|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| Moderated by: Saida.M, safetyblitz, Raven, Miss Brighter Days, LadyDay, Kunjufu, Kibibi, Happiness, Dillinger, Breadfruit, Backatya |
|
|
| Author | |
|---|
Breadfruit
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Sunday September 5th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2372 |
| Photo: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Click here for your Black Profile
Search for Black Sites
|
Posted: Friday November 3rd, 2006 11:32 |
|
National Liberation and Culture
Amilcar Cabral
This text was originally delivered on February 20, 1970; as part of the Eduardo Mondlane Memorial Lecture Series at Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, under the auspices of The Program of Eastern African Studies.
When Goebbels, the brain behind Nazi propaganda, heard culture being discussed, he brought out his revolver. That shows that the Nazis, who were and are the most tragic expression of imperialism and of its thirst for domination--even if they were all degenerates like Hitler, had a clear idea of the value of culture as a factor of resistance to foreign domination.
History teaches us that, in certain circumstances, it is very easy for the foreigner to impose his domination on a people. But it also teaches us that, whatever may be the material aspects of this domination, it can be maintained only by the permanent, organized repression of the cultural life of the people concerned. Implantation of foreign domination can be assured definitively only by physical liquidation of a significant part of the dominated population.
In fact, to take up arms to dominate a people is, above all, to take up arms to destroy, or at least to neutralize, to paralyze, its cultural life. For, with a strong indigenous cultural life, foreign domination cannot be sure of its perpetuation. At any moment, depending on internal and external factors determining the evolution of the society in question, cultural resistance (indestructible) may take on new forms (political, economic, armed) in order fully to contest foreign domination.
The ideal for foreign domination, whether imperialist or not, would be to choose:
- either to liquidate practically all the population of the dominated country, thereby eliminating the possibilities for cultural resistance;
- or to succeed in imposing itself without damage to the culture of the dominated people--that is, to harmonize economic and political domination of these people with their cultural personality.
The first hypothesis implies genocide of the indigenous population and creates a void which empties foreign domination of its content and its object: the dominated people. The second hypothesis has not, until now, been confirmed by history. The broad experience of mankind allows us to postulate that it has no practical viability: it is not possible to harmonize the economic and political domination of a people, whatever may be the degree of their social development, with the preservation of their cultural personality.
In order to escape this choice--which may be called the dilemma of cultural resistance--imperialist colonial domination has tried to create theories which, in fact, are only gross formulations of racism, and which, in practice, are translated into a permanent state of siege of the indigenous populations on the basis of racist dictatorship (or democracy).
This, for example, is the case with the so-called theory of progressive assimilation of native populations, which turns out to be only a more or less violent attempt to deny the culture of the people in question. The utter failure of this "theory," implemented in practice by several colonial powers, including Portugal, is the most obvious proof of its lack of viability, if not of its inhuman character. It attains the highest degree of absurdity in the Portuguese case, where Salazar affirmed that Africa does not exist.
This is also the case with the so-called theory of apartheid, created, applied and developed on the basis of the economic and political domination of the people of Southern Africa by a racist minority, with all the outrageous crimes against humanity which that involves. The practice of apartheid takes the form of unrestrained exploitation of the labor force of the African masses, incarcerated and repressed in the largest concentration camp mankind has ever known.
These practical examples give a measure of the drama of foreign imperialist domination as it confronts the cultural reality of the dominated people. They also suggest the strong, dependent and reciprocal relationships existing between the cultural situation and the economic (and political) situation in the behavior of human societies. In fact, culture is always in the life of a society (open or closed), the more or less conscious result of the economic and political activities of that society, the more or less dynamic expression of the kinds of relationships which prevail in that society, on the one hand between man (considered individually or collectively) and nature, and, on the other hand, among individuals, groups of individuals, social strata or classes.
The value of culture as an element of resistance to foreign domination lies in the fact that culture is the vigorous manifestation on the ideological or idealist plane of the physical and historical reality of the society that is dominated or to be dominated. Culture is simultaneously the fruit of a people’s history and a determinant of history, by the positive or negative influence which it exerts on the evolution of relationships between man and his environment, among men or groups of men within a society, as well as among different societies. Ignorance of this fact may explain the failure of several attempts at foreign domination--as well as the failure of some international liberation movements.
Let us examine the nature of national liberation. We shall consider this historical phenomenon in its contemporary context, that is, national liberation in opposition to imperialist domination. The latter is, as we know, distinct both in form and in content from preceding types of foreign domination (tribal, military-aristocratic, feudal, and capitalist domination in time free competition era).
The principal characteristic, common to every kind of imperialist domination, is the negation of the historical process of the dominated people by means of violently usurping the free operation of the process of development of the productive forces. Now, in any given society, the level of development of the productive forces and the system for social utilization of these forces (the ownership system) determine the mode of production. In our opinion, the mode of production whose contradictions are manifested with more or less intensity through the class struggle, is the principal factor in the history of any human group, the level of the productive forces being the true and permanent driving power of history.
For every society, for every group of people, considered as an evolving entity, the level of the productive forces indicates the stage of development of the society and of each of its components in relation to nature, its capacity to act or to react consciously in relation to nature. It indicates and conditions the type of material relationships (expressed objectively or subjectively) which exists among the various elements or groups constituting the society in question. Relationships and types of relationships between man and nature, between man and his environment. Relationships and type of relationships among the individual or collective components of a society. To speak of these is to speak of history, but it is also to speak of culture.
Whatever may be the ideological or idealistic characteristics of cultural expression, culture is an essential element of the history of a people. Culture is, perhaps, the product of this history just as the flower is the product of a plant. Like history, or because it is history, culture has as its material base the level of the productive forces and the mode of production. Culture plunges its roots into the physical reality of the environmental humus in which it develops, and it reflects the organic nature of the society, which may be more or less influenced by external factors. History allows us to know the nature and extent of the imbalance and conflicts (economic, political and social) which characterize the evolution of a society; culture allows us to know the dynamic syntheses which have been developed and established by social conscience to resolve these conflicts at each stage of its evolution, in the search for survival and progress.
Just as happens with the flower in a plant, in culture there lies the capacity (or the responsibility) for forming and fertilizing the seedling which will assure the continuity of history, at the same time assuring the prospects for evolution and progress of the society in question. Thus it is understood that imperialist domination by denying the historical development of the dominated people, necessarily also denies their cultural development. It is also understood why imperialist domination, like all other foreign domination for its own security, requires cultural oppression and the attempt at direct or indirect liquidation of the essential elements of the culture of the dominated people.
The study of the history of national liberation struggles shows that generally these struggles are preceded by an increase in expression of culture, consolidated progressively into a successful or unsuccessful attempt to affirm the cultural personality of the dominated people, as a means of negating the oppressor culture. Whatever may be the conditions of a people's political and social factors in practicing this domination, it is generally within the culture that we find the seed of opposition, which leads to the structuring and development of the liberation movement.
In our opinion, the foundation for national liberation rests in the inalienable right of every people to have their own history whatever formulations may be adopted at the level of international law. The objective of national liberation, is therefore, to reclaim the right, usurped by imperialist domination, namely: the liberation of the process of development of national productive forces. Therefore, national liberation takes place when, and only when, national productive forces are completely free of all kinds of foreign domination. The liberation of productive forces and consequently the ability to determine the mode of production most appropriate to the evolution of the liberated people, necessarily opens up new prospects for the cultural development of the society in question, by returning to that society all its capacity to create progress.
A people who free themselves from foreign domination will be free culturally only if, without complexes and without underestimating the importance of positive accretions from the oppressor and other cultures, they return to the upward paths of their own culture, which is nourished by the living reality of its environment, and which negates both harmful influences and any kind of subjection to foreign culture. Thus, it may be seen that if imperialist domination has the vital need to practice culturaloppression, national liberation is necessarily an act of culture.
On the basis of what has just been said, we may consider the national liberation movement as the organized political expression of the culture of the people who are undertaking the struggle. For this reason, those who lead the movement must have a clear idea of the value of the culture in the framework of the struggle and must have a thorough knowledge of the people's culture, whatever may be their level of economic development.
In our time it is common to affirm that all peoples have a culture. The time is past when, in an effort to perpetuate the domination of a people, culture was considered an attribute of privileged peoples or nations, and when, out of either ignorance or malice, culture was confused with technical power, if not with skin color or the shape of one's eyes. The liberation movement, as representative and defender of the culture of the people, must be conscious of the fact that, whatever may be the material conditions of the society it represents, the society is the bearer and creator of culture. The liberation movement must furthermore embody the mass character, the popular character of the culture--which is not and never could be the privilege of one or of some sectors of the society.
In the thorough analysis of social structure which every liberation movement should be capable of making in relation to the imperative of the struggle, the cultural characteristics of each group in society have a place of prime importance. For, while the culture has a mass character, it is not uniform, it is not equally developed in all sectors of society. The attitude of each social group toward the liberation struggle is dictated by its social group toward the liberation struggle is dictated by its economic interests, but is also influenced profoundly by its culture. It may even be admitted that these differences in cultural level explain differences in behavior toward the liberation movement on the part of individuals who belong to the same socio-economic group. It is at the point that culture reaches its full significance for each individual: understanding and integration in to his environment, identification with fundamental problems and aspirations of the society, acceptance of the possibility of change in the direction of progress.
In the specific conditions of our country--and we would say, of Africa--the horizontal and vertical distribution of levels of culture is somewhat complex. In fact, from villages to towns, from one ethnic group to another, from one age group to another, from the peasant to the workman or to the indigenous intellectual who is more or less assimilated, and, as we have said, even from individual to individual within the same social group, the quantitative and qualitative level of culture varies significantly. It is of prime importance for the liberation movement to take these facts into consideration.
In societies with a horizontal social structure, such as the Balante, for example, the distribution of cultural levels is more or less uniform, variations being linked uniquely to characteristics of individuals or of age groups. On the other hand, in societies with a vertical structure, such as the Fula, there are important variations from the top to the bottom of the social pyramid. These differences in social structure illustrate once more the close relationship between culture and economy, and also explain differences in the general or sectoral behavior of these two ethnic groups in relation to the liberation movement.
It is true that the multiplicity of social and ethnic groups complicates the effort to determine the role of culture in the liberation movement. But it is vital not to lose sight of the decisive importance of the liberation struggle, even when class structure is to appear to be in embryonic stages of development.
The experience of colonial domination shows that, in the effort to perpetuate exploitation, the colonizers not only creates a system to repress the cultural life of the colonized people; he also provokes and develops the cultural alienation of a part of the population, either by so-called assimilation of indigenous people, or by creating a social gap between the indigenous elites and the popular masses. As a result of this process of dividing or of deepening the divisions in the society, it happens that a considerable part of the population, notably the urban or peasant petite bourgeoisie, assimilates the colonizer's mentality, considers itself culturally superior to its own people and ignores or looks down upon their cultural values. This situation, characteristic of the majority of colonized intellectuals, is consolidated by increases in the social privileges of the assimilated or alienated group with direct implications for the behavior of individuals in this group in relation to the liberation movement. A reconversion of minds--of mental set--is thus indispensable to the true integration of people into the liberation movement. Such reonversion--re-Africanization, in our case--may take place before the struggle, but it is completed only during the course of the struggle, through daily contact with the popular masses in the communion of sacrifice required by the struggle.
However, we must take into account the fact that, faced with the prospect of political independence, the ambition and opportunism from which the liberation movement generally suffers may bring into the struggle unconverted individuals. The latter, on the basis of their level of schooling, their scientific or technical knowledge, but without losing any of their social class biases, may attain the highest positions in the liberation movement. Vigilance is thus indispensable on the cultural as well as the political plane. For, in the liberation movement as elsewhere, all that glitters is not necessarily gold: political leaders--even the most famous--may be culturally alienated people. But the social class characteristics of the culture are even more discernible in the behavior of privileged groups in rural areas, especially in the case of ethnic groups with a vertical social structure, where, nevertheless, assimilation or cultural alienation influences are non-existent or practically non-existent. This is the case, for example, with the Fula ruling class. Under colonial domination, the political authority of this class (traditional chiefs, noble families, religious leaders) is purely nominal, and the popular masses know that true authority lies with an is acted upon by colonial administrators. However, the ruling class preserves in essence its basic cultural authority over the masses and this has very important political implications.
Recognizing this reality, the colonizer who represses or inhibits significant cultural activity on the part of the masses at the base of the social pyramid, strengthens and protects the prestige and the cultural influence of the ruling class at the summit. The colonizer installs chiefs who support him and who are to some degree accepted by the masses; he gives these chiefs material privileges such as education for their eldest children, creates chiefdoms where they did not exist before, develops cordial relations with religious leaders, builds mosques, organizes journeys to Mecca, etc. And above all, by means of the repressive organs of colonial administration, he guarantees economic and social privileges to the ruling class in their relations with the masses. All this does not make it impossible that, among these ruling classes, there may be individuals or groups of individuals who join the liberation movement, although less frequently than in the case of the assimilated "petite bourgeoisie." Several traditional and religious leaders join the struggle at the very beginning or during its development, making an enthusiastic contribution to the cause of liberation.
But here again vigilance is indispensable: preserving deep down the cultural prejudices of their class, individuals in this category generally see in the liberation movement the only valid means, using the sacrifices of the masses, to eliminate colonial oppression of their own class and to re-establish in this way their complete political and cultural domination of the people.
In the general framework of contesting colonial imperialist domination and in the actual situation to which we refer, among the oppressor's most loyal allies are found some high officials and intellectuals of the liberal professions, assimilated people, and also a significant number of representatives of the ruling class from rural areas. This fact gives some measure of the influence (positive or negative) of culture and cultural prejudices in the problem of political choice when one is confronted with the liberation movement. It also illustrates the limits of this influence and the supremacy of the class factor in the behavior of the different social groups. The high official or the assimilated intellectual, characterized by total cultural alienation, identifies himself by political choice with the traditional or religious leader who has experienced no significant foreign cultural influences.
For these two categories of people place above all principles our demands of a cultural nature--and against the aspirations of the people--their own economic and social privileges, their own class interests. That is a truth which the liberation movement cannot afford to ignore without risking betrayal of the economic, political, social and cultural objectives of the struggle.
Without minimizing the positive contribution which privileged classes may bring to the struggle, the liberation movement must, on the cultural level just as on the political level, base its action in popular culture, whatever may be the diversity of levels of cultures in the country. The cultural combat against colonial domination--the first phase of the liberation movement--can be planned efficiently only on the basis of the culture of the rural and urban working masses, including the nationalist (revolutionary) "petite bourgeoisie" who have been re-Africanized or who are ready for cultural reconversion. Whatever may be the complexity of this basic cultural panorama, the liberation movement must be capable of distinguishing within it the essential from the secondary, the positive from the negative, the progressive from the reactionary in order to characterize the master line which defines progressively a national culture.
In order for culture to play the important role which falls to it in the framework of the liberation movement, the movement must be able to preserve the positive cultural values of every well defined social group, of every category, and to achieve the confluence of these values in the service of the struggle, giving it a new dimension--the national dimension. Confronted with such a necessity, the liberation struggle is, above all, a struggle both for the preservation and survival of the cultural values of the people and for the harmonization and development of these values within a national framework.
