posted
After all these years I have to conclude that whites do not want a rational conduct of research and discussion. Any discourse is war to them, and they need to descredit any Black argument. So I think that in order to be white, to feel white; they are taught to hate Blacks, and never answer a rational argument or look into the evidence or rationally discuss a reasoning offered by a Black identified research.
Then I also feel that there is some bullying here towards people who know one another; not to cross the race-line. This is not what I would expect from a free people like the Americans. There is no freedom of research on this web, when people are not free to explore different viewpoints or give support to alternative views.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whites have held to a white-superiority, -supremacy view before engaging Blacks in any social arena. So obviously, to "feel white," it is not necessary to discredit Blacks. White arrogance is a result of the Western Renaissance and the Age of Science and Enlightenment. Whites primarily look to their historical achivements as a source of racial pride.
Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe you're right. They do gainsay blacks unlike any other colour groups, ethnicities, or nations in exactly the manner and matter that you point out.
More than hatred their attitude is one of contempt.
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: After all these years I have to conclude that whites do not want a rational conduct of research and discussion. Any discourse is war to them, and they need to descredit any Black argument.
... and never answer a rational argument or look into the evidence or rationally discuss a reasoning offered by a Black identified research.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This "relative ease" was due to some Africans offering other Africans for sale more so than any direct raiding.
Whereas other peoples quit the abject enslaving of their co-continentals some Africans paid it no mind that only their fellows were still being outright marketed up to a century ago and are to this day "clandestinely" passing hands from one enslaver to the next.
Look at the examples of Mauritania and Niger who have just passed laws within the last six years making slavery (African on African) illegal this late in history, i.e., the 21st century.
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: After all these years I have to conclude that whites do not want a rational conduct of research and discussion. Any discourse is war to them, and they need to descredit any Black argument. So I think that in order to be white, to feel white; they are taught to hate Blacks, and never answer a rational argument or look into the evidence or rationally discuss a reasoning offered by a Black identified research.
Then I also feel that there is some bullying here towards people who know one another; not to cross the race-line. This is not what I would expect from a free people like the Americans. There is no freedom of research on this web, when people are not free to explore different viewpoints or give support to alternative views.
partially true, but as a 100% blanket statement covering 100% ofall whites- not so much. There are a number of white scholars who have had the courage to present a more balanced picture of African diversity. Much of what you say is true though. Diop's early challenge from past years has forced a reassessment in many areas- not 100% but there has been some progress compared to say the 1960s or 1970s.
Continuing in the footsteps of Diop, places like ES, Takur @Reloaded and other similar blogs like Explorer's, sites like Myra Wysinger's and other efforts by veteran posters over the years have created and put enough data on the table so that African history is being recovered in more balanced perspective. The academic work of Keita, Kittles, and even white scholars like Armelagos, Zakrewski et al, provide a strong scientific basis for those outside academe to work with.
The "Stormfront" and "biodiversity" types and the Wikipedia moles with bogus "stealth" edits may all be active, but they can't do a thing about the data on the table and its dissemination. All the disinformation and propaganda they put out can be forcefully refuted with current, accurate information. If they want war, as one Maroon leader in Guyana said a long time ago when confronting the Dutch: "But if you want war, [we] likewise are ready."
Yes I would agree that discourse is sometimes a war. It is a protracted struggle. One thing you will notice is that the opposing forces often quietly concede much of what the people's forces argue but in a veiled way, to save face. That tells you right there that progress is being made relatively speaking. There is some way still to go and it will be protracted struggle. The key point today is to protect and expand "the base." Think of it like the bases of the VietCong and PAVN during the Vietnam War. An American intrusion could be bled for maximum pain after which the liberation forces temporarily withdrew. Inevitably the intruders had to move on, and the people's forces returned to build. There is a big need to get accurate, up to date, easy to digest info into the hands of the people.
