Originally Posted by RasRuben

Despite your large font which can only be described as superfluous in it's being, I do agree with some things you have said, just not all.

1. You say dating/marrying "black" has no proven practical value. I should hope you are not suggesting that this then means one has reason to go and be with any other group, because that wouldn't be very intellectual of you. There is no proven practical value in Africans marrying exclusively within our own group but there is also no proven practical value in dating/marrying outside of it. There is however proven downsides to marrying outside of it where I have seen none to suggest that dating/marrying exclusively African has any downsides. If you're going to be overly intellectual about it I don't see how you're going to prove the benefits of any group having relationships within itself or without. I don't see that as necessary and you would just be flexing intellectual muscles for aesthetic purposes if you tried. For me the fact that mixing en masse has always been a precursor to a massive downfall in African civilisations historically is enough for me and I consider myself to be at least intellectual in my acquisition of knowledge. I guess I would have to understand what you consider to be proof of practicality.

And the notion that there has to be a plan rings alarm bells for me. You sound like a platonic intellectual rather than an African ("black") one. Interesting. I hope you will explain what you consider to be proof of practicality and also who you think will be the one who will create this plan you think we need. Just so you know, speaking in your terms, there is no proof of practicality in the belief that we need "a" plan IMO.

2. Where do you get the idea that dating/marrying black is a tactic at all? I would like to know that. 90% of the world's population dates and marries within their own ethnic grouping. The numbers were higher further in the past. It could be said that the higher number of people dating and marrying outside of their ethnic group is as a result of new age ideology that is going against natural desire (evidenced by mass mixing happening within places that seek "multiculturalism"). This suggests that it is not practical or a tactic but a natural human desire to be with someone of your own ethnic group. I needn't address your analogy as I think what I wrote above suggests I believe your assumptions to be wrong and therefore your conclusions in this case. May I also ask for the proof of the practicality in Africans banding together under strategists.

3. Africans have always taken care of their image, long before non Africans turned up (see Merira Kwesi, the destruction of black civilisation viewed through fashion). I agree that there is an insecurity due to the upbringings many of us have but I would put to you this; if as you say the chicken can never take pride in it's chicken-ness due to the mode of evaluation being grounded in duck-ness, would you say that your mode of intellectualising the African struggle is devoid of all duck-ness? Do you think you have come to a rational conclusion based on the necessities, and complexities found within chicken-ness alone? I ask because I believe your method to be solely rooted in duck-ness rather than chicken-ness.

4. I believe your statement "the natural thought patterns of the INTELLECTUAL" to be wholly incorrect. One learns to be an intellectual and are not born into it. Although there may be evidence to suggest there is a natural affinity towards being an intellectual, that state cannot be reached without learning and learning something makes calling it natural completely contradictory (I hope you understand what I mean by that)

I don't care what beef you have with other posters and I am not trying to create any of my own, I just wanted to have this discussion as most of the conjecture and supposition has left along with the posters who posted it and this is now becoming an interesting conversation to me.

PS when you say things like "don't worry readers, it's not what you think" it is annoying in that it presumes that people would come to that conclusion based on your words and thus becomes a statement, not unlike one a person who is going for a "self-aggrandizing pat-on-the-back indicative of an overblown sense of mental self" would make and this could be the reason you recieve all of those labels. But that's just me.