Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

FROM AN INSIGHTFUL DISPUTE BETWEEN AFRICANS AND AMERICANS ON TWITTER

(Content Warning!!!) (This might be offensive!!!)

This conversation is important. Why? Because we still find disputes between the more developed more rational and scientific, and less developed civilizations – particularly indian, islamic, jewish, and african.

And we still find disputes between the classes: theological-occult-sophistry, marxist-postmodernist-feminist pseudoscience, and those of us in confucian-aristotelian civilizations (science and reason).

While the dispute between Protestant-Catholic-Russian, Chinese, korean-japanese, and even christian pacific is limited to what is in our interest and in our preferences, and in our political organization and social responsibility that is the limit of our variation. We are all aristotelians now. But we have also succeeded at soft eugenics.

So here is the (content warning!!!) dispute between an african referring to ‘african epistemology’ instead of ‘justification for group strategy’. And what I assume are members of the anglosphere explaining european epistemology.

“Whiteness” is the pejorative term used by the african fellow to refer to the group strategy of western civlization.

So “Whiteness” = “Racism” and use of Whiteness ~= A Marxist Critique.

—“WHITENESS: Whiteness questions African epistemology simply because there’s no room in their normative framework to process this! I bet there’s a non-African you know who is an “expert” on African matters.”—

—“Is there ever a scenario in which a white person questioning the thought in your head might do so because the thought itself, regardless of its origin, is nonsensical, unkind, and/or disturbing–in theory?”—

—“No. And even you asking that is whiteness in action because you seem to think that white people can read other people’s thoughts.”—

—“So in your opinion, any thought originating from a white person is automatically invalidated, correct?”—

·

—“That’s not what I’m saying. Understand “whiteness” devoid of race. Whiteness is an ideology of domination. Its diabolical. Its anti- spiritual. Its anti-human. The more need to have it understood, deconstructed and demystified.”—

1) Whiteness = Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism, Empiricism(Science), Reciprocity and Truth Regardless of Cost(Natural Law), Voluntary Markets in association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities(Meritocracy), and suppression of underclass reproduction.

2) Whiteness = Profiting from the domestication of animal man into civilized man using science, natural law, meritocracy, suppression of underclass reproduction, and direction of those savings to the production of the high returns on high trust commons.

3) Whiteness = The fastest means of evolving man into gods we imagine by the use of the most adaptive artistic, intellectual, economic, social political means possible, under the most prosperous, peaceful, and enjoyable means possible.

4) Whiteness = The means by which we dragged mankind kicking and screaming, one civilization and generation at a time, out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, hunger, starvation, disease, suffering, early death, and victimhood under an uncaring universe.

5) Whiteness = Aristocracy, Elitism, Heroism, Excellence, Beauty, Truth, Reciprocity, Duty. And the reason you hate “Whiteness” is because you cannot meet that standard of excellence. It is because your genes cannot lie, like your mind and your words.

6) But here is the test: While only europeans could have invented Whiteness, any people can practice “Whiteness” if they are willing to suppress the reproduction of the underclasses – which for some nations constitutes the vast majority of the people – so it’s politically impossible or impractical.

8) Whiteness is the desire to transcend into gods, and not to devolve into animals again. Whiteness (white man’s burden) was our desire to profit from dragging mankind with us into godhood under the presumption that we could all be equal. But you rejected us – and we agreed.