I frequently encounter people who are, as I like to call them, historical illiterates. I don't fault people for not knowing certain things about history, but when people, especially racist slime molds, try to pontificate about African people and African history in a way that makes Black people inherently incapable of normal functionality, these people always end up distorting our history so greatly that it becomes unrecognizable in comparison with reality.

In reality, these people are taking a present state of affairs concerning Africa and Africans and interpreting it as a result of a long history of failure. They use phrases like “you people are STILL in the stone ages”. The use the word “still” as if Africans have never seen metal before, let alone smelted it and made tools, crafts, weapons and arts out of it.

Some will say that Africans have never built any civilization before and that any “so called” civilization they did manage to create could not measure up to an actual "authentic" civilization with the likes of that of other nations found in Europe and Asia. Not only are they wrong, in the sense that Nubia, Ethiopia, West Africa and the East Coast of Africa were are highly advanced truly Black civilizations, but even the interior, non influenced peoples of the Kongo, Yoruba, Luba, and Mutapa achieved highly evolved societies.

They will say that Africans were illiterate and never formed their own writing. When you inform them that West African and East African Muslims were indeed literate and wrote many manuscripts, poems, scribes, they will say that these people were “influenced” by the Arabs, as though this somehow discounts their achievements.

Throughout history most people were influenced by some outside source. Greece was not literate until it received influence from the Middle east. Arabs themselves garnered much influence, not only in writing, but in the Islamic culture they manifested, from places such as Persia, the Mediterranean, India and even China. For these people, being influenced by outsiders is normal and commonplace, yet when Africans are influenced, it is because they are somehow inferior and couldn't do it by themselves. Yet at the time of Greece and Rome, most of the rest of Europe was also illiterate and didn't become literate until after the the AD period.

I recently came across a forum thread with yet another racist spouting his usual illiterate nonsense. He, like many racists, actually believes that Africans are better off being dominated by non-Blacks than themselves, and that that is the only way or the best way Africa will ever prosper.

Here my response to some of his comments. His statements are marked in bold. Enjoy:

“Over 40 million people in China live in caves. FACT. However that is for a different reason, not poverty. The reasons that they have not advanced is that If the average IQ of a country is 74.... they arent going to be advanced.. regardless of race.”

If I were to concede this to be true, it still wouldn't matter because there is no evidence that African IQ is inherently low. An African who lives in desperate poverty is obviously going to have a lower IQ than one who was raised in a middle-class or upper-class environment.

Furthermore, there is no evidence that Africans today have an overall lower IQ than that of Africans who lived 500-1000 years ago. Saying that Africa is in a poor state because of low IQ completely ignores the fact that these very same supposedly “low IQ” people are responsible for creating stable and prosperous societies all the way up to when colonialism started or before they were destroyed by either Europeans or Berbers.

“To blame whites for the failures of africa is so unfair since BLACKS and ARABS invented black slavery (not whites).....”

This is a non-sequitur. People blame White people for Africa's troubles because they colonized Africa, destroyed many of their kingdoms, exploited them for their resources, subjugated the locals, incited ethnic warring, among many other things. White people didn't invent Black slavery, but they did practice an alien brand of slavery known as chattel slavery. Africans never did this to each other traditionally.

They definitely did not treat slaves as inferior beings or less than human. They did not rape the mothers of their slaves. They did not chop off their hands, or hang them or whip them senselessly, or any of the other myriad of inhumane acts that Europeans enacted on Africans.

There is simply no logical way you can ever equate the level of barbarism Europeans inflicted on Africans with any so called “African” form of traditional slavery.

“and whites BUILT africa. We are the ones who put industry there to begin with. If we hadnt gone into africa EVER.. it would be WORSE off not better off.”

Nobody “built” Africa. Africa is a continent that was here before Euros existed and will be here until this Earth collapses.

The first industries in Africa were spawned by Africans themselves, way before colonialism, Islam, or even the ancient Greece civilization reached it's maturity. Nubia and Egypt were the earliest wealthy economies in Africa.

Over in West Africa—and this was still before Ancient Greece had become established—you still had industries comprised of local crafts such as tools, weapons, iron, food stuffs, cloth, and other personal ornaments and adornments that were traded across long distances by both agriculturalists and pastoralists.

So in other words, nobody “introduced” industry into Africa as it was an indigenous development, just as with agriculture, iron-working, state development, and democratic polities.

“If japanese or european men were in control of africa as leaders and presidents... it would be more successful. There would be fewer people starving.”

Well if competent, erudite, and altruistic Black men were in control of Africa as leaders and presidents, would they not also manifest the same presumed effect you are describing?

Why is race being posited as some sort of missing link as to the reason problems why are occurring in Africa? Again, if Africa's current scene is a result of an intrinsic defect in Africans based off them being Black, then how is it Africans throughout history have been able to build stable and prosperous societies?

This is an issue of knowledge and application. Things that were done to heal other countries that were in poor conditions can be done to help Africa. End of.

“The biggest mistake africans EVER made.. was kicking the colonialists out. Africa would be way more successful if the colonialists were still in power.... but I can understand why they'd want to run their own countries... but they never do right.”

The Mossi did it right. They were highly democratic, family oriented, and had no sense of the kind of “individualism” that can commonly be seen today in western societies. They ran their governments as competently as any successful government. They of course, are not nearly the only ones to do this, but I just wanted to make known that, yes, Africans can and have run their own societies in ways of such adeptness and fairness that could rival any contemporary European society prior to colonial intervention.

Saying that Africans don't have the inherent ability to rule over their own selves is completely ignorant and shows the type of feeble logic that permeates the minds of people who think like you.

For example, if you are suggesting that, because (according to you) Africa was more successful in a past era, colonialism, that it is today, and therefore, logically it would make sense to revert back to the economic and political set up that occurred during that time, with White people lording over Blacks like cattle, then could one not use that very same logic to go back even further in history before colonialism even existed in Africa?

Back to a time when Africans not only ruled themselves, without the help of any European or anyone else, but to a time when Africans displayed inspiring levels of sophistication and efficiency in the way they ran and governed their societies and manifested wealth for their nations?

If we are to use history as an example as to what Africans should now aspire for, then wouldn't it make sense to revert back to a time when African societies were self sufficient as opposed to being reliant on the White man? But of course, because you don't read, you don't even realize that such a time period ever existed in African history, which is why you spew such ignorant rhetoric.

“Black men have yet to even give black women equal rights in many africancountries. The most basic thing. African leaders have been ruthless dictators like idi amin. They kill their rivals. They dont allow freedom of speech. BLack men ran africa into a hole by being ruthless dictators. Nobody else did it for them. They fought for "freedom" from the colonialists.. and then became RUTHLESS DICTATORS (sometimes genocidal madmen) who killed anybody who wanted freedom from their dicatorships. They became WORSE than the colonialists.”

This is partly true. I have never denied the senseless atrocities committed by Africans themselves onto other Africans. However, these are all recent events in comparison to the multi-millennia track record of Africans have been making civilizations. You make it seem like Africa never had a history beyond colonialism. The same way uneducated Europeans seem to think that African Americans never had a history beyond slavery.

Even while slavery was still taking place, African Diasporans achieved much greatness. A lot of people don't know that there were many Blacks, during the slavery era, that bought their freeedom or were born free, or took their freedom by rebellion or escape, and become enterprising citizens, engaging in trade and business just as any White man. In Brazil, you had the notable example of the Palmares who created their very own African state.

As an aside, another occurrence a lot of people don't know about is that during this time, you also had African slaves who were literate and could write. Some slaves were even more literate than their masters. Most of these literate slaves were Muslim and because their religion requires them having knowledge of Koranic principles, and thus knowing how to read them, there were a substantial amount of literate Black Muslims who were slaves but still ended up playing a substantial role in Black achievement during these oppressive times.

I always find it amusing when you have racists claim that Blacks are stupid,“monkies” and all this childish nonsense, but they don't even read and aren't even educated on the topic they seem to be the most obsessed with; Black people.

So yes, a corrupt, dictatorial African is way worse than an non corrupt and non dictatorial European. But then again, an altruistic, democratic, and competent African leader would be better than a corrupt, dictatorial, and non-democratic European leader.

The character traits one exhibits are what ultimately make that person a good or bad leader. The color of skin one has has nothing to do with whether they are or will be a good leader or not.

“Every society that is beneath the equator... stayed primitive too long. Australia ... south america.... and africa. They all stayed primitive for too long because they were isolated from the progress of whites and asians. At best.. africans could emulate arab advancement but arabs were never really thatadvanced. If black africans lived next to europe instead of arabs and berbers ... maybe they would have been more successful because they could have been emulating european success all those centuries.”

The kingdoms of Central Africa and the West African forest region were relatively uninfluenced by either Europe or Asia, yet they still created phenomenally stable and prosperous kingdoms.

In Nigeria, you had the Ibgo-Ukwu, or the Nri people. They are highly adept bronze-makers who with their crafts, demonstrated geometric exactitude and perfection of form. These people were obviously not “primitive”. They were also not poor, as they “acquired a well-founded reputation for enterprise in trade”(Davidson 1998).

The Igbo were not known to have centralized government, and they lacked an army, yet they were “fiercely democratic” and their system of democracy was “very much in line with the democratic habits of the modern world”(Davidson 1998).

Yoruba formed powerful states in the forest region as well. The manifested walled complexes, palaces, courtyards, shrines. They, like the Ibgo, were metallurgist artists who crafted art that no European Renaissance artist ever surpassed. The Yoruba system of government was extremely complex and “was established on what can be called a participatory democracy.”(Salami 2006) I don't necessarily have time to go over it right now in depth, but more information about their governmental structuring can be found here:

http://www.jpanafrican.com/docs/vol1no6/DemocraticStructureOfYorubaPoliticalCulturalSociety_vol1no6.pdf

Further south along the coasts of modern day Angola you had the Kongo Kingdom. The Kongolese had their own effective system of government complete with their own courts, both royal and provincial, officals, pages, titleholders, etc. They had their own monetary system, streets, satellite states...

The Kongo people “had a highly organized social system, an impressive artistic tradition and a secular form of government that expressed the will of the people through a democratic political system” that was “ruled by a protocol as rigid and complicated as that of Versailles under Louis XIV.”(Clarke) The Kongolese had no writing and were illiterate, yet still their “political organisation was nevertheless efficient enough to control a population of perhaps two million”.

History Kingdom of Kongo

There are other kingdoms that thrived in Central Africa too, but the point is, without influence from Euros or Asiatics, Africans still exhibited high levels of political and economic sophistication.

"So the reason (if its not IQ) most likely has something to do with their location in the world.... the southern hemisphere.
That ENTIRE hemisphere stayed primitive. I dont know why."

Mapungabwe, Mwene Mutapa, Zimbabwe, Kilwa, Zulu were all kingdoms south of the Equator.

The Shona people established numerous gold mines numbering in the thousands and were responsible for removing millions of tons of ore. Like many African societies, the Shona created highly advanced ceramic and artistic creations.

“The work displayed in executing these bowls, the careful rounding of the edges, the exact execution of the circle, the fine pointed tool-marks, and the subjects they chose to depict, point to the race having been far advanced in artistic skill...Seven of these bowls were of exactly the same size, and were 19.2 inches in diameter.”(Bent 1896)

Bent was talking about the soapstone ceramic bowls found in the Mashonaland of Zimbabwe. He made the point that the one find was “worthy of a good period of classic Greek ware”(Bent 1896).

Primitive? Do your research before you decide to open your mouth and end up sounding silly.

"But whites are NOT the reason why. We are the ones who put the first pair of pants on a non muslim african, south american tribesman... AND aborigine. Whites did NOT invent tribalism, dung huts and war face paint."

Nor did they invent democracy, monetary system, judicial system, state-building, metal-working or creation of the arts. They certainly didn't introduce it to Africans. With or without pants, Black Africans didn't need Europeans to create self sufficient societies. Not for Nubia, not for Ghana, not for Benin, not for Luba, not for Kongo, not for Mutapa, not for any of them.

at first i thought you were plain confused and contradicting yourself. until i read that you were replying to someone else's baseless comments. good responses. .

Thanks. I really hoped I would have gotten more posts. I would have loved to have started a discussion.

Bakari Neferu: Thanks. I really hoped I would have gotten more posts. I would have loved to have started a discussion.

people in this section like more pictures and less writing. maybe you should have tried posting this in the Rascist Section.

Personally,i think we kicked the colonial masters out too soon as the previous generations weren't ripe enough to adapt to the new system of govt. The mentalities of black people was to have kings and chiefs-just like our rulers are doing now. Government of the people,by the people and for the people doesn't exist in Africa. We certainly will have to dig deep to get it right or forget about the system as we have failed terribly.

Our African cultures played a huge role in our under-developed societies. Crowned with religion that rather than enlightening us,kept us more into isolation from other groups. I think Africa would have been better off developing herself,we are like an egusi soup that wasn't cooked long enough.

Do Africans have low IQ? Certainly not but our traditions are still very much with us,and is causing a huge conflict with our ways of life. Obama was brought up the western world and he is the leader of the world's most powerful country. That should be a source of inspiration to every black nation that we can do it.

With time i see Africa breaking free from every form of mental slavery,barbaric religions and will approach the laws of common sense.Then africa will progress and get back to the greats we used to be.

ifeness: Personally,i think we kicked the colonial masters out too soon as the previous generations weren't ripe enough to adapt to the new system of govt. The mentalities of black people was to have kings and chiefs-just like our rulers are doing now. Government of the people,by the people and for the people doesn't exist in Africa. We certainly will have to dig deep to get it right or forget about the system as we have failed terribly.

Our African cultures played a huge role in our under-developed societies. Crowned with religion that rather than enlightening us,kept us more into isolation from other groups. I think Africa would have been better off developing herself,we are like an egusi soup that wasn't cooked long enough.

Do Africans have low IQ? Certainly not but our traditions are still very much with us,and is causing a huge conflict with our ways of life. Obama was brought up the western world and he is the leader of the world's most powerful country. That should be a source of inspiration to every black nation that we can do it.

With time i see Africa breaking free from every form of mental slavery,barbaric religions and will approach the laws of common sense.Then africa will progress and get back to the greats we used to be.

lol cogratulations for your slave mentality!!!! kicked the colonial masters out too soon yes true that. we should have let them stay longer and steal all our resources, slaves and poach animals in our Nations while other countries in the Far East declare Independance and start progress and development.

Africa is not a black continent. There are people of all hues and colours living here. I myself am Dark Brown. There are indigenous Touareg, berbers, Malagasy, etc., living here. stop pushing this akata mentality upon us.
the affairs of the UShave nothing to do with us.

barbaric religions yes like islam and christianity, those religion of slavers and fanatics. other countries have Monarchies to, both in Arabia and in Asia and they are doing an excellent job. Thailand, Malaysia and especially Brunei are extremely rich. so is the COnstitutional Monarchy of Japan, and ofcourse ALL the Gulf Arab States.

today very few countries in Africa have a full-fledged Monarchy.

PAGAN 9JA:


lol cogratulations for your slave mentality!!!! kicked the colonial masters out too soon yes true that. we should have let them stay longer and steal all our resources, slaves and poach animals in our Nations while other countries in the Far East declare Independance and start progress and development.

Africa is not a black continent. There are people of all hues and colours living here. I myself am Dark Brown. There are indigenous Touareg, berbers, Malagasy, etc., living here. stop pushing this akata mentality upon us.
the affairs of the UShave nothing to do with us.

barbaric religions yes like islam and christianity, those religion of slavers and fanatics. other countries have Monarchies to, both in Arabia and in Asia and they are doing an excellent job. Thailand, Malaysia and especially Brunei are extremely rich. so is the COnstitutional Monarchy of Japan, and ofcourse ALL the Gulf Arab States.

today very few countries in Africa have a full-fledged Monarchy.

Whether we kicked them out or not,they are making $100b dollars off our resources every year and yet we remain in poverty. Is it not better we allowed them finish up with that they started. At least we were better off then than now. All i heard from my parents was how Nigeria used to be good,but now when we ruled ourselves it all about corruption and bad economy. Malaysia,India nd a few Asian countries were colonized and are doing better than we Negro Africans.

