The 11 Immutable Laws of the Game of Empires according to commenter Somali Prince (the bolding is mine):
- There will always be a dominant Empire.
- Civilians are not part of the Game. If their Empire wins, they may live a life of tranquility. If their Empire loses, they may face rape, slaughter and pillaging. As such, you must never blame a civilian for its Empire’s actions. They are but pawns.
- If an Empire’s civilians do not believe a war justified, the Empire will ‘find’ the necessary evidence to convince the civilians that it is.
- War is an Empire’s natural state. Peace can only be guaranteed within the confines of the Empire. If you do not wish to play the Game and do not wish to be a victim of the Empire’s machinations, migrate to the Empire’s interior – by any means necessary.
- Only soldiers (who signed up to fight) and politicians (who put their name forward to acquire a position of leadership) are players in the Game. If a civilian is obligated, by law, to fight and he does not wish to be a part of the Game, then he must migrate – by any means necessary.
- Accept the machinations of the Game. Empires will do what Empires do: Empire-building. Do not bemoan it. Bitterness is unbecoming. A victorious Empire dwells little on its past sins. A defeated Empire must also, therefore, dwell little on its past defeats.
- The Game of Empires is governed by the Theory of Chaos and Perpetual-F*ck-Ups. This ensures that an Empire’s dominance is always temporary. Humans make mistakes and have frailties. Accept your own weaknesses. Strong Empires become arrogant and pride always comes before the fall. This theory excludes the possibility of Conspiracy Theories, the Illuminati or a Zionist Agenda. No single group has the ability or the intelligence to effectively control all of the world’s events. F*ck-ups are perpetual.
- Racism belongs to inferior minds. Intelligence and ability are equally distributed amongst all groups. Racism equates to underestimating your enemy.
- Never underestimate your enemy. Always be respectful and courteous to your rival. Accept that you may one day be in his position and that he may one day be in yours. If your enemy is stronger, respect his strength and learn from him as much as you can. If you are to defeat him, you must learn the secrets of his ways.
- The Empire will one day be Black. Bide your time. Do not do anything rash. If you do not expect the Empire to be Black within your lifetime, then work on strengthening your community. Acquire capital and pass on knowledge to your children. Ensure that your children acquire the knowledge of the dominant Empire.
- All Empires commit atrocities. If you want the Empire to be Black, be very careful what you wish for. The conscience of the victim is always cleaner than that of the victor.
Blacks who talk of racism are “victim-blacks”. He, like Whites, is beyond good and evil: he is “super-black”.
Source: Game of Empires blog.
– Abagond, 2015.
See also:
- Broken Records
- related tropes:
- Machiavelli
- Nietzsche
- Sun Tzu
- Booker T Washington
529
His blog has been deleted.
LikeLike
Somali Prince said he was building a website.
LikeLike
We’re his Beta group. A sampling of his intended audiance.
LikeLike
@Abagond
Good and evil exist. My point was, when evil is committed against you, who is there to stand up for you?
If the current Empire is not standing up for you, then who will?
It is a fair point. One that I was discussed with MJB.
I am indeed.
LikeLike
@Everyone
For anyone who wants to read up on it. The Game of Empires is inspired by political realism, famous proponents being people like Niccolò Macchiaveli (who wrote ‘the Prince’).
One of the main concepts is International anarchy.
Empires largely do as they want. There is no central authority above the state.
LikeLike
His #8 is lacking. It is foolish to underestimate racism and the role it plays. After civil rights movement, I believe blacks did just that. They went on with life with the idea that laws would protect them. Highly underestimating racism and allowing it to spread in a more insidious manner. Blacks must be aware of racism and learn to navigate the system regardless of it. Not pretend it does not exist. Being aware and achieving is possible.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Now who is putting up straw men? You are arguing a point I never argued in order to discredit the overall theme.
Since I have spent the majority of my time talking about racism, that would put me in the victim-black category.
Does everyone on this blog have to agree 100% of the time?
Victim-black is when you expect something to be given to you, without any leverage.
How many sins does the Empire have to commit for non-Whites to realise the Empire does not have a conscience? It doesn’t care.
It simply does not care for its past sins. As you have mentioned before Abagond, White people actually think of the ‘other’ very little.
We are barely in the back of their mind. When the murder of Black youths comes onto the news, most Whites just flip the channel.
In order to extract what you want from the Empire, you need sufficient leverage. Thus, my political realism.
Thus the super-black is active, and takes what he wants, regardless of what the Empire might think, the victim-black is passive and waits for the Empire to develop a ‘conscience’.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Sharina
Another ‘straw man’, read it again. I never said you have to underestimate racism. I said you must not underestimate your enemy.
Has no one on this blog read ‘The Art of War’?
@Abagond and @Sharina you have both already made fallacious statements.
Anyone else want to have a go?
@Kiwi?
LikeLike
somaliprince
You could claim straw man had people not seen ithe in your comments. I will quote yout ifor that helps. I thought hypocrite myself, but oddly I believe another poster did call you on it.
LikeLike
somaliprince
Sorry but you are falsely applying straw man here. Perhaps you need to reread what you #8 says (which I was referring to) and then try rereading what I said.
LikeLike
@Sharina
I have defended every point I have been called out on. You have dodged everything, as you are doing now.
You have clearly made use of the ‘straw man’ yet are now washing your hands of it.
LikeLike
FYI I also never said you said to underestimate racism. In an effort to yell straw man you really only engaged in one.
LikeLike
@Sharina
You said: ‘It is foolish to underestimate racism’.
When did I say you should underestimate racism?
LikeLike
@somaliprince
If you call defending every point yelling super black, Somalian prince, deflecting, or engaging in straw men then by all means you have defended your point.
I can dodge plenty when I don’t make claims that need to be defended. You sir are making the claims. I am only pointing at the holes. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
somaliprince
“When did I say you should underestimate racism?”—When did I say you did? Reading comprehension is key. Read it very slowly and it will all be clear.
LikeLike
@Sharina
You just made a claim that needs to be defended.
I am just waiting for the ad hominem. Anyone?
LikeLike
somaliprince
What claim was that? Just because you can’t comprehend something does not mean a claim is being made. Now if you want an ad hominem try another poster.
LikeLike
@Sharina
Did you not write:
You made the direct link between my #8 and underestimating racism. That is as clear an example of the ‘straw man’ as I have ever seen.
@Abagond, also, has made use of the ‘straw man’.
‘Tis but part of the art of debating. You may make use of it. I may call you out on it.
LikeLike
@Sharina
That quote, itself, is an ad hominem.
LikeLike
@Sharina
Try using that sentence in a live debating session and see how the judges react.
LikeLike
somaliprince
Then Mr. Super black I am afraid you don’t know what a straw man is. As I stated reread it slowly and it may become clear. If it is not clear in the next hour or so I may clear it up for you, but until then….screaming strawman and not bothering to let it register is not going to help.
I am not Abagond’s babysitter.
LikeLike
somaliprince
How? You made it clear you don’t comprehend it. Especially if you are asking me to explain.
LikeLike
“Try using that sentence in a live debating session and see how the judges react”—Probably a lot better than you screaming super black and I am a prince.
LikeLike
@Sharina
You stated that ‘underestimating racism is foolish’.
You are attacking a position that I never made.
You purposefully pulled up an argument so that you could easily knock it down.
The only problem being, the argument that you knocked down, I never actually made it.
LikeLike
somaliprince
And again I never claimed it was a claim you were making. I said your # 8 was lacking. Now add that part with the remainder and it should be clear.
LikeLike
@Sharina
Seriously?
And now you are arguing that your first sentence and your second sentence are completely unrelated? Is that how you are trying to get out of it?
So you just impulsively, at random, decided to talk about underestimating racism?
You decided to state that my #8 is lacking and then to completely veer off topic?
LikeLike
@Abagond
Please address your straw man, if not, can you edit the post?
I have written a sentence explaining what ‘victim-black’ is, can you please add that sentence instead?
LikeLike
@Abagond
Can you add this sentence instead:
LikeLike
somaliprince
Where did I say they were unrelated. I stated clear as day. Read them together. I mean is it really that hard to get?
LikeLike
@Sharina
Did you not write:
You made a statement that #8 is lacking.
You then expounded on that by stating: ‘It is foolish to underestimate racism.’
The only problem being, I never even talked about underestimating racism.
LikeLike
It is a decent thesis, although I do not understand the following statement:
Is it saying that to talk about racism is somehow to step outside of morality? That Blacks should just shut up about racism?
LikeLike
@Sharina
I honestly think you just misread my #8. You could have just owned up to it.
LikeLike
@mike4ty4
The statement you are referring to was made by @Abagond. I never made it.
I argue that racism is intrinsic to the current establishment. Because of it, the current Empire is contravening the Laws of the Game and will crumble as a result.
An Empire that respects the Laws of the Game has a higher probability of surviving.
Due the very racist nature of the current Empire, Blacks should seek to destabilise it.
If Blacks want to have their rights recognised, they need to establish a new state. Or, as I call it, a ‘Black Empire’.
I am moving my website to a new address.
LikeLike
@somaliprince
“Did you not write:”—It is pretty obvious I wrote it as I have yet to deny I have. You can move on from repeatedly asking this question.
“You made a statement that #8 is lacking.”—Now what is the definition of lacking?
“You then expounded on that by stating: ‘It is foolish to underestimate racism.’”—No, I don’t. You are so caught up on one sentence that you can’t put the whole thing together to get it yourself.
“The only problem being, I never even talked about underestimating racism.”—Another problem being is I never said you did.
LikeLike
@somaliprince
“I honestly think you just misread my #8. You could have just owned up to it.”—That is not how I work. Also my opinion of your #8 is not based on this post, but things you have said on other posts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Sharina
If you never think I talked about underestimating racism, then you can just make it clear.
Now that that is resolved. We can move on.
The overarching theme is that Empires eventually become arrogant and believe in their tribe’s innate superiority, this leads to pride and eventually to their own downfall.
Treating the ‘other’ as subhuman and underestimating him, is essentially the recipe that has caused many Empires to fall.
The Nazis treated the Jewish as subhuman, they fell.
The Japanese treated the Chinese as subhuman, they fell.
The British became jingoists (‘Britannia rules the waves’), they fell.
Rome was eventually overrun by the very barbarians it looked down upon.
America is currently committing the same mistakes, and will also fall.
Never, ever, underestimate the effects that tribalism – or racism – can have.
An exclusive Empire is one that sets itself up to fall. An inclusive Empire is one that has a better chance of surviving.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@somaliprince
“If you never think I talked about underestimating racism, then you can just make it clear.”—It was clear. Why you did not get it and probably don’t now is beyond me, but trying to make it as if I did not make it clear is pretty pitiful.
I don’t really care about any of that other stuff you are talking. Mainly because you fail to realize to what extent your #8 is lacking (as in deficient or in need of). It does not expand enough in explanation at all. Especially in a civilization where blacks have to regularly deal with it and navigate around it.
You claim racism is for inferior minds and have gone so far as to chastise other commentate for even bring it up. You even state above how “Racism equates to underestimating your enemy.” But learning, knowing, understanding, and seeing it for what it is really only makes blacks aware of it in order to take counter measures to deal with it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m assuming Sun Tzu as well?
LikeLike
While I only chose to focus on #8, most of these leave blacks under-prepared. You can not adequately explain them and when you attempt to it is always with additives and changes from what you originally said. You say one thing here, but other posts so far have you saying other things and it becomes a big unorganized mass of laws that, for lack of a better word, are lacking. There needs to be more and it needs to be clear.
As a final note to #8. blacks will talk about racism and deal with it. The direction should not be to tell them they are inferior for talking or mentioning racism. The goal should be to direct them in how to build upon that to achieve. Instead of allowing it to tear them down. They get enough of being told they are inferior by whites, others, and other blacks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@King
Yes. The majority of the credit goes to Sun Tzu, particularly Law 9.
I studied in China for a while.
I will state all my sources on my new website.
LikeLike
@Sharina
My point is that the current Empire has othered us and that it is in its dying stage. We have to somehow force it into giving us rights.
Better yet, we have to create our own state. Although I agree that this will not happen for a while.
I do not, at any point, argue that protests are a bad thing. If anything, the fear of protests is very powerful leverage.
I subscribe to the idea that an Empire that breaks one of the Laws cannot be suprised if some its inhabitants eventually revolt.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@somaliprince
I get that and that is not something I disagree with, but you are really just dancing around what I am pointing out to you.
LikeLike
@Sharina
It is, honestly, not my intention to dance around. Did you mind stating what you are pointing out to me again?
LikeLike
somaliprince
And I politely ask that you reread it.
LikeLike
@Sharina
It is not talking of racism that I have a problem with, it is the ‘wailing at the moon’ approach.
We have to develop a clear strategy. Those that fall under ‘The White Man is Evil’ trope actually commit a fallacious error themselves.
They continuously point out racism to the White Man and believe that he will eventually develop a conscience. If he is Evil, then why would he ever develop a conscience?
A lot of this blog is centered around telling White People they are evil, but if they are evil, why would they even care?
Surely, that is a rational point to make.
A better standpoint is to view the White Man as a self-serving agent that will, like all other agents, take what he can get away with.
If he can take away from us without impunity, then he will.
We must develop our own tools of leverage to stop the White Man from doing this.
The laws do exactly that. The laws have been used countless times in the past to achieve military victory. If we are to extract what we want from the White Man, we will eventually have to develop military superiority over him.
LikeLike
@Abagond
Do you have an automatic defence mechanism whereby anything you disagree with is classed as ‘Broken Record’.
I never subscribed to any of the following tropes:
Asian Atrocity argument
“Get over it”
White innocence
White paternalism
Accepting the reality that the Current Empire is and always will be racist is not the same as the
trope.
As for the Asian Atrocity argument, when did I state that:
Gratitude never comes into it. We must not be grateful to the White Man for anything, we have to surpass him.
Whites do not know what is best for us. Only we know what is best for us.
White civilians are exactly that, civilians. If we are to develop our own Empire, some may have to bear the consequences. Such is the Game.
I harbour no feelings of hatred towards White civilians. Emotions cloud the rational mind. Bitterness is unbecoming.
Great military leaders accept the machinations of the Game. They sleep easy.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
Exactly, I am glad you picked up on that.
No Empire lasts forever. The only thing leaders can do is to maintain some form of tribal inclusivity (like the Romans had with citizenship) to avoid the Empire crumbling.
Eventually, the Black Empire will become complacent and, ‘fat-of-belly’, will rest on its laurels. Thereby breeding discontent.
But that does not mean the Black Empire cannot last 1,000 years, or 2,000 years.
Would it be better to have a Black Empire that lasts 1,000 years, or to live under a White Empire for another 500 years?
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Kiwi
Because Black leaders may choose to adopt a different system to the current White one.
The Black Empire may have a different form of tribalism. This tribalism usually occurs as a natural extension of persecution.
Many groups are united by their common persecution.
How many groups are united by their persecution at the hands of the White Man?
The tribalism of the new Empire could be based on that shared persecution.
If the White Man is to be inferior under the new Black Empire, then so be it.
He is my rival.
if I must defeat him, I will.
LikeLike
@Abagond
I do not subscribe to the ‘Bootstrap’ trope either – Blacks have historically worked more to build America than any other group.
I subscribe to the Trojan-Horse policy. Or, in other words, ‘deceive to achieve’.
But, of course, when everyone is deceiving, it is hard to tell their true motives.
Perhaps Booker T. Washington had himself read Machiavelli, who knows.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
First of all, it would not be my Empire. I will probably be dead by then.
The tribalism could be anything.
It could be non-white tribalism. Would the term, Non-White Empire be better?
Like I said, all Empires have some form of tribalism.
Would you rather live in an Empire where you are forever other or live in an Empire where your tribe is dominant?
I can only say that it would be better than the current setup.
I often imagine what life would be like if the dominant Empire was not White.
Maybe I am the only one that has these thoughts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
1.”There will always be a dominant Empire.”
True for the moment but it doesn’t have to be that way forever.
We currently have one dominating hierarchy. We have other political hierarchies laying the ground work to challenge the current Western empire.
Historically we have had areas that were Stateless. Ireland never had a king. Prior to the colonial period almost all African nations were polycentric tribal anarchies, which practiced a system of customary law.
So I don’t believe Empires are necessary for civilization to progress and the violence they bring out weighs any benefit actualized to a civilized society.
2. “Civilians are not part of the Game. If their Empire wins, they may live a life of tranquility. If their Empire loses, they may face rape, slaughter and pillaging. As such, you must never blame a civilian for its Empire’s actions. They are but pawns.”
False. Citizens are just as much a part of the Empire as it’s State actors. Civilians have carried out lynching’s, genocide and cheered on State violence.
Are they Pawns ? They can be. Shifting the blame solely to the State doesn’t end racism or oppression towards those of a less dominate tribe. To focus solely on the State takes personal responsibility away from the actions of individuals who oppress their neighbors under the protection of an imaginary social construct. Ending racism and oppression requires a paradigm shift within society in how people view human value.
3. “If an Empire’s civilians do not believe a war justified, the Empire will ‘find’ the necessary evidence to convince the civilians that it is.”
True. Think perpetual terrorist. Remember the Iraq war was about weapons of mass destruction hidden in Iraq. An added bonus to “crisis” is a loss of civil liberties.
4.” War is an Empire’s natural state. Peace can only be guaranteed within the confines of the Empire. If you do not wish to play the Game and do not wish to be a victim of the Empire’s machinations, migrate to the Empire’s interior – by any means necessary.”
“War is an Empire’s natural state.” True. That is the essence of Empire: A monopoly on violence. This statement should be carved over the entrance of every State capital on the planet.
It does not guarantee peace though. Look at Paris, Beirut and Mali. American history is full of atrocity directed at those within the Empire it deemed unworthy of constitutional protection. Even with “civil rights” their is no peace, no justice.
5. “Only soldiers (who signed up to fight) and politicians (who put their name forward to acquire a position of leadership) are players in the Game. If a civilian is obligated, by law, to fight and he does not wish to be a part of the Game, then he must migrate – by any means necessary.”
False. Again deflects responsibility away from the citizens of society that support and benefit from the privileges the Empire offers them.
Where shall a person migrate to when you live in an Omniscient State?
6. “Accept the machinations of the Game. Empires will do what Empires do: Empire-building. Do not bemoan it. Bitterness is unbecoming. A victorious Empire dwells little on its past sins. A defeated Empire must also, therefore, dwell little on its past defeats.”
“Empires will do what Empires do: Empire-building.” That’s true.
Do we have to accept it ? I think not. Change comes when people refuse to die upon their knees. A killer cop got charged with murder in Chicago. That wouldn’t have happened if it hadn’t been for Ferguson and Baltimore.
7. “The Game of Empires is governed by the Theory of Chaos and Perpetual-F*ck-Ups. This ensures that an Empire’s dominance is always temporary. Humans make mistakes and have frailties. Accept your own weaknesses. Strong Empires become arrogant and pride always comes before the fall. This theory excludes the possibility of Conspiracy Theories, the Illuminati or a Zionist Agenda. No single group has the ability or the intelligence to effectively control all of the world’s events. F*ck-ups are perpetual.”
This is neither True nor False because it’s just a bunch of words assembled together to take up space. This is your weakest argument. The line “the Theory of Chaos and Perpetual-F*ck-Ups.” isn’t a catchy phrase that means anything. Your paragraph touches on the symptoms on why Empires may decline but doesn’t actually explain what causes implosion. Instead you point fingers at conspiracies and say “not their”.
8. “Racism belongs to inferior minds. Intelligence and ability are equally distributed amongst all groups. Racism equates to underestimating your enemy.”
The first two lines contradict each other. If racist are stupid and the majority of society is racist then “Intelligence and ability” aren’t equally distributed are they? If you mean that racism is an inferior ideology then that would make more sense. Racism can lead to underestimating your enemy but it doesn’t “equate” anything. Nobody showed up to save the Native Americans here nor did anybody show up to save the Armenians from the Ottoman empire. Their is nothing equal about getting lined up against a wall and shot.
9. “Never underestimate your enemy. Always be respectful and courteous to your rival. Accept that you may one day be in his position and that he may one day be in yours. If your enemy is stronger, respect his strength and learn from him as much as you can. If you are to defeat him, you must learn the secrets of his ways.”
That’s good advise.
10. “The Empire will one day be Black. Bide your time. Do not do anything rash. If you do not expect the Empire to be Black within your lifetime, then work on strengthening your community. Acquire capital and pass on knowledge to your children. Ensure that your children acquire the knowledge of the dominant Empire.”
This is a possibility that requires a post all by itself. What knowledge are you passing onto your children?
11. “All Empires commit atrocities. If you want the Empire to be Black, be very careful what you wish for. The conscience of the victim is always cleaner than that of the victor.”
I believe what comes around goes around.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Ugh .. I had a long response and just lost it. Will have to redo tomorrow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@MJB
I hate it when that happens. I have resorted to writing in Notepad first.
I try to take a positive outlook on it when it happens:
‘Either way, what I re-write will be even better.’
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Kiwi
2,000 years ago, few would have expected Northern Europe to become the dominant Empire. Even fewer would have expected North America to become dominant.
I believe that Africa will become dominant. Not because it is my continent but because of many reasons, mainly related to changing demographics and the vast resources Africa contains.
Africa’s population is booming and soon, the shackles of neo-colonialism will be thrown off.
How powerful will Africa be when it is master of its own resources?
Naturally, I expect the dominant tribe to be Black people, which is why I call it the Black Empire.
When I said Non-White Empire, it was mainly to indulge your argument.
But again, this new Empire may choose to base its tribalism on citizenship (like the Romans) rather than skin colour.
As such, White people may be able to achieve equality (through citizenship).
A tribalism based on citizenship would probably lead to a longer lasting Empire than one based on skin colour.
That will be up to the leaders to determine. I believe that Great Leaders can, indeed, shape the course of history.
I am assuming sarcasm, because I havn’t shown them ‘gushy’ consideration, right?
My point is, if Whites (the current dominant group) – or the Chinese for that matter – resist the creation of a Black Empire, then we will have to obliterate them.
As Sun Tzu and Machiavelli would advocate.
This may indeed precipitate a tribalism based on skin colour. I suppose it depends on how we treat White people once we have defeated them.
If we treat them as subhuman and keep them marginalised, then the Empire will not be long lasting as they will eventually revolt.
If we adopt an inclusive system more akin to the Romans then the Empire may be longer lasting.
I think I understand your point though. If the system is not based on skin-colour then how can it be called the ‘Black Empire’?
I would agree, if the system is inclusive, a better term would be the African Empire.
If the system is not inclusive, a better term would be the Black Empire.
That Empire would be one that follows a similar tribalism to the current White Empire.
But that does not affect my conscience. I would rather be dominant over the White Man than be subjugated by him.
I nevertheless understand the point you are making.
The Black Empire would be as bad the current White Empire.
Yes.
Except we will be the ones at the top (African-descendant peoples, I will be dead).
Whites will not.
LikeLike
@Everyone
I will be absent for about a week or two. Along with my day job, I have a website to build.
A lot of php coding lies ahead.
@Abagond
As a pretty consistent contributor over the last fortnight or so, I hope you will not begrudge my request for a slight modification to your original post?
Particularly with regards to the definitions of victim-black and super-black and the various tropes that I, at no point, have subscribed to.
I nevertheless am very grateful to you for highlighting the ‘Game of Empires’ in such a way.
There will be more to follow.
Au Revoir.
LikeLike
Does rule#1 say that there will always be one single dominant empire?
Or can there be multiple dominant empires operating in different spheres?
(eg, could the Mongol Empire coexist with the Songhay and the Aztecs?)
Also, do these rules come from a single individual’s philosophy or from a school of philosophical thought?
LikeLike
@Kiwi
You suprised me with the eloquence of that post. Have you finally come to regard me as a worthy opponent?
I think your post is worthy of a proper rebuttal, that I can not give you now (perhaps on my website).
But in short, yes, it would be more advantageous to dismantle white supermacy in the West.
But your assumption is that a multiracial Western Empire would not hamper the creation of another multiracial African Empire.
This would contravene the Laws, since all Empires compete for dominance.
If the Western Empire were to become multiracial and dominant, it would still attempt to subjugate all other peoples (Chinese or Africans), as it is currently trying to do.
Western interests have long held back Africa.
And America is currently increasing its military presence in the Pacific.
I do not think that this would change if America were to become multiracial.
But beyond that, have we seen any evidence that America can transform itself into a multiracial Empire?
I think not, some may be more optimistic.
I believe that, as the dominant tribe feels its power becoming ever more threatened (by changing demographics, a weakening economy etc.), it will fight ever more to protect its superiority.
White America will refuse to relinquish control and its racism will intensify.
It will basically spiral out of control and collapse.
Like many Empires before.
Race and the state have become so intricately woven together in America – perhaps more so than any Empire in history.
There are so many historical precedents to prove this (treatment of Blacks, Asian Americans, Japanese Americans etc.) that repeat themselves to this day, I do not see how this can be unwoven without an explosion.
Furthermore, even if the current Empire became multiracial, that does not, by definition, mean that the next Empire (Chinese or African) would adopt a similar structure.
As you rightly pointed out, China has already adopted the ethocentric model (some may dispute this, I would not agree).
One not only based on skin colour but actual racial heritage, in the narrowest sense (Han vs everything else).
In other words, the trend for a continuous succession of tribalistic Empires appears to be continuing.
I have written a lot already, yet I feel I still have not done your post justice.
Forgive me for that, I will elaborate on everything properly on my new website and hope that you may be a frequent contributor.
LikeLiked by 2 people
[…] https://abagond.wordpress.com/2015/11/27/game-of-empires/ […]
LikeLike
@Jefe
There may be many different Empires (as is the case presently), but there is always one more dominant than the other.
I would argue that never has the imbalance between the dominant Empire (White Empire) and all other Empires been so stark.
In other words, never in the history of mankind has there been such a dominant force as the alliance that currently exists between the US, the EU, Oceania and Israel.
They are (more or less) all on the same page.
But I digress.
And I am pressed for time.
Adios.
LikeLike
I often wonder why Egypt lasted so long while Rome destroyed itself so soon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
(trying to find a pensive smiley)
LikeLiked by 1 person
One last point.
The Game is governed by competition between different groups/tribes (in this day and age).
Under Sun Tzu, it was different clans. Under Macchiavelli, it was different families.
Competition is the natural state.
It is when you come to believe that you are innately superior and that you no longer need to compete that you hasten your downfall.
You must always treat your rival with respect.
If you do not, you begin to underestimate him and he will eventually surpass you.
LikeLike
The Machiavellian approach here I think would still mean AAs demanding for their rights but with a different mindset. More or else the way Jews do it in America. For instance, using the law against the police, deliberately setting up black suburbs where they have their own plumbers, teachers, private police and then asking African leaders for recognition (like Haiti, Dominican Republic and Jamaica).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Abagond,
Thank you for posting this. At least we can try to see some method to the madness (although I still don’t agree with some of the assertions). He almost started to appear like a troll or black sockpuppet.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ Kiwi
Since racism is for inferior minds, does it not make more sense to actively dismantle White supremacy in the West than to just passively accept it as the “natural order of things”?
I was just thinking the same.
Putting in other words: what to do before the foreseen collapse of the present Empire?
The prophet of the Empire, aka Somaliprince, has apparently one suggestion: accumulate capital, learn the ways of the present Empire as good as you can and pass the acquired knowledge to your descendants.
I frankly think that Black communities worldwide do or try to do those things already for a long time. Maybe they must intensify or refine their act but they have always tried. So what is missing?
Regarding the attempts to accumulate capital by Black Americans, remember The Black Wall Street. See (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwood,_Tulsa#The_Black_Wall_Street).
The reaction of the present masters of the game in that particular episode, and others similar to it, shows two things:
– that they are not asleep and that you can’t easily do things outside their control without expecting some counter-measures from them;
– that they don’t want you to acquire capital and change your current position in the current society so easily.
The Game of Empires seems to me to be an overarching frame of reference. It doesn’t address apparently the details of how should today’s Black in America and other places, behave, in order to accelerate the coming of a foreseen Black Empire or something similar.
Anyway, remember that today’s human beings are not only a tool to build things to come for future generations, like in the Socialist-Communist narrative. They have expectations for their lives in the here and now, and they should have!
In such a context how should they react to growing White racism and its consequences?
Stand by? I don’t think so!
P.S.:
Somaliprince, your ideas make me remember, the seminal book of Chika Onyeani: The Capitalist Nig**r: The Road to Success, a Spider-Web Doctrine. There he promotes with passion the idea that instead of winning, Blacks, worldwide, should try to accumulate wealth and become capitalists. He adds also that Blacks should try to reinforce their societal connections in spider-nest-like social structures where outside money sinks in and remains there, therefore, contributing to accumulation of capital inside Black communities.
But Onyeani too, doesn’t seem to be aware of the fact that Black communities have always tried to achieve that!
I must recognize that you, Somaliprince, are the first in this blog – so far I know – that sees clearly the pivotal role of the African continent in any worldwide Black Renaissance. The potential of Africa is oft overlooked here despite encouraging signs that different economists already see in its current development trends.
LikeLiked by 4 people
@ Somali Prince
When I get time later today, I will read through all the comments and answer them.
In the meantime, know that this was not a guest post. That means you do not get to determine its contents.
I limit my posts to 500 words and your rules are very nearly that. So I had little room for my own commentary. I was limited to the last two sentences and the See Also section.
I am not saying you agree with everything in the See Also section. I doubt one could completely agree with both Machiavelli and Booker T. Washington at the same time, for example. But both have said things that are like what you are saying. The “related tropes” are more riddled with White fragility than what you are saying, but have some of the same flawed reasoning.
I think it goes without saying that I am not going to agree with everything you say. That is why there is a comment section.
From what I have skimmed, I do not think we disagree on what “victim-black” and “super-black” mean, just on the implications. I tried to express that in those last two sentences. I will expand on it in a later comment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Somali Prince
A Broken Record is an argument that comes up so often it deserves a post of its own. From a blog administration point of view, it makes more sense for it to be debated in one place than for it to be endlessly half debated over and over again on other threads.
LikeLike
Interesting stuff. One question: Can the term “empire” be differentiated from general “rule”?
Rule 2-4 don’t seem plausible to me. I think history shows that any kind of rule, empire or not, is carefully negotiated with the ruled. Perhaps with the exception of the most violent communist and colonial regimes like the USSR under Stalin or Belgish Congo
LikeLike
@Kiwi
It seems like the Chinese Empire conquered enough land then became content. They came to Africa but did not cause bloodshed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Most Middle Eastern and European empires expand for no reason other than for sport.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ somaliprince
“A better standpoint is to view the White Man as a self-serving agent that will, like all other agents, take what he can get away with.”—-Still yet from this very standpoint, it puts people in the position of hoping the white man will have a conscience. I believe even more so than racism, because most people believe a self-serving person can be swayed by simply showing him the error of his ways through pictures, song, or dance.
Racism on the other hand prepares blacks for what it looks like. It can go further into how to deal with it, but for the most part blacks need to know it when they see it or deal with it. One of the things I notice when racism became more visible to modern day blacks is many were in shock and awe. Many thought it would pass. Many allowed it to get them in a funk. Very few hand an understand of it enough to not allow it to put them in that position of self defeat. Old cats knew what it was and were in better positions to deal and fight. Even now we have too many young cats out here claiming the white mans song of “Racism will disappear if we stop talking about it.” They are not in a position to build an empire and won’t be because they are uneducated on racism and the need to build anything for themselves. They may build, but always for the convenience of the white empire and nothing more.
“The laws do exactly that.”—To an extent. As I said and I see others have pointed out, it is lacking. There are flaws that have to be polished. We can not afford to half-step.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ villagewriter
I think it is fallacious to think of Ancient Egypt as one empire. I’s sy it is a series of empires that happened to exist in the same place, but with very different inner structure.
@ Kiwi
I think your explanation of the dissolvement of the Roman empire is outdated. Now it is believed that the empire wasn’t overcome by militry onslaught, but that the instituional weakening invited the invasions. Also your approach doesn’t explain why the Roman Empire expereinced a pretty long period of relative peace between its expansionist and dissolvement phase.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@Kartfortel
Fair enough but either way the Egyptian civilization lasted a long time; longer than the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire itself had its own problems with generals always trying to get unlimited power and senators enriching themselves.
LikeLiked by 1 person
True, but it doesn’t explain the dissolvement. These problems have always existed in the Roman Empire.
That Ancient Egypt was such an impressive civilization compared to its contempories for a long time, has imo a a pretty straightforward explanation: The Nile valley is naturally one of the best-suited places for agriculture in the world. The Western mediterrean had to be cultivated for centuries until it could support a civiliztion that could rival Egypt or Mesopotamia.
LikeLike
Despite the fact that Somali Prince comes off a bit abrasive, I think his thesis is good from a strategic perspective. My problem lies with the assumption that imperialism is the natural order of the world and is the only/best way to organize societies. Africans have not historically been imperialists. We have always have tribal conflicts, but nothing even close to Western imperial wars. Not that I’m romanticizing African people, but history just does not support the notion that Africans are naturally inclined to want to dominate others. If imperialism is the current state of affairs, it’s not because we made it so.
The majority of the people I know who are interested in African liberation are not talking about building empires, but nation-building. We just want to be left alone to be free to determine our own fates. I know I’m not only speaking for myself when I say that I have no interest in being a part of an empire that subjugates and oppresses others. Why would the goal be to become the very thing you’re fighting against?
@somaliprince
Do you spend as much time studying the African scholars as you do reading about about the Europeans and Chinese, since you’re a prince, a Somali one at that? Don’t you think that some of the knowledge that we are passing on to future generations of African children should be about their own culture?
We don’t need to spend all of our energy learning the ways of our oppressors (or rivals, as you would call them). Most of us have been learning this our whole lives through experience – unless the lived experience of African peoples does not count as knowledge to you?
LikeLiked by 4 people
Also, Africa happens to be the breadbasket of the entire world. There would be no need for imperialism if Africans controlled their own land and resources. Everything we need is there; no need to “extract tributes” from anybody else. Hence the reason we never historically engaged in imperial wars.
LikeLiked by 3 people
so litigious this is not a guest post it’s better than how he reacted to xpraetorius ‘s-itting up my threads’
i’m not convinced of the 11 laws of empire
LikeLike
Somali Prince, Please look at the article below and tell me what you make of it? The discussion on your ideas is getting absurdly abstract. I hate to say it, but you don’t look Somali to me. Which part of Somalia are you from?
Sino-Zim relations: A peek into the future
November 27, 2015
Phyllis Johnson Correspondent
Africa and China have agreed to strengthen co-operation in international affairs through mutual respect for the UN Charter, the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence, the Constitutive Act of the African Union and other universally recognised norms governing international relations.
Africa has an agenda – Agenda 2063 The Africa We Want – developed by the African Union in consultation with all formations of African society.
Agenda 2063 has a 50-year horizon with five 10-year implementation plans that cover 2013-2063, founded on the African Union vision of “an integrated, prosperous and peaceful Africa, driven by its own citizens and representing a dynamic force in the international arena”.
Agenda 2063 was adopted in January 2015 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, by the 24th African Union (AU) Assembly of Heads of State and Government as a shared strategic framework for inclusive growth and sustainable development.
This aspires to an Africa that is integrated, united, peaceful, sovereign, independent, confident and self-reliant; with world class, integrative infrastructure that crosses the continent; seamless borders and management of cross-border resources through dialogue; and dynamic links with the African Diaspora.
The plan for Agenda 2063 notes that it will not happen spontaneously, but requires “conscious and deliberate efforts to nurture a transformative leadership that will drive the agenda and defend Africa’s interests”.
Each region and country has a plan that contributes to the vision. The AU has its first 10-year plan 2013-2023. SADC has its 15-year Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan.
Zimbabwe has the Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic Transformation (ZIM-ASSET) 2013-2018 for “an empowered society and a growing economy”.
The African Agenda 2063 predicts that African countries will be among the best performers in the global “quality of life” measures by that date.
“This will be attained through strategies for inclusive growth, job creation, increasing agricultural production, investments in science, technology, research and innovation; gender equality, youth empowerment and the provision of basic services including health, nutrition, education, shelter, water and sanitation.
“Africa’s collective GDP will be proportionate to her share of the world’s population and natural resource endowments.”
Just as China has helped the African Union to construct its new headquarters for the 21st century so too is China providing support and investment to advance the African vision for a connected and prosperous continent.
Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, Chinese leaders have attached great importance to the relations between China and Africa, and have worked out a series of principles and policies for the development of China-Africa relations.
In 1996, the Chinese government put forward a five-point strategy for a long-term relationship with Africa that is the foundation of China’s Africa policy.
“Whatever change may take place in the world, our policy of supporting Africa’s economic and social development will not change.”
China announced plans in 2003 to shape this partnership based on long-term stability, equality and mutual benefit, stressing that there is no intention to impose ideology, social system or mode of development.
The Chinese and African leaders who met in Beijing in 2006 at the first Summit of the Forum on China Africa Co-operation (FOCAC) proclaimed a new type of strategic partnership.
The Beijing Action Plan that emerged from that Summit provided the roadmap for 21st century relations, including political and economic co-operation, as well as co-operation in international affairs, social development, human resources, education and health, environmental protection, tourism, culture, media, and people-to-people exchanges.
The 2007-2009 Action Plan gave priority to infrastructure, notably for transportation, telecommunications, water conservancy and power generation. China also pledged to expand co-operation with Africa’s financial institutions.
Africa and China agreed to strengthen co-operation in international affairs through mutual respect for the UN Charter, the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence, the Constitutive Act of the African Union and other universally recognised norms governing international relations.
As the FOCAC, founded in 2000, had emerged as an important platform for collective dialogue and an effective mechanism for co-operation, the leaders decided to strengthen its role.
The Sharm el-Sheikh Action Plan 2010-2012 focused on trade, agriculture, infrastructure, climate change and social welfare, among other issues approved at the fourth ministerial FOCAC held in Egypt in 2009.
China pledged to further open its market to African products, and to build clean energy power stations to increase the uptake of solar power, biogas and small hydropower, set targets for road and rail construction, and increase agricultural technology demonstration centres, teams and training.
By 2012, the scholarships for African students to study in China had passed 5 000 and teaching training had reached 20 000, as well as provision of medical equipment and materials, and training of 3 000 doctors and nurses.
FOCAC also pledged to establish a China-Africa partnership in addressing climate change, and to launch a joint science and technology partnership.
The fifth FOCAC ministerial conference held in Beijing in 2012 reviewed the targets, expressed satisfaction with implementation, and set new targets for further expansion of co-operation, including peace and security, and for the first time, reference to a regional dimension.
China provides technical and material support to the Africa Standby Force, and also has the largest number of UN peacekeepers in African countries.
The second full Summit of FOCAC and the sixth ministerial conference, to be hosted by South Africa in Johannesburg on December 3-5 2015, will be a milestone in China-Africa relations, through consolidating and institutionalising some of the structures to strengthen and accelerate this co-operation, based on the aspirations of Africa and China.
The African aspirations are expressed in Agenda 2063 and the Chinese vision was presented in a new policy framework announced by President Xi Jinping in March 2015, titled “Visions and Actions on Jointly Building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st Century Maritime Silk Road”.
Collectively known as “Belt and Road”, this is a development policy with a holistic vision of economic, political and security development to reach out and initiate action to jointly build a new world order that is development-oriented, with mutual prosperity as its goal, and human security at its heart.
The initiative will establish new routes linking Asia, Africa and Europe. It has two parts — a new “Silk Road Economic Belt” linking China to Europe through Central Asia; and the “maritime Silk Road” that links China’s ports with the African coast and through Suez to Europe.
China’s vision for the overland Silk Road Economic Belt, and the Maritime Silk Road by sea is expected to change the world political and economic landscape through rapid development of infrastructure and transport corridors of countries along the routes, and the emphasis is on “joint”.
While China is establishing mechanisms for financing, such as the Asian Infrastructure Development Bank which attracted large-scale investments from Europe, and the New Development Bank established by Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) countries, recipient countries are expected to grasp the vision and contribute to development in their own country and region.
This article from the Southern African Research and Documentation Centre (SARDC) through its Institute for China-Africa Studies in Southern Africa, is part of a series exploring the dimensions of China Africa relations in advance of the FOCAC Summit to be held in Johannesburg in early December. http://www.sardc.net
LikeLiked by 2 people
Instead of all the blather about “race”, “racism” and whatnot, how about discussing Agenda 2063 The Africa We Want?
http://www.sardc.net/en/
http://agenda2063.au.int/
LikeLike
@gro jo
Now that is the gro jo I like to see. Thanks for the links. I was not aware of it and it should be an interesting read.
LikeLike
v8driver
The plan has its merit. I will not ignore than, but more can be said and done.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indignant
I appreciate your comments because it speaks to the heart of how I feel.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Abagond for posting the laws. I was searching for them so that I could better understand the points that the SomaliPrince was actually trying to make the other day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I read in many places and saw documentaries that if the world runs out of enough oil, without sufficient alternative energy sources, that the globalized economy would have to become a lot more local. Sprawling suburbs will have to cluster into denser communities with open space in between so that people can get what they need on foot or without oil based transportation. The clustered communities will have to produce their own food and daily needs.
The imperialism impetus is more about energy than other resources, but what if cheap energy is suddenly not available?
What impact would that have on the scramble for water?
LikeLike
sharinalr, You know I only come here to please you. 😉
LikeLike
@Gro Jo
The guy on Somali Prince’s profile is the president of Somalia. Somalis don’t have one look, just like other Africans from different ethnic groups do not look the same. I can actually tell (75% accurate) which ethnic group someone is from by just looking at them.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sorry abagond i be talkin smack all this academic crap and you know life goes on in all its tawdry presence i need to find some practical grounding. And btw power is a vaccuum a thing to itself … i think dostoevsky did this with raskolnikov ciao fer now
LikeLike
@ Kiwi
America does the same thing today as the world police and has been keeping the peace since it became a superpower after World War II.
My vision of the world after Word War II is slightly different. The world became then effectively divided in 2 main spheres of influence: the capitalist bloc (with the USA as its leader) and the soviet bloc (with Russia as its leader).
Peace was maintained essentially because both blocs were assured of mutual destruction in case an open war broke up, therefore they restrained themselves of open hostilities. Both were polices of the world, each in its own sphere.
In fact, to have a more complete description of the world after World War II we must add that, after a while, a third loose bloc of countries appeared, who tried or pretended to be independent of the two main blocs. It was called the bloc of Non-Aligned Countries. This bloc was filled mainly of so-called Third World or Developing Countries. The only open hostilities at that time could only occur in those countries and were often proxy wars were the belligerent parties counted on the help of the two dominant blocs to advance their opposite positions.
After the collapse of the soviet bloc many people came to discount the influence of Russia at world stage and see the USA as the only military superpower.
I don’t subscribe to this point of view. Clearly Russia was and remains a military superpower. The only one that USA can really respect as almost equal.
I see almost everything that happened after World War II until now as a series of metamorphosis of the same Great White Schism: the division of White Power in two competing and irreconcilable White Powers – one centered in North America and the other centered in Russia.
This division left its mark in everything and is part of the explanation of almost all geopolitical changes that happened until now and continuing. This is the real Game of Empires that is overlooked in this thread but remains the essence of the world of today. Let’s see:
– the rise of Japan after World War II; oft attributed to some specific idiosyncrasies of the Japanese people (“they are very intelligent and have a very strong work ethic”); in fact, Japan reconstructed and developed rapidly because the USA wanted to encircle Russia (or the Soviet Union) with a showcase of the triumphant capitalism nearby and therefore helped Japan in many ways (think about the Marshall Plan); here the USA empire scored “one” point;
– the rise of Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore (the Asian tigers); similar analysis to the one about Japan; here the USA empire scored more “three” points;
– the development of West Germany; idem; “one” point more for the USA;
– the fall of the Baptistas in Cuba and the establishment of Castro regime; here the soviet empire scored “one” point;
– the dismantling of the Portuguese (and other similar) colonial empire and the rise of nationalistic and leftist regimes in Mozambique, Angola etc; the soviet bloc scored here “one” more point;
– the fall in a domino-like fashion of all “white minority regimes” in Southern Africa (Rhodesia turned Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa); the soviet bloc scored “one” more point here;
– the came to power of Salvador Allende in the beginning of the seventies; “one” point for the soviet bloc;…
-… followed by the Pinochet coup d’etat that installed a fascist-like dictatorship in that country; a “one” point for the USA;
– the recent economic rise of China; “one” point for the USA empire; because one of the leading goals of this empire is to reduce to a minimum the network o former alliances of Russia; attracting China to the capitalist bloc, even if contradictory, aims at weakening the global influence of Russia;
– Ukraine turned recently in a playground for both empires to dispute and score or loose points;
– Middle East disputes, in particular the Syrian war is one more showcase of this uncompromising confrontation of these two empires as is clear for everybody
– and much, much more!
So we live in a world today where there are two global powers engaged in a Game of Empires. Both are White Powers and therefore, those empires cannot be seen strictly as racial based despite the fact that in their interior you can see manifestations of racism, here and there. Because these empires are both White they can oft run in help of a “colored race” ally to score points against the opposite empire as the above examples amply illustrate.
Being a citizen of Southern African country that became independent from colonialism thanks to the help – a real muscled help! – of the soviet bloc, I do not tend to see the world essentially in racial terms. As colonial subjects we thought – in our limited understanding of the world – in terms of a racially hierarchical world with Whites on top ruling in harmony all societies and also the relations between nations. The onset of the anti-colonial war with the soviets backing up the nationalistic Black African guerrillas against the White colonialists shook our understanding forever. Were not the soviets Whites like the Portuguese colonial masters? How could it be that they could give weapons to Blacks to shed White blood?
We began to realize that the almighty worldwide White Power was deeply divided in its core and this – Great White Schism – gave the people of color worldwide opportunities to grow and become strong themselves.
My White acquaintances at that time could confess to me their hate of the soviets: they too could not understand that Whites (the soviets) could give weapons to “murderous” guerrillas bent (in their narrative) on killing White women and children (sic). They were deeply anti-communist.
The main lesson of the above lines is that people of color must realize that Whites are divided and exploiting this division is their chance for them to further their own objectives in a world still dominated by White Power. I would call it: to exploit the fractures inside the Game of Empires.
P.S.:
Possible translation for next USA elections – choose Clinton or Sanders to assure that the main Republican candidate looses and with him a possible rise in racist tendencies in the society at large.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Kiwi
Ok, now I got your point. I agree that the military went from the pillar of Roman rule to its gretest threat. But I wouldn’t tie the crisis in the 3rd century directly to the end of the Empire. They did bounce back quite successfully in the 4th. I think the moment of fate was in the late 4th century when they decided to allow Germani not just as soldiers within the Roman hierarchy, but mad Germanic leaders generals who led their personal troops outside of it.
LikeLike
@Munubantu
Nice summary. It made me more curious about Soviet contribution to independence in Africa. But on racism, I am afraid I have to disagree with you. Let me explain. You seem to insinuate that racism is not a major tool in the game of empires and to prove your point you give the example of Russia giving arms to Africans to kill other white people. Of course, the British and the Germans did give arms to Africans to kill the British and the Germans (many Africans who fought in Tanzania and Kenya for the British and the Germans realized that white people could bleed). Fair enough.
But realize that racism is not really about skin color; its just an easy way to rally people together to steal from others. Its a way to maintain power without having to use the military-a cheap effective way actually. That is the reason why the European Union was formed to maintain white hegemony. The Elite in Europe steal from white people but when white people complain they are told its the Muslims, it black people, it the Asians. So, the poor white guys take a lot of time to form racist movements to scare away black people and other brown people.
Racism is a major tool for controlling people and ignoring it even a little is not wise. Tell me Munubantu where do all the white people in Mozambique live, which schools do they take their children to, and how much do they contribute to the development of Mozambique at home and abroad. We have descendants of colonialists here with large tracts of land and they are as racist as the South African Boers. Richard Leakey (a Kenyan white man) called his own relatives racist and snobbish. Here is an article that describes the white people in Kenya http://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/oct/26/kenya.chrismcgreal
LikeLiked by 3 people
@Munubantu
Quote from Richard Leakey about the descendants of colonists who remained in Kenya after independence:
“These people bore me stiff and I’m not part of that set at all,” he says. “Some of them are pretty racist people deep down. They don’t mix and have very negative attitudes to their fellow Kenyans. I keep them at arm’s length and I find them offensive.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
villagewriter, thanks for the information.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Everyone
I will be back to respond to everyone properly in time. Quick commentary in the meantime.
@MJB – #7 is actually my favourite, I will explain why.
@Kiwi – We have unfinished business.
@Sharina – I agree, more polishing needs to be done.
@Munubantu – Your Russian analysis is an interesting one. I am actually very interested in the way Russia has chosen to play the Game in the post-Soviet era. This all came to a head with the coup in Ukraine 2 years ago. Putin’s subsequent actions were very revealing.
@gro jo – Very informative read. You make some good points, that I will address.
Also, the individual in my profile picture is not me. I am much better looking. Abagond, so far, is the only one to have guessed correctly who the person is (he is a great player of the Game).
@Indignant – Two very powerful posts. I think you were already aware of how I would respond when you wrote them. Your criticism is very valid. It could be said that I am advocating African Imperialism which, in itself, is un-African.
We therefore rush headlong into the whole Idealism/Realism debate. I think you therefore know already what my answers will be.
@villagewriter – Yes. Very much Yes. When you wrote ‘But realize that racism is not really about skin colour; it is just an easy way to rally people together to steal from others.’
This is a point Kiwi, Abagond and I became stuck on. I have decided to use the term ‘tribalism’ henceforth, for fear of falling into the same debate.
I basically believe that you can have different forms of tribalism, one based on skin colour (America), one based on citizenship (Rome), one based on racial purity (Nazis), one based on religion (ISIS) etc.
I believe an analogy might be useful:
(The Art of War is often used in business.)
When you start a company, it might just be you and a co-founder. You both therefore own 50% of the company and are the only shareholders.
Your tribe is ‘shareholder’. You sit on the board of directors and call all the shots.
As the company grows and grows, you can choose whether you eventually reward long term employees by giving them a seat on the board of directors and a slice of the ownership.
Or you can choose not to.
The Laws would advocate that you eventually should.
If you don’t – and you have, say, 100 employees – these employees will grow increasingly dissatisfied at the fact that they are doing all the work and you are receiving all the profits.
My argument is that America has refused to award anyone else a seat at the table.
Kiwi’s argument could be paraphrased as being: Eventually they will. My argument could be paraphrased as being: They never will.
I hope that somehow clarifies the debate.
More to follow.
LikeLike
@gro jo
Flattering, but no. I believe in a few reasons why you come, but not for me.
LikeLike
I admit I suffer from the hysteria of “White Supremacy”. Just watching a Navy Seal guy on CNN talk about protecting Western Culture from Isis scum bastards just the other day and I immediately decode it to protecting white people and culture only, fuck everybody else that don’t follow under this statute. It’s a problem that’s hindered my life know that’s what America and every other colonized country, all of Latin America, Australia, NZ, and South Africa is what really is about. I do undo this thinking and live a normal life?
LikeLike
@ Somali Prince
How Whitecentric of you. I notice you see Black Americans through a grievance industry model. Peel away your Somali Prince shtick and you are little different than some old White guy saying, “Quite whining and get a job.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
@ Somali Prince
I do remember you scolding Merrimay for not being grateful enough.
LikeLike
@ Somali Prince
I think most people here already know that. Which is why, when you say it, it comes off as if you are defending White people, excusing their actions. You did that on the New York Times thread.
LikeLike
@ Somali Prince
I agree with Kiwi: your argument does not point to a Black Empire as the answer. That would just be more of the same. I think it points to world government, where each nation gives up some of its power for the sake of greater security. Like the states in the US.
LikeLike
@Somali Prince
I often tell South Africans(the ones I encounter online) not to entertain the Boers but they naively believe that there is nothing Boers can do to them. i hope not all South Africans trust Boers -especially the farmers. They are collaborators with the empire and sooner or later will cause terror in SA.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Somali Prince
So when we do, then what? Seize control of Mississippi?
Black Americans live in a society where they are outnumbered. And there is no Africa for them to “go back” to. Their future is in the US, for good or for ill. Black rule of the US would only recreate the same evils. Only the colours would be changed.
You keep saying racism is for inferior minds, yet you keep buying into its mindset.
LikeLike
@ Somali Prince
#3 contradicts #2: if civilians are not part of the game, if they are helpless innocents, why do they have to be persuaded of anything?
LikeLike
Kiwi said:
Exactly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Abagond
I have read most of your responses and will get to them in time.
I stumbled upon this blog following the Paris attacks.
As @MJB correctly called me out on, I initially underestimated the rhetoric on this blog and started out quite arrogant.
(For newcomers, it actually takes a while to figure out what is going on.)
On the Paris article, I initially read @Jade’s relatively innocuous comment and @Merrimay’s somewhat unwarranted attack on her.
From what I remember, @Jade made a call to arms for a multiracial society, the same thing that you and @Kiwi are now arguing for.
Yet @Merrimay shot her down.
I perhaps then went too hard on @Merrimay myself.
@Merrimay, if you are reading, my apologies.
LikeLike
Aah, such modesty, how charming!
somaliprince, I’m glad to read that you’ll give some thought to the article I posted. I hope you’ll compare and contrast the proposed “21st Century Maritime Silk Road” and its predecessor that existed as early as 800AD if not earlier and lasted until the 1500s.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2015-03/28/c_134105858_5.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road#Southern_route
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Indignant
Excellent comment!
LikeLiked by 1 person
@villagewriter
&
I find it interesting how sometimes black people are more optimistic than white people.
A lot of white people, who have firsthand experience of other white people, will openly say, as your quote highlights, just how pervasive racism (colour-based tribalism) is in the current Empire.
This is something that I brought up with @Jefe.
African peoples, even Chinese peoples (Sichuan, Hebei, Guangdong, Urumqi etc), often seem to me to be a lot more diverse.
There’s this strange ethereal mindset within the White Empire where, although there are different languages, they all seem to be on the same page.
Like within the European Union.
The EU is actually becoming more predatory and callous.
The French tried to distance themselves from the Americans under Chirac.
Since Sarkozy, they have been openly embracing them.
EU nations were quick to gang up on Kadafi. A massive suprise to the Kadafi regime, since they had donated money to Sarkozy’s campaign and Blair did the whole ‘handshake’ thing.
Futhermore, everyone now is jumping on board with the plan to bomb Syria. The UK is offering the use of its bases to show ‘solidarity’.
If the EU decides to develop its own military and develop into a modern day Roman Empire (as Boris Johnson alluded to), White Imperialism (or neo-colonialism) could actually worsen.
LikeLike
@ gro jo
Somali Prince’s avatar is a picture of Somali president Sharif Sheikh Ahmed:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharif_Sheikh_Ahmed
The Wikipedia says he was born in the southern Shabeellaha Dhexe region of Somalia.
LikeLike
@Everyone
In the 48 Laws of Power, it also states that when you crush your enemy, you should crush him totally.
LikeLike
Forgot the link: (http://48laws-of-power.blogspot.ie/2011/05/law-15-crush-your-enemy-totally.html)
LikeLike
@Abagond
@Kiwi picked up on the initial inevitable conclusion of the Machiavellian mindset. Every Empire is as bad as the one before it, so what is the point of having a Black Empire?
And you’ve picked up on the second inevitable conclusion that many political realists (and others) have argued for:
World Government.
The laws do not exclude a World Government. In fact, many have argued it is the only way to have perpetual peace (Immanuel Kant, for instance).
But I don’t want to stray too far off into hyperbole. @Grojo has rightly tried to pull me back down to earth.
LikeLike
@ mike4ty4 @ Somali Prince
I said:
What I mean by this is that Somali Prince has framed the world so that morality, good and evil, do not apply to White people:
– civilians are helpless innocents, while
– soldiers and politicians are merely “playing the Game”, a Social Darwinnian game of survival of the fittest, of kill or be killed.
So neither can be blamed. They are beyond good and evil.
In his world model, morality only has meaning if there is someone who can give it effect, who can be appealed to to punish those who do wrong.
That means there is no morality between empires – because there is no higher power to appeal to. And within empires, the empire itself is that higher power.
Therefore morality, good and evil, is not independent of power. At best, it is just a sugar-coating applied to the stick of power.
That means when Blacks talk of racism they are “wailing at the moon”. Because, he thinks, they are doing little more than making a moral appeal to the Empire, one that is empty and pointless because they do not have the power to back it up. They are the “victim blacks”.
Somali Prince, meanwhile, is beyond racism, beyond “New Black”. He is “super black”: he has joined Whites in that space beyond good and evil that he has thoughtfully created for them.
So, at bottom, this is little more than a “might makes right” argument. Which, in this period of history, means “White is right” – even when it comes to what he tells us and what he would have us tell our children and grandchildren. The main thing wrong with Black people is that they are not “White” enough, not imperialistic, Machiavellian and deceitful enough.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dam Abagond,
you nailed it so completely! — that your words are worth repeating:
this sounds like the most reasonable explanation to explain his persona
(because he sounds like a white American)
LikeLike
And your objection to that claim is based on what? There’s nothing ‘white’ about wielding power, Thucydides, Sun Tzu, Chan Akya and Machiavelli teach basically the same thing, if you want respect you have to be willing to fight for it because, as , Thucydides wrote: “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”. World Government and a federal state like the USA would operate on the same premise. My favorite example is Lincoln’s Roach Motel view of the American union, once you check in you don’t check out, as the Southern States learned to their chagrin. Yes, it is a flaw to be weak, if Blacks want to quit singing the Blues, they must make the necessary changes, nobody will do it for them. They should apprentice to the Chinese for as long as it is in their advantage, all the while making preparations for the day when their interests diverge from those of that ally. To put it succinctly, no permanent friend and no permanent enemy.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ somaliprince – Is there any consideration for the deontological responsibilities required to sustain any long-term empire? Does religion come into play at all?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@grojo
Exactly.
One of my arguments is that White people are largely currently dominant by chance, not due to any innate superiority. Something touched upon by Jared Diamond.
Power has been wielded by many different peoples. Nothing excludes Africans from wielding it.
@Abagond
Again, you have carefully reworded my argument so that I sound like an apologist.
My argument has been that morality only exists within the state. White people have created their own state and, therefore, their own morality.
They decide what is good and bad. A white person getting shot is very bad. A black person isn’t.
Their morality is just another form of oppression.
Have we seen any evidence to disprove this?
You are making an appeal to their morality, one that Blacks, Native Americans etc. have been excluded from.
Also, since I am technically advocating the military destruction of the White establishment, I do not believe I have been thoughtful in any way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ gro jo – Do you think that the Chinese plan to build a naval installation in Djibouti is at any point in the best interest of Africa or is it attempt to exploit Africa as part of China’s new empire?
LikeLiked by 3 people
How about providing a link showing that the Chinese are indeed building such naval installation? https://www.rt.com/news/323621-china-first-overseas-base/
The Chinese are the biggest investors in Africa, they will do what they can to protect their investments. The US already has a base in Djibouti. Djibouti needs to evaluate whether hosting militaryforces of other nations is wise.
LikeLike
@Kiwi,
Loewen seems to feel that the South’s succession before the Civil War was in respect of slavery and for economic reasons other than tariffs and taxes. I don’t know the full details (still have to read them), but it deserves some more research.
He wrote the following Washington Post article in July about how all the border states (eg, Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland) did not secede from the Union despite being slave-holding states, but nearly all the historical markers found there today are all pro-Confederate (even some found in Washington, DC itself).
Why do people believe myths about the Confederacy? Because our textbooks and monuments are wrong.
False history marginalizes African Americans and makes us all dumber.
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/07/01/why-do-people-believe-myths-about-the-confederacy-because-our-textbooks-and-monuments-are-wrong/)
LikeLike
@Jefe
I will go into details later but my textbooks have always stated that the war was about slaves. Now I don’t believe that to the extent most do as other factors came into play. One being that no one, including the North, wanted to end slavery.
LikeLike
@ gro jo
Sure, at a general enough level, elements of what he is saying is found in other cultures. But he does not simply want Blacks to gain power to protect their own interests. Instead he holds up Whites as the shining example, the thing that Blacks should copy, repeating even their mistakes – because a moral and ecological catastrophe with a Black face on it is better than one with a White face. As others have pointed out, White/Western ideas of power and hierarchy are not the only ones out there – except maybe for White worshippers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Somali Prince
And how is this different than what I said you said: that might makes right? That you have placed Whites beyond good and evil?
LikeLike
@ Somali Prince
How Whitecentric of you: Whites as the source of all morality.
LikeLike
I went to high school in the northern US. I was taught that slavery was the fatal flaw in the constitution, one that in time would tear the country apart, as it did during the civil war. Lincoln was against slavery, which was the very reason the South broke away. “State’s rights” was just a nice way to say the right to keep slaves (as it would later become a nice way to say Jim Crow).
LikeLike
Loewen always purports that the Confederate states were AGAINST states’ rights. They did not want the states in the North to have the power to prohibit slavery or the rights of southerners to bring their slaves with them when they traveled.
That is why he says that it was about states’ rights is rewriting history.
LikeLike
Abagond wrote:
Show me the race that has not practiced slavery after reaching a higher level of civilization than the village level and I’ll take seriously your claim. Whites are indeed the shining example because they have pushed themselves into every corner of the globe, making it imperative for everybody to emulate them or perish. Somali Prince is flat wrong when he wrote:
chance had nothing to do with it. I don’t buy the innate superiority bit either, what made the white ruling classes standout was their suicidal commitment to rule. The destruction of St-Domingue due to white recalcitrance is my point of reference. They preferred to be massacred than to accept to live on terms of equality. Freud wrote of the Thanatos or death instinct, White rulers seem to have a more developed one than leaders of other races.
LikeLike
@ gro jo
White people are sick. I would not hold them up as a shining model for anyone.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Does that mean that both their narratives may be “made up”? How can we know what actually happened?
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ abagond
The mentality of White people – you couldn’t have said it any better.
LikeLike
@ Somali Prince
Your arguments are like those talked about in this post:
LikeLike
You speak their language, went to their school, worship their God,work for them or did so until you struck it rich, etc. when did you come to the conclusion they were sick? Is your blog the cure for what ails them? Blacks obsess over Whites because they are subordinate to them. Blacks go for peaceful demonstrations, vigils, and turn the other cheek because that’s the option left to them due to their powerlessness, such tactics are venerable because showing the oppressor the pain he causes wears him down psychologically. The few blacks who make it to the top are as mendacious as their white rivals. They put their guile at the service of the sick system we all live under. I disagree with lumping all whites in the same bag because it elides the fact that the vast majority of them don’t get a say in how things are run. Collin Powell had the power to sent any redneck racist in the US army to his death, that bigot had no such power over Powell. Let’s be clear about one thing, wielding power requires a special kind of person who is indeed beyond good and evil. the stories of Sundiata and Shaka Zulu show that the same rule applied in Africa. The kind of beliefs Jesus preached were appropriate for slaves who had no choice but to give unto Ceasar what he saw fit to claim. Somali Prince, if I understand him, isn’t talking about ordinary whites but their lords and masters. I don’t understand why you can’t see that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Jefe
I wager somewhere in between. I do think that it was likely over financial disputes more than anything.
LikeLike
Hey everyone, lets’ find a white man, bend him over and kiss his buttocks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Gro jo
I will address more later but….
“Blacks go for peaceful demonstrations, vigils, and turn the other cheek because that’s the option left to them due to their powerlessness, such tactics are venerable because showing the oppressor the pain he causes wears him down psychologically.”—–I disagree. Blacks do that because they think (as per lectures from whites) that that is the only way whites will hear or see them as human. Many blacks have yet to realize many whites, average or no, do not care.
LikeLike
In other news while white people are convincing POC to focus on what they deem important. White people are robbing them blind. For example black people move out of their neighborhoods to whiter ones thinking it is better. White people buy the property cheap in the black neighborhoods, flip it, and bank it. Leaving blacks with the idea that they kept up with the jones, yet no property investment.
LikeLike
And one day, all the blacks will wise up and overthrow the system? Really, when talented blacks are perfectly happy to serve the interests of powerful whites who open slots in the system for them? Whites are in positions to lecture Blacks because they have power over them, Somali Prince opened that conversation, and it seems to me that people here don’t want to speak about it so they dismiss him as some kind of a crank. I’m willing to listen to what he has to say as long as he gives up the worldly philosopher bit and dons the mantle of observer of the current state of things. I gave him several links to see what he’d make of them, one of which you found to be of value, what did you think of the subject treated in that article? He has let me down because he has not tried to assess said articles.
LikeLike
gro jo
How you got all that from my two sentences is beyond me, but do feel free to address it when it is more in line with what I said versus your whatever stance. 🙂
LikeLike
My dear Sharinalr, you must stop being so cute, we’re having a conversation where you bring your perspective and I bring mine. My response to you indicates that I took you seriously and pointed out the omission in your claim that Blacks want to be seen by Whites as human beings. Why is that? I’ll hazard the guess that Christianity had quite a lot to do with it. As I stated above, that’s a religion fit for slaves, you are free to disagree. I wouldn’t even mind if you decided to respond by pointing out something that would never have occurred to me in a million years. I regret to inform you that as much as I aim to please you, I will not limit my responses to what you deem appropriate, monologues are boring, wouldn’t you say? 🙂
LikeLike
That’s a defeatist claim. If you were right no laws would have been passed enlarging the freedoms Blacks enjoy. Let’s take the fates of the Civil Rights Movement and the Black Panther/ Black/Liberation movement, the icons of the former have become saints and those who are still alive enjoy a fair amount of power, while the icons of the latter are still reviled and those who are still alive have for the most part either given up politics, joined the Civil Rights crowd or are languishing in jail. Why the difference? because the white elite deemed some serviceable and co-opted them and unleashed their repressive apparatuses on the rest. If you disagree please point out the flaws in what I wrote, don’t waste your time admonishing me for not adhering to your strictures for conversing with you. 🙂
LikeLike
White people are sick because they are drunk with power. Villiagewriter once said that white people do the things they do because they can.
The question is where does this power come from? I’d argue that it was learned from Rome and perfected into the Western Empire we have today but unlike Rome there is a racial hierarchy that it is rooted in.
It was Rome that came up with the prison system designed as a form of punishment. It was Rome that had Democracy and a Judicial system. But who did these institutions serve ? The Roman rich. And today these institutions serve white people in the same way. I’d ague that the fastest way to spread white supremacy around the planet and maintain it is through Democracy.
This is why you can have democracy in a place like South Africa and today have more Blacks imprisoned and for longer sentences then during apartheid. And who controls the resources their today ? Certainly not Black Africans.
Kewi said that non whites make gains when whites fight amongst themselves. I think their is some validity in that observation. Someday we will have world war 3 and it is during this period of flux that the African continent will have its best chance of driving out it’s conquers and regaining control of its resources.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ sharinalr – But the loss of hereditary Black-owned property is Black people’s fault not whites’.
Q: How many people who post here grew up in the ‘hood? How many still live there?
Why didn’t those who moved away instead decide to stay and make those areas better?
Once one gets beyond the aspirational and acquisitive stages he must then make a conscious effort to remain attached to his former peers (or not).
Investment in the Black community rarely comes from other Blacks (Even Asians and Hispanics tend have a greater business footprint in many Black neighborhoods.)
somaliprince addresses the idea that we cannot wait for nor expect help from others. That any changes in our communities must first begin with our own investments.
Some always seem to complain about the lack of investment in Black schools, neighborhoods and business areas. But why should we beg and wait for others to do what we as should already be doing?
In all honesty, it doesn’t really take a lot to get a lot done as long as we have people who are willing to work together.
No one is robbing Blacks of their potential wealth, most just focus on the wrong things and they end up willfully giving their futures away.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@UBD
in poorer neighborhoods, yes.
In middle-class black neighborhoods, there are more black entrepreneurs. At least that is what I saw in suburban DC.
My 2 cents: Most black Americans rely on the same financial and legal system (eg, banking and credit, insurance, public security) as whites, which is not keen on investing in black neighborhoods, esp. the poorer ones. They also rely on white supply and distribution networks. They also cannot always rely on other blacks to provide them with business training and models.
Some Asians and some Latinos can tap into systems which operate outside the mainstream white system.
The challenge would be to set up those parallel systems that are not bound by the “rules” of the white mainstream institutions.
LikeLiked by 2 people
@ jefe – Yeah… middle class Blacks have access to more resources any many are better acculturated. My current neighborhood is 99.9% Black. Most are two parent homes and many were built with cash (no mortgage). Most Black business owners, state and local politicians, athletes as well as two-income refinery workers (who, with only high school educations, make $100k yr), doctors, lawyers and others who managed their money live in my neighborhood. The thing is, most of us have at least a few years of ghetto experience.
And most of us moved out as soon as possible.
My rental houses are all in the hood. I only charge $150 a month (no section 8) for a three bedroom two bathroom home. I don’t make a lot of money but it is a social investment to provide nice homes that are also affordable in an area overrun with slums and shacks.
My construction company is a partnership with another brotha’ from the hood. Our main workers are well paid and our apprentices learn a trade while earning money. We mainly focus on repairing homes in the hood at an affordable price. Again, we don’t make a lot of money.
My clubs are in Black neighborhoods but they are as nice (if not nicer) than corporate models. The thing is that the costs associated with doing business are somewhat cost-inhibiting. (We BUY the buildings and land, we need extra security and insurance is higher) My lowest paid (tipped) employees start at $15hr. We actually make a good deal of money from these clubs and we give away from 25% – 33% of our profits to local Black charities.
Now, if everyone from my neighborhood would have built our homes in the hood – would the hood still exist? Would the middle-class culture raise the hood to it’s level,
or would the middle-class culture be overwhelmed by the ghetto?
IMHO – Not Everyone is equal – nor should they be. I think that by providing the societal equivalent to Scipio’s ‘Golden Bridge’ that more people would choose to escape the hood.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Uglyblackjohn
“But the loss of hereditary Black-owned property is Black people’s fault not whites’.”—-By all means please quote where I said it was the fault of whites. Don’t take what I say and run off assuming what I mean. When you assume and all….
LikeLike
@Gro Jo
“My response to you indicates that I took you seriously and pointed out the omission in your claim that Blacks want to be seen by Whites as human beings.”—No offense, but you lie too much. Your response talked about Somali prince and the article and threw in a few questions you expected me to answer (all having nothing to do with what I disagreed on).
“That’s a defeatist claim.”—How so? Because I am not sitting around trying to save the average white person? Because I am not trying to convince the masses that it is all just the leaders and they play no part?
“If you were right no laws would have been passed enlarging the freedoms Blacks enjoy.”—Passing laws to pacify blacks vs passing them because they care are two different things. Those laws were passed on the basis that they could shut blacks up while still looking good in the eyes of those world wide.
“If you disagree please point out the flaws in what I wrote, don’t waste your time admonishing me for not adhering to your strictures for conversing with you.”—-I disagreed with what you said above and instead of addressing it here we are on a totally different point as per your direction. I never admonished you at all for that. I just made it clear that I will not address your straw man arguments, goal post shifting, or flat out changing of the subject. Period. You truly believe a person should when you do it. I am straight up telling you I won’t.
LikeLike
@Uglyblackjohn
“somaliprince addresses the idea that we cannot wait for nor expect help from others. That any changes in our communities must first begin with our own investments.”—- I already know this. This is not new to me, which is exactly what I told Somali prince. But let’s be honest here. He does not really address it. I have seen quite a few people address what he said and then he will just agree. He has no solid course of action for anything he says. He has no real response for it. Trojan Pam has more of a grasp on this and likely other bloggers who have been doing this for some time.
“Some always seem to complain about the lack of investment in Black schools, neighborhoods and business areas. But why should we beg and wait for others to do what we as should already be doing?”—-I feel sorry for those that do complain, but who said blacks should be begging and waiting for others? No one here is saying that, but I am also not going to sit here and not speak on the fact that blacks don’t do it. We are not where we could be because of it.
“No one is robbing Blacks of their potential wealth, most just focus on the wrong things and they end up willfully giving their futures away.”—I disagree. Black people focus on things that whites deem acceptable. It really is a form of deception. Convince a mass of people to want A and whites take B. Blacks don’t know the wealth they had in A so it makes it easier for whites to take from them.
LikeLike
I agree with pretty much everything @Uglyblackjohn is saying. As well as most of what @villagewriter and @grojo have written.
When I say the White man is dominant by ‘chance’, I basically mean that a very fortunate turn of events allowed northern barbarians to suddenly develop Empires.
There is nothing stopping Africa from surpassing them. Especially because events are now turning in Africa’s favour.
I will eventually respond to everyone properly. I have been very busy.
I am just stopping by to deal with some antisemitism.
LikeLike
My dear Sharinalr, I’m perplexed by your claim that I lied, you said that Blacks engage in peaceful demonstrations because they wish to be seen as human beings by Whites.
I showed you the obverse side of the coin of that argument by going down memory lane with you, using the fate of the Civil Rights and Black Liberation Movements, is that where you claim we disagree?
If it is, where’s your refutation of what I wrote? Is it a lie to write that the remnants of these movements were co-opted? The only thing you did here was pull a “Kiwi” on me by accusing me of the sins of “…straw man arguments, goal post shifting, or flat out changing of the subject. Period. ” I thought better of you.
You really believe that’s the only alternative they have? I guess you’ve never heard of COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO and other such programs. The US government is a very violent organization that killed millions all over the world for centuries.
LikeLike
@grojo
I noticed the same thing. Both Sharina and Kiwi have pulled that on me. Although they might have been correct in a couple of instances.
I am very glad you pointed that out. The US government is no less totalitarian in its pursuits of internal ‘opponents’ as Russia or China.
And its incarceration rate is worse than both.
The USA is a ruthless Empire. Most of the democratic institutions that exist were created to serve White people only.
White people get to see the ‘nice’ side of America.
For everyone else, it is just pure totalitarianism.
LikeLike
@Somali prince
I will address you first because you are easy to dismiss without quotes. I did not do the “samething” to you, because you misunderstood what I said and accused me of using a strawman first. So please stop playing victim here.
Secondly you maybe a slick talker, but anyone with time to read can clearly see that you have NOT addressed anything, but yelled I agree to everything you have been challenged on. Let’s be real dude.
LikeLike
gro jo
You should never be confused. You are a liar and a good one and you know it.
You stated: pointed out the omission in your claim that Blacks want to be seen by Whites as human beings.”
Do we need to debate what omission means?
You then state:you said that Blacks engage in peaceful demonstrations because they wish to be seen as human beings by Whites.
So on one hand I omitted it, but now I said it. Which is it? I tell you what. When I have time I will make a laundry list for you. Then you can just use another lie to cover it up.
“The only thing you did here was pull a “Kiwi” on me by accusing me of the sins of “…straw man arguments, goal post shifting, or flat out changing of the subject. Period. ” I thought better of you.” —–Kiwi is extremely observant. When he first accused you of it I did not believe it, but looking at you in action on the other thread and the other one. It is all the proof I need that you do it.
LikeLike
@Gro Jo
I stated: I disagree. Blacks do that because they think (as per lectures from whites) that that is the only way whites will hear or see them as human. Many blacks have yet to realize many whites, average or no, do not care.
You stated in response: And one day, all the blacks will wise up and overthrow the system? Really, when talented blacks are perfectly happy to serve the interests of powerful whites who open slots in the system for them?
This is goal post shifting and a straw man. My response to you was simple and addressed nothing more than what you stated. You then, here, proceed to address an issue I never brought up, but one you did not either. Sure we can say you were just asking a question, but your “Really” implies you believe that is what I believe or am saying when I was not.
You also state: Whites are in positions to lecture Blacks because they have power over them, Somali Prince opened that conversation, and it seems to me that people here don’t want to speak about it so they dismiss him as some kind of a crank. I’m willing to listen to what he has to say as long as he gives up the worldly philosopher bit and dons the mantle of observer of the current state of things. I gave him several links to see what he’d make of them, one of which you found to be of value, what did you think of the subject treated in that
article? He has let me down because he has not tried to assess said articles.
While it is interesting to know how you feel it really brings me back to what I stated…which is “How you got all that from my two sentences is beyond me, but do feel free to address it when it is more in line with what I said versus your whatever stance.”
You stated: pointed out the omission in your claim that Blacks want to be seen by Whites as human beings. Why is that? I’ll hazard the guess that Christianity had quite a lot to do with it. As I stated above, that’s a religion fit for slaves, you are free to disagree. I wouldn’t even mind if you decided to respond by pointing out something that would never have occurred to me in a million years. I regret to inform you that as much as I aim to please you, I will not limit my responses to what you deem appropriate, monologues are boring, wouldn’t you say?
This still has nothing to do with what I said. I responded to your idea on why blacks do it, but you want to bring in others portions of what you said (much of what I have yet to read). So again shifting goal posts. Even going so far as to tell me how you would not limit your response, when it is clear I never asked you to.
I stated: Many blacks have yet to realize many whites, average or no, do not care.
You stated: That’s a defeatist claim. If you were right no laws would have been passed enlarging the freedoms Blacks enjoy. Let’s take the fates of the Civil Rights Movement and the Black Panther/ Black/Liberation movement, the icons of the former have become saints and those who are still alive enjoy a fair amount of power, while the icons of the latter are still reviled and those who are still alive have for the most part either given up politics, joined the Civil Rights crowd or are languishing in jail. Why the difference? because the white elite deemed some serviceable and co-opted them and unleashed their repressive apparatuses on the rest. If you disagree please point out the flaws in what I wrote, don’t waste your time admonishing me for not adhering to your strictures for conversing with you.
And once again on a whole different subject matter because you don’t want to address what was originally said. What new goal post should we shift to later? On top of that you are not showing that whites care. A lot of laws were passed and none of them indicate they care.
“I showed you the obverse side of the coin of that argument by going down memory lane with you, using the fate of the Civil Rights and Black Liberation Movements, is that where you claim we disagree?”—It took you 4 posts before you got to that. Not to mention that that comment was in response to another quote as per this detailed comment. You have lied here and I was clear on where I disagreed as it begins with “I disagree”. This, according to you, was to show me whites care. Remember?
“ If it is, where’s your refutation of what I wrote?—I never brought it up and I never refuted it. So….
“Is it a lie to write that the remnants of these movements were co-opted? The only thing you did here was pull a “Kiwi” on me by accusing me of the sins of “…straw man arguments, goal post shifting, or flat out changing of the subject. Period. ” I thought better of you.”—Straw man and trust me this is not a kiwi move. This is not what I am calling you a liar on. Even in my comment I made it clear what you were lying on. You lied about the fact that you, and allow me to quote you, “My response to you indicates that I took you seriously and pointed out the omission in your claim that Blacks want to be seen by Whites as human beings.” Nothing more and nothing less. On another note, I did not accuse you of those sins. I stated “I will not address your straw man arguments, goal post shifting, or flat out changing of the subject. Period.” So here you are caught in yet another lie in which you conveniently remove what I fully said to claim I accused you of something that obviously fits the bill.
“You really believe that’s the only alternative they have?”—I never claimed that was the only alternative. I only responded to you saying “If you were right no laws would have been passed enlarging the freedoms Blacks enjoy.” So another straw man or nah?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@ Kiwi
I agree. But there have already been some African voices concerned about China’s influence and the fact that the economic relationship isn’t that much different than that between Africa and the West.
LikeLike
sharinalr, I’m tired of your confusion. You want whites to do things for you because they really love you, not because they deem it in their interests to do so. I’ve given you evidence that’s the way things work by going down memory lane with you, using the fates of the Civil Rights and Black Liberation movements. Your response was to claim that I was lying, goalpost shifting, etc. I have no response for such claims. After you take the time to learn some history, we might have a useful conversation on how the world works. As I’ve already indicated to you, when I debate with somebody, I will not limit my responses merely to what they write, I’ll draw inferences from their statements as well, and I do reserve the right to reframe the discussion to make my points. Sorry to read that such tactics are beyond you! The debate was about power, who has it, how to get it and how to use it. All my points addressed these themes, that’s hardly goalpost shifting in my book!
LikeLike
gro jo
I am not confused. Just not interested in your straw men arguments or ad homiems which eventually come once one does not engage in your other tactics.
” You want whites to do things for you because they really love you, not because they deem it in their interests to do so.”— Must you be so desperate? This is too far from the truth.
“I’ve given you evidence that’s the way things work by going down memory lane with you, using the fates of the Civil Rights and Black Liberation movements.”—You gave an opinion based on your beliefe that that is how things work. Evidence would be stats or correspondence showing such.
“Your response was to claim that I was lying, goalpost shifting, etc. I have no response for such claims.”—Actually that was not my original response. That was my response once you engaged in it. I detailed you doing it for extra effect.
After you take the time to learn some history, we might have a useful conversation on how the…”—-Perhaps when I choose to engage in a conversation about history, but not when it involves someone using it to avoid a discussion they don’t want to have.
“As I’ve already indicated to you, when I debate with somebody, I will not limit my responses merely to what they write, I’ll draw inferences from their statements as well, and I do reserve the right to reframe the discussion to make my points. Sorry to read that such tactics are beyond you! The debate was about power, who has it, how to get it and how to use it. All my points addressed these themes, that’s hardly goalpost shifting in my book!”—-That is great. More power to you as I like a deep discussion, but what you are inferring from those two sentence is not possible. You concluded things I never said and I never brought up. Things not in the same category. What I disagreed with you on was not about power. So if I am addressing YOUR statement on why blacks protest, then you decided to address power….. how are you addressing ant of my points? News flash. You’re not. Sure you can use the good Ole “I was addressing the main theme of power” but then shouldn’t you be addressing it with people who are also addressing this? Helps avoid being caught in straw men argument, goal post shiftng, or even lying. I ain’t mad at you, but own it for once. You do it too often not to.
LikeLike
” I ain’t mad at you,” same here my dear, I just disagree with you. You’ve been horribly unfair to me, not so much out of malice, but due to a clear incomprehension how adults debate. The name of this thread is “Game of Empires”, not do whites love blacks and feel compelled to give them rights because they, the whites, truly care for the blacks. When you brought that idea in the conversation, I felt compelled to point out to you that your criterion was irrelevant. Here’s more history for you, LBJ passed the Civil Rights act in 1964 after spending a very long time being the darling of the Southern segregationists in Congress. Abraham Lincoln wrote a lot of anti-black political humor prior to emancipating the slaves. LOVE FOR BLACKS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THESE POSITIVE ACTIONS ON BEHALF OF BLACKS. Sorry for “shouting”, it’s just that I get the impression that you are too self-involved to take into account what others have to say. 🙂
LikeLike
@gro jo
As hard as you try you are just missing the mark.
“same here my dear, I just disagree with you. “—I didn’t care enough to ask if you were.
“You’ve been horribly unfair to me, not so much out of malice, but due to a clear incomprehension how adults debate.”—Unfair? You call exposing you as a calculated liar unfair. Adults don’t usually engage in goal post shifting or straw man arguments do they? I think not. So perhaps it is you who have a “clear incomprehension” of how adults debate.
“The name of this thread is “Game of Empires”, not do whites love blacks and feel compelled to give them rights because they, the whites, truly care for the blacks. When you brought that idea in the conversation, I felt compelled to point out to you that your criterion was irrelevant. “—-Slick, but Fail, as LOM would say. It does not matter what the name of the thread is. I already addressed the thread and had my discussion with Somali Prince. As to the comment you are referring to it saying nothing of whites love for blacks and feeling compelled to give them rights due to caring. This is a straw man.
“Here’s more history for you, LBJ passed the Civil Rights act in 1964 after spending a very long time being the darling of the Southern segregationists in Congress. Abraham Lincoln wrote a lot of anti-black political humor prior to emancipating the slaves. LOVE FOR BLACKS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THESE POSITIVE ACTIONS ON BEHALF OF BLACKS. Sorry for “shouting”, it’s just that I get the impression that you are too self-involved to take into account what others have to say. :)”—-Nice history lesson. Too bad it is one to an argument I never made. I have no problem listening to others. I do have a problem listening to liars and ones that have a detailed track record above. 😉
LikeLike
My dear Sharinalr, I’m still waiting for you to point out the “lies” I’ve written. I do not wish to bicker with you. I must confess that it’s getting harder to make sense of what you write. What were you trying to say when you wrote the following?
“This is not what I am calling you a liar on. Even in my comment I made it clear what you were lying on. You lied about the fact that you, and allow me to quote you, “My response to you indicates that I took you seriously and pointed out the omission in your claim that Blacks want to be seen by Whites as human beings.” Nothing more and nothing less. On another note, I did not accuse you of those sins. I stated “I will not address your straw man arguments, goal post shifting, or flat out changing of the subject. Period.” So here you are caught in yet another lie in which you conveniently remove what I fully said to claim I accused you of something that obviously fits the bill.
“You really believe that’s the only alternative they have?”—I never claimed that was the only alternative. I only responded to you saying “If you were right no laws would have been passed enlarging the freedoms Blacks enjoy.” So another straw man or nah?”
I’m guessing that you objected to the fact that I pointed out to you that Blacks have an interest to keep their protests peaceful, and thereby, to be seen by Whites as human beings because the Whites have the guns and know how to use them. How have I lied by pointing that fact out to you? The rest of your quote is the usual he said, she said stuff that bores me, so I won’t respond to it. Show me that successful Blacks have not been co-opted, show me that black politicians aren’t complicit in the crimes of the “White” system, then we can have a serious debate.
LikeLike
@Gro Jo
“My dear Sharinalr, I’m still waiting for you to point out the “lies” I’ve written.”—I already did. It can be found here (https://abagond.wordpress.com/2015/11/27/game-of-empires/#comment-302301) You can Feign ignorance if you want, but it is a bit late to help you slither out of it. Funny part is not only do I quote what you lied about, but then explain how it is a lie.
“I’m guessing that you objected to the fact that I pointed out to you that Blacks have an interest to keep their protests peaceful, and thereby, to be seen by Whites as human beings because the Whites have the guns and know how to use them.”—-Nope.
“How have I lied by pointing that fact out to you?”—That is not what I said you lied about. See if you had avoided all those side-widing tactics, then you wouldn’t need to play this guessing game to figure it out.
“Show me that successful Blacks have not been co-opted, show me that black politicians aren’t complicit in the crimes of the “White” system, then we can have a serious debate.”—You show me. That is your argument not mine. 🙂
LikeLike
Sharinalr, I’m going to quote the original comment I made and that you objected to. Please feel free to show me my “lie”: ” Blacks go for peaceful demonstrations, vigils, and turn the other cheek because that’s the option left to them due to their powerlessness, such tactics are venerable because showing the oppressor the pain he causes wears him down psychologically. Your initial response was “I disagree. Blacks do that because they think (as per lectures from whites) that that is the only way whites will hear or see them as human. Many blacks have yet to realize many whites, average or no, do not care.”(quoted from sharinalron Tue 1 Dec 2015 at 02:55:30)
I can see how you can legitimately claim that I’m wrong, but I don’t see any basis for you to call me a liar.
We had a difference of opinion which you chose to escalate into hysterical accusations of lying. Kiwi did the same thing to me on the Mao thread, even accusing me of being an anti Chinese racist because I wouldn’t concede the point he was making.
In order to reason with you, I wrote the following: “And one day, all the blacks will wise up and overthrow the system? Really, when talented blacks are perfectly happy to serve the interests of powerful whites who open slots in the system for them?
Whites are in positions to lecture Blacks because they have power over them, Somali Prince opened that conversation, and it seems to me that people here don’t want to speak about it so they dismiss him as some kind of a crank.”
The first sentence of this quote tried to deal with your claim that many blacks don’t realize that whites,average or no don’t care and tried to draw a possible outcome of that would occur once they did, along with my skepticism that such revelation would turn lead them overthrow the system. You may disagree with me, but I see no basis for calling me a liar.
LikeLike
@gro jo
“ Please feel free to show me my “lie”:”—What part of this is hard to get? I NEVER claimed you lied about that statement. I quoted what I said you lied about and this statement was never one of them. I only said I disagreed with you on that statement. Nothing more.
“In order to reason with you, I wrote the following”—That is not you reasoning with me. Mainly because it is not something I believe or indicated I believe. This is you looking for another way to side step your actions or excuse them.
LikeLike
Kiwi, why do you lie so much?
Sharinalr, I’m still waiting for you to show me when and where I lied to you. Hurry up, I’m an old man.
LikeLike
@Gro jo
I already did. If you want to stay in denial then that is your business.
LikeLike
Just as I thought, you can’t show I lied to you.
LikeLike
Gro jo
Maybe you are confused on the meaning of can’t and already have, but I am not. I gave you a link, I quoted your lies, and explained it was a lie.
What you need to do is sit down and read it instead of skipping it and trying to toss in your straw man arguments to avoid the fact that you got caught.
LikeLike
The lies come from you because you can’t tell the difference between your opinions and facts. Too bad.
LikeLike
Gro jo
I don’t remember claiming my opinions to be fact, but I do see where you have.
LikeLike
” on Thu 3 Dec 2015 at 15:30:03
Kiwi
The reason why so many African countries are courting China is because they recognize that China’s interests are in conflict with the West’s interests in Africa. By allowing in another empire to act as a counterweight to the West, African governments are attempting to play the two imperialist powers against each other to obtain more leverage for themselves.
An analogy of this is two men who are attempting to rape the same woman. If the men get in a fight or argue, the woman could use that opportunity to get away.”
Nice bit of Afro pessimism Kiwi, aren’t you implying that Africans are too dumb to see what’s good for them? Given the fact that the Chinese can’t even protect their own people in Asia, what makes you think they’ll be able to do so in Africa? Where are China’s naval and air bases in Africa? Based on what I’ve read, the Chinese offer loans at competitive rates and build infrastructure, how do you analogize these facts to attempted rape?
LikeLike
” on Fri 4 Dec 2015 at 19:07:14
Kiwi
@ gro jo
Rape is rape. It doesn’t matter if you beat them or lure them in with gifts. The Chinese are biding their time.”
Lol, the Chinese have been in Africa since the 1960s, what’s taking them so long to do the deed? Haven’t they got enough on their hands “raping” your precious Tibetans, or is that claim also a figment of your imagination? Say, what’s your opinion on the Chinese Silk Belt Road and Maritime Silk Road initiatives? Britain, South Africa and a number of others are on board? Do you fear that the Chinese are going to “rape” the Brits, if not, why not? I’m asking you about these things because you are the self-styled “expert” on all things Asian here.
LikeLike
What, no comment on the Silk Road initiative? What kind of Asian “expert” are you? So, only “the West” can stop China from colonizing Africa, because Africans are too dumb to look after themselves? No doubt, I’m reaching the wrong inferences from your comments, please tell me it is so, otherwise I’d be forced to conclude that you are a racist who believes Africans to be innately inferior to the rest. You wouldn’t be alone in that belief, why, no less a personage than prof. James Watson made the same claim. Far be it for me to challenge such superior beings such as yourself and the good professor but a black guy from Africa, Ufot Ekong, graduating at the top of his class at a Japanese university and another one, Victor Olalusi, graduating with a cumulative GPA of 5 in Russia leads me to doubt your and Watson’s Afro pessimism.
LikeLike
Nice cop out Kiwi, you never disappoint. Centuries from now you think your Chinese brethren will be lording it over the Africans unless “the West” rescues the hapless blacks, yes or no?
LikeLike
” on Sat 5 Dec 2015 at 04:28:37
Kiwi
@ gro jo
Can you read?”
Unfortunately for you, yes.
This is what you wrote:
“The reason why so many African countries are courting China is because they recognize that China’s interests are in conflict with the West’s interests in Africa. By allowing in another empire to act as a counterweight to the West, African governments are attempting to play the two imperialist powers against each other to obtain more leverage for themselves.
An analogy of this is two men who are attempting to rape the same woman. If the men get in a fight or argue, the woman could use that opportunity to get away.”
Being the fraud you are, you left out the second paragraph of your comment. When I asked you how your rape analogy fit mutually advantageous trade deals you came back with this gem:
“Europeans had been “on board” with various African states for hundreds of years before they completely took over the continent and Africans really felt the sting of colonialism. The West probably won’t allow China to go that far but if you feel the best future for Africa is one that is decided by outsiders, good luck with that.”
I concluded from your comments that you entertained the thought that history could repeat itself with the Chinese in the role of the Europeans and the Africans the eternal victims.
Unlike you and others on this blog, I don’t go for accusing people merely because I suspect them, so I asked you to clarify what you meant, and pointed out a possible interpretation of your comment that would reflect poorly on you.
Your reply was some nonsense about how obtuse I am. I’d like to know how you can ‘predict’ the future of Africa when you can’t even write something sensible about the Silk Road initiatives China launched? You can see in the distant future, using racial supremacist optics, but you can’t see what’s going on right now! Your “Asian expertise” is looking pretty shabby to me.
LikeLike
You’re right about that, I do have a score to settle with you, I’m tired of your cant. You are wrong about not wanting to discuss things with you. I’ve bent over backwards to be civil to you and elicit a civil response from you but all I got for my troubles were insults and stupid jokes.
Let’s stay on topic and discuss your bs claim that China is “imperialist” and out to rape the hapless Africans. I’ve advanced several arguments against your claim, all I got back in return is your stupid attempt to make this discussion about my personality, which I gather, you don’t care for. Too bad.
Tell me how ‘imperialist’ China, that can’t even rule its own territory, Taiwan, due to US interference is going to lord it over Africa, a world away from its shores? You are mouthing US propaganda as usual, I pointed out the racist implications of your claim but you saw fit to respond by throwing a hissy fit. Choke on your anger.
LikeLike
@Kiwi
You summed up my thoughts exactly.
LikeLike
@ gro jo – The Silk Road projects could be upsetting to many current Western powers but I think the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (I think it was MJB(?) who brought this bank up sometime last month.) could have a bigger impact. With the managing director of the IMF saying that they (IMF) and the World Bank would cooperate with the venture, the U.S. seems pretty upset because some it’s traditional allies are signing on.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Uglyblackjohn,
AIIB will very likely be the financial muscle behind the Silk Road projects.
sharinalr,
Did Kiwi express any thoughts in his diatribe against me? I thought they were just personal insults hurled at me.
Did you finally figure out the ‘lies” I told you? I don’t believe you dislike me as you are wont to pretend, If you find me so unpleasant, why do you seek my attention so much? Are you playing the coquette with me or are you stalking me on this blog? God, I feel so unsafe (sarcasm alert).
LikeLike
Yeah, by spending $100m/yr for their base in Djibouti (the U.S. spends another $63m/yr in rent) to protect their interests and their plan for a trans-continental railway the deal could be good for both Asia and Africa.
LikeLike
@Gro Jo
The real question is….Did you finally decide to read the detailed comment highlighting your lies? No? Then you have another set of comebacks to use until you do.
I never said I dislike you. I don’t know you, but I am aware of your bad habits. Seek your attention? You are constantly calling my name or directing comments at me. Looks like you are seeking mine. Maybe I should ask if you enjoy stalking me.
LikeLike
“I never said I dislike you. I don’t know you, but I am aware of your bad habits. Seek your attention? You are constantly calling my name or directing comments at me. Looks like you are seeking mine. Maybe I should ask if you enjoy stalking me.”
You are playing the coquette with me! The above is practically a declaration of love, I’m touched, I wish I could pursue this but I can’t, sorry, I’m just too old and tired.
LikeLike
@Gro jo
I am not playing coquette with you either. You lack qualities of a man. I made that clear on the “it’s not race, it’s class” thread.
LikeLike
That’s a huge relief, I was beginning to fear That I would have to get a restraining order against you requesting a ten comments interval between yours and mine. 😉
LikeLike
Gro jo
The mere fact that you actually thought I was flirting or interested in you, after being told otherwise on a thread weeks prior, says that a restraining order might be good for me, but you need some other type of help.
LikeLike
Sharialr, you know I love you, but enough of playing the coquette, enough about me. Do you have any opinion on the subject under discussion? I’m dying to read what you make of AIIB, the Silk road initiatives, Kiwi’s belief that Africa will be taken over by China, and his apparent belief that Africans are the dumbest people on earth?
LikeLike
Kiwi
I have noticed, but you know how insecure some supposed men can be. 😉
LikeLike
Gro Jo
If I wanted to talk about that I would have by now. So would you, but your interest seems to be more in line with trying to convince yourself that you are not the insecure delusional old tart that you are.
That is not what Kiwi said or positioned as his belief. That is, however, something you said and something I am beginning to believe you view as true.
At any rate you should find more productive way to deal with that bruised ego.
LikeLike
Hey, who removed my reply to Sharinalr showing she was lying?
LikeLike
@ gro jo
When did you post it?
LikeLike
Shortly after she posted her comment.
LikeLike
“Sharinalr showing she was lying?”—-ROFL. I doubt it.
LikeLike
Sharinalr, did you remove my reply? Was it an unsubtle ploy on your part to goad me into arguing with you some more? We’ve exhausted this topic. Let’s start a new round on the Holocaust in Denmark thread. I’m excited to learn how you’ll mangle the facts, bring Kiwi along. I love you guys. HA.
LikeLike
^^^^Sad part is this individual will never fully understand the level of his delusions. Smh
LikeLike
The real game of Empires.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-dominates-arms-trade-asia-mid-east-boost-231808814.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
@munumabtu
Hello there. This site is speeding up like a coyote which has bitten some pepper spice, so I have to write before having read Sartre.
The so-called ‘white schism’ is an illusion. The stand, yes. A schism, no, because there is no more schism than, say, between Zulu and Yoruba; these are just different cultures.
There is no Soviets any more; what most Westerners lable as ‘Soviets’ are, in fact, different countries of different nations fought by another nations.
You should not overestimate the after-Soviets’ amiability or friendliness. What is seen as a strategic goal by the current power holders is an International Russian empire controlling most of the world, comprising Africa and Alaska and turning the USA and the EU into a set of conflicting failed states under a global havoc.
What would become elsewhere, outside from the Russian interests would be a caste-like society, or. perhaps, a caste-and-genes-based society with a strong cybernetic control over lower castes, a dictatorship, a monarchy actually with the rest of the world being a provider of raw material resources, cheap labor, organs to be transplanted and recruits to be killed for private military companies, the wars non-stop making a perfect market for all these things.
Here are some fresher info about the current decision-makers in Russia. The site can be easily (and in most cases adequately) translated into English — with the exception of the pictures.
https://putinism.wordpress.com/
To wish such species of homo sapiens (?) to get their victory over the USA, or to think they would see the Blacks as allies is like fighting for the Confederacy at Civil war being Black. I mean, you can do it if you want to, and there is no such a law that could prohibit a person to work for the sake of one’s own unhappiness and suffering, but why?
This Russia already sees itself as a ‘Great White Empire’, the ideas of colonialism are even planted into the childrens’ brains.
https://wiki2.org/en/The_Three_Bogatyrs_on_Distant_Shores
Africa is often referred to as an uncivilised land of Bokassa and Mobutu; at best, I’ve heard a phrase like ‘it is not us but the Africans who should be insulted by comparison of the two lands, because Russians, unlike Africans, were enslaved not by foreigners but by the people of their own nation’.
But the more usual rhetorics is something about Kipling’s ‘white man’s burden’ and ‘great historical mission to colonise the world’.
If I were you, I would play for the USA, and being me, I would also play for Blacks and the USA.
The sick Kremlin clowns don’t deserve to be where they are; in fact, I doubt their rights to live.
LikeLike
@ A Russian Nagpo
First, thanks for sharing with us your concerns about new dangers looming on the horizon for the peoples of the Earth.
Let me make some observations and put some questions regarding your arguments.
Really?
How many missiles equipped with nuclear warheads are there on Earth?
From those, how many belong to the USA plus Russia? A few thousands each, I suppose.
And – this is indeed the fundamental question – how many of those nuclear warheads from both the USA and Russia are i) pointed to each other and ii) how many are pointed to other countries. I don’t know but I’ll bet that the overwhelming majority of those objects are pointed to each other by these two military superpowers. This is what means Great White Schism! The fact that these two White powers basically live in a confrontational mode, each against the other, for the domain of the Earth! The rest of the world’s nations are basically like pawns in this Game of Empires. The winner will take all!
The correction in this narrative is only that right now another big kid appeared recently on the block and day by day is becoming more ready to fight. I’m speaking about China! And maybe more warriors will join the big fight. India? Maybe.
But I understand that having experienced directly one of those big powers, you are more likely to see the evil of its ways and to want to embrace the opposite. But remember that other people can come from different life pathways and have different feelings regarding who is bad and who is good!
No such overestimating! As many other people, I believe that nations and states associate with one another following their individual interests. When they perceive that their interests can be aligned with the interests of another nation or state, they build a relationship. Shorter or longer, it depends on each case,but important is the relation to be perceived as useful by both sides.
Mozambique is a country in Africa which received substantial help from Russia/ Soviet Union in its fight for Independence from Portugal, but since then it has cultivated good relations with the USA, relations that are becoming stronger day by day. For the record: the USA is building right now one of its largest embassies in Africa just in Maputo. See: (http://clubofmozambique.com/news/first-stone-laid-new-us-embassy-maputo/)
Recent gas discoveries in the country certainly are part of the reason why this is happening. See: (https://www.export.gov/article?id=Mozambique-Oil-Gas)
As a side note, I must say that when you speak about Russia taking over Africa and kind of colonizing it easily, you seem to underestimate the various interests of foreign powers in the continent. These interests show no signs of diminishing.
And this is not only about Western powers! China is becoming more and more entangled with African countries, specially in the economic domain.
See: (https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/middle-east-and-africa/the-closest-look-yet-at-chinese-economic-engagement-in-africa)
In such a forest of foreign interests I’m not sure that Russia could easily accomplish anything in the way of re-colonizing the continent of Africa. To want is not enough!
Remember that of the 3 big military powers – the USA, Russia and China – the one that shows the most significant weakness in economic basis is just Russia. This means that as the Game of Empires become more and more heated in the near future, Russia will probably show more difficulties to maintain afloat. Looking at the past, remember that in a not so distant past Russia (then the core of Soviet Union) wasn’t able to maintain the dispute with the USA because the USA was powerful not only militarily but also economically, whereas the Soviet Union was equally strong militarily but much weaker in economic terms, therefore the defeat.
No surprise here!
If you read more and more of what is discussed in this blog, you’ll realize that this is one of the central problems of White societies: this strong disposition to despise the other, especially the man of color!. Despite the fact that in Asia more technologically advanced societies emerged recently in Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, etc joining Japan (that was already very developed more than a century ago!), Russia, as a White country, fails to recognize to have been left behind! So much for White self-serving illusions of grandeur!
I suggest that Russian citizens update their picture of Africa! With Internet this is not so difficult! See for example a China-Mozambique infrastructural project near completion: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSRMCE3n7tw)
Remember also the advises given in this thread by commentator Somali Prince: Strong Empires become arrogant and pride always comes before the fall and Never underestimate your enemy.
Being a late comer in this colonizing game it’ll no be easy as I said before! The environment in Africa is already crowded! Many natives and many foreigners! Some narratives are already outdated!
LikeLike