The theory of “White” “race” in the United States: “North Africa” and “Middle East” do not exist.
The theory of “White” “race” in the United States: “North Africa” and “Middle East” do not exist.
The second in a three-part series directly repudiating “race” theory in the United States. The first part deconstructs the term “Black” “race” The theory of “Black” “race” in the United States: “black racial groups of Africa” do not exist.
Consider the exchange Roland Martin Confronts White Nationalist Richard Spencer On NewsOne Now, in pertinent part
MARTIN: The greatest genius came from the building of the Pyramids. Do you know…
SPENCER: Those were white people.
MARTIN(incredulously): Who were white people?
SPENCER: The Egyptians were not Africans. I’m sorry.
MARTIN: The greatest genius came from the building of the Pyramids. Do you know…
SPENCER: Those were white people.
MARTIN(incredulously): Who were white people?
SPENCER: The Egyptians were not Africans. I’m sorry.
MARTIN: Do you know where Egypt is?
SPENCER: Yes. It’s in North Africa.
Some questions arise
- When was the first time the term “White people” was used?
- Where is “North Africa”?
We find the term “North Africa” in the definition for “White” “race” in Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity
White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.
However, “North Africa” is not clearly defined. Nor is the term “Middle East”. Thus, the terms are vague.
Nor is it clear how “original peoples” is determined, other than “self-identification”.
The terms “skin” and “color” do not appear in the official administrative regulation governing the definition of “White” “race” in the United States.
Thus, it is not possible to determine if an individual self-identifies as “White” “race” without asking them, individually.
Further, no individual is compelled to self-identify with any “race”.
One description of the theory of “race” in the U.S. The American Association of Anthropologists in American Anthropological Association Response to OMB Directive 15: Race and Ethnic Standards for Federal Statistics and Administrative Reporting (Sept 1997)
Anthropologically speaking, the concept of race is a relatively recent one. Historically, the term “race” was ascribed to groups of individuals who were categorized as biologically distinct. Rather than developing as a scientific concept, the current notion of “race” in the United States grew out of a European folk taxonomy or classification system sometime after Columbus sailed to the Americas.
The earlist that found in independent research of the term “White” used in Colonial law is 1681, Maryland Colony
Proceedings and Acts of the General Assembly, October 1678-November 1683 (Volume 7, Page 203–205) Liber W. H.
An Act concerning Negroes & Slaves —
Bee itt enacted by the Right Honourable the Lord Propry by & with the Advice & Consent of the vpper & Lower houses of this prsent Genll Assembly & the authority of the same, that all Negroes & other Slaues already Imported or heereafter to bee Imported into this Province shall serve (durante vita) & all the Children already borne or heereafter to bee borne of any Negroes or other Slaues within this Province shall bee Slaues to all intents & purposes as theire fathers were for the Terme of theire naturall Liues.
p. 174
And for as much a diuerse ffreeborne Englishe or White- woman sometimes by the Instigacon Procuremt or Conievance of theire Masters Mistres or dames, & always to the Satis- faccon of theire Lascivious & Lustfull desires, & to the dis- grace not only of the English butt allso of many other Chris- tian Nations, doe Intermarry with Negroes & Slaues by which meanes diuerse Inconveniencys Controuersys & suites may arise Touching the Issue or Children of such ffreeborne women aforesaid, for the prvencon whereof for the future, Bee itt further enacted by the Authority aforesaid that if any Mar Mirs or dame haueing any ffreeborne Englishe or white woman Servt as aforesaid in theire possession or property, shall by any Instigacon procuremt knowledge permission or Contrive- ance whatsoeuer, suffer any such ffreeborne Englishe or Whitewoman Servt in theire possession & wherein they haue property as aforesaid to Intermarry or Contract in Matrimony with any Slaue from and after the Last day of this prsent Ses- sions of Assembly, That then the said Mr Mirs or dame of any such ffreeborne women as aforesaid, soe married as aforesaid, shall forfeite & Loose all theire Claime & Title to the service & servitude of any such ffreeborne woman & alsoe the said woman Servt soe married shall bee & is by this prsent Act absolutely discharged manymitted & made free Instantly vpon her Intermarriage as aforesaid, from the Services Imploymts vse Claime or demands of any such Mr Mirs or dame soe offending as afforesaid, And all Children borne of such ffree- borne women, soe manymitted & ffree as aforesaid shall bee ffree as the women soe married as aforesaid, as also the said Mar Mirs & dame shall forfeite the sume of Tenn Thousand pounds of Tobacco, one halfe thereof to the Lord Propry & the other halfe to him or them that shall Informe & sue for the
