Yes, I see. That's why I said there were exceptions and gave the example of African Americans. So I do understand where you are comming from.
@lamin:
I woulnd't call 900 years recent...=P (though it's true, even after Portugal was created, a feeling of Hispanicity remained for quite sometime)
"The point about identity is that it is most effective when the group or individual is in charge of it and calls all the shots about how such identities should be established and evolve."
Exactly. Though from my point of view, most of Africa's problems in this regard (or any others really) are due to the Colonialism which started after the Conference of Berlim. Carving up Africa with no regard for its ethnic groups then half-heartedly trying to Europeanize the natives had very bad effects which are still strongly felt today. The new states must either create a new identity, or simply disapear and give way to nation/ethnic states. Let's see what the future holds.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Case close: Al Takruri agreed not to touch native African subjects he doesn't understand. I would ask the moderator to closed this provocative thread toward native Africans...
[Watch your comments, AFRICA I - just because it's not insulting, doesn't mean that it's not instigating - Henu]
quote:What is so unique about the Khoisan's body plan?
I didn't ascribe Khoisan a body plan or say that is was unique.
I stated that South African Khoisan do not have tropical limb ratios...probably because they do not live in the tropics, and are descendant to some degree from peoples who have lived outside the tropics for and astoundingly long time. [southeast African coast where some of the earliest ancestor of South Africans lived has a climate more like Southern Europe or Magreb, than tropical Africa or the sahara]
They aren't tropical Africans.
quote: Tropical Africans don't have one set of 'body plan',
This statement is actually a contadiction.
'Tropical' is by definition 'a single set' of body plans, placed into a 'single set' deemed tropical. You can list the features of this set, as I did earlier in this thread.
The issue isn't that tropical isn't a single set -> it is.
The issue is that 'people' don't necessarily have one set of characteristics that can be deemed tropical or non tropical.
It's critical to understand that the term tropical originates in skeletal anthropology as a specific reference to heat dissipating functionality of long tapering limbs and short torsos.
The South African Khoisan do not typically have this feature [East African Khoisan may - the issue is not -Khoisan- as ethnic group, but rather adaptation to tropical environs]
South African Khoisan have arguably lived outside of the tropics for longer than Northern Eurasians, and some of their physical features, including lighter coloration of the skin compared with tropical Africans [including tropical Khoisan] and also distinct limb ratios reflect that.
I am puzzled as to why you wish to label them tropical Africans, other than for the arbitrary and inaccurate point of giving them some label that is shared with - well - tropical Africans, ie - African who live in the tropics.
Ok, i'm not really puzzled.
It goes back to the futility of trying to turn and anthropology term into and ethnic label, or vice versa.
This thread will never recover from that error, established in the parent post, and which turned it into a predictable quagmire, imho.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:What is so unique about the Khoisan's body plan?
I didn't ascribe Khoisan a body plan or say that is was unique.
I stated that South African Khoisan do not have tropical limb ratios...probably because they do not live in the tropics, and are descendant to some degree from peoples who have lived outside the tropics for and astoundingly long time.
That's what doesn't make sense, and which is what the question you are replying to is trying to get to the bottom of. If you don't "ascribe Khoisan a body plan or say that it was unique", then what is your point about it being "non-tropical", as though it has some sort of unique characteristics that are not to be found amongst tropical Africans? Your comment makes it seem that tropical Africans are supposed to have another set of body plan, that is distinct from Khoisan 'body plan', when in reality, tropical Africans come in a wide range of body sizes, including limb-ratios.
"Tropical African" here, specifically "Saharo-Tropical African", is used in biological terms, denoting indigenous biological characteristics subsumed in these regions, as anybody who can read Keita's piece would understand it to be. Khoisans need not continue to live in the tropics to be deemed part of this biological continuum.
quote:rasol:
[southeast African coast where some of the earliest ancestor of South Africans lived has a climate more like Southern Europe or Magreb, than tropical Africa or the sahara]
They aren't tropical Africans.
If they aren't part of the tropical African continuum, then why do you assume that they are 'black Africans', any more than you assume southern Europeans and Maghrebians "blacks"?
quote:rasol:
quote: Tropical Africans don't have one set of 'body plan',
This statement is actually a contadiction.
'Tropical' is by definition 'a single set' of body plans, placed into a 'single set' deemed tropical.
Keita uses the term "Tropical African", particularly "Saharo-tropical African" as I have just cited, and subsumes all indigenous 'biological' characteristics, including morphology , that emanate from these regions. Wherein Keita's piece, for instance, did you ever come to that conclusion, that 'tropical African' implies a "single set" deemed "tropical"? Tropical Africans come in a wide range of sizes, and phenotypic details.
quote:rasol:
You can list the features of this set, as I did earlier in this thread.
By all means, please list this "single set", and demonstrate how the limb ratios therein are somehow supposed to be distinct from the "Khoisan limb ratios".
quote:rasol:
The issue isn't that tropical isn't a single set -> it is.
That is the issue. Reference above, and see what you need to do.
quote:rasol:
The issue is that 'people' don't necessarily have one set of characteristics that can be deemed tropical or non tropical.
"Black skin" is certainly a tropical characteristic, just as the supposed 'elongated body plan'. In tropical Africa alone, hair thickness is demonstrated to range from tightly curled hair to wavy types. Cranio-morphometric patterns in the region are again quite diverse. Yet "black" doesn't begin to give us a real sense of variation in the levels of melanin grandients observed across tropical Africa, and the so-called 'elongated body plan' certainly isn't the only 'body plan' exhibited by tropical Africans, which is all the more reason I'd like to examine the 'single set' that you proscribe to as 'tropical'.
quote:rasol:
It's critical to understand that the term tropical originates in skeletal anthropology as a specific reference to heat dissipating functionality of long tapering limbs and short torsos.
