Baldilocks on Arab Racism against Blacks
The following excellent article, four years old but still highly-relevant, "Fair Trade" by Baldilocks (http://www.luoamerican.com/baldilocks/2004/09/fair_trade.html).
She quotes a statement by an Iraqi rebel leader, originally quoted in the Guardian:
Black soldiers are a particular target. "To have Negroes occupying us is a particular humiliation," Abu Mujahed said, echoing the profound racism prevalent in much of the Middle East. "Sometimes we aborted a mission because there were no Negroes."
which appears to have actually shocked some liberals under the delusion that the Iraqi rebels were in some way "progressive."
But of course, to those aware of their history, this is a very old story. Referring to the African Embassy bombings, Baldilocks points out:
In all cases, that more black Africans were blown to bits than either Americans or Israelis is telling. The perps had no actual beef with the blacks. They simply did not care that a “few” abid got caught in the mix.
I liken it to a demolition company destroying a building. Who cares if the "vermin" in it are destroyed along with the building? For that is the cultural view that Arab Muslims hold for blacks, even for those blacks who are foolish enough to believe that being Muslims themselves will save them. Sudan, anyone?
referring to the Sudanese re-institution of black chattel slavery, an evil eradicated by the West, but which has returned with decolonization (and the accompanying decivilization of much of Africa and the Mideast).
It's true, of course, that many Arabs are of part-black ancestry themselves. The reason is that
During their on-going 800 year history of enslaving blacks, Arab Muslims murder and/or castrate the men and take the women into the household as slaves/concubines. Under Sharia law, children, sons in particular, hold the status of their father ...
In terms of "group rights," of course, this was a better deal than blacks got in antebellum America. Of course, it was far worse in terms of individual rights (shall Monsieur be having the murder or the castration?). And there's the little matter that America outlawed slavery almost a century and a half ago, while black chattel slavery is growing in modern Africa and the Mideast.
Whenever I meet or read about a black American who has adopted Islam and/or an Arabic name, I view him/her with a certain amount of skepticism and pity ...
Ditto here.
As a black American who, through simple patrimony, was born honestly owning an African surname, I can definitely understand the desire of some black Americans to embrace the heritage denied to them and to their ancestors by American slave owners. So why not adopt a West African name? For a black American to adopt an Arabic name is to trade one set of now-symbolic chains for a set of real ones. One type of oppression is dead/dying; the other is still alive and growing. Like a tumor.
Well said, Baldilocks. Well said.
She quotes a statement by an Iraqi rebel leader, originally quoted in the Guardian:
Black soldiers are a particular target. "To have Negroes occupying us is a particular humiliation," Abu Mujahed said, echoing the profound racism prevalent in much of the Middle East. "Sometimes we aborted a mission because there were no Negroes."
which appears to have actually shocked some liberals under the delusion that the Iraqi rebels were in some way "progressive."
But of course, to those aware of their history, this is a very old story. Referring to the African Embassy bombings, Baldilocks points out:
In all cases, that more black Africans were blown to bits than either Americans or Israelis is telling. The perps had no actual beef with the blacks. They simply did not care that a “few” abid got caught in the mix.
I liken it to a demolition company destroying a building. Who cares if the "vermin" in it are destroyed along with the building? For that is the cultural view that Arab Muslims hold for blacks, even for those blacks who are foolish enough to believe that being Muslims themselves will save them. Sudan, anyone?
referring to the Sudanese re-institution of black chattel slavery, an evil eradicated by the West, but which has returned with decolonization (and the accompanying decivilization of much of Africa and the Mideast).
It's true, of course, that many Arabs are of part-black ancestry themselves. The reason is that
During their on-going 800 year history of enslaving blacks, Arab Muslims murder and/or castrate the men and take the women into the household as slaves/concubines. Under Sharia law, children, sons in particular, hold the status of their father ...
In terms of "group rights," of course, this was a better deal than blacks got in antebellum America. Of course, it was far worse in terms of individual rights (shall Monsieur be having the murder or the castration?). And there's the little matter that America outlawed slavery almost a century and a half ago, while black chattel slavery is growing in modern Africa and the Mideast.
Whenever I meet or read about a black American who has adopted Islam and/or an Arabic name, I view him/her with a certain amount of skepticism and pity ...
Ditto here.
As a black American who, through simple patrimony, was born honestly owning an African surname, I can definitely understand the desire of some black Americans to embrace the heritage denied to them and to their ancestors by American slave owners. So why not adopt a West African name? For a black American to adopt an Arabic name is to trade one set of now-symbolic chains for a set of real ones. One type of oppression is dead/dying; the other is still alive and growing. Like a tumor.
Well said, Baldilocks. Well said.