Chevdove

@Troy Right away, when I think about 1821, I think about 1807 being the year that Chattel Slavery was outlawed in UK and America... my ancestor was brought over here in the 1840s via British Slave Ship. Then, I jump to now, and my mind immediately contemplates the many 'very young' Black males railroaded into a prison cell where they are raped by other men--no chance to choose to be males or homosexuals--I think about Black men being systematically effeminized and the reality that we, as AFrican American DOS existed in a Matriarchal system where the Queen of Europe has been the head of our government for hundreds and hundreds of years... I think about how the priesthood has been loathed for so long and now, we Black women run the show, and assist in this effeminization of the Black males because, some of us don't want to see our sons hurt and some of us 'have other reasons'... So for me, well, I don't feel that I should have to be the one go be sacrificed or martyred that was already done and because the Civil Rights Movement achieved that already, but nevertheless, @Troy when I think about that question, My third and next thought(s) and question(s) in return would be, 'Is this living!?' What about choosing death as an option? Give me liberty or give me death. I would rather not live in 1821 nor 2021. I am not happy to exist in this humanity at all. You will never see an apex animal like male lions having sex with another male lion, not even in captivity and humans are suppose to be higher!? The effeminization of Black African males is pre-meditated. That is what I think about going on now, in 2021. It is deliberate. Oh yes. lol.

Yeah!--That is painful--a painful reality in some sense, especially because we are still under a White dominant system! And, even though this may seem off topic, but this can be viewed from a much wider standpoint as well--even about what the news portrays in Africa as well. The Colonial Empire, imo, has a bearing on some of the conflicts over there too--TRADE RELATIONS, unfair trade, etc.

Oh yes! @Pioneer1 Absolutely. @Troy Just like the broad definition under the governmental term of 'Americans' setting up racism, the focus I suppose would not be 'the government' but the kind of people that infiltrated the government and set up racism, not only in America but in so many other governments in the past. Not all 'Americans' were part of setting up racism. Not all 'Europeans' were part of setting up racism. Not all 'European Americans' were part of setting up racism. It is the infiltrators that have done this in the past and present. Oh yes, and not only 'White people' were part of setting up the system of Colorism as well! Well, before 'White people' that set up our government here came to be called American, they were Europeans and there is a long, long history there! That European history goes way back in time and, this strange belief in White Supremacy was adopted by many different kinds of people, not just Europeans, Europe was the spring board; so-to-speak.

WOW! Great post! So there is a movie about Aretha Franklin. ... Olympic speed skater. Interesting! Sky diver... amazing. Loving this, however, the killing of those Asian women is very bad and it's good to know that this too is being addressed.

Awesome! LOL! @Pioneer1 Thank you! But then too, I try to be cordial, however, I feel as an AFrican American sometimes dealing with 'racial' issues here in America, it can get controversial! Oh no! Not Delano! No way! LOL. He offers a lot! @Delano @Troy Thanks!

Yes, this is very sad and it's been happening for so long. My husband speaks about his experience a lot! He says that he was blocked from being put in a Special Ed classroom because of a teacher and had it not been for her, he was definitely slated for that fate. And, I don't see this getting any better for certain reasons, one of which is 'human competition' and another is preparedness, imo. the learning environment is so competitive and so many cultures here in America fight to get into the best classrooms and in front of the best teachers, and it seems to me, that young Black males are being replaced in large numbers for various reasons and yes, it seems that the term 'Emotionally Disabled' is the main reason. I think that other cultures prepare their children and African Americans may not realize 'as a whole' how competitive the educational system can be. But another major issue, for me, would be content! I can't believe what is being taught today! I am very frustrated. I strongly believe that if Black males were exposed to a better curriculum at a young age, the outcome would be amazing--I know this first hand!

When I refer to 'Syrians' it would have to be in context because that could mean both the Assyrians or the Original Syrians. Because the Assyrians were Separatist based on Colorism and White Supremacy, the word 'Syria' can be a confusion unless it is regarded within context of the subject at hand. The Original Syrians come from the very same origin as the Assyrians, however they became two distinct ethnic groups by the time of the height of the Greater Babylonian Empire back in the 2000s BC. The Syrians were 'the Brown 'race' of people! The Syrians formed their cultures in South Syria. The Arameans and the Syrians are two totally different kinds of people. But all of them, the Assyrians, the Syrians and the Arameans have a major history in the country of Syria. The Assyrians formed their civilization to the North of the Syrians that they separated from. One 'GENERAL SOURCE' I will refer to and that is the Bible: Abraham was told to break off from his father Terah, because Terah bonded with the Assyrians. So Abraham later broke off from his father when he became older for this reason and his grandson, Jacob bonded with the SYRIANS in South Syria for this reason. The EBERS [ie. Hebers] were divided on this Assyrian White Supremacist movement. And Terah was involved in that Moon goddess--White woman fertility cult in Assyrian that Nefertiti later came out of hundreds of years later. Abraham was told by God to break off from his father for this very reason WHITE SUPREMACY. In the Book of ACTS, the Jews stoned Stephen for bringing up this very issue. Abraham was born in Ur of the Chaldees and at this time when he was very young, the Creator told him to break off from his father. Terah fled Ur due to violence and resettled with the Assyrians in North Syria. Terah lived in Greater Babylon at the time that the Cush Hamites began to enslaved their own people. Abraham [ie. Abram] maternal origins are linked to RAM. But his half-sister Sarah [ie. Sarai] had maternal origins with THE MEDES [ie Madai or the People of AI]. Abraham's maternal origins stems from a Black woman of Ur of the Chaldees. The Syrian culture was formed at this time. So the term 'Ur' is the key in that out of Greater Babylon, there were so many different kinds of 'Urian cultures' of ethnic peoples that came out of this massive civilization after it was eventually overthrown. They Syrians' name 'SHUR' actually refers to their origins too from Greater Babylon. Then their were the HURIANS in Turkey Anatolia of which many of these people migrated or were forced marched to other places, one of which was Africa... The Aramean history is massive! But they are a distinct people apart from the Syrians and the Assyrians.

Ah!!! @Pioneer1 That's it! The Chaldeans!!! The Chaldeans of Cush Ham. They are the dudes, the Sumerians that overthrew the Assyrians. And yes, again, they were a small tribe oppressed in the Assyrian Empire, but they are the ones that overthrew the Assyrians and set up the Neo-Babylonian Empire. Chal--ROOT WORD Chalcol Chalcolithic Chalcidice Cal Kali... Laki, Loki,

Yes! Assyrians = White Syrians [Asshur Shem] 500 BCs Again, I need to actually refer in detail to answer this question, but I will try now: Prior to the fall of the Assyrian Empire, part of their captives were NEGROES [Black African-typed people] that they tried to keep a tight reign on because these Negroes were historically powerful and were generally known to be tall, black typed Cush Ham typed men and also another dominant group were the Negroes of Israel [NORTHERN ISRAEL] known as the Ten Tribes [ie Joseph] and both of these groups were oppressed under the Assyrians. The Ten Tribes had been overthrown in the 600s bc and they were violently overthrown; skinned alive, tied to oars in ships, dragged and forced marched into Assyrian captivity. The Assyrian forces were the ones to do the job and they were mostly Negroes too, the big huge Canaanites, Syrians [ethnic Syrians--SHUR], etc. Assyrian overthrow: The Assyrians were overthrown byway of the Cush Hamites that somehow bonded with other black men, such as Canaanites but they were especially helped byway of the Medes who turned against the Assyrians. The tribe of Cushites that did the job were known in secular books as NABUPOLASSER but after they overthrew the Assyrians, they changed their name. Out of this dynasty came Nebuchadnezzar and he led the attack against the Assyrians. He became famous for his war tactics and because he always razed the cities that he overthrew. So, his people formed the Neo-Babylonian Empire. Sometimes his name would be written as 'Nebuchanrezzar' because he 'razed cities' and sometimes it is written as Nebuchadnezzar because he was 'a Nazarite' and took the ancient oath of a Nazarite. So Nebuchadnezzar loathed the Assyrians, and after he tore up their land, he and his people developed their empire in Babylon. I think that by the Roman Empire times, the country was known as SYRIA but there were many different types of people in that country and they were probably known by other names as well. The term ASHURIAN by the Roman Empire times was probably obsolete. The name Ashur or Asshur referred to a thousand year prior and so, even at that time, there were distinct kinds of Assyrian peoples. Well, again, I need to reference. But the Roman Empire historical figures are well known and definitely White. Ancient maps and histories refer to that area as being the land of the AMORITES. So, if you reverse the name, guess what? ROMA--AMOR The Amorites are definitely the Biblical Canaanites. They came from the Original Canaanites whose supreme goddess is ASHTORETH-- Ash-White-- WHITE GODDESS. The Original Canaanite Moors, Phoenicians, Kenites were obsessed with White women and so from these early times they heavily intermixed with Eastern or Asian people and eventually the Amorites became dominant.

Hi @Troy Do I know my grandfather? Yes. I am assuming that you are asking about her husband? My Great-grandmother's husband? There is a lot of information I have learned over the course of about 30 years. I have been relentless and at times, I have had to back off, because my relatives at times became angry with me and did not want to speak about the past. I am very stressed right now and reluctant to look at my information because of the tense reaction I have received from my relatives, but I am considering writing a book. My Great-great grandfather was from the southern parts of Nigeria and was initially brought to a slave plantation to Virginia. My Great grandfather was sold with his father from Virginia to South Carolina. I was told a heart rendering story in how My Great-great grandfather ... spun around and then he fell down, had an heart attack and then he died. My Great grandfather met my Great-grandmother when she was a little girl and they became childhood sweethearts. But she was raped. After she gave birth to two half-white offspring, my Great-grandfather still married her, but she was sold away soon after... and the story goes on and on... After Emancipation, my Great-grandfather walked all the way to another state, found her and they reunited. They had many children and my Grandfather was her last offspring from him. Then, guess what!? My Great-grandmother married another man and had more children! Her first 'half-white' son, became very substantial and he was very bonded to her and so, before he died, he reached out to help her 'black family'... I am extremely fascinated with this story. I am kind of 'in shock'. I have gotten the Death Certificates of some my ancestors.

No Way! Racism was NOT invented this late in time by Americans. I have seen a few other films like this that also state the Nazi Movement came out of America and that is a complete deception! America is absolutely NOT the inventors of racism! Americans are NOT the inventors of White Supremacy! Racism is a social construct in these modern times, however, it should more properly be recognized as a Social Re-construction, a practiced that has been done for thousands and thousands of years. The film falsely states that in 1681 the word 'White' was used for the first time and that is so misleading. For this American government of the 13 Colonies that term may have been new, but long before 1681, the SPANISH COLONIES and so many more WHITE Europeans had come and exercised against the indigenous peoples. Okay, LONG Before 1705 Blacks and Whites, English, Scots, Irish, Africans did inter-related in many ways but this kind of deceptive history being handed to us to believe is just another common ploy to confuse us. We think we are putting out truth, however, we are only putting out spoon fed truths given to us by what seemingly is informed Blacks who actually got this from some 'White do-gooder source' -- LONG before 1705 Blacks, Whites, English, Scots, Irish, Africans, Moors... did inter-relate in various ways however, what we are not taught through formal education is the outrageous and violent breakdown of the Moorish Empires across Europe and the violent breakdown of the Turkish Empire LONG before the Americans re-started this White Supremacist Movement. The breakdown of THE INFIDELS was based on them being Black!!! Come on! Wake Up! There is nothing new under the sun. The Americans were not the first to form a government based on White Supremacy.

Again, the word 'Race' is problematic, so I do not know how to respond to your question in a technical sense. No way @Troy I read the article that you referenced and it speaks to what I have mentioned "groups" of people based on a scientific basis. The word you use "Race" is not the correct term. That word, I agree is based on today's modern world social constructs. However, ancient people were categorized in ancient civilizations based on "ancestry" and etc. What!? @Pioneer1 Good points. With the COVID Deaths, prison systems being heavily populated by Black people, the George Floyd types of murders going on, etc., I believe that it is impossible to equate both time periods. Today, Black people are being oppressed severely.

Yes, @Pioneer1 Thank you for asking! I would love to and will try to do it as soon as possible. Right off though, I remember studying about Syria today, and I saw that their flag and symbolism are the very same as the ancient Assyrians, and that surprised me. I know that there are many distinct kinds of Syrians today and they are divided based on religion, however, I will go back and look at my resources again. But right off the top though and from what I remember, the term 'Assyria' was changed to 'Syria' after the time of the Neo-Babylonians about 500s BC. 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, etc. There is a lot of history in this area. But the Assyrians [ie White Syrians] formed late at the time of the Greater Babylonian Empire times, around 2000s BC. Again, they were Separatist based on Colorism. 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. They were defined as being 'White Canaanites' just like the Romans and they were somewhat related to the Romans as well. The Syrians were also called 'Syro-Phoenicians' by the Roman Empire times and this term too carries a lot of history as well that go back to the rise of the Assyrian Empire around the 600s BC when the Phoenicians [also, the Etruscans and Romans] reformed.

I wish I would have seen this post earlier! Yes, I bought a book from this community about this subject! I have not sat down to read it yet, but I can't wait to absorb it. My relatives thought that My Great Grandmother was stolen and brought over here late as well around the 1850s, but I have just confirmed her actual date of arrival. She was brought over here very late though. I just found her gravesite and it was marked by one of her many sons, my Grandfather. It took me about 30 years to piece together all of my research and then finally to find her gravesite. I am still in shock because, I actually gave up a little. I didn't think I would ever be able to find her gravesite so when I saw it, I was totally shocked. I have a copy of her slave ship record, and the death certificates of many of her children. I am in shock.

The term 'Race' is problematic, however, if scientist do not confront the government then, confusion will continue. These terms used in the past such as 'EGYPTIAN', 'NUBIAN', 'SHEM', need to be interpreted correctly in order to understand the past and how people today connect to the past. For example, the term 'SHEM' is actually not the same as 'SEMITIC' but there are scholarly resources that can bridge the gap and explain how these terms relate to each other! The ancient descendants of the Biblical Shem can be connected to the SEMITIC people of later times and can be understood with adequate resources. The ancient EGYPTIANS are not the same today as they were in the past and there are so many other terms that can be interpreted correctly to understand how the Original Egyptians (ie ancient Egyptians) existed in the past, interacted with other kinds of people (ie KINDREDS), reproduced and formed other kinds of Egyptian cultures, etc. There are many different kinds (ie. KINDREDS) of ancient Egyptians and then, there are also distinct kinds of ORIGINAL Egyptians! Both of these terms, 'ancient' and 'original' can defined distinct kinds of 'early Egyptian people' and early Egyptian cultures and these topics are all based on a solid understanding of the science of GENETICS. The original Egyptians are scientifically defined to have an origin from ONE MALE INDIVIDUAL of African origin. And the word 'African' today has a scientific definition (Original African) which includes an individual with WOOLY HAIR-TYPE, Black/Dark skin complexion, etc.

Sure they can. It was done for the majority of time that governments have existed. @Troy I don't understand you. I don't understand what you mean in that governments have existed without classification of humans based on a scientific process, albeit, the terminologies that have been used may be relative though, but can you explain more what you mean? you know that I don't like to use the term 'race' but this is the term used in these modern times even on federally approved applications in just about every regard! You have to check whether you are categorized (ie classified) as Black/Afro-American, White/European-American, Hispanic, etc. These terms are relative to our government but may differ in other countries and governments across the world. @Troy The genetic basis for how human beings are classified is varied but it is a reality due to how human beings have interacted over the course of thousands of years. @Troy This thread actually addresses a topic and contention between @Pioneer1 and me, from what I remember, anyway, about Egyptians vs Moses, the Hebrews, at the time of the Biblical Exodus. So you may regard the ancient Semites as being Black Negro people as I do believe too, but there are many others like Pioneer1 who have other beliefs. @Pioneer1 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. 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. No. Not at all. @Pioneer1 You don't think that there are certain type of Asian people like the girl you posted, but with African traits? I've seen Asian people that actually have nappy hair. And then, the man you posted has nappy hair, but then what about Black people in Australia? Some of them express very straight hair but have 'thick' traits just like the man you posted. Color is not a primary factor in determining how we as humans should be classified. This modern world has debauched everything in their social constructs of today. They have actually caused awful divisions within cultures based on this type of Colorism.

Oh WOW! Thank you for this comment and I absolutely agree. I appreciate so much what you have written. Thank you again.

Oh gosh! I guess I am not an avid TV viewer. I have never heard of Ma Rainey! Yes, Viola Davis is a great actress from the little I have saw of her.

@Pioneer1 In all fairness though, I do understand why @Troy has contention about the word 'race'. I understand the social construct of today as opposed to the ancient world. I looked at a link with this name 'Tahamu' or 'Tahamau' and saw only one source and from what I gather, this one source stems from a French man named Champollion, that was translated.

But when the government ignores thousands upon thousands of years of certain groups of humans that have been targeted for their physical presence and oppressed, it leads to a continual oppressive existence that will only get worse. @Troy You expect White Supremacist systems to agree with you in that we humans are all 'one commodity'? They will not because, that would be impossible. But just because they use this natural process of categorizing and distinguishing certain cultures of humans for various reasons for harm does not help you if you think that we are all one commodity. That kind of thinking that you support won't help the kind of Black and Brown 'races' of people being suppressed by this type of evil. We need to accept the truth in that yes, we are all 'one human [race] people' but we have also been subdivided into many subgroups for various scientific and historical reasons. @Pioneer1 Thank you! But @Troy That would only be because their genetic makeup originates from one individual out of Africa and color is not the primary basis for classification of the humankind and you may not understand the data correctly due to the wrong focus on colorism. If certain 'black people' do not have the same amount of DNA presence as a European based on some data, it does not mean that the Europeans have more 'African DNA' than 'a Black person' at all, but it only means the modern worlds form of 'social construct' has presented a distortion of scientific interpretation. Oh no! This is NOT common knowledge @Troy. The subject of the reality of who the Original Egyptians and Semites were in the ancient days has been a huge distortion! That is what the thread has focused on. It is so crucial that the world governments are having to address it. Many 'Black' people today such as yourself do not believe White Supremacy, racism, and Colorism existed in ancient times and this too, becomes a part of the global confusion with regards to the original Egyptians and the Original Semites. You say we are all 'one human race' but if you understand ancient history, you would understand why even today, this subject is important to discuss. The ancient Egyptians were a distinct type of 'Black' people a part from other kinds of humans in the world at that time. And, as @Tazarah wrote, their phenotype becomes a hallmark that identifies them even a part from other kinds of ancient 'Black' humans!

@Troy For any adequate government all over this world to not classify human based on some sort if distinguishable character would result in a failed system. They cannot ignore or erase the history of humankind by just defining us as 'one human race'! Based on all of the evils and good of the historical past, Governments that are functional cannot simply ignore classification. Absolutely not. However, Phenotype must be considered hand-in-hand with Genotype. The reality of ones phenotype is vital in all manner of scientific classification. In many cases scientist cannot confirm anything without considering the phenotype. For example, when scientist consider many diseases, in many cases they must regard the phenotypic characteristic of a person exhibiting certain appearances in order to expediently determine the outcome of a particular disease! Thus by doing this, they can save a person's life! They can deal with the problem correctly and make interventions on certain levels to improve a persons quality of life. Now, I can give specific examples but I would need to look at data in order to be specific though. But again, a person's phenotype is a scientific concept iand it is vital to regard for purposes of classification. No, not at first. All of those categories are a later development after the initial formation of early humankind when they formed their communities. LOL. Not true at all! But the term 'racial category' would not be correct either. Not true at all! Genetics is absolutely based on categorizing humans based on 'groups' and how humans formed early communities and shared common genetic traits. To define 'An original person of AFrican descent' is definitely finite in certain genetic and scientific terms. From that ORIGINAL basis, sure there are so many other kinds of people that formed 'African cultures' but they would all be based on the original genetic and scientific definition of an ORIGINAL AFRICAN!

She is gone but not forgotten. Wow! This is news for me. May she rest in peace.

Oh! But this is truth! There is a scientific distinction based on many levels of research, especially the DNA findings. Fossils remain and can be studied today! @Stefan Oh Wow! @Tazarah I think this quote was meant for me! Thank again! i like how this point was stressed, "while acknowledging the scientific evidence for the physical diversity of Africans." Yes, I agree in that there are physical diversities of Africans and so, it would be crucial to go back into history and better define just who the original Egyptians were in the past! @Troy I totally disagree! As far as the word 'race' and 'racial', I understand this to be a confusion, but the phenotype of people are extremely important and helps when compared to the genotype of people! Why should scientist not use phenotype to distinguish people just because White Supremacist use this as a means to justify their supremacist beliefs? Yes, that kind of belief is flawed logic but, just as there are distinct kinds of Europeans, there are distinct kinds of Africans, there are distinct kinds of Asians today, and etc., these distinctions are based on scientific classifications as well as cultural distinctions, etc. Over the course of thousands of years, humans have developed distinct cultures and nations, and communities, etc, and these developments have been distinguishable based on reproductive basis as well! @Troy to say that we are all 'one human race' is not enough when we have to refer certain data! There needs to be other kinds of rhetoric to distinguish people in the past and present. When you go to fill out paperwork for jobs and etc. at times, it is important to identify based on your cultural, ethnic, or 'racial' category. It is evil for people to believe they are more superior because they are a certain color or etc. but that should not stop the government from distinguishing people based on a scientific basis. I am not one that believes in Colorism on any level, but we need to address this issue and not deter from it just because of White Supremacist.

LOL! I guess men see other things! @Pioneer1 Get out!

Ahhh! So this is the meaning of 'metaphysics'-- beyond physics. Thanks!