it is returned.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is a particularly controversial topic. There is no doubt that the people referred to as "crackers" were often slave owners so I understand the anger of it being equated so regularly as a slur to some that target other ethnic groups. That said, I don't think such an argument should be based on misinformation and its inclusion may be WP:POINT until we know for sure this is true. We should probably exclude it for now either way until better sources can be found --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 21:16, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources for the claim

message: Old discussion has been archived and may be accessed in the box at the right. -THB 20:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old discussion archived

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Cracker (pejorative). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110525082418/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Cracker to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Cracker
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040830012938/http://athena.english.vt.edu/~appalach/essaysa/cracker.htm to http://athena.english.vt.edu/~appalach/essaysA/cracker.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:16, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cracker (pejorative). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222001054/http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2014/02/did_white_male_insecurity_kill_jordan_davis.html?wpisrc=burger to http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2014/02/did_white_male_insecurity_kill_jordan_davis.html?wpisrc=burger
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:49, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I thought the term came from the fact that white people's skins was similar in color to saltines, hence the name crackers.
Adamv88 02:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is exactly what I was taught.  I'll have to look for some sources before including it in the article. Alatari (talk) 03:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: That I thought also, having been called a "soda cracker" growing up in a mixed race neighborhood in Washington DC in the sixties.  When I tried to add that to the article, an overzealous editor kept deleting it, insisting that the term came exclusively from whites cracking the whip on black slaves.
I had always heard the term came from chain-gang rock breakers, that they were referred to as crackers, and the term just grew from there.  Not sure where I heard that, but I heard it many times growing up so I always assumed that's where the term came from.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:2203:2B00:FC25:78CE:6743:B635 (talk) 02:01, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  I thought...