p. 175
same to bee Recouered in any Court of Record within this Province by Bill plaint or Informacon, wherein noe Essoyne proteccon or wager of Law to bee allowed. And any preist Minister Majestrate or other person whatsoeuer, within this Province that shall from & after the Publicacon heereof Joyne in Marriage any Negroe or other Slaue to any Englishe or other Slaue to any English or other whitewoman Servt ffree- borne as aforesaid shall forfeite & pay the sume of Tenn Thousand pound of Tobacco, one halfe to the Lord Propry & the other halfe to the Informer or the person greiued, to bee Recouered by action of debt bill plaint or Informacon in any Court of Record within this Province, wherein noe Essoyne Proteccon or wager of Law to bee allowed, And bee itt further enacted by the Authority aforesaid, that one Act entit- uled an Act Concerning Negroes and Slaues bee & is heereby vtterly Repealed & made void, Provided that all matters & thinges relateing in the said Act to the marriage of Negroes with ffreeborne women & theire Issue are firme & valid according to the true intent & purport of the said Act vntill this prsent time of the Repeale thereof, any thing in this Act to the Contrary Notwithstanding.
where the term “White- woman” is incorporated into the new law after repealing the prior 1664 law which used the term “English women”
Proceedings and Acts of the General Assembly January 1637/8-September 1664 (Volume 1, Page 533–534) Liber W H&L
An Act Concerning Negroes & other Slaues
Bee itt Enacted by the Right Honble the Lord Proprietary by the aduice and Consent of the upper and lower house of this
p. 29
present Generall Assembly That all Negroes or other slaues already within the Prouince And all Negroes and other slaues to bee hereafter imported into the Prouince shall serue Durante Vita And all Children born of any Negro or other slaue shall be Slaues as their ffathers were for the terme of their Hues And forasmuch as divers freeborne English women forgettfull of their free Condicon and to the disgrace of our Nation doe intermarry with Negro Slaues by which alsoe diuers suites may arise touching the Issue of such woemen and a great damage doth befall the Masters of such Negros for preuention whereof for deterring such freeborne women from such shamefull Matches Bee itt further Enacted by the Authority advice and Consent aforesaid That whatsoever free borne woman shall inter marry with any slaue from and after the Last day of this present Assembly shall Serue the master of such slaue dureing the life of her husband And that all the Issue of such freeborne woemen soe marryed shall be Slaues as their fathers were And Bee itt further Enacted that all the Issues of English or other freeborne woemen that haue already marryed Negroes shall serve the Masters of their Parents till they be Thirty yeares of age and noe longer.
Thomas Middleton is cited as using the term “white people” in 1613 How ‘white people’ were invented by a playwright in 1613
As far as I, and others, have been able to tell, Middleton’s play is the earliest printed example of a European author referring to fellow Europeans as ‘white people’.
On the back cover of The Invention of the White Race, Volume 1: Racial Oppression and Social Control appears the claim
When the first Africans arrived in Virginia in 1619, there were no ‘white’ people there; nor, according to the colonial records, would there be for another sixty years.
where the question was asked and answers posted at Were there no “white” people in Virginia between 1619 and 1679?
For English language usage we will also find “white women” in Division of the Earth by François Bernier (1684)
Under the second species I put the whole of Africa, except the coasts I have spoken of.
What induces me to make a different species of the Africans, are, 1. Their thick lips and squab noses, their being very few among them who have aquiline noses or lips of moderate thickness. 2. The blackness
which is peculiar to them, and which is not caused by the sun, as many think; for if a black African pair be transported to a cold country, their children are just as black, and so are all their descendants until they
come to marry with white women. The cause must be sought for in the peculiar texture of their bodies, or in the seed, or in the blood-which last are, however, of the same colour as everywhere else. 3. Their skin,
which is oily, smooth, and polished, excepting the places which are burnt with the sun. 4. The three or four hairs of beard. 5. Their hair, which is not properly hair, but rather a species of wool, which comes
near the hairs of some of our dogs; and, finally, their teeth whiter than the finest ivory, their tongue and all the interior of their mouth and their lips as red as coral.
Later we find “white races” and “white race” in An Essay on the Inequality of the Human Races by Arthur de Gobineau (1853–1855)
The white races are, further, distinguished by an extraordinary attachment to life. They know better how to use it, and so, as it would seem, set a greater price on it; both in their own persons and those of others, they are more sparing of life. When they are cruel, they are conscious of their cruelty; it is very doubtful whether such a consciousness exists in the negro. At the same time, they have discovered reasons why they should surrender this busy life of theirs, that is so precious to them. The principal motive is honour, which
under various names has played an enormous part in the ideas of the race from the beginning. I need hardly add that the word honour, together with all the civilizing influences connoted by it, is unknown to both the yellow and the black man.
It would not have been all gain. The superiority of the white race would have been clearly shown, but it would have been bought at the price of certain advantages which have followed the mixture of blood. Although these are far from counterbalancing the defects they have brought in their train, yet they are sometimes to be commended. Artistic genius, which is equally foreign to each of the three great types, arose only after, the intermarriage
of white and black. Again, in the Malayan6 variety, a human family was produced from the yellow and black races that had more intelligence than either of its ancestors. Finally, from the union of white and yellow, certain intermediary peoples have sprung, who are superior
to the purely Finnish tribes as well as to the negroes.
In White Noises, Woman or Women we find the term “white woman” possibly being used as early as 1490.
In White Noises, Person or People we find the term “white person” (1661), “white people” (1555).
In What is the first date of documented usage and attribution of the term “white race” and/or “white races”?, the answer cites the date 1655.
This comment references Cantullus’s poem 93 which can have various translantions, including
NIL nimium studeo, Caesar, tibi uelle placere,
nec scire utrum sis albus an ater homo
to mean, in English,
I HAVE no very great desire to make myself agreeable to you, Caesar,
nor to know whether your complexion is light or dark.
and interpreted as Catullus 93 Translation
In 93, the poet questions Caesar and whether he is a good man or not. Catullus does not want to be someone who favors Caesar. In fact, Catullus is ok with being the opposite. He also does not want to know where Caesar stands with his sexuality. In line two, Catullus questions whether Caesar has a black or white complexion. Caesar’s skin tone would be easy for Catullus to know, which is why the question is not about his actual skin color, but where he stands sexually.
Light and dark are opposites. Catullus is questioning whether Caesar is the active or passive member in a homosexual relationship. The albus and āter were jargon for the roles that men played in homosexuality. Albus, or white, was the passive, womanly man in the relationship. The ater, or black, was the manly member of the relationship.
Yet none of the above answer the question as to where precisely “North Africa” is supposed to be on this planet, Earth.
And we still do not know precisely where “Middle East” is on this planet, Earth.
Depending on the source the term has wildly varying interpretations.
The terms “white person”, “white people”, “White- woman”, “white man”, “white races”, “white race” English language usage do not predate the 15th century.
Therefore we logically conclude that the invented term of art, and or political class or classification scheme “White” “race” cannot possibly be “original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa” per the official controlling United States regulation, O.M.B. Directive 15, due to the fact the terms did not exist before the 15th century, while Europe as a concept does predate the 15th century.
In Editorial Notebook; How the Middle East Was Invented, by Karl E. Meyer, the author states
nobody talked about the Middle East because neither the term nor the states in the region existed. “Middle East” is cited to have been first used in the 19th century.
and continues
The initial designer of the Middle East was Britain’s redoubtable War Minister, Lord Kitchener, who proposed indirect colonial hegemony, relying on indigenous kings and emirs to carry out British wishes. This was the practice in Egypt, where Kitchener was serving as British Agent, “advising” a khedive. In Sykes’s words, “We deprecated the Imperative, preferring the Subjunctive, even the wistful Optative mood.”
which mandates us to conclude that the invented political class “White” “race” could not possibly be the “original peoples” of “Middle East” due to the fact that the term “Middle East” is a fiction invented by fiat in the first instance, therefore no natural persons can possibly be the “original peoples” of a fiction.
“White” “race” in the United States is theory; an arbitrary political classification scheme that has not served any constructive purpose in any society since the inception of the theory.
It is not possible for a natural person to be “born” “white”. Per the official U.S. documentation, “self-identification” is the preferred method of obtaining “race” data
2. Respect for individual dignity should guide the processes and methods for collecting data on race and ethnicity; ideally, respondent self-identification should be facilitated to the greatest extent possible, recognizing that in some data collection systems observer identification is more practical.
and as such no newborn can possibly self-identify as “White” “race”; the newborn is not aware of that fiction. “Race” theory in the U.S. is not based on science, biology, genetics; “race” theory in the United States is based absolutely on political classification of natural persons for the purpose of domination of the “non-White” “races” by individuals and institutions that claim that “White” “race” exists.
Only “White” “race” political class benefit from the political organization “White” “race” or “white people” or “white woman”, “white man”, “white men”, “white children”; and that is by design, not happenstance or coincidence.
Since “White” “race” is not defined whatsoever — officially in the United States — as being based on “skin” “color” or “complexion”, any individual can self-identify with “White” “race”, because “White” “race” is a political classification, and by extension, a political organization.
Therefore, given the history of usage of the term, any individual that decides to self-identify as “White” “race” is by definition a practicing racist. It must be emphasized here that individuals who self-identify with any “race”, including “Black” “race”, and the once official category “Some other race”, et al. are each practicing “racists”, precisely for adopting “race” theory, when each individual possesses the capacity to directly repudiate the grand fraud of “race” theory.
For practicing “White Supremacists” the only way to continue the fraud of “race” theory is to propagate European folklore in hopes of a “race” “war”, as if a “race” “war” has not been occurring since the inception of “race” theory; yielding exclusively negative impacts on any and all societies where “race” theory is practiced, and, or, is official policy, without exception.
There is no constructive benefit for any society substantively or procedurally or any other measure, when “race” theory is practiced or official policy.
The invention of a “White” “race” or “white people” was and is deliberate, to further the aims of that political organization, which is to dominate and continue conquest of all “non”-”White” “race” or “races” or persons.
We have concretely refuted the claim that African Ancient Egyptians were “white people” as that term was not used until, at earliest, the 15th century, C.E. which means the concept of and usage of “white people” did not exist in Ancient Egypt.
Objectively, the listing of a fictitious “North Africa” and “Middle East” could be construed as a land patent claim on and for the entirety of the fiction created.
However, we find no guidance as to exactly which countries as supposed in “North Africa” or “Middle East”, again, absolutely vague terms. There are 54 countries in Africa. We have no number of countries in “Middle East” as “Middle East” is a military-diplomatic term imposed externally not by “original peoples”, rather, by foreign powers, Britain and United States.
Is South Sudan in “North Africa” per U.S. O.M.B. Directive 15 definition of “White” “race”? Is Egypt politically classified as “origin” of a “White” “race” Egyptian Immigrant Wants to be Reclassified as Black? Is Egypt in “Africa”, “North Africa”, “Middle East” or Africa proper and the fictional geo-political regions at the same time? Why is Europe considered “origin” of “White” “race”?
Since “skin” “color” or “complexion” is not a definition of “White” “race” per the official definition, it is certainly possible, and that individuals’ prerogative, to self-identify as “White”, or, be arbitrarily classified as “White” “race” by the United States.
In fact, there is no test to determine if any individual is “White” “race”, as the very concept is based on fiction, or folklore, or deliberate intent to confuse and dominate by means of irreconcible definitions that neither individuals nor journalists nor institutions bother to read, cite, and based on the prima facie contradictions and absolutely vague terms used, vet thoroughly; instead, individuals and institutions continue to rely on European folklore and by doing so never reach the point where “race” theory is dispatched as the fraud it is; resulting in the fraud continuing while on its face the theory is fraudulent.
It is impossible to determine anything of value by mere “White” “race” description, without immediate correlation to the reasoning for such a concept: the theory of “White Supremacy”; or, more generally, creation of “buffer” classes for calamity amongst those classes, while the inventors of such classes have the primary interest in domination of all “buffer” classes. Yet still, classification of John Brown as “white” would do nothing to describe that individuals’ political actions, as the historical account verifies that individual was not a practioner of “White Supremacy”, rather, countered that theory to the fullest extent they could in the physical world.
Having repudiated directly the folklore of a supposed or so-called or official “White” “race” or “white race”, will vet the fraud of “race” theory in the concluding entry in this series.