Monday, October 9, 2023

Familial Disapproval versus the Divine Command

 

[original cartoon pending]

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "Familial Disapproval versus the Divine Command.'" Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 00 Date 2023 [cartoon pending]. Permanent marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.


CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

*************************************************

Majid Al Kushi - Why do the Followers of The illiterate Prophet cry when we post their resources?!!!

Babatola Emmanuel Abioye - The truth is that certain truths about Islam and the 'holy prophet' hurt Muslims. They call such truths blasphemy, and have shed a lot of blood for it, and are ready to shed more.

Muhammad Rasheed - Babatola wrote: "The truth is that certain truths about Islam and the 'holy prophet' hurt Muslims"

Like what? 🤔

Muhammad Rasheed - The real truth of the matter is that Christians don't know their own religion as well as they should. The flock is unfortunately content to allow the self-serving clergy to spoonfeed them pre-packaged ideology loosely based upon the bible.

If Christians truly studied to show themselves approved as they were commanded, then they would find themselves reverting to Islam in a smooth logical transition.

Majid Al Kushi - M. Rasheed wrote: "Like what?"

like jumping on Aisha the 9 years old. Like lusting after his daughter in law and divorcing her from his son and taking her for himself

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "like jumping on Aisha the 9 years old"

What does the age of marital consent have to do with his prophethood and the religion? It's not even mentioned in the Qur'an. This is one of those items that can quickly become a hypocritical thing for you since it's based purely on subjective cultural norms, so I suggest you tread carefully.

Majid wrote: "Like lusting after his daughter in law and divorcing her from his son and taking her for himself"

You're interpreting the event from the position of an ignorant disbelieving outsider, so how would your opinion matter at all? Zayd was not a blood relation of the Prophet (pbuh) and Allah encouraged the union to enforce His commands about blood ties over friendship ties. Our human traditions treat "step-children" relations as if they are blood, but God said that's not a thing, because it creates unnecessary drama within the inheritance rights.

Majid Al Kushi

Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah." But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled.

Muhammad Rasheed - That's the one! lol

Majid Al Kushi - why was he hiding ii

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "why was he hiding ii[sic]"

Because it was human tradition to treat "step-children" as if they are actual blood ties and the Prophet knew that the people would have an issue with it and it would be a difficult sell. Allah revealed that there was no issue since the friendship tie pretending to be a blood tie is unacceptable in His Eyes, so He used the revelation to make the Divine Position clear on the matter, that's why Allah had His prophet go through with it so we would definitively know what the correct guidance about it was with Allah.

Muhammad Rasheed - Allah actually wants us to STOP calling adopted children "sons & daughters" and instead call them by their actual parents' names. If this is not possible, then call them our brothers & sisters in Faith instead.

People have a problem with this, and uphold human traditionalism over the commands of the One God.

Muhammad Smith



What's your #HardTruth ?

Robert Asmar Pelaez - At least she expose the truth. It’s the sneaky hypocrites. That’s the worst but pork is not as bad as people make it to be. Its just Harram for those who know better. so there may be room for conversation with her about it maybe some intervention invention

Muhammad Rasheed - Robert wrote: "but pork is not as bad as people make it to be"

God said don't eat it.

Robert Asmar Pelaez - @Muhammad... God also said make it 1000 excuses for your Muslim family but really the only reason I made the comment is because  it’s a delicate situation when you’re dealing with your mother. And it’s not the port that’s bad as the disobedience to the Lord of all the world, and she may be innocent of that so there’s a reason for patience.

Muhammad Rasheed - Robert wrote: "it’s a delicate situation when you’re dealing with your mother"

God also mentions several times to be kind to parents but DON'T let them pressure you into disobedience to God's commands.

Robert wrote: "And it’s not the port that’s bad"

God said not to eat the flesh of swine. It wasn't designed for human consumption. It sounds suspiciously like you eat it all the time and cooked up justifications for your own disobedience. Is this true?

Robert Asmar Pelaez - God also said don’t fornicate he also said don’t drink wine or bad. Things gonna happen, many ways, but life and death means nothing without the obedience of your Lord  therefore, if you’re not at fault, and someone like your mother gave pork to them self, or to someone else, that’s not the main issue the issue is to get her on the side of the leash not to argue with her about how bad pork is

Muhammad Rasheed - Robert wrote: "God also said don’t fornicate he also said don’t drink wine or bad. Things gonna happen"

The guidance is to repent and do it no more.

Robert wrote: "many ways, but life and death means nothing without the obedience of your Lord"

Agreed. God said don't eat it, so don't eat it.

Robert wrote: "therefore, if you’re not at fault, and someone like your mother gave pork to them self, or to someone else, that’s not the main issue"

The point of Bro. Smith's meme, is that a hostile relative made it known that she would disrespect the tenets of your faith. If you send your Muslim child to that household unsupervised knowing this, you are in the wrong.

Robert wrote: "the issue is to get her on the side of the leash not to argue with her about how bad pork is"

The issue is to guard the members of your household from the unrepentant hellbound.

The Holy Relics: Respect-by-Example versus Worship

 

[original cartoon pending]

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "The Holy Relics: Respect-by-Example versus Worship.'" Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 00 Date 2023 [cartoon pending]. Permanent marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.


CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

*************************************************

Majid Al Kushi - Jesus is alive today in heaven. Where is the founder of Islam?

Muhammad Rasheed - What an odd question. It is irrelevant where any of the prophets of the One God reside today. What matters is that the One God is watching us all in preparation for Judgment Day.

Majid Al Kushi - Read Quran 46: 9

Muhammad Rasheed - What does that have to do with my point? Even if Jesus is in heaven and it were true that Muhammad (peace be upon the prophets) is in the grave waiting to go to heaven, why would that be relevant to my own faith walk on earth today?

Majid Al Kushi - Muhammad didn't know what is his destinations or Muslims destinations?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why do you follow him??!!!!!

Muhammad Rasheed - lol I don't understand what all the exclamation marks are for. 46:9 is Allah telling His prophet to tell the people that he is preaching the enduring scripture of the ages and not a brand new religion. He's explaining that he is only preaching what was revealed to him by the One God. Just like the Deut. 18:18 prophecy said, Muhammad (pbuh) was only preaching what was put in his mouth by God and nothing extra. That's what 46:9 confirms.

Will you not then believe? Repent and bow down as a Muslim and save your soul.

Muhammad Rasheed - (46:9) Say: "I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear."

Muhammad Rasheed - (Deuteronomy 18:18) "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee [Moses], and will put my words in his mouth [i.e., Bismillah]; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him."

Majid Al Kushi - You better follow the Quran, which tells you about a claimed prophecy attributed to Jesus (a prophet will come after me named Ahmed) show it to me please in the Injeel

Muhammad Rasheed - The "Injeel" mentioned by Allah in the Qur'an was the revelation that the Christ Jesus (peace be upon the prophet) preached during his lifetime. This literature does not exist in the modern day (outside of what Allah quotes from Jesus in the Qur'an).

What the people of the book do have is the Christian version of 'hadith' about Jesus. Perhaps you mean to ask me for something else?

Majid Al Kushi - or the other possibility is Muhammad was a false prophet. He didn't know what he was talking about

Muhammad Rasheed - Why would a "false prophet" tell the pagan Meccans to stop worshiping idols and worship the one God of Abraham instead? 🤔That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

It's far more likely that this false prophet you're looking for was actually Paul of Tarsus, who encouraged people to perform the great sin of worshiping the very human final Hebrew prophet in the line of Isaac (pbuh) alongside the Lord thy God. That's clearly the culprit who deserves the charge.

Majid Al Kushi - He claims revelation, so he had to teach something new to the pagans. But he kept the worship of the black stone

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "He claims revelation, so he had to teach something new to the pagans"

Sure, it was new to the pagan Arabs, but it wasn't a new message. It was the return of the pure faith of Abraham himself (peace be upon him).

Majid wrote: "But he kept the worship of the black stone"

You don't seem to know what "worship" means. No one worships the Black Stone. It's regarded with respect as a relic from the smoking gun catalyst of the Great Deluge of Noah (pbuh), but it's not worshiped.

Majid Al Kushi - Muhammad kissed it during Hajj. He said it will come in the day of judgement and testify on behalf of the Muslim who worships it

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "Muhammad kissed it during Hajj"

So? Did he pray to it, asking it for favors and mercy? lol You need to look up the definition of "worship," bro.

Majid wrote: "He said it will come in the day of judgement and testify on behalf of the Muslim who worships it"

In the Qur'an, Allah said literally everything will be given the power to speak, bear witness and testify, including our very own individual body parts. Does that mean we worship them, too? 😏

Majid Al Kushi - read your answer and judge if it makes sense

Muhammad Rasheed - English is my mother tongue. How about you run it through Google Translate so you don't remain so confused.

Muhammad Rasheed - There were no doubt pagans from the days of ignorance who really did worship the Black Stone. We can reasonably expect the Stone to bear witness against those fools on the Last Day, sure. No Muslim worships it though, so you don't have an argument here.

What else do you have?

Majid Al Kushi - kissing a stone in the most holy place of Islam hoping it will testify for in the last day is pure paganism

Muhammad Rasheed - Kissing the Sign of Allah is an act of respect for one of the relics, it's not an act of worship. lol Do you worship your parents, wife & kids when you kiss them?

Majid wrote: "hoping it will testify"

I don't "hope" it will testify, I expect it to testify per the Word of the One God who sent the thing to earth to activate the Great Flood's destruction.

Muhammad Rasheed - "Pure paganism" is worshiping the very, very human son of Mary as a divine entity. You may want to knock it off.

Majid Al Kushi - I don't kiss them to forgive my sins. As for kissing Idols as an act of worship here is a reference

‭(I Kings‬ ‭19:18‬ ‭NKJV‬) Yet I have reserved seven thousand in Israel, all whose knees have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has not kissed him.”

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "I don't kiss them to forgive my sins"

Me neither. I kiss it because my prophet kissed it as a sign of respect towards his Lord's relic. lol

Majid wrote: "and every mouth that has not kissed him"

What does kissing Baal's idols in actual pagan worship have to do with Muslims kissing the Black Stone in non-worshipful respect of the One God's holy relic? You appear to have confused yourself again.

