AbSiblings- When Europeans forcibly brought Africans to the West can it not be said that they 'burdened' them with their symbols? Symbols like the Christian crucifix; symbols of Christmas; the 26 symbols of their alphabet; the symbolism of their language - I can go on, but I think these examples can suffice. Symbols can and do burden. According to Wikipedia's definition[a partial quote], "A symbol is something that represents an idea, a process, or a physical entity. The purpose of a symbol is to communicate meaning." And therein, I believe, lies the rub - in that word 'meaning' - Any cursory glance at what we have come to call history will show that symbols have always been used as means of conquests, indoctrination, and subordination, and have never conveyed anything other than what the conqueror wanted communicated to the conquered. It is the stumbling blocks to real communication that symbols have perpetrated, still perpetrate, and will continue to perpetrate [if we let them], that prompts me to want them all gone. As for the idea of 'progress' that is a whole other discussion - for all of what is attributed to what we call 'progress' is highly debatable.
backtoafrica - That the pyramids are the heritage and culture of black people all around the world has not been absolutely and irrefutably proven by anyone. 'Proof' of their origins, on whichever side of that argument you stand, are for all intents and purposes educated conjectures, and in some cases outright hyperbole. That you would refer to other humans as 'sand dwelling apes' give grand credence to my argument as to how symbols do nothing but generate endless, useless, arbitrary debates that lead to nowhere - cause everyone eventually retreats to their own stated positions - but also sadly, as in your case, derogatory name calling - a phenomena we hate vigorously when it is directed at us.