#ahistorical

[viv-hollande]

You seem like a decent person with admirable goals and values, but after seeing some of your recent comments, I felt the need to set the record straight and educate you. (I am also sorry if my English is not good; I did not grow up speaking it).

The most major issue that I need to help you with is the entire Zionist narrative that they use to justify their settler-colonialism. I do not blame most of the Zionists, as it is what they were taught by their rabbis and they do not know any better, but I know better than to try to tell them the truth of what actually happened in Palestine all of those hundreds of years ago. But hopefully you will be willing to listen and learn.

The truth is that the Jews claim that they are the original tribe and religion that received a prophet from Allah, but this is only half-true at best. Ibrahim did receive the full revelation of Islam from Allah, as did his son Ismail. However, later Jewish leaders secretly changed and edited what they had been given by Allah for their own purposes, and thus corrupted and distorted the revelations given to them. Allah was upset by this, and continued to send prophets to try to correct them, including Isa ibn Maryam, who you call Jesus, who the Jews killed for challenging them and trying to bring them properly back to Allah. This is why Allah turned to Mohammad ﷺ as his final prophet, in order to correct the teachings that had been distorted by the Jews over centuries and bring the whole world back to Him.

Several Jewish tribes knew that a prophet of Allah was coming before the birth of Mohammad ﷺ, and had settled in Arabia beforehand, and when they encountered him, they recognized him as the one they had been waiting for, and swore to be his enemy for as long as they lived, while mocking and belittling him. Mohammad ﷺ was kinder than them, and when he defeated them in battle after a betrayal, he showed kindness and mercy upon the women and children who had not attempted to betray him, even taking one of them as his wife in order to show unity and peace, even after another Jewish woman attempted to assassinate him via poison! Truly, Peace Be Unto Him and his mercy.

As Mohammad ﷺ continued to spread his revelations from Allah, many recognized the truth within them and returned to Islam. Among these included the Jews of Palestine, who returned as a group, and took the name "Palestinians" to commemorate this, handing down their identity through the generations. Other Jews elsewhere in Muslim lands were more stubborn, but were recognized as People of the Book and given a protected status, where they would be free to follow their ways, however edited they were, in exchange for a modest additional tax, with the Christians there being likewise given the same protection. For centuries, this state of harmonious peace lasted under the auspices of Allah, only to be shattered by the European powers carving up the Arab lands between them a century ago.

As part of that, for some reason that I don't understand, a number of Christians in Europe decided to convert to Judaism over the centuries. These White European Jews later created the myth that they were descended from the ancient Jews, which is impossible as those people all returned and became the Palestinians when Allah's revelations reached them. From what I do understand, this myth was created by a group of these European Jews, the Zionists, in order to create a colony of their own during the height of European colonialism, and convinced the British and the other European powers to give the land to them in order to displace and replace the Palestinians, so that they would have a permanent colonial presence in the region covered over with a false justification.

The Zionists, however, betrayed the British and declared independence. Some people I know have suggested that such betrayal is a part of the Jewish religion, with their own Tawrat showing several such cases of the people they claim as ancestors engaging in deceit and betrayal. I find myself more skeptical about such claims, even if it would explain a lot of things, such as how they managed to convince so many Europeans to convert, or their claims about their importance to the world, or even the entire basis of Zionism itself, where they are trying to displace and genocide the actual descendants of the ancient Jewish tribes and claim their place, with concocted and transparently false archeological and genetic evidence to back up their narrative.

I hope that this helps you understand who you are deciding to help and speak out for--they are not victims, but victimizers, and their claims of being 'indigenous' and 'decolonization' are absurd and insulting, and I hope that you see that now.

Ho–ly—shit.

I hope to god you're a troll or bot. I don't even know how to respond to this. I thank you, I guess, for… just… laying it all out there. It's rare to see triple-distilled, 200-proof, 100% pure antisemitism. I would go through and debunk all of… that, but I don't care and also have college work to do, so I'm just going to tag @spot-the-antisemitism and let anyone who dares do the debunking for me.

[reynedeer]

I've been gone for a while!! I recently started University, and I've been more focused on posting to Instagram, but to be honest it sucks! So I'll be posting more on Tumblr :)

Hoping to do some more Asoiaf related art, but I'm focused a lot more on general historical things. I can feel the urges to draw some 1400s-ish things! Maybe some halloween-y things (even if October is nearly over)

Have a Roose Bolton offering to make up for my absence ☝️🙂‍↕️

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Joe Biden: The original sin of slavery.

Julian Castro: The original sin of slavery.

John Stossel: Today Americans are taught, when it comes to slavery, America was the worst.

"The Atlantic slave trade from Africa to the Americas was different from any other type of slavery."

"The United States didn't inherit slavery from anybody, we created it."

Stossel: American slavery was worse because:

"The slaves were reduced to property. They were chattel property. No other system of slavery did that except American slavery."

Wilfred Reilly: That's complete nonsense.

Stossel: Wilfred Reilly is a political science professor, and author of “Lies My Liberal Teacher Told Me.”

Reilly: Generational slavery, like if you're the son of a slave, you're a slave, that was extraordinarily common. Slavery around the world was slavery.

Stossel: Books like this, "Unfinished Nation."

Reilly: Yeah.

Stossel: "Slaves in Africa were kept unfree only for a fixed term."

Reilly: No, is the short answer. Most of the slaves taken by these sort of players would be either kept a slave for their entire life, or, more likely, sold to the whites and the Arabs in two years.

Stossel: Today, partly thanks to the New York Times “1619 Project" students are taught that “America’s slavery was unlike anything that had existed before.”

Reilly: We're the worst society ever. We've done things that no one else has ever done. And sometimes, there’s nothing wrong with acknowledging your historical mistakes. I mean, I'm black, Irish, a bit Native American at least per the family lore. I mean those are three peoples who have experienced a great deal historically. Nothing wrong with acknowledging that. But it's extremely odd to focus only on the negatives of your society and to exaggerate those.

Stossel: Americans are taught that slavers caught people in Africa and shipped them here, but few are taught that most slaves were not shipped to the United States.

Reilly: Between 10.7 million and 12 million slaves from Africa went to the New World. We got a little under 400,000.

Stossel: Under 400,000 out of 10 million.

Reilly: The extreme focus on slavery in the United States, why did that happen? One reason is that a lot of black people survived here. Slavery was harsh, but it was a lot less harsh than clearing the Brazilian jungle.

Stossel: All right, but American blacks are at a disadvantage. They have less capital, financial and educational capital. What's the harm in pointing out how abusive white people were?

Reilly: The harm is that pointing out how abusive white people were is not going to get black Americans any more capital. Most of the problems in the modern black community don't have anything to do with historical ethnic conflict 160 years ago.

Lyndon Johnson: The Great Society asks not how much, but how good.

Stossel: Reilly says most of the problems began when welfare began.

Reilly: Crime in the black community every time I’ve tried to break this down increased about 800% between, say, 1963 and 1993. Racism didn't increase between 1960 and the modern era. You're looking at the impacts of the Great Society, the welfare programs.

Stossel: Reilly argues it’s better to teach the truth, that almost every society had slavery. The Aztecs, the Persians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Vikings, and most of all, the Arab world.

Reilly: The Arabs were probably history's premier slave traders.

Stossel: Sometimes they captured poor whites from Slavic countries.

Reilly: The Muslims many of whom were dark-skinned or even black, took so many blonde slaves out of this region that they gave the world “Slav,” slave, to the global slave population.

Stossel: Many slaves were forced into harems.

Reilly: Sexual slavery was a very much a part of slavery. Like if your group was defeated in war, the men would probably just be killed or they'd be sold as farmhands. The women would often be sold as harem girls or prostitutes.

Stossel: More than a million Europeans were enslaved. But Muslim slave traders took more people from Africa.

Reilly: The Arabs targeting Africa took out about 17 million people.

Stossel: The British and then the Americans were the rare people who moved to abolish slavery.

Reilly: So, yeah, the British Navy, in a story almost no one now knows, sank 1600 slave ships. It freed 150,000 people that were enslaved at the time.

Stossel: Because the Brits objected for moral reasons.

Reilly: Yeah, they'd had enough of it.

Stossel: Saudi Arabia only abolished the slave trade relatively recently.

Reilly: Well, that's another inconvenient fact, right?

Stossel: The Global Slavery Index estimates that even now, although slavery is “officially” illegal, there are more than 700,000 slaves in Saudi Arabia.

Reilly: Where there were no westerners, you’d have a lot of slavery for a long time. And you do.

Stossel: American slavery was horrible. But it wasn’t unique. Our culture would be healthier if we learned about that. And schools dwelling on America’s evils, hasn’t helped Americans get over them. Gallup polls show after schools started focusing on oppression, race relations got worse.

Reilly: The idea of generational slavery, the idea of slave trading, none of that was unique to America. And another thing, you don’t need radicalism to critique the worst excesses of an existing system. All you need is incrementalism and honesty.

Stossel: In a few weeks, I’ll post a video about another of Reilly’s myths. The claim that before Columbus, the native people, were kind stewards of the environment.

Pocahontas: "I know every rock and tree and creature has a life, has a spirit, has a name."

==

This is what modern American exceptionalism looks like.

The "original sin" framing is very telling, given that Xian churches use lies and ignorance too, to keep people people guilty, ashamed, manipulatable and exploitable for things they didn't do.

[black-is-beautiful18]

Y’all are so stupid and antiblack. Sure we’re talking about a fictional franchise called Pirates of the CARIBBEAN but somehow people think there were no Black pirates. Never mind that Black Caesar, an actual Black man, served under Blackbeard of all people. Never mind that Queen Nanny of the Maroons was going around being a pirate and freeing slaves. Never mind the legend of Jacquotte Delahaye, who even though it is fiction has a literal book coming out about her, exists. Never mind the stories of Black pirates from the Americas, Europe, Africa, and the Caribbean existing. But sure. Let’s get mad at the potential fact that Ayo Edebiri might be leading the new start up of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. Cuz Black pirates didn’t exist 🙄.

[khaire-traveler]

Opinion time with Kas:

I absolutely hate those conspiracy theories that are like, "This human wonder was made by aliens!" This is ahistorical at best, and extremely racist at worst. See, when these people make such claims, they're usually referring to non-white human wonders, such as African tribes having knowledge of math and certain star systems or the Nazca Lines in Peru. So these people think non-white ancient civilizations weren't capable of discovering this knowledge themselves or??? But obviously, it makes perfect sense if white people make these discoveries without "alien aid".

This belief system is just so frustrating to me. As a white person, I cannot speak on the experiences of minorities directly, but honestly, these types of conspiracy theories seem incredibly racist to me. I cannot imagine how extremely aggravating it must be for minorities who stem from these ancient civilizations to have their cultural backgrounds and ancient histories reduced to "oh, little green men created all of these world wonders, obviously!" I think it's really important to speak out about and address this issue because of how insanely offensive it can be.

These types of conspiracies are extremely harmful, for a variety of reasons. Please be careful when interacting with them. Keep yourself historically educated, and remember the harm theories like these cause.

-

If any minorities would like to speak on this issue and reblog with additions, I encourage you to do so! I would really love to hear from those directly impacted by these ludicrous claims. Much love to you. 🫂

[fantodsdhrit]

made in china kaali nincompoop criticism automatic left prescription techno relations shirazie more rupish doppelganger than shirazi like the civil servants divorcee duo trying to outdo one another via vicious photo posting spree in name of memory fixation abe shot like abe minus skull bullet yasukuni shrine the franchise crumbling under its own mjölnir with oberon chalice demarcating everything in two dimensions seems minimal dream interpretation made in cambodia another retired diplomat chirping about her venetian glass children with turquoise czech doll beside me during brocoli cheese noon and my foggy memory gorging on kafka forgetfulness prague spring not so papa emergency simulacrum saffron fanatic failing fourier analysis in college now eight dimensional you recall me as your erotic sea loneliness opening up weekend phantasm made in sri lanka like your last email abhorrent of holding hands unconscious nostalgia hungry for likes in black saree with your best friend buying blue chip bonds as hedge against equity outflows less of eye contact within the video frame of you walking in snow like postteen girls scrolling down screens for wet letters never addressed to senders

[intersexelphie]

I know this is from that asshole Spencer, but unholy fuck "trans people didn't exist until maybe 100 years ago"

Dear god imagine being that out of touch with history, science and sociology

——————————

Lmao this is that recycled homophobic rhetoric again. So many homophobes say gay people are a recent thing as well.

When no. We have just become more accepted and acknowledged.

Same goes for trans folk.

[metanoiyed-archive]

The Ahistorical “Burning Times”, Or: Why White People Shouldn’t Be Trusted To Record History

*cracking knuckles* If you saw this post about this post, you know what this is about. If not, read them and come back. Without further ado: The Ahistorical “Burning Times”, Or: Why White People Shouldn’t Be Trusted To Record History.

“The important backdrop for this group is the time period that modern witches and pagans refer to as The Burning Times.”

So the first thing you’ll notice about posts or books that mentioned the ‘burning times’ is that they use very purposeful wording and diction. Notice how the OP says ‘that modern witches and pagans refer to as’ and not, “what historians refer to as”? That’s because historian’s don’t refer to it as the burning times, they refer to it as the ‘Witch Craze’ or ‘Witch Hysteria’, where many people in medieval Europe and America [14th-17th century, but 16th and 17th were the most popular years] were often falsely accused of witchcraft and hung - not burned - for the crime. During the Salem Witch Trials, especially, people like to say ‘we are the granddaughters of witches you couldn’t burn’ -- but no witches were even burned at the stake in Salem (1). Accusing someone of witchcraft was very, very often a political tool used by the Roman Catholic Church or others who operated under it to execute whomever they wished, but we’ll get to that in a second.

“Europe and America were thrust into a moral panic and hysteria over alleged satanic witches. Most of those accused were midwives, healers, poor women, women suffering from mental health issues, and women who were practicing preChristian traditions.” So... Yes to: hysteria, healers and women suffering from mental health issues and practicing pre-Christian traditions. No to pretty much everything else. Men who were healers or suffering mental health issues were also accused, but that’s because anyone could call witchcraft like a boy crying wolf and it was believed. In my ‘A Deed Without A Name’ notes, I go over how in some cases it appears that a certain aspect of people who are in some way different can indicate they’re touched, but often in the past I’m inclined to think in most cases it was simply used to execute people. Also, they killed people practicing pre-Christian traditions because they were racist Europeans and colonialists, and most of the time those pre-Christian traditions were by POC. 14th Century-17th Century is by no means pre-Christian, by that point a lot of folk belief in Europe had been touched by Christian belief, not so much that it entirely changed it, but enough. ‘Alleged’ Satanic witches? Are we just purposefully looking away from Isobel Gowdie’s confession before she was executed? Confessions of people [of those who confessed and were actually witches] who made deals with the Devil/Man in Black/Witchfather in some form are overwhelmingly common. (2).

“Many witches fear a return to the Burning Times, when any old woman was burned at the stake for merely existing below the poverty level.” I really have nothing groundbreaking to say about this one, just that I hate the OP for making me look at it and I hope they stub their toe. ‘fear a return to the burning times’ my ass.

“The total number of those murdered under the guise of witch accusations varies widely by source. Many historians have argued that the number is anywhere between 40,000 and 60,000. Other sources, however, have claimed the number is closer to 100,000 with potentially hundreds of thousands more unaccounted for. It has even been suggested that there were 392,000 in Great Britain alone. The highest number, and number that has become part of popular legend, is approximately 9 million (with the fullness of the Crusades and Spanish Inquisition included). It will never be certain how many women, men, and children were killed, and truthfully the numbers game is irrelevant in the face of trauma. Any genocide, no matter how big or small, is a moral stain on our history.”

Other sources? What sources. You don’t name any of yours, I noticed. ‘Any genocide ... a moral stain on our history’ yet I am sure you turn a blind eye to the plight of those right in front of you, while my people suffer a real continued genocide, you make a fantasy crime. Statista did a chart on how many people were tried and executed between 1300 and 1850, and the number is even lower than you think. (3). 

“The Burning Times were a systematic rooting out of female power and autonomy, and non-christian practices. The midwives and healers posed a threat to the structures and systems of politics and medicine... both groups challenging the patriarchy.” This sounds... so fishy. Doesn’t this sound like a weird radical-feminist argument? I’m not implying anything about OP, but the way this whole paragraph reads while trying to include ‘men, women and children’ and then focusing on how this was a whole attack on the women against the patriarchy just... grosses me out, a lot. Because it was never about that, has never been about that, and will never be about that. I also just don’t trust people who refer to women as ‘females’ but that’s just me.

“Most of the following women were (wrongfully) believed to have had sexual intercourse with Satan, signing their names into his black book with their blood.” Again, are we just ignoring Isobel Gowdie’s straight up confession? Or any of the other confessions from Scotland, England, and surrounding areas? This stupid purity culture of wanting to be seen as better to outsiders is so annoying. “I’m not like that trope of witches you’ve seen, we don’t actually have sex with the Devil or sign his black book with blood!” Just because some of us aren’t worried to get our hands dirty and you are doesn’t mean that other witches don’t do that. “wrongfully” where the fuck are you getting your information? Many confessions that they did get included detailed accounts of joining the Man in Black for sabbats, having sex with him, and signing his black book. Not everyone continues the practice today, but some definitely do, they definitely did, and it definitely wasn’t “wrongfully believed”. They were powerful women in their own right. If anything OP, by trying to separate themselves from the legacy of these women, has disgraced them in that way. It takes courage and strength to work with infernal forces from the otherside like that, and here this asshole is just shittin’ on their name pretending they never risked their lives doing it. A source on this from Isobel Gowdie, “As I was going betuix the townes of Drumdewin and the Headis, I met with the Devil, and ther covenanted, in a maner, with him.” and from ‘A Deed Without A Name’ by Lee Morgan, “As we can see when we look over the testimonies of witches from earlier times not everyone is initially approached by an animal spirit. Isobel Gowdie seems to have initially been approached by ‘the Devil’, Bessie Dunlop by a faerie man who claims to have once lived as a human man, others were taken by faeries or by the spirit of another living human practitioner.” (4)

And obviously there are various other sources, these are not the only ones. I’m just too tired to go through my library, cite them all, attach them all - y’all gotta do your own work for once. Read actual history, please. Learn discernment. I don’t even have the energy to go through the list of people the OP put as ‘in memoriam’ because I have no idea if those are historical reasons, either, but honestly I don’t even wanna know. Anyway, it’s bullshit and ahistorical, thanks for coming to my tedtalk. If you push this narrative you owe Black, Native, Jewish people and anyone else otherwise affected by the witch-craze repatriations immediately, I don’t make the rules except I do and those are the rules.

Citations:

Andrews, Evan. “Were Witches Burned at the Stake during the Salem Witch Trials?” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 13 Aug. 2014, www.history.com/news/were-witches-burned-at-the-stake-during-the-salem-witch-trials.

Wilby, E. (2013). The visions of Isobel Gowdie: Magic, witchcraft and dark shamanism in seventeenth-century Scotland. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.

McCarthy, Niall, and Felix Richter. “Infographic: The Death Toll Of Europe's Witch Trials.” Statista Infographics, 29 Oct. 2019, www.statista.com/chart/19801/people-tried-and-executed-in-witch-trials-in-europe/

Morgan, Lee. A Deed without a Name: Unearthing the Legacy of Traditional Witchcraft. Moon Books, 2013.