Kangz and Kweenz - Blacktivist/Black Nationalist Pseudohistorians trying to reclaim other nations' achievements and histories "WE WUZ KANGZ/KWEENZ N' SHIET"

None of the evidence indicates that aliens didn't help them either, but most people besides the History Channel would disagree. Actually, "aliens built the Pyramids" isn't too different than "slaves/(((slaves))) built the Pyramids", it's just a lack of being able to think outside your own culture and answering the way you think is best rather than try and understand how the Egyptians thought. Egyptians weren't part of your culture, I mean they're the people who believed their ruler had to jerk off into the Nile every year or else they'd have a bad harvest.

I mean the villages the workers lived in exist and we have all sorts of remains. They weren't slaves because one, that would be blasphemous, and two, slaves might do shit work. It's the same reason the Greeks and Romans didn't use galley slaves but because some medieval/early modern European powers did then that meant the ancients must have used galley slaves too.
>They couldn't have had slaves because of their culture and sheit
:story:
nubianslavetrade.jpg

Also, you keep bringing up the kikes in relation to the pyramids, but the biblical claim is not that they ever worked on the pyramids, since those were built by Pharaoh Khufu who came well before Pharaoh Ramses the 2nd. If I had to guess, the slaves that worked on the pyramids likely would have been rando Nubians and Semite tribes (some Jews mixed in) on the borderlands of Egypt at that time. The reason the kikes came into the conversation was because of the post I originally responded to.
>Also this meme is stupid. It's based off pseudohistory that enslaved Jews built the pyramids. Shouldn't rely on Christian pseudohistory with absolutely no evidence other than Bible fanfic for a gotcha. You can't prove hypocrisy by using a fictional example and a real example.
The argument I'm making is from other claims and sources about other projects within that region and era, we can extrapolate that more than likely slaves worked on the Pyramids. (The Biblical source being one of the claims)

The other part of the argument I'm making is that what is currently pressed as "fact" by modern historians is based on the idea that slaves and paid labor are an either-or thing, which is just on its face outlandish. I literally can't even think of any ancient building project anywhere in the world that didn't incorporate both slaves and paid professional labor.
 
>They couldn't have had slaves because of their culture and sheit
:story:
View attachment 2012594

Also, you keep bringing up the kikes in relation to the pyramids, but the biblical claim is not that they ever worked on the pyramids, since those were built by Pharaoh Khufu who came well before Pharaoh Ramses the 2nd. If I had to guess, the slaves that worked on the pyramids likely would have been rando Nubians and Semite tribes (some Jews mixed in) on the borderlands of Egypt at that time. The reason the kikes came into the conversation was because of the post I originally responded to.
>Also this meme is stupid. It's based off pseudohistory that enslaved Jews built the pyramids. Shouldn't rely on Christian pseudohistory with absolutely no evidence other than Bible fanfic for a gotcha. You can't prove hypocrisy by using a fictional example and a real example.
The argument I'm making is from other claims and sources about other projects within that region and era, we can extrapolate that more than likely slaves worked on the Pyramids. (The Biblical source being one of the claims)

The other part of the argument I'm making is that what is currently pressed as "fact" by modern historians is based on the idea that slaves and paid labor are an either-or thing, which is just on its face outlandish. I literally can't even think of any ancient building project anywhere in the world that didn't incorporate both slaves and paid professional labor.
The picture you have there is I think an execution of captives. This sort of scene isn’t uncommon in Egyptian art. And while the Egyptians did have some slaves, the Hebrews were nowhere near Egyptian territory at the time of the construction of the pyramids, and the amount of slaves they did have was certainly not going to be as religiously acceptable to have working on your royal tomb meant to preserve your soul for all eternity - what if they intentionally fucked something up out of spite?

Also, the Hebrews moved into the Levant almost two millennia after Khufu’s pyramid was finished. The Bible exclusively talks in terms of new kingdom Egypt which was different from Old Kingdom Egypt in many, many, ways. Old Kingdom Egypt was very much a pretty isolated place. You had the Nubians to your south but beyond the Cataract you didn’t really go there outside of traders and the occasional military expedition and they didn’t really come north much. There were the Libyan tribes to the west, but they weren’t very active in this period, same with those in the Sinai. You’d have trading contact with some of the coastal mediterranian but not as much as you’d think - the Middle Kingdom period is when Egypt really starts coming into full contact with the wider mediterranian world.
 
Yet they still insist that they invented it View attachment 1967361

Edit: To avoid doubleposting, screenshots I found on twitter

I'm never surprised by the ignorance of black/African nationalists and Afrocentrists. I'm pretty sure that Egypt was settled by Indo-Europeans and other semitic peoples. Would it ever occur to them that Arabs (who are also semitic) in Egypt are also related to certain ethnicities who live in Ethiopia?
 
I'm never surprised by the ignorance of black/African nationalists and Afrocentrists. I'm pretty sure that Egypt was settled by Indo-Europeans and other semitic peoples. Would it ever occur to them that Arabs (who are also semitic) in Egypt are also related to certain ethnicities who live in Ethiopia?
Early Ethiopia even has a proven Semitic connection in its language and monuments. The archaeology is pretty conclusive that the people there were mutually intelligible to, and traded often with, the Arabian Peninsula and had a very linked culture to the Sabaeans of Yemen in particular in the earliest period (as there are Sabaean temples in the area). In the definitively black period there is also a lot of art of Arabian monarchs traveling to Ethiopia or meeting with Ethiopians and having cultural and social exchange with them across the gulf.

So for sure Arabs were there since prehistory, but it would never occur to them because they don't care.
 
Here's something for this thread. Used to work with a guy who claims black people are the true native Americans and therefore as a true native American he doesn't have to pay taxes and also you only need a driver license if you're driving for commercial purposes, if it's personal reasons it's "travelling" and you don't need a license. I saw his bullshit we wuz sovereign citizens ID and I tracked it down to this site. It's a good mix of we wuz and tax evasion. Example from image search (NOT the guy I worked with):
maxresdefault.jpg
 
Here's something for this thread. Used to work with a guy who claims black people are the true native Americans and therefore as a true native American he doesn't have to pay taxes and also you only need a driver license if you're driving for commercial purposes, if it's personal reasons it's "travelling" and you don't need a license. I saw his bullshit we wuz sovereign citizens ID and I tracked it down to this site. It's a good mix of we wuz and tax evasion. Example from image search (NOT the guy I worked with):
View attachment 2060479
This is like legal cargo-cultism. It has all the trappings of a legitimate ID (with some oddities in word choice) but the person who made that website seems to have a limited degree of understanding for what law terms mean and why IDs have certain things on them.

It's all style and no substance.

Edit: Okay actually reading further on there's a mix of schizoid word-salad in there too. This is pretty wild. Sometimes it sounds a lot more sane and sometimes it's full-on Gangster Computer God type stuff.
 
Last edited:
Here's something for this thread. Used to work with a guy who claims black people are the true native Americans and therefore as a true native American he doesn't have to pay taxes and also you only need a driver license if you're driving for commercial purposes, if it's personal reasons it's "travelling" and you don't need a license. I saw his bullshit we wuz sovereign citizens ID and I tracked it down to this site. It's a good mix of we wuz and tax evasion. Example from image search (NOT the guy I worked with):
View attachment 2060479
Check the Nuwaubians too, a wonderful mix of kangery and Nation of Islam to learn more about the Moorish Indian heritage of the black man. This was their compound, until the white man put their leader Dr. Malachi Z. York/Chief Black Eagle/many other names in prison for life for molesting kids and used the Yakubian tricknology of civil asset forfeiture to seize sovereign Moorish land.

IMG_0821.JPG
They discovered in the 90s that they wuz Injunz and organized as an Indian tribe called the Yamasee Native American Moors who came from Africa and built all the mounds in the Southeast despite the white man tricking people into thinking otherwise like the red Injuns. However, the white man (spawn of the devil) still didn't recognize the poor Yamasee Moors and continues to oppress them. Unfortunately for the white man, because the mothership Nibiru is coming soon to bring the warriors to Earth to slay the white devils for all time and then the Yamasee Moors will be free at last.

There's also another one called the Washitaw Nation who are also a totally independent Native American tribe of proud Moors who get oppressed by the white man. One of these good sovereign Moorish Indians killed three cops a few years ago. I am unsure of tribal relations between the Yamasee Moors and the Washitaw Moors.
 
People tend not to take the hotep shit seriously, however in 2019 it came as close as I think it ever will come to mainstream relevence with that intensely silly independant article about Cleopatra:

Cleopatra should be played by a black actor – but not just because it might be more historically accurate​

Lady Gaga and Angelina Jolie may be in the running for the role, but casting a BAME actor is the only way to achieve anything close to equality within the film industry
The Daily Star has revealed that Lady Gaga and Angelina Jolie are competing for the title role in Sony’s upcoming, big-budget production of Cleopatra.

After the internet collectively groaned at yet another Cleopatra remake, a “whitewashing” debate began to emerge. Should Lady Gaga or Angelina Jolie, both white actors, be playing the Egyptian queen in the first place?

This question caused quite a stir, and Twitter has become a hotbed of conflicting theories. Some people insist that Cleopatra was ethnically Greek, explaining that Egypt's Alexandria-based rulers were descended from Alexander the Great's general, Ptolemy I Soter.

They argue that casting Gaga or Jolie wouldn’t count as whitewashing, because Cleopatra was in fact white.

Others want the iconic role be played by a black actor, citing revelations that Cleopatra’s mother was actually African (a theory that emerged after a skeleton, thought to belong to Cleopatra’s sister Princess Arsinoe, was found in Ephesus, Turkey).

Hollywood whitewashing controversies​


Blonde, white US actress Scarlett Johansson was announced to be playing the clearly Japanese character Motoko Kusanagi in Hollywood's Ghost in the Shell remake, much to the dismay of Asian film fans
Marvel sparked outrage when Anglo-Scottish actress Tilda Swinton was cast as Tibetan mystic The Ancient One alongside Benedict Cumberbatch in Doctor Strange
Zoe Saldana was criticised for 'blacking up' to play the considerably darker-skinned soul singer Nina Simone in Nina
The half Jewish, quarter Swedish actor was cast to play a Middle Eastern Prince in Disney's 2010 film
Some people are arguing that applying these dichotomous standards of whiteness and blackness to ancient Egypt is, in fact, unhelpful and anachronistic.

I’m no ancient historian; I have absolutely no idea which party is technically correct. But, ultimately, the answer to whether or not Cleopatra should be played by a white woman shouldn’t come from an ethnological examination of ancient Egypt.

The casting should be informed by the racial and social dynamics of today.

The whitewashing debate isn’t about encouraging incredibly geographically prescriptive casting; it’s not about finding an actor of Greek/Macedonian descent if we can prove that Cleopatra was of Greek/Macedonian descent. Obviously, this level of precision would hugely limit the dramatic range available to actors, and our art would suffer as a result.

However, the whitewashing debate is serving an incredibly important purpose: it highlights the more general, problematic trends within film and television, many of which disadvantage non-white actors in several ways.

Our obsession with telling the same stories over and over again, as well as our infatuation with traditional period dramas, greatly reduces the number of parts available for BAME actors.

While this remains the case, and production companies insist on maintaining this inadequate cinematic canon, the very least we can do is attempt to diversify the range of actors who are offered parts in these stories.

Cleopatra has already been played by many white women (Claudette Colbert, Vivien Leigh, and Elizabeth Taylor); we should be insisting that, this time around, the part goes to a black actor, regardless of the conclusion we reach about the ancient queen’s actual ethnicity.

Just to be clear; yes, I’m advocating a double standard. I’m saying that white people shouldn’t be given non-white parts, but that people of colour should be able to dramatically portray white-skinned figures.

I’m saying this not because I’m an “anti-white racist” but because, until we diversify the range of stories and scripts we develop, this is the only way to achieve anything close to ethnic equality within the film industry.

The limited number of parts for actors of colour (and even fewer for those with darker complexions) means that, for the time being, this double standard is entirely necessary.

The whitewashing debate is important, not because we’re desperate to curtail cultural fluidity in the dramatic arts, but because, currently, the system isn’t working for everyone.

We continue to cast white people in non-white parts, and we continue to favour light-skinned BAME actors, even when they’re supposed to be portraying dark-skinned people on-screen.

This is why, if Sony do insist on reimagining Cleopatra for the gazillionth time, the part should not be played by a white actor. If this role can be given to a black woman, it should be.

Nice of the author to state outright that she knows absolutely nothing about ancient history I guess. I thought research was supposed to be part of journalism? The fact that this medium-tier screed was published in a major newspaper is pretty amazing. Surely Macedonian-Greek actors deserve representation in media just as much as black people? After all, they do make up a much smaller minority.

Dunno why you'd want to claim Cleopatra for clout anyway, she wasn't exactly a great queen.

Here's a bonus nonsensical article from last year:
 
It's also insanely inefficient to make leather from human skin, or soap for that matter. There's not a lot of good uses for human corpses, although they compost well and you can grind them up as animal feed or fertilizer (however, the equipment usually isn't meant to process human corpses and no one ever built good machines for doing that aside from cheap shit I'm sure organized crime uses). Yes, the Nazis did make a few lampshades and bars of soap, but it was very rarely done. The soap was a few scientific experiments and the lampshades were a couple of Nazis who were curious about whether they could make a lampshade out of a Jew's skin.

I've never heard any of this done in the South during slavery. I know it's popular now to present the Confederate States and the slaveholding South as an American version of Nazi Germany and plantation slavery as akin to the Holocaust, but slaveowners didn't want to kill their slaves anymore than a car owner wants to smash it up for the hell of it. Price of a slave for most of American history was like the price of a new car, and not a shitty car either. Anyone slaveowner did shit like that would be flushing their money down the toilet and would be ostracized by their neighbors along with their entire family for all sorts of reasons.
There was one guy, I think, whos name escapes me right now. But the most notable example was probably Delphine LaLaurie.
Basically, there were loads of rumors that she was mistreating her slaves, and about 12 recorded deaths among her slaves which may or may not have been her. Then shit got weird. She was chasing an eight year old slave with a whip, the girl ended up falling off the roof. The LaLauries were investigated for that because a neighbor saw it, found guilty of illegal cruelty and had to forfeit nine slaves. Later, those nine slaves were bought by a relative and given back to the estate. So far, maybe serial killer maybe not, unsure. But, here's where things get bonkers.
The cook, who was chained to the stove, set a fire in a suicide attempt. She was afraid of the owners, because the slaves who got brought to the uppermost room never came back. Police, fire marshals, and even bystanders tried to evacuate the house and deadass broke down a door to find seven slaves hanging in shackles, mutilated, obviously tortured, and later they claimed to have been there for months. After the fire and mob was taken care of, the yard was dug up and they found bodies upon bodies.
Delphine later fled to France or something, fleeing the law. Crazy shit, but I can't remember any cannibalism off the top of my head.
 
Back