So by you responding to me in English aren't you admitting to be a mental slave? Can a slave free a slave?
I don't understand why you'd rather narrow everything down but permit me say here that to learn something does not make a man a slave to that thing. Yes a man is a slave to it when he/she is under the influence or feel bound by that 'thing’. So, what I readily admit is that I certainly don't 'think in English’ (or any language for that matter) Language and intellect are independent entities with clearly distict characters.
servitude means a man is follower i.e. being under the influence, be it of religion, of listening to music, of driving a car and so on. WRT d above, if you’d allowed me modify your statement: ‘Can a slave free a slave?’ to Can a ‘freed slave’ free another, I'd say yes and urge you on Ndigila
Back to your previous question of are you Africanist, Atheist, bili bala, and assuming you know the meaning of the wards, I’ll like to say Language is the brainchild of man and you’d agree with me that we do think even before we start to utter intelligible sounds. I’m of the view that to qualify a man as this or that is a convenience and simplification of a greater truth i.e. if there is and that is why I said I don’t know.
And there are nowadays too many conveniences that the black man has virtually stopped to think. The most evil of all those conveniences is religion because it offers you an easy alternative, HOPE.
Jehovah is a white man’s God.
I don't understand why you'd rather narrow everything down but permit me say here that to learn something does not make a man a slave to that thing. Yes a man is a slave to it when he/she is under the influence or feel bound by that 'thing’. So, what I readily admit is that I certainly don't 'think in English’ (or any language for that matter) Language and intellect are independent entities with clearly distict characters.
with this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atabong
But merely WRT inseparability of language and ideologies it becomes self evident that the black man has not become Christian by choice.
So, language and ideologies are inseparable but language and intellect are. Keeping in mind those two statements, why am I a mental slave if I use my intellect to align myself with a certain ideology?
Point of the question is what exactly do you intend to do with that freedom? You claim that the black man needs to have his mind liberated etc. When all is said and done, then what?
Do you want to invent new ideologies independent of 'mental slavery' or do you want a revival of African ideologies that had no white man's influence?
By the way, why do you think that question was an insult?
So, language and ideologies are inseparable but language and intellect are. Keeping in mind those two statements, why am I a mental slave if I use my intellect to align myself with a certain ideology?
Language and ideologies are inseparable
Language and intellect can be defined and cahracterised
Let's not engage in a battle of wards ndigila . If I were to analyse these statements I'd do so in context
At this point in time we are going to keep going around in circles so i'm going to say my final word on this.
You began by introducing two inseparable entities (language and ideologies) and when I asked why you accepted the language and rejected the ideologies, you introduced a third entity (intellect) independent of the two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atabong
Language and intellect are independent entities with clearly distict characters.
Then, I questioned why am I still a slave if I used my intellect to align myself with a certain ideology and you responded by saying:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atabong
Language and ideologies are inseparable
Language and intellect can be defined and cahracterised
Notice how you removed the phrase independent entities for your convenience
The reason I had to engage you in this 'battle of words' is because when your back is against the wall, you change definitions and introduce new ideas to get yourself out of the hole you put yourself in. If this discussion keeps going on, what's to prevent you from continuing to do so in the future? It will always be a win-win situation for yourself.
Having said that, i've come to this conclusion. By all means, you refuse to accept that a black man can, of his own free will, choose what you're calling "a white man's ideology." Whenever a black man says he is a Christian/(insert foreign ideology here), you automatically conclude that he is a mental slave that needs to be set free. Your presuppositions don't allow you to accept that he could have taken all things into account and, of his own free will, chosen that ideology.
ndigila
At this point in time we are going to keep going around in circles so i'm going to say my final word on this.
i've come to this conclusion. By all means, you refuse to accept that a black man can, of his own free will, choose what you're calling "a white man's ideology." Whenever a black man says he is a Christian/(insert foreign ideology here), you automatically conclude that he is a mental slave that needs to be set free.
Please don't be offended but I'm observing that you are a fanatic
In the midst of all this confusion let it be known that I said:
1. Jehova is a whiteman's creation (Resaponse to your question)
2. A black African worshiping it is eighther under some kind of delusion or as I have said before:is using it to frighten and subdue others for power and for money etc.
ndigila
Quote:
Point of the question is what exactly do you intend to do with that freedom? You claim that the black man needs to have his mind liberated etc. When all is said and done, then what?
Do you want to invent new ideologies independent of 'mental slavery' or do you want a revival of African ideologies that had no white man's influence?
You suppose that I intend to do something with it because that is what you have been conditioned to think and question, so it is you who is doing something by saying that I intend to do something.
I stand alone, in an eternal eternity and advocate for awareness. Let this advocacy mean nothing, I still advocate because that's my part of the music -advocacy, to point to the darkening and thundering clouds and shout out, look, look, it's about to rain
yeah. however, we don't read about an African holding a spear or assegai to the throats of the Greeks (or any other non-african civilization) saying, "accept my religious beliefs or else..."?. It seems this religious imposition was suffered overwhelmingly by Africans at the hands of the world's dominant religions.
At the same time let's not forget that there's some who are Christians by choice and it would be unfair to say all have fallen into the trap of mental slavery.
language (at least Afro-Europhonic ones) is a colonial by-product. i don't think it was much of a choice. I asked a Senegalese jamaa if he spoke any French, and his reply was, "not by choice". i thought his nonchalant yet interesting reply spoke volumes.
no. mental slavery is when you look at the back cover of an exercise book in primary school only to see the pictures of Newton, Alex. G. Bell, et. al., and none of prominent African (or black for that matter) scientists (Cheikh A Diop, Benjamin Banniker, etc) all through your elementary education. if you learned anything in psych 101 then you'd know how maleable an elemetary school mind is. we are (at least when I was in primary school) still carrying on the colonizer's dirty work by de-emphasizing black/African achievements in our primary schools. When euro-centric perspectives are presented as the gold standard on the concepts of civilization, technology, economy, etc without any alternative theories, then i deem that mental slavery because the alterior motive is clear--brainwashing/assimilation.
when i went to highschool we were forced (yes it was compulsory for the first two years) to learn French. this was a form of mental slavery IMO since we were not offered any other viable options. I would have loved to learn another Kenyan language instead of French. hell, i would have loved to learn Spanish (which I'm now fluent in thanks to the choice presented in university).
Thanks for clearing up your position. When it comes to Christianity, you were so outspoken about it that the other issues took a backseat and I thought you were neutral about them. My apologies for that.
lol... i had just replied to Ken Matiba's flame thread so that's probably why I was still hot on the chritianism thing. pole bro
and to answer your Q. yes there's some blacks that chose that path, but I'd argue that their numbers are statistically insignificant (at least during the Christianizing of the African continent)... but this is only an opinion of course.
"A man loving atheist is a thousand times better human than a theist who hates is fellow beings on the grounds of religious bigotry"-- Anwar Sheikh
ok, but what about those who are satisfied and in a state of contentment irregardless of HOW they came to be followers?
aren't they statistically singificant-er (sic)?
and isn't it THEIR satisfaction rather than YOUR dissatisfaction with their situation that really matters?
The closer you look, the more you lose the bigger picture
ok, but what about those who are satisfied and in a state of contentment irregardless of HOW they came to be followers?
aren't they statistically singificant-er (sic)?
and isn't it THEIR satisfaction rather than YOUR dissatisfaction with their situation that really matters?
my dissatisfaction isn't the core of the discussion at hand, and i cannot see anywhere in my posts where i'm expressing dissatisfaction because of another person's religious choices. I'm merely expressing points that have been presented by many cultural anthropologists who contend that the negative,self hating psychological residue of colonization (as well as religious assimilation) is a serious issue (not necessarily good or bad depending upon the situation).
your statement above implies that the ends justify the means. it is really disturbing when we really examine what you've just said. your comment justifies the massacres that took place in ancient Africa in the name of religious conversion/assimilation (insulting my ancestors isn't my forte). IMO you are a member of a very small subset of blacks who would be comfortable knowing that his/her ancestors died at the hands of religious zealots. I for one would be conflicted if I happened to be a follower of a certain religion only to learn that my ancestors were presented with false choices (death or conversion), or were "weaned" away from their traditional religious beliefs because the oppressor's culture deemed them "inferior" or "primitive".
I think I answered the original Q posted by the OP. this discussion is irrelevant to the subject at hand.
"A man loving atheist is a thousand times better human than a theist who hates is fellow beings on the grounds of religious bigotry"-- Anwar Sheikh
11-23-2007, 04:25 AM
. If I were to analyse these statements I'd do so in context
Linear Mode
