quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Then you need to read some articles about the Kurgan hypothesis and the hypotheses about the spread of the "original" Indo Europeans which many claim is signified by R1a. I didn't say this. Suffice to say you haven't really taken time to read the various proponents of this theory. And yes the Kurgan hypothesis is a warmed over Aryan Invasion theory. The core of the theory is that horse warriors spread the language. If you don't believe me read the works of Marija Gimbutas. Secondly, it is based purely on archeological studies not any actual linguistic remains. Nobody actually knows what the Yamna culture spoke, they have no scripts and most of what remains is purely archeological artifacts. Hence, this is a theory based loosely on archaeological artifacts and extrapolation. So the fact that you believe in it is fine, but the critiques I have mentioned are not new and certainly everyone does not buy this theory, because it is a theory and not a proven fact.
You are confusing apples with oranges. The Kurgan theory is a hypothesis based on archaeology and linguistics. The archaeology shows a culture, the Yamnya. Of course we have no idea what language these people spoke, that it was proto IE is based on linguistics again both language distribution as well as age reconstruction. As far as genetics is concerned, R1a predates both proto-IE and the Yamnya culture so whatever claims made by some concerning that haplogroup is irrelevant. On the contrary language distribution does not support IE origins in India, and neither does the archaeology of Harappa support an IE speaking culture. The Kurgan hypothesis maybe a hypothesis but it has some weight to it unlike the Harappan origins hypothesis.
quote: Yes the Vedic and Sansrkrit languages are subject to linguistic analysis, but they came thousands of years after the Yamna and Kurgan cultures. The problem is that there is no linguistic evidence from those cultures to actually determine any relationship to Vedic languages or Sanskrit. So again, it is a theory primarily based around archaeological remains not linguistic evidence. Those things are core to the critiques against this theory and it is not new and not something I made up. And, likewise, Harrappan languages or scripts have not been deciphered or understood. Some people don't even believe there was a Harrappan script. But to the point of the Linga and Yoga, are you sure you understand what you are looking at? Yoga and Linga are core aspects of Hindu/Jain/Buddhist beliefs. And if they occur first in Harrappa, than is proof that much of what is called later Hindu culture was already in place and therefore not introduced from outside no matter what language they spoke. But since they were in place, the linguistics surrounding those things must have also been in place as well. Now some scholars have proposed that Harappan languages are Indo European. I did not make this up. But some others claim they are Australasian/Dravidian. The point is the Harappan languages are lost and undetermined so nobody knows their true relationship to later Indo-European languages. My point is that I doubt that Harappan languages were that much different from later Sanskrit or Vedic. But again, this implies that later Sanskrit and vedic are languages imposed by outsiders, hence the Aryan invasion theory all over again.
Okay, Vedic is a description of the time period or culture in which the ancient Vedas or Hindu holy books were first written. Sanskrit is the name of a language, the earliest known written language in India other than the Indus script. The Vedic period is estimated to be about 1700–1100 BCE. The Sanskrit language itself is estimated to be about 1500-1200 BCE diverging from the common ancestor as Iranian Avestan language. The Yamna Culture dates around 3600-2300 BCE. So of course the Yamna Culture predates both Vedic culture and Sanskrit language enough to be a suitable candidate for a possible ancestor. Again while we have no way of knowing what the Yamna people spoke, linguistics estimates the age of proto-IE to have arisen around 3,000-4,000 BCE and the way the languages are distributed shows European Russia to be a likely candidate. As to your point about the linga and yoga, I know these are features and themes in modern Hinduism. In fact I have already stated that there are actually more non-Vedic (non-Aryan) themes in Hinduism than there are Vedic ones, and all of these same themes can be found in more prevalent forms of the cultures of the non-IE speaking peoples of India like the Dravidians. The same can be said about ancient Greek religion which has many non IE features and deities. By the way, Dravidian and Austro-asiatic or Austrasian are two separate phyla. What you fail to understand is that European origins and diffusion of the language phylum does NOT equate to an invasion, let alone an imposition!! I don't know why you cannot comprehend this fact. The same can be said about the origins and spread of Afrasian languages. Just because most of the people in Southwest Asia, particularly the Levant and Arabia spoke Afrasian languages that originated in Africa does NOT mean that Africans simply invaded the region and imposed their language on the natives!! The process of acculturation and language adoption is far more complex and simplistic than a case of mere domination of one group over another!!
Also, I would like to see an image of that Swastika on a mammoth tusk if you have it. Again, if the swastika is found in Harappa before any certain date of Indo-Europeans being spoken in the region, then it has nothing to do with the spread of Indo-European languages. But it is an important symbol found in cultures throughout the region.
Here is one image of the ivory figure.
By the way, I never said the swastika has anything to do with the spread of IE languages. If you were comprehended what I said, I noted that the swastika not only predates Indo-European but the Harappan culture as well and is definitely a symbol paleolithic in origin!
The Kurgan theory is not based on linguistics Djehuti. I have posted my sources. Please read them. You keep saying this but provide no sources. The sources I read say the opposite. That is the basis of my disagreement and all the other stuff is really secondary. You claim it is based on linguistics but it isn't. Linguistics may have postulated there had to be an ancestor to Indo-European, but they don't have any actual scripts or evidence of who spoke what in what place and time to say for sure. So most of it is pure speculation. Yes, Indo-European is widespread in Europe but when did it become widespread? So again, were the people of Yamna and the Kurgans speaking a Indo-European language? And if they did are they the ones responsible for spreading it in Europe? There are multiple theories on this and the Kurgan theory is not the only one. I am not creating any new ideas on this but I don't believe in that one myself.
And if you don't believe that this is a warmed over Aryan invasion story, see the authors own words:
quote: Bringing together archaeological evidence, comparative mythology and folklore, and symbolic interpretations, Gimbutas's work asserts the existence in prehistoric Europe of a widespread culture centered on the Goddess, lifegiver and sustainer, as well as death-wielder. Through the examination of hundreds of Paleolithic and mostly Neolithic pieces, the author traces cross-cultural and cross-chronological symbolic parallels, some of which are quite broad and open to several types of inference. The central and venerated position of women in the unconscious of early European people seems probable; this order of things changed with the incursions by Kurgan groups (4300-2800 B.C.) and the European world moved "from matrilineal to patrilineal." Whether or not one agrees with these archaeomythological interpretations, Gimbutas offers a thought-provoking symbolic reading of hundreds of selected pieces, beautifully reproduced in this sizeable compendium.
quote: In the mid-1950s, Gimbutas combined her extensive background in linguistic palaeontology with archaeological evidence to locate the homeland of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) speakers and to explain the rapid and extensive spread of Indo-European languages. This theory stimulated a renewed interest in the “Indo-European problem” resulting in a number of other homeland theories (see Mallory 1989:143-185; Gamkrelidze and Ivanov 1985:3-91; Makkay 1987; Renfrew 1987)5. In In Search of the Indo-Europeans (1989), James Mallory writes, “the Kurgan theory has been accepted by many archaeologists and linguists, in part or total, and is the solution one encounters in Encyclopedia Britannica and the Grand Dictionnaire Encyclopédique Larousse” (Mallory 1989, 185; see also Dergachev, 2002). The Kurgan theory continues to be critiqued and debated among a new generation of scholars (see, e.g., Manzura 1999; Stefanovich 2003; Nikolova 2003).
Gimbutas coined the term “Kurgan culture” to refer to the pastoral communities documented from the fifth millennium BC in the harsh environment of the Volga-Ural-Caspian region. These peoples, who are assumed to have spoken a Proto-Indo-European language6, appear to have gone through a long process of convergence that resulted in the consolidation of shared morphology and lexicon (Gimbutas 1997:307; Mallory 1989:195; Anthony 1991:196; Lehmann 1997). “This chronology does not represent the evolution of a single group, but of a number of various steppe peoples who shared a common tradition, extending over broad temporal and spatial parameters” (Gimbutas 1991:352). “As numerous historical instances testify, pastoral societies throughout the Eurasian steppe are typified by remarkable abilities to absorb disparate ethno-linguistic groups” (Mallory 1989:260-261). Horse domestication, which provided a powerful means of transport, was most likely accomplished by 5000 BC or earlier between eastern Ukraine and northern Kazakhstan (Bökönyi 1987; Gimbutas 1991:353)7. Access to horse riding may have intensified the aggressive territoriality and warlike behavior that typify these increasingly mobile tribes.
The use of horses as mounts led to an expansion in the size of potential exploitative territories by a factor of five and therefore to conflicts over localized resources that had formerly been beyond effective reach (Anthony 1986:302)8.
As early as the first half of the fifth millennium BC in the lower Volga basin, male burials appear in pit graves covered by kurgans (round barrows). These graves contain prestige weapons indicating both the importance of warfare and the establishment of social hierarchy. The similarity of grave goods and evidence of a horse cult in burial sites separated by thousands of kilometers suggest the existence of phenomenal mobility and intertribal relations between peoples of the Caucasus and the North Pontic steppe.
While some scholars question the association of language with specific ethnic groups (Renfrew 1987; Anthony 1991:194-195; Makkay 1992:194), Gimbutas emphasized the connection between PIE speakers and an entire complex of traits found progressively from the Volga steppe to the Dnieper. The Kurgan culture is reconstructed according to a lexicon of PIE terminology verified by archaeological data and comparative Indo-European linguistics. This multidisciplinary investigation points to a pastoral economy with rudimentary agriculture, crude cord-impressed pottery with solar motifs, horse domestication, territorialism, warfare, and a patrilineal, patriarchal social system (Gimbutas 1991, 1997; Mallory 1989:123-124; Whittle 1996:137; Best 1989:337). Such elements were unknown west of the Black Sea before 4400 BC, but were spread throughout Europe accompanied by the appearance of Kurgan burials. The Kurgan Theory posits three infiltrations of Kurgan peoples into Europe resulting in the Indo-Europeanization of the continent over a two thousand year period (Gimbutas 1992:400-405)9.
And as for the swastika you posted, while it does look similar to the later swastika in Asia, does it really represent the same conscious symbolic function and continuity as the later Asian character? Whereas later swastikas can definitively be traced back to antecedents in the Near East, India and Asia.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: the thread asks are Indians "Blacks" ?
It's an impossible question to answer because the term "black" means differnt things to different people.
Some Indians have dark skin and have been subjected to prejudice due to it.
Should they be regarded as "black" ?
"Black" is a term that gets imposed on dark skinned people by some light skinned people. The dark skinned person then is faced with accepting the term or not. Some may say o.k. I accept the term "black" and hope they can ally with other people that get called "black" as a power base.
^You come off very paranoid. If an Indian is dark or "black" and that is how he identify then he is black. I went to school with plenty of Bangladeshi and Indian where they identify as black and said they are black in their country. The aborigines of Australia identify as black as well. Who are we to tell these people that they aren't black because they are not African. Being black doesn't mean African and no black person from African descendant can deny these people their identity that they have to live with as blacks socially, culturally, ethnically, and economically, in their country and outside, just because they aren't African. Dark people don't call themselves black because light skin says so. They call themselves black because it is true, figuratively speaking color-wise, and it is a fact of life -- and it has "cursed" many black people throughout the world.
Who are you to dictate to other blacks outside Africa about them not being black. You are so afraid and paranoid about ALL blacks uniting under a common cause, and that is why so many anti-black people are trying to separate blacks based on skin color, features, hair, continent, region and everything else.
Are Iranians, Iraquis, Afghans, Croats, Serbs, Albanians white? If people argue that they aren't because some aren't European and others are too dark and "ethnic" looking, you will be the first one fighting them into white membership.
Why are you threaten by black people and what are you afraid of?
Posts: 2088 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: So in recognizing that many have dark skin do they want to identify with Africans from Africa and people of African ancestry who live in other parts of the world?
There could be an advantage in doing this if it could add to a larger group of people to oppose a group that sometimes oppresses them on the basis of skin color.
However, there are more considerations involved in such alliances because once you make an alliance you have to cooperate and share resources in other areas when you are not actively engaged in countering racism. So the different groups will weigh the advantages and disadvantages in allying with another group.
^ Girl you are showing your fear and paranoia. Who said anything about Indians wanting to or identifying as African? Who said blacks is confined to Africa and no where beyond? Who the fvck said forming alliance and having to share resource and living together? You are showing your inner fears. Now I see why you and others like you work so hard to separate ALL "black" people. Indians can stay in Indian and never ever need to identify as African, and it is better that they don't because they aren't. They can just be black but Indian or black but Asian or Indian but white or Indian and just Indian. Would Iranians, Syrians, Iraqis want to identify as white since they are from a different continent. Should the whites of the caucus identify or be white because they aren't European. Should those from southeastern Europe identify as white or mix because they look so differently from the true whites and they have admixture from darkskin groups from Africa and Asia?
