What does the black buddha represent?

[Faithless]

Have you ever wondered what the significance is in some Asian art to the blackness of some Asian diety images?

http://www.thewonderingeye.co.uk/Images/myanmar_yangon_black_buddha.jpg

This article talks about the THE BLACK PRESENCE IN THAILAND and how it transcends into its art.

http://www.cwo.com/~lucumi/thailand.html

Very interesting.

[SunWuKong]

oh great. more BS that attributes any and all references to dark-skinned people as a certain culture having African origin.

[Faithless]

Sorry. This has been asked before?

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by ChottoMatte@Jun 23 2003, 06:09 PM
Sorry. This has been asked before?
no no. it's just a pet peeve of mine, personally. a lot of black scholars are always trying to find African origins in just about every culture in the world. it's like that one guy that claims that Chinese civilisation was really African in origin because ancient texts made mention of people being dark. the reality is that "dark" and "black" are only one word in Chinese and that people being "dark" was a reference to people being peasants, because they were out in the fields all day and were really tanned.

[Faithless]

OK. I think I'm aware of that context.

I'm just trying to understand the Black Buddha thing.

[teaz0r]

this guy is talking out of his ass.

all this "didn't see black tourists
in Ayudhaya", because nobody
ever fucking goes to ayudhaya
anymore. it's hot and it's boring.

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by SunWuKung@Jun 23 2003, 05:16 PM
no no. it's just a pet peeve of mine, personally. a lot of black scholars are always trying to find African origins in just about every culture in the world. it's like that one guy that claims that Chinese civilisation was really African in origin because ancient texts made mention of people being dark. the reality is that "dark" and "black" are only one word in Chinese and that people being "dark" was a reference to people being peasants, because they were out in the fields all day and were really tanned.
hahahaha yup.

heard tons of that crap from black people when i was at columbia.

it's like all the black people woke up one morning and thought to themselves: "let's claim any historical references to the color black and any historical icons that are black in color as ours."

stupid ass mofo's.

[thaite]

Okay, that really dumb.

The Mon people, apparently highly Africoid, practiced Theravada Buddhism, and it seems that the present Thais adopted Buddhism from them. Indeed, more than ninety-five percent of the Thais today are Theravada Buddhists.

And you can't see me right now, but I'm rolling my eyes.

[kuanyin]

so i think its just the material used in that part of the world to make the statue. i think its beautiful. i like the detail of the statue. looks very serene and nonthreatening. like sometimes i look at jesus pix and i get scared cause i think, you're staring at me!. but the buddha's kinda just looking in your direction, but not at you. get it??

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by KuroBishounen@Jun 24 2003, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 24 2003, 09:04 AM
it's like all the black people woke up one morning and thought to themselves: "let's claim any historical references to the color black and any historical icons that are black in color as ours."

stupid ass mofo's.
............... <_<
settle down.

so you denying this happens?

if so you've been living under a rock.

[kuanyin]

and hey,

if we are political then why are we doggin' black peeps??

every racial group not in power has the right to find the truth to all of their history. how do we know what is really true at this point in time anyway? the white white west has destroyed so much of the truth that to me its plausible that lots of what black people say is true. yes, people can make shit up. but compared to all the WRONG shit white people made up, why can't people of color give them a taste of their own medicine? its not like white people are going to get hurt by this.

[kuanyin]

chasiubao,

if you were the chinesiest chinese man on YW then you wouldn't have even written that.

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by kuanyin@Jul 1 2003, 12:32 PM
chasiubao,

if you were the chinesiest chinese man on YW then you wouldn't have even written that.

hahahahaha you're kidding, right?

if you're not kidding and since i don't know your groove here on yw, my response:

jesus christ. you're uptight.

1)my signature is an inside joke

but, thanks for the lecture, ma.

2)finding one's own cultural history and past doesn't always mean encroaching, incorperating and/or commandeering upon another culture's history and past.

3)my reply to the post in question: the poster had some history and run ins with other members, which at times got ugly. be my guest and do a search if you want.

so take a sedative and chill.

[YuheiCarreau]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jul 1 2003, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by kuanyin@Jul 1 2003, 12:32 PM
chasiubao,

if you were the chinesiest chinese man on YW then you wouldn't have even written that.

hahahahaha you're kidding, right?

if you're not kidding and since i don't know your groove here on yw, my response:

jesus christ. you're uptight.

1)my signature is an inside joke

but, thanks for the lecture, ma.

2)finding one's own cultural history and past doesn't always mean encroaching and incorperating upon another culture's history and past.

3)my reply to the poster is or was a poster with numerous run ins with other members.

so take a sedative and chill.
What kind of a doctor are you, always prescribing these powerful drugs!

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by YuheiCarreau@Jul 1 2003, 01:42 PM
What kind of a doctor are you, always prescribing these powerful drugs!
one that takes cash only.

hi everybody...

http://members.aol.com/klepperco7/simpsons/simpimg/nick_riviera.gif

[golden_buns]

The highlight, therefore, of my first trip to Thailand was the National Museum, where are housed some of the finest and most African looking Buddhist images in the world, particularly those going back to the cultural phase known as the Mon or Dvaravati cultural period when an independent kingdom flourished in southern Thailand from the sixth to the eleventh century. The Mon people, apparently highly Africoid, practiced Theravada Buddhism, and it seems that the present Thais adopted Buddhism from them. Indeed, more than ninety-five percent of the Thais today are Theravada Buddhists.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA,

wow! that's just the best archeological conclusion I've ever seen, and it was fast too.

