posted
Nationalism is merely tribalism on a large scale. It doesn't have to be skin color based Therefore multiculturalism is not it's opposite.
Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nationalism is the control of institutions, means of production, land and resources within the boundaries of a NATION by the population of said nation. White nationalism is the control of institutions, means of production, land and resources within the boundaries of a nation built on other peoples land, labor and resources... AKA Colonies. Europeans over the last 500 years have warped the concept of nationalism into something totally different from the original meaning. All ancient civilizations and empires were by definition nationalistic in that the basis of civilization is the development of the Nation State. Black people as a group have NEVER gone anywhere to create nations based on the subjugation and oppression of non black people. So what Europeans mean by nationalism or civilization is totally different from what black people mean by nationalism or civilization. And as a result of European conquest what black people generally mean by nationalism is the natural state of black people having and controlling their own lives and well being on some level from community, to town to region to nation.
And no it isn't "tribal" because nations imply multiple "tribes" living together for the common good of the nation state.
In fact this is why 'globalization' is a byproduct of European colonization and conquest because it implies a world where all land labor and resources is somehow under the control of Europeans or European led institutions.
Posts: 8901 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Nationalism is merely tribalism on a large scale. It doesn't have to be skin color based Therefore multiculturalism is not it's opposite.
I have to agree with lioness that European Nationalism is basically tribalism. That's why we have seen wars between nations in Europe because of their national origin, e.g. France against Germany.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: White nationalism is the control of institutions, means of production, land and resources within the boundaries of a nation built on other peoples land, labor and resources... AKA Colonies.
That is not the correct definition of white nationalism or nationalism specifically. That is more a definition of imperialism. Nationalism is internal pride for a country's government backed by organized force. Imperialism is when a country extends itself to dominate other countries. Ancient Egypt was one example:
It is clear that the Egyptians considered themselves superior to non-Egyptians. For example, many inscriptions refer to Nubia as ‘the vile Kush’ or ‘the wretched Kush’. The Nubians are also sometimes called ‘troglodytes’ (primitive, barbaric cave dwellers). The following excerpt from the Tombos Stela of Thutmose I is a good example of such language:
The Nubian Troglodytes fall by the sword, and are thrust aside in their lands; their foulness, it floods their valleys; the [—] of their mouths is like a violent flood .
The same kind of language was used to describe the peoples of Syria–Palestine who were frequently referred to as ‘miserable Asiatics’.
The British and Spanish empires are other examples
Black or White Nationalism are specific types of nationalism. It's simple. These would be nations where only black or only white people would be allowed to live, if not only as slaves or servants with no right to own land. America was formerly a white nationalist state
Posts: 43012 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Nationalism is merely tribalism on a large scale. It doesn't have to be skin color based
LOL I know you will insist on it. But there is no black nationalism. You cannot even give examples of this so called "black nationalism" you insist on that souled exists.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Therefore multiculturalism is not it's opposite.
You yourself proposed these two as opposites. You can't find it, so now you dismiss it.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: These would be nations where only black
Therefore there are no black nationalist states.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: America was formerly a white nationalist state
Make America "great again", right?
Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Nationalism is merely tribalism on a large scale. It doesn't have to be skin color based Therefore multiculturalism is not it's opposite.
I have to agree with lioness that European Nationalism is basically tribalism. That's why we have seen wars between nations in Europe because of their national origin, e.g. France against Germany.
Summary of the Argument of The Invention of the White Race
31. The essential elements that gave to Protestant Ascendancy after 1689 in Ireland and white supremacy in continental Anglo-America the character of racial oppression were those that first destroyed the original forms of social identity among the subject population, and then excluded the members of that population from admittance into the forms of social identity normal to the colonizing power. The codifications of this basic organizing principle in the Penal Laws of the Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland and the slave codes of white supremacy in continental Anglo-America present four common defining characteristics of those two regimes: 1) declassing legislation, directed at property-holding members of the oppressed group; 2) the deprivation of civil rights; 3) the illegalization of literacy; and 4) displacement of family rights and authorities.46
John H. Van Evrie, 1868 edition of White Supremacy and Negro Subordination.
posted
White nationalism is imperialism. That is the point.
Nationalism itself isn't bad, because all nations have the right to sovereign control within their own territory. Europeans however believe they have the right to control everything in OTHER peoples territory. That is the religion of white supremacy. White nationalism simply tries to legitimize the imperial agenda by claiming white folks as 'equal' victims of oppression and 'righteous' and 'just' regardless of the carnage and destruction done in their name.
And most of this religious zeal for world conquest came as a result of the Islamic invasions and conquests in Europe during the Medieval era. The Muslims were symbolically looking to establish a lush 'paradise' of Islam outside of the deserts of Arabia and North Africa which led to Islamic Spain becoming the epitome of such a paradise. The concept of Islamic law being the "word of God" in all affairs overseen by the King (Caliph) and the Islamic Scholars became the basis of the Church and its use of the same to regulate Christian kingdoms. Culminating ultimately in the rise of the Italian city state/mafia corporate bankers and traders the Venetians who formed the foundation of the philosophy underpinning the later corporate slave European colonial network.
By definition global European imperialism is "multicultural" as it encompasses a large number of oppressed and subject non European populations. That is actually the goal of global European domination, to create a hierarchy or "caste system" of various populations around the world under the domination of European oligarchs at the very top.
However, between the various countries that had colonies around the world, the English were the most genocidal toward the natives. Whereas the Spanish and Portuguese were a lot more multicultural with the "casta" (caste) system regulating the affairs of different populations. That is changing now with all the global migration taking place, which basically is to reinforce the ideal of the 'multicultural' caste system in the colonies built on genocide in order to provide some sort of 'fake front' of "integration" and "liberalism" for the European imperial enterprise. And of course within this global caste system, black people are the most oppressed and subjugated populations and kept at the bottom of said caste system.
Posts: 8901 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: White nationalism is imperialism. That is the point.
[…]
True, and the final indent here is to find ways to justify this position. This is why we hear Michele Bachmann et al. ranting white nationalism and making weird claims on "western civilization". This is why the minion's argument made no sense in the first place.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The nature of Egyptian imperialism
It is clear that the Egyptians considered themselves superior to non-Egyptians. For example, many inscriptions refer to Nubia as ‘the vile Kush’ or ‘the wretched Kush’. The Nubians are also sometimes called ‘troglodytes’ (primitive, barbaric cave dwellers). The following excerpt from the Tombos Stela of Thutmose I is a good example of such language:
The Nubian Troglodytes fall by the sword, and are thrust aside in their lands; their foulness, it floods their valleys; the [—] of their mouths is like a violent flood .
The same kind of language was used to describe the peoples of Syria–Palestine who were frequently referred to as ‘miserable Asiatics’.
This one was funny, considering that Egypt arose out of Kush. Like America arose out of England.
The question thus becomes who where the nationalities in both instances.
Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Nationalism is merely tribalism on a large scale. It doesn't have to be skin color based Therefore multiculturalism is not it's opposite.
This is precisely why definitions are tremendously important in that they provide context and determine how we asses things. A tribe is a Nation. While homogenous Japan is a Nation, Sudan is clearly not; it is a combination of dozens of different Nationalities. Sudan (like most in Africa) is just a country.
People of the same Nation must largely be virtually genetically, phenotypically and culturally indistiguishable. The idea of a 'black' Nation in Africa is actually a nonsensical non-starter but I make use of it because it's clear what people mean by it.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Nationalism is merely tribalism on a large scale. It doesn't have to be skin color based Therefore multiculturalism is not it's opposite.
This is precisely why definitions are tremendously important in that they provide context and determine how we asses things. A tribe is a Nation. While homogenous Japan is a Nation, Sudan is clearly not; it is a combination of dozens of different Nationalities. Sudan (like most in Africa) is just a country.
People of the same Nation must largely be virtually genetically, phenotypically and culturally indistiguishable. The idea of a 'black' Nation in Africa is actually a nonsensical non-starter but I make use of it because it's clear what people mean by it.
Nice example on Sudan. This is so especially in historical context.
Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [The nature of Egyptian imperialism
It is clear that the Egyptians considered themselves superior to non-Egyptians. For example, many inscriptions refer to Nubia as ‘the vile Kush’ or ‘the wretched Kush’. The Nubians are also sometimes called ‘troglodytes’ (primitive, barbaric cave dwellers). The following excerpt from the Tombos Stela of Thutmose I is a good example of such language:
The Nubian Troglodytes fall by the sword, and are thrust aside in their lands; their foulness, it floods their valleys; the [—] of their mouths is like a violent flood .
The same kind of language was used to describe the peoples of Syria–Palestine who were frequently referred to as ‘miserable Asiatics’.
This one was funny, considering that Egypt arose out of Kush. Like America arose out of England.
That is actually incorrect. Kush does not precede Egypt. It's the other way round; Kush was established (as an Egyptian colony) thousands of years after Narmer united the two lands. You could make the case that predynastic cultures in Sudan and Lower 'Nubia' are antecedents to Pharaonic Egypt.
The ancient Egyptians regarded all their neighbours as wretched, treacherous, wicked and existential threats to their ordered world; they also called Asiatics troglodytyes and regarded them to be treacherous.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [The nature of Egyptian imperialism
It is clear that the Egyptians considered themselves superior to non-Egyptians. For example, many inscriptions refer to Nubia as ‘the vile Kush’ or ‘the wretched Kush’. The Nubians are also sometimes called ‘troglodytes’ (primitive, barbaric cave dwellers). The following excerpt from the Tombos Stela of Thutmose I is a good example of such language:
The Nubian Troglodytes fall by the sword, and are thrust aside in their lands; their foulness, it floods their valleys; the [—] of their mouths is like a violent flood .
The same kind of language was used to describe the peoples of Syria–Palestine who were frequently referred to as ‘miserable Asiatics’.
This one was funny, considering that Egypt arose out of Kush. Like America arose out of England.
That is actually incorrect. Kush does not precede Egypt. It's the other way round; Kush was established (as an Egyptian colony) thousands of years after Narmer united the two lands. You could make the case that predynastic cultures in Sudan and Lower 'Nubia' are antecedents to Pharaonic Egypt.
The ancient Egyptians regarded all their neighbours as wretched, treacherous, wicked and existential threats to their ordered world; they also called Asiatics troglodytyes and regarded them to be treacherous.
I refer to Kush as the South, not by modern interpretation or a colony, I could have just the word Nub etc. But if you truly want to believe that "Egypt" arose before the South, so be it. Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [The nature of Egyptian imperialism
It is clear that the Egyptians considered themselves superior to non-Egyptians. For example, many inscriptions refer to Nubia as ‘the vile Kush’ or ‘the wretched Kush’. The Nubians are also sometimes called ‘troglodytes’ (primitive, barbaric cave dwellers). The following excerpt from the Tombos Stela of Thutmose I is a good example of such language:
The Nubian Troglodytes fall by the sword, and are thrust aside in their lands; their foulness, it floods their valleys; the [—] of their mouths is like a violent flood .
The same kind of language was used to describe the peoples of Syria–Palestine who were frequently referred to as ‘miserable Asiatics’.
This one was funny, considering that Egypt arose out of Kush. Like America arose out of England.
That is actually incorrect. Kush does not precede Egypt. It's the other way round; Kush was established (as an Egyptian colony) thousands of years after Narmer united the two lands. You could make the case that predynastic cultures in Sudan and Lower 'Nubia' are antecedents to Pharaonic Egypt.
The ancient Egyptians regarded all their neighbours as wretched, treacherous, wicked and existential threats to their ordered world; they also called Asiatics troglodytyes and regarded them to be treacherous.
I refer to Kush as the South, not by modern interpretation, I could have just the word Nub. But if you truly want to believe that "Egypt" arose before the South, so be it.
I think we have a small, perfectly solvable mis-understanding; you specifically mentioned Kush, and so I thought you were referring to that particular State. You and I are in agreement that the South birthed the ancient Egyptian civilization.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: I think we have a small, perfectly solvable mis-understanding; you specifically mentioned Kush, and so I thought you were referring to that particular State.
The name "Nubia" also came into use in the Roman period. So it is all semantics at the end of the day. The question is, what was the Southern region called before this time?
The problem here is that all this was and is based on western interpretation. They have written history for the past 400 years or so and everybody follows this doctrine, including African people.
posted
Tribe does not equate to nation. KMT arose from the unification of various clans into a single political entity. China was and is a conglomerate of various ethnic groups. While ethnicity can play a role in nationality, nationalism by definition is the creation of a national construct as the highest definition of identity and purpose for a population. Nationhood is an evolution of social organization by which multiple ethnic populations can unify under a common cause and banner for a larger purpose. Greece was similarly a multi-ethnic population. So was Rome. That myth of 'racial purity' being the basis of the rise of nation states is European garbage that they promote to support their imperial globalist agenda. It has no basis in reality. Look at all the images of various other "nations" as depicted in Ancient Egyptian art. They were all multi-ethnic.
Posts: 8901 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Tribe does not equate to nation. KMT arose from the unification of various clans into a single political entity. China was and is a conglomerate of various ethnic groups. While ethnicity can play a role in nationality, nationalism by definition is the creation of a national construct as the highest definition of identity and purpose for a population. Nationhood is an evolution of social organization by which multiple ethnic populations can unify under a common cause and banner for a larger purpose. Greece was similarly a multi-ethnic population. So was Rome. That myth of 'racial purity' being the basis of the rise of nation states is European garbage that they promote to support their imperial globalist agenda. It has no basis in reality. Look at all the images of various other "nations" as depicted in Ancient Egyptian art. They were all multi-ethnic.
The Lioness used the tribal argument as a straw-man argument.
Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Tribe does not equate to nation. KMT arose from the unification of various clans into a single political entity. China was and is a conglomerate of various ethnic groups. While ethnicity can play a role in nationality, nationalism by definition is the creation of a national construct as the highest definition of identity and purpose for a population. Nationhood is an evolution of social organization by which multiple ethnic populations can unify under a common cause and banner for a larger purpose. Greece was similarly a multi-ethnic population. So was Rome. That myth of 'racial purity' being the basis of the rise of nation states is European garbage that they promote to support their imperial globalist agenda. It has no basis in reality. Look at all the images of various other "nations" as depicted in Ancient Egyptian art. They were all multi-ethnic.
A State and a Nation are not the same thing. A country can be comprised of dozens of different Nationalities, and when they construct an all inclusive identity and define and protect their collective interests... that's patriotism.
The Nuer call themselves a Nation and judge their sons and daughters according to their commitment to the Nuer Nation -- not to the country that is South Sudan. That's Nationalism.
With the exception of the Minoans, the Greeks all maintained that they were all descendants of Helen; they spoke dialects of the same language, worshipped the same gods and were culturally very similar. They were a Nation - just not a State.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Look at all the images of various other "nations" as depicted in Ancient Egyptian art. They were all multi-ethnic.
The Egyptians were imperialists. They liked to make pictures depicting their enemies with their arms bound behind their backs, trampled by chariots and body parts chopped off and pictures of processions of conquered groups paying them tributes.
Here's Narmer ready to club some other ethnic group to death. On the obverse side, upper right, people with their heads chopped off
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Look at all the images of various other "nations" as depicted in Ancient Egyptian art. They were all multi-ethnic.
The Egyptians were imperialists. They liked to make pictures depicting their enemies with their arms bound behind their backs, trampled by chariots and body parts chopped off and pictures of processions of conquered groups paying them tributes.
Here's Narmer ready to club some other ethnic group to death. On the obverse side, upper right, people with their heads chopped off
Or Rameses depicted as bigger than other groups and ready to club them in the head
What specific evidence do you have that Narmer was smiting foreigners? They could just be Egyptians opposed to his ascendance and rule.
The ancient Egyptians seemed to have always been facing threats from Asiatics, and so I think they created military outposts in the Levant to better secure their Nation in response to these dangers.
Kush was the only threat from the South, and they almost wiped out Egypt at one point, so Egypt's response to Kush was understandable.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: I think we have a small, perfectly solvable mis-understanding; you specifically mentioned Kush, and so I thought you were referring to that particular State.
The name "Nubia" also came into use in the Roman period. So it is all semantics at the end of the day. The question is, what was the Southern region called before this time?
The problem here is that all this was and is based on western interpretation. They have written history for the past 400 years or so and everybody follows this doctrine, including African people.
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: You and I are in agreement that the South birthed the ancient Egyptian civilization.
I know, I said it to annoy you.
That's a good point. We all have to free our minds from their myth-making and self-serving propaganda.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
The ancient Egyptians seemed to have always been facing threats from Asiatics, and so I think they created military outposts in the Levant to better secure their Nation in response to these dangers.
Kush was the only threat from the South, and they almost wiped out Egypt at one point, so Egypt's response to Kush was understandable.
