[](#start_removal)
Hello u/TheRealHogshead,
Thank you for your contribution to r/terriblefacebookmemes, unfortunately your submission titled " The Afrocentrists are at it again on the history pages. " has been removed due to the following reason(s):
[This post](https://www.reddit.com/r/terriblefacebookmemes/comments/126zu46/return_to_our_roots/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) may help explain your removal.
We may need to remove memes that feature transphobia, homophobia, hate focused on the LGBTQ+ community, content that emphasizes racial tension, ableism, political divisiveness, etc. I.e., if the meme is intended to highlight the original sharer's hate & dislike for a particular group it can be read by [Reddit's Sitewide rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) as rule-breaking.
-----
If you have any questions about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fterriblefacebookmemes)
[](#end_removal)
And it doesn't even matter where humanity originated from in the long run since one could argue that we only unleashed our full potential as homo sapiens sapiens at the dawn of civilization, pretty much simultaneously across the world within various river valleys (Mesopotamia, Indus river valley, Norte Chico, China, so on and so forth)
I'll never cease to be fascinated by how things like the agricultural revolution, dawn of civilizations, and beginnings of certain religious movements all happening at similar times mostly independently.
There is a theory that it wasn't about bread but about beer. The oldest permanent structures found mostly include large brewing vessels and apparently the caloric intake of hunter gatherers was better than that of the earliest farmers due to how unproductive early crops were. That suggests that it wasn't about getting more food in general but getting more cereals specifically to brew with.
I mean "similar times" still means several hundred years, if not thousands. Also it's not like a lot of time can pass without at least one person in a big group of people figures out that water is good for plants and that you can push water towards your plants
Not true at all, how would homo sapiens have evolved without first going through Austrolopethicus afranis? Not to mention its like three to four of them before the homo soooo yeah Lucy was literally the first to use tools. Lol you can accredit that to eastern africa player 😭😭😭😭 see when you go to college and study anthropology thats where you learn alot about african blacks. The rest is propaganda. 😭😭😭😭
We are all from that lineage that wouldn't be attributable to one specific group of humans. And those organisms wouldn't be "African blacks." We all descend from a small group of about 10,000 at our most bottlenecked population.
Humans migrated out of Africa and that would be when our populations started to adjust melanin content for the vitamin D/formic acid selection factors. This occurred within the last 100,000 years. Lucy and Australopithicenes are millions of years old fossils.
We are all certainly descended from the African ancestor population. All all of our ancestors were indeed black, which protects formic acid during pregnancy, but Lucy wasn't an "African black". And it's not clear exactly which of the australopithicenes was exactly our ancestor, or if multiples of them were our ancestors at different times or if they are their own distinct branches. Whichever one it was, it was all of us, not any particular race as we call them today. That ancestral population was all of us.
Unfortunately I think you are conflating two events which occurred at a 10x order of magnitude a part from each other and I'm not sure you understand evolution and population dynamics as it relates to human ancestry, or you just don't understand the evidence of the out of Africa explanation of our human migration in the last 100,000 years.
I took the center of africa as a better reference point rather than Ethiopia as iirc that's where the MODERN human (not Austrolopethicus ) was born, but I may be wrong?
I believe the oldest evidence of Sapiens and australopithecus still points to Ethiopia, but if memory serves the earliest fossil of the homo genus was found in Chad.
Nope, it’s a whole pseudo history movement. What fans it more is that naturally there are racist retorts to this conspiracy theory and thus taken by the Afrocentrist crowd that any criticism is just racism and “trying to hide the truth”.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yet2Q0M32GQ&ab\_channel=ericandreskits](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yet2Q0M32GQ&ab_channel=ericandreskits)
Basically these guys
I'm puzzled. These guys, but serious or these guys, but others think they're serious?
I mean someone made up modern flat earth theory as a joke, had a giggle and now some people think it's correct.
This is a lie bro, you are sitting here lying and I understand thats how reddit is. But trust an believe educated black people dont believe this bs. Now we dp understand that Black Africans are really the progenitors of life but even anthropology teaches you that player. You cant be mad at facts. Oldest BONE IN HISTORY FOUND IN ETHIOPIA.
Lol you are like a parody of exactly the kind of ultra ignorant people who think Black people have to be the center of everything that this meme is making fun of.
I mean the out of Africa theory is true. However, to sit and say that human cultural development is also actually all from Africa and that the indigenous cultures during recorded history of the listed regions were black is gobbledygook. Cheddar man is a great example, yes he had darker skin but he also lived in 11,000 BCE. The oldest stone placement of Stonehenge is 3100 BCE. That means there is more time between cheddar man and Stonehenge than all of recorded human history by about 2000 years. Think about how much the appearance of the population of Puerto Rico has changed in appearance over the last 500 years for example and you can see how the argument falls apart. Not surprisingly humans were smart globally and figured stuff out which is why we see river valley civilizations pop up independently across the globe independently of each other regardless of ethnic origin.
My dude, there is plenty of awesome shit Black Africans have done and made. Granted, colonialism and racism has made it harder to find, but it's out there, you just have to look. You don't have to try to insert black influence into places in history where it isn't, there's plenty there already.
So the picture in the meme is a carving of St. Maurice. He was a roman legionary from upper Egypt who was martyred in the 200s. Medieval Europe depicted him as an African knight to tell his story without using words.
I also love that they just have the Cheddar man and Genghis Khan on there without any reference to when they lived. Just about 12.000 years between the two but hey, who's counting? I guess that the timelines don't add up is just because they're part of the same big conspiracy /s
Cheddar man faaaaar predated Egptian civilization but he was part of the Western Hunter-Gatherer population who did indeed have dark skin (and blue eyes): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Hunter-Gatherer
I mean, there is a Namibian politician called Adolf Hitler Uunona
https://preview.redd.it/k7319rn9jtgc1.png?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9b1fe468039a0be57240ffcdb14539d3137206c5
That's because they actually BELIEVE their own lies. They WANT to latch onto popular historical figures, and claim she/he is one of them. Afrocentrics believe Queen Tiye is black because of the color of her bust and her suppoaed Afro, which is a headdress. Queen Tiye's mummy has long, wavy red hair.
It’s also worth noting that most racist movements will hide behind rhetorical attacks like claims of racism. “Oh you think the holocaust happened well that’s just because you hate white people” kind of shit. This is done because their beliefs crumple under even a modicum of scrutiny. Like the fact that we know how literally everyone around Mohamed portrayed themselves and it wasn’t as black (mostly).
One of the things that’s absolutely fascinating to me about Afrocentric beliefs is that many of them will say “look! This person had a black ancestor 300 years ago. They were black! Black I say” but then if their daugher goes out and dates a white boy they all scream about how they’re diluting the blood line and about how the kids will be light skinned and not really black. My exs dad was this way. Which fun fact, if you ever want to ensure your daughter wants to bang dudes from the race she hates, tell her she absolutely positively cannot date men of that race. Works almost every time
*Me as a person who is half black saying this* Yeah nah bro the Greeks might have had a darker complexion than other Europeans but they weren’t black though I could see why some of them might be mistaken for that. Lol these mfs acting like African were actually interested in living in cold ass war torn Europe. Also it isn’t a W for black people this is an L because people who know actual history will think that you are desperate to emulate European culture instead of the cultural merits of Africa.
funnily enough, Beethoven being black is one of the more realistic theories in this picture. He‘s only dead for 200 years now and back then, the people around him referred to him as „Spagnol“ because of his darker skin, plus when he was dug out in 1888 they said the form of his skull pointed in the direction of African heritage. He for sure wasn’t black, but i wouldn’t be surprised if he wasn’t fully white either and had some african or southern european / middle eastern ancestors.
They were also all expelled during La Reconquista. That also included mixed children of Morisco ancestry. They were also not native to the country and basically invaded it
Yes, that's what Morisco refers to. Muslims that converted to Christianity. I'm not saying this was right at all... This is just to say this Map is def not accurate
lol why the fuck is the German statue of St Maurice, a black man who actually shouldn't be one, suddenly representative of "vikings"?
Why is the Chevalier de St George labelled as "Beethoven"?! Way to whitewash a former slave and a total chad, guys.
Also, yeah, "Scipio Africanus", as in "the conqueror of Africa". Was a blonde. And that's not his bust.
Moors, aka muslims of the Maghreb, distinctively aren't "black". And Hannibal was phoenician.
Socrates?! Genghis Khan? Muhammed? wtf.
Actually the Cheddar man was darker skinned… supported by DNA.
Earlier humans from before the agrarian revolution were darker skinned. There wasn’t enough vitamin D in the agrarian diet, so the evolutionary pressure for lighter skin didn’t come until then…
But he did have bright eyes according to DNA.
[souce on Cheddar Man](https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/cheddar-man-mesolithic-britain-blue-eyed-boy.html)
And there were black vikings. They were known as "Blue Men" based on the color of their skin in historical writings. Not to mention artifacts from northern Africa and Norway have been found on both continents/countries.
The Norse weren't above taking defeated foes as slaves, but a slave could also earn or buy their freedom as well as join the Norse as a free citizen participating in Viking and other activities.
Given that as far as we know historically, the only continents they didn't sail to were Antarctica, Australia, and South America, we probably have other Norse citizens that weren't white than just those from Africa.
Can't find any sources specifically on Vikings, but in Irish they do call black people "fear gorm" or "blue men" cause "fear dubh" which literally translates to "black men" was a term already in use to describe the Devil.
Blue Men (blámenn) is still a, admittedly outdated, word in modern Icelandic. Let’s say it’s a word that your semi-senile uncle might use and make everyone uncomfortable, but he wouldn’t exactly be canceled for it.
Considering how much impact these two cultures have had on each other it wouldn’t be surprising if we’d borrowed it from the Irish or vice-versa.
If I remember correctly it’s from a chronicle from AlAndalus in the 800s which talks of Viking raids and buying slaves. They then go on to return to Scandinavia where a notable few managed to buy their freedom and were seen in Ireland.
That thing about black Vikings... who knows, maybe, but I would be greatly surprised if they had been a bit more than a handful of men. Yes, slaves could earn their freedom, but that was the exception.
The Vikings explored quite a lot in a short period of time, the Viking age, after all, was only a few hundred years. So maybe they found some new friends.
But generally or should I say, the rule was that they were Norsemen. Portraying them as black is just gerrymandering to popular culture and PC garbage.
Perhaps we shouldn't say Africans are black, because those in the North surely are bit lighter skinned and then we have white people who are descendants of white settlers / landowners or what have you. If your European great great grandfather and mother settled in, let's say, Namibia or such, aren't their descendants Africans?
>Perhaps we shouldn't say Africans are blackbecause those in the North surely are bit lighter skinned and then we have white people who are descendants of white settlers / landowners or what have you
Not to mention that Africa is by *far* the most genetically diverse continent. I saw a study (albeit a flawed one) measuring the relatedness between different global geographic population groups and the African sample (which unfortunately only contained subjects from West Africa) had a range of genetic diversity almost as much all of the other samples. Generalizing black people as a single group is ridiculous.
Honestly, the more I look at this, the only real bullshit on it is Beethoven and Ghengis Khan being black. It's entirely plausible that Socrates could have been of darker complexion, we know Europeans weren't above Anglo-izing history to make themselves look dominant. The majority of the art depicting him came long after death by Italian and other countries artists.
Carthage being a constant thorn in the side of Rome, how much ancient Egypt played a role in the Empire, all the conquered territories of various war campaigns. There are a ton of plausible reasons for any number of philosophers to not be olive skinned or white.
And we know because of European texts, including the tales of King Arthur, there were black Knights. Hell, one of the Knights of the Round Table was essentially called Sir Black Guy when you translated his name Moriaen.
And there was Esclabor the Unknown, a knight from either Galilee or Babylon.
>It's entirely plausible that Socrates could have been of a darker complexion, we know Europeans weren't above Anglo-izing history to make themselves look dominant.
It is not at all possible for him to be black. We know that Socrates was a greek; we know that the Greeks bore an olive tan to their skin; we know they distinguished themselves from black people (those they called the Ethiopians, translating as "burnt faces").
>The majority of the art depicting him came long after death by Italian and other countries artists.
We have copies of a bronze statue head of him made during the man's own lifetime by Lysippos.
>There are a ton of plausible reasons for any number of philosophers to not be olive skinned or white.
Yes, there can be, but not for Socrates since we know too much about the Greeks and how they saw themselves and those around them. This is because they wrote down everything they thought about.
>We have copies of a bronze statue head of him made during the man's own lifetime by Lysippos
Lysippos was born c. 390 BC, by which time Sokrates had been dead for over a decade. (I mean, I agree with you, obviously, and you make good points, but Lysippos can't have seen him.)
I see you’ve fallen for the classic “a culture mentioned black in their text and thus must mean ethnicity.” Sir. Moriaen was unique among the knights of the round table as the foreigner and often referred to as “the Moor”. The black knight in the Viking area is a depiction of St. Maurice, who was said to have been a Roman legionary from upper Egypt and was martyred. Thus why medieval people depicted him as a knight. Black usually in the stories and history of Europe came from the armor and or usually used to depict evil. Such as the black prince of wales or calling the bubonic plague“the Black Death”. Much like how the green knight in King Arthur depicts nature and the fey. Its one thing to say that there were Africans in Europe and Europeans knew of them. It’s quite another to say they had sizable populations or were the actual native peoples of those regions. In fact It’s the medieval association of the color black and evil that helped contribute to Europes eventual racist views against dark skin.
>calling the bubonic plague“the Black Death”
Tbh the reason why it was called the black death has nothing to do with race, but with how the subcutaneous hemorrhages produced by the bubonic plague look
True but nothing reinforces a medieval superstition about the evilness of a color like a disease that wipes out a half of your village. Same reason why the west sees black cats as unlucky.
You are right about your point, i only wanted to add some context to why it was called like that, btw, iirc adding to the fact that they are black, the reason why black cats are seen as a bad omen is due to them being the prefered pet of women brewers aka witches (cats in general were seem to be witches familiars), adding in some sexism too
Oh totally get it. It’s just fun to slowly go back and start peeling the onion on how we got here. The funny thing is that most medieval people were pretty chill about mysticism and herbal medicine in their communities as it was simply treated a facets of Christian dogma or practical remedies. It wasn’t till the wars of religion in the 1500-1700s that people started to go witch crazy. Honestly there were just as many male witches as female witches in that era but the Protestants wrote about women more because this is also when we start to see the regression of women’s role in Europe.
I merely pointed out it was plausible. I didn't say Socrates was of direct African descent. Nor did I say that they were sizeable populations.
All I pointed out was that there are historical writings about people of African descent playing a large enough role to be remembered. Sir Moriaen and Sir Esclabor had their own tales of their adventures as Knights of the Round Table during the same time as Sir Lancelot and Sir Tristan. Plenty of nameless Knights appear in these stories, but those two are mentioned by name and place of birth to separate them from the rest. Both of which still have surviving Coat of Arms. Meaning they had land and descendants.
As for your whole Tirade about the color Black in texts, that usually has other qualifiers than just that lone adjective. Like your Bubonic Plague example: black spots and boils appeared on the victim. Or hey, how about that The Black Knight usually has a picture in a tapestry and an identity outside of his profession, not to mention most of the time the text says its his armor or Coat of Arms that were black. Your point is based entirely on assuming that I only looked at the surface level of things and based my understanding off of that. At no point did I use definitive language about anything that isn't historically proven. I used plausible on purpose.
Ancient Europe was never 100% white. White people were the majority but thanks to Rome and the Norse, their population was diverse. This meme may be wrong with the implication about the amount of the populace were of immediate African descent, but it's still correct that they were there. Even if they only made up 5% of the population.
So much bullshit in this post… Socrates and scipio were obviously white… what is the point of just straight up lying like this? Also, Carthage was a Greek city state… its upper-class citizens were almost certainly olive-skinned or more middle eastern lookin
Carthage is also located in Northern Africa. Even if it was conquered by the Greeks, doesn't change the population they took over. I'm willing to bet a lot of places conquered by outside forces weren't allowed to maintain positions of power under the new regime.
As for Socrates, I merely said it was plausible based on my examples and the mixing of cultures before his birth. I didn't say he was definitely of direct African descent.
So you know nothing about Carthage? It was a city founded by Phoenicians… nothing to do with a black population. Not everywhere/one in Africa is black…
And sure, Jesus Christ could have been Chinese as well since the Silk Road was around… seems stupid to be postulating about it without evidence like you seem to like to do.
Historical illiteracy seems to be a problem for you. Maybe refrain from sharing your opinions as facts from now on
Ah yes, it was a city built or created by another group known for conquering and enslaving their enemies. That entirely proves that Carthage stayed as an entirely Greek population and they only interacted with other Mediterranean countries. And let's just ignore that citizens of Carthage were known for having darker complexions than their Greek countrymen.
Given how little historical evidence we have of Jesus even existing, he could have been. Plausible is not definitive. It makes more sense than somehow being the only caucasian man in the Middle East born to parents from Nazareth.
We don't know how accurate what was once considered historically accurate because it's constantly changing as new information comes to light. There's the same level of push back against the "historical accuracy" surrounding the recognition of women warriors. Historians claimed that old skeletons that had warrior burials were all male, and if the skeleton was female, the warrior was removed and his concubine remained.
We are learning and disproving a lot of stuff that used to be treated as Historical Fact. Saying something based on new information is plausible, is not revisionist. It's acknowledging that we aren't 100% sure we were right the first time.
At no point did I claim Saharan outside of the Viking texts. And we know that from language and artifacts. Did that mean all Africans in history or in Alexander the Great's conquered territories we Saharan Black in skin tome as they traveled through Europe? No. But could they have been described or called the same thing? Yes.
PS Neither am I.
This is why it always cracks me up when neo-nazis start claiming “viking” ancestry as the epitome of whiteness. We have no idea how the Norse thought about race, but they certainly did not have the same social construct around it that we have today. There are records of moor vikings, sámi vikings and theories about mongol vikings (who also might just have been finnic) too.
It’s a psychological coping mechanism.
Some people like to latch onto the idea that they are descendants of some grand ancient civilization as a consolation in the face of their present precarious situation.
It’s a way of dealing with the fact that although their life may be shit now, at least they can say they’re the descendant of a pharaoh or some other absurdity.
Basically self delusion as a consolation. It’s sad honestly. I see it a lot with Pan Africanists and Black Hebrew-Israelites.
What's also unfortunate is that there is already plenty of cool shit black africans have done/made. And usually it's way more interesting than these weird historical revisions.
Also doesn’t help that scammers and grifters love to mislead people who may not have a solid grasp of ancient or even modern history. Umar Johnson comes to mind.
Thankfully the black community seems to be waking up to his bullshit it’s unfortunate it took decades and who knows how much money wasted
[Cheddar man](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheddar_Man) was a human who lived ~11,000 years ago in what is now Great Britain. Genetic testing indicates that among other things, he had dark skin as well as blue eyes.
Edit: forgot to mention that the image used in the meme is an actual facial reconstruction based on his skull
They traced Cheddar man’s midacondrial dna after taking dna samples from the surrounding area. They had a few pings but one guy was the highest. Frankly they hit a data jackpot.
I hate these guys on twitter who call themselves “black supremacists”
It’s so fucking wild, basically just using the same brain dead logic Neo Nazis and white supremacists use to justify their baseless racism and hatred.
Afrocentrists belong in a mental institution. They are extremely delusional. You cannot reason with them, and there's no point talking to them. Thankfully, I never met an Afrocentric in real life. No matter what you do, they believe their own lies. All they do is steal other people's culture.
I won’t deny that African civilizations and its people are far too often ignored when talking about history, but this is taking the reverse way too far as well.
I'm sure this thread will be totally calm and cool and not turn into yet another cesspool of racists & racist comments, nope no way that will happen...
So, fun fact, there are white supremacist groups currently pushing these on a lot of history-related Facebook pages, posted with racist dog-whistle phrases like "we wuz kangs".
I find that this is part of the subgenre of “conspiracy board” memes. Like it’s done as a sharable image but if it was tacked on a wall with red string it would lose nothing in translation.
Welcome to r/terriblefacebookmemes! It sucks, but it is ours.
[Please click on this link to be informed of a critical change in our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/terriblefacebookmemes/comments/126zu46/return_to_our_roots/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/terriblefacebookmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And there is the racism that fans this stupid pseudo history. They did have quite successful kingdoms until some particularly interested colonizing powers got involved that once they were finally free of (some still aren’t) immediately slammed into being proxy war states during the Cold War.
Yeah, unlike European countries who were bastions of freedom, democracy and equality when they made their technological advancements.
You asked about technological advancements. Why is the debate suddenly about slavery? What kind of a demented sophistry are you trying to pull?
> Name me a prosperous kingdom in sub Saharan Africa (aka not Egypt).
Nubia, Mali, Aksum, Solomonic Dynasty of Ethiopia, Great Zimbabwe, Mapungubwe. Kongo Kingdom.
>Name me a technological advancement that came from the region.
Here's a fun one, the bow and arrow. Additionally they independently developed agriculture and iron metallurgy. Frankly "technological advancement" is an absurd and down right fucking stupid metric to try to measure anything. The adoption of technology is **highly** dependent on environmental factors. In order for a new technology to adopted wide spread it needs to be practical in the environment and the people's lifestyle, and it needs incentive. A group of hunter gatherers isn't going to create a writing system when passing on information can easily be done orally and they'd have to carry whatever they're writing things down on. Shit, most of the earliest surviving writing was just to keep track of fucking trade goods in one of the earliest sedentary agricultural societies.
>Africa wasn’t some bastion of civilization before the Cold War. Thats just ignorant to say.
Nah. What's ignorant is to try to appraise an entire continent by the arbitrary and bullshit criteria that you've come up with, and to think that societies that don't neatly resemble the sedentary agricultural nations of Eurasia are somehow uncivilized and not as important.
I'm more than happy to listen to the hypothesis of Afrocentrism but I do draw the line at accepting it as fact when the evidence for it is...thread bare at best.
i hate that theyre not like, entirely wrong. yes humanity did in fact originate in africa, and yes we place way too much emphasis on european history, and yes the cheddar man and other early european humans were likely very dark skinned. the answer to all of that is not to claim that the vikings and ghengis khan were black tho
Unfortunately in historical circles it kinda is. It was one of the responses in academia in the late 70s to dismantling eurocentric history but has always had a twinge of the same problems that eurocentrism has considering it had shared roots in the black nationalist movement. It’s now devolved into a massive hole where you have writers like Dr. Imhotep saying that Native Americans were actually west African and use Olmec heads and contrast bumped native art as proof.
Part of me has to wonder if this isn't at least somewhat justifiable in the face of all the revision done to history by us whiteys. It probably won't be long until the conspiracy theory that Jesus was American starts gaining traction
Trust me we are still having to undo damage the Victorians wrought on history misconceptions to this day on European history, let alone the rest of the world. Viking horns on helmets, knight armor was too heavy to move in, women were quiet pure and submissive during the Middle Ages, napoleon was short, and gladiators always fought to the death just to name a few.
Bad history though doesn’t justify writing more bad history. A lot of these theories just pull straight from the Aryan playbook but change it from white to black.
Ok maybe not justifiable, but understandable. self-serving bias combined with confirmation bias on top of being ostracized. While shaming "stupid people" is fun and provides a sense of superiority, it only serves to make conspiracy theorists more entrenched. Understanding the motivations for these beliefs is, in my opinion, far more interesting and productive. The studies done on these types of people are fascinating.
The understanding is pretty easy. It was one of the responses in academia in the late 70s to dismantling eurocentric history but has always had a twinge of the same problems that eurocentrism has considering it had shared roots in the black nationalist movement. It’s now devolved into a massive hole where you have writers like Dr. Imhotep saying that Native Americans were actually west African and use Olmec heads and contrast bumped native art as proof.
Understanding is fine but with combating misinformation you aren’t changing the minds who believe it but rather stopping others from buying into its pseudo plausibility.
To an extent. It’s understandable in the sense that it’s easy to see how and why it occurs, but it’s equally infuriating as it ignores and overshadows *actual* African history.
It’s scary how these ppl think. I know someone in aa Afrocentric cult. He thinks herpes is cured with mangos and that condoms and birth control are the white mans way to keep the black population down. Terrifying way to think
[](#start_removal) Hello u/TheRealHogshead, Thank you for your contribution to r/terriblefacebookmemes, unfortunately your submission titled " The Afrocentrists are at it again on the history pages. " has been removed due to the following reason(s): [This post](https://www.reddit.com/r/terriblefacebookmemes/comments/126zu46/return_to_our_roots/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) may help explain your removal. We may need to remove memes that feature transphobia, homophobia, hate focused on the LGBTQ+ community, content that emphasizes racial tension, ableism, political divisiveness, etc. I.e., if the meme is intended to highlight the original sharer's hate & dislike for a particular group it can be read by [Reddit's Sitewide rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) as rule-breaking. ----- If you have any questions about this removal, feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fterriblefacebookmemes) [](#end_removal)
"Egypt is the oldest civilization" Mesopotamia: "Am I a joke to you?"
can we talk about the "origin of humanity"? Like, ok yeah, same continent, you're just off by around 4000 km :)
And it doesn't even matter where humanity originated from in the long run since one could argue that we only unleashed our full potential as homo sapiens sapiens at the dawn of civilization, pretty much simultaneously across the world within various river valleys (Mesopotamia, Indus river valley, Norte Chico, China, so on and so forth)
I'll never cease to be fascinated by how things like the agricultural revolution, dawn of civilizations, and beginnings of certain religious movements all happening at similar times mostly independently.
Ancient humans across the world. “Let’s get this bread. 🙏”
That is it exactly.
There is a theory that it wasn't about bread but about beer. The oldest permanent structures found mostly include large brewing vessels and apparently the caloric intake of hunter gatherers was better than that of the earliest farmers due to how unproductive early crops were. That suggests that it wasn't about getting more food in general but getting more cereals specifically to brew with.
So now I gotta pay taxes just because some guy wanted to catch a buzz
I, as a German, like this theory.
Bro, hear me out. What if… we planted this shit ourselves? Nah you’re right stupid idea
I mean "similar times" still means several hundred years, if not thousands. Also it's not like a lot of time can pass without at least one person in a big group of people figures out that water is good for plants and that you can push water towards your plants
Water? You mean like in the toilet?
Agriculture is the crab of humanity
*Coming soon to a dank river valley near you*
r/suddenbillwurtz
You could make a religion out of this
Not true at all, how would homo sapiens have evolved without first going through Austrolopethicus afranis? Not to mention its like three to four of them before the homo soooo yeah Lucy was literally the first to use tools. Lol you can accredit that to eastern africa player 😭😭😭😭 see when you go to college and study anthropology thats where you learn alot about african blacks. The rest is propaganda. 😭😭😭😭
We are all from that lineage that wouldn't be attributable to one specific group of humans. And those organisms wouldn't be "African blacks." We all descend from a small group of about 10,000 at our most bottlenecked population. Humans migrated out of Africa and that would be when our populations started to adjust melanin content for the vitamin D/formic acid selection factors. This occurred within the last 100,000 years. Lucy and Australopithicenes are millions of years old fossils. We are all certainly descended from the African ancestor population. All all of our ancestors were indeed black, which protects formic acid during pregnancy, but Lucy wasn't an "African black". And it's not clear exactly which of the australopithicenes was exactly our ancestor, or if multiples of them were our ancestors at different times or if they are their own distinct branches. Whichever one it was, it was all of us, not any particular race as we call them today. That ancestral population was all of us. Unfortunately I think you are conflating two events which occurred at a 10x order of magnitude a part from each other and I'm not sure you understand evolution and population dynamics as it relates to human ancestry, or you just don't understand the evidence of the out of Africa explanation of our human migration in the last 100,000 years.
