Except in this case the victims (the hungry children) are not the ones being labeled that. Also the word subhuman is in the dictionary (I checked Webster's) with zero reference to the war.
And "n*gro" is the Spanish, non-slur word for "black" but yet we can't use it because US people dislike it. Slavery and such. Cultural sensitivity goes both ways.
> And "n*gro" is the Spanish, non-slur word for "black" but yet we can't use it because US people dislike it. Slavery and such. Cultural sensitivity goes both ways.
Webster's dictionary:
plural Negroes
1 dated, often offensive : a person of Black African ancestry
2 dated, often offensive : a member of a group of people formerly considered to constitute a race (see race entry 1 sense 1a) of humans having African ancestry and classified according to physical traits (such as dark skin pigmentation)
Note the "offensive" warnings. Now let's see subhuman:
: less than human: such as
a: failing to attain the level (as of morality or intelligence) associated with normal human beings b: unsuitable to or unfit for human beings
subhuman living conditions c: of or relating to a taxonomic group lower than that of humans; the subhuman primates
In the case of subhuman, Webster's dictionary does not give any warning. And there is no reference to any wars.
Don't try to make people say things they are not saying.
In this case the intended meaning was clearly:
"failing to attain the level (as of morality) associated with normal human beings"
Like you, probably, I got a very systemizing brain and had trouble understanding this for decades. What the dictionaries say about the words does not matter - what is offensive to other people does not follow any system, but their feelings. And that means its arbitrary and you have probably no chance to know it ahead of time.
