Black is the real 'N' word

[purejam]

A whole lot of fuss has and continues to be made about the word 'nigger'. For many it carries historical offence, whilst for many others, it's a commonly used fraternal word.

The word 'black' doesn't create the same kind of hysteria, but it's far more negative and dangerous.

Like nigger, black used to be a word of abuse. Check out Assata Shakur's autobiography in which she describes how African Americans used to abuse each other using the term 'black'. It wasn't until the 1960s that black became popularised as Black Power, Black Studies, Black Consciousness, Black Feminism and the like took hold.

Yet, the use of the word black ignores not only its history as a term of abuse, it seems to obscure its Eurocentric origins and development. Most importantly, the everyday use of the word black by people to describe themselves fails to deal with how it maintains white supremacy.

Black has Indo-European origins. In terms of people it became popular in the 17th century to describe people of African descent. But, that's only part of the story. The reality is that black is connected to white, the same way day and night, and man and woman are created. You can't have black without white.

This is significant because it was those who called themselves white who named other peoples black. And this has nothing to do with skin colour because if beings from another planet came to earth and understood language, they'd point out that black and white people don't exist.

It wasn't until the 17th century when racial classification began that European elites began to call themselves white. As Europeans conquered vast swathes of Africa and other continents, they created a classification of races and called themselves white because in their languages white was attributed with purity, goodness and cleanliness. Thus, systematic racism, otherwise known as white supremacy, came into being. Blackness is the offspring of white supremacy.

I believe it was John G, Jackson who came up with the phrase about "the evil genius of white supremacy". That destructive and psychosocially enslaving genius lies is in getting people to define themselves in a way that always calls in being the racial classification in which they occupy the lowest rung. Europeans defined 'us' as black in their race system and now we are proud to define and see 'ourselves' by their demeaning term.

Europeans used colored, negro, black and nigger were used interchangeably to describe our ancestors. We've duped ourselves into believing black is a positive, when every single time we use, think or read it, the spectre of whiteness is there.

This is evident in this site, where so many threads and posts involve reference to those who defined themselves as white.

Identity confusion result when peoples take on an common identity that was imposed on them by conquerors who meant them only harm. In this context, believing and acting on concepts of black identity, black culture, black consciousness, black power, black unity and the like, only confuse, mislead and keep people powerless.

Thoughts?

[jah_yout]

I have to agree...I posted a similar thread recently. Notice the euro-american power elite now use "african-american" for the africans, while still referring to themselves as "white"...and whatever they say the sheeple will toe the line. ..
the term "caucasian" is another term the sheeple blindly use without examining on a deeper level

[franksterr]

Language is a living thing and words and their meaning change depending on time and place.
Black, Ni$$er, Melanos, Sable, African or Moor....Are words use to describe us in different times and places in the Anglo world - Only two are truly used by people of the continent to describe themselves

Each word has a history and so is significant as a means to perspective of where and when in relation to here and now.
Such being the case then words is a connection to the past, thereby influencing the present to the extent to which it empowers or disempowers.

There in lies the importance of words.....do they unite and strengthens us toward a ever greater future or not?
Consider this - The word "black" once meant "white" that which today is considered its very opposite.
I say that to impart - that the meaning or history of the word is only important with regards to the effect it engenders in the listener and or speaker of it

Words are our first and primary creation and over it we wield immense power to influence ourselves and others.....choose wisely

Black belt, Black tie, in the Black, black indicates knowledge, graduation, sophistication, elite, power, primal forces, classic, formal etc.....so accentuate the positive in thought when used.

Those are my thoughts on the matter.

[blugiant]

A whole lot of fuss has and continues to be made about the word 'nigger'. For many it carries historical offence, whilst for many others, it's a commonly used fraternal word.

The word 'black' doesn't create the same kind of hysteria, but it's far more negative and dangerous.

Like nigger, black used to be a word of abuse. Check out Assata Shakur's autobiography in which she describes how African Americans used to abuse each other using the term 'black'. It wasn't until the 1960s that black became popularised as Black Power, Black Studies, Black Consciousness, Black Feminism and the like took hold.

Yet, the use of the word black ignores not only its history as a term of abuse, it seems to obscure its Eurocentric origins and development. Most importantly, the everyday use of the word black by people to describe themselves fails to deal with how it maintains white supremacy.

Black has Indo-European origins. In terms of people it became popular in the 17th century to describe people of African descent. But, that's only part of the story. The reality is that black is connected to white, the same way day and night, and man and woman are created. You can't have black without white.

This is significant because it was those who called themselves white who named other peoples black. And this has nothing to do with skin colour because if beings from another planet came to earth and understood language, they'd point out that black and white people don't exist.

It wasn't until the 17th century when racial classification began that European elites began to call themselves white. As Europeans conquered vast swathes of Africa and other continents, they created a classification of races and called themselves white because in their languages white was attributed with purity, goodness and cleanliness. Thus, systematic racism, otherwise known as white supremacy, came into being. Blackness is the offspring of white supremacy.

I believe it was John G, Jackson who came up with the phrase about "the evil genius of white supremacy". That destructive and psychosocially enslaving genius lies is in getting people to define themselves in a way that always calls in being the racial classification in which they occupy the lowest rung. Europeans defined 'us' as black in their race system and now we are proud to define and see 'ourselves' by their demeaning term.

Europeans used colored, negro, black and nigger were used interchangeably to describe our ancestors. We've duped ourselves into believing black is a positive, when every single time we use, think or read it, the spectre of whiteness is there.

This is evident in this site, where so many threads and posts involve reference to those who defined themselves as white.

Identity confusion result when peoples take on an common identity that was imposed on them by conquerors who meant them only harm. In this context, believing and acting on concepts of black identity, black culture, black consciousness, black power, black unity and the like, only confuse, mislead and keep people powerless.

Thoughts?

yuh lookinn att itt onlee fram oyinbo perspective. wat bout da arabs and asians woo ave historicallee appressed blakks?

Dr. Amos Wilson - Blueprint For Black Power

[Reggae plus]

I remember...20 some-odd years ago walking into a Jamaican restaurant in Toronto where I was very close with the owners and their families...both in Toronto and also in Jamaica.

A woman I had not met before called out to my friend Winston Edmund [aka Studwins]...."Hey Winnie...who's your white friend there?" Introductions were made. I pointed at my arm and said "There's NO white there. Maybe a kind of beige, beigey brown." I then gestured at her arm and suggested "And I don't see any black there. A nice dark, chocolatey kind of brown yes. Black? No. So I guess we're both different shades of brown then?"

She, and the people she was with, just looked at me like I'd hopped off of a space ship...in funny shoes. [and said nothing]

Winnie...just laughed. "Fi true G. Dat fi true...to rhatid!"


I don't know if any of the long time people here remember me speaking about my "Auntie" and "Uncle Harvey" who retired back to their home just outside of Mandeville up in Manchester? Auntie's sister was Studwins Mother.

Auntie was the greatest. When she died...it wasn't long 'til Uncle Harvey followed her out the exit door. I'm so glad that they met my Dad, came and stayed with us and enjoyed some of our reciprocal hospitality. And you know what? There were no blacks or whites there to throw a wrench into the good works.

[blugiant]

I remember...20 some-odd years ago walking into a Jamaican restaurant in Toronto where I was very close with the owners and their families...both in Toronto and also in Jamaica.

A woman I had not met before called out to my friend Winston Edmund [aka Studwins]...."Hey Winnie...who's your white friend there?" Introductions were made. I pointed at my arm and said "There's NO white there. Maybe a kind of beige, beigey brown." I then gestured at her arm and suggested "And I don't see any black there. A nice dark, chocolatey kind of brown yes. Black? No. So I guess we're both different shades of brown then?"

She, and the people she was with, just looked at me like I'd hopped off of a space ship...in funny shoes. [and said nothing]

Winnie...just laughed. "Fi true G. Dat fi true...to rhatid!"


I don't know if any of the long time people here remember me speaking about my "Auntie" and "Uncle Harvey" who retired back to their home just outside of Mandeville up in Manchester? Auntie's sister was Studwins Mother.

Auntie was the greatest. When she died...it wasn't long 'til Uncle Harvey followed her out the exit door. I'm so glad that they met my Dad, came and stayed with us and enjoyed some of our reciprocal hospitality. And you know what? There were no blacks or whites there to throw a wrench into the good works.

intarestinn argument. so yuh reduced blakk to a color ann yuh reduce oyinbo to a color. dat wan aff de tricks oyinbo use fe minimized racism. y yuh tink oyinbo waan to abolish da oyinbo race?

