*This blog is not intended to create confusion amongst members of the M.S.T.of A nor give the M.S.T.of A, a bad reputation. This blog's purpose is to invoke critical thinking and upstanding interpersonal relations between all who might comment or take something away from the knowledge concealed. I encourage all Moors to comment and defend your square, as this is merely my opinion---and as you know, everybody has one.
Question: If Marcus Garvey was the "John the Baptist," or the forerunner of the so called prophet Noble Drew Ali (founder of the Moorish Science Temple of America), why do they have conflicting messages? Show me were John the Baptist said something contrary to what Jesus brought. And after all, I didn't choose those words, Noble Drew Ali did. In chapter 48 of the Circle 7 Koran, we read:
"In these modern days there came a forerunner of Jesus, who was divinely prepared by the great God-Allah and his name is Marcus Garvey, who did teach and warn the nations of the earth to prepare to meet the coming Prophet..."
BUT, while reading"Selected Writings and Speeches of Marcus Garvey," something struck me as odd.
In "The Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey Volume 2 (speech entitled Who and What is a Negro)," Garvey speaks against the very philosophy that Drew Ali brought to Asiatics. More specifically, I believe that Garvey would refute the term "Moorish American." Allow me to present some evidence from Garvey himself:
"If we were Negroes when we were down under the heel of oppression then we will be Negroes when we are up and liberated from such thralldom." -Marcus Garvey
In short, in this speech, Garvey notes that European scholars often isolate groups of blacks [Africans] because of some accomplishment they have achieved and classify them as non-negro. On the flip side, if Drew Ali was the prophet all our people had hoped for, a nationality better than "Moorish-American" should have been revealed. The term in itself is simply not accurate, and on it's face, Ali did a poor job of explaining the details of why we are Moorish Americans. Moreover, it is divisive. When people become members of the M.S.T. of A, they are no longer black. Ali taught Asiatics that black means death (he also taught that white means God). Subsequently, you have "Moors" who attempt to convert "blacks" to Moorish Americans. See how confusing this gets?
"Imagine a dark colored man in the middle of Africa being anything else but a negro." -Marcus Garvey
Undoubtedly, the Moors would have to admit that the forerunner sought to unite ALL Asiatics, and sought to include no division thereof. However, when Drew Ali appeared, he brought MORE confusion to the condition of the black man, women and child, in the sense of nationality.
" That is why the nationality of the Moors was taken away from them in 1774 and the word negro, black and colored, was given to the Asiatics of America who were of Moorish descent, because they honored not the principles of their mother and father, and strayed after the gods of Europe of whom they knew nothing. (Circle 7 42:17)"
But is the term Moor a nationality? In part two, I will explore the term Moor (and prove that the term is extremely ambiguos), and prove it is not a concise enough word to be classified as a competent nationality.
*pictures courtesy of nessence.com and whitescarver.com
No comments:
Post a Comment