It is critical to understand that that this isn't the only context that 'tropical' has been used in physical anthropology. It has been used in craniometrics, and indeed, with respect to lineages, as Keita's papers attest to. *Anybody* who proclaims to come away from reading Keita's work, and only understand 'tropical African' to imply a single type of 'body plan', must have not been taking proper reading lessons.
quote:rasol:
The South African Khoisan do not typically have this feature [East African Khoisan may - the issue is not -Khoisan- as ethnic group, but rather adaptation to tropical environs]
What single body plan does tropical Africans supposedly have, and how is the Khoisan body plan supposed to stand out from that observed in this region? If you can establish that the body plans of other tropical Africans, besides the so-called 'elongated body plan' that you single out as 'tropical', aren't indigenous to the tropics, I will be glad to examine your authoritative sources.
quote:rasol:
South African Khoisan have arguably lived outside of the tropics for longer than Northern Eurasians, and some of their physical features, including lighter coloration of the skin compared with tropical Africans [including tropical Khoisan] and also distinct limb ratios reflect that.
Again, please demonstrate how Khoisan 'limb ratios' stand out from the range subsumed in Saharo-tropical Africa. The same with skin shade; demonstrate that Khoisan pigmentation is out of this range.
quote:rasol:
I am puzzled as to why you wish to label them tropical Africans, other than for the arbitrary and inaccurate point of giving them some label that is shared with - well - tropical Africans, ie - African who live in the tropics.
I can only assume you are puzzled, because you don't understand what Keita means by 'Saharo-tropical African' or 'tropical African' continuum, in which case, if so, then that would be your personal problem.
quote:rasol:
Ok, i'm not really puzzled.
One minute you are confused, and the next minute you aren't; which is it, rasol? Sounds like a confused personality.
quote:rasol:
It goes back to the futility of trying to turn and anthropology term into and ethnic label, or vice versa.
Tropical African, as used by Keita and *yourself*, is biological. Nobody is turning an ethnic term into an anthropological term here as a 'new event'; so you are really tackling a strawman here. The issue is the often proferred usage of 'black Africans' here, presumably not in a 'racial context', but merely alluding to the idea of dark skin, as an adaptive response to UV radiation. It is in this context, I reiterate, that 'Tropical African', or better yet 'Saharo-Tropical African', was used as a viable alternative, if not even more so.
quote:rasol:
This thread will never recover from that error, established in the parent post, and which turned it into a predictable quagmire, imho.
Haven't seen anything in the parent topic, which argues for turning 'black African' into ethnic or what not; I do however, understand from the intro-thread, that 'black African' seems to be something of an exception, with regards to 'color descriptor' in African studies discourse, whereas people of other continents are rarely designated so. The author of the thread makes his case for this, and so, I suggest you take that up with him.
I have not suggested turning a bio-anthropological term into an 'ethnic term'; however, in that 'black African' is passed off as a biological term, I am suggesting 'Saharo-tropical African', or else simply 'tropical African', as an alternative. I hope you now understand the difference between your charge of turning a biological term into an 'ethnic label', and that of advocating the usage of 'tropical African' as an alternative, whereby 'black African' is not presented as an 'ethnic label', but as a supposed biological term, alluding to dark skin.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If they aren't part of the tropical African continuum
^ Continuum only requires relatedness to....every human being is part of the tropical African 'continuum', whether they are ethnically African or morphologically tropical or not, so the above sentense makes no sense.
quote: then why do you assume that they are 'black Africans',
Because they do, and they don't care about 'tropical african continuum' which is completely irrelevant.
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- rasol: I stated that South African Khoisan do not have tropical limb ratios...probably because they do not live in the tropics, and are descendant to some degree from peoples who have lived outside the tropics for and astoundingly long time. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- mystery solver: That's what doesn't make sense --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What? That the South African Khoisan don't have tropical limb ratios? That they are descendant from people who lived outside the tropics?
Those are the two facts cited above,and it isn't clear which one you are taking issue with, or how.
Maybe it's not meant to be clear?
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- and which is what the question you are replying to is trying to get to the bottom of. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^ I don't know what this refers to. I don't think I'm supposed to by the way it's phrased.
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you don't "ascribe Khoisan a body plan or say that it was unique", --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I never did. You're choosing not to listen carefully to what I said, which results in asking faux questions which have already been answered.
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- then what is your point about it being "non-tropical", --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The point was as exact and clear as your determination to ignore it.
'South African' Khoisan have lived outside the tropics for millenia, have physically adapted to non tropical conditions, in ways that make them distinct from tropically adapted peoples.
They are no more tropical in many ways than coastal north Africans are.
And this makes perfect sense, as coastal South Africa is no more tropical than coastal North Africa. So it's wrong to pretend 'tropical' is some sort accurate biological description.
Anyway, I have concluded, by the nature of your reply that you understood every word of the above, but need to argue over it, to defend a fetishisation of the term 'tropical'.
When that happens, I just move on to the next thread....
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
What? That the South African Khoisan don't have tropical limb ratios? That they are descendant from people who lived outside the tropics?
Those are the two facts cited above,and it isn't clear which one you are taking issue with, or how.
Maybe it's not meant to be clear?…
quote: and which is what the question you are replying to is trying to get to the bottom of.
^ I don't know what this refers to. I don't think I'm supposed to by the way it's phrased.
…because you don’t know how to read complete comments it seems. If you aren’t busy ‘selectively’ breaking them down to segments, so that you can dodge them, perhaps then you’d be presenting answers, instead of questions underlying your confusion.
quote:rasol:
quote: If you don't "ascribe Khoisan a body plan or say that it was unique",
I never did. You're choosing not to listen carefully to what I said, which results in asking faux questions which have already been answered.
