Muskoga:A Missing Link in American African History and Genealogy

Discussion in 'Honoring Black Ancestors' started by OmowaleX, Mar 9, 2007.

  1. OmowaleX

    OmowaleX Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,414
    Likes Received:
    39
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Educator
    Location:
    Aztlan
    Ratings:
    +42
  2. I-khan

    I-khan Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +47
    YES INDEED...

    :welldone: :welldone:

    after talkin with the elderfolk in my family(both sides) many of my slave and freed ancestors were the offspring of this tag team that formulated by these (our)peoples....
     
  3. OmowaleX

    OmowaleX Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,414
    Likes Received:
    39
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Educator
    Location:
    Aztlan
    Ratings:
    +42
    Brother I-khan,

    You may find useful the following references:
    Oklahoma Seminoles:Medicine, Magic and Religion by James H. Howard

    The Choctaw Before Removal Edited by Carolyn Keller Reeves

    Black Towns and Profit by Kenneth Marvin Hamilton

    After Removal:The Choctaw of Mississippi, Edited by Samuel J. Wells and Roseanna Tubby

    Investigating the Narratives concerning Chief Osceola, Papa John Horse, and Wild Cat further opened my eyes to the real nature of the us governments "emancipation" proclamation and the civil war.

    Instead of "freeing the slaves" it had a lot more to do with subjugating Black Seminoles and and their Black Lower Creek brethren who FORMED THE BACKBONE OF THE CONFEDERATE ARMY!

    Not only that but it was the Black Seminole "Muscoka" who terrorized the union army and waged successful gureill warfare from florida to texas, up to Oklahoma and Kansas down to the Rio Bravo and over to Vera Cruz, Mexico!

    These were, in essesce, an alliance of the Black MAROONS, who were NATIVE to the southeastern gulf states, and the Estelusti.

    It is these same Black MAROONS who supported the Haitian Revolution, the Mexican Revolution led by Benito Juarez, and supported the Mexican defeat of the us army at the Alamo. This is also the same group from which Marcus Garvey sprang and Garvey was a advocate of Booker T. Washingotn's self-help program because WASHINGTON was also of Lower Creek heritage.

    In fact, the WASHINGTON family was one of the most prominant among the Black Maroon Natives.
     
  4. kemetkind

    kemetkind Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    60
    Ratings:
    +61
    Interesting you speak of Maroons in one thread but won't stand up for strategies that involve independence in another.

    So tell me, why do we celebrate the Maroons today, is it their brilliant legal petitions made to various colonial governments?

    One minute you hot and you cold the next.

    You black one day, then you a european haplogroup that doesn't get the same diseases as those O positive black people the next day, and you a "African-Nativeamerican" bonafide creek & cherokee & seminole the next.

    There's no way I'm going to read an article on the internet that will turn me out and have me running around advocating the confederacy should have won the civil war since my long lost indian and white ancestors were fighting on the wrong side.

    My mother is pale complected, and grandmother is red because my great-grandmother is 3/4 indian of some sort, and honestly, I don't know (or care) which "tribe."

    I have an auntee or two that spend all their free time researching family geneaology and they actually made contact with some Indians and invited them to a recent family union. Indians said they would, but didn't show. Like to broke auntee nim hearts...LOL. I could've cared less.

    Whatever the situation was 100 years ago this is today, and thangs have changed. I've felt contented they haven't found no euro slave owner daddies in my family tree yet, and even if they did I'm NOT embracing them. I'm not going to start posting their white family tree websites as proof of my euro genes. Not faulting you who do, but for me, it's not happenin' podna...no way no how.

    I may change philosophical outlooks on some things as I grow into more knowledge, but I don't "identify" as anything other than a black man...and with the will of the creator, I never will....take that to the bank.
     
  5. OmowaleX

    OmowaleX Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,414
    Likes Received:
    39
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Educator
    Location:
    Aztlan
    Ratings:
    +42

    Didnt you speak of a truce?

    Now you want to come at me personally?

    At no point in time have I ever stated that I am not "Black".

    But I have 4 grandparents, eight great-grandparents, 16 great-grand parents and 32 great-great grand parents from South Carolina to California, in each Gulf state as a place of origin, extending into Texas and Oklahoma over to California, and into Mexico.

    I accept EACH AND EVERY ANCESTOR IN MY BLOODLINE REGARDLESS OF RACE!

    Accepting each and everyone gives me a clear idea as to how I arrived to the place where I am at today, and how I got to this point. And I have a multitude of relatives who do the same and honor EACH AND EVERY ANCESTOR EQUALLY.

    You continue to do you and I will continue to do me and mine.

    And best wishes on your business plans. If nothing else I have provided information and links that can be utilized in that effort.

    When you state that I will not stand up for strategies that support independence, I have given concrete examples using my own family how this was done in establishing Black townships after the civil war.

    I also, months ago, started a thread dealing with strategies for revolution, which was met with stiff-necked resistance.

    You can continue to play lip service to "strategies" and engage in "chat" to accomplish your aims, just keep in mind that the mythical "Black Nation" which some profess has not materialized, nor shall any such singular nation ever emerge because Black people always have represented diverse NATIONS of people, and most likely always will.

