Yes, it seems that Mugabe's truth cannot be suppressed! this video is hilarious and the guy in it's words quite enlightened! Right in the oppressor's face! Classic!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqOexvFcShA
Sunday, 29 June 2008
Mugabe Understands Their Evil Plans!!!
Well,
from the dirty 'mouth of babes' itself. This is the most audacious and self assured factology Ive ever read! In their Times Newspaper itself! True Africans please wake up, this is a rare chance to peer into the oppressor's true thoughts!
The New Scramble For Africa - Matthew Parris, TimesOnline
-----------------
From The Times
April 19, 2008
The new scramble for Africa begins
Modern imperialism on the resource-rich continent will be less benign than old colonialism
Matthew Parris
Fifty years ago the decolonisation of Africa began. The next half-century may see the continent recolonised. But the new imperialism will be less benign. Great powers aren't interested in administering wild places any more, still less in settling them: just raping them. Black gangster governments sponsored by self-interested Asian or Western powers could become the central story in 21st-century African history.
Nature abhors a vacuum. Take Zimbabwe. In the Western news media the clichés about Robert Mugabe's “despotism” roll, but this is a despotism crippled by monumental incompetence. The BBC's audience must have been bemused in recent weeks by John Simpson's reports from within a country where, as we are always being reminded, the BBC is banned. I yield to none in my respect for Mr Simpson's courage and ingenuity but only modest quantities of either will have been required to enter the country, move within it or broadcast from it.
Our own correspondent, Jonathan Clayton, was unluckier, but there are journalists in Zimbabwe reporting what Mugabe would stop them reporting if he could. It is chance whom his thugs stumble upon. They may be easily capable of beating to a pulp those poor, anonymous Zimbabweans who cross them, but when it comes to the apparatus of a modern state - effective policing, surveillance, restriction of movement, or censorship which works - the regime in Harare has plainly lost what control it ever had.
Zimbabwe is not Iraq. Any great power could pick a leader in Zimbabwe today, send in a modest military support force to sustain him in power, and follow this up with ten jumbo jets filled with economic, technical and political advisers and half-a-billion-pound's-worth of reconstruction aid. Within a couple of years the intervening power would be sponsoring something tantamount to a puppet government there. In modern management-speak, there exist bunches of low-hanging fruit, overlooked, on the African continent.
Background
Dockers block China arms shipment for Zimbabwe
India takes on China over Africa’s riches
China builds African empire
If Zimbabwe had oil the Americans would be plucking this fruit already. If the country's mineral resources were greater, if the persistence of white settlers there were not throwing an international spotlight on the news, and if China were not embarrassed by Tibet and the forthcoming Olympics, I think the argument in Bejing for sponsoring either Mugabe or the most amenable available opposition leader would be strong.
It may yet prevail. I had just left school in Africa when Maoist China tried something similar in the early 1970s, constructing a 1,160-mile railway from Zambia to Dar-es-Salaam in Tanzania to transport copper to the Indian Ocean port. But Tanzania's Julius Nyerere was wily, the construction proved fraught with difficulty, and Chinese advisers and workers did not make themselves popular with local people. China never recovered a decent return on that economic and political investment. China may well yet do so, however. Meanwhile, China's support for a vicious Sudanese regime in Khartoum has been too widely commented on to need rehearsing. Hydrocarbons are the prize.
But enough of China: simply a little hungrier, a little more opportunistic and a little less scrupulous than some of its competitors. This is not about China, but about vacuums into which, if Beijing does not move, then someone else surely will. If modern British governments still had the stomach for this kind of thing we could be more or less in charge of Sierra Leone today, and accept northern Somaliland as a client state tomorrow.
The American neocons were unlucky in the pilot projects they chose. For those seeking the creation of biddable states, Iraq and Afghanistan proved among the least amenable places to pick. But there is something more than the awful bloody nose received in both these Asian interventions, and America's earlier disaster in Vietnam, that may have temporarily blocked Western minds from thinking about neo-imperialist opportunities in sub-Saharan Africa. It is the myth that black liberation movements were formidable. They were not. They were no Vietcong or Algerian FLN. The lesson from 20th- century sub-Saharan Africa is not how irresistible were the forces faced by European imperialism, but how easily, and for how long, they were resisted.
Remember that America was on the other side in this conflict, fanning the flames of African nationalism and undermining the European powers. Yet Belgium - Belgium - managed to hold on to a colony 76 times its size, the Congo, from 1908 (after its rapine private ownership by King Leopold II) until 1960. Contrary to widespread belief, Britain was never beaten by the Mau Mau in Kenya, and in most of the African colonies and protectorates relinquished between 1957 (Ghana) and 1968 (Swaziland) we had been meeting little if any armed resistance. Britain was not drummed but shouted out of Africa.
Portugal, meanwhile, hung on to two territories (now Angola and Mozambique) the first twice the size of Texas, the second twice the size of California, until 1975. For years an impoverished and virtually Third World European tinpot dictatorship sustained two wars simultaneously against nationalist insurgencies in both countries without going under. Meanwhile. a tiny force of white renegades denied victory to Mugabe's Patriotic Front for nearly eight years until 1980: yet there were 20 times as many blacks as whites in Rhodesia, and the breakaway regime of Ian Smith was under international economic siege throughout.
Why then did the great (and lesser) powers of the day turn their backs on empire in Africa in the 20th century, and why in the 21st might their successors return to an interest in acquiring political grip?
European imperial powers lost the will rather than the capacity to own and govern overseas resources. A world in which all could buy and sell on the global market was arriving. It is a world, however, which is now feeling the pinch in the natural resources with which Africa is richly endowed. Meanwhile, the continent is in many places run by outfits that resemble gangs rather than governments. At their most dysfunctional (as in Congo) this disintegration seriously impedes the extraction of resources, because security, communications and infrastructure break down.
But a solution beckons: buy your own gang. You hardly need visit and are certainly not required to administer the gang's territory. You simply give it support, munitions, bribes and protection to keep the roads and airports open; and it pays you with access to resources. You dress up the arrangement as helping Africans to help themselves. The French, who have been doing this in their former African possessions for years, lead the way. But it is when China, then America, and perhaps even Russia or India follow, that the scramble for Africa will truly be resumed.
Hypocrisy, they say, is the homage that vice pays to virtue. During the last scramble for Africa, colonial administration was the homage greed paid to responsibility. But greed may be less sentimental during the next. From a resource-starved industrialised world in the 21st Century, reponsibility for Africa will get no more than a passing nod.
from the dirty 'mouth of babes' itself. This is the most audacious and self assured factology Ive ever read! In their Times Newspaper itself! True Africans please wake up, this is a rare chance to peer into the oppressor's true thoughts!
The New Scramble For Africa - Matthew Parris, TimesOnline
-----------------
From The Times
April 19, 2008
The new scramble for Africa begins
Modern imperialism on the resource-rich continent will be less benign than old colonialism
Matthew Parris
Fifty years ago the decolonisation of Africa began. The next half-century may see the continent recolonised. But the new imperialism will be less benign. Great powers aren't interested in administering wild places any more, still less in settling them: just raping them. Black gangster governments sponsored by self-interested Asian or Western powers could become the central story in 21st-century African history.
Nature abhors a vacuum. Take Zimbabwe. In the Western news media the clichés about Robert Mugabe's “despotism” roll, but this is a despotism crippled by monumental incompetence. The BBC's audience must have been bemused in recent weeks by John Simpson's reports from within a country where, as we are always being reminded, the BBC is banned. I yield to none in my respect for Mr Simpson's courage and ingenuity but only modest quantities of either will have been required to enter the country, move within it or broadcast from it.
Our own correspondent, Jonathan Clayton, was unluckier, but there are journalists in Zimbabwe reporting what Mugabe would stop them reporting if he could. It is chance whom his thugs stumble upon. They may be easily capable of beating to a pulp those poor, anonymous Zimbabweans who cross them, but when it comes to the apparatus of a modern state - effective policing, surveillance, restriction of movement, or censorship which works - the regime in Harare has plainly lost what control it ever had.
Zimbabwe is not Iraq. Any great power could pick a leader in Zimbabwe today, send in a modest military support force to sustain him in power, and follow this up with ten jumbo jets filled with economic, technical and political advisers and half-a-billion-pound's-worth of reconstruction aid. Within a couple of years the intervening power would be sponsoring something tantamount to a puppet government there. In modern management-speak, there exist bunches of low-hanging fruit, overlooked, on the African continent.
Background
Dockers block China arms shipment for Zimbabwe
India takes on China over Africa’s riches
China builds African empire
If Zimbabwe had oil the Americans would be plucking this fruit already. If the country's mineral resources were greater, if the persistence of white settlers there were not throwing an international spotlight on the news, and if China were not embarrassed by Tibet and the forthcoming Olympics, I think the argument in Bejing for sponsoring either Mugabe or the most amenable available opposition leader would be strong.
It may yet prevail. I had just left school in Africa when Maoist China tried something similar in the early 1970s, constructing a 1,160-mile railway from Zambia to Dar-es-Salaam in Tanzania to transport copper to the Indian Ocean port. But Tanzania's Julius Nyerere was wily, the construction proved fraught with difficulty, and Chinese advisers and workers did not make themselves popular with local people. China never recovered a decent return on that economic and political investment. China may well yet do so, however. Meanwhile, China's support for a vicious Sudanese regime in Khartoum has been too widely commented on to need rehearsing. Hydrocarbons are the prize.
But enough of China: simply a little hungrier, a little more opportunistic and a little less scrupulous than some of its competitors. This is not about China, but about vacuums into which, if Beijing does not move, then someone else surely will. If modern British governments still had the stomach for this kind of thing we could be more or less in charge of Sierra Leone today, and accept northern Somaliland as a client state tomorrow.
The American neocons were unlucky in the pilot projects they chose. For those seeking the creation of biddable states, Iraq and Afghanistan proved among the least amenable places to pick. But there is something more than the awful bloody nose received in both these Asian interventions, and America's earlier disaster in Vietnam, that may have temporarily blocked Western minds from thinking about neo-imperialist opportunities in sub-Saharan Africa. It is the myth that black liberation movements were formidable. They were not. They were no Vietcong or Algerian FLN. The lesson from 20th- century sub-Saharan Africa is not how irresistible were the forces faced by European imperialism, but how easily, and for how long, they were resisted.
Remember that America was on the other side in this conflict, fanning the flames of African nationalism and undermining the European powers. Yet Belgium - Belgium - managed to hold on to a colony 76 times its size, the Congo, from 1908 (after its rapine private ownership by King Leopold II) until 1960. Contrary to widespread belief, Britain was never beaten by the Mau Mau in Kenya, and in most of the African colonies and protectorates relinquished between 1957 (Ghana) and 1968 (Swaziland) we had been meeting little if any armed resistance. Britain was not drummed but shouted out of Africa.
Portugal, meanwhile, hung on to two territories (now Angola and Mozambique) the first twice the size of Texas, the second twice the size of California, until 1975. For years an impoverished and virtually Third World European tinpot dictatorship sustained two wars simultaneously against nationalist insurgencies in both countries without going under. Meanwhile. a tiny force of white renegades denied victory to Mugabe's Patriotic Front for nearly eight years until 1980: yet there were 20 times as many blacks as whites in Rhodesia, and the breakaway regime of Ian Smith was under international economic siege throughout.
Why then did the great (and lesser) powers of the day turn their backs on empire in Africa in the 20th century, and why in the 21st might their successors return to an interest in acquiring political grip?
European imperial powers lost the will rather than the capacity to own and govern overseas resources. A world in which all could buy and sell on the global market was arriving. It is a world, however, which is now feeling the pinch in the natural resources with which Africa is richly endowed. Meanwhile, the continent is in many places run by outfits that resemble gangs rather than governments. At their most dysfunctional (as in Congo) this disintegration seriously impedes the extraction of resources, because security, communications and infrastructure break down.
But a solution beckons: buy your own gang. You hardly need visit and are certainly not required to administer the gang's territory. You simply give it support, munitions, bribes and protection to keep the roads and airports open; and it pays you with access to resources. You dress up the arrangement as helping Africans to help themselves. The French, who have been doing this in their former African possessions for years, lead the way. But it is when China, then America, and perhaps even Russia or India follow, that the scramble for Africa will truly be resumed.
Hypocrisy, they say, is the homage that vice pays to virtue. During the last scramble for Africa, colonial administration was the homage greed paid to responsibility. But greed may be less sentimental during the next. From a resource-starved industrialised world in the 21st Century, reponsibility for Africa will get no more than a passing nod.
Mugabe Seems Right from All Angles these Days
Yes,
Well here's a young chap who seems to have done a sterling job in visually articulating the history behind Mugabe's vehement refusal to bow to the agenda. For sure, they must be 'stepped over!'
Well here's a young chap who seems to have done a sterling job in visually articulating the history behind Mugabe's vehement refusal to bow to the agenda. For sure, they must be 'stepped over!'
Monday, 24 December 2007
Mugabe's Motives..? The History of Land Violence in Zimbabwe
Well, for those of you that are actually interested in understanding the background to Mugabe's recent antics, (beyond the 'just another mad African dictator,' common 'wisdom,') here is a well researched paper on the history of Zimbabwe's land situation. It seems Mugabe maybe right about this land thing as well...
http://ccrweb.ccr.uct.ac.za/archive/two/9_1/zimbabwe.html
http://ccrweb.ccr.uct.ac.za/archive/two/9_1/zimbabwe.html
Wednesday, 24 October 2007
Mugabe, Dr James Watson and a 'Nigga'
With all this hype in America concerning use of the 'N-word' in mainstream media, does today's African/Negro actually have a clue as to what their position is in all this this debate? In that light, and following all that other noise, in response to that gene dude, Doctor Watson's recent comments to the press, I received this most interesting article indeed via email. This is THE TRUTH... Something I feel every person of Negro/African origin should read. I recommend making some proper time to comprehensively go through it.
Africans arise!
""Well, the smiley guy above, Dr James Watson, (who's a Nobel Prize winning genetic scientist by the way.., a pioneers in DNA science apparently,) caused quite a stir last week. All sides of the PC brigade, including the perennially pissed Black Activists & etc, were up in arms, fighting to stuff the proverbial gag down the old buggers throat. The rage was in response to a scientific, 'observation,' our Dr Watson is said to have made... Basically, he felt that, all objective research he's had access to in his career, leaves him convinced of the fact that, the Negro race is less intelligent than its Caucasoid counterpart.
Now, before Y'all go off eating Your head wear, I would like to start by noting that I, for one, do see quite some sense in our good doctor's sentiments! So much so, that I've decided to don Dr James Watson, one of my honorary, 'Patron,' mudzimu, a flag bearer in the African's current struggle to remember her relevance...
I mean firstly, it is important to understand that, in an objective sense, there is nothing wrong with someone's being bold enough to draw our attention to aspects they perceive as physiological differences, between the races that comprise our species! In fact, this is a discussion that is, these days, often suppressed, in the interests of 'correctness..,' yet we all know how feelings that are not at least expressed, often turn into the more dangerous feelings, such as resentment and hatred. I mean lets be real people, as Africans, don't we all relate to the fact that our Western cousins' womenfolk, 'generally,' exhibit a less pronounced figure in that all important, 'booty,' department..? Off course, we don't consider it racist to speak on this topic, in fact often revelling in this, 'generalisation,' the many times we point it out!? Alas, if only there was some doctorate in Bootology to validate our great understanding in this matter! (Hello '...honkies have no rhythm...'!??)
To be fair, racism is based on such sweeping generalisations.., and despite the fact such generalisations are in themselves dangerous to make.., really, it is when we begin to prejudge individuals we encounter based on these generalisation, that it becomes racism. When we interact with someone based on prejudgement, we deprive them the opportunity to be an individual.., and in the process, often deprive ourselves of potentially enriching experiences... (hello Rhodies!)
Anyway, what I am in essence trying to say is that, there was nothing wrong with Dr Watson presenting his, 'hypothesis'! As a man who's spent most of his time studying the so-called, building blocks of human physiology, (these, 'genes..,') isn't he reasonably placed to make an objective observation on such matters..? However, it is important to start by noting that there are two aspects to his assertion;
Of course he is firstly stating that, his studies show him that there is a genetic/physiological DIFFERENCE, in terms of intellect, between the two races.., This is in my view, a fair point, and one that would be supported by most other scientific observation at our disposal. In this, I am referring to the fact that we, as human beings, should start openly acknowledging and exploring the fact that, there are physiological differences between races in our species. I mean, beyond the 'ass' assertion already laboured above, comparative variation in melanin content between these two races, is in itself another outward, physiological manifestation, of a difference that exists on the genetic level. So, on this aspect, I essentially agree with, and applaud, Doctor Watson's 'boldness.'
Now, there is a second element to Dr Watson's observation. This is in the fact his statements also imply that, his observations leave him convinced the African is LESS intelligent than the Westerner.., Now this, this I find most interesting indeed.., a QUALITATIVE / QUANTITATIVE deduction... I mean what he is saying here is that, by his EVALUATION, the physiological DIFFERENCE in intellect he has observed, is TIPPED in a way that puts the Westerner at an ADVANTAGE... ie, there is a difference, and this difference is in the favour of the Westerner.
Now I'm sure Y'all can sense where I'm going with this... To help us, we could quickly turn to that, 'great,' Western, 'intellect,' Einstein, with his theory of RELATIVITY.., ie; when You propose that a DIFFERENCE between two points, may be balanced in the FAVOUR of one of these sides, You must always remember that; i) the, 'perception,' of what counts as being an advantage, will differ, depending on position, relative to the sides, from which You make Your evaluation.., and that ii) In arriving at Your deduction, You may be depending on a unit/value of evaluation that may in reality, only be uniquely relevant to Yourself! So simply put, what I am asking is, by whose authority/values/standard, is Doctor Watson concluding that, between his two, 'versions,' of human intellect, the Africans' proves inferior?
It is on this point that Doctor Watson proves himself bullsh%t, racist, supremacist and imperialist all at once.., in that, his assertion proposes whatever his value of measurement is, as absolute! Madness... This is why I found this whole kafaffule extremely interesting.., in that it exposes the deeper level on which racism actually resides. This almost instinctive assumption by Westerners that their units of value are the absolutes... (think when they decide to launch vessels into space, beaming all types of radiation via our collective atmosphere.., I'd be surprised to learn of any African who's ever been included in the conversation on the intelligence of such actions...) Fortunately, on another level, this also highlighted to me the true area through which the African continues to be kept under the Westerner's colonial control... The African lives, and evaluates, his life against a value system that is not his own.
To fully understand this, lets go back to this issue of genetics. So far, we have sort of sketched out a scenario in which we more or less observe the African, (predominantly negroid,) to variously be genetically different to the Westerner, (read Caucasoid.) We've also seen how such differences are often construed to further supremacist views. Now it would be wrong to front like Dr Watson and his fellow Westerners are alone in this area of racial supremacy..! Black supremacists are another quite well known faction! The 'Anti-Watson's' of sorts!
Now, I want to point out something such fellows may find quite alarming indeed... Basically most Black supremacists base their position on the scientific findings that show Africa, (and hence the aboriginal African,) as the ancestral cradle of human life. What they seem to ignore, is the fact that today's Negroid is in reality, mostly descendant of the Nubic-Bantu, a relatively modern Negroid strand.., (that became distinguishable in parts of North-East Africa around 10 000 BC.) More so, genetically, this Negroid strand is more than likely a cross between the earlier, aboriginal African already outlined, and.., (hold on to Your seats for this..,) a Caucasoid influence that migrated across the Red Sea, into the horn of East Africa around 15 000BC* (*The Roots of the Bantu - A Chigwedere - ISBN 0-7974-1852-0)
I wont delve too deeply into this history here, (as all the resources one needs to learn more on this subject, are easily 'googleable,' via Your very same PC..,) but for starters, physiologically, today's negroid displays a broader range of height variance within its members, than would be expected if she were purely descendant of the aboriginal African, (who were pygmy/dwarf-like in stature.) After 10 000BC, the negroid that's then seen to spread across the African continent, (eventually swallowing up, and overshadowing, its dwarf-like aboriginal predecessor,) is the actual forefather of today's Negro.
Now, although this resultant Negro does exhibit some features imparted by the Caucasoid influence, a few generations of interbreeding down the line, ensured the prevailing dominance of its majority, aboriginal, genes.
This is significant in that it implies that, of the many races walking the earth today, the Negro is likely the most direct genetic descendant of the aboriginal African... Hence, (leading from the inference of Africa being the cradle of life,) its sensible to deduce that, today's Negro race, may safeguard the gene pool most closely related to this planet's earliest evolutionary source. In other words, today's African could be said to have the strongest rooting in the original, native gene pool of this planet... ie, in their most natural state, Negroes may genetically have been better suited to co-existing harmoniously within the habitat of this planet...
As we reflect on that, lets return to our good friend Watson.., as this point is important for today's Negro to understand! It is actually great that this Western scientist is making it possible to openly have this conversation! Maybe this will bring Negroes back to terms with the simple, commonsense knowledge-of-self, that's eluded them for the longest time. Returning to his assertion concerning a superiority of Western intelligence.., so far, we've objectively built a case that, hypothetically, supports part of his assertion, in that, yes, we agree there may be a difference between the two races' intelligences.
However, (in light of our effort to trace the genetic roots of today's African,) could we then, not also now say the following; from the point-of-view of suitability, to naturally, & sustainably, thrive within this planet's ecology, the African's intelligence may likely be better suited? (In that African intelligence, may, genetically, be the one closer linked to the earliest, harmonic ecology that allowed life on this planet to thrive in the first place..?)
As You see, there is a difference in our assertion here, because, unlike Dr Watson, we have qualified it with a point of reference.., "from the point-of-view," Even more-so, could we not also say, the African's intelligence is likely to be the best suited to cope with life in the environment of Africa?
I mean, a simple parallel lies in the obvious aspect of the variance in melanin levels, source of the two races' distinct skin complexions. From the point-of-view of most of the life-forms native to this planet, melanin is crucial to harmonising interactions with sunlight. Hence in this aspect, in line with most other earth-native species, we see the African exhibiting a well suited genetic default.., never really requiring the aid of, 'artificially,' fabricated sun-creams so common among Westerners. Off course, some scientist argue that Africans' levels of melanin puts them at disadvantage in regions where sunlight is less abundant.., (in respect to synthesis of vitamin D..,) however, this again highlights the importance of the point-of-reference, when making comparative judgements.
In closing, we've seen through all this, that, in order for a group of people to weigh something, they must first agree on a common point of reference, and/or, unit of measurement... A point that may be very important for today's African to grasp. He who controls the scales, controls the sale. Do today's Africans truly have their own unit of self-value..? And because we have seen that in determining a unit of evaluation, having a point of reference is crucial.., can we not see that, by conditioning us out of the knowledge, (and appreciation,) of our true relevance, (our true significance in the picture of life as it exists on this planet,) we have been left open to our current condition.., a condition in which we weigh out all aspects of our self-worth, based on a value system that is largely alien to us.
Today's African, strives to achieve and measure their, 'progress,' against a value-system that definitely belongs to the Western genetic strand. We need to STOP. Externalising the values and beliefs of, 'the natives,' was always the front-line of attack, in the Weterners' process of colonial aggression.., be it on the spiritual, language, economic or educational levels. Once someone starts to evaluate themselves by a standard whose tone You dictate, (more so when they even begin to subconsciously accept it as the only possible, universal, standard,) You do not even need to remain present to keep them under Your control! You can be far away, and rest assured Your subjects will police themselves, even passing Your values on to their own future off-spring! (hello Y'all Africans with dodgy Catholic names!)
I would like to assert that, the only way today's African can achieve real progress, is by taking charge of re-aligning himself with his true genetic self-worth. We must remember who we are, and remember our own native values... We must redefine the units against which we measure our progress as a race. As long as the continent continues to aspire to this Western, synthetic and materialistic concepts of, 'development,' the African will continue to be a second rate citizen, trapped in a never-ending game of catch-up. For starters, this whole, "money," system.., a system we place so much confidence in, despite the fact we have very little say in its operation..? It's all like trying to win a game in which Your opponent is the only one allowed to dictate the rules!
Africa wake up! What values were of real importance to those long gone, original African ancestors of ours.., that foremost gene pool, fore-runner of all races that call this planet home..? That creature that lived sustainably, among, and at one, with its surroundings..? It seems in a way, we must all let our dominant, (but now dormant,) African genes, temper the Western influence.., which is now currently threatening all our chances of continued existence on this planet...
So that African intelligence will rise to prominence once again.
Thanks again dear Watson..!
Signed, Sherlock""
Africans arise!
""Well, the smiley guy above, Dr James Watson, (who's a Nobel Prize winning genetic scientist by the way.., a pioneers in DNA science apparently,) caused quite a stir last week. All sides of the PC brigade, including the perennially pissed Black Activists & etc, were up in arms, fighting to stuff the proverbial gag down the old buggers throat. The rage was in response to a scientific, 'observation,' our Dr Watson is said to have made... Basically, he felt that, all objective research he's had access to in his career, leaves him convinced of the fact that, the Negro race is less intelligent than its Caucasoid counterpart.
Now, before Y'all go off eating Your head wear, I would like to start by noting that I, for one, do see quite some sense in our good doctor's sentiments! So much so, that I've decided to don Dr James Watson, one of my honorary, 'Patron,' mudzimu, a flag bearer in the African's current struggle to remember her relevance...
I mean firstly, it is important to understand that, in an objective sense, there is nothing wrong with someone's being bold enough to draw our attention to aspects they perceive as physiological differences, between the races that comprise our species! In fact, this is a discussion that is, these days, often suppressed, in the interests of 'correctness..,' yet we all know how feelings that are not at least expressed, often turn into the more dangerous feelings, such as resentment and hatred. I mean lets be real people, as Africans, don't we all relate to the fact that our Western cousins' womenfolk, 'generally,' exhibit a less pronounced figure in that all important, 'booty,' department..? Off course, we don't consider it racist to speak on this topic, in fact often revelling in this, 'generalisation,' the many times we point it out!? Alas, if only there was some doctorate in Bootology to validate our great understanding in this matter! (Hello '...honkies have no rhythm...'!??)
To be fair, racism is based on such sweeping generalisations.., and despite the fact such generalisations are in themselves dangerous to make.., really, it is when we begin to prejudge individuals we encounter based on these generalisation, that it becomes racism. When we interact with someone based on prejudgement, we deprive them the opportunity to be an individual.., and in the process, often deprive ourselves of potentially enriching experiences... (hello Rhodies!)
Anyway, what I am in essence trying to say is that, there was nothing wrong with Dr Watson presenting his, 'hypothesis'! As a man who's spent most of his time studying the so-called, building blocks of human physiology, (these, 'genes..,') isn't he reasonably placed to make an objective observation on such matters..? However, it is important to start by noting that there are two aspects to his assertion;
Of course he is firstly stating that, his studies show him that there is a genetic/physiological DIFFERENCE, in terms of intellect, between the two races.., This is in my view, a fair point, and one that would be supported by most other scientific observation at our disposal. In this, I am referring to the fact that we, as human beings, should start openly acknowledging and exploring the fact that, there are physiological differences between races in our species. I mean, beyond the 'ass' assertion already laboured above, comparative variation in melanin content between these two races, is in itself another outward, physiological manifestation, of a difference that exists on the genetic level. So, on this aspect, I essentially agree with, and applaud, Doctor Watson's 'boldness.'
Now, there is a second element to Dr Watson's observation. This is in the fact his statements also imply that, his observations leave him convinced the African is LESS intelligent than the Westerner.., Now this, this I find most interesting indeed.., a QUALITATIVE / QUANTITATIVE deduction... I mean what he is saying here is that, by his EVALUATION, the physiological DIFFERENCE in intellect he has observed, is TIPPED in a way that puts the Westerner at an ADVANTAGE... ie, there is a difference, and this difference is in the favour of the Westerner.
Now I'm sure Y'all can sense where I'm going with this... To help us, we could quickly turn to that, 'great,' Western, 'intellect,' Einstein, with his theory of RELATIVITY.., ie; when You propose that a DIFFERENCE between two points, may be balanced in the FAVOUR of one of these sides, You must always remember that; i) the, 'perception,' of what counts as being an advantage, will differ, depending on position, relative to the sides, from which You make Your evaluation.., and that ii) In arriving at Your deduction, You may be depending on a unit/value of evaluation that may in reality, only be uniquely relevant to Yourself! So simply put, what I am asking is, by whose authority/values/standard, is Doctor Watson concluding that, between his two, 'versions,' of human intellect, the Africans' proves inferior?
It is on this point that Doctor Watson proves himself bullsh%t, racist, supremacist and imperialist all at once.., in that, his assertion proposes whatever his value of measurement is, as absolute! Madness... This is why I found this whole kafaffule extremely interesting.., in that it exposes the deeper level on which racism actually resides. This almost instinctive assumption by Westerners that their units of value are the absolutes... (think when they decide to launch vessels into space, beaming all types of radiation via our collective atmosphere.., I'd be surprised to learn of any African who's ever been included in the conversation on the intelligence of such actions...) Fortunately, on another level, this also highlighted to me the true area through which the African continues to be kept under the Westerner's colonial control... The African lives, and evaluates, his life against a value system that is not his own.
To fully understand this, lets go back to this issue of genetics. So far, we have sort of sketched out a scenario in which we more or less observe the African, (predominantly negroid,) to variously be genetically different to the Westerner, (read Caucasoid.) We've also seen how such differences are often construed to further supremacist views. Now it would be wrong to front like Dr Watson and his fellow Westerners are alone in this area of racial supremacy..! Black supremacists are another quite well known faction! The 'Anti-Watson's' of sorts!
Now, I want to point out something such fellows may find quite alarming indeed... Basically most Black supremacists base their position on the scientific findings that show Africa, (and hence the aboriginal African,) as the ancestral cradle of human life. What they seem to ignore, is the fact that today's Negroid is in reality, mostly descendant of the Nubic-Bantu, a relatively modern Negroid strand.., (that became distinguishable in parts of North-East Africa around 10 000 BC.) More so, genetically, this Negroid strand is more than likely a cross between the earlier, aboriginal African already outlined, and.., (hold on to Your seats for this..,) a Caucasoid influence that migrated across the Red Sea, into the horn of East Africa around 15 000BC* (*The Roots of the Bantu - A Chigwedere - ISBN 0-7974-1852-0)
I wont delve too deeply into this history here, (as all the resources one needs to learn more on this subject, are easily 'googleable,' via Your very same PC..,) but for starters, physiologically, today's negroid displays a broader range of height variance within its members, than would be expected if she were purely descendant of the aboriginal African, (who were pygmy/dwarf-like in stature.) After 10 000BC, the negroid that's then seen to spread across the African continent, (eventually swallowing up, and overshadowing, its dwarf-like aboriginal predecessor,) is the actual forefather of today's Negro.
Now, although this resultant Negro does exhibit some features imparted by the Caucasoid influence, a few generations of interbreeding down the line, ensured the prevailing dominance of its majority, aboriginal, genes.
This is significant in that it implies that, of the many races walking the earth today, the Negro is likely the most direct genetic descendant of the aboriginal African... Hence, (leading from the inference of Africa being the cradle of life,) its sensible to deduce that, today's Negro race, may safeguard the gene pool most closely related to this planet's earliest evolutionary source. In other words, today's African could be said to have the strongest rooting in the original, native gene pool of this planet... ie, in their most natural state, Negroes may genetically have been better suited to co-existing harmoniously within the habitat of this planet...
As we reflect on that, lets return to our good friend Watson.., as this point is important for today's Negro to understand! It is actually great that this Western scientist is making it possible to openly have this conversation! Maybe this will bring Negroes back to terms with the simple, commonsense knowledge-of-self, that's eluded them for the longest time. Returning to his assertion concerning a superiority of Western intelligence.., so far, we've objectively built a case that, hypothetically, supports part of his assertion, in that, yes, we agree there may be a difference between the two races' intelligences.
However, (in light of our effort to trace the genetic roots of today's African,) could we then, not also now say the following; from the point-of-view of suitability, to naturally, & sustainably, thrive within this planet's ecology, the African's intelligence may likely be better suited? (In that African intelligence, may, genetically, be the one closer linked to the earliest, harmonic ecology that allowed life on this planet to thrive in the first place..?)
As You see, there is a difference in our assertion here, because, unlike Dr Watson, we have qualified it with a point of reference.., "from the point-of-view," Even more-so, could we not also say, the African's intelligence is likely to be the best suited to cope with life in the environment of Africa?
I mean, a simple parallel lies in the obvious aspect of the variance in melanin levels, source of the two races' distinct skin complexions. From the point-of-view of most of the life-forms native to this planet, melanin is crucial to harmonising interactions with sunlight. Hence in this aspect, in line with most other earth-native species, we see the African exhibiting a well suited genetic default.., never really requiring the aid of, 'artificially,' fabricated sun-creams so common among Westerners. Off course, some scientist argue that Africans' levels of melanin puts them at disadvantage in regions where sunlight is less abundant.., (in respect to synthesis of vitamin D..,) however, this again highlights the importance of the point-of-reference, when making comparative judgements.
In closing, we've seen through all this, that, in order for a group of people to weigh something, they must first agree on a common point of reference, and/or, unit of measurement... A point that may be very important for today's African to grasp. He who controls the scales, controls the sale. Do today's Africans truly have their own unit of self-value..? And because we have seen that in determining a unit of evaluation, having a point of reference is crucial.., can we not see that, by conditioning us out of the knowledge, (and appreciation,) of our true relevance, (our true significance in the picture of life as it exists on this planet,) we have been left open to our current condition.., a condition in which we weigh out all aspects of our self-worth, based on a value system that is largely alien to us.
Today's African, strives to achieve and measure their, 'progress,' against a value-system that definitely belongs to the Western genetic strand. We need to STOP. Externalising the values and beliefs of, 'the natives,' was always the front-line of attack, in the Weterners' process of colonial aggression.., be it on the spiritual, language, economic or educational levels. Once someone starts to evaluate themselves by a standard whose tone You dictate, (more so when they even begin to subconsciously accept it as the only possible, universal, standard,) You do not even need to remain present to keep them under Your control! You can be far away, and rest assured Your subjects will police themselves, even passing Your values on to their own future off-spring! (hello Y'all Africans with dodgy Catholic names!)
I would like to assert that, the only way today's African can achieve real progress, is by taking charge of re-aligning himself with his true genetic self-worth. We must remember who we are, and remember our own native values... We must redefine the units against which we measure our progress as a race. As long as the continent continues to aspire to this Western, synthetic and materialistic concepts of, 'development,' the African will continue to be a second rate citizen, trapped in a never-ending game of catch-up. For starters, this whole, "money," system.., a system we place so much confidence in, despite the fact we have very little say in its operation..? It's all like trying to win a game in which Your opponent is the only one allowed to dictate the rules!
Africa wake up! What values were of real importance to those long gone, original African ancestors of ours.., that foremost gene pool, fore-runner of all races that call this planet home..? That creature that lived sustainably, among, and at one, with its surroundings..? It seems in a way, we must all let our dominant, (but now dormant,) African genes, temper the Western influence.., which is now currently threatening all our chances of continued existence on this planet...
So that African intelligence will rise to prominence once again.
Thanks again dear Watson..!
Signed, Sherlock""
Wednesday, 17 October 2007
Mugabe's new "CIO" Hit-Team!?!
Wow, there is so much hatred in this cyber-world!! I've only blogged for 3 weeks and already I've got all the crazies coming out the wood work to spew hate, make threats and generally show the real racism that exists in our society! As I sit here in my humble Highfields abode, I've had 10 or so emails about how I am part of the dreaded "CIO"... how I'm a "Mugabe Crony" etc etc... Wow, for people who claim to have fled, 'tyranny,' to relocate in so-called Western 'democracys,' many seem to have a real problem with someone holding a view point different to the "Rhodie" or "BBC" status-co!
Have a read!
(YouTube Comment) Nigs in zimbabwe sit on some of the worlds best coal and they can't keep the lights on. Walk miles to carry water on their lice ridden heads because only whites can clean water. If you try to teach a nig to fish he will eat the bait, strangle someone with the line and give the hook to his baby to play with.
(Email) And now the West will have to feed these stupid niggers! Stop breeding and get off your lazy asses. These retarded nigs just sit there poking the ground with sticks and wondering how the white man made food pop out of the ground. Let them eat cake!
(Email) Zanoid C.I.O scum! you will hang with your master hahaha!!
YouTube Comment Stupid nigger! Bet you wish you had some food the white man didn't make. Bet you wish you had a roof over your nappy head, the white man didn't build. All niggers have AIDS and an IQ that would be called retarded by any other race. You shit skins can't even make it in 1st world countries because you are too damn retarded. Everyone thinks so even if they don't say it. LOL
Incredible! Anyway for every negative comment are 10 positive! Just like they have a "right" to say what they like, so do I!!
Have a read!
(YouTube Comment) Nigs in zimbabwe sit on some of the worlds best coal and they can't keep the lights on. Walk miles to carry water on their lice ridden heads because only whites can clean water. If you try to teach a nig to fish he will eat the bait, strangle someone with the line and give the hook to his baby to play with.
(Email) And now the West will have to feed these stupid niggers! Stop breeding and get off your lazy asses. These retarded nigs just sit there poking the ground with sticks and wondering how the white man made food pop out of the ground. Let them eat cake!
(Email) Zanoid C.I.O scum! you will hang with your master hahaha!!
YouTube Comment Stupid nigger! Bet you wish you had some food the white man didn't make. Bet you wish you had a roof over your nappy head, the white man didn't build. All niggers have AIDS and an IQ that would be called retarded by any other race. You shit skins can't even make it in 1st world countries because you are too damn retarded. Everyone thinks so even if they don't say it. LOL
Incredible! Anyway for every negative comment are 10 positive! Just like they have a "right" to say what they like, so do I!!
Wednesday, 3 October 2007
Mugabe seems to be Right about Sanctions..!
Just finished reading a quite interesting examination of the sanctions situation in Zimbabwe. Check it out;
Zimbabwe: The MDC Must Renounce the Sanctions
Zimbabwe: The MDC Must Renounce the Sanctions
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)