Black Culture Discussion Thread

[Rootin4EverybodyBlack]

Humans originated from Africa, humans originally had dark skin. Anything else is a mutation.

Stop being stupid.

 

[spottieottie305]

But America brainwashed so called Africanot Americans to believe they're African and Black. In reality you're just homosapien, with dark skin due to adapting to climate for survival reasons and vice versa for the so called whites and other "races"

First off the word Latino originally meant people whose languages descend from Latin. This whole I'm a Latino thing is a huge detraction. We are all just one boat stop away from being considered a Jamaican, Haitian, Cuban, Dominican, etc. Do people not realize African American mixed with the native populations as well.

And how could you say that "America" has brainwashed us into believing our ancestry is from Africa? Really? Please do some research on DNA before making such false claims...

There is tons of scientific proof that says otherwise. Their is cultural and linguistic proof that says otherwise. Socially we are not treated the same, and its disgusting that people continually try to embrace a people who rape, murder, and oppress you.

Why embrace only a small part of who you are? Yes, some of our ancestors were raped, but that doesn't change the fact our ancestors were African. Our DNA says we are African.

 

[spottieottie305]

You're repeating what I said basically... race doesnt exist and all skin tones and features are due to mutation. How do you think the first being got dark skin? Just by getting it? No, due to Africas climate the human gained features for surviving Africa. Then the people that migrated elsewhere mutated AGAIN. All humans mutate. Dont be a black supremacist with ignirant racist comments. Youre in the same bowl as white supremacists with comment like that. Life is really logical. So use your common sense, not lies from school or other supremacists (black, white, etc) Because humans hardly know anything. Just about Everything in life is theory and assumptions. The fact that everything is theory and assumptions says ALOT about us as a race(homosapiens). We're so stupid that we get into battles of "races" and petty ****. Lmao

Homo Sapien Sapiens or anatomically correct humans were always black. Life originated in Africa and the oldest human remains were that of "black" people. Europeans were the mutations. Fact.

But I get what you're saying. There is only one race. The human race, yet that is not the world we live in. African people scientifically have dominant DNA. We carry dominant genes. White people carry recessive DNA. This is not black supremacy, this is fact.

So science proves we are not the same, even though we are all human beings. Does this make black people better. No, but I will pose this question. Why did those who carry recessive DNA create a system of white supremacy in the first place? I'll let you answer that question

 

[danikerhino]

Homo Sapien Sapiens or anatomically correct humans were always black. Life originated in Africa and the oldest human remains were that of "black" people. Europeans were the mutations. Fact.

But I get what you're saying. There is only one race. The human race, yet that is not the world we live in. African people scientifically have dominant DNA. We carry dominant genes. White people carry recessive DNA. This is not black supremacy, this is fact.

So science proves we are not the same, even though we are all human beings. Does this make black people better. No, but I will pose this question. Why did those who carry recessive DNA create a system of white supremacy in the first place? I'll let you answer that question

Thought this was common knowledge, Asians and Whites are results of genetic drift.

 

[tokes99]

I hear you and that truly is the plight that we're dealing with. Cause of the way that we are socialized we don't have the type of leverage to compete with big business but if we made the conscious decision to support our own and somehow get the support from a good majority of our communities then it would be a no-brainer. Would take loads of sacrifice and discipline but it is what it is

definitely, remember though, that this would essentially be asking people who for the most part already struggling to sacrifice more...for example it is pretty much a known factor that when a walmart comes to town it usually crowds out local business(es), but MAAAAAAAD people shop there because the price (especially with wages being so stagnant over the past 3-4 DECADES!!!) is right & its super convenient, people want to support local business(es) in theory but people also have real bills...

Humans originated from Africa, humans originally had dark skin. Anything else is a mutation.

Stop being stupid.

