Let's begin with
some definitions from A
Case Study in Mental Colonization. [1]
Question:
What is a White Man?
“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”.
Question:
What is The White Man's Burden?

Caption The White Man's Burden appears Uniformly Distributed; Judge for yourself – The foolish 'untermenschen' better understand the insidious breadth and depth of the common ‘la mission civilisatrice’ bond among the white man (and including their ‘house niggers’ who are often more white than the white man) when they come, individually, and in groups, wearing different colored labels of Left, Right, Liberal, Conservative, Progressive, Atheist, Christian, Jew, etcetera, bearing gifts of pious virtue in various Hegelian Dialectics. Zbigniew Brzezinski justified the primacy of the powerful with “Hegemony is as old as mankind” in The Grand Chessboard only as the latter day secular version of that same white man's burden. Unless the 'untermensch' nations of the East indigenously come to our own common self-defense against these almost superhuman global forces arrayed against the world for fashioning world government from the ashes of civilization, no one else will. See The White Man's Burden. [2]
Question:
What is a Negro?
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.
And if you got
to give it up, let it be Even Steven.” -- (Malcolm X, House
Negro vs. Field Negro Speech
[3] Transcription by Project Humanbeingsfirst.org)
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.
See The
Unknown Transformation of Malcolm X [4])
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)
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)
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 (to play the bully) 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. The 'right-conservative'
nexus that usually align openly with the massa class and its primacy
imperatives, also dabble in engineering consent among the minority in
their own flock who refuse to tow the massa's line, by playing WWF
wrestling with the massa.
These
cheer leaders round up their respective flock around the core-axioms
and presuppositions of the massa while playing vigorous dissent with
the massa. This WWF exercise requires considerably more intellectual
prowess and sophistication than typical propaganda with big lies.
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
avant-garde 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 facade of 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.
These
vulgar Negro types, spanning the full gamut of the colonized mind so
ubiquitous among the Western educated likkha-parrha jahils
ruling the Muslim mind today as the surrogate of the Mighty
Wurlitzer, are employed or co-opted by the massa to cunningly
manipulate the perspectives, and consequently the behavior, of the
field Negros. [5]
Several examples
of how this cunning is accomplished across Muslim cultures,
especially among the Pakistani House Niggers, are described in the
FAQ:
What is an Intellectual Negro? A Case Study in Mental Colonization.
The massa's skilful cunning that the house niggers copy for the want
of a few crumbs from the massa's table, is dissected in The
dying Songbird. [6]
What
fundamentally causes this malfunction of the human psyche such that
neither the massa class nor its vile surrogates harbor any moral
compunction before the fact, nor any shame or remorse after the fact,
as they continue to exercise their unfettered primacy upon the public
mind rather openly?
Here
is a bold look into the Sociopathic mind and what ought be done to
preempt its primacy imperatives before it is fait accompli.
Question:
What is the Sociopathic mind
A
few years ago I accidentally stumbled on to the study of modern
psychopathy and sociopathy. My first exposure to the latest
developments in this field was to a book called Political
Ponerology by a polish social scientist, Andrew Lobaczewski.
Subsequently, my interest and study in neuroscience also contributed
a measure of deeper understanding of the involuntary impact of DNA
and neuro-biochemistry on pathological behavior. What had immediately
attracted my attention to Lobaczewski's study however, was the bold
claim made by its author and the editor of the English version of the
book, that Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National
Security Advisor (1976-1980, d. 2017), had tried to suppress its
publication.
Now,
why would the late Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski want to do that --- apart
from the fact that he is himself a Polish Catholic immigrant to the
United States and has been the key architect of The Grand
Chessboard - American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives
(which is also the title of a book which he wrote in 1996) since
1972, when he founded the Trilateral Commission with International
banker David Rockefeller?
So,
like a child who is always curious when someone says “don't”,
I read the book. Followed by other works on the subject, such as
Martha Stout's The sociopath next door.
None
of you in Pakistan are likely aware that the recent advances in
psycho-sociology in the study of evil, betray that there is an
element of it in a significant number of cases which may transcend
moral choice.
Hitherto,
good and evil have always been viewed from moral and religious
perspectives. And it is still true for the vast majority of “normal”
people.
But
empiricism has also shown that it has never been true for the vilest
psychopaths among mankind throughout history who have felt no
internal need for the abstraction of good and evil.
Now
a new empirical theory is evolving which is lending powerful
explanation for these observations which appear to be as old as
mankind. From time immemorial, it is a fact that remorseless fiends
have risen to become leaders of men. Just like a snake bites, and a
lion rules by might is right, which are also not moral choices for
the beasts – because to exercise their primacy, for food, for
hunger, or for territory, is in the very nature of these creatures.
Psychopathy
is now being viewed in new light as a physical/emotional/neurological
disorder where the person is physiologically unable to feel empathy,
unable to feel remorse. The neurological or cellular material which
generates empathy is suspected to be entirely missing in them, or
severely atrophied for some reason.
The
psychopath is often highly intelligent, very ambitious, very
cunningly deceptive. He is able to disguise his primacy instincts
with an affable smile and platitudinous nod to morality. As some
might cynically observe in Pakistan, he often comes in uniform, with
a broad smile, or with sajda (piety) stamped upon his
forehead. And it is evidently independent of caste, color, ethnicity,
creed, sex, sexual orientation, and political affiliation (which
changes easily in any case).
These
abnormal people don't appear prima facie abnormal. In fact, they tend
to gain easy acceptability among their peers, sometimes even well
liked, and often have the instincts to rise to the top of their
profession by any means necessary. As they say in popular vernacular
in Hollywood movies: sleep their way to the top!
But
in reality, the sociopath next door adopts any method that will get
him or her to the top in whatever he might be interested in. The
notion of shame, remorse, hesitation, etc., which normal people feel
when transgressing moral limits, or when caught, is alien to their
nature in the same way as it is alien to a snake which strikes the
unsuspecting victim that happens to come in its path.
No
one really expects the snake to feel remorse, or admit guilt, or
resign from its hunting ground in a show of moral gravitas that it
bit an innocent doe.
Well,
it is being discovered that the most audacious psychopaths, often the
sociopath next door, are physiologically equally unable to feel
remorse.
What
is most frightening about this is that the number of such abnormal
people who prey upon normal people from their perches is disturbingly
higher than previously thought by sociologists.
The
number disclosed in the book Political Ponerology is 6%.
According
to these insane demographics, about six people in a hundred are
potentially psychopathic. He or she will prey upon you as
nonchalantly as the rest ninety four might step on a harmless bug
while taking a walk in the park. But while you won't go to the bug's
funeral or show any hypocrisy in the matter, it's only a bug after
all, the psychopath will come to your funeral with a dozen roses and
a wet handkerchief.
And
these psychopathic people typically also tend to be the ones who
invariably rise to all positions of power in society – from
corporate to political to religious to yes, education too, all across
the power spectrum in modern institutionalized society in every
corner of the world.
They
tend to congregate together in a fraternal bond and support each
other just like a pack of wolves. They wash each other like Peter and
Paul. How they actually recognize each other is rather obvious –
even brief associations can betray who shows moral compunction and
who does not.
Most
normal people for whom good and evil are moral choices, even when
they might choose evil, feel the guilt-pangs of that choice which
manifests in a number of anxiety inducing ways from superficial guilt
to stress, to PTSD.
And
for all normal people, even if they were some how habitually
desensitized through long years of immersion in the banality of
evil, their physiological makeup is not averse to feeling
remorse. And once it is brought to their attention and explained how
they are complicit in the evil, they at least feel some guilt, some
remorse, some anxiety, some shame.
That
ability to feel shame, remorse and pangs of conscience is what makes
us characteristically human.
I
am not really making any of this up as I go along. Just outlining
here my understanding of this fascinating subject which uncannily
appears to meet the acid test of empiricism. Please refer to the
cited books if even your own everyday commonsense observations
disagree with any of this.
What
is apparent to me, and should be to you as well, is that the
rulership of Pakistan, like the rulership of most nations including
the United States', are outstanding empirical evidence of this
psychopathy lending great substantive import to these new researches
into the study of evil. There is neither any moral compunction before
the fact, nor any shame or remorse after the fact.
The
only sensible way to control this evil is not to talk to it, or try
to tickle its conscience – for that would be as effective as
trying to talk to a viper to stop “dussing” (Urdu word
for a snake striking a prey) or to feel guilt or remorse afterwards.
The
only rational and effective approach to deal with psychopaths (those
who look the part) and sociopaths (those who don't) is to detect and
preempt them before they “duss” and cause their
disproportional havoc; to seek legal entitlements under appropriate
laws and statutes rather than with platitudes. If some laws are
wanting to deal with this abnormal group effectively, than
appropriate ones have to be legislated. While the natural predatory
instinct of the rest of the normal ninety-four percent population can
be modified to live by self-policed ethical standards, principally by
nurturing them through education systems and expecting the same at
all tiers of social intercourse, the remaining six percent shall
always require legal dispensation, both before and after the fact.
This report
on Whistleblowing Masterpiece of Plagiarism in Pakistan, underwrites
the raison d'être of these differing approaches to be developed
simultaneously for both these markedly different types of
dysfunctional people to extract Pakistan out of its ethical morass.
[7]
However,
what causes their victims, the masses, to accept becoming such easy
morsels of these sociopaths? Especially the Muslims who have been
amply endowed with Great Divine Guidance to overcome all sociopaths
among them? What causes their mass dysfunction?
One of the
psychological forces that so easily disarms its victims appears to be
the commonplace notion of Waiting
for Allah. In that dissection of fatalistic eschatology, I
take a bold look into the believing mind and how its resignation to
fate is cunningly harvested by the Mighty Wurlitzer playing its
specious epistemological tune on religion. [8]
The
Machiavellian machinery of the Mighty
Wurlitzer, which is now global and ubiquitous across all
cultures and civilizations controlling virtually every domain of
human belief systems, and consequently aggregate human behavior, is
systematically deconstructed in a detailed report on psychological
warfare operations on civilian populations using all aspects of
modern media and official narratives. Pakistanis, while harboring a
more healthy skepticism of power than their Western counterparts,
must still pay particular attention to this diabolical cunning that
is making their mind on virtually every matter pertinent to their
lives and times. In the age of universal deceit, to learn the truth
is a revolutionary act – the ultimate jihad. [9]
Footnotes
[1] A Case Study
in Mental Colonization,
https://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2010/02/what-is-intellectual-negro.html
[2] The White
Man's Burden,
https://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2011/02/white-mans-burden-uniformly-distributed.html
[3] Malcolm X,
House Negro and Field Negro speech,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ_VWpJj0Dw
[4] The Unknown
Transformation of Malcolm X,
https://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2011/07/palestine-enemy-within-by-zahirebrahim.html
[5] The Art and
Science of Co-option,
https://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2014/08/what-have-i-learnt-zahir-ebrahim.html
[6] The Dying
Songbird,
https://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2013/09/dying-songbird.html
[7]
Whistleblowing Masterpiece of Plagiarism in Pakistan,
https://plagiarism-central.blogspot.com/2018/11/whistleblowing-masterpiece-of-plagiarism.html#TOC
[8] Waiting for
Allah,
https://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/04/god-is-running-theworld-let-him-run-it.html
[9] Report on
the Mighty Wurlitzer,
https://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/05/note-on-mighty-wurlitzer.html
Source
URL:
https://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2019/06/a-brave-look-into-colonized-mind.html
This
adaptation from Project Humanbeingsfirst's original essays published
on Thursday, July 4, 2019
10:00 am
4536
A
Brave Look Into The Colonized Mind by Zahir Ebrahim | Project
Humanbeingsfirst.org 14
/ 14