____________________
History is a people's memory, and without a memory, man is demoted to the lower animals
Malcolm X (1925 - 1965)
____________________
Click here for your Black Profile
|
Breadfruit
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Sunday September 5th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2372 |
| Photo: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
Click here for your Black Profile
Search for Black Sites
|
Posted: Friday November 3rd, 2006 12:30 |
|
To Be Afrikan
Dr. Marimba Ani
All people, all over the world, throughout history have shared in common the fact that they belong to a culture of origin. That is a universal reality. Another equally important universal reality is that there are many, many different cultures in the world and each of them is unique.
The uniqueness of a culture is what gives specialness to its members. The members of a culture are bonded together by their shared culture, which gives them a sense of collective identity.
"We are an Afrikan people," simply reveals that there are values, traditions and a heritage that we share because we have a common origin. The cultural process is naturally a ongoing, which allows people to continuously affirm their connectedness through being linked to their origins.
However, the continuity of our cultural identity has been interrupted cruelly and unnaturally by the experience of slavery. We as a people are still suffering from this crime because we have not been allowed to find our way back to the sense of cultural identity and continuity which would transform us into a unified and whole people. We have not been able to function in the world with a collective consciousness that naturally imparts a strong sense of cultural roots.
The term "Maafa" (from the book, "Let The Circle Be Unbroken) is a kiswahili word for "disaster" that we are now using to reclaim our right to tell our own story. Maafa refers to the enslavement of our people and to the sustained attempt to dehumanize us. Because the Maafa has disconnected us from our cultural origins, we have remained vulnerable in a social order that does not reflect our cultural identity.
We are people of African ancestry living in denial of who we are. We have lost our strength as a people. We are losing our children to systems which miseducate them. Our families are disintegrating before our eyes. Our numbers are growing in the statistics of drug addiction and incarceration.
Responsible national Black organizations are seeking remedies to these problems, but we are not speaking with one voice. We need to work together as a family who supports its members and who is responsible for their welfare. We must use the most valuable asset that we have: That is the spirit of our people. It is that spirit that connects us to our Afrikan roots.
Slowly, we are awakening to the need to claim our cultural legacy. The term "Sankofa" from Akan tradition in Ghana, West Africa tells us to return to the Source so that we can go forward with strength and clarity. Culture is a powerful tool for inspiring human beings and bringing them together in a concerted "family" action.
Our cultural roots are the most ancient in the world. The spiritual concepts of our Ancestors gave birth to religious thought African people believe in the oneness of the African family through sacred time, which unites the past, the present and the future.
Our Ancestors live with us. They created the first civilizations thousands of years ago and they suffered the pain of the Maafa. And yet, they were able to endure the most disastrous and dehumanizing circumstances ever perpetrated against a group of people, only because of the power of the African spirit. They did not have the freedom to affirm their cultural heritage. We now have that choice. In the African view of life it is our responsibility to honor their name.
This is perhaps our moment of truth. We must come together as a family. We must do all that we can do to uplift our people. Otherwise, we are still denying who we are and bringing dishonor to our "family name;" to our Ancestors.
The answer to our social dilemma is the resocialization of our people into the cultural value-system that affirms our spiritual being. Our Ancestors are calling us "home", back to our cultural selves. We must begin the process of Sankofa.
____________________
History is a people's memory, and without a memory, man is demoted to the lower animals
Malcolm X (1925 - 1965)
____________________
www.blacksearch.co.uk - Helping to promote Black African and Caribbean Websites
|
Breadfruit
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Sunday September 5th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2372 |
| Photo: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
Click here for your Black Profile
Search for Black Sites
|
Posted: Friday November 3rd, 2006 14:01 |
|
A culture creates its own possessing spirits and enculturates and inculcates those spirits into the bodies of its members so that those members, in defending their own egos, in defending their own interests, in defending what they perceive as their own needs, in satisfying their own tastes, in satisfying their own values, satisfy the needs of the culture, enrich the culture, empower the culture, defend the culture, and advance the interest of the culture.
How then does the culture implant its spirit into its members?
It does so in a very strong and primordial way. It uses vehicles. One of the major vehicles it uses is music.
Rhythm, song, dance.
A culture involves people moving together, in tandem, in rhythm. It involves them having the same temporal sense, the same kind of time clock so that they can move in synchrony, poetry is about synchrony, song is about synchrony. Music is about symbols and ultimately it is through symbols that you evoke behavior from people. So when a culture creates symbols, those symbols are designed to evoke particular types of reactions, feelings and moods in its members. A culture establishes the potency of those symbols through rituals, through song and through dance.
One of the best ways to inculcate cultural values, a cultural spirit, is through entertainment.
It’s while the members are being entertained, while they are feeling good, that the song is carrying the cultural values into the mind and into the body. The lyrics that represent the cultural interests and cultural values are being carried on the vehicle of the music, carried through the vehicle of the poetry. The togetherness, the cooperativeness, the mutual movement together and the synchrony of the culture is being entrained through the music and through the rhythm of the dance.
Therefore when you let another people take over your music, when you let another people take over your dance and attach their content to it, they will use your own music, your own dance, your rap lyrics, your poetry and your own cultural symbols to carry their message into your bodies and into your minds such that you can only respond to their beck and call and to their wishes. As a consequence they get you to buy those sneakers and other items by associating them with you music, with your poetry, with your rhythms, with your cultural symbols.
So they attach their content to our rhythm, their content to our songs. In this way they take our own instruments and turn them against the self.
Notice how quickly when one of our youngsters [Ice-T] was rhyming “Kill the Police� that kind of content was washed right out, immediately. Butwhatwash-out occurs when they [our youngsters] talk about shooting each other with their glocks and the other weapons, when their contents of self-destructiveness ride on the rhythm of their song and dance and the symbols are loaded with self-destructive elements and content?
What we [are] saying is that enculturation is a process of building in responsivity and ultimately, respons-i-bility, the ability to respond to a particular call. We then have appropriately enculturated ourselves when we can respond to our own culture, to our own values and to our own needs.
Amos N. Wilson
Afrikan-Centered Consciousness Versus The New World Order
____________________
History is a people's memory, and without a memory, man is demoted to the lower animals
Malcolm X (1925 - 1965)
____________________
Click here for your Black Profile
|
Breadfruit
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Sunday September 5th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2372 |
| Photo: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
Click here for your Black Profile
Search for Black Sites
|
Posted: Tuesday November 7th, 2006 08:48 |
|
"Culture has been defined in perhaps its simplest form as the way of life of a people. A country’s culture is the dynamic reservoir of ways of thinking and doing accumulated over time, which has come to be agreed upon and transmitted across generations in a community. It includes the knowledge, experience, beliefs, values, customs, traditions, distinctive institutions and its ways of making meaning in life. This is not to be read as cultural homogeneity since a country like Jamaica, may be composed of several and varied communities, each with its own cultural characteristics. The national cultural identity will include aspects of each community as they interact to create a common system of being, thinking and doing, and the individual’s cultural identity will be based on his/her familiarity with the cultural characteristics of the community of which s/he is a part as well as in relation to the surrounding community/communities.
Culture, then, is an intrinsic factor which affects all aspects of human life. It is one of the determinants of attitudes to work, production, and so on. Although it is not quantifiable or tangible, it is central to the definition of the basic unit of economic development – the individual and the human spirit – and the eventual unleashing of creative energies."
"National cultural policy is the statement of government’s understanding of the reality within which its citizens have lived historically and through which it is itself called upon to express the desire and willingness to establish and implement a set of coherent principles, objectives and means to foster, protect and promote the cultural expression of its people.
In this regard, then, cultural policy for Jamaica must seek to provide opportunities for full and unbridled cultural expression as an act of liberation and empowerment of our people who only recently surfaced from periods of enslavement and colonialism and who are even now, forty years after political independence, searching to establish ourselves as one independent nation.