You're repeating what I said basically... race doesnt exist and all skin tones and features are due to mutation. How do you think the first being got dark skin? Just by getting it? No, due to Africas climate the human gained features for surviving Africa. Then the people that migrated elsewhere mutated AGAIN. All humans mutate. Dont be a black supremacist with ignirant racist comments. Youre in the same bowl as white supremacists with comment like that. Life is really logical. So use your common sense, not lies from school or other supremacists (black, white, etc) Because humans hardly know anything. Just about Everything in life is theory and assumptions. The fact that everything is theory and assumptions says ALOT about us as a race(homosapiens). We're so stupid that we get into battles of "races" and petty ****. Lmao

i see what you're saying, and in the same vain the "from africa" theory is merely another assumption, a well evidenced, informed, and researched supported one, but a theory none the less...we find out we only exist in some higher beings computerlike simulation...

But America brainwashed so called Africanot Americans to believe they're African and Black. In reality you're just homosapien, with dark skin due to adapting to climate for survival reasons and vice versa for the so called whites and other "races"

First off the word Latino originally meant people whose languages descend from Latin. This whole I'm a Latino thing is a huge detraction. We are all just one boat stop away from being considered a Jamaican, Haitian, Cuban, Dominican, etc. Do people not realize African American mixed with the native populations as well.

And how could you say that "America" has brainwashed us into believing our ancestry is from Africa? Really? Please do some research on DNA before making such false claims...

There is tons of scientific proof that says otherwise. Their is cultural and linguistic proof that says otherwise. Socially we are not treated the same, and its disgusting that people continually try to embrace a people who rape, murder, and oppress you.

Why embrace only a small part of who you are? Yes, some of our ancestors were raped, but that doesn't change the fact our ancestors were African. Our DNA says we are African.

this happens so much in these types of discussions, we are so quick to correct, that we miss the finer point; in this case all that is being said is that race is a social construct, albeit a persistent one. in some ways i can see why some ethnicities are wary of defined by that AFRO-prefix, because it may be that they don't identify with it and/or feel it doesn't fit with their experience...

 

[tay1]

I study anthropology, dna, and ancestry... I got on forums specificall based on that stuff... Youre not teaching a lesson about Latino. Youre just filling spacing telling me elementry info. Latino is any one of a culture wwhich speaks a Latin based language(French, Italian, Puerto Rican, Dominican, etc). Now that I just gave you the definition of Latino. How can you contradict yourself so badly? You don't believe the history taught to u yet believe other stuff from the same source that you get your history from? Think about that...really, I mean it. THINK ABOUT IT...

Now you're putting words in my mouth by saying why do I embrace such a small part of my ancestry and culture. Why because we don't lie and claim that were African or A EUROPEAN? There's no logic behind your thinking. It's Afro centric and racist. We're neither. Which is why logically consider my self homosapien but when I speak to the ignorant or uneducated people on this topic, I dumb it down and let it be knowe I'm mixed, not white, not black, not asian, not Indian. I'm mixed and embrace being so diverse. That mix is what keeps me looking fly as hell. But in America I'm considered a man of color, and mutt, ****, n word, etc due to all you guys illogical logic on "race" and the one drop rule.

Now, so called African Americans are not African. Youre mixed because either your ancestor was raped, raped a white person or just was attracted to a white man. It's a fact that it's over exaggerated that Africans were the only victims and the only ones raped. It's also illogical. Proof that the history we learn about our ancestors is that they make it seem like our African ancestors were innocent and did nothing. Again West Africans treated their slaves horribly just as ever race of people including Europeans did to their own slaves (white people) whom were white. No race is innocent. So cut the blablack and white supremacist **** out. Really you should sit back and think about everything ur told about history and see if it makes sense. What u learn I'm school is most likely lies, what you read on the Internet and books is lies, what a black person tells u is also biased and lies.

Unless we were there in those times we don't know crap. All we can do is use logic and make theories. It's what the schools for, historians, and that random person who says"school history is a lie young blood. The white man holding us f own, let me break down the TRUE HISTORY that the books won't tell u."

All our resources arenot 100% accurate true. Theyre all biased. Being that humans are so stupid, ignorant, and sensitive; people in control of the info just make **** up and then it leads to years of confusion and misinformed people.

NOW WHAT I JUST SAID, IS ACCURATE, FACTS AND TRUE. THAT'S FOR SURE. Stay strong my fellow human brother. Go use logic and stop believin everything u read and hear. If u do listen and read, then use unbiased logic and accept the truths. What do u gain out of being biased? Nada MI Mano. So Cojelo suave. Duces

What makes people say stupid **** like this?

 

[spottieottie305]

this happens so much in these types of discussions, we are so quick to correct, that we miss the finer point; in this case all that is being said is that race is a social construct, albeit a persistent one. in some ways i can see why some ethnicities are wary of defined by that AFRO-prefix, because it may be that they don't identify with it and/or feel it doesn't fit with their experience...

I completely understand that race was a social construct created by Europeans. My whole point was that its wrong to deny the very differences that make us great. Who is he to tell me I'm not an African becasue some white person may have raped my ancestors.

My genetic make up is mostly African, therefore I identify as an African living in America.

well so called whites and Asians are just black people that adapted to their new environmentsu to survive... but again the same black person that the Asians and whites evolved from, is also a mutation of something prior to the first human. Just logic. So to say that Blacks arenot a result mutations is false. I'm unbiased so Idc. I use logic, I'm "mixed race" according to our social structure.

I come from a Latin speaking culture. I deal with struggles and discrimination. And I just live my life and dna waste time dwelling on **** cut in reality it slows us down. If u ignore ignorancenter and not complain; you'll learn how far in life u can get. I live in MY own world. Life is what YOU make it. Regardless of what goes on outside. Just be socially intelligent enough and ull survive and get through life easily. It's been working for me and many others that I know.

I guess you're the only person on the planet who is not biased. The fact you even needed to say that shows how naive you are. Everyone is biased

The fact these people mutated they became a distinct people outside of Africa proves we are different. But keep doing you... who cares what happens to the masses of other black people in the diaspora..

View media item 1325592

 

[tokes99]

Southern Africa's ancient inhabitants evicted from ancestral lands

View media item 1325313

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

NEW XADE, Botswana - The San people in Botswana, ordered to leave land in the Kalahari desert that their ancestors had inhabited since time immemorial, suspect the authorities want to make room for diamond mines.

The government says it wants to integrate the hunter-gatherers into modern society.

At the resettlement camp for the San at New Xade, west of Botswana's Central Kalahari Game Reserve, the only bar fills up in the afternoon.

Customers play cards in the yard. One of them tries to tune-in an old radio for music.

Some people are already so drunk they can barely stand.

Empty beer cans litter the sand.

"Everyone drinks in New Xade," barmaid Kgomotsego Lobelo said from behind the counter in the bare concrete room, with bottles ranged neatly on shelves.

"Even I drink. There is nothing else to do."

More than 3,000 San people, also known as the Basarwa, were moved from villages inside the game reserve in the Kalahari desert to three resettlement camps between 1997 and 2002.

The government says it wants to provide southern Africa's oldest ethnic group, regarded by many Botswanans as "primitive", with modern services.

The San, though, believe the real reason for the resettlement lies in the development of tourism in the game reserve, and in the discovery of diamonds there in the 1980s.

Mining is thought to have been postponed in order to first exhaust other mines in the country and keep prices high, because diamonds make up 80 per cent of Botswana's export income.

A first mine started operating in Gope in the south-east of the game reserve in September.

The operating company, Gem Diamonds, estimates it contains deposits worth 4.9 billion dollars.

Activists suspect the government wants to prevent the San from claiming royalties for diamonds found on their ancestral land.

"Officials initially told us we could not coexist with wild animals and mines in the area," said Roy Sesana, 85.

A government spokesman said there were restrictions on human activities in the game park, such as a hunting ban, but denied the resettlement had anything to do with diamonds.

It would not have been necessary to move people because of mines, and royalties were not an issue, because "natural resources belong to the state," he said.

A spokeswoman for Gem Diamonds said San people interested in job opportunities had accepted the opening of the mine.

The government compensated the San for moving to New Xade.

"I was given 59,900 pula (6,6430 dollars) and my wife was given five cows," said Xamme Gaothobogwe, 58.

Despite such offers, many of the people did not want to leave villages near which their ancestors lie buried.

"My wife was moved to New Xade in 2001, while I was away," Sesana said.

"I took her back to our village, but officials took our goats and police beat me."

"My elderly mother ran away from soldiers trying to force us to move, fell exhausted, and died of shock," said Mmolawa Belesa, 56.

The lobby group Survival International says it has documented more than 200 cases of the abuse of San men and women between 1992 and 2014, including torture leading to death.

Many of them were accused of hunting protected animals.

"We cannot say there were never any cases of abuse, but most such charges were false," the government spokesman said.

At New Xade, the 1,500 residents have a school, a health centre and shops.

But there are few edible wild plants and the hunting ban was extended from game reserves to the entire country in January, depriving the Bushmen of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle they still partly rely on.

The resettlement camp has few jobs and most of the residents live on government handouts.

Some - mainly teachers and nurses - have modern housing, while others live in traditional grass huts.

"If we cannot return to our ancestral lands, there will soon be no San people left in Botswana," activist Jumanda Gakelebone said.

But San people living in the resettlement camp also appreciate the advantages there.

"My sick father can get treatment here," Belesa said.

In 2006, Botswana's Supreme Court ruled that the San had the right to live on their ancestral land.

The government interpreted that as meaning that only the ones who had signed the court petition - less than 200 - were allowed to return.

Roy Sesana was one of them. He now splits his time between New Xade and Molapo, one of the villages that were re-established.

Activists say the government is trying to drive the San back to resettlement camps.

Their relatives are not allowed to visit them without permits, and residents are dependent on rainwater and juice from melons.

"Nobody may enter the game reserve without permits, including tourists," the government spokesman said, adding that it would not be "economical" to transport water to the few San people now living there.

In 2011, the Court of Appeal ruled the San had the right to water.

The government has allowed Gem Diamonds to sink some boreholes for them, but it has otherwise ignored the ruling, their lawyer Gordon Bennett said.

"They want us out of here," Molapo resident Kesebonye Roy said.

http://www.enca.com/africa/southern-africas-ancient-inhabitants-evicted-ancestral-lands

this is a interesting story, which is maybe complicated because i believe the ruling elite of south africa may be dutch/white, but suppose they weren't would this then be ok? because this is a real world situation where a country may want to use the land to build wealth (granted they should have to pay the people for the land) but the people on the land seem to content to use it in a subsistent way...

You're repeating what I said basically... race doesnt exist and all skin tones and features are due to mutation. How do you think the first being got dark skin? Just by getting it? No, due to Africas climate the human gained features for surviving Africa. Then the people that migrated elsewhere mutated AGAIN. All humans mutate. Dont be a black supremacist with ignirant racist comments. Youre in the same bowl as white supremacists with comment like that. Life is really logical. So use your common sense, not lies from school or other supremacists (black, white, etc) Because humans hardly know anything. Just about Everything in life is theory and assumptions. The fact that everything is theory and assumptions says ALOT about us as a race(homosapiens). We're so stupid that we get into battles of "races" and petty ****. Lmao

Homo Sapien Sapiens or anatomically correct humans were always black. Life originated in Africa and the oldest human remains were that of "black" people. Europeans were the mutations. Fact.

But I get what you're saying. There is only one race. The human race, yet that is not the world we live in. African people scientifically have dominant DNA. We carry dominant genes. White people carry recessive DNA. This is not black supremacy, this is fact.

So science proves we are not the same, even though we are all human beings. Does this make black people better. No, but I will pose this question. Why did those who carry recessive DNA create a system of white supremacy in the first place? I'll let you answer that question

dominant & recessive are loaded words, they don't mean what you mean to imply...and the system of white supremacy is merely a circumstance of how things played out, not the result of some cleverly orchestrated master plan; guns germs & steel (again granted it is just a person's theory, but its probably the best laid out theory on the history of civilizations) basically makes it clear if not for a gang of luck breaks enjoyed by western europe via the fertile crescent this whole thing could have played out differently...

 

[spottieottie305]

this is a interesting story, which is maybe complicated because i believe the ruling elite of south africa may be dutch/white, but suppose they weren't would this then be ok? because this is a real world situation where a country may want to use the land to build wealth (granted they should have to pay the people for the land) but the people on the land seem to content to use it in a subsistent way...
dominant & recessive are loaded words, they don't mean what you mean to imply...and the system of white supremacy is merely a circumstance of how things played out, not the result of some cleverly orchestrated master plan; guns germs & steel (again granted it is just a person's theory, but its probably the best laid out theory on the history of civilizations) basically makes it clear if not for a gang of luck breaks enjoyed by western europe via the fertile crescent this whole thing could have played out differently...

Dominant and recessive inheritance are useful concepts when it comes to predicting the probability of an individual inheriting certain phenotypes. Which means people who carry dominant DNA have the highest chance top pass on their genes. It's not that complicated.

So white supremacy just magically came to be becasue of bad luck?? You can't be serious. Of course it was planned out. What do you think happened after World War 1. Europeans sat down and planned who was going to control Africa. This has been going on for years. Ever since the last of Moors were expelled from Europe in 1492, White people have made a concerted effort to prevent black people from accessing any real power.

 

[tokes99]

this is a interesting story, which is maybe complicated because i believe the ruling elite of south africa may be dutch/white, but suppose they weren't would this then be ok? because this is a real world situation where a country may want to use the land to build wealth (granted they should have to pay the people for the land) but the people on the land seem to content to use it in a subsistent way...
dominant & recessive are loaded words, they don't mean what you mean to imply...and the system of white supremacy is merely a circumstance of how things played out, not the result of some cleverly orchestrated master plan; guns germs & steel (again granted it is just a person's theory, but its probably the best laid out theory on the history of civilizations) basically makes it clear if not for a gang of luck breaks enjoyed by western europe via the fertile crescent this whole thing could have played out differently...

Dominant and recessive inheritance are useful concepts when it comes to predicting the probability of an individual inheriting certain phenotypes. Which means people who carry dominant DNA have the highest chance top pass on their genes. It's not that complicated.

So white supremacy just magically came to be becasue of bad luck?? You can't be serious. Of course it was planned out. What do you think happened after World War 1. Europeans sat down and planned who was going to control Africa. This has been going on for years. Ever since the last of Moors were expelled from Europe in 1492, White people have made a concerted effort to prevent black people from accessing any real power.

basically true, but it seemed your were implying 1)that this is knowledge that factors in some historical context {as it pertains to white-people of color relations} 2) that it indicates that one is somehow better than the other...neither of which are true

yes you are correct in that the western powers did pretty much divvy up africa (and as much of the known world that they could, #sidebar i believe antartica is the only "unclaimed" landmass, and there was a controversy about who would own it not too long ago...) but yes the factors that put them into position to be able to do so was all luck. colonialism was just an exercise in power, racism came out of it as justification not a root cause. this is not to absolve european colonialism, the affect of which reverberates throughout africa, central & western asia today, but just to say that things were set in motion well before any one had any notions about race.

also to clarify a point i made earlier about europeans enslaving europeans, one of the "problems" with indentured servitude from their perspective was that it was supposed to be temporary (which is problematic that your workforce can up and leave), and they could leave and blend in to society or move away to another place without too much suspicion. native americans were susceptible to western europe's diseases and also knew the land enough to escape and maybe bring back reinforcements, africans had none of these "advantages" and from the point of view of colonialists must have been the perfect solution with a pigment that could be taken as synonymous for slave almost with impunity. based rather arbitrarily on a trait...try to imagine a a world where everyone shorter than you could basically be assumed to be inferior (or eye color for that matter, there is an experiment on youtube where someone did just this) and tell yourself you would never take advantage of that notion however arbitrary it is, to that extent i would agree that whites have made any effort to "prevent black people form accessing any real power."but i would argue that isn't any different from any other ethnic/national tribe on this earth throughout human civilization. (north korea & south korea, china & taiwan, jeez one of the reasons the european union is struggling now is in part due to the fractured nature of europe)

though i do basically believe "white supremacy" or more broadly colonialism is a circumstance of history but also in a way fundamentally human (not white supremacy, but ethnocentricity generally) i do however think reparations are necessary, america never really followed through on the 40 acres and a mule promise

 

[mr marcus]

 In reality you're just homosapien, with dark skin due to adapting to climate for survival reasons and vice versa for the so called whites and other "races"

 

[victor page]

I study anthropology, dna, and ancestry... I got on forums specificall based on that stuff... Youre not teaching a lesson about Latino. Youre just filling spacing telling me elementry info. Latino is any one of a culture wwhich speaks a Latin based language(French, Italian, Puerto Rican, Dominican, etc). Now that I just gave you the definition of Latino. How can you contradict yourself so badly? You don't believe the history taught to u yet believe other stuff from the same source that you get your history from? Think about that...really, I mean it. THINK ABOUT IT...

Now you're putting words in my mouth by saying why do I embrace such a small part of my ancestry and culture. Why because we don't lie and claim that were African or A EUROPEAN? There's no logic behind your thinking. It's Afro centric and racist. We're neither. Which is why logically consider my self homosapien but when I speak to the ignorant or uneducated people on this topic, I dumb it down and let it be knowe I'm mixed, not white, not black, not asian, not Indian. I'm mixed and embrace being so diverse. That mix is what keeps me looking fly as hell. But in America I'm considered a man of color, and mutt, ****, n word, etc due to all you guys illogical logic on "race" and the one drop rule.

Now, so called African Americans are not African. Youre mixed because either your ancestor was raped, raped a white person or just was attracted to a white man. It's a fact that it's over exaggerated that Africans were the only victims and the only ones raped. It's also illogical. Proof that the history we learn about our ancestors is that they make it seem like our African ancestors were innocent and did nothing. Again West Africans treated their slaves horribly just as ever race of people including Europeans did to their own slaves (white people) whom were white. No race is innocent. So cut the blablack and white supremacist **** out. Really you should sit back and think about everything ur told about history and see if it makes sense. What u learn I'm school is most likely lies, what you read on the Internet and books is lies, what a black person tells u is also biased and lies.

Unless we were there in those times we don't know crap. All we can do is use logic and make theories. It's what the schools for, historians, and that random person who says"school history is a lie young blood. The white man holding us f own, let me break down the TRUE HISTORY that the books won't tell u."

All our resources arenot 100% accurate true. Theyre all biased. Being that humans are so stupid, ignorant, and sensitive; people in control of the info just make **** up and then it leads to years of confusion and misinformed people.

NOW WHAT I JUST SAID, IS ACCURATE, FACTS AND TRUE. THAT'S FOR SURE. Stay strong my fellow human brother. Go use logic and stop believin everything u read and hear. If u do listen and read, then use unbiased logic and accept the truths. What do u gain out of being biased? Nada MI Mano. So Cojelo suave. Duces

This reads like complete jibberish.

You might want to start uploading audio. Keyboard isn't your friend.

 

[Top Boy]

also to clarify a point i made earlier about europeans enslaving europeans, one of the "problems" with indentured servitude from their perspective was that it was supposed to be temporary (which is problematic that your workforce can up and leave), and they could leave and blend in to society or move away to another place without too much suspicion. native americans were susceptible to western europe's diseases and also knew the land enough to escape and maybe bring back reinforcements, africans had none of these "advantages" and from the point of view of colonialists must have been the perfect solution with a pigment that could be taken as synonymous for slave almost with impunity. based rather arbitrarily on a trait...try to imagine a a world where everyone shorter than you could basically be assumed to be inferior (or eye color for that matter, there is an experiment on youtube where someone did just this) and tell yourself you would never take advantage of that notion however arbitrary it is, to that extent i would agree that whites have made any effort to "prevent black people form accessing any real power."but i would argue that isn't any different from any other ethnic/national tribe on this earth throughout human civilization. (north korea & south korea, china & taiwan, jeez one of the reasons the european union is struggling now is in part due to the fractured nature of europe)

though i do basically believe "white supremacy" or more broadly colonialism is a circumstance of history but also in a way fundamentally human (not white supremacy, but ethnocentricity generally) i do however think reparations are necessary, america never really followed through on the 40 acres and a mule promise

Expanded upon and mostly pulled out of the first chapter of The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander for those wondering.

Can grab the exact page numbers if requested.

 

This reads like complete jibberish.

You might want to start uploading audio. Keyboard isn't your friend.

Was wondering if I was the only one whom observed that

Sentence structure on fleek

 

[tokes99]

Expanded upon and mostly pulled out of the first chapter of The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander for those wondering.

Can grab the exact page numbers if requested.

i have read that book and highly recommend it! i wasn't aware i was pulling text verbatim from it down to the chapter & page...

 
This reads like complete jibberish.

You might want to start uploading audio. Keyboard isn't your friend.

Was wondering if I was the only one whom observed that

Sentence structure on fleek

isn't on fleek a good thing? #seriousquestion

 

[mr marcus]

View media item 1316029

 

[Top Boy]

 

Expanded upon and mostly pulled out of the first chapter of The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander for those wondering.

Can grab the exact page numbers if requested.

i have read that book and highly recommend it! i wasn't aware i was pulling text verbatim from it down to the chapter & page...

 

 

This reads like complete jibberish.

You might want to start uploading audio. Keyboard isn't your friend.

Was wondering if I was the only one whom observed that

Sentence structure on fleek

isn't on fleek a good thing? #seriousquestion

Im still trying to figure out how to properly incorporate that word lol.

And yeah, meant no offense by it btw. But when I read it I was like, "I swear I know where that information came from"

I agree.. Matterfact, for those whom observe this thread

MUST COP! ABSOLUTELY WORTH THE READ!

Should be added to the OP as mandatory reading.

 

[tr1ll]

 

Expanded upon and mostly pulled out of the first chapter of The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander for those wondering.


Can grab the exact page numbers if requested.

i have read that book and highly recommend it! i wasn't aware i was pulling text verbatim from it down to the chapter

Im still trying to figure out how to properly incorporate that word lol.

And yeah, meant no offense by it btw. But when I read it I was like, "I swear I know where that information came from"

I agree.. Matterfact, for those whom observe this thread

MUST COP! ABSOLUTELY WORTH THE READ!

Should be added to the OP as mandatory reading.

Your slang game is NOT of FLEEK.

 

[bradnsu]

 

[tokes99]

it is said that a little bit of knowledge is more dangerous than having none at all...there are so many easily look-up-able inaccuracies it makes me skeptical of the argument, the bits of factual info contained within that speech almost give an air of truth to the questionable stuff...I don't claim to any type of historian, just thinking critically about the crux of the speech, slavery was definitely about economics but was hardly a new concept, slavery has been known to exist with almost every version of human civilization...in the middle ages people basically BELONGED to land owned by a lord...Darwin may have well been a racist, doesn't make natural selection (which describes an evolutionary process and nothing more) any less valid, and that people would corrupt objective knowledge for their owns means is nothing new (in this very thread the insinuation of superiority by way of dominant vs. recessive has been made a few times...)

i think some people really WANT to believe there is this grand conspiracy against people of color, and true enough there have been many instances that reveal some truth to that belief, however is seems much more likely to be a consequence of history, one that should be atoned for, but not a plot against a particular creed of (wo)man...

 

[tokes99]

and as a slightly off topic addendum to this topic, just about every single person that ever lived was birthed into the world by a woman, but over the course of history it hasn't made that much of a difference in how, even today, a great many women are treated many parts of the world; is this too the result of a master plan???

 

[gotjz]

tokes99 You know I have a friend just like you. Reading some of your posts, I was almost ready to text him and say have you been on this forum and just didn't tell me lol. And we get into these type of discussions the majority of the time simply because finding a solution to the problems that plague and are universal to Africans really has become the purpose to my existence. I literally see nothing that comes close in regards to importance as that.

With that being said, one of the questions I always have for him is why he feels the need to defend or justify this stuff. "Whites aren't racists, this is just a result of how history went down....." Again, why? These are people that have had nothing but African people's worst intent at heart (those who haven't, didn't have the balls to condemn and totally give up their privileges to join the fight) yet you're worried about being offensive and over-generalizations? Even if we had to "brainwash" (remember this dominant vs recessive stuff is GOD work, not human dealings or theories) fellow African people to believe they're superior in an attempt to simply pull ourselves out of what HAS BEEN DONE TO US, you'd be against that why?

If I have to tell a black woman that the hair God gave her is the BEST hair one could ever have in order to stop her from frying her hair and skin with chemicals to look closer to the very same people who have created and manifested the GLOBAL society we all are apart of, I will.

Lastly, I may be naive but have yet to find another group of "humans" that have committed a similar number or even single atrocities that match the routine, persistent, grotesque nature of certain perpetrators I know.... The very worst of the worst that has happened in this world (that we can all agree we "know" of) has a common culprit behind it. Miss me with the "we are all one" ish. That ship sailed over 500 years ago.

One more point I have as well is that yes all the scholarly, historical, philosophical, etc information is great. I do my own research as well, and don't want to diminish the importance of that. But to me what's even more important is the FEEL. If you're of God (God or GOOD whichever you prefer for it's only a difference of one 'O') and have come into consciousness/awareness you can't tell me this FEELS right. You have a people that were brutalized and disenfranchised in the worst ways known to man, yet those same people are at the dirt bottom of a society that's governed by the same owners and brutalizers? That's a clear effort and plan. If it weren't, the victims of all this would be basically spoiled and pampered in an attempt to make right for an in-correctable wrong.

 

[trueprada]

New York Daily News  ‏

A Brooklyn mariner won the USNavy’s prestigious Top Sailor award.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn-mariner-wins-prestigious-top-sailor-award-article-1.2055215?

 

[gotjz]

^^^ Counter productive if you ask me....

 

[Maximus Meridius]

Egypt bans 'inaccurate' Exodus film

View media item 1324343

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Egypt has banned a Hollywood film based on the Biblical book of Exodus because of what censors described as "historical inaccuracies".

The head of the censorship board said these included the film's depiction of Jews as having built the Pyramids, and that an earthquake, not a miracle by Moses, caused the Red Sea to part.

Exodus: Gods and Kings stars Christian Bale as Moses.

There have also been reports that the film is banned in Morocco.

Although the state-run Moroccan Cinema Centre (CCM) had given the film the green light, Moroccan business website Medias24.com said that officials had decided to ban the movie from being screened the day before its premiere.

According to the book of Exodus, Jewish slaves were led to freedom by Moses after God inflicted a series of plagues on Egypt.

The Pyramids are believed to have been built about 1,000 years before the story of the Exodus.

The Biblical story tells how the Red Sea was parted by a miracle performed by God through Moses, allowing the Jewish people to escape from the pursuing Egyptian army.

Exodus: Gods and Kings, which cost a reported $140m (£89m) to make, took $24.5m on its debut weekend.

Mixed reviews

The Biblical epic overtook the third instalment of The Hunger Games, following three weeks at number one. However, it has had mixed reviews.

Time called it a "cinematically uninspired retelling of the Moses story", Vulture said it was "as uneven as Ridley Scott's career", while the New York Times described it as "both woefully insufficient and much too much".

The film's opening fell well short of other modern Biblical films, including Darren Aronofsky's Noah which took $43.7m on its opening weekend in March and 2004's The Passion of the Christ, which took $83.3m.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30605059

No mention of the real race of the Egyptains, but hey its better than nothing....

Good, that movie is a big *** slap in the face. They even made Sphinx look white. **** is so blatant. Then people will say "well why does it matter" if it didn't matter the powers that be wouldn't be trying so hard to change history.

 

[AEA18]