Jump to content

anonymous50

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

anonymous50's Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • Collaborator Rare
  • First Post Rare
  • One Month Later Rare
  • Conversation Starter Rare
  • Week One Done Rare

Recent Badges

7

Reputation

  1. Is it possible for an individual, not politician (because most of them are well off anyway), to believe in Democratic Socialism when they are financially successful. Sure, when a person is financially struggling, Socialist programs are very appealing. For example. politicians like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and AOC promise free college tuition and socialized healthcare that won't bankrupt an individual when they get sick. In some instances very progressive candidates promise to abolish student loan debt, which can be very devastating to someone who owes such debt. They also promise higher taxes on the rich to pay for these social programs. But, to the dusty* who remains in poverty this does not matter. They look upon the rich as having too much anyway. Part of it is class envy and the other part is realism. The so-call 99 percent who look at the extremely wealthy 1 percent class with their palatial manors, Rolls Royces, private jets, yachts, and access to some of the most beautiful women in the world know that all of these luxuries are beyond their reach in this lifetime. I know some would call this a poverty mindset. Most people don't have the drive, ambition, skills and patience to become rich. The paths to riches are limited anyway. Most start up businesses fail after a short period of time. You stand a greater chance of being struck by lighting twice than winning the lottery. Many get-rich-quick schemes advertised in the mail, online, or TV(infomercials) don't work. Only a small number of Pookies and Ray Rays from the hood who aspire to become rappers or baller are successful. People who go to Hollywood to find themselves seldom become the next big movie stars. So, the poor dusty who struggles from paycheck to paycheck to barely put food on the table looks at the astronomical wealth and toys the 1 percent has and thinks "why should they not be willing to have their wealth redistributed to help those who are less fortunate." But, when a person is able to lift themselves out of poverty and become wealthy, is he or she still willing to give up a certain percentage of income through taxation to fund the programs that person once relied upon when he or she was destitute? Some politicians would like to impose a 40 percent tax rate on the well-to-do. *To use online urban vernacular, a dusty is a man(usually a black man) who is low quality, poor, broke, and has no ambition
  2. In some Black Nationalist circles and on YouTube, there is this thought that interracial marriages will lead to the end of the black race (at least in America). Nothing could be further from the truth. White Nationalist also believe this about their race but there is a difference. White people are drastically declining in their population due to low birth rates. The death rate among white people is higher than the birth rate. This is the reason why in America, Europe, and even in Ukraine there is a rise in white supremist and nationalist groups. They feel that white people are on the verge of extinction. But, I digress, getting back to the topic. All interracial marriages do is reassure that there will always be white admixture in African Americans. ADOS people will never be as black as their African descendants. The reason for this is because mulattoes are considered black in America. Because of the one drop rule, we don't distinguish mixed blacks from unmixed blacks. As a result, most black bi-racial people embrace a black identity and marry full black people. Some mixed black people marry white. Some marry each other. But, most marry black. As a result, they are going to produce future offspring that are mostly black that have white admixture. This is the reason why there are varying shades and phenotypes of black people in America is because of the miscegenation that took place during slavery between white slave masters and their black concubines ranging from light skinned, brown skinned, light brown skinned, light skinned with Negroid features, dark-skinned with Caucasian features and looser texture hair, etc. Some Black Nationalist, particularly on YouTube, oppose both interracial marriages and the one drop rule because they think both are responsible for colorism in the black community. Black people tend to fetishize light skinned mixed people because their features are closer to white. And it is certainly no secret that black men who are considered high value with money and status generally(not always) prefer light skinned black women as trophy wives because they represent the approximately to whiteness. One black female YouTuber said that anytime a black man gets a dollar he has to have the closest thing to white as possible , which is something many darker skinned black women have been complaining about for many years. But, with all that said, most people of any race tend to marry within their own racial or ethnic groups. Although the bi-racial population has grown significantly, most belong to one ethnic group. They don't belong to the "Other" category.