[blugiant]

Abolish the White Race - By Any Means Necessary



The white race is a historically constructed social formation - historically constructed because (like royalty) it is a product of some people's responses to historical circumstances; a social formation because it is a fact of society corresponding to no classification recognized by natural science.

The white race cuts across ethnic and class lines. It is not coextensive with that portion of the population of European descent, since many of those classified as "colored" can trace some of their ancestry to Europe, while African, Asian, or American Indian blood flows through the veins of many considered white. Nor does membership in the white race imply wealth, since there are plenty of poor whites, as well as some people of wealth and comfort who are not white.

The white race consists of those who partake of the privileges of the white skin in this society. Its most wretched members share a status higher, in certain respects, than that of the most exalted persons excluded from it, in return for which they give their support to the system that degrades them.

The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race. Until that task is accomplished, even partial reform will prove elusive, because white influence permeates every issue in U.S. society, whether domestic or foreign.

Advocating the abolition of the white race is distinct from what is called "anti-racism." The term "racism" has come to be applied to a variety of attitudes, some of which are mutually incompatible, and has been devalued to mean little more than a tendency to dislike some people for the color of their skin. Moreover, anti-racism admits the natural existence of "races" even while opposing social distinctions among them. The abolitionists maintain, on the contrary, that people were not favored socially because they were white; rather they were defined as "white" because they were favored. Race itself is a product of social discrimination; so long as the white race exists, all movements against racism are doomed to fail.

The existence of the white race depends on the willingness of those assigned to it to place their racial interests above class, gender or any other interests they hold. The defection of enough of its members to make it unreliable as a determinant of behavior will set off tremors that will lead to its collapse.

RACE TRAITOR aims to serve as an intellectual center for those seeking to abolish the white race. It will encourage dissent from the conformity that maintains it and popularize examples of defection from its ranks, analyze the forces that hold it together and those which promise to tear it apart. Part of its task will be to promote debate among abolitionists. When possible, it will support practical measures, guided by the principle, Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity. Dissolve the club

The white race is a club, which enrolls certain people at birth, without their consent, and brings them up according to its rules. For the most part the members go through life accepting the benefits of membership, without thinking about the costs. When individuals question the rules, the officers are quick to remind them of all they owe to the club, and warn them of the dangers they will face if they leave it.

RACE TRAITOR aims to dissolve the club, to break it apart, to explode it. Some people who sympathize with our aim have asked us how we intend to win over the majority of so-called whites to anti-racism. Others, usually less friendly, have asked if we plan to exterminate physically millions, perhaps hundreds of millions, of people. Neither of these plans is what we have in mind. The weak point of the club is its need for unanimity. Just as the South, on launching the Civil War, declared that it needed its entire territory and would have it, the white race must have the support of all those it has designated as its constituency, or it ceases to exist.

Elsewhere in this number, readers will find an account of John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry and some of the events it set in motion. Before the Civil War, the leading spokesmen for the slaveholders acknowledged that the majority of white northerners, swayed above all by the presence of the fugitive slave, considered slavery unjust. The Southerners also understood that the opposition was ineffective; however much the white people of the north disapproved of the slave system, the majority went along with it rather than risk the ordinary comforts of their lives, meager as they were in many cases.

When John Brown attacked Harpers Ferry, Southern pro- slavery leaders reacted with fury: they imposed a boycott on northern manufactures, demanded new concessions from the government in Washington, and began to prepare for war. When they sought to portray John Brown as a representative of northern opinion, Southern leaders were wrong; he represented only a small and isolated minority. But they were also right, for he expressed the hopes that still persisted in the northern population despite decades of cringing before the slaveholders. Virginia did not fear John Brown and his small band of followers, but his soul that would go marching on, though his body lay a-mould'rin' in the grave.

When the South, in retaliation for Harpers Ferry, sought to further bully northern opinion, it did so not out of paranoia but out of the realistic assessment that only a renewal of the national pro-slavery vows could save a system whose proud facade concealed a fragile foundation. By the arrogance of their demands, the Southern leaders compelled the people of the north to resist. Not ideas but events were in command. Each step led inexorably to the next: Southern land-greed, Lincoln's victory, secession, war, blacks as laborers, soldiers, citizens, voters. And so the war that began with not one person in a hundred foreseeing the end of slavery was transformed within two years into an anti-slavery war.

It is our faith - and with those who do not share it we shall not argue - that the majority of so-called whites in this country are neither deeply nor consciously committed to white supremacy; like most human beings in most times and places, they would do the right thing if it were convenient. As did their counterparts before the Civil War, most go along with a system that disturbs them, because the consequences of challenging it are terrifying. They close their eyes to what is happening around them, because it is easier not to know.

At rare moments their nervous peace is shattered, their certainty is shaken, and they are compelled to question the common sense by which they normally live. One such moment was in the days immediately following the Rodney King verdict, when a majority of white Americans were willing to admit to polltakers that black people had good reasons to rebel, and some joined them. Ordinarily the moments are brief, as the guns and reform programs are moved up to restore order and, more important, the confidence that matters are in good hands and they can go back to sleep. Both the guns and the reform programs are aimed at whites as well as blacks - the guns as a warning and the reform programs as a salve to their consciences.

Recently, one of our editors, unfamiliar with New York City traffic laws, made an illegal right turn there on a red light. He was stopped by two cops in a patrol car. After examining his license, they released him with a courteous admonition. Had he been black, they probably would have ticketed him, and might even have taken him down to the station. A lot of history was embodied in that small exchange: the cops treated the miscreant leniently at least in part because they assumed, looking at him, that he was white and therefore loyal. Their courtesy was a habit meant both to reward good conduct and induce future cooperation.

Had the driver cursed them, or displayed a bumper sticker that said, "Avenge Rodney King," the cops might have reacted differently. We admit that neither gesture on the part of a single individual would in all likelihood be of much consequence. But if enough of those who looked white broke the rules of the club to make the cops doubt their ability to recognize a white person merely by looking at him or her, how would it affect the cops' behavior? And if the police, the courts, and the authorities in general were to start spreading around indiscriminately the treatment they normally reserve for people of color, how would the rest of the so-called whites react?

How many dissident so-called whites would it take to unsettle the nerves of the white executive board? It is impossible to know. One John Brown - against a background of slave resistance - was enough for Virginia. Yet it was not the abolitionists, not even the transcendent John Brown, who brought about the mass shifts in consciousness of the Civil War period. At most, their heroic deeds were part of a chain of events that involved mutual actions and reactions on a scale beyond anything they could have anticipated - until a war that began with both sides fighting for slavery (the South to take it out of the Union, the north to keep it in) ended with a great army marching through the land singing, "As He died to make men holy, let us fight to make men free."

The moments when the routine assumptions of race break down are the seismic promise that somewhere in the tectonic flow a new fault is building up pressure, a new Harpers Ferry is being prepared. Its nature and timing cannot be predicted, but of its coming we have no doubt. When it comes, it will set off a series of tremors that will lead to the disintegration of the white race. We want to be ready, walking in Jerusalem just like John. What kind of journal is this?

RACE TRAITOR exists, not to make converts, but to reach out to those who are dissatisfied with the terms of membership in the white club. Its primary intended audience will be those people commonly called whites who, in one way or another, understand whiteness to be a problem that perpetuates injustice and prevents even the well-disposed among them from joining unequivocally in the struggle for human freedom. By engaging these dissidents in a journey of discovery into whiteness and its discontents, we hope to take part, together with others, in the process of defining a new human community. We wish neither to minimize the complicity of even the most downtrodden of whites with the system of white supremacy nor to exaggerate the significance of momentary departures from white rules.

We should say that there are some articles we are not interested in publishing. Since we are not seeking converts, we probably will not publish articles which lecture various organizations about their racial opportunism. Also we probably will not publish articles promoting inter-racial harmony, because that approach too often leaves intact differential treatment of whites and blacks and provides subtle confirmation of the idea that different races exist independently of social distinctions.

In the original film version of ROBIN HOOD (starring Errol Flynn), the Sheriff of Nottingham says to Robin, "You speak treason." Robin replies, "Fluently." We hope to do the same.

http://racetraitor.org/abolish.html