Return to Reasoning List

---

Here is a link to this page:
https://www.jah-rastafari.com/forum/message-view.php?message_group=5796&start_row=1

Are Ethiopia,Kemet,Cush etc derogative names towards InI?

Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)

Messenger: Bobobinghi Jahcub Sent: 8/22/2014 6:26:21 PM

Land of the Burnt face people,Land of the blacks, were these names used by Europeans to degrade InI or was it more of Metaphorical/abstract way of describing what they saw, Nigga and such names were of course originally used as mockery,disrespect,racism etc but all the same is not nearly on the same level as calling Iselves Ethiopians or Africans, but why do we glory in these titles,if you ask an Idren where does the I come from, how often are you going to hear 'Alkebulan'(meaning 'mother of mankind' before it was translated to mean something else in arabic) or other such names created by our people,the I see how European language is a plague?, is our nation incapable of naming itself,it seems weird to I that mothers and fathers of creation in this Iwa are going by a name that our children have given to us,what child names its master?On the other hand is it just a thing that InI should glory in, glory in calling Iselves burnt faces?the I couldn't call I parents etc a burnt face,no way iya,is it just how InI continue to call our wooly natty 'dread'locks, it is fact that that term wasn't used to uplift the people who wore InI 'mother nature is my hairdresser'hair

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 8/22/2014 8:11:33 PM

Big urself up immediately. The European languages are but a plague onto black people. A curse from with all due respect, a lower language. No use of the right side of the brain or higher self as our ancient languages always had. Like most religions, the European languages are like the illegitimate ungrateful bastardized son of incient African language. As for the rest ive veen yanting for years now ethiopian is a highly offensive term. And tbh the country of ethiopia only started calling themselves that recently / after European contact. But that may also be a biblical reason behind it as ethiopia is mentioned in the bible - as the word comes from the same racist Greeks who translated the bible originally. We know when Europeans first used that term they didnt mean just Abysinnia, but the whole North East, if not the whole of black Africa More fire

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 8/22/2014 8:12:38 PM

Kemet = black people of the land Not derogatory. And mentioned within our mdu ntr 'gods language' Africa and Kush are not derogatory neither

Messenger: VoodooRuutz Sent: 8/22/2014 9:12:59 PM

If one look at d description of Ethiopians in Greek terms then mainstream modern Ethiopians don't fit dat description HIM included. I think Ethiopian was more to refer to dose in d BUganda Soudan area like d Dinka people first then d whole of Africa. you right bout the Ethiopia Abyssinia thing too Ras. I think in now terms it is offensive, in Palestine Kushi is and offensive derogatory term to d Africans it equates to niggER for dose ones n ones. Most ones seem OK with Nubian tho Are we capable of naming ourself? We are but y do we accept d name others give us? Moor? Maroon? Gullah? Geechee? Cromanti,Kromanti? Yoruba? Black-Seminole? Creole of Color? Europeans gave us all these names! They named the countries! Big Up all African countries with African official languages and all what change to African names. Bless Up Benin for Vodun, Big Up Aiyti for d Kreyol and Vodou and d name change!

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 8/22/2014 9:17:56 PM

VDR Dr Clarke taught that the Greeks referred to anyone who was black African dem time as Ethiopian, burnt face. They were in the Eastern part of Africa as you say king but they was talking about all a we. IS only dat dem didn't reach dat far into mama Africa dem always have to stay coastal. Not built to survive inna dem terrain!! I also hear Moor is a name we never called ourselves but what dem would call we when we would go inna Europe. But the word moor stay contraversial Big up everytime

Messenger: NordMan Sent: 8/22/2014 10:11:18 PM

Lower language and right side of the brain, very intresting GA. Please elaborate and include some of the I's sources. Bless

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 8/23/2014 12:26:34 AM

Any neuro/medical literature on the right side vs left side of the brain, speech centres, and which side is more for creative thought and emotion, which side is more for logical expression. And which languages utilize the most of them. The clicking San tribe utilize both sides more dan the European who ridicule. The Greeks, Romans, and Persians could only partially decipher our Mdu Ntr with it's variation of over 2000 characters and glyphs. English lacks a certain....... emotion, ?if dats the right word, it get difficult to express certain indigenous concepts through this limited thing. Look how the Iyarics a confound them for example, created from our mighty patois - a language based on the African retentions despite supposingly having our tongue 'beaten' out of our ancestors. But whether a dat or Ebonics or Pidgin, anywhere across the globe; Africans are not suffice with English alone! And Ra Un Nefer Amens classic book - Mdu Ntr vol.1/2 goes into detail about wha u ask and has further references.

Messenger: NordMan Sent: 8/23/2014 3:04:59 AM

I'm sure there is a great possibility ancient language/languages activated or used the right side in a greater way than most or all languages of today. However, to say all europeans languages this or that and 'no use' of the right side might a little much to say. I doubt the I know enogh about europe really and with that said I take nothing from Africa and Black history, I'm just saying the I's retorical standards are quite low and facts not allways right. The I have great energy and a outstanding will to write and reason though and that is fantastic and resorceful tools. What are Finnish and Same based upon for example? No use of there right side? Are you sure? English is not all Europeans languages and are also in europe, by europeans, considered to be a "simple" language. Give thanks for sources though. I will study more.

Messenger: VoodooRuutz Sent: 8/23/2014 3:08:41 AM

True GA but dey would describe Egyptians and Ethiopians as "Burnt of Skin" which obviously refered to really dark people in my view, Also thick Lipps, wooly hair and "FLAT NOSES" that's y I say that because most mainstream Horners don't have flat noses and I don't think they would've refered to the really lighter yellowish brown tones of we as sun burnt with da darkest of we! My own view! But at a time they also say the Egyptians were not as burnt as Ethiopians and one even make d statement of to dark and to light are the signs of cowards (dat was a mid tone person's statement),so even from acient time people played the skin color card. I just think the first people refered to as Ethiopians or burnt faces ones were Dinka type who fit d description and also resemble some on d wall paintings and it spread to include everybody just like when I see a painting of a Moor usually I see a Hausa man if one knows Hausa clothing and horse stylings. Just I own sightings! San KhoiKhoi most complex of the worlds languages and oldest! English jus can't fully explain certain ideas of even 'Ebonics' prolly d closet to standard English out of all our tounges grown from English contact!

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA Sent: 8/23/2014 6:06:04 AM

Most Common European languages come from the ROOT of 'Ancient' GREEK. I don't know about Finnish. Maybe that diff. I only know about the Europeans from the Imperialist Colonising Scramble for Africa countries, a so I edited my first statement to all COMMON European language, Burning

---

Return to Reasoning List