Pioneer1

Troy To answer you question, no. But what do you think of the video I posted where the young man smoking weed said he was smoking dope? Now you have atleast one other person besides myself confirming to you that weed is indeed referred to as "dope" by some.

Troy You did not read (or comprehend) the article I shared. If you had, you would not have made that statement. I read it. It actually does more to support MY position than it does to support yours, lol. For example, it says: Stating that the line BETWEEN THE RACES are much more blurred clearly implies multiple races. Variation within the RACES...again, implies that there are multiple race. And again, the author clearly states there are mutliple races by saying their is much ambiguity BETWEEN THE RACES. She doesn't deny the existence of multiple races, she merely defines those races DIFFERENTLY than I have. But she still supports the idea that there are multiple races, however we may define them. The only statement in this article that even comes close to supporting your position is: It didn't say race didn't exist, nor did it say that there was ONLY ONE race. It merely said that race was a social construct. And even this only supports PART of your position but not the meat of it. But even if we were to pursue the flawed statement Malcolm X had read hair was he "probably a Caucasian" too? Did Malcolm X have green eyes and brittle bones? Those were the other two factors along with red hair that I said may suggest a person was Caucasian. You're cherry picking parts of the statement to make it SOUND ridiculous rather than trying to understand it in context. Have you ever taken a DNA test, like the ones offered by Ancestry and the like. Have you ever wondered why, with all the information they provide, they never say anything about anyone's race? I haven't taken one and don't plan to. I'm not going to send my DNA off to people I don't know.

Insightful Most contemporary policing institutions in the U.S. grew out of slave patrols, slave catchers, and other institutions and tactics used in the maintenance of slavery in the South. The use of dogs to "track down" people is a great example of tactics that are still used by law enforcement. This is one of the reasons policing in the U.S. needs to be reformed.

Troy I grew up in Michigan and people of various ages there called marijuana "dope". It wasn't the only name or most common name for it, but it was called that from time to time...especially before the mid-90s. Apparently some young people STILL call weed "dope"; check out this video: That site in the link you provided requires registration; something I'm usually hesitant to do. Been hearing a lot of good reviews about the movie, I'll get to see it sometime in the future...no rush.

Troy RACIAL CLASSIFICATION is a social construct, so ofcourse you won't be able to run tests to tell if a person from 4000 years ago called themselves "Black" or "White" or "Asian" anymore than you can test the genes to determine if a person is Catholic or Hindu. What can be seen in the gene code are the likely PHENOTYPES of the subjects being tested such as their skin color, hair texture, eye color, ect....and from THAT you can make presumptions about what race they would be classified as. If you run tests on a mummy and find out it's eyes were green, hair was red, the bones were weak and brittle....you will determine that the person is probably a Caucasian.

Herb isn't called dope ANYMORE Back in the day both heroin AND marijuana were called "dope". Don't you remember as a kid old folks sitting around talking about people "smoking dope"?

Chev @Chevdove You said: But the Assyrians [ie White Syrians] formed late Ok, so the Assyrians were the White Syrians? Assyrians = White Syrians? I just want to confirm and put a check next to that so I can continue. But the Assyrians [ie White Syrians] formed late at the time of the Greater Babylonian Empire times, around 2000s BC. Ok, now WHO was running Babylon by the time of around 500 BC? Around the time when Jews were allegedly being held captive in Bab'il....was it the Assyrians/ "white Syrians" still, or another group primarily in charge of Bab'il? By the time of the Roman Empire times, they became known simply as 'Syrians' but again, they still identified with the flags and symbolisms of the Original Assyrians because by the Roman Empire times, White Supremacy was dominant and the Syrians were defined in that way. Now when you said they were known simply as "Syrians"....did they call THEMSELVS that or were the Romans calling them that or who? In your research what exactly did they call THEMSELVES? My research is that those people (of whatever color they were) who were often called Assyrian called themselves "Ashurian" They were defined as being 'White Canaanites' just like the Romans and they were somewhat related to the Romans as well. This is the first time I've heard the Romans being refered to as "White Canaanites". How did you arrive at this conclusion or where did you hear this from?

Chev the term 'Assyria' was changed to 'Syria' after the time of the Neo-Babylonians about 500s BC. Now this gets into what I'm reading about...... How much do you know about these "Neo-Babylonians"??? Persians are an ethnic group. Medes are an ethnic group. My recent research on "Babylonians" is running into a few obstacles because Babylon (actually Bab'il) was a city occupied by multiple racial/ethnic groups and I'm having a time trying to nail down exactly WHO the Babylonians were around that 500 B.C. era. Chaldeans maybe, but that sounds more like a tribe or clan within a larger group. But prior to that and during the time of the Assyrian Empire, the word 'Assyria' always meant 'Ash' or 'White'; White Syrians and their origins were North Syria. They were separatist so, the Original Syrians of Asshur-Shem were located in South Syrian [ie Canaan land] and this can be seen on ancient maps. The Syrians were located in lands near to other ancient peoples such as the Urgarits, the Arameans When you say the Syrians...are you talking about the Assyrians or Original Syrians? I ask, because I thought the Original Syrians WERE Arameans. I'm probably gonna start another thread on this.

How else would you explain so many poor Caucasians without health insurance who STILL opposed Obamacare and voted Republican?

Troy Did you read the paragraphs in the MIDDLE of the article that said: "Eventually in 1993, they were allowed back with a team of geneticists from Italy. And this is when they began to study them properly. They used the most up to date technology of the time to confirm the date of the mummies. They now believe that they are about 4,000 years old, and the youngest about 2,000. There are probably many more to be found, possibly in the same region of China, but it is also possible they could have settled anywhere in China, as long as the conditions were suitable to live in. These people were from the Bronze age, they were Caucasian, and it is possible that they interacted with the indigenous people at that time. The local people probably taught them their traditions, and the Caucasians most likely introduced them to their way of life as well." You asked "why there were no genetic tests for race" and I just showed you where geneticists actually CONFIRMED the race of some ancient mummies over 4000 years old and called them Caucasian! Chev I agree somewhat. But I still believe that the word 'race' is very problematic and is based on these modern times and the deliberate confusion it was meant to bring about. Race is only a problem if you are confused as to it's proper definition. Most people confuse race with ethnicity with nationality. It's their CONFUSION that's problematic, not the word "race" itself. Well, part of the confusion here is that today, we are conditioned to view the two people you posted based on color as being primary, but Color should never be viewed in terms of any type of 'social construct'. Color should never be primary factor at all. There is a lot of science and genetics behind why Colorism is so wrong. I take a milder stance. Color should be a factor in determining race, it just shouldn't be the ONLY factor. And then, the man you posted has nappy hair, but then what about Black people in Australia? You're calling them both "Black" but Africans and Australians Aboriginees are not of the same race. That's why. YOU are now confusing race with "color"....lol. How is your father doing, btw...

maeve I know this comment is old, but I'm still here....lol I really do have a problem with you calling pale Native people “fake”. Yes, $5 Indians and pretendians do exist, but that doesn’t mean you can alienate actual Native people from their identities because they’re pale I wouldn't do that ONLY because a person is "pale" in color, they could be an albino. There are plenty of pale/albino Africans, Native Americans, Chinese, ect.. A pigment disorder doesn't change one's race. However the problem comes in when your genetics is PREDOMINATELY WHITE with a smaller trace element of African/Native American/Mongol genes...and you're running around trying to claim the later instead of more appropriately identifying as the former...or atleast mixed race. —we’re hurt by having our identities appropriated by white people too! That's absolutely correct. Being indigenous isn’t about blood quantum or skin tone (and blood quantum is itself white supremacist bullshit designed to “breed out the Indian”), it’s about having a real, tangible connection to your family, culture, and community. If you have Native family, if you identify as Native, if you put effort into reconnecting with and reclaiming your culture, if you care about Native issues—every second of every day, that is, you don’t get to put on and take off being Native like a coat—you’re Native. Native American isn't a culture it's a RACE (please Troy......just let it go man) which means it's not based on cultural habits but GENES. You can practice the various Native American cultures all you want, but if you have blonde hair and blue eyes you are NOT a Native American. If merely practicing a culture and being in love with it and immersing yourself in it was enough to make you the same race of those who practice it...then White boys who love Rap music would TURN Black and be valid as such. Unless they have some sort of pigment mutation, Native Americans have BROWN SKIN and BLACK HAIR...it's as simple as that. If you don't have a pigment mutation and your skin is very light or damn near white or white...you are NOT a Native American. You're a Caucasian. You may have Native American "ancestry"...but those are some of your ancestors...not you. I have some Caucasian ancestors....they aren't me nor am I them. I’m mixed-race and quite pale; OK... Something tells me this is the REAL reason you're taking issue with what I'm saying. It's personal, because you fit that description. Don't take it personal or get offended, what I'm saying is true. But I'm glad you acknowledge that you're mixed race. Exactly which races are you mixed with?

Troy Besides..... If it came out of MY mouth, Del probably wouldn't listen to it anyway...lol

Troy Man, it's gonna be a GOOD while before sit in a movie theater again. I don't care how much they claim the cases are going down or up, I've been doing pretty good so far (Thanks to The SUPREME BEING) and I'm gonna continue doing what I'm doing in that regard. Maybe I'll catch it on cable or on the internet. I don't smoke dope, btw....lol.

I haven't seen this movie yet, just the trailer that Del provided. However there are 2 concerns I have based on the trailer........ 1. If the focus of the movie is less on Caucasian racism and more or the traitorous behavior of the "Judas" character, this may exacerbate the paranoia that already exist in many conscious AfroAmerican circles. 2. If there are a lot of focus on radical Caucasian organizations like the Weather Underground, it may trick a lot of our people into believing they can truly maintain a large group of "White Allies" to come to their rescue instead of solving their own problems.

Troy if race exists, can you tell me why there is no genetic test for race? I'll wait.... You don't have to wait TOO long...lol...because there ARE genetic tests for race, and anthropologists use them frequently. Chinese History: The White Tribes of Ancient China - Owlcation - Education

So you missed me! To be continued........

Jeffrey Thanks for clarifying. I'm gonna suggest another way of looking at it and include an answer within that suggestion............ It seems to me that creators of Black cultural product (music, art, education, literature, etc.) must first get the approval and qualifications from a white person (a "gatekeeper") to do so. It may seem like a petty thing to point out, however I would say that Black creators don't need approval and accreditation of a Caucasian to actually create. Our people will do that automatically because it's in our nature. *We need their approval and accreditation to DISPLAY our creations on THEIR PLATFORM (there television shows, social media, media outlets, ect...) And here in lays most of the problem. Too often our people think CAUCASIAN platforms are the only platforms, and spend too much effort and energy seeking Caucasian approval to be accepted on THEIR platforms instead of using our creativity to establish OUR OWN platforms where Cauasian approval and qualifications would be irrelevant if not non-existent. I could care less what YOUR rules are for renting a room in YOUR apartment...when I'm living in a 57 room mansion. They would be totally irrelevant to me. As far as whether your feelings of suspicion is wrong...... You may be surprised to learn that just as money only has the value we GIVE IT -the value of Caucasian platforms (television shows, radio, internet channels, ect...) are the same way! The REAL reason they put up rules and stipulations and force many of our people to seek their approval and accept SOME while dismissing OTHERS on their platforms (television shows, radio, youtube channels, instagram, ect...) is simply to RAISE IT'S VALUE by making it seem exclusive and make people fight extra hard to participate on them. Think about that for a minute or two. The fact is, most Caucasian institutions whether they are Universities, social media, television shows, ect...actually STRONGLY DESIRE Black participation and creativity. They don't want us away, they want us IN them for the most part and if we stopped patronizing them they'd BEG us to start participating again and even offer us money to do so. Don't believe me, look at sports and entertainment industries and how they pay our people MILLIONS to exploit their creativity! What they DON'T want is for us to form OUR OWN platforms where they'd be powerless and we'd have complete control over the content and it's distribution. Complete control over the display and presentation of our creativity. For example..... Imagine us having OUR OWN totally independent universities (not needing any money or licensing from Caucasians or the government) where we're teaching WHATEVER we want to teach and they couldn't shut it down. In a manner of MONTHS they'd lower all of the standards of THEIR BEST universities like Harvard and Yale and make enrollment absolutely to them FREE in order to pull our students back in them for participation because their value would be almost gone.

Great questions, let me go in on them............. Jeffrey I've noticed a recent pattern in colleges: increasing numbers of non-Black professors as experts in Black studies (African, Diaspora, American). And I personally question my feelings about it. In some ways, I find myself suspect of institutions that may feel more progressive for what could be described as "color-blind" selections. My feelings aren't very mixed on the issue....lol....I simply DON'T LIKE it. But I understand some of the reasons behind it. I've said for years that there's been a deliberate "dumbing down" of the AfroAmerican community over the past 4 or 5 decades to the point that many of our institutions are suffering from INTELLECTUAL DECLINE. If nature hates a vacuum and there aren't enough smart and qualified AfroAmerican professors to teach our culture then professors of other races will take advantage of that opportunity and step in to fill the void bringing their own nefarious agendas with them. gone to white makers of Black culture (your favorite white rapper and such) or Black makers established with a white publisher. Another good point. As much as I don't like Eminem...he's a good rapper. If AfroAmerican youth aren't developing their MC skills and coming up with great lyrics and deliveries like the greats in the past (Rakim, Ice Cube, Public Enemy, Keith Murray, ect...) did, then it's hard to get mad at a White boy who saw the opportunity to step up and deliver. Another result of the "dumbing down" process. A lot of our youth are simply too stupid from excessive weed smoking and poor public eduction...to come up with powerful lyrics. So, my question: How important is the idea of "own voice" representation? Very. Because if you aren't good at representing your own culture it says a lot about your intellect as well self-esteem and nobility. I oscillate on the issue myself. Should I be happy someone is teaching Black studies? To a point. But understand that if Caucasians are stepping in and assuming the position of teacher/professor to teach Black studies....and we know that traditionally Caucasians have been the enemy of African people....then you should be very suspicious of why they would want to take up that responsiblity. Common sense demands that you PRESUME...based on historical precedent...that there is some sort of nefarious ulterior motive behind their interests. .....such as an agenda to FURTHER TARNISH the image of African peoples. Being a professor who has the minds of young and vulnerable AfroAmericans who trust him/her to teach them the truth is a GREAT position to be in if one wants to futher brainwash and distort the image of AfroAmerican history. Next thing you know they'll be some of our historical greats, "LGBT" with very little or no evidence at all. Or is it reasonable that I suspect a non-Black candidate may have some advantages over a qualified Black instructor? That's VERY reasonable....because in many cases they do. The fact that they are NOT BLACK and can pretend to be interested in Black studies will make them very attractive to some unsuspecting AfroAmericans who strongly desire a "friend" or non-Black "ally" who understands and empathizes with their plight. Should I be happy to see diverse representation even if presented by less-diverse makers? Idealistically....yes. I'm usually flattered when non-AfroAmericans show interest in AfroAmerican culture. But I always have my antenna up also. Or should I voice my suspicion that a Black maker seems to have to pass white gatekeepers for the opportunity? Don't understand this question....specifically about a "Black Maker"....so I'll await your response to what me and others (if there are any others...lol) have said and perhaps you'll also clarify the question.

Akah Ra I have a couple questions for you.............. I listened to some of the information in your Youtube presentation, did the information you presented come from what YOU have researched directly.....or did it come from various sources found around the internet? Also, if your information came from various sources around the internet...except for Baba Creto Mutwa (whom I'm familiar with) what race would you say MOST of the people you got your information from are?

The idea of a "Christ" actually comes from a Persian Emperor named Korus (Cyrus) whom sent a group of Persians known as "Jews" to Palestine to establish a settlement there. Korus -> Krus -> Christ -> Cross

Africatown in Alabama? Gotta check it out next time I go down there. There's a different "vibe" down South that makes it feel cozy. It's the same with Mehico. When you go there you feel like you're in another home.

Troy You're back....I was getting a little concerned for a minute, lol. I thought maybe your Caucasians work-mates at that work-space may have pulled a "fast one" over on you. At the end of the day you believe there are multiple races as defined in our genetics. I don't believe that because the science tells us something different. Any science that tells you race doesn't exists isn't "science"....it's SCIENCE-FICTION. I've shown you through numerous articles that science SUPPORTS the idea of multiple races...regardless as to how those races are defined. Haven't you been hearing in the news lately about the RACIAL disparities between "Blacks" and "Latinos" and "Whites" when it comes not only to whose getting Covid 19 but also when it comes to who's getting the shots? If racial differences didn't exist, why are not only medical professional but even journalists acknowledging these differences? Come on Troy, give up man.....lol. However I don't like the term even though you enjoy it. I think it's causes more problems than it solves. See! That's the problem right there! You DON'T LIKE the fact that there are multiple races. You want everyone to be one big happy family because you think that will improve racial relations and bring more peace to the world That may be a noble and idealistic goal, but I don't think DENYING racial reality will bring this about. Peace comes from MUTUAL RESPECT. When AfroAmericans (or African people globally) get enough power to PROTECT ourselves and prevent others from taking advantage of our race then people will treat us much better.

I wonder why Fox News, News Max, and other so-called "Conservative" outlets rarely if ever have Mr. Sowell on? They love pushing silly minded negroes like Candace Owens and Jesse Lee Peterson who parrot racist right-wing talking points, but when it comes to intelligent well spoken AfroAmericans who promote traditional "conservative" AfroAmerican values with clarity.....they pretend these people don't even exist.

@Chevdove You know what, can you do me a favor...... I'm reading some literature that's really deep right now and I remember YOU wrote something some months ago detailing the differences between SYRIA and ASSYRIA and what I've been reading reminded me of you and what you were saying. But I don't remember EXACTLY what you wrote nor it's context in which you wrote it. Can you do a separate thread and detail again the difference between Syria and Assyria?