Be Careful!!! Don't lose your mind.......
- Thread starter water
- Start date
this isn't related to any of this but
i was just reading this on wikipedia..
although i've heard of this before.. but damn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ota_Benga
less than a 100 yrs ago..
i was just reading this on wikipedia..
although i've heard of this before.. but damn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ota_Benga
less than a 100 yrs ago..
KingFlip said:this isn't related to any of this but
i was just reading this on wikipedia..
although i've heard of this before.. but damn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ota_Benga
less than a 100 yrs ago..
Check out this thread............
I'm going to bump it.
http://198.65.131.81/board/showthread.php?t=165377
.
Marimba Ani
Yurugu: An African-Centered Critique of European Cultural Thought and Behavior
Within the nature of European culture there exists a statement of value or of "moral" behavior that has no meaning for the members of that culture. I call this the "rhetorical ethic;" it is of great importance for the understanding of the dynamics of the culture. The concepts of traditional European anthropology are inadequate to explain the phenomenon to which I am referring here, as it has no counterpart in the types of cultures to which anthropologists have generally directed their attention in the past. But with the concept of asili, which facilitates an ideological approach to the study of culture, the rhetorical ethic becomes visible; even compelling. It fits the logic of the European asili, assisting the culture in the achievement and maintenance of power. Without this interpretation certain manifestations within the verbal iconography of the culture appear to be inconsistent with its underlying ideological thrust. And that simply would not make sense. Let us see how the mechanism of the rhetorical ethic works.
Don't be scared.............
.
Yurugu: An African-Centered Critique of European Cultural Thought and Behavior
Within the nature of European culture there exists a statement of value or of "moral" behavior that has no meaning for the members of that culture. I call this the "rhetorical ethic;" it is of great importance for the understanding of the dynamics of the culture. The concepts of traditional European anthropology are inadequate to explain the phenomenon to which I am referring here, as it has no counterpart in the types of cultures to which anthropologists have generally directed their attention in the past. But with the concept of asili, which facilitates an ideological approach to the study of culture, the rhetorical ethic becomes visible; even compelling. It fits the logic of the European asili, assisting the culture in the achievement and maintenance of power. Without this interpretation certain manifestations within the verbal iconography of the culture appear to be inconsistent with its underlying ideological thrust. And that simply would not make sense. Let us see how the mechanism of the rhetorical ethic works.
Don't be scared.............
.
Author: Marimba Ani
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Part I - Thought And Iconography
Ch. 1 - Utamawazo: The Cultural Structuring of Thought
Ch. 2 - Religion and Ideology
Ch. 3 - Aesthetic: The Power of Symbols
Part II - Image And National Consciousness
Ch. 4 - Self-Image
Ch. 5 - Image of Others
Part III - Behavior And Ethics
Ch. 6 - Rhetoric and Behavior
Ch. 7 - Intracultural Behavior
Ch. 8 - Behavior Towards Others
Part IV - Ideology
Ch. 9 - Progress as Ideology
Ch. 10 - Universalism: The Syntax of Cultural Imperialism
The Author's description of her book:"This study of Europe is an intentionally aggressive polemic. It is an assault upon the European paradigm; a repudiation of its essence. It is initiated with the intention of contributing to the process of demystification necessary for those of us who would liberate ourselves from European intellectual imperialism.
"Europe's political domination of Africa and much of the "non-European" world has been accompanied by a relentless cultural and psychological rape and by devastating economic exploitation. But what has compelled me to write this book is the conviction that beneath this deadly onslaught lies a stultifying intellectual mystification that prevents Europe's political victims from thinking in a manner that would lead to authentic self-determination.
"Intellectual decolonization is a prerequisite for the creation of successful political challenges to the present situation. Europe's imperialistic success can be accredited not so much to superior military might, as to the weapon of culture: The former ensures more immediate control but requires continual physical force for the maintenance of power, while the later succeeds in long-lasting dominance that enlists the cooperation of its victims (i.e., pacification of the will).
"The secret Europeans discovered early in their history is that culture carries rules for thinking, and that if you could impose your culture on your victims you could limit the creativity of their vision, destroying their ability to act with will and intent and in their own interest. The truth is that we are all "intellectuals," all potential visionaries.
"This book discusses the evolution of that process of imposition as well as the characteristics of cultural beings who find it necessary to impose their will on others. It is not a simple process to explain, since the tools we need in order to dissect it have been taken from us through colonial miseducation. It is necessary to begin, therefore, with a painful weaning from the very epistemological assumptions that strangle us. The weaning takes patience and commitment, but the liberation of our minds is well worth the struggle."
Fear is the enemy..............
.
Last edited:
Two Thousand Seasons (African Writers) (Paperback)
by Ayi Kwei Armah (Author)
2000 SEASONS
African scholar and historian John Henrik Clarke once pointed out that in colonizing the world, Europeans also colonized information about the world. The savage theft of land and resources, the wholesale murder of millions - this physical assault was accompanied by an ideological assault from which Africans are still trying to recover.
In recent years, many of us have stepped up to challenge the backward, racist ideology that permeates much of what is written about African people, history and culture. Ayi Kwei Armah is one author who has taken on the task of reconstructuring out story. The body of work he has produced is just one example of how even creative outlets can be used to further our struggle for liberation.
Armah's novel Two Thousand Seasons was first published in 1973 and was reprinted last year by Per Ankh, an African publishing cooperative based in Senegal. Its significance is profound for all Africans fighting to reclaim out stolen land and resources, primarily because it tells a story built upon the progressive theories of African revolutionaries such as Nkrumah, Garvey and Diop. Armah lays the foundation for this in the opening pages of the novel by asserting that "we are not a people of yesterday," "that we black people are one people we know," and that "[Africa] is ours, not through murder, nor through theft, not by violence or any other trickery. This has always been our land. Here we began."
Two Thousand Seasons by Ayi Kwei Armah, is a deeply profound and monumental text, for those who understood it. It is titled an historical novel, however it really doesn’t fit into any of the european defined structures for books. The term ‘novel’ implies “fictional,” “untrue,” “made up” and the like. One critique agrees. “Indeed the term ‘novel’, though it appears clearly on the title page, sits oddly on a book so apparently remote from the existing novelistic models.” (Pg. 64, The Novels of Ayi Kwei Armah by Robert Fraser)
2000 Seasons IS about actual accounts told from our oral tradition and only the exact names of people and places have changed. For those of us who know our connected history, it reads like autobiography of disconnectedness and reconnectedness. There have been some critiques that have said that there is no connection of Black people and that Armah’s history is off. I personally do not want to waste wrist energy typing that stuff but, for those interested, the text is Ayi Kwei Armah’s Africa by Derek Wright beginning on pg. 221.
Beyond a literary critique of this masterful work, 2000 Seasons is a text that can help Africa’s children return home, return to ourselves and return to OUR WAY (OUR WAY). It shows possibly how we let the arabs and europeans into our societies and our lives. We were trippin’!!! We had started to get lax in performing rituals, in exercising reciprocity, in being connected Afrikan people. We did not listen to the Oracles, Sages and Prophetesses. We turned our backs on that which had sustained us. Is it possible that the last 500 years have been an Afrikan Ancestral Butt whippin’? Was it allowed so it could whip us back into Afrikans? Will it continue until enough of us faithfully and from the heart return to OUR WAY (OUR WAY)?
WE SHALL SEE!!! The creator of this site felt exceptionally moved, not only by the text in its totality but also with the character of “Isanusi.” As you all remember, Isanusi was the older man who stuck to the traditions-at all costs. He saw what was coming down the pike, acted accordingly and was labeled a madman and banished to the fifth grove (beyond the third grove). After things got increasingly worse, the King sought him out to calm the people down, Isanusi still spoke the truth and he was sent back to his “prison.”
This site especially reflects the warnings and teachings of Isanusi. I personally attempt to live my own life as close to OUR WAY (OUR WAY) as possible, however I am still growing, and am falling by the wayside on a few things, but that is expected with growth. ReAfrikanization is a life long process. We are constantly in a process of “becoming.” For those of us who are CONSCIOUSLY re-embracing OUR WAY ( OUR WAY), we already know this and are growing daily. What I would like to share now is part of the conversation Isanusi had with the people of Anoa and with the children who understood him. These words ring loudly to our situation today and I submit that we need more Isanusi’s around today to get us out of this present mess.
“Have we forgotten the cause of our long wandering? Did we not learn near the desert how priests and warriors are twin destroyers, the priest attacking the victim mind, the warrior breaking bodies still inhabited by resisting wills?” “All honest people who have come to us have come because they sought to do themselves good among us, as part of our people, and they said so. These white men, they do not want to be part of us. But here they have come claiming they have crossed the sea from wherever it is they come from just to do us good. They are pretenders. They are liars. We have asked them for nothing. We should not have let them come among us. They have no desire to live with us. They will live against us.” (153-154)
“’The whites intend a lasting oppressions of us’ . . . He told us in the town Poano he had heard a white man, a missionary whose white greed was so subtle it looked forward to the ending of the open trade of human beings, to the beginning of a subtler destruction. This white missionary thought there would be far greater profit in keeping the victims of the trade here on our own land, having the kings and courtiers use them to mine and grow whatever the whites need, then offering the product to the white destroyers . . . Isanusi said this white missionary would be busy finding ways to eternalize our slavery through using our leaders in a cleverer kind of oppression, harder to see as slavery, slavery disguised as freedom itself. ‘The whites intend a long oppression of us.’” (163)
(The narrator) “Our choices in the life we were ready to begin would not be many: we could fit into existing arrangements, abandoning our dreams of that better world, dreams of our way, the way. Or we could try to realize the way. That would mean fighting against the white road, the white people’s system for destroying our way, the way.
We listened to Isanusi. We did not know then the knowledge contained in his words was immediate, urgent knowledge. We thought we would have time to absorb it, time to adjust to its meaning. We had none.
Isanusi tried to warn us but we misjudged him. We thought there was a distance between his words and reality, a space for us to manoeuvre in. There was none . . . . He warned us to stay completely clear of the new arrangements, the positions which had already become mere jobs for parasites.”
(Isanusi)”The way things have become, if you do not want to be parasites you need time in which to think of what else there is to be. And above time, courage to do what you conclude you ought to do, which is more difficult . . . .”
(Isanusi)”If you knew who you were, you would accept no invitations fromlack men who call white people friends. Such unnatural friendships are fed by bloody interests. You will live to be their victim.” (164-166)
I could go on and on. There is soooooooooooo much wisdom and knowledge contained within 2000 Seasons for Afrikans who Consciously want to reconnect to OUR WAY (OUR WAY). WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY?
.
You know what concens me about people like this. They are so deeply caught up in their cause where it up to par to mondern day thinking or technology. I guess what I'm trying to say is they don't know how to adapt to modern day living. I don't know if I'm getting my message across to you guys though. I guess what I'm trying to say is their style of everyday life is more or less like a native style. Or put it like this, if the lady in the video ran this country, it would collapse. Sorry if my reply is confusing.
Remember don't lose your mind..........
Excerpt Chapter 6
Hypocrisy as a Way of Life
Within the nature of European culture there exists a statement of value or of "moral" behavior that has no meaning for the members of that culture.
I call this the "rhetorical ethic;" it is of great importance for the understanding of the dynamics of the culture. The concepts of traditional European anthropology are inadequate to explain the phenomenon to which I am referring here, as it has no counterpart in the types of cultures to which anthropologists have generally directed their attention in the past. But with the concept of asili, which facilitates an ideological approach to the study of culture, the rhetorical ethic becomes visible; even compelling. It fits the logic of the European asili, assisting the culture in the achievement and maintenance of power. Without this interpretation certain manifestations within the verbal iconography of the culture appear to be inconsistent with its underlying ideological thrust. And that simply would not make sense. Let us see how the mechanism of the rhetorical ethic works.
The related distinction used traditionally in anthropology is stated in terms of "ideal culture" and "actual behavior" and is said to be characteristic of all cultures, thereby helping to confuse the issue of the uniqueness and problematical nature of European culture. The conventional distinction is illustrated in the following manner by the authors of a recently published anthropology textbook.
For example, an idealized belief, long cherished in America, is that all doctors are selfless, friendly people who chose medicine as their profession because they felt themselves "called" to serve humanity, and who have little interest in either the money or the prestige of their position. Of course, many physicians do not measure up to this ideal. Nevertheless, the continued success of television programs that portray the average American M.D. as a paragon of virtue indicates how deeply rooted in our collective psyche the ideal of the noble physician is.
This is a common misconception that has led to a mistaken view and superficial understanding of the nature of European (Euro- American) society. To refer to the images offered above as "ideal" is a misuse or at least a misleading use of the term "ideal." The projection and success of the image of the committed, altruistic doctor do not indicate that it is a "deeply rooted" ideal in the American psyche.
It is rather an indication of the fact that this is how Americans want to appear to others, most often to non-European peoples-their "objects.''
In this case it is the way that the doctor wants to appear to his patients, or ''objects,'' because this appearance works to his advantage. On the other hand, an image that projects him as a potential exploiter can lead to the possibility of malpractice suits and to the institutionalization of socialized medicine-neither of which is lucrative for him.
An ''ideal'' should be understood to be some thing that functions normatively and something that is emulated; that which has meaning for those who share it. It is the European experience that encourages the confounding of meaning and commitment with mere verbal expression. (It was within the incipient European experience that "rhetoric" came to be regarded as art.) In African culture words have power.
The European mind is a political one and for this reason constantly aware of the political effect of words and images as they are used for the purposes of manipulation.
By "political" I mean to indicate an ego that consistently experiences people as others; as representatives of interests defined differently and, therefore, as conflicting with this "ego."
The individual is concerned, therefore, with the way in which his verbal expression and the image he projects can influence the behavior of those to whom he relates, be they patients (would-be consumers), neocolonial subjects, an opposing candidate for office, or an African selfdeterminist/nationalist. This is what is "deeply rooted" in the American mind-the psychology of "public relations," "salesmanship," and political strategy. It is in the Euro-American vernacular that the word "image" is used so frequently. To be concerned with one's image as opposed to one's self is a European characteristic.
To be aware of the strategical advantage of appearing to be altruistic when one is operating out of self-interest does not mean that altruism is a meaningful "ideal" in terms of one's value-system.
It is, instead, an outgrowth of the propaganda that the Europeans have fed "non-European" peoples since they first sought to conquer them. Because they exported ("sold") this altruistic image so successfully, they have had to project themselves as adhering to this "ideal"; similarly, the projection of themselves or their motives in this way has been essential to the successful imposition of this "ethic" on others.
The basic principle to be kept in mind in order to understand this dynamic of European culture is that the major contributing factor to the success of European nationalism has been its projection as disinterested internationalism,
The use of "ideal" in the passage quoted above is simply an inadequate concept for the ethnological analysis of European culture. Hoebel, in an earlier textbook, offers his version, which is similarly inadequate: "Ideal Culture consists of a people's verbally expressed standards and behavior." The examples that these anthropologists offer from other cultures to explicate the distinction between "ideal" and "actual" in no way represent the phenomenon in Western culture under consideration.
Hoebel describes "normative postulates or values" as "deep- lying assumptions about whether things or acts are good and to be sought after, or bad and to be rejected." This is precisely what the "rhetorical ethic" is not. Hoebel's definition can be used to get at the converse of the phenomenon I wish to describe. A "rhetorical ethic" is not a "deep-lying assumption." It is a superficial verbal expression that is not intended for assimilation by the members of the culture that produced it. The "rhetorical ethic," a European phenomenon, has been neglected in conventional ethnological theory, which has consistently offered concepts devoid of political significance.
Anthropologists talk about the gap in all cultures between thought and deed, between ideas and actions. The gap to which I am referring, however, is between verbal expression and belief or commitment; between what people say and what they do. Nowhere other than in European culture do words mean so little as indices of belief. It is this characteristic that is of concern here and this characteristic for which the concepts of traditional anthropology are inadequate to explain.
As a cultural trait it has, however, been described by others, particularly those who have been made victims of European cunning.
Below an indigenous American describes European behavior:
It is an inherent characteristic of the culture that it prepares members of the culture to be able to act like friends toward those they regard as enemies; to be able to convince others that they have come to help when they, in fact, have come to destroy the others and their culture.
That some may "believe" that they are actually doing good only makes them more dangerous, for they have swallowed their own rhetoric-perhaps a convenient self-delusion.
Hypocritical behavior is sanctioned and rewarded in European culture.
The rhetorical ethic helps to sanction it. European culture cannot be understood in terms of the dynamics of other cultures alone. It is a culture that breeds hypocrisy-in which hypocrisy is a supportive theme a standard of behavior. Its hypocritical nature is linked to the Platonic abstraction, to objectification, to the compartmentalization of the person and the denial of the emotional self. Below Havelock characteristically understands the case:
Another thing noticeable about them [pre-Platonic" Greeks] in this period is their capacity for direct action and sincere action and for direct and sincere expression of motive and desire. They almost entirely lack those slight hypocrisies without which our civilization does not seem to work.
The distinction and definitions that can lead to a better under- standing of the Europeans and their culture can only come from a perspective that is not one of European chauvinism; for it is the method of European chauvinism or cultural nationalism to conceal European interest. As I use it, "value" is only meaningful value; it is that which motivates behavior and is the origin of human commitment. Value determines what is imitated and preserved, what is selected for and encouraged. "Avowed values" on the other hand, which are merely professed, which find expression only verbally, which are not indicative of behavior, belong to what I have called the "rhetorical ethic."
The European rhetorical ethic is precisely that-purely rhetorical- and, as such, has its own origins as a creation for export; i.e., for the political, intercultural activity of the European.
It is designed to create an image that will prevent others from successfully anticipating European behavior, and its objective is to encourage nonstrategic (i.e., naive, rather than successful) political behavior on the part of others. This is the same as "nonpolitical" behavior.)
It is designed to sell, to dupe, to promote European nationalistic objectives. It "packages" European cultural imperialism in a wrapping that makes it appear more attractive, less harmful. None of these features represents what can culturally be referred to as an "ideal" in any sense. The rhetorical ethic is, therefore, not dysfunctional in European culture.
It does not generate nor reflect conflict in European ideology or belief-system; but it is, rather, necessary to the maintenance and projection of the utamaroho and performs a vital function in sustaining European cultural nationalism in the pursuit of its international objectives.
The rhetorical ethic is made possible by the fact that hypocrisy as a mode of behavior is a valued theme in European life; the same hypocritical behavior that its presence sanctions. Again, "value" refers to that which is encouraged and approved in a culture. European culture is constructed in such a way that successful survival within it discourages honesty and directness and encourages dishonesty and deceit-the ability to appear to be something other than what one is; to hide one's "self," one's motives and intent.
People who are duped by others and relate to a projected image are considered fools or "country bumpkins." Hypocrisy in this way becomes not a negative personality trait, not immoral or abnormal behavior, but it is both expected and cultivated. It is considered to be a crucial ingredient of "sophistication," a European goal.
European intracultural, political behavior is based on hypocrisy-as are business relations, the advertising media, and most other areas of public, and social interaction.
It is merely a manifestation of this theme when Americans claim that politicians are basically honest. The claim itself is hypocritical, and the public expects it to be so. We all know that the objective of commercial advertising is to convince us to buy products so that manufacturers can make large profits, but the slogans attempt to persuade us that the product is beneficial to our well being, as though the producer has our welfare at heart.
This hypocrisy touches the lives of every member of the culture in their dealings with one another, and yet it originates in part in the nature of their intercultural relationships. It is a part of the mechanism of European expansionism, All of these factors must go into the understanding of the rhetorical ethic and not an overly simplistic distinction between "ideal" and "actual" culture; perhaps a relevant distinction with regard to other cultures that create and are created by very different "cultural personalities." Let us look more closely at this "ethic" and see how it has functioned historically.
Be careful...........
.
Excerpt Chapter 6
Hypocrisy as a Way of Life
Within the nature of European culture there exists a statement of value or of "moral" behavior that has no meaning for the members of that culture.
I call this the "rhetorical ethic;" it is of great importance for the understanding of the dynamics of the culture. The concepts of traditional European anthropology are inadequate to explain the phenomenon to which I am referring here, as it has no counterpart in the types of cultures to which anthropologists have generally directed their attention in the past. But with the concept of asili, which facilitates an ideological approach to the study of culture, the rhetorical ethic becomes visible; even compelling. It fits the logic of the European asili, assisting the culture in the achievement and maintenance of power. Without this interpretation certain manifestations within the verbal iconography of the culture appear to be inconsistent with its underlying ideological thrust. And that simply would not make sense. Let us see how the mechanism of the rhetorical ethic works.
The related distinction used traditionally in anthropology is stated in terms of "ideal culture" and "actual behavior" and is said to be characteristic of all cultures, thereby helping to confuse the issue of the uniqueness and problematical nature of European culture. The conventional distinction is illustrated in the following manner by the authors of a recently published anthropology textbook.
For example, an idealized belief, long cherished in America, is that all doctors are selfless, friendly people who chose medicine as their profession because they felt themselves "called" to serve humanity, and who have little interest in either the money or the prestige of their position. Of course, many physicians do not measure up to this ideal. Nevertheless, the continued success of television programs that portray the average American M.D. as a paragon of virtue indicates how deeply rooted in our collective psyche the ideal of the noble physician is.
This is a common misconception that has led to a mistaken view and superficial understanding of the nature of European (Euro- American) society. To refer to the images offered above as "ideal" is a misuse or at least a misleading use of the term "ideal." The projection and success of the image of the committed, altruistic doctor do not indicate that it is a "deeply rooted" ideal in the American psyche.
It is rather an indication of the fact that this is how Americans want to appear to others, most often to non-European peoples-their "objects.''
In this case it is the way that the doctor wants to appear to his patients, or ''objects,'' because this appearance works to his advantage. On the other hand, an image that projects him as a potential exploiter can lead to the possibility of malpractice suits and to the institutionalization of socialized medicine-neither of which is lucrative for him.
An ''ideal'' should be understood to be some thing that functions normatively and something that is emulated; that which has meaning for those who share it. It is the European experience that encourages the confounding of meaning and commitment with mere verbal expression. (It was within the incipient European experience that "rhetoric" came to be regarded as art.) In African culture words have power.
The European mind is a political one and for this reason constantly aware of the political effect of words and images as they are used for the purposes of manipulation.
By "political" I mean to indicate an ego that consistently experiences people as others; as representatives of interests defined differently and, therefore, as conflicting with this "ego."
The individual is concerned, therefore, with the way in which his verbal expression and the image he projects can influence the behavior of those to whom he relates, be they patients (would-be consumers), neocolonial subjects, an opposing candidate for office, or an African selfdeterminist/nationalist. This is what is "deeply rooted" in the American mind-the psychology of "public relations," "salesmanship," and political strategy. It is in the Euro-American vernacular that the word "image" is used so frequently. To be concerned with one's image as opposed to one's self is a European characteristic.
To be aware of the strategical advantage of appearing to be altruistic when one is operating out of self-interest does not mean that altruism is a meaningful "ideal" in terms of one's value-system.
It is, instead, an outgrowth of the propaganda that the Europeans have fed "non-European" peoples since they first sought to conquer them. Because they exported ("sold") this altruistic image so successfully, they have had to project themselves as adhering to this "ideal"; similarly, the projection of themselves or their motives in this way has been essential to the successful imposition of this "ethic" on others.
The basic principle to be kept in mind in order to understand this dynamic of European culture is that the major contributing factor to the success of European nationalism has been its projection as disinterested internationalism,
The use of "ideal" in the passage quoted above is simply an inadequate concept for the ethnological analysis of European culture. Hoebel, in an earlier textbook, offers his version, which is similarly inadequate: "Ideal Culture consists of a people's verbally expressed standards and behavior." The examples that these anthropologists offer from other cultures to explicate the distinction between "ideal" and "actual" in no way represent the phenomenon in Western culture under consideration.
Hoebel describes "normative postulates or values" as "deep- lying assumptions about whether things or acts are good and to be sought after, or bad and to be rejected." This is precisely what the "rhetorical ethic" is not. Hoebel's definition can be used to get at the converse of the phenomenon I wish to describe. A "rhetorical ethic" is not a "deep-lying assumption." It is a superficial verbal expression that is not intended for assimilation by the members of the culture that produced it. The "rhetorical ethic," a European phenomenon, has been neglected in conventional ethnological theory, which has consistently offered concepts devoid of political significance.
Anthropologists talk about the gap in all cultures between thought and deed, between ideas and actions. The gap to which I am referring, however, is between verbal expression and belief or commitment; between what people say and what they do. Nowhere other than in European culture do words mean so little as indices of belief. It is this characteristic that is of concern here and this characteristic for which the concepts of traditional anthropology are inadequate to explain.
As a cultural trait it has, however, been described by others, particularly those who have been made victims of European cunning.
Below an indigenous American describes European behavior:
They would make slaves of us if they could; but as they cannot, they kill us. There is no faith to be placed in their words.
They will say to an Indian, "My friend; my brother!" They will take him by the hand and, at the same moment destroy him.... Remember that this day I warned you to beware of such friends as these. I know the Long-Knives. They are not to be trusted.
They will say to an Indian, "My friend; my brother!" They will take him by the hand and, at the same moment destroy him.... Remember that this day I warned you to beware of such friends as these. I know the Long-Knives. They are not to be trusted.
It is an inherent characteristic of the culture that it prepares members of the culture to be able to act like friends toward those they regard as enemies; to be able to convince others that they have come to help when they, in fact, have come to destroy the others and their culture.
That some may "believe" that they are actually doing good only makes them more dangerous, for they have swallowed their own rhetoric-perhaps a convenient self-delusion.
Hypocritical behavior is sanctioned and rewarded in European culture.
The rhetorical ethic helps to sanction it. European culture cannot be understood in terms of the dynamics of other cultures alone. It is a culture that breeds hypocrisy-in which hypocrisy is a supportive theme a standard of behavior. Its hypocritical nature is linked to the Platonic abstraction, to objectification, to the compartmentalization of the person and the denial of the emotional self. Below Havelock characteristically understands the case:
Another thing noticeable about them [pre-Platonic" Greeks] in this period is their capacity for direct action and sincere action and for direct and sincere expression of motive and desire. They almost entirely lack those slight hypocrisies without which our civilization does not seem to work.
The distinction and definitions that can lead to a better under- standing of the Europeans and their culture can only come from a perspective that is not one of European chauvinism; for it is the method of European chauvinism or cultural nationalism to conceal European interest. As I use it, "value" is only meaningful value; it is that which motivates behavior and is the origin of human commitment. Value determines what is imitated and preserved, what is selected for and encouraged. "Avowed values" on the other hand, which are merely professed, which find expression only verbally, which are not indicative of behavior, belong to what I have called the "rhetorical ethic."
The European rhetorical ethic is precisely that-purely rhetorical- and, as such, has its own origins as a creation for export; i.e., for the political, intercultural activity of the European.
It is designed to create an image that will prevent others from successfully anticipating European behavior, and its objective is to encourage nonstrategic (i.e., naive, rather than successful) political behavior on the part of others. This is the same as "nonpolitical" behavior.)
It is designed to sell, to dupe, to promote European nationalistic objectives. It "packages" European cultural imperialism in a wrapping that makes it appear more attractive, less harmful. None of these features represents what can culturally be referred to as an "ideal" in any sense. The rhetorical ethic is, therefore, not dysfunctional in European culture.
It does not generate nor reflect conflict in European ideology or belief-system; but it is, rather, necessary to the maintenance and projection of the utamaroho and performs a vital function in sustaining European cultural nationalism in the pursuit of its international objectives.
The rhetorical ethic is made possible by the fact that hypocrisy as a mode of behavior is a valued theme in European life; the same hypocritical behavior that its presence sanctions. Again, "value" refers to that which is encouraged and approved in a culture. European culture is constructed in such a way that successful survival within it discourages honesty and directness and encourages dishonesty and deceit-the ability to appear to be something other than what one is; to hide one's "self," one's motives and intent.
People who are duped by others and relate to a projected image are considered fools or "country bumpkins." Hypocrisy in this way becomes not a negative personality trait, not immoral or abnormal behavior, but it is both expected and cultivated. It is considered to be a crucial ingredient of "sophistication," a European goal.
European intracultural, political behavior is based on hypocrisy-as are business relations, the advertising media, and most other areas of public, and social interaction.
It is merely a manifestation of this theme when Americans claim that politicians are basically honest. The claim itself is hypocritical, and the public expects it to be so. We all know that the objective of commercial advertising is to convince us to buy products so that manufacturers can make large profits, but the slogans attempt to persuade us that the product is beneficial to our well being, as though the producer has our welfare at heart.
This hypocrisy touches the lives of every member of the culture in their dealings with one another, and yet it originates in part in the nature of their intercultural relationships. It is a part of the mechanism of European expansionism, All of these factors must go into the understanding of the rhetorical ethic and not an overly simplistic distinction between "ideal" and "actual" culture; perhaps a relevant distinction with regard to other cultures that create and are created by very different "cultural personalities." Let us look more closely at this "ethic" and see how it has functioned historically.
Be careful...........
.
bgbtylvr said:
Believe it or not some churches were like this growing up...I don't know what happened...like I said in other threads...progressive Black consciousness just seemed to be a phase in the late 80s early 90s...
...but I remember attending lectures held at churches with pops from speakers that have been mentioned and posted on BGOL...
kayanation said:So you think she would do a worse job than Bush????
.
Honestly yes. The reason is she is so one-sided she would cause a race war in this country. She would generalize every white person in this country which is a bad thing.
man, every time you say anything to strengthen Black people, somebody tries to call it reverse racism.
this woman is absolutely on point, and any Black person fearing a race war is retarded.
there is WAY too much money to be lost nationally with a physical race war.
the war is over the MENTALITY individually and collectively of Black people, and it is fought every day.
well, fought by some of us.
others of us just capitulate, roll over, or completely sell out.
this woman is absolutely on point, and any Black person fearing a race war is retarded.
there is WAY too much money to be lost nationally with a physical race war.
the war is over the MENTALITY individually and collectively of Black people, and it is fought every day.
well, fought by some of us.
others of us just capitulate, roll over, or completely sell out.
Tight Post!! But Brother you need to make the Title of the thread reflect the Powerful Information in the thread.
I might have past this due to the title, but because i know the type of stuff you post (Knowlege Info) I wanted to see what you had.
Good Look!!!
Hotep
I might have past this due to the title, but because i know the type of stuff you post (Knowlege Info) I wanted to see what you had.
Good Look!!!
Hotep
teeski53 said:
Bro, if more people would bump the knowledge threads when they are through reading them, then it would help us all...........
Instead some people read and close the thread when done.
Point taken though.
I find myself having to bump threads sometimes single-handedly, sometimes it gets tiring............
I think I understand what she's saying.
Society doesn't value spirituality, because it doesn't make money. So we, being a spiritual people, lose value in society.
Without spirituality, you have no bond to your fellow man. And that just makes it easier to objectify a person. Which means, in todays society, a black man is viewed as a worthless object.
In fact, that is the very nature of a capitalist society. Or, as Tay would say, "Turns that body into GDP."
[flash]http://www.youtube.com/v/PxJ1iX7LIJo[/flash]
Society doesn't value spirituality, because it doesn't make money. So we, being a spiritual people, lose value in society.
Without spirituality, you have no bond to your fellow man. And that just makes it easier to objectify a person. Which means, in todays society, a black man is viewed as a worthless object.
In fact, that is the very nature of a capitalist society. Or, as Tay would say, "Turns that body into GDP."
[flash]http://www.youtube.com/v/PxJ1iX7LIJo[/flash]
VegasGuy said:
Control implies that something is beyond you in scope and there is an effort to submerge/get over/rise above it..........
Taking a world view:
In a kumbaya world where is is only peace and love, whites (being defined by their lack of melanin) will become extinct.
Quantitatively, whites are already a minority in the world view.
It is counter survival to intermingle and have offspring with non-whites.
Hence a set of cultural survival techniques will develop.
It is a fact that where the caucasian man have interacted with other cultures/civilisations, he has only brought total destruction of the indigenous culture.
Of course cultures interact and borrow from each other. There is a melding and fusion that takes place and all participants benefit.
However the caucasian man seeks to active destroy and replace instead of contribute and exchange with the incident culture.
Some examples:
Zulu
Shaka Zulu unified south africa. He did so by declaring war on his neighbors and in the process built a massive empire.
However within that empire, cultures that belonged to it were free to thrive and were elected to just about any position or could even marry into royalty.
Ethiopia/Thebes/Egypt
Consisted of a number of different cultures without societal structures for conforming to only one culture
Ashante/Mali/Songhgay
Number of cultures living within the same space with no reward & punishment system in place for non-conformance.
For the sake of Colin, let me stop here................
It was an interesting listen, but in my opinion has many flaws in her argument.
I may stand corrected, but she said that the european construct does not embody truth...
In a nutshell, We have several nations that are ran in europeon construct and nations that are not.
In the US we have FREEDOM..freedom of choice in philosophies..to practice what we will...And I notice that she has a congo playing in the background so I believe that she is trying to portray that she is giving a philosophy from the motherland...However in many of these countries, You don't have much freedom and if you were to speak out...action would be taken against you in something unpleasurable..like a limb being ambutated or a tongue...
Although it was interesting, her philosophy will take you back to the dark ages philosophies in my opinion.
Black folks are interseted in what comes from our motherland...however if Black folks in America only knew half the story..They would not succumb to such notions.
I may stand corrected, but she said that the european construct does not embody truth...
In a nutshell, We have several nations that are ran in europeon construct and nations that are not.
In the US we have FREEDOM..freedom of choice in philosophies..to practice what we will...And I notice that she has a congo playing in the background so I believe that she is trying to portray that she is giving a philosophy from the motherland...However in many of these countries, You don't have much freedom and if you were to speak out...action would be taken against you in something unpleasurable..like a limb being ambutated or a tongue...
Although it was interesting, her philosophy will take you back to the dark ages philosophies in my opinion.
Black folks are interseted in what comes from our motherland...however if Black folks in America only knew half the story..They would not succumb to such notions.
Great Post - but I dont understand why "Brothers" would defend a system that is against us .... and criticize anyone that speaks out
oh well ,the revolution is always led by the few ,not the majority
Maybe they don't see that it would be their turn next.............
BAD DEBT GOT NEWS FOR YA BRO WE AINT FREE CHECK THE BACK OF YOUR SOCIAL SEC CARD BOTTOM RIGHT NOTICE THE NUMBER THATS YA STOCK RIGHT ALONE WITH YA BIRTH CERTIFICATE YA KIDS (B.C.)AN IF YA DUMB ENOUGH YA MARRIAGE LICENSE WE ARE CHATTLE STUDY THE LAW DICTIONARY SOMETIMES, FROM DAY ONE TAKE IT FROM SOMEONE WHO (TRAVELS OFTEN) AMERICA IS BUT A MARAGE
THE ONLY WAY WE CAN STOP IT IS TO CHANGE OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO HAVE BECOME CORPARATE WHORES (AN ALL I GOT TO SAY BOUT THIS POST IS BUMP) BE PAYING YA CLOSE FROM NO ON (KAYA).......NOHOMO 
THE ONLY WAY WE CAN STOP IT IS TO CHANGE OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS WHO HAVE BECOME CORPARATE WHORES (AN ALL I GOT TO SAY BOUT THIS POST IS BUMP) BE PAYING YA CLOSE FROM NO ON (KAYA).......NOHOMO Similar threads