This expression must take into consideration the reality of low self esteem and inferiority that have affected the thinking of our people over the aforementioned period of enslavement and colonialism, especially of the vast majority of the population of African descent. Yet, amid all this, there has been an assertiveness as our people have registered throughout our history great resilience and affirmation of our identity and being. The expression must also reflect on the inflated, even destructive air of superiority or distorted sense of being by certain sections of our population, also as a result of slavery and colonialism.
The policy then must reflect our continuing need/struggle to assume postures of confidence and responsibility, to constantly and consistently reflect the cultural diversity of the Jamaican society and to discover the things that make for peace and build up the modern life."
"It is also important to note that this Policy promotes a vision for cultural development of Jamaica. It has taken into consideration the historical realities and current situation facing culture in Jamaica and the actions/strategies/measures needed to advance the cause of cultural and economic development. As such, this Policy is seen as an investment in the future prosperity of our people by promoting the integral role of culture in development with its concomitant issues of cultural identity, cultural diversity and the development of the economy.
In the latter area of the economy, the Policy recognizes the value of Jamaica’s cultural industries and their capacity, if developed through greater and concentrated investment, to provide a real alternative to failing traditional industries. In support of this, mention must be made of a survey done in the United States of America in 1999 by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) that affirmed that reggae music was worth US$14.5 billion in that economy, while Jamaica was unable to recover US$0.5 billion of that sum. Note that this is in the United States alone!
It must also be noted that cultural industries represent the second largest contributor to the United States economy and also that international institutions, including the World Trade Organization (WTO), point to a growing cultural services industry as the future for global economic prosperity. The Policy therefore stresses the need for cultural industry development through specific provisions and considerations in the areas of Culture and Trade, Culture and Tourism, Culture and Technology, and Culture and Development. Of significance, too, is the role to be played by cultural industries in the reduction of poverty and violence and the promotion of youth employment in Jamaica."
Taken from:TOWARDS JAMAICA THE CULTURAL SUPERSTATE
Culture Division
Ministry of Education, Youth and Culture
http://www.moeyc.gov.jm/culture/CulturalSuperstate.pdf#search=%22jamaica%20development%20culture%20superstate%22
____________________
History is a people's memory, and without a memory, man is demoted to the lower animals
Malcolm X (1925 - 1965)
____________________
www.blacksearch.co.uk - Helping to promote Black African and Caribbean Websites
|
Breadfruit
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Sunday September 5th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2372 |
| Photo: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
Click here for your Black Profile
Search for Black Sites
|
Posted: Saturday November 11th, 2006 11:34 |
|
Hypocricy as a Way of Life
Marimba Ani
(Excerpt from her book, Yurugu)
Within the nature of European culture there exists a statement of value or of "moral" behavior that has no meaning for the members of that culture. I call this the "rhetorical ethic;" it is of great importance for the understanding of the dynamics of the culture. The concepts of traditional European anthropology are inadequate to explain the phenomenon to which I am referring here, as it has no counterpart in the types of cultures to which anthropologists have generally directed their attention in the past. But with the concept of asili, which facilitates an ideological approach to the study of culture, the rhetorical ethic becomes visible; even compelling. It fits the logic of the European asili, assisting the culture in the achievement and maintenance of power. Without this interpretation certain manifestations within the verbal iconography of the culture appear to be inconsistent with its underlying ideological thrust. And that simply would not make sense. Let us see how the mechanism of the rhetorical ethic works.
The related distinction used traditionally in anthropology is stated in terms of "ideal culture" and "actual behavior" and is said to be characteristic of all cultures, thereby helping to confuse the issue of the uniqueness and problematical nature of European culture. The conventional distinction is illustrated in the following manner by the authors of a recently published anthropology textbook.
For example, an idealized belief, long cherished in America, is that all doctors are selfless, friendly people who chose medicine as their profession because they felt themselves "called" to serve humanity, and who have little interest in either the money or the prestige of their position. Of course, many physicians do not measure up to this ideal. Nevertheless, the continued success of television programs that portray the average American M.D. as a paragon of virtue indicates how deeply rooted in our collective psyche the ideal of the noble physician is.
This is a common misconception that has led to a mistaken view and superficial understanding of the nature of European (Euro- American) society. To refer to the images offered above as "ideal" is a misuse or at least a misleading use of the term "ideal." The projection and success of the image of the committed, altruistic doctor do not indicate that it is a "deeply rooted" ideal in the American psyche.
It is rather an indication of the fact that this is how Americans want to appear to others, most often to non-European peoples-their "objects.'' In this case it is the way that the doctor wants to appear to his patients, or ''objects,'' because this appearance works to his advantage. On the other hand, an image that projects him as a potential exploiter can lead to the possibility of malpractice suits and to the institutionalization of socialized medicine-neither of which is lucrative for him.
An ''ideal'' should be understood to be some thing that functions normatively and something that is emulated; that which has meaning for those who share it. It is the European experience that encourages the confounding of meaning and commitment with mere verbal expression. (It was within the incipient European experience that "rhetoric" came to be regarded as art.) In African culture words have power. The European mind is a political one and for this reason constantly aware of the political effect of words and images as they are used for the purposes of manipulation. By "political" I mean to indicate an ego that consistently experiences people as others; as representatives of interests defined differently and, therefore, as conflicting with this "ego." The individual is concerned, therefore, with the way in which his verbal expression and the image he projects can influence the behavior of those to whom he relates, be they patients (would-be consumers), neocolonial subjects, an opposing candidate for office, or an African selfdeterminist/nationalist. This is what is "deeply rooted" in the American mind-the psychology of "public relations," "salesmanship," and political strategy. It is in the Euro-American vernacular that the word "image" is used so frequently. To be concerned with one's image as opposed to one's self is a European characteristic.
To be aware of the strategical advantage of appearing to be aItru- istic when one is operating out of self-interest does not mean that altruism is a meaningful "ideal" in terms of one's value-system. It is, instead, an outgrowth of the propaganda that the Europeans have fed "non-European" peoples since they first sought to conquer them. Because they exported ("sold") this altruistic image so successfully, they have had to project themselves as adhering to this "ideal"; similarly, the projection of themselves or their motives in this way has been essential to the successful imposition of this "ethic" on others.
The basic principle to be kept in mind in order to understand this dynamic of European culture is that the major contributing factor to the success of European nationalism has been its projection as disinterested internationalism,
The use of "ideal" in the passage quoted above is simply an inad- equate concept for the ethnological analysis of European culture. Hoebel, in an earlier textbook, offers his version, which is similarly inadequate: "Ideal Culture consists of a people's verbally expressed standards and behavior." The examples that these anthropologists offer from other cultures to explicate the distinction between "ideal" and "actual" in no way represent the phenomenon in Western culture under consideration.
Hoebel describes "normative postulates or values" as "deep- lying assumptions about whether things or acts are good and to be sought after, or bad and to be rejected."s This is precisely what the "rhetorical ethic" is not. Hoebel's definition can be used to get at the converse of the phenomenon I wish to describe. A "rhetorical ethic" is not a "deep-lying assumption." It is a superficial verbal expression that is not intended for assimilation by the members of the culture that produced it. The "rhetorical ethic," a European phenomenon, has been neglected in conventional ethnological theory, which has consistently offered concepts devoid of political significance.
Anthropologists talk about the gap in all cultures between thought and deed, between ideas and actions. The gap to which I am referring, however, is between verbal expression and belief or commitment; between what people say and what they do. Nowhere other than in European culture do words mean so little as indices of belief. It is this characteristic that is of concern here and this characteristic for which the concepts of traditional anthropology are inadequate to explain.
As a cultural trait it has, however, been described by others, par- ticularly those who have been made victims of European cunning. Below an indigenous American describes European behavior:
They would make slaves of us if they could; but as they cannot, they kill us. There is no faith to be placed in their words.
They will say to an Indian, "My friend; my brother!" They will take him by the hand and, at the same moment destroy him.... Remember that this day I warned you to beware of such friends as these. I know the Long-Knives. They are not to be trusted.
It is an inherent characteristic of the culture that it prepares members of the culture to be able to act like friends toward those they regard as enemies; to be able to convince others that they have come to help when they, in fact, have come to destroy the others and their culture. That some may "believe" that they are actually doing good only makes them more dangerous, for they have swallowed their own rhetoric-perhaps a convenient self-delusion. Hypocritical behavior is sanctioned and rewarded in European culture. The rhetorical ethic helps to sanction it. European culture cannot be understood in terms of the dynamics of other cultures alone. It is a culture that breeds hypocrisy-in which hypocrisy is a supportive theme a standard of behavior. Its hypocritical nature is linked to the Platonic abstraction, to objectification, to the compartmentalization of the person and the denial of the emotional self. Below Havelock characteristically understands the case:
Another thing noticeable about them [pre-Platonic" Greeks] in this period is their capacity for direct action and sincere action and for direct and sincere expression of motive and desire. They almost entirely lack those slight hypocrisies without which our civiliza- tion does not seem to work.
The distinction and definitions that can lead to a better under- standing of the Europeans and their culture can only come from a perspective that is not one of European chauvinism; for it is the method of European chauvinism or cultural nationalism to conceal European interest. As I use it, "value" is only meaningful value; it is that which motivates behavior and is the origin of human commitment. Value determines what is imitated and preserved, what is selected for and encouraged. "Avowed values" on the other hand, which are merely professed, which find expression only verbally, which are not indicative of behavior, belong to what I have called the "rhetorical ethic."
The European rhetorical ethic is precisely that-purely rhetorical- and, as such, has its own origins as a creation for export; i.e., for the political, intercultural activity of the European. It is designed to create an image that will prevent others from successfully anticipating European behavior, and its objective is to encourage nonstrategic (i.e., naive, rather than successful) political behavior on the part of others. This is the same as "nonpolitical" behavior.) It is designed to sell, to dupe, to promote European nationalistic objectives. It "packages" European cultural imperialism in a wrapping that makes it appear more attractive, less harmful. None of these features represents what can culturally be referred to as an "ideal" in any sense. The rhetorical ethic is, therefore, not dysfunctional in European culture.
It does not generate nor reflect conflict in European ideology or belief-system; but it is, rather, necessary to the maintenance and projection of the utamaroho and performs a vital function in sustaining European cultural nationalism in the pursuit of its international objectives.
The rhetorical ethic is made possible by the fact that hypocrisy as a mode of behavior is a valued theme in European life; the same hypocritical behavior that its presence sanctions. Again, "value" refers to that which is encouraged and approved in a culture. European culture is constructed in such a way that successful sur- vival within it discourages honesty and directness and encourages dishonesty and deceit-the ability to appear to be something other than what one is; to hide one's "self," one's motives and intent.
People who are duped by others and relate to a projected image are considered fools or "country bumpkins." Hypocrisy in this way becomes not a negative personality trait, not immoral or abnormal behavior, but it is both expected and cultivated. It is considered to be a crucial ingredient of "sophistication," a European goal. European intracultural, political behavior is based on hypocrisy-as are business relations, the advertising media, and most other areas of public, and social interaction. It is merely a manifestation of this theme when Americans claim that politicians are basically honest. The claim itself is hypocritical, and the public expects it to be so. We all know that the objective of commercial advertising is to convince us to buy products so that manufacturers can make large profits, but the slogans attempt to persuade us that the product is beneficial to our well being, as though the producer has our welfare at heart.
This hypocrisy touches the lives of every member of the culture in their dealings with one another, and yet it originates in part in the nature of their intercultural relationships. It is a part of the mechanism of European expansionism, All of these factors must go into the understanding of the rhetorical ethic and not an overly simplistic distinction between "ideal" and "actual" culture; perhaps a relevant distinction with regard to other cultures that create and are created by very different "cultural personalities." Let us look more closely at this "ethic" and see how it has functioned historically. The Rhetorical Function of the "Christian Ethic."
____________________
History is a people's memory, and without a memory, man is demoted to the lower animals
Malcolm X (1925 - 1965)
____________________
Click here for your Black Profile
|
Breadfruit
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Sunday September 5th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2372 |
| Photo: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
Click here for your Black Profile
Search for Black Sites
|
Posted: Saturday November 11th, 2006 13:50 |
|
Africa and its Diaspora: Forging ideas of an African renaissance
Molefi Asante
(From: FIRST CONFERENCE OF INTELLECTUALS OF AFRICA AND ITS DIASPORA
Dakar, 6 - 9 October 2004)
Prologue
If you listen you might hear out beyond the clashing waves of Goree Island, the voices of Zumbi of Brazil, Yanga of Mexico, Nat Turner of the United States, Nanny of Jamaica, Louis Delgres of Guadeloupe, Boukman and Mariesaint Dede Bazile of Ayiti, these are the voices that have now been heard in the chambers of the Heads of State and have given impetus to this historic gathering under the direction of the African Union.
I believe that this is the beginning again when the collective powers of Africa will realize new objectives, new policies, new ideas, and new politics. I believe that we will launch a new era of peace among African peoples. I believe that we will begin to honor our heroes and use them as models for a more perfect future. At this congress are the intellectuals who have written books, devised theories, examined digital methodologies, organized institutes, directed research projects, and forged relationships between people of the African world.
The Word Diaspora
What is the meaning of the Diaspora? How are we to understand it with regards to the possibility of the African renaissance? What are the necessary interfaces between us that will alleviate the half of a millennium of despair that grips so many of our communities, those within African nations and those dominated by non Africans? How do we embrace the courageous efforts of African Venezuelans like President Hugo Chavez Frias to defend freedom and integrate and unify independent peoples. The African people of Venezuela, like Jesus Chucho Garcia of Rio Chico (Barlovento), inspired by the examples of the African continent, are leading a new renaissance in their country.
The term Diaspora is derived from the Greek and has been used most prominently to refer to the scattering of the Jews. Its etymology in the Greek, from the word diaspeirein, suggests that it means, a dispersion. It has now come to mean the dispersal of any group of people outside of its traditional homeland. So it is possible to speak of an African Diaspora in a large context, that is, continental context or a Diaspora in a national sense, such as the Algerian Diaspora in France, or the Ghanaian Diaspora in the United Kingdom.
What we mean by the Diaspora
There is a sense in which the African homeland is homeland to the entire human race. According to the latest scientific studies the DNA of all human beings can be traced back to an African woman who lived nearly 250,000 years ago in East Africa. This is the biological reality of all human beings. We know from archaeology and paleontology that skeletal remains of hominids can be dated to 6 million years in Chad and nearly 4 million years in Ethiopia. However, in the continuous human line to the present we have enough evidence to suggest from mitachondrial DNA that all living humans are descended from an African woman, the African mother. However, our current notion of the Diaspora is fairly recent, mainly within the past five hundred years during which time the people of Africa were attacked, victimized, colonized, and enslaved by those who lived outside of the continent. Our Diaspora is vast, encompassing millions of people and many nations.
