shouldn't Ancient Egypt be counted as an extension of Nubia?

[Im Kemet Rocky & I like penis]

cacs love to argue that "black people sold eachother as slaves too", completly disregarding how dehumanizing,putrid,and harsh the cacopean slavery was compared to a west african "slavery" (they had freedom and could marry, kind of makes you think why they call it slavery...)

 

[GMOGMediaTV]

None of you nikkas ever read, Nile Valley Contributions to Civlization by Anthony Browder?

Here's a quote from his book:

The Nubians

The Egyptians of today are not the same people as the ancient

Kernites of 5,000 years ago, just as the Americans of today are

not the same as the Native Americans of 500 years ago. The

Egypt of today is an Islamic nation, which is currently inhabited

by peoples from Assyria, Syria, Persia, Europe and other areas

of the world, who have, through a process of miscegenation

over a period of thousands of years, evolved into the Egyptian

of today.

In order to correctly address the issue of race in modern

Egypt, one must have a clear understanding of the racial

makeup of the peoples who originally occupied that land,

where they carne from and where their descendants currently

live. They certainly haven't all disappeared into the modern

Egyptian melting pot. These indigenous people are still called

Nubians today.

The area called Nubia was divided into two regions, Lower

Nubia (in southern Egypt) and Upper Nubia (in northern

Sudan). The word Nubia was derived from the Kernetic word

nub which meant gold. ThusNubia was referred toastheland

of gold and its people were called Nubians, or people from the

land of gold. In addition to gold, ebony, incense, spices, ivory feathers and animal skin were also exported to Kemet from Nuba

 

[observe]

None of you nikkas ever read, Nile Valley Contributions to Civlization by Anthony Browder?

Here's a quote from his book:

I got that book..its a good starting point..but like someone mentioned...read .Cheikh' s African Origins ...it goes more into depth..just started reading it yesterday....or watch Dr Ben Yosef lectures on YouTube

 

[OsO]

c

can you give us a source besides wiki? and where exactly does it say that Ethiopia fathered Sumeria, Mesopotamia, and India?

you're basing this on what?

not saying ur wrong.

to really get into this discussion we need to have a common understanding of how colonialism functioned during this time, because it's different than the colonialism of today.

no one book on the topic is 100% accurate, but if you can read several different texts by different authors that all address this same subject, you can begin to accurately triangulate the truth.

some good reads on the subject:

 

[GetInTheTruck]

to really get into this discussion we need to have a common understanding of how colonialism functioned during this time, because it's different than the colonialism of today.

no one book on the topic is 100% accurate, but if you can read several different texts by different authors that all address this same subject, you can begin to accurately triangulate the truth.

some good reads on the subject:

Instead of posting pictures of books that were played out in 1999 why don't you address the issue in your own words?

Egyptian yoga?

 

[theworldismine13]

While I won't call the Arab Slave trade benevolent, it differed greatly from the European counterpart. Plus slavery was a part of African culture for the longest but it was generally a means of assimilating conquered people into the conquering society instead of making a person property, not human unfit to be with general society, etc. So I dunno if calling the first Muslim converts c00ns(for extreme lack of a better term) makes much sense cuz that would mean all Africans regardless of religion were c00ns too.

To answer the other question, Ethiopia practiced slavery until 1924 so certain effects linger today, not to mention misinformation from news depictions from cac media, crime dramas/movies, and relatives who come to America and have bad experiences with other black people.

As for us and other Africans, it goes both ways so its no point in discussing it. We should be on some Nkrumah shyt, leave it to people like me to eliminate white washed Ethiopians.

We were sold into slavery by Africans so pardon me, but yeah a lot of Africans can be considered c00ns and Africans participating in slavery internally and externally was a mistake and wrong but when people when into the slave trade with non African people and sending African people to different continents I think that is when it crossed the line into c00ning, so yeah a lot of people were c00ns

The Arab slave trade was not benevolent it was the same or worse than the atlantic slave trade and everybody that partcipated in either trade whether African, Arab or European can eat a dikk

 

[theworldismine13]

cacs love to argue that "black people sold eachother as slaves too", completly disregarding how dehumanizing,putrid,and harsh the cacopean slavery was compared to a west african "slavery" (they had freedom and could marry, kind of makes you think why they call it slavery...)

There are problems with even that kind of slavery, but either way it is historically correct that west Africans sold other west Africans into slavery to Europeans, so at the point when they did that your point about African slavery being benevolent becomes moot

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahomey

 

[2Quik4UHoes]

We were sold into slavery by Africans so pardon me, but yeah a lot of Africans can be considered c00ns and Africans participating in slavery internally and externally was a mistake and wrong but when people when into the slave trade with non African people and sending African people to different continents I think that is when it crossed the line into coining, so yeah a lot of people were c00ns

The Arab slave trade was not benevolent it was the same or worse than the atlantic slave trade and everybody that partcipated in it whether African, Arab or European can eat a dikk

Not in every case, Africans definitely were involved but in other cases you had cacs simply imposing themselves on two depleted warring tribes, or instigating conflict to produce slave stock from the losing side, it wasn't all that cut and dry. Now I don't disagree, there were/are black people like that everywhere. Still the Arab Slave trade and the Euro slave trade were a bit different. For starters, slaves weren't stuffed into the inside of the boat like canned sardines, the Arab slavers let slaves take their musical instruments and other items from their home. Of course the end result was ugly in most instances, but in others you found those same slaves rise to some prominence within the home of their master. So not only the transport, but the use of the slaves and their meaning in society were different from the Americas. Again, I'm not saying them or any other group involved were fukked up for it. I just think its important to remember that the Trans Atlantic slave trade and the chattel slavery of the Americas(particularly in the U.S.) was the most cruel, dehumanizing, and brutal form of slavery.

 

[theworldismine13]

Not in every case, Africans definitely were involved but in other cases you had cacs simply imposing themselves on two depleted warring tribes, or instigating conflict to produce slave stock from the losing side, it wasn't all that cut and dry. Now I don't disagree, there were/are black people like that everywhere. Still the Arab Slave trade and the Euro slave trade were a bit different. For starters, slaves weren't stuffed into the inside of the boat like canned sardines, the Arab slavers let slaves take their musical instruments and other items from their home. Of course the end result was ugly in most instances, but in others you found those same slaves rise to some prominence within the home of their master. So not only the transport, but the use of the slaves and their meaning in society were different from the Americas. Again, I'm not saying them or any other group involved were fukked up for it. I just think its important to remember that the Trans Atlantic slave trade and the chattel slavery of the Americas(particularly in the U.S.) was the most cruel, dehumanizing, and brutal form of slavery.

Breh I made a simple statement and simple definition , anybody whether African, European or Arab that participated in transporting an African outside of the continent is a disgusting piece of shyt that should be shat on, and the Africans that participated in it are c00ns, actually it is that cut and dry

Please stop with trying to say how the Arab slave trade was different, I already posted a link with pictures, and we have had this discussion in dozens of threads, if you need me to post up more information about the Arab slave trade let me know

 

[Amare's Right Hook]

why do they split the Nubian and Egyptians into two different ethnicity's when they are genetically the same.

Because they were different

 

[2Quik4UHoes]

Breh I made a simple statement and simple definition , anybody whether African, European or Arab that participated in transporting an African outside of the continent is a disgusting piece of shyt that should be shat on, and the Africans that participated in it are c00ns, actually it is that cut and dry

Please stop with trying to say how the Arab slave trade was different, I already posted a link with pictures, and we have had this discussion in dozens of threads, if you need me to post up more information about the Arab slave trade let me know

Feel free.

I'm not disagreeing in the fact that they were wrong, but it was still two different systems for two different reasons. Slavery was more complicated than your making it. The Africans that were involved in selling their slaves into exile outside the continent were fukked up, that doesn't mean the business of slavery was done the same way even in the case of non-Africans.

 

[theworldismine13]

Feel free.

I'm not disagreeing in the fact that they were wrong, but it was still two different systems for two different reasons. Slavery was more complicated than your making it. The Africans that were involved in selling their slaves into exile outside the continent were fukked up, that doesn't mean the business of slavery was done the same way even in the case of non-Africans.

to the african that was sold to another continent why would it be different? arabs are different than europeans.....and? yeah the arab slavery was different because in that trade the males were castrated and the females were used as sex slaves....and? what exactly is the point you are trying to make by saying it was different?

the complications and differences that you are referring to are not important to the people that actually got sold into slavery

 

[2Quik4UHoes]

to the african that was sold to another continent why would it be different? arabs are different than europeans.....and? yeah the arab slavery was different because in that trade the males were castrated and the females were used as sex slaves....and? what exactly is the point you are trying to make by saying it was different?

the complications that you are referring to are not important to the people that actually got sold into slavery

Not all males were castrated, but a lot were....

lol, in the end no it probably wasn't important but slavery was a reality of those times and the European trade was far more cruel even though the Arabs set the foundations and made their own efforts to destroy Africa. But here's a thing just as a lot of the men were castrated, there were some that also became soldiers, administrators, artisans, etc. They weren't completely divorced from society in the way they were here. The point I'm making basically is although both were fukked up, the European brand was far more sadistic and damaging.

 

[theworldismine13]

Not all males were castrated, but a lot were....

lol, in the end no it probably wasn't important but slavery was a reality of those times and the European trade was far more cruel even though the Arabs set the foundations and made their own efforts to destroy Africa. But here's a thing just as a lot of the men were castrated, there were some that also became soldiers, administrators, artisans, etc. They weren't completely divorced from society in the way they were here. The point I'm making basically is although both were fukked up, the European brand was far more sadistic and damaging.

no it wasnt, there is no evidence to support the notion that the european version was more sadistic and damaging, that is just a straight up lie, they were both evil, especially since that slave trade never ended and is still going on today in parts of africa

 

[2Quik4UHoes]

no it wasnt, there is no evidence to support the notion that the european version was more sadistic and damaging, that is just a straight up lie, especially since that slave trade never ended and is still going on today in parts of africa

So what you're saying is you believe Arabs were stuffing black slaves into ships even though the demand for slaves wasn't as high as in the Americas, things like that weren't going on in the Arab trade not to mention in some cases Africans were allowed to keep aspects of their culture like music and stories. The European version barred slaves from reading, writing, or any kind of learning aside from the ones in the house and were treated no differently than cattle yes or no? African slaves in the Arab world lived better than those in the New World/West Indies in that they were integrated into society and lived off of the masters wealth as oppose to under his whip and boot. I'm not at all saying it was benevolent, but compared to cacs it was tame. Both were fukked up regardless either way.