  3. I just want to start out by saying that I am not a race denier. I believe, from an anthropological standpoint, that there are only three races. There is the Caucasian race, the Negroid race, and the Mongoloid race. Although originating in the Caucasus Mountains, the Caucasian race consists of white Europeans, Arabs, and East Indian (both dark skinned and light-skinned). The Mongoloid or Asian race includes the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Filipinos, Indonesians, and what we would term American Indians. The Negroid or Africoid race involves Sub-Saharan black Africans. However, the Australoid race kind of defies a racial category because they have a similar phenotype as Africans but are not considered to be Negroid. Then, there are people who are legitimately of mixed race. Many Latinx peoples are mestizos mixed Spanish and Indian descent). Some are even mulatto (mixed black and white) like Dominicans. I think East Indians are a Mediterranean Caucasian people with a strong Australoid admixture. Filipinos are a Mongoloid people with Negrito/Australoid admixture. Polynesians are mixed Melanesian/American Indian-type Mongoloid. Jews are not a race, even though most people think of them as an ethnicity. Judaism is a religion. Most Jews, racially, are Caucasian. But, America does not exclusively define race by DNA or biology. For instance, take the one drop rule. The one drop rule says that a person who has any black in their DNA is considered black. I, like many ADOS families, have some people in my family going way back who look white. It does not matter if the person is over 90 percent white and has a predominately white phenotype. On the other hand, many Hispanic mestizos are technically considered white even though they are of partial indigenous blood. Many of them don't look white. White people don't think of them and treat them as white. And a lot of them don't see themselves as white. But, some of the assimilated ones would like to be thought of as close to white as possible. Some people in Sub-Sharan Africa don't look at black Americans as being black because they are so mixed and admixed with European blood. So, race is more socially constructed in America than it is in other places.
  4. Slavery in the traditional sense is when a person is considered a chattel worker with absolutely no freedom whatsoever. That person or group is considered a piece of property with no rights as a human being!
  5. Personally, I don't think that the bible did sanction slavery in the traditional sense, But, some racist theologians have tried to justify slavery and Jim Crow by using the curse that Noah put on Ham in the Old Testament of the Bible. This happened after the flood Technically, there are only three geographically races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and African. All three of them are descended from Noah's sons Japhet, Shem, and Ham. Because Ham caught and exposed Noah in some sin that the Bible does not specify (although some may think that it may have been an orgy), Ham was condemned to serve Japhet. Japhet is the father of the white race. Ham is the father of the black race. Shem is the father of the Asians and Jews. So, I guess we have the postdiluvian Noah to blame for slavery and white supremacy.
  6. Politically speaking, most oppressed minority groups in America vote Democratic against white, right wing, Christian, racist, homophobe Republicans. These groups are blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Jews, and LGBTQ. But, beyond the fact that they vote for the same party does not dismiss the tribalism that is strong among them. There are a lot of blacks that don't like Mexicans and vice versa. Someday, when the Anglo white population dwindles down to a bare minority (even though they will still have the economic power), then that is when you are really going to see the tensions between rise between non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics. Personally, in their heart of hearts, I think Hispanics really would like to be considered white and technically they are (despite the fact that most Latino nationalities are mestizos). Maybe not white in the same sense as an Irishman, German, Englishman, or Norwegian; but, more like a southern Italian, southern Spaniard, or an Arab since most of them share a similar brown complexion. My Grandad always said that when a Mexican gets a nickel, he thinks he is white. This is actually a colonial Latin American concept. During the that era, it was not uncommon for some well-to-do Spaniards to provide their mestizo and mulatto offspring education, land, money, and status. Thus, they frequently classified them as white. This also explains the reason why Dominicans and Haitians don't get along. Dominican mulattoes think they are white compared to full black Haitians. There are also tensions between Asians and blacks, particularly with Koreans. In LA, back in 1992, a 15 old black girl was shot in the head by a Korean shop owner. This incident took a back seat to the Rodney King police beating. I hear that Koreans are some of the most racist Asians. At the time of the riots, Korean shop owners were targeted. At one time, there used to be a strong alliance between African Americans and Jews. Jews were some of the biggest supporters of the civil rights movement. But, when Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan made anti-Semitic back in the '80s, relations between blacks and Jews have suffered since. In all fairness, Jesse Jackson apologized for the offensive remarks he made. In more recent times, Rep. Ilhan Omar from Minnesota has made anti-Semitic remarks regarding Israel. And none of the groups that were mentioned above like gays. There are many black Christians, Hispanic Catholics, Muslims, and Orthodox Jews that are just as opposed to homosexuality as white Protestant Evangelicals. So, just because different groups of people vote Democrat does not mean that they like each other. Right now, they are too busy fighting white supremacy, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, and homophobia. But, after 2045, when the minorities will collectively become the majority, these rifts will come to the surface.
  7. You might be wondering why I am talking about Germanic mythology on an African American platform? In order to understand a system of oppression, one must trace it back to its pagan roots. White people as a whole have always thought that they were better than nonwhites, but peoples and nationalities of blond, blue-eyed, pinkish skinned origin seem to have a superiority complex. Individuals of British, Irish, Scottish, German, Swedish, Dutch, and Norwegian ancestry tend to be more racist than Italian, Greek, French, and Spanish descent. The more anthropological terms used to describe them are the Nordics, Teutons, Anglo Saxons, and Celts. I always wondered why. Then I looked at a program on The American Heroes Channel (formerly known as the Military Channel). The AHC channel features a lot of documentaries on WW II and Hitler. One of these programs was about the Nazis and their fascination with the occult and Germanic/Northern European mythology. Most of these theories have been proven bunk, but they can still influence what some people believe. Many Nazis thought that the blond blue-eyed Nordic race is originally a God race of people from heaven. When they descended to earth, they founded the mythical civilization of Atlantis. There are many theories as to where Atlantis really was. Many Nazi archaeologist and anthropologist visited various places around the world searching for this pseudo civilization. Many thought that it was part of the ancient Andean civilization of modern-day Peru (since there are some pre-Columbian light haired, blue-eyed Indians there). Others believe that it was in northern India where the Aryan Indians live. Then still others believe it was in the Tibet region of China. This is the reason why they use the term Aryan to describe people of Germanic /Nordic origin. The Aryans of Northern India are lighter skinned than the Dravidians of Southern India, but they are far from being Nordic. In fact, they are quite Mediterranean in their appearance. If an ethnic group follows the logic that they are descended from a "superhuman" or "Godlike" master race of people, they I guess they would feel superior to everybody else. I wonder if this ancient mythical mentality came to the surface in the similarities and contrasts of how the different European colonial powers treated their nonwhite subjects. I noticed that places like America and South Africa that had segregation/apartheid laws established after slavery were settled by Northern Europeans (British, Irish, Dutch). Their rational was almost identical to the anti-Semitic laws established in Germany before the Holocaust. This is not to say that colonialism under the Spanish, Portuguese and French was not terrible. But, with the exception of the Indians that were annihilated, they at least acknowledge their subjects and slaves as human beings. There is still a sizable indigenous population in Latin America today. When the British settled America and Australia, they immediately began to exterminate the American Indians and Australian Aborigines for the most part (except those on reservations). This is also similar to what Hitler wanted to do to European jews. Of course, European conquerors also used Christianity as a reason to oppress heathen peoples. But, just because people convert to Christianity does not mean they abandon their pagan roots altogether. After all, the days of the week and months of the year all still have pagan names. There was something else that was said that I also took note of in this TV special. The ancient "godlike" Nordics of Atlantis believed that their race was pure and that even the slightest admixture of another race would ruin the purity of it. Could this thought have been manifested in the one drop rule in the US? Under this rule that once existed, even the most minute trace of black ancestry made a person black regardless of how white they looked. This also stands in contrast with the Iberian stance on race. They mixed freely with other races. From Mexico to Brazil, l there is a solid line of mixed blood countries. As I stated earlier, most of this mythology has been proven false; but, I wonder how much of it has subconsciously influenced white supremacy and racism.
  8. When I use the term "black," I am referring to both the Australoid and African peoples. I think that some people who belong to other racial categories have a visible black admixture. According to anthropologists, there are two "black" races of people who look almost exactly alike but are not related. The first is the African or Negroid race which consists of all Sub-Saharan black people. Then there is the Australoid race which includes Australian aboriginals, Southeast Asian Negritos, and South Pacific Melanesians. But, both groups share phenotypical similarities of very dark skin, broad noses, full lips, and kinky hair(except for Australian aboriginal). Southeast Asians are members of the Mongoloid race that have a lot of Negrito/Australoid admixture. Archaeologist Peter Bellwood once referred to the region as being a clinal "Mongoloid-Australoid Zone." Even the language that Southeast Asians speak is classified as being Austronesian. This is due to the fact that Negritos were the native people of Southeast Asia and maybe China. You can see it in some Filipinos. The Negrito admixture manifests itself through through darker skin, rounder faces, broader noses and fuller lips. The line of demarcation between Mongoloid and Negrito really becomes blurred in the Aeta People. East Indians also manifest Australoid features because an Australoid Aboriginal-like people were the original inhabitants of India. They are basically a mixture of the Mediterranean race and Australoids. There is a sizable degree of African admixture in some Latin American mestizos as a result of the African slave trade. Even though the term mestizos is mostly applied to people of mixed Spanish and Indian ancestry, it does not exclude some degree of African admixture. The term Mestizo means mixed blood in Spanish. The following picture is of a Venezuelan family. The Second picture is of an Afro mestizo family in Mexico. A lot of Middle Easterners, especially North Africans have a noticeable Sub-Sahara Strain. Many Egyptian and Moroccan children are almost indistinguishable from mulatto with their swarthy skins and curly hair. Of course the biggest difference between these people and blacks is that they are not black. In fact, some of them would become offended if you suggested they had some African or Australoid ancestry. But, Negroid/Australoid features are still exhibited in their phenotypes. They are mixed at best.
  9. Netflix is going to be streaming a film version of Nella Larson's novella Passing(1930). The story is set in New York City circa late 20s/early 30s. It tells the fictional story of two very light skinned friends Irene Redfield and Clare Kendry. Irene stays within the black community and marries a black man. Clare passes for white and marries a racist white man. Much of the novel focuses on Clare attempting to conceal her identity from husband. For those who have not read the book or looked at the Netflix film, I don't want to be a spoiler and give away to much of plot. But like many tragic mulatto stories, it has a sad, fatal ending. It really ends in a cliffhanger because you don't know whether it is a murder or suicide. Nella Larson should have written a sequel to clear things up. Passing was published during an African American cultural revival in the 1920's (mostly in New York City) known as the Harlem Renaissance. The name is a take off of The Italian Renaissance from the 14th to 17th centuries. Harlem at that time was the mecca of black life similar to the way Atlanta is today. The Harlem Renaissance era focused mostly on literature, art, culture, profession and entertainment. Novels written during that period were Nella Larson's Passing, Alan Locke's The New Negro, Carl Van Vechten's Nigger Heaven, Wallace Thurman's The Blacker The Berry, and Zora Neal Hurston's There Eyes Were Watching God. For the short period it lasted, I would have to say that the Harlem Renaissance was probably the best period in black American history pre-civil rights era
  10. Recently, archaeologists have found in a cave the skeleton remains of one of the earliest inhabitants of England(maybe Europe in general). He is called Cheddar Man because his remains were found in Gough's Cave in Somerset's Cheddar Gorge. It turns out the man had dark skin, curly hair, and blue eyes. I know a lot of white people must really be pissed off about this discovery because, if it is true, the earliest prehistoric Europeans did not have white skin, However, his features are not Africoid and he does have blue eyes. Cheddar Man looks more like he is closely related to the Australoid or Veddoid branch of dark skinned people than the African race,
  11. She can identify herself however she wishes but a Black Irish is a type of white Irish person, not one of Negroid descent. I figured that MIGHT be what Anonymous50 might have been getting at with the "black Irish" term, but I'm still not sure. Perhaps she can make it a little more clear. Did you know that the ORIGINAL people of Ireland were small Black folks...very small....and that's where the legend of the Leprachauns come from? Yes, Mzuri was right. That is what I meant by black Irish. There ancient ancestors were the Silures who are ;thought to originally come from Spain. They were physically characterized as a short Caucasian people having swarthy skin and curly hair, similar to Arabs. The Silures were the original people who were present in what is now Great Britain at the time the Romans invaded. This was before the redheaded pale skinned Celts and Germanic peoples came.
  12. Depending on what part of the country you live in, interracial marriage can still be a very controversial issue. Although most people of all ethnic groups tend to stay within their race, there are those who still take issue with the matter. But some black/white marriages stand out more than others. For example, a very dark skinned black person who is with a blond, blue eyed pale skinned white person is going to draw the most fire from both the white and black communities (especially if it's a black man with a white woman). On the other hand, a racially ambiguous, white passing black with a Mediterranean white would be less noticeable because their are less physical distinctions between the two of them. The Mediterranean branch of the Caucasian race consists of Arabs, southern Italians, southern Spaniards, many Greeks, black English, black Irish, many Indians, and even some Russians. They are called Mediterranean because they live along the Mediterranean Sea. They have olive colored to light brown skin, dark eyes, and dark hair. A Mediterranean person does not look as "pure white" as say a northern European pale skinned, redheaded Celt or a blond, pink-skinned Scandinavian, but that is a matter of anthropological dispute. Many mixed racially ambiguous black people(since mixed people are considered black under the one drop rule) have similar features to Mediterranean white people. Many light skinned African Americans who have attempted to pass as white did so by saying they were of Spanish or Italian descent. Have you ever noticed how much Megan Markle looks so much like she could be a Kardashian. Even though former President Barak Obama married Michelle, he could have easily married an Egyptian, Palestinian, or Moroccan woman(especially since he has a Muslim surname anyway). Many Egyptians look just like Barak Obama. But, he would have not become the first black president if he did. When Lena Horne auditioned for MGM studio back in the 1940's, Louis B Mayer wanted to pass her off as something other than black maybe Latin or Mediterranean. He felt she was too light skinned and too good to play black. There may even be more similarities between near white black biracials and Mediterraneans than just physical. Please understand that I am not an Afrocentric who is trying to "one drop" other racial groups. According to anthropologist Sir Harry H Johnston, there is a very ancient Negroid admixture going back many thousands of years in many individuals of Mediterranean descent. Also biologist Thomas Huxley(father of Brave New World author Aldous Huxley) referred to them as the Melanochroi(dark white) race and thought that they were a hybrid race between the Xanthochroic(fair whites) and the Australoid race. In addition to darker skin tones, some of them have big round eyes and fuller lips which could point to underlying Negroid/Australoid ancestry. Also East African Hamites(Ethiopians and Somalis), people we would think of as black, are also considered to be a branch of the Mediterranean "white" race. The women in both categories are considered exotic for their race. In the black community, women like Mariah Carey, Zendaya, Amber Rose, and Rashida Jones are referred to as "redbones" and "exxoticals." In the white community, women like Kim Kardashian, Melissa Rycroft, Sophia Loren(in her day), and the late Natalie Wood are considered exotic. Of course, on average, most Mediterraneans are still whiter looking than ambiguous mulattoes; but, there still is not that great of a phenotypical difference where it would really stand out in interracial marriage. Here is Kim Kardashian and Chris Humphreys.
  13. I would like to clear up a possible misconception pertaining to my last post about mixed bloods and the one drop rule. It was inappropriately entitled Why Blacks Continue To Hold On To The One Drop Rule and Mixed People. On face value, it may have seemed as though I was blaming black people for perpetuating the one drop rule. Nothing could be further from the truth. I was just pointing out reasons why blacks may be a little leery of bi racial people having their own racial category. The one drop rule was established by Anglo American colonizers to maintain white social status and preserve the purity of the race. They did this by primarily targeting mixed bloods and white people with black admixture, even though all black people were covered. And I was not disparaging black men(especially high status) who marry lighter skinned women. This has been going on for a very long time in the black American community. This is just an observation that a lot of black women who have issues with colorism in the dating market have noticed.
×
×
  • Create New...