Artistic depiction of the Battle of the Little Bighorn, also known as Custer’s Last Stand, the most ferocious battle of the Sioux Wars. Colonel George Custer and his men never stood a fighting chance.
Our view was that they fought on, even when it was clear they stood no chance of victory, even when defeat stared them in the eye. This view was prompted by the depiction of native Americans in the movies and series popularly known as westerns.
We would however thank the fact we (Africans) stopped fighting and surrendered for the fact we are still alive to tell the tale.
You must understand here that what I am talking about are infants doing the math. When we had these conversations, my friends and I were very young. The oldest participants in these conversations were no older than 10 years old.
We had already gathered information on the fact the native Americans were exterminated but it was too little to allow us to know the actual circumstances that prevailed at the time, whether indeed it was a fact that they fought till the very end, even in light of a full defeat, that was the cause of their extermination and the relagation to reservations of the few survivors.
Neither did we know enough about our own history to make the conclusion that our ancestors surrendered when they knew it was no use fighting, which saved them from extermination.
The view that putting up a white flag was responsible for our survival is actually widely held in Africa not just among insufficiently informed infants, but especially among the higher social rung adults. Even today in 2022, it is widely held as the proper policy towards the west, for instance. People who don't abide by this policy are either considered to be fools who don't get it, or ostracized. Some adherents of this policy will even overtly affirm that the attitude equates to "wise cowardice", and back it up with sayings about cowardice that are supposed to support the policy, such as "cowards survive". This is supposed to be wisdom in these parts.
But it's very easy to blow holes through the rationale.
For starters, wisdom in a group is fickle and there are as such times when what appears to be wisdom is in fact the reverse. This is because wisdom is genetic and can be bred out of a group during wars of conquest the likes of which Africa experienced. It's simple geneology. Get rid of the best one by one and over time there will no longer be enough born. The natives will start to become dumber and dumber on average, ending up with their most intelligent leader being a regular fool compared to what was once the norm, before the breeding-out or culling started. This is how a group is prepared for subjugation and kept oppressed easier and longer.
Also, intelligence has nothing to do with sayings in a language. Sayings can be intelligent but the fact sayings promoting cowardice exist doesn't mean it is a safe policy to adopt in light of an invasion. It also doesn't mean that adherence to such sayings preserves sanity or the intellect of a collective. When strictly adhered to, sayings don't improve on the inherent general intelligence of a people because there is no link between sayings and genes.
If the best have been depleted from a collective then sayings are not going to bring back the brilliance of the group, because then they are liable to be applied inappropriately.
Most crucially, it goes without saying that the logic of a coward is that of a fool. Under the circumstances that may prevail in an all out war, a coward's logic, as opposed to a brave man's logic, can often be the logic of self annihilation. And It's very easy to demonstrate this by showing just why the best generals in war are brave people as opposed to cowards.
Western imperialists out to grab territory don't leave people alive simply because they are cowards who won't fight them back. Europeans wouldn't have left native Americans alone if they hadn't fought back. The Kabal in Australia wouldn't have had a change of heart if the aboriginals hadn't fought off their incursion.
The fate of Australian aboriginals differs from that of Africans in many respects precisely because the former put up little to no resistance to a colonizing force. They fared far much worse than Africans precisely because they didn't fight or didn't know how to.
In fact, if the natives anywhere European explorers and conquerors went didn't resist the Impeding land encroachment, it would have made the task of eliminating their populations easier because that was the ultimate objective of the Kabal driving the process.
It was not for nothing that when the Germans invaded Togo, they sang in jubilation that the Africans didn't have guns, because they were not delusional. African resistance was a major hindrance to the objective of having a country devoid of blacks at little cost to the invader. The Germans were experiencing losses that were putting them off the idea of taking the land they had set out to colonize but there was some comfort to be had in the fact ultimate victory could still be theirs, thanks only to the fact the other side couldn't put up as much resistance.
If you look at the wiping out of native Americans today, you realize one thing: they never stood a chance. The odds were so piled against them they wouldn't have made it except with external intervention. Therefore, if any native population survived the western Kabal's global rampage, then it's something else that saved them from annihilation, and it definitely isn't cowardice or simple surrender. Simply put, it couldn't have been because they stopped fighting.
Basically, the fighting back bought all native populations threatened with European colonization time. This is very true of central, southern and western Africa where the warriors that stood as a wall between the invaders and the interior can be thanked for the fact Africans found the space and time needed to do that which was required to survive Europeans.
The anopheles mosquitoe and the high breeding rates of Africans did the rest. But these two could only have been effective if Africans didn't ran off in a cowardly panic when there was nowhere left to run and the invaders would come after them, in hot pursuit, and quickly finish them off.
As Africans with knowledge of our history, we need to get these facts strait in order to survive, because we are still at war! A coward doesn't just destroy his/her own people, they also live to fight another day themselves because the war doesn't stop once they have ran away. Africans didn't stop fighting, and thank goodness for that because we wouldn't be here if we had all chickened out.
The war is still ongoing and cowards have caused us unnecessary loss in this war. We wouldn't be where we are at this stage in the struggle had they not been so numerous in our midst selling us out at every turn but, all else notwithstanding, our chances of surviving this never have been better thanks to our men and women who took and continue to take the fight to the Kabal in any way possible.
Native Americans weren't this lucky. Not only were they betrayed by the cowards in their midst for 12 dollars a piece, they were also up against a better armed enemy they realized was set on their complete annihilation, meaning they just had to fight till the end, if they could.
We have done better in this war compared to them, so let's keep it up by not letting our cowards lead us down the path to defeat. We should always keep in mind the fact cowards don't survive in the ultimate sense. No nation has ever been built by cowards. Cowards are liable to betray your trust. Cowards will sell anybody out. Cowards are basically losers and a liability. It's folly to allow a coward to lead you in battle. Cowards are the weak link in our struggle to free ourselves from western capitalist oppression. We will never win the war for control of our destiny with these cowards around.
No comments:
Post a Comment