Tut George
The picture at left is a computer simulation of white supremacy. Wired Magazine reports on the ‘objective’ findings of ‘rational’ scientists attempting to reconstruct the appearance of an ancient Egyptian. We are taught to call this person “King Tut” because it’s easy to say in this language.
The picture at right is Rosie O’Donnell and Boy George. I think Boy George looks like King Tut—now that we have the ‘accurate’ scientific evidence and everything. Am I being sarcastic? Of course I am.
I am sure there are some fiery afro-centrists out there who are still interested in pontificating lengthy details about why this ‘scientific’ activity should be suspect. I don’t need to do their work. I show respect to the work that came before me and expect others to do the same or go off and play. Bam:
- Physicist Cheikh Anta Diop would not have received his degree from the University of Paris, Sorbonne in 1951 without proof that the ancient Egyptians were African people that looked nothing like Boy George. Do ‘we’ think that the French are that stupid?
- Afro-centrists often idealize and sterilize Egypt using the same purity tests white supremacists use. They forget that Egypt after the Old Kingdom was an Egypt overrun by invaders of Indo-European origin. King Tut is not of the Old Kingdom. So the reggae sounds of Boy George are quite different from the Reggae of Bob Marley—and before Bob Marley is Lee ‘Scratch’ Perry.
And you think my rants are tangled? Then try to unravel Lee ‘Scratch’ Perry, his lyrics to “Jungle Safari” here at kintespace.com.
Comments
timeka, 2005-05-17 19:04:34
that pic of boy george = yikes!
Tasha, 2005-05-17 19:13:14
Well, seeing is believing. How much of the White Supremacist psychestructure rests on just such image wizardry. The rest on ill-logic, mumbo-jumbo labelling of "racial categories" like "black-skinned caucasian" and "mediterranean type", that confuses the obvious. Now you see it, now you don't--real Rodney King(et al)style. And the vitality of pontification is indeed spent. It has indeed generated a receptive atmosphere, but reactionary argument for "inclusion" dissipates like smoke. Academic models-integrated consensual,revisions must be proactively established.Projecting "here a little, there a little" piecemeal scraps of information no longer serve the need.Will the real paradigm shifters please stand up, and work your image/language magic on the fettered mind?