...
EgyptSearch Forums Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

» EgyptSearch Forums » Deshret » Do You "Black Americans" Have Resentment Towards "Native Africans" Who Sold Slaves? » Post A Reply

Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon: Icon 1     Icon 2     Icon 3     Icon 4     Icon 5     Icon 6     Icon 7    
Icon 8     Icon 9     Icon 10     Icon 11     Icon 12     Icon 13     Icon 14    
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

 

Instant Graemlins Instant UBB Code™
Smile   Frown   Embarrassed   Big Grin   Wink   Razz  
Cool   Roll Eyes   Mad   Eek!   Confused    
Insert URL Hyperlink - UBB Code™   Insert Email Address - UBB Code™
Bold - UBB Code™   Italics - UBB Code™
Quote - UBB Code™   Code Tag - UBB Code™
List Start - UBB Code™   List Item - UBB Code™
List End - UBB Code™   Image - UBB Code™

What is UBB Code™?
Options


Disable Graemlins in this post.


 


T O P I C     R E V I E W
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
Honestly, I hope not. Otherwise I may have to leave this forum for better more open-minded and healthy pastures. I thought we were deeper than that. I thought we were bloods.  -


But so what anyway, sh|t happens all the time. People are always beefing and reefing. Let's hope we beef over real sh|t and not over nonsense. [Razz]
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
fyi, this thread is not for the sensitive or the insensitive. [Smile]
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
Cheer up folks. It was a long time ago. We apologise. Me and de Man dem. [Smile]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghHWa75Jdo8
 
typeZeiss
Member # 18859
 - posted
what is your question exactly?
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
Do You "Black Americans" Have Resentment Towards "Native Africans" Who Sold Slaves? [Mad] [Big Grin]
 
the lioness
Member # 17353
 - posted
Native American adoption of African slavery
Native Americans interacted with enslaved Africans and African Americans on many levels. Over time all the cultures interacted. Native Americans began slowly to adopt white culture.[66] Native Americans in the South shared some experiences with Africans, especially during the period, primarily in the 17th century, when both were enslaved. The colonists along the Atlantic Coast had begun enslaving Native Americans to ensure a source of labor. At one time the slave trade was so extensive that it caused increasing tensions with the various Algonquian tribes, as well as the Iroquois. Based in New York and Pennsylvania, they had threatened to attack colonists on behalf of the related Iroquoian Tuscarora before they migrated out of the South in the early 1700s.[67]
In the 1790s, Benjamin Hawkins was assigned as the US agent to the southeastern tribes, who became known as the Five Civilized Tribes for their adoption of numerous Anglo-European practices. He advised the tribes to take up slaveholding to aid them in European-style farming and plantations. He thought their traditional form of slavery, which had looser conditions, was less efficient than chattel slavery.[68] In the nineteenth century, some members of these tribes who were more closely associated with settlers, began to purchase African-American slaves for workers. They adopted some European-American ways to benefit their people.
The writer William Loren Katz contends that Native Americans treated their slaves better than did the typical European American in the Deep South.[69] Though less than 3% of Native Americans owned slaves, bondage created destructive cleavages among those who were slaveholders.
Among the Five Civilized Tribes, mixed-race slaveholders were generally part of an elite hierarchy, often based on their mothers' clan status, as the societies had matrilineal systems. As did Benjamin Hawkins, European fur traders and colonial officials tended to marry high-status women, in strategic alliances seen to benefit both sides. The Choctaw, Creek and Cherokee believed they benefited from stronger alliances with the traders and their societies.[citation needed] The women's sons gained their status from their mother's families; they were part of hereditary leadership lines who exercised power and accumulated personal wealth in their changing Native American societies. The historian Greg O'Brien calls them the Creole generation to show that they were part of a changing society.[citation needed] The chiefs of the tribes believed that some of the new generation of mixed-race, bilingual chiefs would lead their people into the future and be better able to adapt to new conditions influenced by European Americans.[69] Proposals for Indian Removal heightened the tensions of cultural changes, due to the increase in the number of mixed-race Native Americans in the South. Full bloods, who tended to live in areas less affected by colonial encroachment, generally worked to maintain traditional ways, including control of communal lands. While the traditional members often resented the sale of tribal lands to Anglo-Americans, by the 1830s they agreed it was not possible to go to war with the colonists on this issue.
 
Troll Patrol
Member # 18264
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
what is your question exactly?

quote:
Originally posted by BIT:
Do You "Black Americans" Have Resentment Towards "Native Africans" Who Sold Slaves? [Mad] [Big Grin]

I too like others don't understand your question. What is it you imply?
 
the lioness
Member # 17353
 - posted
Do You "Black Americans" Have Resentment Towards White People Who Sold Slaves?

^^^ I can't understand it, what are you trying to ask
 
lamin
Member # 5777
 - posted
Most Africans who eventually became slaves were just war prisoners. Others were just kidnapped.

Consider the following: a) A poor woman badly in need of cash sells her last child to a stranger for X amount of cash(dollars, euros, etc.). The stranger takes the child and raises it in the best possible conditions. the child becomes highly successful and wealthy in life. Should the child praise the buyer or blame the mother?

Scenario b): A poor woman badly in need of cash sells her last child to a complete stranger who then makes child into a slave and abuses him/her daily. The child ends up a broken person with full resentment against the abuser. Should the child blame the enslaver or blame the mother.

In both scenarios the buyers actually traveled to distant lands looking for a child to buy.


In scenario a)child as an adult had the freedom to travel back to his/her land of origin. In scenario b)child was eventually set free or just escaped the cruel oppression and was free to travel back to
his/her land of origin.
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
Most Africans who eventually became slaves were just war prisoners. Others were just kidnapped.

Just asking. [Cool]
 
Troll Patrol
Member # 18264
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by BIT:
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
Most Africans who eventually became slaves were just war prisoners. Others were just kidnapped.

Just asking. [Cool]
I too like others don't understand your question. I still don't know what it is you imply?
 
lamin
Member # 5777
 - posted
Flash forward to today. 90% of all Africans today suffer because of the greed, cruelty and duplicity of Africa's comprador(they pend stolen state funds but they don't produce) classes who have established solid partnerships with the white Western nations to the extent that the Westerners loot Africa's resources and pass on a minor portion to the comprador criminals--who are then allowed to spend their portion of the loot on Western trinkets, toys, and goods.

There is just "paper independence"--a flag, a so-called independence day, and a song called a "national anthem". The truth is that there is still colonialism but this time the rule is "Indirect Rule". The whites of Europe and America rule through the local African sellouts--all greedy, wicked and corrupt to the core.

In Nigeria, a senator earns more than his U.S. counterpart while the average monthly salary is less than $100. In Nigeria, a politician, such as a governor always leaves office with at least $10 million in his pocket.

Name the problem--it's there big time. People die from accidents on bad roads all the time. But people smile and pray and pray. Bad things happen. It's God's will.

Same problem all over Africa: greedy a nd wicked comprador classes in league and partnership with the white Europeans are destroying the continent.

Like with the Atlantic slave trade--whom to blame? Blame everybody or just the wicked people and their white co-criminals who have hijacked the African state?
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
Yeah Black Americans sell out too. This guys just got a check for $100 million a short while ago, for what you might ask? For selling out Lil' Wayne show tickets.
http://youtu.be/3uf8k2lE-V4
^^ The new CEO of Hip Hop. [Wink]
 
Mike111
Member # 9361
 - posted
lamin - It seems Nigeria, and perhaps all of Africa, is now ripe for the Communists. Wonder where they will come from?

BTW - what's the situation with the eastern oil rebels?
 
the lioness
Member # 17353
 - posted
what about Zimbabwe?
 
Troll Patrol
Member # 18264
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by the lioness:
what about Zimbabwe?

What about it?


The white farmers were the offspring of the colonizers, they owned 90% of the prosperous soil, yet made up less than 10% of the population. Yet, the native Zimbabwean who made up about 90% or more of the population lived predominantly in poor areas and underdeveloped soil. Not for use. And as given poor education, if they did receive that at all. While these racist white hubbies took the best rural land for farming, so the could produce and export these products to Western countries such is the UK and USA, so it only actually benefitted racist Euro's Britain and the USA. Therefore, due to the land reform program implemented by Mugabe wich was not favored by the colonialist racists and Bush his foreign policies. He, Bush and his lapdog Tony Blair called for a boycott of Zimbabwe's economy internationally. Zimbabwe is in todays condition because of Bush and his buddies like Tone Blair who did not like this land reform and equal share of land. Because it did not support there racist agenda and ideology.

The Zimbabweans who did not listen to these white farmers, were threatened, mistreated, tortured and even killed by fighting clubs, paid killers/ murderers, criminals, all of it supported by the farmers/ colonialists. Nice huh...?

And here you have the root of the problem. Now, what name appears in it again...I let you answer that question..., enjoy!

HARARE, Zimbabwe (Reuters)-- A senior Zimbabwean official condemned on Saturday a U.S. decision to impose sanctions on the leadership as part of a "white racist" attack on a government he said was fighting for the interests of its black majority.

Click the link to entrance your curiosity, enjoy!

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/africa/03/08/zimbabwe.sanctions.reut/index.html


(They have found archeological evidence of Egyptian pottery there too.)

It appears you also lack understanding when it comes to economics and international political affairs.
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
Baby is living proof... [Big Grin]
 
Troll Patrol
Member # 18264
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by BIT:
Yeah Black Americans sell out too. This guys just got a check for $100 million a short while ago, for what you might ask? For selling out Lil' Wayne show tickets.
http://youtu.be/3uf8k2lE-V4
^^ The new CEO of Hip Hop. [Wink]

I don't really care this nonsense. But I did notice him saying during this interview he earned his Masters!


I show him about eight years ago in a tv-special telling about his record label on how the made twenty-five mill and how he was a author/ columnist writing articles for magazines.


I still don't know what it is you imply, with your opening statement.
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
Wow. [Smile]
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
 -

What I was thinking...but really I gave up believing that anyone really thinks like me a long long time ago.
 
BIT
Member # 6729
 - posted
 -

This is a better look for the culture, I guess.
 
Troll Patrol
Member # 18264
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by BIT:
Wow. [Smile]

I still don't know what it is you imply, with your opening statement.

I get the feeling, it has to do with your intelligence?
 
Troll Patrol
Member # 18264
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by BIT:
 -

This is a better look for the culture, I guess.

From that picture I see, they are in a studio (self owned). A studio you can't afford.


Anyway,


 -


 -


 -


 -


 -

 -


 -


Now, what have you accomplished in life?
 
Tukuler
Member # 19944
 - posted
Resurrect GoddessQueen Niyabinghi!
Death to white and black downpressors.

Only to the ones the below applies to
Personal accomplishments and riches
mean little unless the person directs
some back by instituting productions
employing mainly their own.

How is it a neighborhood bodega or
a neighborhood liquour store export
money to an outsider ethny?
 
osirion
Member # 7644
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by BIT:
Honestly, I hope not. Otherwise I may have to leave this forum for better more open-minded and healthy pastures. I thought we were deeper than that. I thought we were bloods.  -


But so what anyway, sh|t happens all the time. People are always beefing and reefing. Let's hope we beef over real sh|t and not over nonsense. [Razz]

No, I have never heard of such resentment.
 
typeZeiss
Member # 18859
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by BIT:
Honestly, I hope not. Otherwise I may have to leave this forum for better more open-minded and healthy pastures. I thought we were deeper than that. I thought we were bloods.  -


But so what anyway, sh|t happens all the time. People are always beefing and reefing. Let's hope we beef over real sh|t and not over nonsense. [Razz]

It is like asking do whites hate blacks because our forefathers took them as slaves. I mean, its a odd question to me. Odd because the people who did all this are dead and gone. Should we all go and dig up the bones of those who have done wrong in the past and put them on trial?

Blacks enslaved whites LONG before a black person ever touched the shores of N. America. I mean, its like me getting mad because the person who I slapped, hit me in the back of the head a week later. I wouldn't really have a leg to stand on. This is why history is so important. The diaspora needs to understand history VERY well, but do not let it make you angry. This anger crap will only cloud judgement.

I mean, that's why all this happened you know? Black men going into Europe, taking resources, enslaving white men and having their way with the women. Its a bit much. I know if someone did that to my forefathers and i could do something about it, I would. But now is the time to move past that emotional response. The diaspora needs to educate itself on history, get back in touch with its roots and then help the continent regain its footing. Some of the diaspora will not be able to make it back to the continent because they are still slaves mentally and the continent doesn't need these types. The strong (mentally) and able bodied should differently look to rebuild the homeland. Why build up something for someone who has clearly shown their disdain for you and your kind. We (the diaspora) need to rebuild. I for one plan to return to Salone (sierra leone) one day to help build, God willing.
 
asante-Korton
Member # 18532
 - posted
I think Peter Tosh can answer your question

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uL2HoozDNIU
 
The Explorer
Member # 14778
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by typeZeiss:

Blacks enslaved whites LONG before a black person ever touched the shores of N. America.

Examples?
 
typeZeiss
Member # 18859
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:
Originally posted by typeZeiss:

Blacks enslaved whites LONG before a black person ever touched the shores of N. America.

Examples?
Ancient Egyptians, Moors, etc.
 
Troll Patrol
Member # 18264
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:
Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:
Originally posted by typeZeiss:

Blacks enslaved whites LONG before a black person ever touched the shores of N. America.

Examples?
Ancient Egyptians, Moors, etc.
It was euros/ "whites" who came on the shores of Northern Africa, first! Trying to robe, rape and murder.
 
typeZeiss
Member # 18859
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
quote:
Originally posted by typeZeiss:
quote:
Originally posted by The Explorer:
quote:
Originally posted by typeZeiss:

Blacks enslaved whites LONG before a black person ever touched the shores of N. America.

Examples?
Ancient Egyptians, Moors, etc.
It was euros/ "whites" who came on the shores of Northern Africa, first! Trying to robe, rape and murder.
ummm i don't think so. Can you give specific examples other than say the sea people? Africans went into places like Greece and colonized, long before the Greeks came into Africa in any meaningful way.

It is easy to paint the African as the victim, when we are unfamiliar with history, but its just not the case. We struck out, conquered land and setup kingdoms LONG before any white man ever had the ability to do the same to Africa. I can't even say we were less brutal, because its not true, we were very brutal. The first instance I know of is during the 18th dynasty when Africans killed off the Hyksos rulers and laid waste to M.E., Present day turkiye and even went as far north as present day Georgia. I forget which king it was, but he would make his generals cut off the heads, hands or penis of every person they killed. Thats pretty damn brutal if you ask me. Modern day whites don't know their history (as don't most Africans). So everyone thinks the African was the sweet and innocent victim and it just isn't the case. I am not saying the Atlantic slave trade is justified, I am just saying, Africans are not inherently godly in nature and the white man inherently the devil.
 
lamin
Member # 5777
 - posted
But in terms of "kill count" whites take the prize for the following reasons: 1)in Europe the Roman Empire under its emperors like Caesar were quite brutal. The Via Appia in Rome was regularly adorned with strung-up slaughtered bodies of enemies. Alexander of Greece was also quite brutal in his conquests in Asia--as far as India. 2)Because they took advantage of the new technologies of the 15th century whites were able to travel out of Europe to practically commit wholesale genocide and appropriate the lands and resources of many peoples. Whites are the only group to fully exterminate other human groups. Examples: the indigenous Tasmanians, the Aboriginese of Australia[practically on the way out as a distinct people--both through genocide and being bred out], many indigenous Native American groups in the Americas--the Arawaks, Caribs, and other groups.

The white collective has the huge monopoly of nuclear weapons[the U.S. and Russia, plus Britain, France and Israel] and they will use it if necessary--as they did on Japan. The Japanese are still subconsciously very afraid of the whites--as they have allowed the U.S. to keep bases on their soil even when they are not necessary. Same for South Korea--great fear and respect for whites.

3) Because whites instictively feel superior to Africans they can kill thousands of Africans and not feel the least bit of guilt. Historical examples: Congo when the personal property of King Leopold of Belgium, the German genocide of the Herero of Namibia in the late 1890s, the slaughters of thousands of Africans during the wars of independence.

4) Blacks can be quite brutal as in the nonsensical wars in Africa, funded by whites indirectly or directly in that they provide the arms. But such wars though brutal--Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Congo, and now the stupid bombings of Boko Haram, etc--don't really have any meaningful goals as the wars waged by whites to capture resources and people--as during the Atlantic slave trade.

If you take the big names in recent white history such as Columbus, Cortes, Pizzaro, Elizabeth 1, Lincoln, Napoleon, Roosevelt(slaughters in Philippines), Churchill, Stalin, Hitler, etc., their kill numbers are massive compared to those of the Africans. It's like 5 million to 1.
 
typeZeiss
Member # 18859
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
But in terms of "kill count" whites take the prize for the following reasons: 1)in Europe the Roman Empire under its emperors like Caesar were quite brutal. The Via Appia in Rome was regularly adorned with strung-up slaughtered bodies of enemies. Alexander of Greece was also quite brutal in his conquests in Asia--as far as India. 2)Because they took advantage of the new technologies of the 15th century whites were able to travel out of Europe to practically commit wholesale genocide and appropriate the lands and resources of many peoples. Whites are the only group to fully exterminate other human groups. Examples: the indigenous Tasmanians, the Aboriginese of Australia[practically on the way out as a distinct people--both through genocide and being bred out], many indigenous Native American groups in the Americas--the Arawaks, Caribs, and other groups.

The white collective has the huge monopoly of nuclear weapons[the U.S. and Russia, plus Britain, France and Israel] and they will use it if necessary--as they did on Japan. The Japanese are still subconsciously very afraid of the whites--as they have allowed the U.S. to keep bases on their soil even when they are not necessary. Same for South Korea--great fear and respect for whites.

3) Because whites instictively feel superior to Africans they can kill thousands of Africans and not feel the least bit of guilt. Historical examples: Congo when the personal property of King Leopold of Belgium, the German genocide of the Herero of Namibia in the late 1890s, the slaughters of thousands of Africans during the wars of independence.

4) Blacks can be quite brutal as in the nonsensical wars in Africa, funded by whites indirectly or directly in that they provide the arms. But such wars though brutal--Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Congo, and now the stupid bombings of Boko Haram, etc--don't really have any meaningful goals as the wars waged by whites to capture resources and people--as during the Atlantic slave trade.

If you take the big names in recent white history such as Columbus, Cortes, Pizzaro, Elizabeth 1, Lincoln, Napoleon, Roosevelt(slaughters in Philippines), Churchill, Stalin, Hitler, etc., their kill numbers are massive compared to those of the Africans. It's like 5 million to 1.

I fully see what your saying. But I think we have to change the dynamics of the discussion. My point is, no one's hands are free of blood, regardless of the numbers.

If Africans regain their foothold should we then turn around and take out more whites again? I mean, where does it stop? We have to move humanity forward, not live in the past. We must know our history very well, but the conversation has to be a progressive one. In my opinion, the tit for tat debate isn't progressive, it is digressive.

Our sons (Europeans) are very aggressive, no one can deny that, just look at their history. However, if a new power were to emerge, which had the ability to restrain their aggressive nature and hopefully teach them/the world a better way of doing things, wouldn't that be more meaningful? We Africans (this includes the diaspora) have to change the dynamics of our conversations regrading history, whites, and our place in the world.
 
TruthAndRights
Member # 17346
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by lamin:
But in terms of "kill count" whites take the prize for the following reasons: 1)in Europe the Roman Empire under its emperors like Caesar were quite brutal. The Via Appia in Rome was regularly adorned with strung-up slaughtered bodies of enemies. Alexander of Greece was also quite brutal in his conquests in Asia--as far as India. 2)Because they took advantage of the new technologies of the 15th century whites were able to travel out of Europe to practically commit wholesale genocide and appropriate the lands and resources of many peoples. Whites are the only group to fully exterminate other human groups. Examples: the indigenous Tasmanians, the Aboriginese of Australia[practically on the way out as a distinct people--both through genocide and being bred out], many indigenous Native American groups in the Americas--the Arawaks, Caribs, and other groups.

The white collective has the huge monopoly of nuclear weapons[the U.S. and Russia, plus Britain, France and Israel] and they will use it if necessary--as they did on Japan. The Japanese are still subconsciously very afraid of the whites--as they have allowed the U.S. to keep bases on their soil even when they are not necessary. Same for South Korea--great fear and respect for whites.

3) Because whites instictively feel superior to Africans they can kill thousands of Africans and not feel the least bit of guilt. Historical examples: Congo when the personal property of King Leopold of Belgium, the German genocide of the Herero of Namibia in the late 1890s, the slaughters of thousands of Africans during the wars of independence.

4) Blacks can be quite brutal as in the nonsensical wars in Africa, funded by whites indirectly or directly in that they provide the arms. But such wars though brutal--Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Congo, and now the stupid bombings of Boko Haram, etc--don't really have any meaningful goals as the wars waged by whites to capture resources and people--as during the Atlantic slave trade.

If you take the big names in recent white history such as Columbus, Cortes, Pizzaro, Elizabeth 1, Lincoln, Napoleon, Roosevelt(slaughters in Philippines), Churchill, Stalin, Hitler, etc., their kill numbers are massive compared to those of the Africans. It's like 5 million to 1.

 -
 
aintplayin22
Member # 18179
 - posted
HELL NO!

Why would the indigenous Americans have a resentment toward Native Africans, when the indigenous people were already in the Americas thousands of years before slavery? [Razz]
 
Whatbox
Member # 10819
 - posted
Ha! [Big Grin]

quote:
Originally posted by BIT:
 -

What I was thinking...but really I gave up believing that anyone really thinks like me a long long time ago.

I love this guy.
 
Djehuti
Member # 6698
 - posted
quote:
Originally posted by BIT:

Honestly, I hope not. Otherwise I may have to leave this forum for better more open-minded and healthy pastures. I thought we were deeper than that. I thought we were bloods.  -


But so what anyway, sh|t happens all the time. People are always beefing and reefing. Let's hope we beef over real sh|t and not over nonsense. [Razz]

African slavery where slaves were more like servants and still had rights is not the same as European chattel slavery, also many African nations were tricked into selling slaves for guns in their wars with other African nations who were doing the same as part of the Euro-colonialist tactic of divide and conquer.

Anything else?
 
argyle104
Member # 14634
 - posted
HA HA HA HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!


Look now they are at the Djehuti cycle of posts. Now watch he will disappear in a week and then reappear like clockwork. You guys are a bunch of fools for being on this site.


Hey Djehuti, or whomever that is posting for pay...........


MOLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDS, ON YOUR TOEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES


LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL : )
 



Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3