only the definition that you prefer is valid. Not the actual meaning of the word

So the meaning of a word is how it's used. This case with Jefferies, the meaning of the word is "famous black man like Tupac". That's the meaning. We know this because the person assigning it to him is not speaking in Arabic, and not applying the same moniker to white people.

So even in that basis alone, the moniker may as well be "AIPAC Blackman". Because that's literally the extent of thought being put into it.

The problem is that Tupac's name is not just some accident of history. It is a deliberate choice. Therefore it comes with meaning.

Meaning is constructed. It's not something found in a dictionary, it's a participatory process.

This is true for plenty of other names: Hitler, Trump, Gandhi, etc. Imagine calling JD Vance's wife "A Hot Ma Gandhi". Not only is it offensive simply by virtue of the dehumanization that comes from decontextualizing a name based on ethnicity or race and just applying a famous name of one member of that community to another (like calling all Chinese people Lee or Ching), but it's ALSO applying a name with the baggage if honor to a person who doesn't deserve that honor.

I wouldn't be offended on behalf of the Gandhi family. I would just find it offensive and ignorant.

This is like that. I am not upset on behalf of the Shakur's, I am upset as me, because it's an ignorant and offensive name for all of these reasons. And you defending it is a lot like the good old boys saying "what are you some kind of Indian lover? If they don't like it let them come tell me to my face that they don't like it". It's not a good look