Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Yakub and the Origins of the White Race
I have an interesting story to tell you.
About 6,600 years ago, all people in the world were black. They generally lived in peace and harmony, although about 30% were somehow dissatisfied. At that time, a black scientist named Yakub was living in Mecca.
Yakub led a group of 59,999 followers to the Greek island of Patmos, also called Pelan, where he instituted a human breeding program that lasted 600 years, carried on by his followers after Yakub’s death. They systematically killed the darker-skinned babies and bred the lighter-skinned babies. In this way, they selectively bred all of the non-black races: first the brown people, then the red (American Indians), then the yellow (East Asians), and finally the whites.
Yakub was an evil genius whose motives seem a bit unclear. But he wanted to produce white people, who are devils whose purpose is to persecute and kill the righteous, who are the black nation.
It was prophesied that the white devils, the progeny of Yakub, were destined to rule the earth for 6,000 years. Jesus condemned them 2,000 years ago. The white devils were bottled up in Europe for about 1,000 years by Muhammad (may the peace of Allah be upon him) and his successors.
But the white devils have been loose for 400 years. These devils have tried to deceive the people all over the earth with Christianity, which is a religion organized and backed by the white devils for the purpose of making slaves of black mankind. The white race was created to be the enemy of black mankind for 6,000 years, but the separation and War of Armageddon are at hand.
We know this because God in person, sometimes called the Messiah or the Mahdi, appeared in America, coming from the Holy City Mecca in 1930. He was persecuted and jailed in America in the 1930s. God in person was a black American man named Wallace Fard Muhammad, who taught the religion of peace, Islam.
Has anyone heard this story before?
As far as I can tell, this is the actual theology of the Nation of Islam, as professed by Elijah Muhammad, its long-time leader who died in 1975. His son, Warith Deen Muhammad, assumed leadership after his death and sought to move the organization toward a more standard Sunni Islam, but this was unsuccessful, and Louis Farrakhan assumed leadership in 1981. Muhammad Ali (the boxer) was a prominent believer in this theology. He was honored as the American chosen to light the Olympic torch at the 1996 games in Atlanta.
Until yesterday, I had no idea that these were the beliefs of the Nation of Islam. I admit that I hadn’t looked into the issue in much detail. I had the general impression that Farrakhan was a rather odious guy, something of a black supremacist, and often castigated as anti-Semitic (though it’s not clear that NoI theology is more hostile toward Jews than it is toward whites in general). I heard an outline of this story in Prof. Wilfred Reilly’s fine book, Taboo, which I’ve been enjoying in audio format.
Sources:
There’s a Wikipedia page here about Yakub. I know, Wikipedia may be dubious, so I looked a bit further.
I found several official Nation of Islam sources supporting the story. Here is their “Brief history on the origin of the Nation of Islam.” Here is their “A historic look at the Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad.” Here is their “The Muslim Program,” which explains “What The Muslims Want.” Here is a 2015 article, “Echoes of Mr. Yakup after Patmos,” by the Nation of Islam Research Group.
If you can endure it, here is a pdf version of Elijah Muhammad’s book, “Message To The Blackman in America by Elijah Muhammad (Messenger of Allah).” Paper versions of the book are available on Amazon (and presumably elsewhere), but I cannot personally attest to the accuracy of the pdf version.
Here are some quotes from Message to the Blackman in America (page references are to the pdf version linked above):
“You originally came from the God of Righteousness and have the opportunity to return, while the devils are from the man devil (Yakub), who has ruled the world for the past 6,000 years under falsehood, labeled under the name of God and His prophets. The wort thing to ever happen to the devils is: the truth of them made manifest that they are really the devils whom the righteous (all members of the black nation) should shun and never accept as truthful guides of God! This is why the devils have always persecuted and killed the righteous. But the time has at last arrived that Allah (God) will put an end to their persecuting and killing the righteous (the black nation).” Chapter 3, page 18.
“Read and study the above chapter of John 8:42, all of you, who are Christians, believers in the Bible and Jesus, as you say. If you understand it right, you will agree with me that the whole Caucasian race is a race of devils. They have proved to be devils in the garden of Paradise and were condemned 4,000 years later by Jesus. Likewise, they are condemned today, by the Great Mahdi Muhammad, as being nothing but devils in the plainest language.” Chapter 13, p. 29.
“Your misunderstanding and misinterpretation of it is really the joy of devils. For it is the devils’ desire to keep the so-called Negroes ignorant of the truth of God until they see it with their eyes. The truth of God is the salvation and freedom of the so called Negroes from the devils’ power. Can you blame them? No! Blame yourself for being so foolish as to allow the devils to fool you in not accepting the truth after it comes to you. The devils have tried to deceive the people all over the earth with Christianity, that is, God the Father, Jesus the Son, the Holy Ghost; three Gods into one God.” Chapter 6, p. 21.
“The greatest hindrance to the truth of our people is the of [sic] Christianity.” Ch. 8, p. 26.
“Again, know that Jesus was only a prophet and cannot hear you pray any more than Moses or any other dead prophet. Know, too, that this white race was created to be the enemy of black mankind for 6,000 years, which makes their number to be six. That is not your number or mine. We do not have a number, because we have no birth record. Do not let anyone fool you. This is the separation and the War of Armageddon.” Ch. 18, p. 35.
“They were created to rule us for 6,000 years, and then Allah (God) will destroy them from the earth and give the earth back to its original owners — the Black Nation.” Ch. 53, p. 78.
“Allah, your God, will grant you power to overcome your enemies though their power may look as endurable as the mountains. Fear not! Allah is the Best Knower. Armageddon has started, and after it there will be no Christian religion or churches. Jesus was a Muslim, not a Christian.” Ch. 11, p. 28.
“They (white race” are not hostile toward me because I am a Muslim and because I am teaching the true religion, Islam, to my people and the worship of the true and living God who is not a spook, but is flesh and blood (Allah). They are hostile against me and my followers because were are of the Original Black Race whom they were created to hate from the very beginning of their existence, 6,000 years ago. They were not created to love respect any member of the darker nations, for they are by nature, as Almighty Allah has taught them, in capable [sic] of loving even themselves. They cannot produce good, for they are without the nature of good. They cannot love Allah and His religion Islam, for it is against their nature to submit to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds. All manner of evil and corruption has come from the white race.” Ch. 54, p. 80.
“According to Allah, the origin of such teachings as a Mystery God is from the devils! It was taught to them by their father, Yakub, 6,000 years ago. They know today that God is not a mystery but will not teach it. He (devil), the god of evil, was made to rule the nations of earth for 6,000 years, and naturally he would not teach obedience to a God other than himself. So, a knowledge of the true God of Righteousness was not represented by the devils. The true God was not to be made manifest to the people until the god of evil (devil) has finished or lived out his time, which was allowed to deceive the nations . . .. The shutting up and loosing of the devil mentioned in Rev. 20:7 could refer to the time between the A.D. 570-1555 when they (John Hawkins) deceived our fathers and brought them to slavery in America, which is nearly 1,000 years that they and Christianity were bottled up in Europe by the spread of Islam and Muhammad (may the peace of Allah be upon him) and his successors. Their being loose to deceive the nations of the earth would refer to the time (A.D. 1555 to 1955) which they were loose (free) to travel over the earth and deceive the people.” Ch. 1, p. 16.
“Allah came to us from the Holy City Mecca, Arabia, in 1930. He used the name Wallace D. Fard, often signing it W.D. Fard, in the third year (1933). He signed his name W.F. Muhammad which stands for Wallace Fard Muhammad. He came alone. He began teaching us the knowledge of ourselves, of God and the devil, of the measurement of the earth, of other planet [sic], and of the civilization of some of the planets other than earth. He measured and weighed the earth and its water; the history of the moon, the history of the two nations, black and white that dominate the earth. He gave the enact birth [sic] of the white race, the name of their God who made them and how; and the end of their time, the judgment and how it will begin.” Ch. 8, p. 25.
“I asked him, ‘Who are you, and what is your real name?’ He said, ‘I am the one that the world has been expecting for 2000 years.’ I said to him again, ‘What is your name?’ He said, “My name is Mahdi; I am God, I came to guide you into the right path that you may be successful and see the hereafter. He described the destruction of the world with bombs, poison gas, and finally with fire that would consume and destroy everything in the present world.” Ch. 8, p. 25.
“He condemned the teachings of God not being a man as a lie from the devils for the past 6,000 years; he said that Christianity was a religion organized and backed by the devils for the purpose of making slaves of black mankind.” Ch. 8, p. 26.
“He (Mr. W.F. Muhammad, God in person) chose to suffer three and a half years to show his love for his people, who have suffered over three hundred years at the hands of a people who by nature are evil and wicked and have no good in them. He was persecuted, sent to jail in 1932, and ordered out of Detroit, on May 26, 1933. He came to Chicago in the same year and was arrested almost immediately on his arrival and placed behind prison bars.” Ch. 14, p. 30.
“The time has arrived. The only way to put off for a few more years that total destruction of America is to deal fairly with the Negro. But, nevertheless, one day it will come, unless she would like to return to Europe instead of sending the Negro back to Africa. The whole Western Hemisphere belongs to the darker people, and Europe was given to the white people.” Ch. 26, p. 45.
Elijah Muhammad even mentions Muhammad Ali. “Watch how anxious the white man is to hold you and call you by his name. He still would like to call the champion, Cassius Clay, after himself, and he would like to call me Poole, after himself.” Ch. 26, p. 45.
This is probably too much detail. Believe it or not, Elijah Muhammad keeps going along these lines for well over 200 pages.
It would be interesting, though painful, for me to investigate these issues further. I think that I perceive some connections between NoI theology and several other black liberation-type ideologies — Moses James H. Cone, Jeremiah Wright, and the Black Hebrew Israelites. I must admit, however, that I don’t know enough about any of these ideas to make a firm connection. I note that they seem similar.
The story of Yakub and NoI theology strike me as . . . how to put this . . highly implausible, as well as quite hateful and racist in an anti-white way.
BLM delenda est.
Published in Religion & Philosophy
Nothing. We go with Frederick Douglas’s advice.
That might be important health-related information. What else?
Different gestational times is another.
I feel like Flicker and everyone else are talking past each other. I think Castaigne and the “race is real” group are thinking of the differences in finch groups and dog breeds. They are genetic differences that don’t create a new species and outbreeding spreads the genetic traits.
Flicker seems to be thinking it in terms of skin color only. You are either black or white. But that part IS the social construct. Group genetics are real and have different incidence rates. It isn’t as clear cut as skin color.
Skin color is a proxy for race simply because it is an easily identifiable differentiator. If we were honest about it, there is no such thing as white and black races. There are peoples whose skin color is predominately white. Irish are not Italians. There are enough genetic differentiators. They are not separate species that give birth to sterile offspring.
No, I’m talking the least about skin color. I’m talking about the wide, wide variety of types phenotypes and genotypes within “racial groups” and with in sub, and sub-sub groups. And I’m talking about that there is no distinct boundary, even intellectually let alone scientifically, between so-called races. I’m saying that there are no specific genetic distinctions or boundaries that are able to describe one race from another, unless of course everyone is a race unto himself.
Then why can we accurately use genetic analysis to figure out where our ancestors came from? That is some Popperian falsifiability right there.
Overall, I agree with you, but I’ll continue.
I’m also saying that from a medical perspective some blacks are subject to, for examples, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia, but these problems exist in other populations as well. It is convenient to say, “Oh, he’s black so I should check this”, but it is not intrinsic to being black, nor exclusive to being black. Blacks are not a monolithic medical group.