Muhammad Rasheed - For example, the Ark of the Covenant contains the Rod of Aaron (pbuh), the Tablets of the Commandments and other relics of God. We Muslims would kiss all of them (if the Ark wouldn't zap us for the presumption) for the same reason we kiss the Black Stone. These are all Signs of the Supreme Creator and they deserve our respect as proof of our belief. That respect is not worship. lol

There are no people on earth more anti-idolatry than us Muslims. No one recognizes this more than you Christians, since we've been giving you guys flack over your very pagan worship of the final Hebrew prophet for the last 1400 yrs. Trust me, we know the difference between worship versus respect and certainly more than you do.

Muhammad Rasheed - Majid wrote: "you better follow the Quran, which tells you about a claimed prophecy attributed to Jesus (a prophet will come after me named Ahmed) show it to me please in the Injeel"

lol You didn't want to follow up on this? I only asked you to rephrase it since nobody in their right mind actually believes that the collected letters of Paul the False with the anonymously-written four Pauline Gospels are actually the divinely revealed Injeel preached by Jesus. Those are two completely different works.

Thursday, October 5, 2023

A Flabby Flex Attempt

 

[original cartoon pending]


CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "A Flabby Flex Attempt.'" Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 00 Date 2023 [cartoon pending]. Permanent marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.


CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

*************************************************


Chris Bast - Anything's possible, but in this case it would have taken a much longer time. Like, multiple generations long.

Realistically slavery would have eventually faded away no matter what happened. Industrialization makes slavery inevitably unprofitable. But that would have taken so long we might have gone well into the 20th century before slavery finally ended for good.

To accelerate the process, we would have to engineer, essentially, an industrial revolution in the Southern states. Someone would have had to convince the South AND the North that a grand program of economic reform was necessary and practical. That could have, in theory, weaned the South off of slavery. But like I said, it would take a long time. A lot of elections would have to go right for this to work.

Although that doesn't address the cultural problem. Making slavery unprofitable doesn't make blacks and whites equal, socially speaking. You might have ended slavery but you'd probably still have something resembling Jim Crow for a very long time.

The Civil War was unfortunate, but compared to the several generations of work that could have gone wrong at multiple points, I think it was the lesser evil.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “Realistically slavery would have eventually faded away”

Realistically, no one would willingly give up free slave labor. It would never just fade away; people have to be forced to stop doing wrong when they lack the moral fabric to do the right thing.

Chris Bast - M. Rasheed wrote: "Realistically, no one would willingly give up free slave labor."

Nonsense. There's no such thing as “free” labor. Even slaves have to be fed, clothed, and housed. Machines don't. They cost less money and take up less space. And they don't ever revolt.

People will absolutely willingly give up “free” slave labor when the alternative is probably cheaper.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “Nonsense. There's no such thing as ‘free’ labor.”

That’s the formal definition. You’re right though that EVERYTHING costs something as your very misplaced pedantic point.

Chris wrote: “Even slaves have to be fed, clothed, and housed.”

True. So, the pre-Civil War version of U.S. chattel slavery was replaced with the mass incarcerate state, where the U.S. gov paid for the overhead of the convict leasing modern version of slave labor and businesses pay a fee to use that labor force.

Chris Bast - Oh please. A minuscule percent of the labor in this country is done by prisoners.

Knock that racial chip off your shoulder and join us in the real world.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “Oh please. A minuscule percent of the labor in this country is done by prisoners.”

A minuscule percentage of the pre-Civil War populace owned slaves, too, but the nation still ran on the chattel slave economy. You don’t have a point. Checkmate.

Chris wrote: “Knock that racial chip off your shoulder”

I don’t actually have a “racial chip” on my shoulder, since the weaponization of African & Caribbean immigration reveals that America’s “peculiar” systemic racism legacy is actually xenophobe-based discrimination against my American Descendants of Slavery ethnic group and not racial after-all.

Chris wrote: “and join us in the real world.”

Based on the strength of your argument (such as it is), I can’t say I understand what you mean by that. I doubt it means you are a fan of the Tate Bros. lol

Chris Bast - Okay, you realize we can all see who you are replying to, right? You don’t have to keep repeating who you’re quoting like a child.

M. Rasheed wrote: "the nation still ran on the chattel slave economy."

Not even close to true.

M. Rasheed wrote: "I don’t actually have a 'racial chip' on my shoulder"

You’re only lying to yourself.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “You don’t have to keep repeating who you’re quoting like a child.”

This must be a form of the Tone Police Fallacy. lol

Chris wrote: “Not even close to true.”

It’s quite true.

Chris wrote: “You’re only lying to yourself.”

Since you’ve resorted to fallacies and willfully ignorance denials that we both know you have zero evidence for, it’s clear which one of us is actually lying to ourselves with a reddened face. lol



Chris Bast - M. Rasheed wrote: "This must be a form of the Tone Police Fallacy. lol"

That’s…not a fallacy.

M. Rasheed wrote: "It’s quite true."

I know you really want to believe that, but…

M. Rasheed wrote: "Since you’ve resorted to fallacies"

I’m convinced you don’t know what that word means.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “That’s…not a fallacy.”

Geez. Do you know anything at all? Your existence must be pretty sad living in a fact/knowledge/truth void.



Chris wrote: “I know you really want to believe that, but…”

…somehow you believe that no one wanted to use free slave labor in a free slave labor economy. smdh I think you have a ‘being wrong fetish.’ You love it. lol

Chris wrote: “I’m convinced you don’t know what that word means.”

hahahahaha At this point, you should delete your account.

Chris Bast - M. Rasheed wrote: "Do you know anything at all?"

Do you? Just because some idiot wrote it up on a blog and it got thrown into the google algorithm doesn’t make it a formal (or informal) fallacy.

Besides, you are not in a position to complain about fallacies since your every comment is full of them. Indeed, you are using that very “fallacy” (which is not really a fallacy) right now.

M. Rasheed wrote: "smdh I think you have a ‘being wrong fetish.’ You love it. lol"

Ad hominem fallacy.

M. Rasheed wrote: "hahahahaha At this point, you should delete your account."

Appeal to ridicule fallacy.

I guess you either really don’t know what fallacies are, or you really really like them.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris wrote: “Do you?”

I certainly know more than you do on the topic of U.S. race relations. You appear to solely rely upon a foundation of white supremacist emotionalism as your evidence sources.

Chris wrote: “Just because some idiot wrote it up on a blog and it got thrown into the google algorithm doesn’t make it a formal (or informal) fallacy.”

True. Fortunately for our purposely, this blog is actually the structured explanation of fallacies using the book Logically Fallacious by Dr. Bo Bennett as the source text. So, we don’t need to fear being taken by “some idiot” who doesn’t know what he is talking about, as the title is itself well-sourced and peer-reviewed in the proper fashion.

Chris wrote: “Besides, you are not in a position to complain about fallacies”

“Complain” isn’t the appropriate term here. “Amused” would be more accurate, since I’m watching you flip around like a beached fish desperately trying to save face. lol

Chris wrote: “(which is not really a fallacy)”

To be clear, “tone policing” is indeed an official logical fallacy, and described as such within every definition from any source you’d care to use, since you hate blogs published by the “idiot” at the top of my casual Internet search for the term.

Anyway, I’m not guilty of tone policing you at all and have managed to skillfully address your actual (weak) message content. I challenge you to demonstrate HOW I’m guilty of the charge, if ye are truthful. ;)

Chris wrote: “Ad hominem fallacy.”

For example, in order to successfully prove that I’m guilty of the ad hominem, you’d have to show where I purposely ignored the content of your claim to instead attack you as a person. At no point have I done this, and in fact, I instead fully addressed your content point-by-point, using my signature style that you attacked with your tone policing faux-complaint. After I made my counter-point, and it was clear you had nothing to offer to defend your position, then I was free to tease you all I liked. Were I to have committed the ad hominem fallacy, I would have attacked your person INSTEAD of addressing your point, while pretending I addressed your point.

You see, you’ll need to first take the time to understand what the fallacies actually are, and know what they mean, before you are able to use them to call out your opponent’s trip ups. Your argument level is not that advanced, I’m afraid. Did you somehow believe it was? Based on what exactly? I’ll admit bafflement at your misplaced confidence based on what you’ve demonstrated thus far.

Chris wrote: “Appeal to ridicule fallacy.”

Again, the fallacy claim is only true if the opponent ridicules you instead of addressing your content. I did nothing of the sort. All of my ridicule came after you proved incapable of defending your position and were thoroughly checkmated and thus, butthurted, as we see demonstrated here in your enthusiastic fish-flopping exercise.

Monday, October 2, 2023

Smearing Your Ethnic Crazy-Town on a Whole Race

 

Become an M. Rasheed Patreon Subscriber!

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "Smearing Your Ethnic Crazy-Town on a Whole Race." Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 02 Oct 2023.  Water Soluble Marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.


CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!










________________________________

Get a signed copy of M. Rasheed's first novel!











Sunday, October 1, 2023

Notes While Observing #20: Cosplay as a Social Engineering Tool

 

Elijah Muhammad mimicking Jiddu Krishnamurti (top)
and Shahid Bolsen mimicking Malcolm X 

A few days ago, I saw a clip of this Shahid Bolsen character and my first impression was that someone told AI to mimic Malcolm X using a white dude's image. Everybody has spent sometime being fascinated with Bro. Malcolm — I'm certainly no exception — so, of course I would recognize an effort to deliberately mimic how he came across in his old 1960s television appearances. I went to this Bolsen dude's YouTube channel to investigate, to see if his account really was set up as an AI platform. It wasn't, but you can see, while scrolling through his video backlist thumbnails, the exact moment when the creative decision was made to begin deliberately mimicking Malcolm X in the aesthetic.

I felt an instant flash of anger, thinking at first this was yet another "Wallace Fard" agent trying to misdirect my people into some more bullsh*t. Did we come full circle? At first, real Islamic missionaries were prevented from converting the abused and dejected jim crow era American Descendant of Slavery (ADOS) ethnic group, and were instead replaced by a succession of grifters pretending to be exotic ideological gurus. That's why Elijah Muhammad's handlers had him mimicking Krishnamurti's accent and going on about the "Asiatic Black man" bit. So, is this Malcolm X impression a white dude's mimicry designed to make him a "guru" from the other direction?

According to Bolsen's channel description, the message is supposed to promote the interests of Muslim majority countries, he just decided to exploit a popular ADOS figure to do it. Unless, like Marcus Garvey, his intention is to attract a bunch of Muslim ADOS followers that he can exploit for his own foreign goals? To successfully pull that off, in addition to fabricating a familiar Malcolm X identity to attract the target group, he would have to build upon a generation of anti-USA/Western rhetoric as provided by the pan-africanists. So, in order to successfully build an ADOS army, Bolsen, like Garvey, would have to convince us that our own interests in our own country weren't worth fighting for, which is 100% how pan-africanists talk.

Interestingly, according to another video of his, Bolsen appears to believe that the racial issues that Malcolm X fought against were fictions invented by Western liberals even as he performs his cosplay of an anti-racism, civil rights leader. How offensive is that? Especially considering he readily admits that Malcolm was not only an influence upon him, but also led Bolsen to eventually accept Al-Islam. Noble enough, but why does he—and many other foreigners besides—think that it's okay to exploit our ADOS historical figure while joining white supremacy in downplaying/dismissing the ADOS freedom struggle? How come you can't use your own cultural heroes? In that, it's similar to whites fabricating a fictional 'white' version of Malcolm X's story to give white youth a socially engineered motivation, instead of using whoever their cultural figures are.

Spike Lee's Malcolm X film was studied to
make the plastic American History X,
because whites don't want to use
their own culture's figures for stuff.

I also wonder, if he is indeed trying to attract ADOS with this performance, if it's similar to white entrepreneurs (like DJ Vlad) who will often court the interest of ADOS to give their product a numbers boost to enable them to leverage into bigger investments later.
A sampling from hundreds of
white-owned, fake "black"
platforms infesting social media


See Also:


Notes While Observing #18: Quantum Thought...?

Notes While Observing #17: How Systemic Racism Works

Notes While Observing #16: The Exclusive White Male Homosexual Club

Notes While Observing #15: Playing the Coon Card

Notes While Observing #14: The Toxicity of Unsolicited "Advice"

Notes While Observing #13: Breaking the Chains of Plunder

Notes While Observing #12: The Sloppiest Cover-Up of All

Notes While Observing #11: Driving the Narrative of 'Whiteness'

Notes While Observing #10: The White Establishment's Plan for Profiting From Black Reparations

Notes While Observing #9: The Descendants of Yakub

Notes While Observing #8: The 1972 Gary Convention

Notes While Observing #7: Strategies of the Discrimination Olympics

Notes While Observing #6: The GOP's International War on Black America

Notes While Observing #5: The Case of the Old Switcheroo

Notes While Observing #4: Risk Responses of the Racial Contract Beneficiary

Notes While Observing #3: Pig Blood, Clinton vs Alton, & Black Twitter

Notes While Observing #2: The Crack in the Musical Bedrock

Notes While Observing #1: Stephen King (Carrie) & Barbra Streisand (Yentl Mendel)

________________________________
MEDIUM: Scanned pen & ink cartoon drawing w/Adobe Photoshop color.

SUBSCRIBE and receive a FREE! Weapon of the People eBook by M. Rasheed!


Monday, September 25, 2023

Rich Watson - Review of Monsters 101, Book One

 


April 6, 2008Monsters 101, Book One: From Bully to MonsterM. Rasheed, story and artSecond Sight Graphix

Review by Rich WatsonA grade school bully gets recruited by a clan of monsters to lure kids to them for food, but one girl who sees the potential for good inside the bully makes him question his self-worth. This was a submission in this year’s Glyph Comics Awards (2008) that didn’t make the final cut, a reprint of a collection originally published in 2004. The creator, M. Rasheed, is a regular at the BlackSuperhero.com forums. It looks like it was originally done in installments, either pamphlets or maybe online. It’s 150 pages, so you’re getting a good amount of story here.Monsters 101 is hella violent. Now my generation grew up with Tom & Jerry and Road Runner reruns on Saturday mornings; however, we also had GI Joe, where elite American soldiers and international terrorists constantly took shots at each other and never got hurt; and sanitized Japanese imports like Battle of the Planets (AKA Gatchaman) that didn’t have anywhere near the level of violence as their original incarnations. Generally, I believe kids can handle cartoon violence, especially when the victim is someone who deserves it (Elmer Fudd, Sylvester, Wile E. Coyote, etc.). That’s not the case here. In this book, horrible things happen to kids who don’t deserve it, and we get to see it on-panel. Now, some of it is the kind of violence that defines characters in important ways, like the pivotal scene between Pugg and Katina about two-thirds of the way in. It’s shocking, but at the same time it’s necessary to see. (It’s also difficult to talk about without giving away spoilers.)I question, however, whether we need to see an innocent kid get ripped apart by two hungry monsters who proceed to eat him. From the get-go, we know these monsters want to eat little children. Does it serve the story better to actually see that happen on-panel, or is it better to imply the act – say, have the monsters drag the kid off-panel and cut to reaction shots of Pugg and Katina as they see the deed done? Bad things do happen to good people in kiddie stories sometimes (Bambi’s mom, Simba’s dad, etc.), but I believe creators of all-ages stories have a responsibility to remember their audience when they craft scenes like this, even when it involves fantastic, unreal elements like monsters. And if I were a parent and I saw this scene, where we see the kid’s blood and intestines spill out all over the place (NO JOKE), no way am I letting my kid read this book.In addition to the violence, the language in Monsters 101 is inappropriate. More than a few “damns” and “hells,” some “bastards,” at least one “son of a b*tch,” and “frig/frag/frik” is a little too close to the f-word for my tastes (Pugg says “motherfragger” at least once). This is a particular shame because there’s a decent, if familiar, beauty-and-the-beast-style redemption tale underneath the profanity, although it ends with the death of a character I didn’t want to see die – especially since this book is the first in a series.The design of Pugg and the way Rasheed depicts him throughout the story is wonderful. (Pugg reminded me most of a kiddie version of Sal Buscema’s Hulk! Seriously!) From the way he lumbers through the school halls, to the way he grimaces at schoolteachers and scowls at opponents, and especially to his protective and genuinely affectionate manner towards Katina, Pugg visually comes across as a fully formed, three-dimensional character, and I give the creator props for that. One can quite easily determine his state of mind from the pictures alone. The design of the three monsters falls somewhere between Maurice Sendak’s Wild Things and Pixar’s Mike and Sully – goofy and slightly eerie without being really scary. I think Rasheed overdoes it on the shadows, though. In places it looks like nothing more than a scribble of the brush to indicate light and dark without making any sense, and it doesn’t look professional. And why isn’t Katina on the cover, especially given her pivotal and proactive role in the third act?I wish I could recommend this book, but the liberal use of profanity, couple with certain scenes of gratuitous violence (did I mention Pugg’s six-page, no holds barred fight scene that ends with Pugg bashing his opponent’s head in with a rock?), plus several misspellings in the second half, leads me to conclude that this isn’t the best book for kids to read. C

[ORIGINAL SITE; NOW DEFUNCT] http://www.popcultureshock.com/the-sunday-review-monsters-101/43594/

Friday, September 22, 2023

Son of Batey

 

[original cartoon pending]

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "Son of Batey.'" Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 00 Date 2023 [cartoon pending]. Permanent marker w/Adobe Photoshop color.


CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

*************************************************


Truth And Common Sense Warrior - You assume in the question that black americans are treated differently. They are treated like everyone, according to the content of their character. It's no one's fault if they wish to follow their gangsta lifestyle, get arrested, then play the victim. We all know who commits the highest amount of violent crime and racist hate crimes. Even devil Farrakhan knows that,’ cause he promotes and incites it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You assume in the question that black americans are treated differently.”

Your profile name says you are a “truth warrior,” yet the well-documented truths of Black Americans being discriminated against and economically excluded from society seems to have missed you. The obvious question is why did you respond to this question when you possessed such a clear knowledge deficit and were not qualified to speak on it at all?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “They are treated like everyone, according to the content of their character.”

Not so. The dominant political identity group routinely economically discriminates against Black Americans, continuing the tradition started at the beginning of the slave era when the enslaved Africans were permanently, and unfairly delegated to a hereditary chattel bondsman class by law, continuing the discrimination through the jim crow period up to now in the era of mass incarceration. The “content of their character” line ironically references a speech by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose brutal assassination is what signaled the end of the Civil Rights Movement, not any enlightenment by the white populace. In fact, their behavior only got worse, even on the liberal side.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “It's no one's fault if they wish to follow their gangsta lifestyle, get arrested, then play the victim.”

The so-called “gangsta lifestyle” was established by the CIA when, on the orders of president Ronald Reagan, pumped crack into the Black American community and radicalized the youth into hyper-violent trafficking gangs in order to siphon out the little bit of manufacturing wealth to fund the Contras war. Blaming the artificially-impoverished victims for the effects of a multi-billion dollar U.S. government long-con is evil and on-brand for your group.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “We all know who commits the highest amount of violent crime and racist hate crimes.”

Do we? I know I do (hint: racketeering corrupt white businessmen, white politicians & their blue collar lackeys), but your true knowledge is covered up by your partisan-flavored, propagandist nonsense.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Even devil Farrakhan knows that,’ cause he promotes and incites it.”

Despite his personal flaws, and the treacherous flaws of his organization, Farrakhan’s efforts to call out the evils of white supremacy neither promotes nor incites the crime our own complicit US gov established.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior - You also assume that it’s okay to follow the example of a sexually perverted pedophile ( muhammed the prophet of islam, or the drug dealer Fard Muhammed) tyrant whose message continues to promote murder and rape of non- muslims. Your name is his name. Your ghetto mentality is why you addressed me with your lies. Suddenly the cia has domination of the actions of individual people? That has got to be the most low iq bs I have heard in years. ( how much crack did you smoke before professing pisslam?) How did you get to that level of stupid? Sounds like your mind perversion is condoned by a race baiting degenerate named devil Farrakhan. Just send your islamic white killing spaceships (1500 of them plus a mothership🤣🤣)to come and get me. My god, you people are the propietors of a sadistic joke. When will people wake up? You can match me on any level because I can tear you to pieces in a debate. I know who you are and how you think. I also can debunk your crack pipe fairy tales. I come from the school of Anton Batey, a decent black person that helped debunk your racist ghetto cult. With me you have no chance of winning in a debate. Zero!!!

Muhammad Rasheed - Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You also assume that it’s okay to follow the example of a sexually perverted pedophile ( muhammed the prophet of islam”

You obviously don’t know anything at all about the religion of Al-Islam. You used the term “debate” at the end of your juvenile, profane tirade, which is comical. Is this how you flex your “truth & common sense” powers? I find both your warrior’s heart and your intellect lacking.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “or the drug dealer Fard Muhammed)”

I’m not in the NOI. Never have been.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “tyrant”

Where’s your evidence that the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was a “tyrant?” Do you even know what a tyrant is?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “whose message continues to promote murder and rape of non- muslims.”

lol In what way does Islam promote that exactly? Let’s see your evidence. Throw down your rod.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Your name is his name.”

Proudly.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Your ghetto mentality”

lol And just where did I exhibit a ghetto mentality? Copy/paste it so we can analyze your claim together.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “is why you addressed me with your lies.”

Again, at the end of your tirade above, you curiously used the word “debate.” Be so kind as to provide your evidence that objectively proves that the historical events I referenced were “lies,” if you please.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Suddenly the cia has domination of the actions of individual people?”

This is a strawman effigy fallacy. The Reagan administration directed the CIA to attack and economically oppress the entire group—not just the individual—the same way they radicalized youth in foreign lands to destabilize sovereign nations on behalf of megacorporate. That they did this to U.S. citizens is a disgrace and clear treason, but people like you dismiss the evil because you are an anti-Black American racist. Shame on you. You didn’t even ask for my proof, you just defaulted to childish name-calling and calling the claims “lies” without any kind of intelligent query. Please note that neither ‘truth’ nor ‘common sense’ work like that, “warrior.”

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “That has got to be the most low iq bs I have heard in years.”

Should I be surprised that you are unaware that the so-called intelligence quotient was debunked and proven fraudulent by scientists? I’m not.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “( how much crack did you smoke before professing pisslam?) How did you get to that level of stupid?”

So far, you haven’t typed anything that suggests you are intelligent on any level. I have noted that you are racist, xenophobic, willfully ignorant, uncouth and profane. This is demonstrably the sum total of your claimed “truth and common sense.” I haven’t given up on you though. You may just be having a bad day. I’ll give you a chance to bring your A-Game.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Sounds like your mind perversion”

Apparently, you believe my mind is perverted for no other reason than because I don’t blindly parrot biased, partisan-flavored rhetoric like you. Is that supposed to mean something to me? You’ll need to present verifiable facts to fill your shallow and delicate “truth” title you wear—which appears to be made of tissue paper. lol

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “is condoned by a race baiting degenerate named devil Farrakhan.”

I’m not in the NOI and I’m not a fan, but if you’re suggesting that Farrakhan is somehow a lower human being than any random money-worshiping, politically corrupt, filthy celebrity name on your side of the ideological aisle, then you must be mentally ill. You just don’t like the idea of ANYONE sticking up for the Black American former slave class ethnic group, whom you despise.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Just send your islamic white killing spaceships (1500 of them plus a mothership🤣🤣)to come and get me. My god, you people are the propietors of a sadistic joke. When will people wake up?”

None of this means anything to me. I’m an orthodox Muslim who follows the Qur’an and the way of the prophet (pbuh). That means I claim no divergent sects of any kind.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You can match me on any level because I can tear you to pieces in a debate.”

Can or can’t? I’ve frankly seen nothing yet to suggest you even know what a debate actually is. I’ll give you the chance to prove yourself though. En garde.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I know who you are and how you think.”

lol Clearly not. But you’ll find out soon enough if you can at least manage to not be a coward.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I also can debunk your crack pipe fairy tales.”

No, you can’t. So far, you’ve only blindly vomited political talking points that aren’t backed by anything of substance.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I come from the school of Anton Batey, a decent black person that helped debunk your racist ghetto cult.”

Really? You mean this clown here whom I destroyed in a 2017 debate, shamed him into deleting his “Proof the Fard/Einstein Debate is Fake” video on YouTube and posted his trouncing up on my trophy wall:


Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “With me you have no chance of winning in a debate. Zero!!!”

Well, if you’re supposed to be Batey’s protégé or whatever, be so kind as to read through our battle and pick up where your slain mentor left off…

…if you’re able. ;)

Truth And Common Sense Warrior - You’re blatant ignorance assumes too much. The racist ghetto cult you are in is bashing what little brain you have left. Get your real name back, not the one of a goat screwing pedophile. You exposed yourself big time when you called yourself Muhammed Rasheed. I knew you were NOI right away. You people ignorant beyond all logic, and hideously evil to boot. You don’t know the freedom you could have by dumping that worthless cult. As if islam weren’t bad enough, you subscribe to a racist ghetto cult which is a second generation cult of the original cult. All of it is BULLSHIT. I lived in the middle east for 3 years. Had you taken a little time to do your homework instead of becoming a ghetto forged bigot of a racist cult, perhaps you wouldn’t have had waste yoyr life in the street selling the “final call”. What a fucking joke that is. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Gotta be a true mindless twit to fall for that bullshit. Next thing you’re going to tell me that a black scientist created the moon by placing high explosives in the earth 66 trillion years ago. Dude, you are a joke by choice. You choose to surround yourself with narccisstic numbskulls who don’t know anything but how to mentally masturbate yourself into the most idiotic cult in America. Come back with something more orginal, not that programmed sissified bs they feed you in that phony ass mosque. What is your real name?

Muhammad Rasheed - Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You’re blatant ignorance assumes too much.”

I’m not ignorant on this topic at all. I did notice that you didn’t counter any of my points. You just posted another emotional, profane tantrum. Is this all you have?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “The racist ghetto cult you are in is bashing what little brain you have left.”

I’m unconvinced you know what ‘racist,’ ‘ghetto,’ or ‘cult’ mean. I’m starting to suspect you’re just typing all the words you’ve heard before…

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Get your real name back, not the one of a goat screwing pedophile.”

You realize you’re insulting the messenger of the One God of Abraham, right? You also realize that hell is eternal torment, right?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You exposed yourself big time when you called yourself Muhammed Rasheed.”

lol Meanwhile, I’ve never called myself that. I’m amused that you can’t spell even when you’re looking directly at the word, but you had the nerve to call me “low iq.” smh

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I knew you were NOI right away.”

Meanwhile, I’ve never been in the NOI. I’m an orthodox Muslim. I guess we can add poor reading comprehension to your list of offenses.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You people ignorant beyond all logic, and hideously evil to boot.”

You think the NOI are “evil?” In what way?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You don’t know the freedom you could have by dumping that worthless cult.”

You’re a white man in Catalonia who is completely ignorant about U.S. race relations saying this to me. How can you lecture someone when you don’t know anything? You know who else does this bit outside of you white supremacists? Four year olds. When they do it, they’re just mimicking the cadence of adults. When you do it, you think I’m supposed to just believe your empty, hateful rhetoric for no other reason than because an ignorant, hateful white person is saying it.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “As if islam weren’t bad enough”

“Bad” in what way?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “you subscribe to a racist ghetto cult which is a second generation cult of the original cult. All of it is BULLSHIT.”

I’m not in the NOI. lol

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I lived in the middle east for 3 years.”

So? Just because you stole money from the USG by being a lazy d*ck on a defense contract somewhere doesn’t mean you bothered to learn anything about Islam — which you could’ve done back home on the Internet at anytime. Plus, there’s a 100% chance that all you did was traffick booze from the U.S. Embassy (or Spanish embassy?) and rent Filipina & Ethiopian prostitutes, like every other white guy contracting in the Middle East. How does that make you an expert on Islam again? I’m confident it doesn’t. lol Y’all just say anything.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Had you taken a little time to do your homework”

Anytime you wanna start the debate and demonstrate you’re an expert on the subject — waitin’ on you, bud. Are you going to yap or fight? Maybe you’re stalling while you wait for Anton to show up and save you. lol

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “instead of becoming a ghetto forged bigot of a racist cult , perhaps you wouldn’t have had waste yoyr life in the street selling the ‘final call.’”

I’m not in the NOI. Never have been.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “What a fucking joke that is. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Gotta be a true mindless twit to fall for that bullshit. Next thing you’re going to tell me that a black scientist created the moon by placing high explosives in the earth 66 trillion years ago. Dude, you are a joke by choice. You choose to surround yourself with narccisstic numbskulls who don’t know anything but how to mentally masturbate yourself into the most idiotic cult in America.”

I guess this counts as a particularly elaborate version of the strawman effigy logical fallacy, performed so you can pretend to be half-illiterate & crazy so you don’t have to actually accept this duel challenge and epically lose face like Batey did.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Come back with something more orginal”

How about re-read my last post and respond to it appropriately instead of being a coward? Let’s try that.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior - Cowards hide behind vendictive lies. You answer like a well brain washed uncle Tom on the plantation. I know what you believe and how to debunk it. Your character defect of envy couoled with toxic pride left you vulnerable to the noi satanic ghetto cult. YOU’RE IN A RACIST GHETTO CULT!! You Ball lick9ng Murderers need to grow up and man up. You probably have never traveled past the margin of your shithole ghetto except to spread your racist venom. Going to the “haj” is the exact opposite of traveling. You polarize your sick mind with your pussified blanky. Your co-dependence level is so profound that you will never know true freedom. You allow cultic scumbags to define your destiny, all because of your racist hate for whites. Isn’t it time for you to grow a pair and become a real man in the real world. Why must you hide behind that pussy cult?

Muhammad Rasheed - Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Cowards hide behind vendictive lies.”

How do you know my points are lies? What metric are you using to determine this?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You answer like a well brain washed uncle Tom on the plantation.”

lol Am I? I’m merely asking you to prove your assertions, something that a skilled debater would have zero problem providing. You appear to be challenged in this regard. I wonder why?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I know what you believe”

You appear to be confused as to whether I’m an orthodox Muslim or a member of the NOI, despite me doing you a favor and definitively answering the question for you a couple of times at least. Naturally, I consider this performance a stall tactic designed to hide your transparent bluffing and ignorance.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “and how to debunk it.”

Will we be getting to that part anytime soon, or will you continue your shallow & profane yapping about it? My patience isn’t inexhaustible.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Your character defect of envy”

??? What am I supposed to be envious of? The jackassery of your unrepentant hellbound state? Why would I be envious of that?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “couoled with toxic pride”

You don’t think your identity group isn’t exactly as prideful as you’re projecting at me? Yours is worse since it’s based on a degenerate, monopolizing, racketeering organized crime culture.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “left you vulnerable to the noi satanic ghetto cult.”

I’m not in the NOI it turns out.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “YOU’RE IN A RACIST GHETTO CULT!!”

News to me. When did this occur?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You Ball lick9ng Murderers need to grow up and man up.”

This will be difficult for me considering my membership in this “cult” you’re talking about is fictional, as it’s only in your head. At this point, I need to ask you to confine your accusations to reality so we may both contribute to the discussion. lol

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You probably have never traveled past the margin of your shithole ghetto except to spread your racist venom.”

