I prefer to use Negro as a generic name for Black people when writing about historical and anthropological themes.I have always liked this term for these themes because growing up in Chicago the Natural History museum always put the African and Oceanic artifacts in the same proximity.
I try not to use negro in reference to race traitors. For race traitors I use Uncle tom and Coconut.
I refer to myself and other Black people native to America for the past 300 years, as Afro-American. I use this term because the Afro-American has a threefold heritage: African slaves, Black Native American and Black Europeans.
We can not use African American, because today thousands of Africans have migrated to the United States. As a result, I call the native born Black or Negro Americans: Afro-Americans. This term is based on the popular generic name for Blacks during the Harlem and Black Chicago Renaissance : Afraamerican.
As a result of the tripart ancestry of Afro-Americans they are not just the descendants of African slaves. As a result, the term African American is inappropriate in identifying my ancestry and heritage.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
I prefer to use Negro as a generic name for Black people when writing about historical and anthropological themes. I have always liked this term for these themes because growing up in Chicago the Natural History museum always put the African and Oceanic artifacts in the same proximity.
I try not to use negro in reference to race traitors. For race traitors I use Uncle tom and Coconut.
"Black people" is the generic name.
And it is the current accepted formal term.
"Negro" is obsolete and it is being used constantly in this forum as a term of condescension, not to describe black people in general but to describe ignorant ones. It's being used as an insult
Here are some of your article titles:
Blacks in Ancient America
The Ancient Chinese were Li Min: Black People
Blacks in China
Xia China's First Black Civilization
The Sumerians were Black _________________________________
Of course the forum is not going by your practice but I don't even see you writing articles with Negro in the title
I don't see you writing articles called The Sumerians were Negroes
________________
Clyde be reminded this is 2017 not 1963
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
I prefer to use Negro as a generic name for Black people when writing about historical and anthropological themes.I have always liked this term for these themes because growing up in Chicago the Natural History museum always put the African and Oceanic artifacts in the same proximity.
I try not to use negro in reference to race traitors. For race traitors I use Uncle tom and Coconut.
I refer to myself and other Black people native to America for the past 300 years, as Afro-American. I use this term because the Afro-American has a threefold heritage: African slaves, Black Native American and Black Europeans.
We can not use African American, because today thousands of Africans have migrated to the United States. As a result, I call the native born Black or Negro Americans: Afro-Americans. This term is based on the popular generic name for Blacks during the Harlem and Black Chicago Renaissance : Afraamerican.
As a result of the tripart ancestry of Afro-Americans they are not just the descendants of African slaves. As a result, the term African American is inappropriate in identifying my ancestry and heritage.
I agree we need to create a brand new language of our own design. If Negro is retained, then it shouldn't be defined by those pseudoscience practices that originally created them. IMHO, all of those OCA dominant terms created for blacks (Negro, colored, African American, etc) should all be reevaluated and fine tuned or completely dropped, if only as an exercise for blacks to agree on what we call ourselves, with majority acceptance.
Racial terms are so steeped in OCA dominant fear and pseudoscience, they are not only scientifically inaccurate, but disgraceful that blacks have not only accepted them "as is", but all the other pseudoscience derived racial terms as well. I.E., White, Caucasian, Eurasian, mongrel, etc.
As long as we continue to use and accept those meaningless European created terms, then people such as Lionese will always be in the position to control when, why, and how they are used.
-------------------- Selenium gives real life and true reality Posts: 4693 | From: Saturn | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged |
I prefer to use Negro as a generic name for Black people when writing about historical and anthropological themes. I have always liked this term for these themes because growing up in Chicago the Natural History museum always put the African and Oceanic artifacts in the same proximity.
I try not to use negro in reference to race traitors. For race traitors I use Uncle tom and Coconut.
"Black people" is the generic name.
And it is the current accepted formal term.
"Negro" is obsolete and it is being used constantly in this forum as a term of condescension, not to describe black people in general but to describe ignorant ones. It's being used as an insult
Here are some of your article titles:
Blacks in Ancient America
The Ancient Chinese were Li Min: Black People
Blacks in China
Xia China's First Black Civilization
The Sumerians were Black _________________________________
Of course the forum is not going by your practice but I don't even see you writing articles with Negro in the title
I don't see you writing articles called The Sumerians were Negroes
________________
Clyde be reminded this is 2017 not 1963
I have not written much on the anthropology of Sumerians, my main interest over the years has been linguistics.
It may be 2017, but I do use the word Negro and Negroid in my anthropological and scientific articles. Here are a few examples below:
posted
The use of the word "Negroid" is permissible in some scientific contexts
However in such a context it is not synonymous with "an ignorant black person" it is referring to a phenotype in context of a discussion of phenotypes.
However the alternate meaning "an ignorant black person" as opposed to a non-ignorant black person is in inappropriate usage.
-and such usage describing character does not coincide with a physical description that might be used in anthropology.
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
I prefer to use Negro as a generic name for Black people when writing about historical and anthropological themes.I have always liked this term for these themes because growing up in Chicago the Natural History museum always put the African and Oceanic artifacts in the same proximity.
I try not to use negro in reference to race traitors. For race traitors I use Uncle tom and Coconut.
I refer to myself and other Black people native to America for the past 300 years, as Afro-American. I use this term because the Afro-American has a threefold heritage: African slaves, Black Native American and Black Europeans.
We can not use African American, because today thousands of Africans have migrated to the United States. As a result, I call the native born Black or Negro Americans: Afro-Americans. This term is based on the popular generic name for Blacks during the Harlem and Black Chicago Renaissance : Afraamerican.
As a result of the tripart ancestry of Afro-Americans they are not just the descendants of African slaves. As a result, the term African American is inappropriate in identifying my ancestry and heritage.
I agree we need to create a brand new language of our own design. If Negro is retained, then it shouldn't be defined by those pseudoscience practices that originally created them. IMHO, all of those OCA dominant terms created for blacks (Negro, colored, African American, etc) should all be reevaluated and fine tuned or completely dropped, if only as an exercise for blacks to agree on what we call ourselves, with majority acceptance.
Racial terms are so steeped in OCA dominant fear and pseudoscience, they are not only scientifically inaccurate, but disgraceful that blacks have not only accepted them "as is", but all the other pseudoscience derived racial terms as well. I.E., White, Caucasian, Eurasian, mongrel, etc.
As long as we continue to use and accept those meaningless European created terms, then people such as Lionese will always be in the position to control when, why, and how they are used.
I agree with what you wrote. I only returned to using the generic term Negro, after I began to read population genetics articles on the Australians and Oceanians , in which it was claimed that these populations were no longer related to Blacks in Africa.
Eurocentrics did this because of the fact the East Asians: Mongoloid people carry Melanesian haplogroups. It was recognized that if the Mongoloid people were carrying "Negro genes", they had to be "Negroes" too.This was a new phenomena. So they began to claim Sub-Saharan Africans and Melanesians belonged to separate populations.
Prior to this there were Negroes in Guinea, (Africa) and New Guinea (now Papua New Guinea, in the Pacific Region). Instead of using the generic term Negro for these populations as they did in the past, Eurocentrics now claim there are Sub-Saharan Africans (the new/old Negroes) and Blacks in Asia are named after the Islands they are found on.
This is unacceptable to me. The separation of Blacks in Africa and Melanesia, and the rise, and return of the Geno-Hamitic Theory (i.e., the so called Afro-Asiatic speakers are a unique African population) has successfully separated Black people into three different populations. using the term Negro returns these separate populations into one monolithic group:Negroes.
I used Afro-American because it was began by Black intellectuals. Jesse Jackson probably created the term African-American due to the influence of the foriegn Relations group in New York.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The use of the word "Negroid" is permissible in some scientific contexts
However in such a context it is not synonymous with "an ignorant black person" it is referring to a phenotype in context of a discussion of phenotypes.
However the alternate meaning "an ignorant black person" as opposed to a non-ignorant black person is in inappropriate usage.
-and such usage describing character does not coincide with a physical description that might be used in anthropology.
My use is clearly anthropological. I now use coconut to denote an ingnorant Black person.
Traditionally Black intellectuals referred to themselves as Colored or Afraa(Afro)-Americans up until Jesse Jackson (probably under the direction of the Foriegn Relations group in New York) began to call us African Americans.
Traditionally, Black intellectuals when writing historical and Anthropological text referred to Blacks as Negroes, be cause this is the term you can use in any research institution to research the history of Black people.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
I prefer to use Negro as a generic name for Black people when writing about historical and anthropological themes.I have always liked this term for these themes because growing up in Chicago the Natural History museum always put the African and Oceanic artifacts in the same proximity.
I try not to use negro in reference to race traitors. For race traitors I use Uncle tom and Coconut.
I refer to myself and other Black people native to America for the past 300 years, as Afro-American. I use this term because the Afro-American has a threefold heritage: African slaves, Black Native American and Black Europeans.
We can not use African American, because today thousands of Africans have migrated to the United States. As a result, I call the native born Black or Negro Americans: Afro-Americans. This term is based on the popular generic name for Blacks during the Harlem and Black Chicago Renaissance : Afraamerican.
As a result of the tripart ancestry of Afro-Americans they are not just the descendants of African slaves. As a result, the term African American is inappropriate in identifying my ancestry and heritage.
I agree we need to create a brand new language of our own design. If Negro is retained, then it shouldn't be defined by those pseudoscience practices that originally created them. IMHO, all of those OCA dominant terms created for blacks (Negro, colored, African American, etc) should all be reevaluated and fine tuned or completely dropped, if only as an exercise for blacks to agree on what we call ourselves, with majority acceptance.
Racial terms are so steeped in OCA dominant fear and pseudoscience, they are not only scientifically inaccurate, but disgraceful that blacks have not only accepted them "as is", but all the other pseudoscience derived racial terms as well. I.E., White, Caucasian, Eurasian, mongrel, etc.
As long as we continue to use and accept those meaningless European created terms, then people such as Lionese will always be in the position to control when, why, and how they are used.
I agree with what you wrote. I only returned to using the generic term Negro, after I began to read population genetics articles on the Australians and Oceanians , in which it was claimed that these populations were no longer related to Blacks in Africa.
Eurocentrics did this because of the fact the East Asians: Mongoloid people carry Melanesian haplogroups. It was recognized that if the Mongoloid people were carrying "Negro genes", they had to be "Negroes" too.This was a new phenomena. So they began to claim Sub-Saharan Africans and Melanesians belonged to separate populations.
Prior to this there were Negroes in Guinea, (Africa) and New Guinea (now Papua New Guinea, in the Pacific Region). Instead of using the generic term Negro for these populations as they did in the past, Eurocentrics now claim there are Sub-Saharan Africans (the new/old Negroes) and Blacks in Asia are named after the Islands they are found on.
This is unacceptable to me. The separation of Blacks in Africa and Melanesia, and the rise, and return of the Geno-Hamitic Theory (i.e., the so called Afro-Asiatic speakers are a unique African population) has successfully separated Black people into three different populations. using the term Negro returns these separate populations into one monolithic group:Negroes.
I used Afro-American because it was began by Black intellectuals. Jesse Jackson probably created the term African-American due to the influence of the foriegn Relations group in New York.
True, everyone here is fully aware of the tricks and lies they use to obscure truth, but the main point is, for them to succeed depends entirely on acceptance and propagation by the so-called, black intellectual. I'm not hung up on the usage of Negro because of it's long history. It can and should still be used, but not in the broad sense that European pseudoscience has defined it. Especially by black scholars who by now should have the capacity to create unique definitions based on modern scientific knowledge. To observe black scholars just accept and regurgitate whatever terminology they propose I find very sad, and uncovers a severe weakness and perhaps detrimental compromise in black scholarship. As I stated, DuBois, Rogers and other past black historians had little choice but to accept what they proposed, but they accepted it at the threat of their very lives, but today is not yesterday, so blind acceptance at the threat of immediate death or prosecution is no longer relevant. From a psychological standpoint, this is no different from transforming Kunta Kente into an accepting European defined caricature.
To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill. 4· Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy;
there are four circumstances in which victory may be predicted:
- He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious.
- He who understands how to use both large and small forces will be victorious.
- He whose ranks are united in purpose will be victorious
- He who is prudent and lies in wait for an enemy who is not will be victorious. __________________________________________________
Therefore I say: ' Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril.
When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal.
If ignorant both of your enemy and of yourself, you are certain in every battle to be in peril.
Sun Tzu was a black man.
-------------------- Selenium gives real life and true reality Posts: 4693 | From: Saturn | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged |
True, everyone here is fully aware of the tricks and lies they use to obscure truth, but the main point is, for them to succeed depends entirely on acceptance and propagation by the so-called, black intellectual. I'm not hung up on the usage of Negro because of it's long history. It can and should still be used, but not in the broad sense that European pseudoscience has defined it. Especially by black scholars who by now should have the capacity to create unique definitions based on modern scientific knowledge. To observe black scholars just accept and regurgitate whatever terminology they propose I find very sad, and uncovers a severe weakness and perhaps detrimental compromise in black scholarship. As I stated, DuBois, Rogers and other past black historians had little choice but to accept what they proposed, but they accepted it at the threat of their very lives, but today is not yesterday, so blind acceptance at the threat of immediate death or prosecution is no longer relevant. From a psychological standpoint, this is no different from transforming Kunta Kente into an accepting European defined caricature.
To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill. 4· Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy;
there are four circumstances in which victory may be predicted:
- He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious.
- He who understands how to use both large and small forces will be victorious.
- He whose ranks are united in purpose will be victorious
- He who is prudent and lies in wait for an enemy who is not will be victorious. __________________________________________________
Therefore I say: ' Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril.
When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal.
If ignorant both of your enemy and of yourself, you are certain in every battle to be in peril.
Sun Tzu was a black man. [/qb]
Narmerthoth you have brought up some important points: 1) the need for a language of our own to illuminate our history and 2) a dependence on Europeans to define us, and our history. I discussed the language issue in my Essay on the "The Structure of the Africalogical Social Sciences ", @ http://olmec98.net/Structure.htm
My wife has scolded me because she says I could have made tons of money writing Japanese and Chinese history, because they love their history and themselves. But. I have always loved the history of Black and African people.
Sadly, I had numerous Afro-American professors in Undergraduate school but, they failed to teach me how to write history. I had to learn how to write history by reading the texts of the Heroes of Afrocentric studies to see how they practiced their craft.
The major problem in the study of Black history is that African people did not write history. African people wrote annals i.e., historical records; but we did not write history which is the study of historical records to provide a narrative about an historical event or series of events. This has meant that we have to read the annals left by Black and African people either written in their own languages (Ajami Arabic, Egyptian, Geez, Sumerian and etc.), or annals translated into European and Asian languages (Chinese, Arabic and etc).
As a result, to study ancient Afrocentric studies the africalogical researcher has had to become skilled in understanding and reading non-English languages. DuBois (1970) noted that: "The time has not yet come for a complete history of the Negro peoples. Archaeological research in Africa has just begun, and many sources of information in Arabian,Portuguese, and other tongues are not fully at our command....(p.3).
This taught me that I had to learn numerous foreign languages if I wanted to KNOW the history of African people. Today, Asar and myself are the only AAs writing Afrocentric history and anthropology because nobody wants to take the time to study a foreign languages. We have many Street Corner historians talking about the history of Black and African people but they depend on studies done by the Heroes of Afrocentric studies. As a result, they have contributed nothing new to Africological studies.
For the heroes of africalogical research such as Delany, Blyden, DuBois, Parker, Perry and Williams, a knowledge of Latin and \or Greek were a requirement for normal scientific study of the classical and Old Testament literature which served as the basis for the creation of the theoretical paradigms associated withthe Afrocentric study of ancient history (ASAH).
In addition to possessing a reading knowledge of these Eurocentric classical languages for Western thought, africalogical researchers have also had to have a knowledge of modern European languages. This has been necessary because of the fact that much of the research supporting the ASAH paradigms has usually been published in French and German.
The is the main reason many of the contemporary africalogical researchers and Street Corner historians interested in early history use outdated references in their work, they do this because of their ignorance of French and German. The inability to read these languages separate them from the primary sources they need to write history.
Proficiency in a language other than English, helped africalogical researchers conduct the normal africalogical social science. It was DuBois' (1965, 1970) and Hansberry's knowledge of German that allowed these Afrocentrists to conduct research into the role of Blacks in Egypt and Ethiopia. J.A. Rogers mastered many languages including French and German to prove that Blacks inhabited almost every continent on the globe.
I have been able to write Afrocentric history, linguistic and anthropology because I learned Arabic, Chinese, Malinke, Portuguese, Otomi, Mayan, Sumaerian, Swahili, Tamil and Tokharian (Kushana) to conduct my africalogical studies of Blacks in Asia and the Americas.
In the 1960's due to the rise of independence in the east African country of Tanzania, Swahili became a language used by africalogical scientists. Swahili terms were used to explain and define the phenomena associated with africalogy. This is one of the reasons that the terms used in the Kwanza ceremonies practiced by blacks are Swahili lexical items .
In the 1970s-1980s Swahili was used by africalogical researchers to define our research but beginning in the mid-1980's Egyptian was recognized as the classical language for africalogical research. Wimby who studied Egyptian at the University of Chicago,Carruthers who learned Egyptian from Wimby, and Diop popularized the idea that Egyptian should be used as the classical language for the study of ancient africalogical language and historical studies.
Wimby, goes under the name of Rkhty Amen. She has taught many AAs Egyptian.
Today, some people pay lip service to knowing Egyptian and that they were students of Dr. Ben, but only Asar is using his knowledge of the Bantu languages to expand our knowledge of the Egyptian language from an Africalogical perspective.
I personally believe that the most important AA researcher into the Egyptian language was a former poster here called Wally. Wally not only was the first AA scholar to illustrate the connections between Egyptian and the major Niger-Congo languages he also proved that Egyptian was a Pan-African Society and that Egyptian was a lingua franca.
Wally's illustration that Egyptian was a lingua franca explained why it was related to so many West African languages . Due to his research we learned that each Egyptian nome not only had its own gods, the people in each nome probably spoke their own native language(s). This made the ancient Egyptian language a major tool in unifying the diverse Egyptian peoples into a united Nation. Wally's research is the perfect example of what you demand AA scholars to do to enhance our understanding of African phenomena.
Outside of Wally and Asar, I think I am the only Afrocentric researcher today doing original research. This is due to the fact that I accept the saying: ' Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril" as truth. I obtain knowledge of this truth because I had confidence in myself and the ability to write history. This is due to my knowledge of foreign languages and ability to look at a piece of research literature, interpret the text and use this knowledge to write research articles in the jargon associated with the journal. As a result, although I only had a Master's degree, and in my 20's and 30's I was publishing articles in peer reviewed journals.
The lack of confidence hinders AAs from writing history. This is obvious because they depend on Europeans to set the agenda what they will write and research. This is obvious here, because except for Ish, among the young writers herein, the rest can not think for themselves. Since they don't know themselves, they lack confidence and only write what they feel Europeans would feel comfortable with.
Finally, I agree that we need to make our own paradigms and reinterpret phenomena from an Afrocentric perspective. But this can only become evident when you know your field and can read the material the information it is written in. Blindly following others will never get us anywhere.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jewish American, American Jew, Arab American, Arab World, Asian American, Chinese American, American Chinese, Japanese American, etc.
Hypothetical: Amy Chen was was born in New York and describes herself generically as "Asian America" yet her ancestors first came to America in the 1860s to build the railways. She is excited about going to Chicago to join an "Asian American Society" which includes persons of East Asian ancestry.
Jews in America have similar organizations comprised of Jews of any persuasion.
Are such organizations problematic ? If not, what is it that prevents persons of African origin from doing the same? Or so-called Native Americans?
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In a vacuum nothing but organization started by blacks were infiltrated or are something like the NAACP,the issue is not one of creation but of black folk knowing are true condition and organizing appropriately.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic