“The colour of a man’s skin should not determine the colour of his mind.”
- Xenocrates

hy is it so common for black people to be associated with negativity? I bet most people looking at the photo above will automatically think that it’s a depiction of black men in a prison. You wouldn’t be too far off if that’s the first interpretation you had – but you’d still be wrong. It goes to show that your mind is automatically trained to think of black people in a negative way. But that aside, even within the race itself, there seems to be a destructive propensity that drives the collective. It’s not limited to blacks in America, but blacks everywhere. Because of this and the civil rights upheavals which have occurred over the decades, almost everywhere you go in non black cultures, people walk on eggshells whenever a black man walks in through the door. Those who don’t are immediately labelled as being “racist” or “bigots”, whether or not it’s true. In fact, black people have made so many people of other ethinicities, races and cultures so uncomfortable around them, that it has made many people who were not even racist to begin with, start to develop a strong dislike for people of African descent. For some people, it’s easier to just be racist, simply because they don’t have the patience to put up with the hypocritical B.S. But it’s not just non blacks who’ve become frustrated with their culture being hijacked by this hypocrisy. Even people within this ethnic demarcation have expressed such misgivings. This post is dedicated exposing the fallacy of the ignorant mindset that people of African descent like to call “black culture”. Black people, pay attention. This is going to hurt, but it will challenge you to think about the way you think and how you perceive yourselves.
The ‘All men are created equal’ Myth
In the United States Declaration of Independence, we read that “all men are created equal“. However, history seems to disagree with this notion. Even though scientists agree that mankind is rooted in Africa, the groups that migrated out of Africa seem to have done comparatively better than those that remained behind. As the earth’s climate changed over the ages, groups that chose to move north carried most of the genetic markers that made them fairer skinned with more varying features in hair, nose, skull and eyes as they seemed to prefer cooler northern temperate regions of the continent. Those that remained behind carried most of the genetic markers that predicated darker skin and a more monolithic aesthetic features in the nose, eyes, hair and body structure as they seemed to prefer the harsher, torrid zones closer to the equator. After several thousand years of interbreeding within these separate groups, the genetic markers most common to each group became the de facto traits of each group’s third generation offspring and races were formed. White races appeared in the north, and darker races in the south.
However, an interesting thing happened. The races that moved north developed faster than those that remained in Africa. In fact, when the white man found black folks in Africa, they were still toting wooden spears, woven shields, wearing loin cloth and living in mud huts. At this time, white men were already wearing sophisticated embroidered cotten clothing and leather boots, had already discovered the new world, conquered the oceans in water faring vessels, had mapped the earth, the seas and the stars, created governments, world trade, economies of scale, mathematics, chemistry, geography, had invented point and click weapons that he didn’t have to use at close range and lived in brick and mortar homes. What is the explanation for this disparity in technological evolution? Why didn’t the darker races in Africa evolve just the same? There are several theories:
Theory #1: Not All Men were created Equal
The first theory suggests that the original groups that left Africa not only carried the genetic markers that made then fairer in complexion, but also the genetic markers that were more likely to produce people who evolved cognitively at a greater pace. This, purports the theory, is evidenced by their natural propensity to explore the rest of the world (hence leaving Africa in the first place). That propensity to explore is the same that produces a greater degree of cognitive evolution, since explorers are people who naturally think outside the box. So it’s like saying that all the smart people packed up shop and left Africa once the climate changed. This we see in a greater degree through the ages as white men became smarter, and theorised that the world wasn’t flat and set out on a voyage to prove it, thus discovering America and the new world. The rest is history.
This theory is the one that most people dislike even though it has the greatest degree of historical and scientific proof. People dislike this theory simply because they prefer to think that all men were created equal. Who can blame them? Nobody wants to think that their race is intrinsically stupid – irrespective of the overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary.
Theory #2: Africa didn’t feed the mind
The second theory suggests that all men were created equal and that the migration out of Africa was due to internal struggles in the original groups that settled in various parts of the dark continent. This theory suggests that after several eras of conflict, the physically weaker groups were forced out of Africa, and further north (which explains why black people are generally physically superior to most other races). The theory then suggests that when these people moved north and their offspring became white, they discovered more fertile soil, which was better for raising crops and livestock. Much of Africa is well known for being a desert land that is rich in mineral ore and other precious gems. This however comes at a trade off, as it doesn’t make the land suitable for growing ground produce. This subsequently led to the groups that moved north being better nourished than those in Africa. The better nourished groups thus developed better brains and thus evolved faster.
This theory, however plausible, fails to explain how the aryan caucasians who lived in the icy tundras of northern Europe (now Norway, Switzerland, The Netherlands & Germany) still evolved even faster than their dark haired counter parts in middle Europe (now Spain, France, Portugal and so on). It simply fails to explain the phenomena where the further north men moved, the smarter they seemed to get. It’s a nice theory though – however inconclusive.
Theory #3: Slavery did it.
The third theory suggests that over the ages, after the dark and fair races were formed and the migrations took place, that the people who migrated north came back and conquered Africa – multiple times. They suggest that over the ages, black people were enslaved so often that it didn’t give them a chance to evolve socially, economically or technologically as a cohesive society. They suggest that when the Egyptians (who were dark skinned), Greeks, Persians, Babylonians, Romans and everyone else in between conquered the known world, they kept hitting the “Reset” button on the black race, thus inhibiting their otherwise natural propensity for cognitive evolution.
This theory has plenty of flaws. First of all, it fails to account for why the races which moved north evolved faster than the black race to the point where they could return and conquer Africa multiple times. The mere fact that they conquered Africa suggests that they were at least more technologically advanced. Secondly, this theory doesn’t explain why in every recorded account of a first encounter between white races and black ones, that the black people – get this – bowed down and worshipped them. It also doesn’t explain why black people sold their own kin into slavery. Yes, you read right. Check your history books. Slavery was not only the white man’s fault. Barring those situations where blacks were outrightly kidnapped, white men merely capitalized on the black race’s collective lack of cohesion (and perhaps, intelligence). Whether he tricked them into slavery, kidnapped them, coaxed them or traded with nefarious African kings is irrelevant. It demonstrates that the white man must have been cognitively superior to pull off this heist in the first place. In case you haven’t realised, he’s still doing it to this very day through modern capitalism.
Exposing the Myth
We are taught today that all men were created equal. However, I have a hard time believing that teaching. If all men were truly created equal, then there’s no way that black folks would’ve been outsmarted to where they could be subdued by so many kingdoms and races so often in history. It doesn’t explain how these other cultures had more advanced technology and social development even though we all started at the same position in Africa. Black people would have been on more or less the same or similar level of technological and social development as everyone else if all men were created equal. It’s such a pitiful situation that comic book giant Marvel even had to invent a ficticious African nation called Wakanda (home of the aptly named super hero Black Panther) which equalled the same level of social, technological and economic advancement of white countries. It goes to show that the very notion of ‘all men were created equal‘ is most probably a myth.
What makes this more darkly humorous is that although most of the world’s ore and precious stones come from Africa – it is the poorest continent on Earth. Even though black people claim Africa as their home, one cannot deny the irony of the fact that they didn’t realise the value of its resources until the white men came along, raped and pillaged it for its resources, and enslaved them to do it. These things will make one wonder if God is playing some kind of cosmic joke on the black race that only He and every other non-black race gets. Clearly somebody got the short end of the genetic stick here.
However, irrespective of the historical short comings of the black race, they do have the capacity to do just as well as others once they apply themselves – even though scholastic statistics say otherwise. Let’s assume for argument’s sake that black people and all other races are somehow on equal cognitive footing. There are still some issues that must be addressed:
On Language and Misnomers
First of all, ‘Negro’ is not a bad word. It’s actually Latin in origin and it means “Black”. Black is not a bad word either. In fact, Black is not actually a colour. In terms of physics, it is an absence of colour. This means that the term “coloured people” which refers to blacks is a misnomer. The term ‘African-American’ doesn’t make you less Negro and it doesn’t make you less black. It’s just white people’s way of over compensating for the fact that their forefathers and your forefathers didn’t get along. That’s why they call it being “politically correct”.
With that said, you can’t call each other ‘N*gger’ in a ‘brotherly’ context when the white man invented it to demean you. That word is the southern slang of the word ‘Negro’ and it only attained it’s “Bad” word status because of slavery. So when you call each other using that word, that’s the same thing as you demeaning yourselves. White people don’t call each other ‘cracka’ in brotherly love. They say “dude” or “bro”. Asian people don’t call each other “chink” and “yella” in brotherly love. In Japan they say [your name]-chan if they mean to do that. So where did black people get this stupid idea that using a derogatory word to refer to each other is an expression of brotherly love? I’m not even going to touch the fact that it is a double standard to suggest that other races can’t do it. This is one of the many reasons why other races will never take black people seriously. Ever.
You cannot call your women “bitches” or “Ho’s” in your everyday language, because it would imply that your mother was also a prostitute or an obnoxious woman (or both). However true that may be, you should not demean your women. Women are a precious element of society. Therefore even if some of them are stupid enough to dance naked in your music videos and allow themselves to become even more so objectified to satiate your super-masculine propensities, once you belittle your women, you will never respect them (black women, please take note!). You’re only disrespecting yourself and your race when you do that.
Calling white people “crackas” and not expect them to respond to you with “n*gga” is hypocritical. I don’t care if their forefathers called your forefathers “n*ggers”. Their offspring do not have you in shackles. Therefore you are not entitled to be disrespectful to them or anyone else in this context. Being black doesn’t make you a victim. So don’t try to play that using this type of language as your most common defence just because you are unable to formulate a valid defence upon being criticised. You only expose your ignorance in doing so and is the primary reason why Asians have a particular distrust of your kind.
On Biological Demarcations
Speaking of being black, please note that the colour of your skin is not a disability claim. Therefore you are not entitled to special rights or privileges because you or your forefathers were oppressed or by virtue of belonging to this ethnic group. Therefore you cannot use this as justification for being lazy. Although most of you don’t have the capacity to realise it yet, most non blacks with whom you have to deal with in business didn’t really care about your skin colour until you brought it up. In fact, when it comes to money, they were mostly of an open mind until you opened your mouth and confirmed all those negative stereotypes about black people they always heard about. Most white people who you think dislike you are not people who are racist. They are actually people who have very little respect for you because you have no respect for yourself or your kin. Your skin colour is also not a valid argument. You can’t claim your race as a valid point in an argument that you just lost because of your inability to respond adequately.
Black women, I need to address several issues related to your self perception. About those wigs you weave into your hair – they make you look fake. You were not born with naturally long, straight hair. You also don’t have naturally blond or red hair. I’m not sure if you know this, but black people don’t naturally have blue, green or hazel eyes either. Brown eyes maybe (if there is mixed parentage), but not usually. Don’t make the other races believe that you envy them. You give them the false impression that they look better than you when you do that. Celebrate your blackness. Short hair styles can look just as great when done tastefully. You don’t need long hair to look beautiful. Even though white women try to get a tan, or even fuller lips, or thicker buttocks, I very sincerely doubt it is because they envy black women. Victoria’s Secret and every other company that accentuates white beauty through runway models and television & product marketing all seem to insinuate quite the opposite.
Remember, white people still mostly own television and radio, so their standards of beauty will naturally predominate the airwaves. That’s what appeals to them. It was not meant for your race. Furthermore, many white men like their women pasty, bony & shapeless (as per Hollywood standards). So there’s no use trying so hard to mimic the biological traits of a white woman. Don’t try to accede to beauty standards that only apply to white women. I don’t care what silly excuse you women come up with to justify this kind of self-deprivation. It’s a form of self-hate, and screams of insecurity. Furthermore, there are lots of white boys out there who would love give you the time of day of you bothered to care. Real men will love you for who you are, and not what you look like.
And what’s with this bleaching of the skin? A lot of black folks have taken up this nasty habit of systematically applying chemicals to the face and hands which have bleaching agents in them, in a bid to “lighten” the complexion of their skin. This is a manifestation of what psychologists call an “inferiority complex“. Some black people have somehow managed to convince themselves that being dark skinned means that they are ugly and thus have taken steps to change that. They feel that the world prefers people of fairer complexions. Even if this could be proven to be vaguely true, bleaching the skin is foolish. Even if you manage to change the tone of the skin in your face and your hands, can you imagine how ridiculous you’ll look if you show up at the beach in a bathing suit or just your trunks with your face in one colour and the rest of your body in another? Don’t be stupid. Some of these agents can actually cause permanent damage to your skin and in some cases cause deadly skin cancer. The melanin in your skin gives you protection from harmful UV rays that many other fairer races do not naturally carry. You are dark skinned because of natural genetic evolution – not genetic malformation.
Speaking of skin tones, if you’re a black person, wearing tatoos is silly. Wearing excessive makeup is also silly. Most of these things were invented for people of fairer skin tones. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that if you have dark coloured imagery on a dark background, it’s not going to show up well. I’m not even going to get into the other dangers of tatooing. Even though there is makeup that complements the skin tone of black women, most of it is invisible. So unless you’re covering up a blemish or evening out your face, or applying some kind of medication, wearing excessive makeup not only makes you hideous, but it reeks of how frighteningly insecure you are about the way you look. Maybe if you spent less time watching BET, your sense of self perception (or that of your race) wouldn’t be so dangerously shallow.
On Racism & Slavery
Slavery ended over 300 years ago. Therefore it is no longer a logical defense in any argument that seeks to examine why the black race suffers from seriously self destructive attitudes, behaviours and grossly underdeveloped societies that even to this day depend heavily on white governments to aid them in social development. That shortcoming in the black race is so pervasive that one is tempted to think that it points to something in the building blocks of the black race’s genetics. It’s a horrific thought and I’d like to hope that there’s no truth to that whatsoever, however hard it is to ignore.
In almost every society where black people are found, there is relatively poor performance with respect to education, economic stability, social and family development in comparison to fairer races. While this is most obvious in the United States, you can see the same kind of social ills in virtually every black population around the world. It is characterised by developing societies which have significantly high crime rates, fatherless families, poor educational performance, high levels of governmental corruption, poor social development, economic instability, a high level of dependency on white states for economic buoyancy and the occasional social unrest, especially as it relates to political affairs.
You will find these ills in every black society on earth – from the sunny islands in the Caribbean, to the streets of the USA to the dark continent of their origin. This is one of the reasons why we know that racism had very little (if anything) to do with it. Racism doesn’t explain that behaviour in societies which are predominantly black. Slavery doesn’t explain that behaviour in countries where it never existed or in European states where black people migrated to in the 20th century. So that pretty much rules out racism and slavery in most cases. Furthermore, this sort of behaviour is predominant in black communities where there are simply no white people. So this also rules out the white man as black people’s problem – especially in some African countries.
With that said, I won’t deny that racism still exists today. There’s no denying that black folks still have a harder time in the world, depending on how dark their skin complexion is. There’s no denying that a fairer skinned black man is treated better than a darker skinned counterpart. There’s no denying that inequality still exists in the world. However, the world has changed greatly and black people no longer have a glass ceiling over their heads. Therefore, racism, slavery and the white man are no longer convenient excuses for all of the race’s problems. Therefore, the following problems are not likely because you’re black;
- If you didn’t get a job, try getting educated. People with degrees tend to fare far better than those without.
- If you didn’t get funding for your project, you should probably blame the way you sold the idea. Project managers have a business to run. So if your idea got turned down, it’s probably because it stunk, not because you’re black.
- If a cop gives you a hard time, try being respectful and co-operative. Most cops don’t want to be labeled ‘racist’ or ‘pig’ and they don’t have the patience for unnecessary aggression. Also, don’t run. If you run, you insinuate that you’re guilty of something and they will lock you up.
- Just like how many white people use a few bad black people to judge every black man, when you collectively hate white people, you are doing exactly the same thing. It’s still racism. Most white people aren’t racist, just like most black people aren’t necessarily ignorant. If you treat white men like your brothers, there’s a very good chance they’ll return the favour.
- If your white next door neighbour calls the cops on you when you were just walking down the street, try pulling up your pants, getting rid of that ridiculous swagger in your step, quit grabbing your crotch, turn your hat forwards, and look like somebody’s child, instead of a gang banger. Comb your hair too. It makes you look less like a thug or a trouble maker. And for God’s sake, pull down that hood. It’s the middle of summer. This is also why you get followed around in the Korean grocery store.
- Being “ghetto” is not cool and is one of the many reasons white folks still have issues with the race. Being civilised doesn’t make you an oreo. Speaking loudly or behaving in a boorish manner in the cinema during a film won’t win you any brownie points either.
- And for God’s sake, while you’re at it, read a book. You’ll eventually see why white people have the most dominant civilizations on earth.
On Education
Why should a man’s ethnic identity be questioned if he is black and educated? I’ve seen many situations where a black person’s peers thought them to be “too white” to be black or “acted too white” or thought that they were “trying to be white” or were even accused of “hating their own race“, just because they’re educated, went to constructive social activities that were predominantly white, went to a white college or just because they had white friends. What the hell? Where did this idiotic teaching come from? Since when was being educated equivalent to being white? That’s when I check black entertainment, and I finally realise why.
Black music predominantly celebrates thuggery, gangster life, violence, sex, debauchery, pimping and whoring. Black movies predominantly celebrate all of the above things, plus obnoxious and ignorant behaviour, often played up for cheap laughs (as per many Tyler Perry movies and similar predecessors). We have many black comedians who play up black stereotypes for comedic effect (like Dave Chappelle) which does absolutely nothing for the black community’s image. We are told that these things iconify blackness and that as a black person, they should embrace this rubbish as purported by MTV and BET. If you fail to do so, you are labelled a “sellout” or an “Oreo“. What a steaming pile of bull.
Almost every facet of black culture surrounds the theme that blackness is what it is, as if being black automatically means that the corresponding behaviour should also be black. I have one thing to share with all black people: The colour of your skin does not predicate the colour of your mind. Just because you were born into a culture that celebrates ignorance, it doesn’t mean that you must therefore identify with this ignorance (or the culture for that matter). Education will change your world.
Education will make you realise that just because you were born into a fatherless family that you don’t have to do the same thing to your own children. You will realise that you can become married and still live a happy life with picket fences, a dog named Scruffy and two happy kids, just like you see on TV. Education will spare you the challenges of raising children out of wedlock, dropping out of school, being incarcerated for drugs or violent crime, being unemployed, getting caught up in gangs and all that other rubbish. You’ll realise that you don’t have to become another statistic just because your skin colour is different from the majority race.
Education will elucidate the fact that money is something that should be invested – not spent wantonly and indiscriminately. Furthermore, you should only spend money on things that you can actually use, not things that make you look shiny. It’s like you’re trying to overcompensate for the fact that your skin colour doesn’t reflect much light. Only children obsess over expensive shiny things they don’t have any practical use for – especially when they stick those things into their teeth. Speaking of children, when you call your home a “crib”, it speaks volumes about the cognitive maturity of the race.
Conclusion
These things are known by every non black person who has interacted extensively with the race. However, none of them will share this knowledge with black people for fear of being unfairly called “racist”. There is only one major solution to black people’s problems:
Break the stereotypes. Your music shouldn’t reflect how dark and ignorant you really are. I don’t care if the record companies will only sell records of yours that make money because they market filth. I also don’t care if your music reflects the reality of your life. Even though sex, violence and immorality sells, “the man” is using your own ignorance to contribute to the destruction of your race to make himself rich. Sure, you get rich when your record goes platinum, but the company owns the copyright to your record. So long after you’ve become a has-been, they’re still getting rich selling your tripe to BET and MTV so that your young ones become influenced by your music to become gangsters, pimps, drug dealers, whores, irresponsible fathers and the like, thus repeating the vicious cycle. Shame on you. Shame on all of you.
Break the stereotypes. Stop calling all of this tripe a part of “black culture”. You are hurting those blacks who are being collectively labeled as being ignorant, lazy, stupid and poorly dressed even though they are none of these things. Every time a black man calls his peer his “n*gger” you destroy a little bit of the race’s image. Every time a rapper appears on MTV with his pants half way down his waist, with diamonds in his teeth and several half naked women ass-dropping in front of the camera, he destroys a little bit of the race’s image. Every time a Jamaican DJ tours Europe talking about “gun stick” and “kill batty man”, he destroys a little bit of the race’s image. Every time you wrongfully use the race card, every time you call somebody racist just because they criticized your behaviour, every time you act ignorant or use that behaviour to sell cheap laughs, you’re destroying the black race’s image.
Break the sterotypes. Get an education. Go to college. Get a degree. Get married before you have children. Become a man before you become a father. Become a woman before you become a mother. If you are an unmarried woman and you have a child for a man who hasn’t married you yet, GET SMART – he’s only using you for the sex. There’s nothing wrong with having an education. There’s nothing wrong with having white friends, being a part of white clubs or playing golf. Moving out of a violent black neighbourhood into a civil, peaceful white suburb doesn’t make you a sellout. It makes you SMART. Being properly dressed doesn’t make you white. It makes you properly dressed. Speaking with a clear distinctive voice inflection doesn’t make you a white wannabe. It means that you have proper diction. Aspiring after the good and proper things doesn’t make you white. When you say such ignorant things, you insinuate that the white race is indeed better than you (thus adding to the myth of equality of all men).
Break the stereotypes. These cultural stereotypes don’t define you. You define yourself. Your skin colour is just the result of a genetic permutation – nothing more. The mind you have is not controlled by the shade of your skin or the expectations of others who look like you. Education will make you see that being black is just one of the many qualities that is a subset of what makes you human. It is just a biological trait – not a cognitive or social limitation. It doesn’t predetermine what type of music you should listen to, the race of the person you should marry, or the kinds of crowds you should move with. Your skin colour is not what makes you human. Your mind is. Education will allow you to emancipate yourself from such mental slavery, to free your mind from the blackness that your black culture has imposed upon you and to embark upon the world as a free mind, a child of the world whose individuality adds to the variety of our species and makes humanity so special.
Whether you are black, white, asian or somewhere in between, you must realise that there is no such thing as race. What we call “race” only accounts for less than 3% of our genetic material. That means we are 97% the same all around. Don’t use your race to limit your thinking, your hopes, your attitudes or your dreams or that of others. Free your mind. Become one with the world, not as a black man or woman, but as a human being.







58 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 28, 2008 at 2:51 am
Chris Moran
Nice writing style. Looking forward to reading more from you.
Chris Moran
July 30, 2008 at 10:51 pm
alamanach
Wow, first Mormons, then women, now black people– you’re really on a tear lately.
I notice this post combines what could probably be two separate posts. First, the differential acheivement of different races, then the self-defeating lunacy of ghetto culture. In the differential achievement, there’s one very important theory you’ve left out: culture. Personally, I think this theory explains a lot, and I don’t think genetic differences or evolutionary pressures have had much of anything to do with it. Western Civilization is mankind’s greatest achievement. That’s a politically incorrect statement too, because anthropologists would accuse me of being ethnocentric, and hippies would say I don’t appreciate world culture. If I didn’t have the education, background, and family that I do, maybe I wouldn’t burst into laughter at such criticism.
There are two components that make Western Civilization so great– Greek rationalism and Christian ethics. Armed with these two modes of thought, westerners (who, by chance, happen to be predominantly white), have dominated the world. Other great civilizations have come and gone; Arabs for a while dominated, because they inherited the Greek tradition, but they’ve stagnated without Christian ethics. The Chinese did well over the centuries, but they never mastered objective reasoning the way the Greeks did, and thus never quite mastered pure science. These days, anywhere in the world where you see great, worldly success, you see people who have learned how to look at the world the way westerners do. (Like Wakanda.)
So, I don’t think race really has anything fundamental to do with it. People are created equal, but cultures are not.
That 50 Cent picture speaks volumes. Imagine what a different, yet equally powerful message it would send if we had the exact same picture, but with his other arm he was shielding his young daughter. Instead, the arm is empty. He’s got a Glock in my face, ready to shoot me for nothing. It’s an empty, empty life he’s advertising. Rambo’s got a line, live for nothing or die for something. I guess 50 Cent chooses nothing.
July 30, 2008 at 11:20 pm
xenlogic
Thanks. I appreciate the comment.
You could be on to something here Al.
I did mention the culture bit (several times in fact) but I am not convinced that it is culture. There’s a different culture in Africa, from the one in the US from the one in the Caribbean (although the Caribbean culture very closely imitates the US one). But although these three separate cultures are in and of themselves separate, we see the same behaviour patterns. So it has to be something more basic than that – something that transcends culture. The only thing that does that is biology. That’s the only other common factor in all three regions where black people are most predominant.
With that said, I am inclined to agree with you about the Christianity and Greek philosophy holding much of modern civilisation together. Honestly, I’ve never seen it that way before, and I think you could be right. Maybe that’s why most other cultures other than those which embraced these two philosophies fail to mature in like manner.
Yet, one could easily counter argue that many european cultures do not accede to many christian philosophies, and yet they are still more advanced than most other countries. The same could be said of Asian and Pacific territories. If anything, they embraced Greek philosophy (as far as science is concerned). But even that has a possible counter argument. How come all those other races were compelled to see the value in Greek philosophy, and so many other races didn’t? That’s the part that bothers me.
Speaking of 50 Cent, did you hear about Nas wanting to name his latest album “N*gger”? His record company denied him that title. So the album was released untitled. That speaks volumes as well… Now THAT? Is just sad…
July 31, 2008 at 1:29 am
alamanach
“Yet, one could easily counter argue that many european cultures do not accede to many christian philosophies, and yet they are still more advanced than most other countries.”
Though they don’t explicitly embrace Christianity today, there’s only one country in all of Europe that hasn’t been formed and molded over the centuries by Christianity. (Kalmykia) Non-Christians who grow up in those historically Christian places are still taught values of forgiveness, and the inherent worth of Other people. They may not talk about Jesus any more, but his teachings still form the foundations of those cultures.
If there is something biological in all this, then how do we account for the Condoleeza Rices and Barack Obamas on the one hand, and white trash on the other? It seems to me we have plenty of winners and losers of all colors.
“How come all those other races were compelled to see the value in Greek philosophy, and so many other races didn’t? That’s the part that bothers me.”
Don’t overlook pig-headedness in the original culture. Arabs are a great example. There was a time when they welcomed and embraced Greek thought, and their culture thrived as a result. There was a centuries-long shift to an extreme where they wouldn’t even talk to the outside world, and this caused them to stagnate and all but collapse. These same people who were once able to see the value in another culture lost that ability. It’s doubtful the biology changed so quickly, but a cultural change in that time is easily explained. So, the answer, I think, is culture again. Some cultures are better than others.
July 31, 2008 at 4:50 pm
xenlogic
- Every possible genetic permutation that produces intelligence exists. You said it yourself in a previous comment on the previous post. People like you and me occur for every 10,000 individuals. It’s therefore not unreasonable to assume that there is every possible permutation of intelligence in every race in both directions, smarter and otherwise. The question is, why does this permutation have a greater probability of occurrence in some races (eg. Caucasians & Asians) than others (e.g. Negro, Latin, Arab)? This is not a cultural phenomenon. It is far too universally ostensible to be chalked up to culture.
- Did they “lose” that ability or is it just that they just weren’t wired to keep it? Think about it. I see black people go to US and European colleges all the time and get educated. Yet when they come back to their home countries, they fail to apply what they’ve learned and somehow go right back to the problem behaviours their education was supposed to rectify. Then at the end of the day, they have to hire white consultants to come in for exhorbitant sums of money to tell them what to do to fix the problem, even though that consultant has the same education as the people who are hiring him. I see this in Caribbean governments all the time. And furthermore, culture is a product of a collective of perrsonalities. Why is there a comparatively more progressive culture in caucasian and Asian societies than there are in societies for other races? I think you’re tip-toeing around the point. I can understand that. But rest assured, I won’t hold it against you.
July 31, 2008 at 8:36 pm
alamanach
“This is not a cultural phenomenon. It is far too universally ostensible to be chalked up to culture.”
But it’s not all that universal. What about Great Zimbabwe? What about Ethiopia? (Aksum) What about the Mali Empire? These weren’t messy tribal war powers (like, say, the Zulu), these were advanced civilizations. And I mean really advanced; Aksum in its day was ranked by Persia as one of the world’s four great powers. (The other two being Rome and China.) In the late Eighteenth century Timbuktu (in Mali) was renowned around the world as a great center of learning. People in Europe and America at that time would speak of Timbuktu the way you or I today would speak of Oxford and Cambridge. You don’t get much more advanced than that, and that was hard-core black Africa.
“Did they “lose” that ability or is it just that they just weren’t wired to keep it?”
White folks aren’t wired to keep it. You can find populations of whites, in Europe, who really are as thuggish and stupid as 50 Cent pretends to be: http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/10/europe/feud.php
Blacks in America are hampered only by their own self-image. I’ve seen this unfold within my lifetime. In the late eighties, slavery was ancient history, and even the civil rights movement was something we read about in books. For the younger generation, “racism” was this anachronism our parents had had to deal with; nobody cared about color any more.
The term African-American appeared in 1988, when Jesse Jackson identified himself as such at the Democratic National Convention. Jackson and his ilk encouraged and fed racial polarization, mistrust, and animus. We saw this in the nineties, with the sudden rise of multiculturalism, and its kid brother, afrocentrism. Events like the Rodney King beating didn’t help matters. I distinctly remember Michael Stipe on MTV telling me that I must be a racist because I was white. It was during these ugly years that hip-hop decayed from this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C2b8XWJnfE to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9nsxKFqjFw . As you’ve identified, hip-hop culture today promotes a depraved lifestyle. It does that because if blacks actually succeeded, Jackson would be out of business. But it wasn’t always that way. Life used to be nice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7lwcjNaH_A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKUTITOqktk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdotLSBbUug
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxS9qSU-25E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdusgXW_Wi4
So, you’ll have a hard time convincing me that blacks are somehow biologically predisposed to debase themselves. I lived in a time when that simply wasn’t true. The debasing came because guys like Jackson told blacks that their problems weren’t their fault, and that therefore they were owed something. His audience was not the first to be seduced by such a message and they won’t be the last. But I know blacks can do better because I’ve seen it. So has the good Reverend Run: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkXICa__1CY
August 1, 2008 at 2:33 am
rgularjoe
You know for a person that seems to be weell read you sure do employ very shortsighted logic.
For one, you have not taken into account that America was able to ascend to its present “greatness” due to the free labor that was employed for numerous centuries. This country was able to leap frog other countries in terms of wealth & strength because there was ample workforce that grew your food, built your infrastructure (i.e. roads, railroads, bridges), nurtured your children, invented essential technology (i.e. Andrew Beard invented the plow and the rotary engine), and helped to defend your borders from the French, English, Mexican, Native American, & even from yourselves. Everybody knows that while other countries were working linearly, America was able to compound its efforts and experience exponential growth on the whipped backs of African slaves. So you really should be thanking them for providing the foundation for your great country.
Second, slavery was ended in the mid-1800’s…schools desegregated in 1955 (just 53 years ago), voting rights were granted in 1965 (just 43 years ago). I mention this because although the institution of slavery has been abolished for 143 years, the practice of apartheid in America has only ended within the lifetime of my mother and father. Meaning my parents were born into an oppressive system, my grandparents (who are in their 70’s) were actually in their 30’s when they were given voting rights, were subject to unequal wages while raising their children, and were prevented from attending schools that were on par with their white counterparts. That being the case myself and my peers are the first truly post-apartheid generation of African-Americans born in this country. Therefore, the effects of an oppressive society are still felt in my community. My grandmother doesn’t even talk about her childhood with us. Her and my grandfather was ran out of Tarboro, NC by your grandparents peers. So your reasoning that slavery and the Jim Crow laws doesn’t have a direct impact on this generations is utterly false.
Third, white and black are complete opposites in the spectrum of color. White is the absence of color, while black is a collection of all colors. (if you mix all of the colors in a crayon box you will have created the color black.) The same can be said for how we, live & think. Black people are communal, white people are very individualistic. Black people find rhythm on even counts, white people on odd counts. White people are very technology driven (rational, right brain), black people are very in tune with nature (creative, left brain). This is obvious when you study the religions of Kemet (Egypt), Yoruba, Native Americans, and South American Indians you find that their gods are based on natural elements: Sun, wind, fire, earth. (Just in case you didn’t know Africans had already journeyed to North & South America prior to the European conquest of the Americas.) That being said, in times of warf technology that increases the range and impact of strike will in most scenarios prevail. So its not a function of being stupid that Africa was conquered or its resources are being exploited for wealth by Europeans, it’s more of an indication of culture and moral code that tells the tale as to why White people find them selves at the tip of spear right now. And it is basically because white people historically have shown very little morality or humanity when it comes to dealing with or fighting with other cultures. For instance, conquering European nations have used chemical warfare, nuclear bombs, and even infested people with diseases to meet your goals of domination.
Lastly, it is very true that my community has some major issues to grapple with. The biggest issue is the mental restraint that many of my people have of viewing themselves as victims. When black people are able to remove that shackle from their mind they have proven to be the very best that society has to offer. The accomplishments that African Americans have achieved while being systematically denied education & the right to vote for just over 43 years since the end of American apartheid are mind boggling considering from where we have come. We boast African American astronauts, doctors, lawyers, CEOs, politicians, generals, justices, architects, and soon to be a U.S. President. So in fact, your entire theory of not being created equal is true. Black people have shown themselves to be able to not only overcome insurmountable odds, but then to also excel at the highest levels society. What other race can boast such an accomplishment?
In conclusion, I believe it is fair to say that America could not & would not be the country it is today without the institution of slavery & the peak physical fitness, mental toughness & spiritual astuteness of my African forefathers. Their contributions are undeniable, whereas, the contributions that white people have made to this world are: 1. suspect due to the malevolence that preceded your rise as conqueror 2. Your contributions are more like the pyramid of Giza…brilliant, will last the ages, but would if given the proper foundation.
Maybe you should stop holding a mirror up to Black people and giving us a back handed compliment and start focusing on the many failures of white culture. starting with your propensity to have a God complex.
Hopefully, we will talk more.
August 1, 2008 at 5:19 pm
xenlogic
You are right. There are examples of these kinds of depravity in every race on earth. In fact, whites are probably responsible for some of the greatest atrocities against their own kind (and mankind in general) than any other race. However, that is mutually exclusive from their propensity for social and economic progress through the ages. This is more prevalent in the white races of ancient and modern Europe than any other race on earth. I don’t deny that every race has demonstrated their own propensity for evil and self destruction. However, some races appear to have a greater propensity for this. THAT is what is not explained by culture. Why does it occur in civilizations dominated by a particular race more than others? That’s what I’m trying to get at.
That’s not what I was trying to do. I was trying to elaborate on what is a very ostensible phenomenon. Are you trying to tell me that disparate black cultures all over the world are somehow responsible for black people all over the world not having an equal share in world dominance in the world today? If all men are created equal, how come it is that most of the men that rule the world belong to one race and not to another? I’m still waiting on a rational answer to this one.
Thanks for writing in. I will let the fact that you refer to me as a fool on your blog slide and tackle your arguments with rational counter-arguments. For if I responded in like kind, I would have to stoop to that level. But just to prove a point, I shan’t.
So let’s get to the business end of this debate:
First of all, it was not only America that built its empire on the backs of African slaves. So did many ancient empires like those of Rome, Greece, Persia and numerous others. My contention is not an act of ungratefulness for the development of the American or any other predominantly white empire. I could care less about that, since such empires are bound to implode sooner or later. History never fails to repeat itself. My contention is this: WHY DID IT HAPPEN SO OFTEN? Why were black people repeatedly harnessed by fairer-skinned races? Why is racism or black oppression such a frequently recurring theme in history? Why don’t we have a history dotted with more equal situations where black races enslaved others? Why is it that it is black races that get enslaved? Even when some white races were enslaved by dominant kingdoms, black people were still among those set of slaves. My question is this: WHY?
My country is not quite as great as America or any of the others in Europe. I do conceed that it was likewise built on the backs of slaves. But my country’s problems started shortly after the British gave us independence as a sovereign nation. Many of my country’s historians concede that the nation was under better governance when under British rule. A series of short sighted decisions and poor economic choices have led to a chain of cause and effect that have made my country the murder capital of the world.
I see the same kinds of statistics in black communities in Africa, in Washington DC and many other predominantly black communities around the world. This is one of the reasons why I am not convinced that this is a culture problem. The culture in my country is vastly different from that of many African nations and many black communities (like Compton) in the USA – yet the tragedy of imminent social implosion persists. If you can offer me a logical explanation as to why the black race has so many social ills in most of the regions in the world where they are located, then I’m all ears buddy.
By this comment, I’m guessing that you’re assuming that I’m white. Care to ask me first before you jump off the deep end? It will probably help you to make a more informed decision about how you choose to respond. Never-the-less, you know what? I forgive you. I’ll chalk this one up to the inherent anonymity of the internet and let this one slide. I’m cool like that.
I insinuated nothing of he sort. If you were paying attention to my post, you’d have read where I said:
There are simply too many successful black people in the world today to still be blaming racism and Jim Crow. It is not only irresponsible, but it shows that black people have a nasty habit of not liking to look themselves in the mirror and admit to their own flaws. I’ve seen too many black folks around the world chalk up their own failures to white people, as though we are still slaves. I know that black folks are still being treated differently in the world – but it is no longer an excuse for settling for mediocrity.
You know that rapper “Nas” who’s leading a campaign against Fox News? He was on Stephen Colbert’s show the other day. He was talking about how violent his neighbourhood is. Stephen asks him: “So don’t you think that singing about this violence glorifies and thus perpetuates it?” His response: “How did those guns get into my neighbourhood?”. That is SO LAME! Even though it is black people buying the guns pulling the trigger, Nas still feels that this is the white man’s fault, because they got the guns from white men selling Uzi’s out of their car’s trunk. That’s BULL! If those white men were selling slingshots or water guns, the people buying the weapons would still be the same. That’s the same crap that got us into slavery in the FIRST place. So this argument about the “long term effects of oppression” is nonsense. Long after slavery ended, black people have continued to oppress themselves and they’re too narrow minded and self righteous to admit it.
Physis 101 anyone? If you read carefully, you’d have seen where I was referring to light – not paint. White light is a combination of all colours. Black doesn’t create any kind of luminescence as it absorbs all colours and reflects none back. The substance of paint in this discussion is irrelevant, since the perception of colour is based on the reflection of light, not in the substance that reflects it. By the same limited logic, I could say that black water is a combination of all the colours of water – but that logic fails because water in and of itself has no colour. Its colour is given to it by the substances which are either near it or in it.
The same can be said of paint. It is nothing more than a mixture of chemical oils that produce a certain colour graded reflection of light. Depending on the chemical variations in paint, you can produce various colours of light. However, if you should turn off all the light, paint has no colour. Under certain coloured light, red paint will have a very different colour. In fact, light is what gives everything its colour, as colour doesn’t exist in the substance, since colour is a manifestation of light energy, which can only be perceived once there is light. Therefore using the chemical composition of a hard substance to prove your point will fail as light energy is what defines that colour you see. Check your high school physics text.
I know of which you speak, but this is more a function of culture and not biology. Been to Europe any? The Europeans are far more communal than North Americans. They also tend to be far more liberal and free-spirited. Visit Amsterdam. Better yet, visit Germany’s Love Festival in the spring. You’ll be quite surprised.
Studied music any? I have. I play both piano and violin. I write music as one of my many hobbies. As such, I can arrogantly say with great certainty, based on my extensive musical background, that black music is based on break-beats, which are almost always based on an odd number of beats per whole note. Everytime you examine the musical progression in hip-hop, you will notice that it uses an odd number of whole note progressions per stanza. That’s part of the reason why black music is more exciting than white music. It’s very unpredictable as the beat sequence is not bound to the 4 quantum, 8 note octave progression that white people predominantly use in their music.
If you listen to white music much (and I can tell that you don’t), you’ll notice that almost every genre of white music uses even count progressions per stanza. For example:
Rock Music: 4 beats per stanza
Classical: 8 beats per stanza
Dance music: 16 beats per stanza
Alternative: 4 beats per stanza
…you get the idea.
It’s always consistent like that. The key difference between “white” and “black” music, is that white music is melody-centric. The beat is almost an after thought so it tends towards consistency. Black music however is more beat-centric and relies very little on melody. This is why black music will use anywhere between 3 and 5 beats per stanza. That’s what makes black music traditionally more “fun”, “soulful”, “artsy” or even “hip”. That brings me to the next point:
[Continued...]
August 1, 2008 at 5:38 pm
xenlogic
Wrong again. Technologically driven thinking is a function of your left brain. Naturalistic, artsy thinking is driven by the right brain. This is why white people are credited with most of the world’s greatest inventions. The best engineers, scientists, mathematicians and doctors around the world are mostly white. This is the same reason why white people’s music is driven by fixed beats based on quantums of 2 and 4.
Black people on the other hand are predominantly right brained – which explains their music, their art, their culture… and everything else. It is also a logical explanation for why black students are predominantly weaker at math than their white counter parts. I won’t get further into this, because there’s no way to prove this to you without making you feel uncomfortable. In fact, I’d rather concede this one to you than to win this part of the debate, because I will gain nothing from proving myself right. So let me just leave it at that and move on:
I don’t think Africans are stupid. I think they were just not as smart as the people who came in and raped their territories. Africa is the laughing stock of the economic world for one very good reason: Black people call Africa their home – which is (in terms of the intrinsic economic value of the land), the richest continent in the world. Africa is the source of most of the world’s precious metals, precious stones, chocolate, exotic fabrics – a whole list of things I can’t possible list here. Yet still, the black race which pretty much dominated the continent, failed, REPEATEDLY to secure the continent from being plundered by non black races (of which the Chinese are the latest plunderers). If you don’t see the epic joke that, then my brother, I don’t know what else to tell you. If black people were indeed as smart as everyone else, we’d have held a monopoly on the entire world. We would be the economic kings of the planet. Black Panther and Wakanda wouldn’t just exist only in Comic books – it would be a reality. Think about it.
I actually agree with you here. White races have demonstrated a level of immorality, inhumanity, decadence and debauchery throughout history that is unparalleled. From the Greek empire to modern day America – white people’s empires have changed very little (with the exception of exponential technological growth). However, be that as it may, they still rule the world – whether we choose to admit it or not. The white governments on this planet dictate the majority of the principles of governance that run the world. Morality aside, history has shown that their left brain dominance has given them an advantage that other races simply pale in comparison to. Are you university educated? If you are, then you can trace the existence of higher level education right back to its origins in the Greek empire. The most renown universities in the world are run by white governments. Yale, Harvard, MIT, University of Berlin – all from white countries. We blacks may be physically stronger, faster, more durable and all that jazz (we dominate most sports in the world), but having bigger, longer bones and more creative musical and expressive talent means very little if we don’t have matching brain power. Think about it.
…and that is the whole point of my post. It is not to demean black people as that would mean that I am demeaning myself. Rather, my post was the result of my own frustration in seeing black people quite literally destroy themselves through what they believe to be their own culture. I don’t subscribe to that argument at all. So I decided to do some research and find out about our history.
My good friend Alamanach hinted that my post could be actually two posts. That was deliberate. The first half sought to examine what the possible source of our problems were (based on research). That is why I posted three of the most popular theories. Of the three, only one has enough unbiased scientific evidence to answer all the questions – unfortnately it is not the one we would like to agree with. If you read July’s issue of American Scientist, you’ll come across an article called “Tracing the history of the Y Chromosone” (or something to that effect). It shows the efforts of the Genome project to map the movement of mankind as he migrated out of Africa.
However, they were met with some challenges because many African tribes (and some African descendants) were reluctant to allow their genes to be sampled and mapped as they fear it would prove what I believe most people in the world already know. However, this was not the intention of the Genome project. The magazine’s editor commented on the article by saying that every scientist concedes that some knowledge is probably too dangerous to unearth. He being a scientist himself is aware of what this kind of knowledge can do to black people. This is why the white race has always dominated the black race in history. It’s not because they’re more evil than we are, because if the tables were turned, we black people have proven through history that we would not have done any differently. Humans are intrinsically evil by default – irrespective of race.
Unfortunately, a lot of the evidence uncovered in that article (as well as previous work) is the fundamental basis of proof of many of the points I’ve demonstrated in this post. Nobody (me included) wants to think that their race is inferior to another. However, history and science present undeniable evidence to the contrary. Never the less, the reason why this information is so uncomfortable for many of us, is not because it makes one race feel bad in comparison to another. It’s because people are intrinsically evil and will ultimately use this information to oppress other races. Hitler did it. Jim Crow did it. Lots of white folks did it – and that’s why there’s this long standing blood feud between the races.
I think that was a typo (I think you meant to say that my theory is NOT true), but I know what you mean. I will agree that black people have the SAME CAPACITY for cognitive greatness as other races. There’s no denying that. Unfortunately based on historical data of our academic performance across the board, this is not as common in our populace as it is in other races and as such this capacity is not an intrinsic quality it seems. Furthermore, much to my dismay, where there have been notable exceptions in the black race have all been proven to have white ancestry. Barack Obama is no exception. So again, we’re right back at square one. Once again my friend, I do GENUINELY want to believe that all men are created equal. But the science doesn’t seem to be giving us a helping hand in believing this. So do we continue to believe what we want to believe and ignore the evidence? At the end of the day, it probably doesn’t matter. I’m more interested in fixing the here and now. What’s past is past. It’s time for us to move on.
I am imminently unqualified to comment on the white race as I am not white. I’ll leave that up to my friend Al. The reason for that is not because I don’t know anything about the white race. Rather it is because of the narrow minded thinking of many people, that would label me a racist (no matter how unbiased my comments would be) for all the same reasons why I would be labeled a racist by black people if I was actually white and said these very same things. Do you see the double standard here? It’s for this very same reason why most well meaning white people would never openly agree with anything I say here (no offense Al), because nobody wants to be labelled a racist. That is perfectly understandable and I don’t blame anyone for taking that position.
However, it is because of this inherent hypocrisy in men that makes your response (however poignant & eloquent) fall short. You write based on the assumption that a black man would never criticize his own race. That assumption insinuates three things:
1. Anyone who criticizes black people MUST be white as nobody hates black people like white people. That would automatically make my friend Al, a racist (even though he’s not) and it would exonerate all those other races who also hate black people who are not white (like many Asians).
2. A black man would never criticise his own race, because it is expected that all black people would turn a blind eye to their own flaws and expect to be progressive. NEWSFLASH: That doesn’t work in real life.
3. That black people should not be criticised because of all the crap we had to take from white people. To that, I have to ask: Are we still in shackles? No. Are we still being whipped? No. Who’s calling us “n*ggers”? White people? No. Who’s killing our young brothers in the streets? White people? No. Where does this “crabs in a barrel” syndrome come from? White people? No. Who has the highest rate of crime against black people? White people? NO…….
So long as black people uphold this hypocrisy, we will never be taken seriously by any other race. That’s the point of this post. It has nothing to do with the science of who’s smarter anymore. That point I made moot by saying:
Because I recognize our capacity for greatness. It’s not a back handed compliment. I only speak the truth. I know that makes you uncomfortable because at one time, it made me uncomfortable too. I just decided to suck it up and move on. That’s why every black man and woman needs to do too. Suck it up and move on. Life’s no fair. We weren’t all created equal – but the equal opportunities we enjoy today is all we need to fill that deficit. So why do we still have ourselves enslaved by our limited thinking? It’s our propensity for limited thinking that bothers me Joe. It bothers me to tears. It makes me fret for my kin in ways I can’t even begin to describe here.
Thanks again for writing in. I look forward to your rebuttal if you should choose to do so. Cheers and respect always,
- Xen
August 1, 2008 at 8:28 pm
alamanach
“If all men are created equal, how come it is that most of the men that rule the world belong to one race and not to another? I’m still waiting on a rational answer to this one.”
~shrug~ My answer is culture, but you’re unpersuaded by that argument. I think you fail to appreciate how important Greek rationalism has been to the development of civilization, and how remarkable and special the Greeks were; no other culture, before or since, of any color, had looked at the world the way they did. (The only exceptions being cultures that have the ancient Greeks as part of their cultural heritage.) People do not naturally look at the world in such a formalized way, it was an utterly bizzare approach unique in human history. The other populations in Europe showed no sign of developing such a strange discipline of thought; they were as passionate and myopic as all the other people in the world. Passionate and myopic is how humans naturally are. The whole formalized thinking thing is flippin’ weird. Effective, though.
I could hammer on this more, but I think I’ll take a back seat and let you wrestle with Rgularjoe.
By the way, Joe, those were quite possibly my relatives running yours out of Tarboro; I’ve got a lot of extended family out that way. Happily, those kind of days are behind us…
Both of you cite brutality (chemical/ nuclear weapons, etc.) as evidence that whites possess a special kind of depravity. This is where the Christain ethics comes in. Such depravity is not unique (the weapons might be, but the psychology is not). Within our own lifetimes we have seen naked genocide in Africa, multiple times. In the past, the Mongols sought to exterminate every man, woman, and child living in the Persian world, and they gave serious thought to doing the same thing in China. (I’m studying some stuff on this right now– possible blog post for another day.) And don’t even get me started on the Khmer Rouge. People are capable of this kind of cruelty.
Western civilization, already getting a huge boost from the Greek mode of thought, was also steeped in Christian ideals of mercy, forgiveness, and the inherent worth of all people. This hasn’t been enough to prevent atrocities like slavery and world wars, but it has been the force that ended slavery, and wrote the Geneva Convention. (How many international aid organizations have sprung from non-Western countries?) Other civilizations don’t have that. Read the great Persian epic “Shahnameh”, written back in the tenth century. Though the stories in it are entertaining, they have no moral core. Every hero is “tall and beautiful like a cypress tree”, gets showered in gold and jewels, and has a hot babe for a lover. People go out to war and slay each other with abandon, and the only difference between the noble Persians and those despicable Turks is that we’re supposed to be on the Persians’ side. There is no recognition of the humanity of other people, or even acknowledgement of some higher, better, ideal to strive for. This epic is the national poem of Iran.
“Shahnameh” is an extreme example, but other great works are similar. Forgiveness is a fundamentally Christian value, and possessing that value has prevented bad situations in Western civilization from becoming worse. It’s been a check on brutality, it has fostered cooperation, and has discouraged any form of tribalism. The Persians and Turks of “Shahnameh” know nothing about forgiveness (except when it serves selfish ends), which is why those people never invented the steam engine. They couldn’t stop hacking at each other long enough to solve mutual problems. Imagine where Europe would be today if it had always had the same kind of attitude.
Finally, I note that all three of us agree that black culture as it exists right now is vicitm-oriented and self-defeating. Finding common ground on that point is pretty remarkable, given what different causes we ascribe it to. Personally, I am hoping that if Obama becomes president (which is looking pretty likely), then the whole “I’m discriminated against” mindset will shrivel up and die. I think blacks can acheive not because I fear being labeled racist (I openly admit to being sexist), but because I’ve seen it.
(By the way, Rgularjoe, you mention Kemetic teaching. According to those guys, blacks invented everything that is. You may find some good ammo there.)
August 1, 2008 at 9:10 pm
xenlogic
If there was only just one culture among all black civilisations and it was ubiquitous in all cases, then this rational would fly. Unfortunately, we are talking about at least three different cultures here:
1. Black Americans
2. Caribbean Nationals
3. Africans
These cultures only share similarities in some elements of language and communication. Everything else is as disparate as oil and water. Yet, the modus operandi is exactly the same in each. Outside of Africa, the Caribbean and the Americans were greatly influenced by white cultures. Even so, the traditional problems that face black people still persist in all three geographic regions. For example, why is the rate of crime highest in all the regions of America that have the highest black populations? Why is that just the same in African & Caribbean nations with similar demographics?
That’s another reason why culture does not do enough to explain away this disturbing phenomena. If White culture didn’t change their behaviour for the better (even after leaving Africa), then whatever is responsible for this behaviour has to be far more pervasive and ubiquitous than something as fickle as culture.
I agree. I would also contend that the cause is probably not as important as the future implications. That can still change. That is my hope anyway.
Don’t be surprised if it doesn’t. Personally, I don’t think it will. I’ve seen enough black people attack Obama’s unification ideas enough (even his pastor did it) to know that black people (particularly in America) carry such a deep seated hatred of whites, that I don’t think that even the black Messiah can unify them. He will try. He will have a level of success (personally, I hope he manages to pull it off) – but I’ve seen enough black folks insinuate that white people should be rounded up and killed to know that such will never happen. Those black folks don’t seem to realise that they are no different from Hitler.
Ha! If he’s smart (and I can tell that he is) he will avoid those teachings like the plague. The Rastafarians of Jamaica have very similar teachings. They’re so obnoxiously arrogant, that they even believe that the black race was the first on earth, just by virtue of the fact that mankind originated in Africa. They don’t account for things like climate change, geography, genetic redistribution and propagation. They just want to believe that God created black people to rule the world and that somehow the white man took away their rightful inheritance from them. It’s the same nonsensical pro-black ideas we see being argued by people who blame racism and the white man for their problems. If the logical flaw in that reasoning is not immediately obvious to all, then it only goes to prove my point even more so.
August 1, 2008 at 11:07 pm
alamanach
“If there was only just one culture among all black civilisations and it was ubiquitous in all cases, then this rational would fly. Unfortunately, we are talking about at least three different cultures here…”
OK, now I see where you’re coming from. It’s not so much that “white culture” is superior (basically what I’ve been arguing), but that the various black cultures are uniformly inferior. To explain that, I would go back to what I said earlier about Persians and Mongols. Those groups had cultures that were violent, unenlightened, and impoverished. A LOT of cultures are that way. Civilization does not depend on high technology– we’ve had plenty of fine civilizations that were prosperous and happy yet lacked indoor plumbing– and it is by no means exclusive to whitey. But civilization is fragile, and impermanent. The same people who are in one age civilized and decent to each other are in another age building mounds of skulls from human conquests. So, people of all colors and places are capable of barbarism.
The particular people you are talking about are behaving barbarically while living in and around higher civilization. (This is not the first time and won’t be the last; look at Palestinian youths and Israel, or the Germanic tribes and Rome, or the early Jurchen and China, and so on.) The basic barbarity should not surprise you; blacks do not have a monopoly on crime and violence any more than whites have a monopoly on civilized behavior. The crime rates you see are an expression of a basic human capacity.
So I think the question is, given that many blacks are exposed to a better way of life, why aren’t they adopting it? Why does 50 Cent insist on sporting a Gucci shoulder holster when he could be reading a book, or visiting a museum, or vacationing on the beach? Unlike a Palestinian, Visigoth, or Jurchen, 50 Cent isn’t barred from those things. He’d be welcomed into the library if he’d just holster the gun and put on a shirt. So what’s his problem?
Your answer to that question has been that all men are not created equal after all. My answer is that demagogues like Jesse Jackson keep blacks down (by lying to them about racism) in order to maintain power. My answer only addresses blacks in America.
Blacks in the Caribbean I can’t speak to; I’m not sufficiently familiar with the culture.
Blacks in Africa have, from time to time, created great civilizations all on their own. This has been going on for thousands of years. But “empires wax and wane, kingdoms cleave asunder and coalesce.” Right now we happen to be living in an age where there is no a great empire in Africa, but scoot back in time just 200 years, and you’ll find a very advanced one. It was not a western civilization, it was an African one, with some Islamic influences.
Western civilization has yet to take root in Africa because the westerners who colonized there were short-sighted elitist egomaniacs. Look at Zimbabwe for a case study on this. Europeans came in there and founded Rhodesia, and ran it as their own country. They explicitly made blacks second-class citizens, and though they brought in medical care and some education, they didn’t fraternize with blacks the way, say, whites in America do. Now, on the one hand, they built a wealthy and prosperous country. But on the other hand, they looked down their noses at the natives, and as a result did a very poor job of sharing Western culture. Eventually the blacks, who outnumbered the whites by more than ten to one, took over the country renamed it Zimbabwe, and are now running it into the ground. Zim’ ranks number two or three on Foreign Policy magazine’s recent Failed States Index, political opponents hack and burn each other, and last I heard, inflation was around 12 million percent.
Why did this happen? Why did Zimbabwe collapse so dramatically when the blacks took over? Well for one thing, the Zimbabwe government started repossessing white farms and giving them to blacks. No compensation, no just cause, just redistribution. Such an action will destroy any capitalist economy because capitalism depends on (among other things) a guarantee of property rights. If I don’t know for sure that I own a thing, then I can’t make full use of it and I can’t attract investment. Also, my rights as an individual have been trampled.
Individual rights are a Western idea. They spring from a Western understanding of the basic worth of a human being, a worth reflected in such documents as the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, and the Beatitudes.
The Rhodesians never taught the blacks about individual rights. In fact, they themselves trampled blacks’ rights. They did this out of a belief that blacks “weren’t ready yet” and “needed more time”. Maybe. But time finally ran out, and now the whites there not only have lost their country, they’ve lost a great opportunity to bring Western civilization to the dark continent. You’ll find much the same story across Africa.
I don’t think the violence and barbarity sweeping Zimbabwe is anything unique; worse has happened in Cambodia, Afghanistan, and other places. I don’t think a failure to adopt civilization is unique; we see that in other places too. I don’t think blacks are in any way incapable of building or appreciating civilization; Aksum reportedly rivaled Rome. I think a lot of what you are seeing in black populations around the world is part of the normal ebb and flow of history. Though certain patterns appear ubiquitous across space (America, Caribbean, Africa, all with high-crime black populations), these patterns are not ubiquitous across time.
If an Obama presidency has the effect we’d like, then things will look very different just four short years from now.
August 1, 2008 at 11:32 pm
xenlogic
I’m glad you finally understand what I’m getting at. I hope you’re right though Al, about the periodic manifestation in history. The only reason why I’m a little skeptical is that the same situation that you described in Zimbabwe is not unique to Zimbabwe. Similar things happened right here in Jamaica, culminating in the bloody 1980’s elections. Similar things happened in Grenada, Haiti and lord knows how many other Caribbean nations.
Even my Bahamian friend will tell you that the Bahamians collectively have a stronger degree of trust in the political party that is dominated by fair skinned and white people, simply because the country was better run when that particular party was in power. When the other party (predominated by black politicians) was in power, they sold off a lot of their (already limited) land to foreigners (like Anna Nicole Smith) and engaged in a lot of corrupt acts. They were voted out in a landslide victory just last year and the predominantly white/mixed race party took back control of the country, much to everyone’s satisfaction.
The same thing is prevalent in Jamaica. Over the last 18 years, we were under an administration that was dominated by black folks. The country sloped into a period of unprecedented crime, violence and over 6 billion US dollars worth of corruption and scandal over that time frame. The economy was never at a worse position. Ever since a new party took over, in November 2007, lead by a man who is just as mixed as Barack Obama, things started to look up – save for the economic problems being posed because of the high oil prices. Even before that previous administration took office, many people believed that the country was far better run when mulattoes and people of syrian and lebanese descent held the role of prime minister.
Al, in Jamaica, the biggest businesses are owned by white people, despite the fact that the banks are run by mostly black men. The reason for this disparty is not because of racism. Rather, as the bank managers will tell you, most of the black people who are business owners are just really poor at management for some inexplicable reason or they end up killing each other because of competition. So most businesses owned by black folks usually implode within a year of start up. This doesn’t mean that there aren’t any successful businesses in Jamaica owned by black men – but they are few and far between and they tend to be the ones that compete with businesses owned by white men. The big money earners in Jamaica are all owned by rich white, syrian, asian and indian families. Not one of the top multi-billion dollar businesses is owned by a black man – and Jamaica is 80% black, with white people taking up less than 8% of the population.
Now you tell me… Considering all the stuff I just told you, combine that with what you know about Zimbabwe, do you still think that is a culture issue or does it speak to something else that is far more pervasive?
Please tell me that I’m wrong. Just this once? I want to be wrong.
August 2, 2008 at 1:17 am
alamanach
When the People’s Army massed outside Tienanmen Square in 1989, the student protestors held a vote. If they stayed the night, the tanks would roll in in the morning and their pro-democracy demonstration would be crushed (literally). If they went home, everything would resolve peacefully (though probably without making a dent in the system they were trying to change).
They decided that this vote would be decided by ~minority~ rule.
Why the hell would they do that? I scratched my head on that one for a long time. The best answer I’ve been able to guess at is this: there is in political science a theoretical idea called tyranny of the majority. If you have an electorate of two basic groups, the more numerous one will always get its way, and the interests of the smaller group will effectively be underprotected and under-represented. The electoral college exists as a check against this kind of thing; it gives slightly more weight to votes that come from smaller states. I figure the students, being students, had read about tyranny of the majority in a book, came away with somewhat the wrong lesson, and thought minority-rule would dodge this obscure form of tyranny.
If that’s the case, then though they had studied Western-style democracy, they clearly had missed the point. They didn’t get it. The ideas that form the foundation of Western civilization aren’t easy to get. Formal reasoning is really weird. Loving your enemy as yourself is really weird. If one is raised from the cradle with such ideas, then it is easy not to notice just how weird they are.
Most humans are rather tribal in their outlook. For example, when the tsunami hit Indonesia, very little aid came from fellow Muslims in the Arab world. Indonesians aren’t Arab, and the idea of helping these strangers never occurred to a lot of Arabs. People raised in Christian cultures– whether they themselves are Christian or not– have a lot easier time seeing the point in helping others because they’ve been raised with that value. They’ve had plenty of opportunity to see it in action and see how it works.
The weirdness of formal reasoning is harder to illustrate, though we see it everyday. Common sense, by which a person intuits an answer to some problem, comes naturally. But common sense is often wrong. Common sense orders the world with the self at the center of the universe, and works from there. Formal reasoning doesn’t work that way, and can find solutions that are utterly divorced from the self. The best example I can think of are the ISO 9000 standards, which dictate some really weird behaviors in a manufacturing environment. There are reasons for all the rules, but common sense can’t see them, and so there is often a lot of resistance to ISO implementation. Other workplace rules are often the same way.
To be able to appreciate ISO, one has to have seen how formal rules operate, to see them in action and see how they work. Computers and mathematics operate in a formal way, as well. People who have not grown up with such things often have a hard time wrapping their brains around such a rigid, inhuman approach to the world. (And who could blame them? It’s flippin’ weird.) This is more than just left-brained logic, this is left-brained logic coupled with the abolition of the self.
So, if one has not been raised around Christian values and exposed to formal reasoning, then these weird modes can be very hard to understand later in life. And if they are not deeply, thoroughly understood, then the systems like capitalism and democracy which are based on them can be easy to misunderstand, too. That’s not to say it’s impossible, of course. But the average person is going to interpret what you teach him through the prism of the values he was brought up with. Teach a Chinese college student about Western democracy and he will not become a Western political leader. He will be a Chinese political leader trying to make use of foreign teachings that have been grafted onto him. The more he learns about Euclidian geometry and forgiveness, the better he’ll understand democracy. But how many Chinese, Zimbabweans, or anybody else interested in politics are going to sit around for lessons in that?
I imagine it’s much the same with Jamaicans. You could give him classes in business management, but if he hasn’t learned to look at the world from the same perspective as the culture that generated these ideas of business mangement, he’s less likely to get it.
It goes both ways. I know an executive back home who is big on Lean Management, and wanted me to be proficient in it if I was to work with him. Lean comes from Japan, I think it was Toyota that developed it. Looking into it, I found that it contained a lot of ideas that exist already in our own culture, just worded and applied somewhat differently. Proponents of Lean toss around a lot of Japanese words to indicate things we already have perfectly good words for in English. Do these guys realize what they’re actually saying? Do they get it? I have my doubts. They are like your Jamaican felow who opens a business and gets clobbered; he studied what he was doing, but he never understood.
I mentioned “Shanameh”. I started reading that book after finishing “The Life of Abdur Rahman”, an autobiography. I’m now on to “The Secret History of the Mongols”. The newest of these books is over a hundred years old; these are the old books that made Afghan culture what it is. (I’m working in Afghanistan, for those of you who don’t know.) Most Afghans never actually read this stuff, but their culture is encoded in it. If I can understand these books, I can understand how these guys think. If I can understand how these guys think, then I can understand why a bridge gets built the way it does.
Get it?
August 2, 2008 at 1:38 am
xenlogic
Aaaah… point well taken.
Ok. I will admit that question was elegantly handled. However, cultures are still a product of the people, irrespective of where they live. So ultimately, the people are still inextricably culpable for the success or failure of the culture which represents their ethnic identity.
August 2, 2008 at 5:43 am
alamanach
“So ultimately, the people are still inextricably culpable for the success or failure of the culture which represents their ethnic identity.”
To use one of your phrases, ORLY? I’ve said from the beginning that Christianity is part of the foundation of Western Civilization– a really big part. But Christianity itself is of purely oriental origin. It was non-Western Jews who gave us Christianity, the religion has no roots in Western thought. And as one studies Christianity, one discovers that it is profoundly Jewish in its outlook. It is an irony of history that the Jews rejected Christianity and the Romans of the day picked it up, but sometimes that’s how it goes.
So whose ethnic identity does Christianity represent?
I agree that people are ultimately culpable for the success or failure of their culture, but culture is not always the product of its people. Culture gets transplanted all the time.
August 2, 2008 at 3:33 pm
xenlogic
Agreed. And that’s exactly my point. I hereby rest my case.
August 2, 2008 at 7:23 pm
alamanach
What? You said culture represents ethnic identity, I disagreed. How does that make your point? You’ve lost me.
August 3, 2008 at 2:33 am
xenlogic
Forgive me. I’m keeping a long train of points in my head. I said:
you said:
Which backs the point I made earlier:
Because I don’t think culture is that much of a factor, which you further validated by saying:
Which I agreed with when I said:
But, the point still remains:
Which you validated when you said:
…which actually automatically implies that all white cultures are uniformly superior – as is evidence by my visitor map below. We are basically arguing nature vs. nurture here. I’m saying that nature has the heavier impact. All those white cultures on earth speak multiple languages and have varied histories – yet they are more pronounced on the map than other territories. How do you explain that?
August 3, 2008 at 7:14 am
alamanach
First let me emphasize that in your last quote of mine, I was trying to summarize a part of your position, I wasn’t stating my position. I don’t think black cultures are uniformly inferior. I do think Western Civilization is the greatest thing ever created by man, but that’s different from claiming something “uniformly inferior” about some other cultures. (Particularly, it’s the “uniformly” part I’d have to object to.)
To your line “Even so, the traditional problems that face black people still persist in all three geographic regions.”, my response was the natural ebb and flow of history. To reiterate, you are observing a pattern that persists across space. I say the pattern breaks down when you look at it across time.
From there you asked why businessmen in the Carribean seems so prone to failure, and I suggested that they probably just don’t get it. You credited the success of western modes of thought to something in the makeup of white ethnicity, and I countered with the important counter-example of Christianity. I contend there’s nothing special about white people.
Your map shows a preponderance of readers in the United States, a place loaded full of millions of black people. It’s also loaded full of Asian people, and Indo-paks, and Eastern Europeans, and hispanics, and so on. Every kind of person lives in the United States. People succeed in that very successful country to the extent that they embrace its values, its ways, and its culture. People of all colors have done this. Plenty of whites have failed at it. Blacks and hispanics may have something of a reputation for failing at it, but that only happens when they reject the culture. Those who embrace it can end up as doctors, astronauts, and presidential candidates. (Come to think of it, most countries don’t even have astronauts. Yet the U.S. has black astronauts. Happy thought.)
It was the United States that declared a few hundred years ago that all men are created equal, and it then went about proving it. So I wouldn’t go looking to the map for support of your position.
August 3, 2008 at 11:38 am
apollostwin
In reference to the concentration of readers in NA and Europe, it could be strongly influenced by socio-economics. Richer more technologically advanced countries will have a greater number of people with access to computers and the internet. Such isn’t the case in Africa and to a lesser extent in South America (though the language barrier may be a factor here as well). It may be a matter of if they had it, they would use it. I know the deeper implications of what the map references, but lets assume all other things but access and wealth are equal
.
August 3, 2008 at 6:52 pm
xenlogic
Thank you Apollostwin. That’s exactly what I was referring to by using the map. You hit the nail squarely on the head. Look at where the largest number of hits are concentrated. The United States and Europe have the highest number of hits on the map. Those territories were developed by white people. They are now so advanced that many other races have migrated to those nations, thus building their populations. They have the most advanced governments, the most advanced communication infrastructure, the most advanced education systems, roads, businesses… the whole nine yards.
Now compare places like Africa, South America and the far east on the map. Comparatively speaking, their civilizations are not quite as advanced, meaning:
1. Most of their inhabitants don’t speak the language of commerce (i.e. english) other than their native tongue (which is required for reading this blog). This would explain why I still get heavy hits even in Europe where the inhabitants regularly speak 3 or more non-english languages. That alone speaks to their level of education.
2. They don’t have internet access or a communications infrastructure that would get them to the web in the first place.
3. Access to the technology (like a computer) is not quite as ubiquitous.
4. They’re simply too poor to care about any of this stuff. Their basic needs such as food, clothing and shelter have not been met.
5. They’re illiterate. So even if they had access to technology, it has no use to them. In every black culture across the world, one of the key indicators is an alarmingly high rate of illiteracy. I’m still shocked at some of the stats….
6. The population is sparse which is a factor of one of two things:
a. The land is largely unhospitable for sprawling civilizations (eg. desert land or tundra)
OR
b. The large majority of the populations have moved to one of the more populous territories, most likely in the US or Europe – thus adding to my point about white dominance.
What’s my point here? This:
Even though there are many, MANY white cultures, which are as disparate as night and day, white civilisations have collectively demonstrated that they are, without question, considerably more advanced in many areas (socially, economically, technologically) than others – to such an extent that their cities attract immigrants from other races. Why don’t we see the same patterns all over Africa?
Now using the same logic, consider the other end of the spectrum. There are many black cultures – each as disparate from each other as the white cultures mentioned earlier. My point is, despite the many differences in black culture, all of the things which are good and bad about black people still persist irrespective of their culture. It doesn’t matter what culture they have imbibed, developed, transplanted or have been influenced by. The performance of the race is relatively consistent – right across the board, irrespective of culture.
Ahh. I think I finally understand what you mean when you said earlier that:
So you’re basically saying that the time for black kingdoms came and went and that what we’re seeing now as a dominance of white culture is merely a cross-section in time as in another couple of centuries, we may see a dominance of some other culture, maybe Arabic or Asian, in the future, correct? If that’s the case, then you might be right. With the economic crisis going on in the USA now, it might just be the beginning of the end of the American empire and the rise of the Chinese Empire, wouldn’t you say?
August 3, 2008 at 10:08 pm
alamanach
I would hazard a guess that most people in the world speak three or more languages (whereas in America most people are only fluent in one language.) Have you travelled much? In Kenya 18 years ago (before globalization really took off), the average Kenyan spoke three languages– Swahili, whatever mother tongue was common to his tribe, and English. On the coast it was Swahili, Arabic, and English. India had the same pattern– Hindi, a local language, and English. Here in Afghanistan, common languages are Pashto, Dari, Urdu, and classic Persian. Classic Persian here is like English or Russian; it seems to be mostly your more educated types who pick up that one. But in any case, polyglots abound.
(By the way, if you’re going to travel the world armed with only one language, make it English. Only in the remotest parts of Africa, a few rare spots in Asia, and throughout what feels like all of South America will that language let you down.)
Your list of plagues on the black parts of the world could apply just as well to Afghanistan, or any number of places. It could apply to most places throughout history. Civilization is no trifling achievement, it is hard work, and it absence looks like the things that you list. I contend there’s nothing special about black people.
I’m not quite suggesting that a future black kingdom will rise to dominance, just prominence and possible rivalry. Any future culture that dominates the world will have to have major elements of Western civilization in its makeup. Will the USA someday slide from the top? Yes, it is inevitable. Are we presently seeing the Chinese rise to be the world’s first power? I don’t think so, but that’s a debate for another time.
Are we finished with this one?
August 3, 2008 at 10:19 pm
xenlogic
Sure! It’s just that it means that black civilizations have been on a timeout for the last 5500+ years.
August 3, 2008 at 11:04 pm
alamanach
200ish years; you forget Mali.
August 3, 2008 at 11:24 pm
xenlogic
I’m counting Egypt, Cush, Nubia – the scale of those have not been repeated since. Otherwise we can count South Africa and the Coalition of Caribbean States as manifested in the Caribbean Single Market Economy.
August 4, 2008 at 10:36 am
rgularjoe
Xenlogic…I will admit a few things:
1. You are a very long-winded dude
2. You are pretty funny
3. That we have our problems. There is no denying that. And most of those problems start and stop with self-esteem. Knowledge of self is a powerful determinant in how you carry yourself and set out to live your life. I am 30 years old, a father, husband, business man, avid hip-hop listener, and wanna be world pundit. What has been at the core of my growing success has been the knowledge that as a Black Man I am very special. I owe alot of that to Afro-centrism. Reading and learning that this world is old and my ancestry has played a pivotal part in its development. That helped to broaden my aspirations beyond my neighborhood. Knowing that my potential to impact others like me drves me to grind out whatever success that God may have in store for me.
Unfortunately, not all of my buddies developed that sense of self and instead of embracing who they are, they embraced what society said they were. Ultra masculine, ladies-men that are driven my money, power, and success in spite of people. Those are not attitudes that are innate to the Black pysche, but more carcicatures developed by Western Civilization. So black men and women are attempting to live out tinsel town lives that they believe will lead them to happiness.
The Black Community could erase many of its social ills by being true to itself and embracing their culture. Even if it means speaking ebonics or re-inventing the N word. The most important thing is regaining a sense of history, pride, and nationalism that drives people to network and combine resources.
My contention with most of your statements is that it you limit the impact of institutionalized segration and oppression, as well as, the destruction of a peoples history and cultural pride to a minor paragraph at the end of a well thought out thesis that effectively said black people will instinctively destroy itself or allow other people to destroy them. Its not the only reason that we have failed but it is a mahor reason and it bothers us when the world attempts to play down its significance. Its condescending and smells of Self-righteousness. There are numerous ills that are present in every culture that don’t get the same treatment (media) as the ills that exist within the Black Community.
And to answer your question as to why it seems like anywhere in the world black people are they are not thriving is that centuries of assimilation has placed us on a path that is not our own. African Americans can’t truly connect with the brothers and sisters from Africa. Africans don’t understand how we’ve become so intoxicated with Eurocentric ideals. And the rest of the world see African Americans as either failures for not exploiting the freedoms America grants us or as simply haughty Americans that are driven by capitalism.
At the end of the day, American born Blacks need to revamp our educational system to start the process of renewing a pride in common African ancestry that spans all the globes Black people. We then need to rebuild and focus our political and economic power into the Black communities here in America and then force the American government to take us much more seriously. This way we can help to shape the political agenda that includes treating Africa as the sacred birthplace of all human-kind. Thus helping to funnel the proper resources, training, infrastructure building expertise to the continent of Africa.
Lastly, African Americans need to say damn everybody else, no one cares about us or loves us and thats just how it is. Like I said the sooner we give up the victim role, the sooner our fortunes change. Its evident that our numerous contributions to world technology, business, politics, arts & culture speak to the potential of the black mind so we should never worry ourselves about what we can’t do. What we can do should be our focus.
4. Please don’t be offended by my blog referring to you as a fool. We are all foolish at times. Myself especially. I only want people to be less judgemental and more willing to build people up vs tear them down.
What can I say…I’m a foolish idealist
August 4, 2008 at 4:29 pm
xenlogic
rgularjoe,
I must say that I am impressed with your rhetoric. I don’t know if you realise it yet, but it appears that you and I were saying the same things all along. I feel I owe you an explanation as one is certainly most deserving.
First of all, like you, I am a black man. You and I share very similar demographics and I suspect that we may actually have very similar worldviews. However, to avoid having my commentary being pre-judged (as you saw), I deliberately eliminated all evidence from the post that I am black. Most people would miss that little detail and assume that I’m white. This was deliberate. You and I both know that the world automatically assigns a motive behind anything you say based on your ethnic affinity – especially when it has to do with the issue of race. It’s sad that this is the reality, but it’s true. Never-the-less, this was deliberately done to expose that very point being brought across in the post. Now that it has, I can drop the subterfuge and proceed to the rest of the explanation.
What I find is that most of the people (especially black people) who have never met me in person automatically assume that I write and reason like a white man. Let me qualify what I mean. Whether I am writing some article on relationships, a philosophical dissertation on religious apologetics or having a debate with my buddy Al on some matter of quantum theory, most people who read my stuff automatically assume that I’m white – not because I say anything against black people, but because they assume that no black man would be educated or well read enough to know about anything as thought-heavy as philosophy, and theoretical physics. Everytime I meet someone in person who has read my material, the first response is always the same:
“I thought you were white!”
You want to know what’s even funnier? Even my current girlfriend had a similar presupposition. So then I realised that this has absolutely nothing to do with how well educated or how smart you are. Rather, it’s because black people have created a stereotype for themselves and they seem to be quite comfortable with it. The problem is that the stereotype is assumed for all black men, even those who don’t fit it. So according to the given stereotype, many of my black peers assume that because I look a particular way, I am expected to believe and do certain things. That’s why my friend, I get called “Oreo” …A LOT… lol!
I don’t find it annoying. People who liken me to a white man are not dissing me. It is more of a backhanded compliment in a way. However I see it as a manifestation of their inferiority complex; the same psychological deficit that would make them wear false hair, insert blue coloured contact lenses, dye their hair blond / brown or even bleach their skin. In Jamaica, older folks have an expression that “nothing black is good” and so many people who are now our age have this mentality stuck in their head. They don’t realise that being black is nothing more than a biological trait and it doesn’t automatically pre-determine your expected level of intelligence. But there is a scientific reason for all this self defeat.
The act of racism is actually a manifestation of a very primal kind of fear. It is born out of the same psychological precursors that would case people to fear (or hate) a black animal or to at least consider it to be threatening. Consider black spiders, black cats, black panthers, black snakes, black [insert your favourite 'terrifying' creature here]. Psychologists at Yale recently discovered that the same parts of the human brain that light up and trigger that primal fear when someone encounters what is perceived to be a threatening black creature, are the SAME parts of the brain which first trigger when people encounter black people…
Let that soak in for a few seconds before you read on….
Can you imagine that? I was shocked when I first read it – but it explains a LOT of things.
It means that God has hard wired humanity to possess an inherent dislike, however provisional, of all things black – including black people. That primal fear is really designed as a survival instinct. That means, despite our efforts to swim out of the blackness (so to speak), black folks are quite literally hardwired for a greater probability of failure. Even if white men didn’t hate us enough in the past to enslave us (because at one point, white men didn’t think that black people had souls), we would have destroyed our ownselves because of the same psychological precursors. It is frightening to me, rgularjoe, that God, in all his wisdom would do such a thing. It makes one wonder if God had intended to eventually create black people when he hard wired humans with this trait. But that’s something that only God can answer.
Never the less, this is the reason why black people have the type of culture they have. This is the reason why we are not very good at building and maintaining empires. This is the reason why we were enslaved so often in history. This is the reason why when many of us are grouped into large communities, crime and violence are not far behind. This is the reason why, even when white people hand over governments to us, the levels of corruption and economic instability shoot right through the roof. In fact, this is why many people are saying that George Bush is actually black… (no offence white people
) The same psychological precursors that created racism in non blacks are the same precursors that cause black people to hate themselves. For lack of a better expression, it is a flaw in human design (and I only say this because I cannot fathom what useful purpose God could have possibly had in mind).
But I’m not willing to let that biological deficit take away my psychological freedom. Do you know Plato’s allegory of the cave? Dudes like you and I are like that one dude who was born in the cave, but decided to go outside and checkout the light. The rest of the guys inside the cave judge their level of importance by their ability to discern shadows. The one guy who stepped outside became enlightened and thus realised he didn’t need shadows at all. The real challenge, rgularjoe, is to get others who look like us to think like us. They need to realise that just because they were born in a cave, it doesn’t mean that they have to spend their lives living in one.
The Egyptian, Cush and Nubian empires are situations where black guys who got out of the cave managed to compel other men like them to build an empire. To say the least, it worked. Unfortunately, it has had mixed success in the 5500+ years that followed. This is not to say that blacks haven’t achieved great things in that period. It’s just that we’ve never duplicated that level of success since then. For in order to pull that off, we have to resist the powerful temptation to feel comfortable living our lives in that cave.
That was the point of my post. Just because we are born black, it doesn’t mean that we have to think black, no matter how powerful the compulsion is. And we can’t just think about only black people. That kind of thinking will lead us right back to square one. We have to think about everyone – including white people. White people aren’t our enemies. They’re just men like us with a 3% variance in their DNA. Unfortunately, life’s not fair and because they weren’t born black, the same psychological precursors that would make humans hate most black things did not become reflexive and thus self defeating for people who are born fair in complexion.
So we black people have our work cut out for us. We have to free ourselves from ourselves before we can free ourselves from anything else. Bob Marley saw it a long time ago and so did Marcus Garvey. The lesson is still valid even to this day. Once we break the mental shackles of self defeat, we can break the stereotypes. Once we break the stereotyoes, then the world is ours.
Forgive my long windedness. If I could say all the important things I needed to say in one sentence, I’m sure it would not be understood. If I could say it in one paragraph, I would be accused of trivialising the matter. But if I say it in a mini-essay, I run a better chance of both being understood and not being accused of trivialising something that is important. Sometimes long-windedness is a necessary evil, if only to stave off the inherent propensity of the human sensibility to see only the tiny black spot on a massive white wall.
I enjoyed this discussion guys. I certainly learned a lot.
Cheers!
Xen
August 4, 2008 at 7:52 pm
alamanach
“Psychologists at Yale recently discovered that the same parts of the human brain that light up and trigger that primal fear when someone encounters what is perceived to be a threatening black creature, are the SAME parts of the brain which first trigger when people encounter black people… It means that God has hard wired humanity to possess an inherent dislike, however provisional, of all things black – including black people.”
After reading the rest of your comments, I’m now wondering if those Yale psychologists were black. Because if they hold attitudes similar to yours, it would explain their results.
When I was 19 there was a really good-looking girl at work, and we used to flirt a lot. I think we both started to realize there was some genuine attraction there, and the possibility of dating came up. “Yeah, but would your parents be okay with you bringing home a black girl?” she suddenly asked. The question caught me so totally by surprise, I couldn’t even answer at first. I hadn’t given any thought to her being black, and so had nothing to say on the matter. Then the normal flow of work interrupted our conversation, and my chance was lost. I think she misinterpreted my hesitancy, and that was as far as things ever went. She wouldn’t go out with me because she’d gotten it into her head that the race thing would have gotten in the way.
I really would have liked to have dated that girl. There were some black women I met in college I would have liked to cozy up to as well. But none of it ever happened because these girls kept assuming that race mattered. I wish people would get off it already.
August 4, 2008 at 9:56 pm
apollostwin
@Al
Don’t you think those black women in question were manifesting a sort of inferiority complex by making their race an issue in the first place? I mean if they were confident in their personalities and characters, the minor detail of their skin colour shouldn’t have factored in. You already showed them interest, obviously undeterrred by their race. They could not see that, or the value in their personalities regardless of race. Unless this was a time like the days of segragation in the US when it was illegal and dangerous for an interracial couple. I assume you are not that old…lol. Then I can see them making it an issue, as the social consequences would have been far from minor for the both of you.
August 5, 2008 at 12:11 am
xenlogic
Nah. Yale? C’mon. I’m surprised no one asked if they were white supremecists. LOL!
It’s Catch 22 Al. If I wasn’t black, it would not have been a noticeable issue in the first place. I, like you, would not have given two hoots about the issue if I was white.
I concur. Unfortunately, the problem is not about being black. It’s because of an inherent “flaw” in human psychology. Think of it this way:
In 1966, a computer program was designed to store date values. However it could only store data six bytes long at a time. So they truncated the year value to two digits, so that you had MM/DD/YY. Fast forward 34 years. The 21st century rolls along and all those people who were born before the year 2000 are now being calculated as being centurians and thus, their insurance companies started printing cheques for them in the sum of hundreds of thousands of dollars because it assumed that they were all over 100 years old and thus eligible for insurance cash backs. Dozens of insurance companies went under.
It’s the same thing with humans. Millenia ago, before distinctive races appeared on earth, when we all more or less looked alike, our brains were hard wired to fear (avoid, kill) creatures that carry certain appearance markers (we see this even insinuated in the Bible when Cain was cast out as a vagabond). Fast forward 70,000 years and those psychological markers are still there. But guess what? Some of the races that have now appeared on earth now carry some of those genetic markers. The primal psychological responses kick in anyway producing the effects we now know as racism, slavery, interracial tension, and a black race with issues.
It’s the same way how men still carry that cave man instinct to desire more than one woman, even though the instinct is now redundant as the earth is already adequately populated. The article about the Yale psychologists wasn’t trying to show why the black race has problems. It was trying to show that just like how humans still carry organs they will never need to use anymore (like the appendix), humans still carry primal psychological programming from the caveman days that they no longer need. This programming was valid 70,000 years ago, before races appeared in humans. Just like the Y2k problem, it’s old code that still exists in our brains that we no longer need.
Now if only there was a way to remove it…
Anyway, next topic: Atheism on Trial!
August 11, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Majadi Baruti
This is a brilliant dissertation, I appreciate an intelligent Afrikan mind! Keep posts like this coming.
Afrikan Power!
Upward Movement!
August 15, 2008 at 8:45 am
Stewart Panton
Well, as usual I am late in reading your posts… But I do have some things to add. I do agree with your conclusions. Black People need to stop this nigger rubbish that we perpetuate through our music (im not singling out black americans). We also perpetuate negative values of having these many children with these many different women etcetera as you have laid out above. My disagreement comes in the following areas though:
1) Your initial thought that the white civilization is superior to blacks. – As people evolve around the world, we have seen where people have ADAPTED to their environment around them and through their adaptations they will seem less advanced culturally as their European counterparts. However they are not, they are simply more suited for their environment. You speak about the fact that Europeans came back to africa with woven cotton clothes and leather boots etcetera… In the african context, (Hot sun, poor land quality (no agriculture), lots of dangerous animals etc) there was no need for black people to learn to weave cotton, or to make boots out of leather. They needed to be cool during the days and warm during the nights (they were little clothing in the days and at nights had their blankets and houses). They made their houses out of wattle and thatch because it is by far the most cooling material (to be in, during the days) and then it keeps the warmth to take you throughout the night. In fact most of the europeans who returned to africa died off quickly and if it wasn’t for the fact that they took alot of tips from the africans they wouldn’t have lasted anytime down there.
To see how great the african civilization is one only needs to look at Egypt. Egypt in its heyday was the most advanced civilization in the world HANDS DOWN, all the europeans came to egypt for their education and then they went back to europe and then re-used what they learned to dominate (I will get on this in a second). Egyptians also explored the world (just as much as europeans except they did it in africa (which is a very large continent), and not just went out to sea as europeans did (because they dont have as large a space to explore so they went out… not because they were explorers, because they were already finished with europe). The egyptian civilization were astronomers (layout of the pyramids) mathematicians, architects, scientists etcetera, etcetera. At a far more advanced level that is seen by europeans at the same level.
Next, the europeans aren’t as brilliant as you have made them seen in your post. Alot of it has to do with the north africans (and middle easterners) and the asians. These people brought forth all of the inventions that europeans later used to move forward with their civilization. Zhang He a chinese explorer had already explored all of the world at least 300 years before columbus was even born and has left his mark all over the caribbean and the americas. The chinese invented typing (the invention that basically created the modern world), gun powder (will get to this too), the system of monetary trade and the list could go on.
So of course the question goes, if these civilizations were so good, why is it that Europeans dominated the world? The simple answer, because all they know is destruction. Before europeans returned to africa and went to asia their civilization was on the brink of destruction because they couldnt adapt and they were always fighting within themselves, unlike in africa and asia where people were advancing together and inventions were running wild. As we have seen europeans have taken all these great inventions and instead of using them for their greater good have used them to create destruction.
They were welcome with open arms into china, they go in, take fireworks and create, the gun and then attack asia, which is why china eventually kicked them out. They took ship design and navigation tips from middle easterners and asians and then created war-ships and went back to destroy the very people they learned from. Even their religion, took from asian and middle eastern religions and built upon it changed a few things and then went back and fought the muslims (the same people who came up from africa FIRST, and taught these europeans that you need to learn to bathe more than once a year and you need a reading system etcetera. The europeans were on a path to self destruction that if it wasnt for africans and asians would’ve been successful. I could go on and on about how backwards european civilisation was, they depended on destruction which is why they rose to the level of dominance that they have, not because they were smarter. (If i seemed racist, i apologize I was just stating facts).
August 15, 2008 at 10:19 am
alamanach
“…they depended on destruction which is why they rose to the level of dominance that they have…”
That’s nonsensical; destruction destroys, it does not create. Destruction alone cannot lead to dominance, the idea is absurd. Even if destruction were to eliminate native resistance, there has to be something positive, something creative, following behind it.
I certainly agree that Europe was terribly backward for most of the roughly 1,000 years between the fall of Rome and the Italian Renaissance, and that it was contact with Asia that finally breathed life back into Europe again. But your interpretation of history doesn’t address the exceptional technical achievements of Western Civilization (the steam engine, the Moon landings, etc.), it doesn’t explain why China turned back from its explorations of the world, and it doesn’t explain why so many countries today use globalization to pursue some remarkably western trappings. It has not been through destruction– or even military might– that the automobile, McDonald’s, and rock-n-roll have taken root across the globe. Osama bin Laden wears a Timex digital watch. I’m pretty sure nobody has forced him into doing that.
I’d be interested in hearing your take on the Eastern Empire.
August 15, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Stewart Panton
I’m not sure i understand that final sentence about my take on the Eastern Empire… care to elaborate?
I do agree that I have been fairly unclear though. I say they depend on destruction because of the fact that it is the destruction of other cultures that has led to the dominance that they have. In other words, had it been that Europeans didnt use almost every invention they have taken from other cultures for destruction and instead used it for positive means, it could probably have happened that the chinese, the african, the mayan etcetera could be the greater technological powers nowadays and not the europeans. I say this because I have always thought it rather wierd that most of the inventions which came out of Europe(or white culture) have been destructive. In comparison with the inventions coming out of every other culture in the world.
The only positive thing that I can think about that came out of the opium trade(started by europeans) destroying china is that china was split up and forced into servitude under various european countries… Oh wait that isnt very positive to the Chinese. It is however beneficial to Europe, through this europe spread christianity into china, destroyed the chinese system of weights & measures and trade (and then reformed it and took it as their own) and also took any other technological advancement that the chinese had made.
The achievements of western civilization occured not due to great innovativeness or brilliance, but instead by copying and improving upon existing ideas. For example, the use of steam, can be traced back to Greece, and can be traced even further back to Alexandria (the African one). However the engine itself was a simple matter of putting two and two together… If steam can move an object, maybe if it was harnessed it could push something larger. However the actual realization that steam can move something should be seen as the greatest part of this invention.
I wont say anything about the moon landings, because I am one of the people who have began to believe that the moon landings were fake… I would still like better proof…
China turned its back on its explorations of the world due to the fact that the emperor who had ordered the explorations had died and was replaced by an emperor who wanted to focus more on making china better. As for the more modern inventions, these are the same inventions that are leading to the destruction of the environment(cars) and the destruction of people(mcdonalds)… Ok I wont lie, i’m a clutching at straws as far as the more modern inventions go. The motorcar is one of the inventions that really made the modern world as it is. So is the semi-conductor and silicon, most of which are mainly white inventions… until i can prove otherwise (I’m a historian, but I haven’t delved that far into history… yet). However most of these inventions do have a base, and the bases are African and Asian.
If anything, I can say the one thing good about the European destructive nature and their taking of other cultures advancements is the fact that all of these different inventions etc were in one place. And thus they could combine them to come up with better inventions. However the destruction of these other great civilizations should never have to come as a precurser to great inventions. All these civilizations managed to do these things without destroying other cultures… why do they?
August 15, 2008 at 3:22 pm
alamanach
While the Opium Wars were ignoble, they didn’t start until the 1800’s. Your theory would have Europeans stealing from the Chinese long before then, so this doesn’t really jibe.
I have been using the example of the steam engine deliberately because that innovation was far more than the obvious follow-on to ancient uses of steam. The steam engine would not have been possible without the science of thermodynamics, especially the understanding of something engineers call enthalpy. Unlike mass or temperature or pressure, enthalpy is a derived quantity that cannot be measured directly. It comes from a mathematical relationship between those other quantities. We can build thermometers and barometers, but there’s no such thing as a device that acts as an enthalpy meter. So, discovering enthalpy is a big leap. Using the concept of enthalpy to invent a steam engine is another leap, one that would have been far beyond what the ancient Greeks or Egyptians, or even the Chinese, were capable of. (And I say that knowing full well just how sophisticated their science was.)
Faking the Moon landings would have required television, and some other achievements that are still pretty remarkable. And there is no faking the fact that airplanes, rockets, and satellites exist. All of these depend on scientific concepts (EM theory, the Bernoulli equation, the rocket equation, calculus, Relativity) developed by the West. To claim that the West hasn’t had innovation and brilliance behind its achievements is, I think, demonstrably false.
China’s civilization is 5,000 years old. It’s decision to shy away from exploration depends on more than the whims of two emperors.
Other civilizations have achieved a lot, I agree with you there and have already argued as much. But they have plenty of their own destruction that they’ve meted out, too. The emperors of the Qin dynasty were far more harmful to China than the Opium Wars could ever have hoped to be. African slavery, for another example, was a native development. The Europeans didn’t introduce it or start it, they just participated in it. Then there’s Sundiata who, without any help or influence from Europeans, was an illegitimate usurper and conqueror. I could go on and on and on, but there’d be no end to the list.
The thing about the Eastern Empire was just asked out of idle curiosity, there wasn’t anything in your comment that led straight to it. But it was a Western culture that didn’t slide into the barbarity of the middle ages, yet never really went forward, either. They didn’t do much conquering, nor much of anything else. They were prosperous and boring for centuries.
August 15, 2008 at 10:01 pm
xenlogic
Hey Panton,
I think you were a little more bored than you let on dude.
Anywho, aside from the corrections Alamanach made:
This doesn’t explain why the Europeans still had more advanced machines like ships, guns, compasses etc. Furthermore they had figured out how to map the globe and the curvature of the earth beyond recognizable land. If you realise how remarkably difficult such a science is, you’ll likewise recognise the advancement of the civilisations that developed them.
Cotton forms a more protective barrier between the bare skin and the elements. It doesn’t need to be all covering – it just needs to be covering enough. The same can be said of leather boots. A lot of the diseases which afflicted pre-slave Africans (not to mention the grittiness of the skin due to raw exposure) would have been avoided with proper covering. Furthermore, even you wear cotton and protective boots in the hot sun.
This proves nothing. If you moved to Africa right now without taking the requisite barrage of immunizations for the rare diseases that have been eliminated from the rest of the world that still thrive in Africa, you’d have died just as quickly and for all the same reasons the Europeans did when they visited Africa. Furthermore, you forget that the European disease Influenza (or the Flu as we know it today) killed a number of African slaves who moved north. The vagrant omission here Stewie, is that in every corner of the world, people build up genetic resistance to disease indigenous to their location. Visitors to those regions do so at their own peril.
That was 5500 years ago. There hasn’t been a black civilization like it since. And technically, the Egyptians weren’t Negroid black. They were Caucazoids (the same thing that Jamaicans call “brownings”). The Egyptians were anthropologically different from the blacks in southern African states. They were an ‘in between’ race of sorts between Persian-Caucasians and Negroids. That sort of thing happens all the time as is evidenced in the Persian Caucasians, Aryan Indians and the Amero-Caucasians which differ substantially from Aryan Caucasians of Northern Europe. This is just another reason why scientists repeatedly declare that technically speaking, there’s no such thing as race. Those characteristics which make us look different only occupy 3% of our DNA and can change with just a change in environment.
Global exploration didn’t take on the scale it did until white civilisations had achieved relative maturity in Europe – and I’m talking pre-Columbus exploration. None-the-less, the discovery and documentation of the New World didn’t happen until Columbus. So mentioning anything pre-Columbus is moot. The point is thus void.
Not quite true. They still didn’t match the advanced observatory notations of white astronomers like Galileo. Egyptian astronomy was limited to anthropomorphication as static observational (for city building) and religious purposes (which eventually created Judaism and Christianity). However, astronomy didn’t take on theoretical quantifications until the Reneissance period. Guess who were the top minds during that age?
Much of North African kingdoms were long gone when Caucasian civilisations arose in Northern Europe. Asian kingdoms were effectively self contained for much of recorded history. I agree that white men took inventions from both – but it is inaccurate to say that most of their inventions came from both. That is simply not true. That is one of the many false teachings of Afrocentricism which is filled with logical paradoxes, like blaming white people for slavery, when black kingdoms were selling their own into slavery long before white men came along. In fact, this has been a practice in Africa from the time of Moses (see the story of Joseph).
None the less, Caucasian civilisations invented theoretical science. They were the ones that invented Biology, Chemistry and Physics, the foundation sciences that drive modern civilisation. None of those sciences were imbibed from other kingdoms. I will give you mathematics; as the Egyptians, the Kemetics and the Arabs had long used math. But it was Caucasian civilisations that invented theoretical mathematics that we use to build space craft and orbiting telescopes that we use to explore the universe today. Beware of Afrocentricism. It is just as dangerous as the Aryan doctrines of Hitler.
This is not true. It was based on a theory posited by Gavin Mendes which was scientifically refuted based on his obvious misinterpretation of historical evidence. Mendes was not a professional Historian. He was a submarine commander. History was just a amateur gig for him – not something he has any professional certifications in.
Wrong again. Typing was invented by a white man, Christopher Sholes in 1866. You’re right about Gun power, but monetary trade was invented by the Templar’s Knights of ancient England (also white men) who invented the first bank.
Nonsense. If they were so destructive, where do you think your education came from? Where do you think our Government in Jamaica comes from? Would you have rather to be born in Africa instead of in Jamaica? Do you speak Swahili (a black man’s language) or English (a white man’s language)? Who invented the components in your computer that you use to visit this blog? Who invented an internet for you to use your computer to surf?
I think what you meant to say is that the white man is so advanced that he’s found as many ways to build as he has to destroy with just as much efficiency. It speaks to the sheer cognitive prowess of his collective genetic contemporaries.
In fact, it’s the white man’s research into genetic crops that is feeding hundreds of our starving cousins in Africa. Every rich black man in America was made rich by a white economy. Even local DJs in Jamaica got rich only because they toured Europe. They don’t make that kind of money in Jamaica because we black people are pirating their CDs. Again, beware of Afrocentric teachings. They are full of bunk.
That was some 5-600 years ago. Look at the crime rate in Jamaica. It’s not very different from the level of ignorance exhibited by white men in ancient Europe. The key word here is “ancient”.
Do you not realise the inherent flaw in your logic? If White men were smart enough to adapt what other people invented such that they could make it BETTER and then return and conquer the very same people they stole the idea from, who does that make smarter, the non-white inventors or the white men? Think about it.
Again, Afrocentric nonsense. If they were on a path to self destruction, they wouldn’t rule the world’s economies, have the world’s most powerful military nations, or run the world’s last remaining superpower – although, if Barack Obama wins (which seems likely), that might change. Never the less, I still can’t use Barack as a good example as he’s a Caucazoid, like the Egyptians. The Americans only refer to him as being black because of the silly one-drop rule.
August 15, 2008 at 10:33 pm
alamanach
“Do you speak Swahili (a black man’s language) or English (a white man’s language)?”
Ninasema Kiswahili; nilisoma Kiswahili na Chuo Kikuu cha Chicago. Ninapenda Kiswahili kwa subabu Kenya yetu na ninapenda wabantu. (Na sasa ninawaza kwa kii, internet na kawaida mzuri kwa Kiswahili. Hmm… )
(God, I love being an Alamanach!
)
August 16, 2008 at 11:02 am
Stewart Panton
^^ (What the hell did alamanach just say)… I hope its not something about my parents
“While the Opium Wars were ignoble, they didn’t start until the 1800’s. Your theory would have Europeans stealing from the Chinese long before then, so this doesn’t really jibe.”
Yes you are correct, the opium wars were not until the 1800’s but the pre-curser to the opium wars were happening before that. If you remember, the opium wars began as a deliberate attack on the chinese due to jealousy of the success of the chinese by the Europeans.
I cant disagree with what you said about the other cultures carrying destruction in their pathway. However, the difference I find between the destruction carried by the other cultures and the europeans is that the europeans automatically turned to it instead of negotiations. To Elaborate, trading has been taking place between africans and north africans (trans saharan trade), and China and the Middle East (Canton Trade System and later to Europe, with the Silk road). Through these different trade routes there were ideas exchanged and breakthrough’s found. The entrance of Europeans into both trade systems were both very violent, and was one of outright dominance, that is the difference between both. (By the way Al, would you mind giving me a book name or a link to read up on that Eastern Empire that you spoke about. Right now this is very foreign to me)
“This doesn’t explain why the Europeans still had more advanced machines like ships, guns, compasses etc. Furthermore they had figured out how to map the globe and the curvature of the earth beyond recognizable land. If you realise how remarkably difficult such a science is, you’ll likewise recognise the advancement of the civilisations that developed them.”
Next to the guns (which I said are european inventions), compasses, ships, the Astrolobe (and the idea to map by stars to get longtitude and latitude that led to the mapping of the world) etcetera were all North African (Muslim… Caucazoid as you call it) inventions (With the exception of the compass which was Chinese). None of these came from Europe. Which is where I think you are mistaken. Prior to the building of the first European marine school by … King Henry the Navigator (correct me if i’m wrong, I cant remember), which employed muslim teachings and muslim teachers, none of these technologies existed in Europe. The building of ships with round bottoms, etcetera all came from the Caucazoid who were marine masters long exploring the asian continent.
“That was 5500 years ago. There hasn’t been a black civilization like it since. And technically, the Egyptians weren’t Negroid black. They were Caucazoids (the same thing that Jamaicans call “brownings”). The Egyptians were anthropologically different from the blacks in southern African states. They were an ‘in between’ race of sorts between Persian-Caucasians and Negroids.”
I guess its purely coincidental that the Egyptian civilization ended with the introduction of the european… I wouldn’t seperate Caucazoid from African simply because of the pretext of your post which states that the early men went to europe and came back smarter… that is the point which i disagree with. Thats why I referred to them as Africans.
“None-the-less, the discovery and documentation of the New World didn’t happen until Columbus. So mentioning anything pre-Columbus is moot. The point is thus void.”
This is a point I disagree with also. Well, I cant disagree using strictly facts however… I disagree by stating… The first documentation that has survived of the new world is from christopher columbus. As we know alot of history was destroyed by people burning books as they dominated cultures (I wont say europeans becuz the burning of history was something that most ancient cultures did).
“I agree that white men took inventions from both – but it is inaccurate to say that most of their inventions came from both. That is simply not true. That is one of the many false teachings of Afrocentricism which is filled with logical paradoxes, like blaming white people for slavery, when black kingdoms were selling their own into slavery long before white men came along. In fact, this has been a practice in Africa from the time of Moses (see the story of Joseph).”
What is wrong with being proud of my African heritage? I never said black people didn’t enslave each other, or that black people aren’t right now destroying their own race in what they say and do. However I do think that you are severely underestimating the works of other groups (Africans and Asians and Indians) and how it has impacted the world. That is what I have a severe problem with. I actually am not a very afro-centric person at all, as a historian I currently focus all my studies on the Asian continent.
“Typing was invented by a white man, Christopher Sholes in 1866. You’re right about Gun power, but monetary trade was invented by the Templar’s Knights of ancient England (also white men) who invented the first bank.”
Sorry I inserted the wrong word there. I meant printing, printing is the invention that drove the modern world, that allowed education for the masses etcetera. This was a purely chinese invention that was later taken and improved upon by gutenburg with the printing press that allowed for more automated printing and on a larger scale.
“Where do you think our Government in Jamaica comes from? Would you have rather to be born in Africa instead of in Jamaica? Do you speak Swahili (a black man’s language) or English (a white man’s language)?”
What were the pre-cursers to this? Was it anything positive? Or was it strictly for the benefit of one culture with a “Who gives a f***” attitude about the other culture?
“In fact, it’s the white man’s research into genetic crops that is feeding hundreds of our starving cousins in Africa. ”
Why are our cousins starving in Africa? Who started the raping of the African landscape with no care for who suffers, and not giving any benefit to the owners of the land? Who started alot of the wars in africa (in modern times)? It is this wanton disregard for other people and cultures why I say that they are the most destructive culture.
Destruction is not the path to greatness. Development and creation is the path to greatness. Using what you have stated I can assume that if hitler had been successful in cleansing the aryan race and created a super race, killing off all blacks and jews in the process, then this super race would’ve been seen as progress.
August 16, 2008 at 12:22 pm
alamanach
“By the way Al, would you mind giving me a book name or a link to read up on that Eastern Empire that you spoke about. Right now this is very foreign to me”
That’s not surprising; they didn’t achieve much, and are easily overlooked. I recommend “The Age of Faith” by Will Durant. Only a section of it deals with the Eastern Empire, but it is a good section, and I think you would really enjoy the rest of the book. Thanks to the time period this book covers– the Middle Ages– you’ll also find plenty of material that supports your wonderfully loopy view of history.
August 17, 2008 at 8:48 am
Stewart Panton
History is about telling a story, this is just my interpretation of it, from what I’ve read.
August 18, 2008 at 9:59 pm
xenlogic
Sir Stewie:
You’re dead wrong here sir. Destruction is ONE of many paths to greatness. If one country destroyed all the others, or subdued them, it makes them GREAT. That’s why Alexander has “the Great” attached to his name.
In fact, there’s a well known expression in the US Marines that goes:
But that is neither here nor there. We were deliberating this:
Which you have yet to substantially dispute. In fact, one can say that you might’ve already proven my point via induction:
I insinuated no such thing. That aside, assuming that you’re correct, then even though the Chinese invented a lot of this stuff, and white civilizations dominated them anyway, what does this prove? They even forced the Asians to simplify their own language (Katakana & Hiragana for Japan and Simplified Chinese for Hong Kong). The influence of the white man is profound! The mere fact that you’re a black man speaking a white man’s language is PROOF of what I’m talking about!
Dude, if the Asians invented tech that blacks didn’t and the whites still outsmarted them, (such that they even created a city within their own country which became a country unto itself) what much do we have to say about the blacks? You see Stewie? You can beat around the bush all you like. The large majority of the greatest impacts upon civilisation were made by white men. So whether they dominated other civilisations or not, it doesn’t take away from what they accomplished.
There is comparatively very little history of black races which demonstrates the same propensity (whether good or evil) for world changing domination as other races in such a relatively consistent manner throughout history. Even if I were to turn a blind eye to anthropology and give you Egypt, there has never been a “Black” Empire like Egypt since. However, the Egyptians were Caucazoids. Just because their empire was in Africa, it doesn’t make them black. In fact, did you know that it was the Egyptians that crushed the Nubian empire? Think about it!
Never-the-less, how many white/pseudo-caucasian empires have persisted throughout History in the same or similar magnitude? Hmm… let’s see:
Babylon
Greece
Persia
Rome
Ottoman
Soviet Union
United States
…and those are just the ones I can recall off the top of my head. Now even though they all consisted of fair skinned men with varying degrees of ethnic permutation, not one of them were black. I’m sure you’re going to tell me at this point that all traces of black dominance in history were erased/destroyed by these destructive white men…
Actually, Hitler was trying to cleanse the HUMAN race, leaving only the Aryan Caucasians to rule the earth. None-the-less, I see the point you’re trying to make. But it is moot! For if you and I have the tech to build sticks and my stick is bigger, it means you’re more likely to loose. Even if you invented sticks, if I stole your stick tech and made mine bigger, faster, stronger, and more efficient (let’s say my stick has remote control!), if I crush your civilisation using the stick technology YOU invented, who does it make greater? Me or you? Either way, even though other races invented other stuff, white people invented and/or did most of the stuff that changed the world. No other race has claim to that.
Now when it comes to sports, black people rule… Even many of the Roman Gladiators were black.
August 19, 2008 at 10:40 pm
alamanach
“If one country destroyed all the others, or subdued them, it makes them GREAT. That’s why Alexander has “the Great” attached to his name.”
As much as I want to disagree with this first sentence, it would just boil down to what definition we want to give to the word great. But I’m going to take issue with you on Alexander.
There have been a number of successul conquerors in the world; Ghengis Khan, Tamerlane, Darius, Xerxes, and even Mohammad. All of these people expanded their respective empires to an extent that made them immortal historical figures. None of them had the title “the Great” appended to their name. What made Alexander different? If we read Plutarch’s biography of Alexander, the answer becomes clear: unlike those violent conquerors, Alexander was characterized by a probing mind and a remarkably warm heart. One scene in India illustrates this superbly. He was moving by boat, and on this same boat happened to be some yogi prisoners his army had captured. Engaging these sages in conversation, Alexander found them to be wise and insightful men. Their theology was at odds with his, but he could recognize the wisdom these men possessed. Furthermore, he could hold his own in a debate with them, even when they were blind to his own wisdom. At the end of the boat ride, he let them go.
“In this voyage he took ten of the Indian philosophers prisoners who had been most active in persuading Sabbas to revolt, and had caused the Macedonians a great deal of trouble. These men, called Gymnosophists, were reputed to be extremely ready and succinct in their answers, which he made trial of, by putting difficult questions to them, letting them know that those whose answers were not pertinent should be put to death, on which he made the eldest of them judge. The first being asked which he thought the most numerous, the dead or the living, answered, “The living because those who are dead are not at all.” Of the second, he desired to know whether the earth or the sea produced the largest beasts; who told him, “The earth, for the sea is but a part of it.” His question to the third was, Which is the cunningest of beasts? “That,” said he, “which men have not yet found out.” He bade the fourth tell him what argument he used to Sabbas to persuade him to revolt. “No other,” said he, “than that he should either live or die nobly.” Of the fifth he asked, Which was the eldest, night or day? The philosopher replied, “Day was eldest, by one day at least.” But perceiving Alexander not well satisfied with that account, he added, that he ought not to wonder if strange questions had as strange answers made to them. Then he went on and inquired of the next, what a man should do to be exceedingly beloved. “He must be very powerful,” said he, “without making himself too much feared.” The answer of the seventh to his question, how a man might become a god, was, “By doing that which was impossible for men to do.” The eighth told him, “Life is stronger than death, because it supports so many miseries.” And the last being asked, how long he thought it decent for a man to live, said, “Till death appeared more desirable than life.” Then Alexander turned to him whom he had made judge, and commanded him to give sentence. “All that I can determine,” said he, “is, that they have every one answered worse than another.” “Nay,” said the king, “then you shall die first, for giving such a sentence.” “Not so, O king,” replied the gymnosophist, “unless you said falsely that he should die first who made the worst answer.” In conclusion he gave them presents and dismissed them.”
Most conquerors wouldn’t do that, not the way Alexander did. This man, moreso than the others of his sort, could see the value in other human beings, even those humans who dressed, spoke, and prayed differently from the way he did. His dream was not to rule the world so much as it was to unite it. Had he not died so young, he might very well have succeeded. That is why we call him “the Great”.
August 24, 2008 at 10:27 am
christian
Let me begin by saying that i really like your site xenlogic.wordpress.com a lot
now.. back on topic haha
I cant say that im 100% with what you typed up… care to explain deeper?
August 24, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Stewart Panton
Xen, re: the stick question. If i invented the stick and share the technology with you, and you turn around take the stick from me and beat the crap outta me with it forcing me to submission, eventually killing me, I dont see how that makes you the smarter individual. Just the individual with the high propensity for violence. While I cant disagree with
“white people invented and/or did most of the stuff that changed the world.”
I still say their method for doing so was wrong. It could’ve been done much differently and still lead to the same result (or I daresay an even better result… world peace *shrug*). Also please note that all of those white empires that you listed all ended in their own destruction basically by their own hands(except for the more modern ones, who are doing just about the same thing anyway)… other civilizations however have always fallen to the white man’s hands mostly due to them trying to accept the white mans way and then being beaten up anyway.
I must say I enjoy reading alamanach’s posts… I feel like i get 5 points smarter each post
August 25, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Sunshine
Very interesting but you need to make a clear difference between black Americans, Africans and West Indians. And in the West Indies, make a difference between Spanish cultured islands, English cultured ones and French cultured ones. I don’t know if you have traveled a lot and that is not the point, but I can tell you from my little experience that depending on where you are, the feeling and négritude are very diversified. I don’t think that in Africa (except maybe in South Africa) or in the West Indies success is linked to being/acting White. The USA example was maybe the easiest for you to study.
August 27, 2008 at 4:21 pm
xenlogic
It doesn’t take away from the fact that war was involved. You don’t build an empire of that size without violence. Stewie here is trying to imply that it is possible to build empires without violence. That is impossible. America didn’t become the greatest nation on earth by asking nicely. They had to wave their guns in the faces of everyone else a couple of times and kill a few world leaders (either outrightly or surreptitiously) to scramble to the top of the heap. You can’t build an empire without killing somebody. The two ideas are inextricably linked.
By the same logic, we could say that the Allied Forces had a greater propensity for violence than Hitler. But that idea falls flat. Hitler was outsmarted – not outgunned.
It doesn’t make them any less great.
I disagree. You assume that diplomacy will always work. Furthermore, empires are inexorably built by taking away the freedoms of those who are not necessarily in support of its construction. That’s why every empire that was ever built involved wars of some sort. I think you’re being delusional here. Proof:
Impossible. So long as there are disparate personalities, world peace will never happen.
Everything that has a beginning has an end. Therefore, it is the destiny of all empires to end. If the empire isn’t the most powerful one around, it will be ended by an even more powerful one. If the empire is the most powerful one around, it will implode. That’s the nature of power. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. But none of that takes away from the greatness of an empire.
If the white man could’ve been outsmarted, he would’ve been. So far, the only empires that have consistently outsmarted those of white men are those of other white men. Therefore, he is at the top of the food chain and he is his own worst enemy.
Alamanach is a Savant. If he lived 120 years ago, he’d be more famous than Albert Einstein. However, because of genetic evolution, guys like him are more common now and so we don’t recognise them for being as great as they really are. That genetic “fluke” that makes people super-smart is not so much a fluke anymore. Every 10,000 years or so, it seems that evolution leaps forward.
Hi G,
I don’t need to. The statistics are relatively the same right across the board.
Ah, mais la culture d’un peuple appartenant a une ethnique particuliere est déterminée par des facteurs génétiquement propagés, non? Culture et langue font une différence tres petite.
That isn’t bound to the USA alone. The phenomenon exists in the USA, in some places in Europe (like Germany & Belgium) and in the largest English speaking Caribbean nations. Even in Cuba where the dominant language is Spanish, the phenomenon persists. Again, as I said before, culture et langue font une différence tres petite (culture and language make little difference).
August 31, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Stewart Panton
Xen, you assume I was implying that you can build an empire sans violence but I really wasn’t. While I do think its possible that was not a major point of mine (but I can understand why you would say it is implied), as I said again my point is all focused on your original point that white people made all the major technological advancements, this is a point I will continue to disagree with.
I am saying that the europeans could’ve taken the ideas from these other people and left them to continue their society (as these people have been doing with each other for years, as is seen by the shared technology between them)… I dont think this argument will ever be ended though lol…
“Alamanach is a Savant”
Whoa O.o I’ve always wanted to meet a savant… This is cool
September 6, 2008 at 9:56 pm
xenlogic
Sir Stewart:
That was never my point. My point was they they made most of the major ones that changed the world. All races can take credit for major technological advancements. For example: It was a Black man that came up with the mathematical theory that DOD scientists used to create the Transmission Control Protocol that we used to build the internet. However, it was still white men who invented the internet. Similarly, even though it was Asians who invented Gunpower, it was white men who invented Guns. Can you see the difference?
But they didn’t. It’s not in them to leave well alone. God designed white men to dominate the world and they have. I don’t know why, and I don’t care. That is just a fact and all we can do is accept it.
September 7, 2008 at 5:37 am
Dave Collymore
Wonderful Blog xenlogic, I really like your writing style and most of your reasoning. I see that my friend Stewart is also a fan. Sugoii desune
Based on my experiences (by the way Im a Jamaican now living in Japan) with other races thus far, which I believe is wide and varied; just being black alone, automatically red flags start to shoot up… Even though some non-blacks have no clue how educated you are or what you are capable of doing… Fortunately with me, after interacting for a while with people of different “races” they almost always eventually become my friend, or so I believe.
I guess you said it right, we probably caused it on ourselves. But still I think everyone should have an open mind and not automatically judge you based on outward appearances only. Unfortunately, in Japan (based on my experience) not many of the Japanese are open minded…Especially in the country areas… Stares and finger pointing galore
What is wrong with the majority of our black brothers though??? I have no idea… I personally think it boils down to the values imposed upon us by our parents, friends, community etc etc.. I STRONGLY believe that if an average black kid grew up in a setting full of opportunities, a community full of educated people, have parents that teach him/her proper ethics and values and keep friends who are educated and rational thinkers, he/she will follow suit….I personally dont think it has anything to do with white people brain being more developed than other races or any biological whatever… I think its more the nature/nurture stuff and that “MOST” white people tend to grow with good, happy families, mother and father, relatively peaceful communities etc etc… Most black people just need to think more and be careful of the friends they keep…BUT then again I see where in a general sense, blacks are by nature violent and love parties and whites very smart and forward thinking…I did say in a general sense..
The case in many predominantly black communities and countries is unfortunate, as many blacks rather the lazy way out and many suffer from the:
“get rich quick” syndrome
“I must have many girl friends and children that I cant maintain” sickness
“Let me go to a party and have fun all the time” virus
“I want everything in style” epidemic
“School/reading/education sucks and hanging out with idle friends with no aim in view is much cooler” disease
Why does this vicious cycle go over and over, from one black generation to the next???? and then as you said, many black people simply blame their own folly, misfortunes or otherwise on the white man… Take some of the rastafarians in Jamaica for example… Some of the rastafarian kid’s moms and dads dont even send them to school but home teach them the same “Stuff” (I really dont want to call anyone’s religion foolishness) about Emperor Haile Selassie who Im not sure was even fully black and who himself was a life-long member of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, an Oriental Orthodox Church…You cannot have a rational conversation with a die hard rastafarian because chances are, he will tell you that the white man caused this and the white man caused that and we should burn the queen of England etc etc and if you dont follow their belief, then you should be burned also… SIGH!!! OOH and we should all go back to Africa??? TO DO WHAT???
I personally think that slavery does account for much of our backward thinking and slow economic growth though. And I also think racism in many predominantly white countries, is quite evident and does account for some of the messed up stuff that a couple black persons face…
I remember going to Virginia in 2005 at a Baptist camp which was my first experience of culture shock. This camp had about 500 white people and I along with 2 other persons were the only blacks.. As soon as I walked in the main area where everyone was seated, it was almost as if a bomb just dropped or something…. you could hear a pin fall. There was this heavy tension present that I cannot even describe… I got some weird stares from every angle.. Now me being Jamaican and knowing little about the black/white stuff in the American south at the time, had noooo idea what to think…But I was overwhelmed by these stares.. Fortunately, after they got to know me, everything changed significantly. Everyone became very warm and friendly…I heard some interesting stories from the white friends I met there though. Like some of their parent and grand parent were members of the KKK, and they should never ever even consider marrying a black person…
In Japan, I would be sorry for the resultant child of a black/Japanese union. That kid will have an extremely difficult time…It happens though… They would much prefer a white/Japanese union, rather than one with a black… Some of my Japanese teacher friends, say that the white skin is beautiful … hmmmm I dont know if that means that the black skin is the opposite…
I went to Germany recently and was speaking to one of my white friends who went somewhere in Nigeria, and she said while driving through, some men came out of a little village place and started to do some voodoo crap, fearing that they were ghosts… and when she and her friends were going to the police for help, the police started throwing plastic bottles at her and her friends???? What the heck!!! Yes in Nigeria which is supposed to be one of the most developed black countries…. Was that racism???? Im sure if this happened to a black man in a predominantly white country, I’m sure it would be classified as such…
But why, do the blacks have to go through this???? Why couldn’t there be only 1 race so that no one would be discriminated against?? Why was there never a black empire ruling many other nations??? And why did we have to go through slavery?? I must say we got a raw deal, maybe we weren’t destined to be really really super successful (a part from the few who are, which happen to probably be 90% American). I cant help but imagine what if the world was the other way around in that, most blacks were rich and successful, While whites, were where the blacks are now….I know its difficult to imagine but it crossed my mind several times… PLEASE its not a I wish it were like that kinda thing, its more like a what if it was…
Theologians could argue that it all started when Noah cursed the descendants of his son Ham (who is believed by many theologians to be the father of the black race) in Genesis 9:25 but he blessed the other 2 sons Japheth and Shem… Genesis 9:26-27 … According to Theologians, this was the beginning of the new race of people, from Noah after the flood, through his sons :
SHEM – (Hebrews, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Persians, Syrians….Basically the line where Abraham, King David and Jesus came from, which would refute what many believe that Jesus was black)
HAM – (Canaanites, Philistines, Hittites, Amorites, Egyptians and all of Africa…. basically a set of people who face some messed up situations to this day…. because the Philistines are said to be the fore-fathers of the present day Palestinians…the other set of people were at constant war with Israel )
JAPHETH – (Greeks, Thracians, Scythians…Basically white people and some Turkish looking like Ottoman)
This is what the verse said from the New living translation starting from Genesis 9:25 … Then [Noah] cursed the descendants of Canaan, the son of Ham: A curse on the Canaanites! May they be the lowest of servants to the descendants of Shem and Japheth.
If there is any truth to this, then I have no clue where the mongoloids came from…
I am happy I found this blog though, because I see many of the questions that I have been asking myself and God recently (only since I came to Japan), also being asked here..
Questions I was asking include :
Why has there never been a superior Black empire? seriously why??
Why are most Multi Billionaires white?
Why cant most Black people and predominantly black countries unify?
I must say it is sad for us as black people the way how some other non-blacks look at us, sometimes without even trying to know us. Fortunately there are many open-minded people in the world…I think I am lucky though to have friends from many race and countries now though..
Peace
Dave
http://www.davecollyjap.blogspot.com
September 7, 2008 at 12:46 pm
xenlogic
Hey Dave!
Thanks for writing in. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your comments. I thought it was brilliant and great entertainment at the same time. I love to meet other intelligent black people around the world – especially if they like myself are Jamaicans. I say this because Jamaicans have a very limited grasp on the rest of the world and as such, it feeds many of their narrow minded views on such issues as race. Therefore, it’s a breath of fresh air to meet people like you.
I have a few comments:
Well, the quandary is that slavery and the retarded development of black societies around the world are both functions of a deeper problem that is inherently genetic. I made mention of it earlier with the discovery made by cognitive psychologists who examined how the human brain responds to various things. They were surprised about its response to things that are black.
Without repeating myself word for word, they discovered that the human brain is hard wired to “fear” anything that is black. It’s a primal cognitive function that was designed to keep us alive. That’s why children fear the night, why we have mythology about black cats, witches dressed in black robes, ideas about black magic, are terrified of black bears, black panthers, black spirders or black shadows. God basically wired us like that. So when the races evolved over 70 millennia, that same cognitive function carried over.
Racism is nothing more than an exhibition of that primal cognitive reaction. It’s just non black people (unknowingly) responding to their animal instinct. White folks who aren’t racist have usually undergone some social reprogramming as societies evolved – usually through education or religion, thus inhibiting that natural reaction. Now can you imagine that cognitive reaction among black people? It has a reflexive effect; Meaning, that many black people (or perhaps, a large majority of them – particularly those who are uneducated) carry an inherent hatred of their own selves for exactly the same reason. Concordantly, this is the reason why:
1. Black societies are crime ridden & socially underdeveloped.
2. There have never been any lasting black empires.
3. Slavery happened (several times in history).
4. There is a prominent level of ignorance among black folk.
Now I’m not saying that black people aren’t (or are) victims of the world. In fact, I WILL agree with you and say that genetically speaking, we DID get the short end of the stick. That’s life. Eventually however, cognitive evolution will over the next 50 years completely eliminate this psycho-social deficit and all of these issues will become a thing of the past. Black folks are overcoming this psychological trap that is naturally manifested in their minds as they go out and see the world. You and I are living proof of that.
Many white folks believe that if Barack Obama becomes the next President of the USA, it would impel a massive leap in black cognitive evolution and we will have made the first permanent step out of the dark age. Personally I think that view is both correct and a little too hopeful. It will take a little more than Obama’s win to make it happen – but I believe it’s a huge step in the right direction. I just hope that there aren’t any white folks voting for him just to make this happen.
That’s exactly what they’re saying.
I for one believe that Asians are more outspokenly racist than whites. You can see the same thing right here in Jamaica.
That’s not uncommon. When white folks first showed up in Africa, they were worshiped as gods.
The same thing happens everyday in Africa and probably will never stop happening so long as there are indigenous tribes still left in the world.
REALLY?! WOW!! LOL!!!! THAT… IS… WOW……….LMAO!!!!
Well, that’s exactly what I was saying earlier, that racism is nothing more than a very primal reaction. It’s the same type of fear we exhibit when we see animals like sharks, large cats and spiders. There a very primal part of the human brain that just kicks in (fight or flight) in these scenarios. It’s the same part of your brain that’d make you want to hurt or kill the thing that you fear, even if it poses no danger to you.
Psychology is fascinating stuff I tell you. The Human animal is a very interesting creature.
September 23, 2008 at 4:50 am
The Black Messiah « The World According to Xenocrates
[...] a little bit more complicated here. Barack Obama is one of those few black men who broke the stereotypes and made it – and made it BIG. White America loves a Black man that has broken the stereotype – at [...]
October 6, 2008 at 8:43 am
Dave Collymore
But does Obama really count? Isnt he Half black half white, but just happened to have dark skin?
October 11, 2008 at 11:43 am
xenlogic
Do you subscribe to the notion of the one-drop rule?
October 13, 2008 at 9:59 am
Dave Collymore
No NOT at all do I subscribe to the one-drop rule. Thats why I said he is Half black / Half white… But I am guessing because of his appearance people refer to Obama as being black… But do they do that with any other race?? If some one is half white and half Chinese then what are they???
They are simply half white and half Chinese right?? Then why is Obama not seen as half black and half white?
Hardly anyone speaks about Obama as half white… But again, I guess its the colour of your skin that realy determines your race are afterall…If he had fairer complection he would still be black and not white…. So the resultant kid of any black person, no matter what the race of the other parent is, they are, is automatially black????…That is just non-sense to me… That one-drop crap was for segregattion purposes … … If you are half you are half…If 3/4 then 3/4 … That how I think it should be…
November 10, 2008 at 3:02 am
The Obama Nation « The World According to Xenocrates
[...] passionate – but lacking self control. This feeds the stereotype of the angry black man. Obama broke that stereotype and achieved what most people thought was [...]
November 19, 2008 at 7:45 pm
K-ris
Why should african americans conform to the so called “man’s” way of doing things. I understand on the job being professional including speech, dress, and presentation of one’s self should be a priority. But if I am off my job walking down the street with my own style of clothing I should not have to worry about the cops pulling up beside me claiming I am a gang banger. Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression is a given right to all people. Every race is different and every person of every race is different.
Certain things do need to be changed including the way our men treat our women publicly on TV. Mostly it is due to the music industry, because Caucasian people are PIMPS to.
And women do not need to change their hairstyles. If ladies want weave they can do what they do.
Personally who gives a F*** what people give about you when your not up for a job.
As long as african americans can learn to love and respect their race then our race can keep progressing in our world of today and tomorrow
November 22, 2008 at 3:25 am
Dave Collymore
My view on what you say Kris is that you can always do whatever you want to, but ultimately you will have to face the consequencies… My question is why would you continue to do something if you know its not absolutely necessary Or if it can cost the chance of getting a multimillion dollar job or if it can cause you to be picked on unnecessarily???
Unfortunately we are in this world system that is almost if not exclusively controlled by caucasians… And its solid facts that black people in a very general sense just dont unite and live peacably at all times… So we can either be a part of the system and try to be at peace with everyone in the world while trying to look like normal people… Or we can fight against the system… That is totally up to you..
You might say caucasian people are pimps too but compare that with the African Americans you know…There is little comparison I believe, although I have no solid proof of that. There is good and bad in very race of people… Its just very unfortunate that too many black people are seen in the bad light and there are enough reasons for this…… Plus the predominantly black communities are yet to prove themselves to be good nice people…