I ain’t a black supremacist, either. I am not better (or worse) than anyone because of my complexion. I just want to set the record straight.
It’s called the WHITE MAN’S BURDEN–not one man’s burden to help out another. It’s called the WHITE man’s burden. How long do you think it will take for me to come up with a whole slew of racist comments by your “heroes?” Race/racism was a very significant factor in the whole colonization thing.
I already said that brown/black folks had already been to the Americas. YOUR OWN explorers reports seeing Africans in the Americas in the early 1500’s. What do i say to that? Interesting part of history. I’d like to investigate more into it–and i’d say that we may have to reinvestigate what we call “history.” As far as what Colon (Columbus) and the Conquistadors was certainly BAD in the eyes of the millions they annihilated.
What does Columbus coming to America mean for black people in general? A massive trans-Atlantic slave trade and the death of millions of people (in the name of white supremacy). For me, and a good part of my ancestry, that is just something that i can’t see celebrating. Nonetheless, i do understand that the “discovery” of the Americas, pillaging of native people’s lands and resources, and selling millions of Africans was a boon to the EUROPEAN economies.
Sam, are we going to be consistent here or what? One drop of black blood makes one black–that’s your rule, not mine. I have shown you plenty of images of what one would have called “back of the busers.” The pictures were pretty random. I simply invite you to type in Egypt + People under google images.
The population over the past 2,000 years has not gotten darker; Sam, it’s gotten lighter. The Cushite invasion was when? Five hundreds years before the time of Alexander? As a result of that invasion 2,800 years ago, the Egyptians became “black?!?” But the occupation of Egypt by numerous fairer skinned people for 2,300 years has not lightened the complexion of the people?!? As far as Egypt getting darker because of modern transportation and easier access, that applies to ALL PEOPLES from all across the Mediterranean and Arab world!
The Sadat case doesn’t work for you. If a guy in Egypt is part Armenian, Slav, Turk, and Kurd, he’s a “genuine Egyptian,” but if he is part Egyptian and part Sudanese, then, he’s a “quasi-Egyptian.” I knew you were going to bring the Sadat issue up, and that’s why i made this point earlier (twice). This is where you guys get lost in that racist maze. If Sadat is not a “real” Egyptian then let’s discount everyone in the port cities of lower Egypt who is of “mixed ancestry” and see who’s left–and leave out half the population of Cairo, as well. I don’t doubt that there were “Caucasian” people in Egypt from very early time. Those people mixed with the people from other parts of the Nile Valley. So what do you get? Inter-racial (read: non-“white”) people. Also, Egypt is different that other parts of northern Africa in that there is a thing called the Nile running down the middle of it. (Not that the Sahara was a ever a complete barrier between the two worlds.) It ain’t difficult to float a boat down stream to northern Egypt. (And don’t pretend, Stam, that the black folks on the river–who have lived there for thousands of years–could not portage cataracts.)
If you want to equivocate with the Caucasian/white semantics, you know and i know that most American white folks don’t consider a coal black South Indian a “white man” merely because he has an aquiline nose and straight hair. If such a man can be classified as “white,” then i–and 20% of the African-American population–can be considered “white” for their Caucasian heritage. As far as calling the typical Egyptian a “honkey”, black people don’t call Puerto Ricans “honkeys”–and i mean that Egyptians look a whole lot more like Puerto Ricans (or Cubans) than they do the people who are sometimes called “honkeys.” The Egyptians would more than likely be called “Reecans” and sometimes “N!ggas”, but almost never “honkey.”
Again, thou equivocates. In America, the many of the Berbers would be seen as non-white (whatever you guys would call them–mongrelized/mulatto race) [although there is a tribe of Berbers (the Kabyle) that have VERY European features]. However, if they contribute something to civilization, they become “honorary whites” or “whites of color” (with some negro features).
I already quoted your own white historians on the influence of the Moors. I even quoted those old school orientalists who definitely weren’t doing the PC thing. In spite of all their arrogance and cultural pride, they could not deny the fundamental influence on the Moors/Muslims on Europe. Some of the more fair-minded historians admit that this information has been suppressed out of European pride. I am sure that you won’t accept what i post, but for the benefit of others, i will give you some more quotes and facts on the subject.