|
Post by africurious on Nov 29, 2018 22:15:49 GMT -5
" Despite these efforts, the current human reference genome derives primarily from a single individual.."What single individual they talking bout? The ref genome is the genome of a random guy who gave a blood sample in response to an ad. It was his dna scientists sequenced when it was said that the “human genome” was sequenced. His dna is now the standard aka reference genome for humans. I read somewhere that he may’ve been a black American too.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Nov 29, 2018 22:04:18 GMT -5
Good links. Africa has its scientific innovators- it just does not have them in the volume Europe and Asia does. It will take time and good modern education to remedy this situation. And you are indeed correct that Africans as far as immigrants to the US, are more into hard science than native-born blacks. THis debunks claims that some sort of magical "white blood" is responsible for high level functioning in science and related fields. The Africans have much LESS magical "white blood" than the US blacks. "The Africans have much LESS magical "white blood" than the US blacks." Please state your source for this claim? A number of black Africans claim Jewish ancestry. The Igbos, the Lembas and Ethiopian jews come to mind. www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLAZhsnmCbQwww.youtube.com/watch?v=hHJFIBUQkbAwww.youtube.com/watch?v=aFZBRd5Cj8Yen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igbo_Jewsen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_of_Bilad_el-SudanLike you, I reject the pernicious myth of "white blood is responsible for high level functioning in science and related fields." because neither Thomas O. Mensah, the Ghanaian-American chemical engineer whose manufacturing process made fiber optics, the stuff that makes the internet available worldwide, a viable commercial alternative to copper wires. www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6OFRUCiwuI nor Bertin Nahum, the creator of the "Rosa" surgical robot claim Jewish ancestry. www.youtube.com/watch?v=NI043F5voZowww.youtube.com/watch?v=kPzDq9Tb0uEFrom what I’ve seen your challenges to assumptions are usually valid but I can’t see why anyone would question zarahan’s claim when it’s so obvious. Also you seem to attach whiteness to Jewishness and view Judaism as more than just a religion (but an ethnicity/race also). Judaism is a religion that has been practiced by people of various ethnicities/races the last few 1,000 yrs. Associating Judaism with whiteness is a modern phenomenon originating in Europe based on Europeans familiarity with Ashkenazi Jews (who are converts living in Europe). Judaism is a religion and not a race/ethnicity/whatever (you can read shlomo sand’s “the invention of the Jewish people” for an excellent summary or read articles/genetic papers by Prof. Elhaik). AAs have been found to carry 20-25% of their paternal ancestry from Europeans. This has been out for years so you can search for the genetic studies and get em free at this point. This finding is no surprise—rape was frequent during slavery. The euro maternal ancestry of AAs is only a few % points I believe. No African group who considers themselves black has so far been found to have majority or large minority of euro/other non-African dna unless it’s from colonial period. The exceptions are Africans from the horn, Sudan and some central Afs, most of whom don’t claim Jewish ancestry. Also these non-African genetic material they carry have nothing to do with being Jewish. All this is old news to anyone who follows genetics of Africans. Also old news is that Ethiopian Jews have already been tested and found to carry the same genetic profile as other Ethiopians. Ethiopian jews are descended from converts, just as most Jewish groups worldwide are. The Lemba didn’t claim “Jewish” ancestry until euros came there. They have been tested and they do have paternal ancestry that is similar to what many Jews (ashkenazis, sephardis, mizrahi, etc) have but who knows what “original Jewish dna” is when we don’t have “original Jews” to test and just about every Jew is primarily descended from converts. In any case Lemba’s non-African paternal ancestry is at lower % (can’t remember #) than AAs. Igbos also didn’t claim Jewish ancestry until the whiteman told igbos they were inferior negroes and gave them Christianity which labels Hebrews the chosen people. The limited dna testing among igbos has shown they’re similar profile to their west Af neighbors. There’s a Yoruba prince who currently also claims the Yoruba are from Jews despite the Yoruba having 2 other older origin stories. This is a new claim. No more strange than other W Afs claiming to come from Jews or Egyptians, which is even more popular than the former (the whiteman taught them well to be ashamed of themselves and seek greatness outside of the “true negroes”). If you want to understand how these falsities spread you can read this article by an Igbo professor who studied his people’s history: www.google.com/amp/s/africaisrael.wordpress.com/2012/06/23/expolding-the-jewish-israel-hebrew-myth-of-igbo-origins-6/amp/
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jul 2, 2018 10:41:19 GMT -5
Well, I'm not leaving out the history of the European powers, check out video with PLO Lumumba, which he details the colonial powers in Africa with the new addition of China, which has come to Africa with a much more diplomatic nuance; but can be just as deadly . what the old e saying," beware of strangers baring gifts ."Is China the Trojan Horse?? Well I certainly wasn't implying old enemies of African sovereignty be given a pass, just that one cannot allowed the same mistakes of the past, African govt gave western govt licence to setup bases in their lands and asked for their help in dealing with African issues that should be and can be solved by Africans themselves, thus setting themselves up for further resource grabs under the guise of "Security" we have all seen this movie before..why are Chinese and Japanese bases in Africa again?? Sorry Nebsen the above response was to Kel and Africurious. My response is very different from what Kel is saying. Kel is saying China is a “non-issue” and “no threat to Africa”. I’m saying China may be a threat but I haven’t seen any evidence they’re particularly worse than the other 2 main non-continental actors: US, France. This thread and previous ones have reflected the general tenor in media of China being particularly bad for Africa hence my statements and questions. What are some examples of non-continental govts setting up bases in order to “grab resources” in the post-colonial period? If by “grab” you mean “steal” I can’t think of any. African govts are eager sellers, there’re well-managed international markets to trade raw materials, no African country is blocked from selling openly to any country by a colonial master. Those 3 reasons make it unnecessary to spend huge amounts of money to set up bases in Africa and use one’s military to “grab resources”. That only made sense in the colonial period. If the bases were all about stealing resources then Congo DRC would’ve had a major base as it’s army is weak, keeps being threatened both internally and from Rwanda and it’s extremely resource rich. I’m sure the govt would love to have a big base there as guarantee from being overthrown. Instead there’s a small outpost run by the US in far NE border to help catch the madman Kony. The US’s biggest base in Africa by far is in Djibouti, China’s lone base is there too, and many other countries have bases there. Djibouti doesn’t have a lot of resources. The reason so many countries are there militarily is the strategic logistical point of the bab al-mandeb which is one of the most important shipping lanes in the world. Also for the US it’s also a good logistical spot to ferry men and equipment to the nearby strategic areas in the Middle East. In fact, the US’s many bases in Africa seem to be there to allow it the opportunity to have transit spots across the continent so it can militarily move almost anywhere and to fight terrorism. See this article here that outlines the many outposts the US has in Africa (while most media coverage and layman talk is focused on the bogeyman China): tonyseed.wordpress.com/2016/05/25/us-empire-of-african-bases/I agree that African countries should in general not have foreign run bases on their soil as it can always lead to interference by the foreigner. But as far as African govts solving african military problems often they can’t or are unwilling to help each other in certain instances. Example, what countries in Africa were able and willing to help Mali turn back the Islamist attack a few years ago? Such aid cost lots of money and requires multi-year commitment. Also, just because a fellow country is African doesn’t mean it’s your friend. Congo had intermittent wars that killed 4million people and many surrounding countries jumped in. Uganda in particular stole a whole lot of resources from Congolese territory they controlled. One of the chief invaders/murderers of Congo was a group controlled by Rwanda govt. Many African govts don’t care about their own ppl so it should be expected some of them will behave horribly on foreign land.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 30, 2018 22:05:09 GMT -5
I don’t understand this emphasis on China as a big bogeyman in Africa. The US and France even Britain have been much bigger threats to Africa, involving themselves in African domestic matters and overthrowing govt’s to put in new leadership more agreeable to their ends. I haven’t seen much evidence of what China is doing that is so much more of a threat than the US or France. Mostly what I hear is vague innuendo. It seems ppl are just reacting based off what’s being presented in western or western-slanted media. Not much was/is being reported when America and W Euro make deals but China’s moves are watched like a hawk. Ok China has a military base in Africa. So? The US and France have several. And of any major power France is the one that is definitely out for a neocolonialist agenda as has been demonstrated by their actions upon their colonies’ “independence” and even a sort of admission from their former prez. China and Japan are out for themselves in Africa as all outside powers are but so what is new?
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 21, 2018 16:11:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 13, 2018 12:59:43 GMT -5
@ Asante [ Sir.....We are looking for a place in Africa to get away from these Devils. If it was really about all of that that you're saying then we could just sail on back to a Utopian Nigeria. That is not the case....Let's not play games here. ] Yes we all can cherry pick Nigerian slums or Nigerian high rise, the same can be said of the U.S Europe or places in Asia, is that the game you of all persons wanna play?? And in an Ironic twist, maybe ,just maybe such squalor exists in their home countries is the driving force to succeed, maybe even the poorest AAs haven't hit rock bottom like the above pic. I've have watched Nigerians and other Africans hustling knock off bags,watches etc to tourist in NY Chinatown of all places sharing back ally kosk with Chinese, whom they had nothing in common with, back in the day and both hauling ass when the cops approach, today they moved in doors and are legit , I suspect these are the poorer sorts from such hellhole , who would later send their kids to go on to higher education. My point is they are not afraid of the hustle with an end game, not just the hustle for hustling sake. I've seen them doing the same raw Entrepreneurship in places in Asia, most Americans Black or others, are in the English language business or military, although the Money isn't bad, still they are working for someone, incidentally Jamaicans are into moving car parts. although some are in the English business. Some spot on comments anansi. @ Asante We were talking about nigerians in america, not about nigeria. How does cherry picking pics help AAs get out from the bottom of the socio-econ ladder? How does that stop Nigerians from getting more $$$ than AA's in AAs own country? How does what Nigerians or other black immigrants get paid prevent old line AAs from getting paid better? You still mad? Spam some more cherry picked pics while black immigrants get that $.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 13, 2018 12:42:13 GMT -5
Good roundup- real substance. Some questions: 1) But could not detractors argue that the progress of the Nigerians is artificial- built up by a white supremacist cabal to LOOK good, so as to pursue the white supremacist agenda? Exactly how ahem, an African-immigrant relentlessly progressing in his/her studies is part of the supremacist agenda has been left unexplained to date, but could not the racist power structure just be allowing these negroes the ILLUSION of progress so they can be used to make native blacks "look bad?" That argument is so spurious it doesn't even require rebuttal but I sometimes engage those detractors cuz the argument grates me so much. From the census data I posted Nigerians in america have already surpassed the median income of white americans ($60.3k vs $57.4k). Do these detractors think this omniscent and omnipotent white bogeyman in this scenario would've allowed that to happen when said bogeyman could've just limited nigerians and other immigrant negroes to median incomes 20% lower than whites and still accomplished what these detractors have alleged? Or that this white bogeyman would've let asians make so much $ when they don't like them either? Makes no sense.
here’re no earmarked positions for affirmative action in schools or jobs. That’d be illegal, smh. One black getting a spot doesn’t mean another won’t get one, smh. You sound like those racist whites who assume cuz they didn’t get in a school or a job they wanted it’s cuz a minority took “their spot” via affirmative action. 2) Could not the detractors argue that while quotas are illegal, "diversity" guidelines "encourage" the utilization of Nigerians and other Africans and Caribbean folk, essentially pushing aside native Americans who suffered for civil rights, and would be benefiting from these slots, in favor of foreigners? This is one of the major arguments- that affirmative action is benefiting those better off, not the broad masses. 1: africans and caribbean folk were involved in the civil rights movement and in other black movements in america prior to that. Stokely Carmichael is one of the most notable figures from the civil rights movement and he was from Trinidad & Tobago. Marcus Garvey was Jamaican and started one of the largest pro-black movements in the US and inspired many blacks in the struggle who came after him. People need to recognize that blacks of immigrant stock have been in the trenches with american blacks for a long time. Just cuz people don't hear an accent or a name they find weird doesn't mean they're not immigrants or descended from immigrants.
2: Alls claims need evidence. Where's the evidence that the white bogeyman is favoring black immigrant stock over AAs? The disparity in achievement alone is no evidence of such.
3: "diversity" guidelines/affirmative action/etc. cannot explain the disparity in achievement between immigrant stock and AAs. It's a lazy argument but also ignorant cuz it assumes blacks get to where they are solely based on diversity/affirmative action.
4: The goal of affirmative action was changed in the 70s from specifically addressing black american oppression. People need to take up that issue with congress and the supreme court instead of coming at black immigrant stock. Further white women and all non-whites are beneficiaries of this too. Affirmative action is insufficient to address core factors in black inequality such as: historical red lining and still current housing discrimination that created/maintains segregated blighted black neighborhoods, unequal application of law enforcement against blacks, implicit/explicit bias at the individual human level. Further, America has become a more unequal country over the last several decades and it's now more difficult for the extreme lower classes to move up. Because black americans have been historically kept in a low econ position they are now disproportionately trapped in the low socio-econ bracket due to current american econ infrastructure (even if we disregard racism). That's the f'd up thing about it.
AAs are disproportionately high among lowest decile of US income where ppl are trapped in poverty. Quote is from this article (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/) which has pretty good explanation of american class structure.
3) How do you respond to the argument used by assorted white right-wingers, heriditarians, etc that poo poo African achievements by holding that such achievements are by an "elite"- educated way above the average of their home societies? This claim is actually true. But the problem is that these people aren't consistent with their argument and recognize that the success of asians in america is also due to this fact. It's been demonstrated by studies too that immigrant asians outperform old line asian americans in entry at elite american colleges. This was mentioned in a study discussed in the 2nd article I posted. The success of Ashkenazi jews in america likely works on a similar dynamic. Ashenazi jews in western europe were an economically powerful group better off than the avg w. european. We shouldn't be surprised that they went to another country (with their white skins) and still were an elite group. But racists prefer to use race and ethno-cultural arguments to explain these peoples successes.
4) Finally, an assortment of racists, right wingers, etc allege that levels of "white blood" explain the progress of peoples of African descent. But how is it that your roundup shows Africans who have very little "white blood" so far ahead of the pack , particularly since the Africans are from a variety of situations- including refugees from the many wars and political turmoil in some African countries? Furthermore your roundup shows that Ethiopians, who are said by many to have more "Caucasoid" or "Eurasian" genes that those "more negroid" West African types, falling near the bottom of the pack. How can this be, if "Caucasoid blood" was working its magic? ANd how come the Black AMurricans who have up to 20% "white blood" in some studies (Kittles etc) are at the bottom of the pile? How can this possibly be? Hahaha. Can I tell you how it makes me happy that the "true negroes" are the ones doing the best? Even subsaharans as a group have higher median income in the US than the caucasoid-blooded N. Africans . But I'm sure the racists are going to come up with some mental gymnastics to excuse this fact.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 12, 2018 13:25:05 GMT -5
Now this is a post for all the playa haters, special shout out to Asante and Kel. www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-10-13/it-isn-t-just-asian-immigrants-who-excel-in-the-u-s-3 preceding quotes from: www.africaresource.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=235:african-immigrants-are-the-most-educated&catid=135:immigration&Itemid=348Are y'all big mad or little mad now? Uppity immigrant negroes stealing your shine? I pulled the latest census data for median household income for several ethno-racial groups and surprisingly AAs were at the bottom (though of course other ethno-racial groups are likely to be lower too as I didn't pull the majority of groups): Asian Indian alone (400-401) $101,558 Filipino alone (420-421) $83,256 Russian (148-151) $75,283 Asian alone $74,245 Croatian (109-110) $70,382 Chinese alone (410-419) $69,689 German (032-045) $63,054 Portuguese (084-086) $62,943 Nigerian (553-560) $60,376Spaniard (200-209) $59,724 French (except Basque) (016, 026-028, 083) $58,757 Dutch (021, 029) $58,240 Korean alone (440-441) $58,146 White alone $57,407 Ghanaian (529) $56,321Total [U.S.] population $53,889 Cambodian alone (405-409) $53,569 Senegalese (564) $52,000West Indian (335) $51,746Hmong alone (422) $50,773 Bangladeshi alone (402) $48,103 Central American (excludes Mexican) (221-230) $43,181 Cuban (270-274) $42,660 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) (200-299) $42,651 Ethiopian (522-524) $42,485Subsaharan African (All groups [500-599]) $42,290American Indian and $37,408 Alaska Native alone Black or African American alone $35,695 See all those black immigrant groups in bold earning way more than the median income of AAs (>$35.7k because black immigrants are included in the figure and they bring up the median)? Y'all haters mad? See the Nigerians earning more than even white americans, koreans, dutch--y'all mad? See them earning more than the american median while y'all earning way below--y'all mad? Wanna bash your black brother of immigrant stock instead of trying to figure out why the american systems is so f'd up? And no i'm not talking some nonsense about black immigrants being groomed or taking affirmative action spots. Everytime I'm in the corporate world and I see a black face in a high position i'm proud. I may not know what background he/she is from but i'm proud one of us is on a high level. When I and fellow blacks in the corporate world give each other the black man nod we don't even know the background of the other but we know the struggle of the skin and see kin, hence the nod. Y'all hating negroes who can't contribute to solving problems but love to lament can stay in your corner cry me a river. I'ma build with the blacks (AAs, africans, immigrants, whoever) that're trying to move all of us ahead instead of knocking the next black group.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 12, 2018 12:23:35 GMT -5
“Folk” weren’t questioning the fetishisim they were talking ish about Nigerians and trying to downplay their achievements, similar to how some whites do when blacks or other POC accomplish things but play it off as leveling relevant critiques. In tone and substance of their language the jealousy and insecurity was obvious.
Please explain who is exploiting? How are they exploiting? And what “situation” are they exploiting?
Of course higher ed and income achievement puts some in a better situation than others. Are Nigerians or other black immigrants supposed to get permission from native blacks on how far they should go in life or they need to restrict their achievement to what native blacks have accomplished? What exactly is your point in mentioning that?Those exploiting the issue are those using the Nigerian situation to take unfair jibes at Black Americans as hapless unproductive, as compared to Nigerian paragons of perfection in school and on the job. Black Americans too for their part have taken some cheap shots at Nigerians. Some people on both sides are equally to blame for excessive rhetoric. www.library.yale.edu/~fboateng/akata.htmANd who says Nigerian Americans are supposed to wait for permission from Native Blacks? No one said that- you did. What exactly is your point in mentioning that? True, I’ve seen people exploit achievements gaps in this way but aint nobody mention that before Asante and Kel brought it up with their african immigrant bashing. The convo wasn’t even going that way nor was it even how the OP broached the thread. They are some triggered haters. I didn’t make a statement. I asked a question cuz that’s the only thing I could see implied by your pointing out a fact which takes place in virtually all countries except for communist ones. That’s why I followed up and asked you what you meant exactly.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 12, 2018 12:21:57 GMT -5
"Are Nigerians or other black immigrants supposed to get permission from native blacks on how far they should go in life or they need to restrict their achievement to what native blacks have accomplished? What exactly is your point in mentioning that?" No. but they should stop acting like what they have accomplished isn't a DIRECT result of native activism and struggle and that what they accomplish they do by taking advantage of opportunities originally earmarked for the Black Americans. what is the point of your question ? what is it exactly that Nigerians have accomplished that natives have not ? It is the native who have managed to carve out a space for themselves despite overwhelming numerical, political, cultural and financial odds in a society that marks them for an underclass. Whereas the Nigerians have to leave their own country and come to where the Black American has already prepared a base in order for them to be able to move up in life. You either don’t know the definition of earmark or/and don’t understand how affirmative action works. There’re no earmarked positions for affirmative action in schools or jobs. That’d be illegal, smh. One black getting a spot doesn’t mean another won’t get one, smh. You sound like those racist whites who assume cuz they didn’t get in a school or a job they wanted it’s cuz a minority took “their spot” via affirmative action. I talk with a lot of black immigrants and I’m one myself. We know a lot about the black struggle for equality in the US, some of us even more than some AAs. 2 mods/founders of this site are black immigrants from Africa and Jamaica (anansi and takruri) who both know a ton about what’s gone on in American struggle. You mad at them too for taking your “earmark”? You should realize that blacks achieve ish not just by affirmative action cuz that ain’t even enough. So what black immigrants achieve ain’t just cuz they took your nonexistent earmark. Don’t hate, congratulate. Either way, we black immigrants are gonna continue tryna climb this racist ladder and we’re actually helping break down obstacles so other blacks can advance. So it’s not just AAs who are helping to advance black equality in this country although they set the foundation cuz they were here in greater #s. One hand washes the other but haters like you just try to protect your position on the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. Want to keep all the immigrant blacks behind you even though that ain’t doing ish to advance the position of AAs. But at least that way you can say another group is lower than your group. Nigerians have accomplished a lot. That's why you hating. Don't worry I'll be addressing you and your fellow haters later with some additional info.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 11, 2018 15:18:50 GMT -5
Well if the article in OP fetishizes NIgerians folk will question it, though I agree some of what Asante says seems over the top. Still he has a point as to those exploiting the situation. Re- Educational or income achievement- no it does not make any group INHERENTLY better human beings, but it puts some in a much better situation than others. “Folk” weren’t questioning the fetishisim they were talking shit about Nigerians and trying to downplay their achievements, similar to how some whites do when blacks or other POC accomplish things but play it off as leveling relevant critiques. In tone and substance of their language the jealousy and insecurity was obvious. Please explain who is exploiting? How are they exploiting? And what “situation” are they exploiting? Of course higher ed and income achievement puts some in a better situation than others. Are Nigerians or other black immigrants supposed to get permission from native blacks on how far they should go in life or they need to restrict their achievement to what native blacks have accomplished? What exactly is your point in mentioning that?
|
|
|
Post by africurious on Jun 10, 2018 23:32:41 GMT -5
Why do certain native blacks like to hate on black immigrants to the US? The OP posted an article that fetishizes Nigerians and all of a sudden people are talking about African immigrants claiming to be “special” and saying watch out for them. Sounds like some loserific ish. Stop hating the next man doing well. It’s obvious racism is still a problem and holds back all blacks whether immigrant or native. How about congratulate your black brother instead of being jealous. Educational or income achievement doesn’t mean any group is better than the other. Nigerians or any black immigrant doing well is a boon for native blacks cuz that black immigrant who does well is prob as likely to look out for yo black ass as a native black is. I’m gonna celebrate any black group in the US doing well as long as they don’t shit on other blacks.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on May 14, 2018 22:13:53 GMT -5
If I'm following your question/argument right I believe the reason some of them are anti-Islam is that they tend to not be Muslim. A similar proportion would likely be anti-Christian if not for the fact that most blacks in the Americas were raised Christian. Being Christian allows them to separate the religion from the mass enslavement of Africans by Christians while they can't do so with Islam as its foreign to them. Also the way some history books are written the trans Saharan and East African trades are intertwined with Islam while of course the same is not done for Christianity with the trans Atlantic trade cuz of course the books in the west where written by Christians or ppl brought up in Christendom who've follow conventions of historiography there. That's a good point, but I would add regardless if they view Islam as forgein or not Islam is tied to our history and there is a good chance they may have a Muslim ancestor or two. As African Muslims found themselves bound for the Americas with some leaving records, there could be possibly more records that haven't surfaced yet, I know of Ibn Umar Said and some others yet we're lead to believe that Europeans found us languishing in ignorance before they arrived. Yea a lot of them might not even know that many Muslims were taken as slaves including maybe some of their ancestors. But when I said foreign I meant more so that it’s not personal to them as Christianity is (they and their families practice it) so it’s easier to vilify the other religion that they don’t know. It’s inconsistent thinking and contradiction as you say but that’s human emotions.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on May 14, 2018 0:27:58 GMT -5
So I wasn't exactly sure where to post this but since it's concerning religion (Islam to be specific) so I'll just rant from here. More often times than not do I notice most "Afrocentrics", or any other assortment of pro-black types when discussing African history rail against Islam which is understanble to an extent. They sing the praises of Mansa Musa yet he was noted as a pious and devout Muslim, cling to the scholarly legacy of Timbuktu despite it's overt Islamic influence, quote Malcom X all day, and go on about how the Moors ruled over Europe (Southern Europe to be extact i.e. Spain) even though it was obvious that they were overwhelmingly Muslim. Of course some of the predictable responses I'm going to get is the Muslim slave trade which Africans themselves participated in and if anyone is actually aware of history would know that the trade in African slaves only intensified only after Muslims were cut off from areas such as parts of Eastern Europe and other parts as well but this isn't to diminish what took place just to point out obvious facts that both sides (Afrocentrics & Eurocentrics) like to cherry pick and use conveniently when they see fit in an argument. I would add more but that's all I got for now, but when discussing the matter let's try to keep it half-way civil please. If I'm following your question/argument right I believe the reason some of them are anti-Islam is that they tend to not be Muslim. A similar proportion would likely be anti-Christian if not for the fact that most blacks in the Americas were raised Christian. Being Christian allows them to separate the religion from the mass enslavement of Africans by Christians while they can't do so with Islam as its foreign to them. Also the way some history books are written the trans Saharan and East African trades are intertwined with Islam while of course the same is not done for Christianity with the trans Atlantic trade cuz of course the books in the west where written by Christians or ppl brought up in Christendom who've follow conventions of historiography there.
|
|
|
Post by africurious on May 14, 2018 0:00:39 GMT -5
Hahaha, you funny. Ad homina is a loser's tactic. Xxyman is gramps. He knicknamed me Sage. Are emotions of hate and jealousy your guide? Oh now you're playing the victim card. Good try. Don't start ish and I won't have to shoot back. Also I'd need to know stuff about you to be jealous or hateful and I barely know anything about your life. You just a dude on niche online forums. Maybe u need to fabricate haters to make you feel good about yourself or puff your chest. Straw man argument. You the only one saying there needs to be direct quote saying something explicitly bad about blacks. I never argued that nor did the other 2 posters that had an issue with Sergi. I said his theory was inherently anti-black. If you want to play like you only understand explicit language and can't put 2 and 2 together to recognize implicit racism then that's your issue. All the quotes I use from Sergi are meant to substantiate the implicit racism in his racial theory. Even if I buy your argument that he was using savage in technical term it still doesn't detract from implied racism of his Hamites/eurafrican theory. This is irrelevant so this is a red herring tactic. Further, you know full well that Sergi's Eurasians aren't the same as what's meant in modern parlance. His Eurasians excluded west Europeans, eastern euros along southern coast, levantines and Mesopotamians among others. So try to fool someone else with that sleight of hand. Dispassionately? You brought up some gripe of yours that's at least 12 yrs old and confused it for what I was talking about then replied with a pissy response. Now you wanna act like you had no feelings involved. Sure I buy it. Whatever, deuces. All you're offeriing is head in the sand avoidance of racist theory.
|
|