So if statues represent what really existed once upon a time, then that means Egypt had people who were half-man half-animal, right? or India has people who were blue, etc, etc

What a dumbass

[golden_buns]

Originally posted by kuanyin@Jul 1 2003, 09:31 AM
every racial group not in power has the right to find the truth to all of their history. how do we know what is really true at this point in time anyway? the white white west has destroyed so much of the truth that to me its plausible that lots of what black people say is true. yes, people can make shit up. but compared to all the WRONG shit white people made up, why can't people of color give them a taste of their own medicine? its not like white people are going to get hurt by this.
That's true;every racial group not in power has the right to find the truth to all of their history, but have you ever read any of those reports. They're mostly based on assumptions and not on facts. The argument that some of the pro-africans make is that some old texts refer people as 'dark'. I'd most likely assume that they could be talking about darked skinned peasants or people from SE or southern asia

It's cool to fight for unjustice but it's not cool to be condescending and give away what's yours just to please others.

Oh, and I also don't see the relation of white people doing wrong to african-americans and the Afrocentrism theories of Asia. You might wanna start a new thread and rant about it though

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Originally posted by kuanyin@Jul 1 2003, 12:31 PM
and hey,

if we are political then why are we doggin' black peeps??

every racial group not in power has the right to find the truth to all of their history. how do we know what is really true at this point in time anyway? the white white west has destroyed so much of the truth that to me its plausible that lots of what black people say is true. yes, people can make shit up. but compared to all the WRONG shit white people made up, why can't people of color give them a taste of their own medicine? its not like white people are going to get hurt by this.
Of course white people aren't getting hurt by this. It's a bunch of black pseudo-intellectuals misrepresenting Asian history. How is American black African Studies professors lying about Asian history an example of "people of color" scoring some victory against whites anyway?

If you're that concerned about presenting a united front with blacks against Evil Whitey, it's Afrocentric lies like this you should be concerned about anyway, cuz it'll just cause conflict between the average black guy on the street who has been duped into believing this bullshit, and the average Asian guy on the street who has already seen white "intellectuals" and Asian "intellectuals" of every other ethnicity pretending (Chinese are especially guilty of this kind of faulty historiography) like they played some major role in his ancestral country's history, and is already getting damn well sick of it by the time black "intellectuals" get around to it.

[golden_buns]

Man! I got fed up with this discussion at GoldSea

[deez nuts]

Originally posted by KuroBishounen@Jul 1 2003, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jul 1 2003, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by KuroBishounen@Jun 24 2003, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jun 24 2003, 09:04 AM
it's like all the black people woke up one morning and thought to themselves: "let's claim any historical references to the color black and any historical icons that are black in color as ours."

stupid ass mofo's.
............... <_<
settle down.

so you denying this happens?

if so you've been living under a rock.
Yes, I'm denying all Black people woke up one morning, and thought to themselves: "Let's claim any historical references to the color Black and any historical icons that are Black in color as ours."

Yes...I'm denying that all Blacks are "stupid ass mofos"...

No, I'm not denying you do have some Blacks who take an afrocentric pov on history as I'm sure other backgrounds have done...
typical self righteous and jump to conclusions approach as usual.

read it again, but as one continuous paragraph, this time. i broke it into paragraphs cuz it looks cleaner and easier on the eyes.

i should've made it more clear or flat out said that "all the black professors and their students i've encountered at columbia university woke up one morning...blah blah blah"

i guess what i said in the beginning in my initial post:

heard tons of that crap from black people when i was at columbia.

was already assumed that everything said there after would pertain solely to the experience in question when i was at columbia. i'll be more careful next time. but, this is just an online forum not some fucking dissertation to get a doctorate.

and before you jump to more conclusions, let me break it down for you:

columbia university, as you may or may not know, is situated in harlem, nyc on 116th street. columbia also has a high population of asian students. since the school is situated in harlem there are a lot of reknowned and radical thinking black history professors that hold tenure at the university. a good majority of these black professors have similar theories or near similar theories like the one in question. they in turn, teach it to their students, in which most are black students since it is black history class. black history classes are very popular amongst the black students (both matriculated and non-matriculated) at columbia, in part due to the reknowned department and staff. the students in turn buy into the theory and discuss it with their friends etc etc. you get the drift.

[golden_buns]

Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jul 1 2003, 05:59 PM
typical self righteous and jump to conclusions approach as usual.

i should've made more clear that "all the black professors at columbia university, i've encountered" after the infamous "all........"

i guess what i said in the beginning in my initial post:



was already assumed that everything said there after would be implied to the experience in question when i was at columbia. i'll be more careful next time.

and before you jump to more conclusions, let me break it down for you:

columbia university as you may or may not know is situated in harlem, nyc on 116th street. columbia also has a high population of asian students. since the school is situated in harlem there are a lot of reknowned and radical thinking black history professors. a good majority of these black professors have similar theories like the one in question. they in turn teach it to their students, in which most are black students since it is black history class. the students in turn buy into the theory. you get the drift.
Oh and this shit gets even better, now that they found some caucasian mummies in nothern china, Eurocentrists are starting to claim that ancient china was white

[yoMAMA]

Originally posted by golden_buns@Jul 1 2003, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jul 1 2003, 05:59 PM
typical self righteous and jump to conclusions approach as usual.

i should've made more clear that "all the black professors at columbia university, i've encountered" after the infamous "all........"

i guess what i said in the beginning in my initial post:



was already assumed that everything said there after&nbsp; would be implied to the experience in question when i was at columbia.&nbsp; i'll be more careful next time.

and before you jump to more conclusions, let me break it down for you:

columbia university as you may or may not know is situated in harlem, nyc on 116th street.&nbsp; columbia also has a high population of asian students.&nbsp; since the school is situated in harlem there are a lot of reknowned and radical thinking black history professors.&nbsp; a good majority of these black professors have similar theories like the one in question.&nbsp; they in turn teach it to their students, in which most are black students since it is black history class.&nbsp; the students in turn buy into the theory.&nbsp; you get the drift.
Oh and this shit gets even better, now that they found some caucasian mummies in nothern china, Eurocentrists are starting to claim that ancient china was white
Those mummies are not europeans, they are turks who happened to mingle with ancient china a lot :P

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by golden_buns@Jul 1 2003, 10:05 PM
Originally posted by Chasiubao_Boy@Jul 1 2003, 05:59 PM
typical self righteous and jump to conclusions approach as usual.

i should've made more clear that "all the black professors at columbia university, i've encountered" after the infamous "all........"

i guess what i said in the beginning in my initial post:



was already assumed that everything said there after&nbsp; would be implied to the experience in question when i was at columbia.&nbsp; i'll be more careful next time.

and before you jump to more conclusions, let me break it down for you:

columbia university as you may or may not know is situated in harlem, nyc on 116th street.&nbsp; columbia also has a high population of asian students.&nbsp; since the school is situated in harlem there are a lot of reknowned and radical thinking black history professors.&nbsp; a good majority of these black professors have similar theories like the one in question.&nbsp; they in turn teach it to their students, in which most are black students since it is black history class.&nbsp; the students in turn buy into the theory.&nbsp; you get the drift.
Oh and this shit gets even better, now that they found some caucasian mummies in nothern china, Eurocentrists are starting to claim that ancient china was white
oh yeah, i read about that. actually i thought it was in the western parts of China, close to central Asia?

[golden_buns]

Originally posted by SunWuKung@Jul 5 2003, 09:04 AM
oh yeah, i read about that. actually i thought it was in the western parts of China, close to central Asia?
Doesn't the western part of china have persians (caucasians) that have been living there for centuries?

China always had several ethnicities as far as I understand.

Anyways, the report I read was that ancient mighty China was ruled by caucasians and its decadence began when the 'mongoloids' took over. Which sounded almost the same as David Duke's theory on India

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by golden_buns@Jul 6 2003, 02:21 AM
Doesn't the western part of china have persians (caucasians) that have been living there for centuries?

China always had several ethnicities as far as I understand.

Anyways, the report I read was that ancient mighty China was ruled by caucasians and its decadence began when the 'mongoloids' took over. Which sounded almost the same as David Duke's theory on India
bah. what else is new. everybody has always wanted a piece of China. materially or historically.

[kimpossible]

no no. it's just a pet peeve of mine, personally. a lot of black scholars are always trying to find African origins in just about every culture in the world. it's like that one guy that claims that Chinese civilisation was really African in origin because ancient texts made mention of people being dark. the reality is that "dark" and "black" are only one word in Chinese and that people being "dark" was a reference to people being peasants, because they were out in the fields all day and were really tanned.

Why would an African American scholar want to lay claim to Chinese civilization? I've seen this subject posted a few times on various Asian American sites, usually by posters who claim to be black/African American. Is this more Asian exoticism, or do these scholars and people who promote these theories make the same claim for other races/cultures? Have Caucasian scholars done this as well [outside of the 'caucasian' mummies discovered that were actually turk/chinese]? Or anyone else? This just strikes me as bizarre to draw conclusions like that. It's difficult to understand the motivation behind it.

And I know the evolutionary theory about 'mankind' having originated from Africa, which is a very plausible theory - I believe it, but if I remember my dinky 200 series evolution class... those were primate hominids like australopithecene, not 'black' people.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Those mummies are not europeans, they are turks who happened to mingle with ancient china a lot :P

I've been wondering about that. I've met a few people from Turkey (not many) and some of their physical features (long face and nose, large eyes, jawline, cheekbone area etc) do seem to resemble some of my family members (and me) though I realize that Turkey is not anywhere near ethnically homogenous and I am nowhere near Turkish. Oh well, maybe my great great great great great grandfather was a Turkish rapist who found his way to a harem of Chinese women along the Pearl River Delta and took one down to Guangdong with him :laugh: ok kidding about that part...hope no one gets offended

[kitty]

I dunno, I'm agreeing with KB on this stuff... there is an afrocentric intellectual field. And I don't think it's misappropriating or trying to take over someone else's culture to examine the possible migration of different ethnic peoples way back when.

I mean, I always thought that Buddha came from India, and that's why Buddha is often described as darker. And I subscribe to the idea that Jesus was black after hearing the argument about his skin and hair from the bible... I don't think it's offensive for African/African Americans to push forth theories like this...

Then again, to say "ooh, the statues are black, therefore ancient china must've been full of displaced Africans" is just poor science.

[kimpossible]

I mean, I always thought that Buddha came from India, and that's why Buddha is often described as darker. And I subscribe to the idea that Jesus was black after hearing the argument about his skin and hair from the bible... I don't think it's offensive for African/African Americans to push forth theories like this...

That kind of makes sense. I'm with you on the Jesus thing due to the ''his hair was of lamb's wool" reference... but I still disagree with the idea that it equates 'black' and I don't think Indians count as African. Not every dark skinned person on the planet is of African origin. I'm of the opinion that it's not the entire body of African American scholars that's jumping to conclusions based on crappy research, just a few crackpots who aren't aware of their American-centric view of race and take translations too literally.

[kitty]

That kind of makes sense. I'm with you on the Jesus thing due to the ''his hair was of lamb's wool" reference... but I still disagree with the idea that it equates 'black' and I don't think Indians count as African. Not every dark skinned person on the planet is of African origin. I'm of the opinion that it's not the entire body of African American scholars that's jumping to conclusions based on crappy research, just a few crackpots who aren't aware of their American-centric view of race and take translations too literally.

Well, I think with the Jesus thing, I was told that the whole thing went down in an area that was originally ethnically black, and that's one of the other major pieces of 'evidence'.

[kitty]

back on topic: the stupidity of blacks towards 'claiming' asian civilisations is plain idiotic. but i think you can explain this because historically blacks, africans, have no history whatsoever. all they had was oral traditions - language (even then their language was never written down), music, but had no literature, sculpture, architecture, etc. so in essence, what the blacks want is some cultural status which they don't have.

Isn't this kind of implying that what African American scholars are doing is inherently wrong and fueled by some "pity me" gut reaction towards being wrenched from Africa? I mean, I think it's more than a search for "cultural status"...

[deez nuts]

And I know the evolutionary theory about 'mankind' having originated from Africa, which is a very plausible theory - I believe it, but if I remember my dinky 200 series evolution class... those were primate hominids like australopithecene, not 'black' people.

i knew i should've put african american/black on my college apps. maybe harvard would've taken me and offered me a free ride.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

and chinese girls are no exception man. no exception at all. my white friends all want a piece (literally) of them and they do get a 'piece' of them!! :laugh:

back on topic: the stupidity of blacks towards 'claiming' asian civilisations is plain idiotic. but i think you can explain this because historically blacks, africans, have no history whatsoever. all they had was oral traditions - language (even then their language was never written down), music, but had no literature, sculpture, architecture, etc. so in essence, what the blacks want is some cultural status which they don't have.

Judging from your history of posts, you sure you ain't a white guy? Anyways, if I'm wrong, my bad *shrug*

[YuheiCarreau]

Jesus was (or at least he claimed to be) the Jewish Messiah. Therefore I think any references to him being dark-skinned should lead us to the conclusion that he was Semitic (either Jewish, Arab, etc.) rather than that he was African...

[kitty]

long post coming up...

Jesus was (or at least he claimed to be) the Jewish Messiah. Therefore I think any references to him being dark-skinned should lead us to the conclusion that he was Semitic (either Jewish, Arab, etc.) rather than that he was African...

Actually, I talked to the guys who proposed the whole thing to me, and actually the idea is that he definitely wasn't white. Whether he is "African" or "Arab" or whatever really isn't all that important because he at the very least definitely couldn't have been a pale European. And back during those times, our definitions of Africa, Arab, and even race didn't really matter.

Here are the reasons though that Jesus may have been coloured, or as some would put it, African. (Disclaimer: I don't have as many factual sources as I could because I never majored in Africana Studies. I heard this from my friends who took the class but who can't remember the citations anymore. I do have an African American Bible lying around so I'll refer to that but other stuff I'm gonna have to say, there are sources out there, I just don't have them in front of me. Also, I'm not baptized, nor am I some religious expert, so forgive me if I'm generally unfamiliar with reference to Bible excerpts etc...).

Okay:

1) Revelations says that Jesus had hair like 'lamb's wool' and 'feet of brass' which is definitely not a blonde haired, light-skinned dude from Britain.

2) Jesus was the messiah of Jews. "In Matt. 2:15 and Hos. 11:1 we find the words, "Out of Egypt, I have called my son." Definitely not a white guy, unless he was very lost.

3) Jews were the slaves of the Egyptian elite. This is mainly conjecture, but where did the Egyptians get their slaves from? Most likely they didn't go club some Vikings over the head. Instead, they got their slaves largely from the surrounding area, including more southern (than Egypt) areas of Africa. Theory goes that original Jews were Ethiopian. (see point 5)

4) [I dunno how much this counts as evidence, but this is in the Bible I have in front of me so here's the quote]. "Literally hundreds of Shrines of the Black Madonna have existed in many parts of North Africa, Europe, and Russia".

5) Many 'compromised' by saying, maybe Jesus was Semitic. They are referring to our current idea of what a Semite is. According to this Bible intro, "this nineteenth-century term refers not to a racial type, but to a family of languages including both Hebrew and Ethiopic." Hence, original Jews may have arisen out of an area near Ethiopia and thus incorporated that language into the 'Semetic' language.

6) Our current conception of Arabs, "Semites", or Africans is... two thousand years too modern to apply adequately to the time of Jesus. Because of a lot of influx south from northerner, more lighter races, it is very likely that Arabs of today are lighter than Arabs of yesteryear. So saying "as a matter of fact, it's more likely he was an Arab or Semite looking (meaining bronzed) man" is a little anachronistic.

The whole reason why we pursue the "was Jesus coloured" question is because the current model of Jesus being the "image of God" and being "blonde and blue-eyed" has been used to oppress people of colour for centuries. The inherent idea being that because whites are the colour of Jesus, they are superior to people of colour. So, rather than African Americans trying to "claim" Jesus, they are actually trying to combat centuries of oppression and discrimination that hurt all of us.

[kitty]

back on topic: the stupidity of blacks towards 'claiming' asian civilisations is plain idiotic. but i think you can explain this because historically blacks, africans, have no history whatsoever. all they had was oral traditions - language (even then their language was never written down), music, but had no literature, sculpture, architecture, etc. so in essence, what the blacks want is some cultural status which they don't have.

Okay, forgive me but I didn't read your entired statement the first time. Now that I actually read what you said, I'm gonna have to refute. Sorry if this post is pretentious or condescending but I'm really astonished you could actually claim what you write above. Also, I've been reading Al Franken, and I think he's rubbing off on me.

"They have no history whatsoever"
The African people were, under some theories, the original man, and so were in Africa long before Asians were in Asia, Europeans were in Europe, and Bush stole the election. Even if not, there is documentation that Africans have been standing on the continent of Africa for thousands of years. In that time, I assume they would have accumulated some sort of collective experience, thus creating a 'history'.

Dictionary.com defines history as

his·to·ry
n. pl. his·to·ries
1. A narrative of events; a story.
2. A chronological record of events, as of the life or development of a people or institution, often including an explanation of or commentary on those events
3. The branch of knowledge that records and analyzes past events
4. The events forming the subject matter of a historical account
(my italics)


Therefore, it would be kind of difficult, if not impossible, for people to have no history. Unless they all dropped out of the sky two milliseconds ago.

"even then their language was never written down"
There is evidence of written language. Here's one:
http://www.adventureprone.com/travel/photos/thumbs/thumbDSCF1534.jpg

Yep, Egyptian hieroglyphics. Egypt is in fact in Africa. Here's another important example of the written language.

http://www.cla.umn.edu/courses/hist1011/images/image10.gif

This rosetta stone actually helped us translate egyptian hieroglyphics, which was previously too difficult for us to decode on our own. There might be other examples of African written language, and there might not be, but since I'm not an Africana major, I wouldn't know.

"[they] had no literature"
see above point.

"[they had no] sculpture"
Here's an example of some African sculpture:
http://www.webzinemaker.net/africans-art/photo/photo_270_1.jpg
Tada Seated Figure, ca. late 13–14th century
Copper; H. 21 1/8 in. (53.7 cm)
Tada National Museum, Lagos, 79.R.18

That one's an Ife Bronze (made by the Ife Casters, whom I assume made enough stuff to actually be capitalized in the historical record) The Tada village is found near the Niger River which is, I assume, near Niger and Algeria, in northern Africa.

Here's a terracotta piece from the same area:
http://www.webzinemaker.net/africans-art/photo/photo_269_1.jpg

In fact, there's a load of images of African sculpture here (http://www.webzinemaker.net/africans-art/). I found it just by doing a Google search on "African" + "primitive" + "sculpture"

"[they have no] architecture"
To say this, you would be saying that traditional Africans lived in the mud all the time and never built any architecture. I'm gonna have to disagree.

Again, let's turn to our friends, the Egyptians.
http://www.pma.edmonton.ab.ca/events/timetrav/iv/_images/pyramids.jpg
These are the pyramids of Gisa. They are sometimes called one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.

But, we don't need to look only at Egypt; here's another example:
http://www.pitt.edu/~tokerism/0040/images1/184.jpg
This is a traditional earthen roundhouses from the Tamberma (Batammaliba) region of Togo and Benin. The website I found this at didn't list a time period for when they were built but it is listed as being African in origin.

Basically, Morientes, I think that the only thing you got right in your statement is that Africans have a strong oral tradition, and that they have a musical history. The rest of it sounds like you are subscribing to the Western intellectual argument that Africa was filled with a bunch of barbaric primitives who were thankfully colonized and 'humanized' by those kindhearted American plantation owners, who finally gave them a culture and history of their own. That image -- the one of the barefooted, animalistic African -- is one that was created by Europeans to not only justify the slave trade to themselves but also to control the newly dubbed African Americans.

And before you go refuting that you meant African Americans have no culture, I can give you examples of a rich African American history, culture, language (no ebonics does not count), written language, and music. In fact, a lot of what we base modern American pop culture on was once a part of African American history, including jazz, the peanut, Martin Luther King Jr, and the traffic light.

In conclusion, I hope that your original statement was made hastily without much thought because I really can't understand how you could have made those sweeping generalisations any other way.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Okay, forgive me but I didn't read your entired statement the first time. Now that I actually read what you said, I'm gonna have to refute. Sorry if this post is pretentious or condescending but I'm really astonished you could actually claim what you write above. Also, I've been reading Al Franken, and I think he's rubbing off on me.

"They have no history whatsoever"
The African people were, under some theories, the original man, and so were in Africa long before Asians were in Asia, Europeans were in Europe, and Bush stole the election. Even if not, there is documentation that Africans have been standing on the continent of Africa for thousands of years. In that time, I assume they would have accumulated some sort of collective experience, thus creating a 'history'.

Dictionary.com defines history as


Therefore, it would be kind of difficult, if not impossible, for people to have no history. Unless they all dropped out of the sky two milliseconds ago.

"even then their language was never written down"
There is evidence of written language. Here's one:
http://www.adventureprone.com/travel/photos/thumbs/thumbDSCF1534.jpg

Yep, Egyptian hieroglyphics. Egypt is in fact in Africa. Here's another important example of the written language.

http://www.cla.umn.edu/courses/hist1011/images/image10.gif

This rosetta stone actually helped us translate egyptian hieroglyphics, which was previously too difficult for us to decode on our own. There might be other examples of African written language, and there might not be, but since I'm not an Africana major, I wouldn't know.

"[they] had no literature"
see above point.

"[they had no] sculpture"
Here's an example of some African sculpture:
http://www.webzinemaker.net/africans-art/photo/photo_270_1.jpg
Tada Seated Figure, ca. late 13–14th century
Copper; H. 21 1/8 in. (53.7 cm)
Tada National Museum, Lagos, 79.R.18

That one's an Ife Bronze (made by the Ife Casters, whom I assume made enough stuff to actually be capitalized in the historical record) The Tada village is found near the Niger River which is, I assume, near Niger and Algeria, in northern Africa.

Here's a terracotta piece from the same area:
http://www.webzinemaker.net/africans-art/photo/photo_269_1.jpg

In fact, there's a load of images of African sculpture here (http://www.webzinemaker.net/africans-art/). I found it just by doing a Google search on "African" + "primitive" + "sculpture"

"[they have no] architecture"
To say this, you would be saying that traditional Africans lived in the mud all the time and never built any architecture. I'm gonna have to disagree.

Again, let's turn to our friends, the Egyptians.
http://www.pma.edmonton.ab.ca/events/timetrav/iv/_images/pyramids.jpg
These are the pyramids of Gisa. They are sometimes called one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.

But, we don't need to look only at Egypt; here's another example:
http://www.pitt.edu/~tokerism/0040/images1/184.jpg
This is a traditional earthen roundhouses from the Tamberma (Batammaliba) region of Togo and Benin. The website I found this at didn't list a time period for when they were built but it is listed as being African in origin.

Basically, Morientes, I think that the only thing you got right in your statement is that Africans have a strong oral tradition, and that they have a musical history. The rest of it sounds like you are subscribing to the Western intellectual argument that Africa was filled with a bunch of barbaric primitives who were thankfully colonized and 'humanized' by those kindhearted American plantation owners, who finally gave them a culture and history of their own. That image -- the one of the barefooted, animalistic African -- is one that was created by Europeans to not only justify the slave trade to themselves but also to control the newly dubbed African Americans.

And before you go refuting that you meant African Americans have no culture, I can give you examples of a rich African American history, culture, language (no ebonics does not count), written language, and music. In fact, a lot of what we base modern American pop culture on was once a part of African American history, including jazz, the peanut, Martin Luther King Jr, and the traffic light.

In conclusion, I hope that your original statement was made hastily without much thought because I really can't understand how you could have made those sweeping generalisations any other way.

I personally think Morientes is white or at least not Asian. There's my assumption and/or sweeping statement.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Women say I'm really black due to my size and my physical prowess in bed.

P.S - Are you sure you're not a reincarnation of Frozen Pizza?

Uh...I am Frozen Pizza, haha. I just changed my name. Thought everyone knew that by now. :blink:

Physical size, yeah right. Not after all that bitching and whining about how your own physique just doesn't measure up cause ur 'Asian' :laugh: or how you always got beat up in school for bein 'Asian' but didn't do nuthin' about it cause you were physically inferior. Time to break out the UFC and K2 tapes.

[kimpossible]

Well, I think with the Jesus thing, I was told that the whole thing went down in an area that was originally ethnically black, and that's one of the other major pieces of 'evidence'.


Maybe it's a matter of semantics of race and ethnicity. I think of 'black' as a catch-all American term. Like 'white'. It makes sense since in the US we have a policy [at least in theory] of putting nationality before race, so to divide us up we look at skin color and assign a weird blanket ethnicity. I realize there are other languages that will use the words 'black person' or 'white person' to describe people of certain skin tones but the true ethnic geographies of Western Europe, the Middle East and Africa are so diverse, and the people have been on the same land for so long... black and white [as racial terms] lose a lot of meaning, or perhaps more importantly the peoples haven't abandoned so much of their unique ethnic or national identity.

Of course, that discounts people who live in border areas, wars, occupations, etc., but I'm not looking to write a short history of the world here.

Regarding the Jesus thing, if I wasn't clear enough I completely agree he wasn't what we would term in modern day American English as white. I also don't think he was what we would term in modern day American English as black. This might sound completely stupid, but since I don't know much about the history of Jesus saying 'he came from a black area' makes no more sense to me than 'he came from a white area.' given the geography and terminology.

So, in conclusion, because I'm starting to confuse myself, it's silly to so directly interpret histories written in non-English, and most likely ancient versions of the non-English language, and ascribe modern day American English definitions of racial identity without giving thought to the possiblity of vast differences in ethnicity. Short story, in the US we like to think in terms of black and white and nothing in between. That's what's bugging me. :)

[kitty]

Kittygirl - Hey, I'm impressed with your knowledge of Egyptian history, language and architecture. I guess you've proved to me that Africans, or is that Arabian-Persians (?), of Egypt produced one of the greatest civilisations in the world.

Funny, because I addressed this in my post. You said "back on topic: the stupidity of blacks towards 'claiming' asian civilisations is plain idiotic. but i think you can explain this because historically blacks, africans, have no history whatsoever. all they had was oral traditions - language (even then their language was never written down), music, but had no literature, sculpture, architecture, etc. so in essence, what the blacks want is some cultural status which they don't have."

Egypt is in Africa. An Egyptian is an African. Just because they had an advanced ancient civilization doesn't suddenly discount their geographic location.

More importantly, I only use an exclusively Egyptian example to discount your generalization that Africans had no written language. Like I said, I couldn't find anything else in a cursory search after two minutes, but there may still be examples of it.

Certainly though, what kind of view are you espousing if you're saying that civilizations are only advanced if they use writing? African tradition placed a lot of emphasis on oral tradition... it doesn't make them less advanced. That's something used by white anthropologists to discount non-white, "tribal" civilizations as less advanced.

Also notice I am citing non-Egyptian examples for sculpture and architecture. So exactly how do you still find your position defensible?

[kitty]

Maybe it's a matter of semantics of race and ethnicity. I think of 'black' as a catch-all American term. Like 'white'. It makes sense since in the US we have a policy [at least in theory] of putting nationality before race, so to divide us up we look at skin color and assign a weird blanket ethnicity. I realize there are other languages that will use the words 'black person' or 'white person' to describe people of certain skin tones but the true ethnic geographies of Western Europe, the Middle East and Africa are so diverse, and the people have been on the same land for so long... black and white [as racial terms] lose a lot of meaning, or perhaps more importantly the peoples haven't abandoned so much of their unique ethnic or national identity.

Of course, that discounts people who live in border areas, wars, occupations, etc., but I'm not looking to write a short history of the world here.

Regarding the Jesus thing, if I wasn't clear enough I completely agree he wasn't what we would term in modern day American English as white. I also don't think he was what we would term in modern day American English as black. This might sound completely stupid, but since I don't know much about the history of Jesus saying 'he came from a black area' makes no more sense to me than 'he came from a white area.' given the geography and terminology.

So, in conclusion, because I'm starting to confuse myself, it's silly to so directly interpret histories written in non-English, and most likely ancient versions of the non-English language, and ascribe modern day American English definitions of racial identity without giving thought to the possiblity of vast differences in ethnicity. Short story, in the US we like to think in terms of black and white and nothing in between. That's what's bugging me. :)

HH, I actually agree with you here, and I have to apologize since I misspoke about the Jesus thing before I checked on the facts and thoroughly thought about what I was saying. My bad...

[kimpossible]

HH, I actually agree with you here, and I have to apologize since I misspoke about the Jesus thing before I checked on the facts and thoroughly thought about what I was saying. My bad...

Oh no big. Don't apologize. :)

I myself just realized I was harping on semantics.

[Napoleon Chynamite]

Jealous now?




I see you're still upset over my remarks concerning Asian MA "Masters" and their chances in street brawls? Well, you're right to be upset since I'm still sticking with my opinion on physique and power over mythical ancient death strike techniques.

I can't help but be jealous of white boys. Keep up the hardcore training :happy: haha

[kitty]

I looked up the term "negroid" on an online dictionary. Here's what I found.


1. [n] a member of any one of several East African tribes whose physical characters show an admixture with other races.

2. [adj] characteristic of people traditionally classified as the Negro race; "negroid features"



That seems to imply anyone from the continent of Africa. However, consider the synonyms it listed, which gives you an idea of how offensive the term can be.


See Also
Black man, Black race, Black woman, colored, colored person, coon, darkey, darkie, darky, jigaboo, Negress, Negro race, Negroid race, nigger, nigra, person of color, person of colour, picaninny, piccaninny, pickaninny, spade, Tom, Uncle Tom


But anyways, Egyptians made their land in Egypt, which thus makes them Africans. To say that they therefore cannot be considered part of African history because they didn't originate in Africa is like to say that Japanese culture cannot be attributed to Japan because original Japanese people migrated out of China and there was some exchange of cultural traits.

More importantly, many cultures were influenced by others through trade and export during that time. This doesn't somehow diminish their achievements -- what you imply is that somehow the native Africans were "incapable" of great civilization on their own when you say "being at the crossroads of Asia and SE Europe may have been influenced by outside influences", without acknowledging their *own* influence in their culture.

You also might want to check out a book called Black Athena. It's really big and in two parts, and I myself haven't read it, but it's a book that argues, very convincingly, that many of Greek and Roman cultural achievements that we attribute to them today may have been appropriated from African and Asian cultures, such as some techniques used in their famous marble sculptures. From what I understand (a summary I received from a friend), the idea is that the Greek and Roman power elite sent out a number of scholars to the surrounding areas to observe and bring back wonders that they see, which were then incorporated into their own culture.

Does this somehow demean Greeks and Romans, making them little more than cultural theives? By your logic, our entire Western culture (based on the Greeks and Romans) is false.

[kitty]

So then, can you answer me: can the Hamites be regarded as coons or not?

not. funny.

[golden_buns]

That's exactly my point; If you read my reply to you, you would understand that I agreed with you that's why I said I was impressed with your knowledge of African, or shall we say Egyptian, traditions. I just replied that I do not know for certain whether Egyptians can be classified as negroid; the original inhabitants of Egypt were, if I'm not mistaken, Hamites and there does seem to be some evidence that Egypt, being at the crossroads of Asia and SE Europe may have been influenced by outside influences.

Actually, the southern inhabitants from Egytp were black, I can't remember their name right now, but they got to conquer the northern part a couple of times.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

But anyways, Egyptians made their land in Egypt, which thus makes them Africans.
Yes, they're Africans by that definition. By the same definition, so are Algerians, with whom you can start a fight sometime by telling him his mom was black. (And it's the same logic by which people lump Bangladeshis, Siberian aboriginals, Koreans, and Malays into an "Asian" category). But the Egyptians have about as much to do with the cultural practices of modern American black people or their Nigerian cousins as the Bhagavad Gita has to do with a 4th-generation JA. So I just find it rather amusing that as a result of them being on the same continent, black people will try to point them out as a "Black civilization." When in reality, they were more closely related to modern Arabs, who are just as racist and even more so against blacks as the KKK, took black slaves and castrated them and otherwise mistreated them.

[kitty]

*sigh*... African Americans are not nationally Africans. They are a culture created and heavily influenced by slavery and enforced "Americanization". Saying "but the Egyptians have about as much to do with the cultural practices of modern American black people" is an obviously pointless thing to say.

At no time do I claim that African Americans and Africans are similar or the same thing.

Why don't you say that which everyone around here is trying to dance around? People are trying to use "black" and "African" to try and make a point about "African Americans" -- that somehow they have "no culture". (And trying to avoid saying it so as not to sound un-PC). African and African American are not interchangable terms. Talking about one does not mean you can even say a damn about the other.

[SunWuKong]

Why don't you say that which everyone around here is trying to dance around? People are trying to use "black" and "African" to try and make a point about "African Americans" -- that somehow they have "no culture". (And trying to avoid saying it so as not to sound un-PC).

i don't really think anyone here but Morientes will go so far as to say that African Americans have no culture. others here are only disputing about what is considered African - Egyptians, Jesus, etc.

[kitty]

sorry... got upset and frustrated... my bad :p

[deez nuts]

you're all wrong.

jesus is latino. he had a last name too, forgot what it was.

it's really pronounced heeey-seeeus.

he really is the savior, he had the bestest weed in brooklyn on church ave.

church ave? coincidence? i think not.

the black drug dealers did try and run him off the block and claim it as their own though, those heathens. poor poor poor heeeeeeeeeeeeey-seeeeus.

[ChinaLama]

and chinese girls are no exception man. no exception at all. my white friends all want a piece (literally) of them and they do get a 'piece' of them!! :laugh:

back on topic: the stupidity of blacks towards 'claiming' asian civilisations is plain idiotic. but i think you can explain this because historically blacks, africans, have no history whatsoever. all they had was oral traditions - language (even then their language was never written down), music, but had no literature, sculpture, architecture, etc. so in essence, what the blacks want is some cultural status which they don't have.

Thank you for ignoring the existence of EGYPT.

oops never mind, just read the last few pages and see i'm repeating kittygirl. btw in the Bible, I think Ham was considered black but i'm not 100% sure. also, the fact that most Egyptians are of Arab descent now does not mean they were of Arab descent back in ancient times. A lot of things change in a few thousand years.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

btw in the Bible, I think Ham was considered black but i'm not 100% sure.
Yup, that's what slavers said too.

[ChinaLama]

Yup, that's what slavers said too.


and the point of that other than to strike a random low blow was...

[kitty]

Yup, that's what slavers said too.

I don't get it...

:confused:

[ChinaLama]

hey, i was just thinking, are there any Black Buddha blaxpoitation films?

[AliBabaIncorporated]

I don't get it...

:confused:
I thought you would be better versed in such knowledge of how Europeans used religion and academia to perpetuate the Evil Whitey Supremacy System, especially given that you got offended by Morientes' bad joke up there about Hamites.

But don't mind me, I just found it rather amusing that CL's argument for black Americans who never went near the Nile in their lives to point to and take pride in Egypt as a "black civilization" is the exact same faulty anthropological argument that Southerners and the Arabs from who they bought their slaves used to justify slavery --- that cursed Ham was black (http://www.umsl.edu/~cfh/abstracts/ham.html).

Anyway the whole point of this thread that got this whole discussion started was about black people and the major contributor to their ancestry Sub-Saharan Africans, not all people happening to live on the continent of Africa.

[ChinaLama]

oops, that didn't come out right. ;-)

Anyway, a perhaps better reason to think Egyptians were black is the appearance of men in Egyptian heiroglyphics. They're usually dark-skinned. Also, I'm gonna say this again, just because the majority of Egyptians are of Arab descent now or since 500 years ago, or even 1000 years ago, doesn't mean they were mostly of Arab descent 2000 or 5000 years ago. The ethnic composition of an entire region can and does change a lot through time.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

Anyway, a perhaps better reason to think Egyptians were black is the appearance of men in Egyptian heiroglyphics. They're usually dark-skinned
Well yeah, but their facial features don't look like Sub-Saharan African, notably nose and mouth. This goes back to the original thing which SWK was bitching about --- American Black Afrocentrists automatically associating any mention of "dark colored" skin as indicating Sub-Saharan African ancestry. But besides, the Egyptian drawings and sculpture weren't exactly known for photorealism --- they weren't so highly stylized like, say, statues on Easter Island, but still, it's laughable to see either the Afrocentrists or the white nationalists trying to draw racial conclusions by pointing to them.

[kitty]

I thought you would be better versed in such knowledge of how Europeans used religion and academia to perpetuate the Evil Whitey Supremacy System, especially given that you got offended by Morientes' bad joke up there about Hamites.

But don't mind me, I just found it rather amusing that CL's argument for black Americans who never went near the Nile in their lives to point to and take pride in Egypt as a "black civilization" is the exact same faulty anthropological argument that Southerners and the Arabs from who they bought their slaves used to justify slavery --- that cursed Ham was black (http://www.umsl.edu/~cfh/abstracts/ham.html).

Anyway the whole point of this thread that got this whole discussion started was about black people and the major contributor to their ancestry Sub-Saharan Africans, not all people happening to live on the continent of Africa.

oh, yeah, i knew about how the slavers used religion to oppress the slaves -- i just didn't know what you were trying to say, since it didn't seem to follow from the comment you were quoting...

[Napoleon Chynamite]

To all Moderators:- that was meant to be a joke.

Kittygirl is getting wound up on the definition of negroid and I'd thought she was getting too PC, so I'd thought I'd be on the light-hearted side.

Hey Tito Ortiz, I thought you said you were Asian? To refer to your past posts, all those asian chinky jokes must really have scarred you on the inside, especially if you're actually hispanic.

[golden_buns]

jesus is latino. he had a last name too, forgot what it was.

Gonzalez Espinoza de los Rios

[golden_buns]

it's really pronounced heeey-seeeus.


chucho... ay ayyyy ayyyyyyyy!!!! chuchito lindo

[deez nuts]

chucho... ay ayyyy ayyyyyyyy!!!! chuchito lindo

fumez mota?

[golden_buns]

fumez mota?

si, pinche cabroooon

[deez nuts]

si, pinche cabroooon


pinche punta