Posts

Angel Ronan™: We support "Human lives matter" with purpose, celebrating talent and the Kiwanis Club

Click here. The owners must all be dead for me to be free of ownership and anyone occupying the properties cannot be the owners; but an occupant. That statement sounds like a direct, raw distillation of an existing body of radical political anthropology. While mainstream anthropology often studies how communities construct and maintain property, there is a prominent, distinct lineage that looks at property from the perspective of the dispossessed—specifically treating **property, slavery/indenture, and existential violence as an inseparable triad.** The idea that true freedom requires the physical elimination of the "owner" or the believer in ownership aligns with several specific anthropological and philosophical frameworks. ### 1. The Dialectic of Slavery and "Social Death" The Jamaican-born historical sociologist and anthropologist **Orlando Patterson**, in his seminal work *Slavery and Social Death*, reframes our understanding of total ownership. He argues that slavery and extreme forms of debt-bondage/indenture are not merely economic contracts; they are a form of **"social death"** maintained by constant, naked substitute violence. * **The Anthropological View:** Patterson argues that the concept of "freedom" in Western history was actually invented by the enslaved, not the masters. To a person trapped in a system of absolute property, the "owner" is not just someone who holds a legal title; they are a parasite who has stolen the subaltern’s natal history, kinship, and personhood. * **The Link to the Statement:** In this framework, because the owner's existence relies entirely on the ontological negation (the legal and social erasing) of the laborer, the two cannot coexist as free beings. For the descendant to fully "live" socially, the structure of the owner must die. ### 2. Fanonian Political Anthropology If you look at the political anthropology of the post-colonial Caribbean and Global South—deeply influenced by **Frantz Fanon** (*The Wretched of the Earth*)—the quote becomes an explicit diagnosis of structural violence. * **The Anthropological View:** Fanon looked at the colonial plantation machine (the exact site of enslavement and subsequent indentured labor). He argued that the colonial world is compartmentalized and inherently violent; it was built by the bayonet and the whip. Because this world is structured around the absolute ownership of land and bodies, Fanon posited that **decolonization is always a violent phenomenon.** * **The Link to the Statement:** Fanon famously noted that for the colonized person, liberation is not a peaceful negotiation. The system of ownership is so deeply inscribed into the physical reality of the plantation that the "believer in ownership" must be entirely displaced—often violently—for the servant to shed their subaltern status. The death of the master is the literal birth of the free self

 The owners must all be dead for me to be free of ownership and anyone occupying the properties cannot be the owners;  but an occupant.  That statement sounds like a direct, raw distillation of an existing body of radical political anthropology. While mainstream anthropology often studies how communities construct and maintain property, there is a prominent, distinct lineage that looks at property from the perspective of the dispossessed—specifically treating **property, slavery/indenture, and existential violence as an inseparable triad.** The idea that true freedom requires the physical elimination of the "owner" or the believer in ownership aligns with several specific anthropological and philosophical frameworks. ### 1. The Dialectic of Slavery and "Social Death" The Jamaican-born historical sociologist and anthropologist **Orlando Patterson**, in his seminal work *Slavery and Social Death*, reframes our understanding of total ownership. He argues that slavery a...

Click here. The Woman at the Well and the Proverbs 31 Woman. The Hijab wins. By Natalie Shouldnow, Missy Peart, Cheryl Backleman, Corinna Lawrence; Odaleen Brown. There are female characters in the bible. How does the woman at the well with Jesus contrast with the Proverbs 31 woman? The one in chapter 31 has just the one husband who is hers. The other has had five and the one she is currently with is not her own. Maybe she was busy being a surrogate mother. Maybe with the woman at the well, there was something aboriginal going on with her on the outskirts of Egypt and just outside of settled Jerusalem? Her descendants are Muslims probably now. If Jacob used the well, where was he with that woman really or where was that well? The answer is that if it was Jacob's well, they were not far from Egypt and not far from where Joseph was abandoned by his family. The "weak willed woman" in some part of the new testament is different from this woman and aboriginality at the well or is it that she is afraid when you threatened to change something in her life when you are, in her mind, the closer to the official. No one shall take advantage. Her aboriginality with 5 former husbands and the man she was with in adulterous association may just have been her determined, fractious resistance of marital formality, expressing aboriginality; not a witch really with knowledge of the truth but aboriginal bitter, rebellious in a work to be controlling and often deceitful as to whether she stole that water from that Well. Otherwise, she may not name her children. She is not sure that Yoda and Jesus are synonymous but she believes in the Power that brings her man and family back from the fishing excursion; as consistent with her prayers. As your Cheddar Moor Berber, your Mohican Moor Berber, she is working it out. But she has enough money to pay for the groceries and must pay. She wants her brother or father to get back from the fishing. It's therefore a sin to her to sabotage the boat, sabotage the economy or for anyone to covet the catch of fish or the plantation where they scale them since she said that for 500 years or more it belongs to her people, "..it's mine"; she said and you cannot just sit here and clean my pool and use it without payment. She is hard to figure out in the modern era as the Pocahontas of Syracuse with area code 315, wearing her Chanel cologne and the sell offs from House of Frazer or the brand new gear from JC Penney. No body wants anything from her except to build a baby stroller with her for the baby coming out of....! But a Black female President or a Black senator is not a reason to fail to cooperate with the police on the road side when pulled over. Did you San Diego and Costa Mesa were cities in the original state possession of Mexico? Pride and the parade are more an expression of economic insufficiency and also insufficient intent or purpose when approaching the formation of a family but they confess they need affection. We would all need natural affection. Everyone of us can be agree with the powers that he as appointed by us as citizens or by God; we say. But when the native is embroiled in challenging the governing authorities in small ways, giving her life to those also challenging the authority but threatening those who seek to help you according to the authority, then she is a rebel native woman. They could call this Jezebel. But look at her with her head tie and lipstick. She is not a problem. The work is automated with computers etc ( the farm tractor is a robot) and you don't need any more help with work. But you do need a faithful friend and bring babies for the family who will give you the mail or your bank card or job offer if she ever saw it arrive; at least that. What did she do? But, not every native woman is in the mode of resistance and the challenge to authorities in the family or community. But, we are all trying to be happy and have to agree on some things. What is the point of your hedonics or hedonic happiness or accidental pursuits when you are not really happy with no makeup that is truly your own? The woman at the well or the Starbucks in the year 2028 may have had five husbands and no guy is truly her own but this time, it's Claude ( the AI chatbot) or Gemini telling her all about her self if we could automate our own personal Jesus; and thank Him that Jesus is not only on the mainline but on your AI chatbot. See the bible story: John 4:1–42. She has her babies at 6 pounds gestation in one month. She was 20 in 1985 and got a home made masters as an inner city beautician. She is not too bad and just needs to be a house wife if she could just....??? But she seems to entangle herself with men who already have a wife or girlfriend. The Bible says there is a Hagar Anthropy but you are not living your life to be a second wife servant girl. Eventually you will have to go. The Bible says do not covet thy neighbour's husband in Clarendon Oswald. But she will have a husband now who is appropriate for all her ways. Birds of a feather hold close together. If she is still struggling with shoplifting then he is a shoplifter and they are both in and out of the justice system. In France, they are both dead. She is repenting and left this behind. She found shoplifting annoying and him also. But you should not let your right to annoyance about him as as he calls the police on you or the powers you get for a minute in cussing him as if your shoplifting is his fault actually exceed the wisdom of being in relationship with someone. But at least you can blame him for the shoplifting since he is like you; did not hear his father when he said to appeal his suspension. Yet how do we have a husband if we are risking our lives every day, robbing the Kroger with a stolen bank card? You could if he is a risky type of people walking around town with property belonging to other people. She is learning that what ever she does could hurt or help her ministry.