Posts: 2088 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
True, but you can't deny that the Bollywood industry has an ideal that does not match with how the majority of Indians look like. Even the lightest Indian actresses must still wear make-up to make themselves even lighter etc.
But that is true of all societies. Angelina Jolie or Brad Pitt are not representative of the average white woman or man respectively; Halle Berry is not representative of the average African American. East Asian actresses routines have surgeries to remove the epicanthic fold. Black women straighten their hair or wear wigs or weaves. Why should Indian women be held to a different standard? Looks like most people want what they can't have naturally.
Correction. Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie do represent average white Americans in looks albeit in a quirky way in the case of Angelina. If this couple were not in make-up and definitely if they were not famous they would not stand out in a crowd of whites. In the case of Halle Berry however, while there are many biracial or mixed people of African descent in America, the fact that she is the main African American starlet in Hollywood is due to a long tradition of bias against African American women where WHITE is the ideal and black women had to measure up to that. This is only expected in a country where not only are whites the majority and blacks a minority, but that the white majority was traditionally chauvinist and oppressive to blacks. Why is it that in many African countries movie stars as beautiful as they are, still remain the same dark complexion as the average or general populace?? This is not to say no bias for light skin exists, as many countries in Africa were colonized by Europeans, however it is not as prevalent or great in degree as it is in America. As for east Asians removing the epicanthic fold, you're right that it is a growing trend, though a recent one. But again, mind you this happens in cultures that have much contact with Western nations. In the same nations where East Asian actresses do this, if you go to rural areas and especially among ethnic minorities they actually favor the eyefolds and shun round eyes as alien and in the case of some cultures demonic! Again, there is a pattern here that I'm trying to get you to see.
I don't think Jolie or Pitt are representative of the common man/woman on the street at all. They're much more attractive, more fit, etc. That's true of Bollywood as well. Second, the average man/woman on the streets of India is just not into grooming & styling as the average American or East Asian is. That is why the disparity seems so huge between Bollywood and the average man/woman on the street.
But I agree with you that the white standard of beauty is universal. Part of it is also that people always want what they can't have naturally.
Posts: 53 | From: Minnesota | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: the thread asks are Indians "Blacks" ?
It's an impossible question to answer because the term "black" means differnt things to different people.
Some Indians have dark skin and have been subjected to prejudice due to it.
Should they be regarded as "black" ?
"Black" is a term that gets imposed on dark skinned people by some light skinned people. The dark skinned person then is faced with accepting the term or not. Some may say o.k. I accept the term "black" and hope they can ally with other people that get called "black" as a power base.
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
You come off very paranoid. If an Indian is dark or "black" and that is how he identify then he is black.
many don't
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
I went to school with plenty of Bangladeshi and Indian where they identify as black and said they are black in their country. The aborigines of Australia identify as black as well. Who are we to tell these people that they aren't black because they are not African.
I'm not telling Indians they can't call themselves black but many who are bothe dark skinned or light skinned call themselves black. "Black" is a political term. It's not like people talking about their hair color.
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
Being black doesn't mean African and no black person from African descendant can deny these people their identity that they have to live with as blacks socially, culturally, ethnically, and economically, in their country and outside, just because they aren't African.
This is an odd statement. You are saying" I can't "deny what they have to live with" I assume you mean racism So in effect to are saying they have to live with how others label them. In many counties people do not use skin color as identitiy, they mighjt describe their skin if asked say "brown" but it doesn't have a meaning to them more special than the color of their eyes or hair.
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
Dark people don't call themselves black because light skin says so. They call themselves black because it is true, figuratively speaking color-wise, and it is a fact of life -- and it has "cursed" many black people throughout the world.
Another odd statement. The people that call themselves black are not in fact truly black they are brown. For example this man:
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
Who are you to dictate to other blacks outside Africa about them not being black. You are so afraid and paranoid about ALL blacks uniting under a common cause, and that is why so many anti-black people are trying to separate blacks based on skin color, features, hair, continent, region and everything else.
I'm not dictating anything only pointing out how people may or may not choose themselves to identify themselves. The man above is brown. You are saying he should identify himself by a color for political power and call himself black. That's up to him. He might prefer to identify himself as Bolivian or South American rather than by eye or skin color.
Here's another Bolivian:
Does he have to decalre himself an identity as a skin color?
What if he doesn't want to?
People may decide to identify themsleves in various different ways they think may be the most important factor overridding other factors So they might choose one of the following as the most important factor:
in no particular order:
religion nationality philosophy skin color profession culture sexual preferance hair color birth "defect" music preferance disability etc.
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
Are Iranians, Iraquis, Afghans, Croats, Serbs, Albanians white? If people argue that they aren't because some aren't European and others are too dark and "ethnic" looking, you will be the first one fighting them into white membership.
none of these people are white. Most are light beige. You think that sounds silly? How about the idea that they are the color of milk? That's even more silly, but the idea is so ingrained "black" and "white" that we accept these stereotypes not only as a superficial trait like hair of eye color but instead as something more important. So why is skin color more important than eye or hair color? I'll tell you why. It isn't. but people wish it was. It's like believing in magic.
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
Why are you threaten by black people and what are you afraid of? Girl you are showing your fear and paranoia. Who said anything about Indians wanting to or identifying as African? Who said blacks is confined to Africa and no where beyond?
I'm not afraid of anything. You want to draw a line between people and call them "black" or "white". If people choose to accept these terms as the most important thing about themsleves that's up to them. I use the words but only in casual identification of looks. If someone comes in and oppresses people based on these concepts as being intrinsic to who people are are we supposed to accept it?
In ancient times people did not get discriminated against on the basis of skin color. It was not any more important than eye or hair color. People were discriminated against by nationality. That some nationalities happened to look different than others, it was not physical appearance that was the important difference. The imprtant difference is that they had different cultures and territories.
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
Who the fvck said forming alliance and having to share resource and living together? You are showing your inner fears.
If brown skinned people identify as "Black" for politcial reasons then in doing so it forms an alliance with other dark skinned people. That's up to them if they feel that they want to group themslevs primarily according to darkness of skin rather than by one of the other factors such as I mentioned nationality, religion, profession etc.
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo:
Now I see why you and others like you work so hard to separate ALL "black" people. Indians can stay in Indian and never ever need to identify as African, and it is better that they don't because they aren't. They can just be black but Indian or black but Asian or Indian but white or Indian and just Indian. Would Iranians, Syrians, Iraqis want to identify as white since they are from a different continent. Should the whites of the caucus identify or be white because they aren't European. Should those from southeastern Europe identify as white or mix because they look so differently from the true whites and they have admixture from darkskin groups from Africa and Asia?
Ideally nobody should identify themsleves by skin color.
If people are opressing you on a skin color basis than you might decide to ally with other people in the same boat for more strength in numbers.
Some Indians are darker than others.
Indians might be in conflict with other people in various ways, by religion, class, sexual preferance, skin color, etc. They will decide for themsleves which alliance is most important for them to form, which has the most advantages for them. For example, Hindu or Muslim or "black". If somebody puts something like Muslim as primary then light skinned and dark skinned people are required to cooperate under Islam. If they but being dark skinned as first then it's a different alliance. If they happened to be Muslim then they would consider lighter skin Muslims less important or not important at all. And once you decide to organize and do things rather than just us talking theortically here alliances will include both teaming up and taking on burdens. So if things get serious and you actually do things together it's like a marriage. You get to split the bills. You share things, food and so on, it's cheaper, some things are easier people can to the tasks they are betsa at doing. But if the other person gets sick it's more work. So if you are looking for a mate and that person has ten twenty dollars of dental work to be done you have to weigh if your love is stronger than that.
posted
The original inhabitants of the Sahara where the Kemetic civilization originated were Blacks not Berbers or Indo-European speakers. These Blacks formerly lived in the highland regions of the Fezzan and Hoggar until after 4000 BC. This ancient homeland of the Dravidians, Egyptians, Sumerians, Niger-Kordofanian-Mande
and Elamite speakers is called the Fertile African Crescent. ( Anselin, 1989, p.16; Winters, 1981,1985b,1991). We call these people the Proto-Saharans (Winters 1985b,1991). The generic term for this group is Kushite. This explains the analogy between the Bafsudraalam languages outlined briefly above. These Proto-Saharans were called Ta-Seti and Tehenu by the Egyptians. Farid (1985,p.82) noted that "We can notice that the beginning of the Neolithic stage in Egypt on the edge of the Western Desert corresponds with the expansion of the Saharian Neolithic cultureand the growth of its population".
The inhabitants of the Fezzan were round headed Africans. (Jelinek, 1985,p.273) The cultural characteristics of the Fezzanese were analogous to C-Group culture items and the people of Ta-Seti . The C-Group people occupied the Sudan and Fezzan regions between 3700-1300 BC (Jelinek 1985).
The inhabitants of Libya were called Tmhw (Temehus). The Temehus were organized into two groups the Thnw (Tehenu) in the North and the Nhsj (Nehesy) in the South. (Diop 1986) A Tehenu personage is depicted on Amratian period pottery (Farid 1985 ,p. 84). The Tehenu wore pointed beard, phallic-sheath and feathers on their head.
The Temehus are called the C-Group people by archaeologists(Jelinek, 1985; Quellec, 1985). The central Fezzan was a center of C-Group settlement. Quellec (1985, p.373) discussed in detail the presence of C-Group culture traits in the Central Fezzan along with their cattle during the middle of the Third millennium BC.
The Temehus or C-Group people began to settle Kush around 2200 BC. The kings of Kush had their capital at Kerma, in Dongola and a sedentary center on Sai Island. The same pottery found at Kerma is also present in Libya especially the Fezzan.
The C-Group founded the Kerma dynasty of Kush. Diop (1986, p.72) noted that the "earliest substratum of the Libyan population was a black population from the south Sahara". Kerma was first inhabited in the 4th millennium BC (Bonnet 1986). By the 2nd millennium BC Kushites at kerma were already worshippers of Amon/Amun and they used a distinctive black-and-red ware (Bonnet 1986; Winters 1985b,1991). Amon, later became a major god of the Egyptians during the 18th Dynasty.
The linguistic, anthropological and linguistic data make it clear that these people came to India from Africa during the Neolithic and not the Holocene period.
In the sub-continent of India, there were several main groups. The traditional view for the population origins in India suggest that the earliest inhabitants of India were the Negritos, and this was followed by the Proto-Australoid, the Mongoloid and the so-called mediterranean type which represent the ancient Egyptians and Kushites (Clyde A. Winters, "The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians, Manding and Sumerians",Tamil Civilizations 3, no.1(1985), pp.1-9. (http://olmec98.net/Fertile1.pdf ). The the Proto-Dravidians were probably one of the cattle herding groups that made up the C-Group culture of Nubia Kush (K.P. Aravanan, "Physical and Cultural Similarities between Dravidian and African", Journal of Tamil Studies, no.10 (1976, pp.23-27:24. ).
B.B. Lal ("The Only Asian expedition in threatened Nubia:Work by an Indian Mission at Afyeh and Tumas", The Illustrated London Times , 20 April 1963) and Indian Egyptologist has shown conclusively that the Dravidians originated in the Saharan area 5000 years ago. He claims they came from Kush, in the Fertile African Crescent and were related to the C-Group people who founded the Kerma dynasty in the 3rd millennium B.C. (Lal 1963) The Dravidians used a common black-and-red pottery, which spread from Nubia, through modern Ethiopia, Arabia, Iran into India as a result of the Proto-Saharan dispersal.
B.B. Lal (1963) a leading Indian archaeologist in India has observed that the black and red ware (BRW) dating to the Kerma dynasty of Nubia, is related to the Dravidian megalithic pottery. Singh (1982) believes that this pottery radiated from Nubia to India. This pottery along with wavy-line pottery is associated with the Saharo-Sudanese pottery tradition of ancient Africa .
Aravaanan (1980) has written extensively on the African and Dravidian relations. He has illustrated that the Africans and Dravidian share many physical similarities including the dolichocephalic indexes (Aravaanan 1980,pp.62-263; Raceand History.com,2006), platyrrhine nasal index (Aravaanan 1980,pp.25-27), stature (31-32) and blood type (Aravaanan 1980,34-35; RaceandHistory.com,2006). Aravaanan (1980,p.40) also presented much evidence for analogous African and Dravidian cultural features including the chipping of incisor teeth and the use of the lost wax process to make bronze works of arts (Aravaanan 1980,p.41).
There are also similarities between the Dravidian and African religions. For example, both groups held a common interest in the cult of the Serpent and believed in a Supreme God, who lived in a place of peace and tranquility ( Thundy, p.87; J.T. Cornelius,"Are Dravidians Dynastic Egyptians", Trans. of the Archaeological Society of South India 1951-1957, pp.90-117; and U.P. Upadhyaya, "Dravidian and Negro-African", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5, no.1) .
There are also affinities between the names of many gods including Amun/Amma and Murugan . Murugan the Dravidian god of the mountains parallels a common god in East Africa worshipped by 25 ethnic groups called Murungu, the god who resides in the mountains .
There is physical evidence which suggest an African origin for the Dravidians. The Dravidians live in South India. The Dravidian ethnic group includes the Tamil, Kurukh, Malayalam, Kananda (Kanarese), Tulu, Telugu and etc. Some researchers due to the genetic relationship between the Dravidians and Niger-Congo speaking groups they call the Indians the Sudroid (Indo-African) Race(RaceandHistory,2006).
Dravidian languages are predominately spoken in southern India and Sri Lanka. There are around 125 million Dravidian speakers. These languages are genetically related to African languages. The Dravidians are remnants of the ancient Black population who occupied most of ancient Asia and Europe.
Linguistic Evidence
1.1 Many scholars have recognized the linguistic unity of Black African (BA) and Dravidian (Dr.) languages. These affinities are found not only in the modern African languages but also that of ancient Egypt. These scholars have made it clear that lexical, morphological and phonetic unity exist between African languages in West and North Africa as well as the Bantu group.
1.2 K.P. Arvaanan (1976) has noted that there are ten common elements shared by BA languages and the Dr. group. They are (1) simple set of five basic vowels with short-long consonants;(2) vowel harmony; (3) absence of initial clusters of consonants; (4) abundance of geminated consonants; (5) distinction of inclusive and exclusive pronouns in first person plural; (6) absence of degrees of comparison for adjectives and adverbs as distinct morphological categories; (7) consonant alternation on nominal increments noticed by different classes; (8)distinction of completed action among verbal paradigms as against specific tense distinction;(9) two separate sets of paradigms for declarative and negative forms of verbs; and (l0) use of reduplication for emphasis.
1.3 There has been a long development in the recognition of the linguistic unity of African and Dravidian languages. The first scholar to document this fact was the French linguist L. Homburger (1950,1951,1957,1964). Prof. Homburger who is best known for her research into African languages was convinced that the Dravidian languages explained the morphology of the Senegalese group particularly the Serere, Fulani group. She was also convinced that the kinship existed between Kannanda and the Bantu languages, and Telugu and the Mande group. Dr. L. Homburger is credited with the discovery for the first time of phonetic, morphological and lexical parallels between Bantu and Dravidians
1.6 By the 1970's numerous scholars had moved their investigation into links between Dr. and BA languages on into the Senegambia region. Such scholars as Cheikh T. N'Diaye (1972) a Senegalese linguist, and U.P. Upadhyaya (1973) of India , have proved conclusively Dr. Homburger's theory of unity between the Dravidian and the Senegalese languages.
1.7 C.T. N'Diaye, who studied Tamil in India, has identified nearly 500 cognates of Dravidian and the Senegalese languages. Upadhyaya (1973) after field work in Senegal discovered around 509 Dravidian and Senegambian words that show full or slight correspondence.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
All Indians are not Black. You may be able to classify the Dravidian and Munda people as Black.
There is mtDNA data uniting Africans and Dravidians.
Can Parallel Mutation and neutral genome selection explain Eastern African M1 consensus HVS-1 motifs in Indian M haplogroup http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?hg07022
The most interesting fact about this evidence is that the Dravidian language is closely related to the Niger-Congo group. There are other linguistic groups that separate the Niger-Congo speakers from the Dravidians. The fact that they are genetically related indicates that the Dravidians recently came to India.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: the thread asks are Indians "Blacks" ?
It's an impossible question to answer because the term "black" means differnt things to different people.
Some Indians have dark skin and have been subjected to prejudice due to it.
Should they be regarded as "black" ?
"Black" is a term that gets imposed on dark skinned people by some light skinned people. The dark skinned person then is faced with accepting the term or not. Some may say o.k. I accept the term "black" and hope they can ally with other people that get called "black" as a power base.
^You come off very paranoid. If an Indian is dark or "black" and that is how he identify then he is black. I went to school with plenty of Bangladeshi and Indian where they identify as black and said they are black in their country. The aborigines of Australia identify as black as well. Who are we to tell these people that they aren't black because they are not African. Being black doesn't mean African and no black person from African descendant can deny these people their identity that they have to live with as blacks socially, culturally, ethnically, and economically, in their country and outside, just because they aren't African. Dark people don't call themselves black because light skin says so. They call themselves black because it is true, figuratively speaking color-wise, and it is a fact of life -- and it has "cursed" many black people throughout the world.
Who are you to dictate to other blacks outside Africa about them not being black. You are so afraid and paranoid about ALL blacks uniting under a common cause, and that is why so many anti-black people are trying to separate blacks based on skin color, features, hair, continent, region and everything else.
Are Iranians, Iraquis, Afghans, Croats, Serbs, Albanians white? If people argue that they aren't because some aren't European and others are too dark and "ethnic" looking, you will be the first one fighting them into white membership.
Why are you threaten by black people and what are you afraid of?
Just to clarify Bettyboo's crackpot racial clasification:
Black (everyone except blonde haired Scandinavians) White (blonde haired Scandinavians)
They are a clear troll. According to Bettyboo a brown or red haired Scandinavian is black because according to them only blondes are white.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the other thread Bettyboo claimed Pierce Brosnan is a black man because he has a tan -
As i said their racial classification is crackpot. If a white person has a lightly olive or tan - suddenly they are 'black'.
Now why would Bettyboo classify white men and woman as 'black'? Because obviously they are a self-hating Negro that they want to lump whites into their own racial category. Its bizarre.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
K.P. Aravanan, former Vice-Chancellor of Manonmaniyam Sundaranar University[/b]
Dravidian speaking people recognize their African heritage. See:
Aravanan KP. 1976. ''Physical and cultural similarities between Dravidians and Africans''. Journal of Tamil Studies 10:23–27;
Aravanan KP. 1979. "Notable negroid elements in Dravidian India". J Tamil Studies 20–45.
Aravanan KP. 1980. Dravidians and Africans, Madras.
LOL. These Dravidians do not look like caucasoids. .
U. P. Upadhyaya and S.P. Upadhyaya
1. 'Dravidian and Negro-African', U.P.Upadhyaya, Intnl. J. of Dravidian Linguisitsics 5:1 (1976) 32-64
2. U. P.Upadhyaya & S.P.Upadhyaya, 'Affinites ethno-linguistiques entre Dravidiens et les Negro-Africain' , Bull. IFAN , no.1 (1976) pp.127-157
3. U. P. Upadhyaya & S.P. Upadhyaya, 'Les liens entre Kerala et l"Afrique tels qu'ils resosortent des survivances culturelles et linguistiques', Bulletin de L'IFAN , no.1 (1979) pp.100-132
quote:
A Speaker of the Tulu Dravidian Language
2009
In a small discrete village of Majur, around three kilometres from Kaup on the road to Shirva, adjacent to 300 years old temple of Shri Durga Parameshwari, lives an elderly couple-Dr. Uliyar Padmanabha Upadhyaya (76 years) and Dr. Susheela P Upadhyaya (73 years). When i met them in mid-August they appeared to be frail, simple, unassuming, friendly and warm. After interacting with them for two hours, i had nothing but awe, admiration and reverence to this great couple whose scholarship in linguistics and folk culture especially that of the Tulunadu has been appreciated by scholars not only in India but also in Europe, America and Africa. Their monumental contribution to the Tulu language is the Tulu Lexicon (Tulu Nighantu) in six volumes, which they value the most as their labour of love and sacrifice. Besides, this significant work, their numerous research books and articles on the folk culture and literature of Tulunadu has enriched the Tuluva heritage.
The archaeological, anthropological, ethonographic and linguistic data make it clear that Dravidians came to India from Africa during the Neolithic and not the Holocene period.
In the sub-continent of India, there were several main groups. The traditional view for the population origins in India suggest that the earliest inhabitants of India were the Negritos, and this was followed by the Proto-Australoid, the Mongoloid and the so-called mediterranean type which represent the ancient Egyptians and Kushites (Clyde A. Winters, "The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians, Manding and Sumerians",Tamil Civilizations 3, no.1(1985), pp.1-9. (http://olmec98.net/Fertile1.pdf ). The the Proto-Dravidians were probably one of the cattle herding groups that made up the C-Group culture of Nubia Kush (K.P. Aravanan, "Physical and Cultural Similarities between Dravidian and African", Journal of Tamil Studies, no.10 (1976, pp.23-27:24. ).
Genetics as noted by Mait Metspalu et al writing in 2004, in “Most extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans” http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/5/26
can not tell which group first entered India. Mait Metspalu wrote _________________________________________________________________ Language families present today in India, such as Indo-European, Dravidic and Austro-Asiatic, are all much younger than the majority of indigenous mtDNA lineages found among the present day speakers at high frequencies. It would make it highly speculative to infer, from the extant mtDNA pools of their speakers, whether one of the listed above linguistically defined group in India should be considered more “autochthonous” than any other in respect of its presence in the subcontinent (p.9). ________________________________________________________________________
B.B. Lal ("The Only Asian expedition in threatened Nubia:Work by an Indian Mission at Afyeh and Tumas", The Illustrated London Times , 20 April 1963) and Indian Egyptologist has shown conclusively that the Dravidians originated in the Saharan area 5000 years ago. He claims they came from Kush, in the Fertile African Crescent and were related to the C-Group people who founded the Kerma dynasty in the 3rd millennium B.C. (Lal 1963) The Dravidians used a common black-and-red pottery, which spread from Nubia, through modern Ethiopia, Arabia, Iran into India as a result of the Proto-Saharan dispersal.
B.B. Lal (1963) a leading Indian archaeologist in India has observed that the black and red ware (BRW) dating to the Kerma dynasty of Nubia, is related to the Dravidian megalithic pottery. Singh (1982) believes that this pottery radiated from Nubia to India. This pottery along with wavy-line pottery is associated with the Saharo-Sudanese pottery tradition of ancient Africa .
Aravaanan (1980) has written extensively on the African and Dravidian relations. He has illustrated that the Africans and Dravidian share many physical similarities including the dolichocephalic indexes (Aravaanan 1980,pp.62-263; Raceand History.com,2006), platyrrhine nasal index (Aravaanan 1980,pp.25-27), stature (31-32) and blood type (Aravaanan 1980,34-35; RaceandHistory.com,2006). Aravaanan (1980,p.40) also presented much evidence for analogous African and Dravidian cultural features including the chipping of incisor teeth and the use of the lost wax process to make bronze works of arts (Aravaanan 1980,p.41).
There are also similarities between the Dravidian and African religions. For example, both groups held a common interest in the cult of the Serpent and believed in a Supreme God, who lived in a place of peace and tranquility ( Thundy, p.87; J.T. Cornelius,"Are Dravidians Dynastic Egyptians", Trans. of the Archaeological Society of South India 1951-1957, pp.90-117; and U.P. Upadhyaya, "Dravidian and Negro-African", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5, no.1 ) .
There are also affinities between the names of many gods including Amun/Amma and Murugan . Murugan the Dravidian god of the mountains parallels a common god in East Africa worshipped by 25 ethnic groups called Murungu, the god who resides in the mountains .
There is physical evidence which suggest an African origin for the Dravidians. The Dravidians live in South India. The Dravidian ethnic group includes the Tamil, Kurukh,Malayalam, Kananda (Kanarese), Tulu, Telugu and etc. Some researchers due to the genetic relationship between the Dravidians and Niger-Congo speaking groups they call the Indians the Sudroid (Indo-African) Race (RaceandHistory,2006).
Dravidian languages are predominately spoken in southern India and Sri Lanka. There are around 125 million Dravidian speakers. These languages are genetically related to African languages. The Dravidians are remnants of the ancient Black population who occupied most of ancient Asia and Europe.
