Rootsie Homepage | Weblog | Tracey | Ayanna | Reasoning Forum | AmonHotep
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 13, 2017, 05:41:45 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  Rootsie
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10

 21 
 on: September 03, 2009, 02:25:59 AM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by discipleofmaat
******I think it would also be good to do a comparative study of other imperial(isms) throughout the world - ones that may not necessarily have the influence of any of the players we are discussing here.*******


Why?
The world is not being massacred and exploited and depleted by those holding Mithraic or Zoroastrianistic or other imperialistic principles.   The world is being terrorized CLEARLY and PRESENTLY by those who are indoctrinated with non-paganic, sole-male-God semitism...be it Judaic, Christian, or Islamic, you will see a similar track record and wake of destruction by each branch...regardless of "who did it too or beforehand".  That's like absolving Obama of any complicity by bringing up what Bush did before him.  TODAY, we are under the 'regime' of Obama.  And nothing has changed.

I would stand firmly AGAINST any push to incriminate Bush of anything without naming Carter, Clinton, Bush 1 and Obama as co-defendants.

In my dictionary, the definition of 'pagan' is a person who is not xtian, moslem or jew.  Boy, pagan is a very vague grouping isn't it?  So why can't I use "semitism" in the same context.

Explain the empirical differences between either of the Semitic-3...they all call for a messiah...they all call for damnation to outsiders/gentiles...they all call for male supremacy and female subservience...they all call for a jealous, angry, wrathful, spooky, ass-whuppin detached God...and they ALL demonize/inferiorize/terrorize 'earth-dwellers', those who lived upon nature.

And I supposed be delighted and a ease to know that Kungans and Mithraics and Kurds and Zoroastrianists and Persians and Akkadians and Mesopotamians or whoever else did some dirt too?!?!

Maybe some semites would feel comfortable with that but not I.

It would not make me feel better about my family being murdered in their home knowing that Charles Manson did the same thing about 40 years ago.

Show me the DIVINE JUSTIFICATION in a Mithric holy-text that justifies my CURRENT people's land invasions and enslavement...I eagerly await.


Going back in history just to find some sort of absolution is escapist.

Actually, to respond to your inclusion of Kemetic sources, I think you are DEAD ON when it comes to the analysis of Egypt as a source.  Egypt was in fact an "empire".  Empire does not mean hugs and smiles for the masses.  But regardless, we are not both under an unliberated planet because of Kemetians but by those who have extrapolated and mastered power/control mechanisms from the Afrikan/Kemetic entirety.

Egypt is known as the foundation of Western civilization.  The secret societies know and practice this.  The Semitic-3 are nothing but manifestations of control upon the masses by these societies.

Also, you basically admitted that singular-male-Godism (monotheism) was shared by the most notorious oppressors throughout history. 

You nor Rootsie can find me an example of a supreme-sole female-god culture that oppressed and/or invaded other lands.  Nor can you absolve semites from complicity.

My people were not massacred and enslaved, nor was the activity bankrolled by white european pagans.  EVERY aspect of the oppression of the people of the Afrikan continent was done by the hand of some male in the semitic family, one way or another.

Why not refute that last statement and send me to bed.

 22 
 on: September 02, 2009, 03:39:31 AM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by three_sixty
OK. I'm not trying to argue sides here. I am trying to reach for a more "nuanced" approach to history - and (at least trying to)bring many ideas to bear on the table. I think you both bring up important points and perhaps the truth is in bringing it all in.

It seems that Rootsie is saying that the European(ism) is "most to blame" and you are saying that it is the "Semitism" as you define it that is "most to blame"(in regards to European expansionism and imperialism).  I'm trying to integrate it all - I don't think it does any good to try to pinpoint one specific thing when all things interact(including things which I am not even considering) to give us the story.

I think it would also be good to do a comparative study of other imperial(isms) throughout the world - ones that may not necessarily have the influence of any of the players we are discussing here. What would we find then?




 23 
 on: September 02, 2009, 12:48:57 AM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by discipleofmaat
Before I respond, I just want to let you know that you basically completely refuted Rootsie's premise of the sourcing/roots of the worldwide terrorism being "evil european man".

Unless you can cite in her original post where what you stated was touched upon.

 24 
 on: September 01, 2009, 08:28:26 PM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by three_sixty
I think you may have missed the point of my posting. You said: "However, you will not find an assembly of texts that have been forced upon the masses from the Persians or Greeks or Mithrans or Romans. In other words, semitism is self-indicted by its own writs."

If you take all of the quotes I have assembled, instead of picking out ONE and talking about it, you may have a clearer picture of what I was trying to point out. Maybe I was wrong in assuming you would understand and need to give more explanation as to my thought process. So - here it goes:

A confluence of forces are what create what is. Karibkween was pointing out that the general ideology of what you are labelling "Semitism" in fact has a greater history that begins far before Judaism, Islam or Christianity came on the scene. My quote was meant to show the general thread of what was to become monotheism and how this impulse was one and the same of empire creation which united many people under the banner of one god(administration). If you read the source from which I picked my quote from, it makes the argument that Judaism is a forged religion, with much of its history written after the purported facts actually were said to occur. It is the creation of a history of a people in retrospect. It goes on to state that in fact - "Israel" may very well have been an outpost for Persian empire which already had the monotheistic/empire trajectory.

The Assyrian universal state that the Persians took over, with the brief interlude of Babylon, had a god called Ashur (Asshur, Assur) who was depicted as a man rising from a winged solar disc and shooting a bow or offering a ring, often thought to be a diadem or coronet but probably symbolising a bond (like a wedding ring) or covenant such as we find often in the Hebrew scriptures.

Brahma and Abraham - think of the Aryan invasions of India - think how there are a confluence of things coming together which are shaping cultures and ideologies.

"The general historical trend to the world state was not altered by the change of central power when the Persians became leaders after the Mesopotamians. The Persians had been students of the Assyrians in the several hundred years that they had taken to move into Iran, and they or their allies the Indo-European Scythians had been mercenaries of the Assyrians. The refined culture and science of the long established civilisations of Syria and Mesopotamia merged with the vigour and technical innovations of the warlike Aryan invaders from the north"

Judaism is but a small branch of these historical processes. The question is - how are Jews different from the historical processes and cultures involved which went into forming their ideology and identity? The monotheistic impulse did not start with them, the conversion of an empire through the usage of religion did not start with them. So where is "semitism" in all of this? How broad can we push that term, and, at what point, do we need to start using a different term that is more encompassing of these processes? Where does the "Semitic" differ from the "Aryan" - and how do we even seperate them when they both intertwined at some point to become a new culture?

 "The refined culture and science of the long established civilisations of Syria and Mesopotamia merged with the vigour and technical innovations of the warlike Aryan invaders from the north"

What about "Alexander the Great" - I would like to know how much he was influenced by the Aryan/Semitic impulse - what inspired him as an Empire builder?

Now remember - a large religion in the Roman Empire prior to the conversion to Christianity was Mithraism - a Persian import. Christianity seems to be a hybrid of Mithraism and Judaism - perhaps here we have another revision and synthesis of Aryan and Semitic ideology - and now (ah yes we need to take this into account) - in the Roman Empire context. It was the military in Rome that had the most adherents to Mithraism - Mithra was believed to have a sword in hand at birth.  Ah yes - "IN THIS SIGN YOU SHALL CONQUER!"

So - what happens now when all of this happens and COMBINES with what Rootsie observed?. . .

"To ask why the Europeans robbed and enslaved the globe, I think a map explains a lot, this tiny (paranoid) peninsula jutting out into the North Sea. . . " and "What I see is a map that shows this little northwest corner (Europe) of this enormous landmass hanging out there in the north Atlantic subject to wave on wave of disastrous invasions from the east, defining itself in opposition to a varying 'them'"

. . . you have the aspects of paranoia, chosenism, and militarism that are the combined effect of all these factors. To pick out ONE and say "a-ha this is it" - at least in the context of European expansionism would only serve to obfuscate the COMBINATION of factors that created European imperialism.

Gerald Massey:

"69.     The field of Babylonian Mythology is one vast battle-ground between the early Motherhood and the later Fatherhood—that is, the Mother in space, in the stellar and lunar characters opposed to the later and solar Fatherhood, which became more especially Semite; indeed, where the Akkadians wrote the "female and the male," the Semite translators prepensely reverse it, and render it by the "male and the female." This setting up of the supreme God as solely Male, to the exclusion of the female, has often been erroneously attributed to a supposed "Monotheistic Instinct" originating with the Semites! In Egypt the solar Fatherhood had been attained in the sovereignty of Atum-Ra, when the records begin; but this same battle went on all through her monumental history, more fiercely when the Heretics, the Motherites, the Blackheads, were now and again reinforced by allies from without."

source: http://gerald-massey.org.uk/Massey/dpr_05_hebrew_and_other.htm

He says that male monotheism came from Egypt originally. So would it be fair to also make an argument that Egypt is the source of the ideology that caused Europe's imperialism(this is if we are sticking to your premise that male monotheism was what was the most poignant factor).

Personally I would say no - because we are not taking into context all the factors that make situations unique. And I hope that we can acknowledge that this is always the case when dealing with history. I don't know if we can isolate so easily.









 25 
 on: September 01, 2009, 05:21:49 PM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by discipleofmaat
****Richard Frye of Harvard (The Heritage of Persia) thought the Persian kings had a concept of “One World” and the “fusion of all people and cultures” in one “Oecumen” was their important legacy, inherited by Alexander, the Romans and the Arabs. In ancient times “culture” essentially was religion."****

There is no argument to this.  However, you will not find an assembly of texts that have been forced upon the masses from the Persians or Greeks or Mithrans or Romans.

In other words, semitism is self-indicted by its own writs.

As we can see by today's human behavior, once we are detached from harmony with nature, we fall into chaos.  Religion re-tied/replaced this chaos/void with a notion of order which had a detrimental side-effect.  This was the acceptance of the hierarchical arrangements as dictated by holy-writs and edicts implemented by the controlling/ruling class (those mentioned 'evil european men').

This is the foundation of "whiteness".  There was no whiteness awareness per se before the conversion to christianity.  Christianity manifested a worldview amongst the Europeans of superiority by the will and grace of GOD ALMIGHTY.  Who dared argue that?  This divine superiority fueled the expansive endeavors of the Age of Discovery, Enlightenment, Renaissance, etc.

There was not even racism during Columbus's travels.  There was ANTI-PAGANISM.  It was upon the complete conversion of Europe to semitic xtianity that non-saved infidelism, demonization and inferiorization was attributed to those with pigmentation (non-whites) and women, thus the birth of whiteness/racism (white MALE supremacy) borne from xenophobia and ethnocentrism.  Before this, the Normans vs. the Vikings vs. the Nordics vs. the Anglos vs. the Germanics vs. the Slavics was business as usual.

Ironically, everyone had their own stinking, filthy unwashed "gentiles".  Anti-semitism is a result of xtians looking at jews as gentiles in their minds...the xtians look at arabs as gentiles...and ALL THREE look at Afrikans and others as gentiles.

ANTI-GENTILISM
ANTI-PAGANISM
XENOPHOBIA
ETHNOCENTRISM
CLASSISM
SEXISM
RACISM
RELIGIOUSISM

"...isms, schism and more divisions", right 360?

I even had the wisdomism/ageism card played when Rootsie continuously states how old she is (I will not repeat, lol).

We just get bought into all these notions and we lose focus of the Omnipresent truths that surround us, of course tainted by man-made identities.

We are supposed to be seeking truth, from my assumption of these blogs and forums.  This reasoning proves that indoctrinated identities, including religion, nationality, race, etc., are the obstacles that prevent our harmonic unity.

Instead of playing the "well what about others" card.  I think it would be productive and progressive to our development if we FIRST analyzed what we have been engrained with and accept as our identity.

I have more than analyzed and criticized what it means to be a MALE and my own privileges, contributions and complicity to the oppression.  All I ask is if others are willing to do the same.

Rootsie has been at the forefront of identifying her own complicity and contributions via whiteness.  And it is commendable.  In fact, I think very highly of her for doing so.  But whiteness is not the only categorization that needs analysis.

By the defense/protection mechanisms alone should we suspect something behind the veil.

As I have said before, you know where the treasure vault is by the number of guards protecting it.

THE BASIS/SOURCE OF ANTI-SEMITISM IS SEMITISM ITSELF.  Its the chicken come home to roost.

 26 
 on: August 31, 2009, 02:45:57 PM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by three_sixty
There are a lot of important things being touched on in this reasoning. As Rootsie pointed out, European expansionism was a "perfect storm" - and there were many contributing factors. Here are some quotes from different reasonings that I have listed here that I think are important to keep in mind, in my opinion that is!

Rootsie:

"What I see is a map that shows this little northwest corner (Europe) of this enormous landmass hanging out there in the north Atlantic subject to wave on wave of disastrous invasions from the east, defining itself in opposition to a varying 'them',"

Discipleofmaat:

"semitic ideology amalgamated europe into a world order,"

Karibkween:

"Who said Semitism began in Canaan? What of Brahminism? Show me proof that Abraham came before Brahman
Who said Egypt was spared from semitism?"

http://www.askwhy.co.uk/judaism/0180PersiaJudaism.php:

"The general historical trend to the world state was not altered by the change of central power when the Persians became leaders after the Mesopotamians. The Persians had been students of the Assyrians in the several hundred years that they had taken to move into Iran, and they or their allies the Indo-European Scythians had been mercenaries of the Assyrians. The refined culture and science of the long established civilisations of Syria and Mesopotamia merged with the vigour and technical innovations of the warlike Aryan invaders from the north.note: sounds familiar to the European story - two cultures merging, remember 'in this sign you shall conquer" - me

Dix writes that Zoroastrianism, Mithraism and the solar monotheism of Akhenaten “appear” to have been born under Syriac influence. Perhaps they would “appear” thus to a Catholic monk, who believed the myths of Moses, but “appear” betrays nothing other than an opinion. When the myths of the Jewish scriptures are recognized as fiction then Judaism can no longer rival Zoroastrianism in antiquity and proper priorities can be established. A world state was the way of enforcing stability and was obviously welcomed by most people, but especially trading peoples and those making specialized products for trade. Besides the use of military and administrative means of control, such empires depended on the propagation of a universal religion. The Assyrian universal state that the Persians took over, with the brief interlude of Babylon, had a god called Ashur (Asshur, Assur) who was depicted as a man rising from a winged solar disc and shooting a bow or offering a ring, often thought to be a diadem or coronet but probably symbolising a bond (like a wedding ring) or covenant such as we find often in the Hebrew scriptures. The Persian god, Ahuramazda, was depicted in a similar way as a man rising head and shoulders above a solar disc also offering a ring, or sometimes apparently a blessing. . . . Richard Frye of Harvard (The Heritage of Persia) thought the Persian kings had a concept of “One World” and the “fusion of all people and cultures” in one “Oecumen” was their important legacy, inherited by Alexander, the Romans and the Arabs. In ancient times “culture” essentially was religion."


 27 
 on: August 30, 2009, 03:58:14 PM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by discipleofmaat
Why do you keep associating my statements with "Jews"?  You talk about ME not reading someone's posts.  I made that point crystal clear I thought in my first response...and I also clarified it in my post on other boards, namely that good ol' anti-semitic breeding ground, Rastafari Speaks, according to you.

I asked you to specifically cite the anti-semitic statements you claim...no response.

This is getting ridiculous.



It is typical european and semite protectionism to use the "well look at them" card...we aren't the only "bad" people on Earth.  If the Japanese or Aztecs had taken over and tainted the entire planet then perhaps we would be looking into their ideologies/foundations...but they did not.

EUROPEANS DID and are still at it.


I asked you to tell me specifically which european tribe/clan these "evil european men" belonged to who you concluded were responsible for the folly.  And you criticize others for 'generalizing' yet leave a generalized statement like that on the table.

C'mon...you are satisfied with the 'big bad evil european man' conclusion?

My argument is that european man was corrupted by semitic ideology.
My argument is that semitic ideology is responsible for white/male supremacy.

First of all, semitic ideology amalgamated europe into a world order, in their case based upon the semitic branch of christianity.  Secondly, because semitism is associated with a universal/omnipresent/supreme God, it sanctions the same replicated behavior by men who buy into it here on Earth.  God created a planet for your disposal...with your authorized dominion.  So 'bad european man' simply acted upon his divine responsibilities in his mind.

Like father, like son.
Monkey see, monkey do.
As above, so below.

If this did not originate from a spiritual justification supported by holy-writs and divine directorates then hone me in the right direction.  Edify me.

What made Europe so powerful?
Was not Europe unified and regulated by the Papal superiority catholic wing of semitic religion?
Catholics do/did encompass the Old Testament into their canon don't they?

*******I'm here to say that the Goddess is alive and well in the person of Mary in people's hearts and in countless astonishing treasures, for all the good it ever did the people of Spain, who have suffered so much.*******

Please spare me this "the mother is revered in Spain" thing.  Mary was just some lady who followed divine orders and was utilized to give birth.  The "Blessed Virgin" did a good job and played an important role for God.  You are not going to tell me that Mary is on par with the Creator in Spain or anywhere else.

Are you so indoctrinated by male supremacy that you are accepting of subservient and contributory females...good ol' Betsy Ross?  good ol' Florence Nightingale?  good ol' Ruth?  good ol' Mary of Magdalene?   It reminds me of the legend of some good black man who helped Jesus carry his cross.  Ahh shucks, what a good guy.

And while you are at it, also edify me on this horrible holocaustic Spanish suffering.  I am eager to here of their enslavement and other atrocities...and for the simply reason of being Spanish.

 28 
 on: August 30, 2009, 01:11:30 AM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by Rootsie
This spring I went to Spain for the first time, which is where my family came from. I'm here to say that the Goddess is alive and well in the person of Mary in people's hearts and in countless astonishing treasures, for all the good it ever did the people of Spain, who have suffered so much.

 29 
 on: August 30, 2009, 01:04:20 AM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by Rootsie
There’s two threads that run through this: first there’s the labeling by you Disciple of everything bad as ‘Semitic’ which is frankly just weird to me, and dangerous too for that matter. Just when was it that worship and embrace of  the feminine principle translated into equality and justice in the affairs of humans? Maybe 13 or 14 thousand years ago, maybe never. We don’t really know. In any of the ancient times we know about, worship of goddesses didn’t mean women ran anything or even had a voice.. Au contraire. I am intrigued by the idea that the patriarchy first arose as a violent response to a more female-centered societal structure, and the book Blood Relations that I reviewed is so cool in that regard. It invites us to envision a more humane world.

The Chinese and Japanese are not Semites. Those crazy Aztecs weren’t either. I could go on and on citing cultures that degraded women and made slaves of strangers  and exploited the powerless who have no relation to Semitic history, even in the extraordinarily broad way you choose to define it.

The other thread is European history. I don’t know how European history can be seen as a story of the rise of the Jews. As I’ve said before, I look at Jews playing the part they always did when they were viziers to sultans—they get the blame when a fall guy is needed. The immolation of whole cities full of Jews is a big feature of European history, and the stereotyping and demonization of Jews almost constant. Again, using the term “semitic’ for both Christians and Jews (and Muslims) muddies important distinctions. It might just be my own family history, but Christian Europe is a far more recent and poignant and deadly manifestation of nasty human tendencies toward fear of ‘the other’, exploitation of ‘the weak’, greed, and power lust. Are these primarily male problems? I don’t feel to even touch that one. To ask why the Europeans robbed and enslaved the globe, I think a map explains a lot, this tiny (paranoid) peninsula jutting out into the North Sea. We can debate whether their theology was principally to blame. I go back and forth about it, but I think it was probably a ‘perfect storm’ of factors. The Catholic Fathers in Europe largely invented the more appalling aspects of that theology anyway.

There are Jewish bankers, Jewish financiers, Jewish media moguls, and a bunch of messed-up Jews running Israel. The Jews have shown a certain brilliance for fitting right in, but Christians built the modern West and North, not the Jews. I don’t think I could be convinced otherwise. There have always been Jews, Christians, and Muslims who have stood for the good and noble parts of us. We’re so all mixed up, so many parts to us.

As a poor kid, I always feel like it’s the rich and powerful, whoever they are, that comprise the problem. That’s a generalization that stands up over the entire span of known history. The construction of whiteness is a devastating problem, poisoning every good thing that’s been created or done by Europeans for 500 years, and renders so so many things morally ambiguous. The version of anti-Semitism that reared up in the 19th century made Jews into a ‘race’ unworthy of life. Did Jews behind the scenes dream that up to cover up their crimes?  I cannot imagine,

I am as irritated as anybody by the ways the Israelis in particular exploit their history as a cudgel to silence criticism.  There are Jews who use accusations of anti-Semitism to conceal their complicity. I will never believe that at some unspecified date or dates somebody got together to mastermind modern history. They might have tried, I guess, but it definitely got away from them. I guess it might come down to our conflicting views of the world. I sympathize with seeking a framework from which to understand events, but I have come to question how helpful that is, let alone how accurate. I see the all-too-familiar patterns in human history. What really distinguishes this time from the ancient ones IMO is the capacities technology has given those whose tendencies run towards oppressing and dehumanizing others to go crazy with it to the point of wrecking the entire biosphere. On the other hand, this same technology has given us the ability for the first time in human history to regard ourselves all together and communicate together and work on behalf of one another.

 30 
 on: August 29, 2009, 06:58:53 PM 
Started by Rootsie - Last post by discipleofmaat
give thankhs for the elaborated response.

I see that you have included moslems within the 'semitic' umbrella along with jews.  All we need to analyze is the christian impact and we have covered the 3 families of the semitic mafia.

*******I would not place historical culpability on one group or ideology - that would be generalization - I would rather explore how different cultures interacted and amalgamated.*******

But why spite 'generalizing' just for the sake of not generalizing?  What if the shoe fits?

Why could we not seek if in fact "THE" ideology of divine sanctioning via those chosen to implement the sanctioning (as shared by xtians, moslems and jews alike) is the foundation of ALL ills imparted by Europeans across the globe.

Otherwise, help me identify some other ideologies/sources that may be culpable.

What could be a stronger influence on human behavior other than the indoctrination of 'The Father' God-force which is singular, detached, angry, and punitive for those who do not comply...not to mention the demotion of 'The Mother'.  If a mother were included within the divinity structure on par with the father, humans would naturally place the same value upon feminine essences/qualities instead of demonizing and inferiorizing them as does ALL of the semitic/monotheistic triad.

-always

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!