Even if I didn’t, what difference would it make? I’m still smarter than you, I still beat up your mentor in our debate and shamed him into deleting his YouTube channel, and I recognize you probably still have traces of the venereal diseases you picked up from your unhealthy fascination with Filipina & Ethiopian prostitutes when you were contracting in the Middle East. #ExpereinceIsTheFoolsTeacher

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Going to the ‘haj’ is the exact opposite of traveling.”

I literally have to “travel” in order to get from Point-A to Mecca. That’s actually real, not a metaphor or code word for anything. Are you making up your own definition of “traveling” for the sake of your weird non-point? Why would I be obligated to take that foolishness seriously?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You polarize your sick mind with your pussified blanky.”

English, please. I’m unfamiliar with the Catalonian colloquial.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Your co-dependence level is so profound that you will never know true freedom.”

The freedom of being a buffoon completely devoid of knowledge and truth of any kind such as you display? You’ll have to walk that road without me, I’m afraid. lol

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You allow cultic scumbags to define your destiny”

I’m pretty sure you proudly name-dropped Anton Batey—who’s himself a member of the very cultic Mises Institute—as your mentor. Did you forget already? Our thread isn’t even that long…

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “all because of your racist hate for whites.”

I don’t hate anyone. I only reasonably hate evil actions inflicted upon my group and that certainly doesn’t make me a racist.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Isn’t it time for you to grow a pair and become a real man in the real world.”

I honestly don’t have a clue what this is supposed to be code for when you say it.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Why must you hide behind that pussy cult?”

What cult?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior - The nation of islam is a racist ghetto cult full of black nazis. I know things about you black devils and your sick cult. I know about tge zebra murders and how you phony ass muslims incite violence against whites. I know how and why you think what you think. You’re a black supremacist with the superiority of a toad on a freeway.

Your fairy tales are at the level of sesame street. Debunkable on every turn except when dealing with ignorant morons such as yourself. You can’t expect me to believe you’re not an ignoramus when believing “N” Farrakhan and his spaceship fairy tales. You don’t believe that childish bullshit do you?

From here we begin the unraveling of your ghetto mind. Just answer “yes or “no”.

Do you believe the nation of islam has 1500 mini planes and a mother ship as their main base?

Please answer just so we can get a good laugh at your expense.

Muhammad Rasheed - Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “The nation of islam is a racist ghetto cult full of black nazis.”

At this point, it’s clear that you aren’t even reading my comments. I’m starting to suspect that you don’t know how to read—maybe you’re just talking into an AI app and copy/pasting what it transcribes as your ‘responses.’ That’s really the only thing that explains your behavior. What was the point of dragging Batey into your delusions? Was he your weed man?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I know things about you black devils and your sick cult.”

There is not a single “sick black cult” in existence that is worse than what your people have done in the world, and for the love of money no less. smh

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I know about tge zebra murders”

What does that have to do with me?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “and how you phony ass muslims”

I’m a real and practicing Muslim, thanks.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “incite violence against whites.”

Even if they did, you objectively deserved it. A heavy hand is the only thing your group listens to, that and hitting you in your precious, precious stolen wealth hoards.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “I know how and why you think what you think.”

Meanwhile, you’re too cowardly to even read my comments and honestly respond to them. You possess a chronic case of strawman-itis.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You’re a black supremacist with the superiority of a toad on a freeway.”

A “black supremacist” is nothing more than an agent for white supremacy, whose job is to direct energy away from the real Black American political advocacy & liberation movements and confuse the people.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Your fairy tales are at the level of sesame street.”

Sesame Street is a children’s educational program, not a “fairy tale.” Use a more appropriate simile, please. Thanks.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Debunkable on every turn except when dealing with ignorant morons such as yourself.”

Are you saying you can perform true debate with anyone except for me? Is that why you are being a ducking coward in this thread? An interesting public admission, assuming you aren’t simultaneously high on edibles or alcohol or whatever.

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “You can’t expect me to believe you’re not an ignoramus when believing ‘N’ Farrakhan and his spaceship fairy tales. You don’t believe that childish bullshit do you?”

I’m not a member of the NOI nor have I ever been. What does the “N” mean?

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “From here we begin the unraveling of your ghetto mind. Just answer ‘yes’ or ‘no.’”

Is it possible that you really believe you’ve been performing at a high-level throughout this whole thread? Dude, you ARE high. wtf

Truth And Common Sense Warrior wrote: “Do you believe the nation of islam has 1500 mini planes and a mother ship as their main base?”

I’m not a member of the Nation of Islam (NOI) nor have I ever been.



Monday, September 18, 2023

The Greatest Slave of All

 

[original cartoon pending]

CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "The Greatest Slave of All.'" Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 00 Date 2023 [cartoon pending]. Pen & ink w/Adobe Photoshop color.


CLICK & SUBSCRIBE below for the Artist's Description of this #MRasheedCartoons image:

M. Rasheed on YouTube!

M. Rasheed on BitChute!

*************************************************

Q: What made Uncle Tom's Cabin controversial?

Jean-Marie Valheur - [Linked Answer on Quora

Muhammad Rasheed - Jean-Marie wrote: “Uncle Tom eventually has the good fortune of being owned by a”

*cringe*

Are you a Filipino, Jean-Marie?

Jean-Marie wrote: “I know that, in later years, it has become controversial because African Americans dislike the forgiving nature of Uncle Tom”

You admit later in your Answer that the work would became a distorted caricature through the numerous remakes across different media. Do you not think it is much more likely that’s the reason that modern Black Americans have come to flinch away from the story? The Black American former slave class has always been a primarily forgiving group who just want to be economically included in our own country and have the endless discrimination and exploitations cease.

It’s painful reading an outsider’s opinions presented as definitive truths, but that has been the tradition in Black America’s relationship with our foes & rivals.

Slack-Man - I agree that being an outsider to the issue can be a curse & blessing, though France had some parallel experiences.

Nevertheless, his approach was to examine the impact the original story had on the US when it was written.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, the off-putting part is the tradition where the outsider treats their opinion of the matter as the default truth and often any pushback or alternative analysis from the actual group depicted in the fiction will get you muted or blocked for daring to pushback on the outsider’s opinion. Apparently, only members of that outsiders own identity group are allowed to challenge his/hers opinion of U.S. race relations history.

This has been my experience on Quora especially.

Muhammad Rasheed - For example, literally EVERYTHING about this post found below in this thread is “problematic” 



— but if I label it what it really it, it would probably get my comment deleted and the comments section closed.

Slack-Man - I agree that being an outsider to the issue can be a curse & blessing, though France had some parallel experiences.

Nevertheless, his approach was to examine the impact the original story had on the US when it was written.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, the off-putting part is the tradition where the outsider treats their opinion of the matter as the default truth and often any pushback or alternative analysis from the actual group depicted in the fiction will get you muted or blocked for daring to pushback on the outsider’s opinion. Apparently, only members of that outsiders own identity group are allowed to challenge his/hers opinion of U.S. race relations history.

This has been my experience on Quora especially.

Slack-Man - Well, I was just blocked by someone who I was have a rather civil conversation with, though we were in disagreement.

Look, you can disagree with me all day long as long as you are polite. Everyone has the right to be wrong, including me.

Muhammad Rasheed - You and I have always had civil discussions when our paths crossed. I do remember having a discussion with someone on one of your threads related to the Dilbert controversy with someone else that turned ugly out of the blue and the discussion was missing afterwards, which shocked you as much as it did me.

Muhammad Rasheed - Apparently, some folks are actually seething behind a barely-holding-on faux-civil façade when it comes to certain topics…

Muhammad Rasheed - I think a big part of the problem is that some topics are so controversial, that people have a tendency to want to FORCE a certain narrative to be true without the discomfort of doing any actual research into it. Their forced narrative makes them feel better about it in a shallow way, and they feel validated when the people who think exactly the way they do about the topic and are just as uninformed, high-five and agree with their forced narrative.

That’s why they kneejerk react so negatively at pushback derived from the historical sources they pointedly avoided to keep from feeling bad.

Karen Fowler - The author is not presenting them as truths. What would you prefer — that he preface every single sentence with “I think” or “in my opinion?” The post would soon become unreadable.

Everything anyone says on here is opinion unless it’s cited to be from someone else or is expressing some known mathematical or scientific truth.

In this particular case, we’re discussing the interpretation of a work of literature. By definition there is no absolute objective truth of the matter.

And, last but not least — don’t read painful stuff if it bothers you to that extent.

Muhammad Rasheed - Karen wrote: “The author is not presenting them as truths.”

Sure he(?) is. You can tell by how that second line I quoted begins (“I know”).

Karen wrote: “What would you prefer”

Freedom from anti-Black racism in all of its forms — which includes the passive-aggressive gaslighty ones popular in Quora threads, “Karen.”

Karen wrote: “that he preface every single sentence with ‘I think’ or ‘in my opinion?’”

Placed once at the top of his rant would suffice, thank you.

Karen wrote: “The post would soon become unreadable.”

Obviously, we hold radically different views over what’s subjectively readable or not. I thought it was trash to begin with, but you lot all came to congratulate him and high-five him for supporting a long-running agreed upon narrative, or whatever.

Karen wrote: “Everything anyone says on here is opinion unless it’s cited to be from someone else or is expressing some known mathematical or scientific truth.”

Or unless a particular demographic is expressing the opinion with their penchant for wanting to force it down the throats of those not in their demographic and pretend it’s a truth, which is a common (and insufferable) trait of a particular demographic.

Karen wrote: “In this particular case, we’re discussing the interpretation of a work of literature. By definition there is no absolute objective truth of the matter.”

By a normal and reasonable definition, sure. lol Unfortunately, “normal & reasonable” rarely come into play during U.S. race relations encounters.

Karen wrote: “And, last but not least”

lol Who are you again?

Karen wrote: “don’t read painful stuff if it bothers you to that extent.”

TRANSLATION: “Don't read stuff written about or that references your ethnic group because your opinion about what we make up about you is not welcome.”

Yeah, thanks for confirming my point.

Karen Fowler - In the words of Sgt Hulka, “lighten up, Francis.” No one’s shoving anything down your throat. It’s his analysis of Uncle Tom’s Cabin. You have your own unique take on it, which, from your comments I think is absolutely wrong, but OK…that’s what makes horse racing, as the saying goes.