The major grain exploited by Saharan populations was rice ,the yam and pennisetum. McIntosh and McIntosh (1988) has shown that the principal domesticate in the southern Sahara was bulrush millet. There has been considerable debate concerning the transport of African millets to India. Weber (1998) believes that African millets may have come to India by way of Arabia. Wigboldus (1996) on the other hand argues that African millets may have arrived from Africa via the Indian Ocean in Harappan times.
Both of these theories involve the transport of African millets from a country bordering on the Indian Ocean. Yet, Weber (1998) and Wigboldus (1996) were surprised to discover that African millets and bicolor sorghum , did not reach many East African countries until millennia after they had been exploited as a major subsistence crop at Harappan and Gujarat sites.
This failure to correlate the archaeological evidence of African millets in countries bordering on the Indian Ocean, and the antiquity of African millets in India suggest that African millets such as Pennisetum and Sorghum must have come to India from another part of Africa. To test this hypothesis we will compare Dravidian and African terms for millet.
Winters (1985) has suggested that the Proto-Dravidians formerly lived in the Sahara. This is an interesting theory, because it is in the Sahara that the earliest archaeological pennisetum has been found.
Millet impressions have been found on Mande ceramics from both Karkarchinkat in the Tilemsi Valley of Mali, and Dar Tichitt in Mauritania between 4000 and 3000 BP. (McIntosh & McIntosh 1983a,1988; Winters 1986b; Andah 1981)
Given the archaeological evidence for millets in the Sahara, leads to the corollary theory that if the Dravidians originated in Africa, they would share analogous terms for millet with African groups that formerly lived in the Sahara. The linguistic and anthropological data make it clear that the Dravidian speaking people were part of the C-Group people who formed the backbone of the Niger-Congo speakers. It indicates that the Dravidians took there red-and-black pottery with them from Africa to India, and the cultivation of millet. The evidence makes it clear that the genetic evidence indicating a Holocene migration to India for the Dravidian speaking people is wrong. The Dravidian people given the evidence for the first cultivation of millet and red-and-black pottery is firmly dated and put these cultural elements in the Neolithic. The evidence makes it clear that genetic evidence can not be used to effectively document historic population movements.
There is mtDNA data uniting Africans and Dravidians.
Can Parallel Mutation and neutral genome selection explain Eastern African M1 consensus HVS-1 motifs in Indian M haplogroup http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?hg07022
The most interesting fact about this evidence is that the Dravidian language is closely related to the Niger-Congo group. There are other linguistic groups that separate the Niger-Congo speakers from the Dravidians. The fact that they are genetically related indicates that the Dravidians recently came to India.
1.1 Many scholars have recognized the linguistic unity of Black African (BA) and Dravidian (Dr.) languages. These affinities are found not only in the modern African languages but also that of ancient Egypt. These scholars have made it clear that lexical, morphological and phonetic unity exist between African languages in West and North Africa as well as the Bantu group.
1.2 K.P. Arvaanan (1976) has noted that there are ten common elements shared by BA languages and the Dr. group. They are (1) simple set of five basic vowels with short-long consonants;(2) vowel harmony; (3) absence of initial clusters of consonants; (4) abundance of geminated consonants; (5) distinction of inclusive and exclusive pronouns in first person plural; (6) absence of degrees of comparison for adjectives and adverbs as distinct morphological categories; (7) consonant alternation on nominal increments noticed by different classes; (8)distinction of completed action among verbal paradigms as against specific tense distinction;(9) two separate sets of paradigms for declarative and negative forms of verbs; and (l0) use of reduplication for emphasis.
1.3 There has been a long development in the recognition of the linguistic unity of African and Dravidian languages. The first scholar to document this fact was the French linguist L. Homburger (1950,1951,1957,1964). Prof. Homburger who is best known for her research into African languages was convinced that the Dravidian languages explained the morphology of the Senegalese group particularly the Serere, Fulani group. She was also convinced that the kinship existed between Kannanda and the Bantu languages, and Telugu and the Mande group. Dr. L. Homburger is credited with the discovery for the first time of phonetic, morphological and lexical parallels between Bantu and Dravidians
1.6 By the 1970's numerous scholars had moved their investigation into links between Dr. and BA languages on into the Senegambia region. Such scholars as Cheikh T. N'Diaye (1972) a Senegalese linguist, and U.P. Upadhyaya (1973) of India , have proved conclusively Dr. Homburger's theory of unity between the Dravidian and the Senegalese languages.
1.7 C.T. N'Diaye, who studied Tamil in India, has identified nearly 500 cognates of Dravidian and the Senegalese languages. Upadhyaya (1973) after field work in Senegal discovered around 509 Dravidian and Senegambian words that show full or slight correspondence.
1.8 As a result of the linguistic evidence the Congolese linguist Th. Obenga suggested that there was an Indo-African group of related languages. To prove this point we will discuss the numerous examples of phonetic, morphological and lexical parallels between the Dravidian group: Tamil (Ta.), Malayalam (Mal.), Kannanda/Kanarese (Ka.), Tulu (Tu.), Kui-Gondi, Telugu (Tel.) and Brahui; and Black African languages: Manding (Man.),Egyptian (E.), and Senegalese (Sn.) _________________________________________________________________
code:
COMMON INDO-AFRICAN TERMS
ENGLISH DRAVIDIAN SENEGALESE MANDING MOTHER AMMA AMA,MEEN MA FATHER APPAN,ABBA AMPA,BAABA BA PREGNANCY BASARU BIIR BARA SKIN URI NGURU,GURI GURU BLOOD NETTARU DERET DYERI KING MANNAN MAANSA,OMAAD MANSA GRAND BIIRA BUUR BA SALIVA TUPPAL TUUDDE TU CULTIVATE BEY ,MBEY BE BOAT KULAM GAAL KULU FEATHER SOOGE SIIGE SI, SIGI MOUNTAIN KUNRU TUUD KURU ROCK KALLU XEER KULU STREAM KOLLI KAL KOLI
6.1 Dravidian and Senegalese. Cheikh T. N'Diaye (1972) and U.P. Upadhyaya (1976) have firmly established the linguistic unity of the Dravidian and Senegalese languages. They present grammatical, morphological, phonetic and lexical parallels to prove their point.
6.2 In the Dravidian and Senegalese languages there is a tendency for the appearance of open syllables and the avoidance of non-identical consonant clusters. Accent is usually found on the initial syllable of a word in both these groups. Upadhyaya (1976) has recognized that there are many medial geminated consonants in Dravidian and Senegalese. Due to their preference for open syllables final consonants are rare in these languages.
6.3 There are numerous parallel participle and abstract noun suffixes in Dravidian and Senegalese. For example, the past participle in Fulani (F) -o, and oowo the agent formative, corresponds to Dravidian -a, -aya, e.g., F. windudo 'written', windoowo 'writer'.
6.4 The Wolof (W) -aay and Dyolo ay , abstract noun formative corresponds to Dravidian ay, W. baax 'good', baaxaay 'goodness'; Dr. apala 'friend', bapalay 'friendship'; Dr. hiri 'big', hirime 'greatness', and nal 'good', nanmay 'goodness'.
6.5 There is also analogy in the Wolof abstract noun formative suffix -it, -itt, and Dravidian ita, ta, e.g., W. dog 'to cut', dogit 'sharpness'; Dr. hari 'to cut', hanita 'sharp-ness'.
6.6 The Dravidian and Senegalese languages use reduplication of the bases to emphasize or modify the sense of the word, e.g., D. fan 'more', fanfan 'very much'; Dr. beega 'quick', beega 'very quick'.
6.7 Dravidian and Senegalese cognates.
code:
English Senegalese Dravidian body W. yaram uru head D. fuko,xoox kukk hair W. kawar kavaram 'shoot' eye D. kil kan, khan mouth D. butum baayi, vaay lip W. tun,F. tondu tuti heart W. xol,S. xoor karalu pup W. kuti kutti sheep W. xar 'ram' cow W. nag naku hoe W. konki bronze W. xanjar xancara blacksmith W. kamara skin dol tool mother W. yaay aayi child D. kunil kunnu, kuuci ghee o-new ney
Above we provided linguistic examples from many different African Supersets (Families) including the Mande and Niger-Congo groups to prove the analogy between Dravidian and Black African languages. The evidence is clear that the Dravidian and Black African languages should be classed in a family called Indo-African as suggested by Th. Obenga. This data further supports the archaeological evidence accumulated by Dr. B.B Lal (1963) which proved that the Dravidians originated in the Fertile African Crescent.
Agricultural Evidence
One of the principal groups to use millet in Africa are the Northern Mande speaking people (Winters, 1986). The Norther Mande speakers are divided into the Soninke and Malinke-Bambara groups. Holl (1985,1989) believes that the founders of the Dhar Tichitt site where millet was cultivated in the 2nd millenium B.C., were northern Mande speakers.
To test this theory we will compare Dravidian and Black African agricultural terms, especially Northern Mande. The linguistic evidence suggest that the Proto-Dravidians belonged to an ancient sedentary culture which exitsed in Saharan Africa. We will call the ancestor of this group Paleo-Dravido-Africans.
The Dravidian terms for millet are listed in the Dravidian Etymological Dictionary at 2359, 4300 and 2671. A cursory review of the linguistic examples provided below from the Dravidian, Mande and Wolof languages show a close relationship between these language. These terms are outlined below:
code:
Kol sonna --- --- ----
Wolof (AF.) suna --- ---- ---
Malinke (AF) suna bara, baga de-n, doro koro
Tamil connal varaga tinai kural
Malayalam colam varaku tina ---
Kannanda --- baraga, baragu tene korale,korle
*sona *baraga *tenä *kora
It is clear that the Dravidian and African terms for millet are very similar. The Proto-Dravidian terms *baraga and *tena have little if any affinity to the African terms for millet.
The Kol term for millet ‘sonna’, is very similar to the terms for millet used by the Wolof ‘suna’ ( a West Atlantic Language), and Mande ‘suna’ (a Mande language). The agreement of these terms in sound structure suggest that these terms may be related.
The sound change of the initial /s/ in the African languages , to the /c/ in Tamil and Malayalam is consistent with the cognate Tamil and Malayalam terms compared by Aranavan(1979 ,1980;) and Winters ( 1981, 1994). Moreover, the difference in the Kol term ‘ soona’,which does retain the complete African form indicates that the development in Tamil and Malayalam of c < s, was a natural evolutionary development in some South Dravidian languages. Moreover, you will also find a similar pattern for other Malinke and Dravidian cognates, e.g., buy: Malinke ‘sa, Tamil cel; and road: Malinke ‘sila’, Tamil ‘caalai’.
African Millets Carried to India by Dravidian Speakers
quote:Originally posted by Pandabear: Well Lioness, I'm an Indian and I know of no Indian that considers him/herself to be black as in someone of African descent. I also don't know of any Indian that is delusional enough to think of him/herself as white. I'm sure someone will point to a some Indian friend that thinks otherwise but, by and large, Indians don't think of themselves of recent African descent.
However, most Indians do sympathize with the plight of African Americans and I believe the Indian community voted for Obama at the rate of 90%.
This is the most valid remark. Afrocentrist have no business imposing a Black identity on people who themself give no such indication or abhorr the comparison. This research is about bringing white surpremacy down, and it's greatest victims and opponents are Blacks. Only Blacks do like Blacks...most of the time, at least. Others will not rejoice in the discovery of Black European Kings. A sooty black Surinam Indian, blacker then me, volunteered to tell me they are Caucasians. But his problems with the white Caucasians are no different then mine, my subnasal prognatism self. He pointed out that Indians do not have this facial structure, which is so goddam important. Why: because the goddam European nobility doted on this facial trait as proof of pure, blue blood.
We have no time to waste. At least the Blacks in Surinam have always been loud and brash about their blackness, shamelessy exposing their Africa derived Winti religion to the whole world. Shaking their huge asses and dancing Kawina, truly a very racy dance. Surinam blackness is extremely outgoing, in your face, loud and colourfull; never, ever considering shame, embarrasment or holding back. As the Dutch masters tried to convince us. We even embrace all bodyshapes, as we love to eat. Evenso that the Surinam Indians go to Black witch-doctors as their own do not cut it in the spirit world: go figure. Even the spirits obey the blackness of the Blacks. That should tell us something. I myself love the blackest of Indians.
quote:Originally posted by Pandabear: Well Lioness, I'm an Indian and I know of no Indian that considers him/herself to be black as in someone of African descent. I also don't know of any Indian that is delusional enough to think of him/herself as white. I'm sure someone will point to a some Indian friend that thinks otherwise but, by and large, Indians don't think of themselves of recent African descent.
However, most Indians do sympathize with the plight of African Americans and I believe the Indian community voted for Obama at the rate of 90%.
This is the most valid remark. Afrocentrist have no business imposing a Black identity on people who themself give no such indication or abhorr the comparison. This research is about bringing white surpremacy down, and it's greatest victims and opponents are Blacks. Only Blacks do like Blacks...most of the time, at least. Others will not rejoice in the discovery of Black European Kings. A sooty black Surinam Indian, blacker then me, volunteered to tell me they are Caucasians. But his problems with the white Caucasians are no different then mine, my subnasal prognatism self. He pointed out that Indians do not have this facial structure, which is so goddam important. Why: because the goddam European nobility doted on this facial trait as proof of pure, blue blood.
We have no time to waste. At least the Blacks in Surinam have always been loud and brash about their blackness, shamelessy exposing their Africa derived Winti religion to the whole world. Shaking their huge asses and dancing Kawina, truly a very racy dance. Surinam blackness is extremely outgoing, in your face, loud and colourfull; never, ever considering shame, embarrasment or holding back. As the Dutch masters tried to convince us. We even embrace all bodyshapes, as we love to eat. Evenso that the Surinam Indians go to Black witch-doctors as their own do not cut it in the spirit world: go figure. Even the spirits obey the blackness of the Blacks. That should tell us something. I myself love the blackest of Indians.
We are not imposing a Black identity on Indians, many Indians, like the Dalits, already accept such an identity.
posted
A salient point, which reveals the reason behind Afrocentrism or Afrocentrists in their crusade to label all non-whites, "Black." It is all for contesting world domination by Whites. Blacks are impotent intellectually, technologically and militarily before Whites. Yet, the final frontier where Whites have not asserted full control and, they perceive to have a chance at winning, is the social and political arena. And so, they need to swell up their ranks to better bolster themselves to wage a war on those fronts.
Do not be deceived by the Afrocentrist-Trojan horse. "All that glitters is not gold" or better stated, not all dark-skin people are 'Black.'
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: There could be an advantage in doing this if it could add to a larger group of people to oppose a group that sometimes oppresses them on the basis of skin color.
posted
The majority of people on this world are of colour. Why should the pinks of Europe dominate? I for one have been looking at them for the past 32 years And I see just people, revoltingly exploited by their own kind, following some demented idea that Blacks and Muslims are their enemies. For strategic reasons I urge my fellow fighters not to waste time with people who do not jump up when they hear a Black drum, as my Black Surinamese are apt to do. Nobody has to explain to us that we are Blacks. We do not need headmeasurers, we would kick them to dead. We just love our Blackness, no matter what horrors whites, since 1848, have perpatrated on us.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
Posts: 1064 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
bullshit! and a typical afrocentric response. Black is exclusive to specific dark skin people within a certain phenotype range. Stop your bullshit!
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
Honey, I'm talking Black, while you are blabbering about black. It's not the same fu-cking thing, and if you do not know the difference you should get the hell out of my threads.
Blue blood is black blood is based on the need for change, because I'm vastly unhappy what I see about me and what is happening with my folks.
If you encounter a person who has no complaint on any of the **** we have to put up with, then pack your stuff and move on. You have ran into a goddam house nigger who will take his silverlings and do you in. Do not get bogged down with the housenigger, they are even worse then the pinks.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You fool, all human flesh tones are a color -we are all "of color." Your statement is a contradiction reflecting your own self-contradiction (LOL)!
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: The majority of people on this world are of colour. Why should the pinks of Europe dominate? I for one have been looking at them for the past 32 years And I see just people, revoltingly exploited by their own kind, following some demented idea that Blacks and Muslims are their enemies. For strategic reasons I urge my fellow fighters not to waste time with people who do not jump up when they hear a Black drum, as my Black Surinamese are apt to do. Nobody has to explain to us that we are Blacks. We do not need headmeasurers, we would kick them to dead. We just love our Blackness, no matter what horrors whites, since 1848, have perpatrated on us.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: bullshit! and a typical afrocentric response. Black is exclusive to specific dark skin people within a certain phenotype range. Stop your bullshit!
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
posted
You dumb prick! that person is taking up your argument! RFLOL!!!!!!!!! You are such a fucking blundering sociopath, you can hardly see when someone is helping you out! MUHAHAHAHAHA!
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
Honey, I'm talking Black, while you are blabbering about black. It's not the same fu-cking thing, and if you do not know the difference you should get the hell out of my threads.
Blue blood is black blood is based on the need for change, because I'm vastly unhappy what I see about me and what is happening with my folks.
If you encounter a person who has no complaint on any of the **** we have to put up with, then pack your stuff and move on. You have ran into a goddam house nigger who will take his silverlings and do you in. Do not get bogged down with the housenigger, they are even worse then the pinks.
posted
Blacks are Blacks because they self-identify as Black. They are not Black because some eurocentric revisionist wanted to wipe out the Blacks from history who were oppressing and civilising the European whites, and using them for shoe leather: and he came up with some definition involving skull size, and portruding lips. As if Blacks are all about thick lips and big dicks. Lord have mercy.
Black
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Break-the-bull: A salient point, which reveals the reason behind Afrocentrism or Afrocentrists in their crusade to label all non-whites, "Black." It is all for contesting world domination by Whites. Blacks are impotent intellectually, technologically and militarily before Whites. Yet, the final frontier where Whites have not asserted full control and, they perceive to have a chance at winning, is the social and political arena. And so, they need to swell up their ranks to better bolster themselves to wage a war on those fronts.
Do not be deceived by the Afrocentrist-Trojan horse. "All that glitters is not gold" or better stated, not all dark-skin people are 'Black.'
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: There could be an advantage in doing this if it could add to a larger group of people to oppose a group that sometimes oppresses them on the basis of skin color.
LOL. Indians recognize their African/Black heritage.
The archaeological, anthropological, ethonographic and linguistic data make it clear that Dravidians came to India from Africa during the Neolithic and not the Holocene period.
In the sub-continent of India, there were several main groups. The traditional view for the population origins in India suggest that the earliest inhabitants of India were the Negritos, and this was followed by the Proto-Australoid, the Mongoloid and the so-called mediterranean type which represent the ancient Egyptians and Kushites (Clyde A. Winters, "The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians, Manding and Sumerians",Tamil Civilizations 3, no.1(1985), pp.1-9. (http://olmec98.net/Fertile1.pdf ). The the Proto-Dravidians were probably one of the cattle herding groups that made up the C-Group culture of Nubia Kush (K.P. Aravanan, "Physical and Cultural Similarities between Dravidian and African", Journal of Tamil Studies, no.10 (1976, pp.23-27:24. ).
Genetics as noted by Mait Metspalu et al writing in 2004, in “Most extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans” http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/5/26
can not tell which group first entered India. Mait Metspalu wrote _________________________________________________________________ Language families present today in India, such as Indo-European, Dravidic and Austro-Asiatic, are all much younger than the majority of indigenous mtDNA lineages found among the present day speakers at high frequencies. It would make it highly speculative to infer, from the extant mtDNA pools of their speakers, whether one of the listed above linguistically defined group in India should be considered more “autochthonous” than any other in respect of its presence in the subcontinent (p.9). ________________________________________________________________________
B.B. Lal ("The Only Asian expedition in threatened Nubia:Work by an Indian Mission at Afyeh and Tumas", The Illustrated London Times , 20 April 1963) and Indian Egyptologist has shown conclusively that the Dravidians originated in the Saharan area 5000 years ago. He claims they came from Kush, in the Fertile African Crescent and were related to the C-Group people who founded the Kerma dynasty in the 3rd millennium B.C. (Lal 1963) The Dravidians used a common black-and-red pottery, which spread from Nubia, through modern Ethiopia, Arabia, Iran into India as a result of the Proto-Saharan dispersal.
B.B. Lal (1963) a leading Indian archaeologist in India has observed that the black and red ware (BRW) dating to the Kerma dynasty of Nubia, is related to the Dravidian megalithic pottery. Singh (1982) believes that this pottery radiated from Nubia to India. This pottery along with wavy-line pottery is associated with the Saharo-Sudanese pottery tradition of ancient Africa .
Aravaanan (1980) has written extensively on the African and Dravidian relations. He has illustrated that the Africans and Dravidian share many physical similarities including the dolichocephalic indexes (Aravaanan 1980,pp.62-263; Raceand History.com,2006), platyrrhine nasal index (Aravaanan 1980,pp.25-27), stature (31-32) and blood type (Aravaanan 1980,34-35; RaceandHistory.com,2006). Aravaanan (1980,p.40) also presented much evidence for analogous African and Dravidian cultural features including the chipping of incisor teeth and the use of the lost wax process to make bronze works of arts (Aravaanan 1980,p.41).
There are also similarities between the Dravidian and African religions. For example, both groups held a common interest in the cult of the Serpent and believed in a Supreme God, who lived in a place of peace and tranquility ( Thundy, p.87; J.T. Cornelius,"Are Dravidians Dynastic Egyptians", Trans. of the Archaeological Society of South India 1951-1957, pp.90-117; and U.P. Upadhyaya, "Dravidian and Negro-African", International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics 5, no.1 ) .
There are also affinities between the names of many gods including Amun/Amma and Murugan . Murugan the Dravidian god of the mountains parallels a common god in East Africa worshipped by 25 ethnic groups called Murungu, the god who resides in the mountains .
There is physical evidence which suggest an African origin for the Dravidians. The Dravidians live in South India. The Dravidian ethnic group includes the Tamil, Kurukh,Malayalam, Kananda (Kanarese), Tulu, Telugu and etc. Some researchers due to the genetic relationship between the Dravidians and Niger-Congo speaking groups they call the Indians the Sudroid (Indo-African) Race (RaceandHistory,2006).
Dravidian languages are predominately spoken in southern India and Sri Lanka. There are around 125 million Dravidian speakers. These languages are genetically related to African languages. The Dravidians are remnants of the ancient Black population who occupied most of ancient Asia and Europe.
The major grain exploited by Saharan populations was rice ,the yam and pennisetum. McIntosh and McIntosh (1988) has shown that the principal domesticate in the southern Sahara was bulrush millet. There has been considerable debate concerning the transport of African millets to India. Weber (1998) believes that African millets may have come to India by way of Arabia. Wigboldus (1996) on the other hand argues that African millets may have arrived from Africa via the Indian Ocean in Harappan times.
Both of these theories involve the transport of African millets from a country bordering on the Indian Ocean. Yet, Weber (1998) and Wigboldus (1996) were surprised to discover that African millets and bicolor sorghum , did not reach many East African countries until millennia after they had been exploited as a major subsistence crop at Harappan and Gujarat sites.
This failure to correlate the archaeological evidence of African millets in countries bordering on the Indian Ocean, and the antiquity of African millets in India suggest that African millets such as Pennisetum and Sorghum must have come to India from another part of Africa. To test this hypothesis we will compare Dravidian and African terms for millet.
Winters (1985) has suggested that the Proto-Dravidians formerly lived in the Sahara. This is an interesting theory, because it is in the Sahara that the earliest archaeological pennisetum has been found.
Millet impressions have been found on Mande ceramics from both Karkarchinkat in the Tilemsi Valley of Mali, and Dar Tichitt in Mauritania between 4000 and 3000 BP. (McIntosh & McIntosh 1983a,1988; Winters 1986b; Andah 1981)
Given the archaeological evidence for millets in the Sahara, leads to the corollary theory that if the Dravidians originated in Africa, they would share analogous terms for millet with African groups that formerly lived in the Sahara. The linguistic and anthropological data make it clear that the Dravidian speaking people were part of the C-Group people who formed the backbone of the Niger-Congo speakers. It indicates that the Dravidians took there red-and-black pottery with them from Africa to India, and the cultivation of millet. The evidence makes it clear that the genetic evidence indicating a Holocene migration to India for the Dravidian speaking people is wrong. The Dravidian people given the evidence for the first cultivation of millet and red-and-black pottery is firmly dated and put these cultural elements in the Neolithic. The evidence makes it clear that genetic evidence can not be used to effectively document historic population movements. The most interesting fact about this evidence is that the Dravidian language is closely related to the Niger-Congo group. There are other linguistic groups that separate the Niger-Congo speakers from the Dravidians. The fact that they are genetically related indicates that the Dravidians recently came to India.
1.1 Many scholars have recognized the linguistic unity of Black African (BA) and Dravidian (Dr.) languages. These affinities are found not only in the modern African languages but also that of ancient Egypt. These scholars have made it clear that lexical, morphological and phonetic unity exist between African languages in West and North Africa as well as the Bantu group.
1.2 K.P. Arvaanan (1976) has noted that there are ten common elements shared by BA languages and the Dr. group. They are (1) simple set of five basic vowels with short-long consonants;(2) vowel harmony; (3) absence of initial clusters of consonants; (4) abundance of geminated consonants; (5) distinction of inclusive and exclusive pronouns in first person plural; (6) absence of degrees of comparison for adjectives and adverbs as distinct morphological categories; (7) consonant alternation on nominal increments noticed by different classes; (8)distinction of completed action among verbal paradigms as against specific tense distinction;(9) two separate sets of paradigms for declarative and negative forms of verbs; and (l0) use of reduplication for emphasis.
1.3 There has been a long development in the recognition of the linguistic unity of African and Dravidian languages. The first scholar to document this fact was the French linguist L. Homburger (1950,1951,1957,1964). Prof. Homburger who is best known for her research into African languages was convinced that the Dravidian languages explained the morphology of the Senegalese group particularly the Serere, Fulani group. She was also convinced that the kinship existed between Kannanda and the Bantu languages, and Telugu and the Mande group. Dr. L. Homburger is credited with the discovery for the first time of phonetic, morphological and lexical parallels between Bantu and Dravidians
1.6 By the 1970's numerous scholars had moved their investigation into links between Dr. and BA languages on into the Senegambia region. Such scholars as Cheikh T. N'Diaye (1972) a Senegalese linguist, and U.P. Upadhyaya (1973) of India , have proved conclusively Dr. Homburger's theory of unity between the Dravidian and the Senegalese languages.
1.7 C.T. N'Diaye, who studied Tamil in India, has identified nearly 500 cognates of Dravidian and the Senegalese languages. Upadhyaya (1973) after field work in Senegal discovered around 509 Dravidian and Senegambian words that show full or slight correspondence.
1.8 As a result of the linguistic evidence the Congolese linguist Th. Obenga suggested that there was an Indo-African group of related languages. To prove this point we will discuss the numerous examples of phonetic, morphological and lexical parallels between the Dravidian group: Tamil (Ta.), Malayalam (Mal.), Kannanda/Kanarese (Ka.), Tulu (Tu.), Kui-Gondi, Telugu (Tel.) and Brahui; and Black African languages: Manding (Man.),Egyptian (E.), and Senegalese (Sn.) _________________________________________________________________
code:
COMMON INDO-AFRICAN TERMS
ENGLISH DRAVIDIAN SENEGALESE MANDING MOTHER AMMA AMA,MEEN MA FATHER APPAN,ABBA AMPA,BAABA BA PREGNANCY BASARU BIIR BARA SKIN URI NGURU,GURI GURU BLOOD NETTARU DERET DYERI KING MANNAN MAANSA,OMAAD MANSA GRAND BIIRA BUUR BA SALIVA TUPPAL TUUDDE TU CULTIVATE BEY ,MBEY BE BOAT KULAM GAAL KULU FEATHER SOOGE SIIGE SI, SIGI MOUNTAIN KUNRU TUUD KURU ROCK KALLU XEER KULU STREAM KOLLI KAL KOLI
6.1 Dravidian and Senegalese. Cheikh T. N'Diaye (1972) and U.P. Upadhyaya (1976) have firmly established the linguistic unity of the Dravidian and Senegalese languages. They present grammatical, morphological, phonetic and lexical parallels to prove their point.
6.2 In the Dravidian and Senegalese languages there is a tendency for the appearance of open syllables and the avoidance of non-identical consonant clusters. Accent is usually found on the initial syllable of a word in both these groups. Upadhyaya (1976) has recognized that there are many medial geminated consonants in Dravidian and Senegalese. Due to their preference for open syllables final consonants are rare in these languages.
6.3 There are numerous parallel participle and abstract noun suffixes in Dravidian and Senegalese. For example, the past participle in Fulani (F) -o, and oowo the agent formative, corresponds to Dravidian -a, -aya, e.g., F. windudo 'written', windoowo 'writer'.
6.4 The Wolof (W) -aay and Dyolo ay , abstract noun formative corresponds to Dravidian ay, W. baax 'good', baaxaay 'goodness'; Dr. apala 'friend', bapalay 'friendship'; Dr. hiri 'big', hirime 'greatness', and nal 'good', nanmay 'goodness'.
6.5 There is also analogy in the Wolof abstract noun formative suffix -it, -itt, and Dravidian ita, ta, e.g., W. dog 'to cut', dogit 'sharpness'; Dr. hari 'to cut', hanita 'sharp-ness'.
6.6 The Dravidian and Senegalese languages use reduplication of the bases to emphasize or modify the sense of the word, e.g., D. fan 'more', fanfan 'very much'; Dr. beega 'quick', beega 'very quick'.
6.7 Dravidian and Senegalese cognates.
code:
English Senegalese Dravidian body W. yaram uru head D. fuko,xoox kukk hair W. kawar kavaram 'shoot' eye D. kil kan, khan mouth D. butum baayi, vaay lip W. tun,F. tondu tuti heart W. xol,S. xoor karalu pup W. kuti kutti sheep W. xar 'ram' cow W. nag naku hoe W. konki bronze W. xanjar xancara blacksmith W. kamara skin dol tool mother W. yaay aayi child D. kunil kunnu, kuuci ghee o-new ney
Above we provided linguistic examples from many different African Supersets (Families) including the Mande and Niger-Congo groups to prove the analogy between Dravidian and Black African languages. The evidence is clear that the Dravidian and Black African languages should be classed in a family called Indo-African as suggested by Th. Obenga. This data further supports the archaeological evidence accumulated by Dr. B.B Lal (1963) which proved that the Dravidians originated in the Fertile African Crescent.
Agricultural Evidence
One of the principal groups to use millet in Africa are the Northern Mande speaking people (Winters, 1986). The Norther Mande speakers are divided into the Soninke and Malinke-Bambara groups. Holl (1985,1989) believes that the founders of the Dhar Tichitt site where millet was cultivated in the 2nd millenium B.C., were northern Mande speakers.
To test this theory we will compare Dravidian and Black African agricultural terms, especially Northern Mande. The linguistic evidence suggest that the Proto-Dravidians belonged to an ancient sedentary culture which exitsed in Saharan Africa. We will call the ancestor of this group Paleo-Dravido-Africans.
The Dravidian terms for millet are listed in the Dravidian Etymological Dictionary at 2359, 4300 and 2671. A cursory review of the linguistic examples provided below from the Dravidian, Mande and Wolof languages show a close relationship between these language. These terms are outlined below:
code:
Kol sonna --- --- ----
Wolof (AF.) suna --- ---- ---
Malinke (AF) suna bara, baga de-n, doro koro
Tamil connal varaga tinai kural
Malayalam colam varaku tina ---
Kannanda --- baraga, baragu tene korale,korle
*sona *baraga *tenä *kora
It is clear that the Dravidian and African terms for millet are very similar. The Proto-Dravidian terms *baraga and *tena have little if any affinity to the African terms for millet.
The Kol term for millet ‘sonna’, is very similar to the terms for millet used by the Wolof ‘suna’ ( a West Atlantic Language), and Mande ‘suna’ (a Mande language). The agreement of these terms in sound structure suggest that these terms may be related.
The sound change of the initial /s/ in the African languages , to the /c/ in Tamil and Malayalam is consistent with the cognate Tamil and Malayalam terms compared by Aranavan(1979 ,1980;) and Winters ( 1981, 1994). Moreover, the difference in the Kol term ‘ soona’,which does retain the complete African form indicates that the development in Tamil and Malayalam of c < s, was a natural evolutionary development in some South Dravidian languages. Moreover, you will also find a similar pattern for other Malinke and Dravidian cognates, e.g., buy: Malinke ‘sa, Tamil cel; and road: Malinke ‘sila’, Tamil ‘caalai’.
African Millets Carried to India by Dravidian Speakers
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
Honey, I'm talking Black, while you are blabbering about black. It's not the same fu-cking thing, and if you do not know the difference you should get the hell out of my threads.
Blue blood is black blood is based on the need for change, because I'm vastly unhappy what I see about me and what is happening with my folks.
If you encounter a person who has no complaint on any of the **** we have to put up with, then pack your stuff and move on. You have ran into a goddam house nigger who will take his silverlings and do you in. Do not get bogged down with the housenigger, they are even worse then the pinks.
I don't even think you know what your on about lol
Posts: 1064 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: bullshit! and a typical afrocentric response. Black is exclusive to specific dark skin people within a certain phenotype range. Stop your bullshit!
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
There is mtDNA data uniting Africans and Dravidians.
Can Parallel Mutation and neutral genome selection explain Eastern African M1 consensus HVS-1 motifs in Indian M haplogroup http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?hg07022
[Portrait of an African man, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam: I believe it's Charles V Habsburg]
Dear Doctor Winters, I'm really not talking about the theoretical connection between Indians and Blacks. I'm talking about a practical way to end white supremacy, and if these people really see themselves like fellow Caucasians, there is no way in hell to make them take pride in Black ancestors. Indians are known for their skin-bleaching practices, to heighten their sacred Causcasionness, perhaps? They worship white skinned gods, most of the time, presented their dark skinned actors as extremely fair. Indians do not think our lips, hair and noses beautiful: so how the hell you gonna enlist them in the Black mans fight? Jeez, what's the matter with you people? You can speak with them about post colonialism, if their religions purity rules do not prevent them from talking to you, put they will never be enthousiastic about no goddam Black European King, period.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
Correct. Teach....
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Give me a fucking break, Clyde! I lost respect for you a long time ago when I peeped your M.O.. Sir, you fucking claim every damn DNA African when it suits you. Be gone! You sham!
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: bullshit! and a typical afrocentric response. Black is exclusive to specific dark skin people within a certain phenotype range. Stop your bullshit!
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Most Indians are black, all black means is that you have dark skin, that is why the Greeks referred to India as eastern Ethiopia
There is mtDNA data uniting Africans and Dravidians.
Can Parallel Mutation and neutral genome selection explain Eastern African M1 consensus HVS-1 motifs in Indian M haplogroup http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?hg07022
posted
so then if they DO NOT want to be Black, stop trying to fucking claim them already! Get it? No you dont! cause misery lovvvvveeeess company!
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: Dear Doctor Winters, I'm really not talking about the theoretical connection between Indians and Blacks. I'm talking about a practical way to end white supremacy, and if these people really see themselves like fellow Caucasians, there is no way in hell to make them take pride in Black ancestors. Indians are known for their skin-bleaching practices, to heighten their sacred Causcasionness, perhaps? They worship white skinned gods, most of the time, presented their dark skinned actors as extremely fair. Indians do not think our lips, hair and noses beautiful: so how the hell you gonna enlist them in the Black mans fight? Jeez, what's the matter with you people? You can speak with them about post colonialism, if their religions purity rules do not prevent them from talking to you, put they will never be enthousiastic about no goddam Black European King, period.
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: Dear Doctor Winters, I'm really not talking about the theoretical connection between Indians and Blacks. I'm talking about a practical way to end white supremacy, and if these people really see themselves like fellow Caucasians, there is no way in hell to make them take pride in Black ancestors. Indians are known for their skin-bleaching practices, to heighten their sacred Causcasionness, perhaps? They worship white skinned gods, most of the time, presented their dark skinned actors as extremely fair. Indians do not think our lips, hair and noses beautiful: so how the hell you gonna enlist them in the Black mans fight? Jeez, what's the matter with you people? You can speak with them about post colonialism, if their religions purity rules do not prevent them from talking to you, put they will never be enthousiastic about no goddam Black European King, period.
Please be serious. Black Americans only recently stopped bleaching their skin.
Dravidians and Dalits in India are in the fight because they are fighting the white supremacy of the Hindutva (Hindu Nationalists of North India) who discriminate against them.
They are fighting the racist movie makers who refuse to put beautiful Black skinned Indians in their Films.
They are fighting the Hindutva who refuse to let Dalits attend certain Temples.
They are fighting the Hindutva who murder them at will.
You feel this anger toward Indians because of your experiences in Suriname where Indians were placed in a different category than the other Blacks so they could help Europeans dominate you.
Stop being prejudice. Learn world history so you won't be teaching such falsehood.
Surinam ladies dressed a la kotomissie dancing away, doing the Kawina dance, mashing ass to belly, and serious grinding as the circle halts. This is Blackness to me, they need no DNA proof to confince them they are Blacks. They rejoice in their Blackness. Just chuck out the revisionist B.S., get practical, we can win this thing.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: so then if they DO NOT want to be Black, stop trying to fucking claim them already! Get it? No you dont! cause misery lovvvvveeeess company!
LOL. It was Dravidians who acknowledge their Africaness through their writings and research.
K.P. Aravanan, former Vice-Chancellor of Manonmaniyam Sundaranar University[/b]
Dravidian speaking people recognize their African heritage. See:
Aravanan KP. 1976. ''Physical and cultural similarities between Dravidians and Africans''. Journal of Tamil Studies 10:23–27;
Aravanan KP. 1979. "Notable negroid elements in Dravidian India". J Tamil Studies 20–45.
Aravanan KP. 1980. Dravidians and Africans, Madras.
LOL. These Dravidians do not look like caucasoids. .
U. P. Upadhyaya and S.P. Upadhyaya
1. 'Dravidian and Negro-African', U.P.Upadhyaya, Intnl. J. of Dravidian Linguisitsics 5:1 (1976) 32-64
2. U. P.Upadhyaya & S.P.Upadhyaya, 'Affinites ethno-linguistiques entre Dravidiens et les Negro-Africain' , Bull. IFAN , no.1 (1976) pp.127-157
3. U. P. Upadhyaya & S.P. Upadhyaya, 'Les liens entre Kerala et l"Afrique tels qu'ils resosortent des survivances culturelles et linguistiques', Bulletin de L'IFAN , no.1 (1979) pp.100-132
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: Dear Doctor Winters, I'm really not talking about the theoretical connection between Indians and Blacks. I'm talking about a practical way to end white supremacy, and if these people really see themselves like fellow Caucasians, there is no way in hell to make them take pride in Black ancestors. Indians are known for their skin-bleaching practices, to heighten their sacred Causcasionness, perhaps? They worship white skinned gods, most of the time, presented their dark skinned actors as extremely fair. Indians do not think our lips, hair and noses beautiful: so how the hell you gonna enlist them in the Black mans fight? Jeez, what's the matter with you people? You can speak with them about post colonialism, if their religions purity rules do not prevent them from talking to you, put they will never be enthousiastic about no goddam Black European King, period.
Please be serious. Black Americans only recently stopped bleaching their skin.
Dravidians and Dalits in India are in the fight because they are fighting the white supremacy of the Hindutva (Hindu Nationalists of North India) who discriminate against them.
They are fighting the racist movie makers who refuse to put beautiful Black skinned Indians in their Films.
They are fighting the Hindutva who refuse to let Dalits attend certain Temples.
They are fighting the Hindutva who murder them at will.
You feel this anger toward Indians because of your experiences in Suriname where Indians were placed in a different category than the other Blacks so they could help Europeans dominate you.
Stop being prejudice. Learn world history so you want be teaching such falsehood.
.
I do not hate Indians, you should have seen me the other day...I'm reporting what I have seen and heard. Please, let's end thus useless tug of war, attracting crazies to my thread, and show me one page where it says that Indians are presenting themselves as Blacks, citing African ancestors. I'm not talking about poor Dalits fighting the cast system, but Indians connecting themselves to the struggle of broadnosed, big lipped, big assed, frizzy haired honest to goodness Blacks. The way you make your statement you seem to have what I require at your fingerthings. Now, please deliver.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: Dear Doctor Winters, I'm really not talking about the theoretical connection between Indians and Blacks. I'm talking about a practical way to end white supremacy, and if these people really see themselves like fellow Caucasians, there is no way in hell to make them take pride in Black ancestors. Indians are known for their skin-bleaching practices, to heighten their sacred Causcasionness, perhaps? They worship white skinned gods, most of the time, presented their dark skinned actors as extremely fair. Indians do not think our lips, hair and noses beautiful: so how the hell you gonna enlist them in the Black mans fight? Jeez, what's the matter with you people? You can speak with them about post colonialism, if their religions purity rules do not prevent them from talking to you, put they will never be enthousiastic about no goddam Black European King, period.
Please be serious. Black Americans only recently stopped bleaching their skin.
Dravidians and Dalits in India are in the fight because they are fighting the white supremacy of the Hindutva (Hindu Nationalists of North India) who discriminate against them.
They are fighting the racist movie makers who refuse to put beautiful Black skinned Indians in their Films.
They are fighting the Hindutva who refuse to let Dalits attend certain Temples.
They are fighting the Hindutva who murder them at will.
You feel this anger toward Indians because of your experiences in Suriname where Indians were placed in a different category than the other Blacks so they could help Europeans dominate you.
Stop being prejudice. Learn world history so you want be teaching such falsehood.
.
I do not hate Indians, you should have seen me the other day...I'm reporting what I have seen and heard. Please, let's end thus useless tug of war, attracting crazies to my thread, and show me one page where it says that Indians are presenting themselves as Blacks, citing African ancestors. I'm not talking about poor Dalits fighting the cast system, but Indians connecting themselves to the struggle of broadnosed, big lipped, big assed, frizzy haired honest to goodness Blacks. The way you make your statement you seem to have what I require at your fingerthings. Now, please deliver.
LOL. You sound silly. All Black people do no have frizzy hair.
LOL. If this was the case we would have to reject most of your work on the Blacks of Europe.
K.P. Aravanan, former Vice-Chancellor of Manonmaniyam Sundaranar University
Dravidian speaking people recognize their African heritage. See:
Aravanan KP. 1976. ''Physical and cultural similarities between Dravidians and Africans''. Journal of Tamil Studies 10:23–27;
Aravanan KP. 1979. "Notable negroid elements in Dravidian India". J Tamil Studies 20–45.
Aravanan KP. 1980. Dravidians and Africans, Madras.
LOL. These Dravidians do not look like caucasoids. .
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: so then if they DO NOT want to be Black, stop trying to fucking claim them already! Get it? No you dont! cause misery lovvvvveeeess company!
LOL. It was Dravidians who acknowledge their Africaness through their writings and research.
K.P. Aravanan, former Vice-Chancellor of Manonmaniyam Sundaranar University[/b]
Dravidian speaking people recognize their African heritage. See:
Aravanan KP. 1976. ''Physical and cultural similarities between Dravidians and Africans''. Journal of Tamil Studies 10:23–27;
Aravanan KP. 1979. "Notable negroid elements in Dravidian India". J Tamil Studies 20–45.
Aravanan KP. 1980. Dravidians and Africans, Madras.
LOL. These Dravidians do not look like caucasoids. .
U. P. Upadhyaya and S.P. Upadhyaya
1. 'Dravidian and Negro-African', U.P.Upadhyaya, Intnl. J. of Dravidian Linguisitsics 5:1 (1976) 32-64
2. U. P.Upadhyaya & S.P.Upadhyaya, 'Affinites ethno-linguistiques entre Dravidiens et les Negro-Africain' , Bull. IFAN , no.1 (1976) pp.127-157
3. U. P. Upadhyaya & S.P. Upadhyaya, 'Les liens entre Kerala et l"Afrique tels qu'ils resosortent des survivances culturelles et linguistiques', Bulletin de L'IFAN , no.1 (1979) pp.100-132
.
What is going on in the USA? Are they letting all the Bedlam inmates free? What's up with them in my thread?
This is interesting stuff, yet I sense a lot of theorist approaches, which are fine, but of no practical benefit to end white supremacy right now. And that is what we should be doing, right now.
The pain is in the history of Europe, the situation of Blacks today is influenced by what happened between 1100-1848. We need to open the eyes of young Blacks who are dissatisfied in the west. They study hard, they work hard; still they are shut out. Show them the white and black portraits of the same persone: open their eyes. Schools take our children to museums: churches of revisionism. Prepare them, tell them they will see fake images. Let them ask the curator if these are overpaints. Beat them at their own game. My Surinam Blacks need not to be told they are Black, they came out hollering their blackness.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, Clyde. It was self-hating Indians, influenced by Black [pseudo] intellects and thinkers. Just look at the year of their publications, right smack in the golden era of Afrocentrism.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: so then if they DO NOT want to be Black, stop trying to fucking claim them already! Get it? No you dont! cause misery lovvvvveeeess company!
LOL. It was Dravidians who acknowledge their Africaness through their writings and research.
K.P. Aravanan, former Vice-Chancellor of Manonmaniyam Sundaranar University[/b]
Dravidian speaking people recognize their African heritage. See:
Aravanan KP. 1976. ''Physical and cultural similarities between Dravidians and Africans''. Journal of Tamil Studies 10:23–27;
Aravanan KP. 1979. "Notable negroid elements in Dravidian India". J Tamil Studies 20–45.
Aravanan KP. 1980. Dravidians and Africans, Madras.
LOL. These Dravidians do not look like caucasoids. .
U. P. Upadhyaya and S.P. Upadhyaya
1. 'Dravidian and Negro-African', U.P.Upadhyaya, Intnl. J. of Dravidian Linguisitsics 5:1 (1976) 32-64
2. U. P.Upadhyaya & S.P.Upadhyaya, 'Affinites ethno-linguistiques entre Dravidiens et les Negro-Africain' , Bull. IFAN , no.1 (1976) pp.127-157
3. U. P. Upadhyaya & S.P. Upadhyaya, 'Les liens entre Kerala et l"Afrique tels qu'ils resosortent des survivances culturelles et linguistiques', Bulletin de L'IFAN , no.1 (1979) pp.100-132
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: What is going on in the USA? Are they letting all the Bedlam inmates free? What's up with them in my thread?
This is interesting stuff, yet I sense a lot of theorist approaches, which are fine, but of no practical benefit to end white supremacy right now. And that is what we should be doing, right now.
The pain is in the history of Europe, the situation of Blacks today is influenced by what happened between 1100-1848. We need to open the eyes of young Blacks who are dissatisfied in the west. They study hard, they work hard; still they are shut out. Show them the white and black portraits of the same persone: open their eyes. Schools take our children to museums: churches of revisionism. Prepare them, tell them they will see fake images. Let them ask the curator if these are overpaints. Beat them at their own game. My Surinam Blacks need not to be told they are Black, they came out hollering their blackness.
If you’re so race conscious why do your people continue to call their children Pickaninny? , i.e., Creole English of Surinam the word for a child is pikin ningre (li. "small negro").
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: What is going on in the USA? Are they letting all the Bedlam inmates free? What's up with them in my thread?
This is interesting stuff, yet I sense a lot of theorist approaches, which are fine, but of no practical benefit to end white supremacy right now. And that is what we should be doing, right now.
The pain is in the history of Europe, the situation of Blacks today is influenced by what happened between 1100-1848. We need to open the eyes of young Blacks who are dissatisfied in the west. They study hard, they work hard; still they are shut out. Show them the white and black portraits of the same persone: open their eyes. Schools take our children to museums: churches of revisionism. Prepare them, tell them they will see fake images. Let them ask the curator if these are overpaints. Beat them at their own game. My Surinam Blacks need not to be told they are Black, they came out hollering their blackness.
If you’re so race conscious why do your people continue to call their children Pickaninny? , i.e., Creole English of Surinam the word for a child is pikin ningre (li. "small negro").
.
Now I feel you are attacking me like some common house nigger trash. First you made this extremely ignorant remark that I hate Indians while i almost every week see a Indian movie, the sole Black in a hall full of Indians, have been ananlysing them right here. Then you seem to think you know more about Surinam, then me?
I will next post images of Black young men who are right now fighting against this racist initiation called Sinterklaas. This is the fight I'm refering to. Their little action, standing about with printed t-shirts has already resulted in canada banning Pieterbaas that the Dutch in Canada parade about on the 5th of December. And in my Surinam, Pieterbaas is banned from the central Independence square. These are serious breaches in the racist conspiracy, and will breed more opposition. It will set the people thinking, that this whole sinterklaas bullshit might not be so innocent als the racist Dutch pretend.
When I was complaining about the crazies in my thread, it was not about you, as I have included you already in my list of people who accept Black European Kings and Nobles, thus people who matter to me. But now that you are coming at me with these truly unfounded attacks I have serious doubts about you. People who promote Atlantis are nuts, anyway. Yet I have always promoted pan-africanism so I will not pursue some fued with you.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
This little action has been very beneficial in our struggle against white supremacy, and shows that protests can pay off. The struggle has to be brought to the Young Urban Blacks in the West, who are educated and street wise: who reject the constant stigmatising of Blacks as off-spring of slaves. I heard the young lady, this brave martyr on the radio disputing the reporting of the police they were chanting slogans. She just stood with the other protesters quietly talking and were so brutally manhandled. I am happy to inform you all that even now they are holding meetings for the protests in november and december. We can beat this thing.
posted
As a Surinamese I have to accept that my Hindustani countrymen often act with impatience when Blacks state their discontent. Because of rampant Dutch racism all etnic groups in the Netherlands are seperated from each other, Black Surinamese are pitted against Africans, against Muslims. Muslims are divided. So I often feel the Surinam Indians in Holland do not respond to me as fellow Surinames should, or vice versa. But when we have commenced our struggle, we cannot waste time with people who regard themselves, inspite of coal-black skin, as Caucasians. We need to respect this, and move on. I know there are Blacks who hate Indians, they will open up to me, and I will set them straight. The Indians have their own little odd customs, and purity laws, which Surinam Blacks may find insulting. But in the light of freeing Surinam from colonialism I want us not to focus on these little matters. Apparently the Indians did not feel our opposition against Pieterbaas as keenly as we the Blacks feel it. This we need to accept as a fact of live, and move on with our struggle against white supremacy.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
This is a true person, presented as Diana? goddes of the hunt, so a hunting scene. The hunt was a privilege of the nobility, jealously guarded. such a painting was to inform visitors of the high nobility of the persons they visited. It's almost erotic, so much movement and expression.
As pale as she might look on this painting, this lady is shouting her blackness at us. So many Moors! Naked breast! This too much.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: What is going on in the USA? Are they letting all the Bedlam inmates free? What's up with them in my thread?
This is interesting stuff, yet I sense a lot of theorist approaches, which are fine, but of no practical benefit to end white supremacy right now. And that is what we should be doing, right now.
The pain is in the history of Europe, the situation of Blacks today is influenced by what happened between 1100-1848. We need to open the eyes of young Blacks who are dissatisfied in the west. They study hard, they work hard; still they are shut out. Show them the white and black portraits of the same persone: open their eyes. Schools take our children to museums: churches of revisionism. Prepare them, tell them they will see fake images. Let them ask the curator if these are overpaints. Beat them at their own game. My Surinam Blacks need not to be told they are Black, they came out hollering their blackness.
If you’re so race conscious why do your people continue to call their children Pickaninny? , i.e., Creole English of Surinam the word for a child is pikin ningre (li. "small negro").
.
Now I feel you are attacking me like some common house nigger trash. First you made this extremely ignorant remark that I hate Indians while i almost every week see a Indian movie, the sole Black in a hall full of Indians, have been ananlysing them right here. Then you seem to think you know more about Surinam, then me?
I will next post images of Black young men who are right now fighting against this racist initiation called Sinterklaas. This is the fight I'm refering to. Their little action, standing about with printed t-shirts has already resulted in canada banning Pieterbaas that the Dutch in Canada parade about on the 5th of December. And in my Surinam, Pieterbaas is banned from the central Independence square. These are serious breaches in the racist conspiracy, and will breed more opposition. It will set the people thinking, that this whole sinterklaas bullshit might not be so innocent als the racist Dutch pretend.
When I was complaining about the crazies in my thread, it was not about you, as I have included you already in my list of people who accept Black European Kings and Nobles, thus people who matter to me. But now that you are coming at me with these truly unfounded attacks I have serious doubts about you. People who promote Atlantis are nuts, anyway. Yet I have always promoted pan-africanism so I will not pursue some fued with you.
I have serious doubts about you. You attack my work and ignore the fact that Dravidians in India accept their Blackness.
It is clear that you are an ignorant negro trying to make other people hate "all" Indians because of your experiences in Suriname.
Negro. I just questioned your contention that you're more "blacker than Afro-Americans, when in reality ,your people continue to call their children Pickaninny? , i.e., pikin ningre (li. "small negro").
It is fact you still refer to yourselves using derogatory names taught you by the European.This shows a lack of racial pride among you folk.
It is nice to know that some European royalty were Black. But these royals like most royals were not supportive of African people who were not part of their class and European.
You are ignorant and prejudice. On the one hand you say that when someone claims they are black in Europe--although they are reconized as white by other Europeans, they are Black. But when a Dravidian says his black , he is not black because Egmond defines who is or is not Black.
To me a Black is anyone who says they are Black or anthropologically classified as a black.
I now view you as a boot-licking, negro, kissing the behinds of dead black aristocrats, who just happen to be white. It is my opinion that you envy these powerful Blacks who enjoyed 'being' white because you really worship whites and view other Blacks as beneath you, like the black royals you admire.
Your hero David Hume was the first Euronut. Scottish philosopher David Hume said: "I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There scarcely ever was a civilised nation of that complexion, nor even any individual, eminent either in action or in speculation. No ingenious manufacture among them, no arts, no sciences."
It is people like Hume you want us to admire. People like our African forebears who sold us into slavery and the Negro elites: ‘Blue Bloods’ that supported our mistreatment.
Yes I am proud to be a street brotha. You ain't nothing but an uppity negro like Hume and the rest of your Black Blue Bloods.
It probably hurt you when you got to Europe and the whites you admire rejected your black ass, instead of embrassing you since you see yourself as that special Negro.
It is your hope they will learn their error once they learn about the blacks who ruled them.
Fool, they know Blacks ruled them that's why they will do everything in their power to keep your black ass down.
posted
"Apostles and Heresiarchs: Representations of Early Christianity in 16th - 17th Century India
25-26 April 2012
A major consequence of Vasco da Gama's expedition to India was the establishment of a new contact between the Roman Catholic Church and the Saint Thomas Christians in the Malabar region, an ancient and thriving community subject to the Eastern Syriac Patriarchate of the Church of the East, established in Mesopotamia. The arrival of the Portuguese meant also the beginning of Catholic missions in various regions of India. Our workshop aims to explore how the St Thomas Christians and the new Latin Christian communities of India were represented by European observers during the 16th and 17th century, by the means of analogies and evocations of the Christian origins. On the one hand it was widely believed that the conversion of Indian groups configured a new apostolic age; on the other hand, the early Christian heresy of Nestorianism was projected on the St Thomas Christians in order to establish a distance, impose otherness and enable reduction strategies. Both the apostles and the heresiarchs, the "heroes" and the "villains" of early Christianity, were active models in the European perception of early modern Indian Christianity. If early Christianity is an integral part of the classical tradition, then the history of its transmission to the modern world needs to include even India, as far and marginal it may appear to a Eurocentric perspective. "
posted
Clyde I think I get what both of you are saying. Though there are Indians that are black and live and identify as black in their countries they are not one of us. Indians are welcoming of white supremacy especially if they feel it does not affect them. A lot of people around the world are black but they are not one of us, and we Afro-descendants need to make that discernment if we Afro-descendants want to fight against white racism. Your cause shouldn't be about "freeing" all blacks around the world but focused only on your branch. Other blacks aren't worthy of our time or might. Even the black as coal Indians normally question why Africans and Afro-descendants aren't compliant with the white racist system. Yes, there are many black Indians but they are not one of us. Their history, culture, ideology, heritage, and traditions differ than that of Africans and Afro-descendants. Nothing set a people apart more than the way they think. Just because there are black Indians doesn't mean they're one of us or our friends, and we shouldn't be lenient with them.
Posts: 2088 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: Clyde I think I get what both of you are saying. Though there are Indians that are black and live and identify as black in their countries they are not one of us. Indians are welcoming of white supremacy especially if they feel it does not affect them. A lot of people around the world are black but they are not one of us, and we Afro-descendants need to make that discernment if we Afro-descendants want to fight against white racism. Your cause shouldn't be about "freeing" all blacks around the world but focused only on your branch. Other blacks aren't worthy of our time or might. Even the black as coal Indians normally question why Africans and Afro-descendants aren't compliant with the white racist system. Yes, there are many black Indians but they are not one of us. Their history, culture, ideology, heritage, and traditions differ than that of Africans and Afro-descendants. Nothing set a people apart more than the way they think. Just because there are black Indians doesn't mean they're one of us or our friends, and we shouldn't be lenient with them.
Well, we are getting somewhere, though I will never condone anyone speaking in hateful tones against my Surinam Indians. I'm every week in that goddam cinema, since my early youth watching how lovely Indian actresses jiggle their round tits to the leading man. I love it, and nobody in the world will tell me I can't.
I guess that when these Indian Indians came out with their research about Indians coming from Africa, someone ran quickly to Surinam to tell the Surinam Indians that they were in fact whites: Caucasians. They are pure of blood and thus have no connection with Blacks. We know that Indian migrant women who were single were given Black husbands on arrival in Suriname. So they are not pure, not when they arrived, and sure as hell not pure after they settled in Surinam.
My point again is that when the pink Dutch Caucasian pours his **** over both Black Surinamese and Indian Surinamese, The Black protests, the Indians not. That's sad. They eat into the lie that Hindu's are exemplary migrants. Like hell they are. I live in The Hague and I see and know it all. Even they that have been kicked to dead by some racist neighboour who is a pink Caucasian, nobody cares about their black Caucasian ass. They are treated like any nigger.
Yet again, pitch-black, way up their ass-crack; them is Caucasian. So let them. You cannot enlist them in the immediate fight to end white supremacy, just like some other Black house nigger trash, on the loose on this very forum who sticks it to me in the back.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: Clyde I think I get what both of you are saying. Though there are Indians that are black and live and identify as black in their countries they are not one of us. Indians are welcoming of white supremacy especially if they feel it does not affect them. A lot of people around the world are black but they are not one of us, and we Afro-descendants need to make that discernment if we Afro-descendants want to fight against white racism. Your cause shouldn't be about "freeing" all blacks around the world but focused only on your branch. Other blacks aren't worthy of our time or might. Even the black as coal Indians normally question why Africans and Afro-descendants aren't compliant with the white racist system. Yes, there are many black Indians but they are not one of us. Their history, culture, ideology, heritage, and traditions differ than that of Africans and Afro-descendants. Nothing set a people apart more than the way they think. Just because there are black Indians doesn't mean they're one of us or our friends, and we shouldn't be lenient with them.
Bettyboo your observations are welcome but they fail to reflect the divide in India between Dravidians and Indo-Aryan speaking Indians. These groups have different world views. The Dravidians love their Blackness. The indo-Aryans on the otherhand want to be caucasian and promote their heritage.
quote:Originally posted by Bettyboo: Clyde I think I get what both of you are saying. Though there are Indians that are black and live and identify as black in their countries they are not one of us. Indians are welcoming of white supremacy especially if they feel it does not affect them. A lot of people around the world are black but they are not one of us, and we Afro-descendants need to make that discernment if we Afro-descendants want to fight against white racism. Your cause shouldn't be about "freeing" all blacks around the world but focused only on your branch. Other blacks aren't worthy of our time or might. Even the black as coal Indians normally question why Africans and Afro-descendants aren't compliant with the white racist system. Yes, there are many black Indians but they are not one of us. Their history, culture, ideology, heritage, and traditions differ than that of Africans and Afro-descendants. Nothing set a people apart more than the way they think. Just because there are black Indians doesn't mean they're one of us or our friends, and we shouldn't be lenient with them.
A people can not be whole or complete if they do not know their history. Our complete story needs to be retold/rewritten based on well researched documentation. Only then will who we are as a people be fully understood. Africans ruled over India for a LONG time, and I believe Hinduism clearly shows strong africanisms. The cattle cult within it (which you see through out ancient African religions). The One supreme Deity whose emanations are studied in order to draw closer to Him (you see this in Yoruba, ancient Egypt and even Islam i.e. 99 names of Allah for example). The astrological bases behind much of the religion which you see in Kemet, among the Dogon and in many if not most of the secret societies in W. Africa, even in Islam, Christianity and Judaism you see astrological meanings which have been hidden. Once these things come to light, Africans can learn to appreciate themselves again, appreciate their heritage and will come to understand nothing we have done is backward, in fact it is the basis for civilization. So no, we shouldn't ignore Indians or any other society which we clearly had a hand in creating or which the diaspora is present.
Posts: 1296 | From: the planet | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic