White people, conflicted wanna-BEs

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Joro, Sep 7, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. x - calli

    x - calli friend of israel

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 1999
    Messages:
    13,402
    correct.

    civilization is based on cities, trade and interaction. any time people are isolated from the world, there is usually stagnation... whether its an island in the ocean, or people living in rugged mountain regions, or people who culturally isolate themselves.

    one historian said that civilization spreads far horizontally, but does not spread vertically.. in past times, people living in mountainous regions (balkans, appalachia, scottish highlands) often were far less advanced and built up than people in the lowlands, because they were cut off and isolated from the world and sometimes from each other.

    one reason the Jews have been so successful is because theyve been dispersed in the diaspora among numerous nations and cultures. Rome would never have been so successful without its roads and urban centers. and remember that the renaissance started in italy which was very connected to the world (to both east and west) and in cities like florence.

    as far as europes success, it has a pretty good environment. its not too dry or wet, plenty of arable land, and there are many navigable rivers as well as many natural harbors and a long coastline. and the various western european nations and cultures have been easily able to interact among themselves and other civilizations.

    africa, on the other hand, has an extreme environment... especially subsaharan africa. jungles leach all nutrients out of soil, and savannahs cant be farmed either. there are intense dry periods and monsoons. their rivers are far fewer given the size of the continent, and are often difficult to navigate with rapids and so on, and they get too shallow in a dry season. the coastline is also smooth with few natural harbors. and the tse-tse fly plagued men and animals alike with sleeping sickness.. not to mention other diseases which run rampant.
    this is why africa, through much of its history, has been divided, tribal, and unadvanced. though i will say that africa north of the sahara is better, as is western africa.. and both those areas have seen more advanced kingdoms and civilizations. ancient egypt in particular was brilliant, and it was based around a reliable, navigable river which flooded at regular intervals - the Nile. not that there havent been some kingdoms and development in subsaharan africa, but not nearly as much.

    overall, cultural exchange and connections to the world lead to greater advancement. it certainly helped lead europe to success.. and its also the reason why computers and internet are the 5th great revolution in history.
    test
  2. Joro

    Joro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    5,054
    Radium.......

    I apologize. I completely missed your bullshit post. I'll respond now.

    Your premise, if I understand you, is that advancements in civilizations are proportional to population density. And Europe's population dispersal lends itself more to civilization.

    Ok. Then why were Europeans barbarians for so long?

    You have this image in your head of Africans being spread out, each man farming his land in isolation.

    Meanwhile, the truth of Africa having been the world center of trade is lost on you.

    Meanwhile the truth of the Moors, black Africans who conquered Europe and built its first universities, is lost on you.

    Meanwhile ancient societies like Zimbabwe, Timbuktu, Benin, Carthage, Aksum and Nubia .... are all unknown to you.

    Civilization flourished in Africa while white Europeans were 'densely' packed in caves.
    test
  3. Joro

    Joro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    5,054
    If it were true that civilization spreads horizontally and not vertically, than Europe never would have been civilized.

    The tse-tse fly? Affected Africans kept goats instead of cows.

    Diseases? Africans developed immunity to them over the millenia in the constant war between microbes and their bodies. As far as diseases go Africa was only dangerous to white men in that respect, whose bodies had not developed the weapons to fight them.

    Savannas? Well, actually, Africans perfected intricate irrigation systems for farming. Which book told you savannas couldn't be farmed? Burn it.

    Harsh climate? Africa does NOT have one particular climate. Every type of climate found on the globe can be found in Africa.

    As well as every type of people. Don't talk about lack of cultural exchange. People have been migrating in and out of Africa since the beginning of mankind.

    There's a number of inaccurate assumptions in your post.
    test
  4. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    not arguing for density

    arguing cross-cultural interaction

    key difference

    do you know why?

    dope ass post @ X-calli too

    and *kanye interruption* @ you thinking that moors settling in the Iberian Peninsula = conquering all of Europe
    test
  5. Joro

    Joro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    5,054
    I did not say ALL of Europe .... I just said Europe ...

    They only had a stronghold on a piece of the continent, but their cultural influence was widespread.

    Fact is, they built Europe's first universities....Europe's first street lights ....
    test
  6. x - calli

    x - calli friend of israel

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 1999
    Messages:
    13,402
    i was quoting a historian who lived at least 100 years ago - id have to check my books. for most of history its generally been true though - cities, urbanization and civilization have mostly been in lower, flatter terrain. thats not to say the pyrenees cant be crossed for example, but theyre not going to be nearly as settled.

    maybe so.. but theyve definitely done their share of damage.

    its true that the africans developed resistances, and european colonization of africa did not really get started until european medicine got better. but africans were certainly not completely immune to all those microbes.

    they CAN be farmed by way of irrigation.. after all, the egyptians farmed harsher terrain through their extensive irrigation. but savannahs are a good deal more difficult to farm than arable terrain.

    that is true. and it can often be harsh.. even in temperate areas, uneven rainfall has presented a problem.

    theres certainly been some exchange and migrations, but the Sahara desert acted as a wall to the rest of the world in many ways. i also described earlier why the continent isnt too conductive to river travel and seafaring. i recall reading that subsaharan africa would gain knowledge from other areas through Islamic mediums.. also, the city of khartoum in sudan/nubia was a great city of trade and learning. but much of the continent has been cut off from external civilization in many ways.. they were certainly at a disadvantage when compared to western/eastern europe and the middle east for example.

    certain issues did need clarification, but my general ideas are on point..
    test
  7. x - calli

    x - calli friend of israel

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 1999
    Messages:
    13,402
    another thing, lets not go too far astray saying that "black moors" brought so much advancement to europe. spain was conquered by the Islamic Caliphates - a civilizing force from the middle east, starting with the arabs in particular. its a bit of a misnomer to identify this with black people, though the Moors did have dark complexion.

    the Islamic Caliphates were an advanced civilization in their day, and were well ahead of europe. when they conquered spain, they built universities, medical centers, roads, street lamps, and plenty of other infrastructure. they also brought much knowledge of philosophy, science, mathematics and so on. its the reason why the word "algebra" is of middle eastern origin, to give one example. many classic texts, including works by the ancient greeks, were brought to europe by the Muslims.

    im not going to group every people with darker skin in with "black civilization" which quickly becomes an arbitrary and imposed category on people who were not african.. and in fact, the arabs enslaved africans.
    test
  8. Joro

    Joro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    5,054
    The Moors weren't black? Look, while Europe was in its "Dark Ages", West African kingdoms had universities where the world's first eye surgeries were being performed. And have you ever read Shakespeare's Othello? He was a black moor. Here, read up:

    "The Greeks were the first civilized Europeans who were primarily civilized by the Black Africans of the Nile Valley. The Greeks passed on this acquired culture to the Romans who ultimately lost it, thus initiating the dark ages that lasted for 500 years. Civilization was again restored to Europe when another group of Black Africans, The Moors, brought the Dark Ages to an end.

    In trying to hide the truth, white historians promote the lie that it was the Europeans who gave civilization to Africa when in fact this is a total reversal of the truth. In school you might have been brainwashed into thinking that western or white civilization was founded on Greek civilization, which seemed to just suddenly appear out of nowhere. What they were trying to conceal or deny was the fact that Greek civilization was a descendant, a child of the more advanced Black African civilization which had preceded it by thousands of years. In fact, Greek legend tells of Egyptian and Phoenician conquerors who had been ruling Greece until the 14th or 15th century B.C.

    Muhammad, the Arab prophet, began to preach the word of Islam at the start of the 7th century. The Arabs, obsessed with religious zeal, sought to spread Islam and conquer the world, and by 708, the Arabs had overrun North Africa. Consequently, the Moors in large numbers accepted Arabic as the national language and converted to Islam, the religion of their conquerors.

    In the year 711, a Black Moorish army from Morocco arrived in Spain under the command General Tarik ibn Ziyad (al Gibral), with 7,000 troops consisting of 300 Arabs and 6,700 native Sudanese, - an Arabic word for Black people."




    Here's the first sentece of preceding paragraphs:

    "By the 11th century, however, the Moroccan Islamic rulers of Spain had become decadent and soft, and in 1086 under the command of the Black-skinned Yusuf ibn Tashfin, the Almoravids, a dynasty of very Black Muslim sultans from Senegal in the heart of western Africa arrived, further consolidating the earlier incursions."

    AND ....

    "It is said that a Black Moorish woman named Nugaymath Turquia was the leader of a contingent of 300 Black Moorish Amazon Queens with their heads shaven, leaving only a top knot. They were described as "negresses" and were members of the Almoravid Dynasties which occupied Spain in 1086AD. The Almoravids were a heavy Black population, originating in southern Morocco and Northern Senegal, in western Africa."

    AND ....

    "Al-Mansur, known to his subjects as The Black Sultan, came to power in Africa during a period when the Christian re-conquest of Spain had again obtained tremendous momentum, since the Almoravids, like the Umayyads before them, had become decadent and soft. Al-Mansur thus conquered and began to expand the empire that was first established by the great Almoravid leader, Yusuf ibn Tashfin"


    LINK------- Africans from the Nile Valley first civilized the Europeans. -------LINK

    All this is just to show that the Moors were black.

    So the story goes like this: Blacks civilized Europe, nurturing Greece and Rome, but white barbarism fucked it up. Then Blacks came back and civilized the continent again.

    Not what you're taught in school, right? I know ...

    But remember, history is always written with an agenda. And the society you live in is not too far removed from enslaving blacks - as well as raping Africa to this day - and these actions must be justified somehow.
    test
  9. liquid`acid

    liquid`acid gods busy can I help you?

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2005
    Messages:
    13,603
    kind of a jaded write up but pretty much accurate to what i was taught in school


    i think it should be noted that the christians in their typical massive ignorance did believe they were 'civilizing' the african population despite the fact that everytime they went to conquer them (the crusades is a good example) they were astounded by there opponents cities.

    despite being somewhat portrayed as a black vs white war in the site you posted it was actually a religion vs religion war.

    you should also note that civilizations go thru peaks and valleys.. obviously while the christian controlled civilizations were going thru a valley the islamic civilizations were at a peak... while one is in a peak they often conquer the others in a valley.. it has always been this way.
    test
  10. x - calli

    x - calli friend of israel

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 1999
    Messages:
    13,402

    first of all, moors included blacks, but moors is a general north african term. naturally the islamic conquest of spain included black people at the helm and in the ranks, but my point was that it was the advance of a middle eastern islamic society and civilization.. not strictly black.

    i believe i mentioned earlier that north africa, and to a lesser extent west africa often achieved quite a bit, more so than south of the sahara.



    as far as the greeks, naturally they learned much from civilizations that came before them, notably the ancient egyptians, but others as well. i know the greek alphabet comes from the phoenician alphabet, which came from canaan. but the greeks were not purely an offshoot of egypt or canaan. the classical civilization has roots in older cultures like the minoans, and other bronze age greeks even before them.

    you should give credit where its due, even if the people happen to be white. blacks were not the only bearers of civilization - greeks and romans were too. and so were the persians, and chinese, and so on.

    by the way, writing was independently invented around the world by egypt (heiroglyphs), sumer (cuneiform), china, and mesoamerica. theres a few other examples as well such as the script of the indus valley civilization. this example shows that blacks are not the only civilizing force in history... though they have certainly constituted one of them.
    test
  11. Joro

    Joro New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    5,054
    ^^^You're serious huh .....and you have the nerve to talk about "give credit where it's due" ....

    The first two Empires of ancient China, the Xia Dynasty and the Shang Dynasty, were black people - of the Fertile African Crescent by way of Iran. ( Black Chinese )

    The founders of the civilization of the Indus Valley were also black. ( THE AFRICAN PRESENCE IN INDIA: A PHOTO ESSAY )

    According to you, North Africa "achieved quite a bit" and West Africa achieved a little less, and south of the Sahara was barren, cut-off from humanity. "The closer to white people, the closer to civilization", is that the idea?

    Or is it about trade and access? If it is, then, I quote..."The civilization of Kush arose in Nubia as a major trading terminus; later, as caravan routes linked Kush with Niger basin, the Congo basin, and the Ethiopian highlands, it would provide goods from central, southwestern and southern Africa to the peoples of the Mediterranean region as well as the Red Sea region. Some Kushite goods were trans-shipped to India and China; Chinese copper vessels have been found at Meroe" ( http://www.thewha.org/bulletins/spring_2006.pdf scroll down to page 12)

    South Africa developed iron smelting techniques independently of the middle east. In fact, their development predates it, and their technique is more advanced, producing hotter ovens.

    The civilization of ancient Zimbabwe was for years covered up by the imperial/colonial powers of southern Africa. Their agenda is obvious. The history of the south of the continent remains unexamined and/or suppressed for the same reason.

    Don't patronize me with comments like, "blacks are not the only civilizing force in history... though they have certainly constituted one of them".......ONE of them? Blacks ARE the civilizing force of history.

    As for the Moors....because they were converted doesn't mean they were an extension of Arab civilization. They were Africans in Africa ruling themselves. I know it eases your white heart to see the Moors as anything but black.
    test
  12. FlyChick

    FlyChick New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,305
    To argue against the fact that white people are thieves and oppressors would be a waste of your time. Why? because its the truth and anybody with a thinking brain who is not in denial can clearly see it.
    Im half white...and no my other half isnt black, but ill admit to the negativity of white people and the bullshit they have brought on, and continue to bring on to the people of this world.
    But what about the evil that other cultures and races have committed? yes, nobody is denying there are evil people of all races, but the whiter race takes the cake. look at history, look at many of the problems today, the white race is to blame for so much more than any other race.

    The ironic thing is that the white race got their power through their insecurity. Only insecure people oppress and kill. Only insecure people would claim that Africans were less human just because of the way they physically look.
    At one time Europeans were considered uncivilized and stupid by the rest of the world.
    test
  13. FlyChick

    FlyChick New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,305
    That being said, you cant hate all white people because not all white people committed these acts and a lot of them are oppressed too. So being racist and hateful back wont do anybody any good.
    test
  14. x - calli

    x - calli friend of israel

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 1999
    Messages:
    13,402
    your statements are entirely untrue, except for the fact that europe was once a backwater.

    whites are no better or worse than any other race or group in history. europeans have built and advanced themselves.. just because theyve been influenced and learned from other civilizations, doesnt mean that they didnt achieve quite a bit themselves.

    colonialism was very exploitive, but thats because europeans had guns and the natives did not. anytime in history when one group has great power over another group, bad things usually happen. this also ties into slavery.. did whites own and trade slaves? yes.. were they the only ones? no. slavery has been known in most civilizations throughout the world, and most peoples have been slavers or enslaved at some point. keep in mind that it was the british empire who led a worldwide abolition movement - once again, real history doesnt fit your preconceptions and agenda.
    test
  15. excedrin

    excedrin THE 8-BIT APE

    Joined:
    May 1, 2000
    Messages:
    3,468
    WE ARE THE WORRRRRLD

    WE ARE THE CHILDREEEEN
    Posted via Mobile Device
    test
  16. x - calli

    x - calli friend of israel

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 1999
    Messages:
    13,402
    the idea is trade and connections. i realize that there were kingdoms and civilization in subsaharan africa, but to a much reduced extent, for reasons i described (cut off from the world, bad environment, etc). learning more about them would be interesting, though.. i havent fully studied that region.

    im well aware of black migration, and of the human race starting in africa. but claiming that china and india were creations of black africans is wildly stretching the truth. blacks are not THE civilizing force, they are but one.. if you even take the concept of race seriously, and i try to stay away from it. race is often anachronistic and arbitrary when studying history.

    and maybe the moors were mostly black.. but the term "moor" is a loose one and includes various north african peoples, not all of them purely african by any means. my point was that the islamic conquest of spain was an advance of arab/islamic civilization, not so much african.
    test
  17. Mcg-

    Mcg- New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    183
    First interesting thread in ages, particularly x-cali and sodium's posts.

    Sadly, I have nothing original to add at the moment.

    continue...
    test
  18. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    yeah x-cally was dropping knowledge all over the place
    test
  19. Dex Lewis

    Dex Lewis Guest

    x-cal has been a tragically slept on intellectual powerhouse for years.
    test
  20. T.a.C

    T.a.C Guest

    wtf @ african americans being cut off from their history cuz of white people?


    dumb ass, the stupid african were sold into slavery by the smarter africans. wanna bitch, go to africa and find the family of those who sold them.

    you only make these threads because YOU want to be white. fuck off you moronic douche cock.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)