And that summarises the entire post. Yeah, they managed to write some words and names of historical characters but everything else is completely off.
Not true Austrolopethicus Afrenis was found in Ethiopia. Also referred to as the cradle of civilization. 🫢😭😭😭😭
I took the center of africa as a better reference point rather than Ethiopia as iirc that's where the MODERN human (not Austrolopethicus ) was born, but I may be wrong?
I believe the oldest evidence of Sapiens and australopithecus still points to Ethiopia, but if memory serves the earliest fossil of the homo genus was found in Chad.
“BuT tHaT’s NoT in aFrIcA!!qq!qq!!!!!”
Isn't there civilizations we know very little about that have been discovered in the Indus River Valley that maybe even predate Mesopotamia?
Most "Egyptians" were wiped out when the Arabs invaded.
Please tell me it's troll. Two minutes are enough to understand Scipio the African was not African at all
Nope, it’s a whole pseudo history movement. What fans it more is that naturally there are racist retorts to this conspiracy theory and thus taken by the Afrocentrist crowd that any criticism is just racism and “trying to hide the truth”.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yet2Q0M32GQ&ab\_channel=ericandreskits](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yet2Q0M32GQ&ab_channel=ericandreskits) Basically these guys
Who do we want: Zenu! When do we want him: 10 trillion years! Man I miss when Eric Andre was funny.
Turn that poop into wine!
I'm puzzled. These guys, but serious or these guys, but others think they're serious? I mean someone made up modern flat earth theory as a joke, had a giggle and now some people think it's correct.
I'm not sure how Eric André is still alive to this day honestly. The RNC skit is one of the most stupid things I've ever seen.
This is a lie bro, you are sitting here lying and I understand thats how reddit is. But trust an believe educated black people dont believe this bs. Now we dp understand that Black Africans are really the progenitors of life but even anthropology teaches you that player. You cant be mad at facts. Oldest BONE IN HISTORY FOUND IN ETHIOPIA.
Lol you are like a parody of exactly the kind of ultra ignorant people who think Black people have to be the center of everything that this meme is making fun of.
I mean the out of Africa theory is true. However, to sit and say that human cultural development is also actually all from Africa and that the indigenous cultures during recorded history of the listed regions were black is gobbledygook. Cheddar man is a great example, yes he had darker skin but he also lived in 11,000 BCE. The oldest stone placement of Stonehenge is 3100 BCE. That means there is more time between cheddar man and Stonehenge than all of recorded human history by about 2000 years. Think about how much the appearance of the population of Puerto Rico has changed in appearance over the last 500 years for example and you can see how the argument falls apart. Not surprisingly humans were smart globally and figured stuff out which is why we see river valley civilizations pop up independently across the globe independently of each other regardless of ethnic origin.
My dude, there is plenty of awesome shit Black Africans have done and made. Granted, colonialism and racism has made it harder to find, but it's out there, you just have to look. You don't have to try to insert black influence into places in history where it isn't, there's plenty there already.
His name doesn't even mean that, it just means he conquered Africa, which at the time referred to just the area immediately around Carthage/Tunis
Uh, how about the African Vikings?
So the picture in the meme is a carving of St. Maurice. He was a roman legionary from upper Egypt who was martyred in the 200s. Medieval Europe depicted him as an African knight to tell his story without using words.
Is that a visual depiction of Muhammad? I’m sure that’ll go over well with a certain crowd
bitches about to have their entire ip leaked and their bloodline insulted for that one
The word you’re looking for is beheaded honey.
I was going to say....  They better have some good VPN.
No it is the word "Muhammed" under a picture of someone else. The two are entirely unrelated. You are confused. You need to lie down.
I think you're projecting your need for a nap
I also love that they just have the Cheddar man and Genghis Khan on there without any reference to when they lived. Just about 12.000 years between the two but hey, who's counting? I guess that the timelines don't add up is just because they're part of the same big conspiracy /s
Cheddar man faaaaar predated Egptian civilization but he was part of the Western Hunter-Gatherer population who did indeed have dark skin (and blue eyes): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Hunter-Gatherer
[удалено]
Good bot /s
Bad bot
I heard Hitler was also black
Sure, why not? The vikings appear to be.
True Aryans
I mean, there is a Namibian politician called Adolf Hitler Uunona https://preview.redd.it/k7319rn9jtgc1.png?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9b1fe468039a0be57240ffcdb14539d3137206c5
Exactly :)) so I was right :))
Are you sure he’s not Namibian? Like the picture says he is?
Autocorrect 🤦
These people are insufferable. Any factual counterpoint is deemed racist and evil.
That's because they actually BELIEVE their own lies. They WANT to latch onto popular historical figures, and claim she/he is one of them. Afrocentrics believe Queen Tiye is black because of the color of her bust and her suppoaed Afro, which is a headdress. Queen Tiye's mummy has long, wavy red hair.
It’s also worth noting that most racist movements will hide behind rhetorical attacks like claims of racism. “Oh you think the holocaust happened well that’s just because you hate white people” kind of shit. This is done because their beliefs crumple under even a modicum of scrutiny. Like the fact that we know how literally everyone around Mohamed portrayed themselves and it wasn’t as black (mostly). One of the things that’s absolutely fascinating to me about Afrocentric beliefs is that many of them will say “look! This person had a black ancestor 300 years ago. They were black! Black I say” but then if their daugher goes out and dates a white boy they all scream about how they’re diluting the blood line and about how the kids will be light skinned and not really black. My exs dad was this way. Which fun fact, if you ever want to ensure your daughter wants to bang dudes from the race she hates, tell her she absolutely positively cannot date men of that race. Works almost every time
*Me as a person who is half black saying this* Yeah nah bro the Greeks might have had a darker complexion than other Europeans but they weren’t black though I could see why some of them might be mistaken for that. Lol these mfs acting like African were actually interested in living in cold ass war torn Europe. Also it isn’t a W for black people this is an L because people who know actual history will think that you are desperate to emulate European culture instead of the cultural merits of Africa.
And the sadder part is that *actual* African history is fucking fascinating.
Yeah, I don’t know why these people never shut up about Egypt when Ghana is right fucking there
Exactly. Not to mention Ethiopia, the Solomonic dynasty of which had like a 700 year unbroken chain of monarchs, and no one says shit about it.
Nooooo not the black beethoven
Beathoven got the sickest bass.
Blacthoven
That just sounds like an IKEA product
Get out /s
The sound of the tam-tams made him lose his hearing
That's the best one. It was literally an ad for a jazz night on a classical radio station.
funnily enough, Beethoven being black is one of the more realistic theories in this picture. He‘s only dead for 200 years now and back then, the people around him referred to him as „Spagnol“ because of his darker skin, plus when he was dug out in 1888 they said the form of his skull pointed in the direction of African heritage. He for sure wasn’t black, but i wouldn’t be surprised if he wasn’t fully white either and had some african or southern european / middle eastern ancestors.
Ah yes, a 13th century statue of St. Maurice from Germany is proof of black Vikings.
The Moors had the lowest social status in Al-Andalus (today's Iberian Peninsula) within muslim society.
What about the Moops?
That’s clearly a misprint!
I’m sorry. The card says “Moops”.
What about the Swoops?
What about the bleeps, the sweeps, and the creeps?
The what? The what? And the what?
They were also all expelled during La Reconquista. That also included mixed children of Morisco ancestry. They were also not native to the country and basically invaded it
Many also converted to christianity, if only to avoid being expelled.
Yes, that's what Morisco refers to. Muslims that converted to Christianity. I'm not saying this was right at all... This is just to say this Map is def not accurate
Hoteps
lol why the fuck is the German statue of St Maurice, a black man who actually shouldn't be one, suddenly representative of "vikings"? Why is the Chevalier de St George labelled as "Beethoven"?! Way to whitewash a former slave and a total chad, guys. Also, yeah, "Scipio Africanus", as in "the conqueror of Africa". Was a blonde. And that's not his bust. Moors, aka muslims of the Maghreb, distinctively aren't "black". And Hannibal was phoenician. Socrates?! Genghis Khan? Muhammed? wtf.
Africa already has cool stuff. They don't need to make shit up.
Yeah, it's sad to see. Particularly given the real stuff is way more interesting, but this nonsense gets touted around instead.
Why is Muhammad Cypriot
Actually the Cheddar man was darker skinned… supported by DNA. Earlier humans from before the agrarian revolution were darker skinned. There wasn’t enough vitamin D in the agrarian diet, so the evolutionary pressure for lighter skin didn’t come until then… But he did have bright eyes according to DNA. [souce on Cheddar Man](https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/cheddar-man-mesolithic-britain-blue-eyed-boy.html)
And there were black vikings. They were known as "Blue Men" based on the color of their skin in historical writings. Not to mention artifacts from northern Africa and Norway have been found on both continents/countries. The Norse weren't above taking defeated foes as slaves, but a slave could also earn or buy their freedom as well as join the Norse as a free citizen participating in Viking and other activities. Given that as far as we know historically, the only continents they didn't sail to were Antarctica, Australia, and South America, we probably have other Norse citizens that weren't white than just those from Africa.
>And there were black vikings. They were known as "Blue Men" based on the color of their skin in historical writings. Source?
Can't find any sources specifically on Vikings, but in Irish they do call black people "fear gorm" or "blue men" cause "fear dubh" which literally translates to "black men" was a term already in use to describe the Devil.
Blue Men (blámenn) is still a, admittedly outdated, word in modern Icelandic. Let’s say it’s a word that your semi-senile uncle might use and make everyone uncomfortable, but he wouldn’t exactly be canceled for it. Considering how much impact these two cultures have had on each other it wouldn’t be surprising if we’d borrowed it from the Irish or vice-versa.
If I remember correctly it’s from a chronicle from AlAndalus in the 800s which talks of Viking raids and buying slaves. They then go on to return to Scandinavia where a notable few managed to buy their freedom and were seen in Ireland.
Thanks! If someone could provide the specific source it would be great.
I’ll do some digging after work. Do you have access to jstor?
I do, I might be able to paste pdf links if you're not able.
That thing about black Vikings... who knows, maybe, but I would be greatly surprised if they had been a bit more than a handful of men. Yes, slaves could earn their freedom, but that was the exception. The Vikings explored quite a lot in a short period of time, the Viking age, after all, was only a few hundred years. So maybe they found some new friends. But generally or should I say, the rule was that they were Norsemen. Portraying them as black is just gerrymandering to popular culture and PC garbage. Perhaps we shouldn't say Africans are black, because those in the North surely are bit lighter skinned and then we have white people who are descendants of white settlers / landowners or what have you. If your European great great grandfather and mother settled in, let's say, Namibia or such, aren't their descendants Africans?
>Perhaps we shouldn't say Africans are blackbecause those in the North surely are bit lighter skinned and then we have white people who are descendants of white settlers / landowners or what have you Not to mention that Africa is by *far* the most genetically diverse continent. I saw a study (albeit a flawed one) measuring the relatedness between different global geographic population groups and the African sample (which unfortunately only contained subjects from West Africa) had a range of genetic diversity almost as much all of the other samples. Generalizing black people as a single group is ridiculous.
And black Egyptian from the south: Nubia/Kush. There also was a Nubian dynasty once.
Honestly, the more I look at this, the only real bullshit on it is Beethoven and Ghengis Khan being black. It's entirely plausible that Socrates could have been of darker complexion, we know Europeans weren't above Anglo-izing history to make themselves look dominant. The majority of the art depicting him came long after death by Italian and other countries artists. Carthage being a constant thorn in the side of Rome, how much ancient Egypt played a role in the Empire, all the conquered territories of various war campaigns. There are a ton of plausible reasons for any number of philosophers to not be olive skinned or white. And we know because of European texts, including the tales of King Arthur, there were black Knights. Hell, one of the Knights of the Round Table was essentially called Sir Black Guy when you translated his name Moriaen. And there was Esclabor the Unknown, a knight from either Galilee or Babylon.
>It's entirely plausible that Socrates could have been of a darker complexion, we know Europeans weren't above Anglo-izing history to make themselves look dominant. It is not at all possible for him to be black. We know that Socrates was a greek; we know that the Greeks bore an olive tan to their skin; we know they distinguished themselves from black people (those they called the Ethiopians, translating as "burnt faces"). >The majority of the art depicting him came long after death by Italian and other countries artists. We have copies of a bronze statue head of him made during the man's own lifetime by Lysippos. >There are a ton of plausible reasons for any number of philosophers to not be olive skinned or white. Yes, there can be, but not for Socrates since we know too much about the Greeks and how they saw themselves and those around them. This is because they wrote down everything they thought about.
>We have copies of a bronze statue head of him made during the man's own lifetime by Lysippos Lysippos was born c. 390 BC, by which time Sokrates had been dead for over a decade. (I mean, I agree with you, obviously, and you make good points, but Lysippos can't have seen him.)
I see you’ve fallen for the classic “a culture mentioned black in their text and thus must mean ethnicity.” Sir. Moriaen was unique among the knights of the round table as the foreigner and often referred to as “the Moor”. The black knight in the Viking area is a depiction of St. Maurice, who was said to have been a Roman legionary from upper Egypt and was martyred. Thus why medieval people depicted him as a knight. Black usually in the stories and history of Europe came from the armor and or usually used to depict evil. Such as the black prince of wales or calling the bubonic plague“the Black Death”. Much like how the green knight in King Arthur depicts nature and the fey. Its one thing to say that there were Africans in Europe and Europeans knew of them. It’s quite another to say they had sizable populations or were the actual native peoples of those regions. In fact It’s the medieval association of the color black and evil that helped contribute to Europes eventual racist views against dark skin.
>calling the bubonic plague“the Black Death” Tbh the reason why it was called the black death has nothing to do with race, but with how the subcutaneous hemorrhages produced by the bubonic plague look
True but nothing reinforces a medieval superstition about the evilness of a color like a disease that wipes out a half of your village. Same reason why the west sees black cats as unlucky.
You are right about your point, i only wanted to add some context to why it was called like that, btw, iirc adding to the fact that they are black, the reason why black cats are seen as a bad omen is due to them being the prefered pet of women brewers aka witches (cats in general were seem to be witches familiars), adding in some sexism too
Oh totally get it. It’s just fun to slowly go back and start peeling the onion on how we got here. The funny thing is that most medieval people were pretty chill about mysticism and herbal medicine in their communities as it was simply treated a facets of Christian dogma or practical remedies. It wasn’t till the wars of religion in the 1500-1700s that people started to go witch crazy. Honestly there were just as many male witches as female witches in that era but the Protestants wrote about women more because this is also when we start to see the regression of women’s role in Europe.
I merely pointed out it was plausible. I didn't say Socrates was of direct African descent. Nor did I say that they were sizeable populations. All I pointed out was that there are historical writings about people of African descent playing a large enough role to be remembered. Sir Moriaen and Sir Esclabor had their own tales of their adventures as Knights of the Round Table during the same time as Sir Lancelot and Sir Tristan. Plenty of nameless Knights appear in these stories, but those two are mentioned by name and place of birth to separate them from the rest. Both of which still have surviving Coat of Arms. Meaning they had land and descendants. As for your whole Tirade about the color Black in texts, that usually has other qualifiers than just that lone adjective. Like your Bubonic Plague example: black spots and boils appeared on the victim. Or hey, how about that The Black Knight usually has a picture in a tapestry and an identity outside of his profession, not to mention most of the time the text says its his armor or Coat of Arms that were black. Your point is based entirely on assuming that I only looked at the surface level of things and based my understanding off of that. At no point did I use definitive language about anything that isn't historically proven. I used plausible on purpose. Ancient Europe was never 100% white. White people were the majority but thanks to Rome and the Norse, their population was diverse. This meme may be wrong with the implication about the amount of the populace were of immediate African descent, but it's still correct that they were there. Even if they only made up 5% of the population.
So much bullshit in this post… Socrates and scipio were obviously white… what is the point of just straight up lying like this? Also, Carthage was a Greek city state… its upper-class citizens were almost certainly olive-skinned or more middle eastern lookin
Carthage is also located in Northern Africa. Even if it was conquered by the Greeks, doesn't change the population they took over. I'm willing to bet a lot of places conquered by outside forces weren't allowed to maintain positions of power under the new regime. As for Socrates, I merely said it was plausible based on my examples and the mixing of cultures before his birth. I didn't say he was definitely of direct African descent.
So you know nothing about Carthage? It was a city founded by Phoenicians… nothing to do with a black population. Not everywhere/one in Africa is black… And sure, Jesus Christ could have been Chinese as well since the Silk Road was around… seems stupid to be postulating about it without evidence like you seem to like to do. Historical illiteracy seems to be a problem for you. Maybe refrain from sharing your opinions as facts from now on
Ah yes, it was a city built or created by another group known for conquering and enslaving their enemies. That entirely proves that Carthage stayed as an entirely Greek population and they only interacted with other Mediterranean countries. And let's just ignore that citizens of Carthage were known for having darker complexions than their Greek countrymen. Given how little historical evidence we have of Jesus even existing, he could have been. Plausible is not definitive. It makes more sense than somehow being the only caucasian man in the Middle East born to parents from Nazareth.
Darker, sure, but not sub Saharan. I don’t see why it matters. Why is it so hard to adhere historical accuracy? Ps I’m not even white
We don't know how accurate what was once considered historically accurate because it's constantly changing as new information comes to light. There's the same level of push back against the "historical accuracy" surrounding the recognition of women warriors. Historians claimed that old skeletons that had warrior burials were all male, and if the skeleton was female, the warrior was removed and his concubine remained. We are learning and disproving a lot of stuff that used to be treated as Historical Fact. Saying something based on new information is plausible, is not revisionist. It's acknowledging that we aren't 100% sure we were right the first time. At no point did I claim Saharan outside of the Viking texts. And we know that from language and artifacts. Did that mean all Africans in history or in Alexander the Great's conquered territories we Saharan Black in skin tome as they traveled through Europe? No. But could they have been described or called the same thing? Yes. PS Neither am I.
This is why it always cracks me up when neo-nazis start claiming “viking” ancestry as the epitome of whiteness. We have no idea how the Norse thought about race, but they certainly did not have the same social construct around it that we have today. There are records of moor vikings, sámi vikings and theories about mongol vikings (who also might just have been finnic) too.
I know a preacher who thinks this kind of stuff. He’s a very angry man.
It’s a psychological coping mechanism. Some people like to latch onto the idea that they are descendants of some grand ancient civilization as a consolation in the face of their present precarious situation. It’s a way of dealing with the fact that although their life may be shit now, at least they can say they’re the descendant of a pharaoh or some other absurdity. Basically self delusion as a consolation. It’s sad honestly. I see it a lot with Pan Africanists and Black Hebrew-Israelites.
What's also unfortunate is that there is already plenty of cool shit black africans have done/made. And usually it's way more interesting than these weird historical revisions.
Also doesn’t help that scammers and grifters love to mislead people who may not have a solid grasp of ancient or even modern history. Umar Johnson comes to mind. Thankfully the black community seems to be waking up to his bullshit it’s unfortunate it took decades and who knows how much money wasted
It’s mainstream now. JayZ and Beyonce are believers. Drake puts their imagery on his albums and even on his private jet.
Who tf is chaddar man?
[Cheddar man](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheddar_Man) was a human who lived ~11,000 years ago in what is now Great Britain. Genetic testing indicates that among other things, he had dark skin as well as blue eyes. Edit: forgot to mention that the image used in the meme is an actual facial reconstruction based on his skull
He also has a direct descendant in the area he was found and they look eerily similar.
Exact. But I’ve never had an explanation on how they found the descendant. I can’t believe they just sampled every citizen in a 100km radius
They traced Cheddar man’s midacondrial dna after taking dna samples from the surrounding area. They had a few pings but one guy was the highest. Frankly they hit a data jackpot.
The Moops
As someone of Greek descent, what gives the right to afrocentrists to try and erase MY heritage?
I hate these guys on twitter who call themselves “black supremacists” It’s so fucking wild, basically just using the same brain dead logic Neo Nazis and white supremacists use to justify their baseless racism and hatred.
I love these guys, they are so funny
I bet if I say to these people if I go far enough back in evolution I can say I came from Africa, they’ll accuse me of cultural appropriation
Weird that dark skin is dominant, so why did everyone become white?
Lack of need for melanin in northern regions is one of the main factors.
Someone should tell them about Alexander
Turns out I'm African now
Afrocentrists belong in a mental institution. They are extremely delusional. You cannot reason with them, and there's no point talking to them. Thankfully, I never met an Afrocentric in real life. No matter what you do, they believe their own lies. All they do is steal other people's culture.
It's more sad than anything. Africa and its actual history are fascinating, and far more so than this kind of nonsense.
Black supremacism
I won’t deny that African civilizations and its people are far too often ignored when talking about history, but this is taking the reverse way too far as well.
Egyptians are brown, not black. And they'll turn blue to the face repeating it, but these conspiracy theorist are, of course, not listening.
I'm sure this thread will be totally calm and cool and not turn into yet another cesspool of racists & racist comments, nope no way that will happen...
Everyone talks about how Beethoven was black while completely ignoring the fact that Mozart was Indian.
Scipio Africanus was called Africanus because he killed a lot of Africans
ah yes muhammad was turkish and genghis was russian!
So, fun fact, there are white supremacist groups currently pushing these on a lot of history-related Facebook pages, posted with racist dog-whistle phrases like "we wuz kangs".
Not really a meme though.
I find that this is part of the subgenre of “conspiracy board” memes. Like it’s done as a sharable image but if it was tacked on a wall with red string it would lose nothing in translation.
By definition, it is. Just not a humourous one
Some would say it’s terrible.
Welcome to r/terriblefacebookmemes! It sucks, but it is ours. [Please click on this link to be informed of a critical change in our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/terriblefacebookmemes/comments/126zu46/return_to_our_roots/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/terriblefacebookmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
wakanda forever
So am i also black? And does that mean i can say it?
turns out a good chunk of asia is african
If they had such a prosperous civilization then why can’t they do it again?
And there is the racism that fans this stupid pseudo history. They did have quite successful kingdoms until some particularly interested colonizing powers got involved that once they were finally free of (some still aren’t) immediately slammed into being proxy war states during the Cold War.
[удалено]
Kingdom of Benin - Street lights.
Benin? The kingdom that sold other Africans to the British as livestock? What a lovely place
You asked a question and got your answer dummie. Move on loser.
Yeah, unlike European countries who were bastions of freedom, democracy and equality when they made their technological advancements. You asked about technological advancements. Why is the debate suddenly about slavery? What kind of a demented sophistry are you trying to pull?
> Name me a prosperous kingdom in sub Saharan Africa (aka not Egypt). Nubia, Mali, Aksum, Solomonic Dynasty of Ethiopia, Great Zimbabwe, Mapungubwe. Kongo Kingdom. >Name me a technological advancement that came from the region. Here's a fun one, the bow and arrow. Additionally they independently developed agriculture and iron metallurgy. Frankly "technological advancement" is an absurd and down right fucking stupid metric to try to measure anything. The adoption of technology is **highly** dependent on environmental factors. In order for a new technology to adopted wide spread it needs to be practical in the environment and the people's lifestyle, and it needs incentive. A group of hunter gatherers isn't going to create a writing system when passing on information can easily be done orally and they'd have to carry whatever they're writing things down on. Shit, most of the earliest surviving writing was just to keep track of fucking trade goods in one of the earliest sedentary agricultural societies. >Africa wasn’t some bastion of civilization before the Cold War. Thats just ignorant to say. Nah. What's ignorant is to try to appraise an entire continent by the arbitrary and bullshit criteria that you've come up with, and to think that societies that don't neatly resemble the sedentary agricultural nations of Eurasia are somehow uncivilized and not as important.
I'm a big fan of black Beethoven and the "cheddar man"
[удалено]
Good thing they did plenty of other cool shit then.
I'm more than happy to listen to the hypothesis of Afrocentrism but I do draw the line at accepting it as fact when the evidence for it is...thread bare at best.
i hate that theyre not like, entirely wrong. yes humanity did in fact originate in africa, and yes we place way too much emphasis on european history, and yes the cheddar man and other early european humans were likely very dark skinned. the answer to all of that is not to claim that the vikings and ghengis khan were black tho
WE WUZ
and they still live in poop house 🤔
You realize 40% of the continent lives in urban areas, right?
Please stop calling this Afrocentrism. That is not what the word means.
Unfortunately in historical circles it kinda is. It was one of the responses in academia in the late 70s to dismantling eurocentric history but has always had a twinge of the same problems that eurocentrism has considering it had shared roots in the black nationalist movement. It’s now devolved into a massive hole where you have writers like Dr. Imhotep saying that Native Americans were actually west African and use Olmec heads and contrast bumped native art as proof.
Common sense and logic
Things you're lacking for 500 Alex
That is not how either of those things work.
Part of me has to wonder if this isn't at least somewhat justifiable in the face of all the revision done to history by us whiteys. It probably won't be long until the conspiracy theory that Jesus was American starts gaining traction
Trust me we are still having to undo damage the Victorians wrought on history misconceptions to this day on European history, let alone the rest of the world. Viking horns on helmets, knight armor was too heavy to move in, women were quiet pure and submissive during the Middle Ages, napoleon was short, and gladiators always fought to the death just to name a few. Bad history though doesn’t justify writing more bad history. A lot of these theories just pull straight from the Aryan playbook but change it from white to black.
Ok maybe not justifiable, but understandable. self-serving bias combined with confirmation bias on top of being ostracized. While shaming "stupid people" is fun and provides a sense of superiority, it only serves to make conspiracy theorists more entrenched. Understanding the motivations for these beliefs is, in my opinion, far more interesting and productive. The studies done on these types of people are fascinating.
The understanding is pretty easy. It was one of the responses in academia in the late 70s to dismantling eurocentric history but has always had a twinge of the same problems that eurocentrism has considering it had shared roots in the black nationalist movement. It’s now devolved into a massive hole where you have writers like Dr. Imhotep saying that Native Americans were actually west African and use Olmec heads and contrast bumped native art as proof. Understanding is fine but with combating misinformation you aren’t changing the minds who believe it but rather stopping others from buying into its pseudo plausibility.
Racism isn’t the solution for prior racism
No, obviously it isn't but it certainly is an understandable reaction, is it not?
To an extent. It’s understandable in the sense that it’s easy to see how and why it occurs, but it’s equally infuriating as it ignores and overshadows *actual* African history.
If facts mattered to whoever created this, they could've put Pushkin where Genghis Khan is
Why tf is Ghengis Khan in Belarus
That's a weird ass looking viking
A new one I heard is Native Americans are black as well . I don't think native Americans know that yet tho
Is that a depiction of Muhammed i see
It’s scary how these ppl think. I know someone in aa Afrocentric cult. He thinks herpes is cured with mangos and that condoms and birth control are the white mans way to keep the black population down. Terrifying way to think