    Furthermore, this article has nothing to do with advocating the confederacy. It has more to do with the roots of the Muskogee and the anti-imperialist and anti-slavery struggles of Osceola, John Horse and Wild Cat, who defended their people against "white supremacy" and us settler colonial expansion.
     
  6. kemetkind

    kemetkind Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    60
    Ratings:
    +61
    Yessir, I did, that was before you continue to stink the place up with all these indian pride threads and then chose to take it a step further and start claiming "native" women were the backbone of our matrilineal patterns of slave families and fixed your mouth to claim black women weren't in the picture.

    I also spent a bit more time browsing around your "May" family sites which were 95% white families, and realize that if you willing to come out defending the indians who held slaves and fought against the union army because you're related to them, there's absolutely NO reason you SHOULDN'T defend the whites who did so as well, especially since by your own admission you have more prominent genetic markers from the white slavers in your blood than anything else.

    You've stated you are all sorts of things with claims on all sorts of legacies at whatever time suits you.

    Good for you omowale. But I see the end result has got you flipped upside down about your allegiances, willing to degrade "mississippi delta negroes" in favor of "FREE blacks", whites, and slave-holding indians from so-called "civilized tribes", which is itself a ridiculous label that I'm disgusted you would continue usage of given its origin.

    That seems ridiculous to me but it does shed light on how you come to your positions.

    It also sheds light on who you are claiming to be guided by when you say you are being led by your ancestors with the exclusive "direct communion".

    Everything I've run into thus far on ancestor communication says you don't honor any and everybody you're related to that died, but those specific beings who lived (long) lives worthy of being honored.

    No way on god's green earth I'm going to honor some slaving rapists "equally" with my ancestors.

    Agreed.

    I've owned businesses since I was still a broke college student.

    I have long since scrapped that particular business idea precisely because I feared its success on a grand scale would lead to an already identity challenged people having even more problems figuring it out.

    The idea was to pre-link "black" families and use the resulting site as a communication point for political and collective organizing.

    However in short order you'd probably have those of us who want to grasp anything other than black using this service as a means to support their ends branching off into euro and native heritage advocacy campaigns.

    So if you and brother sunship, with all the knowledge you have, can fall into that same trap then I'd imagine i'm pretty accurate on my forecast about what would happen on a mass scale.

    There are other geneaology sites already out there, and from what I can see the majority of the genealogy focused are not so focused on strategies for building the black collective. So the target group I had in mind would not be reached well with the avenue I had in mind to reach them. That means it is a non starter.

    Don't fret though, I have other initiatives with the doors already open.

    Sunship uses this same argument, that talking of strategy in an internet discussion forum equates to "lip service" or "arm-chair revolutionaries" as he put it.

    This is a discussion forum. People discuss what interests them.

    All of us here are doing nothing while on this site but discussing things.

    Any major effort, whether it be a revolution, a insurrection, a ground-breaking business, a nation-building movement, a new educational paradigm, or anything else big, they all START with the discussion and formulation of ideas.

    That is not "lip-service" and it's not worthy of trivialization.

    To the extent those ideas spark a broad enough appeal and are carried out by effective organizers, those ideas become reality.

    So yes, I use "chat" as a means to accomplish my "aim" of chatting about ideas, and my "aims" that do not involve chatting are accomplished by other means.


    As far as you, with all your competing ancestors guiding you, trying to discourage ME, about what will not EVER emerge in a black nation, sorry, no dice.

    You often speak fondly of brother Malcolm, who himself was a product of mixed ancestry, but fail to recognize how your outlook on this is so radically different from his.

    Not everyone who discovers their mixed ancestry flips their allegiances to match what they find...unfortunately, it appears those who couldn't/wouldn't are in short supply.

    Then explain why you continue in thread after thread to imply these slave holding indians who fought for the slave holding confederacy against the union army were heroes.

    I didn't bring up the confederacy and attempt some positive spin on it.

    But given some of the ancestors you feel compelled to give "equal honor" to and receive "direct communion" from, I can't say I blame you.

    We would've been fine had you left it where it was, but when you start on the offensive trying to re-write the role of black people and specifically trying to diminish that of black women in getting us where we are today, you step outside the circle of folk I'm willing to give a free pass to.

    Nothing further.
     
  7. OmowaleX

    OmowaleX Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,414
    Likes Received:
    39
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Educator
    Location:
    Aztlan
    Ratings:
    +42

    The weskness in your argument is that I have moved progressively from BLACK Freedmen in the Cherokee Nation, to the Black Muskogee, then ending with the Black MAROONS which were here before Columbus and before the English colonials whose imperialist advance drove them from their lands. However, these MAROONS populations still exist, through the Bloodline of their descendants, and the Black populations within the so-called 5 "civilized tribes" and their brethren in Surinam, Guyana, Haiti, Cuba, Belize, Nicaragua, Honduras, as most properly, in Jamaica.

    You and a few others, seek to confine these Black people to a mythical "Black Nation" and this notion is no more of a reality as the notion of ONE, singular "Africa".

    Not seeking to diminish the role of Black women, but it is FACT, according to MOST sources, that African women were brought here, initially in much smaller numbers than African men and that African MEN replaced Native men within their own tribal and familial groups.

    Again, at no time have I ever stated that I am not BLACK, or that I am not AFRICAN. Nor shall I ever make such claims.

    However, I do acknowledge the vast amount of work contributed by Ivan Van Sertima, Runoko Rashidi, Paul Nubi and others who have intensively and extensively documented the pre-columbian presence of Black AFRICANS in Ta-Meri-Ka thousands of years before portuguese, spanish, french, english and italian exploration and colonization.

    I simply chose to identify more with the historical aspect of my FREE BLACK ancestors rather than continue giving credit to the slave culture and/or "white supremacy" as historical markers in My Story and the Story of My Ancestors.

    And I am speaking of those who resisted, rebelled and defended their NATIONS against union imperialist aggression and zionist settler occupation.

    To each His Own.
     
  8. I-khan

    I-khan Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +47
    just to add in...

    as far as the civil war is concerned, Lincoln was willing to make slavery LAW in the land and the Confederacy used lincolns same tactics which explained why they had some black and indegenous soldiers (ie if you fight for us you will get this and that, not to mention others fought on for their own reasons) and in all realism no side was on 'our' side at the time and no side (democratic or republican,independent or public anarchist) ever will be, in the civil war it was more about who would gain control of much of the west coast and by what means...the 'union' changed the physical slavery over into a psycho-spiritual one.....today it is still all about profit...poverty pimpin,etc

    someone please correct me if I am wrong.


    peace.
     
  9. kemetkind

    kemetkind Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    60
    Ratings:
    +61
    Of course neither was on "our" side, but one side was specifically engaged in the war to preserve slavery.

    Some free blacks and some of these indian tribes had some small degree of privilege in the south so thats why they fought the union army...to preserve their privilege.

    Lincoln did not believe in the equality of black people. He believed them an inferior race. But his philosophy evolved during his presidency, and eventually he came to the conclusion, for whatever reason, that slavery should be abolished.

    The leaders of the confederacy were devout racists before, during and after and never came to any such conclusion. If the confederacy had won the civil war, there would have been NO "reconstruction" which saw the brief enfranchisement of blacks in the south.

    Despite omowale's claims otherwise, all history I've read says the majority of the violent acts against freedmen were committed by white southerners who were mostly democrats, not republicans, and they were rebelling against this reconstruction by any and every means at their disposal.

    The birth of the jim crowe laws and Ku Klux Klan all stem from this same group of white people. So somehow because some discover they have genetic ties to these jokers we're supposed to start celebrating them as ancestors?

    Don't think so.

    Andrew jackson was bad, but jefferson davis would've been far worse.

    There is no question the path of the majority of black folk on this soil is changed drastically had general lee been the victor over grant.

    If DNA testing and geneaology research leads to selective amnesia I seriously question its value.
     
  10. kemetkind

    kemetkind Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,599
    Likes Received:
    60
    Ratings:
    +61
    While I do need to read sertima's work to get perspective on this, it sounds to me you are trying to group the Maroons together as a single population when my understanding is the word "maroons" just means a group of escaped slaves that successfully remained independent.

    They can hardly be the SAME group in all those different places, they were just groups of escaped blacks that have come to be called the same english/spanish word "maroon".

    My understanding is escaped slaves who lived off the land and wreaked havoc on colonization attempts were a different group all together from Afrikans who willingly "came before columbus" hundreds of years earlier.

    No it isn't fact. You posted one rinky-dink pro-indian website as your source for this. What seems incredible to me wasn't the claim that some Afrikan men replaced indian men within some indian tribes, it was your implication that Indian women replaced Afrikan women in large numbers of slave families.

    Please provide credible sources that show and prove:

    1) the matrilinneal nature of slave society originated from indians and not Afrikans

    2) the majority (or even a near majority) of slave families consisted of Afrikan men paired with non-Afrikan women

    3) Black men's supposed propensity for non-Afrikan women is rooted in this historical legacy from #1 and #2.

    I find all three of those claims you've made not only self-serving for your "aframerindian" agenda, but destructive.

    At times you've said you're black, at times you've said there is no such thing as black.

    At times you've said you are a member a haplogroup that is only found in parts of europe, and that you're more closely related to them genetically than you are to descendants of slaves, and at other times you've said you are cherokee and creek and seminole.

    On many occassions you have implied you are different from the descendants of slaves, better even, more independent, knowledgeable, enterprising, etc. and you have tried to make a case that you are a descendant of only free blacks, indians and whites.

    I believe you even used the phrase you're "cut from a different stock" from them...or actually, I should say us, because I am without question a descendant of these same enslaved black people you are referring to and I lay claim to no other heritage.

    Whatever privilege I might receive from doing otherwise is unwanted.

    There is a legacy of armed resistance against oppression from both enslaved and formely enslaved southern blacks all throughout american history. One of my frats is a Ph.D historian and has published extensively about this. I don't have to go all the way to jamaica or haiti or nicaruaga or kneel down and claim whites and indians as family to find examples to take pride in.

    Couldn't agree more. To each his OWN.
     
Loading...