posted
Afrocentrists love to say, "Africans are diverse," which, by the way, is a correct statement. Science validates this point. Unfortunately, Afrocentrists use this fact as a Trojan Horse or what I have recently termed - "blackdoor semantics" - to claim history and legacy rightfully not theirs.
When mainstream Academics say Africans are a diverse people it is different to when Afrocentrists say it. Yet without being aware of this, one would logically conclude that mainstream academia supports the Afrocentric view on the diversity of Africa. Needless to say, the difference lies in context, as will be evident.
The explanation is rather simple and telling. When Academics say Africans are diverse, the statement is independent of racial affinity, while impinging on the fact that Africa is a continent that hosts more than one race; hence diversity in the “African” people. However, Afrocentrists slant this fact to assail those who argue a non-black AE; Afrocentrists claim that the diversity or variability of “Black Africans” accounts for the diversity in the African phoeno- and geno-type. Their assessment is a gross misrepresentation of the scientific understanding of the matter.
Academia teaches that in Africa is found different racial stocks that add to the diversity of the African people. Blacks of Africa do not have a monopoly on the term "African," i.e., John Kerry's wife, the Heinz heiress, an African.
Afrocentrists need to be countered by continually reminding them of this fact, thus, denying them their ploy to hijack and black-wash history.
Gigantic Member # 17311
posted
And if the Yahoos still don't get it then just point to them the fact that Asians and Caucasians share the same continent [Eurasia] yet are different people racially. In other words, sharing a continent does not necessarily mean the people are racially identical.
posted