Its a common scam to pose as somebody "black", sometimes complete with bogus
"ebonic" dialog. This is supposed to be more "convincing." Another common dodge
is the "Asian" woman, who is just "inquiring" or "asking" if, well you know, why
bleks are the most criminally violent people in the world. Are there any
statistics or studies on this asks the "innocent" inquiry? Riggght..........
The "Asian" disguise is supposed to deflect a critical response, after all
who wants to be seen criticizing an "innocent" Asian female?
Course the "innocent Asian inquirer" never asks why allegedly "low" violence
Chinese racked up a massive body count in the tens of millions under "the thought
of Chairman Mao", or why smiling Asian dude Pol Pot wiped out around 20-25% of
Cambodia's population to build his "new socialist" society. Then there are those
sweet "low violence" white people. Hey, what's several million Poles, Jews or Russians
along with "useless" handicapped kids or mentally ill people slaughtered in
cold blood, and quite efficiently too?
Another angle is to set up a fake strawman argument, then having set up the false
strawman, pretend to be "debating" the fake point and "refuting" it. The classic
strawman is the "true negro" stereotypical construct, where African are only
"supposed" to look a certain way, usually like Louis Armstrong or Mike Tyson. Anything
different can be defined away as some sort of "mixed" race or "outside" Asiatic
or "Caucasoid." Africans aren't supposed to be diverse people, even though scientifically
they are the most diverse people in the world. But we know the game..
Yet another standard scam is the broken record repetition dodge- that is keep on denying
proven fact by just repeating the same denialist talking points. It is settled
SCIENTIFIC fact that the Ancient Egyptians were indigenous, tropical Africans, called
"black" in some modern usage, but the "black" label is really secondary. They were
typically dark-skinned tropical Africans that originated south of the Sahara, and
hard data shows this. Labels can;t change this scientific reality.
^^This is
hard scholarship and data not speeches during black history month.
But in any event even credible mainstream Egyptologists critical of so-called "Afrocentrism"
have said the use of the modern social construct term label "black" is reasonable. But
the opponents already know this. The only thing left now is to repeatedly deny it as an article
of faith, like the flat-earth faithful who still deny that the earth is a sphere shape.
