The beautiful diversity of black Africa

Octavian

Hmm
VIP
Sociology is a science hence scientific.
funny u giving a shit about science :hemad:
Skjermbilde 2020-09-22 kl. 15.15.45.png
 
Around a hundred years ago Somalis were considered as part of the caucasian race. We never considered ourselves to be white then. We shouldn't consider ourselves black now?

ROM-Eth1.jpg
 
Last edited:

Alluring

Sayonara
The hypocrisy is showing entirely in this thread. Cushite is the white man's term, the same way black is the white man's term. How are you going to claim one and then complain the other is European classification when they both are?
 
The hypocrisy is showing entirely in this thread. Cushite is the white man's term, the same way black is the white man's term. How are you going to claim one and then complain the other is European classification when they both are?

Except black is based on colour and cushite is based on our genetic, cultural and linguistic heritage. We are said to be the descendants of Nabi Noahs grandson Kush. Hence the term cushite.

I fully agree with being labelled a cushite because that is what we are. Its not a silly theory or pseudoscience this has been scientifically proven and tested. Also I don't care for the white mans acceptance. The truth is I am a somali cushite.

The same who reject this term have no problem with other ethnic labels such as bantu, nilotic, arab, amigh, Tuareg etc.

Why can't we have our own ethnic label that goes behind our nationality? The selective denial is ridiculous.
 

Alluring

Sayonara
Except black is based on colour and cushite is based on our genetic, cultural and linguistic heritage. We are said to be the descendants of Nabi Noahs grandson Kush. Hence the term cushite.

I fully agree with being labelled a cushite because that is what we are. Its a silly theory or pseudoscience this has been scientifically proven and tested.

That's fine but some people don't claim the term "black" because a white man created it. Then go on about how they're cushites. If you acknowledge one being a white term, acknowledge the other.
 
That's fine but some people don't claim the term "black" because a white man created it. Then go on about how they're cushites. If you acknowledge one being a white term, acknowledge the other.

Ignorant. Cushite existed far before Europeans. Also its a real ethnolinguistic group with shared genetic ancestry, language and other aspects of culture.
 

reer

VIP
The hypocrisy is showing entirely in this thread. Cushite is the white man's term, the same way black is the white man's term. How are you going to claim one and then complain the other is European classification when they both are?
Except black is based on colour and cushite is based on our genetic, cultural and linguistic heritage. We are said to be the descendants of Nabi Noahs grandson Kush. Hence the term cushite.

I fully agree with being labelled a cushite because that is what we are. Its a silly theory or pseudoscience this has been scientifically proven and tested.

because somalis are related to afar amhara hararis etc we aren't related to nearly all peoples outside the horn they are completely foreign to us even arabs across the red sea have more in common with us (inb4 someone calls me arab wannabe coon)
 
That's fine but some people don't claim the term "black" because a white man created it. Then go on about how they're cushites. If you acknowledge one being a white term, acknowledge the other.

One is based on heritage the other on colour alone. We have nothing in common with blacks minus our skin. With cushites we have a similar culture, language, dna and even ancient religion.

I haven't rejected the term black on the basis of it being constructed by whites but because it doesn't apply.

Would you reject a medicine because it was created by a white doctor? Not everything should be accepted or rejected based on race. Rather the commonalities and logic instead.
 
Last edited:

Alluring

Sayonara
Ignorant. Cushite existed far before Europeans. Also its a real ethnolinguistic group with shared genetic ancestry, language and other aspects of culture.

The term came in the 1820s.......
because somalis are related to afar amhara hararis etc we aren't related to nearly all peoples outside the horn

Did I say they didn't exist? I'm saying that term came in the 1820s. Just call yourself Somali and go.


" Cushite (Proper Noun) "
  1. a member of one of the peoples of eastern Africa, or any black African
    Etymology: Cush + -ite, coined in the 1820s.
  2. Cushite(Proper Noun)
    a sub-family of the Afro-Asiatic languages, Cushitic
    Etymology: Cush + -ite, coined in the 1820s.
 

Alluring

Sayonara
One is based on heritage the other on colour alone. We have nothing in common with blacks minus our skin. With cushites we have a similar culture, language, dna and even ancient religion.

I havent reject the term black on the basis of it being constructed by whites but because it doesn't apply.

Would you reject a medicine because it was created by a white doctor? Not everything should be accepted or rejected based on race. Rather the commonalities and logic instead.

That's not my argument? I am stating that others will reject black because it is a European term and use Cushite which is another European term.

If you reject black and claim Cushite for other reasons like ancestry and culture, that's fine. I'm just pointing hypocrisy of some people's reasoning.
 
That's fine but some people don't claim the term "black" because a white man created it. Then go on about how they're cushites. If you acknowledge one being a white term, acknowledge the other.

Cushitic is a term that reflects an ethno-linguistic reality. Call it whatever you like, the terminology isn't important so long as it reflects a biological/genetic reality.

But black is a social construct that has no basis in scientific or genetic classification. A Somali has no genetic relation with a Bantu from West Africa despite the 'black label' whereas those labeled as Cushitic have a genetic relation.
 
because somalis are related to afar amhara hararis etc we aren't related to nearly all peoples outside the horn they are completely foreign to us even arabs across the red sea have more in common with us (inb4 someone calls me arab wannabe coon)
I agree with you 100% except for the Amhara bit. They are semetic and descend from South Arabia from a few thousand years ago. Albeit they are mixed with Madows and other groups. But their language is closer to Soqotri or Mehri then cushite languages.
 

Trending

Latest posts

Top