Recently, in many articles published by Czech media outlets across the spectrum, we see the following expressions being used more and more often: "Romani aggressor" or the plural "Romani aggressors", "Romani racist aggressors", "brutal Romani gang", "violent Romani man", "a group of aggressors (Romani, of course)", "six aggressors (Romani)". The neo-Nazis Dufek and Svoboda, who organized demonstrations not long ago in Duchcov against Romani people (all of them), used the slogan: "Against the Romani aggressors".
This is all in addition to the phrase "Romani attacker", which is already completely common and is used even when the alleged perpetrator’s ethnicity has no bearing on the particular case. The expression "Romani aggressor" has even unfortunately been used by some Romani writers themselves, as it was in a recent article by Patrik Banga.
I am not defending the crimes that have been committed by Romani people. If someone beats someone else up, he should be given a proportionate punishment – I don’t think anyone doubts that – no matter who he is.
My concern here is the formulation of the reporting of these incidents. When a perpetrator of Czech nationality beats someone up, it never occurs to any author to use a harsher descriptor for him than "perpetrator" or "violent man", or "violent men", "group of perpetrators", etc. However, when a Romani person allegedly commits the same crime, suddenly we are using the term "aggressor", and if more than one Romani person allegedly commit a crime together, they are immediately a "band of racist Romani aggressors".
The online commentaries posted beneath the articles where these terms are used are buzzing with the hatred that this kind of language has been escalating. We can read calls there for the genocide of the Roma, for their murder, for their deportation from the Czech Republic, for the revival of concentration or extermination camps.
It is completely common to read racist exclamations such as "Gypsies to the gas chambers", "black swine", "black mugs", etc. Of course, no one is bothered by this, or to be more precise, it only bothers a few "nuts" like me – and only some of us take a public stand against it.
Recently I used the term "white aggressor" in an article in response to the rising wave of "Romani aggressors" referred to across the media, and that bothered readers – mainly some of Czech nationality, but also several of Romani nationality. Sometimes it is good to hold up a mirror for others so they can see that their actions, including agreement or silence, are not correct.
I understand the Romani people who objected to the term "white aggressor". They are concerned that some people from the majority society will lose whatever love they might have for news server Romea.cz or for Romani people as a whole when they see such an expression being used here.
Some people do not like anything that is phrased in an extreme way. Some are just careful, and given what is happening in this society, I am not at all surprised.
As a person who has been involved with these problems for more than 20 years, of course, I know that those who object to Romani people in general will do so irrespective of how I or Romea.cz do our writing, or what we write about. Those who reflect on these matters will realize what I intended when I used the phrase "white aggressor".
I understand that others have a different opinion of this. I will be grateful to them if they respect that my perspective also differs from theirs.
In the discussion area beneath the article where I used "white aggressor (see http://www.romea.cz/en/news/czech/czech-republic-white-aggressor-brutally-beats-up-two-romani-women-one-of-them-disabled-in-the-sluknov-foothills), the following opinions were posted (some of which have since been erased):
"White aggressor" – when a gypsy writes that it’s not racism, but if a Czech writes "black aggressor" its third-degree racism …
Mr Kostlán, what will happen if I write "b…k aggressor"? Why in this case are you using those words? In one of your articles you condemn Nova, Blesk, etc., but you yourself are using the same tactic. Don’t add fuel to the fire…
… why are you writing "white aggressor" when you condemn those who use "Romani aggressor"?
…when you write white aggressor it really stinks.
…In the case of Romani people, you mostly write here about "youths" or about 16-year-old fathers who have been spanked by their 30-year-old parents. I haven’t read anything about Roma, if there wasn’t a photo or a video, then it’s just a guess.
… I will leave it up to the police to decide whether this was started by that evil, ugly white aggressor or by Marcela…
To be correct this should be "White aggressor attacks two black passers-by", right?
This could have happened differently. Maybe that little group overestimated their strength and the victim they sought turned out to be too physically gifted, or wasn’t drunk enough. That scenario is much more likely given the usual behavioral model of Roma.
Was the violent man a white aggressor or a drug addict???
So-called politically correct, serious journalists do not mention the ethnic origin of perpetrators, but activists from Romea’s news server base their existence on alleged racism, the "fight" against it, and mainly on the financial contributions from the state they receive for their activity. So if a brute who is drunk and high attacks two women, the information that the brute was white is particularly important. It means the state money flow to Romea won’t dry up for some time.
To all those who posted these comments, I would just like to quote Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol: "Don’t blame the mirror if your own mug is crooked."
