THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
All Logical Conclusions and Assertions contained herein, have been arrived at by practical application of the “Scientific Method”. Often we use Scientific Studies published in "PubMed" of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, to support our "Logical Conclusions and Assertions".
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD:
The above proclamation of adherence to the Scientific Method clearly indicates the importance we place on "Believability" that is, to PROVE what we say! How disheartening then are reports from readers who, when they try to share the knowledge they gained on Realhistoryww, are meant with disbelief and even hostility. We pondered this for some time, and though we came to no understanding, we were able to put the questions into context. The following is how Albinos define Black Americans:
African Americans (also referred to as Black Americans or Afro-Americans) are an ethnic group of Americans with total or partial ancestry from any of the black racial groups of Africa. The term typically refers to descendants of enslaved black people who are from the United States. As a compound adjective, the term is usually hyphenated as African-American.
Black and African Americans constitute the third largest racial and ethnic group in the United States (after White Americans and Hispanic and Latino Americans). Most African Americans are descendants of enslaved peoples within the boundaries of the present United States. On average, African Americans are of West/Central African and European descent, and some also have Native American ancestry. According to US Census Bureau data, African immigrants generally do not self-identify as African American. The overwhelming majority of African immigrants identify instead with their own respective ethnicities (~95%). Immigrants from some Caribbean, Central American and South American nations and their descendants may or may not also self-identify with the term.
African-American history starts in the 16th century, with peoples from West Africa forcibly taken as slaves to Spanish America, and in the 17th century with West African slaves taken to English colonies in North America. After the founding of the United States, black people continued to be enslaved, and the last four million black slaves were only liberated after the Civil War in 1865. Due to notions of white supremacy, they were treated as second-class citizens. The Naturalization Act of 1790 limited U.S. citizenship to whites only, and only white men of property could vote. These circumstances were changed by Reconstruction, development of the black community, participation in the great military conflicts of the United States, the elimination of racial segregation, and the civil rights movement which sought political and social freedom. In 2008, Barack Obama became the first African American to be elected President of the United States.
The cryptic allusion to European and Native American ancestry in this Wiki article is not about admixture, if it was they would have said it; rather, it is about covering their asses, they read Realhistoryww too!
The immediate question one would ask is: why would anyone cling to being defined as being descended from some poor Hut building villager in Africa, who was too slow to escape the raiding party? I mean if it's true, it's true. But if you are shown that it's NOT true (for 98% of Black Americans - see various pages), then why would you still cling to that false information? Which brings up the question of just WHO is it that refuses to believe the truth. While most Blacks we hear from are ecstatically grateful to finally know the truth about themselves, there are still these reports about those who are not.
In that regard, we have often pondered the concept of "Gene Memory" that is memory which controls our "Instinctive" reactions. It has been documented that infants will react positively or negatively to things that they had not previously encountered. That would seem to indicate a "Hard Wired" response mechanism to certain stimuli. Getting to the point: could the people who refuse to believe the truths on Realhistoryww really be the "Actual Descendants of African Slaves" who instinctively know that it does not apply to them?
OR, are these people who are so psychologically damaged (like Stockholm Syndrome people), that they fear believing anything new, because they are afraid of being fooled by "Soap Box Charlatans"? Not being Mental Health professionals here, we have no answers. But should readers in those professions have a thought, please share.
The material presented herein is the result of decades of individual and collaborative "Original" research. At the time this effort was started, there appeared to be no Afrocentric writers talking about Black history outside the bounds of Slavery and arguments about the race of ancient Egyptians. That angry perception was so complete, that no modern Black works were ever interrogated for data, or even consulted. We resolved to start from scratch, building our True Black history, only from "Original" sources: which could be anything from ancient documents to Statues, Paintings, and other artifacts. The exception being of course, "Race Neutral" non-controversial filler material found in encyclopedia type media. That is not to say that encyclopedias are race-neutral, they most certainly are not, they can be just as racist as any other Albino source.
In pondering the sad state of Black history as written by Blacks, we assumed that Black historians were either the "Brainwashed" lackeys of the Albino establishment, or too frightened to write True Black History because: a) it would never be published by Albino controlled media, and b) they would be "Blackballed" from gainful employment.
So how sad we were to see that we were wrong, when we happened across the article below by the late Dr. John Henrik Clarke. Wiki: John Henrik Clarke was a Pan-Africanist writer, historian, professor, and a pioneer in the creation of Africana studies and professional institutions in academia starting in the late 1960s. Born: January 1, 1915, Union Springs, AL. Died: July 12, 1998, Manhattan, New York City, NY. Education: Columbia University, California Miramar University, New York University.
Though the article is really a put-down of the very deserving "Skippy" Gates, and some other similarly deserving wannabees: it is so wide ranging that Dr. Clarke apparently manages to capsulate his entire mindset regarding history. From the article, It is clear that historically, Dr. Clarke was talking about the very same things that we are; only he had to say it in an "Indirect" way to avoid clashing with the Albino power structure.
Example: Dr. Clarke says this - "When Europeans rose in the 15th and 16th century, started the slave trade, colonized history and information about history, they also colonized the image Of God."
Not having read his works, we don't know if he identifies the vehicle the Albino people used to usurp Black rule as Protestantism/Anglicanism, or if he identifies the "Thirty years Wars" and the English Civil wars as the means. But he says enough to make us aware that he knew and understood "True" History, and got us thinking that perhaps some others did also.
Accordingly - as a Mea Culpa, and homage to Dr. Clarke, we asked certain readers to compile a list of similarly honest and aware Black historians, who they have read, and whose works, in their opinion, may be worth reading.
Samuel Cornish, John Russwurm (1827)
Edward Blyden (1869)
G.W. Williams (1883)
R.L. Perry (1893)
Pauline E. Hopkins (1905)
Ivan van Sertima
John Henrik Clarke
The fall of Jerusalem was a pivotal moment in the first Jewish-Roman war. It resulted in the destruction of the ancient temple of Solomon and much of the surrounding city by a fire started by the Roman army under the command of the future Emperor Titus.
The Jewish-Roman war of 66 to 73 A.D. was the first of three rebellions by Jews against Roman rule in Judaea and is referred to as "The Great Revolt." The revolt started in 66 A.D. following religious tensions between Greeks and Jews, but soon involved protests against taxation and attacks on Roman citizens. Shocked by the defeat of a legion under the command of Gallus, Emperor Nero sent military commander Vespasian, with a force of 60,000, to ensure that order was restored. Despite victories elsewhere, Jerusalem proved difficult to take. Vespasian’s son, Titus, surrounded the city with a wall and a trench, and anyone caught trying to escape was crucified. Titus then put pressure on the food and water supply by allowing pilgrims to enter the city in order to celebrate Passover but not letting them out.
After a number of failed attempts to attack the city, the Romans set about the destruction of Jerusalem’s formidable defenses with a battering ram. Having breached these defenses, the Romans fought their way from street to street. Many Zealots sought sanctuary in the ancient temple of Solomon and in the fortress of Antonia. The Romans finally overwhelmed the fortress, and the ancient temple was destroyed by fire in the ensuing battle, reputedly against the wishes of Titus. The destruction of the temple is still mourned by Jews in the annual fast of Tisha be-Av, and the fall of Jerusalem is celebrated in Rome’s Arch of Titus. Losses: According to Jewish historian Josephus, Jewish, 1.1 million dead and 97,000 enslaved; Roman, unknown.
Publius Cornelius Tacitus c. 56 – c. 120 A.D.) was a senator and a historian of the Roman Empire. The surviving portions of his two major works—the Annals and the Histories—examine the reigns of the emperors Tiberius, Claudius, Nero, and those who reigned in the Year of the Four Emperors (69 AD). These two works span the history of the Roman Empire from the death of Augustus, in 14 AD, to the years of the First Jewish–Roman War, in 70 AD. There are substantial lacunae in the surviving texts, including a gap in the Annals that is four books long.
Only the first four books and twenty-six chapters of the fifth book survive, covering the year 69 and the first part of 70. The work is believed to have continued up to the death of Domitian on September 18, 96. The fifth book contains—as a prelude to the account of Titus's suppression of the Great Jewish Revolt—a short ethnographic survey of the ancient Jews, and it is an invaluable record of Roman attitudes towards them.
The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-120 A.D.) had these thoughts on the origins and customs of the Hebrews, as the Romans prepared to destroy Jerusalem.
This is in the context of Titus Caesar, who had been selected by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea.
Tacitus: History Book 5
1. EARLY in this year Titus Caesar, who had been selected by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea, and who had gained distinction as a soldier while both were still subjects, began to rise in power and reputation, as armies and provinces emulated each other in their attachment to him. The young man himself, anxious to be thought superior to his station, was ever displaying his gracefulness and his energy in war. By his courtesy and affability he called forth a willing obedience, and he often mixed with the common soldiers, while working or marching, without impairing his dignity as general. He found in Judaea three legions, the 5th, the 10th, and the 15th, all old troops of Vespasian's. To these he added the 12th from Syria, and some men belonging to the 18th and 3rd, whom he had withdrawn from Alexandria. This force was accompanied by twenty cohorts of allied troops and eight squadrons of cavalry, by the two kings Agrippa and Sohemus, by the auxiliary forces of king Antiochus, by a strong contingent of Arabs, who hated the Jews with the usual hatred of neighbours, and, lastly, by many persons brought from the capital and from Italy by private hopes of securing the yet unengaged affections of the Prince. With this force Titus entered the enemy's territory, preserving strict order on his march, reconnoitring every spot, and always ready to give battle. At last he encamped near Jerusalem.
2. As I am about to relate the last days of a famous city, it seems appropriate to throw some light on its origin. Some say that the Jews were fugitives from the island of Crete, who settled on the nearest coast of Africa about the time when Saturn was driven from his throne by the power of Jupiter. Evidence of this is sought in the name. There is a famous mountain in Crete called Ida; the neighbouring tribe, the Idaei, came to be called Judaei by a barbarous lengthening of the national name. Others assert that in the reign of Isis the overflowing population of Egypt, led by Hierosolymus and Judas, discharged itself into the neighbouring countries. Many, again, say that they were a race of Ethiopian origin, who in the time of king Cepheus were driven by fear and hatred of their neighbours to seek a new dwelling-place. Others describe them as an Assyrian horde who, not having sufficient territory, took possession of part of Egypt, and founded cities of their own in what is called the Hebrew country, lying on the borders of Syria. Others, again, assign a very distinguished origin to the Jews, alleging that they were the Solymi, a nation celebrated in the poems of Homer, who called the city which they founded Hierosolyma after their own name. (The Solymi were supposedly a tribe from Pisidia, a region of ancient Anatolia/Asia Minor/Byzantium/Eastern Roman Empire/Turkey).
According to historians of the actual times,
the above is what a Jew (or Hebrew) actually looked like.
So who are the Albino people claiming to be Jews?
Encyclopedia Britannica - The Khazar people
But the most striking characteristic of the Khazars was the apparent adoption of Judaism in about 740 A.D. The circumstances of the conversion remain obscure, the depth of their adoption of Judaism difficult to assess; but the fact itself is undisputed and unparalleled in central Eurasian history. A few scholars have even asserted that the Judaized Khazars were the remote ancestors of many eastern European and Russian Jews.
© The Liberator Magazine | liberatormagazine.com
The following is Dr. John H. Clarke's response to a 1992 New York Times OP-ED by Henry Louis Gates Jr. entitled "Black Demagogues and Pseudo-Scholars":
Click here for a link to Henry Gates OP-ED
I am raising the following questions: At once, I questioned the title of Professor Gates' article. He should never refer to anyone as a demagogue unless he's ready to call the names of the demagogues, singular or plural, and point out the nature of their demagoguery. He should never refer to any scholar as being pseudo, unless he is ready to name the scholar and prove the pseudo nature of his or her work. To disagree with a scholar does not make the scholar a demagogue. Most of the old and new Black scholars asking for a total reconsideration of African history, in particular, and world history, in general, are using neglected documents by radical White Scholars who are generally neglected by the White academic community.
In African history I am referring to scholars like Gerald Massey and his work, Egypt, Light of the World, (two volumes), The Book of the Beginnings, (two volumes) and Natural Genesis, (two volumes).I am also referring to Gerald Massey's greatest English disciple, Albert Churchward, whose book, The Signs and Symbols of Primordial Man, asks for a reconsideration of the role of people outside of Europe and their role in human development. Your attention should also be called to the work, Anacalypsis, two volumes by Godfrey Higgins, published in 1837.
These books deal with the dispersions of African people throughout the world. Many of these Black scholars, whose work Professor Gates questioned, were reading works by Whites in French, German and other languages that spoke positively about African American achievement long before Mr. Gates' parents were born. This school of Black scholars are neither demagogues nor are they pseudos; they are the forerunners of the present propagators of Afrocentricity. They know what Professor Gates doesn't seem to know: that African people are the most written about and the least understood people in the world. If Professor Gates has not read the works of the White pioneer scholars about the role of African people in world history, it stands to reason that he has no understanding of the senior Black scholars such as Yosef ben-Jochannan, John G. Jackson, Cheikh Anta Diop, Jacob Carruthers, Chancellor Williams, Lao Hansberry and myself. Professor Gates' reference to Black anti-Semitism is an exaggeration.
A new Black awareness is causing Blacks, young and old, to question everything that has any influence on their lives. We are realizing that Jewish people have an influence on our lives far out of proportion to their numbers in the population. I totally disagree with Professor Gates that anti-Semitism among Whites is on the wane in the country. Quite the contrary, I think it is increasing in this country and in the world, and Black people are not the cause of it. What you have in this new charge of Black and Semitism against Blacks is the most pathetic of all tragedies, a scapegoat looking for a scapegoat. Because of Black Americans' reading or misreading of the Bible, we have always had a sentimental attachment to Jewish people and, to a large extent, most of us still do. During slavery, we wanted to attach ourselves to a people who had escaped from bondage.
So, the Exodus story in the Bible became more real to us than to the Jewish people. Right now, in a large number of Black Baptist churches, you can get a large number of the congregation to shed real tears of sympathy over the three Hebrew boys in the fiery furnace. Most of the organized White hate groups in the United States, I know of no overt attacks by the Jews being made on any of them. Yet, Jewish people have attacked Louis Farrakhan more than they have attacked the leaders of the Aryan Nation or the American Nazi Party. Are the Jews in America looking for an easy victory or the Truth? Black Americans have never been their enemy. And they, the Jews, have never been our friends unless it was to their convenience. Neo-Nazism has fully re-emerged in Germany and in other states in Europe.
These are people with a nation structure and armies. Why is it that a group of weak Black Americans are getting more attention from the Jews than these powerful White forces rising against them? I'm sorry that Professor Cornell West saw fit to make a statement about this false charge of Black anti-Semitism. I could agree with his statement if the statement were true. What Black people are realizing in this country, in the Caribbean Islands and in Africa is that the Jewish people, of European descent, are a part of the world apparatus of European control. And, in the matter of White control over the world, their position is no different than that of other Europeans. I am not saying that the Jews of Europe are more bent on world dominance than other Europeans; I am saying that they are not radically different from other Europeans in this regard. Internal disputes between the Jews and other Europeans is a form of European domestic racism.
European racism has spent itself out outside of Europe. During the Nazi regime in Germany, that racism turned inward on itself and created what is referred to as The Holocaust. This was a problem started in Europe by Europeans that should have been resolved in Europe by Europeans. Repeatedly I have said that Europeans are geniuses at draining the diseased pus of their political sores on the lands of other people. What is now being called anti Semitism among a newly awakened Black intellectual class is that they are beginning to look at the people referred to as Jews as part of the totality of European world dominance. We are not saying that the European who is a Jew is any more of an imperialist than any other of the Europeans, but that he is basically the same. We are not saying that the role of the Jews in the slave trade was any different then any other Europeans, but that it was basically the same. When they saw the opportunity to make money in the slave trade, they took advantage of this opportunity the same as other Europeans in the same business.
I do not choose to deal with Jesse Jackson's opportunistic appearances at the World Jewish Congress and the statements that he made. Jesse Jackson has his own agenda that is unrelated to the Liberation Movement of his own people. He was catering to his Jewish audiences for reasons unrelated to Black people and their liberation movements. Black people are becoming increasingly conscious of people who exploit their community and hold them in contempt. We make no exceptions when these exploiters are non-European. In referring to present-day anti-Semitism and the attempt to trace it to having roots in Christianity, Professor Gates shows his lack of understanding of the manifestation of Christianity among American Blacks and how that interpretation of this religion is part of their humanity.
Their interpretation, in no way, relates to anti-Semitism. I wonder if Professor Gates would explain the words in the Negro spiritual: Go down Moses ... Tell ol' Pharaoh To let my people go, or the words: Deep river, My home is over Jordan. This is African identification with the Biblical people of the Hebrew faith. It would help if Professor Gates would read a towering masterpiece in three volumes by James Fraser, The Folklore in the Old Testament and another contemporary book, Hebrew Myths, edited by Robert Graves and Raphael Patai. I do not think that Professor Gates completely read Michael Bradley's The Iceman Inheritance before referring to it because in it Michael Bradley has very little to say about the Jews.
The book, in essence, is about the rise of a certain kind of temperament that changed the world-the European Personality. This personality has shown little or no respect for civilizations, cultures and ways of life that it did not create. Cultures and people that the European did not understand were declared primitive. In the last 500 years especially, European historians have inferred, or said outright, that the world waited in darkness for the Europeans to bring the light. In fact, the Europeans destroyed more civilization than they ever created.
They destroyed civilizations that were already old before Europe was born. Michael Bradley was characterizing the Europeans as "Icemen" is not totally incorrect, if it is incorrect at all. I wrote the Introduction to the new edition of this book, because I considered the book to be of some significance in explaining the origin of racism. I did not say the book was a masterpiece of the greatest achievement in writing. It was good basic research and told honesty about Europeans' beginnings and the impact of racism on the broader world. I have also written the Foreword to another book by Michael Bradley that will be even more controversial, Chosen People From The Caucasus: Jewish Origins, Delusions Deceptions, and Historical in the Slave Trade, Genocide Cultural Colonization. (Third World Press, Chicago). My writing on Black-Jewish relationships is not new. I participated in forums on this subject in the old Harlem History Club in the 30s.
In my latest book, Notes for an African World Revolution: Africans at the Crossroads, (Africa World Press, Trenton, 1991), Chapter Four is called 'Africa, Zionism, and Friends Without Friendship." This is an analysis of 500 years of African-Jewish relationships. I am not writing about an historical Black-Jewish affiance, because the one often referred to is a myth. There can be no successful alliance between weak people and strong people. There have been times when it was to the best interest of the Jews to support certain Black causes, and they have supported them. When it was no longer in their interest, they withdrew from them. The Jewish people have practiced what all people on this earth have a right to practice the essential selfishness of survival. Indeed, I have criticized multiculturalism and Jewish control over the education system in New York City and the education system in the United States, in general, especially the Teachers Union. Jews have had no compunction in fighting for a holocaust curriculum.
And in many schools it is mandated and Black students must learn about the Holocaust before they learn about their own history. Over the years, I have said repeatedly I am not willing to argue whether Hitler killed 6,000,000 or six. He was wrong if he only killed six. I think he committed one of the greatest crimes in history. No human being would ever approve of this crime. If we are honest about historical information, we would know that the mass murder and what is referred to as the Holocaust was a small event in comparison to other mass murder events in history.
The Belgians killed three times more people than this in the Congo. In an island near Australia called Tasmania, the British killed every man, woman and child. In the years of the slave trade, Africa lost over one hundred million people. For every African captured, three were killed. The Arab slave trade in East Africa that started a thousand years before the European Atlantic slave trade and the Atlantic slave trade that lasted approximately 300 years was a holocaust against African people, which started 500 years ago and is not completely over to this day. If the four policeman in Los Angeles had been beating a dog instead of Rodney King, they would have been put on trial and convicted.
It is time to speak of the Great Holocaust in history. The European holocaust, I repeat, was small in comparison to some of the others. When Professor Gates refers to me as the paterfamilias of the Afrocentric movement," I'm not too clear about whether this is a compliment or a thinly veiled insult. I did not go to the dictionary to look up the words because I never use dollar words in 25 cents situations. But, as a matter of fact, my interest in African history and world history in general started when I was a Baptist Sunday School teacher in Columbus, Georgia, where I grew to early manhood. I could not find the image of my people in the Bible, so I began the search through the literature of the world until I found them and learned why some people considered it a necessity to leave African people out of the respectful commentary of history. I became active in the old Harlem History Club at the Harlem YMCA soon after arriving in New York City at the age of 18 in 1933.The study of African history, culture and politics and world history in general has been the all-prevailing passion of my existence. It is something I do, like breathing is something I do. I think too much fuss has been made of the case of Professor Jeffries who has said nothing that he cannot document.
It is too often forgotten that most of the information Professor Jeffries gave on the slave trade was taken from Jewish writers. The book, The Grandees, by Steven Birmingham, set his search in motion. He read large numbers of documents over and beyond that book, such as more revealing books by Professor Ben-ram Wallace Korn: Jews and Negro Slavery in the Old South 1789-1865, (1961), and The Early Jews of New Orleans, (1969).The story of Aaron Lopez of Newport, Rhode Island, is too well-known to be retold here. Conrad Muhammad and Kahlid Kahfah are not intellectual cohorts with Professor Jeffries. I doubt if he's met either one of them. Neither one of these men belongs to the academic community, nor is either one well read enough to be classified as a scholar. They are mainly Moslem zealots; not too different from zealots of other religions. I have no argument for or against the Learned Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I have not been able to authenticate it one way or the other.
If someone assures me that it is a piece of fiction, I am not prepared to argue. Professor Gates' complaint about the book, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews seems without justification. The book is no masterpiece. It is a competent piece of research. The documentation is good. Instead of complaining about the footnotes, Professor Gates should read some of the footnotes and the books they refer to; especially he should read the works of Professor Bertram W. Korn, an able Jewish scholar whose writings about the role of American Jews in the slave trade is most revealing. Professor Gates should also learn that neither Blacks nor Jews can go on forever denouncing every thing that is not in their favor.
Honest sentiment and some very able research in favor of the Jewish people was started in the old Harlem History Club by Willis N. Huggins in the 30s. Some of the best known of these findings were published in the Chicago Defender and in the magazine, The African. The following quote is from Willis N. Huggins' article, "How Wrong is Hitler?...On the History of Jews, Black Folk and 'Aryanism?'" (Chicago Defender, Chicago, January 28, 1939).When the news broke in the American Press on July 15th that the Italians were ready to go tread "The Aryan Path," it evoked as much laughter as the world may get when news comes from Germany that Max Schmeling has been cast out of the "Aryan Fold" because "anonymous scientists" have discovered that he has a grandfather named Goldberg.
"Political Aryanism," according to a prominent Nazi leader, "aims to turn its ire against Jews, Gypsies and the Negro races. "Since Jews are able to take care of their part of this "sentence" and, doubtless, the Gypsy does not give a hoot I should like to summarize the reactions of black folk to the new "Aryan Wave." If we should look at the records we would see that the early Aryan language-groups stemmed from the black Dravidians who occupied southern India in remote times. 'Me two peoples mingled freely. Thus, the so-called Indo-European movements around 2,500 B.C., were basically migrations of a Negroid folk which pooled itself in southern southeastern and southwestern Europe, around 2,000 B.C. Indeed black African races, The Grimaldi" had already covered most of Europe as early as 20,000 B.C.
They left a secondary African base for art in ancient Hellas (Greece) and a primary African base for color in Austria, Italy, France, Spain and Portugal. Willis N. Huggins also wrote a series of articles on the African origin of Adolf Hitler's racist symbols. In my opinion, I think both Blacks and Jews are often arguing about the right thing the wrong way. Jews who lived in slave trading countries participated in the slave trade as citizens of the respective country. Slavery was a business, a dirty business, but still a business. Business people engage in any business where profit can be made. The same thing is true about business people living in colonial countries in relationship to African people. I place no special blame on Jewish people who are white Europeans. I offer no special vindication, either. Their behavior in relationship to non-Europeans is basically the same as other Europeans. The internal difference and difficulties that Jews have had within the White family does not alter or change what I have just said.
What Professor Gates, the Jews and some people referred to as "Black Conservatives" fail to understand is that the African people throughout the world have suffered a special catastrophe over and above that of other people of the world. When Europeans rose in the 15th and 16th century, started the slave trade, colonized history and information about history, they also colonized the image Of God. They took away from millions of people the image of their original God-concept and replaced him or her by a god conceived in Europe. Again, I ask Professor Gates and other Black conservatives to try to understand that for 500 years we have lived in a European-conceived intellectual universe. I am willing to acknowledge that I am influenced by this conception, but I am, at least, at war against it because I realize that it is not only detrimental to my people, it is detrimental to the whole world.
Professor Gates and other Black conservatives are the crawling dogs to this new design to continue European world dominance. Professor Gates is snide in his assumption that "We can rarely bring ourselves to forgive those who have helped us." The truth is the contrary. African people have always over-rewarded those who have helped them, often to their detriment. I wish he would explain the nature of the help and the time it was given. All people that have come among us have taken more than they have given and have eventually done us more harm than good. If you forgive the modesty, I refer you to my pamphlet, Black, White Alliances: A Historical Perspective (Third World Press, Chicago, 1971).Professor Gates keeps referring to an historical alliance between Blacks and Jews. I wish he would be more precise and say when this historical alliance occurred. I have been a teacher of African World History most of my life and a student of history in general. I know of no evidence indicating such an alliance.
The earliest opportunity for a coalition between Blacks and Jews came in 1675 B.C., when an African people called the Egyptians took in the sons and daughters of Abraham, who were fleeing from hunger and starvation in Western Asia. After receiving food, clothing and shelter as well as the foundation for Judaic culture, language and religion, the majority of these a guests" joined the invaders, the Hyksos (or Shepherd Kings) rather than form an alliance to defend the country of their African benefactors. They had found a greater acceptance in Africans than Africans have ever found in a European-dominated country. With this visit to Africa, the people who would later be known as Jews conspicuously entered world history.
Professor Gates, Cornel West and other Black conservatives use beautiful words, sometimes to say nothing, sometimes to say what has already been said and sometimes to say what is not in debate. They display their ignorance of European history and history in general. They decry any form of Black nationalism and often call it racism without knowing that for the last 500 years the world has been controlled by European or White nationalism. African self-assertion, the demand for a proper curriculum in the schools demand that we stop praising a liar and a faker like Christopher Columbus who discovered absolutely nothing: threatens an apparatus of European control set in motion by the Atlantic slave trade and continued with colonialism that ultimately laid the basis for present-day monopoly capitalism.
No matter what Europeans say they believe religiously, politically or culturally, their main objective in the world is control. Everything that has ever been developed in the European mind was meant to facilitate mind control of the world. There are no exceptions, Left or Right politically. Black conservatives are really frustrated slaves crawling back to the plantation, figuratively, letting their master know that they are willing to go back into bondage. One needs to question their words because, as slaves and enemies of their people, they will say what they are told to say and do what they are told to do. The Black conservatives have nothing to conserve except their miserable obscurity and their tragic cowardice.
These pathetically lost creatures and avid White behind kissers don't have the nerve to be African or Black. To be African or Black with the understanding of all of its ramifications is, in itself, a commitment to the unification and uplift of all African people on the face of this earth. It is a commitment; also, to take Pan-Africanism beyond its narrow base of Black Nationalism to a concept of an African world union. When the real tragedy of Black-Jewish relations is finally identified, I think it will be the dictionary and how we have misused its words.
Here is a case where semantics change depending on who is listening and what they are listening for. Your listener will often hear what you did not say and stubbornly ignore what you said. The present controversy around Black and Jewish relations is a good example of a poor and unimaginative use of words. What exactly do we mean by Black-Jewish relations? From these words we have no way of knowing that there are Blacks who are also Jews, members of the Hebrew faith. There is a genuine conflict between Black and Jewish people, and this conflict has international implications.
We can not deal with this conflict honestly until we call it by its correct name and examine its origin and development. African people the world over have no culture or religious fight with Jewish people. We come out of pluralistic societies, of our own making, where we lived side by side with a multiplicity of cultures and religions, most of the time in peace. Cultural and religious tolerance is part of our heritage as a people. If we were disposed to be against any culture or religion, it would probably not be Jewish culture and religion that had part of its early development in Africa.
Now that I have eliminated culture and religion as the basis of the Black-Jewish conflict, precisely what is the conflict about? It is about power and the emerging expectations of most of the world's people who until recently were mainly ruled by Europeans or people of European extraction. The one thing the conflict is not about is anti-Semitism. There is a world-wide Black-White conflict which is part of the broader conflict between European and non-European people. African people are on one side of that conflict, and the people we refer to as Jews are on the other side.
When I use the words Jews or Jewish people, I am referring to White people of European descent, whose culture, development and political loyalty is European. This political loyalty to Europe and the part that Jewish people still play in maintaining European world-wide power, and not anti-Semitism, is the basis of the conflict between us. This conflict will become more fierce and tragic as non-European people challenge the power of European people all over the world.
With urgency I invite you to read Yosef A.A. ben-Jochannan's book, We the Black Jews and the book by John G. Jackson, Christianity Before Christ. I believe that Blacks and Jews need a genuine partnership. Before one can be built both of them have to be honest in admitting that they have no partnership now. Figuratively speaking, the partnership between a horse and a rider is neither a partnership or an agreement.
Today the Jews are aligning themselves with the forces of White supremacy that is diametrically opposed to the interest of most of mankind. I think they have made a political mistake of disastrous proportions, and I compare their present political position with the period of Joseph and his brothers in Egypt and the period and time that followed the loss of political connections with the Egyptian Court that Joseph made for them. And I wonder will their present position lead to another time when a king will arise, figuratively speaking, who politically knew not Joseph.
The Black Blogger Neyo Webster has compiled material which he claims proves Jewish Dominance in Pre-Nazi Germany: his sources however have not been verified.
|Click for Realhistoryww Home Page|