As for free speech, I am sure there are many who would love it if ES disappeared, taking all its information with it. No doubt that will happen one day, but "the base" should not rely on any one website. More multiple blogs and sites are needed to preserve and expand the info- like the multiple networks of PAVN bases. "The base" need have no one central directorate or ideology, or leader. There will be varying approaches by varying people, but united by certain basic principles such as the reality of the diversity of African peoples and their accomplishments.
Defenders of "the base"..
But what do you mean bullying not to cross the race line?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: Whites have held to a white-superiority, -supremacy view before engaging Blacks in any social arena. So obviously, to "feel white," it is not necessary to discredit Blacks. White arrogance is a result of the Western Renaissance and the Age of Science and Enlightenment. Whites primarily look to their historical achivements as a source of racial pride.
^^You always were the ignorant sort of pink-thrash...
Did you say rennaisance? The Muurs invented rennaissance:
Do you know the great Medici family?
Do you know Lodovico Sforza?
We start with Lodvico Sforz:
Lodovico Sforza, called Lodovico il Moro (the Moor): The Black Duke who invented the European Renaissance
Ludovico Sforza Duke of Milan ( aka Ludovico il Moro, “The Moor”; 27 July 1452 – 27 May 1508).
He was a member of the Sforza dynasty of Milan, Duchy of Milan, was the fourth son of Francesco Sforza. Francesco I had married Bianca Maria, sole daughter and heir of Filippo Maria Visconti, and thus had become duke of Milan.
The Muurish Duke Ludovico presided over, and personally funded the final and most productive stage of the Milanese Renaissance. He was famed as the patron and financier of Leonardo da Vinci, Bramante and other artists. He is probably best known as the man who commissioned the Last Supper.
As the regent of Milan, Ludovico invested in agriculture, horse and cattle breeding, and the metal industry. Some 20,000 workers were employed in the silk industry.
Alessandro de' Medici (July 22, 1510 – January 6, 1537) called "il Moro" ("the Moor"), Duke of Penne and also Duke of Florence (from 1532), ruler of Florence from 1530 until 1537. He was the last member of the "senior" branch of the Medici to rule Florence and the first to be a hereditary duke.
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^Whites gainsay Blacks because of the relative ease by which they were able to enslave them - it is borne of contempt.
Are you saying white people hate black people because they put black people in bondage? That sounds rather silly and senseless no? If anything whites gainsay blacks because of indoctrinated religion born from the tendency and act of conquest toward black people, not hatred.
Posts: 535 | From: From the Darkest of the Abyss | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^Whites gainsay Blacks because of the relative ease by which they were able to enslave them - it is borne of contempt.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: This "relative ease" was due to some Africans offering other Africans for sale more so than any direct raiding.
Whereas other peoples quit the abject enslaving of their co-continentals some Africans paid it no mind that only their fellows were still being outright marketed up to a century ago and are to this day "clandestinely" passing hands from one enslaver to the next.
Look at the examples of Mauritania and Niger who have just passed laws within the last six years making slavery (African on African) illegal this late in history, i.e., the 21st century.
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^Relative ease was due to the gun.
Yes, guns were the main item exchanged for enslaved Africans.
Infinitesimally few Africans were directly enslaved by Euros. It's a myth that Euros roamed unfettered throughout the Atlantic shores of Africa raiding as they pleased.
Africans made big business from the triangular trade. Euros were often made to wait for weeks on end, spending resource on food, drink, lodging, and entertainment while a deal for slaves was brokered.
What follows is a mostly, though not completely, accurate essay. Bracketed words and hi-liting are my editing. Otherwise it appears as originally presented on www.netnoir.com in 1997.
quote: THE AFRICAN SLAVE TRADE The First Slav[ing] Expeditions to [West] Africa by Anthony A. Lee
Kidnapping [people] from the African coast was part of European practice even before Portuguese ships had explored the coast of the continent or discovered a new route to India. One of the first expeditions to the Senegal River, led by the Portuguese in 1444, brutally seized the black residents of several off-shore islands near the river and carried them off to be sold as slaves. Other expeditions from Europe about this time did more or less the same.
