The pro-Africans really feel the pain of their enslaved ancestors. You are establishing arbitrary thresholds. The Africans were migrating, conquering lands and peoples, the Arabs were migrating conquering lands and the Africans: along came the Europeans and conquered both groups. All three groups were involved in the same type of activity only the proportions are different. God only knows how many millions of Africans were enslaved by the Arabs and Turks. They are not putting up any web sites because they castrated all the males.
The Sidis(African people of India that recently visited their cousins in Zanzibar) and the African Iraquis would disagree with you. They both still exist and sing their ceremonial songs in Swahili. They both are marginalized by poverty and colurism(sound familiar) so the masses of people don't know about them. I've posted about them on this site.
By the way we don't just feel the pain of our ancestors. We are in pain now under oppression and exploitation.
You may not notice but the white people are absorbing the black people in the Americas.
In many places the Black people has disappeared.
This is largely a myth(created by the oppressive elite). The African/Black populations are marginalized by poverty and colourism in their respective countries of location. Although miscegination has occured at a higher rate in Central and South America(much more with the also oppressed indigenous people than with the European ruling elite) the African Black populations are quite visible and distinctly seperated by socio-economic status and physical location. Even in places like Puerto Rico where the miscegination rate is as high as it was(over 80% of the population has some African genetic history) there are still 2 seperate African/Black 'slums'...one being Luiza. I just posted on the African/Black people of Argentinia and Bolivia.
They are been absorbed in United States too. By the complaints that some people make they are really saying the process is not going fast enough.
Are you serious? It's mainlychocolate sities
here!... BTW I noticed you used the term 'they' when referring the African/Black people in the U.S....Are you European/White? Or are you just not located in the U.S.? If you are in the U.S. please point out where this 'absorbtion' of African/Blakc folks is taking place. I would love to know...Have nver seen it myself.
I think you are confusing ignoring African/Black communities with 'absorbing' them.
This issue of Africans circumnavigating the globe keeps coming up.
Let us look at the sequence. Some people came to the Americas from Asia, they establish major population. Then the Africans came, they vanish from the earth. Then the Europeans came, they establish major populations. I do not know why the Africans cannot establish major populations outside of Africa. Why does any body want to build a major theory around something that did not happen? The Africans were in Egypt too, before the Arabs, maybe the same thing happened to them.
You really need to reevaluate your take on history by reading the archives and suggested reading on this site. Your sequencing is way off.
There were hundreds of 40,000 year old African/Australoid skulls found in Brazil, along with rock paintings that depicted the coming of the Asiatics(by these African/Australoids). The African/Astraloid poluations were absorbed by the Asiatics who came in larger numbers and there are some of their genetic offspring living at the Southern tip of South Amerikkka. The Asiatics were 2nd to this land. Then the Mende speaking people came as traders and established the Olmec civilization. they were of smaller numbers than the Asiatics so they also were absorbed. There cultures were also humanist based. So unlike the apartheid regimes set up by Europeans when they have contact with other peoples... Therefore ceating pretty much distinct populations based on a racial hierarchy... They were absorbed. Egypt is Africa genious. The Hyksos invaded, the Persians, the Marmalouks, the Romans, and the Greeks, ect. Blakc Africans were the ones who established and continued to rule through the dynastic period until the Persians(and the bried hyksos period)...I see why we are not agreeing now. Your take on history seems very Eurocentric.
Come now! You find hard to accept that the Indians would have held their own if the white people were fighting with the same weapons systems?
If you study the Indigenous/Native Amerikkkan 'tribal' form of warfare before and under their confederacy...their culture would not permit the genocidal type of warfare that the Europeans performed on them as a people. They never totally dessimated their opponent. Only a few people would be killed because they respected life too much. Usually about 14 people or so. Notive they welcomed and shared the land with the Europeans when they first arrived. Like I said before, culture is a large determining factor in societal behavior.
Now, once they were under full genocidal colonial attack, if they had the same weaponry they would have been more successful in defending themsleves and their land.
Man is only going to cooperate with nature to the degree that he cannot control it. We will not know what is wrong for the relationship with nature until it starts to go wrong.
It has started to go wrong now. People are reacting. Quite likely there will be disasters on earth because of human activity but the industrial societies will be more able to weather the storms and when the smoke has cleared all the pre-industrial peoples would have been swept from the face of the earth. And it will not matter whether it was caused by greed or altruism, love or hate.
I think it will be quite the opposite. In the industrialized nations man is over dependent on technology and when nature has the inevatable result of responding to the horrendous conditions created by it's abuse....It is the people closest to nature that will fair the best.
BTW I think a little Western arrogance has crept into your post at this point. Since African people and other indigenous people have been on this planet for millenia, and their have been rising and falling of empires, kingdoms, civilizations, ect. Wouldn't it be these people that would be practicing the more tried and tested form of life? Western man is often arrogant enough to think he has 'invented' and discovered new things...that his is the highest form of civilization...When actually it is the youngest. Youth and inexperience often breeds arrogance. I think Western man will learn the lessons of our ancestors. If you don't live with nature...it will bite you in the proverbial ass... That lesson will be learned by the youngest group on the earth, sooner than later. The people that still follow the ways of their ancestors will fair much better IMO.
Why is it that people cannot see that the “superiority complex” of Europeans have an historical context. For centuries they were regularly defeating people with fewer men and less resources. They naturally came to the conclusion that they were superior. Europeans now believe that they have a superior culture and they are very busy telling people all over the world that if follow their lead, things will work out. Are there not enough examples of this? The Chinese definitely had a superiority complex before the Europeans beat it out of them, so did the Japanese. The Japanese has since shown the Europeans-and all the rest of humanity-that their industrial prowess is nothing to do with their history, their blood line or their geography.
Notions of superiority are developped out of an inferiority complex...much like the schoolyard bully. I don't expect you to understand that one though.
Honestly...keep reading the site.
I see why we don't agree now.