MALCOLM X WAS NOT A BLACK MAN
This is going to be an unpopular post but in order to carry out the final solution against our enemies we are going to need to refine the streams of thought that exists in the Kmtyw Community.
In all honesty, I personally do not consider myself to be a Blue Black Supremacist, I however do understand and respect where Blue Black Supremacists are coming from. Blue Black Supremacy states that all people who are Blue Black are genetically ethnically and biologically dominant and superior to all people who are not blue black.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/1f1633650f2d22d9eabb12a7582a443b.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/6e2f8b311db4de1619f5610b9ac29cea.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/59f03486407605b89ecf38d91099ee8b.jpg)
Blue Black Supremacy states that those who are Blue Black are racially pure perfect and the closest to God. Blue Black Supremacy signifies that those who are the darkest among us are destined to lead and rule the earth and that all those lighter than them are destined to submit and serve beneath them.
Again, I do not classify myself as a Blue Black Supremacist, but I respect and honor those who subscribe to Blue Black Supremacy because this stream of thought will be necessary in order to carry out the final solution against our enemies.
Now on the topic of race mixing and mixture, Blue Black Supremacists believe that Mulattos are absolutely not Kmtyw and that all individuals who are the descendants of Mulattos do not qualify as Kmtyw even if they are the children of a mulatto and a Black person. Using this standard, Malcolm X was not a Black man because one of his grandparents was a cracker. Because he was of cracker descent he and those like him do not qualify as Black/Kmtyw. Because Malcolm X was not Black his children also do not qualify as Black under the Blue Black Supremacy paradigm.
In comparison the Garveyite position on race States that all individuals who are of Kmtyw descent that identify as Kmtyw and fight for Kmtyw liberation qualify as Kmtyw. Under the Garveyite position, Malcolm X is an Kmtyw man by the nature of his deeds. I personally agree more with the Garveyite position than the Blue Black Supremacy position, but the Blue Black supremacy position is valid for the type of society that we live in.
There are indeed very reactionary components of the Blue Black Supremacy paradigm.
The wholesale slaughter of Albinos in places like Tanzania is one of these.
The Anti Colorist Anti Featurist extremists that one might find on social media is another reactionary variant of the Blue Black Supremacy paradigm. These are women that speak out against colorism and attack Black Male celebrities that promote colorism while supporting interracial relationships between Black women and yurugus (something that will produce more colorism). 90% of the anti colorist activists on social media fit directly into this category.
A true Anti Colorist purist would only support relationships between Dark Skinned women and Dark skinned men or Blue Black women and Blue Black men, however in most cases the anti colorist activists on social media are dark skinned female hypergamous seeking the financial resources of any and all race of men as opposed to true activists against colorism.
Most Blue Black Supremacists also have a political identification component to their ideology meaning that in order to classify as Black/Kmtyw one must be actively fighting against white terrorism.
This means that all people who are not revolutionaries against white terrorism are not Black and exist in the same category as Mulattos no matter how dark their skin is. Under this paradigm, these people and their children are not Black unless they fit into the culture of Kmtyw liberation.
The Blue Black Supremacy paradigm is very relevant in media. This is something that I actively support.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171212/8139e0c8dc78f107f626d2697dd50e60.jpg)
Under the Blue Black Supremacy paradigm 100% of the representation of all Black people in the media is and must remain Blue Black. This means that the darkest brothers and sisters among us are not only the first people in line, they are the only people in line and all Kmtyws who are not Blue Black are removed from the media.
Have you been to Kmt?
Many people have blue black parents but they themselves are lighter skinned how does one account for that?
Are their not so well endowed offspring culled? Are we talking Kmtyw eugenics?
Yes. Multiple times.
I am not a Blue Black Supremacist as I have previously stated. However, I do recognize the utility of the ideology today.
You have noticed that all in certain families or tribes are not blessed with obsidian glow?
If black "eugenics" is valid for Kmtyw people, is it valid for yurugu as well in their own distorted way?
That those with full melanin expression are genetically superior cannot be argued.
But what about other characteristics such as spiritual atunment or jumping ability or advanced analytical thought?
Or how about hearing or vision? Or sense of smell?
Why not improve the Kmtyw people by sharing that blue black melanin amongst those not so well endowed? Although these attributes are more common amongst blue black peoples not all have all characteristics
Your points are valid. Blue Black Supremacy is considered extremist and very radical. It is the radical promotion of Blue Black complexion in all aspects of life. The assumption is that Blue Black Kmtyws are superior in every aspect anf possibility of life. The working methodology of Blue Black Supremacist radicalism is founded upon this concept.
Word. I do have melanin envy. But I also wish I had better pitch and hearing and ability to jump.
In terms of color, they are absolutely right. This is why I don't align myself with saying I'm black. I align myself to the culture and the spiritual doctrine I adhere to. To say that you're black, is allowing the Cauceurasian to identify you by what he deems is your political and/or corporate designation.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=88213)
I feel the sentiment of such a directive but its VERY dangerous. do you recall what happen somewhere in Kmt around 1994? That was a direct result of a similar mentality.
The real problem with mixed offspring is they are always left in the hands of the enemy.
Instead of taking his legacy after realizing incompatibility with the west eureurasian female, he leaves his offspring with her and her pale family.
For example look how Malcom X turned out as opposed to Obammer?
One died for us. The other sold out!
The aAmws infiltrated Kmt by taking Kmtyw women having children with them and ensuring they take up after the father.
This doesnt mean go have babies with people who need sunscreen. Just saying it would be a different situation if an Kmtyw man stayed with his offspring instead of leaving em to the pale as that has been used against us since the greeks and probably before.
@cuitocunavale I enjoy many of your post and you probably mean well but this post is very ignorant.
Sent from my XT1585 using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=88213)
What do these representations of Tutankhamen mean to ya'll?
Is one black and the other not black? From my studies it suggest before Maafa we understood in mass that it's the blackness within that counts not without. By this viewpoint point grandcestor Malcolm X is blacker than anyone on this forum as his actions show regardless of color. This creates division our enemies reading this post would surely be pleased with. The mere fact someone responded to this post as justification for not calling themselves black is enough evidence of this division. Should darkness be promoted? absolutely but only to the extent it will lead to the restoration of our freedom and MA"AT. This idea of separating us more based on complexion most certainly does not help anyone but our enemies. Suggesting grandcestor Malcolm X is anything less than black=Afrakan is extremely disrespectful and you should be ashamed. Nothing posted here is revolutionary, or MA'ATic it's just pure ignorance.
You mention "Bio D", from a biological/scientific standpoint your post is ignorant on many levels. Please study genotype, phenotype, and the epigenetic link between the two before disrepecting your grandcestor. There is no understanding of biology and genetics here. I can provide some sources of study if you or whomever wishes.
Further aligning the present science with our ancestors wisdom (spiritual-science): it is the brain (in part neuromelain/internal blackness) that sees, touches, hears, taste, and smells not the ears eyes etc. In short if you have a crakkas brain and put it in a black body the crakka won't be able to hear, move, taste, and think like us/ they wont be black. In other words if you have the blackest body on the planet but are indoctrinated with a Eureurasian mind ya not gonna promote liberation and MA'AT/ will not be black=Afrakan.
Black=Afrakan Afrakan=black, it's that simple, if anyone doesn't recognize yourself when ya see yourself then go study or go to sleep. If you don't want to be Black=Afrakan then why are you here?
Show your grandcestors more respect, and study more before spreading such ignorance. To anyone reading please don't use this or any other excuse to not call yourself or someone Black=Afrakan, it's doing nothing but digging our graves for genocide.
QuoteSankofaMA'AT;259290 wrote: @cuitocunavale I enjoy many of your post and you probably mean well but this post is very ignorant.
Sent from my XT1585 using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=88213)
I am not and have never identified as a Blue Black Supremacist. I do however recognize the utility of the ideology and philosophy in this current world that we live in. I hope this distinction makes sense.
I am not and have never identified as a Blue Black Supremacist. I do however recognize the utility of the ideology and philosophy in this current world that we live in. I hope this distinction makes sense.
Black Roots Science states that it takes seven generations of 'mulattoes' descendants deliberately and only breeding with whites to remove the black gene. This means that even blacks who marry whites are black, whether they think they are or not!
On the issue of colorism, I thought colorism was light skin preferance (or the reverse). An anti-colorist would then be against any measuring by skin tone criteria..
(//ppMigration/259626=10377-984682583_a62a81b7d3_z.jpg) (//ppMigration/259626=10377-984682583_a62a81b7d3_z.jpg)
(//ppMigration/259626=10378-download.jpeg) (//ppMigration/259626=10378-download.jpeg)
Repost-
Which one is black?
Before maafa we didn't seemed to be so confused and understood that it's the melanin inside that counts not the outside. By that count Malcolm X is blacker than anyone here, as his actions and sacrfices show.
Sent from my XT1585 using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=88213)
"Malcolm X isn't black" is a very disrespectful utterance regardless of context. Our enemies would cheer the entertainment of such division
Surley if our enemies know how to group us together so can we.
Afrakan=black black=Afrakan it's that simple.
Sent from my XT1585 using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=88213)
Biologically speaking please study a bit about genotype, phenotype, and Epigenetics before spreading divisive ignorance and disrespecting a grandcestor. We came in many shades before the amu existed.
Sent from my XT1585 using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=88213)
In the context of this discussion, Malcolm X was not black according to the Blue Black Supremacist paradigm because one of his parents was a mulatto(half cracker) and because he had a significant amount of white blood running through his veins to not be considered Black by Blue Black Supremacists.
I would like to reiterate that I personally am not a Blue Black Supremacist and do not agree with Blue Black Supremacists on many topics. However I understand why they feel the way they do.
In the Garveyite context, Malcolm X was a Black Man because if his identification and his actions to back that up. I personally agree with the Garveyite position more but I do recognize that many especially Blue Black Supremacists reject all Mulattos and the descendants of Mulattos even if they happen to be Black.
Please give us a reference to this so called blue black supremacy doctrine. Your post is the first time I've heard of this. And thus although you deny ascribing to said philosophy, you nevertheless are promoting it.
A quick web search found your post here as the the only hit on blue black supremacy
QuoteLion-O;259456 wrote: Black Roots Science states that it takes seven generations of 'mulattoes' descendants deliberately and only breeding with whites to remove the black gene. This means that even blacks who marry whites are black, whether they think they are or not!
On the issue of colorism, I thought colorism was light skin preferance (or the reverse). An anti-colorist would then be against any measuring by skin tone criteria..
It is also stated that one shouldn't question love, but once person is conscious that they are weakening the gene-pool, interracial relations IS a sin!
I wanted to read more about 'colorism' and eugenics, so I can say something with regards to something that has already been said. But this post burns me up (I think I can put it under my 'pet peeves'), because it is demeaning to some. I myself for a long time considered my self on the blackest end of the scale in terms of physical appearance. I have even been (and made aware) that I was darkest member of a group (one incident stands out from my childhood). Pictures like the ones in this thread remind me otherwise.
Dr Frances Cress Welsing herself broke it down when she described how even children of mixed couples are not considered white when they go to white institutions. I say if you are not white, you must be black. Someone else in this thread speaks of men leaving their mixed babies with the whites. I think the opposite is true, that it's the whites who hold resentment to their dark children if that is possible...
Another thing is that @cuitocanavale, you say you can see where blue black supremacy wiould be useful, but you haven't given examples or points to support that.
I only replied to this thread because I am always irked by this sentiment, and I seem to be coming across it a lot lately. Perhaps I even thought the title would dissappear off my dash!
"I say if you are not white, you must be black"
^^
That is complete & utter nonsense. If you don't understand the concept of being EXCLUSIVE, then you shouldn't be talking about empowerment of ACTUAL Kmtyw people at all.