quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
quote:
Originally posted by Khalliqa:
ConFeed...

Are you black?


My ancestors are from AFRICA.


Why so vague... everyone's ancestors are from Africa...

quote:
I don't "sun tan"


Excuse my slowness... but what are you trying to communicate here? that you don't like sun tanning so you don't "sun tan"...? or that you are so dark that you don't "sun tan"? Or that you are so light that you can't "sun tan"?


quote:
But most importantly - I have learned to OPERATIONALIZE MY DREAMS - thus my attempt to add SUBSTANCE to the original post.


appreciated...
quote:
Originally posted by Saracen:
I am well aware of the fact that it took 50 years to realize the vision for the Jews, however, as I have already mentioned, we have more money, and influence...


I understand why you (and many others) use Zionism as an example/comparison, BUT Zionism came to fruition through the military might of the Brittish and Amerikkkan imperialists(not to mention their money). The state of Isreal was SET UP to do the proxy work of colonial interests in the region of the so-called Middle East.

We do not have, nor do we want the assistance of the colonialist/imperialist power structure. "Black Nationalism" and Pan-Africanism both work against the interests of colonialism/imperialism, so we would not have such assistance in the set up of our nation. We will actual have to fight against these powers.... Therefore, since our objectives and goals fly in the face of colonialist/imperialist interest, I don't think it is accurate to say we actually have more money or influence backing us than the Zionists did.
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

We do not have, nor do we want the assistance of the colonialist/imperialist power structure. "Black Nationalism" and Pan-Africanism both work against the interests of colonialism/imperialism, so we would not have such assistance in the set up of our nation. We will actual have to fight against these powers.... Therefore, since our objectives and goals fly in the face of colonialist/imperialist interest, I don't think it is accurate to say we actually have more money or influence backing us than the Zionists did.


Should we care how we get a homeland? If through whatever means the US/UN or whomever deem it in their interests to - finally - solve the "Negro Problem" and exert their will to do so, should we really care how that happens? Does it indicate any less of a commitment to our goal if we are willing to accept that goal only under what we might deem an ideal context? In practical terms, unless we choose to go to Antarctica or something (what about the Moon?), won't ANY land that we might gain come with "casualties"?

For example, if the US took over another country to "give" to African Americans - should we care about the "collateral damage" that might occur in that endeavor? Black Nationalism would be achieved!
maybe CF is like Theresa Heinz Kerry.....a white person with some African heritage.....but he is a little on the pale side and that would take away from his whiteness if he tanned.....that would explain allot huh?
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

We do not have, nor do we want the assistance of the colonialist/imperialist power structure. "Black Nationalism" and Pan-Africanism both work against the interests of colonialism/imperialism, so we would not have such assistance in the set up of our nation. We will actual have to fight against these powers.... Therefore, since our objectives and goals fly in the face of colonialist/imperialist interest, I don't think it is accurate to say we actually have more money or influence backing us than the Zionists did.


Should we care how we get a homeland? If through whatever means the US/UN or whomever deem it in their interests to - finally - solve the "Negro Problem" and exert their will to do so, should we really care how that happens? Does it indicate any less of a commitment to our goal if we are willing to accept that goal only under what we might deem an ideal context? In practical terms, unless we choose to go to Antarctica or something (what about the Moon?), won't ANY land that we might gain come with "casualties"?

For example, if the US took over another country to "give" to African Americans - should we care about the "collateral damage" that might occur in that endeavor? Black Nationalism would be achieved!


Wow MBM I'm suprised. I hope you are just asking this question for conversational purposes.

Of course we should care what interests people have that would finance or supply military support for Black nationalism or Pan Africanism. Unless we don't mind being the puppet of their interests and also don't mind taking the risk that the moment we step out of line with those interest(colonialism and imperialism) that they pull an 'Iraq' scenario. They don't think of 'us' as a 'problem to solve' as long as we remain good consumers and a good supply of imperialist soldiers, of which, succession or Pan Africanism would eliminate.

I'm not talking about a pipe dream perfect scenario, but what exactly would be the point of having a nation of African/Black people if we are still under the colonialist/imperialist/white supremacist system's thumb and had to do their bidding? If their is no qualitative change in the system we would establish, we might as well not even be physically seperated then.

I don't see the point of succession or Pan African liberation if it doesn't lead to our liberation(political, economic, as well as physical).

If our seperation and/or unification of things isn't based on humane principles that try to minimize or eliminate exploitation and oppression, what exactly is the point?
If our seperation and/or unification of things isn't based on humane principles that try to minimize or eliminate exploitation and oppression, what exactly is the point?---Oshun Auset

I hope, in fact I am sure, MBM's question is to stimulate conversation.

Nothing else makes sense.


PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

Wow MBM I'm suprised. I hope you are just asking this question for conversational purposes.


C'mon girl - you know that's my job here! 4
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

Of course we should care what interests people have that would finance or supply military support for Black nationalism or Pan Africanism.


My questions really presumed that there was a sincere interest in creating a homeland for us. If we take that as a given in this argument - that there are no nefarious intentions or subterfuge involved - then - should we care what the US/UN has to do to get us our land? This question has much more to do with "feeling badly" about whatever the US/UN would do to get us our land - and would we/you reject a homeland if the cost was too high? If so - what kinds of things would cause you to reject that offer?

If they have to take over an existing country and expel a people from their land to get us ours - do you care?

Furthermore, let's say the deal is the US needs to have a stabilizing force in a particular region. They set us up there (and perhaps guarantee grants to us over a set number of years in payment for our efforts which help us get our new nation together etc.) and we commit to doing certain things. Is that a deal that you would want to even consider?
Peace....


quote:
understand why you (and many others) use Zionism as an example/comparison, BUT Zionism came to fruition through the military might of the Brittish and Amerikkkan imperialists(not to mention their money). The state of Isreal was SET UP to do the proxy work of colonial interests in the region of the so-called Middle East


The State of Israel was established by powers far to great measure, however, I do not wish to see this thread spiral into a conspiracy theory quest.

I raise the example of Israel to demonstrate the power of a united people. Israel is not in existence to do the bidding of the West..No...America is the dog being wagged here...

quote:
We do not have, nor do we want the assistance of the colonialist/imperialist power structure. "Black Nationalism" and Pan-Africanism both work against the interests of colonialism/imperialism, so we would not have such assistance in the set up of our nation. We will actual have to fight against these powers.... Therefore, since our objectives and goals fly in the face of colonialist/imperialist interest, I don't think it is accurate to say we actually have more money or influence backing us than the Zionists did.



Oshun, we are in no position to fight an open war against the powers of the West. If we are wise we will use the advantage of political might to gain a foot hold into our vision. Once we have established a seperate state then we can begin phase two which would be a full and complete self reliant independance...

I wish to emphasize the fact that I am not suggesting a facsimile of Israel..I only raise this example to silence the naysayers...



Whirling Moat
Peace....


quote:
If they have to take over an existing country and expel a people from their land to get us ours - do you care?



I would reject a plan which called for the expulsion of a native people..Luckily for us there are others ways to secure land..We could always negotiate the inclusion of a native people into the vision..Perhaps they would welcome a sophisticated, well financed, and educated people...It wouldn't be the first time foreign forces were welcomed into foreign lands.


I think that several nations would be happy to accomodate us..


Whirling Moat
quote:
I raise the example of Israel to demonstrate the power of a united people. Israel is not in existence to do the bidding of the West..No...America is the dog being wagged here...


You also raised a demonstrably FALSE idea regarding THEIR MONEY vs. OUR MONEY.

You, apparently, "do not wish" to return to that rhetoric of yours because you know it is chock-full of holes via the falsehood that it is. There is no reason to EXAGGERATE. Yet another reason why...

Anyway... How exactly do you think America is the dog being wagged if WE HAVE MORE MONEY (i.e. material, financial power, capital, etc.) than they did?

The idea just does not follow. So, for once, you need to dispense with the madness and let the merits of your points make the point on their own merits. NO NEED TO EXAGGERATE or present blatant falsehoods just to try to persuade, etc.

.
Naturally I did a search on technology and found only this:

quote:
A "robust economy" doesn't detail the economic principals that this new economy that you speak off will have. The "hunting and gathering" economies of our ancestors lasted for a much, much, much longer time than system that we have today and thus one could argue that THIS is more "robust" than any competing system. The question is - would YOU, having been conditioned to live under American's system be willing to let go of your advanced technology in order to go for a more enduring system?


Frankly I find it difficult to imagine Black Americans pulling it off even with the land and the money. Black Americans are addicted to and dependent on the technology but not enough of us know enough about it to run a hi-tech nation.

How many of us with the money just buy the stuff to show off. A friend of mine was trying to install a high definition LCD screen in his girlfriend's kitchen last week. I don't understand what the point of that stuff is.

Do we have the people to run power plants and sewage treatment plants and TV stations, etc. etc.? How many of us get degrees in easy subjects just to say they have a piece of paper? I think short circuiting the control the palefaces have on education is a prerequisite to this nation. Of course I think an underground supranation based on distributed ownership of land and economics and knowledge makes more sense. Technology makes geographic nationalism obsolete.

umbra
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by umbrarchist:

Frankly I find it difficult to imagine Black Americans pulling it off even with the land and the money.


I find your cynicism troubling. Respectfully, I think you should expose yourself to a broader cross-section of our community.
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
I understand why you (and many others) use Zionism as an example/comparison, BUT Zionism came to fruition through the military might of the Brittish and Amerikkkan imperialists(not to mention their money). The state of Isreal was SET UP to do the proxy work of colonial interests in the region of the so-called Middle East.

We do not have, nor do we want the assistance of the colonialist/imperialist power structure.



Does she wear a perm or does she have locks? Does she wear a perm or does she have locks?

Oshun Auset THE DAMNED HOUSE THAT YOU LIVE IN RIGHT NOW "came to fruition through the military might of the Brittish and Amerikkkan imperialists(not to mention their money)". WHAT MAKES YOU ANY DIFFERENT? Do you not pay a mortgage each month so that you will one day OWN THE LAND? If you are renting then you are assisting SOMEONE ELSE in owning this same "stolen land".

The claim that "WE didn't steal it" is null and void. "NOW THAT YOU KNOW" that it was stolen WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO RETURN IT TO THE RIGHTFUL OWNER, DAMN YOUR PERSONAL LOSSES?

I heard a "Real Black" lady on the radio during a discussion of White Racism in America. She told about how the LAND WAS STOLEN FROM THE INDIANS. She talked about how violent these White folks were. THEN SHE TALKED GLOWINGLY ABOUT THE "BLACK PIONEERS" who traveled Westward and set up a particular city that she mentioned. Oshuny - IF THE WHITE SETTLERS WERE ON "STOLEN INDIAN LAND" and had to kill Native Americans who were seeking to drive them off of Native American lands.......what do you think the Black Settlers.............(I will allow you to fill in the rest).

The Kneegrow has the amazing capacity to excuse himself/herself from HIS CURRENT LIFESTYLE and project sins upon someone else.

While the Buffalo Soldiers were said to never have participated in any massacre of Native Americans.....ultimately WHO'S INTERESTS WERE THEY PLAYING TOWARD? The AMERICAN government's who's uniform they had on OR THE NATIVE AMERICAN'S interests who was attempting to keep the "invaders" out?
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

For example, if the US took over another country to "give" to African Americans - should we care about the "collateral damage" that might occur in that endeavor? Black Nationalism would be achieved!


Brother MBM - your answer can be found by thinking back and telling us ONE COUNTRY IN THIS WORLD that was established upon land that was obtained via totally PEACEFUL MEANS? Since this behavior has GLOBAL expression - is this pattern of violent confiscation evidence of "The Europeans's deeds" or simply HUMAN NATURE?
quote:
Oshun Auset THE DAMNED HOUSE THAT YOU LIVE IN RIGHT NOW "came to fruition through the military might of the Brittish and Amerikkkan imperialists(not to mention their money)". WHAT MAKES YOU ANY DIFFERENT?


STUPID question.

Clear difference. Jews got Israel. We got what? Slavery, Jim Crow and America's WHITE SUPREMACY Regime #3 as a product of British/American military, etc.
quote:
Originally posted by Kevin41:
maybe CF is like Theresa Heinz Kerry.....a white person with some African heritage.....but he is a little on the pale side and that would take away from his whiteness if he tanned.....that would explain allot huh?


The words of an academician, no doubt.

Look at the sentence structure. Look at the balanced use of nouns and verbs. spank (take wood Crescent)
quote:
Brother MBM - your answer can be found by thinking back and telling us ONE COUNTRY IN THIS WORLD that was established upon land that was obtained via totally PEACEFUL MEANS? Since this behavior has GLOBAL expression - is this pattern of violent confiscation evidence of "The Europeans's deeds" or simply HUMAN NATURE?



Hmmm.... No PROPORTIONALITY CLAUSES. No talk about who does it more or to a greater extent or extreme.

The Life & Times of DEFERENCE MAN.


It's your patented RACISM showing again. You can see negatives in every group but find it hard to see positives in one particular group. And when a certain group, your BELOVED WHITE FOLK, exhibit a behavior in some extreme fashion or one distinguishable in degree and frequency from others, a behavior marked by extremes on a number of other things (Slavery Europeans practiced on Africans, e.g. = markedly different from other forms of slavery)... Well, you find it too hard to mark them as remarkably flawed the way you do Black people.

CASE IN POINT... When you tried to promote Chinatowns... Once I pointed out the same type of human problems with crime, drugs (stop snitchin'), etc. in those communities... your immediate and curious response was essentially it's not as bad as it is in the Black community.


YOUR DEFERENCE and RACISM shown.


.
quote:
You can see negatives in every group but find it hard to see positives in one particular group. And when a certain group, your BELOVED WHITE FOLK, exhibit a behavior in some extreme fashion or one distinguishable in degree and frequency from others, a behavior marked by extremes on a number of other things (Slavery Europeans practiced on Africans, e.g. = markedly different from other forms of slavery)... Well, you find it too hard to mark them as remarkably flawed the way you do Black people.



POOR EXAMPLES.

My constant battle is AGAINST the subset of BLACK PEOPLE who, via their flawed viewpoints, MAINTAIN A STRANGLEHOLD UPON MY PEOPLE. Thus I AM NOT ATTACKING BLACK PEOPLE. I AM ATTACKING THE IGNORANCE that you and others possess.

The IGNORANCE that is inside of you is not a BLACK ATTRIBUTE. It is an attribute of lack of perspective and consciousness.

It is a well worn trick to attempt to make my ATTACKS UPON Y.O.U. as an attack upon THE BLACK MASSES. You represent a PERSPECTIVE upon BLACK PEOPLE but certainly not an INALIENABLE CONCEPT OF BLACKNESS.

YOU CLAIM to want certain ECONOMIC OUTCOMES. My showcasing of CHINATOWN as compared to those areas WHERE YOUR IDEAS DOMINATE is not a shot against BLACK PEOPLE. It is a shot against the IGNORANCE that you are guided by.
CERTAINLY if the people within the communities in which your ideas are popular were to break free and practice those points that have brought others SUCCESS within this country - THEIR RESULTS WOULD BE SIMILAR.

Your goal is to unite Black people within our COMMON POINT OF VICTIMIZATION.

My COUNTER POSITION is to have BLACK PEOPLE PURSUE GREATNESS by ABANDONING THAT WHICH YOU HAVE TOLD THEM - AT LEAST THE PARTS WHICH CAN ONLY LEAD TO FAILURE.

YOU CONTROL THE REIGNS TODAY. I am only asking YOU to PUT UP OR SHUT THE HELL UP. Get your azz off the stage if YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO EFFECTIVELY LEAD TO A BETTER END. The leashes for the dogs at the back end of the team are being handed out in the line toward the rear. GO GET YOURS and apply your muscle but no longer your navigation. YOU HAVE FAILED.
quote:
YOU CONTROL THE REIGNS TODAY.


More evidence of the type of STUPIDITY involved with your CHALLENGE(D) mindset.


If I "control" anything, it is because I am way more SKILLED than you are.


quote:
YOU CLAIM to want certain ECONOMIC OUTCOMES.


QUOTE ME or STROKE ME, WhiteBoy... I quoted you. IT IS NOT THAT HARD!


quote:
My showcasing of CHINATOWN...


I reported accurately on your reaction regarding Chinatown.

When you tried to promote Chinatowns... Once I pointed out the same type of human problems with crime, drugs (stop snitchin'), etc. in those communities... your immediate and curious response was essentially... "it's not as bad as it is in the Black community."

Since you're unable to explain that... just STFU!!!

Chalk it up to another time when... "I GOT YOUR WOLF TICKETS!!!"


quote:
My showcasing of CHINATOWN as compared to those areas WHERE YOUR IDEAS DOMINATE


SHUT UP FOOL and list "MY IDEAS"

[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5] .........


quote:
CERTAINLY if the people within the communities in which your ideas are popular


SHUT UP FOOL and list "MY IDEAS"

[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5] .........

Then tell me when and where they have been "popular."

It's called: QUOTE ME or STROKE ME!! But none of this will distract from the point:

When you tried to promote Chinatowns... Once I pointed out the same type of human problems with crime, drugs (stop snitchin'), etc. in those communities... your immediate and curious response was essentially... "it's not as bad as it is in the Black community."

CONFRONT YOUR RACISM & DEFERENCE or STFU!!!


quote:
Your goal is to unite Black people within our COMMON POINT OF VICTIMIZATION.


RHETORIC MAN has done it again!! (Hey, KWELI!! lol)


quote:
My COUNTER POSITION is to have BLACK PEOPLE PURSUE GREATNESS


You can't do that when you're ON TOUR PERFORMING CLOWN ACTS, Mongoose! Excuse, I mean... Billy Joe CUTHBERT.

You'd have to be "TAKEN SERIOUSLY" to have or to get BLACK PEOPLE to do anything you'd like to see and to "pursue" any of the things you've called YOUR GOAL.

Mongoose wants to challenge the Mamba to a battle (or game)... he ain't going to get it because he, like you, doesn't have the skills and BLACK PEOPLE don't give a sh*t about the bs you say.


quote:
I am only asking YOU to PUT UP OR SHUT THE HELL UP.


My thoughts exactly:

SHUT UP FOOL and list "MY IDEAS"

[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5] .........


quote:
Get your azz off the stage if YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO EFFECTIVELY LEAD TO A BETTER END.


SHUT UP FOOL and tell me what "stage" I'm on that you're not. (I'm on this forum. You're on this forum.)

[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5] .........



quote:
YOU HAVE FAILED.


PUT UP or SHUT UP time, PUNK!!!

WHAT HAVE I FAILED TO DO? I am a RESIDENT FATHER; married to my BLACK wife, raising my BLACK KIDS. WHAT??? LIST WHAT I HAVE FAILED TO DO based on your own CRITERIA - the one you have for yourself.

[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5] .........



__________________________________________

And don't even get it twisted. Don't even think you got something sidetracked:


When you tried to promote Chinatowns... Once I pointed out the same type of human problems with crime, drugs, etc. in those communities... your immediate and curious response was essentially...
"it's not as bad as it is in the
Black community."


CONTRAST THAT TO YOUR IDEA
RE: YOUR BELOVED WHITE FOLK.


NOTHING BUT PURE RACISM.
YOU ARE GUILTY AS CHARGED!



That was like your MASSA MOORE argument. You busted a couple of blood vessel on each subject.
You were quick to adamant and vehement in your response. Determined to make sure NOT to call Black behavior mere human behavior not unlike the behavior found in other populations. No. You never made or sustained a single point like that. You took particular pains and, no doubt, certain pleasures in trying your best to point out Black negatives that were "far worse" than anybody elses. BUT YOU CAN'T BRING YOURSELF TO EVEN BEGIN TO SEE YOUR BELOVED WHITE FOLK IN THAT MANNER (or anyone else for that matter).

With you it's always:
BLACK FOLKS = DUMB/Remarkably FLAWED/Inferior/THE WORST or MOST PROBLEMATIC

Damn... YOU GOT IT BAD. And this is proof of it:


quote:
Since this behavior has GLOBAL expression - is this pattern of violent confiscation evidence of "The Europeans's deeds" or simply HUMAN NATURE?


The "GLOBAL EXPRESSION" didn't stop you from having a conniption when I pointed out the negatives... the THINGS CON-Feed Fails To Mention When He Talks About Chinatowns... Again, you were quick to say, unequivocally "BLACKS = WORST".

Yep! You got the ISM (and the HATE) real bad! Nothing can hide or take away from it!


.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
quote:
Originally posted by Kevin41:
maybe CF is like Theresa Heinz Kerry.....a white person with some African heritage.....but he is a little on the pale side and that would take away from his whiteness if he tanned.....that would explain allot huh?


The words of an academician, no doubt.

Look at the sentence structure. Look at the balanced use of nouns and verbs. spank (take wood Crescent)


okay....I lack writing skills....and I'm sure my dissertation does not meet your standards.....


**Now answer the question.....are you a black man CF?
quote:
Originally posted by Kevin41:


**Now answer the question.....are you a black man CF?


Yes... why will you not answer this question directly and soundly leaving no doubt...

If you are you can satisfy this answer by saying something just as long as your other response like:

I am a black man, society sees me as a black man, when a cop stops me he sees a black man, I check african american or black on forms, my birth certificate lists me as black, I have never looked at myself in any other way....

or I consider myself a black man, even though I look white... have been raised white... my early years were spent as a white child and I think white.. but for the purposes of this board... I wanna be black..

sunthin' like that...
15

quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

My questions really presumed that there was a sincere interest in creating a homeland for us. If we take that as a given in this argument - that there are no nefarious intentions or subterfuge involved - then - should we care what the US/UN has to do to get us our land? This question has much more to do with "feeling badly" about whatever the US/UN would do to get us our land - and would we/you reject a homeland if the cost was too high? If so - what kinds of things would cause you to reject that offer?

If they have to take over an existing country and expel a people from their land to get us ours - do you care?

Furthermore, let's say the deal is the US needs to have a stabilizing force in a particular region. They set us up there (and perhaps guarantee grants to us over a set number of years in payment for our efforts which help us get our new nation together etc.) and we commit to doing certain things. Is that a deal that you would want to even consider?
tongue

quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
15

quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

My questions really presumed that there was a sincere interest in creating a homeland for us. If we take that as a given in this argument - that there are no nefarious intentions or subterfuge involved - then - should we care what the US/UN has to do to get us our land? This question has much more to do with "feeling badly" about whatever the US/UN would do to get us our land - and would we/you reject a homeland if the cost was too high? If so - what kinds of things would cause you to reject that offer?

If they have to take over an existing country and expel a people from their land to get us ours - do you care?

Furthermore, let's say the deal is the US needs to have a stabilizing force in a particular region. They set us up there (and perhaps guarantee grants to us over a set number of years in payment for our efforts which help us get our new nation together etc.) and we commit to doing certain things. Is that a deal that you would want to even consider?
Last edited {1}
If we take that as a given in this argument - that there are no nefarious intentions or subterfuge involved - then - should we care what the US/UN has to do to get us our land?---MBM

I get your point.

Taking such a given as a basis for a logical construction is really an adventure into fantacy.

We are talking about the (assignment) of power here.

It is inherently about an ulterior motive.

Establiahing a land in a foreign land is imperialism, at the very least...oppression at the most.

I would not want such a land to 'call my own'.

Since such 'displacement' is inevitable, let it be Americam land for Americans.

I would like to take this opportunity to amend my original suggested land for take over with the remainder of Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and in particular all of Texas...the remainder of Tennessee, and Missiouri, and Arkansas.


PEACE

Jim Chester
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:

Taking such a given as a basis for a logical construction is really an adventure into fantacy.

We are talking about the (assignment) of power here.

It is inherently about an ulterior motive.


OK - then assign whatever "fantasies" you'd like. Do you want land or are you more interested in either fantasizing about it or complaining that you don't have it? There are costs to everything. Is it really logical or realistic to think that something would be delivered us on a silver platter?

quote:
Establiahing a land in a foreign land is imperialism, at the very least...oppression at the most.

I would not want such a land to 'call my own'.


So - you are more interested in protecting someone else than in achieving your own goal?


quote:
Since such 'displacement' is inevitable, let it be Americam land for Americans.


What's the difference in displacing someone 'not American' and someone American?

quote:
I would like to take this opportunity to amend my original suggested land for take over with the remainder of Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and in particular all of Texas...the remainder of Tennessee, and Missiouri, and Arkansas.[/i]


Is this realistic in your opinion? Do you see this as more likely than African Americans getting land outside of continental North America?
Last edited {1}
The definition that I like regarding Black Nationalism is the one given by Malcolm X.
(Paraphrase)The Black Man should control the economy, the politics and social aspects of the black community. That's simple enough.
OK - then assign whatever "fantasies" you'd like. Do you want land or are you more interested in either fantasizing about it or complaining that you don't have it?---MBM

Neither, really.

I've never really fantacized about a 'land or our own'.

I see a sovereign nation as something in the distant future, and desirable, but...

I want mine now.

Right now.


There are costs to everything. Is it really logical or realistic to think that something would be delivered us on a silver platter?---MBM

True.

There is indeed always a cost.

I think our cost has been another generation os our children without an identity constructed in a manner as is all other ethnicities of the world.

The cost going forward will be to the elders of the current generation in the pain, and discomfort of changing mindsets from 'what' we are to 'who' we are.


So - you are more interested in protecting someone else than in achieving your own goal?---MBM

That's not a reasonable interpretation of what I have in mind.

In the 'druthers' I offered the occupants of all the States and Territories I designated would have to give up something.

Some more than others.


What's the difference in displacing someone 'not American' and someone American?---MBM

My fantasy is about resolving what is essentially an on-going dispute.

My fantasy simply 'puts border, lines, around it.

There can be no dispute as to entitlement.

The discussion can only be about how much and where.


Is this realistic in your opinion?

Fantasy is never realistic, according to everyone's opinion.

Do you see this as more likely than African Americans getting land outside of continental North America?---MBM

Absolutely!!!

Beyond the inherent validity of our entitlement, we already have our people living on the land in (almost) of the land areas listed.

In some cases to a near majority.

Clearly, the United States govenment would not, maybe could not, authorize such a thing.

After all, each State...and Territory...in sovereign in its own right beyond its agreement as a member of The Republic.

I am willing to listen to alternatives.


PEACE

Jim Chester
A sovereign country could consist of an independent economic entity within the very infrastructure of this country...a huge spending bloc..responsive to changes and able to leverage for political, social and economic gains.....a much greater version of the Montgomery Boycotts....on a national scale....so the country would not have to be physically separate, but financially speaking.......it sounds a little off...but the U.S. would find it in its best financial interest to defend it like it does its own....
quote:
Originally posted by Saracen:
The State of Israel was established by powers far to great measure, however, I do not wish to see this thread spiral into a conspiracy theory quest...Israel is not in existence to do the bidding of the West..No...America is the dog being wagged here...


Spiral it won't. I gotcha(wink)...and I agree. Thanks for correcting me. I try to remove the conspiracy 'theories', or rather 'realities' from my discussions on boards because I don't want to confuse the point.

quote:
I raise the example of Israel to demonstrate the power of a united people.


I understand that, not to spiral, but don't they have a 'unity' that we haven't anywhere near established yet? Heck, the folks doing their bidding haven't established that kind of 'unity'...for lack of a better word.

quote:
Oshun, we are in no position to fight an open war against the powers of the West.


Who said it had to be 'open'?

quote:
If we are wise we will use the advantage of political might to gain a foot hold into our vision. Once we have established a seperate state then we can begin phase two which would be a full and complete self reliant independance...


I'm at a loss for what this 'political might' that we curently 'have' and you are referring too is, as well as what form it takes. Please expand. Otherwise I can see how the 'foothold' approach may work.

quote:
I wish to emphasize the fact that I am not suggesting a facsimile of Israel..I only raise this example to silence the naysayers...


I understood that was why you mentioned it.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

Of course we should care what interests people have that would finance or supply military support for Black nationalism or Pan Africanism.


My questions really presumed that there was a sincere interest in creating a homeland for us. If we take that as a given in this argument - that there are no nefarious intentions or subterfuge involved - then - should we care what the US/UN has to do to get us our land? This question has much more to do with "feeling badly" about whatever the US/UN would do to get us our land - and would we/you reject a homeland if the cost was too high? If so - what kinds of things would cause you to reject that offer?

If they have to take over an existing country and expel a people from their land to get us ours - do you care?

Furthermore, let's say the deal is the US needs to have a stabilizing force in a particular region. They set us up there (and perhaps guarantee grants to us over a set number of years in payment for our efforts which help us get our new nation together etc.) and we commit to doing certain things. Is that a deal that you would want to even consider?


I agree with what Saracen said...

quote:
I would reject a plan which called for the expulsion of a native people..Luckily for us there are others ways to secure land..We could always negotiate the inclusion of a native people into the vision..Perhaps they would welcome a sophisticated, well financed, and educated people...It wouldn't be the first time foreign forces were welcomed into foreign lands.


That being said, honestly, the rest of your post is so fanciful, it is hard for me to address even for conversations sake. I understand you were coming form a 'what if' scenario, but it is so disconnected from any realistic situation I can forsee, considering as I mentioned before, our different interests that the oppressor, which is our whole reason for wanting our own land, I can't seriousely address it.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Nmaginate:
quote:
I raise the example of Israel to demonstrate the power of a united people. Israel is not in existence to do the bidding of the West..No...America is the dog being wagged here...


You also raised a demonstrably FALSE idea regarding THEIR MONEY vs. OUR MONEY.


On this we agree.

quote:
How exactly do you think America is the dog being wagged if WE HAVE MORE MONEY (i.e. material, financial power, capital, etc.) than they did?

The idea just does not follow. So, for once, you need to dispense with the madness and let the merits of your points make the point on their own merits. NO NEED TO EXAGGERATE or present blatant falsehoods just to try to persuade, etc.


This can be explained. The Rothchilds. Check their connections to the rise of International finance capitol(European colonialism), the Nazi regime, Zionism, the Federal reserve, and the World Bank.

Uhoh, I spiralled.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by Kevin41:
A sovereign country could consist of an independent economic entity within the very infrastructure of this country...a huge spending bloc..responsive to changes and able to leverage for political, social and economic gains.....a much greater version of the Montgomery Boycotts....on a national scale....so the country would not have to be physically separate, but financially speaking.......it sounds a little off...but the U.S. would find it in its best financial interest to defend it like it does its own....


In buisiness terms this is ethno-aggregation. Something most ethnic groups practice, but we have forfitted(and been somewhat bamboozled into after desegrgation never entered the economic redistribution phaze) for blind consumerism. I support(and practice) etho-aggregation as a mean to an end, the end being Pan-Africanism, and our eventual liberation. But liberation is based on land(and it's natural resources), without a land base, we may be better off, but we would not be liberatied.
quote:
This can be explained. The Rothchilds. Check their connections...


Okay, OA... You're going to have to stop "spiralling" off of my post or IT'S ON! lol

No, my question was simple: If SARACEN wants to say African-Americans have MORE MONEY than what they Jews did prior to the establishment of the State of Israel then the burden is on him to RECONCILE his "Wagged Dog" statement with the supposed LESSER monetary power Jews supposedly had.

If we follow his logic, given how much greater monetary power we have we should be able to make America our "Wagged Dog" in nothing flat.


.
How many more times do you ask??? How much longer can we afford to be tolerant??---Saracen

As you may know, I am not a nationaitst in the traditional sense.

The example of Israel will not transfer, will not apply, for Americans of unknown African ancestry (African American-Americans), and for obvious reasons.

The formation of Israel was not a humanitarian act for its own sake.

Humanitarianism, in that instance, was a fiat of the pragmatic, socio-economic decisions involving oil and the need acuire, and secure future supply.

it morphed into the perception of a simply political manifestation.

The United States has no external socioeconomic need regarding African American-Americans.

I believe for foreseeable generations our future in in the land we, as did our ancestors, have invested in deeply.

I further believe our first level of success, as a people, will be achieving parity in our identity in the greater society in which we live.

You cannot ask for that.

You demand it.

You simply declare it irrevocably.

It is irrefutable in its finality.

With the achievement of 'critical mass', our identotu will acquire a parity position as have all other declared ethncities in the society.

We will build, on a firm foundation, from there.

And we will be successful.

The rest will come, as needed, or demanded.

Our problem thus far seems to be to wait for 'enough' others to 'go first'.


PEACE

Jim Chester
Well, do you think we would be able to form our own nation without it ending up like Liberia? I'm deeply critical of whether or not African-Americans are too Westernized to smoothly assimilate or acculturate into different African societies. I have a feeling that if we went over there, we would see ourselves as "superior" because of our Western education and better-paying jobs. We might see ourselves as savior figures like the Liberian immigrants did.

I don't think we should abandon America, we put too much work into this damned land to just leave it behind. Instead of trying to seperate and form our own nation and leave European-Americans to enjoy the spoils of our past and present labor, we should stay here and attain equal power with the White population. It's our right as American nationals.
quote:
I don't think we should abandon America, we put too much work into this damned land to just leave it behind. Instead of trying to seperate and form our own nation and leave European-Americans to enjoy the spoils of our past and present labor, we should stay here and attain equal power with the White population. It's our right as American nationals.



Why the EITHER ~ OR? ... and the DISCONNECT?


quote:
I have a feeling that if we went over there, we would see ourselves as "superior" because of our Western education and better-paying jobs. We might see ourselves as savior figures like the Liberian immigrants did.


That would hardly be applicable. What part of OUR OWN NATION don't you understand?

But maybe you're responding to something outside of what the author of the thread has presented.


.
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:
Well, do you think we would be able to form our own nation without it ending up like Liberia? I'm deeply critical of whether or not African-Americans are too Westernized to smoothly assimilate or acculturate into different African societies. I have a feeling that if we went over there, we would see ourselves as "superior" because of our Western education and better-paying jobs. We might see ourselves as savior figures like the Liberian immigrants did.

I don't think we should abandon America, we put too much work into this damned land to just leave it behind. Instead of trying to seperate and form our own nation and leave European-Americans to enjoy the spoils of our past and present labor, we should stay here and attain equal power with the White population. It's our right as American nationals.


fro Very good analysis! We have built the foundation in which America stands strong. No other country has ever acquire such power and wealth as America-strictly as a result of slavery. You brought up excellent points! fro
Dang, I have to do this even though I am a new member.

Have any of you have even been to Africa? I was on a USS ship when the drought hit Somalia hard in the early 90's and we delivered food aid. I have traveled to Marrekesh Maroc (Morocco) and Ethiopia with two of my best friends who are from there. Through them I have met many other Eastern Africans here in DC and other Africans who were brought here as refugees. PanAfricanism is the last thing on their mind. Consider the internal wars/struggles in Sudan, Uganda, and Nigeria. Many tribes and citizens of different African countries hold grudges and prejudices against one another which many times comes to bloodshed. Yet some of you have actually made serious posts concerning going to Africa (did you know Africa is a CONTINENT and not a SINGLE country?) to establish a "LAND" where many people don't even get along with each other. Wow, I am impressed. NOT.

As far as the original question. Hunh??? You ask the question if we could build our own nation if we had the ample money and land? At this moment, we haven't even reduced the gang violence, Black on Black crime, made it a standard to get half of our offspring enrolled in college, held a percentage of Black business ownership that reflects our national population, reduced out-of-wedlock/teenage pregnancies, addressed the AIDS epidemic as a majority in our community, forced or chucked our supposed "civil rights leaders" to actually LEAD, .............. *puff*cough*wheeze* bang

Yeah sure we can do it...As far as Land, I am sure an african SOVEREIGN nation will allow it..oops, I forgot most were referring to the continent of Africa as a country. My bad. If you spend any significant time around people from the African CONTINENT, you will mostly hear them refer to themselves or others by their tribe or country. It is in the States that it is common to use color reference. As far as money, we can do it as soon as we stop putting chrome rims on beat-up cars, buying outrageous jewelry/expensive cars/clothes, and struggling to pay for necessities at the same time.
quote:
I am a black man, society sees me as a black man, when a cop stops me he sees a black man, I check african american or black on forms, my birth certificate lists me as black, I have never looked at myself in any other way....


Kalligula

If you notice one thing about me I DON'T REALLY CARE about what folks on this board think about me.

My RACE is not the relevant point. I have CLEARLY laid down enough tracks for you to figure this out.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×