I did not say all African are black,i was only in particular about the Negros. Since we have started chasing our monarchs out of their palaces,i do wonder what we gonna do next.

ifeness:

Whether we kicked them out or not,they are making $100b dollars off our resources every year and yet we remain in poverty. Is it not better we allowed them finish up with that they started. At least we were better off then than now. All i heard from my parents was how Nigeria used to be good,but now when we ruled ourselves it all about corruption and bad economy. Malaysia,India nd a few Asian countries were colonized and are doing better than we Negro Africans.

the above 2 sentences in bold, especially the one in italics is a very rash statement and i suggest you to ammend your views.

what do you mean by finish what they started?? are we a chraity continent or a bank of the european nations, that they can take whatever and whenever they want from us. are you saying that they have to finih all our resources, empty our continent and ship us all as slaves to their countries BETTER OFF THAN NOW??!!!
your parents must have been sons and daughters of rich people or Kings/Chiefs or else they wouldnt say such things. there was some form of order back then, yes. i am not saying there wasn't. but look at the wider picture and all the devastation they have caused. do you want us to return back to THIS ? :



also remember the apartheid in SA ?

PAGAN 9JA:


the above 2 sentences in bold, especially the one in italics is a very rash statement and i suggest you to ammend your views.

what do you mean by finish what they started?? are we a chraity continent or a bank of the european nations, that they can take whatever and whenever they want from us. are you saying that they have to finih all our resources, empty our continent and ship us all as slaves to their countries BETTER OFF THAN NOW??!!!
your parents must have been sons and daughters of rich people or Kings/Chiefs or else they wouldnt say such things. there was some form of order back then, yes. i am not saying there wasn't. but look at the wider picture and all the devastation they have caused. do you want us to return back to THIS ? :





also remember the apartheid in SA ?

If we do not put our houses in order, a country like chine would enslave us again.They are already owning most of the textile industries in Africa. What are we doing to stop the second coming of slavery- maybe its because too many nigerians are waiting for the 2nd coming of Jesus in the sky,they have decided to be useless to the economy.

ifeness:

If we do not put our houses in order, a country like chine would enslave us again.They are already owning most of the textile industries in Africa. What are we doing to stop the second coming of slavery- maybe its because too many nigerians are waiting for the 2nd coming of Jesus in the sky,they have decided to be useless to the economy.

i doubt China would ever go to the extent of slavery. after all, the reason they own so many business, etc., is that they arejust plain smart, determined and hard working. they have picked themselves up through their own means without the help of anyone else, That is their sole right.

This is a non-sequitur. People blame White people for Africa's troubles because they colonized Africa, destroyed many of their kingdoms, exploited them for their resources, subjugated the locals, incited ethnic warring, among many other things. White people didn't invent Black slavery, but they did practice an alien brand of slavery known as chattel slavery. Africans never did this to each other traditionally.

They definitely did not treat slaves as inferior beings or less than human. They did not Molestation the mothers of their slaves. They did not chop off their hands, or hang them or whip them senselessly, or any of the other myriad of inhumane acts that Europeans enacted on Africans.

There is simply no logical way you can ever equate the level of barbarism Europeans inflicted on Africans with any so called “African” form of traditional slavery.

africa was not the only place taking over,

This map of the world in 1914 shows the large colonial empires that powerful nations established across the globe

[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/World_1914_empires_colonies_territory.PNG[/img] so that's not really an excuse to be dysfunctional

TerryCarr: africa was not the only place taking over,
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/World_1914_empires_colonies_territory.PNG[/img] so that's not really an excuse to be dysfunctional

Why isn't south America completely Yellow, almost the whole continent was colonized by Spain, and Brazil colonized by Portugal, don't know why they colored it grey, any way good map

ifeness:

Whether we kicked them out or not,they are making $100b dollars off our resources every year and yet we remain in poverty. Is it not better we allowed them finish up with that they started. At least we were better off then than now. All i heard from my parents was how Nigeria used to be good,but now when we ruled ourselves it all about corruption and bad economy. Malaysia,India nd a few Asian countries were colonized and are doing better than we Negro Africans.

I did not say all African are black,i was only in particular about the Negros. Since we have started chasing our monarchs out of their palaces,i do wonder what we gonna do next.

Actually I disagree, if the colonizers had stayed longer they would have found out about our precious resource(oil) and the country would have turned into another South Africa or Brazil where the blacks will be second class citizens because for sure the British wouldn't have left but that doesn't mean Nigeria is paradise though. When it comes to what my parents told me about Nigeria, is that it was doing good for a while after independence, that the naira was equal to the dollar then, especially when Murtala Mohammed was around but once illiterates like Abacha and all those other clowns got into office things changed. SO I wouldn't sell Nigeria short there were some good leaders in the beginning but they were either assassinated or removed from power, and that's when we saw the downhill.

anonymous6:

Actually I disagree, if the colonizers had stayed longer they would have found out about our precious resource(oil) and the country would have turned into another South Africa or Brazil where the blacks will be second class citizens because for sure the British wouldn't have left but that doesn't mean Nigeria is paradise though. When it comes to what my parents told me about Nigeria, is that [b]it was doing good for a while after independence, that the naira was equal to the dollar then, especially when Murtala Mohammed was around [/b]but once illiterates like Abacha and all those other clowns got into office things changed. SO I wouldn't sell Nigeria short there were some good leaders in the beginning but they were either assassinated or removed from power, and that's when we saw the downhill.

that was not just the situation of Nigeria, it was the situation of most other colonzied recently independant countries.

anonymous6:

Why isn't south America completely Yellow, almost the whole continent was colonized by Spain, and Brazil colonized by Portugal, don't know why they colored it grey, any way good map

it is a map of 1914 most of south america got independence in the 1800's. Suriname got independence in the 1970's and Guyana got it in 1960's and French Guiana is still part of france

anonymous6:

Actually I disagree, if the colonizers had stayed longer they would have found out about our precious resource(oil) and the country would have turned into another South Africa or Brazil where the blacks will be second class citizens because for sure the British wouldn't have left but that doesn't mean Nigeria is paradise though. When it comes to what my parents told me about Nigeria, is that it was doing good for a while after independence, that the naira was equal to the dollar then, especially when Murtala Mohammed was around but once illiterates like Abacha and all those other clowns got into office things changed. SO I wouldn't sell Nigeria short there were some good leaders in the beginning but they were either assassinated or removed from power, and that's when we saw the downhill.

being black in Brazil is hell of a lot better then being black in America

TerryCarr: being black in Brazil is hell of a lot better then being black in America

South America is the land of the Natives.

PAGAN 9JA:


South America is the land of the Natives.

not no more the only native majority nations are Bolivia and they have little power over the mixed/white elite

TerryCarr: not no more the only native majority nations are Bolivia and they have little power over the mixed/white elite

and you forget Peru. yes grave injsutice has been done to them. i will do my utmost to help them in my lifetime, especially the Aymara & Quechua.

TerryCarr: being black in Brazil is hell of a lot better then being black in America

Well maybe with history between both countries you may have points but in general NO, because at least african americans have a Oprah, Barack & Michelle Obama, Denzel Washington, Colin Powell, Condolessa Rice, and etc but in Brazil there can never be a Oprah & Obama there or a voice for Black Brazilians, the only voice they have is they admit that they have black african heritage compared to other or most South American countries that don't. I am not saying that Black Brazilians are going through a apartheid but when they can't have a voice in the government, entertainment industry, and etc in Brazil, while white Brazilians are controlling almost all that I listed, it makes you wonder.

anonymous6:

Well maybe with history between both countries you may have points but in general NO, because at least african americans have a Oprah, Barack & Michelle Obama, Denzel Washington, Colin Powell, Condolessa Rice, and etc but in Brazil there can never be a Oprah & Obama there or a voice for Black Brazilians, the only voice they have is they admit that they have black african heritage compared to other or most South American countries that don't. I am not saying that Black Brazilians are going through a apartheid but when they can't have a voice in the government, entertainment industry, and etc in Brazil, while white Brazilians are controlling almost all that I listed, it makes you wonder.

3 Gbosa for you....Gbosa! Gbosa!! Gbooosssaaaaaa!!!

TerryCarr: being black in Brazil is hell of a lot better then being black in America

what? How did you come about that conclusion

nyameke: what? How did you come about that conclusion

Brazil never had this after slavery




yea black were disadvantage but not in fear for there lives

anonymous6:

Well maybe with history between both countries you may have points but in general NO, because at least african americans have a Oprah, Barack & Michelle Obama, Denzel Washington, Colin Powell, Condolessa Rice, and etc but in Brazil there can never be a Oprah & Obama there or a voice for Black Brazilians, the only voice they have is they admit that they have black african heritage compared to other or most South American countries that don't. I am not saying that Black Brazilians are going through a apartheid but when they can't have a voice in the government, entertainment industry, and etc in Brazil, while white Brazilians are controlling almost all that I listed, it makes you wonder.

True! Brazillians love to go on about how there is no racism in Brazil but it's a load of bull.

Black Kenichi:

True! Brazillians love to go on about how there is no racism in Brazil but it's a load of bull.

True, I think Black brazilians are beautiful people but they live like total second class citizens in their country, and it is not right.

Brazil is not obsessed with race as America is

anonymous6:

Well maybe with history between both countries you may have points but in general NO, because at least african americans have a Oprah, Barack & Michelle Obama, Denzel Washington, Colin Powell, Condolessa Rice, and etc but in Brazil there can never be a Oprah & Obama there or a voice for Black Brazilians, the only voice they have is they admit that they have black african heritage compared to other or most South American countries that don't. I am not saying that Black Brazilians are going through a apartheid but when they can't have a voice in the government, entertainment industry, and etc in Brazil, while white Brazilians are controlling almost all that I listed, it makes you wonder.

Machado de Assis

"was a Brazilian novelist, poet, playwright, short story writer, and advocate of monarchism. Widely regarded as the greatest writer of Brazilian literature, nevertheless he did not gain widespread popularity outside Brazil in his own lifetime. He was multilingual, having learned French, English, German, and Greek later in life.

Machado's works had a great influence on Brazilian literary schools of the late 19th century and early 20th century. José Saramago, Carlos Fuentes, Woody Allen and Susan Sontag are among his admirers, the American critic Harold Bloom calls him "the supreme black literary artist to date"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joaquim_Barbosa
"is the only black Supreme Federal Tribunal justice minister in Brazil.

Although many people believe he is the first black justice minister in Brazilian Supreme Court, he is actually the third one. He was preceded by:

Hermenegildo de Barros (from 1919 to 1937)
Pedro Lessa (from 1907 to 1921)"

Nilo Peçanha the 7th President

"was a Brazilian politician. He was Governor of Rio de Janeiro State (1903–1906), then elected Vice-President of Brazil in 1906. He assumed the presidency in 1909 following the death of President Afonso Pena and served until 1910. He was disputably the only mulatto president of Brazil."

blacks in Latin America may have problems but i would rather live there then america in the 1900's.

TerryCarr: Brazil is not obsessed with race as America is

True to a extent but when it comes to opportunities to be given to Black Brazilians, it just isn't there at all, they have no opprotunities in the government, entertainment industry and etc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C11gIwOh2xs

TerryCarr:
Machado de Assis

"was a Brazilian novelist, poet, playwright, short story writer, and advocate of monarchism. Widely regarded as the greatest writer of Brazilian literature, nevertheless he did not gain widespread popularity outside Brazil in his own lifetime. He was multilingual, having learned French, English, German, and Greek later in life.

Machado's works had a great influence on Brazilian literary schools of the late 19th century and early 20th century. José Saramago, Carlos Fuentes, Woody Allen and Susan Sontag are among his admirers, the American critic Harold Bloom calls him "the supreme black literary artist to date"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joaquim_Barbosa
"is the only black Supreme Federal Tribunal justice minister in Brazil.

Although many people believe he is the first black justice minister in Brazilian Supreme Court, he is actually the third one. He was preceded by:

Hermenegildo de Barros (from 1919 to 1937)
Pedro Lessa (from 1907 to 1921)"

Nilo Peçanha the 7th President

"was a Brazilian politician. He was Governor of Rio de Janeiro State (1903–1906), then elected Vice-President of Brazil in 1906. He assumed the presidency in 1909 following the death of President Afonso Pena and served until 1910. He was disputably the only mulatto president of Brazil."

Thanks for this info I never knew about this guy, but this is where I will come and bring this up with you, was he identified as a Black brazilian or closer then, or when he was known in Brazil was he painted as brazilian and more toward the white brazilian side because he can pass for white, so it makes you wonder will he had made it if he looked more black because obama looks more black then him, but any way your info is enlightening

TerryCarr: blacks in Latin America may have problems but i would rather live there then america in the 1900's.

I agree, there was no segregation, jim Crow and etc in Brazil like it is in America then, but you can even add though that because black americans fought for their rights by force in America, it gave them the opportunity to have more standing in America then Black Brazilians that didn't, and that is why I said you will never see a Oprah in Brazil or a Black billionaire because black Brazilians are permanently put in a level in the country where they can't progress to higher lengths. I feel what gives Brazilians more leg room then Black americans is that they managed to retain some of the culture from their african ancestors like the ancient Yoruba religion for example then black americans, and they have gained from that today.

anonymous6:

True to a extent but when it comes to opportunities to be given to Black Brazilians, it just isn't there at all, they have no opprotunities in the government, entertainment industry and etc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C11gIwOh2xs




Thanks for this info I never knew about this guy, but this is where I will come and bring this up with you, [b]was he identified as a Black brazilian or closer then, or when he was known in Brazil was he painted as brazilian and more toward the white brazilian side because he can pass for white, so it makes you wonder will he had made it if he looked more black because obama looks more black then him, but any way your info is enlightening

i seen black in L. America on pbs. he denied it

Nilo Peçanha was born to Sebastião de Sousa Peçanha, a baker, and Joaquina Anália de Sá Freire, the descendent of a wealthy and noble family from northern Rio de Janeiro State. He was one of seven siblings (five boys and two girls). His family lived in a state of poverty in the remote and poor neighborhood of Morro do Coco, Campos dos Goytacazes, and moved to the downtown area when Peçanha started elementary education.

He was frequently described as being a mulatto and often ridiculed in the press for his skin color. During his youth, the local Campos dos Goytacazes social elite alluded to him as the "mestiço of Morro do Coco" (the half-breed from Morro do Coco district). In 1921, when he ran for the Presidency of Republic, letters falsely attributed to the other candidate Artur Bernardes were published by the press and caused a political crisis because they insulted both the former president Marshal Hermes da Fonseca and also Peçanha, another former president, claiming he was a mulatto. Gilberto Freyre mentioned his "mulatismo" in Brazilian politics as the same that prevailed in Brazilian soccer. According to some scholars, his presidential photographs were touched up to whiten his dark skin.


Some scholars assert that, despite his tez escura (dark skin color), Nilo Peçanha always hid his black origins, and to this day his descendants and family have denied that he was a mulatto. The official biography written by a relative Celso Peçanha does not mention his racial origins, but another later biography does so, thus some scholars express doubts. In any case, his origins were very humble: he used to claim that he had been raised on day-old bread and paçoca (cassava flour grounded with dried beef).

After finishing his primary studies in his home city, Peçanha went on to study at the Law Schools of São Paulo and Recife, where he earned his degree. As a student, he supported both the campaign to abolish slavery and the establishment of the Republic.

Peçanha was married to Ana de Castro Belisário Soares de Sousa, also known as "Anita", the descendant of an aristocratic and wealthy family from his birth city. She was a daughter of lawyer João Belisário Soares de Souza and of Ana Rachel Ribeiro de Castro, who was herself a daughter of the Viscount of Santa Rita, one of the richest men in northern Rio de Janeiro State. The marriage was a social scandal since the bride escaped her house to marry her poor and "mulatto" groom, despite his status as a promising young politician.

it seems blackness does not exist in Brazil for better or worse. racial quotas are being put in collages which is causing problems

Affirming a divide
Black Brazilians are much worse off than they should be. But what is the best way to remedy that?

IN APRIL 2010, as part of a scheme to beautify the rundown port near the centre of Rio de Janeiro for the 2016 Olympic games, workers were replacing the drainage system in a shabby square when they found some old cans. The city called in archaeologists, whose excavations unearthed the ruins of Valongo, once Brazil's main landing stage for African slaves.

From 1811 to 1843 around 500,000 slaves arrived there, according to Tânia Andrade Lima, the head archaeologist. Valongo was a complex, including warehouses where slaves were sold and a cemetery. Hundreds of plastic bags, stored in shipping containers parked on a corner of the site, hold personal objects lost or hidden by the slaves, or taken from them. They include delicate bracelets and rings woven from vegetable fibre; lumps of amethyst and stones used in African worship; and cowrie shells, a common currency in Africa.
In this section

It is a poignant reminder of the scale and duration of the slave trade to Brazil. Of the 10.7m African slaves shipped across the Atlantic between the 16th and 19th centuries, 4.9m landed there. Fewer than 400,000 went to the United States. Brazil was the last country in the Americas to abolish slavery, in 1888.

Brazil has long seemed to want to forget this history. In 1843 Valongo was paved over by a grander dock to welcome a Bourbon princess who came to marry Pedro II, the country's 19th-century emperor. The stone column rising from the square commemorates the empress, not the slaves. Now the city plans to make Valongo an open-air museum of slavery and the African diaspora. “Our work is to give greater visibility to the black community and its ancestors,” says Ms Andrade Lima.

This project is a small example of a much broader re-evaluation of race in Brazil. The pervasiveness of slavery, the lateness of its abolition, and the fact that nothing was done to turn former slaves into citizens all combined to have a profound impact on Brazilian society. They are reasons for the extreme socioeconomic inequality that still scars the country today.

Neither separate nor equal

In the 2010 census some 51% of Brazilians defined themselves as black or brown. On average, the income of whites is slightly more than double that of black or brown Brazilians, according to IPEA, a government-linked think-tank. It finds that blacks are relatively disadvantaged in their level of education and in their access to health and other services. For example, more than half the people in Rio de Janeiro's favelas (slums) are black. The comparable figure in the city's richer districts is just 7%.

Brazilians have long argued that blacks are poor only because they are at the bottom of the social pyramid—in other words, that society is stratified by class, not race. But a growing number disagree. These “clamorous” differences can only be explained by racism, according to Mário Theodoro of the federal government's secretariat for racial equality. In a passionate and sometimes angry debate, black Brazilian activists insist that slavery's legacy of injustice and inequality can only be reversed by affirmative-action policies, of the kind found in the United States.

Their opponents argue that the history of race relations in Brazil is very different, and that such policies risk creating new racial problems. Unlike in the United States, slavery in Brazil never meant segregation. Mixing was the norm, and Brazil had many more free blacks. The result is a spectrum of skin colour rather than a dichotomy.

Few these days still call Brazil a “racial democracy”. As Antonio Riserio, a sociologist from Bahia, put it in a recent book: “It's clear that racism exists in the US. It's clear that racism exists in Brazil. But they are different kinds of racism.” In Brazil, he argues, racism is veiled and shamefaced, not open or institutional. Brazil has never had anything like the Ku Klux Klan, or the ban on interracial marriage imposed in 17 American states until 1967.

Importing American-style affirmative action risks forcing Brazilians to place themselves in strict racial categories rather than somewhere along a spectrum, says Peter Fry, a British-born, naturalised-Brazilian anthropologist. Having worked in southern Africa, he says that Brazil's avoidance of “the crystallising of race as a marker of identity” is a big advantage in creating a democratic society.

But for the proponents of affirmative action, the veiled quality of Brazilian racism explains why racial stratification has been ignored for so long. “In Brazil you have an invisible enemy. Nobody's racist. But when your daughter goes out with a black, things change,” says Ivanir dos Santos, a black activist in Rio de Janeiro. If black and white youths with equal qualifications apply to be a shop assistant in a Rio mall, the white will get the job, he adds.

The debate over affirmative action splits both left and right. The governments of Dilma Rousseff, the president, and of her two predecessors, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Fernando Henrique Cardoso, have all supported such policies. But they have moved cautiously. S[b]o far the main battleground has been in universities. Since 2001 more than 70 public universities have introduced racial admissions quotas. In Rio de Janeiro's state universities, 20% of places are set aside for black students who pass the entrance exam. Another 25% are reserved for a “social quota” of pupils from state schools whose parents' income is less than twice the minimum wage—who are often black. A big federal programme awards grants to black and brown students at private universities.[/b]

These measures are starting to make a difference. Although only 6.3% of black 18- to 24-year-olds were in higher education in 2006, that was double the proportion in 2001, according to IPEA. (The figures for whites were 19.2% in 2006, compared with 14.1% in 2001). “We're very happy, because in the past five years we've placed more blacks in universities than in the previous 500 years,” says Frei David Raimundo dos Santos, a Franciscan friar who runs Educafro, a charity that holds university-entrance classes in poor areas. “Today there's a revolution in Brazil.”

One of its beneficiaries is Carolina Bras da Silva, a young black woman whose mother was a cleaner. As a teenager she lived for a while on the streets of São Paulo. But she is now in her first year of social sciences at Rio's Catholic University, on a full grant. “Some of the other students said ‘What are you doing here?' But it's getting better,” she says. She wants to study law and become a public prosecutor.

Academics from some of Brazil's best universities have led a campaign against quotas. They argue firstly that affirmative action starts with an act of racism: the division of a rainbow nation into arbitrary colour categories. Assigning races in Brazil is not always as easy as the activists claim. In 2007 one of two identical twins who both applied to enter the University of Brasília was classified as black, the other as white. All this risks creating racial resentment. Secondly, opponents say affirmative action undermines equality of opportunity and meritocracy—fragile concepts in Brazil, where privilege, nepotism and contacts have long been routes to advancement.

Proponents of affirmative action say these arguments sanctify an unjust status quo. And formally meritocratic university entrance exams have not guaranteed equality of opportunity. A study by Carlos Antonio Costa Ribeiro, a sociologist at the State University of Rio de Janeiro, found that the factors most closely correlated to attending university are having rich parents and studying in private school.

In practice, many of the fears surrounding university quotas have not been borne out. Though still preliminary, studies tend to show that cotistas, as they are known, have performed academically as well as or better than their peers. That may be because they have replaced weaker “white” students who got in merely because they had the money to prepare for the exam.

Nelson do Valle Silva, a sociologist at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, says that the backlash against quotas would have been even stronger if access to universities were not growing so fast. For now, almost everyone who passes the exam gets in somewhere. It also helps, he says, that many universities have adopted less controversial “social quotas”. Mr Fry agrees that affirmative action has “become a fait accompli”. He attributes the declining resistance to guilt, indifference and the fear of being accused of racism.

The battle for jobs

For black activists, the next target is the labour market. “As a black man, when I go for a job I start from a disadvantage,” says Mr Theodoro. He notes that the United States, which is only 12% black, has a black president and numerous black politicians and millionaires. In Brazil, in contrast, “we have nobody”. That is not quite true: apart from footballers and singers, Brazil has a black supreme-court justice (appointed by Lula) and senior military and police officers. But they are exceptional. Only one of the 38 members of Ms Rousseff's cabinet is black (though ten are women). Stand outside the adjacent headquarters of Petrobras, the state oil company, and the National Development Bank in Rio at lunchtime, and “all the managers are white and the cleaners are black,” says Frei David.

Some private-sector bodies are starting to espouse racial diversity in recruitment. The state and city of Rio de Janeiro have both passed laws reserving 20% of posts in civil-service exams for blacks, though they are yet to be implemented. If unemployment rises from today's record low, job quotas are likely to create even more controversy than university entrance has.

What stands out from a decade of debate about affirmative action is that it is being implemented in a very Brazilian way. Each university has taken its own decisions. The federal government has tried to promote the policy, but not impose it. The supreme court is sitting on three cases addressing racial quotas. Some lawyers suspect it is deliberately dragging its heels in the hope that society can sort the issue out.

Society itself is indeed changing fast. Many of the 30m Brazilians who have left poverty over the past decade are black. Businesses are taking note: many more cosmetics are aimed at blacks, for example. The mix of passengers on internal flights now bears some resemblance to Brazil, rather than Scandinavia. Until recently, the only black actors in television soap operas played maids; now one Globo soap has a black male lead. Much of this might have happened without affirmative action.

The question facing Brazil is whether the best way to repair the legacy of slavery is to give extra rights to darker-skinned Brazilians. Yes, say the government and the black movement. Given the persistence of racial disadvantage that is understandable.

But the approach carries clear risks. Until the invasion of American academic ideas, most Brazilians thought that their country's racial rainbow was among its main assets. They were not wholly wrong. Mr do Valle Silva, a specialist in social mobility, finds that race affects life chances in Brazil but does not determine them. And if positive discrimination becomes permanent, a publicly funded industry of entitlement may grow up to entrench it and to promote divisive racial politics.

There may be better ways to establish genuine equality of opportunity and rights. Brazil has had anti-discrimination legislation since the 1950s. The 1988 constitution made both racial abuse and racism crimes. But there have been relatively few prosecutions. That is partly because of racism in the judiciary. But it is also because judges and prosecutors think the penalties are too harsh: anyone accused of racism must be held in jail both before and after conviction. And in Rio de Janeiro the black movement's preference for affirmative action led the state government to lose interest in measures aimed at attacking racial prejudice, according to a study by Fabiano Dias Monteiro, who ran the state's anti-racist helpline before it was scrapped in 2007.

The hardest task is to change attitudes. Many Brazilians simply assume blacks belong at the bottom of the pile. Supporters of affirmative action are right to say that the country turned its back on the problem. But American-style policies might not be the way to combat Brazil's specific forms of racism. A combination of stronger legal action against discrimination and quotas for social class in higher education to compensate for weak public schools may work better.

here is a video about it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDNJoeSAAb8

here is a video about the twins
http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/wideangle/videobank/brazil_identity.html

Full documentary here. it is very interesting
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/episodes/brazil-in-black-and-white/video-full-episode/2104/

TerryCarr: i seen black in L. America on pbs. he denied it

Who denied what? and in 40:27 the black brazilian he was talking to said different, even the black Brazilian actress high lighted some of that in the documentary I just showed, any way watch these videos because this just shows what most live as second class citizens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZctDfysuhg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj8lP-yg04U&feature=relmfu

The only difference between Brazil and the rest of South America is that they at least admit their black african heritage or connection while some other south american countries refuse to admit the connection.