I have listened to what you said, and it implies to me what I deduced in the questions you evaded with incoherent selective reading and non-sequitur question-format responses, which are replete with nothing but your whining about being confused by something that shouldn't be. If it doesn’t have any implications, then of course, you had no point to make to begin with. If you can read the said questions carefully, rather than breaking them into pieces to provide non-sequitur questions as answers, I guarantee you, you’ll either have answers accordingly, or else won't have any. I suspect that the latter is at work here.
quote:rasol:
quote: then what is your point about it being "non-tropical",
The point was as exact and clear as your determination to ignore it.
Which again was…, and to which my follow up questions were answered where, i.e. without your classic non-sequitur and evasive questions for answers?
quote:rasol:
'South African' Khoisan have lived outside the tropics for millenia, have physically adapted to non tropical conditions, in ways that make them distinct from tropically adapted peoples.
You mentioned the Khoisan body plan and limb ratios earlier, and now, you’re trying to tell me you had no point in bringing them up?
quote:rasol:
They are no more tropical in many ways than coastal north Africans are.
I know this seems to be a very complex question for you, but I’ll take the liberty of asking it several times anyway: in what way does the ‘Khoisan body plan’ and 'limb ratios' stand out from those of tropical Africans, which are the items you’ve used to say that they are not ‘tropical’?
quote:rasol:
And this makes perfect sense, as coastal South Africa is no more tropical than coastal North Africa. So it's wrong to pretend 'tropical' is some sort accurate biological description.
Tropical African makes perfect sense as a biological term. If it didn’t make sense as a biological term, why then would Keita have used it as such; who has refuted its use in that regard, and when? And why have *you* used it in biological terms? This is the second time I’m asking you this, but I suspect, we'll get more breaking down of these very comments into ‘pieces’ you’d like to focus on, to hopefully fool yourself into thinking that you’ve succeeded in distracting the gullible ones from your lack of answers.
quote:rasol:
Anyway, I have concluded, by the nature of your reply that you understood every word of the above, but need to argue over it, to defend a fetishisation of the term 'tropical'.
I’ve concluded you’ve understood my questions, and know how damaging your answers to them would do to your so-called rationalization that “Khoisans are black”, and yet they cannot be part of the Saharo-tropical African biological continuum.
quote:rasol:
When that happens, I just move on to the next thread....
There is a term for what you’re doing here, rasol; it’s called a copout. Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Overlooked these insertions in what appears to have been edited into the post I was replying to above, after my reply...
quote:rasol:
quote: If they aren't part of the tropical African continuum
^ Continuum only requires relatedness to....every human being is part of the tropical African 'continuum', whether they are ethnically African or morphologically tropical or not, so the above sentense makes no sense.
Of course it makes perfect sense; it doesn’t cease to, just because you’ve stopped understanding what it is involved at hand. Khoisans are still very much part of the tropical African continuum, as attested to by their TMRCA lineages. Not every human being shares the most recent common ancestor(s) with Africans.
quote:rasol:
quote: then why do you assume that they are 'black Africans',
Because they do, and they don't care about 'tropical african continuum' which is completely irrelevant.
If you can establish that Khoisans have always called themselves “black Africans”, as opposed to a response to a label that settler Europeans imposed on them, I’ll be glad to examine the basis for it.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you can establish that Khoisans have always called themselves “black Africans”, as opposed to a response to a label that settler Europeans imposed on them, I’ll be glad to examine the basis for it
Who asked you to examine anything?
Who is going to to stop being Black and become 'tropical' because of your issues?
Your psychological need to establish a fake ethnic label called tropical africans is your waste of time and your problem, not ours.
So you *examine that.*
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mystery: What's your opinion about this exchange where it is said that Khoisan don't tropically adapted body? link I'm just curious because you didn't object to Thought's comment in 2004 although you were part of the discussion. AFRICA I The Black African
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
AFRICA, stop putting words in my mouth. You know I don't agree with your views. Support your views with evidence not your false assumptions about what other posters think.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you can establish that Khoisans have always called themselves “black Africans”, as opposed to a response to a label that settler Europeans imposed on them, I’ll be glad to examine the basis for it
Who asked you to examine anything?
Nobody asks me to do anything. It was a request to produce substantiation accordingly. You either have the answer or you don't. It seems that you don't, and that's all there is to it.
quote:rasol:
Who is going to to stop being Black and become 'tropical' because of your issues?
Who suggested otherwise, other than you chasing whatever fragile straws you feel that you can cling onto? Has nothing to do with anything I've said. I suggest you take some strong coffee, liven yourself, and then engage yourself with the discussion at hand.
quote:rasol:
Your psychological need to establish a fake ethnic label called tropical africans is your waste of time and your problem, not ours.
Citation is in order. [Insults redacted - Henu]
quote:rasol:
So you *examine that.*
You bet; your nonsensical response has been examined above. What remains, is your acceptance and not 'denial' of it as such. [Insults redacted - Henu]
Mystery Solver, please avoid insults and otherwise instigating comments in your responses - Henu
quote:Yom:AFRICA, stop putting words in my mouth. You know I don't agree with your views. Support your views with evidence not your false assumptions about what other posters think.
As requested:
quote:Yom:Yonis is 100% Black African (not African American).
The Black African.
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^That has nothing to do with what's at hand:
quote:Originally posted by AFRICA I:
Here is the deal, you take the Black(in Black African) and we native African take back African(in African American). Hint: it is true that the majority of Africans define themselves as belonging to ethnic groups then as Africans...but the term Black is found in many languages to define Black Africans from other groups who are not as dark because of some non African ancestry or because they are non Africans who are not as dark...so it is part of the African landscape and here to stay...Yom is aware of that, Rasol as well and myself included...let's take back African from African American...and please refrain from delving in your fantasies, you can't impose your point of view to a whole group people who can't care less about your wishes...You have a problem with Black Africans...Even AE defined themselves as Black with respect to lighter folks. It's possible that it has no scientific meaning but it's a social and sometime political reality...but definitely other social aspect are more important like your ethnic background or even your geographical background than the color of your skin in an African context...
That's what I object to. Variations in color aren't due to admixture and/or non-Africanness.
-------------------- "Oh the sons of Ethiopia; observe with care; the country called Ethiopia is, first, your mother; second, your throne; third, your wife; fourth, your child; fifth, your grave." - Ras Alula Aba Nega. Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's what I object to. Variations in color aren't due to admixture and/or non-Africanness.
There is higher diversity in skin complexion among Africans than any human groups on earth...What I meant is that there is a certain limit in the skin complexion where you can tell if someone is mixed or not aka mulatto...simple observation...and those people are not called Black among Africans, but something else: either white or something else...
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's what I object to. Variations in color aren't due to admixture and/or non-Africanness.
There is higher diversity in skin complexion among Africans than any human groups on earth...What I meant is that there is a certain limit in the skin complexion where you can tell if someone is mixed or not aka mulatto...simple observation...and those people are not called Black among Africans, but something else: either white or something else...
What you implied was that all African groups that use "black" for other darker African groups are either of non-African origin or have non-African influence. Most Africans are nowhere near as dark as the Nilotes that border Ethiopia, so it's no wonder that they are classified differently in Ethiopia.
Posts: 1024 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:What you implied was that all African groups that use "black" for other darker African groups are either of non-African origin or have non-African influence.
Nope, read my post again I didn't say that...many of my relatives are quite light but they view themselves as Black...what I meant is that Africans define themselves as Black with respect to Arabs, mixed Africans they encounter or Europeans. There are specific terms that define Black in many African languages even AE defined themselves as Black(I don't know about Semitic Ethiopians or Cushitic speakers, you tell me) to describe their human phenotype with respect to non Black people(meaning who have obvious foreign ancestry or are non African)...my relatives are light, medium light or dark to very dark, but all have an African pigmentation...but they all view themselves as Black African. For example in Kenya and Tanzania (Swahili speakers who live with many non Africans: Arabs, European...) someone with some form of foreign admixture would be called if I remember: Arabu or something of the equivalent of mix-mix. Conclusion: You didn't understand my previous post..
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mystery: What's your opinion about this exchange where it is said that Khoisan don't tropically adapted body?
link I'm just curious because you didn't object to Thought's comment in 2004 although you were part of the discussion. AFRICA I The Black African
I hope you are still around and not banned Supercar...your insults are incontrollable..
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
For any poster here who doubt that Black Africans do exist and are aware of their identity(it's native and not imported), I had many leucoderm friends from the Maghreb, even to this day Arab and Berbers mingle with Black Africans in social settings...same thing with Arab Sudanese(they are all Africans anyway)...BUT:
Grim New Turn Likely to Harden Darfur Conflict(New York Times) By LYDIA POLGREEN Published: October 23, 2006
ON THE CHAD-SUDAN BORDER, Oct. 20 — Haroun Abdullah Kabir stepped from one bloodied corpse to another on the parched, rocky battlefield. He searched the soldiers’ decomposing faces for an aquiline nose, fair complexion or fine, straight hair: telltale Arab features.
An unidentified Sudanese soldier, left, and Nireen Mina, a rebel, both victims of a battle on Oct. 7, were treated last week in the Darfur region. More Photos »
Instead Mr. Kabir, a field commander of the Darfur rebels fighting the Arab-dominated Sudanese government, found among the Sudanese soldiers his men had felled only the dark-skinned faces of southern Sudanese and Darfurians. He looked away in disgust.
“You see, they send black men to kill black men,” he said. “We are waiting for them to send Arabs for a real fight.”
Jeune Afrique l’Intelligent, Nos. 2266, 2270, 2273–76, JuneAugust 2004, Paris
During its colonial rule, France enlisted West Africans to fight on its behalf in regiments called the Tirailleurs Sénégalais. One of the battlefields was the Maghreb, the Arabic word for the region comprising Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia. The French did not create racial enmity in the region—Moroccan dynasties brought subSaharan Africans north as soldiers and slaves centuries earlier—but they exploited and exacerbated it for their own ends. Today, as fresh waves of migrants make their way to the region, old patterns of mistrust are reemerging.
Thousands of subSaharan Africans fleeing poverty and political strife have arrived in the Maghreb in recent years. This influx has garnered much attention in local media, but what receives less attention is Maghrebi hostility toward the new arrivals and the patterns of discrimination toward darkskinned Maghrebis upon which it builds. Last summer, the Parisbased magazine Jeune Afrique l’Intelligent launched a fivepart series titled “Are Maghrebis Racist?” to provoke debate about this taboo subject. The magazine itself is no stranger to controversy. It was founded in Tunisia in 1960 and associated with the nationalist and panAfrican projects of that period. The magazine once critiqued Moroccan regimes, but it is now criticized by independent Maghrebi media for being too close to the state.
Maghrebi racism is highly controversial because it contradicts national ideologies of tolerance, as well as constitutional and religious doctrines of equality. The testimonials that make up the bulk of the series focus on this hypocrisy. Staff writer Cherif Ouazani...
And Zanzibar
Zanzibar Independence: Declaration that misfired
2007-01-16 10:01:30 By Keregero Keregero
The independence of Zanzibar and the ensuing revolution were not an accidental occurrence. The people needed to govern themselves; they wanted to be free to determine their own destiny without the interference of any other sovereignty.
The 1963 Independence Conference was therefore convened. The conference involving both the government and opposition sides was held at Lancaster House in London from 20th to 24th September, 1963 to deliberate on the issue. It was agreed that Zanzibar should become fully independent on 10th December, 1963.
The proceedings were under the chairmanship of the British Secretary of State and the ideas that came about were adopted. One of the most significant changes was that the Sultan would be declared the Head of State of Zanzibar (British government, 1963).
On 10th December, 1963 the British government declared the Independence of Zanzibar and handed sovereignty to the Sultan, hence cementing Arab domination of the islands.
That is how the efforts towards true independence for the African majority by constitutional means came crashing to a halt shortly after it had been declared.
But the British colonialists left behind a political mess and a complete failure to deliver justice of which they surely could not boast about.
Disgruntled with what had happened alternative ways had to be sought by the victimised African majority and the final solution was to come through the 1964 revolution.
Although they had traded along the Coast for centuries, the Arabs were among the latter settlers in Zanzibar when it already had a substantial population.
It therefore defies logic even to contemplate that Zanzibar could possibly grow to an authentic Arab state.
It is evident that the colonial desire to develop Zanzibar as an Arab state lacked any historical, ethnographic or linguistic support. It was merely an expedient political decision forced upon Africans so that they could be effectively kept forever under Arab subjugation.
The justification underlying the revolution, that is the bold decision of the courageous Zanzibar African youths to organise and carry out the revolution of 1964 was a precursor to centuries of oppression, subordination and humiliation of Africans by foreign rulers.
In other words the revolution was a byproduct of polycentric considerations which included the slave master sentiments.
Africans had continued to suffer from the most dehumanising slave/master relationship to which they were subjected to in the 18th and 19th centuries in the form of slavery.
They continued to suffer from residual effects even after the abolition of the slave trade.
These experiences entrenched themselves in Zanzibar during the whole period of struggle for independence, reaching the level of racial injustice.
Another reason that caused the revolution was the long and rather deep- rooted desire by Arab rulers and the British colonialists to make Zanzibar an Arab state.
As a matter of fact a British colonialist Ingram had described Zanzibar ``an Arab state`` as far back as 1926.
Sir Alan Pim had also claimed that Zanzibar was ��an Arab state both in origin and constitution,`` whereas Sir Vincent Glendley had visualised Zanzibar as ``an Arab Sultanate``.
The colonial desire to develop Zanzibar as an Arab state was therefore a pure fantasy that lacked any logical support from historical, geographical, linguistic and racial perspectives.
Zanzibar was for Zanzibaris, the only people who had African origins and not the Arabs or any other foreigners.
Segregation of the Africans in Zanzibar especially in access to social services was another factor that compounded further the already lop-sided relationship which finally blew up into a revolution.
There was tangible discrimination in the delivery of education, medical treatment, housing and water services, only to mention but a few.
For instance, exorbitant medical fees charged in hospitals could only be afforded by the rich Indian merchants and Arab landlords.
Different grades for medical services rendered were introduced, with the African natives assuming the last grade.
But segregation was also felt in the social associations formed along lines of racial bigotry.
However, such attitude could not continue further as a wind of political change for independence was blowing across the continent of Africa and Zanzibar was no exception to this tide of historical necessity.
It is no wonder that in the prevailing circumstances, the people of Zanzibar were fed up and could not in any possible peaceful means whatsoever, resolve the political crisis except through the barrel of the gun.
And, that is exactly what happened at the zero hour on the material day. The revolution remains to be the sole historical milestone and an impregnable guiding spirit that serves to explain in no terms of incertitude, Zanzibar`s present and future development.
After Independence, the revolution and the formation of the Union what next for Zanzibar?
Zanzibar should now forge ahead with invigorated dedication. Much as it opposed racial bigotry and attendant isolationist tendencies in the past it must not let them loosely creep in again.
With a dedicated and strong political leadership that Zanzibar enjoys at the moment, I harbour no doubt at all in my mind that great progress will be made in the interest of the people of Zanzibar and Tanzania in general.
The British colonialist administration is long gone and the Sultanate hegemony long toppled.
The bitter historical record should now be transformed into an avenue of meaningful progress and development.
Long live Zanzibar as she proudly marks her 43rd independence anniversary amidst remarkable achievements and progress made despite the attendant challenges and shortcomings encountered.
* SOURCE: Guardian
Keep in mind that Black African Zanzibari were Muslims but they knew that Arab and Europeans had a common interest: the oppression of Black Africans. The same thing happened in Mauritania were the leucoderms (Arabized and Europeans) united against Black Africans...same story in Sudan...Arabs and Europeans slept in the same bed for along time while plotting against Black Africans...Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you can establish that Khoisans have always called themselves “black Africans”, as opposed to a response to a label that settler Europeans imposed on them, I’ll be glad to examine the basis for it
Who asked you to examine anything?
Nobody asks me to do anything. It was a request to produce substantiation accordingly. You either have the answer or you don't. It seems that you don't, and that's all there is to it.
quote:rasol:
Who is going to to stop being Black and become 'tropical' because of your issues?
Who suggested otherwise, other than you chasing whatever fragile straws you feel that you can cling onto? Has nothing to do with anything I've said. I suggest you take some strong coffee, liven yourself, and then engage yourself with the discussion at hand.
quote:rasol:
Your psychological need to establish a fake ethnic label called tropical africans is your waste of time and your problem, not ours.
Citation is in order. [Insults redacted - Henu]
quote:rasol:
So you *examine that.*
You bet; your nonsensical response has been examined above. What remains, is your acceptance and not 'denial' of it as such. [Insults redacted - Henu]
Mystery Solver, please avoid insults and otherwise instigating comments in your responses - Henu
Not a single language in the post, that didn't match that of the person I was replying to. What you simply did, was to delete requests made of the said poster, and passed them off as 'insults'. Just inexperienced and prejudiced moderation at work.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mystery: What's your opinion about this exchange where it is said that Khoisan don't tropically adapted body?
link I'm just curious because you didn't object to Thought's comment in 2004 although you were part of the discussion. AFRICA I The Black African
Is it an evasion....
Africa, first of all, in terms of your earlier reply, I can certainly understand why you thumb your nose at virtually toothless warnings of biased moderators to your flame baits, as you have done more than once in this thread alone, and yet have the audacity to speak about legitimate posts deleted by a prejudiced moderator.
Now to your post. Of course it makes just about little sense as you usually do. What am I supposed to be evading, if you just drop a link without the relevant citations?
I've noticed that the two posters here who have thrown strawmen at me, never provide citations. I reckon that it is because deception is at hand. Now of course, I'd refer to such deception as a 'lie', but then Henu the moderator might just come in and delete that post, and call it an insult [while outright gratuitous profanity attacks are regarded as being normal and courteous, as suggested by the repetitive requested actions against them that have thus far gone unheeded in other occasions]. Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Posts: 432 Registered: May 2004 posted 16 November 2004 12:48 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Thought2 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Thought: Linking dark skin to tropical limb ratio perhaps?
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 16 November 2004).]
Thought Writes:
Yes. And it is of note that Khosians are NOT tropically adapted in terms of limb ratios!
no excited reaction from supercar unlike in this thread you said nothing, why this change of heart...tell us...please...
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
Posts: 432 Registered: May 2004 posted 16 November 2004 12:48 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Thought2 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Thought: Linking dark skin to tropical limb ratio perhaps?
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 16 November 2004).]
Thought Writes:
Yes. And it is of note that Khosians are NOT tropically adapted in terms of limb ratios!
no excited reaction from supercar unlike in this thread you said nothing, why this change of heart...tell us...please...
That's more like it. Producing the relevant citation with links, so that people can get a deeper feel for what is involved.
Having said that, I find it funny that you proclaim that I have a change of heart, while saying that I had no response. If I didn't respond, then how are you supposed to know if there has been a change of heart? And change of heart from what specific issue into what?
I will tell you this though...
At the time, in case you didn't notice it, I was focused on some other issue at hand with a specific poster therein, that many others too seemed to have been preoccupied with at the time. This would be that "Orionix" personality. So, Thought's comment wasn't exactly on my priority list at the time.
The situation is different today, aside from the fact that the topics that you are comparing couldn't be more distinct, because it was my post this time around, that somebody decided to pick on and raised some issues therein, upon which I responded accordingly. Amongst these issues, was the notion that Khoisans aren't tropically adapted when it comes to limb ratios. My legitimate response to this, was whether there was supposed to be a definitive set of limb ratios indigenous to tropical Africa. And of course, that question was greeted with a bunch of evasive emotional banter.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now it's clear...now show us that Southern African San speakers are tropically adapted with scientific sources...please...
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: Your comment makes it seem that tropical Africans are supposed to have another set of body plan, that is distinct from Khoisan 'body plan', when in reality, tropical Africans come in a wide range of body sizes, including limb-ratios.
"Tropical African" here, specifically "Saharo-Tropical African", is used in biological terms, denoting indigenous biological characteristics subsumed in these regions, as anybody who can read Keita's piece would understand it to be. Khoisans need not continue to live in the tropics to be deemed part of this biological continuum.
What is the limb-ratios range and body size of tropically adapted African, and where do Khoisans from Southern Africa fit in...I'm here to learn...do you have any scientific material?
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: Your comment makes it seem that tropical Africans are supposed to have another set of body plan, that is distinct from Khoisan 'body plan', when in reality, tropical Africans come in a wide range of body sizes, including limb-ratios.
"Tropical African" here, specifically "Saharo-Tropical African", is used in biological terms, denoting indigenous biological characteristics subsumed in these regions, as anybody who can read Keita's piece would understand it to be. Khoisans need not continue to live in the tropics to be deemed part of this biological continuum.
What is the limb-ratios range and body size of tropically adapted African, and where do Khoisans from Southern Africa fit in...I'm here to learn...do you have any scientific material?
Okay, so you've cited me on the idea of Khoisans being part of the Saharo-tropical African biological continuum; what you haven't cited me on, is any mention of specific tropically adapted trait. I'm here to learn and teach...do you have citations for your charge?
As another counter request, please provide scientific material on what makes Khoisan limb ratios stand out from those indigenous to the tropics.
quote:Africa:
hat is the limb-ratios range and body size of tropically adapted African,...
You've been shown this Hiernaux piece time and again, but it it seems that you never learn from it...
posted
Alright so let's continue my learning: Where can we find the limb ratios in the attached document?
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AFRICA I: Alright so let's continue my learning: Where can we find the limb ratios in the attached document?
Same question here, since it is you who spearheaded the issue of limb ratios in our discourse, the burden is on you to produce what you feel is confined to tropical Africa, and that which is supposed to make Khoisans uniquely stand out, presumably as an adaptive response to the 'sub-tropics'. Go ahead, and produce the scientific documentation that you've been evading to produce, by asking questions that have no bearings on anything I've said.
I've done my part and provided you with a by-now familiar bio-anthropological piece, detailing body sizes. You do the math from there, with respect to average limb ratios. You don't have a problem with mathematics, do you?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
By the way, in the Hiernaux piece, the Khoisans are noted for relative prevalence of steatopygia. Do you think that this is a sub-tropically adapted trait?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What can tell us about the environment to which Khoisan peppercorn hair is an adaptive response to?
While you are at it, can you tell us about Khoisan lineages, how they don't seem to be typical of those that originate and directly descend from tropical Africa? In other words, new sets of distinctive phylogenetic lines delineated from preexisting tropical African macro-haplogroups like say Hg A, Hg B, Hg E and so forth.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I've done my part and provided you with a by-now familiar bio-anthropological piece, detailing body sizes. You do the math from their, with respect to average limb ratios. You don't have a problem with mathematics, do you?
Let me expose publicly your dishonesty or your genus in mathematics: here is a human limb ratio analysis: intermembral ratio=arm length×100/leg. Now explain to me how I can do that analysis from the document you provided...please let me know?
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:I've done my part and provided you with a by-now familiar bio-anthropological piece, detailing body sizes. You do the math from their, with respect to average limb ratios. You don't have a problem with mathematics, do you?
Let me expose publicly your dishonesty or your genus in mathematics: here is a human limb ratio analysis: intermembral ratio=arm length×100/leg. Now explain to me how I can do that analysis from the document you provided...please let me know?
You are right. You are useless in generating little common sense even in issues that you generally bring up. People with intermediate body sizes generally come with intermediate limb proportions, in view with their torso size. Those who come with the tall so-called "elongated body plan' come with relatively elongated limb proportions, somewhat relatively long for their torso size. Dwarfs or Pygmies on the other hand, usually have short limb proportions, relatively short in view with their torso size, not to mention the 'head' in some occasions. When I say do the math, this is the sort I meant by it, by way of common-sensical deduction, which you've made it apparent that you are incapable of doing.
Where are your answers to *anything* I've requested you to produce? None that's what. You're full of hot air. If you were a balloon, you'd be floating by now.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh yeah, Africa, what do you make of the idea that the so-called Bushmen reside in the Kalahari desert which extends into tropical Africa?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
intermembral ratio=arm length×100/leg. They never told you to be more rigorous in Science:"common-sensical deduction", I hope that's the your only option in Scientific analysis, because you won't go too far without hardcore data in Science...that's floppy Science and you know that you are being dishonest...anyway let's go past your dishonesty and ask Rasol to corroborate his position regarding the Sans from Southern Africa with the following: Modern human, early modern human and Neanderthal limb proportions A.M.W. Porter * Redcrest, Heath Rise, Camberley, Surrey, UK
*Correspondence to A.M.W. Porter, Redcrest, Heath Rise, Camberley, Surrey GU15 2ER, UK
Keywords limb abbreviation; brachial index; crural index; thermoregulation; Neanderthal; humans; early modern humans
Mystery, Let's continue my learning, Europeans are intermediate, does it mean they are shorter than the Sans on average?
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
intermembral ratio=arm length×100/leg. They never told you to be more rigorous in Science:"common-sensical deduction", I hope that's the your only option in Scientific analysis, because you won't go too far without hardcore data in Science...that's floppy Science and you know that you are being dishonest...anyway let's go past your dishonesty
What's dishonest, is your bringing up limb ratios to make a point, and you're asking me to prove it for you. I provided body sizes in the Hiernaux piece, since you mentioned them, and therein a wide range of body sizes have been shown in groups that live in tropical Africa. Given this, my friend, the burden is on you to reveal to us, what you find so exceptional about the Khoisan "limb ratios". Your issue, your burden.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You didn't bring the data I was requesting, just come up with hardcore data and you will be taken more seriously: limb ratio range among tropical Africans which include San speakers from Southern Africa...now Rasol, how the above study supports your claim that San-speaking people from Southern Africa are not tropically adapted... P.S:You publicly ignored the following question: "Mystery, Let's continue my learning, Europeans are intermediate, does it mean they are shorter than the Sans on average?" another proof of your dishonesty.
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
You didn't bring the data I was requesting, just come up with hardcore data and you will be taken more seriously: limb ratio range among tropical Africans which include San speakers from Southern Africa
*You didn't produce the necessary citation that necessitates that I bring that data that you're trying to get me to produce for your lazy self, since it is you who professed that Khoisan "limb ratio" is supposed to somehow help you make a case.
*You simply flaunt "Khoisan limb ratios aren't tropically adapted" as though you have a point to make, parroting people who are equally pointless in bringing it up.
Yes, I know what is at stake in terms of limb ratios, and can deduce from common sense what the various stature implicate, but I would have to actually do measurements to produce "hard data", which in any case, is not my obligation to produce, but squarely your own, as I have just noted.
*In that you brought it up supposedly to make a point, Africa, wouldn't any normal human being deduce that you produce the requested evidence and make a point, instead of pointlessly mentioning it, and pointlessly asking me to substantiate it for a yet to be determined point that you're hoping to make?
*You didn't bring data for the multitude of questions and requests you were asked to address?
*Even though you brought up the issue of body size, when confronted with scientific publication on wide ranging body sizes in tropical Africa, you failed to address it to make your point in bringing it up, yet again.
[Insult redacted - Henu]
quote:Africa:
P.S:You publicly ignored the following question: "Mystery, Let's continue my learning, Europeans are intermediate, does it mean they are shorter than the Sans on average?" another proof of your dishonesty.
I'm hereby not ignoring your so called question, by asking you that, since you brought it up, then you must have a point. Well, produce the data for the question you are asking.
[Insult redacted - Henu]
1)You proclaimed that I ignored your thoughtless question, which of course has nothing to do with anything said by anyone else save for your own weirdo self, and then you go onto say it is somehow dishonesty. Tell me how your assumptive question, reflects on my honesty.
2)Africa, do you have a single point to make in this entire exchange. I have not come across any, other than your super weird efforts of spamming the thread with flame baits.
quote:limb ratio range among tropical Africans which include San speakers from Southern Africa
By the way that's my last post where you are the subject among others...don't waste your time reacting to my posts if you can't provide hardcore data...
don't waste your time reacting to my posts if you can't provide hardcore data...
That would be dependent on your avoidance at any cost, from asking strawman and red herrings in question format, with regards to peusdo-points that you bring up without material, but hope for the gullible one turn your non-existent point into some actual point, that you're pretending to be making.
posted
If anyone is interested I would like to invite anyone who reads this thread to provide the following scientific data:
quote:limb ratio range among tropical Africans which include San speakers
I know that some people have access to Scientific Anthropology Journals...please provide your input...bring some raw data...I don't know Rasol or Mystery Solver...let's put science where it deserve to be...Rasol and Mystery Solver don't exist in front of Science...Anyone who can bring the juice above...you are welcome...let's be scientists...
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
AFRICA I and Mystery Solver, this is each your first official warning. Do not continue to post insults and instigate other members. If another member does so, ignore him/her and/or that part of his post, and notify me (PM or "Report Post"). That poster will be dealt with. Do not respond in kind.
Posts: 113 | From: Dayr al-Barsha | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
AFRICA I and Mystery Solver, this is each your first official warning. Do not continue to post insults and instigate other members. If another member does so, ignore him/her and/or that part of his post, and notify me (PM or "Report Post"). That poster will be dealt with. Do not respond in kind.
Produce the citations of wherein I instigate other members. You never bother reading the exchanges to discern who starts these things, and only when I retaliate you complain. When I ask you to take action, before I react, you don't do so, and now you're telling me that the offender will be dealt with. Fine then; you had better believe it. I won't waste anytime when I come across the offender, expecting you to take the necessary action without delay!
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
It's not the first time you are saying that...although none of my countrymen know that...I know West African history: are you European or African? I mean the Moor Muslim spread from Senegal up to Portugal and Spain...are you guys from West Africa real Africans? Here is your brother, that's why I'm confused about Muslims from East Africa and West Africa...you don't know where they come from European? Arabs? You don't know...The only people in Somalia who I think are Africans originally are the Hawiye, maybe the Dir(Issa and Gadabursi) but the Darod and Issaq, they have to prove it since they claim Arab ancestors.... Mr. Haïdara is a descendant of the Kati family, a prominent Muslim family in Toledo, Spain. One of his ancestors fled religious persecution in the 15th century and settled in what is now Mali, bringing his formidable library with him. The Kati family intermarried into the Songhai imperial family, and the habit Mr. Haïdara's ancestors had of doodling notes in the margins of their manuscripts has left an abundance of historical information: births and deaths in the imperial family, the weather, drafts of imperial letters, herbal cures, records of slaves, and salt and gold traded.
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
AFRICA I and Mystery Solver, this is each your first official warning. Do not continue to post insults and instigate other members. If another member does so, ignore him/her and/or that part of his post, and notify me (PM or "Report Post"). That poster will be dealt with. Do not respond in kind.
Produce the citations of wherein I instigate other members. You never bother reading the exchanges to discern who starts these things, and only when I retaliate you complain. When I ask you to take action, before I react, you don't do so, and now you're telling me that the offender will be dealt with. Fine then; you had better believe it. I won't waste anytime when I come across the offender, expecting you to take the necessary action without delay!
It's impossible now, the insults have been deleted. I didn't say you instigated, AFRICA I did. You did, however, respond to his insults with insults, even after being warned. Please just ignore them and report them in the future.
Posts: 113 | From: Dayr al-Barsha | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
It's not the first time you are saying that...although none of my countrymen know that...I know West African history: are you European or African? I mean the Moor Muslim spread from Senegal up to Portugal and Spain...are you guys from West Africa real Africans? Here is your brother, that's why I'm confused about Muslims from East Africa and West Africa...you don't know where they come from European? Arabs? You don't know...
Alright then moderator Henu, what action do you intend to take, as apparently this personality doesn't take you seriously?
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Post deleted. AFRICA I, consider this your second official warning. One more and you will be banned. It would be in your best interest to either return to polite debate or not participate until you can.
Posts: 113 | From: Dayr al-Barsha | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why not just use "indigenous" African? Leucoderms are not indigenous to Africa. Or "Native African," just as "Native American" is used for Indians in the Americas? "Black Africa" does give the impression that Blacks are a special interest group even on their own native land, that there is something alien or abnormal about being Black to the point that skin pigmentation is the only salient quality of Africans, and deletes the history of migrations and colonization that brought Eurasians from the Neolithic to the present time into North Africa. It also allows the unthinking, brainwashed majority of humanity to keep on thinking that the civilizations of North Africa, including Egypt, were created by Eurasians.
The problem with "indigenous African" for example, is that if you are a Berber with a Eurasian phenotype, you might automatically be thought an alien to the continent, when in fact your ancestors have been on the continent for many generations, being the product of miscegenation between the Black North African indigenes and the Mediterranean Sea Peoples. But that is not as bad as seeing all Blacks in North Africa as the descendants of enslaved inner Africans.
But "Black African" and "sub-Saharan Africa" (the latter unless a strictly geographic denotation) do have to be done away with. Blackness has to be normalized and not seen as a badge of shame, of utter alienness to the European norm created by imperialism. Equally annoying is when someone says he/she has travelled to Africa or volunteered in Africa without naming countries. They do not do the same for Asia, Latin America, much less Europe. It is like Africa (segregated in their minds from North Africa, which equals the Middle East to them) is one undifferentiated mass of blackness, squalor, AIDS, tribalism, famine, corrupt governments, etc.
Posts: 140 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic