[Discussion] African Americans are not African | Misclassification

[Loki d]

[video=youtube_share;teP_pv-k3EA]https://youtu.be/teP_pv-k3EA[/video]

Many Indigenous Americans were reclassified as negro, moor, indian, or mulatto especially the dark aborigines of America who had woolly hair. Never were they classified as African. The reason they were given these titles was because they looked like these people. The indigenous people were the first to be enslaved and they were shipped to Europe and Africa.

Moor

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Negroes

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

The Beginning of the Transatlantic Slave Trade was backwards...the indigenous people were being traded. Notice on the posters they have native apparel or tobacco with pipes. The indigenous Americans introduced tobacco to Columbus and Colonist.

Indians

St. Francis of Solana Baptizing Indians

You must be registered for see images

 

[Chikombo]

I don't even think about race, classifiction itself seems racist.

 

[Ciao]

[video=youtube;H4A1haySbx8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4A1haySbx8[/video]

 

[Sagebee]

I don't even think about race, classifiction itself seems racist.

Really the world is too obsessed we need grow up its only skin deep

 

[uhmusddy]

I guess that's a reason why most Africans don't accept black Americans as one of them

 

[Melanin]

Sure a "African American" isn't African if we consider the 9 generations of black people born in America, which is a literal but the majority of "African Americans" have African blood in them.

 

[Avani]

The indigenous people were the first to be enslaved and they were shipped to Europe and Africa.....

..............................
.....................................
...........................................

1)Who was importing and buying these American slaves in Africa?

2) Is your theory also related to

You must be registered for see links

?

The idea you posted is intriguing but you need to back up your post with more reliable source than you tube video or images on a cigar boxes. At least give us something more solid to read or to look up.

About the last image:

Spanish Emperor Philip II requested the Franciscans to send missionaries to preach the Gospel in the Americas. In 1589 Solanus sailed from Spain to the New World, and having landed at Panama, crossed the isthmus and embarked on a vessel that was to convey him to Peru.[1] During the journey, a storm at sea crashed his ship against the rocks not far from Peru. The crew and the passengers abandoned the ship, but Francis stayed with the slaves that were on board. After three days, they were rescued...

You must be registered for see links

Solanus came came with slaves. The ones who converted are painted like this aparantly:

You must be registered for see images

See^ the kind of proof you give without a context is useless.

 

[Ōkami]

Sure a "African American" isn't African if we consider the 9 generations of black people born in America, which is a literal but the majority of "African Americans" have African blood in them.

Ya know you would have a point if European Americans weren't classified as white Americans.

They're black Americans. Done.

 

[Punk Hazard]

All human life come from Africa though

 

[Venomous Cobra]

ikr, these European Americans always wildin tbh

 

[Ōkami]

All human life come from Africa though

So we should all have a giant family reunion.

I'll bring the Deviled eggs.

 

[Melanin]

Ya know you would have a point if European Americans weren't classified as white Americans.

They're black Americans. Done.

Whomp, terrible reply.

In America, white people identify as “white” only in the context of racial distinction. Among themselves, they identify with their ancestral ethnicity (Italian/Irish/German American). Black citizens of the US are called African-Americans because their ancestral roots are in Africa, and because they are obviously not part of the default assumption of "Americans"--the default assumption is Caucasian/white (a common consensus). (2) Unlike white people, since the time of the end of slavery, have been seen by many whites primarily through a racial prism. Since the civil rights movement in particular. (Led by blacks themselves) sought to find appropriate terms that allowed blacks to self-identify. The earliest term was “colored”, which is problematic. Then for a while Negro was the preferred term, which is also problematic. African-American is the terminology that seems most appropriate, given that other ethnic groups in America choose to identify ethnically.

It's really not worth arguing about though because your entitled to categorize what you ackonowlage yourself as being.

 

[To Whatever]

I ain't african.

So i'm not african american.

As far as i'm concerned. I'm black and/or American.


My roots may date back to the motherland but I'm not from there.

 

[Venomous Cobra]

I ain't african.

So i'm not african american.

As far as i'm concerned. I'm black and/or American.


My roots may date back to the motherland but I'm not from there.

That's exactly what an African would say

 

[To Whatever]

That's exactly what an African would say

At the end of the day, it's how you see it and where you're from.

Jamacians aren't black or african american. They're jamacian, regardless of skin tone. There's lighter skin tones in africa, I don't see someone who lineage dates back to areas where people with lighter skin tones being called African American.

Just us, or anyone with a darker skin tone.


This is my opinion of course. I'm not an expert on any of this. It's 2017. You can identify as a god damn gender fluid and be taken seriously. I don't see why identifying as a African American/Black/Dark White/Light skinned makes any difference.

The way I see it. You're human at the end of the day. Hopefully there doesn't come a time where you can be identified as a hippo or some shit...

You must be registered for see images

Edit: Human + your country. I.e Human from America.

 

[Ōkami]

Whomp, terrible reply.

In America, white people identify as “white” only in the context of racial distinction. Among themselves, they identify with their ancestral ethnicity (Italian/Irish/German American). Black citizens of the US are called African-Americans because their ancestral roots are in Africa, and because they are obviously not part of the default assumption of "Americans"--the default assumption is Caucasian/white (a common consensus). (2) Unlike white people, since the time of the end of slavery, have been seen by many whites primarily through a racial prism. Since the civil rights movement in particular. (Led by blacks themselves) sought to find appropriate terms that allowed blacks to self-identify. The earliest term was “colored”, which is problematic. Then for a while Negro was the preferred term, which is also problematic. African-American is the terminology that seems most appropriate, given that other ethnic groups in America choose to identify ethnically.

It's really not worth arguing about though because your entitled to categorize what you ackonowlage yourself as being.

So your whole thing is reduced to you are categorize based on your own acknowledgement. Thus rendering your first post meaningless.

GG bro, your own logic outwits you.

 

[To Whatever]

So your whole thing is reduced to you are categorize based on your own acknowledgement. Thus rendering your first post meaningless.

GG bro, your own logic outwits you.

I'm about to identify as a 35 year old white man from Colorado. it's 2017 I can do it.

[video=youtube;33a5FvqlscY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33a5FvqlscY[/video]

 

[Ōkami]

I'm about to identify as a 35 year old white man from Colorado. it's 2017 I can do it.

[video=youtube;33a5FvqlscY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33a5FvqlscY[/video]

I encourage and support you wholeheartedly my friend.

 

[Loki d]

All human life come from Africa though

That theory has been debunked

..............................
.....................................
...........................................

1)Who was importing and buying these American slaves in Africa?

Africans of course...which ones I don't know

2) Is your theory also related to

You must be registered for see links

?

Nah I have heard about him when it comes to alternative history

The idea you posted is intriguing but you need to back up your post with more reliable source than you tube video or images on a cigar boxes. At least give us something more solid to read or to look up.

About the last image:

You must be registered for see links

Solanus came came with slaves. The ones who converted are painted like this aparantly:

You must be registered for see images

See^ the kind of proof you give without a context is useless.

The guy kneeling in that painting looks to much like the guy with cross and crown in the first painting I posted showing the baptism. I feel like videos would do a better and more efficient job of explaining things.

Christopher Columbus "Origin of the term Indian"
[video=youtube_share;iBbAWNK30-o]https://youtu.be/iBbAWNK30-o[/video]

 

[Loki d]

Sure a "African American" isn't African if we consider the 9 generations of black people born in America, which is a literal but the majority of "African Americans" have African blood in them.

Not really the amount of Africans brought to North America was 300,000 or lower. Only the minority of African Americans have African blood. In 1790 according the demographics there was a black population of 760,000 while the amount of imported Africans by 1790 was only a mere 193,000. Furthermore this was during post 13 colonies time when the United States was just the eastcoast. The "black" population now is above 40 million. You can't get 40 million+ from 300,000 Africans.