And as far and Irish and Italians, they are of course, the same “race”, but there are people in Italy that routinely identify what region of Italy a person’s ancestors come from with just a look. And Sicilians are, so I’m told, looked down upon by more northern Italians because they are reputed to have African blood.
Però io sono Romano. :)
Yes, I know, and you’ve been incorrect about this for years. It is very difficult to try to get through to you about this.
There are many things without sharply defined boundaries. In fact, if I understand particle physics remotely correctly, even our bodies have no sharply defined boundaries. Your electrons may be almost anywhere, as defined by some complicated probability distributions. Does this mean that there is no Flicker?
Of course not.
Other examples:
Based on this, would you deny the existence of the Rocky Mountains and the Great Plains? Would you deny the existence of the land or the sea?
I think that you need to consider a possibility, Flicker. Sometimes we’re factually wrong about something, and emotionally or ideologically invested in the perceived consequences of that incorrect belief. When confronted with the truth, we can’t stand it. We dodge, and weave, and make arguments that are not sensible.
Recognizing the existence of racial and ethnic groups — or populations, if you want to use that word — is not going to cause anything bad to happen. No one is going to be setting up concentration camps, or gas chambers, or putting anyone back in chains. It may simply help us understand differences in average outcomes for certain groups.
But their region of origin determines their propensity for many diseases so why wouldn’t that be considered a race? Location still has some influence on the genetic imprint of an individual.
We can never run from the Truth. Maybe some individual lives are bettered by lies but as a group, the Truth always comes for us like the gods of the copybook heading.
I should have answered this question earlier — it’s from comment #65, many pages ago.
I am a creationist, but not necessarily a New Earth Creationist. In general, I provisionally agree with the propositions that the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, and that there were hominid-type creatures living on the planet for a couple million years. I don’t think that this is nearly as well established as many people believe, but there is some significant evidence.
I’m skeptical about the theory of macroevolution, meaning the change from one species to another by purely random means. This does not seem well supported to me.
I do agree that microevolution occurs, involving changes in traits within species. This is obvious from the historical breeding of dogs, horses, and other animals. I also think that such microevolution has occurred among various human groups, though not generally as a result of consciously selective breeding. (Some slaveholders may have tried to breed slaves, but I doubt that this has had a significant effect.)
I’ve been coming to suspect that there has been some significant evolution of human traits over the past few thousand years. It is possible, for example, that living in a more “advanced” civilization may have favored certain traits — perhaps intelligence, perhaps aggressiveness, perhaps a tendency toward cooperation. Whether or not this is true would be an empirical question, and I don’t know the specific answers as to any particular trait. Culture could also have a strong and independent effect, so there might be no genetic cause at all, but there might be.
Part of the reason for this suspicion is the high “heritability” of certain traits and characteristics, within populations, most notably demonstrated in various twin studies. This suggests that more of our traits and characteristics are the result of genetic influences than we usually like to think. I don’t particularly like this possibility, but it appears to be true. Though there are some theoretical and mathematical problems with the twin study methodology.
So, you are free to classify others based on apparent similarities. This is an old and, I say, a strictly problematic concept. If there are no boundaries between races, how do you classify race? What distinctions make a person one race of another. Looks, that’s all.
Part of the argument could be that that may have been true in the past without science, but not any more.
I’m still looking for the ‘answer’ to my ‘question’ about utility.
That is/has been all of them. There are no special snowflakes.
No. But there are certainly degrees. And the NoI religion is pretty specific in the demonization department.
NoI does seem quite specific (and also in a weird way more Christian than Muslim, despite the name, with this whole anthropomorphising God as a Black man). Wiki says there are 50,000 adherents. (?)
The recognition of the existence of racial and ethnic groups has utility.
I don’t dispute the claim that there was serious and unfair discrimination against a number of racial and ethnic groups in our country’s history. Black folks most obviously, and American Indians, and some other groups faced unfair treatment for many decades, sometimes centuries.
