Yep, Black History Month!

[xpanther206]

I agree 100%.. The only problem with that is the childish nature of the black parent. It's a vicious cycle brought down from slavery; the same ignorance, low self-esteem, lack of courage, and lack of responsibility that can be seen in these kids, can be reflected in the house hold (not in some cases, but in a lot) as well.. These are the same parents and grandparents that used to get sprayed with fire hoses, beaten down, locked away, kicked out of public places, humiliated, taunted, teased, and I shouldn't have to bring up Crack and Heroin. Someone has to save the parents first, that's why we need better organization as a community, and strong leaders. It's almost like every nigga for his/her self and no one sees the big picture. Not to mention that we hate each other and feed into our own stereotypes. It's extremely sad for me to say at this point, but I feel more comfortable around other races than my own sometimes (as far as safety goes).. Too rebellious, rebellion is good, imo, but not when there's rebellion vs. rebellion, or rebels rebelling against rebels to see who's the biggest rebel. That macho shit is useless, because when it gets to that point you're not a rebel anymore, just a criminal. Too much confusion in the black culture. It's like, we refuse to fully accept Euro culture, yet we don't have one so we make up shit as we go along, calling it "black".. I can't emphasis enough about how important Africa is in attaining our identity. I don't give a fuck if it takes a DNA test and a trip back, we need a starting point and don't have one. That's why in a way, things are getting worse, (not the condition so much, but the attitude/consciousness).... But ultimately I agree with you, only if we can somehow get it into these parents heads that education, history, and common sense for these kids will get them anywhere that they need/want to go. Africa is a different story, they basically just got sucked dry, and still are.

The red I agree with 100%. The underlined statements were particularly bold and profound.

The blue is where I don't. I'm a data guy, a numbers cruncher guy (as you can see from that other thread about black-white polarization) so the reason I can't accept the blue statements is b/c as far as I know (I will admit, I do not have the data to prove this statement, if you do or know where to get it, let me know) the family structure stuff (translation black kids that actually grow up w/ a father) was actually better for most of the 20th century. I would love to know the percentage of black kids who grew up with a father for every decade since slavery. If those percentages have remained relatively constant since emancipation, then I would agree with slavery as an explanation blue portion. But I don't think they have, I think they've gone down in the last 30 years.


Just wondering, where did you get your college degree? You seem like a product of the UC system to me. Whatever institution it is, I now have a lot of respect for.

My own college was about 20% black, which is very unusual for a place that costs $40,000 a year. HOWEVER of those 20%, about 15% were from Africa/Jamaica/Bahamas, 4% were African American females, leaving only 1 out of 20 of the 'black people' as African American men. I'm not lying when I say saw more African American men robbed students in the area surrounding campus in St. Paul MN than were attending classes at the school.

 

[ParkBoyz]

The red I agree with 100%. The underlined statements were particularly bold and profound.

The blue is where I don't. I'm a data guy, a numbers cruncher guy (as you can see from that other thread about black-white polarization) so the reason I can't accept the blue statements is b/c as far as I know (I will admit, I do not have the data to prove this statement, if you do or know where to get it, let me know) the family structure stuff (translation black kids that actually grow up w/ a father) was actually better for most of the 20th century. I would love to know the percentage of black kids who grew up with a father for every decade since slavery. If those percentages have remained relatively constant since emancipation, then I would agree with slavery as an explanation blue portion. But I don't think they have, I think they've gone down in the last 30 years.


Just wondering, where did you get your college degree? You seem like a product of the UC system to me. Whatever institution it is, I now have a lot of respect for.

My own college was about 20% black, which is very unusual for a place that costs $40,000 a year. HOWEVER of those 20%, about 15% were from Africa/Jamaica/Bahamas, 4% were African American females, leaving only 1 out of 20 of the 'black people' as African American men. I'm not lying when I say saw more African American men robbed students in the area surrounding campus in St. Paul MN than were attending classes at the school.

Actually, the number of single parent homes in the black community has increased..

"During the days of slavery a black child was more likely to grow up living with both parents than he or she is today."

"Today only [one-third] of black children have two parents in the home."
http://www.divorcereform.org/black.html

But naw, I wasn't talking about statistically broken households anyways. I was referring to the common mentality of the black parent (from what I've observed personally).. Even when the father is present, a lot of the time he's either on drugs, unemployed, low income, or simply not consciously aware of how to raise a man or a young lady. Also not aware of himself because of a lack of knowledge, but this is indeed not in all cases, just a few examples that make my point about mind conditioning in black America. Same with the Mom sometimes, especially with Drugs. The successful parents usually always have a strong sense of pride and identity that they instill into their kids.


And honestly bro, you might think that I'm lying, but I never attended, let alone graduated from a U.C... To keep it terrestrial I never even graduated high school. I attained a G.E.D and took community college classes, but that's as far as my academic credentials go for now.. The only reason that I know anything is because I ask a lot of damn questions, and constantly read to answer them myself when no one else can, lol. It's just ironic (especially on my part) how a lot of black males truly do fit into this stereotype.

 

[xpanther206]

And honestly bro, you might think that I'm lying, but I never attended, let alone graduated from a U.C... To keep it terrestrial I never even graduated high school. I attained a G.E.D and took community college classes, but that's as far as my academic credentials go for now.. The only reason that I know anything is because I ask a lot of damn questions, and constantly read to answer them myself when no one else can, lol. It's just ironic (especially on my part) how a lot of black males truly do fit into this stereotype.

Wow, not what I was expecting to hear. All of that reading shows.

 

[ParkBoyz]

Wow, not what I was expecting to hear. All of that reading shows.

Thanx.. I'm still young though, just turned 22 and I have 35 units already, so I'm thinking about/planning to transfer to a state university and take up sociology or psychology. Maybe sociology since that was my favorite class at C.C.C.. I just fucked up in my teen years though, trying to be something that I'm not and getting caught up in the hype; you live and you learn...

 

[xpanther206]

Thanx.. I'm still young though, just turned 22 and I have 35 units already, so I'm thinking about/planning to transfer to a state university and take up sociology or psychology. Maybe sociology since that was my favorite class at C.C.C.. I just fucked up in my teens years though, trying to be something that I'm not and getting caught up in the hype; you live and you learn...

If the application contains an essay or two, you're in and if you are an African American male with those writing skills, you will most likely be given and deserve a good aid package if needed.

 

[Ethereal]

I see what you mean (I think), but if you're going to push a non-racial agenda, and support integration, then you can't base history from a racial bias. If we're to learn U.S history, it should be U.S history, including the black elements, hispanic, native american, and asian ones.. Also when taught world history why are we to learn about Greece and Rome so much? And not China, Meso-America, Egypt, West Africa, and the Middle East? You couldn't even justify that historically because Anglo-Saxons of America descend from the Nordic branch of North/West Europe, while they (especially the Greeks) were Mediterraneans and were more similar culturally and ethnically with middle eastern peoples. So I'm just pointing out a particular western bias going on, a lot of it fabricated history...

1. How much do we really know about indigenous Americans? Our initial connection with them (Natives) was when they were slaughtered by Europeans. While I do believe that this should be understood by students, I don't expect any schools to willingly teach it to their class.

In my U.S. history class['s] I WAS taught about slavery and the civil rights era. Were you taught nothing on the matter?

As for the Hispanic and Asian elements of our history, perhaps you can enlighten me on the significance of their presence throughout.

2. We are taught about Greece because they laid much of the foundation for European culture, which would eventually become American culture. Much of the language we speak today comes from the greek language. Greece had a GREAT influence on our civilization. And the same can be said about Rome (ancient Rome I presume), although to maybe a lesser extent.

Now, this is not good reasoning for why we do not learn so much about the Middle-East or China (aside from their interaction with the U.S.), but it makes perfect sense to focus our learning with the countries/cultures that had major influence on western civilization.

 

[ParkBoyz]

1. How much do we really know about indigenous Americans? Our initial connection with them (Natives) was when they were slaughtered by Europeans. While I do believe that this should be understood by students, I don't expect any schools to willingly teach it to their class.

In my U.S. history class['s] I WAS taught about slavery and the civil rights era. Were you taught nothing on the matter?

As for the Hispanic and Asian elements of our history, perhaps you can enlighten me on the significance of their presence throughout.

2. We are taught about Greece because they laid much of the foundation for European culture, which would eventually become American culture. Much of the language we speak today comes from the greek language. Greece had a GREAT influence on our civilization. And the same can be said about Rome (ancient Rome I presume), although to maybe a lesser extent.

Now, this is not good reasoning for why we do not learn so much about the Middle-East or China (aside from their interaction with the U.S.), but it makes perfect sense to focus our learning with the countries/cultures that had major influence on western civilization.

1. Bro, I myself can give you an 8 hour a day lecture on Ancient America for a week straight. We can talk about the Clovis people, the Olmec culture, the Anasazi, the Aztecs, the Maya, the Inca, the ancient Inuit, the list goes on. We can focus on contemporary tribes like the Navajo and Apache, the five civilized tribes, etc.. We can talk about thanksgiving, first European contact, the wars, the love stories (Pocahontas), etc.. We can learn names like Geronimo, Cochis, Sitting Bull, and Chief Pontiac among others. We can learn about their cultures, religions, myths, sciences, arts, and that's all available information. So don't sit up there and act like the Native Americans are some forgotten people with no history, I'm at least 20% and I have a dream catcher over my bed as I type. If you don't expect schools to teach multicultural history, especially native history, that's you, but not me.

And of course I learned about slavery and civil rights, but who's history is that? Black history isn't determined by white involvement, talk about what we were doing before we were slaves..

If you don't understand the direct effect that Hispanics and Asians had on the country I feel sorry for you, and I have no time to fully educate you. Just take my word for it, they had/have a lot to do with this country and world history. Btw, everything in the classroom isn't pertained, or doesn't have to pertain to the U.S.. U.S. history is priority, but world history should be, and is in most cases required.

2. Dude, do you know the history of that Area (Greece)? Just because the Greeks laid the foundation for western civilization, in no way means that the U.S. has anymore of a link to them than anywhere else in the world (especially the middle east).. Why aren't we learning about Egypt more then since they gave Greece their philosophy and science. Why not learn more about Phoenicia, the very letters that we use that you claim comes from Greece, were Phoenician (hence the word phonetics).. Also, while Europe was in the dark ages, the Muslims are the ones who preserved the writings of the Greeks, translating it and correcting errors, then giving it to western society as a gift. Rome was just some military empire in eastern Europe, has nothing more to do with the U.S. than anywhere else, this is just a western bias that people hate to admit.

And like I just emphasised, if you want to go tit for tat, pound for pound, the Middle East had much more influence on western society than Rome, much more! From trade, to wars, to exchange of knowledge, to religion, language, art, and ultimately civilization...I swear, westerners claim as much as they can, yet it turns into debate when black people connect with Ancient Egypt, because they want to claim that too, Ha! Honestly bro, the Greeks considered the Northerners/germanic people to be "barbaric", they had no connection to the west. Their relations were with The Middle East, Asia, and Africa. So you can go ahead and say that they started western civilization, but they did it inadvertently because they wouldn't of done anything to help out the tribes of Northern/Western Europe, they hated them, and most of the time never even brought them up. 1

 

[Ethereal]

1. Bro, I myself can give you an 8 hour a day lecture on Ancient America for a week straight. We can talk about the Clovis people, the Olmec culture, the Anasazi, the Aztecs, the Maya, the Inca, the ancient Inuit, the list goes on. We can focus on contemporary tribes like the Navajo and Apache, the five civilized tribes, etc.. We can talk about thanksgiving, first European contact, the wars, the love stories (Pocahontas), etc.. We can learn names like Geronimo, Cochis, Sitting Bull, and Chief Pontiac among others. We can learn about their cultures, religions, myths, sciences, arts, and that's all available information. So don't sit up there and act like the Native Americans are some forgotten people with no history, I'm at least 20% and I have a dream catcher over my bed as I type. If you don't expect schools to teach multicultural history, especially native history, that's you, but not me.

With respect to what I actually posted regarding Natives, I stand corrected. However, what I said was terribly construed. But how can you incorporate all of this into American culture as it is today, in a U.S. history class?

And of course I learned about slavery and civil rights, but who's history is that? Black history isn't determined by white involvement, talk about what we were doing before we were slaves..

Why?

If you don't understand the direct effect that Hispanics and Asians had on the country I feel sorry for you, and I have no time to fully educate you. Just take my word for it, they had/have a lot to do with this country and world history. Btw, everything in the classroom isn't pertained, or doesn't have to pertain to the U.S.. U.S. history is priority, but world history should be, and is in most cases required.

You are clearly missing the reason for which I am asking these questions, and your judgement of my capacity is shortcoming. I don't want you to teach me anything. I am asking you because, more than anything, I want to know that you have knowledge of what you are talking about. For all you should care, I know everything, and we can move on from there. But whatever you do, don't feel sorry for me. Everything taught in U.S. History SHOULD pertain to the United States, and in my opinion it should be priority.

2. Dude, do you know the history of that Area (Greece)? Just because the Greeks laid the foundation for western civilization, in no way means that the U.S. has anymore of a link to them than anywhere else in the world (especially the middle east).. Why aren't we learning about Egypt more then since they gave Greece their philosophy and science. Why not learn more about Phoenicia, the very letters that we use that you claim comes from Greece, were Phoenician (hence the word phonetics).. Also, while Europe was in the dark ages, the Muslims are the ones who preserved the writings of the Greeks, translating it and correcting errors, then giving it to western society as a gift. Rome was just some military empire in eastern Europe, has nothing more to do with the U.S. than anywhere else, this is just a western bias that people hate to admit.

I have knowledge of Greece. Thank you. So tell me, do you honestly believe that we have an equal link to the rest of the world just as we do to Greece? It is impossible for me to tell you that greeks rightfully created everything they handed down to our civilization, and the same goes for you trying to argue otherwise. What I do know is that, we are more directly related to greek culture than any other country in the world, by leaps and bounds. And for you to deny this just baffles me.

 

[ParkBoyz]

With respect to what I actually posted regarding Natives, I stand corrected. However, what I said was terribly construed. But how can you incorporate all of this into American culture as it is today, in a U.S. history class?



Why?



You are clearly missing the reason for which I am asking these questions, and your judgement of my capacity is shortcoming. I don't want you to teach me anything. I am asking you because, more than anything, I want to know that you have knowledge of what you are talking about. For all you should care, I know everything, and we can move on from there. But whatever you do, don't feel sorry for me. Everything taught in U.S. History SHOULD pertain to the United States, and in my opinion it should be priority.



I have knowledge of Greece. Thank you. So tell me, do you honestly believe that we have an equal link to the rest of the world just as we do to Greece? It is impossible for me to tell you that greeks rightfully created everything they handed down to our civilization, and the same goes for you trying to argue otherwise. What I do know is that, we are more directly related to greek culture than any other country in the world, by leaps and bounds. And for you to deny this just baffles me.

I see this is simply a lack of communication because you're coming from an angle to where the only thing beneficial to us in the class room is U.S. History. I never mentioned "U.S. History", I'm talking about overall standard curricula.. This includes sociology, world history, multi-cultural studies, and human relations. Learning about the formation of the country that we live in is a given (Including Native American history, this is their land), it's just when academia reflects bias and only focuses on Euro aspects of culture that it seems like brainwashing. If we're to learn about the country that we live in, wouldn't it be logical to know world history, seeing as how this country is a part of this world? Greece again is not synonymous with U.S. history, neither is Rome or even Britain. When we start getting into Britain it turns racial, because the ancestors of the Anglo-Saxon/White community come from there, but what about the ancestors of the others who helped build this country? Doesn't make any sense... And I still haven't touched on the fabrications, but I'll let that go for now, that's a deeper subject

 

[Rob S4]

I'm talking about White American History, not European history....well you might as well add it on there for the slavery part. It's funny how many "whites", once again not generalizing all whites, demand a white history month. Is it really necessary?

Here goes this guy again. If your going to add slavery to the white history part you better add it on the Black History part. The African Warlords are the ones who upon capturing prisoners sold them to others for use. In certain cases the Warlords would sell them to the whites. Other times the whites would sell them back to the Warlords so that they could use them in tribal wars with others. Iam not even going to diss you on this. Iam just saying read up. Call me racist blah blah blah all you want. I just proved a point.

S4

 

[ParkBoyz]

of course they can still be linked to africa, that doesnt negate the fact that a large percentage of slaves were raped in generations past and now interracial marriage is increasing. from malcolm x to dave chappelle, the african geneology has been tainted.

in reference to modern black egypt, i wasnt talking about the "rural" areas, im talking about cairo, giza, etc, the places of influence and power. these are not "black" cities, these cities themselves are named in arabic. look at the demographics of these places, these people are as black as bryant gumbel, of the egyptians i know with that are from egypt, they would be insulted if you called them black, then they would laugh because its a ridiculous statement. Hosny Mubarak is a black man? i dont think so.

I agree with you somewhat about African Americans, but I still think that African Americans are even more homogeneous than native Africans and the main identity lost was a cultural one. The average African American is usually 20% mixed, 30% of African American's paternal ancestry will be traced to Europe, but usually mtDNA will be traced to Africa. And I agree about the Egyptians, but Lower(North) Egypt has always been diverse since its unification with the South. The South conquered the North in 3100 B.C. and even back then Anthropological remains indicated a difference ethnically and culturally in the population. Yet after becoming unified, the nation became more homogeneous, even though the South always kept its southernly identity.. And you say who'd be insulted to be called blacks? Certainly not the Egyptians, you must be referring to the pseudo-Egyptians, a.k.a Arab invaders, and you must not of read the article I posted on Mostafa Hefny, who is blacker than I am.
http://edition.cnn.com/US/9707/16/racial.suit/

 

[ParkBoyz]

Oh, and Hosni Mubarak is Arabic, of course he's not black.. That's irrelevant, everyone knows that Muslims invaded Egypt in the 7th century and controlled it ever since. Not to mention that classical Egypt was dead and gone for 700 years even before that anyways, so that shouldn't of even been concerned with the convo.. That's like pointing at George Bush and telling me that he isn't Native American, well obviously. The point would be that Native Americans are still here and still know who they are and where they came from; they haven't lost their identity per se..