A 2009 study from the University of Central Florida in Orlando looked at the impact of animated characters on young girls’ self-image.
After watching clips of cartoon characters who were princesses, many of the girls involved in the research aged three to six, reported that they would need to change their hair color, clothes and skin color.
People always say, “It would be unrealistic in the setting for Elsa to be black”. You know what else is unrealistic? Elsa’s body. Or face. Or dress. Or literally any aspect of her design. If the setting matters so much to the realism of the design, why is she wearing a dress with a huge leg slit? Oh yeah, and there’s the fact that SHE HAS ICE POWERS THAT CAN ALSO INEXPLICABLY CREATE SENTIENT BEINGS AND CLOTHING. So the color of her skin couldn’t be changed for the sake of believability?
During Frozen, Kristoff is seen wearing Sami clothes and practicing a typically Sami occupation – being a handyman with a trained reindeer (although in real life, you can’t ride reindeer like a horse).
In line with this depiction, this is what Kristoff should look like adhering to what Sami looked like during the 1800s: tan, with an epicanthic eyefold and black hair because- surprise! -the Sami weren’t originally white!
The only reason you end up with a bunch of white people when you google them is because of centuries of forced assimilation/miscegenation and ethnocide at the hands of the Swedes and Norwegians.
Perabo, Lyonel. Answer to “What Are The Best Examples of a Cultural Genocide?”. Quora. 3 February 2016. Retrieved from https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-best-examples-of-a-cultural-genocide/answer/Lyonel-Perabo
Skinhead was an extension of the sixties mod subculture.
1950s-1960s: The Mods- European Clothes & Black Music
Mods were working-class kids who wanted to dress better than their parents, peers and bosses. Their style was influenced by French, Italian and Ivy League fashion and they listened to (and celebrated) music by black artists, such as blues, soul and R&B. They were also introduced to ska (sometimes called bluebeat) and early reggae by Jamaican immigrants (who had their own subculture, the Rudeboys).
1970s: From Jamaican Rudeboy to English Skinhead
The style skinheads wear today was actually stolen from Jamaican and white Brits. It was all about dancing, looking cool, learning from each other. These weren’t the same skinheads you know today.
Towards the end of the sixties, Mod had become mainstream, commercialised and very flowery. Psychedelic music was becoming popular and some mods became hippies. The tougher, more masculine ‘hard mods’ hated it and wanted to distance themselves from all that. So they started to cut their hair in a very short college-boy style, often with a shaved in side parting (also popular with Rudeboys).
The overall look was stripped down, mixing Ivy League style button-down shirts, dockworker boots and Rudeboy style short trousers and skinny braces (that’s suspenders to you Yanks). People called them various names, such as ‘cropheads’, ‘bovver boys’ or ‘peanuts’, but on the 3rd of September 1969 a Daily Mirror article gave them the name Skinhead.
And so a new, multicultural subculture – based around working-class pride, toughness, looking smart and dancing to ska and reggae music – was created.
The whole scene was influenced by black culture
– the haircut, the length of our trousers, the walk, some of the talk and, of course, the music, much of it copied from Rude Boy style. Black and white generally got on, we intermingled and if there was trouble it was usually about a woman. – Nigel Mann, original Skinhead [quote taken from Paolo Hewitt’s book, The Soul Stylists]
1980s: This Is England
Along with this, white nationalist and supremacist movements began to arise in Britain’s marginalized underclass. Under-educated, unskilled and unemployable, these rebels with neither cause nor clue were so culturally and intellectually bankrupt that they didn’t even have an identity. They resorted to stealing a white imitation of black culture and claiming it as their own, either unaware of the irony, or too desperate to care:
Unfortunately, the skinhead’s hard, macho image started to attract the National Front and the British Movement. Racists put on braces and big boots and called themselves skinheads without knowing the roots of their adopted subculture. Kids were shouting ‘sieg heil!’ and saluting diagonally, unaware of the irony. There was less emphasis on style – racist skinheads tended to wear t-shirts displaying British Movement and National Front logos instead of smart button downs – and they distanced themselves from the subculture’s black influences by listening to white power rock bands.
News of attacks on Asians, black people and other minorities spread and soon the media blamed skinheads, whether they were actually responsible or not.
White supremacists infected the skinhead scene like a virus- hijacked a vitality and identity that they could never come up with themselves.
Let’s take a second to think about how the white skinheads felt. Their look and lifestyle, which was an expression of their admiration of black fashion and music, and multiculturalism, had come to symbolize the opposite. Their identity was stolen from them. They couldn’t even be themselves anymore, unless they wanted to be mistaken for violent racists.
It’s been stolen.
For me it felt great. You’re amongst your own kind with the music and the clothes. I loved it. So when I read these things about fascism, it’s been stolen, they’ve stolen something that meant so much to me.’
– James Ferguson , original Skinhead [quote taken from Paolo Hewitt’s book, The Soul Stylists]
Those Who Hate You Imitate You
That the swastika is an ancient African symbol has been known to historians for centuries:
[They] were a dark-skinned people with short hair and prominent lips; and that they are referred to by some scholars as Cushites (Ethiopians), and as Hamites by others.
Mr. Wells alludes to this early civilization in his Outline of History, and dates its beginnings as far back as 15,000 years B.C.
“This peculiar development of the Neolithic culture,” says Mr. Wells, “which Elliot Smith called the Heliolithic (sun-stone) culture, included many or all of the following odd practices:…(9) the use of the symbol known as the Swastika for good luck. …
Elliot Smith traces these associated practices in a sort of constellation all over this great Mediterranean / Indian Ocean-Pacific area. Where one occurs, most of the others occur. They link Brittany with Borneo and Peru. But this constellation of practices does not crop up in the primitive home of Nordic or Mongolian peoples, nor does it extend southward much beyond equatorial Africa. …
The use of the swastika as an African symbol is an established tradition that still flourishes today amongst the Akan or Ashanti people of western Africa:
The Akan occupy a large part of West Africa including parts of Ghana and the Ivory Coast and include many sub-ethnic groups such as the Baule and the Asante (Ashanti). The Akan were producing swastikas to weigh gold dust which was their currency, thus the name ‘gold weights’. When used on the gold weight, the swastika was a symbol of currency, expressing power, money, wealth and integrity. The idea and the implementation of gold-based currency came from the Akan people of modern-day Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. (Oliver 2014)
The swastika is also one of the Akan people’s famous Adinkra symbols. Look at number 12 below:
Of course, though, the swastika is most famous as the symbol of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or National-Socialist German Workers’ Party, better known as the Nazis. This is where its association with white power and white nationalism comes from. But where did the Germans get it from?
In the century leading up to the Nazi era, Europe and Germany in particular gained a profound interest in Eastern religion, philosophy, mysticism and occultism. The most famous leader of the most famous movement- Theosophy- was Helena Blavatsky. Her writings had a profound influence on the Ariosophy- love of Aryans- that later arose in Germany and Austria, NSDAP founder Adolf Hitler’s place of migration and birthplace, respectively. This is undoubtedly how he became aware of the symbol. As we read above, though, many of the eastern cultures that Theosophy and, in turn, Ariosophy were based on, especially the more ancient ones, were actually dark-skinned, and often Africoid, people. There is evil irony in the fact that their symbol was used against them in hatred.
There is another nearer possible connection to Nazi Germany and the swastika: Germany’s colonial misadventures in Deutsch-Südwestafrika (German Southwest Africa, a/k/a Namibia) from 1884-1915. Namibia borders Angola, in which very ancient swastikas have been observed. Were they exposed to it there? One can only speculate.
Today’s Neo-Nazi Skinhead
Neo-Nazi skinheads are, in essence, using black fashion and an African symbol to express white power and racism. On top of that, their musical style- neo-Nazi punk- is a genre based on- you guessed it- the ska and punk of Jamaican Afro-Brits.
Despite despising them- or maybe because of it, I’m starting to realize- they stole everything from them: their style, their symbols, their very identity.
Without African (diaspora) fashion, music and symbology, white supremacists wouldn’t have an identity. Someone that utterly impoverished- morally, intellectually, spiritually- is normally worthy of sympathy.
Conclusion: Going Viral
As can be seen with the original skinheads- a blend of black and white British culture- trading and borrowing, when credit is given where credit is due, is always welcomed and encouraged. The borrower is enriched, and the donor is embraced. (We have to remember that the original skinheads didn’t become Neo-Nazi skinheads- they were hijacked and discarded, too.) That is cultural appreciation. That is symbiotic.
What we see from modern skinheads, though, is cultural appropriation, and that- feeding off the host and destroying it- is viral.
How do the two differ? Cultural appropriators
claim the cultural items as their own- theft
overlook the plight of the culture they borrow from- hypocrisy
benefit from the borrowed culture in ways its creators can’t- privilege
Here are some examples:
The girl on the left is “edgy” or “eclectic”. The girl on the right, whose culture originated the style, is “ghetto” or “thuggish”:
The woman left and center (Saartjie Baartman) got paraded in human zoos in Europes. The woman on the right who used a wire frame in her dress to imitate her anatomy was a ‘lady’:
This is where skinheads today, the Nazis, Ariosophists and Theosophists of the past, and indeed most racists went awry: they crossed the fine line between appreciation and appropriation. They turned something so beautiful and unitary became so ugly and divisive.
They stole the soul.
Let’s take it back.
All quoted text in “Skinheads” section from Max. “All You Skinheads Get Up On Your Feet!”. 20th Century Max. 1 October 2015. http://20centmax.tumblr.com/post/130292077655/all-you-skinheads-get-up-on-your-feet
“Every king springs from a race of slaves, and every slave had kings among his ancestors.” -Plato
It is reported that the Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said, (In a dream) I saw myself following a herd of black sheep. Then a group of white sheep came (and mixed with the black sheep) until they (the white sheep) became so many that the black sheep could no longer be seen in the herd of sheep.” Abu Bakr, the companion of the Prophet (pbuh) and the interpreter of dreams, said, “Oh Messenger of Allah. As for the black sheep, they are the Arabs. They will accept Islam and become many. The white sheep are the non-Arab Persians, etc. They will accept Islam and become so many that the Arabs will not be noticed amongst them.” The Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) then said that an angel had interpreted the dream the same way.
Zaid ibn Aslam related that the prophet (SAWS) saw a vision and told his companions about it. He said, “I saw a group of black sheep and a group of white sheep then mixed with the black sheep. I interpreted it to mean that the non-Arab Persians will enter Islam and then share with you your genealogy and your wealth.” The companions became surprised by what he (SAWS) said. Then one said, “The non-Arab Persians will enter our land, Oh Messenger of Allah?!” The Prophet (SAWS) then said, “Yes. By He Who Has my soul in His Hand, if the religion was hanging on the distant star, men from the non-Arab Persians would reach it and the luckiest of them would be the people of Faris.
Do the above narrations and interpretations really prophecy a change in the phenotype (physical appearance) of the people of Arabia? Do they really imply that today’s Arabs are a foreign people who have overwhelmed the original populace?
Historians seem to think so:
Bertram Thomas, historian and former Prime Minister of Muscat and Oman, reported in his work ‘The Arabs’:
“The original inhabitants of Arabia…were not the familiar Arabs of our time but a very much darker people. A proto-negroid belt of mankind stretched across the ancient world from Africa to Malaya. This belt…(gave) rise to the Hamitic peoples of Africa, to the Dravidian peoples of India, and to an intermediate dark people inhabiting the Arabian peninsula. In the course of time two big migrations of fair-skinned peoples came from the north…to break through and transform the dark belt of man beyond India (and) to drive a wedge between India and Africa…The more virile invaders overcame the dark-skinned peoples, absorbing most of them, driving others southwards…The cultural condition of the newcomers is unknown. It is unlikely that they were more than wild hordes of adventurous hunters.”
the first certain fact on which to base our investigations is the ancient and undoubted division of the Arab race into two branches, the ‘Arab’ or pure; and the ‘Mostareb’ or adscititions…
A second fact is, that everything in pro-Islamitic literature and record…concurs in representing the first settlement of the ‘pure’ Arabs as made on the extreme south-western point of the peninsula, near Aden, and then spreading northward and eastward…
A third is the name Himyar, or ‘dusky’…a circumstance pointing, like the former, to African origin.
A fourth is the Himyaritic language…(The preserved words) are African in character, often in identity. Indeed, the dialect commonly used along the south-eastern coast hardly differs from that used by the (Somali) Africans on the opposite shore…
Fifthly, it is remarkable that where the grammar of the Arabic, now spoken by the ‘pure’ Arabs, differs from that of the north, it approaches to or coincides with the Abyssinian…
Sixthly, the pre-Islamitic institutions of Yemen and its allied provinces-its monarchies, courts, armies, and serfs-bear a marked resemblance to the historical Africao-Egyptian type, even to modern Abyssinian.
Seventhly, the physical conformation of the pure-blooded Arab inhabitants of Yemen, Hadramaut, Oman, and the adjoining districts-the shape and size of head, the slenderness of the lower limbs, the comparative scantiness of hair, and other particulars-point in an African rather than an Asiatic direction.
Eighthly, the general habits of the people,-given to sedentary rather than nomad occupations, fond of village life, of society, of dance and music; good cultivators of the soil, tolerable traders, moderate artisans, but averse to pastoral pursuits-have much more in common with those of the inhabitants of the African than with those of the western Asiatic continent.
Lastly, the extreme facility of marriage which exists in all classes of the southern Arabs with the African races; the fecundity of such unions; and the slightness or even absence of any caste feeling between the dusky ‘pure’ Arab and the still darker native of modern Africa…may be regarded as pointing in the direction of a community of origin.”
The dark-skinned South Arabian today is short and “extremely round-headed (brachycephalic)” but he was no doubt originally much taller and dolichocephalic (long-headed) like the so-called Hamites of East Africa.
In the 13th century CE the Muslim traveler Ibn al-Mujāwir described the Mahra as “tall, handsome folk” in his Tārīkh al-mustabsir, 271.1.17 and early pre-Christian skulls found in Hadramawt were markedly dolichocephalic.
It has been suggested that the ‘definite change’ in the racial constitution of the people of Hadramawt resulted from the invasion and inbreeding of brachycephalic whites such as Armenoids or Persians.
Henry Field suggested that Arabia’s current ethnography is the result of the mixing of two distinct basal stocks: The dolichocephalic (long-headed), dark-skinned Mediteranean/Eur-African and the brachycephalic (round-headed) fair-skinned Armenoid. See his “Ancient and Modern Inhabitants of Arabia,” The Open Court 46 (1932): 854 [art.=847-869].
These findings are corroborated by Persian sources describing their first impression of their Arab Muslim conquerors.
“When Fredon (mythical hero) came, they (the black people) fled from the lands of Iran and settled on the coast of the sea. Now, through the invasion of the Arabs, they (the Zing-i-Siak posht (i.e. the black skinned negroes)) are again diffused through the country of Iran.”
[Note: in these last sentences allusion is made to the Blackness of both the original inhabitants of Iran, and of the Arabs.]
You’re saying that the real Arabs are Black?! What do these historians know anyway? They’re not Arab or Muslim. They’re colonialists and Orientalists out to distort Islamic history.
True. Who better to ask than the Arabs themselves? How did the Arab historians, grammarians, linguists and pre-Islamic poets describe themselves? Let’s see:
“Red (al-hamra’) refers to non-Arabs due to their fair complexion which predominates amongthem. And the Arabs used to say about the non-Arabs with whom white skin was characteristic, such as the Romans, Persians, and their neighbors: ‘They are red-skinned (al-hamra’)…” al-hamra’ means the Persians and Romans…And the Arabs attribute white skin to the slaves.”
Al-Mubarrad (d. 898), the leading figure in the Basran grammatical tradition, claimed: “The Arabs used to take pride in their brown and black complexion (al-sumra wa al-sawād) and they had a distaste for a white and fair complexion (al-ḥumra waal-shaqra), and they used to say that such was the complexion of the non-Arabs.”
Lisan El-Arab (an old Arabic dictionary) mentions Shamar’s explanation of the hadiths that say that the prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said that he was sent to the blacks and the reds. Shamar explains the hadiths as follows:
قال شمر: يعنـي العرب والعجم والغالب علـى أَلوان العرب السُّمرة والأُدْمَة وعلـى أَلوان العجمالبـياض والـحمرة،
“He means (by the blacks and the reds) the Arabs and the non-Arabs and the complexion of most Arabs is brown and jet-black and the complexion of most non-Arabs is white and red.”
Shams El-Din Mohamed ibn Ahmed ibn Othman El-Dhahabi (died1374 A.D.) explains the hadith that mentions that a man was “red-skinned as if he was one of the slaves” as follows:
يريد ألقائل أنه في لون ألموالي ألذين سبوا من نصارى ألشام وألروم و ألعجم
“The speaker means that the man was the color of the slaves who were captured from the Christians of Syria and from the Romans and the Persians.”
Thus, it was common for the Arabs of the past to describe a light-skinned person as having the color of the slaves. This is a known fact. Ibn Mandhor (1232-1311 A.D.) says in his book Lisan El-Arab:
سبوطة الشعر هي الغالبة علـى شعور العجم من الروم والفرس. و جُعودة الشعر هي الغالبة علـى شعور العرب
“Non-kinky hair is the kind of hair that most non-Arabs like the Romans and Persians have while kinky hair is the kind of hair that most Arabs have.”
The Arabs of the past also used the word green to mean black. El-Fadl ibn El-Abbas ibn ‘Utba El-Lahabi said:
وأَنا الأَخْضَرُ، من يَعْرِفُنـي؟أَخْضَرُ الـجِلْدَةِ فـي بـيتِ العَرَبْ
I am the green one. Who knows me?My skin is green. I am from the family of the Arabs.
Ibn Mandhor, the author of Lisan El-Arab says this about the verse:
يقول: أَنا خالص لأَن أَلوان العرب السمرة
“He says that he is a pure Arab because the color of the Arabs is brown (dark).”
In Lisan El-Arab, Ibn Mandhor also quotes the author of El-Tahdhib, Saad El-Din Masud ibn Umar El-Taftaazaani (1312-1389 A.D.) as saying the following about the verse:
فـي هذا البـيت قولان: أَحدهما أَنه أَراد أَسود الـجلدة؛ قال: قاله أَبو طالب النـحوي، وقـيل: أَراد أَنه من خالص العرب وصميمهم لأَن الغالب علـى أَلوان العرب الأُدْمَةُ،
“There are two sayings about this verse. One is that he meant that he had black skin. This is what Abu Talib El-Nahwi said. It is also said that he meant that he is a pure unmixed Arab because most Arabs are black-skinned.”
Abdella ibn Berry (1106-1187 A.D.), the “King of the Grammarians” as he was called, said the following about the verse:
قال ابن بري: نسب الـجوهري هذا البـيت للهبـي، وهو الفضل بن العباس بن عُتْبَةَ بن أَبـي لَهَبٍ، وأَراد بالـخضرة سمرة لونه، وإِنما يريد بذلك خـلوص نسبه وأَنه عربـي مـحض، لأَن العرب تصف أَلوانها بالسواد وتصف أَلوان العجم بالـحمرة. وفـي الـحديث: بُعثت إِلـى الأَحمر والأَسود؛ وهذا الـمعنى بعينه هو الذي أَراده مسكين الدارمي فـي قولهأَنا مسكِينٌ لـمن يَعْرِفُنـي،لَوْنِـي السُّمْرَةُ أَلوانُ العَرَبْ
“El-Jawhari attributed this verse to El-Lahabi and he is El-Fadl ibn El-Abbas ibn ‘Utba ibn Abi Lahab and he meant by green the brownness (darkness) of his complexion and he meant by that the purity of his genealogy and that he was an unmixed Arab because the Arabs describe their color as black and they describe the color of the non-Arabs as red. Like the hadith says, ‘I was sent to the red and the black. And this is exactly what Miskeen El-Darimi meant when he said:‘I am Miskeen, for those who know me.My color is brown (dark), the color of the Arabs’”.
“When the Arabs said that a man or a woman was ‘white’, they meant that the person was honorable. They weren’t talking about his/her complexion. When they (the Arabs) said that a man or a woman was ‘red’, they meant that his/her complexion was white.
The famous, old Arabic dictionary Lisan El Arab also quotes the author of El-Tahdhib, Saad El-Din Masud ibn Umar El-Taftaazaani (1312-1389 A.D.) as saying:
التهذيب: إِذا قالت العرب فلان أَبْـيَضُ وفلانة بَـيْضاء فالـمعنى نَقاء العِرْض من الدنَس والعيوب… لا يريدون به بَـياضَ اللون ولكنهم يريدون الـمدح بالكرم ونَقاءِ العِرْض من العيوب، وإِذا قالوا: فلان أَبْـيَض الوجه وفلانة بَـيْضاءُ الوجه أَرادوا نقاءَ اللون من الكَلَفِ والسوادِ الشائن
“When the Arabs said that a man or a woman was white, they meant that the person had a faultless honor…they didn’t mean white skin. What they meant by this was to praise the person for his/her generosity and faultless honor. When they said that a man or woman had a white face, they meant that the person had a complexion free of blemishes and free of an unattractive blackness.”
Whatever. If the original Arabs were black, then how do you explain the predominance of light brown and white Arabs of today?
There are different ways that non-Arabs changed the dark-skinned, Negroid/Dravidian appearance of Arabia and the Middle East:
1. Intermarriage between non-Arab converts and slaves with Arabs.
“increasing intermarriage (between Arabs and non-Arabs) served to submerge the original distinctions, and increasing numbers of the conquered, having adopted the religion and language of the conquerors, took to assuming the identity as if Arabs themselves” (Segal 2001:22)
“In one important way … (the second caliph) Omar was unable to prevent the Moslems from mingling with the subject peoples … Since they were forbidden to own land, they used their wealth (from booty) chiefly to buy women … All the children born of these unions – and there were many thousands of them – called themselves Arabs, in order to identify with the ruling class. When they grew up and married, their offspring in turn called themselves Arabs. Thus it came about that the people of the Moslem world, many of them without a drop of Arab blood in their veins, became known as Arabs.”Such ‘conversion to Arabism’ is illustrated by the words of the Iranian poet Bashshar b. Barb (d. 783-4), who responded to the caliph al-Mahdi’s question, “Of whom do you reckon yourself, Bashshar”: “As for my language and dress, they are Arab; but as for my origin, it is non-Arab (ajam.)”” (Suskind 1972:37)
Ninth century poet Abu Al-Hasan Ali ibn Al-Abbas ibn Jurayj, known as Ibn Al-Rumi, wrote a long poem to the Abbasids blaming them for the way that they treated the family of the Prophet Mohamed (SAWS). It should be understood that at that time, the Abbasids had become very mixed with the Romans, Greeks, and Persians. Here is part of what Ibn Al-Rumi said in his famous poem called Al-Jeemia:
“You insulted them (the family of the Prophet Mohamed) because of their blackness while there are still pure-blooded black-skinned Arabs. However, you are blue (eyed) – the Romans have embellished your faces with their color.”
2. Assimilation (Arabization) and Empowerment of Non-Arabs
In the passage quoted below al-Maqrīzī discusses the influence on Islamic tradition of the Abbasid caliph al-Maʿmūn (reigned 813-833) and his successors al-Muʿtaṣim (r. 833-842), al-Mutawakkil (r. 847-861) and al-Mustaʿīn (r. 862-866).
“This fellow al-Maʿmūn …left one of the worst possible reputations in the whole history of Islam. This arose from the fact that he had books on philosophy translated into Arabic, to such a pitch that heretics and deviationists used them to pervert Islam and to trick the Muslims…He removed from the pay-registers the Arabs, the Messenger of God’s people, the race through whose agency God had established the religion of Islam…In their place, he relied on the Turks. He abandoned Arab dress and clothing, put a crown on his head and wore the dress of the Persians, that race which God had sent his prophet Muhammad to slay and to combat. With al-Muʿtaṣim, and through his deliberate agency, the rule of the Arabs came to an end; henceforth, during his reign and under his political regime, the Turks, upon whom the Messenger of God vowed to make war, assumed power. After him, they (viz. the Turks) secured an ascendency in all the lands. God gave the Turks dominion over al-Muʿtaṣim’s son, Jaʿfar al-Mutawakkil, so that they eventually murdered him. They also murdered al-Muʿtaṣim’s grandson, Aḥmad al-Mustaʿīn. They treated the religion of God as a plaything and established a reign of terror throughout all the provinces of the caliphate.”
Slave girls were favored as concubines, and certain of the wives of ʿAbbasid caliphs who gave birth to princes and future caliphs, being of the status of omm walad,are mentioned as being Iranian, e.g., Marājel, the concubine of Hārūn-al-Rašīd, said to be from Bāḏḡīs in northwestern Afghanistan, and the mother of the future caliph al-Maʾmūn, born in 170/787, and also Māreda, born in Kūfa but of Sogdian stock, slave of Hārūn al-Rašīd, who bore him the future caliph al-Moʿtaṣem, born in 179/795 or 180/796.
3. The changes the last two brought are minor in comparison to the next one. And this one’s going to be a huge shocker, because it’s a bit of covered-up history:
There was a massive white slave trade between Europe, Central Asia and the Middle that lasted over 1,000 years. This brought an enormous number of white Western and Eastern Europeans into the Middle East.
(The focus on African slaves in Arabia only came after access to white slave trade routes was lost.)
“In the Viking era starting c. 793, the Norse raiders often captured and enslaved militarily weaker peoples they encountered. In the Nordic countries the slaves were called thralls (Old Norse: þræll) The thralls were mostly from Western Europe [i.e. Far West Asia], among them many Franks, Anglo-Saxons and Celts… There is evidence of German, Baltic, Slavic and Latin slaves as well. The slave trade was one of the pillars of Norse commerce during the 6th through 11th centuries.”
“Slavery during the Early Middle Ages had several distinct sources. The Vikings raided across Europe, though their slave raids were the most destructive in the British Isles and Eastern Europe. While the Vikings kept some slaves for themselves as servants, known as thralls, most people captured by the Vikings would be sold on the Byzantine or Islamic markets. In the West the targets of Viking slavery were primarily English, Irish, and Scottish, while in the East they were mainly Slavs. The Viking slave trade slowly ended in the 1000s…”
“The Middle Ages form 1100 to 1500 saw a continuation of the European Slave trade, though with a shift form the Western Mediterranean Islamic nations (Andalusian Spain, modern day Morocco) to the Eastern, as Venice and Genoa, in firm control of the Eastern Mediterranean from the 12th century and the Black Sea from the 13th century sold both Slavic and Baltic slaves, as well as Georgians, Turks and other ethnic groups of the Black Sea and Caucasus, to the Muslim nations of the Middle East. The sale of European slaves by Europeans slowly ended as the Slavic and Baltic ethnic groups Christianized by the Late Middle Ages. European slaves in the Islamic World would, however, continue into the Modern time period as Muslim pirates, primarily Algerians, with the support of the Ottoman Empire, raided European coasts and shipping form the 16th to the 19th centuries…”
“Genoese merchants organized the slave trade from the Crimea to Mamluk Egypt.”
“For a long time [from declaring independence in1441] until the early 18th century, the [Crimean] khanate maintained a massive slave trade with the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East. In a process called the “harvesting of the steppe”, they enslaved many Slavic peasants.”
“The Byzantine-Ottoman wars [in or near modern Turkey] and the Ottoman wars in Europe brought large numbers of Christian slaves into the Islamic world too.”
Asaolu, Richard Oluseyi. Slavery. PediaPress. pp 4-7. http://books.google.com.sa/books?id=YTXuW0zptegC&dq=Asaolu,+Richard+Oluseyi+slavery&source=gbs_navlinks_s
In early Islamic times, parts of [Arab-ruled] Iran itself remained unislamized, and these infidel regions could be raided for slaves. This was the case with Daylam in northwestern Iran up to the time of the appearance there of the ʿAlid dāʿī Ḥasan b. Zayd b. Moḥammad (second half of the 3rd/9th century); while slaves were captured from the mountainous region of Ḡūr in central Afghanistan, a pagan enclave there till the early Ghaznavid period.
Slaves came into the Iranian world as captives of war from the Arab campaigns in the Caucasus against the Ḵazars and from the campaigns in central Asia against the local Iranian peoples and the Turks of the steppes beyond, from the end of the lst/7th century onward. Thus Naršaḵī mentions how in 87/706 the Arab governor Qotayba b. Moslem slew all the males in the town of Baykand in Sogdia and enslaved all the women and children.
From early in the Abbasid period the caliphs instituted a tradition of forming army contingents composed of slaves, mostly taken as captives in the course of frontier wars and raids into Central Asia, the Caucasus, and India, among other regions. There were also slave markets where young male slaves, along with female ones, captured as booty or procured by other means, were sold. The preferred slaves were Turkic ones, admired for their handsome features, their valor, and their martial gifts. The Samanids, who originated from Sogdiana and were neighbors to the Turkic khanates of Central Asia, adopted the practice of enlisting slaves in their army—a practice which continued under the succeeding dynasties, chiefly the Ghaznavids, the Seljuks, and theKʷārazmšāhs.
[Note: The Abbasids ruled Arabia, Iraq, the Levant (Sham) and North Africa for 500 years, from 750 to 1258. The Seljuks ruled Oman, and parts Iraq and the Levant from 1037-1194.]
The love poetry of these periods is generally addressed to such adolescent soldiers or pages. That these Turks were ‘white’ or pale-skinned is made clear in these poems:
They are of musky facial hair, sweet of speech, with perfumed tresses / Silver-bodied, gold-girded, and narrow-waisted( Kāfi Ẓafar of Hamadān, cited by ʿAwfi in his Lobāb al-albāb (pp. 210-13))
I love silver-bodied, ruby-lipped children. / Wherever you see one of them, call me there (Farroḵi, Divān, p. 5).
O beautifully clad child, silver-bodied and ruby-lipped, / the substance of charm and gaiety, envious houries in pain from you! (Anvari, apud Šamisā, p. 80).
Attar (ʿAṭṭār [d. 1221] uses in his ghazals, which vibrate with profound and passionate, amorous feelings, the imagery developed by earlier poets: he sings of the beloved’s moon-like face, ruby lips, narrow, hair-like waist, cypress-like figure, the lasso of the beloved’s tresses, the chain of his curls…
Of course there were slaves of other origins as well, e.g., Indian and Slav (generally termed bolḡār “Bulgarian,” known for their fair skin).
The Seljuk Turks ruled parts of Iraq and the Levant from 1037-1194. The settlement of Turkic tribes in the northwestern peripheral parts of the empire, for the strategic military purpose of fending off invasions from neighboring states, led to the progressive Turkicization of those areas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seljuks
The Oghuz Turkic Zangids ruled the Levant from 1127-1250.
The Kurdish Ayyubids ruled the Arabian Peninsula and North Africa from 1171-1341.
The Mamluk Sultanate ruled the western Arabian Peninsula, Egypt and Libya from 1250-1517. The sultanate’s ruling caste was composed of Mamluks- soldiers of predominantly Kipchak Turk, Cumans, Circassian, and Georgian slave origin. By the late fourteenth century, Circassians from the North Caucasus region had become the majority in the Mamluk ranks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamluk_Sultanate_(Cairo)
On top of being “white”, all of these dynasties, and the many others not mentioned here, were involved in trading and capturing white slaves, in addition to settlement of peoples of their respective ethnicities. Who can doubt the enormous changes this would have brought to the phenotype and color of these Arab lands? And as all of these people would be in some degree Arabized (particularly in language) they are now known as Arabs.
Thus it seems that the Black & White Sheep” Prophecy would indeed come to pass, and that it was a reference to skin color and phenotype.
The view of the ancient Arabs holds true today: visible European features or ancestry is a sign of foreign, slave ancestry.
This shouldn’t be a problem. African-Americans, Afro-Caribbeans and Afro-Latinos openly acknowledge slave ancestry as an explanation of their presence in the Americas, and they are expected to. Why shouldn’t white and light-skinned Arabs feel comfortable doing the same? Why shouldn’t they be expected to? Why not anybody?
Where’s the line between a “black” person who can pass for “white”, and a “white” person who can pass for “black”?
Before the One-Drop Rule
America used to classify its ethnic African minorities into two categories.
Those with no known non-African ancestry were known as “Black”, “Negro” (apparently for Spanish speakers) and “Colored” because everyone else, apparently, was clear.
Anyone with African and any other ancestry, especially west Asian (“European”), were known as Mulattoes.
West Asians (also known as “Europeans”) with no visible or known African ancestry, were called “White” even though white is a color, so technically they were “colored”, too. (If you are confused about the use of the terms ‘west Asia’ and ‘West Asian’, click here.)
At some point, the ‘Mulatto’ category was abolished, and all people with any African ancestry were lumped into the first category. Thus formed the “One-Drop Rule”: if you had any known or visible African ancestry, you were Black/Negro/Colored.
But what about people with so little African ancestry, or specifically so few African genes expressed in their phenotype, that they appeared West Asian or “white”?
They ‘passed’ for “white”. They hid their African heritage, abandoned the non-passable members of their family (often at their suggestion) and blended into the dominant west Asian society. They did this to qualify themselves for affirmative action, also known as “white” privilege: 100% quotas at colleges and universities, 100% quotas on in the workforce, 100% quotas in the military, access to credit and housing, and basic human rights.
You never know who could be passing for “white”. With as much as 25% African ancestry, a person can have blonde hair and blue eyes. Even without those, a person with African could have little enough of it showing to not be swarthier, as Benjamin Franklin, put it, than the swarthier races of west Asia. (Keep in mind, as the first and frequent settlers in West Asia, Africans have contributed considerably to their genes and phenotype.)
More importantly, a person could be passing and not know it. If your father passed with 25% African ancestry, then you are a full 1/8th (12.5%) African, but your father obviously wouldn’t have told you. Keep in mind that 12.5% is as much west Asian ancestry as the average African-American has, after centuries of pure Africans mixing with multi-ethnic and/or west Asians.
She wouldn’t even know it if she was, like the white supremacist who found out he was 14% African (making him, therefore, “black”). So how do we know she’s not? How do we know that, according to the one-drop rule she shouldn’t be called “black” or African-American (Spanish was dropped as an official language at some point, so “Negro” is out of fashion)?
Only a genetic test could prove she has no African blood, and if she does, she’s “black”. This isn’t a stretch. We regularly celebrate and/or out supposedly “black” people who look completely white, because they have a mixed ancestor even generations ago.
Genes affect more than just phenotype. That’s why Don Cheadle, with dark brown skin, tightly-curled hair, and broad facial features, can still be 19% west Asian: his west Asian genes don’t express themselves in his phenotype.
There are genes for everything: immunity, hormones, metabolism and a lot of things we don’t think about. Genes also affect behavior and personality. Genes are even passed through breast milk- and how many west Asian Americans have been suckled by African women throughout history? What’s more, memory is passed through genes.
So it’s perfectly normal, or at least possible, for a person to have genes affecting those areas coming from an ancestor that they don’t physically resemble.
This explains “white” people who identify with a distant African ancestor, and why so many African-looking people have difficulty opposing “white” supremacy: it’s in their blood.
“Race is a social construct.”
That really is true.
Where I live in Arabia, “blackness” is defined by the opposite of the one-drop rule: if your skin is not very dark, or if you have loosely-curled hair, or a thin nose or lips- signs of possible non-African ancestry, you’re NOT “black.”
My dark-skinned African-American friend, who inherited wavy hair from his Hispanic mother, was told by his Afro-Arab wife that he’s “white”! “White” to them means one-drop of non-African blood!
Further, Arabs identify a person by his or her father. No matter who the mother is, the child is an Arab if the father is Arab. There are Indonesians who are 100% Indonesian in language and appearance, but are considered Arabs because there is an unbroken paternal line to Yemen.
By that logic, by having a “white” forefather, many African-Americans are actually “white”!
For Jews, it’s the complete opposite: the child of a Jewish mother is Jewish, no matter who the father is.
By that logic, my dark-skinned African-American friend is “white” because of his West Asian maternal grandmother. And the dark-skinned son of my friend, who has a west Asian mother and ethnic African father, is also “white”.
And I have one friend who is “white” to the Arabs because his skin is light brown, “black” to Americans because his father is ethnically African, and Jewish to the Jews because he has a Jewish mother. He should go on tour!
The American concept of race, and every concept of race, and the concept of race itself, are all stupid. Black? White? So what’s a “mixed” person, then- Grey? What should I call my friend’s wife who has a Chinese grandfather- Dark Yellow? We’re just making it up as we go along- and mostly getting it wrong…
Don’t Ask Rachel
I’m not defending or attacking Rachel Dolezal. Her family and identity issues are hers and her family’s: not ours.
I just want to know why African-Americans get so happy when they find out a “white” person is really black, but offended when a “white” person says they are “black”.
I wanna know how a west Asian woman pretending to be African can provide more leadership than ethnic Africans who claim to be African, and are supposedly proud of it.
That’s what matters- not what she did, but what you have.
“Even today, a significant number of mainstream Egyptologists, anthropologists, historians and Hollywood moviemakers continue to deny African people’s role in humankind’s first and greatest civilization in ancient Egypt.” –Andre Moore
Click on the evidence that you would like to read about:
The 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision reversing segregated education, also reversed the educational autonomy gained by African-Americans, and the aftershocks of that are still reverberating across Black minds and communities today.
How School Integration Defused Black Advancement :
Before the 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown versus the Board of Education of Topeka, which overturned the principle of separate but equal education, African Americans had made significant educational gains following the abolition of slavery. They did this in spite of living with brutal racial oppression and deadly violence.
In an effort to resuscitate their culture and history, education was seen as necessary for the upward mobility of African Americans. Many African American writers, through the publication of slave narratives and scholarly works, wrote amazing bodies of non-fiction work aimed at educating Black people. Many African Americans could be found reading literature by W.E.B. Dubious, Marcus Garvey, Elijah Muhammad, Dr. Carter G. Woodson, Langston Hughes, J.A. Rogers, and a host of other Black writers.
These literary pieces were works of resistance aimed at transforming Black consciousness. Black illiteracy, which was 30 % in 1919, had dropped to less than 7 percent by 1955. Black illiteracy had almost disappeared in the North, and in some areas Black illiteracy was less than White illiteracy, such as in New York. In 1950, Black colleges had 71,000 students. Nearly all were in the South. Five hundred fifty three (553) African Americans had a doctorate degree.
Black owned and operated publishing companies were abundant, and education for critical consciousness was a vital part of this Cultural Revolution.
The intellectual growth of African Americans following slavery was extraordinary; this was clearly made evident by the thousands of applications for patents submitted to the U.S. patent office during the late 1800s through the early 1900s by African Americans.
This was absolutely remarkable so shortly after slavery and while still enduring racial persecution. Although African Americans students were attending poorly funded, desegregated schools, many Black teachers were restoring the damaged psyche of African American students by including literature produced by renowned African American writers and scholars.
This provided the students a body of literature that featured Black heroes and the various contributions of African Americans. These materials informed Black students that they were more than merely the descendants of slaves and the children of sharecroppers.
Moreover, it offered them hope and stimulated the desire for greater aspirations. This literature of resistance transformed Black consciousness and gave Black students a sense of purpose and pride. However, this did not last long, for integrating Black student into schools indifferent to the contributions of Blacks defused the growth of Black consciousness and self efficacy.
Instead, the shackles of mental slavery were reapplied. The version of History taught in school to African Americans where heavily revised to favor the agenda of the ruling white elites while hiding the true brutality of their crimes committed against Black people throughout history and in doing so fostered an unrealistic sense of false patriotism used to manufacture your allegiance to a still racist government. This curriculum deliberately withheld the many black world contributions from the educational development of African American students.
Therefore psychologically retarding the esteem and potential of many African Americans students.
The new educational system failed to provide Black students the same, essential racially affirming curriculum needed to base their capabilities and potentials upon as it so routinely does for its White students-thus cutting off the aspirations of many Black students at the roots.
The integration of public schools indicates the U.S. Government’s imperative to retard Black advancement as Black students were thrust into an educational system that taught them to admire the accomplishment of Whites and to despise Africans as being non-contributors of modern civilization.
For most African Americans their schools are the first place where they learn just how little they’re valued in America. No group of children can adequately academically compete with other students while being educated to respect the accomplishments of every other racial group except themselves.
After the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the federal government sponsored a study that was supposed to examine the differences among school resources allocated to Black and White students. The idea was that, by pinpointing the advantages available to White students, policies could be made that would replicate those opportunities for Black students. However, during the integration of America’s schools, the government failed to produce culturally relevant instruction for Black students as it habitually did for White students.
Instead, Black children were integrated into White schools without accommodative adjustments to the curriculum. The implication was that Blacks had contributed nothing to society. Arguably, in American education, the achievements and contributions of African Americans have been largely neglected and receive less attention in terms of quality, historical scholarship than any other topic.
As a result, Black students are bereft of robust historical information that can serve as a platform for future efforts. Those African American students who doggedly survive their stifling grade school experiences find that their high school situations are even more challenging.
Tragically, many teachers and administrators who experience “difficulty working with these students” often misdiagnose them as having “behavioral or learning disorders” or misuse special education programs to remove these students from the classroom. Many studies across the nation find that Black students are more than twice as likely to be suspended or expelled from school as White students. In schools where corporal punishment was permitted, some past studies found that Black students were five times more likely to be hit by school adults than were Whites and three times more likely to be kicked out or placed in Educable Mentally Retarded or Behavioral Disorder classes.
These Black students are often over-overmedicated with drugs like Ritalin and Prozac and placed into low level classes that further diminish their self esteem and belief in their abilities. It has also been suggested that prescribing drugs during these children’s school years may also send the message that drugs are necessary to cope with social stresses.
In countless books, medical journals, and psychological lectures over the years, White psychiatrists and psychologists have pointed to the adverse affects of low self esteem and depression in children.
This work resulted in a long list of symptoms and behaviors that are consistent with those now associated with African American youth. Such notables as Dr. Nathaniel Branden, author of the Pillars of Self Esteem, have focused on self-esteem. Dr. Branden has spent the past three decades studying the psychology of self-esteem. In various speeches, articles, and books, he has attempted to describe the connection between self-esteem and the many human problems common to society today. He notes that “Self-esteem enhances our ability to build relationships with others, it gives one the basis to make accurate, concrete interpretations of current events, and it encourages a people to inspire in spite of obstacles. It has a powerful influence on your behavior at work and in your personal life.”
Furthermore, a longitudinal prospective study about the adverse affects of depression on children found that it can have far-reaching effects on the functioning and adjustment of children, which often persists, recurs, and continues into adulthood.
Dr. Harter, one of the researchers conducting the 1992 study stated that “Self-esteem and depression are usually observed in cycles; the cycle begins with low self-esteem, which leads to depression, and this can lead to suicide.” There is increased risk particularly among adolescent boys if the depression is accompanied by conduct disorder and alcohol or other substance abuse. Among children and adolescents, depressive disorders confer an increased risk for illness and interpersonal and psychosocial difficulties and may predict more severe illness in adult life.
There is more than ample evidence that children exposed to a great deal of violence in movies, television and video games etc., may become desensitized towards violence and may develop violent aggressive behavior as result of this exposure. Yet, with regard to African American students in America’s racist education system, this idea and epistemology is grossly ignored. Time and time again in many books and articles, White researchers detail long lists of ailments that imply a crisis of low self-esteem consistent with the symptoms displayed by Black students in the education system. Perhaps because they are satisfied with the existing educational curriculum, they are unwilling to acknowledge the link between widespread suffering of Black students and damaged self images and low self esteem. Sadly and almost inconceivably, these researchers adamantly stand by their research except when there is an attempt to use their studies and findings to validate this premise as it relates to Black students. It is outrageous how White researchers can ignore their own premises when applied to Black people. Even in seeing and/or hearing, they do not register or observe any facts that conflict with their innate proclivity for racism.
Oliver Wendell Holmes once remarked that “the eye of a bigot may be compared to the pupil of an eye in that, the more light poured on it, the more it contracts.” I have studied these symptoms of internalized racism among African American students for more than twenty years in various cities across the United States.
I have also conducted countless interviews with African American students often identified as un-teachable, unmotivated, disruptive, and trouble makers. I have heard repeated painful testimonies from Black students besieged with deep internalized feelings of self-doubt and self-hatred. They could not always fully articulate the source of their problem, but they consistently reported that it had something to do with their Blackness and that neither alcohol nor drugs could remove the hurtful feelings.
Many critics of this premise shift the blame saying that the source of the problem lies with the failure of Black parents to teach their children their self-affirming history. However, the parents of these students are victims of the same demoralizing education process. I have heard parents echo many of the students’ deep feelings of inadequacy. Even those who excelled and made their mark in the world found that the Mercedes and the big house still did not alleviate societal wounds. They too are products of the same humiliating education process.
The future of any race is extremely dependent upon the proper nurturing and education of its children. All children, regardless of their race, need an education that tells them who they are and what they have accomplished as a people. Therefore, a failure to rectify the problem assures the destruction of Black America.
This hypothesis is not new. Dr. Carter G. Woodson wrote in “The Mis-education of the Negro,” in 1931, “the thought of the inferiority of the Negro is drilled into him in almost every classroom he enters and in almost every book he studies and by teaching him that his Black face is a curse and that his struggle to change his condition is hopeless is the worse sort of lynching, because it kills his aspiration and dooms him to vagabondage and crime.” Dr. Woodson’s analysis was that one’s information determines one’s attitude, and an attitude determines one’s behavior. Therefore, the seat of trouble was in what African Americans were being taught about themselves.
He concluded that African American youth are not only being “mis-educated” but, actually de-educated — that they are being systematically excluded from the educational curriculum and that their self esteem is being systematically destroyed as a result.
Dr. King’s dreams of becoming a nation in which Black and White students could attend school together was based upon America being a plural society built by contributions from all segments of American society. It is reasonable that this should be reflected in the education curriculum. However, Dr. King’s dream has been totally effaced by the reality of racial bias in the American education system that conceals the significant contributions of Black people.
An educational curriculum of were in which Black students are taught to admire and respect only the achievements of Whites.
Dr. King would never have imagined that desegregation meant that Black students would be denied an educational setting that allows them to compete equally with White students.
Clearly, it was an illusion to believe that African American students could receive an education that allows them to compete equally with White children in a system designed by the people responsible for oppressing them and pronouncing them inferior.
Perhaps what is most tragic is the fact that when these victimized Black students respond accordingly to their negative educational experiences through demonstrating feelings of self-hatred, disaffection of education ,and disruptive behaviors– these responsive behaviors are then used by the dominant White culture to further affirm and perpetuate their own racist notions of White racial superiority over Blacks.
Unfortunately, many African American students never fully recover from the adverse impact of their mortifying educational experience –by the time they complete school or dropout, the damage has already been done and the effects remain with them for their entire lives.
In order to build a stronger Black America, we must ensure that our children are provided with an education that enables them to effectively compete with White students. It should also afford them the same opportunities to succeed in the 21st century, not merely preparation for the available low-level jobs, or even for high-level jobs that may serve no worthwhile purpose beyond individual advancement.
It is time to take interest in our future seriously by achieving quality education for our children. A new reality for African Americans will only be built upon Black society that dares to take control of the education of their own children. White supremacy is literally destroying the minds of African American children and as long as Whites determine what is taught to Black students, they will always lag behind.
As long as Black people rely upon Whites to tell us which of our children are normal, we will never know the genius of our students. African Americans deserve a quality education free from protracted and debilitating battles. They deserve a system that promotes their education and sense of self worth rather than one that discourages them by excluding them; they deserve an educational curriculum that enables them to feel good about themselves, their past, and their potential.
A pluralistic society is one where all people are treated with respect, dignity, equality, and fairness regardless of racial differences. Therefore, African Americans have every right to expect that the content of their education will be true, appropriate, relevant, and complete, and among other things that upon completion of public school, our children will have the general skills to enter the world of employment and to be fully functional members of the society.
Such an education is a right of all children and not merely one elite group. The future of Black America will be only as strong as the opportunities that exist for them to attend these types of schools.
We shape our future by the way that we educate our children. Therefore, there must be an alternative for every child who is in a school that does not serve that child well. The time has come for us to recognize this unfulfilled need of society thus fulfilling the promise of true equality.
Re-blogged with permission from The Black Matrix by Franklin Jones (c) 2006, 2008
The Black Matrix: A Perception Management
All 3 players were punished according to their crime. In Case A, the offending player was lightly warned after it was judged that his tweets were as much a response to PDA (public display of affection) being unusual at a draft, as they were an expression of his distaste for homosexuality. He was reminded to be respectful of all players’ lifestyle choices. In Case B, the player was hit with heavy fines and a lengthy suspension. He was advised to participate in African-American charity and community events to repair his and the league’s image. In case C, the player was slapped with a lifetime ban from the NFL. A statement was issued in defense of women’s rights.
Sounds about fair, do you want the real stories now?
Case A: Player hit with indefinite suspension (may never play again) and a heavy fine.
Case B: Light fine and suspension after lengthy, contentious investigation.
Case C: No punishment or official response.
What’s the logic? (There definitely is one.)
Case A Logic: Gay Supremacy.
Homosexuality was publicly denounced, so swift, heavy retribution had to ensue to re-assert gay tribalism.
Case B Logic: White Supremacy. The offender is white, and the victim black, however, this is another rule of supremacy- don’t draw exposure. The victim’s case caused a media whirlwind, and there was a written record of the crimes. Punishment was necessary for the sake of masking white supremacist objectives.
Case C Logic: Irrelevant to Supremacists.
Both the victim and perpetrator were black.
The offender and victim were both black heterosexuals. As the crime stayed below media radar, the case drew no interest.
Football is just a sport, but it is America’s biggest sport. And the NFL is one of America’s most profitable organizations. The NFL (clothing, posters, games, sports radio, sports websites, etc.) is a part of nearly every American household. It is the fabric of American society, and American society, in turn, is the world’s most influential culture.
The NFL is run by and for some of the wealthiest men in America, most of whom are white. Their decisions reflect the knowledge and agenda of America’s elites.
Case A had a black man speaking about against another black man, but the interests of gay supremacy were affected, despite the situation having no relevancy to white supremacy.
In Case B, the perpetrator was white and the victim black, but like the NBA’s Donald Sterling, measures had to be taken because of the risk of the white supremacist agenda being exposed. Donald Sterling and the NBA have practiced systematic white supremacy for decades, with discriminatory housing and ticketing prices, intentionally ‘whitening’ the league by importing west Asian (“European”) players, and the like. (Read Here.) None of these caught the world’s attention, because the team-owner elites have brothers in media-owning elites who share their interests. However, in the case of a leak, Freudian slip, or off-the-cuff tirade, damage control has to be done. Occasionally, a member has to take it for the team.
Am I saying that there is an intersection or connection between whiteness and homosexuality, to that white supremacy and gay supremacy should overlap?
For people of Sub-Saharan (“Black”) African descent, the first large-scale experience of homosexuality was with white people and/or in white-organized institutions (prison, vulnerability due to socio-economic disadvantages or slavery). This includes slavery in the clandestine homosexual cultures of the Americas, proselytization of the Catholic church, slave trades in Turkic, Arab, and Persian nations, imprisonment, and sexual predation of socio-economically disadvantaged boys by wealthier, older white men.
Being that whiteness and homosexuality are intertwined, for blacks in a society with a white elite class, homosexuality is a way of gaining white acceptance. He can’t adopt their appearance, but he can adopt their lifestyle. Consciously or sub-consciously, this fills the void left by his lack of self-knowledge and ignorance of black history. Without a past to draw an identity from, he can escape the pressures and hatred of his captors’ society by conforming to what it is, and what it wants of him.
He may now know why he does it, or even that he has but when he, the manliest of black men, the super-athlete, surrenders his blackness, he becomes cause celebre. He, finally, has a place. He is not a threat anymore. His captivity, which he never even knew enough to see, only feel at some sub-conscious level, becomes an embrace.
(Perhaps you protest that people are born homosexual. From the congenital point of view, this is true. It can even be controlled. But homosexual desires and the gay lifestyle are two different things. This article dealt with Black men who choose to promote and celebrate the gay identity, and the society that encourages them.)
“…the rule of the Arabs came to an end; the Turks, upon whom the Messenger of God vowed to make war, assumed power. …they (viz. the Turks) secured an ascendency in all the lands. God gave the Turks dominion… They treated the religion of God as a plaything and established a reign of terror throughout all the provinces of the caliphate.” (al-Maqrīzī)
“increasing intermarriage (between Arabs and non-Arabs) served to submerge the original distinctions, and increasing numbers of the conquered, having adopted the religion and language of the conquerors, took to assuming the identity as if Arabs themselves” (Segal 2001:22)
Al-Mubarrad (d. 898), the leading figure in the Basran grammatical tradition, claimed: “The Arabs used to take pride in their brown and black complexion (al-sumra wa al-sawād) and they had a distaste for a white and fair complexion (al-ḥumra waal-shaqra), and they used to say that such was the complexion of the non-Arabs.”
“…the complexion of most Arabs is brown and jet-black and the complexion of most non-Arabs is white and red.” (Lisan El-Arab (an old Arabic dictionary))
The theft of Aboriginal children is more widespread than at any time during the last century.
As of June last year, almost 14,000 Aboriginal children had been “removed.” This is five times the number when “Bringing Them Home” was written. More than a third of all removed children are Aboriginal — from three percent of the population. At the present rate, this mass removal of Aboriginal children will result in a stolen generation of more than 3,300 children in the Northern Territory alone.
I met a group of Aboriginal grandmothers, all survivors of the first stolen generation, all now with stolen grandchildren. “We live in a state of fear, again,” they said. David Shoebridge, a State Greens MP told me, “The truth is, there is a market among whites for these kids, especially babies.”
The New South Wales parliament is soon to debate legislation that introduces forced adoption and “guardianship.” Children under two will be liable — without the mother’s consent — if “removed” for more than six months. For many Aboriginal mothers like Pat, it can take six months merely to make contact with their children. “It’s setting up Aboriginal families to fail,” said Shoebridge.
This happened to an Aboriginal family in outback New South Wales. It is happening across Australia in a scandalous and largely unrecognized abuse of human rights that evokes the infamous Stolen Generation of the last century. Up to the 1970s, thousands of mixed race children were stolen from their mothers by welfare officials. The children were given to institutions as cheap or slave labor; many were abused.
Described by a Chief Protector of Aborigines as “breeding out the color”, the policy was known as assimilation. It was influenced by the same eugenics movement that inspired the Nazis. In 1997, a landmark report, “Bringing Them Home”, disclosed that as many 50,000 children and their mothers had endured “the humiliation, the degradation and sheer brutality of the act of forced separation … the product of the deliberate, calculated policies of the state.” The report called this genocide.