I think that most of these attitudes have disappeared, though not completely. My impression is that there is a lot more anti-white racism at present, compared to anti-black racism, though there is doubtless some of both.
The present relevance of racial analysis relates to Black Supremacy, a strange phenomenon. For about 50 years, we have lived under a legal system of moderate Black Supremacy, meaning that black folks were on the receiving end of favorable treatment. The idea was to do this for a while, to make up for years of black folks being stuck on the receiving end of unfavorable treatment. This was a pretty weak justification from the start, and has been getting weaker as time passes.
Critical Race Theory (CRT) is a part of Wokeism. CRT insists that there is massive, widespread “systemic racism” that somehow disadvantages black folks, though it’s pretty much invisible. The claim of the CRT folks is that the existence of any disparity in outcome is proof of “racism.” This is an attempt to redefine the word “racism.”
The goal seems to be the continuation, and indeed expansion, of pro-black discrimination in virtually every walk of life. This argument also applies to other racial and ethnic groups, to a greater or lesser degree.
One of the arguments by the CRT folks is that “race is a social construct.” It’s a strange thing to say, and I think that it’s false, which is why I objected when Flicker made this assertion (and kinda derailed this thread – sorry). I think that what the Wokeist/CRT folks mean when they say “race is a social construct” is that racism is the only possible explanation for any outcome discrepancies between groups. If this is what they mean, then they are wrong. There are at least 3 additional possible explanations:
This is important, because accepting their false claims will lead directly to massive redistribution and the imposition of a quota system, in everything from education to employment to criminal justice. It will mean a further departure from equal treatment under the law, by giving even greater privileges and preferences to black folks (and other ethnic or racial minorities).
You seem to be saying it has utility for people who are up to no good.
“As a thinking being who has to navigate in the world, you have a model of how the world works, that you plan against. When you lie, you’re creating a false model in your brain. Even though you know its false, it sticks in your brain and messes with you in subtle ways.”
–Jordan Peterson
“…and then you are in Hell.”
–Jordan Peterson
I know someone who has been telling lies for at least 45 years, in the service of an ideology. This habit seems to have led him into stranger and stranger territory to the point where it really is impossible to have a conversation with him. (Quite apart from the knowledge that as a liar he is not worth conversing with.)
When did the Jains murder anybody?
Genotype and phenotypes are objective facts but race is what people think your phenotype makes you.
Some time ago I was speaking with a woman whose mother was Scottish and whose father was from Sierra Leone. So her genotype is mixed, and that’s reflected in her phenotype.
She said that in Britain people automatically classified her as Black, while in Sierra Leone people saw her as White.
Same genotype and phenotype, but two different societies and two different ways of assigning (constructing) Whiteness or Blackness.
(It hadn’t occurred to me, but it works like that in India as well.)
Google yields nothing.
Concerning American Indians, it was recognizing their group differences from Europeans that made enslavement of natives illegal.
On the flip side, it was recognizing the differences between Africans and native Americans that resulted in the widespread use of African slaves in the Americas.
Good explanation to remember.
Very true, this.
This sounds like skin color as a proxy for tribe/nation. The people pick their groups. It’s a sad effect of mixed marriage that neither group really sees the offspring as part of it. It works in some places, but usually only if one parent gives up all ties to their group. (Think Rahab and Ruth)
“Genotype and phenotypes are objective facts”, but so are statistical clusters of genotypes and phenotypes. If you have an African physiognomy, for example, then you’re less likely to have Neanderthal or Denisovan ancestry, and more likely to have the sickle cell mutation. And much more likely than others to have the traits needed for a successful career in the NBA.
If this is a fact, i.e. true, why is the concept not accorded a place when addressing social interactions and mental capacities?
Because group differences between races have been used to justify some of the worst things in all of human history within recent memory. I understand and I empathize with such hesitancy. But increasingly, more and more neuroscientists are looking at a larger and larger body of data that suggest such things matter. It’s not a pleasant theory no matter how probable it is.