The back history is much earlier than that
Sneferu
Sneferu was the founding king of the 4th dynasty during the Old Kingdom. Estimates of his reign vary between 2613 BC to 2589 BC a reign of 24 -30 year. He built at least three pyramids
To enable Sneferu to undertake massive building projects, he would have had to secure an extensive store of labour and materials. Sneferu’s conquests into Libya and Nubia served two purposes: the first goal was to establish an extensive labour force, and the second goal was to gain access to the raw materials and special products that were available in these countries. This is alluded to in the Palermo stone:
quote:
"[Reign of] Sneferu. Year ... The building of Tuataua ships of meru wood "adoring the two lands" of one hundred cubits, and 60 royal boats of sixteen capacity. Hacking up the Nubians, and the bringing back 7,000 captives, men and women, and 20,000 cattle, sheep, and goats... Construction of the "mansions of Sneferu in Upper and Lower Egypt bringing of forty ships of cedar wood (or perhaps "laden with cedar wood").
Sneferu was able to capture large numbers of people from other nations, make them his prisoners and then add them into his labour force. During his raids into Nubia and Libya, he also captured cattle for the sustenance of his massive labour force. Such incursions must have been incredibly devastating to the populations of the raided countries, and it is suggested that the campaigns into Nubia may have contributed to the dissemination of the Nubian A-Group culture of that region. Sneferu's military efforts in Libya led to the capture of 11,000 prisoners and 13,100 head of cattle.Aside from the extensive import of cedar (most likely from Lebanon) described above, there is evidence of activity in the turquoise mines on the Sinai Peninsula.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: Tribe does not equate to nation. KMT arose from the unification of various clans into a single political entity. China was and is a conglomerate of various ethnic groups. While ethnicity can play a role in nationality, nationalism by definition is the creation of a national construct as the highest definition of identity and purpose for a population. Nationhood is an evolution of social organization by which multiple ethnic populations can unify under a common cause and banner for a larger purpose. Greece was similarly a multi-ethnic population. So was Rome. That myth of 'racial purity' being the basis of the rise of nation states is European garbage that they promote to support their imperial globalist agenda. It has no basis in reality. Look at all the images of various other "nations" as depicted in Ancient Egyptian art. They were all multi-ethnic.
A State and a Nation are not the same thing. A country can be comprised of dozens of different Nationalities, and when they construct an all inclusive identity and define and protect their collective interests... that's patriotism.
The Nuer call themselves a Nation and judge their sons and daughters according to their commitment to the Nuer Nation -- not to the country that is South Sudan. That's Nationalism.
With the exception of the Minoans, the Greeks all maintained that they were all descendants of Helen; they spoke dialects of the same language, worshipped the same gods and were culturally very similar. They were a Nation - just not a State.
A nationality is not an ethnic group. A nationality is a legally recognized member of a Nation. Nations are geopolitical constructs based on an organized system of government and well defined political and territorial boundaries. Within those boundaries can and will be multiple ethnic groups. Ancient Egypt was unified across multiple different "ethnic groups" or clans. Similarly Hellenistic Greece was the result of the unification of various city states and ethnic groups. Within Hellenistic Greece there were various ethnicities: Trojans, Spartans, etc. So again, a nation does not equate to a single ethnic group. Sumeria was the result of the unification of various ethnic groups in different city states.
Civilization itself is epitomized by the evolution of more complex forms of social organization by which larger groups of people can be unified into a single entity. It starts with the individual, then the family, then the tribe/clan, then the village, then the city state and then evolves into the Nation. And this is what you see throughout history.
That is all I am saying.
A perfect example of the confusion surrounding this concept can be seen in the concept of "latinos". What is a "latino"? Is it a nationality, an ethnic group or a race?
See how folks act shocked that one "latino" could do this to another "latino":
Of course the white "latino" says he isn't racist because he is "Argentine".....
Argentine and Mexican are nationalities not ethnic groups.
quote: Hollywood street vendor was attacked and a recording of the incident has gone viral since being posted Monday. Benjamin Ramirez sells elotes (corn) and was doing his job when he was approached by a woman and a man with a dog. In the video, the man, wearing sunglasses and a hat, confronts Ramirez and tells him in Spanish to move his food cart. The man exchanges some words with Ramirez before he pushes Ramirez’ cart to the ground, dumping corn, chicharrones and two coolers onto the street. The woman then tells Ramirez to "stay away," adding in an expletive into her warning.
"I’m recording this because this racist threw my things," the 24-year-old vendor says in the video. The man replies, "I’m not racist. I’m Argentinian," and then proceeds to berate the vendor. The video, which was recorded by Ramirez, has been seen 4.6 million times at its original Facebook post at time of publication.
quote: Whether it is tall or short, dark skin or light skin, skinny or fat, diversity in appearances has created a beauty hierarchy in the United States, and mass media has always played a huge role in forming it. For instance, according to the YWCA Report: Beauty at Any Cost, “one study found that only 30 minutes of TV programming and advertising can change the way a young woman perceives the shape of her body.”
The unattainable standards of perfection shown in TV programming, magazines and even Barbie dolls were some of the reasons why 21-year-old Zuly Garcia decided to break down beauty norms with her photography project, “Flores Políticos” (Political Flowers). The project’s goal is to dismantle the beauty standards that Garcia felt pressured to be a part of growing up.
Garcia’s mother is from Oaxaca, a southern state in Mexico, known for its indigenous people (primarily the Zapotecs and Mixtecs), native cultures and craft.
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: What specific evidence do you have that Narmer was smiting foreigners? They could just be Egyptians opposed to his ascendance and rule.
The ancient Egyptians seemed to have always been facing threats from Asiatics, and so I think they created military outposts in the Levant to better secure their Nation in response to these dangers.
Kush was the only threat from the South, and they almost wiped out Egypt at one point, so Egypt's response to Kush was understandable.
Of course the lioness has no evidence for this, it was just another attempt to derail the topic into oblivion.
Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
The ancient Egyptians seemed to have always been facing threats from Asiatics, and so I think they created military outposts in the Levant to better secure their Nation in response to these dangers.
Kush was the only threat from the South, and they almost wiped out Egypt at one point, so Egypt's response to Kush was understandable.
The back history is much earlier than that
Sneferu
Sneferu was the founding king of the 4th dynasty during the Old Kingdom. Estimates of his reign vary between 2613 BC to 2589 BC a reign of 24 -30 year. He built at least three pyramids
To enable Sneferu to undertake massive building projects, he would have had to secure an extensive store of labour and materials. Sneferu’s conquests into Libya and Nubia served two purposes: the first goal was to establish an extensive labour force, and the second goal was to gain access to the raw materials and special products that were available in these countries. This is alluded to in the Palermo stone:
quote:
"[Reign of] Sneferu. Year ... The building of Tuataua ships of meru wood "adoring the two lands" of one hundred cubits, and 60 royal boats of sixteen capacity. Hacking up the Nubians, and the bringing back 7,000 captives, men and women, and 20,000 cattle, sheep, and goats... Construction of the "mansions of Sneferu in Upper and Lower Egypt bringing of forty ships of cedar wood (or perhaps "laden with cedar wood").
Sneferu was able to capture large numbers of people from other nations, make them his prisoners and then add them into his labour force. During his raids into Nubia and Libya, he also captured cattle for the sustenance of his massive labour force. Such incursions must have been incredibly devastating to the populations of the raided countries, and it is suggested that the campaigns into Nubia may have contributed to the dissemination of the Nubian A-Group culture of that region. Sneferu's military efforts in Libya led to the capture of 11,000 prisoners and 13,100 head of cattle.Aside from the extensive import of cedar (most likely from Lebanon) described above, there is evidence of activity in the turquoise mines on the Sinai Peninsula.
Are you telling that the term "Nubian" existed during Sneferu his days?
Despite this, the quote is much telling
"Hacking up the Nubians, and the bringing back 7,000 captives, men and women, and 20,000 cattle, sheep, and goats…"
And how were they able to reconstruct this, whomever constructed and found this:
"Such incursions must have been incredibly devastating to the populations of the raided countries, and it is suggested that the campaigns into Nubia may have contributed to the dissemination of the Nubian A-Group culture of that region. Sneferu's military efforts in Libya led to the capture of 11,000 prisoners and 13,100 head of cattle."'Posts: 22247 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
That's a good point. We all have to free our minds from their myth-making and self-serving propaganda.
"The remains of an Egyptian pyramid built around 3,700 years ago have been discovered near the well-known “bent pyramid” of King Snefru, the antiquities ministry announced on Monday.
The pyramid from the 13th dynasty was found in Dahshur's royal necropolis, some 30 kilometres south of Cairo, it said."
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic