This was your quote--the reason we were discussing this issue in the first place:

"Black and white like Afrikan culture v. European culture is diametrically opposed. Confusion comes into play with people trying to walk the fence, it's either or."

This is precisely what Diop doesn't prove.

>>Considering the Egyptian rulers were an oppressive and hideous
>> aristocracy, it never made sense to me that Diop spoke highly
>> of those who rebelled against them. If anything, wouldn't that
>> be an argument against Pan-Africanism? This is just one
>>example...
>
>"Hideous and oppressive aristocracy" that's almost as bad as
>your "stereotypes of perpetual judgement" bull.

lol. I'll read on...

You had
>golden ages where people in the Nile got along beautifully
>you also had all out warfare.

Exactly! Tell me what this says about any sort of Pan-culture?

You also has external
>invasions, but how does any of that negate Pan-Africanism.
>Who did he speak highly of and why?

the rebels AND the aristocrats... that's what I'm trying to say.

or was he just examining
>un/sucessful revolution attempts?

this too.

>You sound kinda ridiculous, how can you say he is brilliant
>and you enjoy his reading but then turn around and say
>anything Pan-African isn't logical.

Not just Pan-African, Pan-Anything.. yes, it's still a ridiculous and racist concept that strips people of all races from their individuality.

Everything he wrote was
>Pan-African.

No, it wasn't. Diop is a brilliant historian, and his evidence on Africa's historcial ancestry in Egypt is what impressed me.

Start with the foundation, Northern Cradle and
>Southern Cradle, southern cradle represents all of Africa
>which he insisted in all his work is cultural unified.

And I disagreed with.

Even
>in Establishing that KMT was an African civilization he
>showed the influence from the interior (all Pan-African).

...still disagree with. Again, what I was impressed with was his historical evidence supporting AFrican civilization in Egypt, not his philosophies on Pan-Africanism.

I
>didn't say I was an expert anything but there are volumes
>and contemporaries who builds on the "illogical" stuff you
>never gave an example of.

Well, you apparently know more than I do, so help me out if it's important enough to comment on.

Lol.. I'm not going to son you,
>just take my advice re-read because you surely don't have a
>grasp from what you have displayed or better yet stick to
>your bible.

I will once I get an actual response. peace,