But it was not long before African armies became aware of the new dangers, and Portuguese ships began to meet their match. For example, in 1446, two years later, a ship commanded by Nuno Tristão attempted to land in the Senegal region. It was attacked by African fighters in canoes, and the crew of the ship was wiped out. And in 1447, a Danish raider commanding a Portuguese ship was killed, along with most of his crew, when local African boats attacked.
Of course, this fact of history makes the Atlantic slave trade a bit more problematic, from a moral perspective. It is not simply a question of black and white. Slavery was well known in [many] African societies, as much as it was a fact of life everywhere else in the world during those times.
As soon as Diogo Gomes' diplomatic expedition to West Africa had succeeded, the export of slaves began to number in the thousands. During the bloody course, perhaps 10 or 15 million Africans had been delivered as slaves to the New World, and perhaps just as many more had died in the process. These [people] were captured in Africa by Africans, shipped to the African coast by Africans, and only then sold to European traders in trade ships to begin the dreaded Middle Passage to America. African kings and rulers were active and willing participants in the slave trade, which made them rich[er], and which could not have existed without their full cooperation and support.
Indeed, when African kingdoms decided to stop trading in slaves -- for their own reasons -- there was no way for European nations to force them to continue. The earliest example of this is the Kingdom of Benin on the West African coast (in what is now Nigeria) In the 1520's this state began to restrict the sale of slaves, finally cutting it off entirely by about 1550. This was probably not done for moral reasons, however. Records from this period show that the kingdom was becoming wealthi[er] from the export of cloth and pepper. Although it is only a guess, we can imagine that slaves were needed within Benin itself to produce these valuable products which could bring more wealth to the king than the sale of human beings.
As uncomfortable as this aspect of black history may be, it at least explodes the myth of a "dark," helpless and ignorant African continent that was always at the mercy of European greed. Nothing could be further from the truth. The more we learn about African history, going back even to the middle ages, the more we learn that Africans were full and active participants in the world -- on both sides of the Atlantic.
Depots, like El Mina, were leased from the ruling African power.
Often enough it was rented simultaneously to opposing European interests who then had no choice but to fight each other for actual possession and use as the African power broker refused to designate either claimant as the sole beneficiary.
Do you know what happened between the time a slaving vessel sought docking permission and disembarked for American shores? Have you any idea how long it took?
Slave trading was big profitable business for both the Euro buyers and the African sellers. The apologies issued by two of the biggest African profit reapers give lie to any assertion that Euros overpowered them to supply slaves or that lançados or other Afropeans numerically dominated the African end of the trade.
Even a book as old as Basil Davidson's Black Mother reveals the facts of the African power brokers of the slave trade. There were even some enslaved Africans who made it out of western hemisphere slavery only to repatriate back to Africa and then themselves procure people to enslave and sell to whites.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting dilemma; In order to disprove White power and superiority, you must prove sub-Saharan Barbarity.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another decent work on the subject of the slave trade is
The Slave Trade is a massive (900-page) book that attempts to document the entire history of the Atlantic slave trade, a sordid business that somehow prospered for more than four centuries. As the sheer heft of the book might indicate, the story is complicated. Much of the extensive research conducted by Hugh Thomas relates to rivalries both in Europe and Africa. Those who wonder how slavery could have existed in the United States may find revelatory the moral ambiguity of how the business of transporting slaves was conducted. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/178472.The_Slave_Trade
It details the cost and who made what. and for those who think that Africans were simply trading for trinkets think again.
quote:The king Tegbesu of Dahomey,who made # 250,000 a year from selling Africans in about 1750: far more than any English duke's annual income
posted
I see nowhere a disproval of white power or white technological superiority nor a demonstration of barbarity on the part of blacks along the Atlantic.
What could be more barbarous then the way whites treated blacks from the moment they boarded the slaving boats until the moment life left them at the rum distillery or the mine or the plantation?
I see white contempt of black Africans as born from the latter continuing slavery of co-continentals when other people of other continents had quit doing that by the time the transAtlantic slave trade was in full bloom, so that slave became synonymous with black (African) for Euros and "Arabs" alike.
This greed was transformed in the last century into SSA leaders selling natural resource commodities to whites for the sole benefit of themselves instead of their nations and not persuing infrastructure and technology at least commensurate with the rest of the once so-called 3rd World.
Not that that would be an easy task on any level and especially difficult in the first era of independence from colonialism and more so for those new nations who only had crops not strategic or luxury minerals and metals.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Interesting dilemma; In order to disprove White power and superiority, you must prove sub-Saharan Barbarity.
@ Brada Anansi Thanks a million for broadcasting Thomas' Slave Trade. It's always best to be up to date in this the "Age of Data."
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I see white contempt of black Africans as born from the latter continuing slavery of co-continentals when other people of other continents had quit doing that by the time the transAtlantic slave trade was in full bloom.
This greed was transformed in the last century into SSA leaders selling natural resource commodities to whites for the sole benefit of themselves instead of their nations and not persuing infrastructure and technology at least commensurate with the rest of the once so-called 3rd World.
Bingo.
Posts: 1819 | From: odesco baba | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What irritates me is that those being used as slaves in many African countries today could easily be paid for their services (and I don't mean paying their "parents") by those who "own" them.
-------------------- state of mind Posts: 1819 | From: odesco baba | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some traditions need to go check out Al-Takruri's vids on ESR.
OnRoad What irritates me is that those being used as slaves in many African countries today could easily be paid for their services (and I don't mean paying their "parents") by those who "own" them. http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=pavPosts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
If a person cannot maintain theirself or secure gainful employment paying out a living wage and I cannot pay them for services they may render me but I can provide them with food, shelter, and clothing is that so bad?
Is freedom in homelessness, hunger, and beggary better?
Never to own them in the sense of selling their very person or beating them or forcing females to cater to my sexual whims nor denying marriage with my offspring if both parties so desire, is that kind of slavery heinous?
At one time is that not what household slavery was supposed to be? But of course corruption set in and how could government really regulate and see to it that household slavery operate that way?
And what if in following the ideal household slavery someone in such bondage even if richer than my own offspring and someone in such bondage acquiring slaves of their own, if such a one having become a "big man" or "big woman" themself chooses to remain as mine out of love and apprciation, is that so bad?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Struggling Farmers Say Drop in Strawberry Prices Makes Destroying Crops More Economical Than Shipping to Market
At strawberry farms across southwest Florida, there's an unusual sight. Workers aren't picking strawberries, they're destroying them. Why Florida farmers are destroying, rather than picking, their strawberry crop.
"We've got more berries than we know what to do with," said Matt Parke, a strawberry farmer. He said that prices have dropped so much that it seems cheaper to let the fruit spoil than ship it to market.
quote: Denmark was the first European country to ban slavery. In 1807 Britain declared the slave trade to be illegal. One year later the United States of America followed, Sweden in 1813, The Netherlands in 1814, France in 1815 and Spain in 1820.
However the constant demand for slaves in the Caribbean and in the Southern States of America continued. Huge profits could still be made with the slave trade. In the years that followed, dozens of illegal slave transports took place between Africa and those destinations. Britain on an international level made great efforts to stop this illegal trade. It made agreements with other countries, and British marine ships were authorized to ransack ships leaving Africa. They patrolled along the African coast to stop illegal slave transports. When a slave trader was caught, the ship was confiscated and the captain punished. The punishments England imposed in 1811 was deportation or the death penalty.
But it was not from a humane point of view that England suppressed the slave trade; rather, it was to protect its own sugar colonies against dishonest competition from other countries that could still count on new supplies of cheap slave labor. The British and French ships patrolling along the African coast also had some unintended consequences; It was not unusual for a slave ship to toss her human cargo into the sea when confronted with a British or French slave hunter. There were also rumors about mass slaughters of slaves onshore along the African coast by African slavers, when British or French ships prevented the slave ships from reaching the shore to pick up their human cargo.
posted
Eh-hem. Rumours not reports of African slavers slaughtering the enslaved, big difference. There's no documentation for this, just the word of ALEF webmaster George Alefantes.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting the racial power politics of Slavery.
For centuries, Whites insisted (falsely) that they strong-armed their way into the African interior to take slaves. This while admitting to barbarity, was useful to instill the concept of the all-powerful White man.
The Sand Nigger Turks, never ones for original thought. Applied the same reasoning.
Slave Market, Yemen - Thirteenth Century Submitted by Abel Abdul
THE ACTUAL HISTORICAL HEAD NIGGERS IN CHARGE OF SLAVERY IN YEMEN.
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: There is no freedom of research on this web, when people are not free to explore different viewpoints or give support to alternative views. [/QB]
There is tremendous freedom to research on the web. You can explore almost any viewpoint. For example you, Egmond are free to post threads here on Egyptsearch or Egyptsearchreloaded, better yet creating your own website forum on blackjane.com. What's all this about no freedom? The internet is the freest thing going in the modern world. Maybe you been in Holland too long trying to convince white people that their ancestors were black, people don't care and if it's true they don't want to know it.
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Case in point is the way they have made [b]Jane Austen[/] and her personages white while she is actually Black and an activist to the Black Cause. Strangely every word of her is printed as she wrote it, but whites live under the threat not to go into the blackness. And when I point this out I get abuse, or get ignored. This is very strange. The whites today who know nothing about Black Superiority (1500-1789) are somehow brainwashed in oppressing anything that has to do with blackness.Its like a reflex with them.
I for one always refer to 10.000 years of Black history and Black civilisation, not the last 500 years when some Blacks were slaves. What about the ones who were not enslaved?
Jews helped Hitler to kill Jews, that's how you destroy a people, so we cannot say Blacks are unusual because of selling each other in slavery. This is to superficial. There were white slaves along side the whites.
And the europe elite was Black and coloured, called whites pink and 't grauw, the greys, and held them like serfs. A status they do not seem to have outgrown, is my experience after 30 years of watching them.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Egmond this is crazy you talk about Hitler killing Jews which was done under his concept of racial superiority and race laws and then you say whites today "who know nothing about Black Superiority (1500-1789)".
So you reveal you have a similar racial superiority concept and then expect people who you say used to be inferior who are now in power to commemorate and remember the days when they were "inferior"
The problem is they don't feel like it.
It's an exercise in futility. If you live in a country with a majority of one race in power they are going to act in their self interest. That's human nature, pack animals
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Egmond this is crazy you talk about Hitler killing Jews which was done under his concept of racial superiority and race laws and then you say whites today "who know nothing about Black Superiority (1500-1789)".
So you reveal you have similar racial superiority ideas and expect people who you say used to be inferior who are now in power to commemorate the days when they were "inferior"
The problem is they don't feel like it.
It's an exercise in futility. If you live in a country with a majority of one race in power they are going to act in their self interest. That's human nature, pack animals
Dunce
Have you read Jane Austen already?
Lion!
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
People live in the present and deal with each other that way. If Africa today had the heft of China, say, whites would be much more respectful of blacks. Better to be feared than be loved--as the old saying goes.
At one time, the West were almost on the point of drugging up the Chinese with opium--following the Opium Wars.
Now the story is very different. Mao too charge then blocked the West from entry. When they had regained self-confidence the Chinese opened up--hence the historic visit of Nixon to China.
If Africa can produce a few states that that could do exactly as the Chinese, Koreans and Japanese are doing in terms of technological output--coupled with some nuclear weapons--the black-white interaction will change. The disrespect will diminish.
But most blacks are too caught up with openly and secretly admiring and genuflecting before whites: European religion, European names, European pigmenatation, European hair(wigs), European women, etc. are the rage.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: [qb] But what do you mean bullying not to cross the race line?
I have this idea that we have a dictator like presence here. The idea of crossing the line is linked with calling someone a ' nigger lover.' So even if a white person disagrees with another white he cannot speak out. Offcourse I have to generalise, but all this should be understood in the context of my latest research on Jane Austen where all the scholars simply ignore ample descriptions of Blackness.How is such a thing possible when they poke and prod her from any angle possible.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: People live in the present and deal with each other that way. If Africa today had the heft of China, say, whites would be much more respectful of blacks. Better to be feared than be loved--as the old saying goes.
At one time, the West were almost on the point of drugging up the Chinese with opium--following the Opium Wars.
Now the story is very different. Mao too charge then blocked the West from entry. When they had regained self-confidence the Chinese opened up--hence the historic visit of Nixon to China.
If Africa can produce a few states that that could do exactly as the Chinese, Koreans and Japanese are doing in terms of technological output--coupled with some nuclear weapons--the black-white interaction will change. The disrespect will diminish.
But most blacks are too caught up with openly and secretly admiring and genuflecting before whites: European religion, European names, European pigmenatation, European hair(wigs), European women, etc. are the rage.
My aim is to explain HOW we arrived at this status quo, and what this status quo is about. Blacks, with a Black identity called Blue Blood did rule whites till 1789, but I wonder if whites still have to be so hatefull and fearfull for Blacks. Racism to me is a liberation ideology, its a construct, not a natural emotion. In Jane Austen I found everything I have been saying about Blacks ruling Europe, while whites are only emancipated since 1848. From then they have whitened the whole of history, even giving us blue eyed white pyramid building pharaos!
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by IronLion: [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness: [qb] Dunce
Have you read Jane Austen already?
Lion!
This is the deal; we are to keep company with people who have no ounce of any intellectuality, culture, refinement. I imagine them sitting in some trailer strewn with beerbottles. Do these people have a liberary card? Do they speak a foreign language? Do they travel and speak to people from other cultures? Do they visit museums, symposia? They really do sound like Neanderthalers and don't know this.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^Whites gainsay Blacks because of the relative ease by which they were able to enslave them - it is borne of contempt.
Are you saying white people hate black people because they put black people in bondage? That sounds rather silly and senseless no? If anything whites gainsay blacks because of indoctrinated religion born from the tendency and act of conquest toward black people, not hatred.
I say racism is a liberation ideology because whites, called pinks or grays, were ruled and oppressed by Blacks and coloured. They were the Blue blood nobles and kings of Europe. The whites as we know them today is only since 1848. Then they made the whole European history white.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
''I say racism is a liberation ideology because whites, called pinks or grays, were ruled and oppressed by Blacks and coloured. They were the Blue blood nobles and kings of Europe. The whites as we know them today is only since 1848. Then they made the whole European history white.'' =====
Only in your fairytale mind.
The truth is blacks have never had a civiiziation, the reason you are stealing white history is because you never made anything of your own.
Go to Sub-Sahara Africa today and your ancestors are living in mud huts...
Afrocentrism is a fantasy and form of denialism. Instead of trying to steal whites history, embrace your own roots (mud huts, rap music...thats about it ).
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: ''I say racism is a liberation ideology because whites, called pinks or grays, were ruled and oppressed by Blacks and coloured. They were the Blue blood nobles and kings of Europe. The whites as we know them today is only since 1848. Then they made the whole European history white.'' =====
Only in your fairytale mind.
The truth is blacks have never had a civiiziation, the reason you are stealing white history is because you never made anything of your own.
Go to Sub-Sahara Africa today and your ancestors are living in mud huts...
Afrocentrism is a fantasy and form of denialism. Instead of trying to steal whites history, embrace your own roots (mud huts, rap music...thats about it ).
^So why are you obsessed with us, Afrocentrics?
If its fairytale, just laugh and move on...
When you go the crazy lenghts you journey to "debunk" Afrocentricism including opening a failed website, then there must be more to it...
Someone give me a lil bit more of that Afrocentric thinggy ... tastes good
Oh BTW: Your ancestor gothic/slavic were all cannibals who used to feed on Egyptian Mummies...
And today, you are still cannibals using the body parts of dead black people to make melatonin... for your melanin deprieved brain.. Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^You have a point about the cannibalism Lion. It is well documented.
Based on your analysis above Lion,. do you think there could be certain deep seated anxieties Cassiteri may be hiding- re blacks?
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: Blacks, with a Black identity called Blue Blood did rule whites till 1789, but I wonder if whites still have to be so hatefull and fearfull for Blacks. Racism to me is a liberation ideology, its a construct, not a natural emotion. In Jane Austen I found everything I have been saying about Blacks ruling Europe, while whites are only emancipated since 1848. From then they have whitened the whole of history, even giving us blue eyed white pyramid building pharaos!
you say that blacks ruled over whites in Europe till 1789 (which is insane) and you call racism "liberation theology" which is also insane and then you expect people who you claim freed themselves from black domination to be honest and admit they they were once inferior.
-why would they do such a thing?
you have no understanding of human nature
Are you going to whine for the rest of your life trying to draw blood from a stone? Why don't you take a vacation in Africa and get away from these dutch people for a few weeks?
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: This "relative ease" was due to some Africans offering other Africans for sale more so than any direct raiding.
quote:Whereas other peoples quit the abject enslaving of their co-continentals some Africans paid it no mind that only their fellows were still being outright marketed up to a century ago and are to this day "clandestinely" passing hands from one enslaver to the next.
Look at the examples of Mauritania and Niger who have just passed laws within the last six years making slavery (African on African) illegal this late in history, i.e., the 21st century.
So Blacks are hated by whites because 500 years ago they were selling each other in slavery. Slavery exists as long as the world exist. Whites were keeping other whites as serfs and slaves. Why does this not stigmatise whites?
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: ''I say racism is a liberation ideology because whites, called pinks or grays, were ruled and oppressed by Blacks and coloured. They were the Blue blood nobles and kings of Europe. The whites as we know them today is only since 1848. Then they made the whole European history white.'' =====
Only in your fairytale mind.
Charles II Stuart, King of Britain, named The Black Boy and described as ' A tall black man.'
The truth is blacks have never had a civiiziation, the reason you are stealing white history is because you never made anything of your own.
Go to Sub-Sahara Africa today and your ancestors are living in mud huts...
Afrocentrism is a fantasy and form of denialism. Instead of trying to steal whites history, embrace your own roots (mud huts, rap music...thats about it ).
His granny Anna of Denmark, costme design for a play about how africans came to Europe, looking for a milder son: The Masque of Blackness. If she is wearing black face; how odd for a Britsh queen to do so. And their is no law which says a dark skinned person cannot blacken up further.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: ^^You have a point about the cannibalism Lion. It is well documented.
Based on your analysis above Lion,. do you think there could be certain deep seated anxieties Cassiteri may be hiding- re blacks?
To be sure, i have never said that whites are bad and blacks are good or vica versa. I'm just writing about historical facts, and I have a theory which explains it all.
We need to get to the bottom from this strange, acrimonious fight between whites and Blacks.
Do they still have to go and hide this history and oppress blacks?
Anyone can see how stupid they sound, when they go against Black research.
These European cannibals might have been the black and coloured elite. They did other weird things like painting their faces white or bleaching their black and brown complexion.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: ^^You have a point about the cannibalism Lion. It is well documented.
Based on your analysis above Lion,. do you think there could be certain deep seated anxieties Cassiteri may be hiding- re blacks?
Zarahan
We call that deeeeeep inferiority complex.
They suffered from that ever since they encountered the Noble Muurs of Europe living on the land, just as they (the so-called whites) fled from Turkmenistan into Europe during the era of the great European migrations of 100 AD to 450 AD.
Lion!
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: Whites have held to a white-superiority, -supremacy view before engaging Blacks in any social arena. So obviously, to "feel white," it is not necessary to discredit Blacks. White arrogance is a result of the Western Renaissance and the Age of Science and Enlightenment. Whites primarily look to their historical achivements as a source of racial pride.
Every thing has to start somewhere and the question is: what did blacks do to whites for whites to hate blacks so much?
Book bounded in white human leather?
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
To be able to see blacks as founders of a civilisation one should understnd what civilisation means, one should first be civilised, educated, cosmopolitan, well read, informed etc People who use afro centrism to proof that blacks are good and whites are bad will be disappointed. nor does the reverse works out. the study of hystory is not be able to pass blame, but to understand our world. why do whites hate blacks, what did blacks do to whites? they civilised them, but also oppressed them. their view of whites was expressed in the practice of using white peoplesskins as leather. Cannibalism migh have been another of their tricks.
Gucci white leather shoes
The ermine coat is a symbole of nobility. It shows the white ground with black accents by the tails. a black minority dominating a white multitude.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
The few who do not hate blacks never speak out. Amazing, this hatred, people even bringing their children along. wghen you deal with whites they wwill always act as one body, without consulting each other they have decided to condemn, force, torture, contradict you. hell, even here on this site we see the same pack of hounds behaviour. But yes, i beleive they were used as leather procucing stock, so that the hatred against blacks, even without knowing thhe facts, they know to hate any black. amazing. at last racism is solves as a liberation ideology because these poor whites were indoctrinated to believe that their black kings and nobles were superior beings.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Racism against Blacks is a liberation ideology, since 1760, but really taking of in the second half of the 19th century.
Human races were invented to give whites a human status and declare them as superior to Blacks.
As there are no human races, we need to ask why such a destuctive concept was ever introduced. What did Blacks do to whites for whites to fear and hate Blacks so much?
Well, Blacks ruled and oppressed whites, using their skins as shoe leather, well into the 19th century, till 1848.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
"1. Annibale Carracci (attributed). Portrait of a Black Servant (Fragment of larger portrait). ca. 1580s. oil on canvas, 24 x 12 in. (60.96 x 30.48cm). Leeds, private collection"
Black Servant
??????????????
Posts: 2922 | From: World Empire of the Black People | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
You need to get to the next stage of research and ask WHY there are so many portraits and images of Classical Africans in western art. You will find that they are not always real persons, but symbolize blue blood. the elite was described as brown and black of complexion, some had classical African features; but they were all part of a 'fixed, mulatto race.' they identified as black blue blood was a black identity. the civilization was black identified there is a severe lack of true intellectuals on this site, people who are not afraid to think for themselves.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I understand. I know there are cave paintings indicate that blacks are native to Europe. I've seen thousands of images of blacks of Europe. I thought black people had lost power in the late Middle Ages. But you with your theory of blue blood say no. I believe. I've seen many pictures of black kings and maurice. I'm just wanting to understand more. I know that the Eurocentric twist history by putting all the blacks from Africa to Europe and not as natives. I read that the saint maurice was actually Celtic. I do not think this woman is a servant and you?
Posts: 2922 | From: World Empire of the Black People | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malibudusul: I understand. I know there are cave paintings indicate that blacks are native to Europe. I've seen thousands of images of blacks of Europe. I thought black people had lost power in the late Middle Ages. But you with your theory of blue blood say no. I believe. I've seen many pictures of black kings and maurice. I'm just wanting to understand more. I know that the Eurocentric twist history by putting all the blacks from Africa to Europe and not as natives. I read that the saint maurice was actually Celtic. I do not think this woman is a servant and you?
Continue your research my brother. One one cocoa, full a basket..
You let your head teach you. You don't need no one to approve of what you know is true.
Keep your fire, flaming!
Lion! Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
).
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic