posted
Most Eurocentrists very well know that Egypt was an African Civilisation but to prop up the myth of their racial superiority they will never agree to this fact, even if it means cooking up the most incredible theories. Eurocentrists fear that a black Egypt destroys all of their pretensions of a white civiliser and turns tables around to reveal the fact that Europeans received their civilisation from Africa.
How could they admit the following.;
1) The Kemetian book of the dead reveals the oldest recorded philosophy and cosmology, which was later modified by the Greeks. Modern calendar derives directly from the 30 days a month, 365 days Kemetian calendar. 2) Writing no doubt started in Egypt 3500 years ago and today’s ‘western’ alphabet originates in Egypt. 3) Early Greek and European architecture are almost Egyptian copies . Look at the temple of Karnak built before even the Greeks existed and compare the columns with Greece temples. 4) Most Greece Gods derive from Egypt. Notice Isis and Osiris black gods universally adored in early Europe. 5) Almost all Greece ‘mathematicians’ derived their knowledge from Egypt and they explicitly stated so. Greece Mathematics is a poor copy of Egyptian counterpart. Only a few Egyptian fragmented mathematical texts have been discovered yet these reveal knowledge so profound! Imagine if we had access of all the texts!!
And many more facts…..
That is why admitting to these facts will imply the true fact that Africans did in fact Civilise Europe –A hard fact to swallow –so much so to Eurocentrists.
All African history should always start from Egypt, for this is our greatest and oldest Jewel in which Eurocentrists will do whatever they can to steal it.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
African history starts before egypt since we know that civilization starts south of egypt and that region in the sudan and modern southern egypt had the greatest civilization and still exist today.The mande civilization was more advanced than egypt but was it has great has egypt?i think the mande was at least as great or greater than egypt since more info is coming out about mali etc. egypt of course must be studied as a african civilization.now that i could agree with.
Posts: 2688 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It isn't just Egypt. Europeans have created this great big fantasy world where THEY are the center of world civilization and culture when in reality they are among the LAST to become civilized and the REASON they became civilized was because of the DIRECT influence of EVERYONE ELSE. On top of that, of all the great civilizations of the world prior to 1000 AD, only 6 or so were in Europe, while the rest were in Africa, Asia and the Levant. Of course the OLDEST of these are all outside of Europe. When you talk of Western Europe in particular, West of Rome, the number of great early civilizations goes down to ZERO.
So what on earth can they do but lie?
The last 500 years of Western European "exploration" have led to the growth of European "his - story", where they have "discovered" the world outside of Western Europe. OBVIOUSLY, most of the things they found are far more ancient than anything in Europe, so they HAVE to lie in order to make it seem that they are equally ancient and important when they aren't.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder where black Egyptians could have been today if they were never invaded. They could've invented many useful inventions.
Posts: 603 | From: Mobile, Alabama | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M: It isn't just Egypt. Europeans have created this great big fantasy world where THEY are the center of world civilization and culture when in reality they are among the LAST to become civilized and the REASON they became civilized was because of the DIRECT influence of EVERYONE ELSE. On top of that, of all the great civilizations of the world prior to 1000 AD, only 6 or so were in Europe, while the rest were in Africa, Asia and the Levant. Of course the OLDEST of these are all outside of Europe. When you talk of Western Europe in particular, West of Rome, the number of great early civilizations goes down to ZERO.
Damn you really are envious of europeans, isn't that so Doug M? Your constant rant of europeans is starting to get tiresome.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M: It isn't just Egypt. Europeans have created this great big fantasy world where THEY are the center of world civilization and culture when in reality they are among the LAST to become civilized and the REASON they became civilized was because of the DIRECT influence of EVERYONE ELSE. On top of that, of all the great civilizations of the world prior to 1000 AD, only 6 or so were in Europe, while the rest were in Africa, Asia and the Levant. Of course the OLDEST of these are all outside of Europe. When you talk of Western Europe in particular, West of Rome, the number of great early civilizations goes down to ZERO.
