The Last Negro

A Tribal People of Color in the United StatesBy Krim M. Ballentine

AuthorHouse

Copyright © 2011 Krim M. Ballentine
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4490-4618-7

Contents

Introduction.................................................viiIn the Beginning.............................................1Preliminary History..........................................5Skin Color Does Not a Negro Make!............................17Free Men, A U. S. Constitution Statement.....................54The First Negro..............................................58Negro Defined by Courts......................................62The Negro Revolution (Eric Hoffer)...........................66Current Negro Problem........................................68Today's American Negro.......................................84Re-empowerment of Negro Parents..............................88

Chapter One

In the Beginning

Who are we to accept or reject the definition of negro sufficient to demand that it be capitalized as a proper noun? Why must we accept the dirty meaning of negro to the point that we would rather call ourselves the English interpretive black, still a skin color and non-African? Is it better to be black than negro? Why as Americans or citizens of the United States, we do not redefine negro, capitalize it and adopt it to mean the ethnicity of a people in America of African descent?

Negro is as important an invention as American is to citizens of the United States. Was it skin color to cause racists? Or, was it the pre-genetic conception that one-sixteenth (1/16th) black defined negro blood (?) made one negro regardless to skin color?

Eight persons in ones ancestry with one of the persons being negro multiplied by two equals sixteen, ergo, the one/sixteenth (1/16th) negro blood speculative. While the Creator made the colors of His creations, man made the colors into ethnicity and race. Ergo, this is the preamble to this writing.

Accomplishments in America were not accomplishments by Africans, Afro-Americans or slaves and ex-slaves but by negro people, later calling themselves colored, later calling themselves Blacks, then Afro-Americans and most recently, African Americans. The people were "free men" as defined in the Constitution of the United States made slaves and negroes by the mouths of White people. No writing in The Constitution of the United States mandates slavery in any form.

Dictionaries do not define terms, but explains usage of words that people define by their usage. The negro of the United States like others, searched only for respect; respect pursued by all living creatures, the respect of their exercised and exhibited humanity. They sought respect in a name, Negro.

Today, Negroes seem in pursuit of admiration, acceptance and being politically correct and not human ignored. They pursue and invent a lost history and justification of a historic existence to the detriment of a present and future direction, later to become history.

Surely, making history is a better pursuit of a people than dwelling on history already made. Negroes, like all people must use the history of their yesterdays as plans and pursuits of their future.

Do you know that watermelon is originally an African fruit brought to the United States in the 1600's? Do you know what a guinea fowl is and that they too are African origins imported to the United States? Do you know that Spain occupied by the Moors three periods: the Arab emirate (759-1031), the Almoravids and Almohads (1086-1212) and the Nasrid Dynasty in the South (1230-1492)?

Do you know that the Moors, in Spain, built the Cathedral of Cordoba (786-999), one of the world's greatest mosques, the Cordoba mosque in the Moorish court of Seville and the Giralda, now the cathedral bell tower? Do you know that the Alhambra palace, in Granada, was also an effort completed by Moors between the years 1238-1391? (1997 Grolier's Electronic Encyclopedia)

Also from that source is an explanation of the Moors:

"Moor (from Latin, Maurus) is sometimes used to denote a member of the Muslim populations of North Africa and, by extension, the Arab and Arabicized Berber conquerors of Spain, who established Muslim rule in the Iberian peninsula from the 8th to the 17th century. The term has also been applied specifically to the populations of Morocco and Mauritania and occasionally to refer to Muslims in general, as in the Moors of the Philippines and Sri Lanka. Today the term is rarely used except in reference to the Moorish art and architecture that reached its pinnacle in the medieval Spain."

In accordance with anthropological attributes of the three race designation, Caucasian, Mongolian and Negroid, the Moors were Negroid.

United States President Harding is to have said paraphrased: the colored people need to pursue being better colored people as opposed to the pursuit of being colored white people.

Many people of color called in the world "nigger." Only in America people of color "Negro" was a skin color with a specific intent to be derogatory. Othello an exception in Spain as a Moor was called negro, using the Spanish term for black as opposed to the class caste separations of Don, Donna or peon.

Preliminary history

Today's people "of color" have been falsely holding a so-called "white" people responsible for their perceived social and economic plight. The people "of color" then dwell on that, holding creating a quagmire for any future social and economic overcoming of any perceived plight. True, "whites" surely contributed and embellished that perceived plight: but in actuality are not responsible totally.

However, mistakenly, the people "of color" globally are discovering that "whites" were not foresighted sufficiently or academically astute as presumed to have imagined a world futuristically denying a pigment-different human-beings equal opportunities. Our forefathers did not invent skin color as a class- hierarchy, nor was there a pursuit of white or "of color" superiority, but free labor was the motive.

Worldwide, especially the areas where "whites" maintain a majority, people "of color" blamed continuously for socioeconomic failures.

In Haiti, rumor abound that "light-skin" persons force others to act as pawns in their effort to retain control and power and to emulate whites. In Cuba, where Castro is, and acts, "of color", as opposed to the stripped Batista who clearly was a light-skin Cuban is operable relative to skin-color control. Russia, where Bosnians and Serbs, in recent reporting's, along with others, prevented in their obtaining full-citizenship and opportunities under the united Russia because they were not "white" Russians.

North Africa, where the people call themselves Egyptian, Libyan or other someone's of the continent Africa, to clearly separate themselves from the dark skin people in the south of Africa. India, who allowed Pakistan to occur because of India's approach to light skin people, was tragic. Japan, who deny the orphans of wartime left by the American "of color" and proudly accept marriage and interaction with the "white" Americans.

But for skin color, a person born in a country is of that country and of that country's people. But for skin color, class differentiation would be harder to immediately identify. And, because of skin color one can be held in a fixed social class while others of non-skin color black move homogeneously into the existing mainstream and...