And no, when I said “painful” that’s exactly what I meant — not the nonsense you “translated” it to. No one in this discussion made up anything about black people (except you, perhaps). Your opinion is as welcome or unwelcome as anyone else’s, irrespective of subject matter or race. In this case, your opinion on Uncle Tom’s Cabin is irrelevant to me; I’m not seeing how you have any special insight into things that happened almost two centuries ago.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol at Karen taking away her ‘Reply’ button after posting her snippy tripe at me. #Classic

Karen wrote: “In the words of Sgt Hulka, ‘lighten up, Francis.’”

No thanks. People I don’t know trying to police how I respond to stuff is unwelcome, “Karen.”

Karen wrote: “No one’s shoving anything down your throat.”

Sure, they are. It’s normal in the U.S. race relations for the dominant political identity group to try to force their opinions of literally anything down everyone else’s throat, especially mine.

Also notice that you literally posted your unsolicited opinion at me and then took away your ‘Reply’ button to keep me from responding. lol What else would that mean other than you want your white woman word to a Black man to be the FINAL WORD. hahaha 

Karen wrote: “which, from your comments I think is absolutely wrong”

lol Based on what?

Karen wrote: “And no, when I said ‘painful’ that’s exactly what I meant”

I don’t believe you.

Karen wrote: “not the nonsense you ‘translated’ it to.”

My translation fit the ‘Karen-ish’ and snippy response of your first post. Like a petty and intrusive Ally McBeal character.

Karen wrote: “No one in this discussion made up anything about black people”

Sure, they did. In fact, literally all of them.

Karen wrote: “(except you, perhaps)”

TRANSLATION: You don’t know your own people and we know them better than you do.

lol You are very on-brand, “Karen.”

Karen wrote: “Your opinion is as welcome or unwelcome as anyone else’s”

lol Sure. Because that fits so well with your opinion that you know my people better than I do.

Karen wrote: “irrespective of subject matter or race.”

I guess that explains your snippy effort to control how I respond to my ethnic group’s traditional rivals making up nonsense about us and expecting me to be alright with it like it’s no big deal — as if that very concept didn’t lead directly to slavery and jim crow. smh

Karen wrote: “In this case, your opinion on Uncle Tom’s Cabin is irrelevant to me”

*gasp!*

Karen wrote: “I’m not seeing how you have any special insight into things that happened almost two centuries ago.”

Well, considering your demographic is the literal exact one fighting to keep the negative aspects of U.S. race relations from being taught in our schools to prevent you from having any kind of political disadvantage, my insight into the matter would be one of informed truth versus your own willful ignorance.

Jim Whitney - Thank you for enlightening us on the story of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”. Now I can see why a person I admired growing up, Martin Luther King has been called an “Uncle Tom” because his message was a peaceful one, verses todays BLM message.

Muhammad Rasheed - Dr. King was assassinated by his political foes and so was Malcolm X, who believed in the right to bear arms and defend hearth & home from attacks both foreign and domestic. They were both killed for their pro-Black American views within a few years of one another. Obviously the point had nothing to do with whether they were peaceful in their protest method or not.

By the way, ‘BLM’ turned out to be an LGBT front organization that exploited Black trauma to raise funds for our political rivals.

Rigby Parr - Malcom X was murdered by the nation of islam

Muhammad Rasheed - Malcolm X was murdered by Hoover’s infiltration plants within the NOI.


Jeffrey Dubiel - I wonder how many people who use the term “Uncle Tom” disparagingly have even read the book.

Muhammad Rasheed - Even if they did, do you believe they would automatically agree with the ‘turning the other cheek’ doctrine and allowing the bad guy of the tale to win?

Jeffrey Dubiel - No, I wouldn’t expect that turning the other cheek would be an especially popular viewpoint. It never has been. But that’s not the point. What Harriet Beecher Stowe’s novel does is to meet slavery on its own ground and expose its moral bankruptcy. American slavers, remember, justified their position by saying they were improving the lot of the black man, teaching him Christianity and guiding him on the right path. Some may have even believed it. But Uncle Tom’s Cabin demonstrates with unmistakable clarity what an outrageous lie that was. The only ones who benefited from slavery were the slavers. There’s plenty of room for the men of action, the Nat Turners and John Browns, in the fight against slavery. What Harriet Beecher Stowe did was to give the Abolitionist movement a moral foundation that anyone in that religious age could grasp.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeffrey wrote: “No, I wouldn’t expect that turning the other cheek would be an especially popular viewpoint.”

I don’t think “popular” would be the correct term or action here. I think we’re looking for “appropriate.” If you’re in the middle of an active war against a ferociously hostile enemy, would the Christ’s “turn the other cheek” message be appropriate? Of course not. There’s a time and a place for everything.

Jeffrey wrote: “It never has been.”

Has any tenet of high-level righteousness (“goody-two-shoes”) ever been “popular?” It doesn’t seem likely.

Jeffrey wrote: “But that’s not the point. What Harriet Beecher Stowe’s novel does is to meet slavery on its own ground and expose its moral bankruptcy.”

Literally everyone knew that slavery was morally bankrupt from the beginning. The argument wasn’t new. The problem with America’s “peculiar” institution was 1) the uniqueness of building a permanent, hereditary chattel system that specifically targeted racial phenotype, and 2) the rank hypocrisy of a free slave labor economy in the “land of the free.” The abolitionist movement was a Christian church movement, and conflicting the slave holders through their religion was their core tactic.

Jeffrey wrote: “American slavers, remember, justified their position by saying they were improving the lot of the black man”

lol No, the people knew better. There were quite enough free Blacks around to keep anyone from believing that silliness. The rhetoric you’re talking about was invented later, pretending that Africa was a land of tree-dwelling savages to prevent the new generations of slave from wanting to go back—rhetoric that carried over into the modern day.

Jeffrey wrote: “teaching him Christianity and guiding him on the right path.”

Meanwhile, Charles Colcock Jones, Jr., in his enlightening ‘The Religious Instruction of the Negroes in the United States (1842)’ pointed out that none of his fellows among the slave holder class wanted to give the enslaved Blacks their religion (Part III - Objections to the Religious Instruction of the Negroes in the Slave States) because they recognized it as an inherently empowering message. What they ended up doing, because they knew slavery was very wrong and feared for their souls in the afterlife, was to cobble together just enough of the Word and religion to enable the slave to be saved, but without the empowering part (and tellingly without the Exodus story).

Jeffrey wrote: “Some may have even believed it.”

Nah.

Jeffrey wrote: “But Uncle Tom’s Cabin demonstrates with unmistakable clarity what an outrageous lie that was.”

It demonstrated it from an angle or two, but it by no means represented the full picture. You needed to read it from the actual slave narratives, too, to get the rest.

Jeffrey wrote: “The only ones who benefited from slavery were the slavers.”

lol No. Under a free slave labor economy, quite a few people benefited from it. Just like there’s a quite a few people here in these times who benefit from keeping the minimum wage low. Insurance fraud was also huge back then.

Jeffrey wrote: “There’s plenty of room for the men of action, the Nat Turners and John Browns, in the fight against slavery.”

Uprisings were a never-ending cycle that kept the dominant identity group in a state of tension. It was also normal considering the general brutality of the system. Notice how the common tactic for keeping slave uprising down (savage domestic terror by the proto-police force) is no different from how modern cops keep today’s civil unrest by Black American’s controlled (see: LDJ’s response to the Kerner Commission report findings).

Jeffrey wrote: “What Harriet Beecher Stowe did was to give the Abolitionist movement a moral foundation that anyone in that religious age could grasp.”

No, she didn’t. The abolitionist movement was a Christian movement which drove the national discussion from a moral/ethic conviction. If anything, Stowe drew directly from it during her author planning stage and you see a little of it reflected from her novel in the usual “art reflects life” dance, not vice-versa.

Helmut Worle - Your critique of Jeffrey Dubiel’s comment seems too harsh and completely misses the point of the novel. You apparently would have preferred a violent screed against slavery, which would fit our modern sensibilities on the subject of slavery. What Ms Stowe achieved, however, was to persuade millions of people to her abolitionist view, something John Brown or Nate Turner were not able to do.

Muhammad Rasheed - Helmut wrote: “Your critique of Jeffrey Dubiel’s comment seems too harsh”

The USA’s history of systemic racism against my people has been harsh.

Helmut wrote: “and completely misses the point of the novel.”

Does it?

Helmut wrote: “You apparently would have preferred a violent screed against slavery”

I only prefer the truth.

Helmut wrote: “which would fit our modern sensibilities on the subject of slavery.”

The continuous threat of violent slave uprisings that maintained an atmospheric tension over the time period reveals that it reflected that era’s sensibility, too.

Helmut wrote: “What Ms Stowe achieved, however, was to persuade millions of people to her abolitionist view”

If that were true, then how come it wasn’t the turned hearts of all of these converted pro-abolitionist whites you speak of that freed my enslaved ancestors, but I had to do it myself when the president said we’d be freed if he allowed us to fight in the losing Union’s cause?

I’m not surprised to find that you hold this over-generous fictional high opinion of the morality & ethics of your identity group, I just find it unreasonable that you expect me—the abused victim of the reality of your morality & ethics—to share it.

Randy Carter - I’ll add that Harriet Beecher Stowe was accused of exaggerating the stories of the cruelties of slave owners - only to provide documentation for the examples she had cribbed from. The stories of slaveowner cruelty were just slightly modified versions of the ones told to her by freed and escaped slaves.

Muhammad Rasheed - The folks who wish that America was “great” again, often falsely claim that slavery wasn’t that bad for the people forced by law to live its inherent cruelties. Perhaps they would like to try being permanent hereditary chattel for 250 yrs (followed by another 150 yrs of economic exclusion 2nd class citizenry) and see how they like it?

Neal Lowrey - I never understood the disdain for Uncle Tom. All I can figure is he was not aggressive enough and didn’t put a pick ax in Legree’s head to suit BLM and their Black Panther predecessors. The Roots re wrote woke version where Kunta was killing Americans with the British is more their style. Tom showed plenty courage and resolve helping the girl and her family to escape to Liberia paradise.

Muhammad Rasheed - Neal wrote: “I never understood the disdain for Uncle Tom.”

It seems to be common sense that the real life ethnic group that the ‘Uncle Tom’ character is supposed to represent would take offense to a piece of propaganda written when America was “great” that depicted the Ideal Slave as one that worked super-hard without complaint, bent over backwards to make sure white people were looked after, and ‘turned the other cheek’ without pushback to whatever sociopathic cruelties the evil whites of the story felt like dishing out. After 400 yrs of continuous nonsense, why would a Black American audience not have disdain for such a character written by a white author?

