IF blacks never was enslaved... (lets discuss politics)

[dasonofceo]

...and Dancehall was influenced by R&B.

Not to take anything away from mi brethren, but ask Sugar Minot how he feels about the Godfather of Soul.

lol wut? what does that have to do with my statement? R&B was influenced by slave folk songs, slave folk songs were influenced from Native African tribal folk songs, native african tribal folk songs were influenced by cave man music.

 

[longstroke]

lol wut? what does that have to do with my statement? R&B was influenced by slave folk songs, slave folk songs were influenced from Native African tribal folk songs, native african tribal folk songs were influenced by cave man music.

Quite obviously, you have no intention of being sensible. 

A little on music theory, origins of Soul, and R&B

R&B came from Jazz, which had a more consistent groove, a rhythm, then was originally called by musicians, the sped up blues.

Gospel music was created by a Blues musician, who was inspired by negro spirituals. 

It was Ray Charles who took Gospel, using Jazz treatments and R&B adding a different type of feel by adding drum and bass, then formed the secular music called Soul.

Back then, all forms of Pop and R&B, early Rock, were using a basic 2/4 rhythm, that is until James Brown came along. He then put the groove on the 1/3, which put the bass and drum out front, then turning all the instruments of a big band into a drum. Simplifying the feel, people were ticked off about this, but among Black people around the world, it resonated, as it took the feel of Black music, back to its African type sound and feel. Drawing a serious connection globally, this new sound in the sixties changed all musical genre's, excluding Classical and Country music.

At that time, Brown had never even been to Africa, had never even thought about going either. He had no connection to Africa, which is interesting as to how he got that musical feel.

Also during this time in the sixties, James Brown was signed to King Records in Cincinnati, Ohio. When that recording studio closed, guess where they sent the equipment?

Kingston, Jamaica.

Guess whose studio got it?

Lee Scratch Perry's.

Guess who Bob Marley told Scratch to make him sound like while recording?

You got it.

Now I am going to say this, these are Black people. People of African descent in all of the Caribbean, all got there due to the slave ships and wicked people behind that transport.

Black people.

Black people.

So yes, those Black people and their culture from the Caribbean and the U.S., were a MAJOR influence on the WORLD.

Black is Black 

Q Tip, De La Soul (Me Myself and I )

 

[longstroke]

Just a little more,

Marley has also evolved into a global symbol, which has been endlessly merchandised through a variety of mediums. In light of this, author Dave Thompson  in his book Reggae and Caribbean Music, laments what he perceives to be the commercialized pacification of Marley's more militant edge, stating:

Bob Marley ranks among both the most popular and the most misunderstood figures in modern culture ... That the machine has utterly emasculated Marley is beyond doubt. Gone from the public record is the ghetto kid who dreamed of Che Guevara  and the Black Panthers, and pinned their posters  up in the Wailers Soul Shack record store; who believed in freedom; and the fighting which it necessitated, and dressed the part on an early album sleeve; whose heroes were James Brown  and Muhammad Ali; whose God was Ras Tafari  and whose sacrament wasmarijuana. Instead, the Bob Marley who surveys his kingdom today is smiling benevolence, a shining sun, a waving palm tree, and a string of hits which tumble out of polite radio like candy from a gumball machine. Of course it has assured his immortality. But it has also demeaned him beyond recognition. Bob Marley was worth far more.[sup][57][/sup]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Marley

 

[longstroke]

 

[dasonofceo]

Quite obviously, you have no intention of being sensible. 

A little on music theory, origins of Soul, and R&B

R&B came from Jazz, which had a more consistent groove, a rhythm, then was originally called by musicians, the sped up blues.

Gospel music was created by a Blues musician, who was inspired by negro spirituals. 

It was Ray Charles who took Gospel, using Jazz treatments and R&B adding a different type of feel by adding drum and bass, then formed the secular music called Soul.

Back then, all forms of Pop and R&B, early Rock, were using a basic 2/4 rhythm, that is until James Brown came along. He then put the groove on the 1/3, which put the bass and drum out front, then turning all the instruments of a big band into a drum. Simplifying the feel, people were ticked off about this, but among Black people around the world, it resonated, as it took the feel of Black music, back to its African type sound and feel. Drawing a serious connection globally, this new sound in the sixties changed all musical genre's, excluding Classical and Country music.

At that time, Brown had never even been to Africa, had never even thought about going either. He had no connection to Africa, which is interesting as to how he got that musical feel.

Also during this time in the sixties, James Brown was signed to King Records in Cincinnati, Ohio. When that recording studio closed, guess where they sent the equipment?

Kingston, Jamaica.

Guess whose studio got it?

Lee Scratch Perry's.

Guess who Bob Marley told Scratch to make him sound like while recording?

You got it.

Now I am going to say this, these are Black people. People of African descent in all of the Caribbean, all got there due to the slave ships and wicked people behind that transport.

Black people.

Black people.

So yes, those Black people and their culture from the Caribbean and the U.S., were a MAJOR influence on the WORLD.

Africans create modern music.

 

[Extrait de Minimalisme]

Dason, are you missing a chromosome or two fam?

 

[longstroke]

Africans create modern music.

You know, what's so frustrating is I'd get a detailed message from Method Man, if I say what I really want to say here.

 

[nixonjames]

I'm gonna not really read up on this but I will give my thoughts ha.

If whites hadn't enslaved Africans, whites would probably still have most of the wealth, and Africans wouldn't have left Africa.

This is a gross simplification I realize, but the empowered whites were already stealing land from the Native Americans before the Atlantic Slave trade got really into full effect.  Moreover, African tribes were selling slaves hundreds of years prior to the beginning of the Atlantic Slave trade.  When one village raided another and took male captives (in some regions it was female as it was a more gathering/farming society and they held more importance) they would then sell those captives to a distant tribe as slaves. 

Basically it was just short sightedness.  The tribal leaders wanted to keep their tribe safe so they sold their enemies to far away tribes.  When the europeans started landing on their shores with things to trade, one of the things these tribal leaders offered was their military captives.  It makes sense if you think about it.  If I'm trying to protect my people from a threat, and I've always sent that threat away to ensure their protection, won't we be even more protected if I put them on this boat and they're gone forever?

Again short sighted but my point is this.  The practice was in effect in tribal Africa for hundreds of years before the Atlantic Slave trade truly began, and therefore, had the Europeans not landed on the shores, the only difference is that the Africans wouldn't have been brought to the Americas.  There's lots of amazing information like the attitudes and genetic makeups of the people from the different regions affecting their value.  Believe it or not, the Africans most consistently brought to Haiti were some of the strongest and fiercest fighters of any African slave, resulting in more ships lost at sea and mutinies etc than any other region.  Is it therefore completely surprising Haiti has been a scene of turmoil and conflict for the hundreds of years since. 

I found all of this fascinating, which is why I got a degree in History, specialized in the Atlantic Slave Trade and wrote award winning papers on the economic motives behind varying Slave ship captains.  If anyone wants to discuss in further detail be happy to but I wasn't going to read 19 pages to get caught up to something when I think my educational background and research interests told me the answer already.

Now all of this is of course speculation and silliness b/c as we know the Atlantic Slave trade did take place and forever changed cultural and genetic makeup of every latin american country (google "Latin American Caste Chart") as well as the history of our country.

 

[futuremd]

I'm gonna not really read up on this but I will give my thoughts ha.

If whites hadn't enslaved Africans, whites would probably still have most of the wealth, and Africans wouldn't have left Africa.

This is a gross simplification I realize, but the empowered whites were already stealing land from the Native Americans before the Atlantic Slave trade got really into full effect.  Moreover, African tribes were selling slaves hundreds of years prior to the beginning of the Atlantic Slave trade.  When one village raided another and took male captives (in some regions it was female as it was a more gathering/farming society and they held more importance) they would then sell those captives to a distant tribe as slaves. 

Basically it was just short sightedness.  The tribal leaders wanted to keep their tribe safe so they sold their enemies to far away tribes.  When the europeans started landing on their shores with things to trade, one of the things these tribal leaders offered was their military captives.  It makes sense if you think about it.  If I'm trying to protect my people from a threat, and I've always sent that threat away to ensure their protection, won't we be even more protected if I put them on this boat and they're gone forever?

Again short sighted but my point is this.  The practice was in effect in tribal Africa for hundreds of years before the Atlantic Slave trade truly began, and therefore, had the Europeans not landed on the shores, the only difference is that the Africans wouldn't have been brought to the Americas.  There's lots of amazing information like the attitudes and genetic makeups of the people from the different regions affecting their value.  Believe it or not, the Africans most consistently brought to Haiti were some of the strongest and fiercest fighters of any African slave, resulting in more ships lost at sea and mutinies etc than any other region.  Is it therefore completely surprising Haiti has been a scene of turmoil and conflict for the hundreds of years since. 

I found all of this fascinating, which is why I got a degree in History, specialized in the Atlantic Slave Trade and wrote award winning papers on the economic motives behind varying Slave ship captains.  If anyone wants to discuss in further detail be happy to but I wasn't going to read 19 pages to get caught up to something when I think my educational background and research interests told me the answer already.

Now all of this is of course speculation and silliness b/c as we know the Atlantic Slave trade did take place and forever changed cultural and genetic makeup of every latin american country (google "Latin American Caste Chart") as well as the history of our country.

What do you think about the Louis Gates documentaries on "black in latin america?" 

Also, any links to your papers/work? 

 

[guccjermaine]

Jesus is black and the world killed him. 

 

[nixonjames]

What do you think about the Louis Gates documentaries on "black in latin america?" 

Also, any links to your papers/work? 

I'll have to check those out, I've not heard of them I bet they're fascinating.  I don't think there's a current link, went to college in the late 90s.  I can give you the gist of my findings tho.  Basically I was a dual economics/history interest and I took an advanced course on the Atlantic Slave Trade, part of that was we had access to a complete database of all the information from every slave ship captain's logs and records ever recorded.  So my theory was that I wanted to see if I could deduce economic self-interest from the actions of slave captains.  I found several captains that had recorded ships from the same port which they acquired their slaves and then the same port to which they were sold. 

The crazy thing was that I decided on 2 specific captains because one you could see an interest in preserving the slaves he carried.  Basically over the course of 3 trips, his recorded fatalaties dropped by 50% from trip 1 to trip 2 (about 9% lost to 4) then on his third trip it went to 0.  He had the same number of slaves in each ship and the same size ship, and the only thing that changed was his routes as each trip was progressively shorter.  It gave an indication that this Captain wanted to keep his human cargo alive (I didn't make any prediction as to whether this was due to his wanting to save lives v. make more money) but in contrast to the 2nd captain it was insane.

The second captain also displayed good economic thinking but from a severely savage perspective.  It boiled down to the fact that he did not care about his fatalaties at sea.  They were high on his first trip (like 20%) but instead of finding ways to lower that number he instead chose to carry more and more slaves until by his third trip he had over 2x the number of slaves in roughly the same size ship as the 1st trip, but his fatalaties had risen to over 30%.  So clearly he had no concern for the well-being of his slaves but the value was such that if he could pack a few dozen more in, even if he lost a higher % of them it would still be economically viable when he arrived.

That paper/research product resulted in being honored as one of the best papers in the department that year and was chosen as one of 3 to be presented live to the school's academic community. 

I was raised racist and it never made any sense to me, so I have always had a healthy obsession with understanding how just normal people could go along with such a practice and it was quite mind-opening to focus your studies so directly.  I'm pretty sure you have to be an academic to access that database but I'll see if it's online anywhere, was pretty boring to look at tho, just lots of empirical data and a ton of it was completely unuseable.

I'll definitely check out those documentaries, what year did they come out?  Seems like something that would've come up in my Latin American Historical Values course ah well. [edit: nvm found 'em on google, will watch this week]

 

[futuremd]

What do you think about the Louis Gates documentaries on "black in latin america?" 

Also, any links to your papers/work? 

I'll have to check those out, I've not heard of them I bet they're fascinating.  I don't think there's a current link, went to college in the late 90s.  I can give you the gist of my findings tho.  Basically I was a dual economics/history interest and I took an advanced course on the Atlantic Slave Trade, part of that was we had access to a complete database of all the information from every slave ship captain's logs and records ever recorded.  So my theory was that I wanted to see if I could deduce economic self-interest from the actions of slave captains.  I found several captains that had recorded ships from the same port which they acquired their slaves and then the same port to which they were sold. 

The crazy thing was that I decided on 2 specific captains because one you could see an interest in preserving the slaves he carried.  Basically over the course of 3 trips, his recorded fatalaties dropped by 50% from trip 1 to trip 2 (about 9% lost to 4) then on his third trip it went to 0.  He had the same number of slaves in each ship and the same size ship, and the only thing that changed was his routes as each trip was progressively shorter.  It gave an indication that this Captain wanted to keep his human cargo alive (I didn't make any prediction as to whether this was due to his wanting to save lives v. make more money) but in contrast to the 2nd captain it was insane.

The second captain also displayed good economic thinking but from a severely savage perspective.  It boiled down to the fact that he did not care about his fatalaties at sea.  They were high on his first trip (like 20%) but instead of finding ways to lower that number he instead chose to carry more and more slaves until by his third trip he had over 2x the number of slaves in roughly the same size ship as the 1st trip, but his fatalaties had risen to over 30%.  So clearly he had no concern for the well-being of his slaves but the value was such that if he could pack a few dozen more in, even if he lost a higher % of them it would still be economically viable when he arrived.

That paper/research product resulted in being honored as one of the best papers in the department that year and was chosen as one of 3 to be presented live to the school's academic community. 

I was raised racist and it never made any sense to me, so I have always had a healthy obsession with understanding how just normal people could go along with such a practice and it was quite mind-opening to focus your studies so directly.  I'm pretty sure you have to be an academic to access that database but I'll see if it's online anywhere, was pretty boring to look at tho, just lots of empirical data and a ton of it was completely unuseable.

I'll definitely check out those documentaries, what year did they come out?  Seems like something that would've come up in my Latin American Historical Values course ah well. [edit: nvm found 'em on google, will watch this week]

Are you Tim Wise's brother? 

Louis Gates. Black in Latin America: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/black-in-latin-america/ There are four parts with each an hour long. 

 

[nixonjames]

Haha I studied it, and justified how much I hate so much of entitled suburban upper/upper middle class america but I don't think I'd write a book about it. It wasn't my life's work.

Just became a more informed being and hope I can get good enough with my comedy to eventually talk about changing people's views on things (some standups i was challenged by forced me to see perspectives i'd not been exposed to). anyways back to football.

 

[baktun]