Culture 102

 Freedom Truth & Harmony 

    We have taken some interesting journeys together, experiencing many things: However—until we converse with each other—my persons can never be too sure whether you got the same things out of what I’ve presented or said.  Which brings up another interesting dynamic, in and of itself: That is, What has occurred vs. what has been seen?  Many times, I have rapped with several kats after witnessing an event, and often discovered that what I considered was very different from what the next man thought.  This led me to conclude, a lot of what a person understand has to do with what a person sees—or chooses not to see.  And often, what he or she chooses not to see, can be caused by how affixed he or she is to an opposing subject; how polarized one is to another way of looking at certain topic.  In other words, one’s prejudiced prepositions.  Seeing has to do with perception or point of view.  Perception has to do with how one perceives; which has to do with whether one is looking at things for what they really are (which requires knowledge and wisdom in order to properly assess things), or what one believes (which is primarily based upon feelings, opinions, and beliefs), or how they want things to be (wishes, hopes, dreams, and aspirations): That often causes a dilemma or difficulty concerning seeing, and/or considerations:

 i.e. TROUBLES IN PERCEPTION based on prejudice prepositions, beliefs.  Really wanting to know the truth vs. not wanting to know because of stubbornness, fear, and opposition.

   Now if one bases his or her actions on the known; then all things or behaviors can be predicted to move forward in a straight line.  If one bases their actions on what he or she believes, a straight line can also be drawn—based upon what a person knows about what he or she believes, and their knowledge about such beliefs; which can wind up being opinionated, due to their affiliations to such beliefs and ideologies.  One is based upon things which are generally agreed upon as being truth; whereas the other is based upon the sentiments and stubbornness of a smaller group.  Now if this smaller group happens to be the people in power in the United States, then it will be hard to get justice there because the people's arrogance will uphold its opinions as if they were fact; making their concerns directed only towards those of their kind.

In other words, THEIR PRIVILEGED POSITION does not allow them to relate; therefore the atrocities committed by their kind will be glossed over by them: More succinctly, they will disassociate themselves; That is to say, Their thinking will be that only evil and poor people can behave criminal like that—not those of their society: 

He came from somewhere, back in her long ago

The sentimental fool don't see;
Tryin' hard to recreate, what has yet to be created;
She musters a smile, for his nostalgic tale—
Never coming near what he wanted to say;
Only to realize—it never really was.

She—had a place in his life,
He—never made her think twice;
As she rises to her apology,
Anybody else would surely know;
He's watching her go:

But what a fool believes—he sees;
No wise man has the power, to reason away,
What seems to be:
Is always better than nothing—nothing at all;

  Keeps sending him somewhere back in her long-ago;
Where he can still believe, there's a place in her life:

   Someday, Somewhere, she will return. . .

    —Michael McDonald/Doobie Brothers - What A Fool Believes

   Picture this: You are in a car, with less than an eighth of a tank of gas:  You stop to ask a guy on the road, where's the nearest gas station.  The guy replies, "I know, there's a BP six miles from here: You'll have to travel on this road a bit, make a right onto Jefferson Street, ride several blocks—pass the Girard College wall, then right onto Ridge Ave., when you reach the light, your destination will be on the right."  As you travel a bit and the gas dwindles down, you start to question the directions you jotted down and stop a second man who says; "I believe there's a Sunoco Gas station on Girard Avenue, just 5 and a half miles from here, just continue on this road until you get to Popular Street, then make a left and stay on Popular 'til it merges with Girard Avenue.  It should be there. . ."  

   Now, based upon your circumstances, which way do you choose?

MY EXAMPLES: KNOWING VERSUS BELIEVING

    If you are anything like me, the belief person in this article seemed uncertain—although there are some people in life who can say things with such conviction that what they say may sound very convincing; Nonetheless, the ultimate direction is to go in, is the direction of those who really know.  

   As my person once said in one of my poems; The thoughts I choose are the ones I can't loose with!  What I am saying is, "Go with the things you are certain of—go with what you know."  When a scientist makes an educated guess or hypothesis, he doesn't go out to prove himself right or wrong; He attempts to be as unbiased as he possibly can—and maybe, through persistent research; he finds the truth.  After one removes all of the probability from the equation, the remainder—no matter how strange it may seem—must be the truth.  However discomforting it may feel sometimes, you should (if you haven't already) begin to condition yourself to know and not believe (However: You should have faith in what you know—if you want confidence).                    

Now culture is what a group of people do; Culture is what a group of people believe and  culture is the way a people go about doing things;

 MY QUESTION IS: "Is that belief and performance based upon consensus, or based upon what's true?" 

     In scientific circles, the answer to that question is, Science is based upon truth and knowledge, and knowledge is not  belief; it is an extrapolation of the known; based upon finding the underlying significance of several experiments.  Feelings or opinions have nothing to do with it!  Scientists are persons who are devoted to knowing the truth.  A group or community of scientists would be expected to live their lives based upon things that they know; And if you lived your life like a scientist, all your life would be seen as one big experiment to know, or find out how things really are—as opposed to how you believe or want things to be: Under that premise, daily occurrences would be the testing grounds, and those experiences (or experiments) would give you the opportunity to find out what's  real or true—regardless to your feelings or views on the subject; i.e, despite the pain, pleasure, or sentiments associated with what you are presently going through.  And despite the various moments of sentimentalities, feelings, empathies and sympathies—you owe it to yourself to get the facts straight—because knowing those facts will allow you to conduct yourself in the appropriate manner; which is, according to the known. 

    But most people are certainly not scientists, and huge numbers of people are accustomed to basing their ways and actions upon sentimentality and ritual; rather than reasoning and knowledge.  Now rituals can be good and bad.  Ritual can be described as what you are accustomed to or what you have been conditioned to perform.  

Ritual can be concocted through routines—ritual can also be habitual pain and sadism—and ritual can be constructed from things you definitely know will work, as well.  

    Others [i.e. believers in Western ideology] may describe ritual as; A religious or solemn ceremony consisting of a series of actions performed according to a prescribed order, but your daily routine is a ritual too!  Religion in the church, synagogue, masjid—all consist of ritualistic communication with a higher power or higher aspect of your own self; for the Supreme One is said to have made us in His own image and likeness—thereby making the real duty and/or responsibility of these houses aimed at the giving and gathering of instructions for deliverance from temptations and/or errors; as well as advice for obedience and proper self development—but often improper thinking, Western contamination, and sentimentalities [on the part of these holy men and the congregation who live in this Western world and for the most part also indoctrinated by it as well] often interfere with what life is teaching us, ipso facto, is right. 

      In ancient times [1200-1555] within the West, the Catholic church was the main governing body for the European people; However, corruption, wealth and power, on the part of caucasian people—altered the original Hebrew practices—prompting protest from the conscientious elements within the European populace. 

Zealous and pious people were produced from the European multitude—who were often persecuted by the Catholic Church [known as the Inquisition] and despised by many blind followers of Catholic ideology—but eventually these persons were able to develop a movement which altered the course of the Catholic Church through a movement called the Protestant Reformation.  Kings and sovereignty of the West had something to do with the protestant revolution; but their reasons were more political and economical—rather than spiritual concerns for their subjects.  Despite religious inquisition, heresy, and torture—these European kings were ultimately successful at wrestling back a lot their political power and lands from the clutches of the Pope; not through spiritual, but temporal means. 

I hope you never forget, this is the chronology of the evolution of European politics and religion—done by Europe's indigenous people—period! [Other places have their own transformations of the Hebrew teachings as well—but this is what Europe concocted.] 

     And although this "spiritual revolution" seemed to satisfy the royalty of Europe [in terms of land, wealth and possessions]—the outcome unwittingly produced another political entity that would—once again, challenge the status quo of the new modern society: Political Science, colonization, expansionism and rulership or government without kings. . .  

NOTE; if you live under Biblical translations that are not Eastern, or you do not read Hebrew or study the scriptures from their source; then the way you look at our teachings are tainted by European/Western outlooks and therefore not what Jesus/Joshua/Isa taught (like the worship of popes) us to do, as the people of that destiny.

                                  

     Now what we'd like for you to fully appreciate is that the Scriptures used in the Bible, was not developed in Europe, but in the East on the Asian continent; specifically in the countries on the Arabian peninsula which is in the Far East and bordered by the Indian Ocean in the South.  The cities of Jerusalem and Mecca are also on this peninsula; along with the lands of Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, and Israel.  It was the mentality of these people, which produced a pact with the Almighty source from which all things come—called The Covenant: and it was through this pact that its people developed such a great understanding of life.  That is, through ritualistic communication with the higher form of Self; the people truly became wise.  When Greece and Rome colonized the Far East, they witnessed the effects of this system of Self development and wanted it for themselves.  Both the Septuagint and Vulgate versions of the Bible are documented proof of this sacred phenomena.          

   Europe's ancestry developed their societies off of what they themselves would later call, pagan religions—aka viking religion and viking culture, along with idol worshipping from indigenous tribes.  Among the many indigenous beliefs, it was the viking group of European peoples, who first conquered and colonized most of Europe; that is—along with various Germanic or Teutonic tribes.  And it was through all of this conquering  and colonization that many of these ideas about God were spread throughout Europe.  You might be better familiar with the Germanic tribes as Nordic and Danish people (although some of the Norwegian tribes were vikings as well); along with the Angles and the Saxons.  Examples of viking people are the Normans, Scandinavians and Baltic people.  An example of a major upheaval of a country by a Germanic tribe is the Angles and Saxons take-over and occupation of England; which was followed up by a later occupation of England by the French Norman/Viking king, William the Conqueror of Normandy.  Hastings, Agincourt, the Plantagenets and Edward I, Wars of the Roses—the history of England is one big bunch of hostile takeovers and occupations by other people from Germanic and viking tribes.  The indigenous people of England are a subjugated people, with other people and their culture superimposed.  As a matter of fact, the word, "England," is a corruption of the words, "Angles-land."  It was the German kings and princes—along with Martin Luther—who ushered in the Protestant Reformation; which was adopted by Henry VIII as England's religion; And it was these militant Germanic/Viking and indigenous people, who eventually enslaved our people and brought us to America. . .  Imagine that type of mentality giving anyone of us equal or civil rights. . .   

 If culture is built off of what a people do—and there's a huge number of people who base their actions on sentimentality, belief, routine [rites], rather than reason—then cultural belief, rather than reason, will override the society's better judgment; forcing the rational elements  within  that society/government to legislate laws in order to produce a more rational posture (if that is at all possible) in the people.  Just because laws are made, doesn't mean that they will be enforced; because the officers who are here to reinforce it—will be less prone to enforce  them—if those officers are not feeling those principles in their hearts.  As a matter of fact, how any society or culture operates is largely predicated upon what its people are strongly committed to; And what that society believes depends largely on the character and evolution of that society; However, this can only be said of a people who live in a society that are all of the same indigenous race.*  

   In the movie, Gangs of New York, which takes place in 1863, immigrants in America were having a hard time getting established, period—but this particular film focuses on the tension between the English and the Irish who migrated to America.  This migration to America was due in part to great influx of the Irish immigrants [fleeing Europe due to the Great Hunger (Potato) Famine in Ireland] and Germans who dominated the British landscape—commonly known as Anglo-Saxons—[due to a depression and subsequent revolutionary war] looking for opportunities and/or new lands to colonize; and the two societies collided in New York City around 1863.  Now among the Irish influx population were mainly a large group of farmers, who became part of the unskilled labor force; whereby putting stress on numbers of people already looking for unskilled American labor work (as far as the economy/workforce of America was concerned).  And even though the motto of the New Colossus [or the Statue of Liberty] is ". . . Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. . ." the harsh reality of America is one of competition and resentment—as well as contempt and oppression by the ones who came before you.  Needless to say, Irish immigrants were not very welcome in America during 1863 [around the time of Emancipation and Reconstruction for Blacks in America].

    Americans during 1863 were anything but hospitable to the tired and poor—especially those previous immigrants who had now become freshly-made American citizens.  During 1863, the North and the South were recovering from war; lands in the South was decimated, slave labor was greatly arrested as a result, and  the whole country was hurting financially.  

     Once Upon a Time in America, a movie that illustrates social conditions during the turn of century—before and after Prohibition; shows a group of young Jewish thugs perpetrating crimes to utilize the few avenues left open to the new immigrants vying for a way to live.  Many poor Whites feared they would be competing against the new immigrants, and free Blacks, for the same job.  Former immigrants from other European countries, now acclimated as American citizens, and possessing the same apprehensions as poor Whites, would throw up road blocks towards the newcomers wherever they could—all in the name of liberty. What a fool believes. . .

   Some societies, like ancient Khammau, believed that man could ascend to the point of personifying God on earth; like imitating Christ and becoming a true and living God.  At some point, the collective genius of that society or group of people produced this concept.  Their local and high government—its leaders, parents and teachers—did everything to uphold the concept: Their highest priest, the Shekhem Ur Shekhem, was also the leader of the nation; this made their philosophical beliefs interwoven into their politics!  In the town of Khem, along the Nile River, there were scientists who experimented with metals, stones, oils, and other earthly elements, by judging their affects and effects upon the human body.  It is from this town of Khem, where we get the words chemist and the Arabic word of Al-chemy [the Arabs invaded Khamit (so-called Egypt) later on and made Luxor a city par excellence for Islamic learning].  

The accomplishments within a society, depends on the evolution of its people and the focus, priorities, and interests of that society.

     During Medieval or Middle Ages [a period which occurred after fall of the Roman Empire and lasted from the fifth to the fifteenth century until the Renaissance], Europe dredged through our antiquity for our secrets to life; trying to incorporate their findings into their way of life; similar to what the West did with the Hebrew teachings [besides the creation of Christianity, this gives meaning to why so many of our artifacts being held within their museums].  But this is something that the Europeans chose to do as a Western Society; it was done at a time when Europe was searching for answers to its moral and spiritual poverty: but failed to openly acknowledge their indebtedness.  In America and Western society today—the West "borrows" from the Blackman's culture in America and overseas—without full acknowledgment of Black contributions to America's growing multi-cultural society; taking Soul, Blues, Rhythm and Blues, and Rock and Roll music—while clowning or ridiculing Blacks in the process of taking his inner treasures from him. . .

*     As I said earlier, a lot of various cultural contributions become muddled, when it comes down to multi-cultural societies.  In single cultured societies, where the people and the culture it produces originates from the same ethos; it can be said that its' people will do things in the best interest of that society and socially the culture will survive and uplift itself. But in a multi-cultural society, where there's several sub-cultures and one dominant culture, there are two different forces: the so-called sub-culture and the dominate or dominant culture; and in all cases, the dominant culture forces the sub-cultures to comply—some more than others; depending on relationship!  But the statement concerning single cultured societies and their spearheading for its' people's interests, cannot be made for multi-cultural societies because multi-cultural societies have majority and minority interests. In other words, in a multi-cultural society like the United States there's one dominant culture and the rest of the mini-cultures are subject to how that dominate culture or race feels about the rest.  You can make all kinds of laws in a multicultural society like the United States, guaranteeing rights and such, but takes the dominate culture of the American people to reinforce them—otherwise they have no "bite"—so when prejudices appear, on the part of the people which are part of the dominate culture, its people are not going to enforce things that doesn't match the way they think or that they don't feel within their hearts.

     When the people from the dominant society sit on the judges stand and has to judge one of their own people, subliminally that judge will find reasons for being lenient. This will occur because they are more than likely in line with the way that he or she feels; however, when it comes to people of color—the tendency is to become less tolerant and more opinionated or give into stereotypical views.  The judges will find exceptions despite the facts lain before them—simply because they are members of the dominant society and the people of that dominant culture are so affixed to their way of looking at things [aka interests, ideas, principles, etc] that their affiliations will not tolerate any other opposing ideas coming into their consideration; And in the case of America, Westerners have become so arrogant, that it seems no other ideas can come in, and that's ignorant behavior!  Especially when the opposing ideas are opposing the ideology they believe in; they become real indignant.  And although the Westerners may not be many (as far as the world population is concerned), they have become ultimately significant because—all around the world—THEY have become the ones in power.  Anyone who has watch the United Nation proceedings, concerning the Western powers [namely England, France, and the United States] versus the issues of the rest of the people in the world—know what I'm taking about. 

     In all my life, I have never saw a person of European descent join anything where economically they would be in support of something that politically they don't influence.  This is because ultimately, they want to influence everything to flow the direction of their own societies interests.  Non-White people get it twisted: They believe that a board with people from several social groups including members from the dominant race is a fair committee; never realizing that those in power would have never let the group form—if they could not sway its public opinions.  Back in the day, Black people used to call some of its members sell outs because even though they were Black in appearance, their political point of view was not congruent with the group of people they originated from, nor were they there to protect the interests of their own social group: They were there because they were self-serving and were picked by the powers that be, because they could be influenced by them, and that they pose no threat to the status quo (the colonist way) whatsoever.  In other words, these people (although they may be of various races and people of various social groups), have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo of the people who gained political control over their country.

   This becomes possible because many of these people who belong to the various other social groups and sub-cultures believe they could upgrade their social status in American or Western society, if they become one with the ones who rule this country (either economically or politically)—but nothing can be so-far away from the truth.  First of all, those who colonized this country are European.  Their values are Western.  Overall, they believe in White superiority and in Western colonization—which means none of these other indigenous groups are equal to the White man.  The most common mistake that celebrities, entertainers, and successful business people make is that they think because they own some of the same things, own the same home, go to their parties and live amongst caucasians—that they are equal to caucasians—But this is delusional; Whites never let any non-Whites join their elite social groups; period.  OJ Simpson thought he was, Bill Cosby thought he was, Tiger Woods thought he was, and Oprah Winfrey thinks she is—but HIStory tells a different tale.
  

ONCE AGAIN, what a person understands has to do with what a person sees—or chooses not to see. OR AS THE FICTIONAL CHARACTER, LEO O' BANNION, OF MILLER'S CROSSING SAYS; "Johnny, you're exactly as big as I let you be, and no bigger, and don't forget it; Ever."   

     Black people are so busy trying to escape the racism (hatred, contempt, and patronization, etc), that the minute they are allowed to live among influential Whites, they think they have been accepted into American society:  When the truth is, they are merely a token of a society which only wants to symbolically indicate that there is equal opportunity in America; believing the ones they pick from the so-called minority lot (Blacks, Natives, Latinos, etc) pose no threat to their status quo.  But rest assured, should the elite see things differently—they will immediately come after the helpless colored  figure with all the vigor they can muster: Then you see these Black men's whole public world fall apart, like Michael Jackson. 

Remember in the movie, The Godfather II, when Senator Pat Geary refuses to grant the gaming license to Michael Corleone, only to be framed for murdering a prostitute?  How about the Tiger Woods and Bill Cosby fiascos?  Do they bear any resemblances? 

"Johnny, you're exactly as big as I let you be, and no bigger, and don't forget it; Ever."     

    When a White police officer pulls a White person over—it will be a different interaction than pulling over people from opposite races; and that's no question.  It would be delusional to think anything otherwise.  There is no question that a White policemen will take more inappropriate behavior off of a fellow White man, than he would ever take from a Black man or any other minority—and that's a fact.  He will do so because they are all descendants from the same Western European matrix, and naturally have some of the same affinities and tolerances—because generally they are the same people!  This holds true for their unfamiliarity and intolerances towards other races—because other races are so much different from their own!  They are cultivated differently.

   In a multi-cultural society, such as The United States of America, there is one dominant culture and the rest are subservient to the dominant culture's themes.  It is impossible to get equal treatment out of this theme—particularly since there is long standing theme of expansionism, colonialism, and world domination—on the part of Europe and their descendants.  This situation becomes further exacerbated, when you consider the land was stolen from the Natives and Blacks were stolen from their homelands to play the part of servitude to the White race in America.  It is utterly amazing that we lived under these conditions for so long—not to mention how we have concocted such an erroneous belief that there can ever be justice, equal, and true freedom—given these premises and circumstances.

WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE RACIAL EQUALITY WITHIN AMERICA—UNTIL WE, AS A PEOPLE, ARE ABLE TO CHANGE OUR FORMER RELATIONSHIP WITH THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

   The reason for the above statement is simply because we didn't make the choice to come here, we were brought here.  We didn't come here for an opportunity, we were brought here to be used.  We didn't have rights, we were subjugated; and depending on the slave master denigrated to greater or lesser degrees.  We are still fighting for civil rights, yet claiming to be American citizens—when an immigrant can get off a boat today and have more rights than you. No one is protecting your rights, if you are not protecting them.  No one has your best interests at heart, if you—Blackman—are not securing them.  I am not your enemy, I am your companion in tribulation.  If JayZ is not supporting our common interests, he is not your brother.  If Oprah Winfrey is not supporting our cultural integrity, she is not your sister.  If you are not concerned with status of Black people in the world today, you are not conscious.  If you are making yourself up to look like some other people, you are not conscious.  If you do not support small businesses in your community because you can buy it cheaper at a big corporate chain, you are not conscious.  

     At some point, you will have to pour money back into your own communities, if our communities are going to survive.  This will take another type of thinking on the part of our people.  This will take reconsideration.  No one is going to do the work for you; and no you shouldn't be interested in hand-outs.  No one is going to go out there and get your freedom for you—the actual fact is—they can't!  It starts in the hearts and the minds of the many: How about you?  If you change your mind (or at least the thoughts and ideas you consider), and you change your relationship to time.  You must realize that you will have to protect and secure your own interests; Hell, most of us are still fighting for the civil rights to be a citizen—for over 152 years!  What good is it, if you have all the trappings of your rich counterpart, when you’re drinking, destroying your liver, trying to douse down the feeling that comes from knowing that soon they may throw you under the bus like Bill Cosby—if you don’t continue to be a pawn in their game?  Most of these celebrities are not our leaders, they are pawns in the game.  They are politically controlled by rich "slave makers" of the poor!  What good is your millions, if you can't use it the way you want to?  What good is your millions, if you can't build up Black communities, so that others can live better?  [Kevin Hart does.]  What good is your millions, if you can’t build up the communities in which gave you your skills?  No one is saying that you can’t work for their communities, the point is you have to make that money count in yours, and stop giving back to them in their communities so quick [if you have to give it back at all/aka support Black businesses].  

     Our leadership will have to come from each one of us, as each one of us, when we change the way we look at things:  Times will change because we will change.  This is how cultures are developed; from the attitudes, determination, and determined ideas that drive the hearts and mind of the people—as we move towards our goals as a people.  No, it doesn’t skyrocket; and no this isn’t rocket science.  No man has all the answers but it evolves in the way we all think collectively on the subject: And if you are one of these types of people, then it is mandatory that you find the next person who is similarly advocated for the same common cause, so that we can build something meaningful for the rest of our children—and their children to enjoy.  I know its hard work, but it starts with the will and the willingness to do so.  Are you willing?  I am.

 

Thank you for your consideration,

C. Be'er la Hai-roi Myers