Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
FAQ Last updated 09/16/2011 12:00:06 9435
“White” in White Man is not about skin color or complexion. It is about attitudes towards another. First, permitting Malcolm X to describe it in his own eloquence:
'It was when I first began to perceive that “white man” as commonly used, means complexion only secondarily; primarily it described attitudes and actions. In America, “white man” meant specific attitudes and actions toward the black man, and toward all other non-white men.' -- (Malcolm X, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, 1964, 1999 hardcover edition, Chapter Mecca, page 364)
Project Humanbeingsfirst's usage of the word “white man” denotes an overarching attitude of a superiority complex which is best captured by the union of several nuanced concepts:
Malcolm X's aforementioned description of attitude rather than skin color;
the term 'Hectoring Hegemons' – the attitude of physically imposing one's self-perceived superiority complex upon another, to physically invade, conquer and enslave another in the name of god, glory, Lebensraum, or just for the opportunities to profit;
the term 'la mission civilisatrice' – the attitude which came to be defined by the colonizing European Christians in the preceding centuries, to rob and plunder the natives throughout the world bequeathing them the invaders' “Christian” culture as a gift of “civilization” to the “dogs” and “barbarians” to “save” them from eternal damnation as heathens;
the term 'Orientalism' – the attitude of prejudice, at times in the sub-text, betrayed in Western scholarship of the Orient, i.e., the East, that Western civilization is inherently superior to all the Eastern civilizations;
the term 'pious virtue' – the hypocritical attitude which comes about by harboring any of the above in one's psyche while pretending to be fair and sympathetic to the 'lesser people'. It is the unstated common assumption in the backdrop when dealing with the 'lesser people'. It is most easily discernible when rushing to the aid of the victims of the white man's la mission civilisatrice, sometimes with all the best intentions, but deeming the native victims inherently less worthy in comparison to when the “white man” is made victim. It is ably captured in Noam Chomsky's “worthy victim” vs. “unworthy victim” nomenclature with all its attendant semantics. Its manifestation is most stark in the differing standards for seeking compensation and punitive damages which are sought on behalf of the victims by those representing the victims, often from the victimizer's own civilization, or suitable lackeys chosen from among the 'lesser peoples' who are put up there as proxies for the “white man” now so magnanimously providing the 'lesser people' with the “white man's” justice. The end result exactly betrays that the “white man's” victims are deemed inherently superior to those from among the “barbarians”. The whole transaction is couched in “pious virtue”.
Let's begin by studying the very basic types of mental servitude. Let's start with Malcolm X's version of the ‘Negro’:
“There was two kind of slaves.
There was the house Negro and the field Negro.
The house Negro, they lived in the house, with massa. They dressed pretty good. They ate good, cause they ate his food, what he left. They lived in the attic or the basement, but still they lived near their master, and they loved their master, more than their master loved himself. They would give their life to save their master's house quicker than their master would.
The house Negro, if the master said 'we got a good house here', the house Negro say 'yeah, we got a good house here'.
Whenever the master would said we, he'd say we. That's how you can tell a house Negro.
If the master's house caught on fire, the house Negro would fight harder to put the blaze out than the master would. If the master got sick, the house Negro would say 'What's the matter, boss, we sick?' We sick!
He identified himself with his master, more than his master identified with himself.
And if you came to the house Negro and said 'let's run away, let's escape, let's separate', the house Negro would look at you and say 'man, you crazy! What you mean separate? Where is there a better house than this? Where can I wear better clothes than this? Where can I eat better food than this?'
That was that house Negro.
In those days, he was called a house nigger. And that's what we call him today, 'cause we still got some house niggers runnin around here.
This modern house Negro loves his master. He wants to live near him.
He'll pay three times as much as the house is worth just to live near his master, and then brag about 'I'm the only Negro out here. I'm the only one on my job. I'm the only one in this school.' You're nothing but a house Negro!
And if someone come to you right now and say 'let's separate', you say the same thing that the house Negro said on the plantation: 'What you mean separate? From America? This good white man? Where you gonna get a better job than you get here? I mean this is what you say. 'I ain't left nothing in Africa'. That's what you say.
Why, you left your mind in Africa!
On that same plantation, there was the field Negro.
The field Negro, those were the masses. There was always more Negroes in the field than there was Negroes in the house.
The Negro in the field caught hell. He ate leftovers.
In the house they ate high up on the hog. The Negro in the field didn't get nothing but what was left of the insides of the hog.
They call them chetlands nowadays. In those days they called them what they were, guts!
That's what you were, a guteater. And some of you are still guteaters!
The field Negro was beaten, from morning till night.
He lived in a shack, in a hut. He wore cast-off clothes.
He hated his master. I say, he hated his master.
He was intelligent.
That house Negro loved his master. But that field Negro, remember, they were in the majority, and they hated their master.
When the house caught on fire, he didn't try to put it out, that field Negro prayed for a wind. For a breeze!
When the master got sick, the field Negro prayed that he died.
If someone come to the field Negro and said 'let's separate, let's run.' He didn't say 'Where we going?' he said 'Any place is better than here'.
We got field Negroes in America today.
I'm a field Negro.
The masses are the field Negroes.
When they see this man's house on fire, you don't hear these little Negroes talkin bout 'Our Government is in trouble'. They say 'thee Government is in trouble.'
Imagine a Negro, 'our Government'. I even heard one say 'our astronauts.' They won't even let him near the plant, and 'our astronauts'. 'Our Navy'. That's a Negro that's out of his mind.
That's a Negro that's out of his mind!
Just as the slave master in that day, used Tom, the house Negro, to keep the field Negroes in check.
The same 'ol slavemaster today, has Negroes, who are nothing but modern Uncle Toms. 20th century Uncle Toms, to keep you and me in check.
Keep us under control. Keep us passive and peaceful. And nonviolent. That's Tom making you nonviolent.
It's like when you go to the dentist, and the man is going to take your tooth. You're going to fight him, when he start pulling. So they squirt some stuff in your jaw called Novocain, to make you think they are not doing anything to you. So you sit there and because you got all that Novocain in your jaw, you suffer peacefully. Hahahaha.
There's nothing in our Book, the Qur'an, as you call it, Koran, teaches us to suffer peacefully.
Our religion teaches us to be intelligent. Be peaceful. Be courteous. Obey the law. Respect everyone.
But if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery!
That's a good religion. In fact, that's that old-time religion. That's the one that Ma and Pa used to talk about.
An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, and a head for a head, and a life for a life.
That's a good religion.
And then anybody, no one resist that kind of religion being taught but a wolf, who intends to make you his meal.
This is the way it is with the white man in America. He's a wolf, and you're sheep.
Anytime a shepherd, a pastor, teach you and me not to run from the white man, and at the same time teach us don't fight the white man, he's a traitor, to you and me.
Don't lay down our life all by itself. No! Preserve your life. It's the best thing you got.
In his autobiography, Malcolm X further fleshed out the modern Negro who thinks like the massa. He is black, brown, red or yellow in skin color, but is pure white in mind color:
'Today's Uncle Tom doesn't wear a handkerchief on his head. This modern, twentieth-century Uncle Thomas now often wears a top hat. He's usually well-dressed and well-educated. He's often the personification of culture and refinement. The twentieth-century Uncle Thomas sometimes speaks with a Yale or Harvard accent. Sometimes he is known as Professor, Doctor, Judge, and Reverend, even Right Reverend Doctor. This twentieth-century Uncle Thomas is a professional Negro ... by that I mean his profession is being a Negro for the white man.' -- (Malcolm X, The Autobiography of Malcolm X, 1964, 1999 hardcover edition, Chapter Black Muslims, page 265)
Well, that description of the colonized mind turns out to be not all that modern, even though it accurately captures the modern Uncle Tom among all peoples. Witness the following statement in his speech before the English Parliament in 1835, by Lord Babington Macaulay who devised the new education policy for the Indian sub-continent – the Jewel in the Crown of the British Empire:
'We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern, --a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect.' --(Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay, Minute on Education, 2nd February 1835, page 8)
Martin Luther King Jr. also offered a timeless description for the Negro which today transcends skin color and complexion in its empiricism:
'The white establishment is skilled in flattering and cultivating emerging leaders. It presses its own image on them and finally, from imitation of manners, dress, and style of living, a deeper strain of corruption develops. This kind of Negro leader acquires the white man’s contempt for the ordinary Negro. He is often more at home with the middle-class white than he is among his own people. His language changes, his location changes, his income changes, and ultimately he changes from the representative of the Negro to the white man into the white man’s representative to the Negro. The tragedy is that too often he does not recognize what has happened to him.' -- (Martin Luther King Jr., A Testament of Hope, page 307, read online)
Question What is “Intellectual Negro”
Many more complex shades of the ‘Negro’ have been cultivated in modernity than the ones Malcolm X and MLK had been exposed to. One new shade that I have been grappling with for some time is the “Intellectual Negro”. This new shade of the servile Negro which escaped the experiences of the civil and human rights struggles of the American black leaders, has become ubiquitous among Muslims today, especially among Pakistanis, Afghanis, and Arabs. Indeed, among all nations along the 'arc of crisis' in the 'global zone of percolating violence'.
This kind of Negro is familiar to us under the nom de guerre 'fabricated dissent', a pernicious variant of 'native informant'.
This Negro, the “Intellectual Negro”, is very sophisticated, and often very intelligent with advanced academic and/or public credentials. This Negro will appear to hector the white man and the white man's establishment, while still managing to echo the white man's core-axioms.
In other words, the intellectual Negro will appear to be an outspoken voice of dissent in favor of the downtrodden and the oppressed, typically from the 'left-liberal' nexus, but will still devilishly manage to echo the massa's core message.
For instance, while vehemently critiquing the empire's war on terror and its devastating impact upon the innocent victims across many civilizations, the intellectual Negro will craftily manage to echo the empire's core message that Al Qaeda is the global terrorist menace which carried out the 9/11 attacks on America. That retention of the core-axiom of empire from which all the evil that followed after 9/11, and which enabled all its subsequent aggressive wars and crimes against humanity that he critiques, reduces the intellectual Negro to an absurdity. But he is treated as the most avantgarde in intellectual thought and praised by both, the hegelian instruments of the white man instrumenting its dissent-space, as well as the brain-washed field Negroes themselves to whom he laboriously carries the white man's burden displaying much personal anguish.
Thus, the hectoring, i.e., challenging the visible narratives of power, serves the function of appearing to be on the side of the 'field Negro', but in reality he is still a 'house Negro' without speaking in that ‘we’ vernacular noted by Malcolm X.
And here is another one which does the same all in one article:
And here is deconstructing another intellectual Negro who ostensibly hectors power while still managing to echo its key message:
Here is the latest variant who shamelessly sides with power spinning absurdities:
While the above illustrative examples are typical of the “Left-liberal” nexus carrying the mantra of Secular Humanism and reviling the “Right-religion” nexus, the following is an illustrative example of the “Right-religion” nexus. After villainously condemning each other during the day in “noora kushti” (Urdu word for a WWF style wrestling match where both combatants entertaining the audience by a show of vile antagonist wrestling, work for the same promoter and drink from the same trough after the match), they both congregate at the same white man's table for supper:
The diabolical omissions and selective story-telling, a crime common to all Negro penologists of Pakistan serving the massa's interests, including its news media, its NGO based glittering literati clamoring Secular Humanism, its virtuous politicians picking whichever side leads the quickest to power and graft, its mercenary military slaughtering its own peoples with American payments, and its religious zealots either burning American flags in protests or echoing the massa's own condemnations, is in my 692-page book “The Pakistan Decapitation Papers” 4th Edition, June 2011. A quick examination of these omissions which never see ink in the erudite penmanship of the intellectual Negro picking the “good” side in the Hegelian Dialectic of “militant Islam” vs. “moderate Islam” is here:
And the following is an example from Afghanistan. An Afghani-born, American-naturalized, Stanford and Columbia university educated professor of education playing loud dissent with empire: “I think it was absolutely wrong for the United States to attack and invade Afghanistan, because Afghanistan as such had nothing to do with 9/11”, still managed to echo the core-axioms of empire that 9/11 was an invasion from abroad and the work of vile terrorist Muslims: “In fact people now think that the Taleban had no idea that Al Qaeda had a plan to attack the United States”. The good Samaritan educator has continued to labor since the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, to bring the same sort of Education system of the colonizing white man to Afghanistan as was crafted by Lord Macaulay to cultivate house negroes and Uncle Thomases in the Indian sub-continent:
The aforementioned example is illustrative of the quintessential modern intellectual Negro – highly intelligent, un-afraid to speak up against the massa, yet fully subservient where necessary, laboring with missionary zeal in carrying the white man's burden, its 'la mission civilisatrice', in full sympathy to the victims. The resume of the intellectual Negro is notably representative of the most successful native informants today:
'He was born and schooled in Afghanistan, received a B.A. in sociology from The American University of Beirut, an M.A. in comparative education from Teachers College, Columbia University, and an M.A. in anthropology and a Ph.D. in international development education from Stanford University. Dr. Wahab was the first person in his family’s history to attend the village school, a boarding school in Kabul, and receive scholarships to attend college in Lebanon and the US. Thus far, Dr. Wahab is the only Afghan with a Ph.D. from Stanford University.'
My aforementioned letter to the Afghani scholar was greeted not with stone silence as I had feared, but with the following short encouraging statement: “Dear Mr. Ebrahim, Greetings from Portland, and many thanks for your insightful, passionate, informative, thoughtful, and thought-provoking e-mail. I will respond in detail, or call you, as soon as I have some time and peace of mind. Regards, Zw”. I look forward to such exchange.
The good Afghani professor may well be the rare case of genuinely being mistaken in carrying the white man's burden – as inconceivable as that may be to imagine that someone with a masters degree in anthropology and a doctorate in education would be unaware of the modalities of the greatest colonial conquest of all time, that of the Indian sub-continent, partly with the already mentioned Education policy of Lord Macaulay for fabricating “professional Negroes”. In which case, the good professor will cease and desist from carrying water for the white man's “la mission civilisatrice”. When that transpires, this illustrative example will be appropriately amended.
Here is a similar illustrative example of a stellar high-tech professional resume, one which has proven itself time and again to be unarguably that of an intellectual Negro. This one is a most distinguished resume from Pakistan. It was carried by the Middle East Forum, a Zionist neo-con Quarterly, presumably of the Jewish Islamophobe Daniel Pipes. They love to promote any intellectual Negro who will profoundly echo, in any convolution, the white man's burden encapsulated in the doctrinal craftsmanship of Jewish scholars like Bernard Lewis, in books such as: “Crisis of Islam – Holy War and Unholy Terror” and “What Went Wrong? The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East”:
'Pervez Amirali Hoodbhoy (b. 1950) is one of South Asia's leading nuclear physicists and perhaps Pakistan's preeminent intellectual. Bearer of a Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology , he is chairman of the department of physics at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad where, as a high-energy physicist, he carries out research into quantum field theory and particle phenomenology. He has also been a visiting professor at the University of Maryland, College Park, and was visiting professor at MIT and Stanford. For some time, he has been a frequent contributor to Britain's leading intellectual journal, Prospect. His extracurricular activities include a vocal opposition to the political philosophy of Islamism. He also writes about the self-enforced backwardness of the Muslim world in science, technology, trade, and education. His many articles and television documentaries have made a lasting impact on debate about education, Islam, and secularism in Pakistan. Denis MacEoin interviewed him by e-mail in October 2009.'
Here is that interview with Pervez Hoodbhoy, titled “Islam and Science Have Parted Ways” promoted by MEF. And here is Hoodbhoy's column in the UK Guardian “Islam's arrested development”, echoing the same theme. The deconstruction of the crafty linguistics for the seemingly careless usage of the word “Islam” which enables crafting the public discourse on “Islamism” and its variants such as “militant Islam”, “moderate Islam”, etc., is in my response to the CAIR Report:
The Hijacking of the word 'Islam' for Mantra Creation which unites Pakistani Niggers with the Jewish neo-con massas like Bernard Lewis, Samuel Huntington, Daniel Pipes et. al., is fully fleshed out in:
Once I wrote to Pervez Hoodbhoy suggesting something to the effect that: “if your essays didn't have your name on them, I might have thought the author is Daniel Pipes.” Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy, my co-alum from MIT, fellow Pakistani, and many years my senior, has not talked to me since then. I continually wonder why:
Is it because of my possessing the few skills, the commonsensical knowledge, and the foolish boldness to call a spade a spade continually confronting the “preeminent intellectual” rather than being co-opted into silence?
Or, is it that I am so egregiously mistaken in my conclusions that I am not worth interlocuting with for the lofty “preeminent intellectual” – ubiquitous in the massa's dominion – who only contends with finding major faults with “Islam”, argues willy-nilly with other Uncle Toms of various shades, presents himself prominently in massa's various gatherings ostensibly representing the field Negroes, and just eschews the field Negroes themselves as being just too ignorant to teach?
This is a perennial mystery which repeats itself everyday, as my every unmasking of the intellectual Negro is stoically greeted with the thunderous sounds of silence. Ignoring the field Negro skilled enough to unmask both the massa and their house Negro, has been the most effective way of silencing the field Negro.
For indeed, all the freedom of speech in free space (no air) still naturally leads only to asphyxiation! The massa knows it, and has groomed his house niggers rather well. This leaves the ubiquitous Uncle Toms and his owner free to spin their doctrinal craft unfettered, over all the air which they already own outright.
Thus, while denying the field Negro air to expound, the massa and his “professional Negroes” incestuously reinforce each other unhindered and unchallenged, spanning the full gamut of intellectual and psychological warfare upon civilian populations worldwide.
The “Hegelian Mind Fck” behind such “cognitive infiltration” to:
manufacture consent and dissent as part of the social engineering of mass persuasion;
spin clever red herrings (a smelly fish that a fugitive drags across the path in order to put the pursuing dogs off the trail) through Machiavellian interjections of fabricated “diversity” and fabricated dissent;
synthesize controlled clashes of fabricated opposites for raising a new phoenix from its ashes;
is examined in much depth in the following tutorials:
I fear one would be very hard pressed to find an exception to the “intellectual Negro” in Pakistan and the Middle East from among our uber-educated literati, from among our well-funded 'humanist' NGOs, especially the Human Rights Organizations, the Left as well as the Right, and the new occidentosis plague we seemed to have picked up: think-tanks staffed with our finest Negroes of all shades, including brain-washed 'field Negroes' employed as cover, useful idiots, dupes and patsies.
Just as there was the government-private partnership between the British Empire and the East India Company to maintain the empire upon which the sun once never set, the empire du jour too similarly thrives on government-private partnership for its “imperial mobilization” and for the maintenance of its extended empire.
The line between government and private sector is merely one of who writes the final paycheck to the employees, for they both share the same common goals of empire, and work hand in glove. The Jewish grandmaster of The Grand Chessboard, Zbigniew Brzezinski, self-servingly admitted this modus operandi when he wrote in his 1970 book Between Two Ages, “The trend toward more coordination but less centralization would be in keeping with the American tradition of blurring sharp distinctions between public and private institutions. Institutions such as TVA or the Ford Foundation perform functions difficult for many Europeans to understand, since they are more accustomed either to differentiate sharply between the public sphere and the private (as has been typical of the industrial age) or to subordinate the private to the public (as is favoured by the socialists and some liberals) or to absorb the private by the public (as has been the case in communist states).” (pg. 99)
And the Jewish columnist Thomas Friedman truthfully confirmed what is already obvious, in the New York Times on March 28, 1999, “The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist -- McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the builder of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.”
The professional intellectual Negro typically earns his paycheck from the private sector of the Military-Industrial-Academe-Non-profit-Thinktanks-Foundations half of empire while he critiques the public sector half comprising “the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps”, and of course, including the White House which controls that not so “hidden fist”. That separation of employer name on the paycheck stub evidently provides the much needed soothing balm to the modern intellectual Negro's conscience.
It would be a grave mistake to surmise that the House Negro phenomena is only peculiar to the few professional craftsmen of the Mighty Wurlitzer (see link above). Ordinary peoples are just as much participant in it. The following anecdotal case is in fact rather typical of new Uncle Toms in America.
When I was describing to a very dear friend of mine who only recently became a naturalized US citizen, how Malcolm X taught himself in the prison library, how he read constantly to become the un-challengeable orator and spokesperson for his peoples' cause, my friend's immediate interjection was, “see, even their prisons have such great libraries”! My new Uncle Tom, which I of course immediately addressed my long-time friend as, betrayed empathy with no one else except with prominent house niggers and the massa. Well, at least my friend was honest about his feelings of gratitude for the massa, having observed previously that the white man had given him far more than his own nation. The good fellow, who wears the stamp of remarkable piety on his forehead, and is one of the best in morals and friendship among all the people I know, never stopped to reflect what the white man took from our nations by cultivating fools, useful idiots, stooges, patsies, and mercenaries which he implanted in key positions in our nations to ensure that we stayed rudderless. That fact that our nations became more and more corrupt by villainous means in the post colonial era which the massa had cleverly instrumented for us, has amply been discussed elsewhere (see John Perkins).
To make centuries long colonized nations blind and steeped in servility by methods of neo-colonization in the ostensibly post-colonial period, and then to complain we are still blind, is the characteristic of the house nigger who blames the field niggers for all of their desperate state.
This self-deluding co-option is not atypical. Apart from the fact that it is the story of mental slavery in every epoch, today it is most visible – to those who wish to see it – in virtually every mosque and “mai-khana” (bar, a figure of speech to indicate secular Muslims) in the West. While the latter caters to the spirit of Secular Humanism of the white man in his ongoing “la mission civilisatrice” upon the world, the former, a place of ritual piety, evidently also only succeeds in fabricating the “Good Muslim” and the “Good American” – sort of counterparts to the “Good Christian” and the “Good German” in the Third Reich – for 'United We Stand' in the Fourth Reich!
The massa has always understood this psychology of servility of the colonized man, and all too well. He has always cultivated and harvested from this colonized crop, the most able bodied, the most talented, and turned them into the most credentialled “professional Negroes” as described by Malcolm X in his Autobiography. Due to its immense pertinence to our times, it begs further emphasis: “This twentieth-century Uncle Thomas is a professional Negro ... by that I mean his profession is being a Negro for the white man.” (pg. 265)
The key psychological processes to construct this servility among most immigrant communities in the massa's world of gainful employment, and other material benefits denied them in their native country, is all of that which also went into making the good house negro short of actual physical slavery. Studying Malcolm X therefore, reveals a great deal about many of us today.
Almost 90 percent, that not being an exaggeration, perhaps even an underestimate if anything, first and even second generation immigrants to America, just like the vast majority of elites in all Muslim and formerly colonized lands, are infected with this de facto mental colonization.
Layered atop this foundational layer of de facto mental colonization of the 'Negro' of every flavor, is the layer of fabricated deception purveyors based on shared ideology. And on top of that is another pernicious layer based on apparently our natural trait: our meager price which turns us, not just psychologically, but also physically, into traitors to our own peoples.
These three colonizing mental forces combined in various shades tend to create many more Negro types. The ‘price’ aspect is particularly pernicious – this price today is far more insidious than the mere 'lifafa' (envelope stuffed with bribe money), the bottle of whiskey, or even the trip to Disneyland of yesteryear as narrated by Brig. Tirmazi in his book “Profiles of Intelligence” Ch 3, page 45. His exact words:
'A lot has been said and written by some of our American friends about the price of a Pakistani. Dr. Andrew V. Corry, US Counsel General at Lahore, once said, “Price of a Pakistani oscillates between a free trip to the US and a bottle of whisky.” He may not be too far wrong. We did observe some highly placed Pakistanis selling their conscience, prestige, dignity and self-respect for a small price.'
This is why the aforementioned Pakistani intellectual Negro can blithely claim with a straight face: 'Is the Check in the Mail? The Confessions of a Groveling Pakistani Native Orientalist'! While he also publicly admits to the intangible benefits in 'An End to Hypocrisy': “I belong to the fortunate few who can get a visa,”. The professional intellectual Negro might do well to stare in the mirror while he echoes the massa's message admitting to its benefits. It would surely assist him in comprehending the full import of that Biblical word which he has evidently mastered so well without understanding its real meaning:
“My green passport requires standing in a separate immigration line once my plane lands at Boston’s Logan Airport. The “special attention” from Homeland Security, although polite, adds an extra two to three hours. I belong to the fortunate few who can get a visa, but I am still annoyed. Having traveled to the United States frequently for 40 years, I now find a country that once warmly welcomed Pakistanis to be quite cold. The reason is clear.
Foreigners carrying strong negative feelings—or perhaps harmful intentions—are unlikely to find enthusiastic hosts. I know that the man who tried to bomb Times Square, Faisal Shahzad, a graduate of the University of Bridgeport, is my compatriot. So is Aafia Siddiqui, our new-found dukhtur-e-millat (daughter of the nation). Another Pakistani, Farooque Ahmed, with a degree from the College of Staten Island, made headline news in November 2010 after his abortive attempt to blow up DC Metro trains.
If such violent individuals were rarities, their nationality would matter little. But their actions receive little or no criticism in a country consumed by bitter anti-Americanism, which now exceeds its anti-Indianism.”
If I might be permitted a bit of narcissism here to draw a valid comparison, I too possess only the “green passport [which] requires standing in a separate immigration line once my plane lands”, despite over three decades of permanent residence in the United States with the permanent resident card (green card) which my first employer in Silicon Valley got for me. They claimed before the US Department of Labor (or something similar) that they couldn't find any white man in America to replace my engineering skills which they wanted badly at the time. Yet, compare my Realityspeak (my neologism) to the Newspeak (a term from George Orwell's novel 1984) of both the massa and his obliging Niggers! That's because I am a “field Negro” – figuratively speaking – and that's something which I have proudly earned by dint of my own study and observations, not a misery I was born into like Malcolm X and others birthed on the wrong side of the railroad tracks. Any “house nigger” today, irrespective of their skin color and national origin, would do well to study Malcolm X's Autobiography in some depth. The fate of those who follow in that footstep, to genuinely challenge unjust power and its villainous narratives, is surely the early graveyard. It is written in the indelible pages of history. A choice one knowingly makes – because despite the overt choice, there is really no choice:
As for Pervez Hoodbhoy's lofty demonstration of leftwing compassion for “Aafia Siddiqui, our new-found dukhtur-e-millat (daughter of the nation)”, see its deconstruction identifying all the omissions in the professional intellectual Negro's narratives in deep servility to the massa – when he could have been the strongest ally for his victim:
Pervez Hoodbhoy's show of fearless rebellion against the forces of imperialism is of course predicated on his theory of “leftwing politics” which he most articulately expounded in his already mentioned ode to the Hegelian Dialectic: Between Imperialism and Islamism. Like a learned physicist Hoodbhoy first postulated the problem, thusly:
“Many of us in the left, particularly in Southasia, have chosen to understand the rise of violent Islamic fundamentalism as a response to poverty, unemployment, poor access to justice, lack of educational opportunities, corruption, loss of faith in the political system, or the sufferings of peasants and workers. As partial truths, these are indisputable. Those condemned to living a life with little hope and happiness are indeed vulnerable to calls from religious demagogues who offer a happy hereafter in exchange for unquestioning obedience.
American imperialism is also held responsible. This, too, is a partial truth. Stung by the attacks of 11 September 2001, the United States lashed out against Muslims almost everywhere. America’s neoconservatives thought that cracking the whip would surely bring the world to order. Instead, the opposite happened. Islamists won massively in Iraq after a war waged on fraudulent grounds by a superpower filled with hubris, arrogance and ignorance. ‘Shock and Awe’ is now turning into ‘Cut and Run’. The US is leaving behind a snake pit, from which battle-hardened terrorists are stealthily making their way to countries around the world. Polls show that the US has become one of the most unpopular countries in the world, and that, in many places, George W Bush is more disliked than Osama bin Laden.”
That Pakistani house nigger's problem articulation of course exactly parrots the blowback mantra of the massa in the West. See my response to Chris Hedges where the massa's controlled dissent is carefully dissected and dismantled:
Having firmly played the massa's own Hegelian Dialectic of Dissent, which incidentally is what makes getting visas and sabbaticals a trivial matter for Pakistan's most favored leftwing brown-sahib of the American Embassy in Islamabad: “I belong to the fortunate few who can get a visa,” Hoodbhoy offered his specious solution space of “leftwing politics” --- the key purpose of the Americans for cultivating this house nigger in Pakistan. The main task of “cognitive infiltration” to introduce “beneficial cognitive diversity” (sic!) among Pakistan's Muslim public, right alongside “Moderate Islam” as the Hegelian counterpoints to “Militant Islam”, to orchestrate internal clashes and divisions in the name of being peace-makers (see verse 2:11 of the Holy Qur'an which warns of precisely this age-old villainy: “And when it is said to them, Do not make mischief in the land, they say: We are but peace-makers.”), in Pervez Hoodbhoy's own words:
“The role of the left
Between the xenophobes of the West and the illogical fundamentalism in Muslim societies, the choices keep getting grimmer. A mutually beneficial disentanglement can only be provided by humane, reasoned and principled leftwing politics.
Looking down at planet Earth from above, one would see a bloody battlefield, where imperial might and religious fundamentalism are locked in bitter struggle. Whose victory or defeat should one wish for? There cannot be an unequivocal preference; each dispute must be looked at separately. And the answers seem to lie on the left of the political spectrum, as long as we are able to recognise what the left actually stands for.
The leftwing agenda is a positive one. It rests upon hope for a happier and more humane world that is grounded in reason, education and economic justice. It provides a sound moral compass to a world that is losing direction. One must navigate a course safely away from the xenophobes of the US and Europe – who see Islam as an evil to be suppressed or conquered – and also away from the large number of Muslims across the world who justify acts of terrorism and violence as part of asymmetric warfare.
No ‘higher authority’ defines the leftwing agenda, and no covenant of belief defines a ‘leftist’. There is no card to be carried or oath to be taken. But secularism, universalistic ideas of human rights, and freedom of belief are non-negotiable. Domination by reasons of class, race, national origin, gender or sexual orientation are all equally unacceptable. In practical terms, this means that the left defends workers from capitalists, peasants from landlords, the colonised from the colonisers, religious minorities from state persecution, the dispossessed from the occupiers, women from male oppression, Muslims from Western Islamophobes, populations of Western countries from terrorists, and so on.”
Pervez Hoodbhoy used that “humane, reasoned and principled leftwing politics” for which: “No ‘higher authority’ defines the leftwing agenda, ... It provides a sound moral compass to a world that is losing direction” to admirably defend a frail and defenseless woman he cynically called “our new-found dukhtur-e-millat” in sympathy with his massa's verdict on her without an iota of “humane, reasoned and principled” examination of the matter. We see that Pervez Hoodbhoy goes right along parroting his massa, he reproduces their facts, their data, their analysis, and their conclusions, in the guise of being their antagonist – the clever Intellectual Nigger! But not cleverer than even an ordinary field negro who can administer a single knock-out punch with one hand tied behind his back. Which is why the house niggers tend to lurk only in the shadows of the massa, only dare to engage in WWF style wrestling with their confreres beholden to the same massa and its many instruments who all know how the game is played, and not venture out into free space where the field negroes dwell. As the lovely Pakistani singer Sanam Marvi boldly remarked without hesitation on mainstream Pakistan television to the bs of her interlocuter: “chootia bana rahe ho?” (Indelicate Urdu phraseology for “trying to make a fool of me with your fcking bs?”)