Damn you really are envious of europeans, isn't that so Doug M? Your constant rant of europeans is starting to get tiresome.
Note that Yonis2 did not challenge the FACTS in Doug M's post.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M: It isn't just Egypt. Europeans have created this great big fantasy world where THEY are the center of world civilization and culture when in reality they are among the LAST to become civilized and the REASON they became civilized was because of the DIRECT influence of EVERYONE ELSE. On top of that, of all the great civilizations of the world prior to 1000 AD, only 6 or so were in Europe, while the rest were in Africa, Asia and the Levant. Of course the OLDEST of these are all outside of Europe. When you talk of Western Europe in particular, West of Rome, the number of great early civilizations goes down to ZERO.
Damn you really are envious of europeans, isn't that so Doug M? Your constant rant of europeans is starting to get tiresome.
Note that Yonis2 did not challenge the FACTS in Doug M's post.
I don't disagree with him so why would i challenge his post, however his constant whining about europeans screams inferiority complex in a fashion which is borderline pathetic.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M: It isn't just Egypt. Europeans have created this great big fantasy world where THEY are the center of world civilization and culture when in reality they are among the LAST to become civilized and the REASON they became civilized was because of the DIRECT influence of EVERYONE ELSE. On top of that, of all the great civilizations of the world prior to 1000 AD, only 6 or so were in Europe, while the rest were in Africa, Asia and the Levant. Of course the OLDEST of these are all outside of Europe. When you talk of Western Europe in particular, West of Rome, the number of great early civilizations goes down to ZERO.
Damn you really are envious of europeans, isn't that so Doug M? Your constant rant of europeans is starting to get tiresome.
Whining? Why are YOU wining if you aren't addressing what I said?
Challenging Eurocentrism is not whining. Challenging Eurocentrism is to present the facts and expose a lie. Much of the history written in Europe is Eurocentric. That is a fact and it is not whining. Therefore, putting history in its proper perspective is the right approach and that is the reason why I had to put Europe into its proper context in history. The point is to not be surprised by Eurocentric ideas that contradict the facts. The point is to challenge these ideas and expose their fallacies with facts.
The fact is that most of the flow of culture and civilization was taking place outside of Europe prior to 500 BC and Europe was on the receiving end of much of this flow. They did make advances and push boundaries, but it wasn't in a vacuum and it wasn't because all knowledge and insight originated in the minds of Europeans. Western Europe did not begin to rise to civilization until much later, nearly 800 years ago. Eurocentrism wants to paint a picture that opposes this view, for their own false pride and glory.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doug M: The fact is that most of the flow of culture and civilization was taking place outside of Europe prior to 500 BC and Europe was on the receiving end of much of this flow.
Well that's common sense, is this suppose to be a revolutionizing disclosure? Most people know this, or maybe you use to think otherwise and might explain the reason you seem so excited when it comes to "exposing" europeans.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
You do the same thing with "AfricaI" all the time.
You and he both can improve in this regard.
Let's try to keep ES about examination of history, and not petty personal attack, which in the end, only show personal frustration and need to vent, as in...
quote:Well that's common sense, is this suppose to be a revolutionizing disclosure? Most people know this, or maybe you use to think otherwise and might explain the reason you seem so excited when it comes to "exposing" europeans.
^ Still attacking the messenger out of frustration because you can't dispute the message.
Since you seem to be confused about what is required for civil discourse allow me to explain.
If you cannot refute Doug's facts.
If you have nothing to add to Doug's facts.
Then just, be quiet.
Otherwise you are merely venting out of frustration, which wastes ES' time and makes you look bad.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:rasol wrote: ^ Still attacking the messenger out of frustration because you can't dispute the message.
I'm not attacking him, i'm pointing out that his obsession with europeans is pathetic, he paints this picture of europeans as being some god like types, always whines about them and automatically puts them on a pedestal as if they are divine like. As if all responsibilities of this world are laid on them. From his perspective it seem as everyone else is allowed and suppose to be human and act ethnocentric, love their own and elevate themselves but europeans should always be just, demonstrate equality, higher morality, righteousness and be considerate due to have been given a superior status. Like a child he's outsourcing and giving away all responsibility by blaiming on others.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some people become defensive whenever criticism turns toward Europeans and Arabs. It makes them uncomfortable to hear accusations against these adored groups.
It is like the buddy/mate who loves a local tramp. If you speak negatively about her many past liaisons, even correctly exposing them, he will ask you to stop the sharp criticism against her.
Such is adoration.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think thats unfair Rasol. I can understand where Tonis is coming from. He is simply saying that DougM is giving too much attention to Europeans and that the world does not revolve around them. This may serve to give them an undue "complex".
We cannot "silence" people here because of their opinions, this is a very respectable forum with alot of good thesis's and arguments based upon the facts, but lets not turn it into "one party" state so to speak. Diversity of opinion is good.
Posts: 426 | From: Cali-for-nia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
We cannot "silence" people here because of their opinions, this is a very respectable forum with alot of good thesis's and arguments based upon the facts, but lets not turn it into "one party" state so to speak. Diversity of opinion is good.
^ This is called grandstanding. It's when you fail to address a material issue, and attempt to substitute a 'high moral tone' instead.
And example ->
And apparrent thief caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
He is asked to explain *why(?)* his hand is there?
He respounds by -trying to shame other people- for being so "suspicious-minded" as to think that he would be stealing cookies - which of course, does not explain *why* his hand is in the cookie jar to begin with.
The parent post relates material facts.
When you do not address them, and engage in personal attacks instead [calling someone obsessed is a personal attack], then you are the one attempting to silence others.
Which is a waste of time of course, as it never works.....
Dumbing it down, as is apparrently [and sadly] necessary -
Either you can address the following facts, or you can't.
quote:1) The Kemetian book of the dead reveals the oldest recorded philosophy and cosmology, which was later modified by the Greeks. Modern calendar derives directly from the 30 days a month, 365 days Kemetian calendar. 2) Writing no doubt started in Egypt 3500 years ago and today’s ‘western’ alphabet originates in Egypt. 3) Early Greek and European architecture are almost Egyptian copies . Look at the temple of Karnak built before even the Greeks existed and compare the columns with Greece temples. 4) Most Greece Gods derive from Egypt. Notice Isis and Osiris black gods universally adored in early Europe. 5) Almost all Greece ‘mathematicians’ derived their knowledge from Egypt and they explicitly stated so. Greece Mathematics is a poor copy of Egyptian counterpart. Only a few Egyptian fragmented mathematical texts have been discovered yet these reveal knowledge so profound! Imagine if we had access of all the texts!!
quote:I don't disagree with him so why would i challenge his post, however his constant whining about europeans screams inferiority complex in a fashion which is borderline pathetic.
Reluctantly Co-sign(because of the poster), who cares about Europeans other than the insecure Doug M and Rasol...Djehuti most Africans don't think like Rasol and Doug M, it's stupid to generalize about people, there are good Europeans and bad Europeans, there are good Africans and bad Africans...Doug M is a loser and apparently he's got some friends...who cares about Europeans? Rasol's motives are obvious, he's form South Africa, so his inferiority complex is explainable...
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, some people are retarded. Being honest is a sign of strength, not weakness. Standing up for the truth is the utmost sign of confidence, not weakness. Only someone with a warped mindset that is based on apologizing for the actions of others takes a stance such as some of those above.
Either what is right is right or it is wrong. There is no other way about it. All this trying to play the middle is a sign of weak minded people who don't want to deal with facts, but would rather stay in fantasy land. In other words, some people WANT to believe the lies or WANT to believe that such lies are harmless.....
