If you want to play the "educate" and "rise" card then please do not enter discussions. We're having a discussion not a "who is right" discussion.
They aren't cards, you have come into this thread and said some straight up ignorant things that multiple people have corrected you on. You have also been asking for literature on the subject and help from posters to better understand nomenclature and historical context. When somebody explains these things, they are educating you.
And yes, there is a right and a wrong to this discussion. It's okay to unknowingly say something offensive and then change your stance after being called out on it. What
isn't okay is victim blaming or using excuses like 'I grew up with the word' or 'I have _____ friends' to de-legitimize the feelings of others.
You say in relation to Asia during European imperialism. Do you have evidence of this? Its usage is known to be far older than European imperilism so in relation to Asia is meaningless.
Are you kidding me? No seriously, have you never taken a AP history course in high school or a general education class in college? No shit 'Orient' and 'Oriental' have been around before 'modern' imperialism (Yes, the Romans did engage in imperialism) but that isn't the point here. I'm speaking specifically about the word in relation to the subjugation of people, land resources, and culture in Asia by Europeans. Want some literature on the subject? Start
here.
Just because the term was started by the Roman Empire, which stretched into Babylon (modern day Iraq), known today as Asia, or THE MIDDLE EAST, doesn't make the term 'meaningless.' Seriously, what kind of logic is that? I've already explained multiple times how using the term oriental can hearken back to the days of imperialism and the negative connotations that has for a lot of people.
People can feel dehumanized over a lot of words even with words like exotic. You have to research and learn about the word and why it is offensive. Currently reading the book someone suggested from Amazon (kindle so gud).
Was "oriental" specifically used or even casually used as a way to subjugate people? (it's glossing-ish it over in the book)
In your view the people who use a historical word that designated a region and then those people who conquered the region tainted that word?
People generally don't get upset over being called something for no reason at all, usually a word is used in a derogatory manner, has historical context, or is antiquated and considered rude. If somebody came up to me and called me 'exotic' because of my dark skin and curly hair, I'd be annoyed and correct them. You know why? Because it makes me feel like an object or an animal, and that is dehumanizing. It's wrong to place blame on the victims and tell them to do research on words before getting offended. The bottom line is that if I say something and somebody says 'Hey Gucci, I think that's offensive, can you not use that term?' my reaction is to apologize and not do it again in their presence. That's what rational people do, not get on google to try and tell somebody what they can and cannot be offended by.
To answer the other part of your question, I don't think you know what subjugate means. Europeans used force to conquer indigenous people, keep the population under control, and deprive the country of resources. They were technologically superior in the art of warfare, that was the big difference. I have already described how the term oriental was originally used so go back and read that again. No, it was not used as a slur, yes, it evokes unpleasant feeling based on historical context and can be considered offensive.
How is that racist? It's not like ever color of man is equal in today's age.
If you can't see why believing that every person, regardless of color is equal, I don't know what to say.