White Europeans In S. A. and Slavery

[smasher]

"They created blues, jazz, R&B, funk, reggae, hip hop, rap. They became famous athletics, sportsmen, doctors, lawyers, and movie stars, they served military in Vietnam, they served marine navy, they became famous artists, sculptures, writers, and so on. Without the Afro Americans there would be no America of today." Yes, the Negroes made contributed to the US society in their career, via which they make living. But it's groundless to say Without the Afro Americans there would be no America of today. Looking down upon the blacks is racism, but you bragged and over-estimated. It's evident that without them, someone else will accomplish their work. Moreover, nowadays, the average income of the Indians in US ranks up to $200,000 per year, doesn't their high income denotes they are more creative than Negroes? Negroes are prominent in some fields, but not all, great part of the American scientists are of Chinese genealogy, I wonder how many Negroid scientists or engineers are there? No renowned one as I know!
Some other "jocose" mistake like "With the "simple" invention of gunpowder (today's Nobel Price ! )," I don't want to point them out.
And now, as you like to keep saying the issue about "race" or "ethnic" and you view many problems with the perspective of "race", I'd like to say something about it. "All together white Europeans and descendents overseas possess about 60% of all the land on God's Planet Earth today, but only count 25% of the World Population, while the yellow-, black- and red man will have to do with the remain." 25%? I don't know where you obtained such a ridiculous number. The majority of the residents in Southern Asia are of Caucasoid (so called "white") origin. Their number would be no less than 1.2 billion, that count for 20% of the world population. Not to mention those in Western Asia, Northern Africa, Europe, and America, Australia.
Maybe your ken about anthropology is too poor. You reiterated again and again how you abhor the "white European". I speculate, in your opinion, the "white" originally dwell in Europe solely, and they just deserve living in Europe. That's rather jesting. In Africa, not only these people live north to Sahara desert are Caucasoid, But the Somalia, Ethiopian which might be reckoned as Negro (African) by you are all Caucasoid. And in the history, many Caucasoid groups entered the equator region and western Africa, modified the blood of residents there. That's why, the Negro nowadays are classified into 2 groups: Bantu and Sudan. The Sudan Negro chiefly inhabit in Northern lower-Sahara Africa, they have long skulls (the typical trait of Mediterranean Caucasian whites), and no protruding lips. That bespeaks the Sudan Negro bear plenty of Caucasoid descent. Even, Semites (the ancestor of the Jewish, a group of Mediterranean Caucasian) still live in Uganda, Congo independently, without amalgamating with Negro. They also lived in much Southerner regions like the South Africa until the European invasion. (Extinct by the infectious disease came with European) Those "white" in Africa are not "invader", their history in Africa is no shorter than the Negro itself. So the Africa does not exclusively belong to "blacks" originally.
And in other place in the planet, like central Asia, Siberia, the Caucasoid people also lived there since thousands of years ago. You said "these region still in the hand of offspring of the European" as if these place were grabbed by Caucasoid from any race else, it's sheerly wrong. And, my country--China, the people also share Caucasoid blood since the beginning of appearance of humane in this land. See my post and my subsequent reply of supplement about this in another forum http://www.russia.com/forums/showthr...?threadid=3403 As you mentioned America, doesn't you ever heard besides the American-Indian, the Caucasian also lived there before Columbus' arriving? Many great ancient civilizations correlated them? Don't you know many aboriginal Pacific islanders have Caucasoid feature? (The origin of Polynesian might be the "Whites" from ancient Southern America). So, in your post you said *** is still resided and controlled by descendants of "Whites". (Insinuated they should get out) That just revealed your ignorance, you do not know the Caucasian's history there.
About the Negroid race, its origin is still in loom. The anthropologists can't find skeleton to trace their origin,. But the DNA test attested that the difference between Negro and Caucasian is even smaller than that between the Chinese from central China and Northeastern China. The evidence of blood type and fingerprint also show that black and Caucasian are more likely to be one race, different from oriental. It is said that all the African resemble the Caucasian, including Pygmy. The Pygmy is a hairy (Caucasoid characteristics) race, suspected to be stemmed from primitive Caucasian race. And in east, the Malay (Austroid) race which is the predominant residents in Southern China and Southeastern Asia, Australia, Pacific islands, are considered to be primitive Caucasian blended with Pygmy. The Ainu, once largely lived in Asia, now aboriginal in Japan, with the similar descent. So, except the Mongoloid race (also added in abundant Caucasoid blood) all other races can be traced back to primitive Caucasoid race, including the modern Caucasian. Thus, the Caucasoid people range from various zones, Caucasoid people can be of different complexion, even facial feature. This is to say, it's unreasonable of you to be malcontent that the Caucasian still occupy the vast area, and call on people to drive them out. Because the "native" people there, are likely to be of Caucasoid origin too. So, is Africa, the Negro race itself might be stem from Caucasian at least, share some Caucasian descent, it's funny for the blacks to repel the Caucasian whites in Africa.
As the author loathe the European so much, it's hard to believe the criminal she mentioned in the post truly correlate the European. Then, let's assume they are true, but the author like many other Negroes, attributes the criminal to the whole Caucasoid race. But remember, the European is just a small part of that race, and not all European nations invaded Africa or plot to do the things you mentioned, and, not all members of these nations are colonists or some other kinds of avaricious men, and not all the colonists are brutal. So it's not apposite for you to say: the white¡*, the European¡* As an analog, how will you think if a black man robs a shop, then the newspaper title it as "The black robs"? What I mean is don't relate all the things to the issue of "race". The men do cruel things in Africa not because they are white, but because they are avid. And they raided the Negro not because they are Negroes, but because they were primitive. As a entity, the European, truly expand itself since 16th century, but this is the outcome of the individual acts, European men did these to benefit themselves, rather than the Europe or their race. So, Europe or "white" should not be culpable, don't reproach them. And when a ethnic group become stronger, it is usually accompanied by its expansion. 10,000 years ago, 4 races--Negro (blacks), Caucasian (white), Pygmy, Bushman lived in Lower-Sahara Africa equally (their number). But, the Negro enhanced itself because tech of agriculture and iron, then replaced of the later 2 races occupied the land with Caucasoid. Now only small number of Pygmy and Bushman survived in Africa, as the Negroid race occupied others' resource, should they be condemned? In the past, many Mongoloid tribes also invaded the Europe or West Asia. Their behaviors were much more atrocious than the European did in its expansion. But seldom of these tribes were blamed, and as a whole, the Mongolian race never castigated.
After long time of the European colonists' rule, the aboriginal African have a strong notion of "race". They deem themselves as "blacks" and most of them abominate the "whites", I viewed some of the posts here, I found the "blacks" who usually label themselves as the genuine African think there is great gap between them and the "whites". They always suppose the "Whites" are all racists, but they never cogitate whether themselves have bias on the "whites". Today, the European and their offspring in other place gradually give up the notion of "race", and most of them now able to trait those who with different facial feature fairly. But, on the other hand, some of the "blacks" or other groups once looted by European, including some people in my country, corroborate their notion of "race", call on their race stand together in antagonism against the "whites" (as we see in the original post). This does no avail to the unity of the humane being. Just like in the past the European colonists discriminated the ruled races.
So, don't say bad words to the "whites" as a whole, don't think living in Africa should be the monopoly of the so-called blacks. Don't classify the white and black so clearly, because the blacks might be of Caucasian blood, or, the blacks are Caucasians. Now, we can see, how laughable of these Negroid people it is to detest all the white, and wanna "piss you white away".

[Tiger32]

Good post LillyNomad, many people cannot handle the truth, therefore, they must take a defensive attitude twoards what has been done to the continent of Africa. Racism forces people to defend what indefensible, perhaps that is why Apartheid lasted so long. There are those who would like nothing better than to see the new South African government fail, so that they can further justify the evilness of Apartheid. European NeoColonialism is a cancer which has been spread all over the world.

They have taken it upon themselves to rewrite African history with their own version(his story) rather than being truthful. Many of these colonialist have denied that Egypt and to some extent Ethiopia were black nations. They minimize the culture of black Africa while glorifying their own (Greco-Roman). They even drew up maps during the 19th century which designated only West Africa as "Negro Land", while considering the rest of the continent to be anything other than black.

This gives them security, because Africa can easily fit within its borders all of Europe and the United States, with plenty of room to spare. If you were to look up the word "Negroid" in Webster's dictionary, it says that it is a dark-skinned people of Africa, however if you look up the word "Caucasoid" you get a definition declaring them as a "major group of humans". How come blacks are not considered a major group of humans? There are probably more Africans on the planet than Europeans, yet in Webster's racist eyes, that is still not enough to warrant a major race classification.

In the past fifty years Europeans have taken great lengths to re-classify African culture as their own. In the movies they try to convince the world that the great Pharoah Ramsees Pharisees was white, as well as Prince Moses (Moshes) and the rest of the Ancient Egyptians, another lie. They label any African scholar who tells the truth about Africa, or Ancient Egypt in particular, as "Afrocentric", a word created to descredit black scholarly pursuit. The sad thing is, many blacks have bought into this, and have done anything to avoid being classified as Afrocentric. But things are starting to change with this Generation (X), because the youth in Africa, America, Jamaica etc., are beginning to see what has been done throughout history, as well as the distortion of facts that has been perpetuated the last 400 years.

[Edited by Tiger32 on 18th December 2001 at 23:43]

[Smoke]

The post above is something that I have a strong disagreement with.

Africans are of a caucasian stock? That is by far the greatest insult to Africans. Your information may very well stem from some white supremacist literature that wishes to reveal the dominance of caucasians. Unless you have sources to back this up, this will hold no water. To say that we may be the same and to know that they possibly enslaved their own kin is a insult to both Africans and europeans.

Be that as it may, anyone with eyes and an interest to truth would investigate and prove that your findings border on falsehood, or at best, exagerration.

The idea of caucasoid, negroid, and mongoloid stems from a group of people who chose to differentiate humanity,than unify it. This is the beginning of conflict. If we were to go by this, it is obvious that the denizens of Africa and Asia long existed before the coming of the europeans and that they are not of the caucasian stock that you wish to espouse.

To go further, if we are all the same, which Africans and Asians have long claimed, it was the coming of the europeans who first chose to differentiate themselves from the rest of the world based on physical appearance and subjugated the world with that mentality to this day.

I have no problem with you believing what you will, but more than one view must be stated if the truth is ever to be known.

Peace.

[Smoke]

Originally posted by ANDY-J
I'm sorry to undermine your sense of victimisation but the institution of slavery existed in Africa long before the arrival of white Europeans.Slavery was only viable for europeans due to the fact that black slave traders were plentiful and could provide an inexhaustable supply of slaves.It's a bit of a sore point with many black Africans to have to accept that the people who perpetuated this despicable practice were in fact members of their own race and not Europeans.

This is a maneuver that many europeans practice to somehow absolve their activities within the slave trade. Africans have been quick to admit their participation in the slave trade, as well as the participation of arabs and europeans.

The issue that Africans insist, and that europeans seem to ignore is that the reason for the subjugation of those with Black skin is because of their inhumanity. arabs used islam to justify their actions with the involvement of newly converted Africans. The common societal behavior of African civilizations, which is consistent with all other civilizations, is the use of a caste system. europeans, in an effort to somehow reveal their supposed civilization, has often referred to this as indentured servitude. Yet all civilizations have possessed some sort of caste system with certain individuals in the lower caste.

So the idea of slavery was not new to anyone. What is new is the subjugation of a fellow member of humanity to such abuse because of physical characteristics. To compound that with the distribution of families all across the globe, and the rape of women, mutilation and castration of men, and the abuse, rape, and death of children because Africans we so called inhumane is the x-factor when you compare reasons for forced servitude. To create a global philosophy and ideology called white supremacy to justify and maintain savage like actions and to maintain this point of view and behoavior until this day, along with the refusal to acknowledge on a global scale the impact of such an event and its disastrous affect is key to understanding why there is a level of resentment towards europeans.

All a person has to do is look towards Asians and review their perspective of europeans, and you will find little difference.

Peace.

[Tiger32]

Smoke, once again you are correct. Smasher really is showing his lack of knowledge whenever he states that many Africans are of Caucasoid stock. Anyone should know that just because an African has a straight nose does not make him caucasian.

This is a ploy used by racists to create division among Africans, while at the same time skewing the facts.

Willie Lynch a former slave owner used this tactic both in America and in the West Indies, to try to create a division among blacks.

But no one ever says that a person is not white, because they don't have blond hair and blue eyes. But that is essentially what is being said to blacks, whenever someone like smasher states that they are not negroid because they have a straight nose. They ignore the dark skin and woolly hair, and focus in on just one physical feature.

[Feng-Huang]

Tiger32, what is your major malfunction? All that Smasher was trying to point out, was simply the fact that all humans come from one original race. Insofar he is right. It has nothing to do with trying to undermine "black" history but it is simply stating a common fact. You may look up Malcom X's theories for that one, or if not, then the simple developement of the Darwin Finch on the Galapagos Archipel. One race splits into many through evelution under different enviromental or oekological conditions. Smasher was trying to point out that there is no need for fussing and fighting over this race or that because we all descend from one ancestor, no matter if he is negroid or caucasian.
Do you have to turn every- and anything into a platform for your racial debates, and don't you see that you are only hurting yourself by doing it?
What are you afraid of? Of finding out that all humans are equally corrupt and sinister, as all humans could be equally caring and just? That in the end... just maybe... what we make of our life is really up to us?
If you want to be respected, then show that you are worthy of respect by opening youself up to others. It may be a risk and it may hurt at times, but you will be rewarded if you care to see what others have to offer. Even if it is only a fleeting smile. Peace, Feng

[Smoke]

Smasher's aim was to explain that humanity is all the same yes, but under the banner of white supremacy.

There is absolutely no other consideration in his rhetoric in regards to who else may have fathered other ethnicities.

This is our main arguement against the tenents of white superiority and supremacy. Their idea that they were first when you can trace China for about ten thousand years, and Africa for over ten thousand years and still insist that they preceded or fathered both is not only an example of denial, but also delusion.

To even insist that they comprise over 20% of the global population borders beyond insanity, if the thought was not so frightening if such a claim is true.

Again, when europeans, caucasoids, white people, or whatever you wish to classify them arrived on the shores of Africa, Asia, and North and South America, they were welcomed with open arms. As a result, they have been slaughtered, enslaved, eliminated, oppressed, subjugated, insulted, and given the impression that no one from these respective continents are capable of governing themselves, much less carry an agenda that is contrary to that of europeans.

The same with politcs, art, music, science, and the one that the whole world should have the greatest issue with.. history.

A quote from a African American author..."They have created a concept called the "cultural other' that has influenced their vision of themselves and other peoples in their contact with Africans, Asians, and peoples of the Pacific Islands.....I have referred to this as the manifestation of the evil genius of europe. They were the last branch of the human family to emerge in that arena called civilization. In their quest of the minds of most of mankind they have been able to convince themselves and others that they were indispensible to civilization and with out them it would not have existed."

Peace.