This is not a criticism but and identification of what the division of slaves into house and field servants produced.
The house servant was given slightly better clothing, the house servant was given slightly better English, the house servant was given the illusion of supervision over the field hands.
so when the field servants would "get out of pocket", the house servant would reprimand them
when the slavemaster would feel sick, the house servant would ask "is WE sick today massa"?
Because of the fact that the house servant felt privileged over the field hands, a sense of attachment to whiteness developed as well as a sense of superiority over the field hands. This is also magnified by the fact that house hands were generally light-skinned and field hands were generally dark-skinned. So whiteness/lightness was reinforced (etched into our sub-consciousness) two-fold.
When it came time for slaves to leave the plantation for the "freedom" of emancipation, the house servant was reluctant to leave, for he knew that his status was to leave as well.
So it is no mystery that presently, in the stage of psychological slavery (white mass religion; be it white/male/supremacy OR "judeochristinsanity" [both the same]) there are ones who ask "what about the white guy"...translation: "what about massa?" This can only mean that one's position/elevation is dependent upon the status quo and that there is a perceived threat to that status within the challenge to whiteness.
This is just the result of white/male/supremacy hypnosis of which many are under the spell.
But through the Love and Raspect and Unity of Rastafari, let us remember that panho, Cosby, Tookie, OJ, most of us, and myself are all victims of the psychotic external self-loathing of whiteness. Through the power of Ma'at do we seek to restore EACH OTHER to our rightful thrones.
There is nothing divisive or supremacist about pro-blackness. Blackness throughout Nature is wholistic. Anytime one sights blackness as anti-white, this shows the sleeper defense mechanism that is engrained in white superiority-black inferiority indoctrination.
Every indigenous nation on Earth(that I can recall) , have some kind of divine connection and reverence for the Sun (Son/Sol/Helios). It is scientifically and spiritually overstood that human communion with that sun is manifested through melanin (physical blackness), kind of like green chlorophyll in plants.
Now we know that chlorophyll is green. And if we look towards the forest or jungle, we see mostly green. Now imagine that carrots claim superiority and start invading and destroying other plants. Imagine carrots instilling "orangeness" and demonizing "greenness". Now we have orange vs. green, but this was initiated by the orange carrots. So how is it "anti-forest" or "anti-vegetation" for the green plants to recognize and discuss green truths in the context of green liberation?
The orange supremacy mindset of the carrot is psychotic, because the carrot uses green chlorophyll to connect it to the Sun also. But the carrot just denies that fact because that would make it feel that a deep lush green bush is "above" it. But by invading and destroying the green plants, the carrot is destroying his own environment as well. So the whole forest is in the same condition. But in the long run, the Greenness of all plants will unite and triumph.
Green plants are in harmony with Mother Earth and Father Sun. Green/Plant/Liberation means liberation and peace for THE WHOLE FOREST. So this IS a green and orange thing only because the orange carrots made it so.
It is prudent to "suspect" carrots that seek to participate in a movement that is a response to orange/carrot/supremacy because they enjoy the privileges of orangeness. That is why the best way carrots could help the forest is to discuss and expose the falseness and destruction of orange/carrot/supremacy and share it with as many carrots as possible.
The key to peace in the forest is ALL plants acknowledging their GREENNESS, their SOIL, and their SUN.
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may at times contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml