In the search for a new model, that can lead Nigeria out of the wood, we must first understand that all models were first of all the works of men. These model developers have been described as Great Thinkers, Philosophers but they have never been ascribed with divinity. Therefore, their works can not be perfect and would constantly need to be reviewed and where necessary improved upon. Since their works are in the most part theoretical, it is always difficult to be dogmatic in their implementation. Therefore it would be quite erroneous to equate Marxism with Stalin Communism as practised in the defunct USSR or even with Fidel Castro Cuba. For Marxism in its purest form abhor any instrument of coercion whereas it is quite obvious that communism like capitalism rely so much on military power to sustain the interest of the state as defined by the ruling class. Again let me make it clear here that, I do not claim to be qualified to review the works of these great thinkers, however I am also capable of thinking.
Thinking of Nigeria, it is still debatable as to whether ours is capitalism or socialism, we pretend at government presence everywhere and private ownership in every sphere. This is understandable considering that the metamorphosis of pre-colonial feudal system was arrested midway to be replaced by a new prebendal imperialism arranged for the benefit of the impostors. Our non-alignment posture in a world clearly divided along ideological differences left us more confused than focus. It should also be noted that our non-alignment stance is intended not to displease any of the two new masters of the world then rather than an attempt to satisfy our collective yearnings. At present, the rather hurried shift towards a semblance of capitalism without first determining the authentic owners of public properties is fraud intended to give undue advantage to agents and propagators of rental capitalism.
In its perfect form, capitalism would be expected to encourage individuals reach their full potentials. It is a system in which profit motive propels optimization of industrial output. It actually accepted that, in the pursuit of individuals’ selfishness the collective good would be achieved. It envisaged minimal government intervention in the economy and those should be restricted to areas where opportunity for profitability is absent. Thus, what is moral or right is not of essence here once what is produced is marketable at a profit. The production of arms, ammunition and other weapons of mass and soul destruction may not be right in peace times, but it is profitable. A government which is sustained from the profit of businesses should be able to guarantee continuous patronage for those businesses, am I right? Would I also be right to assume that responsible governments would rather that these weapons are never used in their own soil? Therefore, who would these weapons be made for?
A world in search for peace shouldn’t really be amassing weapons of mass destruction, but sadly that is what we are witnessing. Ironically, the leading producers of these weapons are enjoying relative peace at least within their national boundary. Yet the production of these weapons had never ceased because there is booming market for them in crises prone Africa which is suffering from identity crises and Middle East trying to reconcile theocracy with democracy. Crises in Africa have many dimensions such as; poverty and famine, corruption, ethnic differences, and religious intolerance often fuelled by external forces. Although no society is crises free, African countries have so far demonstrated their incapacity at containing their problems without external interference. What is responsible for this incapacity?
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Saturday, November 26, 2011
ANOTHER RACIST ATTACK THIS ONE IS IRELAND
Moses Ayanwole (41), married with a 12-
year-old son, died in St James's Hospital in Dublin
yesterday. Mr Ayanwole, originally from west
Nigeria, was living in Hartstown, west Dublin.
He was working in the city center at about
12.30am on Monday when he was attacked. He
was punched in the head by a man in his taxi and
fell heavily on to the ground as his taxi was parked
on Pearse Street near the Erne Street junction.
Mr Ayanwole fell into a coma and doctors in St
James's Hospital decided not to transfer him to
Beaumont Hospital, which specializes in head
injuries, because of the seriousness of his injuries.
A police hunt got under way after the attack and
officers arrested the prime suspect, who is in his
mid-20s, for the attack about 8pm on Monday. He
was tracked down to a pub just yards from the
scene of the attack but was released without
charge on Tuesday. A file is being prepared for the
DPP...
year-old son, died in St James's Hospital in Dublin
yesterday. Mr Ayanwole, originally from west
Nigeria, was living in Hartstown, west Dublin.
He was working in the city center at about
12.30am on Monday when he was attacked. He
was punched in the head by a man in his taxi and
fell heavily on to the ground as his taxi was parked
on Pearse Street near the Erne Street junction.
Mr Ayanwole fell into a coma and doctors in St
James's Hospital decided not to transfer him to
Beaumont Hospital, which specializes in head
injuries, because of the seriousness of his injuries.
A police hunt got under way after the attack and
officers arrested the prime suspect, who is in his
mid-20s, for the attack about 8pm on Monday. He
was tracked down to a pub just yards from the
scene of the attack but was released without
charge on Tuesday. A file is being prepared for the
DPP...
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Democratic Socialism 1
“Capitalism vs Socialism. (my view)
In Capitalism: the principle question is, 'is it profitable?' The system is built around figures. Conscience is an Unwanted guest in the board room.
In Socialism: the principle question is, 'is it right?' The system is built around the people. Conscience is Lord in the board room.
Socialism has failed. Capitalism is failing...
I think our solution lies somewhere in between these two systems. Tilting in favour of socialism though”
Taulpaul Oselen Via Facebook 15 Nov 11.
The Capitalist West celebrated the demise of Communist Russia, not only as a test of presumed superiority of Capitalism over Communism, but also as it marks end of the Cold War. Today, Cuba, would also be watching with keen interest as economic crises deepens in the capitalist countries. Perhaps, none of the two is as good as it claims.
Communism, which is the very corrupt version of Karl Max doctrine of socialism, creates a very powerful proletariat class, which holds in trust the collective wealth of the people. This class determines what to produce, how to produce, when to produce and even for whom. In essence, they determine the principle question what is right. Given such absolute power, it is not too difficult to envisage its eventual demise as more and more people are continuously alienated from the decision making process.
Capitalism which has lasted for a longer period is at present facing its own challenges. It may not be easy to sound its death knell now. But whatever the outcome, one could expect that the government would have to subsidies corporate greed and corruption for a long time, which in itself goes against the very principle of capitalism. Capitalism preaches minimal involvement of government in the economy of a country. However, today the government of USA, UK, Italy and Greece are spending billions of dollars as a bail out to what are strictly, private investments with no permanent solution in sight.
Between both ideologies is the adoption of democracy as the means to power albeit with different interpretation. While the communist countries are one party states with little tolerance for opposition, (a fact which is clearly antithetical to the spirit of socialism) the capitalist countries adopted the multi party democracy in order to give the people the delusion of choices and promptly labelled themselves liberal democracy's. In the real sense although the parties differs, the decision makers and their decisions remain the same. That is why the difference between Obama and Bush he replaced was just in the colour of their skin. Corporate interest can never be separated from National Interest.
The most popular definition of democracy was given as “the government of the people, by the people and for the people”. This was accepted as ‘true’ simply because of the man who stated it. Can we in all honesty, equate the rituals of selection as democracy with this meaning attached to it? If governments produced under democracy are the true representative of their people, would there be any need for protest of any kind?
In Capitalism: the principle question is, 'is it profitable?' The system is built around figures. Conscience is an Unwanted guest in the board room.
In Socialism: the principle question is, 'is it right?' The system is built around the people. Conscience is Lord in the board room.
Socialism has failed. Capitalism is failing...
I think our solution lies somewhere in between these two systems. Tilting in favour of socialism though”
Taulpaul Oselen Via Facebook 15 Nov 11.
The Capitalist West celebrated the demise of Communist Russia, not only as a test of presumed superiority of Capitalism over Communism, but also as it marks end of the Cold War. Today, Cuba, would also be watching with keen interest as economic crises deepens in the capitalist countries. Perhaps, none of the two is as good as it claims.
Communism, which is the very corrupt version of Karl Max doctrine of socialism, creates a very powerful proletariat class, which holds in trust the collective wealth of the people. This class determines what to produce, how to produce, when to produce and even for whom. In essence, they determine the principle question what is right. Given such absolute power, it is not too difficult to envisage its eventual demise as more and more people are continuously alienated from the decision making process.
Capitalism which has lasted for a longer period is at present facing its own challenges. It may not be easy to sound its death knell now. But whatever the outcome, one could expect that the government would have to subsidies corporate greed and corruption for a long time, which in itself goes against the very principle of capitalism. Capitalism preaches minimal involvement of government in the economy of a country. However, today the government of USA, UK, Italy and Greece are spending billions of dollars as a bail out to what are strictly, private investments with no permanent solution in sight.
Between both ideologies is the adoption of democracy as the means to power albeit with different interpretation. While the communist countries are one party states with little tolerance for opposition, (a fact which is clearly antithetical to the spirit of socialism) the capitalist countries adopted the multi party democracy in order to give the people the delusion of choices and promptly labelled themselves liberal democracy's. In the real sense although the parties differs, the decision makers and their decisions remain the same. That is why the difference between Obama and Bush he replaced was just in the colour of their skin. Corporate interest can never be separated from National Interest.
The most popular definition of democracy was given as “the government of the people, by the people and for the people”. This was accepted as ‘true’ simply because of the man who stated it. Can we in all honesty, equate the rituals of selection as democracy with this meaning attached to it? If governments produced under democracy are the true representative of their people, would there be any need for protest of any kind?
Friday, November 18, 2011
JEWISH & AFRICAN AFFAIRS
"Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted, the indifference of those who should have known better, the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most, that has made it possible for evil to triumph.-"Haile Selassie
When dealing with a topic as sensitive as Jews and Slavery we must first explain the social and political factors around such a study.
There are no taboos on authentic research as far as Africans are concerned and the European Jewish involvement in African enslavement seems to be a seriously controversial one further exacerbated since.
the publishing of work by the Nation of Islam and Dr. Tony Martin, both are charged with being antisemitic. Along with Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Malcolm X, John Henrick Clarke, Desmond Tutu , obviously Leonard Jeffries and almost all critics of the state of Israel.
This charge of anti-Semitism (which is a misnomer) cannot and must not dissuade Africans from researching into any area of history; especially when that history has traditionally been suppressed. Passionately saying "This is all antisemitic junk" can no longer be used as a defense against this discourse.
Because if the charge of antisemitism was satisfied every time it was invoked no one other than pro-Zionist would be allowed to say "Jew." It has always been very easy for our detractors to assemble all the hand-picked Black defenders of Zionism to act with "authority" and decry this discourse as "fringe theories". Anyone attempting to dictate what topics are viable for African scholars to research is racist as well as those who think the opinions of Africans is not noteworthy. Skipping the colorful names for Tony Martin and Farrakhan it would be far more meaningful to explore this study point-by-point.
Critique is a sign of a healthy society and in this polarized debate some "other" opinion is necessary to balance out white-washing on one hand and blatant antisemitic on the other. And it is a fine line, but that in itself is true for most studies on race and race relations.
No African dictates the volumes of book written on Jewish history or their views on Africa. No one cries for the Arabs when Islam and slavery, Islam and anything bad, are being discussed to death. On the Jewish run Jihad Watch and associates run by secular Jewish organization David Horowitz. [1] The zionist agendas of Darfur Watch are no longer a "conspiracy against Israel", and just because someone says "conspiracy" doesn't mean it is not true.
We have dealt with Arabs, and African systems of slavery with transparency. Therefore why should African people shy away from subjects branded as third rail or sacred cow? Especially when Jewishness has never been an obstacle or inhibitor of White Supremacy.
The relationship of Africans and Jews has always attracted great comparisons: both people of historical persecution. But the sad reality is it is often the case that for African-based arguments to gain validity or make a point they have to be parallel to Jewish experience to evoke empathy. So we see "would anyone expect Jews to let Nazis write their history.." In an attempt to highlight how ridiculous it is for African history to constantly be written through the eyes of the slave master/dominant race-class.
"Until the Story of the hunt is told by the Lion, the tale of the hunt will always glorify the hunter"-African Proverb
It has to be stated that Jews enslaving Africans happen inside of European identity and societies. Jews did not act as through independent Jewish nation unlike Arabs, some Africans, and Western Europe. This is an important factor in understanding that there is a difference between European enslavement of Africans (which contains Jewish slave masters), Arab slavery (which also contained Jewish slave masters),Slavery in Africa (which would also contain Jewish people as victims of slavery as well as slave traders (North Africa)). Arab slavery had a "nationalist" personality by groups of people we call Arab today. So was slavery inside of Africa, it was the actions of nations such as Dahomey. There were no Jewish nations since the 1st century A.D, to act as slaving nations. And this must be clarified so our understanding of this slavery is not confused, thus Jewish slave trade is more accurately termed the role of Jewish people in African enslavement, within Western nation.
In examining Jewish African relations we discover a deep distrust on the part of the Africans and this distrust is not without some merit. The very hint of denying the 5-6 million who died is protected by law in some countries, no such protection protects African history. The impact of the African Holocaust is minimized at every turn, ignored denied, scuffed at with remarks such "what holocaust." "It was Africans doing it to Africans." "Only 10-12 million (arrived)." But how many left?
The African historians who contribute to African Holocaust do not not fit into any of the tidy boxes created by our detractors. And it would make their life easier if we did, because what balanced person would listen to the rants of a Neo-Nazi? But we are against war and racism, corruption and misrepresentation, we defend self-determination, and indigenous peoples rights, women rights, everyone's right to their history, culture, dialogue, research, plurality and meritocracy.
We are not Black radical nationalist, Communist, Islamic or Christian Zealots, Afrocentrics or Black supremist. Neither are we guilty by association because we take the good and the bad from everyone. Our associations and working relationships are not restricted just because someone has an issue with Nation of Islam or Libya.
In America, as actor Ben Affleck said, the way people speak about Arabs and Muslims would not be tolerated if the same things were said about Jews. The world needs one standard across the board. And shame on anyone who profits from human rights and then in their turn denies another people their human rights, dignity and voice.
Jews correctly hunt down every single war criminal and turn them out of their nursing homes to stand trial at 99 years old for crimes against humanity. And rightly so, maybe Africans have a lot to learn from how Jews handle some of their affairs. The horrors of the African Holocaust are not minor just because Africans do not have the power of media on their side. The legacy of slavery, apartheid and colonialism has a twisted double blow in how African history is given priority in the world today.[continue]
"Have our Jewish sisters and brothers forgotten their humiliation? Have they forgotten the collective punishment, the home demolitions, in their own history so soon? Have they turned their backs on their profound and noble religious traditions? Have they forgotten that God cares deeply about the downtrodden?"-Desmond Tutu
Judaism is a solid religion which has been responsible for influencing a significant part of our morality and law. As well as being the religion of the most recognized man to have ever lived — Jesus. As well as the religion of the most influencial man to have ever lived Paul (aka Saul of Tarsus). It definitely absorbed much of its components from Ancient Egypt (KMT) and has continued to this day (indirectly via Christianity and Islam) to be a force in shaping our modern reality. It has been an unspoken ideological cornerstone in the formation of Islam, just as much as Islam has shaped modern Judaic theology.
So we must identify 1. Judaism (religion) and slavery, 2. Historical Jews (Mizrahi, African, etc) and slavery, and finally 3. Modern European Jews and their involvement as European people in African enslavement.
JEWISH MYTH
"Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an Ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew"-Jewish Almanac (1980)
Now let us starting with the terms " Jew" we see that in the 1980 Jewish Almanac we read: "Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an Ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew."
And we must hold on to this when discussing the contemporary state of Israel and historical Israel. Just like Modern Ghana and Ancient Ghana, were not related. Actually the entire notion of a Jewish nation is largely a myth. Judaism as a religion is one thing but the notion of a connected Jewish people who went into 2500 year exile and still retain that genetic-cultural identity is nothing short of a national myth. A myth which piggybacked off of a holocaust to create the pseudo-state called Israel. ( See Invention of the Jewish People - Shlomo Sand).
To put it in another context, can you imagine Nigerian Muslims moving to Saudi Arabia and claiming it as their original land while displacing native Christian Arabs and having more rights than these natives? How are we suppose to honestly belive that white skin red-headed people with cowboy hats have anything to do with the Afro-Asiatic people of Ancient Israel? These are the realities which cause so much debate in African-Diaspora communities. The entire notion of the Khzar ancestry of the European Jew is a study gaining great momentum. But where it becomes vulgar is when White Jews hold themselves up as the original and orthodoxy of Judaism while denying Africans any authentic claim to Jewish heritage.
Zionism is a specific manifestation of white-supremacy and it is the most brutal form of neocolonialism. It is a racist opportunistic political ideology of White Jewish atheist who capitalized on both the horrors of the Jewish holocaust in Europe and the Biblical story of God's promise to the nation of Ancient Israel. It is both arrogant and the highest form of racial supremacy: God has given us, White Jews, someone else's land and we have the right to kill the natives where they stand. Does Apartheid Israel today have a right to exist?
"How can we (Jews) stop trudging along roads paved mainly with the forged materials of national fantasies?"-Shlomo Sand
Historically there is no argument for its creation, especially at the expense of another people. And if Israel was so sacred why was Uganda on the table as a home for Jews? Proving it was all opportunism and not a natural history of a people. But in the interest of human peace and advancement there is enough space in modern Israel to have a home for both Jewish and Arab people. Israel cannot continue to be a dominating oppressive force in a someone else land. Peace demands we make do with what we have and find coexistence based on justice and truth. But the issue is Israel has zero desire for peace, they want and demand complete surrender. The illegal settlements are without need, but still they injure the peace process by these dishonest greedy activities (See Torn Land)
Can anyone with humanity not empathize with the Palestinian whose great great great grandfather ploughed fields in what is now modern Israel?
Especially when that Palestinian is now being stopped by a 6 month old Russian Jewish immigrant (who barely speaks Hebrew) and being ask "where are your papers" to walk over the Palestinians ancestor's land.
It is a mirror to South Africa. And Israel has deceitfully hidden it's policies in smooth language and obfuscation. "There was no Palestinian state when we arrived?" Well there was no state in parts of South Africa when the Europeans arrived, so does that validate conquest? Because the people you are conquering failed to adhere to western notions of parliament and didn't have a flag and an anthem?
Many settlers are living in the occupied Palestinian territories not for ideological reasons but for practical ones. They have been induced to do so by generous Israeli government subsidies. Many settlers are zelots and regardless of need they intentionall provoke the tension by settling in Palestine. Because they believe that all the occupied territories belong exclusively to the Jewish people and that Palestinians there are not entitled to national or political rights.
Modern thinking, recognizes both the inherent rights of individuals as human beings and the rights of self-defined peoples to national self-determination. Medieval thinking, on the other hand, relies on holy texts and symbols, and conceives of people not as individuals and groups of individuals, but as fixed categories in a divinely ordained hierarchy
HISTORY OF MUSLIM PROTECTION OF JEWS It is not very well known outside of intellectual circles that the Golden Age of Islam was also the Golden age of Judaism. Because Jews who were persecuted by Europeans found far greater accommodation and tolerance in Muslim lands. Jewish revisionist have tried to cover up and re-write this history by stipulating that Jews were 2nd class citizens. But that observation is relatively moot when we contrast it against African-Americans today in modern America.
So in our so-called modern progressive democratic ideal, 1000 years on, look at the social-status of Africans in the West. Or let us look at the persecution of Muslims in European countries like France and Norway. But we can bring it closer to this debate and look at Ethiopian or Mitzrahi Jews in modern Israel. So the status of the Jew in Muslim lands allowed a boom in Jewish art, religion, culture, and more important their theology and scholarship. Because of Islamic influence modern Judaism was realized with the greatest scholar of Jewish history Maimonides.
Regards
Nosakhare
When dealing with a topic as sensitive as Jews and Slavery we must first explain the social and political factors around such a study.
There are no taboos on authentic research as far as Africans are concerned and the European Jewish involvement in African enslavement seems to be a seriously controversial one further exacerbated since.
the publishing of work by the Nation of Islam and Dr. Tony Martin, both are charged with being antisemitic. Along with Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Malcolm X, John Henrick Clarke, Desmond Tutu , obviously Leonard Jeffries and almost all critics of the state of Israel.
This charge of anti-Semitism (which is a misnomer) cannot and must not dissuade Africans from researching into any area of history; especially when that history has traditionally been suppressed. Passionately saying "This is all antisemitic junk" can no longer be used as a defense against this discourse.
Because if the charge of antisemitism was satisfied every time it was invoked no one other than pro-Zionist would be allowed to say "Jew." It has always been very easy for our detractors to assemble all the hand-picked Black defenders of Zionism to act with "authority" and decry this discourse as "fringe theories". Anyone attempting to dictate what topics are viable for African scholars to research is racist as well as those who think the opinions of Africans is not noteworthy. Skipping the colorful names for Tony Martin and Farrakhan it would be far more meaningful to explore this study point-by-point.
Critique is a sign of a healthy society and in this polarized debate some "other" opinion is necessary to balance out white-washing on one hand and blatant antisemitic on the other. And it is a fine line, but that in itself is true for most studies on race and race relations.
No African dictates the volumes of book written on Jewish history or their views on Africa. No one cries for the Arabs when Islam and slavery, Islam and anything bad, are being discussed to death. On the Jewish run Jihad Watch and associates run by secular Jewish organization David Horowitz. [1] The zionist agendas of Darfur Watch are no longer a "conspiracy against Israel", and just because someone says "conspiracy" doesn't mean it is not true.
We have dealt with Arabs, and African systems of slavery with transparency. Therefore why should African people shy away from subjects branded as third rail or sacred cow? Especially when Jewishness has never been an obstacle or inhibitor of White Supremacy.
The relationship of Africans and Jews has always attracted great comparisons: both people of historical persecution. But the sad reality is it is often the case that for African-based arguments to gain validity or make a point they have to be parallel to Jewish experience to evoke empathy. So we see "would anyone expect Jews to let Nazis write their history.." In an attempt to highlight how ridiculous it is for African history to constantly be written through the eyes of the slave master/dominant race-class.
"Until the Story of the hunt is told by the Lion, the tale of the hunt will always glorify the hunter"-African Proverb
It has to be stated that Jews enslaving Africans happen inside of European identity and societies. Jews did not act as through independent Jewish nation unlike Arabs, some Africans, and Western Europe. This is an important factor in understanding that there is a difference between European enslavement of Africans (which contains Jewish slave masters), Arab slavery (which also contained Jewish slave masters),Slavery in Africa (which would also contain Jewish people as victims of slavery as well as slave traders (North Africa)). Arab slavery had a "nationalist" personality by groups of people we call Arab today. So was slavery inside of Africa, it was the actions of nations such as Dahomey. There were no Jewish nations since the 1st century A.D, to act as slaving nations. And this must be clarified so our understanding of this slavery is not confused, thus Jewish slave trade is more accurately termed the role of Jewish people in African enslavement, within Western nation.
In examining Jewish African relations we discover a deep distrust on the part of the Africans and this distrust is not without some merit. The very hint of denying the 5-6 million who died is protected by law in some countries, no such protection protects African history. The impact of the African Holocaust is minimized at every turn, ignored denied, scuffed at with remarks such "what holocaust." "It was Africans doing it to Africans." "Only 10-12 million (arrived)." But how many left?
The African historians who contribute to African Holocaust do not not fit into any of the tidy boxes created by our detractors. And it would make their life easier if we did, because what balanced person would listen to the rants of a Neo-Nazi? But we are against war and racism, corruption and misrepresentation, we defend self-determination, and indigenous peoples rights, women rights, everyone's right to their history, culture, dialogue, research, plurality and meritocracy.
We are not Black radical nationalist, Communist, Islamic or Christian Zealots, Afrocentrics or Black supremist. Neither are we guilty by association because we take the good and the bad from everyone. Our associations and working relationships are not restricted just because someone has an issue with Nation of Islam or Libya.
In America, as actor Ben Affleck said, the way people speak about Arabs and Muslims would not be tolerated if the same things were said about Jews. The world needs one standard across the board. And shame on anyone who profits from human rights and then in their turn denies another people their human rights, dignity and voice.
Jews correctly hunt down every single war criminal and turn them out of their nursing homes to stand trial at 99 years old for crimes against humanity. And rightly so, maybe Africans have a lot to learn from how Jews handle some of their affairs. The horrors of the African Holocaust are not minor just because Africans do not have the power of media on their side. The legacy of slavery, apartheid and colonialism has a twisted double blow in how African history is given priority in the world today.[continue]
"Have our Jewish sisters and brothers forgotten their humiliation? Have they forgotten the collective punishment, the home demolitions, in their own history so soon? Have they turned their backs on their profound and noble religious traditions? Have they forgotten that God cares deeply about the downtrodden?"-Desmond Tutu
Judaism is a solid religion which has been responsible for influencing a significant part of our morality and law. As well as being the religion of the most recognized man to have ever lived — Jesus. As well as the religion of the most influencial man to have ever lived Paul (aka Saul of Tarsus). It definitely absorbed much of its components from Ancient Egypt (KMT) and has continued to this day (indirectly via Christianity and Islam) to be a force in shaping our modern reality. It has been an unspoken ideological cornerstone in the formation of Islam, just as much as Islam has shaped modern Judaic theology.
So we must identify 1. Judaism (religion) and slavery, 2. Historical Jews (Mizrahi, African, etc) and slavery, and finally 3. Modern European Jews and their involvement as European people in African enslavement.
JEWISH MYTH
"Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an Ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew"-Jewish Almanac (1980)
Now let us starting with the terms " Jew" we see that in the 1980 Jewish Almanac we read: "Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an Ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew."
And we must hold on to this when discussing the contemporary state of Israel and historical Israel. Just like Modern Ghana and Ancient Ghana, were not related. Actually the entire notion of a Jewish nation is largely a myth. Judaism as a religion is one thing but the notion of a connected Jewish people who went into 2500 year exile and still retain that genetic-cultural identity is nothing short of a national myth. A myth which piggybacked off of a holocaust to create the pseudo-state called Israel. ( See Invention of the Jewish People - Shlomo Sand).
To put it in another context, can you imagine Nigerian Muslims moving to Saudi Arabia and claiming it as their original land while displacing native Christian Arabs and having more rights than these natives? How are we suppose to honestly belive that white skin red-headed people with cowboy hats have anything to do with the Afro-Asiatic people of Ancient Israel? These are the realities which cause so much debate in African-Diaspora communities. The entire notion of the Khzar ancestry of the European Jew is a study gaining great momentum. But where it becomes vulgar is when White Jews hold themselves up as the original and orthodoxy of Judaism while denying Africans any authentic claim to Jewish heritage.
Zionism is a specific manifestation of white-supremacy and it is the most brutal form of neocolonialism. It is a racist opportunistic political ideology of White Jewish atheist who capitalized on both the horrors of the Jewish holocaust in Europe and the Biblical story of God's promise to the nation of Ancient Israel. It is both arrogant and the highest form of racial supremacy: God has given us, White Jews, someone else's land and we have the right to kill the natives where they stand. Does Apartheid Israel today have a right to exist?
"How can we (Jews) stop trudging along roads paved mainly with the forged materials of national fantasies?"-Shlomo Sand
Historically there is no argument for its creation, especially at the expense of another people. And if Israel was so sacred why was Uganda on the table as a home for Jews? Proving it was all opportunism and not a natural history of a people. But in the interest of human peace and advancement there is enough space in modern Israel to have a home for both Jewish and Arab people. Israel cannot continue to be a dominating oppressive force in a someone else land. Peace demands we make do with what we have and find coexistence based on justice and truth. But the issue is Israel has zero desire for peace, they want and demand complete surrender. The illegal settlements are without need, but still they injure the peace process by these dishonest greedy activities (See Torn Land)
Can anyone with humanity not empathize with the Palestinian whose great great great grandfather ploughed fields in what is now modern Israel?
Especially when that Palestinian is now being stopped by a 6 month old Russian Jewish immigrant (who barely speaks Hebrew) and being ask "where are your papers" to walk over the Palestinians ancestor's land.
It is a mirror to South Africa. And Israel has deceitfully hidden it's policies in smooth language and obfuscation. "There was no Palestinian state when we arrived?" Well there was no state in parts of South Africa when the Europeans arrived, so does that validate conquest? Because the people you are conquering failed to adhere to western notions of parliament and didn't have a flag and an anthem?
Many settlers are living in the occupied Palestinian territories not for ideological reasons but for practical ones. They have been induced to do so by generous Israeli government subsidies. Many settlers are zelots and regardless of need they intentionall provoke the tension by settling in Palestine. Because they believe that all the occupied territories belong exclusively to the Jewish people and that Palestinians there are not entitled to national or political rights.
Modern thinking, recognizes both the inherent rights of individuals as human beings and the rights of self-defined peoples to national self-determination. Medieval thinking, on the other hand, relies on holy texts and symbols, and conceives of people not as individuals and groups of individuals, but as fixed categories in a divinely ordained hierarchy
HISTORY OF MUSLIM PROTECTION OF JEWS It is not very well known outside of intellectual circles that the Golden Age of Islam was also the Golden age of Judaism. Because Jews who were persecuted by Europeans found far greater accommodation and tolerance in Muslim lands. Jewish revisionist have tried to cover up and re-write this history by stipulating that Jews were 2nd class citizens. But that observation is relatively moot when we contrast it against African-Americans today in modern America.
So in our so-called modern progressive democratic ideal, 1000 years on, look at the social-status of Africans in the West. Or let us look at the persecution of Muslims in European countries like France and Norway. But we can bring it closer to this debate and look at Ethiopian or Mitzrahi Jews in modern Israel. So the status of the Jew in Muslim lands allowed a boom in Jewish art, religion, culture, and more important their theology and scholarship. Because of Islamic influence modern Judaism was realized with the greatest scholar of Jewish history Maimonides.
Regards
Nosakhare
Pentagon Plan To Muscle Out China: New Scramble For Africa
Southern Africa has become the battle ground for a new scramble for resources, with the United States seeking to muscle out Chinese influence so as to secure strategic minerals - mainly for its military.
More frightening is the possibility of the US military itself becoming involved in securing these strategic minerals within the next 20 years.
According to a study by Dr Stephen Burgess, a Zimbabwean-born associate professor at the US Air War College, Washington may have to enlist the services of the Department of Defence, the National Security Agency and the Africa Command (AFRICOM) to secure Southern Africa's resources.
His study, titled 'Sustainability of Strategic Minerals in Southern Africa and Potential Conflicts and Partnerships', says the US should move quickly to secure Southern Africa's uranium, manganese, platinum, chrome, cobalt and rare earth minerals for America's industrial needs and for its military as well as maintenance of weapons systems.
The study focuses on resource accessibility in the DRC, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe and draws parallels with the 1880s scramble for Africa.
To triumph in this new scramble, Burgess notes, 'all instruments of (US) power' must be deployed.
Burgess visited all these countries – except Zimbabwe – and makes recommendations on how the US can muscle out China.
He interviewed mining sector experts, government officials and journalists as part of his research.
There were also consultations with American institutions such as the Defence National Stock Pile Centre, the Defence Logistics Agency and the Marine Corps Command.
A note in the study indicates that it has nothing to do with the US Air War College, raising the possibility that Burgess was working as a consultant for Washington.
'Southern Africa contains strategic minerals, which the USA and its allies require for industrial purposes and that militaries need for production and sustainment of weapons systems.
'The principal sustainability challenge in SADC for the USA and its allies is uncertain access to strategic minerals.
'The cause of this challenge is increasing global demand and supply shortages caused by inadequate infrastructure, politicization of the mining industry and China's aggressive and sometimes monopolistic behaviour in pursuit of minerals.
'The challenge is most acute in two Southern African countries - South Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) – and also growing in Zambia, Zimbabwe and Namibia.
'Of particular concern is possible future conflict between the United States, which needs strategic minerals for national defence and other purposes, and China, which needs an increasing amount of resources to fuel its accelerating industrialization.
'There is a rising scramble for and struggle over resources in Africa, especially in petroleum and mining economies.
'In particular, the US government is concerned about access to 'defence critical resources'. This requires increased levels of engagement with the African countries concerned, using all the instruments of American power and working with American and Western mining companies, as well as engagement with China and Chinese companies.
'In the future, a 'worst-case' scenario might see the United States having to use coercive diplomacy in the not-too-distant future (perhaps in 10-20 years) in order to regain access to vital resources.
'The onset of 'resource wars' has been predicted by a number of scholars and experts. Given the rising level of Chinese demand for resources, the probability of conflict is likely to rise.
'The new scramble for African mineral resources (and petroleum) is most similar to the 19th century European scramble for African minerals and land that contributed to interstate conflict, especially the First World War.'
The ever-strengthening Sino-Africa ties are a major headache for the US and Washington must move quickly or else conflict will become unavoidable.
'The United States produces a range of materials from strategic minerals, including warships, aircraft, and high tech devices and components.
'Thus far, the United States and its allies have relied on free market forces in Southern Africa and elsewhere. However, US and allied industries may not always have access in the future and may have to reduce output or even close. For example, a worrisome problem has been Chinese control of production of more than 90 percent of rare earth minerals.
'Recently, Chinese companies withheld them from Japan over the Senkaku/Daioyu Islands dispute and threatening to withhold them from the United States over arms sales to Taiwan.
'The minerals are the ingredients in key components in communications devices, satellites, and electric fuel cells and batteries that US industry and the military require.'
Burgess says liberation movements (ZANU-PF in Zimbabwe, ANC in South Africa and SWAPO in Namibia) are politicizing the mining sector to the detriment of free marketeering and this will pose a serious challenge to the US. Issues of black economic empowerment and nationalization of mining feature prominently.
'The free market and government taxation of mining profits have tended to provide optimal conditions for states and industry and maintain a steady flow of minerals to meet demand. However politicization has occurred in the form of nationalisation of the mining industry and the intervention of black empowerment companies which have tended to disrupt the market and flow of minerals.'
The DRC, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe all have – or in the process of implementing – policies that will see greater indigenous participation in mining.
• South Africa
South Africa is targeted for its vast platinum resources which stand at about 75 percent of global production, as well as its vast manganese deposits.
'South African President Jacob Zuma and Mineral Resources Minister Susan Shabangu have said that nationalization is not currently part of government policy.
'However, this does not guarantee it will not be part of government policy in the not-too-distant future. The ANC Youth League managed to get nationalization onto the agenda of the governing party's September 2010 meeting, fuelling investor worries.
'Nationalization of South African mines has been given renewed prominence by the ANC Youth League, which in 2009 issued a discussion paper arguing for state control of 60 percent of new mines.'
• Democratic Republic of Congo
The DRC is viewed as a source to quench America's thirst for cobalt, uranium, coltan (columbite and tantalum), tungsten, tin, and rare earth minerals.
The study says Gecamines, the state miner, has too much control of mining and appears to favour dealing with China over the West.
• Zambia
Zambia's cobalt constitutes 20 percent of global deposits and it is second only to the DRC.
Again, emphasis is on Beijing's growing presence in Zambia through integrated firms such as the China Railway Group, SinoHydro and the Metallurgical Group Corporation.
• Namibia
Naturally, America's interest here is in uranium and there is unease about the activities of the recently created state miner, Epangelo.
Namibia's Cabinet recently said all future mining of strategic minerals should be done in partnership with Epangelo.
Namibia is the fourth largest producer of uranium and global demand is rising faster than the demand for gold.
'The recently established state owned mining company, Epangelo has virtually no capital and may look to Russian and Chinese companies for support.
'Kalahari Holdings (a SWAPO firm) are … looking for uranium prospects and joined ventures, possibly with the Chinese and Russian companies.
'In the long run the politisization of the mining sector could divert uranium to China.'
Recommendations
'One measure the United States could take is to assist South Africa in developing beneficiation. US aid could help to develop local mineral processing and metal manufacturing and assist South Africa in developing sufficient electricity to power such ventures.
'In addition, the United States could negotiate off-take agreements with South Africa and provide assistance to benefit local mining communities.
'The United States could encourage American mining companies to reengage in South Africa and work with Australian, Canadian and South African companies that are committed to the free market.
'Also, the US government could step up strategic communications, broadcasting Chinese abuses and dissuading forces in the ANC and SWAPO from moving their governments closer to China.'
Burgess goes further.
'In order to shape the region to maintain the free market, there are a number of actions that the United States and its allies might take. They might use diplomacy to build strategic partnerships with the most important African countries…
'In the case of strategic minerals, special attention must be paid to South Africa and the DRC.
'The United States and its allies could develop military-to-military relationships with a number of strategic African countries. The US National Security Council, DOD (Department of Defence) and (the) US Africa Command might develop contingencies to deal with the eventual prospect of resource cutoffs and the possibility of conflict over strategic minerals. At issue is how US agencies might adjust to the forthcoming challenges.'
The building of strategic partnerships is politically difficult, given the ANC regime's rejection of AFRICOM during the stand-up process in 2007 and 2008.
'South Africa is the hegemon in the region and must fully accept AFRICOM before military-to-military partnerships can be built throughout the region.
'The United States also continues to apply sanctions against President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and his inner circle, which makes building partnerships with the Southern African Development Community difficult.
'In addition, there is some resistance to US foreign policy from the (President Joseph) Kabila regime in the DRC; SWAPO in Namibia; and the (President Eduardo) dos Santos regime in Angola.
'By 2020, US intervention, including AFRICOM, might be needed to ensure sustained US/allied access to strategic minerals, which means that the building of strategic partnerships in the next decade is important.'
Dr Stephen Burgess farmed commercially in Zimbabwe's Masvingo Province and ceded land during the government's agrarian reforms. He left Zimbabwe in 2001 and works for the Air War College in the United States. He is the author of three books; 'South Africa's Weapons of Mass Destruction' (with Helen Purkitt), 'Smallholders and Political Voice in Zimbabwe', and 'The United Nations under Boutros Boutros-Ghali, 1992-97'.
Burgess helped lead in the organization and execution of the Air Force Africa Command Symposium.
He is an associate director of the US Air Force Counterproliferation Centre. Burgess holds a PhD from Michigan State University and has been a faculty member at Vanderbilt University, the University of Zambia, the University of Zimbabwe, and Hofstra University.
The full study can be found on http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/ ..
More frightening is the possibility of the US military itself becoming involved in securing these strategic minerals within the next 20 years.
According to a study by Dr Stephen Burgess, a Zimbabwean-born associate professor at the US Air War College, Washington may have to enlist the services of the Department of Defence, the National Security Agency and the Africa Command (AFRICOM) to secure Southern Africa's resources.
His study, titled 'Sustainability of Strategic Minerals in Southern Africa and Potential Conflicts and Partnerships', says the US should move quickly to secure Southern Africa's uranium, manganese, platinum, chrome, cobalt and rare earth minerals for America's industrial needs and for its military as well as maintenance of weapons systems.
The study focuses on resource accessibility in the DRC, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe and draws parallels with the 1880s scramble for Africa.
To triumph in this new scramble, Burgess notes, 'all instruments of (US) power' must be deployed.
Burgess visited all these countries – except Zimbabwe – and makes recommendations on how the US can muscle out China.
He interviewed mining sector experts, government officials and journalists as part of his research.
There were also consultations with American institutions such as the Defence National Stock Pile Centre, the Defence Logistics Agency and the Marine Corps Command.
A note in the study indicates that it has nothing to do with the US Air War College, raising the possibility that Burgess was working as a consultant for Washington.
'Southern Africa contains strategic minerals, which the USA and its allies require for industrial purposes and that militaries need for production and sustainment of weapons systems.
'The principal sustainability challenge in SADC for the USA and its allies is uncertain access to strategic minerals.
'The cause of this challenge is increasing global demand and supply shortages caused by inadequate infrastructure, politicization of the mining industry and China's aggressive and sometimes monopolistic behaviour in pursuit of minerals.
'The challenge is most acute in two Southern African countries - South Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) – and also growing in Zambia, Zimbabwe and Namibia.
'Of particular concern is possible future conflict between the United States, which needs strategic minerals for national defence and other purposes, and China, which needs an increasing amount of resources to fuel its accelerating industrialization.
'There is a rising scramble for and struggle over resources in Africa, especially in petroleum and mining economies.
'In particular, the US government is concerned about access to 'defence critical resources'. This requires increased levels of engagement with the African countries concerned, using all the instruments of American power and working with American and Western mining companies, as well as engagement with China and Chinese companies.
'In the future, a 'worst-case' scenario might see the United States having to use coercive diplomacy in the not-too-distant future (perhaps in 10-20 years) in order to regain access to vital resources.
'The onset of 'resource wars' has been predicted by a number of scholars and experts. Given the rising level of Chinese demand for resources, the probability of conflict is likely to rise.
'The new scramble for African mineral resources (and petroleum) is most similar to the 19th century European scramble for African minerals and land that contributed to interstate conflict, especially the First World War.'
The ever-strengthening Sino-Africa ties are a major headache for the US and Washington must move quickly or else conflict will become unavoidable.
'The United States produces a range of materials from strategic minerals, including warships, aircraft, and high tech devices and components.
'Thus far, the United States and its allies have relied on free market forces in Southern Africa and elsewhere. However, US and allied industries may not always have access in the future and may have to reduce output or even close. For example, a worrisome problem has been Chinese control of production of more than 90 percent of rare earth minerals.
'Recently, Chinese companies withheld them from Japan over the Senkaku/Daioyu Islands dispute and threatening to withhold them from the United States over arms sales to Taiwan.
'The minerals are the ingredients in key components in communications devices, satellites, and electric fuel cells and batteries that US industry and the military require.'
Burgess says liberation movements (ZANU-PF in Zimbabwe, ANC in South Africa and SWAPO in Namibia) are politicizing the mining sector to the detriment of free marketeering and this will pose a serious challenge to the US. Issues of black economic empowerment and nationalization of mining feature prominently.
'The free market and government taxation of mining profits have tended to provide optimal conditions for states and industry and maintain a steady flow of minerals to meet demand. However politicization has occurred in the form of nationalisation of the mining industry and the intervention of black empowerment companies which have tended to disrupt the market and flow of minerals.'
The DRC, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe all have – or in the process of implementing – policies that will see greater indigenous participation in mining.
• South Africa
South Africa is targeted for its vast platinum resources which stand at about 75 percent of global production, as well as its vast manganese deposits.
'South African President Jacob Zuma and Mineral Resources Minister Susan Shabangu have said that nationalization is not currently part of government policy.
'However, this does not guarantee it will not be part of government policy in the not-too-distant future. The ANC Youth League managed to get nationalization onto the agenda of the governing party's September 2010 meeting, fuelling investor worries.
'Nationalization of South African mines has been given renewed prominence by the ANC Youth League, which in 2009 issued a discussion paper arguing for state control of 60 percent of new mines.'
• Democratic Republic of Congo
The DRC is viewed as a source to quench America's thirst for cobalt, uranium, coltan (columbite and tantalum), tungsten, tin, and rare earth minerals.
The study says Gecamines, the state miner, has too much control of mining and appears to favour dealing with China over the West.
• Zambia
Zambia's cobalt constitutes 20 percent of global deposits and it is second only to the DRC.
Again, emphasis is on Beijing's growing presence in Zambia through integrated firms such as the China Railway Group, SinoHydro and the Metallurgical Group Corporation.
• Namibia
Naturally, America's interest here is in uranium and there is unease about the activities of the recently created state miner, Epangelo.
Namibia's Cabinet recently said all future mining of strategic minerals should be done in partnership with Epangelo.
Namibia is the fourth largest producer of uranium and global demand is rising faster than the demand for gold.
'The recently established state owned mining company, Epangelo has virtually no capital and may look to Russian and Chinese companies for support.
'Kalahari Holdings (a SWAPO firm) are … looking for uranium prospects and joined ventures, possibly with the Chinese and Russian companies.
'In the long run the politisization of the mining sector could divert uranium to China.'
Recommendations
'One measure the United States could take is to assist South Africa in developing beneficiation. US aid could help to develop local mineral processing and metal manufacturing and assist South Africa in developing sufficient electricity to power such ventures.
'In addition, the United States could negotiate off-take agreements with South Africa and provide assistance to benefit local mining communities.
'The United States could encourage American mining companies to reengage in South Africa and work with Australian, Canadian and South African companies that are committed to the free market.
'Also, the US government could step up strategic communications, broadcasting Chinese abuses and dissuading forces in the ANC and SWAPO from moving their governments closer to China.'
Burgess goes further.
'In order to shape the region to maintain the free market, there are a number of actions that the United States and its allies might take. They might use diplomacy to build strategic partnerships with the most important African countries…
'In the case of strategic minerals, special attention must be paid to South Africa and the DRC.
'The United States and its allies could develop military-to-military relationships with a number of strategic African countries. The US National Security Council, DOD (Department of Defence) and (the) US Africa Command might develop contingencies to deal with the eventual prospect of resource cutoffs and the possibility of conflict over strategic minerals. At issue is how US agencies might adjust to the forthcoming challenges.'
The building of strategic partnerships is politically difficult, given the ANC regime's rejection of AFRICOM during the stand-up process in 2007 and 2008.
'South Africa is the hegemon in the region and must fully accept AFRICOM before military-to-military partnerships can be built throughout the region.
'The United States also continues to apply sanctions against President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and his inner circle, which makes building partnerships with the Southern African Development Community difficult.
'In addition, there is some resistance to US foreign policy from the (President Joseph) Kabila regime in the DRC; SWAPO in Namibia; and the (President Eduardo) dos Santos regime in Angola.
'By 2020, US intervention, including AFRICOM, might be needed to ensure sustained US/allied access to strategic minerals, which means that the building of strategic partnerships in the next decade is important.'
Dr Stephen Burgess farmed commercially in Zimbabwe's Masvingo Province and ceded land during the government's agrarian reforms. He left Zimbabwe in 2001 and works for the Air War College in the United States. He is the author of three books; 'South Africa's Weapons of Mass Destruction' (with Helen Purkitt), 'Smallholders and Political Voice in Zimbabwe', and 'The United Nations under Boutros Boutros-Ghali, 1992-97'.
Burgess helped lead in the organization and execution of the Air Force Africa Command Symposium.
He is an associate director of the US Air Force Counterproliferation Centre. Burgess holds a PhD from Michigan State University and has been a faculty member at Vanderbilt University, the University of Zambia, the University of Zimbabwe, and Hofstra University.
The full study can be found on http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/ ..
Miss Sarah Forbes Bonetta the Africa Queen
Miss Sarah Forbes Bonetta, was a Yoruba Egbado Omoba of royal blood, who was orphaned in a brutal massacre in her home country at the age of eight.
She was captured and later given to Queen Victoria by Captain Fredrick. E. Forbes of the Royal Navy who received Sarah as a gift from King Ghezo of Dahomey. Mr Forbes then gave her to Queen Victoria as a present "She would be a present from the King of the blacks to the Queen of the Whites, he later wrote in his journal.
The Queen was immediately impressed by the girl's natural regal manner, exceptional intelligence and gift for academic studies, literature, art and music that she gave her an allowance for her welfare with Sarah becoming a regular visitor to Windsor Castle. Sarah's genius became admired throughout the royal court and she continued to outshine her tutors with her advanced abilities in all studies spending her life between the royal household and Sierra Leone where she was educated.
Sarah was raised as Queen Victoria’s goddaughter in the British middle class and went to the Church Missionary Society to be educated, she also attended the Female Institution in Freetown, Sierra Leone. When she was 12 years old, Queen Victoria commanded that Sarah return to England, where she was placed under the charge of Mr and Mrs Schon at Chatham.
Sarah would later gain a long lasting cough that was caused by the climate transferring from Yorubaland to England which would later prove to be fatal.
In August 1862 Sarah was sanctioned by Queen Victoria to marry James Pinson Labulo Davies at Nicholas Church in Brighton . Davies was a Yoruba businessman of considerable wealth for the period. The wedding party, was an extravagant affair and Sarah arrived from West Hill Lodge, Brighton in ten carriages and pairs of grays. There were sixteen bridesmaids and the wedding was made up of white ladies with African gentlemen, and African ladies with white gentlemen the couple later moved back to their native Yorubaland after their wedding and Sarah was baptised at a church in the town of Badagry, Lagos.
Shortly after her marriage, Sarah gave birth to a daughter and was granted permission by the Queen to name the child Victoria - the Queen also became her Godmother.
Sarah visited the Queen in 1867 with her daughter and then returned to Lagos where she had two more children.
James Davies later became very concerned about Sarah having a bad cough that would not go away, and she was later diagnosed with tuberculosis dying at the age of 37 in 1880 she was buried in Funchal Madiera.
Later, upon Sarah's death the Queen wrote in her diary: "Saw poor Victoria Davies, my black godchild, who learnt this morning of the death of her dear mother". So proud was Queen Victoria of Sarah's daughter, that when she passed her music examination, teachers and children had one day holiday.
Her daughter Victoria was given an annuity by the Queen and she continued to visit the royal household throughout her life.
In his journal Captain Forbes gave an account of his mission with relation to Miss Bonetta.
I have only to add a few particulars about my extraordinary present The Yoruba child” in a former portion of these journal I have mentioned the Okeadon war; one of the captives of this dreadful slave-hunt was this interesting girl.
It is usual to reserve the best born for the high behest of royalty and the immolation on the tombs of the diseased nobility . For one of these ends she had been detained at court for two years: proving, by her not having been sold to slave dealer, that she was of a good family.
So extraordinary a present would have been at least burden, had I not the conviction that, in consideration of the nature of the service I had performed, the government would consider her as the property of the crown.
To refuse, would have been to have signed her death warrant: which, probably, would have been carried into execution forthwith. Immediately on arriving…
Of her own history she was only a confused idea. Her parents were decapitated; her brother and sisters she knows not what their fate might have been.
For her age supposed to be eight years. She is a perfect genius; she now speaks English well, and have and great talent for music. She has won the affections, with but few exceptions, of all who have known her, she is far in advance of any white child of her age, in aptness of learning, and strength of mind and affection: and with her, been an excellent specimens of the Negro race.From Beutiful Yoruba album
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Before We Occupy
Too much inequality can harm the efficient operation of an economy…excessive inequality can have two perverse consequences: first, the very wealthy lobby for favours. Contracts and bailouts that distort markets; second growing inequality undermines the ability of the poorest to invest in their own education…
These factors mean that high inequality can generate further high inequality and eventually poor economic growth.
Professor Lawrence Katz, Harvard University economist, 2011.
If not for anything else, the masses, the silent majority, about 96% of Nigerians, now 167million, must be prepared to occupy selected places, once the fuel subsidy is removed without government, first of all, fishing out the members of the cabal feeding fat on NNPC and its operations. Even the President has admitted there is a cabal; the House of Representatives boasted recently that it will name them; the people are waiting. We want to know the vultures of NNPC. But, that is only the beginning; we also want to know the vultures of PTDF, NPA, CBN, PHCN, CUSTOMS etc.
One group of vultures is already known – they are the elected officials; irrespective of political party. Forget all the nonsense about “progressives” and other self-acclaimed titles; they have all become inured to the inequality which, not only Professor Katz wrote about;
but the former IMF Chief and Professor Stiglitz as well.
Nigeria is the only country where a Ward Councillor earns more than a full fledged Professor! Surely, the Federal Minister of Finance knows that. Inequality in sharing the proceeds of the vaunted 7% and above economic growth has created a situation where Nigeria is also the only country in the world where the GDP is growing at over double the rate of population without jobs being created. There is only one explanation; government has created a situation where the benefits of growth have been privatized by a few people while the attendant risks of poverty have been socialized.
In other words, they have been passed to the rest of the people. Subsidy removal without addressing inequality will merely pass more burden to the people while increasing the gap between the favoured few and the majority.
One individual and his conglomerate of businesses receive more subsidy than 100 million Nigerians. Yet he employs less than 50,000. Can anybody tell us where is the equity in that?
Once so called subsidy is removed, prices of cement and fuel, in particular, will go up.
Among the leading members of the National Economic Management Team are people with heavy investments in cement and petroleum products. They will be the initial and inescapable beneficiaries of the policy. They number less than two thousands. The victims include virtually the rest of us; but most especially, pensioners and people on fixed incomes. A few Nigerians, less than six, will move up the Forbes List of the world’s richest people; the majority will slide down and join the “wretched of the earth” (apologies to Franz Fanon).
President Jonathan might deny this all he wants; just as he denied owning assets which Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB, later discovered. But, those will be the initial consequences of subsidy removal – more for the rich; even less for the poor – unless the issue of inequitable distribution is addressed simultaneously.
It is interesting that while the President speaks without hesitation on the need for subsidy removal, he tells us that the “details of the palliatives are still being worked out”.
That is akin to a surgeon announcing that, “I will sedate the patient; cut him up; but details about how to wake him up later are still being worked out!!”.
Amazingly, President Jonathan speaks as if he is a stranger to Nigeria – a Johnny Just Come, JJC – as we used to call new arrivals in the 1970s. Was he, by any chance in Outer Mongolia when Obasanjo announced the Austerity Measures in 1978 and proceeded to borrow $2.8 billion from the IMF?
Those policies were supposed to result in sustainable gains after the temporary pains.
The $2.8 billion disappeared without trace; the debt remained for years; the promised gains never materialized. Instead under successive governments, the $2.8 billion grew to become over $36 billion; the technocrats who advised Obasanjo that the country was under-borrowed and could easily
repay were silenced – at least for a while.
The technocrats, led by the acclaimed leader of the Organised Private Sector, OPS, Chief Shonekan, resurfaced again when the debate started about whether Nigeria should accept the conditionalities proposed by the International Monetary Fund, IMF, which meant to devalue the currency. President Babangida, took the advice of the “technocrats” while at the same time pretending that the Structural Adjustment Programme, SAP, forcefully imposed on the people was “home-grown”. On the eve of SAP, the exchange rate was N0.70/US$1. The prices of Volkswagen (people’s car) and Peugeot 504 (middle class car) were N6,000 and N15,000 respectively.
A week after SAP was announced as official policy, Volks and 504 escalated to N25,000 and N48,500 respectively. And that was only the beginning. By the time Peugeot Automobile Nigeria (PAN) Limited discontinued assembling 504, the price had been catapulted to N2.7 million. SAP in effect brought about the “Tokunboh economy” – which remains till today. Millions of middle class citizens bought their last new car or television or refrigerator after that.
Then, as now, SAP was sold with the promise that the pains of adjustment will be temporary; while the gains (diversified economy, export promotion, more employment, improved infrastructure etc) will
be sustainable. The pains remain enduring; the gains proved elusive. Was President Jonathan in outer space when all these were happening or has he simply chosen selective remembrance and forgetfulness as a mental shield? And, lastly for now, could the President of Nigeria have forgotten about the $13-16 billion illegally taken by President Obasanjo to increase power supply to 10,000 MW, according to Engineer Lyel Imoke – his Minister for Power? Now governor of cross river state? The money has, as usual, vanished; power supply remains steady at under 4,000 MW – same as since May 1999.
Given the track record of governments, how on earth can this President expect the people to believe what he promises –especially when his own personal record of keeping promises is dismal?…..
WHY ARE “PROGRESSIVES” COMPLAINING? –1
“Those who make a pact with the devil end up in hell”.
Adolf Hitler, 1889-1945.
Action Congress of Nigeria, ACN, had its own presidential candidate for the 2011 elections.
The party called out the votes, in the Southwest, for every other office and won handsomely. Then rumours, which turned out to be partly factual, had it that an agreement was reached to allow Jonathan to “capture” the zone. Well, he is President. And he has taken the whip to the “progressives”; their leaders, supporters and media. …
REMEMBER $1.76b was reduced to under $450m in a few months in 2006. Till today, nobody has told Nigerians what happened to the money. They want to remove “subsidy” instead of catching the crooks. No Wikileaks. This is DeleLeaks Read the book. Only N5,000 per copy.
WHY ARE “PROGRESSIVES” COMPLAINING? –2
“History never repeats itself; man does”.
Barbara Tuchmann, US historian, authority on 14th Century Europe. Monday, after 2011 Presidential
These factors mean that high inequality can generate further high inequality and eventually poor economic growth.
Professor Lawrence Katz, Harvard University economist, 2011.
If not for anything else, the masses, the silent majority, about 96% of Nigerians, now 167million, must be prepared to occupy selected places, once the fuel subsidy is removed without government, first of all, fishing out the members of the cabal feeding fat on NNPC and its operations. Even the President has admitted there is a cabal; the House of Representatives boasted recently that it will name them; the people are waiting. We want to know the vultures of NNPC. But, that is only the beginning; we also want to know the vultures of PTDF, NPA, CBN, PHCN, CUSTOMS etc.
One group of vultures is already known – they are the elected officials; irrespective of political party. Forget all the nonsense about “progressives” and other self-acclaimed titles; they have all become inured to the inequality which, not only Professor Katz wrote about;
but the former IMF Chief and Professor Stiglitz as well.
Nigeria is the only country where a Ward Councillor earns more than a full fledged Professor! Surely, the Federal Minister of Finance knows that. Inequality in sharing the proceeds of the vaunted 7% and above economic growth has created a situation where Nigeria is also the only country in the world where the GDP is growing at over double the rate of population without jobs being created. There is only one explanation; government has created a situation where the benefits of growth have been privatized by a few people while the attendant risks of poverty have been socialized.
In other words, they have been passed to the rest of the people. Subsidy removal without addressing inequality will merely pass more burden to the people while increasing the gap between the favoured few and the majority.
One individual and his conglomerate of businesses receive more subsidy than 100 million Nigerians. Yet he employs less than 50,000. Can anybody tell us where is the equity in that?
Once so called subsidy is removed, prices of cement and fuel, in particular, will go up.
Among the leading members of the National Economic Management Team are people with heavy investments in cement and petroleum products. They will be the initial and inescapable beneficiaries of the policy. They number less than two thousands. The victims include virtually the rest of us; but most especially, pensioners and people on fixed incomes. A few Nigerians, less than six, will move up the Forbes List of the world’s richest people; the majority will slide down and join the “wretched of the earth” (apologies to Franz Fanon).
President Jonathan might deny this all he wants; just as he denied owning assets which Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB, later discovered. But, those will be the initial consequences of subsidy removal – more for the rich; even less for the poor – unless the issue of inequitable distribution is addressed simultaneously.
It is interesting that while the President speaks without hesitation on the need for subsidy removal, he tells us that the “details of the palliatives are still being worked out”.
That is akin to a surgeon announcing that, “I will sedate the patient; cut him up; but details about how to wake him up later are still being worked out!!”.
Amazingly, President Jonathan speaks as if he is a stranger to Nigeria – a Johnny Just Come, JJC – as we used to call new arrivals in the 1970s. Was he, by any chance in Outer Mongolia when Obasanjo announced the Austerity Measures in 1978 and proceeded to borrow $2.8 billion from the IMF?
Those policies were supposed to result in sustainable gains after the temporary pains.
The $2.8 billion disappeared without trace; the debt remained for years; the promised gains never materialized. Instead under successive governments, the $2.8 billion grew to become over $36 billion; the technocrats who advised Obasanjo that the country was under-borrowed and could easily
repay were silenced – at least for a while.
The technocrats, led by the acclaimed leader of the Organised Private Sector, OPS, Chief Shonekan, resurfaced again when the debate started about whether Nigeria should accept the conditionalities proposed by the International Monetary Fund, IMF, which meant to devalue the currency. President Babangida, took the advice of the “technocrats” while at the same time pretending that the Structural Adjustment Programme, SAP, forcefully imposed on the people was “home-grown”. On the eve of SAP, the exchange rate was N0.70/US$1. The prices of Volkswagen (people’s car) and Peugeot 504 (middle class car) were N6,000 and N15,000 respectively.
A week after SAP was announced as official policy, Volks and 504 escalated to N25,000 and N48,500 respectively. And that was only the beginning. By the time Peugeot Automobile Nigeria (PAN) Limited discontinued assembling 504, the price had been catapulted to N2.7 million. SAP in effect brought about the “Tokunboh economy” – which remains till today. Millions of middle class citizens bought their last new car or television or refrigerator after that.
Then, as now, SAP was sold with the promise that the pains of adjustment will be temporary; while the gains (diversified economy, export promotion, more employment, improved infrastructure etc) will
be sustainable. The pains remain enduring; the gains proved elusive. Was President Jonathan in outer space when all these were happening or has he simply chosen selective remembrance and forgetfulness as a mental shield? And, lastly for now, could the President of Nigeria have forgotten about the $13-16 billion illegally taken by President Obasanjo to increase power supply to 10,000 MW, according to Engineer Lyel Imoke – his Minister for Power? Now governor of cross river state? The money has, as usual, vanished; power supply remains steady at under 4,000 MW – same as since May 1999.
Given the track record of governments, how on earth can this President expect the people to believe what he promises –especially when his own personal record of keeping promises is dismal?…..
WHY ARE “PROGRESSIVES” COMPLAINING? –1
“Those who make a pact with the devil end up in hell”.
Adolf Hitler, 1889-1945.
Action Congress of Nigeria, ACN, had its own presidential candidate for the 2011 elections.
The party called out the votes, in the Southwest, for every other office and won handsomely. Then rumours, which turned out to be partly factual, had it that an agreement was reached to allow Jonathan to “capture” the zone. Well, he is President. And he has taken the whip to the “progressives”; their leaders, supporters and media. …
REMEMBER $1.76b was reduced to under $450m in a few months in 2006. Till today, nobody has told Nigerians what happened to the money. They want to remove “subsidy” instead of catching the crooks. No Wikileaks. This is DeleLeaks Read the book. Only N5,000 per copy.
WHY ARE “PROGRESSIVES” COMPLAINING? –2
“History never repeats itself; man does”.
Barbara Tuchmann, US historian, authority on 14th Century Europe. Monday, after 2011 Presidential
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)