Originally posted by spiderman44Wow should it be considered racist to label a race of people "bin ladins"?
hahaha do u really believe those people r from africa ur hella gulable there all bin ladens or somethin trust me they r not egyptian
Those are Egyptians. I'm not so gullible as to swallow your lies.
Originally posted by spiderman44Technically they are Caucasian.
me i aint liein nd if ur bin laden sorry bout the comment but i forgot wat that race iz called
Your words though may not be racist because of this are no less biggoted, and speak volumes for your ignorace. They damage your credibility, and force me into an immediate cynical and skeptical veiw of anything further you have to say.
Originally posted by spiderman44Again you further use that term.
if u say so but ya if those guys r egyptians there like bin ladens that waz born there not the original kind
Do you have any proof that they did not originate there? Because as far as I know they've lived there for generations.
That's much like saying that the Americans that live in the united states are not American unless they are the American Indians that were here long before european settlers set foot on a boat.
Race is a social construct made by humans, it isn't really backed by science and clumps together groups who have very different back grounds and seperates groups who have more in common genetically to those in another "race".
Egypt has many different groups of people take it over in its history. The black egyptians would be nubians that took over egypt around 3000 years ago, there are indeed "black" sphinx's and such. En Sabah Nur may have been "black" egyptian if he came about during the nubian part of egypts history. He may have been the mixture of alot of ethnic groups, who knows.
Originally posted by jemakaiBaically, yeah.
Race is a social construct made by humans, it isn't really backed by science and clumps together groups who have very different back grounds and seperates groups who have more in common genetically to those in another "race".Egypt has many different groups of people take it over in its history. The black egyptians would be nubians that took over egypt around 3000 years ago, there are indeed "black" sphinx's and such. En Sabah Nur may have been "black" egyptian if he came about during the nubian part of egypts history. He may have been the mixture of alot of ethnic groups, who knows.
Originally posted by Creshosk
Technically they are Caucasian.Your words though may not be racist because of this are no less biggoted, and speak volumes for your ignorace. They damage your credibility, and force me into an immediate cynical and skeptical veiw of anything further you have to say.
O FUX SON I BELIEVE YOU WERE JUST TOLD.
btw, the word you're looking for is 'Semite.' Arabs, along with Jews and several Mediterranean peoples, are Semitic. They've got the beak-nose thing going on.
I said I was done on the topic, but I want to make one more statement:
After clearing my head, I see where Creshock's points are coming from, but it's not taking a lot of different factors into account.
Egypt was an empire that encompassed a lot of regions of Northern Africa, westward towards what is now Tunisia, northeastward to what is now Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and the Arabian peninsula (Tigris/Euphrates Valley), and Southwestward into Somalia.
There were many different people in this empire, just as there were in the Roman Empire.
Not all Egyptians were of the extreme dark skin tone and had features of say a Shaka Zulu (who comes from a region further south). They ranged from a dark tone to a fair bronze tone, even an olive tone.
You can't unilaterally say that the people of Egypt were "black" (or "white"😉, nor can you say they were wholey Semetic or Hemetic or Japhetic (the group caucasians fall under, not Semites like "Jews"😉.
There were fair skinned Egyptians and there were dark skinned Romans. Empires encompass many groups.
I think the problem in the here and now is trying to look at historical accounts through the eyes of people subjected to a predisposition of divisive classifications based upon color and 'race'.
Not all people of my 'race' (and I use the term loosely because we are all the same race, but it's easier to conquer and control a divided people) have the same bone structure and facial features. Hell, not everyone in my family has the same facial structure and measurements. My brother has a pointy nose and is 2 shades darker than myself, and I resemble a muscular Musiq Soulchild, but maybe a shade and a half darker.
Your environment plays a factor in some your physical structure, as well as your genes.
I don't put much credence into using the measurements of bones and skulls as scientific canon. Not to long ago scientist tried to compare the size of the skulls of my people to that of chimpanzees to justify the dehumanization of Africans in America, and later German scientists tried to doctor the numbers of measurements taken of peoples from Tibet to quantify and validate their belief in a historical Aryan "Master" Race that decended from Indo-China.
Basically, the precedent has already been set for historians to have agendas with their findings, so I don't put much credence in them.
However, the fact does remain that not all citizens of the Egyptian Empire, nor members of the ruling families, were wholely of a very dark pigmentation.
They didn't all look like Dikembe Mutombo, but they also didn't all look like Yasser Arafat either. There was a full spectrum based on the gene pool available in the region at the time.
And Dylan still beats Superman.
Originally posted by illadelph12✅
I said I was done on the topic, but I want to make one more statement:After clearing my head, I see where Creshock's points are coming from, but it's not taking a lot of different factors into account.
Egypt was an empire that encompassed a lot of regions of Northern Africa, westward towards what is now Tunisia, northeastward to what is now Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and the Arabian peninsula (Tigris/Euphrates Valley), and Southwestward into Somalia.
There were many different people in this empire, just as there were in the Roman Empire.
Not all Egyptians were of the extreme dark skin tone and had features of say a Shaka Zulu (who comes from a region further south). They ranged from a dark tone to a fair bronze tone, even an olive tone.
You can't unilaterally say that the people of Egypt were "black" (or "white"😉, nor can you say they were wholey Semetic or Hemetic or [B]Japhetic
(the group caucasians fall under, not Semites like "Jews"😉.There were fair skinned Egyptians and there were dark skinned Romans. Empires encompass many groups.
I think the problem in the here and now is trying to look at historical accounts through the eyes of people subjected to a predisposition of divisive classifications based upon color and 'race'.
Not all people of my 'race' (and I use the term loosely because we are all the same race, but it's easier to conquer and control a divided people) have the same bone structure and facial features. Hell, not everyone in my family has the same facial structure and measurements. My brother has a pointy nose and is 2 shades darker than myself, and I resemble a muscular Musiq Soulchild, but maybe a shade and a half darker.
Your environment plays a factor in some your physical structure, as well as your genes.
I don't put much credence into using the measurements of bones and skulls as scientific canon. Not to long ago scientist tried to compare the size of the skulls of my people to that of chimpanzees to justify the dehumanization of Africans in America, and later German scientists tried to doctor the numbers of measurements taken of peoples from Tibet to quantify and validate their belief in a historical Aryan "Master" Race that decended from Indo-China.
Basically, the precedent has already been set for historians to have agendas with their findings, so I don't put much credence in them.
However, the fact does remain that not all citizens of the Egyptian Empire, nor members of the ruling families, were wholely of a very dark pigmentation.
They didn't all look like Dikembe Mutombo, but they also didn't all look like Yasser Arafat either. There was a full spectrum based on the gene pool available in the region at the time.
[/B]
Originally posted by illadelph12I don't know who the Dylan you're reffering to is, so I cant' agree or disagree with that part.
Why didn't you quote that Dylan beats Supes?He spits hot fiyah, you know.
But you got most of what the motivation behind my debating in the topic was. The blanket statements that "Egyptians were Black" or that "Egyptians were White" both being false, because that empire was large and encompassed many different "racial" groups.
The Ancient Egyptians were Black. However, as we know the concept of labeling people by colors is something that is fairly recent in human history. it is true that the empire was large, but the people who were the ancient egyptians were a people of their own identity before they became a world power, or the first super power of the ancient world. Yes, other Nations were ruled by this empire and some peoples may have lived in, near or around the country of Egypt itself but don't forget that this was a sovereign state with its own people and beliefs, not a free market system of genetic trade, where anything goes. for what would they be and how could they be if they allowed everyone to become them. The melting pot system was not a making of the Ancient Egyptians, its something that took form long after the Empire-Kingdom of Egypt had faded and was a structure of the other world empire that ruled afterwards who made their way down to a then weaken but vastly wealthy ex world super power . They were a welcoming people like all Africans were and still are, and so didn't bar others from visiting, and maybe residing in Egypt or its territories but things were always govern and there were regulations that had to be followed or respected. The whole concept with this ancient Egyptians thing stems from them being a black people. You see we live in a world where people called black or viewed as such have been hated and oppressed so thoroughly for a very long time, the perception of the negative and being anything that means nothing and unworthy has been placed on them. In contrast, the perception of being everything good and of value has been placed on Caucasians/white people. When I say that this whole concept about the ancient egyptians is about being a black people, what I mean is that many of the perceptions people have about African people stems from the dramatization of all the negative and terrible conditions they have suffered over the last 1000 years. they have been painted by media, books, studies and other information mediums a people who can only be hungry, thugs, criminals, disease suffers and so on. Everything that is negative has been attach to the identity of being dark, or what non-dark people call black, since no one from Africa or of Hamitic descend has ever been called black or viewed based on the color of their skin until indo-Europeans began labeling them that way. They even created a body measurement system based on skull structure and body shape and phenotype to help them be more effective at imprinting these labels on people. In this system, if you are what they call black, you can only look a certain way and have very limited features and if you're Asian, the same in general is true as well. However, if you are what they call white then there are no such limits. You could live in the heart of Africa or Asia, with all the traditionally beliefs and cultural elements that stem from your ancestors there, and many other factors about your known and mostly known history can testify to who you are/really are but they will label you something you aren't just because they wish to. The ancient egyptians were Hamitic, to be a Hamitic is to be a person who is a descendant of one of the sons of Ham(Ham was the forefather of all the different kinds of brown skinned peoples). Africa was in ancient times called the land of Ham, along with some part of coastal and southern Arabia being called the land of Ham or Ham. What they have done today is label certain Hamitic people black(the ones from the west of Africa that were enslaved in the Americas, since black was to be a label of mockery and negatives and they also said Hamitic means white, saying anything to divide) and any one who doesn't look exactly like them or have noses and body shapes that were a little different then what Europeans viewed as being black were labeled as something else. This was especially so if the Europeans admired and knew of their achievements. The whole notion of being a certain body shape, having a certain skull shape and being labeled a color were things created by colonizing Europeans to assign themselves a place in history everywhere they know that they hadn't been, it was to redefine the world and its peoples according to what they wished. Also, it was to confuse and make hazy the indentity of others while strengthening their's through use of these detailed color chart, shape-structure, phenotype systems of classifying people. Its was all about the perception that they wanted to install of themselves in the world, not about truth, not about history and respecting it, but about manipulating it so they could claim it ALL for themselves. African culture was so rich(Still is) and their wealth and achievements so grand that many outsiders admired and desired the wealth and grace of these lands during ancient times and on up to Africa being colonize during more modern times(2000 yrs ago to present)since that's what led to it being colonized, its wealth in resources and people. For White people it has always been about their identity versus African identity, and their history versus African people's history. That is one of the main reasons why racism has striven so well, and why it still exists today. There have been some improvements on the surface, but that's it.
Very good read. Nice post G.
It will be interesting to see someone try to dispute it when there's a documented historical precedent of this exact practice in Germany in the 1930s-40s.
Trying to prove the existence of the so-called "Master Race" through twisting history and similarities between physical characteristics of Germans and the people of Indo-China (mainly Tibet).
That was only 60-70 years ago.
Originally posted by illadelph12
Very good read. Nice post G.It will be interesting to see someone try to dispute it when there's a documented historical precedent of this exact practice in Germany in the 1930s-40s.
Trying to prove the existence of the so-called "Master Race" through twisting history and similarities between physical characteristics of Germans and the people of Indo-China (mainly Tibet).
That was only 60-70 years ago.
Interestingly enough people of all creeds, colours etc are as likely to share as much genetic marker similarities as someone with a completely different phenotype.
Racism is foolish for this reason alone. I know lots of others exist.