But anyway that is obviously a sign of someone who LACKS confidence in themselves to stand up for what is right. Period.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: He respounds by -trying to shame other people- for being so "suspicious-minded" as to think that he would be stealing cookies - which of course, does not explain *why* his hand is in the cookie jar to begin with.
LOL no need for elaborate logical allegories just to prove really a pointless point. Its not about "grandstanding", its about allowing people to voice their opinions freely, regardless of how you may or may not feel about it. Its really *that* simple.
LOL I like you rasol, you are by far an excellent and very intelligent debater and helpful contributor, but sometime you do go overboard with your reactions. Just accept that sometimes things really are simply understood.
Posts: 426 | From: Cali-for-nia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
If someone argues that the sky is green, then either they are wrong or they are right. Period. What color shoes they have on or how their hair looks or whether they smell bad is irrelevant to whether the original argument is valid or not. Personal feelings of like, dislike or anything else do not make the argument MORE OR LESS valid and are hence IRRELEVANT. Therefore, if you are NOT going to address the ARGUMENT then you are not engaging in a debate you are engaging in distraction.
Facts are facts. Western Europe entered the game of civilization relatively late but since then has tried to revise the history of the world in order to present itself as the epicenter. On top of that, they have pushed this idea of Europe being the model of the "ideal" society, when over the last 500 years Europe has produced some of the biggest genocidal, racist, fascist leaders and societies EVER known in history. They have been responsible directly or indirectly for the deaths of hundreds of millions of innocent people within the span of 200 years and yet they claim to be the "ideal" model of human civilization.
Of course, the apologists would like to say that since you can destroy the ozone with carbon monoxide and get instant porn on the net, shop with plastic and generally go nowhere fast, that all of this is a good thing and that those "anomalies" should be overlooked. Sure, that is like overlooking that your head got chopped off. Good luck with that.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The loser of the year: Doug M, I've never met such a big loser in my life...Congratulations!!!
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Either what is right is right or it is wrong. There is no other way about it. All this trying to play the middle is a sign of weak minded people who don't want to deal with facts, but would rather stay in fantasy land. In other words, some people WANT to believe the lies or WANT to believe that such lies are harmless
Yes and we should know the damage "A Little White Lie" can do
aka Hamitic Myth
Genocide in Rwanda
Doug is Always on Point
Teach !!!
Posts: 567 | From: USA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug M is suffering from a deep inferiority complex which is explainable based on his background...
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^The Hamitic Myth was partly Responible for the Genocide that happen there in Rwanda.
John Hanning Speke in 1863 created the Myth which goes bascially like this
"All culture and civilization in Central Africa had been introduced by the taller, sharp-featured people whom he claimed were a Caucasoid tribe of Ethiopian origin, descended from King David. In Rwanda, the Tutsis were so identified, a superior race to the inferior Hutu Negroids. The Hutus, it was believed, were descendant from the biblical Ham. According to the Bible, Noah learned that his youngest son, Ham, had seen him naked, and subsequently told his brothers, Shem and Japheth, what he had observed. Noah responded by cursing Ham’s son, Canaan, and his progeny with the ill-fated words, “A slave of slaves shall he be to his brothers.” This biblical curse, which was used to justify the enslavement of Africans in the American colonies, was also applied to the Hutus, whom the Europeans designated to serve the Tutsis"
Posts: 567 | From: USA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Hamitic myth is an excuse...what happened in Rwanda is the old antagonism between cattle herders and farmers that is playing out in Darfur...Tutsis are cattle herders...hutus are farmers...That's the origin of the conflict...it's an African conflict...there is no Hamitic myth from an African perspective...if some Europeans fantasized about Tutsis, who cares? Bear in mind that Tutsis were ruling Rwanda before the colonizers came, so it was easy to cajole hutus into believing that they were exploited by Tutsis...All Kings of Rwanda came from a subclan of Tutsis before the colonizers came...The Hamitic myth is just a European fantasy that has nothing to do with Rwanda's social and cultural reality...
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
Yes and it was used as an excuse to commit Genocide of course
AFRICA 1
quote: The Hamitic myth is just a European fantasy that has nothing to do with Rwanda's social and cultural reality...
Yes it does the Europeans create a new reality for them you should know that you can't spread a myth without believers
AFRICA 1
quote: there is no Hamitic myth from an African perspective
Question does Rwanda have a strong Christian population and who control the Economics in Rwanda?
Posts: 567 | From: USA | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AFRICA I: The Hamitic myth is an excuse...what happened in Rwanda is the old antagonism between cattle herders and farmers that is playing out in Darfur...Tutsis are cattle herders...hutus are farmers...That's the origin of the conflict...it's an African conflict...there is no Hamitic myth from an African perspective...if some Europeans fantasized about Tutsis, who cares? Bear in mind that Tutsis were ruling Rwanda before the colonizers came, so it was easy to cajole hutus into believing that they were exploited by Tutsis...All Kings of Rwanda came from a subclan of Tutsis before the colonizers came...The Hamitic myth is just a European fantasy that has nothing to do with Rwanda's social and cultural reality...
^ You are dead wrong, AFRICA. Sure there has always been conflict between pastoralists and agriculturalists, but the genocides you just described are NOT about those age old conflicts but are rooted in the very idea of 'race' that Europeans introduced. One in which YOU yourself seem to be so consumed by hence all your crazy talk about Somalis having "big nosed" Yemeni ancestry which is in the process of getting you banned. Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AFRICA I: Doug M is suffering from a deep inferiority complex which is explainable based on his background...
And, as usual, you are absolutely in denial of reality, which is why you are defending the lie. So, rather than address the lie itself, you seem to take issue with the person calling someone a liar, which is bullsh*t to begin with. In fact, YOU YOURSELF know that this is true, so why even iterate further on a non-issue? Is there something you feel is of value in this lie that you need to defend it?
Maybe you like lies and deception. Or maybe lies and deception have become so much of an important part of your psyche that debunking them causes you too much pain. Either way it is not my problem.
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kenndo: African history starts before egypt since we know that civilization starts south of egypt and that region in the sudan and modern southern egypt had the greatest civilization and still exist today.The mande civilization was more advanced than egypt but was it has great has egypt?i think the mande was at least as great or greater than egypt since more info is coming out about mali etc. egypt of course must be studied as a african civilization.now that i could agree with.
That's correct. The calendar, Mdu-Ntr, rules of Physics, basics of geometry (points, lines, shapes and angles) were already established in pre-dynastic Kemet by the Ancient Anu/Oru people before their descendants would built on it. Heremakhet (falsely known as "The Great Sphinx") was built at the time of the Ancient Anu/Oru people. The water erosions Heremakhet's statue reveals that the statue was possibly built over ~11,000 years ago. Why, well, given the combination of accepted scientific dating; it stopped raining in the Sahara over 9,000 years ago (meaning for a long time areas in the Sahara was fully tropical before desertification set in) and the time it would require precipitation to cause the deep verticle erosions found the Heremakhet(the size of door way on limestone), ~11,000 years, I think is reasonable chronological dating for now (in relation to the establishment of Heremakhet's statue of course and not the Ancient Anu/Oru people themselves).
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The point being made is this:
If someone argues that the sky is green, then either they are wrong or they are right. Period. What color shoes they have on or how their hair looks or whether they smell bad is irrelevant to whether the original argument is valid or not. Personal feelings of like, dislike or anything else do not make the argument MORE OR LESS valid and are hence IRRELEVANT. Therefore, if you are NOT going to address the ARGUMENT then you are not engaging in a debate you are engaging in distraction.
Facts are facts. Western Europe entered the game of civilization relatively late but since then has tried to revise the history of the world in order to present itself as the epicenter. On top of that, they have pushed this idea of Europe being the model of the "ideal" society, when over the last 500 years Europe has produced some of the biggest genocidal, racist, fascist leaders and societies EVER known in history. They have been responsible directly or indirectly for the deaths of hundreds of millions of innocent people within the span of 200 years and yet they claim to be the "ideal" model of human civilization.
Of course, the apologists would like to say that since you can destroy the ozone with carbon monoxide and get instant porn on the net, shop with plastic and generally go nowhere fast, that all of this is a good thing and that those "anomalies" should be overlooked. Sure, that is like overlooking that your head got chopped off. Good luck with that.
The truthful brilliance and simplicity of this explanation had me laughing hard enough to almost fall out of my seat. Good stuff.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ebony Allen: I wonder where black Egyptians could have been today if they were never invaded. They could've invented many useful inventions.
I've wondered this myself. I would strongly suggest for their descendants to remove the mental shackles of hate and slavery European specialist tricksters have successfully placed on them, and get the ball rolling realizing there is absolutely nothing wrong with their Blackness for it is the source and destination of light.
Posts: 213 | From: New York City, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mentu: Most Eurocentrists very well know that Egypt was an African Civilisation but to prop up the myth of their racial superiority they will never agree to this fact, even if it means cooking up the most incredible theories. Eurocentrists fear that a black Egypt destroys all of their pretensions of a white civiliser and turns tables around to reveal the fact that Europeans received their civilisation from Africa.
How could they admit the following.;
1) The Kemetian book of the dead reveals the oldest recorded philosophy and cosmology, which was later modified by the Greeks. Modern calendar derives directly from the 30 days a month, 365 days Kemetian calendar. 2) Writing no doubt started in Egypt 3500 years ago and today’s ‘western’ alphabet originates in Egypt. 3) Early Greek and European architecture are almost Egyptian copies . Look at the temple of Karnak built before even the Greeks existed and compare the columns with Greece temples. 4) Most Greece Gods derive from Egypt. Notice Isis and Osiris black gods universally adored in early Europe. 5) Almost all Greece ‘mathematicians’ derived their knowledge from Egypt and they explicitly stated so. Greece Mathematics is a poor copy of Egyptian counterpart. Only a few Egyptian fragmented mathematical texts have been discovered yet these reveal knowledge so profound! Imagine if we had access of all the texts!!
And many more facts…..
That is why admitting to these facts will imply the true fact that Africans did in fact Civilise Europe –A hard fact to swallow –so much so to Eurocentrists.
All African history should always start from Egypt, for this is our greatest and oldest Jewel in which Eurocentrists will do whatever they can to steal it.
This most eloquent post and its basis for a discussion on the points that it makes has inevitably been ignored and the discussion gone awry. One would think that it was Doug M or rasol who had posted this topic, since they seem to be the principals being targeted for attack!
If you are unable to respond intelligently to the points made in the above topic, then please, shut the f@#k up!Posts: 3344 | From: Berkeley | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is amazing that no 'sane' person can dispute the above facts yet we still have people still peddling the 'fantasy' of white superiority.
If Eurocentrists were objective like ancient Greeks (whom they admire) they would have humbly acknowledged the obvious black African role as the MAIN 'civiliser' of Europe.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why is it so important to be the civilizer of europe? Is that the aim so to boost of being the civilizer of europe? No wonder egyptologists don't want to make AE "black".
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yonis2, no one said it was important to be the civilizer of Europe. It's just true that they were heavily influenced by the Egyptians. And since you say it's no wonder that Egyptologists don't want to see Egypt as black because of this is because they know the truth, dummy! They know that Africans influenced them greatly.
Posts: 603 | From: Mobile, Alabama | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
After participating in the thread: Egypt, Race, Significance, Africa...I am happy to know there are posters who are willing to throw stones at the cavemen and ethno-egoist, toppling their glass fortresses.
The Best Offense Is a Good Offense.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Don't you mean the best defense is a good offense?
Nope. Victims habitually need defend. There are no wallowing victims here at Egyptsearch.
In a recent thread many pages were spent showing that members of this forum could mount a good defense against racist ideology. Bravo.
Ten pages exploring IQ and race. Much of that time, the extremely intelligent participants were at defense. Many participants called it correctly and challenged the post originator for factual data. Correct tactic.
It is time to stop playing defense. It is time to go on offensive against racists from moment they initiate such dialog. Present to them questions that cast aspersion against whatever community they champion as the superior human beings.
By formulating a Best Offense against the racial ideologues, it will cause supremacists to take defensive positions in forum discussions when regarding their supposed racial superiority.
I believe human beings need a different standard regarding Civilization, and intelligence. One where the most violent and murderous groups are not also deemed the most civilized and intelligent.
I think, Non-Whites are trying to fit into a puzzle. Square pegs being made to feel odd because they do not fit into round holes. I am saying do not play the puzzlement game.
Why even accept a position to defend certain cultures and peoples that do not fit into the current civilizations race-obsessed puzzles. Abandon that ruse.
It's time to begin a new year ZERO. Start a new Civilization.
Posts: 96 | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ So who has an unhealthy obsession with Europeans??
Eurocentrist??
How dare you slander their name??!
You know danm well Eurocentrists have an un-healthy obsession with Africa, and a bit less, Asia.
Atleast Asia is connected to them but Africa?
It's funny they slobber over the most African of Asian civilizations.
(Don't confuse Eurocentrism with all mainstream, though it does retain a bit of its strong strangle-hold over the main.)
quote:Originally posted by Yonis:
Why is it so important to be the civilizer of Europe?
I actually agree with what you're trying to say here.
It's not fundamentally important.
However, I'm sure you're aware of the propaganda that pervades in the minds of the (non-knowledgeable) majority. I've even read a quote saying "whites create blacks destroty native americans blah blah blah asians mimic[LOL]".
So, Doug's point out that there were African influences in the civilizing of Europe, are no different that Djehuti's/Tyro's [?] point out that many modern things were a result of medieval East Asian innovation,
or Supercar/Mystery Solver's thread and point out that Arabs had a hand in that East Asian innovation. Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just to get back to the topic of this thread, I believe a time will come when Eurocentrists will have no choice but to let go of Egypt.
Why?? Simply because you can maintain a lie for only so long! That's why.
With all the overwhelming evidence of Egypt's African identity, it's even a miracle or rather pure insanity that Eurocentrics keep their hold on Egypt. Again, I believe the only reason why is because all this evidence is simply not well known in the general public, and of course Eurocentrism like all dogma maintains its position of power through ignorance.
Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Don't you mean the best defense is a good offense?
Nope. Victims habitually need defend. There are no wallowing victims here at Egyptsearch.
In a recent thread many pages were spent showing that members of this forum could mount a good defense against racist ideology. Bravo.
Ten pages exploring IQ and race. Much of that time, the extremely intelligent participants were at defense. Many participants called it correctly and challenged the post originator for factual data. Correct tactic.
It is time to stop playing defense. It is time to go on offensive against racists from moment they initiate such dialog. Present to them questions that cast aspersion against whatever community they champion as the superior human beings.
By formulating a Best Offense against the racial ideologues, it will cause supremacists to take defensive positions in forum discussions when regarding their supposed racial superiority.
I believe human beings need a different standard regarding Civilization, and intelligence. One where the most violent and murderous groups are not also deemed the most civilized and intelligent.
I think, Non-Whites are trying to fit into a puzzle. Square pegs being made to feel odd because they do not fit into round holes. I am saying do not play the puzzlement game.
Why even accept a position to defend certain cultures and peoples that do not fit into the current civilizations race-obsessed puzzles. Abandon that ruse.
It's time to begin a new year ZERO. Start a new Civilization.
I agree with these sentiments. And the most effective way to take the offense is to KNOW exactly what your nemesis thinks and why he thinks it, and the data he has gathered in defense for his position. You should never ignore or dismiss it.
In order to tackle and discredit Hart, you can't say "go read Gould". You should read Hart's book and pick it apart and show where it's wrong. You must stay abreast of the research.
I would say that you probably have the edge from a historical perspective but that Hart has an edge on the IQ/Race front. You take your points from discredited researchers like Gould; the debate and studies have gone beyond what his dubious book proclaimed. Secondly, using the "race doesn't exist" line is old hat as is the argument that "intelligence can't be defined". We don't have to define intelligence in order to see differences in IQ and to understand how IQ correlates with social outcomes. And race does exist and as much as many of you believe that no scientist believes this, you're completely wrong and in the dark. Close to 50% of biological anthropolists believe in race, close to 100% of laypeople believe in race (these are the people that matter the most - not the isolated biologist that looks at bits of similar biology between people to conclude that there is no such thing as race). To add to this, the "we are 99.9% alike genetically" is also old. This was proclaimed by a geneticist who helped unravel the human genome, but studies since have found that we actually differ more than previously thought.
We're all humans, we're all more alike than we are different, but that doesn't mean we're the same. We're obviously not.
Posts: 477 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Don't you mean the best defense is a good offense?
Nope. Victims habitually need defend. There are no wallowing victims here at Egyptsearch.
In a recent thread many pages were spent showing that members of this forum could mount a good defense against racist ideology. Bravo.
Ten pages exploring IQ and race. Much of that time, the extremely intelligent participants were at defense. Many participants called it correctly and challenged the post originator for factual data. Correct tactic.
It is time to stop playing defense. It is time to go on offensive against racists from moment they initiate such dialog. Present to them questions that cast aspersion against whatever community they champion as the superior human beings.
By formulating a Best Offense against the racial ideologues, it will cause supremacists to take defensive positions in forum discussions when regarding their supposed racial superiority.
I believe human beings need a different standard regarding Civilization, and intelligence. One where the most violent and murderous groups are not also deemed the most civilized and intelligent.
I think, Non-Whites are trying to fit into a puzzle. Square pegs being made to feel odd because they do not fit into round holes. I am saying do not play the puzzlement game.
Why even accept a position to defend certain cultures and peoples that do not fit into the current civilizations race-obsessed puzzles. Abandon that ruse.
It's time to begin a new year ZERO. Start a new Civilization.
I agree with these sentiments. And the most effective way to take the offense is to KNOW exactly what your nemesis thinks and why he thinks it, and the data he has gathered in defense for his position. You should never ignore or dismiss it.
In order to tackle and discredit Hart, you can't say "go read Gould". You should read Hart's book and pick it apart and show where it's wrong. You must stay abreast of the research.
I would say that you probably have the edge from a historical perspective but that Hart has an edge on the IQ/Race front. You take your points from discredited researchers like Gould; the debate and studies have gone beyond what his dubious book proclaimed. Secondly, using the "race doesn't exist" line is old hat as is the argument that "intelligence can't be defined". We don't have to define intelligence in order to see differences in IQ and to understand how IQ correlates with social outcomes. And race does exist and as much as many of you believe that no scientist believes this, you're completely wrong and in the dark. Close to 50% of biological anthropolists believe in race, close to 100% of laypeople believe in race (these are the people that matter the most - not the isolated biologist that looks at bits of similar biology between people to conclude that there is no such thing as race). To add to this, the "we are 99.9% alike genetically" is also old. This was proclaimed by a geneticist who helped unravel the human genome, but studies since have found that we actually differ more than previously thought.
We're all humans, we're all more alike than we are different, but that doesn't mean we're the same. We're obviously not.
Well since you are stuck in your own myopia of NEEDING race in order to prop up long discredited views of biology and history, I can't expect more of you. There is no such thing as race in human beings because different races don't interbreed in the animal species. THAT is one of the things that defines race. Humans are but one race. But since you don't understand biology, you think it is OK to remain ignorant. Trick question: is a tabby cat a different race from a siamese cat?
Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic