Why does Egypt being black trigger people? When I say black I don't mean Congolese, but by the western standard of the one drop rule, native Egyptians are and have always been black.
Also where do Nubians end and native Egyptians begin. Is their really a substantial ethnic separation between the two? I suspect the separation implied by academia is artificial or at the very least highly exaggerated.
Other urls found in this thread:
m.youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
There is already another thread about this.
Give it up, Tyrone. Your ancestors were as useless as you are.
Except as slaves of course.
There has to be a deliberate engineering of college level curriculum to produce this nonsense. Because nobody can come to this conclusion by themselves. Neither teach nor student.
If you are referring to black Americans, they are descendants of both the slaves and the slave masters.
That's what's funny about the /pol/ meme to me. They push the one drop rule and then say "E-Egyptians weren't black"
I asked one if he thought they were white and he said "well Cleopatra is". The fact that he thinks Cleopatra or even Ptolemaic Egypt is relevant to any of these discussions is fucking embarrassing
what is the origins of that pic. i seen it here often before
That one particularly black looking Egyptians that somehow proves all Egyptians were black
One drop rule. Native Egyptians and Nubians are essentially one in the same, That's why southern Egypt was called upper Egypt, because their heritage and culture went south to north following the flow of the Nile.
Why it's almost as though they believe the rules apply except when it's inconvenient or something!
Bump
You're just cherrypicking. I know plenty of Egyptians and they are objectively not Black. They are just as racist as Westerners when it comes to darker skinned people.
Blacks come in all shades in phenotypes (one drop rule). I'm going off the American standard for "black". What is considered black is different in different countries. And that guy in your pic is not a native Egyptian.
>What is considered black is different in different countries
You answered your own question
Egyptians are not black because they're not actually black, but brown, neither do they follow the American standard which was born our of colonial slavery
You might as well claim the whole middle east by that categorisation
North Africans are way more racist than your average westerner, heck, they make Slavs seem tame.
Black people aren't actually black either. They too are varying shades of brown.
The browner they are the more racist they became
You can see the same dynamic in south America and, India, and southeast Asia, where fair skin is associated with wealth and beauty, while dark skin is associated with either poverty or uncivilised natives
White people seems to be more secured mentally about their skin colour
>white people more secure about skin color
Have you ever heard of Italy.
>but by the western standard of the one drop rule, native Egyptians are and have always been black.
Except they haven't
Maybe to americans who think the only two races that exist are black and white and that there can be no middle ground
Someone post the study that shows that the subsaharan african ancestry found in modern egyptians didn't exist in ancient egyptians
If Mariah Carey, prince, and Steph curry are "black" than so are e vast majority of Egyptians.
You mean that study that used Greek mummies as the basis of "Egyptian" DNA.
Also do Nubians count as "subsaharan" per the study?
t. Shakka Ahmose
To be fair though that guy is atypically dark.
Even Sicilians are not as dark as people claim them to be. The idea is pushed by some MENA who like to think they would fit as a local in Italy. And the odd nordicist /pol/ack. And the odd afrocentrist/left winger.
But you're right, some italians are insecure about the darkness of their fellow compatriots, but so are MENA people. So are Indians. So are Latin Americans.
And so on...
Some of the first people living there were the first farmers than are very close to the levantines,probably the famiy of that guy has lived in the same patch since before the Asirians knew how to pile stones to make a house.
Only in USA think that, they go from mixed/mulatoes or quarterons depending of the part of Europe/Western world.
USA even puts latinos as a race senpai.
But all black Americans are mixed to varying degrees, on a multigenerational level.
By different standard like the Spanish for ex. they would be called Mulatoes, you can't use American standard for ancient people, especially id the circumstances by which it happened was very different
The American standard was born out of Racial segregation where every ethnics are grouped exclusively by races; due to its context as a colony of many distant ethnics; the grouping itself is unnatural
You can't say the same thing about Egyptians, dynamically, they're more akin to steppe Asian people which was the result of Caucasian and Asian mixing; they're their own thing, they're Eurasian; neither white or Asian, and this happens naturally due to geography, way different from what happened in America
American standards are stupid anyway, its what happen when rootless people try to reclaim their heritage, and this means to both white and black people
That's why calling them blacks is such a funny term, you got blondes with green eyes and all american look labeled as nigs.
Heck, there was an american baseball players or something than was like that, I don't know the name tough.
This is sort of unrelated but ivebeen on a genetics binge due to this whole Egypt dna thing and I'm confused as hell about a few things. if appreciate it if anyone could clear these up:
1. what was the y dna haplogroup of the European Neolithic farmers who came in from Anatolia? I've seen conflicting info saying I, J, E, and G. if it's I, that would mean there were two different waves of I migration since I came in during the Ice Age right? I've read that Sardinians are mostly I.
2. did haplogroup E really evolve in Asia and then return to Africa, meaning that black people are migrants INTO Africa?
3. How the hell did Cameroon get r1b?
4. what haplogroup were the Egyptians in that recent study supposed to belong to?
Derek jeter.
Forgot to include the Meds
Its basically happen in the area of transition between whiter skinned countries and darker skinned countries
By the time Eurasians came down to Egypt it was already inhabited by East Africans. Human migration patterns alone dictate that.
1.It really depends, I is pretty old in europe and then you have a lot of lineages than simply died CT, C1a, C1b,BT, F are nearly/totally extinct, but those are Y-haplogroups, when there were less people it was a lot easier to kill/maim/rape the males and kids and rape/waifu the females. Also a few lineages are older than you would think, you find R1b in europe with the Epiravettian culture than lived nearly 20.000 years ago.
2. I'm not sure but I don't discount it, farmers displaced hunter gatherers in Yurop, I don't see why not would be the same in africa. And probably a few Asian farmers would be enough to kill the sparsly populated hunter gatherers and take they females.
3. A more recent Asian invasion from horse/cattle breeders, probably why the Hausa and some Fulani people retain some traits.
4. E1b clads, j1,j2, r1b and a few, less important others. r1b are fucking everywhere.
I don't deny that Egyptians are at some point have mixed with sub Saharan African Blacks, I just saying that the American standard categorisation can't be applied to Egyptians, by that same logic Indians should be categorised as Abos due to them being originally of Australoid stock but of course that's not the case, just as Indians, Egyptians are their own thing, neither black nor white, having the phenotype of both their northern and southern neighbours, but distinctly different
Applying the new and racialized term "sub-Saharan" shouldn't be applied to these study since the Sahara as we know it didn't exist back then. There is a greater level of population continuity in Africa than "sub-Sahara" implies.
thanks for the answers. I'm mostly co fused about the neolithic farmers/early european farmers I guess. ive seen a lot of people say the sardinians are an almost pure example of then but when unchecked it seems like they are haplogroup I mostly, while from what I can tell the Anatolian farmers were haplogroup G and their closest descendants are in Georgia. That seems rogh4 geographically but then why do people keep saying Sardinians are examples of Neolithic farmers when they're actually more like Paleolithic people?
The early farmers were the I, G groups, J, and even R , with some more rare lineages there and there. Sardinians were mostly I, but had a sizeable G than would be your anatolians than conquered and merged with the I.
we're there any I who came from the near east c. 7k bc with the other farmers or were they just the paleo/me so inhabitants who got merged with the incoming farmers and adopted their way of life? if the latter, which is what I thino you're saying, then the Sardinians are survivors from the LGM who mixed with some others right? and North Europeans are also LGM survivors who went north when they finished out by Neolithic farmers, then merged with incoming Indo-Euros (R1a/b) durng the bronze age and went on to form germans and various slavs?
Its kinda sad that the african american nationalists(?) are so desperate for an identity that they will grab anything.
Nobody even said anything about black Americans. Why do you people envy them so much that they feel the need to drag them into every conversation.
I bet if the founder of Egypt himself got resurrected and turned out to be not black, niggers would still claim they wuz pharaohs n shiet.
Nobody is claiming relationship to the ancient Egyptians. The point is that they would most likely be objectively considered "black" by western standards, not related to Americans, but a kind of black person nonetheless.
Why are white people so insecure about this.
No one is insecure about this, we're all just pointing out how ridiculous the whole thing is. It's like saying Indians wuz hwite n shiet just because they're considered racially "caucasian" to some people.
I was commenting on the image posted you fucking dork
Holy fucking shit you make these posts literally every single day, give it a fucking rest man
This is a good point, people who believe in the solutrean hypothesis are equally nuts
>slaves
>useful
>by the western standard of the one drop rule
don't push american retardation from the 1800s onto the rest of tehword in the 21st century.
black means of subsaharan african extraction.
It used to be that calling them "African" was good enough. But now that "black" is in vogue, there are some obvious problems. Black usually refers to subsaharan Africans. By adopting subsaharan standards, you've given up all of North Africa.
The We Wuzers should emigrate to Egypt, see how long they put up with their shit, arabs are a lot of things but they don't play around.
There has always been black people in Egypt, or maybe I should refer to them as people of color. They would have a problem with any Americans moving to Egypt en mass, unless of course they were rich.
What about blacks that aren't subsaharan like Sudanese or Mauritanians.
Both of those countries are considered subsaharan
Both "black" ethnic groups in Egypt (Nubians and Bejas) had little to nothing to do with with Ancient Egypt (outside of the 25th dynasty, which was Nubian)
>You have to apply the same rules to another group of people as you apply to your group of people
Universalism was a mistake
Source?
Ancient Egypt culture and heritage followed the flow of the Nile south to north which is why southern Egypt was called upper Egypt. Native Egyptians have always had the most in common with their southern neighbors. It is even debatable whether or not they constitute a distinctly separate ethnic group.
Debatable especially since both countries are practically entirely covered by desert.
Shut the fuck up about your anthropological supposition
>posting a greek rapebaby and trying to pass it off as the norm
Bump
Middle Easterners dont give a shit about southern europe desu.
Wasn't there a dynasty that was actually black skinned? When they got conquered by Nubians or something.
Black people don't actually have black skin.
>When I say black I don't mean Congolese, but by the western standard of the one drop rule
>one drop rule
FUCK OFF WITH YOUR AMERICAN BABOONERY, HOLY SHIT. ONE DROP RULE DOESN'T EXIST IN GENETIC SCIENCE.
White people don't actually have white skin.
What is with Americans projecting their cultural retardation onto the rest of the world?
>Asia originally meant just Anatolia + Middle East
>"UGH YOU'RE NOT A *REAL* ASIAN UNLESS YOU'RE LIKE UHHH, JAPANESE OR KOREAN OR SOMETHING" t. American retard
Fuck off.
But they do have a much more narrow range of shades that are considered "white".
>one drop rule
>Being this retarded
One drop rule is a genetic nonentity, yes, but it's important historically and in how people perceive race (in the USA, at least).
>in the USA
And not in Egypt. Who cares about America?
Does it? Maghrebis are like 10% subsaharan, but even am*ricans don't call them black, that would be retarded.
Finally, you took my advice about the picture .
>tfw the first one who uploaded that pic here
Pic related; another Upper Egyptian; most likely the ethnic type of the majority of the Ancient Egyptian populace and source of Ancient Egyptian culture.
It's over. The blacks win
well apparently the ottomans much prefered white slaves and used them for things like diplomatic missions or military (or boipucci) and they made the black slaves do the hard labour because they "aren't smart enough to do what whites can"
which means white people were better blacks than black people were. WE WUZ BLACKZ N SHIET
Win what, some black countries are starving right now.
Ever tried finding Egypt on a map, user?
I like how as soon as he says the word "upper Egypt" everybody knows its the same fucking guy.
You say that like Egyptians had any cultural connection to East Africa or Nubia. They considered themselves completely different and saw those people as alien. Egyptians were most similar to ancient Levantine populations ethnically and culturally. Plenty of predynastic mummies have been found with blonde and red hair, yet you keep pretending they're fucking Greek. Give it a rest dude. It's not that big of a deal.
Nice try retard.
Most of people consider their race by skin color because most of them don't even know where they came from.
Can't find it at the moment, but there was this Egyptian scholar being asked about "black Egypt" and he completely goes off, saying
>"These people have no history and no accomplishments of their own, so they claim those of others!
>"Do they just think we Copts (Egyptians) sprang from the ground?"
They distinguished themselves from Blacks. The black people to them were the southern Nile Kushites. Actual-factual black people. Egyptians as they were in ancient Egypt are virtually non-existent, outside of the echoes modern Egyptian DNA. Those people don't exist anymore, but ancient Egypt, the history and accomplishments being discussed, were most certainly not "black" in any way.
>pre-dynastic mummies with blonde hair
Like who?
Your right it is no big deal, so why make shit up about it. Mummification itself was an exclusively African practice, being cultural derived from Nilo-saharans.
>most of them don't even know where they came from
Most people are not Americans you know.
They would easily be considered "black" by American standards. There are a ton of "black" Americans that are way lighter than what the majority of ancient Egyptians would have been. It's almost as if the definition of "black" changes depending on the circumstances.
Yes, you wanna know why? because Americans are a mongrel race, fuck off with the American ''standard'' bullshit
Not that guy but here you go: en.wikipedia.org
>This male adult body has all teeth present and healthy and there are tufts of ginger-coloured hair on the scalp.
>They would easily be considered "black" by American standards.
Other anons already said this but I'll say it again: Why should I give a fuck about what Americans think? Americans are imbeciles.
Not a chance. By your definition of "American standards" they'd be "Mex'kins", due to not looking black, but looking pretty close to North Africans today, who do not look black.
I fucking hate you, I really honestly do, you're worse than the wehraboos and tankies. You do this shit every single day, get proven to be a dickhead and come slinking back to do it all over again
"Black" in American is the most varied ethnic group in the world, there are plenty of "blacks" that look North African and vice versa, all this thanks largely to the one drop rule.
You're gonna get banned if you don't stop with this horseshit. Constantly baiting with the one drop memery even though it's been refuted numerous times in this thread.
Mexicans would look more like Aztecs. They have more of an Asian look. And ancient Egyptians wore braids.
>this fucking thread
youtube.com
>&hum strikes again
How did this guy become the voice of the movement?
>mexicans
>looking pretty close to North Africans today
What the fuck am I reading?
Mexicans can look like anything. Even in our families we always have that one cousin/sibling that looks whiter and another that looks browner.
>You say that like Egyptians had any cultural connection to East Africa or Nubia
Flat out lie. Lower Egypt recieved much influence from Upper Egypt aka Nubia.
Bump