Moving right along, it is a shame that few people understand the import of crafty omissions. Which is why I have to continually emphasize it. While the reader may have seen similar passages in many of my writings cited here, it is necessary to restate again because the indictment of the Intellectual Negro playing dissent to the massa, is often for his calculated omissions. The art of voluntary persuasion, “to get people actually to love their servitude”, is integral to social engineering of consent. It was most eloquently explained by the famous essayist and novelist, Aldous Huxley on the 30th anniversary of the publication of his allegorical novel Brave New World, at University of California, Berkeley. Huxley had very shrewdly observed a half century ago:
'You can do everything with bayonets except sit on them! If you are going to control any population for any length of time you must have some measure of consent. It's exceedingly difficult to see how pure terrorism can function indefinitely. It can function for a fairly long time, but I think sooner or later you have to bring in an element of persuasion. An element of getting people to consent to what is happening to them. Well, it seems to me that the nature of the Ultimate Revolution with which we are now faced is precisely this: that we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably always will exist, to get people actually to love their servitude! This is the, it seems to me the ultimate in malevolent revolution shall we say.' --- Aldous Huxley, 1962 speech at UC Berkeley, minute 04:06
Therefore, given that engineering consent of the masses is the objective of social engineering, “of getting people to consent to what is happening to them”, Aldous Huxley explained the role of calculated omissions in systems of propaganda which accomplish just that, in his Preface to Brave New World:
‘The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr. Churchill calls an “iron curtain” between the masses and such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable, totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals. But silence is not enough. If persecution, liquidation and the other symptoms of social friction are to be avoided, the positive sides of propaganda must be made as effective as the negative.’ — Aldous Huxley, Preface (circa 1946) to Brave New World, 1931, Harper, pg. 11
Let's just pause here for a moment to deeply reflect, and to keep reminding oneself afterwards when one encounters any material in the New York Times and CNN, and in the so called alternate media which has ostensibly risen to challenge mainstream, that they all work for the same bosses echoing the same core lies by way of both omission and commission. That, these propaganda organs in the twenty-first century do both, the crucial omissions (the negative side using silence on key matters), and the facile mantra recitations (the positive side), which Adolph Hitler in Mein Kampf, Edward Bernays in Propaganda, and Aldous Huxley had written much about in the previous century. See the already cited link for the Mighty Wurlitzer report for a detailed study of how such persuasion actually works in practice.
One other thing to also continually reflect upon – perhaps more so for the professional intellectual Negro enjoying lifetime visa to visit the massa and often finding refuge/tenure/sabbaticals in massa's institutions – is that when finally defeated, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, the Reichminister for Propaganda, only cheated that hangman's noose reflecting: “For us, everything is lost now and the only way left for us is the one which Hitler chose. I shall follow his example'”. Witness the ultimate fate of all propagandists who try to make “chootias” of a nation:
Caption The Goebbels family --- evidently, only defeat or victory adjudicates who is a propagandist and who isn't, not evidence. Hitler had asserted at the eve of World War II from his mountain top in Bavaria to his generals that he would 'give a propagandist reason for starting the war' and admonished them not to 'mind whether it was plausible or not'. 'The victor', he had told them, 'will not be asked afterward whether he told the truth or not. In starting and waging a war it is not the right that matters, but victory.' That unexpected “victory” of hubris eventually caught up with the propagandists. Source of quote is William Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich
May 1, 1945, in the evening. The daughters and the son were already in bed, but were not asleep yet. "Don't be afraid," their mother said. "The doctor is going to give you a shot now, one that all children and soldiers are getting." She left the room, and Kunz injected the morphine, "first into the two older girls, then the boy and then the other girls." Each child received a dose of 0.5 cc. It "took eight to 10 minutes."
When the children had fallen asleep, Magda Goebbels went into the room, the cyanide pills in her hand, as Kunz testified. She returned a few seconds later, weeping and distraught. "Doctor, I can't do it, you have to do it," she said. The dentist replied: "I can't do it either." "Then get Dr. Stumpfegger," she said. Ludwig Stumpfegger, who was slightly younger than Kunz, had been one of SS chief Heinrich Himmler's personal doctors.
A week later, Russian coroners performed autopsies on the bodies of the children and concluded that their deaths had "occurred as a result of poisoning with cyanide compounds." The Goebbels themselves had committed suicide outside the bunker, and Stumpfegger died while attempting to break through the Russian lines in Berlin.” — Source Der Spiegel
Now that the astute reader perceptively comprehends the key arsenal in the professional intellectual Negro's propaganda system, and why it is often difficult for even the super-learned people with a Ph.D. to detect crafty omissions (unless adjudicated by victor's justice) because that requires accurate knowledge of many pertinent matters which is made impossible once the “iron curtain” of propaganda has been lowered around them by massa's zealous missionaries, let's move on.
These Iranian house Niggers of the twenty-first century would do well to carefully comprehend Occidentosis, the plague from the West that was infecting the Iranian psyche in the previous century which they evidently have also inherited:
And this is the Arab world's – not so much an intellectual Negro, but an outright un-apologetic House Negro – Professor Fouad Ajami of Johns Hopkins. It is fascinating to appreciate it in his own vernacular, in his autobiographical Dream Palace of the Arabs: A Generation's Odyssey:
'Today in Arab World – I left for America a day or two short of my eighteenth birthday, in 1963 – I am a stranger, but no distance could wash me clean of that inheritance.' (page 24)
That bit of statement of fact from his autobiography was of course left un-stated as Professor Fouad Ajami was daily paraded on mainstream television and presented to the American viewers as an objective “expert” on the Middle East. He was always there right alongside all the objective expert Pentagon Generals and various other think-tank pundits during the immense “doctrinal motivation” buildup to Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2002-2003! Here is another gem from his autobiography:
'I knew little of religion. My family were Shia Muslims. ... None of my peers I recall, observed religious ritual or went to the mosque for Friday prayers. We were not a religious breed. Our lodestar was the secular political and cultural world. ... Fate had played with the lives of men and women, and it had dealt the Palestinians what it had. This sensibility could not be mine or my generation's as a whole.' (page 12,13)
It is therefore unsurprising that Professor Fouad Ajami finds much favor with Zionist Islamophobes like Daniel Pipes, and of course with the New York Times. The reason I do not consider Dr. Fouad Ajami an 'intellectual Negro', but rather just an ordinary 'House Negro', is because Ajami is very straightforward. He forthrightly speaks in the vernacular “we”. The poor chap is outright suffering from occidentosis in its most basic form: he is more white than the white man! And to his credit, he is also un-apologetic about it. The white man thus adores native informants him! And why wouldn't he? The following is an excerpt from an un-published review of Fouad Ajami's autobiographical book, from Chapter 9 of my own 2003 maiden work, Prisoners of the Cave:
'In many places in the Dream Palace, Dr. Fouad Ajami provides insightful commentaries on the state of the Arab world. It can actually be quite an enjoyable book for its wit with some gems of quotations from Arab poets. But it is also an upsetting book as a politically indoctrinating propaganda for the Zionists. It is replete with prejudice and misrepresentation of facts through carefully crafted omissions of history and its selective retelling – especially by someone of Arab Muslim origin turned Zionist sympathizer. It appears from his book that Fouad Ajami greatly admires the assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Rabin. Laudatorily calls him “a son of Zionist pioneers”, and scorns the intellectuals in the Palestinian Diaspora for their “maximalist” and unrealistic “right of return” position against Israel.
His entire articulation seems to me to be a thinly disguised glorification of Israel, and his opinions mirror those of the Israeli establishment. There is nothing wrong with that per se – one always feels closer to one's own people. But there is something incredibly devious about not openly projecting Fouad Ajami as spokesperson for Israel as he is paraded on mainstream television, but rather always as an expert on the Middle East purveying a neutral and informed perspective on the conflagration there. Whereas on the very rare occasion when the other side is invited, it is made abundantly clear that they speak for the Arab perspective. The subtleties of subliminal manipulation is not lost on any astute observer. But of course, on everyone else in America who are its victim.
Thus, when Fouad Ajami speaks or writes, he dwells on the Palestinian suicide bombers like any Israeli, and omits Israel's incessant killing of innocent Palestinian children, women, and men on a daily basis, the deliberate demolition of their homes with armored bulldozers making large families homeless on their own lands again and again forcing them to life in refugee tents, or any of the facts that have already been exposed earlier in this book. He glowingly talks of Israel's great economy, and conveniently fails to mention the billions of dollars of American tax payer's wealth and the mighty military-industrial complex defense contracts that Israel receives from America annually which makes that economy run in proxy services to the hectoring hegemons.
He berates the Arab dictators and their despotism in those societies, and fails to mention how these same dictators are propped up by active support of the Americans – even as he allows other voices to mildly say these things in his book, he never says them himself. He praises the Arab kings who journey to Israel, and fails to mention the reality of these kings – who put them there in the first place and whose interests they really represent.
His book is replete with sins of omission and misrepresentation in the guise of pseudo psychoanalysis of the Arab psyche, and especially of the Palestinian population in Diaspora. Professor Ajami's dominant appearance in the mainstream news media when no other voices of dissent are allowed to rebut his propaganda, makes him especially powerful in molding public opinion. And he is indeed permitted to hold sway over the minds of the unsuspecting American public mainly because he serves the purpose of empire. Due to this fact, it is imperative and fair to expose his inimical biases against the very people whom he is being called upon to offer his “objective” opinion, so that all may judge for themselves.
So, when Fouad Ajami opines, it must remain clear to the American audience that he does not represent anyone but himself and his Zionist masters. That, his Middle Eastern appearance, accent, and enormous heritage are an inconvenient baggage from which, by his own admission: “no distance could wash me clean of that inheritance.” That, his political views and purported analyses only project the one-sided perspective of the approximately 4 million Zionist Jewish population of Israel and their few hundred thousand backers and financiers in America diabolically orchestrating their Eretz Yisrael on the backs of the conquered superpower du jour. That, Professor Fouad Ajami does not betray the tortuous realities on the ground for the over 100 million Arab Muslims anymore than his Zionist masters. That, Fouad Ajami is in fact, their House Negro!'
So, what's the antidote for such a pernicious disease which is spreading rapidly among a small population of the 'untermenschen' (German word for 'the lesser people')?
I feel that as in the yesteryear, the solution to overcome these dreaded cancers of de facto mental colonization are also the same: un-colonized, un co-opted, clear-headed, inspiring leadership by the fearless who can both instill some pride among the people, and stand up unfettered to the hectoring hegemons – just as Malcolm X did. However, see Palestine: Seeking The Enemy Within to comprehend that blind following only leads to more servitude.
Transformative leadership isn't a parrot. It is a thinker and leader appropriate to its own time and space.
Such transformative leadership can only arise from among the ‘field Negroes’ – I don’t see it happening at all from among the ‘house Negroes’. And such leadership, in order to be effective, would be required to immediately confront both the ‘house niggers’ and the fifth columnists in a continuous battle with entrenched power, and this is where they are liable to come up very prematurely dead without having made a dent!
Therefore, without an astute political acumen and real power base that can protect the emerging leadership, the game is over before it is begun. See: What can be done!
Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
Abridged Version: THE NIGGERS OF PAKISTAN http://bloghumanbeingsfirst.wordpress.com/2011/09/16/the-niggers-of-pakistan-by-zahir-ebrahim/
FAQ: What is an Intellectual Negro? - 29/29 - http://tinyurl.com/faq-intellectual-negro