I am for Afrakan-centered unity, not "Black" unity. People often assume that they are the same thing.

Black unity is the concept that people unify with anybody who has Black skin; as a result, they often find themselves uniting with people who are Eurasian Supremacists (since 95% of Black people are devout Eurasian supremacists) and if you unify with them they will only lead…
…you to their Eurasian master. Most activist in the Black population only preach Black unity, which is why we are not able to develop anything.

This was the same problem with Nkrumah's Pan-African unity.
It resulted in exploitation of the concept by Arabs, Asiatic "Berbers," Chinese and Indians, and even Europoids.

Afrakan-centered unity is distinct from Black unity because it requires the Black person to be Afrakan-centered.
This safeguards the unity because they don't just have skin in common, but common understanding. This is essential because in order to build something we have to have a common understanding of what we are building, why, and for whom.
That common understanding is absent from "Black" unity movements because there are too many varying agendas, most of which are focused on Eurasiancentric rewards.
I know this is very taboo to talk about in our population because we want our race to unite, but you are being quixotic and naive if you believe that a pale Jesus worshipping Black, a beige Arab worshipping Black, or even an Einstein worshipping Black can ever help in building…
…a Black nation; they are psychologically compelled to hand over whatever they build to the people who look like their prophets.

This is why we have to be very clear about what Black people we are unifying with.
The interrupter will tell you that you're not being about unity but the truth is, for something to unify, it must distinguish itself from that which is not a part of the unifying whole. This requires more than racial unity but also a united consciousness.
What empowered the Europoids was their racial unity but ALSO religious unity (Christianity). This is why they fought with other pale races that look like them but did not agree to the religious unity.
Many Muslims, such as Turks and Iranians, do not look much racially different than Greeks or Italians, yet they are enemies to Europoids because they won't abide by religious unity with Europoids.
The Europoid Jew, who is just as pale as any Europoid, was oppressed only because they would not unify with the larger Europoid religious ideology.
The only reason Jews were allowed to be is because their Europeaness was necessary for the Christians to continue the promotion of a Europoid looking Jesus.
At the end of the day, it has been the Afrakan descendants acceptance of any Black that has prevented us from uniting with the right Blacks.
You throw all the fruit you gather into a basket without eliminating the ones that are bad, you will end up with a basket full of all bad fruit because one can spoil all.

(Kushite Pharaoh Natakamani, Meroitic Dynasty.
Altar of Smai Taui with Heru and Tehuti.)

More from History

Folks who don't know history just tweet whatever they want.

On Feb 1935, Bose attacked the Nazis as he was angry as Indians were described as Sub-Humans in Mein Kampf. The British arrested Bose in April 1936, because he insulted the Nazis.

#Thread


The West at this point had a soft spot for the Nazis. France, Great Britain, Netherlands, Poland all gave the Nazi Salute during the 1936 Olympics in Berlin.

Even during the Spanish Civil War (1936 - 1939), the Western powers observed neutrality as the Fascists rose in Spain.


In 1937, Hitler told British Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax that one of his fav movies was ‘The Lives of a Bengal Lancer’. Why?

‘The Lives of a Bengal Lancer’ depicted a handful of "superior race" Brits holding sway over an entire Indian subcontinent (Sub-Humans).

"Shoot Gandhi. If necessary, shoot more Congress Leaders (Nehru & Bose)."

- Hitler to Lord Halifax, Britain's Foreign Secretary

This statement by Hitler in 1937 angered many pro-Leftist leaders of the INC including Bose.

Bose reached London in Jan 1938, and he met many leaders of the British Labour Party including Attlee.

1938 & 1939 were two huge years for the Indian National Congress. As i always say, the 10-year phase from 1938 - 1948 shaped modern India and it began in 1938 Haripura session.

You May Also Like

These 10 threads will teach you more than reading 100 books

Five billionaires share their top lessons on startups, life and entrepreneurship (1/10)


10 competitive advantages that will trump talent (2/10)


Some harsh truths you probably don’t want to hear (3/10)


10 significant lies you’re told about the world (4/10)
प्राचीन काल में गाधि नामक एक राजा थे।उनकी सत्यवती नाम की एक पुत्री थी।राजा गाधि ने अपनी पुत्री का विवाह महर्षि भृगु के पुत्र से करवा दिया।महर्षि भृगु इस विवाह से बहुत प्रसन्न हुए और उन्होने अपनी पुत्रवधु को आशीर्वाद देकर उसे कोई भी वर मांगने को कहा।


सत्यवती ने महर्षि भृगु से अपने तथा अपनी माता के लिए पुत्र का वरदान मांगा।ये जानकर महर्षि भृगु ने यज्ञ किया और तत्पश्चात सत्यवती और उसकी माता को अलग-अलग प्रकार के दो चरू (यज्ञ के लिए पकाया हुआ अन्न) दिए और कहा कि ऋतु स्नान के बाद तुम्हारी माता पुत्र की इच्छा लेकर पीपल का आलिंगन...

...करें और तुम भी पुत्र की इच्छा लेकर गूलर वृक्ष का आलिंगन करना। आलिंगन करने के बाद चरू का सेवन करना, इससे तुम दोनो को पुत्र प्राप्ति होगी।परंतु मां बेटी के चरू आपस में बदल जाते हैं और ये महर्षि भृगु अपनी दिव्य दृष्टि से देख लेते हैं।

भृगु ऋषि सत्यवती से कहते हैं,"पुत्री तुम्हारा और तुम्हारी माता ने एक दुसरे के चरू खा लिए हैं।इस कारण तुम्हारा पुत्र ब्राह्मण होते हुए भी क्षत्रिय सा आचरण करेगा और तुम्हारी माता का पुत्र क्षत्रिय होकर भी ब्राह्मण सा आचरण करेगा।"
इस पर सत्यवती ने भृगु ऋषि से बड़ी विनती की।


सत्यवती ने कहा,"मुझे आशीर्वाद दें कि मेरा पुत्र ब्राह्मण सा ही आचरण करे।"तब महर्षि ने उसे ये आशीर्वाद दे दिया कि उसका पुत्र ब्राह्मण सा ही आचरण करेगा किन्तु उसका पौत्र क्षत्रियों सा व्यवहार करेगा। सत्यवती का एक पुत्र हुआ जिसका नाम जम्दाग्नि था जो सप्त ऋषियों में से एक हैं।
1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.

Please add your own.

2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you


3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.

“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”

“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”

4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:

“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”

“What’s end-game here?”

“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”

5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:

“What would the best version of yourself do”?