Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby Okay Activist Archives topic #5123

Subject: "A Question about Afrikan Thinking" This topic is locked.
Previous topic | Next topic
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 07:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"A Question about Afrikan Thinking"


          

This question is being posed really to Utamaroho and Solarus but anyone who knows the Afrikan way of thinking/living can also add in. When you guys look at Afrikan people and culture within Afrika, I've noticed that you tend to seperate elements like Islam and Christianity particularly as "non-Afrikan" and you paint them as detrimental to original Afrikan culture. To a large extent I see where you are coming from and I agree with you on certain things. However, my question about the Afrikan discourse is I'm wondering if its not a little revisionist in its picture of Afrika. It reminds me a lot of Hindu revivalism/nationalism in India. The Hindu nationalists tend to portray what the see as "non-Hindus" (Muslims, Christians, etc.) as detrimental to Hinduism. They however disregard the fact that both these religions have been syncretised highly within the Hindu culture of India. They seem to be missing the reality of the situation that Hindus and Muslims and Christians have been living with very similar at times cultural background. From my understanding of Afrika, there has also been a high syncretisation of Islam and Christianity within Afrikan culture. You can prove me wrong but this is from what I know.
Don't you think going to visit Afrika would be important in actually seeing the Afrikan way of life rather than just reading theories about it? And if you have been to Afrika(Solarus) how has that affected your viewpoint about Afrikan discourse?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top


Topic Outline
Subject Author Message Date ID
simple.
Apr 07th 2003
1
RE: simple.
Apr 07th 2003
4
this is gonna sound "odd"
Apr 07th 2003
5
      since I was thinking of making a similar post
Apr 07th 2003
6
           i thought i did.
Apr 07th 2003
7
                RE: i thought i did.
Apr 07th 2003
15
                     you should inbox me a phone number.
Apr 08th 2003
32
Correct me if I am wrong
Apr 10th 2003
68
where did we go wrong?
Apr 07th 2003
2
answer:
Apr 07th 2003
3
      again, which COUNTRY in "afrika"
Apr 07th 2003
9
           dumbass question.
Apr 08th 2003
33
Which country in "Afrika"?
Apr 07th 2003
8
Allah, we've been over this ground before brotha.
Apr 07th 2003
10
      what exactly did I say I "understood"?
Apr 07th 2003
13
           The reasoning, but you still didn't like sumin- I forg
Apr 07th 2003
14
                yeah, I didn't like the term Africa and Afrika
Apr 07th 2003
16
RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 07th 2003
11
See this is an example
Apr 07th 2003
12
RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 07th 2003
17
      RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 07th 2003
21
      RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 07th 2003
22
           RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 08th 2003
25
.
Apr 07th 2003
18
RE: .
Apr 07th 2003
19
My response
Apr 08th 2003
30
      RE: My response
Apr 08th 2003
34
thumbs up to this:
Apr 08th 2003
24
RE: thumbs up to this:
Apr 08th 2003
27
      are you serious?
Apr 08th 2003
28
sad
Apr 09th 2003
39
      RE: sad
Apr 09th 2003
40
      RE: sad
Apr 10th 2003
50
           RE: sad
Apr 10th 2003
53
                RE: sad
Apr 10th 2003
56
                     RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
70
                     RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
78
                          RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
80
                          RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
84
                          RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
85
                               RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
86
                                    RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
87
                                         RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
88
                                              RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
89
                                                   RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
90
                                                        peace
Apr 11th 2003
91
                          why sad?
Apr 11th 2003
94
                          RE: why sad?
Apr 14th 2003
118
                               RE: why sad?
Apr 14th 2003
120
                                    RE: why sad?
Apr 14th 2003
127
                                         RE: why sad?
Apr 14th 2003
129
                                              RE: why sad?
Apr 14th 2003
130
                          RE: sad
Apr 12th 2003
99
                               RE: sad
Apr 14th 2003
117
                          RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
95
                     RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
71
                          RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
79
                               RE: sad
Apr 11th 2003
81
      Inclusiveness is not
Apr 11th 2003
75
           RE: Inclusiveness is not
Apr 11th 2003
92
                ...
Apr 12th 2003
111
african discourse?
Apr 07th 2003
20
RE: african discourse?
Apr 08th 2003
26
      By "Afrikan"
Apr 08th 2003
31
i have a question-
Apr 07th 2003
23
RE: i have a question-
Apr 08th 2003
29
      okay-
Apr 09th 2003
45
RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 09th 2003
35
only "we" share
Apr 09th 2003
36
RE: only "we" share
Apr 09th 2003
37
      in retrospect...
Apr 09th 2003
38
           RE: in retrospect...
Apr 09th 2003
41
           RE: in retrospect...
Apr 09th 2003
42
           RE: in retrospect...
Apr 09th 2003
43
           I think that is an important discussion though
Apr 09th 2003
47
           KABOOM!
Apr 09th 2003
48
           it's not a real continent though
Apr 09th 2003
46
                RE: it's not a real continent though
Apr 10th 2003
49
                RE: it's not a real continent though
Apr 10th 2003
51
                     continent:....whatever man...
Apr 10th 2003
52
                     no they are not
Apr 10th 2003
54
                          RE: no they are not
Apr 10th 2003
55
                          there is black people in eastern and northern asia too
Apr 10th 2003
57
                               so what?
Apr 10th 2003
59
                               you mean...
Apr 10th 2003
60
                                    ...
Apr 10th 2003
64
                                         at least you are basing it on something real (language)
Apr 10th 2003
66
                                         RE: at least you are basing it on something real (langu
Apr 11th 2003
69
                                              Wasting your Time
Apr 11th 2003
74
                                         RE: ...
Apr 11th 2003
73
                                              Group infighting means nothing
Apr 11th 2003
76
                                                   neither does academic theorizing
Apr 11th 2003
77
                                                        RE: neither does academic theorizing
Apr 11th 2003
82
                                                        RE: neither does academic theorizing
Apr 11th 2003
83
                                                        !
Apr 11th 2003
97
                                                        RE: !
Apr 14th 2003
121
                                                             RE: !
Apr 14th 2003
123
                                                                  RE: !
Apr 14th 2003
128
                                                                       adding
Apr 14th 2003
132
                                                        RE: neither does academic theorizing
Apr 12th 2003
100
                                                             go ahead
Apr 12th 2003
114
                                                             good points
Apr 14th 2003
125
                               RE: there is black people in eastern and northern asia
Apr 10th 2003
63
                                    5%= empty rhetoric
Apr 10th 2003
65
                                         what is real bull s is this whole "africa" stuff
Apr 10th 2003
67
                                              You truly are a "Greek"
Apr 11th 2003
72
                          RE: no they are not
Apr 10th 2003
61
RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 12th 2003
103
RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 09th 2003
44
*shoots self in head*
Apr 10th 2003
58
      RE: *shoots self in head*
Apr 10th 2003
62
           OK haters
Apr 11th 2003
93
                significant?
Apr 11th 2003
96
                stop being OKignorant.
Apr 12th 2003
101
                     RE: stop being OKignorant.
Apr 12th 2003
102
                     challenge
Apr 12th 2003
104
                          Point?
Apr 12th 2003
109
                               RE: Point?
Apr 12th 2003
112
                                    RE: Point?
Apr 14th 2003
116
                                         uh...
Apr 14th 2003
119
                                              RE: uh...
Apr 14th 2003
122
                                              read their words and find out
Apr 14th 2003
124
                                              RE: uh...
Apr 14th 2003
131
                                                   RE: uh...
Apr 14th 2003
133
so highly syncretized
Apr 11th 2003
98
RE: so highly syncretized
Apr 12th 2003
105
      you missed my point
Apr 12th 2003
106
           RE: you missed my point
Apr 12th 2003
107
                RE: you missed my point
Apr 12th 2003
108
                It's not about WHO is "truly"
Apr 12th 2003
110
                     this is slippery
Apr 12th 2003
113
                          "Traditional"
Apr 14th 2003
126
RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking
Apr 13th 2003
115

Utamaroho
Charter member
17658 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 07:35 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
1. "simple."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

afrikan thought starts BEFORE the introduction of these alien ideologies... one would have to go THERE to even begin. After that a steady chronological progression through time will 1)point to the specific instances of these foreign influences and 2) how they changed what existed BEFORE.

simply put, after the influx of these systems there is no longer a "pure" afrikan way of thought, but something more "synthesized" of the two. one which in all reality is the "actualization" of afrikan thought. (synthesis over division)

It's sorta like how one would start with a base color for painting and coming up with something different with every addition of other colors. the base and foundation is present, one has to just compare and contrast that (what is remembered and retained) with what exists presently.

There ARE people (afrikans) who hold onto the traditions in their pure form and can simultaneously interact with the changing face of their systems as well. These are the people who i'd ask of afrikan theory before the people whose origins in afrikan cultures lie in that "mixed" place.

Red, Black, Green

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 09:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
4. "RE: simple."
In response to Reply # 1


          

>
>There ARE people (afrikans) who hold onto the traditions in
>their pure form and can simultaneously interact with the
>changing face of their systems as well. These are the people
>who i'd ask of afrikan theory before the people whose
>origins in afrikan cultures lie in that "mixed" place.

1. Who are these people? Are they only true Afrikans because they're not Muslims/Christians (or other outside influence)? Are there not Muslims/Christians who for the most part hold Afrikan traditions with some variation? The Muslim/Christian doctrines haven't they been accepted into the Afrikan way of thinking , the pantheon of beliefs?Has not Islam and Christianity affected indigenous Afrikan traditions somewhat as well, even for Afrikans who aren't Muslim/Christian?Isn't there diversity of traditions in Afrika between various ethnic groups anyway? What is/are the underlying thing(s) that makes one Afrikan?Have you been to Afrika? Do you think that "real" Afrikans have problems with Islam/Christianity?

Thank you.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Utamaroho
Charter member
17658 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 09:32 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
5. "this is gonna sound "odd""
In response to Reply # 4


  

          

but i'd suggest reading C.S. Lewis's "Mere Christianity". he's a christian apologist who wrote the BEST discourse on what being a "real" christian is. In it, he explains the difference between "calling" yourself something with reference to the original and skewed definitions...and BEING the thing you're calling yourself. He makes distinctions between the word connotations of "gentleman" and "christain". I'd check that out, because it basically explains the logical progression of thought i think you're trying to understand. It's at EVERY local library.

"In order to see the underlying similarities in the many different peoples and their cultures in Africa, you'd have to listen, read, interact, or live and experience a substantial amount of these cultures". this can be done outside of geopolitical or continental barriers. After a while, i think it'd be fairly easy to see the "whole" and have an understanding of what people (like myself) mean when referring to "traditional afrikan ways". i COULD apply a little reductionism...but why??? (you'll see why i said that after your experiences and reading of massive amounts of african literatur/data/experiences)

and yes. i know of MANY people who practice and try to retain the traditional afrilkan ways who see christianity and islam as a problem.

Red, Black, Green

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
Quest4Knowledge
Member since Jun 20th 2002
2797 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 10:11 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IMClick to send message via ICQ
6. "since I was thinking of making a similar post"
In response to Reply # 5


  

          

it would be coo' if you (Uta) could answer Kala Abkars questions directly:

1. Who are these people? Are they only true Afrikans because they're not Muslims/Christians (or other outside influence)? Are there not Muslims/Christians who for the most part hold Afrikan traditions with some variation? The Muslim/Christian doctrines haven't they been accepted into the Afrikan way of thinking , the pantheon of beliefs?Has not Islam and Christianity affected indigenous Afrikan traditions somewhat as well, even for Afrikans who aren't Muslim/Christian?Isn't there diversity of traditions in Afrika between various ethnic groups anyway? What is/are the underlying thing(s) that makes one Afrikan?Have you been to Afrika? Do you think that "real" Afrikans have problems with Islam/Christianity?






------

Fox has got nothin' on us.

Okayplayers guerilla love
and Quest4Knowledge bringing you fair & balanced moderation since 2003.

Make sure you know the guidelines before posting: http://okayplayer.com/guidelines

Not happy about your post being locked? Want a thread archived? See a post that shouldn't be up? Feel free to Inbox me at Quest4Knowledge or E-Mail me at KemeticSunrise@aol.com



---
In memory of my sig..

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Utamaroho
Charter member
17658 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 10:48 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
7. "i thought i did."
In response to Reply # 6


  

          

but i can see where it seems somewhat avoiding the answer...

because i don't have time to type out a number of examples, i'll just throw out two names: Ayi Kwei Armah (of Senegal) and his book "2000 Seasons" so that you can get an idea of the perspective traditional indigenous afrikans have of christianity/islam if they haven't "assimilated" or "fused" those two belief systems with their own. there are NUMEROUS other examples and literature i can provide of HOSTS of others who write and speak in the same vein.

and to the other query: no i have not been to the continent.

Red, Black, Green

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 12:07 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
15. "RE: i thought i did."
In response to Reply # 7
Mon Apr-07-03 12:21 PM

          

Why would you say that he(Armah) is representative of the average "Afrikan"?

Also, how does one practice "traditional Afrikan thought" with out living amongst true "Afrikans" to see practical things?One can read a lot of theories and ideas about Afrika and even practice but since youre dealing with a culture I dont know how you can be part of it without being amongst it. Hindus who live in Amrika and have grown up here really shouldnt say that they are Indian Hindu and that they know or relate. So why should an Amrikan, albeit a well versed scholar on Afrikan thought, say that he is "Afrikan"? By the way, my questions here aren't meant to be incendiary in any way. I'm just interested.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
Utamaroho
Charter member
17658 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 06:42 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
32. "you should inbox me a phone number."
In response to Reply # 15


  

          

i can call and explain this a LOT faster than typing.

Red, Black, Green

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Humzaki
Charter member
505 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 08:04 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
68. "Correct me if I am wrong"
In response to Reply # 1


  

          

It seems by this logic Afrikan thought cannot evole and continue to be considered,again by this logic, Afrikan thought. Do you consider the Europeans to have their own "pure" thought; or the Chineses for that matter?

Peace
H

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

guerilla_love
Charter member
8273 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 07:48 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
2. "where did we go wrong?"
In response to Reply # 0


          

was it when these religions began to be tainted by western consumerism?

was it when there religions began to alter indigenous ideologies?

was it when indigineous people stopped following ways that had been specifically honed and developed for the specific needs of their communities and started adopting ideologies brought by outsiders that the outsiders claimed were better for them?

was it in the openness to new ideas and people that the indigineous people showed?

was it because they couldn't adopt these new cultures and then hold them true to the way they had been developed for another group and not them?

was it when these new introduced elements changed their roots so profoundly that they had to reintroduce their soil altogether?

how far back do we have to go to find something pure/real/true?

.....

"Who need fossil fuel when the sun ain't goin' nowhere"
- Amiri Baraka

http://www.okayplayer.com/guidelines

BUY MY BOOK- only $6! Inbox me for details

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Utamaroho
Charter member
17658 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 07:54 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
3. "answer:"
In response to Reply # 2


  

          

"how far back do we have to go to find something pure/real/true?"

-March 23, 1978

truth and evidence is ALWAYS available. most systems operate on what works...not what doesn't work. just find the real cats practicing and DOING the real shit and getting the results they set out for. simple.

Red, Black, Green

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 11:05 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
9. "again, which COUNTRY in "afrika""
In response to Reply # 3


  

          

that is the vaguest answer you have given yet.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
Utamaroho
Charter member
17658 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 06:42 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
33. "dumbass question."
In response to Reply # 9


  

          

.

Red, Black, Green

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 10:59 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
8. "Which country in "Afrika"?"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
FireBrand
Charter member
145739 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 11:11 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
10. "Allah, we've been over this ground before brotha."
In response to Reply # 8


  

          

You said you understood. Are you just trying to be difficult, or do you need another explanation?



----------------------
Avatar? Nea onnim sua a, ohu; nea odwen se onim dodo no, se ogyae sua a, ketewa no koraa a onim no firi ne nsa.
_______________________

The Love of my life: (Future Mrs. FireBrand)
http://members.tripod.com/~samblondie/sampage2.htm

Refreshing Lyrics:
http://www.ohhla.com/anonymous/nas/gods_son/i_can.nas.txt

"Everywhere is war- m'say war" -- Bob Marley

Give back:
www.jampact.org.

www.jru.org.jm
Gone clear...Jamaican Rugby nah ras. Mo' Fiya!


"Be intent on action, not on the fruits of action; avoid attraction to the fruits and attachment to inaction! Perform action, firm in discipline, relinquishing attachment; be impartial to failure and sucess - this equanimity is called discipling. Wise men disciplined by understanding relinquish the fruit born of action; freed from these bonds of rebirth, they reach a place beyond decay." --Teachings of Krishna

"...If it were not for them in my life I might have not realized just how dangerous Western culture is for thinking Afrikans and would have gone on to become another empty, wasted intellectualizer." --Larry D. Crawford (Mwalimu A. Bomani Baruti)

"Slaves got options...cowards aint got shit." --PS
"Once upon a time, little need existed for making the distinction between a nigga and a black—at least not in this country, the place where niggas were invented" -- Donnell A

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 11:25 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
13. "what exactly did I say I "understood"?"
In response to Reply # 10


  

          

.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
FireBrand
Charter member
145739 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 11:26 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
14. "The reasoning, but you still didn't like sumin- I forg"
In response to Reply # 13


  

          

----------------------
Avatar? Nea onnim sua a, ohu; nea odwen se onim dodo no, se ogyae sua a, ketewa no koraa a onim no firi ne nsa.
_______________________

The Love of my life: (Future Mrs. FireBrand)
http://members.tripod.com/~samblondie/sampage2.htm

Refreshing Lyrics:
http://www.ohhla.com/anonymous/nas/gods_son/i_can.nas.txt

"Everywhere is war- m'say war" -- Bob Marley

Give back:
www.jampact.org.

www.jru.org.jm
Gone clear...Jamaican Rugby nah ras. Mo' Fiya!


"Be intent on action, not on the fruits of action; avoid attraction to the fruits and attachment to inaction! Perform action, firm in discipline, relinquishing attachment; be impartial to failure and sucess - this equanimity is called discipling. Wise men disciplined by understanding relinquish the fruit born of action; freed from these bonds of rebirth, they reach a place beyond decay." --Teachings of Krishna

"...If it were not for them in my life I might have not realized just how dangerous Western culture is for thinking Afrikans and would have gone on to become another empty, wasted intellectualizer." --Larry D. Crawford (Mwalimu A. Bomani Baruti)

"Slaves got options...cowards aint got shit." --PS
"Once upon a time, little need existed for making the distinction between a nigga and a black—at least not in this country, the place where niggas were invented" -- Donnell A

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 12:13 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
16. "yeah, I didn't like the term Africa and Afrika"
In response to Reply # 14


  

          

but I liked the Black Diasporic thing you broke down.
Peace.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

EthioHoney
Member since Sep 21st 2002
9560 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 11:21 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
11. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 0


          

Well, I am a young 100% Muslim Ethiopian/Somalian woman, born and raised in Ethiopia. There is much separation in Ethiopia as far as religions go. A lot of the Christians dislike the Muslims just because of our beliefs. Our way of life and basic ways of thinking are at 2 different ends of the pole. I even see it here in the States, thats just how it is back home....and it has been carried on over...Personally I dont have a problem w/ any believers or non-believers..Just thought I'd add this, even though it may not be what u are trying to get at..

@ethiozilla

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 11:24 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
12. "See this is an example"
In response to Reply # 11


  

          

the romanticization of this so called uniform "afrikan"
thought. That shit didn't exist now or in the past.
There were STATES (countries) that held a dominant sway over
what various ethnolinguistic groups did in there trade
with each other, but this whole unilateral "Afrikan"
thought thing is bogus.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 12:44 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
17. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 11


          

How do the Muslims and Christians get along with the indigenous religion cats? Is there shared cultural attributes at all in Ethiopia? Like for example, amongst a certain ethnic group. Lets take Somalis. Are there Christian, Muslim, and or indigenous Somalis? If there are, do they have shared cultural attributes?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
EthioHoney
Member since Sep 21st 2002
9560 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 05:11 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
21. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 17


          

I mean we all get along, but there is always that feeling of distinction amongst us. Though we may be at different beliefs, we do share many cultural values, morals, and atributes. We tend not to involve the two....kind of like separation from church and state type of thing..

>How do the Muslims and Christians get along with the
>indigenous religion cats? Is there shared cultural
>attributes at all in Ethiopia? Like for example, amongst a
>certain ethnic group. Lets take Somalis. Are there
>Christian, Muslim, and or indigenous Somalis? If there are,
>do they have shared cultural attributes?

@ethiozilla

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Konnex
Member since Nov 27th 2002
606 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 10:23 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
22. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 17
Mon Apr-07-03 10:26 PM

  

          

>How do the Muslims and Christians get along with the
>indigenous religion cats? Is there shared cultural
>attributes at all in Ethiopia? Like for example, amongst a
>certain ethnic group. Lets take Somalis. Are there
>Christian, Muslim, and or indigenous Somalis? If there are,
>do they have shared cultural attributes?

I am not from Ethiopia but from Kenya,but if you allow me I can answer the above question with reference to my own people.I am of a tribe called the Agikuyu(colloqial term,Kikuyu)and yes there are Christian,Muslim and also Kikuyu who practice the indigenous religion.My answer to your question would be that some cultural attributes that are specific to the Kikuyu apply regardless of religion.My family is Catholic but alot of the things we do even within the Catholic church are from Kikuyu perspective.We have mass in our traditional language(including hymns,and prayers)and for the offering at Mass, it is normal to give fruit from the harvest or even livestock.This is Kikuyu practice.I am not sure how Islamic worship is carried out though, but I would assume that the same does not apply.As far as I have observed,the language used is Arabic and the Kikuyu practices have not made much inroad into the systems of worship here.(Although this might have to do with the fact that there are many more Christian Kikuyu than Muslim)
As far as social practice and day to day behaviour is concerned,The Kikuyu identity is very strong and takes precedence over anything else.That means that customs concerning birth and marriage and circumcision etc are still followed today and apply across religious boundaries.Interestingly,my cousin got married last Summer and there was a big fuss and alot of family dispute because her husband to be was from another tribe.It didn't matter that he was a good Catholic man who teaches at a good Catholic School.What makes this even more interesting is that my Aunt awhile ago converted to Islam but there was not much concern because at the end of the day,we still saw her as a member of our tribe first and anything else second.These are just some examples of the relevance we still attach to our traditional heritage and there are countless other examples I won't bore you with.
Another poster(Allah) has mentioned that we need to stop romanticizing this idea of the single or uniform African thought or practice.I must agree wholeheartedly.There is no such thing and there is no such place.Take it from someone who encounters the day to day realities of what is really just a small piece of Africa.Kenya is not even the size of Texas and we have more than 70(seventy) ethnic groups.Each one thinks it kicks ass and the others come a close second.Imagine how much more the complexity of this is amplified over the entire continent!!! And by the way,alot of us find it insulting and offensive when in discussion we are lumped together as "those Africans".Discussions of this type fail to take account of the fact of the different Nationalities and ethnicities.These nationalities and ethnicities are very unique and individual and it is lazy to think otherwise.But y'all just didn't know





"Fighting for peace is like fucking for celibacy"

Join the fray: http://freddkambo.blogspot.com

"are you black? a nerd? don't fit in with your peers? got no game? YOU SHOULD FORM A ROCK BAND, DUNNY!" AF


Too many Emcees not enough mics.(fugees)

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 04:05 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
25. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 22


          

See this is the insight that I was looking for. Religion plays its part and there have been divisions but in many cases tribal allegiances are more important than religious ones.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 03:17 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
18. "."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

>This question is being posed really to Utamaroho and Solarus
>but anyone who knows the Afrikan way of thinking/living can
>also add in. When you guys look at Afrikan people and
>culture within Afrika, I've noticed that you tend to
>seperate elements like Islam and Christianity particularly
>as "non-Afrikan" and you paint them as detrimental to
>original Afrikan culture. To a large extent I see where you
>are coming from and I agree with you on certain things.
>However, my question about the Afrikan discourse is I'm
>wondering if its not a little revisionist in its picture of
>Afrika. It reminds me a lot of Hindu revivalism/nationalism

No it is not revisionist. First off, as I discussed in a former post "God is IMMANENT," various Afrikan groups tend to be very inclusive when it comes to religious practices, beliefs and/or deities. By this alone, foreign religions already had open door. If we then look at specific cases we see that conversion was generally ushered in by ECONOMIC/POLITICAL BENEFITS. For example, the conversion of King Ezana(sp?) of Axum allowed for better relations with then Christian Egypt and the larger Byzantine Empire; the conversion of the mansas and royalty of the ancient MAli empire to Islam allowed the empire to gain better trade relations with the greater Muslim world; scores of kidnapped and forcibly enslaved Afrikans converted to Islam to gain their freedom from their captors. In all these cases it si obvious that the conversion was not done so simply because someone saw the "truth" of g.o.d. or a.l.l.a.h. but moreso because of economic gain, betterment of international relations or improvement of social status.

Initially there are going to be an obvious syncretization of beliefs. This is obvious in the Kingdom of Mali example when traveler Ibn Battuta visited Mali. He spoke of many differences and drew a distinct line between the people of Mali (who were all technically Muslim) and his own Muslim group in North Afrika. Over time and much money (initially spent by the frivolous Mansa Musa trying to show off his bling bling to Arabs) Arab scholars set up shop teaching Afrikans how to be better Arabs instead of Afrikans.

This technique also occurred in East Afrika where East Afrikans took over the Arab job of capturing more Afrikans for Arab enslavement. Thanks be to a.l.l.a.h.

And yes there is a high degree of syncretization. I would argue that the degree of syncretization varies according to a people's access of teachers of foreign doctrines. In general, in West Afrika for instance, I think one is more likely to find more syncretized (or "afrikanized") versions of ISlam than one would find in Christianity. I think this would be the case simply because modern Christianity had more dedicated and stringent teachers of the religion than did past Muslims.

Overall however, syncretization or not, I would argue that Islam and Christianity ultimately do or will overshadow traditional Afrikan ways of thought simply because of their(Islam and christianity) isolating, segregating and/or excluding natures, thus making any syncretization minimal or negligible.

>Don't you think going to visit Afrika would be important in
>actually seeing the Afrikan way of life rather than just
>reading theories about it?

No because the "Afrikan way of life" exists throughout the diaspora. I've elements of it in America and I've seen the survival of it within MAroon communities of the Americas as a whole. (What IS the "Afrikan way of life?")

>And if you have been to
>Afrika(Solarus) how has that affected your viewpoint about
>Afrikan discourse?

I haven't been to the continent yet but from the views of some close brothas of mine who stayed in the continent for a year it strengthened their resolve. Seeing Afrikans worship alien dieties and the sickness that evolves from it (self-hate, negative look on past traditions and thus one's (particular Afrikan)group as a whole). The sickness only quickens and solidifies the ability of foreigners to sway the minds and hearts of Afrikans for their (foreigners') benefits.

PS. Before anyone responds with some silly ish, I'm not using "Arab" and "Muslim" synonymously but I am advocating that the origin and evolution of Islam emanates from a greater Arab worldview.

PEace

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 04:13 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
19. "RE: ."
In response to Reply # 18


          

>
>No it is not revisionist. First off, as I discussed in a
>former post "God is IMMANENT," various Afrikan groups tend
>to be very inclusive when it comes to religious practices,
>beliefs and/or deities. By this alone, foreign religions
>already had open door. If we then look at specific cases we
>see that conversion was generally ushered in by
>ECONOMIC/POLITICAL BENEFITS. For example, the conversion of
>King Ezana(sp?) of Axum allowed for better relations with
>then Christian Egypt and the larger Byzantine Empire; the
>conversion of the mansas and royalty of the ancient MAli
>empire to Islam allowed the empire to gain better trade
>relations with the greater Muslim world; scores of kidnapped
>and forcibly enslaved Afrikans converted to Islam to gain
>their freedom from their captors. In all these cases it si
>obvious that the conversion was not done so simply because
>someone saw the "truth" of g.o.d. or a.l.l.a.h. but moreso
>because of economic gain, betterment of international
>relations or improvement of social status.

Okay. Except for the slaves, most of your examples are royalty or political leaders. However, do you have information as to occurences of conversion amongst the average Afrikan? Also the slaves youre talking about,did they become Muslims to gain freedom in non-Afrikan lands?(North Africa, the Middle East)or amongst Afrikan Muslim slaveholders?Also some information as to why the leaders themselves thought it fit to become Muslims? Was there an Islamic hegemony on trade?I have a hard time believing that ordinary people only converted for economic gain. I assume they just added Islam/Christianity to their belief systems or just coexisted with it. I do agree that economic interests were considered, especially amongst the elite.






>

>Initially there are going to be an obvious syncretization of
>beliefs. This is obvious in the Kingdom of Mali example when
>traveler Ibn Battuta visited Mali. He spoke of many
>differences and drew a distinct line between the people of
>Mali (who were all technically Muslim) and his own Muslim
>group in North Afrika. Over time and much money (initially
>spent by the frivolous Mansa Musa trying to show off his
>bling bling to Arabs) Arab scholars set up shop teaching
>Afrikans how to be better Arabs instead of Afrikans.

So for example Timbuktu was a place for Islamic learning but also Arabization? There were no Afrikan teachers there? Islam was taught primarily by Arabs? Arabs did not intermarry with the community? My experience with this comes from my knowledge of Islam in India. Arabs, Persians and other Middle Easterners came to Bengal and set up shop there but they eventually (most of them) became Bengalised. So Arabs that went to West Afrika didnt become Afrikanised over time? See in Bengal, there is more of a balance between Islam and the beleifs that preceded its arrival there(primarily Hinduism)even though Bengalis dont realise this. Many pre-Islamic festivals are still celebrated. So this is no more in Afrika?


>
>This technique also occurred in East Afrika where East
>Afrikans took over the Arab job of capturing more Afrikans
>for Arab enslavement. Thanks be to a.l.l.a.h.

No thanks be to Arabs and Persians. Similar things have happened to Bengal and other non-Arab Muslim areas. Bengali children are kidnapped on the daily to work in Saudi Arabia and Bengali girls as well as Somalian girls are used as prostitutes in the Gulf. Most Bengalis aren't anti-Islam because of what Arabs do however, they just might not like Arabs. And I assume that is what is true in Afrika but youre telling me that Afrikan Muslims don't think that theyre different somewhat from Arabs?



>
>And yes there is a high degree of syncretization. I would
>argue that the degree of syncretization varies according to
>a people's access of teachers of foreign doctrines. In
>general, in West Afrika for instance, I think one is more
>likely to find more syncretized (or "afrikanized") versions
>of ISlam than one would find in Christianity. I think this
>would be the case simply because modern Christianity had
>more dedicated and stringent teachers of the religion than
>did past Muslims.
>
>Overall however, syncretization or not, I would argue that
>Islam and Christianity ultimately do or will overshadow
>traditional Afrikan ways of thought simply because of
>their(Islam and christianity) isolating, segregating and/or
>excluding natures, thus making any syncretization minimal or
>negligible.
I can't speak for Christianity but Islam has syncretised well in India. I'm not sure if you feel this way because of the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Afrika?(which I feel is also revisionist)So youre saying that throughout history that Afrikan way of life has been syncretised but at the same deleted by Islam?


>
>>Don't you think going to visit Afrika would be important in
>>actually seeing the Afrikan way of life rather than just
>>reading theories about it?
>
>No because the "Afrikan way of life" exists throughout the
>diaspora. I've elements of it in America and I've seen the
>survival of it within MAroon communities of the Americas as
>a whole. (What IS the "Afrikan way of life?")

Indo-carribeans have bits and pieces of Indian culture within them but they wouldnt dare to call themselves Indian. That would be an insult. Besides the Maroons in Jamaica or Guyana(I might be missing some places)how could you say that Amrikan Blacks can call themselves African? Call-and-response and polyrhythms only takes you too far.


>
>>And if you have been to
>>Afrika(Solarus) how has that affected your viewpoint about
>>Afrikan discourse?
>
>I haven't been to the continent yet but from the views of
>some close brothas of mine who stayed in the continent for a
>year it strengthened their resolve. Seeing Afrikans worship
>alien dieties and the sickness that evolves from it
>(self-hate, negative look on past traditions and thus one's
>(particular Afrikan)group as a whole). The sickness only
>quickens and solidifies the ability of foreigners to sway
>the minds and hearts of Afrikans for their (foreigners')
>benefits.

So Afrikan Muslims hate the fact that they are Afrikan? I think you're essentialising them a little bit to much. I know non-Arab Muslims have complexes but they also have to face the reality of where they live. And what ever is the norms will have to compromise with their religion. This sort of victimisation of Afrikan culture is sort of misleading. Such a great culture wouldn't fight for representation amongst competing cultures doesnt make sense to me. I dont think that Islam or Christianity will overshadow Afrikan culture. Afrikan culture is not weak.
>
>PS. Before anyone responds with some silly ish, I'm not
>using "Arab" and "Muslim" synonymously but I am advocating
>that the origin and evolution of Islam emanates from a
>greater Arab worldview.

Islam might emanate from an Arab worldview but it slowly changes as it travels and it always has. Arabs call a lot of people Kaffir and its not just Malians. Its Bengalis and Pakistanis as well.

>
>PEace

Thanks for answering and I hope you respond.

Codahafez

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 04:56 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
30. "My response"
In response to Reply # 19
Tue Apr-08-03 04:57 AM

  

          


>Okay. Except for the slaves, most of your examples are
>royalty or political leaders. However, do you have
>information as to occurences of conversion amongst the
>average Afrikan?

Varies with the time and period. I discussed the conversion of mali but also I will say that with ANY religion that actively SEEKS converts, the people who are at the lower levels of society or are downtrodden because of social/religious reasons (in traditional AFrikan systems social and religious go hand-in-hand) will often be the first to convert to anything new. The idea is that anyone that has a problem with the social order will be seeking ways of leaving/changing/resisting it and conversion to a new religion/ideology is often the first route taken. Chinua Achebe details in _ThingsFallApart_ how this occurred amongst the Igbo with Christianity during the early colonization of Nigeria.

>Also the slaves youre talking about,did
>they become Muslims to gain freedom in non-Afrikan
>lands?(North Africa, the Middle East)or amongst Afrikan
>Muslim slaveholders?

Both

>Also some information as to why the
>leaders themselves thought it fit to become Muslims?

I don't think anyone can definitely say "why" but I do think it is apparent that initially it was a byproduct of improving trade relations only to eventually lead to a more stricter practice of Islam because of the gaining of Islamic teachers.

>Was there an Islamic hegemony on trade?

No/Yes. I say "no" because Muslims did not "control" the Transaharan trade but they WERE largely the "middlemen" in the process. West Afrikans had the gold, North Afrikans had the salt. By the time of the late empire of Mali, I think that majority of the people involved in the trade were followers (in some fashion or form) of Islam.

>I have a hard time
>believing that ordinary people only converted for economic
>gain.

Well in the empire of Mali, the royalty converted so the conversion of their people is sure to follow. The strength of their conversion (as i said before) only increased with the increase of Islamic teachers and scholars in the land. Remember the people of MAli were inclusive of Islam, which means that they might accept religion, take what's good to them and leave the rest, but over time access to a more in-depth Islamic education causes the exclusion of past traditions.
>I assume they just added Islam/Christianity to their
>belief systems or just coexisted with it.

Exactly. Like I said traditional Afrikan systems are largely inclusive of other beliefs and systems, therefore it is only natural that people accepted or at the very least, tolerated foreign systems. However Islam/Christianity largely negate and in many cases actively try to suppress AFrikan systems as a whole.

>So for example Timbuktu was a place for Islamic learning but
>also Arabization? There were no Afrikan teachers there?

Islamic learning = Arabization.

I'm sure over time enough AFrikan teachers reared in Islamic rhetoric took over. Also considering that many teachers were from Egypt anyway (still plenty of indigenous Afrikans there), there were definite "Afrikan" teachers. It is documented that Mansa Musa on his return from the hajj brought several Islamic scholars back to Mali after his travels.

>Islam was taught primarily by Arabs? Arabs did not
>intermarry with the community?

With any belief system, factors such as "race," "ethnicity," kwk. become negligible. Once someone is reared in a belief system they easily become perpetrators of it. A simple example is the fact that many Afrikans in a America think like Europeans and might as well be dark-skinned white people.

Oh and yes some Arabs did intermarry with the community or at least bore children with community members.

>So this is no more in Afrika?

Depends where you are and who is in power. The hausa of West Afrika (Hausaland is part of several different West Afrikan countries) for instance still have many of their pre-Islamic traditions in tact despite the fact that they are largely Islamic as a group and have been for years. However, the fact remains that THEY controlled their own communities unlike the Arab/Muslim dominated Sudanese government that actively outlaws and suppresses native Nubian traditions such as wrestling matches.

Afrika is a big continent and the people's experiences can and do at times differ with with one anothers'.


>No thanks be to Arabs and Persians. Similar things have
>happened to Bengal and other non-Arab Muslim areas. Bengali
>children are kidnapped on the daily to work in Saudi Arabia
>and Bengali girls as well as Somalian girls are used as
>prostitutes in the Gulf. Most Bengalis aren't anti-Islam
>because of what Arabs do however, they just might not like
>Arabs.

>And I assume that is what is true in Afrika but youre
>telling me that Afrikan Muslims don't think that theyre
>different somewhat from Arabs?

I'm not saying anything. Some do, some don't. Overall isn't a goal of Islam to imitate the lifestyle of the Prophet Muhammad?
Also isn't another goal of Islam to see oneself as part of a larger Muslim brotherhood?

I'm sure a far removed group (far from a large Arab community) such as the Hausa would see themselves more different from Arabs versus East Afrikan Muslims who are closer in proximity (and blood) to Middle Eastern Arabs. I've definitely heard of cases along the Swahili Coast where claiming descendancy from Arabs is akin to having more white in one's blood in the Americas

>


>I can't speak for Christianity but Islam has syncretised
>well in India. I'm not sure if you feel this way because of
>the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Afrika?(which I feel
>is also revisionist)So youre saying that throughout history
>that Afrikan way of life has been syncretised but at the
>same deleted by Islam?

Yeah somewhat in varying degrees.

>Indo-carribeans have bits and pieces of Indian culture
>within them but they wouldnt dare to call themselves Indian.
>That would be an insult. Besides the Maroons in Jamaica or
>Guyana(I might be missing some places)how could you say that
>Amrikan Blacks can call themselves African?
>Call-and-response and polyrhythms only takes you too far.

Languages, practices, ceremonies, thought processes, values, kwk.

all are evident in the daily lives of Afrikan descendants in the Americas. From my experiences INDIANS in the caribbean DO consider themselves INDIAN (see Trinidad or Guyana?). In Panama, there is a group of people who call themselves "Los Congos." the list goes on and on.

As far as in the United States, well many Afrikans might as well be dark-skinned white people but there are still elements of Afrocultural values that are evident among Afrikan Americans (e.g. communalism, expressive individuality, and as you mentioned the ever-so-popular practice of call-and-response).



>So Afrikan Muslims hate the fact that they are Afrikan?

No I didn't say that, absolutely. I stated that as a possible evolution just like having a negative outlook on one's traditions. Nevertheless I have seen the impact of Islam and/or Christianity causing a DEFINITE hate in the fact that one is a member of a traditional Afrikan group

>think you're essentialising them a little bit to much. I
>know non-Arab Muslims have complexes but they also have to
>face the reality of where they live. And what ever is the
>norms will have to compromise with their religion. This sort
>of victimisation of Afrikan culture is sort of misleading.

>Such a great culture wouldn't fight for representation
>amongst competing cultures doesnt make sense to me. I dont
>think that Islam or Christianity will overshadow Afrikan
>culture. Afrikan culture is not weak.

Whether or not Afrikan culture is "weak" is not the issue. (BTW it definitely ISN'T weak). The issue is whether one's following of Islam or Christianity will cause them to negate one's particular traditional Afrikan group belief systems. In some cases Islam and Christianity are successful and in some cases they aren't. Nevertheless, the exclusive nature of those religions makes the conflict, inevitable.

PEace

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 02:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
34. "RE: My response"
In response to Reply # 30


          

>
>
>Varies with the time and period. I discussed the conversion
>of mali but also I will say that with ANY religion that
>actively SEEKS converts, the people who are at the lower
>levels of society or are downtrodden because of
>social/religious reasons (in traditional AFrikan systems
>social and religious go hand-in-hand) will often be the
>first to convert to anything new.

See over here you might be talking more about Western Christians than Muslims. I know there have been forced conversions into Islam through invasions but the Islamic missionary zeal is something that I have never experienced. I've never heard Muslims say "Oh those kaffirs in Polynesia need some Islam in their life, lets go there and fix em up!" or even mentioned this idea vaguely. However, Muslims do preach. In Bengal Sufi saints came from the Middle East and preached and people converted but even then the indigenous Bengali Hindus accepted these saints and joined in worship with them. But I still cant agree with you that Islam/Muslims ACTIVELY seek converts.

The idea is that anyone
>that has a problem with the social order will be seeking
>ways of leaving/changing/resisting it and conversion to a
>new religion/ideology is often the first route taken.
>Chinua Achebe details in _ThingsFallApart_ how this occurred
>amongst the Igbo with Christianity during the early
>colonization of Nigeria.
What were some reasons that people had problems with the Afrikan social order?How were they placed amongst the social order after they converted if there wasn't economic gain if Muslims werent the ruling class? In Bengal for example the majority of the peasants converted to Islam but the rulin landowners were mainly Hindu in many cases. This did not happen in Afrika? There were no indigenous Afrikans ruling over Muslims?I know Afrikan religious systems are inclusive but there had to have been some disdain for people who converted to Islam because they were once the lowest on the societal chain? There was no "Mlechha" (Sanskrit for "foreigner", "barbarian")complex that Hindus gave Muslims? Indigenous Afrikans didn't look down on foreigners or foreign customs at all? Even amongst contact with other tribes, there was no loooking down of lets say Yoruba vs. Igbo?





>
>I don't think anyone can definitely say "why" but I do think
>it is apparent that initially it was a byproduct of
>improving trade relations only to eventually lead to a more
>stricter practice of Islam because of the gaining of Islamic
>teachers.
Muslim North Africans wouldn't trade with non-Muslim Afrikans because they werent Muslim? How did becoming nominal Muslims help the Afrikans kingdoms?



>

>
>>I have a hard time
>>believing that ordinary people only converted for economic
>>gain.
>
>Well in the empire of Mali, the royalty converted so the
>conversion of their people is sure to follow.

Is this a right assumption? History has shown us that many a ruling elite were different religiously from their constituents. My example of Bengal is one(Hindu elite over Muslim peasantry)Just because my king is Muslim doesnt necessarily mean that I would have to be. Is Mali a common enough example in Afrika? Is it common enough to say that Islam will kill Afrikan ways of living?



The strength
>of their conversion (as i said before) only increased with
>the increase of Islamic teachers and scholars in the land.
>Remember the people of MAli were inclusive of Islam, which
>means that they might accept religion, take what's good to
>them and leave the rest, but over time access to a more
>in-depth Islamic education causes the exclusion of past
>traditions.
There were more scholars than religious preachers?Was Timbuktu or places like it accesible to all?The peasant was introduced to Islam through the scholar and not the preacher in Afrika?I ask this because theres a huge difference between the scholar and the preacher in Islam. Theres usually more preachers than scholars in a group of Muslims. And preachers tend to adapt to the environment more often than scholars who will have an Arabist viewpoint usually. The Islamic scholar as primary teacher of islam is foreign to me.



However Islam/Christianity
>largely negate and in many cases actively try to suppress
>AFrikan systems as a whole.
How has Islam negated Afrikan ways of living? Has this always been overwhelming or more common within this last century?If its been common within the last century I would assume it would be due to the new Islamic fundamentalism which is Arabist and is revisionist. And I agree that the Arabist viewpoint would negate Afrika but not Islam practiced in Afrika. Theres a big difference.




>Islamic learning = Arabization.

No not necessarily. Like I said Islamic learning came through preaching in many areas and it definetely either compromised its Arab background in order to harmonise with its new surroundings.But if it was like how you say it was,then over time it would likely be more Afrikanised than Arabised. It doesnt seem logical that way especially in West Afrika what with its distance.
>
>I'm sure over time enough AFrikan teachers reared in Islamic
>rhetoric took over. Also considering that many teachers
>were from Egypt anyway (still plenty of indigenous Afrikans
>there), there were definite "Afrikan" teachers. It is
>documented that Mansa Musa on his return from the hajj
>brought several Islamic scholars back to Mali after his
>travels.
>
>>Islam was taught primarily by Arabs? Arabs did not
>>intermarry with the community?
>
>With any belief system, factors such as "race," "ethnicity,"
>kwk. become negligible. Once someone is reared in a belief
>system they easily become perpetrators of it. A simple
>example is the fact that many Afrikans in a America think
>like Europeans and might as well be dark-skinned white
>people.

okay Agreed but the Afrikans that went to Amrika were forcefully immersed into a culture into which they were the minority. Islam comes into Afrika as the minority. In certain areas it holds sway and Im sure in other areas it doesnt. And even in areas where it holds sway without a strong Arab presence I cant really see how Afrikans became so "Arab" as you say without being close to the Middle East.
>
>Oh and yes some Arabs did intermarry with the community or
>at least bore children with community members.
>
>>So this is no more in Afrika?
>
>Depends where you are and who is in power. The hausa of
>West Afrika (Hausaland is part of several different West
>Afrikan countries) for instance still have many of their
>pre-Islamic traditions in tact despite the fact that they
>are largely Islamic as a group and have been for years.
>However, the fact remains that THEY controlled their own
>communities unlike the Arab/Muslim dominated Sudanese
>government that actively outlaws and suppresses native
>Nubian traditions such as wrestling matches.
>
>Afrika is a big continent and the people's experiences can
>and do at times differ with with one anothers'.
See this is the probably the most important thing you typed in my opinion. Afrika is diverse and expereinces vary so Hausas arent insecure about their Afrikanness but maybe Eastern Afrikans could be more apt to be so. So with this in mind, why is Islam bad when its been expereinced in different ways by different groups?




>
>
>>No thanks be to Arabs and Persians. Similar things have
>>happened to Bengal and other non-Arab Muslim areas. Bengali
>>children are kidnapped on the daily to work in Saudi Arabia
>>and Bengali girls as well as Somalian girls are used as
>>prostitutes in the Gulf. Most Bengalis aren't anti-Islam
>>because of what Arabs do however, they just might not like
>>Arabs.
>
>>And I assume that is what is true in Afrika but youre
>>telling me that Afrikan Muslims don't think that theyre
>>different somewhat from Arabs?
>
>I'm not saying anything. Some do, some don't. Overall
>isn't a goal of Islam to imitate the lifestyle of the
>Prophet Muhammad?
yeah but that doesnt mean you gotta have 4 wives. If its not common in your region then people don't?I think this idea is more in a general universalist sense even though its not practiced as such by most Muslims. Muhammads view of women will differ as its interpreted in different regions. And I'm sure Muhammamed's lifestyle has been interpreted differently in Afrika.



>Also isn't another goal of Islam to see oneself as part of a
>larger Muslim brotherhood?
Sure but I dont see how this stops you from being Hausa and me from being Bengali. We pray towards Mecca but you eat okra and I eat shrimp. We dress differently, language, cultures everything different. Its kind how you define Afrikan cultures. You recognise their differences but see theirs some common links between them. You say Yoruba and Igbo got things in common so through Islam a Muslim could rationalise it as we all Muslims no matter what our language is.


>
>I'm sure a far removed group (far from a large Arab
>community) such as the Hausa would see themselves more
>different from Arabs versus East Afrikan Muslims who are
>closer in proximity (and blood) to Middle Eastern Arabs.
>I've definitely heard of cases along the Swahili Coast where
>claiming descendancy from Arabs is akin to having more white
>in one's blood in the Americas

I have too but still these are specific cases. And youre right in the Muslim brotherhood their is a percieved Arabness once your country is closer to Saudi Arabia but it is far from the truth in most cases.
>
>>

>
>
>Languages, practices, ceremonies, thought processes, values,
>kwk.



>
>all are evident in the daily lives of Afrikan descendants in
>the Americas. From my experiences INDIANS in the caribbean
>DO consider themselves INDIAN (see Trinidad or Guyana?).
They are Indian in relation to Afro-Trinidadians but not in the whole diaspora of Indian people. Geography changes a lot. If you go to Richmond Hill(Indo-Carribean) in Queens and then you go to Jackson Heights(South Asian) its a world of difference.


In
>Panama, there is a group of people who call themselves "Los
>Congos." the list goes on and on.
>
>As far as in the United States, well many Afrikans might as
>well be dark-skinned white people but there are still
>elements of Afrocultural values that are evident among
>Afrikan Americans (e.g. communalism, expressive
>individuality, and as you mentioned the ever-so-popular
>practice of call-and-response).
From my experince living in Jamaica Queens amogst West Indian Blacks, Amrikan Blacks, and Afrikans I've seen more differences than similarities. I saw elements of the Amrikan Black community when I lived in Cleveland but still it was much different than my Afrikans friends houses. Matter of fact I related almost like another South Asian to my Igbo friend Emeka (and vice versa)than lets say to my man Vernell Hunt.Vernell Hunt said I worshipped "the fireplace" (in response to me telling him I was Muslim) and laughed that I took my shoes off in my house. Emeka was cool with everything we did in my crib and vice versa. The fact that I had to stand up in Emeka's house when his mother came in the room just like my Bengali upbringing was a big thing back then. That is just one example. There are countless other ones I dont have to time to type now.


>

>
>No I didn't say that, absolutely. I stated that as a
>possible evolution just like having a negative outlook on
>one's traditions. Nevertheless I have seen the impact of
>Islam and/or Christianity causing a DEFINITE hate in the
>fact that one is a member of a traditional Afrikan group

I;ve seen this too but it really is a minority of people who think like this from my experience. Not enough to kill Ananse and I also dont think Muslims want to kill Ananse but to syncretise with him.
>
>>think you're essentialising them a little bit to much. I
>>know non-Arab Muslims have complexes but they also have to
>>face the reality of where they live. And what ever is the
>>norms will have to compromise with their religion. This sort
>>of victimisation of Afrikan culture is sort of misleading.
>
>>Such a great culture wouldn't fight for representation
>>amongst competing cultures doesnt make sense to me. I dont
>>think that Islam or Christianity will overshadow Afrikan
>>culture. Afrikan culture is not weak.
>
>Whether or not Afrikan culture is "weak" is not the issue.
>(BTW it definitely ISN'T weak). The issue is whether one's
>following of Islam or Christianity will cause them to negate
>one's particular traditional Afrikan group belief systems.
>In some cases Islam and Christianity are successful and in
>some cases they aren't.

Nevertheless, the exclusive nature
>of those religions makes the conflict, inevitable.

The xclusive nature only in cases like Sudan lets say or East Afrika or Mali but there are tons of either cases where the conflict is avoidable or not even brought up. In Islam's case(I'm not arguing for Christianity here) I dont think getting rid of Islam is necessarily the good thing. Keeping it there and absorbing it into Afrika would be the right thing to do (and I think thats what has been going on)
>
>PEace

Peace

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
guerilla_love
Charter member
8273 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 01:40 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
24. "thumbs up to this:"
In response to Reply # 18


          

>Don't you think going to visit Afrika would be important in
>actually seeing the Afrikan way of life rather than just
>reading theories about it?

No because the "Afrikan way of life" exists throughout the diaspora. I've elements of it in America and I've seen the survival of it within MAroon communities of the Americas as a whole. (What IS the "Afrikan way of life?")

.....

"Who need fossil fuel when the sun ain't goin' nowhere"
- Amiri Baraka

http://www.okayplayer.com/guidelines

BUY MY BOOK- only $6! Inbox me for details

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 04:08 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
27. "RE: thumbs up to this:"
In response to Reply # 24
Tue Apr-08-03 04:08 AM

          

What elements? How are they present amongst Amrikan Blacks?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
guerilla_love
Charter member
8273 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 04:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
28. "are you serious?"
In response to Reply # 27


          

look around

see for yourself

black american people are african people who've been placed in america for a while. although white people tried hard as hell to erase any sense of history, culture and/or humanity from black people, there is no denying the strong african foundation- it still leaks out all over the place

.....

"Who need fossil fuel when the sun ain't goin' nowhere"
- Amiri Baraka

http://www.okayplayer.com/guidelines

BUY MY BOOK- only $6! Inbox me for details

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 08:52 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
39. "sad"
In response to Reply # 18
Wed Apr-09-03 08:57 AM

  

          

>No it is not revisionist. First off, as I discussed in a
>former post "God is IMMANENT," various Afrikan groups tend
>to be very inclusive when it comes to religious practices,
>beliefs and/or deities. By this alone, foreign religions
>already had open door.

This "inclusiveness" is NOT a good thing then, IMO. It leaves the door wide open for every tom, dick and harry to enter and pollute us if they have the necessary will to AND we do not care to effectively defend ourselves against their onslaught.

>If we then look at specific cases we
>see that conversion was generally ushered in by
>ECONOMIC/POLITICAL BENEFITS. For example, the conversion of
>King Ezana(sp?) of Axum allowed for better relations with
>then Christian Egypt and the larger Byzantine Empire; the
>conversion of the mansas and royalty of the ancient MAli
>empire to Islam allowed the empire to gain better trade
>relations with the greater Muslim world; scores of kidnapped
>and forcibly enslaved Afrikans converted to Islam to gain
>their freedom from their captors. In all these cases it si
>obvious that the conversion was not done so simply because
>someone saw the "truth" of g.o.d. or a.l.l.a.h. but moreso
>because of economic gain, betterment of international
>relations or improvement of social status.
>

Obviously then, Africans didn't just leave the door open, our ancestors did that AND took off their pants and bent over. How could africans have been so easily conquered and also enticed by petty economics to allow these deadly foreigners into our lands to poison us if this were not the case?

If you do not impose your will over others, your will, will be imposed on is a lesson Africans have sadly failed to learn to this very day.

SAD.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 09:24 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
40. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 39


          

Your whole outlook on it is not healthy. Youre letting Western ideas of dominance get to you. Even your language, "pulled their pants down and bent over" is on some Western rape shit. People can get along without one having to exert dominace over the other.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 01:27 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
50. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 40


  

          

perhaps they can, but it is best not to assume so from jump. it is best to assume the worst until proven wrong.........

in a situation where the interests of europeans/eurasians and africans is consistently diametrically opposed, it is a win or lose proposition.


>Your whole outlook on it is not healthy. Youre letting
>Western ideas of dominance get to you. Even your language,
>"pulled their pants down and bent over" is on some Western
>rape shit. People can get along without one having to exert
>dominace over the other.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 06:15 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
53. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 50


          

Okay, but that sure don't sound African. That shit don't sound balanced out. I can't speak for Europeans I guess. Eurasians to you are whom?

I have a gut feeling that you associate Arabs, Persians, and Indo-Aryans as "gross , European like oppressors"and put Dravidians into the "need to be saved by Afrikans" box.

By the way, I'm not saying you shouldnt be defensive but you also shouldnt be on some nihilistic shit either.

By the way, aren't you half-Indian?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 08:04 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
56. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 53


  

          

>Okay, but that sure don't sound African.

i do not care about what "sounds" african or about what africans did, unless it can help me now. i only care about what i come to know through study and experimentation is in the best interests of recently descended african people, because i am one (otherwise i would not) in the here and now.


>Okay, but that sure don't sound African. That shit don't
>sound balanced out. I can't speak for Europeans I guess.
>Eurasians to you are whom?

Eurasians I would define as people from Western Europe into the Northern part of South Asia. They range in skin colour from pinkish to a light brown, straight to curly hair, high nasal index, etc.

>I have a gut feeling that you associate Arabs, Persians, and
>Indo-Aryans as "gross , European like oppressors"and put
>Dravidians into the "need to be saved by Afrikans" box.

I do not care about "Dravidians". I'm sure they have their problems, I have mine. I will focus mine, while they hopefully focus on theirs. My well-being is not tied up with their's.

And yes, Arabs, Persians, and Indo-Aryans are gross.

>
>By the way, I'm not saying you shouldnt be defensive but you
>also shouldnt be on some nihilistic shit either.
>
>By the way, aren't you half-Indian?

yes, partially indo-guyanese, but an irrelevant matter since i am not a part of that community in any way.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 03:54 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
70. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 56


          

>>Okay, but that sure don't sound African.
>
>i do not care about what "sounds" african or about what
>africans did, unless it can help me now. i only care about
>what i come to know through study and experimentation is in
>the best interests of recently descended african people,
>because i am one (otherwise i would not) in the here and
>now.
What experimentation?


>
>
>>Okay, but that sure don't sound African. That shit don't
>>sound balanced out. I can't speak for Europeans I guess.
>>Eurasians to you are whom?
>
>Eurasians I would define as people from Western Europe into
>the Northern part of South Asia. They range in skin colour
>from pinkish to a light brown, straight to curly hair, high
>nasal index, etc.
Ahh, the "Great Aryan Invasion" theory. This could be true racially but the extreme differencesin worldview (and I do mean extreme)between London and Lahore is big.Most cats who live in North India (and Bengal is considered part of North India)can't even think of being put in the same box as a Frenchman or even the same race. There has been great intermingling within North India (throughout the subcontinent actually)and I'm nottalking about Aryan-Dravidian. There has been crazy intermingling with other tribal groups. A lot of the Sanskrit derived languages still have much vocabulary that is taken from the tribal languages.Many of the rituals are still there.What have North Indians done to Afrikans?
>
>>I have a gut feeling that you associate Arabs, Persians, and
>>Indo-Aryans as "gross , European like oppressors"and put
>>Dravidians into the "need to be saved by Afrikans" box.
>
>I do not care about "Dravidians". I'm sure they have their
>problems, I have mine. I will focus mine, while they
>hopefully focus on theirs. My well-being is not tied up with
>their's.
>
>And yes, Arabs, Persians, and Indo-Aryans are gross.

Why are they "gross"?Particularly Indo-Aryans?
>
>>
>>By the way, I'm not saying you shouldnt be defensive but you
>>also shouldnt be on some nihilistic shit either.
>>
>>By the way, aren't you half-Indian?
>
>yes, partially indo-guyanese, but an irrelevant matter since
>i am not a part of that community in any way.

I find it interesting so youre basically a self-hating dougla.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                            
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 09:03 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
78. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 70


  

          

>>>Okay, but that sure don't sound African.
>>
>>i do not care about what "sounds" african or about what
>>africans did, unless it can help me now. i only care about
>>what i come to know through study and experimentation is in
>>the best interests of recently descended african people,
>>because i am one (otherwise i would not) in the here and
>>now.
>What experimentation?

my own personal life experiences.

>
>
>>
>>
>>>Okay, but that sure don't sound African. That shit don't
>>>sound balanced out. I can't speak for Europeans I guess.
>>>Eurasians to you are whom?
>>

>Ahh, the "Great Aryan Invasion" theory. This could be true
>racially but the extreme differencesin worldview (and I do
>mean extreme)between London and Lahore is big.

There may be "extreme" differences, but in terms of what matters to me their relations with africans: they all have had a consistent antagonistic relationship with africans. In differing degrees perhaps, but none is an ally nor neutral party.

>Most cats who
>live in North India (and Bengal is considered part of North
>India)can't even think of being put in the same box as a
>Frenchman or even the same race. There has been great
>intermingling within North India (throughout the
>subcontinent actually)and I'm nottalking about
>Aryan-Dravidian. There has been crazy intermingling with
>other tribal groups. A lot of the Sanskrit derived languages
>still have much vocabulary that is taken from the tribal
>languages.Many of the rituals are still there.What have
>North Indians done to Afrikans?

The treatment of Siddis/Hubshe (recent African descendents) in South Asia, despite their relatively small population is nothing to boast about.

The "leech" like precense of N. Indians in East African countries like Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda and their buffer class status in South Africa.

>>
>>And yes, Arabs, Persians, and Indo-Aryans are gross.
>
>Why are they "gross"?Particularly Indo-Aryans?
>>

Arabs - gross because they are infighting, first cousin marrying barbarians that started the slave trade of africans for commerical purposes, invaded africa, and horribly polluted parts of africa with their patriarchal psychotic culture through the vehicle of religion.

Persians - gross for their role in the indian ocean slave trade, their invasion of ancient egypt, and giving the world freddy mercury.

Indo-Aryans - gross because of their high lactose diet, their caste system, and their horrible, horrible music and movies.

>>>
>>>By the way, I'm not saying you shouldnt be defensive but you
>>>also shouldnt be on some nihilistic shit either.
>>>
>>>By the way, aren't you half-Indian?
>>
>>yes, partially indo-guyanese, but an irrelevant matter since
>>i am not a part of that community in any way.
>
>I find it interesting so youre basically a self-hating
>dougla.

nope. just not a part of that community.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 09:16 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
80. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 78
Fri Apr-11-03 09:47 AM

  

          


>There may be "extreme" differences, but in terms of what
>matters to me their relations with africans: they all have
>had a consistent antagonistic relationship with africans. In
>differing degrees perhaps, but none is an ally nor neutral
>party.

but they have enough alliance to be grouped together? evn aside fromt hat history would show otherwise. there were african leaders (good and bad), traders and mercenaries in india. with arabs maybe, but even then there are just as many counter examples. there are just as many examples of antagonism within all of these cultures (african, arab, indian, european) too.

>The treatment of Siddis/Hubshe (recent African descendents)
>in South Asia, despite their relatively small population is
>nothing to boast about.

which ones? the makranis of western coast of pakistan who live just like other poeple of balochi descent who are fisherman? or the royal shiddis of hyderabad who are among the elite/high caste there? or the ones in gujrat, who really are oppressed...

>The "leech" like precense of N. Indians in East African
>countries like Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda and their buffer
>class status in South Africa.

while some of that is true, those classes were brought in AND created by the british. but what about the balochis in kenya who are mixed in even among tribes? the pathans in zimbabwe who came before "british imported" classes who live, and look like the shona and ndebele? rhe ones that fought with and for the Mau Mau in kenya? the ones who fought along side the africans against other arab-indians in zanzibar?

u fail to acknowledge the differences that occur betwen those that came earlier and those that were brouth by british for a specific purpose....

>Arabs - gross because they are infighting, first cousin
>marrying barbarians that started the slave trade of africans
>for commerical purposes, invaded africa, and horribly
>polluted parts of africa with their patriarchal psychotic
>culture through the vehicle of religion.
>
>Persians - gross for their role in the indian ocean slave
>trade, their invasion of ancient egypt, and giving the world
>freddy mercury.
>
>Indo-Aryans - gross because of their high lactose diet,
>their caste system, and their horrible, horrible music and
>movies.

so there was no slavery or patriarchy before foreign contact? at all?

freddy mercury was pathan, closer to afghani...but i feel you on that one...

the high lactose diet only applies to punjabis, like me. caste system instituted by less than 5% of population upon others. and still central only to hinduism. the history of anti-casteism within india? doesnt count? plenty of casteism in africa too.

horrible movies? yes. music? no, but thats all relative...and irrelevent really...

>nope. just not a part of that community.

but if everyone else's blood is tainted and fucked up as a group, (ignoring dissent, differences within each group like you did), then arent u the same by the same logic?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                    
MAL
Member since Mar 16th 2003
29 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:15 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
84. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 80


          

>
the pathans in
>zimbabwe who came before "british imported" classes who
>live, and look like the shona and ndebele? >

Which pathans look like the shona and ndebele?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:33 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
85. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 84


  

          

pathans i met in mashvingo.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                            
MAL
Member since Mar 16th 2003
29 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:37 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
86. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 85


          

You mean they are Karanga? Are they mixed race or pure asians?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:41 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
87. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 86
Fri Apr-11-03 10:42 AM

  

          

mixed race

shona and pathan.

u from zimbabwe? where?


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                    
MAL
Member since Mar 16th 2003
29 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:44 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
88. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 87


          

I'm from Zimbabwe and you?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:50 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
89. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 88


  

          

im from pakistan.

but i worked in mashvingo for a summer. i enjoyed very very much. i had been in US for 10 years, never been back home. i had made plans to go back to pakistan, but my mother wouldnt let me, too dangerous. so i found an opportunity to go to zimbabwe.

u shona?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                            
MAL
Member since Mar 16th 2003
29 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:53 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
90. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 89


          

MY father is ndebele/kalanga and my mother is SaManyika.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 11:07 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
91. "peace"
In response to Reply # 90


  

          

thats peace.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                    
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:24 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
94. "why sad?"
In response to Reply # 80


          


>but what about the balochis in kenya who are mixed in even >among tribes? the pathans in zimbabwe who came before "british >imported" classes who live, and look like the shona and >ndebele? rhe ones that fought with and for the Mau Mau in >kenya? the ones who fought along side the africans against >other arab-indians in zanzibar?

you could add the fact that the Colored population in SA includes descendents of South Asian and Indonesian slaves, but in any case, what about them? i mean, you could find white people as well who intermarried in africa or fought with the anc or whatever, but what would that really say about the wages of whiteness?

and whether or not these historical antagonism was created by white elites -- i mean, divisions between the white working classes and black slaves in the US was most certain created and exacerbated by white elites, that these things are historical constructions doesn't change their status as social facts.

i think there are excellent reasons for africans to distrust south asians, and i think there are equally excellent reasons -- from indentured-labor era Trinidad to the anti-Indian calypsos of today, the social prejudices against coolies in the French Antilles, the riots in South Africa and Guyana, the expulsion from Uganda, the anti-Indian incitements in Kenya, dare i mention larme price and 9/11 -- for the distrust to be returned.


>freddy mercury was pathan, closer to afghani...but i feel
>you on that one...

i thought freddy was a parsi?


>but if everyone else's blood is tainted and fucked up as a
>group, (ignoring dissent, differences within each group like
>you did), then arent u the same by the same logic?

afairead him, he was talking about culture, not blood.

i'm not arab, persian or indo-aryan, but if someone were to say that they found my culture gross, i don't think i would trouble myself to point out that we've done <whatever>. as long as they aren't making mendacious claims of solidarity, i have no problem with it.






  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 04:35 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
118. "RE: why sad?"
In response to Reply # 94


  

          

>you could add the fact that the Colored population in SA
>includes descendents of South Asian and Indonesian slaves,
>but in any case, what about them? i mean, you could find
>white people as well who intermarried in africa or fought
>with the anc or whatever, but what would that really say
>about the wages of whiteness?

"wages of whiteness" - interesting term...heehee

>i think there are excellent reasons for africans to distrust
>south asians, and i think there are equally excellent
>reasons -- from indentured-labor era Trinidad to the
>anti-Indian calypsos of today, the social prejudices against
>coolies in the French Antilles, the riots in South Africa
>and Guyana, the expulsion from Uganda, the anti-Indian
>incitements in Kenya, dare i mention larme price and 9/11
>-- for the distrust to be returned.

i think it is perfectly fine to have distrust. it is important to know where it came from. for both sides. i find that for most part it comes from colonialism. i certainly also know the parts that south asians themselves are responsible for perpetuating oppression. and that is what that community is responsible for recognizing and fixing. same for other communities.


>i thought freddy mercury was a parsi?

hmm, i dunno. i remeber people making fun of him and pathans in pakistan...and the village he was from...but i might be wrong...

>>but if everyone else's blood is tainted and fucked up as a
>>group, (ignoring dissent, differences within each group like
>>you did), then arent u the same by the same logic?
>
>afairead him, he was talking about culture, not blood.
>
>i'm not arab, persian or indo-aryan, but if someone were to
>say that they found my culture gross, i don't think i would
>trouble myself to point out that we've done <whatever>. as
>long as they aren't making mendacious claims of solidarity,
>i have no problem with it.

the way yuckwheat put his argument, it certainly seemed like both blood and culture.

as i said before, i dont care if he finds me (or anything else) gross, stupid, dirty, etc.

BUT lumping different peoples into one group is problematic, when oppressed people in that group are struggling to fight the same oppression from within and from the outside.

SECONDLY, all groups of people in history have within them oppressive characters and oppressed. those who wish to perpetuate oppression and those that resist. those that promote hatred and those who oppose it. THIS DISCUSSION SEEMED TO BECOME ONE ABOUT WHO THE REAL INDIANS/whoever ARE? heehee...are the real indians the one who perpetue caste? so anti-caste people from india arent indian?

thats the problem with looking at groups in broad sweeps. saying indian peoples are casteist ignores and delegitimaizes ALL the efforts of indian people struggling against it.

same goes for other groups.

whats "mendacious?"

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                            
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 04:57 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
120. "RE: why sad?"
In response to Reply # 118


          


>BUT lumping different peoples into one group is problematic,

i think someone else said the same thing to you below. i.e. you can't have it both ways, objecting to being included with arabs and persians, and at the same time objecting to people not using larger categories that included all colonized people.


>indian peoples are casteist

indian people are casteist.

i mean, this strikes me as a statement of utter banal obviousness, as obvious as saying yts are racist and men are sexist. because rather obviously, one is speaking of a dominant paradigm in a society which shapes the views of the vast majority. that x or y is an exception who proposes to change the rule brings warmth to my heart and everything, but it doesn't falsify the statement as such.


>whats "mendacious?"

lying, false.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 06:32 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
127. "RE: why sad?"
In response to Reply # 120


  

          

>>BUT lumping different peoples into one group is problematic,
>
>i think someone else said the same thing to you below. i.e.
>you can't have it both ways, objecting to being included
>with arabs and persians, and at the same time objecting to
>people not using larger categories that included all
>colonized people.

i think one has practical function in helping overcome oppression. the other is just an arbitrary grouping.

>>indian peoples are casteist
>
>indian people are casteist.

americans are racist and zionists. what do u think?

considering that about 30-40% of subcontinental population doesnt believe in it. (muslims, sikhs, buddhists, christians, tribals)

secondly, a system imposed by less than 5% (brahmins) of the population in which almost 50% (dalits, shudras, and tribals) of the people are suffering from that oppression/system.

>i mean, this strikes me as a statement of utter banal
>obviousness, as obvious as saying yts are racist and men are
>sexist. because rather obviously, one is speaking of a
>dominant paradigm in a society which shapes the views of the
>vast majority. that x or y is an exception who proposes to
>change the rule brings warmth to my heart and everything,
>but it doesn't falsify the statement as such.

in both your examples, both yt and men benefit from that priviledge, to different degrees. yt men are not oppressed by yt supremecay. men are not oppressed by patriarchy. they are dehumanized, but not oppressed.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                    
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 07:14 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
129. "RE: why sad?"
In response to Reply # 127


          


>i think one has practical function in helping overcome
>oppression. the other is just an arbitrary grouping.

well, what you find practical, other people apparently find arbitrary. and vice-versa. saying something is practical/arbitrary here doesn't say anything except that you find it useful/not.


>>>indian peoples are casteist
>>
>>indian people are casteist.
>
>americans are racist and zionists. what do u think?
>
>considering that about 30-40% of subcontinental population
>doesnt believe in it. (muslims, sikhs, buddhists,
>christians, tribals)


uh, dude, give me a break. muslims, christians and sikhs aren't casteist? i suggest you do more reading of dalit literature or even just look around you, even in the US.


>secondly, a system imposed by less than 5% (brahmins) of the
>population in which almost 50% (dalits, shudras, and
>tribals) of the people are suffering from that
>oppression/system.

being oppressed by a system doesn't mean you can't be its agent.

which brings us back to the original point.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 07:32 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
130. "RE: why sad?"
In response to Reply # 129
Mon Apr-14-03 07:35 AM

  

          

>well, what you find practical, other people apparently find
>arbitrary. and vice-versa. saying something is
>practical/arbitrary here doesn't say anything except that
>you find it useful/not.

i guess you could say that. i can see it you saying it to me.

but can u give any practical dimension to a "i/a/p/e grouping"?

>uh, dude, give me a break. muslims, christians and sikhs
>aren't casteist? i suggest you do more reading of dalit
>literature or even just look around you, even in the US.

remnants of the caste system are there, but even then they are subverted in different ways. these groups dont actively believe in the system. thats why dalits convert to sikhism, christianity, islam, and buddhism. and for most part, significantly improve their lives.


>being oppressed by a system doesn't mean you can't be its
>agent.

yes, but me saying african americans are racist is a problemtatic statement. thats something i had to struggle to understand.

are women agents of domestic abuse?

are african americans agents of white supremecy?

>which brings us back to the original point.

uh...whats was the original point?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                    
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 01:25 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
99. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 80
Sat Apr-12-03 01:28 AM

  

          

please,
the indians in kenya are not mixed in at all. they isolate themselves. i'm not even sure if any of them fought with the mau mau. but they are a distict separate entity. what tribe do they mix in with?

"while some of that is true, those classes were brought in AND created by the british. but what about the balochis in kenya who are mixed in even among tribes? the pathans in zimbabwe who came before "british imported" classes who live, and look like the shona and ndebele? rhe ones that fought with and for the Mau Mau in kenya? the ones who fought along side the africans against other arab-indians in zanzibar?"


.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 04:16 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
117. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 99


  

          

there is a difference between the ones who came before the british (the balochis) and those who came later...

the balochis are well mixed, even inland...versus the ones who came later to work the railroads, and then later as merchants (mostly gujrati) dont have much mixing....

many balochis did fight with the mau mau. i know some gujratis helped them, especially lawyers, but not much more than that.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:28 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
95. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 78


          



they all have
>had a consistent antagonistic relationship with africans. In
>differing degrees perhaps, but none is an ally nor neutral
>party.

but in the history of the world, who *has* been a consistent ally of whom?


>Indo-Aryans - gross because of their high lactose diet,
>their caste system, and their horrible, horrible music and
>movies.

don't dravidians also have a caste system and a high lactose diet? i don't know about the horribleness or otherise of music and movies.



  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 06:53 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
71. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 56


  

          


>Eurasians I would define as people from Western Europe into
>the Northern part of South Asia. They range in skin colour
>from pinkish to a light brown, straight to curly hair, high
>nasal index, etc.

that range of "eurasian" (whatever the fuck that means)
yuckwheat provided would actually range from pink to blue-black. plenty of people (30% and up) who darker than the avergae african american. many people, including some in my family have straight up "african hair" and wide noses. "asian" eyes. afghan noses. there are all sorts of mixtures even within individuals and families. and all these are supposed to be the same?

and as brother akbar said above, the "aryan invasion" theory (still a theory, made by european people) were true, it would apply to the high caste brahmins and kashatriyas, who make up at most 10-20% of the subcontinent. mostly in gujrat, UP, madhya pradesh, rajisthan, and haryana.

north (and south too) india contains mixtures of mongols, dravidians, tribals, "aryans", kushans, huns, greek, african, arabs, persians, afghans. and on the street it is evident. dont be mistaken by tv or books. just as american tv or books arent a good representation of people here, its the same there.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                            
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 09:15 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
79. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 71


  

          

>
>>Eurasians I would define as people from Western Europe into
>>the Northern part of South Asia. They range in skin colour
>>from pinkish to a light brown, straight to curly hair, high
>>nasal index, etc.
>
>that range of "eurasian" (whatever the fuck that means)
>yuckwheat provided would actually range from pink to
>blue-black.

no, it wouldnt. living in eurasia does not equal being a eurasian. eurasians as i have defined them are the majority and dominant population within that region. eurasians is a broad category, it dos not mean they are all the same, it means they frequency of shared traits is high, when compared to other broad categories.

this is true whether you like it or not.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 09:18 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
81. "RE: sad"
In response to Reply # 79


  

          

so my cousin is really not my cousin?

i remeber u posting a picture of a "dark skin caucasian." so he is really not punjabi/sindhi?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 07:17 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
75. "Inclusiveness is not"
In response to Reply # 39


  

          

equivalent to acceptance. It only means that something won't necessarily be thrown out of the door upon initial contact. There are plenty of examples to show that foreign ideas/religion were NOT accepted upon initial contact.

I would say inclusiveness is akin to giving someone the benefit of the doubt. While i definitely do believe it is a useful philosophy, I do agree one can make it too inclusive without proper scrutiny. I speculate that in some cases, the introduction of foreign practices to Afrikans by other Afrikans (particularly those in the same group) caused the practiced to be less scrutinized because of natural group trust.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 02:08 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
92. "RE: Inclusiveness is not"
In response to Reply # 75


          

Was there a strain of thought in Afrikan society that demonstrated aversion to Islam/Muslims? There were not Afrikans who gained nothing by being Muslim who had disdain for Afrikans who did convert? The Afrikans who did convert, according to you, converted because of economic gain, upward social mobility, etc. So since they were former low class people, how did the high class Afrikans look at them?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 05:24 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
111. "..."
In response to Reply # 92


  

          

>Was there a strain of thought in Afrikan society that
>demonstrated aversion to Islam/Muslims?


>There were not
>Afrikans who gained nothing by being Muslim who had disdain
>for Afrikans who did convert?

I don't understand this question.

>The Afrikans who did convert,
>according to you, converted because of economic gain, upward
>social mobility, etc. So since they were former low class
>people, how did the high class Afrikans look at them?

It's not necessarily just an issue of class. For instance in the comment I made about Chinua Achebe describing the conversion of Igbo to Christianity, in one case the son of a extremely proud warrior in the village converted to Christianity in great part due to the dislike of his father and his inability to forgive him for killing the child of an enemy village who had come to be the son's best friend/brother. In another case, twins were seen as bad luck to the Igbo and often left in the wilderness to die upon birth. So twins that were left in the wilderness were taken by missionaries and raised by them only to be the most loyal of converts (for obvious reasons).

I say this to show that it wasn't just a function of "class" as reasons for persons to make the conversion. Therefore I can't see how I can answer that question. Looking at West Afrika I can't see where conversion your question would apply concerning Islam specifically.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

jenNjuice
Charter member
3527 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 05:10 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
20. "african discourse?"
In response to Reply # 0


          

what's that?

"The only thing we wanted for our country was the right to a decent existence, to dignity without hypocrisy , to independence without restrictions... The day will come when history will have its say."-Lumumba


"The only thing we wanted for our country was the right to a decent existence, to dignity without hypocrisy , to independence without restrictions... The day will come when history will have its say."-Lumumba

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 04:07 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
26. "RE: african discourse?"
In response to Reply # 20


          

I probably used the wrong term in trying to describe it. Afrika is very diverse thats why I am trying to get at what exatcly Utamaroho and Solarus mean by "Afrikan"

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 05:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
31. "By "Afrikan""
In response to Reply # 26


  

          

I mean the traditional cultural cores and belief systems of those groups indigenous to the continent.

For example:
Yoruba
Akan
Mbundu
Ewe
Xhosa
Zulu
Shona
Gikuyu
Vai

are just a few examples of groups that are "traditional Afrikan groups."

As far as diversity I don't deny that, however most of these groups have MUCH in common when it comes to core beliefs when it comes to there particular cultures. This topic has been discussed on these boards before though so I will direct you to posts created by myself and Utamaroho in the archives.

PEace

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

shockzilla
Charter member
37796 posts
Mon Apr-07-03 11:26 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
23. "i have a question-"
In response to Reply # 0


          

what's the deal with replacing the C in Africa with a K?


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Quest4Knowledge
Member since Jun 20th 2002
2797 posts
Tue Apr-08-03 04:38 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IMClick to send message via ICQ
29. "RE: i have a question-"
In response to Reply # 23
Tue Apr-08-03 04:39 AM

  

          

I'm pretty sure "c" is not a consonant in any indigenous language there (or in other places - including parts of Europe) so I guess the spelling occurs in that way when heads are trying to speak on or from an "Afrocentric" (or "Afrikan") point of view.


*EDIT* I could be wrong but thats what they told me when I first came back.


------

Fox has got nothin' on us.

Okayplayers guerilla love
and Quest4Knowledge bringing you fair & balanced moderation since 2003.

Make sure you know the guidelines before posting: http://okayplayer.com/guidelines

Not happy about your post being locked? Want a thread archived? See a post that shouldn't be up? Feel free to Inbox me at Quest4Knowledge or E-Mail me at KemeticSunrise@aol.com



---
In memory of my sig..

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
shockzilla
Charter member
37796 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 03:16 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
45. "okay-"
In response to Reply # 29


          

i can see that

it doesn't make a lot of sense, but there you go

anyway, i suppose it's neither here nor there

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 12:48 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
35. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

the romanticization of this so called uniform "afrikan"
thought. That shit didn't exist now or in the past.
There were STATES (countries) that held a dominant sway over
what various ethnolinguistic groups did in there trade
with each other, but this whole unilateral "Afrikan"
thought thing is bogus.

This is definitely something I want to talk about. Just because it touches a huge aspect of who I am and who I come from. I am mainly going to be responding to uta, solarus, konnex (habari gani bro. Vipi?) and allah’s post.

a) First of all, I consider myself to be an african, whichever way you spell it, I come from africa and at my core being I believe that I share certain beliefs with millions of other africans from all over the continent. We spend so much time arguing semantics: what is an african way of thinking? Who are these africans we talk about, what did they call themselves millions of years ago. Why do we ignore the different african tribes that exist and the different cultures and try and lump them as one. Are we trying to disunify? The reason I say that there is this unique, something that we can attribute to the people of africa is that we share so many common beliefs, that only we share: our ideas of ancestry, the after life and the spirit world, how we explain so many phenomena in terms of the spirits and our relationship with them, our creation stories, so similar in so many aspects, our ideas of initiation and rites of passage (what other group of people hold elaborate month long ceremonies (like we do) to celebrate the passage of youth into adulthood?). marriage being a community and not a personal affair, our ideas of family and the hierarchy involved/our society is/was structured upon. Examples like this, to me at least, mean that we share a common heritage that binds as as the people of africa. For all those that feel that I am being simplistic I affirm that yes I am aware that we have different cultures, speak thousands of languages, look and act different in a whole lot of other ways but at the core being we are africans and we have a way of looking at things, whichever tribe we associate with that is familiar. Allah, that to me is what I mean when I say africa. Everything else is… I don’t even know what it is. I mean every discussion we have here, its like despite of what it might be, this is the place we want to stop and expede all this energy and emotion defining the word africa and its usage or misuse? I think you know what this post is trying to get at. Let’s at least, in part answer the question posed.

b) I am gonna speak about christianity because I don’t know too much about islam. I think we can agree that christianity came to africa as an imposed religion. It wasn;t assimilation. The reason the missionaries came is to save our souls from our african selves. To do that, we had to rid ourselves of the barbaric, or uncivilized or whatever it was they were calling it, cultures and become, “christians.”. I think koigi wa wamwere touches on this in his autobiographical book, I refuse to die, where he is talking about his grandmother describing how the christian god was supposed to replace Ngai, and western civilisation, african culture. Konnex talks about worshipping in his language etc etc, but it sounds like the religion is divorced from the people;s culture. Its this Sunday obligation we have but is in no way, linked, assimilated into the kikuyu culture.

If you read the role of religion in what uta is referring to as traditional african society, it played a central role. It was used to explain any and every aspect of the people’s daily lives. I feel that the reason christianity does not do that, for most africans is that it is a separate entity. A personal example, my mother. Church going, belives in ‘modern medicine and the rest of that spuel but if anything ever goes wrong, she feels sick and the doctor says they don’t know what it is, or she has a spell of bad luck etc etc, her last resolve is to go to a medicine man (mganga) to find out what/who is bringing this bad luck. This gives her the assurance she needs, not the church. My grandfather, modern medicine says he has alzheimer’s, (and its probably true) my family and I tend to believe different because our beliefs are different. And this stems from our cultural heritage, or whatever you can call it, it has no christian equivalent/expression. In fact the last thing we are thinking about is what would jesus do, or say and I certainly are not talking to my pastor about it.

We didn’t go to church to seek answers, we sought our tradition/history. If christianity was an assimilated expression much like ‘african’ religion was, then we would seek the christian god/ beliefs. This I believe is true for a lot of africans. You have a society where christianity condemns such practices, and yet christians still practise them. Why is that? my personal answer is because christianity is still viewed as ‘other’ it is not yet an assimilated african concept. Now there are religious movements going that direction. Konnex, the Legio Maria. Christian in its superficial nature, but african in its expression.

And we forget that its only been a few years (maybe 50 at the most), that africans started owning the way they worship. Before then you go to catholic church and mass is the same way its said at the vatican. This peculiar one hour that is supposed to bring us salvation, to something called heaven. With no mention of our ancestors. Its only now that you have discourse that tries to link the catholic to the traditional. I think its too early to say that christianity is now an aesthetic part of african culture. Its only now in the process of assimilation.

i think when uta and solarus talk about christianity as being detrimental to african culture they mean the fact that it is supposed to replace african culture. that was the way the missionaries planned it. that is why christianity condemns, not complements african culture. seriously, think about it. why do i have to separate certain aspects of myself and beliefs from the churche's? especially if its not because i know this is something foreign that is supposed to replace my traditional god? why is it okay for my sister to be whatever religion she wants to be except when it proves to go against cultural beliefs,unless, that religion is viewes as something separate from tradition, i.e. not a part of my 'african' way of thinking? i dont know what syncretism means. i dont know if it means something practiced along with something else, or it means something that is practiced and becomes a part of this something else. the question to ask is, does christianity do this?

Anyway. That’s my entirely too long two cents.


>This question is being posed really to Utamaroho and Solarus
>but anyone who knows the Afrikan way of thinking/living can
>also add in. When you guys look at Afrikan people and
>culture within Afrika, I've noticed that you tend to
>seperate elements like Islam and Christianity particularly
>as "non-Afrikan" and you paint them as detrimental to
>original Afrikan culture. To a large extent I see where you
>are coming from and I agree with you on certain things.
>However, my question about the Afrikan discourse is I'm
>wondering if its not a little revisionist in its picture of
>Afrika. It reminds me a lot of Hindu revivalism/nationalism
>in India. The Hindu nationalists tend to portray what the
>see as "non-Hindus" (Muslims, Christians, etc.) as
>detrimental to Hinduism. They however disregard the fact
>that both these religions have been syncretised highly
>within the Hindu culture of India. They seem to be missing
>the reality of the situation that Hindus and Muslims and
>Christians have been living with very similar at times
>cultural background. From my understanding of Afrika, there
>has also been a high syncretisation of Islam and
>Christianity within Afrikan culture. You can prove me wrong
>but this is from what I know.
>Don't you think going to visit Afrika would be important in
>actually seeing the Afrikan way of life rather than just
>reading theories about it? And if you have been to
>Afrika(Solarus) how has that affected your viewpoint about
>Afrikan discourse?

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 06:05 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
36. "only "we" share"
In response to Reply # 35


  

          

what about the East Asian people? that's what I thought.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 07:26 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
37. "RE: only "we" share"
In response to Reply # 36


          

True a lot of what Akon said is common in variations in other places. Most of these places arent Western.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 08:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
38. "in retrospect..."
In response to Reply # 37


  

          

maybe i should not have said, "only we". I think marimba ani calls it something different.. western vs ... way of thinking.
but anyway, i feel that because we are in the same continent then that can classify as 'our' way of thinking. i see it much in the same way as when i say, kenyans do this, even if its not something peculiar to us... i dont know. in retrospect i should not have said only we: actually i hold on to this because i dont know what east asians think... give me a few examples to look up, or some links or something. i would be interested in knowing. i just really hate that we always get caught up in the semantics of things. if a group of people share distinct similarities, is it wrong to say they have a certain way of seeing things? i think i asked this question once (what;s wrong with using the word africa). i am yet to get a satisfactory answer....

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 09:28 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
41. "RE: in retrospect..."
In response to Reply # 38


          

My problem wasnt with how you look at Afrikans but many of the binds of community are common in South Asia for example.I just have a problem with people saying "we" because I understand where its coming from. It comes from a ideological stance against white folks for the most part in the Afrikan experience. But people sometimes take it too far and I'm afraid of certain cats will distort that into saying"Afrikans vs. the rest of the world" as opposed to "Afrikans vs. Europeans"

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 02:26 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
42. "RE: in retrospect..."
In response to Reply # 41


  

          

gotcha...
and i understand that. i kinda face it everyday.. you know. but i like the dialogue on this post, you know. and i feel it got swayed into a discussion on a definition of the word africa. needlessly, i might add. but that's petty.

i think in some way i might have provided some answers to your questions (the rest of what i wrote).. i dont know what you thought about that (we kinda still latched onto the what is africa debate..)

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 02:38 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
43. "RE: in retrospect..."
In response to Reply # 42


          

You broke down your thoughts very directly. And from my experience of how Christianity has spread I can agree with alot of what you said. But I guess I started off talking about Islam AND Christianity but I can see that there have been two distinct paths of these religions/ideologies over time in Afrika. I ended concentrating on Islam more in this post. But I understand what youre saying.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 06:45 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
47. "I think that is an important discussion though"
In response to Reply # 42


  

          

i.e. the definition of "africa" otherwise
you have these whole south "africa" caucasian
white people talking about "we are africans too"
and how can they be wrong?

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 06:46 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
48. "KABOOM!"
In response to Reply # 41


  

          

I wondered if somebody was beginnning to understand
where I was coming from. Peace.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 06:42 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
46. "it's not a real continent though"
In response to Reply # 38


  

          

it's just something made up from the artificial boundary
called the Suez Canal

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 12:43 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
49. "RE: it's not a real continent though"
In response to Reply # 46


  

          

allah, when i made a post regarding this one thing, you didn't give a valid answer. even these are just very subjective statements. when you mean its not a real continent, does that mean its not a land mass isolated almost entirely in part by water, or what? if you want to define who can and cannot be africans, what criteria are you gonna use. i mean, dont get me wrong, its good that you have your own opinion: i'm just asking for validation. instead of making linear statements, convince me i should not be calling my home africa...

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 01:35 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
51. "RE: it's not a real continent though"
In response to Reply # 46


  

          

so now south america and north america are not distinct continents either?

get a clue.

the term "African" is neither here nor there. fact is, those people with curly to kinky hair, with varying shades of skin color from intermediate brown to dark brown, relative lack of body hair, etc. who descend recently from many parts of the region known as africa by most share many, many things in common culturally, moreso than they do with other groups...........


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 06:05 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
52. "continent:....whatever man..."
In response to Reply # 51


  

          

one of the seven large land masses on the Earth's surface, surrounded, or mainly surrounded, by sea and usually consisting of various countries:
----
2. One of the grand divisions of land on the globe; the main land; specifically (Phys. Geog.), a large body of land differing from an island, not merely in its size, but in its structure, which is that of a large basin bordered by mountain chains; as, the continent of North America. ; The continents are now usually regarded as six in number: North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia. But other large bodies of land are also reffered to as continents; as, the Antarctic continent; the continent of Greenland. Europe, Asia, and Africa are often grouped together as the Eastern Continent, and North and South America as the Western Continent. The Continent, the main land of Europe, as distinguished from the islands, especially from England.
-----
A continent (from the Latin "continere" for "to hold together") is a large continuous mass of land.

There is no single standard for what defines a continent, and therefore various cultures and sciences have different lists of what are considered to be continents. In general, a continent must be large in area, consist of non-submerged land, and have geologically significant borders. While some consider that there are as few as four or five continents, the most commonly used counts are six or seven.

Two of the largest disagreements in listing continents are whether Europe and Asia should be considered separately or combined into Eurasia, and whether North America and South America should be considered separately or combined into America. A few geographers have also suggested grouping Europe, Asia, and Africa into a continent of Eurafrasia (see Africa-Eurasia).

The seven continent model is commonly taught in Western Europe and North America, while the six continent (combined Eurasia) model is also taught in North America and is the primary continent model used in scientific contexts. The six continent (combined America) model is commonly taught in Eastern Europe and South America.

Seven Continents: Africa, Antarctica, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, and South America.
Six Continents: Africa, Antarctica, Australia, Eurasia, North America, and South America.
Six Continents: Africa, America, Antarctica, Asia, Australia, and Europe
Five Continents: Eurasia, Africa, America, Australia, Antarctica
Four Continents: Eurafrasia, America, Australia, Antarctica


i think i am done with this debate on africa: who is or who isn't. i know what i look like, i know what my neighbours looked like when i was back in africa (for the 20something odd years that i was there). and calling myself african had nothing to do with how looks were defined. i agree with what you say when you talk about social, cultural factors and beliefs. i just wish those that dont think we should be called africans could give me some distinct reasons why....
instead of one line statements....

or at least let those that want to discuss "african" issues be... its a bit tiring to see every post being hijacked by the usual, "what do you mean africa" question and "there's nothing like africa etc.
come on. at least drop some science...

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 06:30 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
54. "no they are not"
In response to Reply # 51


  

          

there are native "americans" in the north and south of
the SAME CONTINENT

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                            
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 07:53 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
55. "RE: no they are not"
In response to Reply # 54


  

          

IF you subscribe to the definition that a continent is an entirely isolated principal land mass disconnected from all others and surrounded by water, that is true.

but i have news for you, most people do not use that definition. most geographers don't.

that is why most people "get it" when a person refers to africa, and particularly "black dominated africa" and no do not come back with the same ol bullshit questions about what is "africa", what "country" in africa for the sake bogging down and sidetracking discussion where the people involved understand what africa is, who africans are, etc.

this is all that needs to be understood.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 09:06 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
57. "there is black people in eastern and northern asia too"
In response to Reply # 55


  

          

which is one of my points.
and indegnious to it at that.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                    
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 09:58 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
59. "so what?"
In response to Reply # 57
Thu Apr-10-03 10:01 AM

  

          

in the present is asia a black african dominated region: no.

africa is the region of the world that remains to this today, the most dominated numerically by african blacks.

it is the home base. it is where all other black africoid (african in appearance) groups migrated from ancient times til now. therefore it is a useful term to describe people of a common phenotype, lineage and/or cultural heritage.

when i say "Asian", i do not think of the blacks occupying the hinterlands of the phillipines, they to me are africans, while the majority of the filipino population is not due to major differences in phenotype, lineage and culture..

i do not subscribe to your "original people" vain attempts of including all "coloured" groups into one bland "asiatic" grouping.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 10:13 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
60. "you mean..."
In response to Reply # 59
Thu Apr-10-03 10:21 AM

  

          

like your reactionary and ignorant grouping of europeans, turks, arabs, persians, and indians (maybe asians too?)?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                            
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 03:40 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
64. "..."
In response to Reply # 60


  

          

>like your reactionary and ignorant grouping of europeans,
>turks, arabs, persians, and indians (maybe asians too?)?

Well turks, persians and europeans (btw turks ARE europeans) all have common roots, ie. Indo-Europeans.

Arabs and Indians have a more diverse background although both have Indo-european blood. Well Indians, specifically, consist of a very diverse gorups of people some with more Indo-european (Aryan) roots than others. If I'm not mistaken the Northern Indians have more Aryan than Southern Indians.

Nevertheless I can't recall yuckwheat ever saying that all of those groups belong in one big family.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 07:09 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
66. "at least you are basing it on something real (language)"
In response to Reply # 64


  

          

instead of some bogus shit such as "africans" vs. the rest
of the planet.
Does kinky hair make one an "african" and then how does that
make people different from the other people that
live in the same region that is called "africa"? And then
what about the other black people on other parts of the
CONTINENT (Asia) that have the same characteristics as what
you call a traditional "african" (Runoko Rashidi).

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                    
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 01:22 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
69. "RE: at least you are basing it on something real (langu"
In response to Reply # 66


  

          

>instead of some bogus shit such as "africans" vs. the rest
>of the planet.
>Does kinky hair make one an "african" and then how does that
>make people different from the other people that
>live in the same region that is called "africa"?

what? clearly not every1 within the region commonly defined as africa fits into the protypical african definition as i have put forth, they are either long diluted/bastardized breeds or simply foreign in all aspects such as the zinedine zidane of north africa or francis botha of south africa types. they are not africans, but foreigners and bastards living in africa.


And then
>what about the other black people on other parts of the
>CONTINENT (Asia) that have the same characteristics as what
>you call a traditional "african" (Runoko Rashidi).

they are referred to as africans living in asia, not "asian". as their phenotype is not a product of what commonly constitutes asia but of africa.

they did not significantly change in appearance after leaving africa many, many thousands of years ago. therefore they remain africans.

again the example:

negritos are africans in the phillipines. they were in asia first and they are likely the group from which the other eur/asian races descend (assuming the "out of africa hypothesis to be true). they nonetheless did not change drastically after their ancestors left africa in terms of phenotype.

the majority of filipinos like the majority of asians (and europeans) belong to these non-african races which emerged in asia. they are significantly different in physical appearance and generally culturally from what i have defined as "africans". therefore not african.

i hope that is simple enough for you to understand, but i doubt so.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                        
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 07:04 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
74. "Wasting your Time"
In response to Reply # 69


  

          

Let him be g.o.d.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 07:03 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
73. "RE: ..."
In response to Reply # 64
Fri Apr-11-03 07:06 AM

  

          

>>like your reactionary and ignorant grouping of europeans,
>>turks, arabs, persians, and indians (maybe asians too?)?
>
>Well turks, persians and europeans (btw turks ARE europeans)
>all have common roots, ie. Indo-Europeans.

most turks would disagree with that.

what is this? are we using the same theories and philosphy that fucking europeans used to divide, classify and oppress people all over the world?

i dont give a fuck if there is blood relation or not, the fact on the street, culture and history shows that all these groups are distinct. there is a history of conflict between europeans and turks, arabs, persians, and indians. there is a history of colonialsm. race theories were used to oppress the latter groups, much the same way as in africa.

i am sure, africans dont like to be lumped togethjer in one group, so why do you want to delegitimize the reality, history and oppresion of other people, using white people theories and philosphies?

seems like black skin, white mind/heart to me.




>Arabs and Indians have a more diverse background although
>both have Indo-european blood. Well Indians, specifically,
>consist of a very diverse gorups of people some with more
>Indo-european (Aryan) roots than others. If I'm not
>mistaken the Northern Indians have more Aryan than Southern
>Indians.
>
>Nevertheless I can't recall yuckwheat ever saying that all
>of those groups belong in one big family.

read posts 50 and 53 and 71.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                    
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 07:42 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
76. "Group infighting means nothing"
In response to Reply # 73


  

          

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't part of Turkey in Europe?

Take some geography lessons

>i dont give a fuck if there is blood relation or not, the
>fact on the street, culture and history shows that all these
>groups are distinct.

The Yoruba and Akan are very DISTINCT groups, too. Nonetheless they both possess languages from a common ancestor, and possess many similarities. Overall in the world scheme of things they shared more in common with one another than not.


>there is a history of conflict between
>europeans and turks, arabs, persians, and indians. there is
>a history of colonialsm. race theories were used to oppress
>the latter groups, much the same way as in africa.

There is a history of conflict amongst just about EVERY group in the WORLD!!!!

French vs. English (European)
Han vs. Mongolians (Asia)
Igbo vs. Yoruba (Afrika)
Do I need to continue? That argument is thrown out too.

>i am sure, africans dont like to be lumped togethjer in one
>group, so why do you want to delegitimize the reality,
>history and oppresion of other people, using white people
>theories and philosphies?

More rhetoric. I'm sure I can find a Hutu who doesn't want to be grouped along with Tutsi in Rwanda because of years of group infighting. But ask just about any continental Afrikan abroad being "lumped together" with other Afrikans when comparing them lifestyles to foreign realities.

Besides "lumping" groups together is not an attempt to "delegitimize" anyone's reality. It is simply a matter of taking out inconsequentials to focus on what is necessary. From the perspective of a Fiji apple, I'm sure that a Golden Delicious apple is totally different in taste and look. However they are both apples. And when the two are compared to A zucchini and acorn squash (which are both types of squash) then we see that although both are types of food derived from plants they can be "lumped together" in two groups: apples and squash. For the sake of discussion this is logical and makes for efficient, simplified and comprehensible groups for comparing/contrasting.


>seems like black skin, white mind/heart to me.

Seems likes common sense to me.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 08:47 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
77. "neither does academic theorizing"
In response to Reply # 76
Fri Apr-11-03 09:03 AM

  

          

>Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't part of Turkey in Europe?
>
>Take some geography lessons

part of turkey is in europe. many turkish people ARE wannabe europeans. but culturally, soically, etc etc the common turkish person has just as much in common with brish or french as with an ethiopian.


>The Yoruba and Akan are very DISTINCT groups, too.
>Nonetheless they both possess languages from a common
>ancestor, and possess many similarities. Overall in the
>world scheme of things they shared more in common with one
>another than not.

your point about different african groups may or may not be true. but the groups mentioned in this discussion (western european, eastern european, turkish, arab, persian, indian) they dont share that much in common to group them as one.

do they have the same origin? maybe, maybe not. it doesnt matter. we all share a common origin if we go back enough. i dont care if my great grandfather was a damn cockroach....what i want is my due as a human being. and that has been fucked over by western european colonialism. by rich mudaphucas u who dont give a fuck, even if u the same color/tribe.

"indo-european" theory is still a theory. developed by William Jones in order to include brahminic knowledge into the fold of "europeans" the same way they try to do with egyptian civilization.

the indo-european language theory only goes as far as turkish, kurdish, and somewhat persian. evn those are suspect.

it is based on these things. i'll give u some examples of urdu, spanish, english.

do=dos=two
teen=tres=three
nauN=nuevo=nine
das=diez=ten
nahiN=no=no
maaN=mama=mother

thats REALLY it, when u get to indo languages....rest is baseless....the no, and mother word are the same in many african languages and vietnamese too...so? IT MAY BE MORE IN common with turkish and kurdish, but not by much.

>There is a history of conflict amongst just about EVERY
>group in the WORLD!!!!
>
>French vs. English (European)
>Han vs. Mongolians (Asia)
>Igbo vs. Yoruba (Afrika)
>Do I need to continue? That argument is thrown out too.

the history of conflict doesnt mean that they are together and seperate. it shows where we are today. while u benefit from american AND first world priviledge, turkish, persian, indian, arab, even eastern european kids eat food off the street. why? colonialism, western domination, racism, etc etc...

THAT is real life shit...not academic theorizing that u and yuckwheat are doing.

>More rhetoric. I'm sure I can find a Hutu who doesn't want
>to be grouped along with Tutsi in Rwanda because of years of
>group infighting. But ask just about any continental
>Afrikan abroad being "lumped together" with other Afrikans
>when comparing them lifestyles to foreign realities.

honestly, in some ways, an ethiopian and some west afrikans has more in common with me than with a south afrikan. family structure, social structure. and in some ways they dont. where do u draw the line?


>Besides "lumping" groups together is not an attempt to
>"delegitimize" anyone's reality. It is simply a matter of
>taking out inconsequentials to focus on what is necessary.
>From the perspective of a Fiji apple, I'm sure that a Golden
>Delicious apple is totally different in taste and look.
>However they are both apples. And when the two are compared
>to A zucchini and acorn squash (which are both types of
>squash) then we see that although both are types of food
>derived from plants they can be "lumped together" in two
>groups: apples and squash. For the sake of discussion this
>is logical and makes for efficient, simplified and
>comprehensible groups for comparing/contrasting.

so what is inconsequential and waht is necessary? the fact that my reality growing up is more similar to soemone in afrika than you? not having food, medicine? being screwed over by hypocritical leaders and the west (which u are a part of and enjoy priviledges of)?

>>seems like black skin, white mind/heart to me.
>
>Seems likes common sense to me.

so the fact that the slums of africa and india are virtually the same and affected by colonialism/globalizatoion is less common and meaningful than skin color and origin? so what do i have in common, reality wise, with say a french, or even bulgarian, or a rich pakistani even?

so who has more in common: a slum dweller from kibera (kenya) and kachi basti (pakistan)? OR a slum dweller from kinshasa and mobutu?

u can choose the academic theorizing answer or the ground reality.

****************************************************************

look yall, it cool to take pride in one's own. im ok with that. its cool to say, look we gotta do this on/for our own. its cool to say that we have such and such history and present with this group, and these dynamics that need to be fixed. its okay to say that we (as afrikans or indians or vietnamese) have to deal with this in OUR OWN WAY/CULTURE.

its NOT cool to say these people are all the same. thats when u delegitimize my reality and history. when cultures, and people were raped and taken away the same damn way as in africa as in india as in suth east asia as in the americas.

anything that doesnt deal with peoples reality is just academic theorizing or, in this case, racialism.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                            
yuckwheat
Charter member
1367 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 09:24 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
82. "RE: neither does academic theorizing"
In response to Reply # 77


  

          

>>Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't part of Turkey in Europe?
>>
>>Take some geography lessons
>
>part of turkey is in europe. many turkish people ARE
>wannabe europeans. but culturally, soically, etc etc the
>common turkish person has just as much in common with brish
>or french as with an ethiopian.
>
>
>>The Yoruba and Akan are very DISTINCT groups, too.
>>Nonetheless they both possess languages from a common
>>ancestor, and possess many similarities. Overall in the
>>world scheme of things they shared more in common with one
>>another than not.
>
>your point about different african groups may or may not be
>true. but the groups mentioned in this discussion (western
>european, eastern european, turkish, arab, persian, indian)
>they dont share that much in common to group them as one.

they have more in common with eachother than they do with "africans" by in large.

phenotypically, genetically, culturally, etc.

you can deny it, but it is a valid statement.

>
>the history of conflict doesnt mean that they are together
>and seperate. it shows where we are today. while u benefit
>from american AND first world priviledge, turkish, persian,
>indian, arab, even eastern european kids eat food off the
>street. why? colonialism, western domination, racism, etc
>etc...

shared poverty does not equal shared phenotype, nor shared culture (or higher degree of similarity). the issue.

being under the same foot, does not equal being the same "trash" in a manner of speaking.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 09:36 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
83. "RE: neither does academic theorizing"
In response to Reply # 82
Fri Apr-11-03 09:54 AM

  

          

>they have more in common with eachother than they do with
>"africans" by in large.
>
>phenotypically, genetically, culturally, etc.
>
>you can deny it, but it is a valid statement.

they may have less in common with afrikans. they could be the same gotdamn blood with each other. it has no practical or real value.

there is still just as much diversity in culture, in thought, in resistance, in oppression. and this is what u delegitimize when YOU place in them one group.

why dont u provide examples of culture, social structure, famiily, class, race, etc (anything real and relevent to peoples lives) that are common across all these groups?

>shared poverty does not equal shared phenotype, nor shared
>culture (or higher degree of similarity). the issue.
>
>being under the same foot, does not equal being the same
>"trash" in a manner of speaking.

man, genotype of phenotype desnt mean shit unless u an academic, planning a holocaust, or just theorizing.

ARE you trying to do anything with this knowledge? or is peoples real oppresion irrelevent? are we trying to overturn this fucked up shit?

NOWHERE am i arguing that this or that group is the same or not the same. my father can be a monkey for all i care. PRACTICALLY, where are the differences?

there are differences, power and oppression, between:
black, white, brown, yellow, red, etc
rich and poor
men and women

seems u have bought too much into european ideas of race/culture. in real life things dont get divided into neat little boxes. people gotta worry bout getting food to eat and place to sleep.

they should create a board on here called OkayAcademic.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                            
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 11:21 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
97. "!"
In response to Reply # 77


          


> but the groups mentioned in this discussion (western
>european, eastern european, turkish, arab, persian, indian)
>they dont share that much in common to group them as one.

you're a pakistani punjabi and you're saying that indians don't share that much with persians and arabs?! persoarabic culture had a tremendous amount of cultural influence on india, how could you possibly claim otherwise?


>we all share a common origin if we go back enough.

are you about to sing we are the world?



>"indo-european" theory is still a theory. developed by
>William Jones in order to include brahminic knowledge into
>the fold of "europeans" the same way they try to do with
>egyptian civilization.

surely you are not arguing that sanskrit is *not* an indo-european language? (in this regard, wasn't max muller more important than william jones?)


>and the west (which u are a part of and enjoy priviledges of)?

aren't you?


when cultures,
>and people were raped and taken away the same damn way as in
>africa as in india as in suth east asia as in the americas.


but, wait, yts also share our common origin if we go back enough.

i'm kidding, but i'll say this. i myself also have all sorts of warm feelings about south-south relations, but you can't get solidarity pre-fab from zimbabwean pathans. people's skepticism can't be shouted down, or argued away with references to one's own experience of poverty or social set up or whatever. and i find it curious that the south asians in this thread have a desire for rapprochement that the afrikans do not share. rather than calling yuckwheat a self-hating dougla, perhaps the question is how he arrived at his skepticism.


ps. i find it funny that you as a pakistani keep saying india, when i thought the pc phrase was south asia. just an observation.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 05:01 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
121. "RE: !"
In response to Reply # 97
Mon Apr-14-03 05:27 AM

  

          

>you're a pakistani punjabi and you're saying that indians
>don't share that much with persians and arabs?! persoarabic
>culture had a tremendous amount of cultural influence on
>india, how could you possibly claim otherwise?

u mean arab, indian, or european influences on afrika would render them non-afrikan, or also as arabs/etc? influences are here there everywhere, where do we choose to draw a line? it seems in this discussion it is being drawn with afrikans, but not for toher groups...

>>we all share a common origin if we go back enough.
>
>are you about to sing we are the world?

once again, which idstinctions do we choose to make? if it is easy to make an argument that all non-afrikans are one group..then why not?

>surely you are not arguing that sanskrit is *not* an
>indo-european language? (in this regard, wasn't max muller
>more important than william jones?)

u mean max muller who said: "I hope I shall finish that
work and I feel convinced, though 1 shall not live to see it, yet, this edition of mine and the translation of the Veda, will hereafter tell to a great extent on the fate of India and on the growth of millions of souls in that country. It is the root of their religion and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting all that sprung from it during the last 3000 years."

NO, i dont think that that bastard max muller, an employee of east inida company, did any orignal work. its pure orientalism. i pointed out most of similarities that have been made between sanskrit and european languages are limited to a few numbers, "no", and mother. i think neither him, nor present day historians fully know that history. i think it will take time or we may not ever know....to me its irrelevent, but whatever...

>>and the west (which u are a part of and enjoy priviledges of)?
>
>aren't you?

not much when u are an illegal immigrant. but yes, i became legal only recently, and i do acknowledge the priviledges i have had and have gained.

BUT USING THIS AS AN EXAMPLE: it is just as ridiculous to lump all these groups into one, as it is to lump all americans into one group as enjoyers of first world priviledge and as perpetuator of violence and oppression the world over.

i did this for many years until i came to realize that the oppression suffered by african americans, latinos, immigrants, poor people, etc is the same. it takes different shapes and forms, but it was unfair of me to to think of all those people as americans. because in reality they are not.

> when cultures,
>>and people were raped and taken away the same damn way as in
>>africa as in india as in suth east asia as in the americas.
>
>but, wait, yts also share our common origin if we go back
>enough.

true, we all do. which is why this discussion to me is pointless. what matters is how oppression is played out now. HOWEVER, i do think it is a good thing for afrikans to figure out their oppression and work against it within THEMSELVES, and to hold others accountable for what they perpetuate upon them and even to account for historical oppresion where appropriate.

>i'm kidding, but i'll say this. i myself also have all
>sorts of warm feelings about south-south relations, but you
>can't get solidarity pre-fab from zimbabwean pathans.
>people's skepticism can't be shouted down, or argued away
>with references to one's own experience of poverty or social
>set up or whatever. and i find it curious that the south
>asians in this thread have a desire for rapprochement that
>the afrikans do not share. rather than calling yuckwheat a
>self-hating dougla, perhaps the question is how he arrived
>at his skepticism.

i understand the skepticism. i understand peoples need to do things for themselves. i still have not said that there should be solidarity cuz people need to build up themselves before they can woprk with others. BUT grouping people into one group, when it has no practical basis, denies their history and struggle against oppression.

>ps. i find it funny that you as a pakistani keep saying
>india, when i thought the pc phrase was south asia. just an
>observation.

yeah, it bad habit.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                    
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 05:30 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
123. "RE: !"
In response to Reply # 121


          

>>you're a pakistani punjabi and you're saying that indians
>>don't share that much with persians and arabs?! persoarabic
>>culture had a tremendous amount of cultural influence on
>>india, how could you possibly claim otherwise?
>
>u mean arab, indian, or european influences on afrika would
>render them non-afrikan, or also as arabs/etc?


i didn't say that influence made indians into arabs, i said that your protestations that there was nothing in common was absurd.


influences
>are here there everywhere, where do we choose to draw a
>line?

wherever is convenient. which is why your protestations that a) indians have nothing to with arabs and b) you have a great deal in common with poor african families or whatever it was, are no more or less motivated than people who think otherwise.



BUT grouping people into
>one group, when it has no practical basis, denies their
>history and struggle against oppression.

they aren't in the least bit interested in your history or your struggle. now what?

i think you're wrong about sanskrit and european languages, btw, but i won't pursue it.









  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                        
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 06:41 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
128. "RE: !"
In response to Reply # 123


  

          

>i didn't say that influence made indians into arabs, i said
>that your protestations that there was nothing in common was
>absurd.

this is getting into petty words. but basically, to me there are similarities with persians and arabs and afrikans. there are influences brought by invaders.

BUT, while there may (or may not) be a common origin of indo/arab/persian/european peoples, there is no common i/a/p/e cultural roots, commonalities, or i/a/p/e "way of thinking."

>wherever is convenient. which is why your protestations
>that a) indians have nothing to with arabs and b) you have a
>great deal in common with poor african families or whatever
>it was, are no more or less motivated than people who think
>otherwise.

ture. both are convenient/arbitrary. but one can serve a practical function. the other is ...i must say weak.

>they aren't in the least bit interested in your history or
>your struggle. now what?

then to you your way, and to me mine...

it is shameful to me....but whatever...

>i think you're wrong about sanskrit and european languages,
>btw, but i won't pursue it.

*shrugs* not like it would matter anyway.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                            
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 08:00 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
132. "adding"
In response to Reply # 128


  

          


>BUT, while there may (or may not) be a common origin of
>indo/arab/persian/european peoples, there is no common
>i/a/p/e cultural roots, commonalities, or i/a/p/e "way of
>thinking."

as much as i hate brahmins and brahminism, and think they act just like white (read western europeans) people....aside from the fact that they (and we later on too) have common origins, i dont think that u can pin it to a common i/a/p/e culture or way of thinking....


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                            
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 02:09 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
100. "RE: neither does academic theorizing"
In response to Reply # 77
Sat Apr-12-03 02:15 AM

  

          

i think solarus is deconstructing your theories. you might be calling his academic theorizing but i am beginning to think you are confusing the expressions of capitalism with this particular issue on race.
>
>>The Yoruba and Akan are very DISTINCT groups, too.
>>Nonetheless they both possess languages from a common
>>ancestor, and possess many similarities. Overall in the
>>world scheme of things they shared more in common with one
>>another than not.

this is very true for very many african tribes. there are very many differences culturally, but i feel that the core of our beliefs are more similar than different. different expressions, though. i mean which is why one group would be pastoralists or agriculturalists, have totally different lifestyles, but share certain common ideologies. and we can get into this if you want. so i would hesitate to claim that, "an ethiopian and some west afrikans >has more in common with me than with a south afrikan." even though i can relate to an indian, i know i have more in common with the other tribes from sub saharan africa...we could share the same ideas of family etc but if we are gonna use that basis, we can argue that every human being if you look hard enough shares one thing or the other with another. you can go as far as saying some of the scandinavian europeans, with the same ideas of family and social structure are "african". the reason we dont do that, is that our beliefs are NOT fundamentally the same.n that's wjy they are whatever they call themselves and i am an AFRICAN, with more in common with a west and south african, than the turks, persians, etc etc.


again if we get 'academic' (what's wrong with that). look at the patterns of migration, in africa. look at the history of the different tribes and where they come from. we share a common root. so of course we are going to share fundamental beliefs. its a bit naive to think otherwise. the west africans are considered to have migrated from the south, east and westwards (i could be wrong about this)...
>
>so what is inconsequential and waht is necessary? the fact
>that my reality growing up is more similar to soemone in
>afrika than you? not having food, medicine? being screwed
>over by hypocritical leaders and the west (which u are a
>part of and enjoy priviledges of)?
>
>>>seems like black skin, white mind/heart to me.
>>
>>Seems likes common sense to me.
>
>so the fact that the slums of africa and india are virtually
>the same and affected by colonialism/globalizatoion is less
>common and meaningful than skin color and origin? so what
>do i have in common, reality wise, with say a french, or
>even bulgarian, or a rich pakistani even? >
>so who has more in common: a slum dweller from kibera
>(kenya) and kachi basti (pakistan)? OR a slum dweller from
>kinshasa and mobutu?


this is a question of how poverty expresses itself. every poor person will not have foodshelterclothing. it has nothing to do with cultural expression. as solarus said, shared poverty does not mean shared ancestry. we are not arguing class issues. the russian poor are living much in the same way as the rest of us, maybe not as intense a poverty as indian and the african poor, but that's a question of CAPITALISM. (where is mobutu?).
>
>"look yall, it cool to take pride in one's own. im ok with
>that. its cool to say, look we gotta do this on/for our
>own. its cool to say that we have such and such history and
>present with this group, and these dynamics that need to be
>fixed. its okay to say that we (as afrikans or indians or
>vietnamese) have to deal with this in OUR OWN WAY/CULTURE.
>
>its NOT cool to say these people are all the same. thats
>when u delegitimize my reality and history. when cultures,
>and people were raped and taken away the same damn way as in
>africa as in india as in suth east asia as in the americas.

MAYBE THIS HERE IS THE PROBLEM. by saying these people share common ideologies, cultural expressions, or can be called africanS, I DONT THINK WE ARE SAYING THEY ARE THE SAME. come on, give some of us some credit. we are aware of history and the shit that has gone down. by saying my father's tribe shares this with my mother's tribe, or even my father's tribe (dinka) considers another tribe (nuer) their cousins, that does not mean they are not different... they are... and we are not saying ignore that and say they are all the same, please, it would illogical to do that. but we are saying, they SHARE COMMONALITIES THAT MAKE THEM PART OF THE SAME TREE. which we are calling african. so what if an indian is as black as iam. if he/she does not share these core fundamental beliefs with me, i wont call them african, you know. which is why we still call the indians in kenya, indians, and not kenyans. at least i consider them that way..and that's not academic.

>anything that doesnt deal with peoples reality is just
>academic theorizing or, in this case, racialism.

again, quit trying to talk about six different things, we can start a post about whatever racialism is (racism?)

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 09:15 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
114. "go ahead"
In response to Reply # 100


          

>this is very true for very many african tribes. there are
>very many differences culturally, but i feel that the core
>of our beliefs are more similar than different. different
>expressions, though. i mean which is why one group would be
>pastoralists or agriculturalists, have totally different
>lifestyles, but share certain common ideologies. and we can
>get into this if you want.


what would you indentify as common ideologies and what is their process of transmission?

i can think of a couple processses off the top: the diffusion of egyptian ideas of kingship and the diffusion of bantu languages with iron technology culture. i suppose i could add the construction of the black race and the the berlin conference, but i won't. these i think i've seen developed in fairly rigorous ways. i've seen other things on okp about modified non-dualism and eco-friendliness and whatnot, but in a style more polemical than peer-reviewed journal.

but beyond that tho, the construction of a "significant" level of commonality is itself not a neutral task. to bring up one example, i've seen quite a bit on locating large parts of africa within the "first world system" of the dar-ul-islam, quite excitingly, and to my uninformed mind, persuasively done, and john hunwick has compared the place of arabic in africa to the place of latin in europe. so there is the question of alternative narratives.



which is why we still call the
>indians in kenya, indians, and not kenyans. at least i
>consider them that way..and that's not academic.


it's def not at all academic, especially after uganda, but this is the gap between a blood-and-soil nation and a rights-based nation-state.





  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                
malang
Member since Oct 18th 2002
7081 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 06:09 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
125. "good points"
In response to Reply # 100


  

          

>i think solarus is deconstructing your theories. you might
>be calling his academic theorizing but i am beginning to
>think you are confusing the expressions of capitalism with
>this particular issue on race.

u are right. many of the issues i bring up are realted to practical things such as class. thats my perspective and it is a little off track from this already derailed discussion.

>this is very true for very many african tribes. there are
>very many differences culturally, but i feel that the core
>of our beliefs are more similar than different. different
>expressions, though. i mean which is why one group would be
>pastoralists or agriculturalists, have totally different
>lifestyles, but share certain common ideologies. and we can
>get into this if you want. so i would hesitate to claim
>that, "an ethiopian and some west afrikans >has more in
>common with me than with a south afrikan." even though i
>can relate to an indian, i know i have more in common with
>the other tribes from sub saharan africa...we could share
>the same ideas of family etc but if we are gonna use that
>basis, we can argue that every human being if you look hard
>enough shares one thing or the other with another. you can
>go as far as saying some of the scandinavian europeans, with
>the same ideas of family and social structure are "african".
> the reason we dont do that, is that our beliefs are NOT
>fundamentally the same.n that's wjy they are whatever they
>call themselves and i am an AFRICAN, with more in common
>with a west and south african, than the turks, persians, etc
>etc.

i do think overall africans have more common amongst themselves. i am not arguing to say that they also share common things with others, even though they do.

i personally find it problematic lumping groups together.

but i guess my main point of dissent was that while u can find commonlaities across all those groups as afrikan (they may or may not be pragmatic or real), i dont find those commonlaities between europeans, persians, and indians. there are no shared cultural practices, idealogies, expressions that i can find between me and any european. there are commonalities with arabs and persians, but they seem to be as much influences and similarites as u mentioned between afrikans and non-afrikans.

i mean, most ideas of family and to some extent social structure were similar everywhere except europe after a certain time (maybe "enlightenment" or industrialization eras, i dunno specifically)...

>this is a question of how poverty expresses itself. every
>poor person will not have foodshelterclothing. it has
>nothing to do with cultural expression. as solarus said,
>shared poverty does not mean shared ancestry. we are not
>arguing class issues. the russian poor are living much in
>the same way as the rest of us, maybe not as intense a
>poverty as indian and the african poor, but that's a
>question of CAPITALISM. (where is mobutu?).

true. this becomes another discussion. thats my fault for straying off.

>MAYBE THIS HERE IS THE PROBLEM. by saying these people
>share common ideologies, cultural expressions, or can be
>called africanS, I DONT THINK WE ARE SAYING THEY ARE THE
>SAME. come on, give some of us some credit. we are aware of
>history and the shit that has gone down. by saying my
>father's tribe shares this with my mother's tribe, or even
>my father's tribe (dinka) considers another tribe (nuer)
>their cousins, that does not mean they are not different...
>they are... and we are not saying ignore that and say they
>are all the same, please, it would illogical to do that.
>but we are saying, they SHARE COMMONALITIES THAT MAKE THEM
>PART OF THE SAME TREE. which we are calling african. so
>what if an indian is as black as iam. if he/she does not
>share these core fundamental beliefs with me, i wont call
>them african, you know. which is why we still call the
>indians in kenya, indians, and not kenyans. at least i
>consider them that way..and that's not academic.

ok. here IS THE MAIN MEAT OF DISCUSSIN. i have no problem with afrikans arguing a common afrikaness. it may or may not be real, but it is not my place to argue anyways. AND THAT IS THE POINT. it means something completely different if an outsider groups people into one, real or not. whereas it can mean very different for someone to see commonalities amongst themselves.

so one point is who says it and what it means.

second, is that this grouping of all from europeans to south asians, is just bogus. the commonalities u find between arabs, persians and indians are either just similarities (of traditioanl old lifestyles) or the influence of (mostly) muslim invaders. do they have a common origin? it is still a theory, but i think so. but not much more than that.


>>anything that doesnt deal with peoples reality is just
>>academic theorizing or, in this case, racialism.
>
>again, quit trying to talk about six different things, we
>can start a post about whatever racialism is (racism?)

racialism (i dont think its a real word) but it means to me that there is such a thing as race and it has meaning. to me it is not real, EXCEPT for the fact that its has been used historuically to oppress people. i do think it serves a purpose in getting out of that oppression, but not much more than that.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                    
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 01:08 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
63. "RE: there is black people in eastern and northern asia"
In response to Reply # 57


  

          

>which is one of my points.
>and indegnious to it at that.


allah, i think we've moved away from arguing who is black enough to be considered african or not. we are now bitching about whether or not it is even a continent.
seriously, bro, i dont get your point of view. i keep asking for some validation you come up with on line statements (subjective). in 5% speak: drop some science. explain your ish. or let the rest of us call ourselves what we want to call ourselves..


.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                        
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 03:43 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
65. "5%= empty rhetoric"
In response to Reply # 63


  

          

He can't validate it because the "lessons" consist of nothing but reworked Western words that doing nothing more but show more Western rhetoric and illogic.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                            
Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 07:11 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
67. "what is real bull s is this whole "africa" stuff"
In response to Reply # 65


  

          

which is more an invention GIVEN to caucasian white people,
then the "five percenter rhetoric" you claim I have.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 07:02 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
72. "You truly are a "Greek""
In response to Reply # 67


  

          

As the ancients said about their (your) talk, "nothing but empty speech."

Your "Asiatic" nonsense is ridiculous and makes no sense. By your definition ALL people are Asiatic and if this is the case WHY use the term when trying to specify a group (or groups) of people?

Oh yeah, and you should really read the Ubuntu article that I posted. Read about your Western conception of humanism and compare it to an Afrikan understanding of humanism. Free thinkers indeed...

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                            
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 12:59 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
61. "RE: no they are not"
In response to Reply # 54
Thu Apr-10-03 01:02 PM

  

          

what is this in reference to?

"there are native "americans" in the north and south of
the SAME CONTINENT"....

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Konnex
Member since Nov 27th 2002
606 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 05:09 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
103. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 35
Sat Apr-12-03 05:11 AM

  

          

>b) I am gonna speak about christianity because I don’t know much about Islam
Konnex talks about worshipping in his
>language etc etc, but it sounds like the religion is
>divorced from the people;s culture. Its this Sunday
>obligation we have but is in no way, linked, assimilated
>into the kikuyu culture.

Vipi Akon?weeeeh!!! wacha kunienjoy!!!(smile)I see what you are saying,and I definitely agree on some points.However,When you say that at no time has Kikuyu culture been assimilated into christian religion,I am not sure that that is exactly right.If we are talking about Kikuyu culture and not Kikuyu religion,what I have observed is that my(Christian) religion is making efforts to make this assimilation.I already talked about the use of our language in worship,the language is part of our culture,I talked about the Kikuyu style offertory at mass(livestock,harvest),this too is an aspect of our culture, We call the Christian God Ngai,The priests in my village see no reason why we can't call upon our ancestors(maybe because it is similar to the Catholic Communion of Saints)So in many ways,Kikuyu Culture and Catholicism do exist happily together.As for the question of this unform idea of Africa,I agree when you say sometimes we are caught up in useless semantics.It irritates me no end to have someone who's never been to Africa browbeating me because I spelt it with a "C" as if that's the biggest problem Africa faces.But it also ticks me off,when I'm chillin with friends and someone tells me to say something African to my Nigerian friend for example.Then when I say we don't speak the same language,they say it sucks that I can't speak African when it's my language(what the fuck??)Or when they say they are going to holiday in Italy,Sweden,Finland and Africa,or ask me how come I can speak English when the show they saw on TV showed that there are no schools in Africa(like it's a village)You see my pain?We get thrown into this shapeless mass.I rebel against the idea of a uniform Africa(despite your noble and correct observations on such a uniformity)but only because most of the people I meet who suggest this uniformity do it from a place of ignorance and laziness and not based on the ideas you articulated.Besides,I just want to make it known that Kenya specifically kicks ass.Au sivyo?





"Fighting for peace is like fucking for celibacy"

Join the fray: http://freddkambo.blogspot.com

"are you black? a nerd? don't fit in with your peers? got no game? YOU SHOULD FORM A ROCK BAND, DUNNY!" AF


Too many Emcees not enough mics.(fugees)

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

naiserie
Member since Aug 21st 2002
353 posts
Wed Apr-09-03 03:11 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
44. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

To those who have posted responses implying the erosion of traditional African culture due to the influence of Christianity (or other outside/Western sources), I'm curious what you think of the following link http://www.wycliffe.org/history/BlackMissions/timeline.htm...

It is by no means an authority, but what's your reaction?

This is one of the first intelligent posts I've seen on this board, and just decided to finally ante up and see how far this can go...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Utamaroho
Charter member
17658 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 09:12 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
58. "*shoots self in head*"
In response to Reply # 44


  

          

.

Red, Black, Green

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Thu Apr-10-03 01:04 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
62. "RE: *shoots self in head*"
In response to Reply # 58


  

          

i'm about to as well....
and this was such a good discussion....



.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
naiserie
Member since Aug 21st 2002
353 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 03:08 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
93. "OK haters"
In response to Reply # 62


  

          

What? Neither of you care to seriously consider the FACT that black americans had a significant part to play in the christianizing of Africa? Or how that FACT might affect your discussion.

Okay Activist? Whatever. More like Okay Ignoramus. Must feel good to hide behind a computer screen and be cynical about ideas that challenge your dogma...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 10:50 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
96. "significant?"
In response to Reply # 93


          


>that black americans had a significant part to play in the
>christianizing of Africa?


significant in what sense? tho i was actually just reading some of tunde adeleke's unafrican americans, which is about the af-am missionaries in africa.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 02:49 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
101. "stop being OKignorant."
In response to Reply # 93
Sat Apr-12-03 02:53 AM

  

          

>What? Neither of you care to seriously consider the FACT
>that black americans had a significant part to play in the
>christianizing of Africa? Or how that FACT might affect
>your discussion.

Obviously this is news to me. care to validate?
Exactly where did this happen?

"The first Catholic missionaries had come to Central Africa from Portugal in 1458. But the first Protestant mission was not established until the 1792 - the Moravian Brethren in the Cape."

Livingstone "landed in Cape Town, in modern South Africa, in 1841."

these gotdamn missionaries were christianizing our assess at the same time as they were enslaving us. please, dont just make some statements from the air. shit like this you gotta validate your claims.. just speaking from east and south african, it was the german lutherans, the quakers, the catholics and protestants (brits, scots, the dutch etc etc) taht established christianity.

For you to sit here and try and claim that african americans had a signficant impact in christianizing africa to me, is ludicrous. unless you think a small segment of africa makes "significant." and even if if you are talking about sierra leone and liberia,
"Sierra Leone was a British colony to which freed slaves returned in the late 1700's. They formed a social class which hardly integrated with the indigenous people." -from cry freetown.

even that is questionable.

>Okay Activist? Whatever. More like Okay Ignoramus. Must
>feel good to hide behind a computer screen and be cynical
>about ideas that challenge your dogma...

clearly you have not challenged anything here. you just made some statement.

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 02:54 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
102. "RE: stop being OKignorant."
In response to Reply # 101
Sat Apr-12-03 02:55 AM

  

          

>>Okay Activist? Whatever. More like Okay Ignoramus. Must
>>feel good to hide behind a computer screen and be cynical
>>about ideas that challenge your dogma...

clearly you have not challenged anything here. you just
made some statement and preceded to presume or amke assumptions.

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
naiserie
Member since Aug 21st 2002
353 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 05:36 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
104. "challenge"
In response to Reply # 101


  

          

I apologize, I should've made my argument...

While white Europeans can undoubtedly be credited with introducing Christianity, black Missionaries provided significant contributions to the Christianizing effort in several different ways. One of the more influential contributions were their embrace of native language groups rather than forced English education (see Samuel Adjai Crowther). Black missionaries were the first to recognize the importance of approaching Africans in their mother tongues, an influence which can be seen today in the multitude of varying African groups who worship every Sunday.

Another important contribution was black missionaries willingness to openly oppose colonial powers to the benefit of native groups (see William Henry Shepard in the Congo). Rather than being a tool of outside control, these missionaries fought to establish changes in abusive policies.

Both of these factors are significant in that rather than re-enforcing the 'otherness' of African groups, the black missionaries established ground by which to minister affording respect necessary for effective conversions. Rather than further ostracizing or inflaming existing tensions, black missionaries (partly due to US uplift movements) tended to empathize with native groups, giving them more credence than their white counterparts who had served to re-enforce the colonial death grip on Africans.

I see these influences as significant, especially considering the effect they've had on the development of missions in Africa and current mission efforts on the continent. I'm not claiming that a group of black missionaries had more influence than the thousands of white or european, but rather that their contribution ought to be recognized, and it's significance understood.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 05:04 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
109. "Point?"
In response to Reply # 104
Sat Apr-12-03 05:25 PM

  

          

What is the point of recognizing that African Americans played ***some*** role in Christianizing Afrika?

This is in no fashion or form, an unusual phenomenon.

Oh and I didn't bother responding to your post in the first place because that timeline is obviously European Christian propaganda/nonsense.

Christianity was designed and structured in Afrika by Afrikan (Egyptian) priests (see ) In short the jump from 30 AD to 250 AD as the only two entrances of Afrikan contribution to the structure of modern EUROPEAN Christianity is skewed at best and at worst a conscious lie by omission.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                            
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 08:33 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
112. "RE: Point?"
In response to Reply # 109


          

>What is the point of recognizing that African Americans
>played ***some*** role in Christianizing Afrika?
>
>This is in no fashion or form, an unusual phenomenon.


does something have to be unusual to be interesting? i myself do find it somewhat interesting, only as one example of a long line of "the af-am man's burden" in africa, from liberia to christian missionaries to garvey to rayford logan to rastafarianism to molefi asante. i do not think it's an unusual phenomenon, rather a variant on what benedict anderson calls long-distance nationalism, but interesting nonetheless because it troubles the idea of identification.



  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 01:46 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
116. "RE: Point?"
In response to Reply # 112


  

          

i think the issue here is you said, "made a significant" role in christianizing africa. that is a lie and contradiction. there has not been a very significant african american prescence in black africa. and trust me, dubois tried. the 60's was the pivotal point of these intercontinental relations. if you are going to point out liberia and sierra leone you might need to read up on relations between the afro american population that resettled there and the indigenous african tribes they found there. those relations have been hostile at best. samuel doe was from the descendants of the afro americans, they set up a minority rule in liberia and were not very *kind* to the indegenous folk. which is why i even question their role in christianizing them.

christianity made great inrodes in ethiopia even before the missionaries came. i think that was solarus point. that africans did *know* about christianity. that some african american missionaries probably did do some work in africa, as he said, nothing unusual about that, but to say significant?

af-am man's burden to africa? give me a break. that phrase was not used in an uplifting manner when it was referring to the colonialists i dont think you should disrespect african americans by putting that label on them. neither should you disrespect us africans: we are nobodies burden.

i'd like for you to expound on your theory of long-distance nationalism, and what you are referring to when talking about this: "liberia to christian missionaries to garvey to rayford logan to rastafarianism to molefi asante"

>>What is the point of recognizing that African Americans
>>played ***some*** role in Christianizing Afrika?
>>
>>This is in no fashion or form, an unusual phenomenon.
>
>
>does something have to be unusual to be interesting? i
>myself do find it somewhat interesting, only as one example
>of a long line of "the af-am man's burden" in africa, from liberia to christian missionaries to garvey to rayford logan
>to rastafarianism to molefi asante. i do not think it's an
>unusual phenomenon, rather a variant on what benedict
>anderson calls long-distance nationalism, but interesting
>nonetheless because it troubles the idea of identification.

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                    
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 04:43 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
119. "uh..."
In response to Reply # 116


          


first of all, you're confusing me and the other dude, so i snipped out the remarks which were actually addressed to him.


>if you are going to point out
>liberia and sierra leone you might need to read up on
>relations between the afro american population that
>resettled there and the indigenous african tribes they found
>there. those relations have been hostile at best.

i need to read up? uh, homey, not only am i well aware of this, it was PRECISELY MY POINT.



>af-am man's burden to africa? give me a break. that phrase
>was not used in an uplifting manner when it was referring to
>the colonialists i dont think you should disrespect african
>americans by putting that label on them. neither should you
>disrespect us africans: we are nobodies burden.


again, the phrase was in quotes because THAT WAS PRECISELY MY POINT. i did not put the phrase *on* af-americans, the people i mentioned used that or similar language THEMSELVES.



>i'd like for you to expound on your theory of long-distance
>nationalism,


uh, the theory is not mine, tho i'm flattered you have confused me for Benedict Anderson.


and what you are referring to when talking
>about this: "liberia to christian missionaries to garvey to
>rayford logan to rastafarianism to molefi asante"


they all thought new world people of african descent were especially authorized/located/ to bring enlightenment to africa.






  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                        
MAL
Member since Mar 16th 2003
29 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 05:22 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
122. "RE: uh..."
In response to Reply # 119


          

Which enlightenment would that be?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                            
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 05:31 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
124. "read their words and find out"
In response to Reply # 122
Mon Apr-14-03 05:33 AM

          



i hesitate to lit crit my own jokes, but i did use the word 'enlightenment' as a pun. and of course, for the missionaries there was also the word of God involved.


  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                        
akon
Charter member
26987 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 07:58 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
131. "RE: uh..."
In response to Reply # 119


  

          

>
>first of all, you're confusing me and the other dude, so i
>snipped out the remarks which were actually addressed to
>him.
my bad.. yes i was...
>
>>if you are going to point out
>>liberia and sierra leone you might need to read up on
>>relations between the afro american population that
>>resettled there and the indigenous african tribes they found
>>there. those relations have been hostile at best.
>
>i need to read up? uh, homey, not only am i well aware of
>this, it was PRECISELY MY POINT.

i totally missed (and still do) this part in reply.


>>i'd like for you to expound on your theory of long-distance
>>nationalism,
>
>
>uh, the theory is not mine, tho i'm flattered you have
>confused me for Benedict Anderson.

i think you know i mean to ask what does that theory mean. because i would still like to know..i've obviously never heard of the term before and the person behind it.

>
>
>and what you are referring to when talking
>>about this: "liberia to christian missionaries to garvey to
>>rayford logan to rastafarianism to molefi asante"
>
>
>they all thought new world people of african descent were
>especially authorized/located/ to bring enlightenment to
>africa.
i guess i should have said i would like to know how these different groups felt they had a burden to enlighten africans. i haven't read that aspect in rastafaria (nism), or garveyism..

.
http://perspectivesudans.blogspot.com/
i myself would never want to be god,or even like god.Because god got all these human beings on this planet and i most certainly would not want to be responsible for them, or even have the disgrace that i made them.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                            
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 09:13 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
133. "RE: uh..."
In response to Reply # 131


          


>>uh, the theory is not mine, tho i'm flattered you have
>>confused me for Benedict Anderson.
>
>i think you know i mean to ask what does that theory mean.
>because i would still like to know..i've obviously never
>heard of the term before and the person behind it.


dude, you confused me describing historical phenomena for me advocating them, and went on to school me on the divisions in liberia (!), so i don't think i'm the right person to unpack benedict anderson for you. he wrote a book on the subject tho, and a few of his essays are online. google.


>>
>>and what you are referring to when talking
>>>about this: "liberia to christian missionaries to garvey to
>>>rayford logan to rastafarianism to molefi asante"
>>
>>
>>they all thought new world people of african descent were
>>especially authorized/located/ to bring enlightenment to
>>africa.
>i guess i should have said i would like to know how these
>different groups felt they had a burden to enlighten
>africans. i haven't read that aspect in rastafaria (nism),
>or garveyism..


i don't know how you could have possibly missed it in garveyism, the distribution of titles to territory garvey hardly controlled in the first place is a clue and a half. logan was fond of the french evolue' model, with af-ams as the evolue's. wrt rastas, there's a gregory stephens interview in which he discusses the "africa awaits her creator" discourse in rastafarianism. wrt asante, kelefa sanneh has a detailed reading.

but i liked this quasi-hegelian bit from a review of unafrican americans, and i think it describes the others mentioned above as well:

Africa became a prized target for the civilizing efforts supported by Black Nationalists in that...Africans throughout the Diaspora would be able to take their place alongside Europeans on the great chain of being... The synthesis promoted by such Black Nationalists...sought to reconcile the opposing ideals of American democracy with the reality of an unabashed lack of human rights of African Americans in the matrix of a redeemed Africa and an African race. This synthesis however was at the expense of a free and self-determining Africa.






  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Fri Apr-11-03 11:36 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
98. "so highly syncretized"
In response to Reply # 0


          

The Hindu nationalists tend to portray what the
>see as "non-Hindus" (Muslims, Christians, etc.) as
>detrimental to Hinduism. They however disregard the fact
>that both these religions have been syncretised highly
>within the Hindu culture of India.

...that it didn't stop partition from happening.

i don't think the hindu right ignore it so much as find the syncretization irrelevant.






  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 06:04 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
105. "RE: so highly syncretized"
In response to Reply # 98


          

A large part of that was due to British colonialism. And hold up for me to say that there was no conflict between Hindus and Muslims ever would be ignorant. Of course there has been. Partition ruined a lot of harmony at least when it came to political issues. This animosity has seeped in to the socio/cultural area. However, the BJP isn't as representative as you might think. They're strong but not that strong. However, their power seems to be growing as is the other great revisioners, the Islamic fundamentalists. These cats want to basically Arabize in the name of Islam. But trying to make Bangladesh like the Saudi Arabian government would be probably be the most antiIslamic thing I could imagine. But back to syncretization, I think the reality and strength of it over history and even today(although admittedly it is waning in some parts of South Asia). I mean the BJP would have to ban Indian classical music if they wanted to establish the true Hindu Swaraj considering the tremendous Islamic influence on that genre of music and others.The fuckin spinning wheel on their flag was introduced by Muslims!BJP is basically try to coerce its Hindu constituents into beleiveing their agenda probably using Mahmud-Al Ghazni as their emotional tool and also a lot of their constituents' poverty to eradicate Muslims and blame them for everything.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 07:11 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
106. "you missed my point"
In response to Reply # 105


          


>I mean the BJP would have to ban Indian
>classical music if they wanted to establish the true Hindu
>Swaraj considering the tremendous Islamic influence on that
>genre of music and others.

really? i had no idea that carnatic music had so much islamic influence. oh wait, you mean hindustani music. well, i think banning hindustani music would probably a kindness to humanity, considering how very loathesome it is, but that said, i don't think the hindu right's objection is to islamic cultural influence so much as actual real live muslims with questionable loyalties.

hindu swaraj doesn't require banning hindustani any more than hind swaraj required banning western education: it just requires removing the foreigners from power, and/or removing the foreigners.







  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
Kala Akbar
Member since Mar 06th 2003
35 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 08:06 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
107. "RE: you missed my point"
In response to Reply # 106


          

>
>>I mean the BJP would have to ban Indian
>>classical music if they wanted to establish the true Hindu
>>Swaraj considering the tremendous Islamic influence on that
>>genre of music and others.
>
>really? i had no idea that carnatic music had so much
>islamic influence. oh wait, you mean hindustani music.
>well, i think banning hindustani music would probably a
>kindness to humanity, considering how very loathesome it is,
>but that said, i don't think the hindu right's objection is
>to islamic cultural influence so much as actual real live
>muslims with questionable loyalties.
>
>hindu swaraj doesn't require banning hindustani any more
>than hind swaraj required banning western education: it just
>requires removing the foreigners from power, and/or removing
>the foreigners.
Aight but in doing that, they revise a lot of history, pre-British,to make it seem as if Muslims have been raping Hindu women from the moment they came here. Just because some ruthless Turks came to conquer India supposedly under the guise of Islam doesnt mean that Gujurati Muslims, the majority of whom have no Turkish blood and can't even identify with Asia Minor should be slaughtered. Their idea of what constitutes a "foreigner" then I would say is not consistent with reality. But they are using tactics to make their idea true. Hence this is what I was trying to get at with the Afrikan question. I have a feeling that the same type of revisioning of who is truly Afrikan or who is not is happening when they talk abotu Muslim/Christians in Africa.




As for your hindustani/carnatic music differentiation, its understood but I wonder if there hasnt been any Islamic (read:Middle Eastern)influence on Carnatic music considering Hyderabad was a Muslim kingom in the South. But thats for me to research.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
MAL
Member since Mar 16th 2003
29 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 08:21 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
108. "RE: you missed my point"
In response to Reply # 107


          

I have a feeling that the same
>type of revisioning of who is truly Afrikan or who is not is
>happening when they talk abotu Muslim/Christians in Africa.

I don't think you have much to worry about considering that most African nations, with the exception of Benin tend to be either predominantly islamic or christian with some traditional beliefs mixed with them unlike India where Hindus are the majority.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 05:12 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
110. "It's not about WHO is "truly""
In response to Reply # 107


  

          

"African." It's about discerning which PRACTICES/WORLDVIEWS are TRADITIONALLY Afrikan and which are NOT.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
thrill_factor
Charter member
10183 posts
Sat Apr-12-03 08:37 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
113. "this is slippery"
In response to Reply # 110


          


>RE: It's not about WHO is "truly"
>"African." It's about discerning which PRACTICES/WORLDVIEWS
>are TRADITIONALLY Afrikan and which are NOT.


how is a person whose pratices are, to you, more afrikan, not more afrikan than a person whose practices, to you, are less afrikan?




  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
Solarus
Charter member
3604 posts
Mon Apr-14-03 06:22 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
126. ""Traditional""
In response to Reply # 113


  

          

that is the key word.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

GodFreedom
Charter member
289 posts
Sun Apr-13-03 09:23 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
115. "RE: A Question about Afrikan Thinking"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

read let the circle be unbroken by dr. ani and consciencism by kwame nkrumah

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Lobby Okay Activist Archives topic #5123 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com