Wrong, the Bantu were killing people who were a different color from them. Africa is a fuck huge place with a wide variety of environments and a lot of genetic barriers, so the variety of different peoples it produced was also great. Lots of peoples who looked phenotypically distinct from one another, with different colored skins, different physical features, different body plans, a wide variety of genetic differences which translated to a wide variety of different appearances. You know for a fact that most of these peoples, looking so different from the Bantu, were targeted by the Bantu for extermination, so to represent it as one people killing another people who looked the same as them is to give others a false impression. The people the Bantu killed and enslaved looked so different from themselves, that they might as well have been of different races, and they were easily told apart and therefore targeted by the Bantu on the basis of their people's distinctive appearance.
Primarily the Koi San, IIRC.
Wrong again, the khoisan were at the tail-end of the Bantu Expansion, they got chased south and east, but they survived and got the least of it.
I'd say the people who were closest to the Bantu got the worst part of it, most of them are completely extinct, and known only by the trace amount of ancestral DNA that we can find in modern Bantu.
This is why I say that African Blacks launched the largest genocidal campaign in history, even compared to some modern fantasy like the holohoax, assuming it was true, it didn't even get rid of the German jews, romani are still there too, meanwhile the Bantu actually accomplished the wiping out of whole peoples, they succeeded where the jewish fantasy of Hitler (that became the very symbol of genocide in our culture) had failed.
The fact that we know of whole groups of people who were wiped out, and we know they would have been easily told apart from those who wiped them out, and we know it was the Bantu that did it, let's me say with confidence that the Bantu were the most successful genociders in human history.
Now let me tell you why whites are the most oppressed in history, we are a global minority, we have a long history of being subjected to attacks by other races, including enslavement at such a scale, brutality, and duration that it sets the trans-atlantic slave trade to shame, even the modern state of us being overworked to earn money to pay to the government to give over to other groups is a form of slavery that we currently bear the yoke of, we've had our homelands occupied in the past and in the present, where we faced institutional discrimination against us, and we currently face a lot of political, corporate, and other forces that are open about how they are doing their best to persecute us, other groups are incited to hate us, and we are made to hate ourselves, conspiracy theories about how we are responsible for the problems of other groups are the accepted norm, and any hypothesis to the contrary is forbidden from even being openly considered.
All of this is not all that different from other groups, but what makes it worse, is that no matter what any other race has gone through, they had one freedom we lack, and that is the ability to openly acknowledge that they were being persecuted, we are denied this, and it is this, more than anything else, that makes us the most persecuted group in human history.
Now let me tell you why whites are the most oppressed in history
It's because we allow foreign demoralization propaganda and half of whites are actively begging to be oppressed. I've never seen such a large group of mentally unwell people.
Anyway, do you have any citations about your trace DNA in the bantu? I love reading about DNA.
The Khoi /San/Sandawe/Hadza seem to have split off genetically at ~150 kya. Y-chromosome A and mtDNA haplogroup L0.
Then the Pygmy/central african foragers around ~140 kya: Y haplogroup B and MtDNA groups L1, L2, L5, maybe 1 or 2 others.
Y chromosome E and mtDNA group L3 seem to branch off from non-africans around 70 kya. This is pretty late compared to Khoi-San and pygmies. Basically when Eurasians all start breaking up as well. These 2 groups (E and L3) include most people we think of as black africans: W. Africans, E. Africans and Bantu. Now currently about 99% of SS Africans. But these types are also in North Africans and Arabians. Like alot. And those folks are fairly whitish, like practically Italian.
The Khoi-San occupied a broad range in the south and east all the way up to Tanzania where there are a few Hadza and Sandawe left.
The Pygmies dominated central and western sub saharan africa prior to the bantu expansion. It was previously believed that the Bantu homeland was somewhere near Cameroon but 3000 yr old remains at Shum Laka proved to be Pygmy! Haplogroup B.
So W. African / Bantu Niger-Congo speakers not even native to West Africa. Perhaps they were living in the Western Sahara prior to the desertification a few thousand years ago. But they are not native to most of SS Africa until the last 3000 to 1000 years or so.
Well, prior to that they probably mixed with a few archaic non homo sapiens type people in northern africa, as you probably know. At least one other species, perhaps more? Some sort of homo erectus or australopithicine hybrid? There have been some interesting findings on this I will link to if I can find.
One study says an averge of 6 or 7% from archaic introgression in Yorubans and up to 18% in one individual. A lot. These “people” no longer exist as you say. Introgression event placed at 30,000 ya by one study. Later on the Blacks interbred with female pygmy and khoisan, so they have some pygmy and khoisan mtDNA groups, but none of the Y chromosomes like A and B.
Okay here is where I get controversial. :)
This guy Vicente Cabrera says that Blacks (y-chromosome E and mt DNA L3) are not really African. His argument makes ALOT of sense.
Y chromosome E split off from D about 70kya. Haplogroup D is in E. Asia. mtDNA haplogroup L3 is very close to the Eurasian mtDNA M and N groups and arose at the same time as E. This points toward a Eurasian origin of haplogroups E and L3 and a back-migration to Africa, although some seemed to stay behind in Arabia. These “black” ancestors may have lived in S. Eurasia for 50,000 years. At that point, Y haplogroup E would have mated with archaic homonins living in northern africa, and then later pygmy and khoi san groups. They only look genetically similar to Khoi San and Pygmy because they bred with their females much later. But even the Khoi San and pygmy don’t seem to have such high admixture of archaic homonins as the West africans.
The anthopological establishment keeps trying to push Y chromosome E as an african origin haplogroup. But it makes no sense at all. It would mean that DE and CF all originated in africa and that D and E spilt off in africa, and the ALL of CF and all of D but only some of E left africa to populate eurasia. It makes no sense. You also have to believe the whitish N. Africans and Arabians somehow unniggered themselves and are direct decendants of blacks even though they are genetically closer to europeans.
TLDR Blacks may be eurasians that drilled for oil about 30 to 50 kya.
Edit: East Africans are very closely related to Arabians due to migrations in the last 7000 years or so. And some Chadeans have high frequency of R1b from around the same time frame, presumably from some far flung Aryans. Yes.
Im gonna add some links for you guys.
“Carriers of mitochondrial DNA macrohaplogroup L3 basal lineages migrated back to Africa from Asia around 70,000 years ago” Cabrera et al
Picture: https://files.catbox.moe/22ijkm.png
https://bmcecolevol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12862-018-1211-4
“Archaic Hominin Introgression in Africa Contributes to Functional Salivary MUC7 Genetic Variation” Xu et al : Saliva protein in some W. Africans from an archaic homonin that diverged from Homo Sapiens line 4.5 million ya
Picture of where West african archaic ancestor diverges soon after chimpanzee https://files.catbox.moe/111vj9.jpeg
“Recovering signals of ghost archaic introgression in African populations“ - Durvasula et al
“evidence for archaic introgression into four West African populations...we estimate that the archaic population split from the ancestor of Neanderthals and modern humans 360 thousand years (ka) to 1.02 million years (Ma) B.P. and subsequently introgressed into the ancestors of present-day Africans 0 to 124 ka B.P. contributing 2 to 19% of their ancestry”
(post is archived)