-somalis talk about when ppl say their not black etc

debso said:
cultural divisions caused by Europeans
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the ancient empires of Songhai, Kanem-Bornou, Mali, Ghana, Zulu were all the same Black people until Europeans set up trading posts along the coast of Africa and taught them those languages and customs they speak and practice?

White supremacy did not create the cultural/linguistic differences that exist among black peoples; Europeans exacerbated these differences to weaken the areas they wanted to colonize, and once under their control, spread their eurocentric (or white supremacist) views on the peoples of those territories.
 
reread what I said and you tell me what i'm saying.
I think you think you know more than me but you're not educating me, son.
 
to be perfectly clear

there wouldn't be the same divisions/differences in the diaspora if there wasn't a diaspora in the first place.
of course there would be cultural differences/etc. between tribes but the dividing of ppl from various tribes, which was done on purpose, and everything that came afterward, also which was done on purpose, has led to what you see today.

ados turning their nose up at black immigrants from the Caribbean and Africa (and Europe) doesn't exist and neither does west Africans turning their noses at the diaspora without white supremacy.
that's what i'm saying.

i'm not even talking about the diaspora (specifically meaning those that come from the transatlantic slave trade) and east Africans because we aren't direct descendants of east Africans (yes I know that Africans traveled but that's another topic so for the sake of what i'm saying we'll keep it at west Africans and the diaspora. I will say that not every east African looks down on us.

just like its not true that every west African looks down on black ppl in America.

we were broken on purpose and will remain broken unless we unite. how sad that ppl would rather focus on weak differences while the Chinese continue to colonize the continent and while the Europeans and americans equally exploit the continent.

lastly, there are many, many Yoruba, Igbo, Fulani, etc. descendants throughout the Americas that have maintained language, foods, religion, etc.
despite being in the diaspora. the only reason to focus on what separates us is to keep us separated. that's a tactic used to keep us down.
 
these same divisions are whats allowing Africa as a continent to be recolonized and to be continuously exploited and the rest of us outside of Africa are continuously treated like second and third class citizens, period.
ppl can take that how they want.

we are the only group of ppl that are bent on finding any and every reason to not unite meanwhile our counterparts play on that.
its ridiculous, sad and disgusting.

what benefit does focusing on anything other than uniting have for us? the world has united against us, lets divide and what...? what is the end goal in that?
serious question.

on another note I wish I could talk to Tariq nasheed in person on that topic with his condescending ***.
i'd happily debate him on this subject. that's another topic for another thread tho
 
What actually weakened the African continent so that the colonizers could take hold, was misogyny. Egotistical African tribesmen overthrew the power of African women as the spiritual head of the tribes. In their arrogance they ignored the warnings of those Priestesses to not allow trading along the west african coast line. Impressed with what the europeans held dear as currency, the tribesmen allowed the euro's to stay and trade, and the rest is history.

This war against racism is going to come. But the big war will be against misogyny. If the misogynists continue to have their way, oppressing women?

This world will continue to spiral downward, and not many will be spared.

That said, I wonder how those Somalis feel about what was revealed today about Ronald Reagan?
reagan-called-africans-monkeys-nixon-tape-740x410.jpg

Ronald Reagan called Africans at UN 'monkeys', tapes reveal

 
debso said:
reread what I said and you tell me what i'm saying.
I think you think you know more than me but you're not educating me, son.
Click to expand...
debso said:
there wouldn't be the same divisions/differences in the diaspora if there wasn't a diaspora in the first place
Click to expand...
Before we continue, we have to be clear on which differences we are talking about. I am talking about culture: languages, rites of passage into adulthood, death rituals, marriage rituals, political systems and social organization, etc... For example, the culture my wife is from doesn't have a monarchical tradition like my culture does. The way inheritance is handled in her tradition is very different than the way inheritance is handled in mine. Dietary restrictions in her tribe are different than the restrictions in mine.
These are the kind of differences I am referring to, and these are the things that survived (to an extent) colonialism and predated European contact. These particularities will vary from one ethnic group to another. That's the basis of my disagreement with the idea that white supremacy created differences between black peoples. Without European interference in the course of African history, these differences already existed. That is not even something we should argue about.

debso said:
we are the only group of ppl that are bent on finding any and every reason to not unite
Click to expand...

Again, I disagree. It's not that Black people are bent on finding any reason to not unite; it's that the premise under which we are trying to unite (the idea that we are all the same because we are black) is reductionist.

Practicing and staying faithful to your traditions was a means to resist colonialism and its attempt to impose Eurocentric norms on African societies.

The other thing you may not know is that upholding those traditions is very much observed outside urban centers; in small towns and villages, the local language is what is spoken, and if they know you hail from the area, you will be spoken to in that language and expected to know and abide by the local traditions. You go tell them they are the same as the people in the next town over.

What all Black folks share on this planet is the same oppression, but that doesn't make us all the same. And just because we are different doesn't mean that we can't unite. But what are we uniting for: to prosper together, or just to face the aforementioned oppression?
 
debso said:
what benefit does focusing on anything other than uniting have for us? the world has united against us, lets divide and what...? what is the end goal in that?
serious question.
Click to expand...

I hear you. I truly do...

My question is, what is our union based on?

Speaking of taking things...

This whole conversation reminds me of what my Mom would say:

"Black people cant have ish".

She was talking about our culture (music, style, customs, etc.) but it applies here too.

Everybody steals our creations.

Now we cant even have "Black"?

The whole reason we are called "Black" is because everything else was stolen from us.

Our country of origin, our culture, our religion, our language, our history, our Gods, our traditions, our customs, everything...even our very humanity.

All we had was our skin color.

So we defined ourselves...and called ourselves "Black".

Now we cant have that either?

Seriously?

If uniting means I have to give that up - then that ins't the kind of uniting I'm personally interested in.

We can maintain our uniqueness and still fight for a common cause right?
 
Last edited:
Present said:
I hear you. I truly do...

My question is, what is our union based on?
Click to expand...
necessity.

Side note:

Speaking of taking things...

This whole conversation reminds me of what my Mom would say:

"Black people cant have ish".

She was talking about our culture (music, style, customs, etc.) but it applies here too.

Everybody steals our creations.

Now we cant even have "Black".

The whole reason we are called Black is because everything else was stolen from us.

All we had was our skin color.

Now we cant have that either?

Seriously?
Click to expand...
the crazy part is that now black ppl stateside are trying to dictate who is and isn't black within and outside of the u.s. as if black ppl in the u.s. have a monopoly on blackness. interesting times we live in.
 
debso said:
the crazy part is that now black ppl stateside are trying to dictate who is and isn't black within and outside of the u.s. as if black ppl in the u.s. have a monopoly on blackness. interesting times we live in.
Click to expand...

We do.

Paid in full.
 
Present said:
We do.

Paid in full.
Click to expand...
we don't. most of us here don't even have knowledge of self at all and we want to try to push a platform of ignorance on our ppl. that mindset is steeped in indoctrination IMO.

I don't think ppl are understanding the concept of whiteness and the ever increasing "...umbrella" of whiteness and what that means for everyone outside of the umbrella. especially black ppl.

ppl are playing right into the hands of our oppressors and don't even realize it.
 
you edited your last post and put more stuff in it. i'm at work so i'll have to take on bits and pieces at a time (along with the other person that quoted me). give me some time...
 
Present said:
I hear you. I truly do...

My question is, what is our union based on?

Speaking of taking things...

This whole conversation reminds me of what my Mom would say:

"Black people cant have ish".

She was talking about our culture (music, style, customs, etc.) but it applies here too.

Everybody steals our creations.

Now we cant even have "Black"?

The whole reason we are called "Black" is because everything else was stolen from us.

Our country of origin, our culture, our religion, our language, our history, our Gods, our traditions, our customs, everything...even our very humanity.

All we had was our skin color.

So we defined ourselves...and called ourselves "Black".

Now we cant have that either?

Seriously?

If uniting means I have to give that up - then that ins't the kind of uniting I'm personally interested in.

We can maintain our uniqueness and still fight for a common cause right?
Click to expand...
so why would you be giving up being black or your blackness because you unite with other black ppl? make that make sense.
black ppl around the globe have been disenfranchised. we in the united states do not have the monopoly on blackness, black identity, what it means to be black or being oppressed and suppressed.

our stories are different yet similar. around the world. you don't think Africans living in countries created by Europeans go through things..? as the continent gets recolonized by the Chinese after having been exploited by Europeans and americans?

you don't think black catholics in the Caribbean had their identities stolen as they try to hang on to what little they can from west Africa?

in many ways blacks in the Caribbean have stronger ties to Africa than black ppl in the states as it relates to some foods, music and words used, but that's another topic.

the better question is who put this viewpoint in so many ppl's heads? who is in ppl (for example) like tariq nasheed's ear as he pushes ignorance to the masses on a white platform? ppl are exploiting desperation (which isn't new) and using it to divide (also not new). that's a classic white supremacist tactic but here we are yet again, ready to get duped.

*edit*
should be something said behind closed doors but just throwing this out here real quick:
you don't think unification and using the fact that we speak in many tongues to our advantage isn't the best way to move forward?
dividing ourselves and ******* on our own ppl is better? because what?

its why I can't agree 100% with ados. I want all of what is owed to me and my ppl. WE have been robbed. ignorance isn't exclusive to one group of black ppl. if black ppl are lost outside of the u.s. why cast a stone living in a glass house? black ppl here are lost.

#letsgetfree

also, with Tariq, all that "build the wall" and ******* on Mexicans, etc. is not the move. we don't need to do that to get ours. its not even in our nature to do so and it doesn't benefit us.
 
Last edited:
if this post isn't clear its because i'm at work and doing this between working.

gry60 said:
Before we continue, we have to be clear on which differences we are talking about. I am talking about culture: languages, rites of passage into adulthood, death rituals, marriage rituals, political systems and social organization, etc... For example, the culture my wife is from doesn't have a monarchical tradition like my culture does. The way inheritance is handled in her tradition is very different than the way inheritance is handled in mine. Dietary restrictions in her tribe are different than the restrictions in mine.
These are the kind of differences I am referring to, and these are the things that survived (to an extent) colonialism and predated European contact. These particularities will vary from one ethnic group to another. That's the basis of my disagreement with the idea that white supremacy created differences between black peoples. Without European interference in the course of African history, these differences already existed. That is not even something we should argue about.
Click to expand...
what i'm saying is that, yes, I agree that there were differences predating European colonization and the transatlantic slave trade but what i'm also saying is that we were robbed of our identities (Igbo, Yoruba, Fulani, etc.) and have more differences because of it. why would we completely embrace our differences while pushing away from our African origins when we are not accepted by the ppl that caused us to have the differences we have in the first place? why would we not educate ourselves and reach back and take our identities back?? why would we not unify and take back what's rightfully ours?

the differences you speak of don't matter due to how others have unified against us. listen to the president of Ghana with an open mind. read what Gadhafi was trying to do. or malema.

I may have to edit this on my phone to say what I really want to say...i'll be vague. other groups do this and it benefits them greatly. no matter where they are in the world they give back and everyone wins. why do we not want to do this for our own ppl?

I feel like ppl should ask why often. I also feel like we have so many infiltrators that are influencing ppl with platforms to push certain stuff that is harmful to us, on purpose.

there's no point in breaking down the rest of what you said because I've already responded to some of that mentality in previous posts in this thread...but again, you aren't educating me on anything. at all.

I believe what I believe based off of my own experiences, research and traveling in and outside of the united states. i'm not some local dude that got my info from youtube channels and facebook reposts.
 
Last edited:
The variants neger and negar, derive from the Spanish and Portuguese word negro (black), and from the now-pejorative French nègre (negro). Etymologically, negro, noir, nègre, and ******ultimately derive from nigrum, the stem of the Latin niger (black) (pronounced [ˈniɡer] which, in every other grammatical case, grammatical gender, and grammatical number besides nominativemasculine singular, is nigr-, the r is trilled).

By the 1900s, ****** had become a pejorative word in the United States. In its stead, the term colored became the mainstream alternative to negro and its derived terms.

After the civil rights movement, the terms colored and negro gave way to "black".

Negro had superseded colored as the most polite word for African Americans at a time when black was considered more offensive.[106] This term was accepted as normal, including by people classified as Negroes, until the later Civil Rights movement in the late 1960s. One well-known example is the identification by Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. of his own race as "Negro" in his famous speech of 1963, I Have a Dream. During the American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, some African-American leaders in the United States, notably Malcolm X, objected to the word Negro because they associated it with the long history of slavery, segregation, and discrimination that treated African Americans as second-class citizens, or worse.[107] Malcolm X preferred Black to Negro, but later gradually abandoned that as well for Afro-American after leaving the Nation of Islam.[108]

Since the late 1960s, various other terms for African Americans have been more widespread in popular usage. Aside from Black American, these include Afro-American (in use from the late 1960s to 1990) and African American (used in the United States to refer to Black Americans, people often referred to in the past as American Negroes).[109]

In the first 200 years that black people were in the United States, they primarily identified themselves by their specific ethnic group (closely allied to language) and not by skin color. Individuals identified themselves, for example, as Ashanti, Igbo, Bakongo, or Wolof. However, when the first captives were brought to the Americas, they were often combined with other groups from West Africa, and individual ethnic affiliations were not generally acknowledged by English colonists. In areas of the Upper South, different ethnic groups were brought together. This is significant as the captives came from a vast geographic region: the West African coastline stretching from Senegal to Angola and in some cases from the south-east coast such as Mozambique.

A new African-American identity and culture was born that incorporated elements of the various ethnic groups and of European cultural heritage, resulting in fusions such as the Black church and African-American English. This new identity was based on provenance and slave status rather than membership in any one ethnic group.[110]

By contrast, slave records from Louisiana show that the French and Spanish colonists recorded more complete identities of the West Africans, including ethnicities and given tribal names.[111]

The US racial or ethnic classification "black" refers to people with all possible kinds of skin pigmentation, from the darkest through to the very lightest skin colors, including albinos, if they are believed by others to have African ancestry (in any discernible percentage). There are also certain cultural traits associated with being "African American", a term used effectively as a synonym for "black person" within the United States.

In March 1807, Great Britain, which largely controlled the Atlantic, declared the transatlantic slave trade illegal, as did the United States. (The latter prohibition took effect 1 January 1808, the earliest date on which Congress had the power to do so after protecting the slave trade under Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution.)

By that time, the majority of black people in the United States were native-born, so the use of the term "African" became problematic.

Though initially a source of pride, many blacks feared that the use of African as an identity would be a hindrance to their fight for full citizenship in the US. They also felt that it would give ammunition to those who were advocating repatriating black people back to Africa. In 1835, black leaders called upon Black Americans to remove the title of "African" from their institutions and replace it with "Negro" or "Colored American". A few institutions chose to keep their historic names, such as the African Methodist Episcopal Church. African Americans popularly used the terms "Negro" or "colored" for themselves until the late 1960s.[112]

The term black was used throughout but not frequently since it carried a certain stigma. In his 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech,[113] Martin Luther King, Jr. uses the terms negro fifteen times and black four times. Each time he uses black it is in parallel construction with white; for example, "black men and white men".[114]

With the successes of the civil rights movement, a new term was needed to break from the past and help shed the reminders of legalized discrimination. In place of Negro, activists promoted the use of black as standing for racial pride, militancy, and power. Some of the turning points included the use of the term "Black Power" by Kwame Toure (Stokely Carmichael) and the popular singer James Brown's song "Say It Loud – I'm Black and I'm Proud".

In 1988, the civil rights leader Jesse Jackson urged Americans to use instead the term "African American" because it had a historical cultural base and was a construction similar to terms used by European descendants, such as German American, Italian American, etc. Since then, African American and black have often had parallel status. However, controversy continues over which if any of the two terms is more appropriate. Maulana Karenga argues that the term African-American is more appropriate because it accurately articulates their geographical and historical origin.[citation needed] Others have argued that "black" is a better term because "African" suggests foreignness, although Black Americans helped found the United States.[115] Still others believe that the term black is inaccurate because African Americans have a variety of skin tones.[116][117] Some surveys suggest that the majority of Black Americans have no preference for "African American" or "Black",[118] although they have a slight preference for "black" in personal settings and "African American" in more formal settings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_people
 
Last edited:
^ I feel the same way about being Black.

Doesn't mean we cant unite and fight for whats right.
 
ninjahood said:
gee...seen that somewhere before too :lol: :smh:
Click to expand...
how many threads are you going to skip over everything said and then quote something like that and respond with the same thing?

real talk, you don't identify with being black yet you love black culture, its in your speech, the way you dress, etc. yet you **** on us with your political views yet you're in every black thread on nt. why.

if you're not with us how and why are you in this discussion?
be honest with yourself.

like I said before you can't take the African out of an African. period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom