Getting tired of neo-Marxist BS

Just watched a TV programme on BBC1, called Secret Britain. The reporter asked some 'expert' if the Roman emperor, Septimius Severus, was really from Africa.

"Yes, he was black, he was black!" she squealed excitedly.

Thus the suggestion was implanted into the brains of the unsuspecting audience that merely being African means you're "black".

Here are the facts, unclouded by political propaganda:

Septimius Severus was a LIBYAN; the vast majority of Libyans were then, as now, of Berber not Sub-Saharan origin. Therefore he was probably brown, but not black. Additionally, one of his parents was from Rome, so of mixed race at best, but no suggestion or evidence he had any Sub-Saharan ancestry.

Were there any Roman soldiers in Britain who were black, Sub-Saharan Africans? Yes, there were probably a few, though not many. The Romans colonised the far north of the African continent where only a small minority of the population were of the Sub-Saharan variety.

The Romans didn't penetrate any further than about 200 miles south of the North African coast; Sub-Saharan Africa is further south, and wasn't explored by Europeans till the Age of Discovery in the 15th century.

I don't have any problem with Septimius Severus being black, if this were the case.

I DO have a problem with great institutions like the BBC spreading misinformation to promote their political agenda.

The MSM works in strange ways and has many faces and many financiers.

Getting tired of neo-Marxist BS

I'm not sure I get the neo-Marxist connection.

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.

-Vladimir Lenin

Vladimir Lenin Quotes

originally posted by: xuenchen

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.

-Vladimir Lenin

Vladimir Lenin Quotes

Plato said it way before as "The Big Lie".

originally posted by: FyreByrd

originally posted by: xuenchen

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.

-Vladimir Lenin

Vladimir Lenin Quotes

Plato said it way before as "The Big Lie".

Ah HA

So Lenin was a plagiarizer.

Noble Myths rein.

originally posted by: CJCrawley
Just watched a TV programme on BBC1, called Secret Britain. The reporter asked some 'expert' if the Roman emperor, Septimius Severus, was really from Africa.

"Yes, he was black, he was black!" she squealed excitedly.

Thus the suggestion was implanted into the brains of the unsuspecting audience that merely being African means you're "black".

Here are the facts, unclouded by political propaganda:

Septimius Severus was a LIBYAN; the vast majority of Libyans were then, as now, of Berber not Sub-Saharan origin. Therefore he was probably brown, but not black. Additionally, one of his parents was from Rome, so of mixed race at best, but no suggestion or evidence he had any Sub-Saharan ancestry.

Were there any Roman soldiers in Britain who were black, Sub-Saharan Africans? Yes, there were probably a few, though not many. The Romans colonised the far north of the African continent where only a small minority of the population were of the Sub-Saharan variety.

The Romans didn't penetrate any further than about 200 miles south of the North African coast; Sub-Saharan Africa is further south, and wasn't explored by Europeans till the Age of Discovery in the 15th century.

I don't have any problem with Septimius Severus being black, if this were the case.

I DO have a problem with great institutions like the BBC spreading misinformation to promote their political agenda.

I hear all of your points, and think that there appears to be an even greater agenda to make everything non-white good and everything white bad. I've even seen websites saying all of those ancient major civ's were black. That is an extreme and the flip side of the same racist coin.

However, why do you phrase this as "neo-marxist?"

Yes, Marxism traditionally is against exploitation, racism, colonialism. But it's also against exploitation and classism against low income whites or other minorities.

a reply to: CJCrawley

Yup, just like the Egyptians were black.

Fallacies of Afrocentrism

originally posted by: olaru12

Getting tired of neo-Marxist BS

I'm not sure I get the neo-Marxist connection.

It's not strictly the correct term as neo-Marxism is a particular set of political ideas that some governments adopted in the 20th century.

I'm referring more generally to the liberal democracy of globalisation, or the New Left, if you will.

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

It's the system that you and I are living under, the one that promotes the rights of various chosen minorities by positive discrimination/affirmative action.

I don't think anyone has stuck a label on it yet; just substitute the word 'globalisation' if it makes things clearer.

a reply to: CJCrawley

I call it interventionism, many advocates of the mythical middle refer to it as the third way.

"The Third Way is the fastest way to the Third World".

-Václav Klaus

originally posted by: CJCrawley
Just watched a TV programme on BBC1, called Secret Britain. The reporter asked some 'expert' if the Roman emperor, Septimius Severus, was really from Africa.

"Yes, he was black, he was black!" she squealed excitedly.

Thus the suggestion was implanted into the brains of the unsuspecting audience that merely being African means you're "black".

Here are the facts, unclouded by political propaganda:

Septimius Severus was a LIBYAN; the vast majority of Libyans were then, as now, of Berber not Sub-Saharan origin. Therefore he was probably brown, but not black. Additionally, one of his parents was from Rome, so of mixed race at best, but no suggestion or evidence he had any Sub-Saharan ancestry.

Were there any Roman soldiers in Britain who were black, Sub-Saharan Africans? Yes, there were probably a few, though not many. The Romans colonised the far north of the African continent where only a small minority of the population were of the Sub-Saharan variety.

The Romans didn't penetrate any further than about 200 miles south of the North African coast; Sub-Saharan Africa is further south, and wasn't explored by Europeans till the Age of Discovery in the 15th century.

I don't have any problem with Septimius Severus being black, if this were the case.

I DO have a problem with great institutions like the BBC spreading misinformation to promote their political agenda.

What does this have to do with Marxism?

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Take a few minutes of your life and read through the thread, it's all explained.

a reply to: CJCrawley

I read the entire thread. What you're talking about is revisionism, not Marxism. I entered the thread expecting a discussion about Neo-Marxism, economics, and politics. Instead you were complaining about Ancient Libyan Berbers being brown but not black. That has nothing to do with Marxism.

You even agreed that this isn't about Neo-Marxism by posting:

It's not strictly the correct term as neo-Marxism is a particular set of political ideas that some governments adopted in the 20th century. I'm referring more generally to the liberal democracy of globalisation, or the New Left, if you will.

So why not change the OP or title to fit that, as opposed to calling it Neo-Marxism?

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Indeed, I am completely failing to see the connection to anything marxism-like.

This connection seems to be made to have a clear black/white-separation (not races, but opinions).


Stop that NONSENSE! Nobody is falling for this!

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I've seen the present day politics of the West described variously as 'neo-Marxism' and 'democratic Marxism', I didn't just pluck the phrase out of fresh air.

I always thought 'revisionism' was a term confined to historiography, not politics per se.

Here's a definition:
www.oxforddictionaries.com...

That word 'Marxism' keeps cropping up.

why not change the OP title or to fit that, as opposed to calling it Neo-Marxism?

The edit window expired a long time ago. Sorry about that.

Have you got any thoughts on the thread, or do you just want to nitpick about the title?

originally posted by: CJCrawley
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I've seen the present day politics of the West described variously as 'neo-Marxism' and 'democratic Marxism', I didn't just pluck the phrase out of fresh air.

I always thought 'revisionism' was a term confined to historiography, not politics per se.

Here's a definition:
www.oxforddictionaries.com...

That word 'Marxism' keeps cropping up.

why not change the OP title or to fit that, as opposed to calling it Neo-Marxism?

The edit window expired a long time ago. Sorry about that.

Have you got any thoughts on the thread, or do you just want to nitpick about the title?

a reply to: CJCrawley

I'm aware of what revisionism is, which is why I said that. And yes, I have thoughts on the thread

Mostly that the Berbers are and were various shades of brown, from very light to very dark. As were the people of Carthage during Hannibal's time, as this article nicely points out. Even the Phoenicians were mixed with African ethnic groups. So I don't see why you would have a problem with someone saying the Severan Dynasty were "black".

The Romans didn't mind skin color at all. Roman Catholics even adopted the image of Mother Mary & Baby Jesus as being black with the Black Madonna statues & paintings (here and here). So there wouldn't have been the same stigma of there being a African/"black" Roman Emperor as there apparently is today.

So why would it matter if he was labeled as African or "black"? Black isn't a bad thing, nor is there any specific look for being "black". And not all Africans look like Zulus or Nigerians (which has something like 300 different ethnic groups). For example, would you consider these people as "black"?


They're certainly brown. But they're also the world's oldest surviving branch of humans. And they're from Southern Africa. World's most ancient race traced in DNA study

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I don't see why you would have a problem with someone saying the Severan Dynasty were "black".

Because there's no positive suggestion that they were.

They could just as well have been white, as you have illustrated.

So why do some people say they were black...without knowing?

That's what I have a problem with - people/institutions declaring that certain historical figures were black without really knowing, and clearly to promote a political viewpoint.

a reply to: CJCrawley

Sounds to me like you just re spewing right wing "buzzwords" among people who know what Marxism really is.

a reply to: damwel

Do you have a sensible contribution to make, or are you just one of the post-and-go clan?

I guess time will tell.

a reply to: CJCrawley

One can search and find a good deal of representations of he and him mother and father. They were obviously not black. The town he was born in in Lydia was a Roman city at the time.