“There was a war. You lost.”
There are undoubtedly megabytes of text data out there in the Internet recording self-described “black” and “white” people debating “the race issue.” The recent Blog posts by the Undercover Black man, “UBM—The Early Days” and “UBM—The Early Days (cont.),” remind me of these debates. Having spent years of my life—from my late teens to my thirties—watching this debate, when the “white side” plays fair, the only thing remotely legitimate they have to say is, “There was a war. You lost.”
This comment usually ends the so-called debate. Any other talk afterward is mostly emotional waste. This invocation of the “sanctity” of war is extremely potent for those who do not dare question the legitimacy of warfare. It is very hard for a warlike Black man to respond to this white statement without his dreams of black empire and organized black violence. By respecting this statement as “masculine truth,” the Black man has fallen into the psychological framework that is the foundation of whiteness. As long as this legitimacy stands, Africa will always have guns in the hands of so-called “real men.” The irony is that these “real men” are too often children.
In the first world countries, beginning with the United States, guns are put in the hands of children through profitable video-game rituals and electric church services at the altar of the Hollywood aesthetic. The first-world media, led by Hollywood, literally spends billions of dollars daily to make young boys and girls assume that war is natural. Since this is a Blog post on the Internet and not yet another academic book about African history, let me (yet again) make statements without qualification. Statement number one:
War is not natural. War is imperial.
Any desire for me to “prove” this statement is a waste of my time and betrays ignorance of scholars like Howard Zinn. In fact, my running around “proving” shit can be regarded as falling for a military tactic designed to waste my resources for the sake of a pyrrhic victory in a sadly ironic war against war. It is more efficient to make a few statements and then leave the room:
- Warfare is about moving resources from one region to another. For the offensive force, this is stealing on a massive scale. To avoid being called thieves, the offensive force persuades itself that it is the defensive force. The power of persuasion, The Taming of the Shrew, is the heart of media propaganda.
- In order to steal efficiently on a massive scale you need imperial discipline and imperial order—an imperial work ethic. You need imperial specialists to study the enemy. This anthropological intelligence information allows the offensive force to categorize and catalogue the booty for accounting purposes that maximize profit. It allows you to psychologically subjugate the children of the vanquished in an attempt to preserve your conquest indefinitely. What is best is to educate the children of the vanquished—and the children of the children of the vanquished—that there is no human consciousness other than imperial consciousness. Here in the rasx() context, this is called, “keeping it real.”
- The oldest form of warfare consisted of an offensive force from a region of few natural resources attacking a defensive force (often defenseless by imperial standards) steeped with natural resources. It is very understandable why a naturally poor people would venerate warfare—their very lives beyond subsistence depend on it. To ask them to lose the concept of warfare is to ask them to lose their foundational identity and return to abject poverty and non-profit savagery.
- It is an abomination for a person from a naturally rich region with a measurable matriarchal heritage to worship warfare. They are symbolically spitting on their elder mothers as the ultimate struggle for human consciousness is between matriarchy and patriarchy—between the indigenous wisdom and the imperial ruthless genius. Africa is so old that its cultural memory remembers a time when there were not enough humans to make war—and the preoccupation of the time was producing humans in the first place! It is very difficult to produce human beings correctly and all of the African technology of the time was centered on life preservation and renewal. Anyone familiar with the health care system in the United States knows that using technology to preserve and renew life (apart from battlefield casualties) is not a priority in empire—the imperial innovation of the unwashed masses makes people too far from the elites seem superfluous and disposable.
- Matriarchy, without the influence of warlike concepts and their romantic sentiments, is saying that producing and developing people in a responsible manner is difficult and requires a foundation oriented toward renewing all life. This orientation of life renewal is not hippie liberal bullshit when you are faced with the real challenge of populating the Earth in a responsible manner. Hippie liberal bullshit is just another Halloween costume to be worn at some imperial drinks party.
- Imperialist patriarchy seeks to minimize and deliberately underestimate the challenge of populating the Earth. Its impulse is to associate this topic of discussion with mindless savagery in one extreme and “woman’s work” in another. Imperial consciousness has no concept of a world without an elder civilization that is the subject of their exploitation. It follows that their problems concern the imperial innovation of the very concept of the populous, “controlling” population and systematically killing people. One irony of many is that imperialism is directly responsible for overpopulating the Earth.
- The problem of populating the Earth in a responsible manner is a primal, African problem. The study of how African (and other indigenous peoples that migrated from Africa) solved this problem is fascinating to me. For me, it makes new meaning for the words in scripture saying, “Be fruitful and multiply.” For me it makes new meaning to the purpose of meaning itself. In the context of imperial captivity, there is need for meaning—so it’s like “whatever”—whatever the people in charge tell you.
- African solutions to the challenge of being human were destroyed (and poorly imitated) over several thousand years of conquest. Africans should never forget that imperialism started in Africa (and was started out of an authentic need to defend). To inquire about the solutions to being human that existed before monarchic Africa rose and fell is the responsibility of all people all over the world who correctly identify with their eldest ancestors. There is no question about home and life lost because of war. But in order to “lose” a war itself, you first have to “believe” in war. Since war has no natural basis (disagreement with this betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the divine principle of balance, the steady-state condition in nature), in order to “believe” in war you have to believe in “belief.” Sanctifying war is the act of faith that fuels the irreligious piety of imperial order. The book of Joshua has many false authors and skilled Indian-killing revisionists…
So I wish I could go back to keeping it real but now that I am unable to wish I can’t go back—and, out here, it’s not that fun… it’s not that easy… where’s all the cute women? “There was a war. You lost.”…To step off the master’s real estate, his plantation, and into “the wild” is a truly terrifying experience. It has been (and will be) a terrifying experience for me. So keeping it real is safe—but not “environmentally sustainable.” Plush safe he think.
Ed, 2007-06-23 13:05:04
Bryan, you are dead on about one having to run around a prove a point - it is a military tactic design to waste an opponent resources. This is a popular strategy during modern political campaign John Kerry failed to address. The GOP attack him from all directions from him being a coward in Vietnam to him flopping about the authorizing Bush to start the Iraq War. He never gave Bush this same heat, but sat there looking "dignified" and he lost. Today, it is about manipulating Wikipedia, forcing the opponent to spend time address baseless comments instead of dealing with the real battle at hand.
No one won a race war. Any person who say "Whites won, Black lost" did not participate in the battle and talking from the sidelines. Everybody is guaranteed to grow old and die - what is really there to win?