Neal wrote: “All I can figure is he was not aggressive enough and didn’t put a pick ax in Legree’s head”

Would any of your TOP TEN favorite literary or screen-media protagonists put up with any of what ‘Uncle Tom’ allowed? Why are you suggesting that we should accept this over-submissive white-created “black” character as our hero by default?

Neal wrote: “BLM and their Black Panther predecessors”

‘BLM’ is an LGBT front organization that exploited Black trauma to raise funds for our political rivals. They had nothing to do with the Black Panthers. For their part, the Panthers believed in the right to bear arms and defend hearth & home from attacks both foreign and domestic. Why are you suggesting they were violent terrorists?

Neal wrote: “The Roots re wrote woke version where Kunta was killing Americans with the British is more their style.”

That 2016 remake was written and directed by white Jewish creatives and primarily produced by the white Jewish company ‘The Wolper Organization’ that still owned the screen-media rights from 1977. Since that’s the identity group known for pushing the violent communist revolutions, perhaps you mean it’s actually their style?

Jerry Mc Kenna - In a very Christian country Tom was the most Christlike character. Nobody would write it this way today, but at that time it made sense.

Muhammad Rasheed - Amused at the idea that a country that was built upon delegating a whole group to a permanent bondsman class based on racial phenotype would be considered “very Christian.”

Are you actively campaigning to have the Christ rebuke you as someone he doesn’t know on Judgment Day? You may wish to do a deep-dive on exactly what being a “Christian” is supposed to mean.

Jerry Mc Kenna - I am not saying their Christianity was a good version but the people all thought they were Christian,

Muhammad Rasheed - I know, I was just busting your chops to see how you would respond. They were Christian, and that fact is actually what drove the national abolitionist discussion which genuinely conflicted the slave holder to a degree. It just didn’t conflict him enough to willingly want to give up all that free slave labor wealth. His love of money significantly trumped his love of God.

David Shumate - the story still makes sense today brother. its much easier for people to hate each other than to love others as tho they have more value than yourself thats the entire point of the story…it revealed the evil and the love in the hearts of white slave owners and their slaves and today it reveals the vitriol and latent hatred in the hearts of both black an white people today…

but MOST importantly… Uncle Tom was Christlike in his approach to life. in the face of incredible abuse and neglect, he refused to adopt the hatred of his abusers and retaliate or sabotage…instead he demonstrated love and grace at every opportunity.

i have to see him as a brother believer because of the fruit of his life.

and the US was founded and established on purely Christian principles, our founding documents prove that in writing. if someone says otherwise, they are a fool and a liar…and they probably say that the moon landings were entirely staged too…

Theo N - @Muhammad... Your venomous response shows what an ignorant two dimensional shallow human you are

Muhammad Rasheed - What’s “venomous” about my response? That I didn’t blindly parrot support for this white woman’s ideal submissive slave character with my hat in my hand while staring at the floor?

Theo N - That you were not accepting of anothers thoughts and chose to attack them

Stowe's work was socially as well as politically inciteful. It motivated the abolitionist movement and helped to eliminate slavery. What difference does it make what color the author was?

Uncle Tom was not a sellout. Stowe poignantly portrayed him as a martyr to engender support for the abolition of slavery. Had she made him a warrior leading a violent resistance she would have set the battle to end slavery back by years

You could say she helped set the standard for modern peaceful resistance that Ghandi and Martin Luther King would use to accomplish great things.

Islam recognizes a prophet that led the original revolution of peaceful resistance…..

Muhammad Rasheed - Theo wrote: “That you were not accepting of anothers thoughts and chose to attack them”

There’s a difference between “attacking” versus “disagreeing with,” Theo. I accept the other’s right to express their opinions as they like, just as I accept my own right to critique those opinions as I like. I find it odd that you consider it “venomous” to merely have a difference of opinion in the land lauded for its Freedom of Speech. Would it be reasonable to consider this opinion of yours to be a race-based double-standard? Do you believe America’s rights are exclusively for you and not for me?

Theo wrote: “Stowe's work was socially as well as politically inciteful.”

Agreed.

Theo wrote: “It motivated the abolitionist movement”

To a very limited degree. It seemed to do a better job stimulating whites in the national discussion than the slave narratives did, but I would consider that a cultural trait, since the brutality experienced by real life people for the most part inspired yet more apathy for Black people in the white American populace, while a fictional narrative of their own Ideal Slave archetype, broke all publishing records and STILL didn’t make any meaningful changes to the social structure.

Theo wrote: “and helped to eliminate slavery.”

You lot keep saying this, but it’s not even remotely true. Of note, 250 yrs of passionately discussing the issue on the national stage did not free me. Only Lincoln’s desperate battle strategies during a war he was losing led to the abolishment of the slave institution, and even in the 150 yrs after, the ‘venom’ is found in how the dominant political identity group resentfully feels about the former slave class even in this very thread.

Theo wrote: “What difference does it make what color the author was?”

Her “color” is the physical badge descriptor for her economic high-caste position in a country designed around racial politics as the legacy of the free slave labor era “when America was ‘Great.’” How whites talk about the issue among themselves is different from how they talk about it among the former slave class, and how the former slave class talks about it among ourselves. Even between the two of us, it was considered “venomous” for me even to have a difference of opinion with my identity group rivals and how they choose to see a character that’s supposed to represent me written by one of their own. My opinion is considered that of the hostile outsider as if I have zero say in the matter. Historically, that exact same scenario led to both the establishment of the anti-Black slave institution, as well as the establishment of the anti-Black forced jim crow segregation. I likewise had no say in either of them, and my difference of opinion as to whether my group should be economically excluded and oppressed was considered “venomous” for the same reason, i.e., how dare I suggest that whites shouldn’t oppress Black people for their own exclusive benefit?

Now, ironically, I find a member of that group who established & benefited from those laws against me asking what difference does this author’s color make, as if I was the one who invented racial-politics.

Theo wrote: “Uncle Tom was not a sellout.”

Correct. The character represented the Ideal Slave, who allowed his inhumane white masters to inflict all kinds of cruelties upon him without complaint and without it affecting his own pride in a job well done. I can feel the spirit of the ole slave master practically salivating over my description. The term ‘uncle tom’ came to refer to the treacherous Black sellout figure later. The contrary is not any argument I’ve ever tried to make and in fact, this sub-topic part of the discussion lacks interest to me. This is more in line with how words/language change over time and that sort of thing, and is for the most part divorced from the political stuff that currently has my attention.

Theo wrote: “Stowe poignantly portrayed him as a martyr to engender support for the abolition of slavery.”

Meanwhile, the Southern planters and even the cruel racists in the North thought she was full of crap, preachy and arrogant. For their part, the slave holders responded with the “Uncle Remus” type of archetype and pretended the slaves adored their lot in life.

Theo wrote: “Had she made him a warrior leading a violent resistance she would have set the battle to end slavery back by years”

lol Slavery ended because Lincoln was losing the war and he told the slave that if they helped him fight he would set them free. So, I walked out of the cotton field, picked up a rifle for the very first time, received lackluster & resentful training from white Union soldiers who disagreed with Lincoln’s plan, and went on to win the rudimentary freedoms I possess today as a warrior in the bloodiest war in American history.

Because of this fact, a reasonable person may assume that a proliferation of Black badass slave warriors saturating the markets would have inspired an earlier end to the slave institution.

Theo wrote: “You could say she helped set the standard for modern peaceful resistance that Ghandi and Martin Luther King would use to accomplish great things.”

If I was both simple-minded and ignorant of the history of U.S. race relations, then perhaps I could say such foolishness.

Theo wrote: “Islam recognizes a prophet that led the original revolution of peaceful resistance…”

The Christ Jesus (peace be upon him) held the same position about war & violence used as needed in his Lord’s cause as any of the other prophets. Any attempts to pretend he was unique among them are only the result of corruptions in the message by after-the-fact theologians who were influenced by monarchal agendas and quasi-pagan ideologies.

Muhammad Rasheed - David wrote: “the story still makes sense today brother.”

Said the white guy about the story written by a white woman. Should I be surprised at this demonstration of unlimited support for your own political identity group member? Such unification is the secret to your group’s success after-all.

David wrote: “its much easier for people to hate each other than to love others as tho they have more value than yourself thats the entire point of the story…”

This story was written during the most brutal slave institution that ever existed by a member of the group that benefited from that same brutal system, who wrote the protagonist as an ideal slave for the dominant identity group (see: self-serving, conceited, egomaniacal).

David wrote: “it revealed the evil and the love in the hearts of white slave owners”

If there was love in the hearts of the white slave owners, then the U.S. slave institution would have ended by whites demanding it end because it was the right thing to do. It wouldn’t have taken a desperate battle strategy during the bloodiest war in American history to force it to end, would it?

David wrote: “and today it reveals the vitriol and latent hatred in the hearts of both black an white people today…”

lol The vitriol and hatred comes from the resentful former slave holder class (& lackeys), who lament the loss of their free slave labor gravy train (when America was “great”) even now.

David wrote: “but MOST importantly…”

lol Please do tell.

David wrote: “Uncle Tom was Christlike in his approach to life.”

Can we at least agree this was a fictional character written by a slavery era white woman to be the Ideal Slave archetype? I hold hope that in our managing to remain standing soberly upon the facts, you could eventually curb your suspiciously over-giddy excitement about the dude. smh He’s not real and not available for purchase. Relax.

David wrote: “in the face of incredible abuse and neglect, he refused to adopt the hatred of his abusers and retaliate or sabotage…instead he demonstrated love and grace at every opportunity.”

That also sounds like the caricature you all created around Dr. Martine Luther King, Jr., too (after you murdered him, of course). Imagine a slave that meekly allowed you to beat the crap out of him AND still picked more cotton than everyone else AND went out of his way to cater to every over-the-top whim of white folks AND even allowed you to kill him without complaint… Gosh. When I type it out loud like that, I too find myself getting excited from pure sociopathic greed at all of that potential plantation money. ♪ Ch-CHING! ♫ I think I’m changing my mind about the evils of slavery. Maybe we SHOULD bring it back...? [roll eyes]

David wrote: “i have to see him as a brother believer because of the fruit of his life.”

You mean cotton profits?

David wrote: “and the US was founded and established on purely Christian principles, our founding documents prove that in writing.”

You think the obscene wealth amassed from a brutal hereditary chattel institution is “pure Christian principles,” do you? Have you ever bothered to actually read the bible, or were you afraid of the cognitive dissonance brain-freeze it would be sure to generate in you?

David wrote: “if someone says otherwise, they are a fool and a liar…”

Tell me, how many slaves did the Christ have exactly?

David wrote: “and they probably say that the moon landings were entirely staged too…”

One is a matter of faith, the other a matter of 20th century science. You must confuse yourself a lot, Dave.

Thomas Snider - Back then, what choice did Blacks (or Mulattos even) Have? Either be like Tom or Nat Turner.

Muhammad Rasheed - Thomas wrote: “Blacks (or Mulattos even)”

A curious separation considering why the “one-drop rule” was created after the Trans-Atlantic voyages were outlawed.

Thomas Snider - Interesting.

Christopher Welsh - Except her version is still the better.

The mass revenge never works at establishing lasting peace or change.

The angry black man goes on a rampage robbing stores, burning buildings, and chanting hate whitey? Well a LOT of white people are going to do whatever they can to make sure that guy is kept far away, locked up, etc.

The black man that helps the little old white lady across the street, whose kids play on the community soccer team, and who helps clean the park on weekends? Who cares about skin color, I want him as my neighbor and friend.

Uncle Tom's cabin showed that slaves were PEOPLE. Often kind, loving, and skilled (eg literate). Skin color should not have mattered.

Seeing each other as people, not separated based on skin color, is how things get fixed.

Muhammad Rasheed - I would agree the original novel is objectively better, for one because they wrote better in those days. For two, there’s usually a degradation in quality when translating from novels to other media. Jean-Marie pointed out that the characters devolved into wretched political caricatures of even more offensive archetypes.

But the idea that the novel was better only because the Black ‘uncle tom’ character was willingly self-sacrificing for whites, and accepted the cruelties inflicted upon him without complaint or retaliation is an objectively terrible take.

That’s the way white people write their ideal ‘black’ characters and you think it’s “better.” Better for whom? A casual glance at you all’s list of top fan-favorite white characters shows a whole bunch of military badasses taking blood-thirsty revenge over made up foolishness (“They killed his little dog — now he’s out for BLOOD!”), but I can’t have the same type of badass Black characters for REAL LIFE EVIL inflicted upon me. lol

Muhammad Rasheed - Christopher wrote: “Seeing each other as people, not separated based on skin color, is how things get fixed.”

You know, your demographic actually invented “race politics” as we know it, right? After the Bacon Rebellion of the 1600s, the light-skinned descendants of the European ethnic tribes colluded across all socio-political class lines and agreed that the enslaved Africans of North American would be permanently delegated to the chattel bondsman class and you would solely benefit from this new and ‘peculiar’ racial phenotype caste system.

YOU invented the legal concept of separating us based on skin color for purely self-serving reasons, so who are you supposed to be lecturing here?

Christopher Welsh - No I was commenting generally on the post, not the book, in that a desire for the Django unchained or revenge trope stands very little chance at bringing reconciliation.

Instead a christ like approach of loving our neighbors will.

Which was stowes point as well.

Muhammad Rasheed - So, the group with the bullwhips and amassed free slave labor legacy fortunes get Dirty Harry Callahan and John Wick, while the group living with the negative effects of the ‘Black Codes’ and Sundown Town warnings get Uncle Tom.

That sounds like you believe in a mass media propaganda designed to maintain the power structure first established when Stowe’s book was published. What kind of “reconciliation” maintains that same lopsided power dynamic?

Muhammad Rasheed - The actual righteous option, Chris, is just to do right by my people. A robust Reparatory Justice program designed to close the racial wealth gap, pull the American descendants of slavery up out of the artificial impoverishment pit we were forced into for the last 150 yrs, and economically include us into a wealth-building ownership protected class. The Black American as a fully-free, competitive equal in the open free markets, sharing in the wealth of the nation without further political grifts, exploitation & plunder from your team (and friends).

That’s what the only possible foundation to a true reconciliation between our groups would look like. Then we could be truly alright with each other, yes? And I can have all of my own versions of Jack Reacher and Walker Texas Ranger type badasses, too, without you getting nervous about it — it would just be entertaining fun.

What’s wrong with just doing it the right way, for once, and not this crazy “let’s keep it the same but pretend it’s better” stuff you’re talking about?

Doug Hansen - Great synopsis of an important book. Jesus v. Barabbas might company into play as biblical analogy.

Muhammad Rasheed - “Great” in what way? Clear & readable?

David Shumate - @Jean-Marie... Sir, id like to thank you for your well written post. your description of the book and the background was wonderful.

i didnt see that book in school..late 60s to mid 70s. id heard of it but never sought it out. my perspective of the book has always been based on what others have said, which led to no interest in reading…im 63, and im only now, through your post, learning just how wonderful the book is and think it should have been cherished over they decades rather than spurned. i believe role models and books like Uncle Tom, if it hadnt been buried and missrepresented, could have ultimately prevented 90% of the racial tension in the US today.

of course, i also believe that the fed govt and organizations like kkk and blm have been and still are culpable for stirring and fanning the flames of hatred, intentionally fomenting hatred and distrust between the races…

my last word…if all men and women and children emmulated Uncle Tom, this would be a pretty wonderful world to live in…

heavy sigh…

Muhammad Rasheed - David wrote: “…if all men and women and children emmulated Uncle Tom, this would be a pretty wonderful world to live in…”

If everybody just meekly allowed everybody else to exploit & abuse their persons without complaint, it would make this world wonderful to live in? How would that be?

David Shumate - @Muhammad... im thrilled that you took the time to ask that particular question sir! you actually took a little longer than i expected…lol

to your question:

the answer is absolutely YES! if EVERYBODY were meek and forgiving, there would be nobody to abuse anyone. there would be no people harboring resentment over presumed offenses because EVERYONE would be at peace with everyone.

Jesus demonstrated that sort of meekness as an example for everyone. even back then, He realized that there would be many people, of all races that would reject the Love that He came to teach…He realized that those who decided to reject His way would torment and abuse those that chose to love and forgive…it has been like that since the beginning.

but, even with the misery and suffering that those with a meek heart must suffer at the hands of those that dont believe, their suffering and ultimately their death is eternally worth the cost because Jesus promises eternal life rather than damnation.

it is unspeakably sad, but the truth is that those that think they have all the answers and all the co;ntrol will ultimately find that they have neither…and an eternity to spend in regret and despair as a direct result…

Muhammad Rasheed - David wrote: “im thrilled that you took the time to ask that particular question sir!”

Next time try directing an intended query towards the intended target. Passive-aggressiveness from men can come across kind of fruity and/or serial killer-ish. FYI.

David wrote: “you actually took a little longer than i expected…lol”

Although it may not seem like it, I do have duties I have to attend outside of social media. The 5 Daily Prayers pillar of my religion is kinda famous, for example.

David wrote: “the answer is absolutely YES! if EVERYBODY were meek and forgiving, there would be nobody to abuse anyone.”

lol I see. The problem with this concept is reflected within the way the historical record reads. Traditionally, when members of your political identity group say such things, they never actually mean “everybody.” They always mean everybody except white people. For that reason, it’s impossible to take your pseudo-philosophical rants seriously. U.S. race relations are known to be “peculiar” for a reason—and that reason is of the hypocritical/double-standard variety.

David wrote: “Jesus demonstrated that sort of meekness”

Are we talking about the same “Jesus” who raged out in the Temple and flipped the tables of the usurious money-changers? The one who told his apostles to fetch swords in anticipation of troubles while he prayed at Gethsemane? Forgive me, but I find it likewise difficult to take your offensively-caricatured version of the One God’s messenger seriously, too.

David wrote: “of all races that would reject the Love that He came to teach…”

lol An ironic statement considering the Chris Jesus, son of Mary (peace be upon the prophet) came to instruct the hard-hearted children of Israel specifically in their own religion that they had strayed from. His message is repeated in a fuller form as revealed to the prophesized Comforter after him, which I follow with full submission. Only the children of Israel rejected the Christ’s message, not me.

David wrote: “but, even with the misery and suffering that those with a meek heart must suffer at the hands of those that dont believe, their suffering and ultimately their death is eternally worth the cost because Jesus promises eternal life rather than damnation”

This is literally the same self-servingly twisted version of the faith that the slave holders of old used to give to my ancestors. Should I be surprised to find it resurfacing in an* Uncle Tom’s Cabin* thread? lol Did I not tell you that the word “everybody” had a completely different meaning when your demographic uses it for my demographic? (see: ‘The Black Codes’). smh The more things change, the more they stay the same, I see. Tsk.

David wrote: “but the truth is that those that think they have all the answers and all the co;ntrol will ultimately find that they have neither…”

I’ll admit that does rather accurately describe how my ancestors joined the Civil War, defeated the Confederates and won our freedom finally after 250 yrs. It was starting to seem impossible before that, right?

Arthur Sera - The inspiration for Uncle Tom was a man named Josiah Henson. Look up his story. He was a heroic figure who helped a lot slaves make new lives by inviting them to the lands he had bought in Canada and gifting them a parcel to farm for themselves at no charge.

Mr. Henson negotiated with his owner to buy his freedom and that of his family. The owner freed him as agreed, but refused to free his family as agreed to earlier. Mr. Henson earned more money and then bought their freedom from the craven owner.

Josiah Henson’s little one room cabin is now a historic site on Old Georgetown Rd. In Bethesda, MD, just outside of Washington, DC.

Muhammad Rasheed - He sounds VERY different than the fictional character who meekly allowed a savage white dude to beat him to death that everyone in this thread considers the ideal Black person/slave figure they wish we all would emulate.

Arthur Sera - I am certain that the Harriet Beecher Stowe character for Uncle Tom was written to minimize the blow-back from the slave owning populace for telling an abolitionist tale. The slaver mentality of the times was extremely prone to anger and violence. Unlike Josiah Henson, Uncle Tom’s death was intended to generate more criticism of slavery. Josiah Henson avoided death through superior intelligence and planning.

Anybody that casts the name “Uncle Tom” as an insult to someone of color to criticize their weary good intentions does not know the heroic stature of Mr. Henson. A man who managed to accomplish so much in spite of the injustices that society heaped upon him…

Muhammad Rasheed - Arthur wrote: “Uncle Tom’s death was intended to generate more criticism of slavery”

If this was true, then Stowe was preaching to the choir, since the routine cruelties inflicted upon the slave class were no secret to anyone.

Arthur wrote: “The slaver mentality of the times was extremely prone to anger and violence”

It certainly wasn’t confined to the slavers, since merely the hint of talk about Reparations instantly conjures that same level of anger/violence in not only their descendants, but even in foreign whites who happen to read a Question about it on Quora.