African intellectuals have used the term Diaspora more prominently since the l950s when large numbers of African scholars and activists began adopting the term Diaspora as a statement of solidarity with the struggles of the African continent. Although there had been from the earliest times a sense of belonging to Africa in the writings of Edward Blyden, Martin Delany, Abdias do Nascimento, Marcus Garvey, and others, it was the liberation of the African continent that brought into existence a new era of pride and dignity. The use of the term “Ethiopia� was prominent in the discourse of memory and return and there was a sense in which we no longer had to feel that we were motherless children a long ways from home. Our homeland was and is Africa
Despite opposition and criticism from those who have abandoned the idea of homeland, our history is richer with universal declarations of solidarity with the African world in the works of Edward Blyden from the Virgin Islands; Marcus Garvey, Leonard Barrett, and Mutabaruka from Jamaica; Sheila Walker, Wade Nobles, and Asa Hilliard from the United States; Arthur Schomberg and Marta Vega from Puerto Rico; Jean Price-Mars from Haiti; George Padmore, C.L.R. James, Kwame Ture, and Khafra Kambon from Trinidad; George James, Norman Cameron, Ivan Van Sertima, and Walter Rodney from Guyana; Aime Césaire and René Maran from Martinique; George Lamming and Kamau Brathwaite from Barbados; Maryse Condé, Ama Mazama, and Simone Schwartz-Bart from Guadeloupe; Nicolas Guillen from Cuba, Abdias do Nascimento and Benedita da Silva from Brazil, and more.
The three Elements of the African Diaspora
It should be clear now that the African Diaspora has three elements: concept, process, and situation. At the conceptual level we realize our Pan African potential through the manifestation of a diasporic interface among all segments of the African population. We must look to each other. The idea of process is a continuation, a becoming, khepera, in our classical language, that is not yet complete, but always in motion. When we say situation we mean by it the place in which we are domiciled, that is, where we live.
The concept is political, that is, it contains the potential for influencing economic and social issues. It is also spiritual where the affirmation of our ancestors as philosophers, farmers, metallurgists, scholars, artists, and healers is at the head of our revitalization. Thus, to be in the Diaspora as an African Brazilian or an African Canadian or African Jamaican or African Britisher is to realize similarities and commonalities in memory but also in conquest over obstacles, barriers, and challenges.
As much as the concept is political and spiritual, the process of the Diaspora is social. Those of us who voluntarily leave the continent to find education, work, and personal relationships and pursuits constitute an added layer to the Diaspora. In some cases these Diasporas remain essentially distinct; however, within a generation they become a part of the old Diaspora, as the children of the newcomers take on the symbols, language, styles, and ambitions of the older Diaspora while at the same time enriching the older the Diaspora with new signs, symbols, art forms, and music. What we must do is to advance the integration of our cultures along the best lines for the advancement of Africa. At the process level we are always becoming.
Africa is not static; one can neither claim Africa as it was one hundred years ago, nor fifty years ago, nor five years ago. The continent is preeminent as a dynamic locus for transformation. We are the catalyst for this change. In the Diaspora, it is the same. New Diasporas are being created on the Arabian horn, comprised of Africans from the continent as from other parts of the world. As new people enter the countries of Europe, the Americas, Asia, and the Caribbean, we are forming an inevitable network for international cooperation and a unity of spirit.
Yet it is true that the Diaspora is also a situation. Some of us are in place for a long time. There is the Afro-Asian Diaspora found in the various nations of Asia. There are also Blackfellows of Australia who claim African origins. The Dalits of India, the Siddis of India, the Africans in the United States, Brazil, Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Panama, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Trinidad and Tobago, Cuba, Peru, Surinam, Uruguay, and Guyana must be made to feel a part of this grand movement of consciousness.
A brother from Montevideo, Uruguay came to see me in Philadelphia and told me that there were movie theaters that discriminated against Africans in that country. I believe that it is necessary for African ambassadors to such countries to question the condition of Africans in those countries. Whatever the diplomatic protocol is, it must be in the general interest of African people. Allow the children in those forgotten communities to see Africans acting on the behalf of other Africans. This is what it means to recognize our situation.
Our history is replete with creativity, resilience, and nobility. But we must teach our children to share in the respective victories of the continent and the Diaspora as their heritage. None of us is without culture. Indeed, to be without culture is to be without ancestors and we are all the children of our ancestors. Sometimes we do not honor nor respect them and perhaps that is the beginning of our crime against our own history. Let it be said today that we have transformed the way we approach each other and the way we see ourselves in the world. Since I am in Dakar, Senegal, I am going to publicly ask President Wade to extend to me a Senegalese origin passport. As we are meeting here today the Indian government is giving Indian origin passports to citizens of its diaspora as a way to increase India’s political and economic reach in the world. When will our actions back up our words?
Our record is open to the World
No people can claim any more creativity than African people. We were the first, not as a boast but as a fact, to erect monumental architecture as we did in the Nile Valley and the Axumite empire. We were the first to create a mathematical abacus as we did with the Isonghee bone calculator nearly thirty thousand years ago. We were the first to organize medicine, to create geometry, astronomy, law, politics, kinship customs, theology, art, writing, and sculpture. Indeed, Erastothenes, librarian at Rhacosta, renamed Alexandria to honor the Greek conqueror, reported that Egyptian papyrus ships had sailed as far as Ceylon, now the country of Sri Lanka. In fact, Pliny, the Roman historian in Historia Naturalis, says that the Africans had gone as far as the mouth of the Ganges in the Indus Valley. We know, of course, from Herodotus and other sources that Sesostris had led his armies into the Black Sea region. We know that Herodotus wrote that Necho, the pharaoh sent a fleet to circumnavigate the African continent. We know that the mighty king, Ramses II, user maat re, setep en re, had his portrait and inscriptions placed in three places on the coastal cliffs of Phoenicia. A few years ago around midnight I stood with Theophile Obenga and sixty other people at the great temple of Abu Simbel, where Ramses sits in state, and heard Obenga say, “Ramses, we are your children!�
Yet the past five hundred years have tested our wills and brought us in contact with an avaricious and aggressive culture that has sought to undermine the very basis of our humanity. It has been our resilience on the continent and in the Diaspora that has kept us strong. Like the palm that sways in the storm but does not break, we have taken the blows, the awful, brutal blows of colonialism and enslavement and survived. Yes, it is true that some of us have been broken, shocked by the attacks, injured in the mind, and stunted in our growth by the assaults on us, but for the most part our resilience has been noble.
The European Slave Trade was not of African origin
Our record of fighting and resisting in every part of the globe has been the inspiration for other people of the world. The Native Americans lost an entire continent. This was the fate of the Blackfellows of Australia. This was to be the end of Africa, but it did not happen. Of course, the devastation of Africa in terms of human and material resources was immense. While I am on this subject, let me be clear that Africa was not responsible for its own devastation. The enslavement of Africans was not an initiative of Africans. No African states built ships to transport Africans across the oceans. No African state or kingdom ever insured fleets of ships for the slave trade. No African people ever used slavery as a principal mode of production. So we must not allow Europe to set the agenda for the discourse on the enslavement of our people by trying to minimize Europe’s role and maximize the role of Africans. Indeed, there were Africans, some very colorful, who collaborated with the Europeans but they were never the majority nor yet the initiators of this evil business. There were Jews in the Second Great International European War who collaborated with Nazis and there were Africans who were police in the South African white regime government. But in neither case would we blame the collaborators for the initiative for these horrors. They were in many ways victims themselves. Our nobility comes because we have been able to overcome the issues placed in front of us. The 21st century is the opening to the African renaissance.
Let us set our own terms
Perhaps it is time for us to apply the Diaspora to our renaissance as an instrument, is it possible that we might examine our own cultures and languages for a revitalization of the continent and our lives? I know we can. I am sure we must. The reason some of us have so slavishly followed in the footsteps of the West is that we have not considered the possibility that our own cultures contain the seeds of another way to approach modernization, integration and revitalization. It is difficult to think this way given the career rewards handed to us by the organizations that matter in the Western world. The West has come to dictate the terms of our research, the content of what we study, and how we report that content. It must be reported to the West, as they say, the mainstream journals, literally meaning white European journals. This is a trap our best intellectuals must avoid with the assistance of the governments of Africa. If there must be advantages to scholarship in a material way, let Africa set the terms, let the governments of Africa establish the awards that will attract the best minds to work in the interest of Africa.
Assuming a stance toward Victory
There are several steps that we might take to dispel the misconceptions about the Diaspora. In the first place, we must assume an Afrocentric stance on everything that affects Africa. This means that we cannot assume that ideas promoted by non-Africans are universal, nor can we assume that they are neutral. Many ideas promoted from Europe particularly have been dangerous for African people. To take an Afrocentric position means that you center yourself and your culture in the center of history and then begin the process of reaching out to others from an intense knowledge of your own reality. A student of mine came to me to discuss Jesus Christ. He was a bright student, one whom I had come to appreciate for his humility, his intelligence in my classes, and his deep sincerity. I said to him, where are you from? He said, I am from Zimbabwe. I said to him, Oh, I lived in Zimbabwe. He told me where he was from in Zimbabwe and I said to him, Do you know Chaminuka? He said, who? I said, Chaminuka, the prophet. He was baffled and I could see the stress in his countenance. I said to him, young man, go and find out from your parents and elders about Chaminuka and when you return, let’s talk about Chaminuka and Jesus.
Committing ourselves to Africa and African interests in the Diaspora
I ask you, brothers and sisters, to interrogate all ideas that are non-African, not to dismiss them for being foreign but to see if they are consistent with our goals and aims. All of us must learn to be the people of our ancestors, not the servants of international imperialist masters. This is the source of our victory and the revival of the glory that brings us together with each other. We must talk and we must act. We must harmonize and we must be ready to create chaos in the lives of those who will seek to retain control over African people. Our intellectuals and politicians must not be allowed to abandon us to the nightmare of the imperialists who seek, even while we sleep, to re-gain control of Africa through the fundamentalism of anti-African religions. Let us remember the words of Tsegaye Gabre-Medhin, nearly twenty five years ago here in Dakar at the First Pre-Colloquium of the Third FESTAC. Gabre-Medhin said, “It is time that we let the African peoples and Africa’s Diaspora speak the dialogue of their living giant ancestors, to reconstitute their lost language, to school their children in the harmony of becoming one with humanity, with nature and with the cosmos, and before the nuclear precipice of the hobglobins’ culture should take us by surprise, to let the African people reason for themselves and to let our great living ancestors rekindle a new world cultural order in everyman.�
An Afrocentric ideology
What we need, and I am not the first to suggest this, is an ideology that centers our thinking on Africa itself. This is an Africa-centered perspective where we look into our own cultures and experiences in order to be able to look with better vision at te rest of the world. Afrocentricity is a quality of thought or action that allows the African person to view himself or herself as an agent and actor in human history, not simply as someone who is acted upon. It gives us a perspective from the subject place, not from the margins of being victims or being an object in someone else’s world. We are creators, originators, and sustainers of our ethics, values, and customs. We seek to replace no one; we seek only to be for ourselves as a way of being for the world. As minimum requirements we must accept the idea that:
ï?ª Classical African civilizations are necessary referent points and resources for Afrocentric concept formation and research and that an adequate understanding cannot take place without reference or organic connections made to classical African cultures.
ï?ª The African world is wherever people declare themselves as Africans. This is true whether in Africa, Asia, the Americas, or the Caribbean.
ï?ª Africans are people who share the same consciousness (worldview/orientation), culture and physical qualities to those on some region of Africa.
ï?ª Afrocentricity establishes a positive approach to all information and data
� “Absence of evidence� is not necessarily “evidence of absence.�
ï?ª A necessary goal and outcome of Afrocentric research is emancipatory knowledge.
� “Objective�, “objectivity�, and “universal� are artificial categories, which have little meaning in the real world because they equate by default to a collective European subjectivity supporting European particularism.
Let us redefine ourselves for ourselves
Assuming we all become Afrocentric we must see the Atlantic Ocean as the West African Sea and the Indian Ocean as the East African Sea. There is no real reason except assertion that the Europeans have called the ocean to the west of Africa, Atlantic, and that they and the Asians have called the ocean to the east of Africa, Indian. The continent of Africa is the largest land mass bordering these two oceans yet the intellectual authority of Africa has been so negligible that Europe has spoken in our name. Never again should we allow that to happen. Just a simple matter like when we say classical music we must mean our own classical music. European concert music must not assume the principal place in our pantheon of music. We must act like we are owners of ourselves before we can claim our birthright as Africans in the traditions of our ancestors. We must not allow others to define us as outside of history or the world. We must put ourselves firmly into our own experiences. Our political leaders must have good, strong, bold, and loyal intellectual guidance. Loyalty does not imply rubber stamping, but rather an intelligentsia that understand the threat to Africa, and is committed to Africa.
Five points to our approach
I believe that there are five important ideas in an Afrocentric approach to our African and Diasporan situation: (1) we are subjects, (2) we are agents, (3) we build on our image, (4) we claim African interests, and (5) we share a consciousness of victory.
1. Subject – the place from which we view the world
2. Agent – self conscious and self-determining causal force
3. Image – ideal form or mode rooted in cultural perspective, perception and values
4. Interest –benefits, rights and just claims shared with other humans (life, freedom, justice, self-determination etc.)
5. A consciousness of victory – the awareness and recognition of African agency and capability; the rejection of collective self doubt, and the ability and courage to overcome challenges and transcend difficulties.
In the Diaspora we are often seen as running toward Africa while in Africa we are often seen as running toward Europe. In this curious activity we shall find each other and there shall be such a happy meeting of the children of Africa. We must not allow those who have for nearly five centuries been the engineers of our despair, the architects of our disorientation, and the designers of our miseducation, to continue their assaults on our ancestors, traditions, morality, ethics, and values. If anything, we must resume a vanguard role in the political and moral leadership of the world. Left to those who have articulated a desire to rule the world through globalization, a new form of white racial supremacy, we will be marginalized in the dust baskets of history by an ethically bankrupt hegemonic culture.
Pan-Africanism and the Diaspora
To claim to be a member of the Diaspora I think it is essential that one demonstrates a Pan African solidarity with the world African community, a desire for the revitalization of Africa, a consciousness of victory, and some accountability to the objectives of African renaissance. Any idea of homeland longing must be seen either in psychological, physical, spiritual, or economic terms. If you cannot return to Africa physically, you can return psychologically and economically. If you cannot return to Africa physically, you can return psychologically. If you cannot return to Africa physically, you can advance Africa’s cultural heritage. The least we can do is to stop disparaging the lives of our ancestors. You must make an Afrocentric response to all talk of the degradation of Africa. In l980 the great Cheikh Anta Diop told me something that I have never forgotten when in my youthful exuberance I announced to him that I wanted to devote my career to the defense of Africa. He said, “Africa needs no defense; it only needs to be advanced. Go out and advance Africa.�
We have not begun to tap our power
While it is true that the largest mass movement of people from one continent to others was the movement of Africans to the Americas and the Caribbean, our struggle has been constant and consistent. We have never acquiesced in the separation from our motherland. More than four hundred million Africans now live in the Diaspora and our population is growing. Africa’s population is nearly 900 million. In Brazil, Africans comprise about 110 million people. There are millions of Africans in other South American countries, Peru, Venezuela, and Colombia, have sizable populations. In the United States of America there are 40 million Africans. The Caribbean has some 50 million black people. Mexico has about 100,000 Africans. We know that the combined populations of Africans in countries such as United Kingdom, France, Portugal, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Russia, Germany, Turkey, and Sweden is approximately 1, 000,000. Thus, people of African descent, including those scattered in Southwest and Southeast Asia, make up more than a billion Africans.
I hope that the following ideas might be included in any recommendations we make about the integration of the Diaspora and the Continent:
1. Schools in Africa must include in their curricula information from the Diaspora. There is no reason why every African child should not know Mae Jemison, the first black woman to fly in space, and Guion Bluford, and Arnaldo Tamayo, the first African men to fly in space, one from the United States and the other from Cuba.
2. African nations should have persons in ministries whose job is to interface with the Diaspora on every issue. If there is a need to build a road, a hospital, open a fishery, develop a telecommunication facility, there is no reason why African nations, even if they must deal with Western nations at the level of money, could not understand the issues better by discovering experts of African descent who would take a personal interest in the project.
3. We cannot operate from weakness or the perception of weakness. We must all operate as if we are in charge of our achievement.
4. African leaders should have a precise knowledge of the Diasporan African communities. This would allow them to target these communities for resources, ideas, concepts, and reciprocal political and economic relations.
5. The right of Africans in the Diaspora to return is a legitimate issue for African governments. There is no reason why those who govern the lands of our ancestors should prevent those of us who were taken against our wills from our homeland from returning. This would be a major step in our reconciliation with each other.
I like what Mario Azevedo says about the Diaspora as a concept for analysis. He is essentially concerned with theoretical work, but his point is important. He writes:
“Instead of using concepts based on political relationships of hegemony—such as slavery, race, and colonialism—as the model to study black people, the Diaspora paradigm makes black people the focus and the subject of the study� (Azevedo, “Diaspora,� in Molefi Kete Asante and Ama Mazama, eds., Encyclopedia of Black Studies. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications). What Azevedo understands is that the old paradigm was built on the text of hegemony and the subtext of our subjugation. We were seen as secondary to the grand march of Europe in the history of the world. That time is over. We will not go into the 21st century as secondary on the stage of history. We will not abandon our place in human history to those who speak of civilization yet everywhere they go they brutalized the civilized.
Our commonalities are stronger than our differences
We will advance when we understand the international dimension to our communities, all of them with discreet histories and experiences, but all essentially African in outlook, objectives, ambitions, and ethics. The hegemony of the West in all of its forms, whether capitalist or Marxist, Christian or Secular, socialist or globalist, has been to the advantage of Europe at the expense of Africa. That is why I am suggesting a new, more powerful model, based on the idea of comparative examinations of people of African descent. We must advance the African world in all of its interlocking connections from an Afrocentric perspective.
This means that we must depend upon ourselves. Do not believe that the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, or Britain, France, Germany, or the United States want to see African states achieve economic parity with them. We will not be saved by grants and we cannot develop on handouts and restricted gifts. There will be no saviors from outside of Africa.
Our actions must be based on analysis but we should have no paralysis by analysis. One of the ways ideas are destroyed in the West is by analysis. For example, we know that there may be a multiplicity of Diasporas in one nation, as when you have Senegalese, Chadians, Malians, Algerians, and Togolese in France. They may even overlap with each other in different ways because of class, gender, ethnicity, relationship to the West, and ideas of globalization. We can discover similarities and dissimilarities in our cultural and historical experiences knowing that this type of analysis would reveal more similarities than differences. Of course, more dissimilarities mean that we must abandon the comparative model. Most importantly, as we find similarities in cultural forms, we should propose ways that our common political, social, and economic problems can be solved or resolved by looking at various other Diasporas.
Expose false elements
We must guard ourselves from false people who grin in our face and take our hospitality for innocence and our grace for stupidity. We must be aware of these lethal people. Our strength must come from an Afrocentric bond, stronger than religion because religion has often been used to divide us. There is nothing stronger than a collective commitment to the rise of the African spirit.
Just as our ethnic experiences on the continent differ so do the diasporic experiences differ. Our environments are often different and the responses we have made in Brazil may be different from those we made in Jamaica or Cuba or Canada. Yet our similarities are grounded in the way we have sought to maintain our sanity in the face of insanity, by our search for harmony in the middle of political and social chaos. And also by the Pan Africanism and later the Afrocentricity that drives the idea of the Diaspora as a unit for analysis.
Pan-Africanism was a diasporic innovation. Separated from the continent of origin, unable to control our own destinies, and assaulted on every side, we sought an organizing political instrument for collective action. Thus, Pan Africanism was born to bring us together to struggle for economic, social, and political rights in the Diaspora and on the continent. Pan Africanism allowed us to attack colonialism in Africa and the Caribbean, discrimination in the United States, assimilationism in Brazil, and to promote the unification of black people, particularly those living on the continent.
To the African leaders I make a particular plea. I ask you to give us leadership in the quest for true liberation. With your input, your action, your determination, Africa and the Diaspora will achieve historic successes. We need advocates for our cause and there are no greater advocates than our leaders.
Up! You mighty people!
I am ready to see us establish ourselves at the center of the world stage. I am ready to see us create an integrated African world where the ideas, energies, and concepts that have made us creative, resilient, and capable are used for moral and political leadership. I am ready to see us cast aside all neuroses that are associated with the legacy of colonialism, discrimination, and enslavement. I am ready to see us accept our culture, as a heritage to be shaped and molded, rather than baggage to be thrown to the side. I am ready to see us seize the intellectual initiatives for our own destiny.
REFERENCES
Anselin, A. (1982). Le Mythe D' Europe. Paris: Editions Anthropos.
Asante, Molefi Kete (1998) The Afrocentric Idea. Philadelphia: Temple University.
Asante, Molefi Kete. (2003). Afrocentricity. Chicago:African American Images.
Asante, Molefi Kete. (1990). Kemet, Afrocentricity, and Knowledge. Trenton: Africa World Press.
Asante, Molefi Kete. (1994). Classical Africa. Maywood, N.J.: The Peoples Publishing Group, Inc.
Ben-Jochannan, Yosef.(1971, 1988) Africa: Mother of Western Civilization. Baltimore, MD: Black Classic Press.
Ben-Jochannan, Yosef (1972) African Origins of the Major Western Religions. New York: Alkebu-Lan
Bernal, Martin (l987) Black Athena: the Afro Asiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, Volume I: The Fabrication of Ancient Greece, 1875-1985. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Bernal, Martin (1991) Black Athena: the Afro Asiatic Roots of Classical Civilizwation, Volume II: The Archaeological and Documentary Evidence. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Blyden, Edward Wilmot (1887) Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race. London: W.B. Whittingham.
Browder, Anthony Y.(1992) Nile Valley Contributions to Civilization: Exploding the Myths, Vol. 1. Introduction by John Henrik Clarke. Washington, D.C. Institute of Karmic Guidance.
Carruthers, Jacob H. (1995) Mdr Ntr: Divine Speech (A Historiographical Reflection on African Deep Thought from the Time of the Pharaohs to the Present). Foreword by John Henrik Clarke. London: Karnak House.
Diagne, Pathe (1981). In J. Ki-Zerbo (Ed.), General History of Africa I: Methodology and African Prehistory. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
Diagne, Pathe (2002) Cheikh Anta Diop et L’Afrique dans L’histoire du Monde, Paris: Sankore, 2002.
Diop, C. A., (1955) Nations negres et culture. Paris: Presence Africaine.
Diop, Cheikh Anta (1974) The African Origin of Civilization. Westport, Ct.: Lawrence Hill
Diop, Cheikh Anta (1991) Civilization or Barbarism. Chicago: Lawrence Hill.
Drake, St. Clair, (1987) Black Folk Here and There: An Essay in History and Anthropology. Volume I, Los Angeles: Center for Afro American Studies, University of California, Los Angeles.
Drake, St. Clair (1990) Black Folk Here and There: An Essay in History and Anthropology. Volume II, Los Angeles: Center for Afro American Studies, University of California, Los Angeles.
DuBois, W. E. B.(1946) The World and Africa: An Inquiry into the part which Africa has played in world history. New York: International Publishers.
Fanon, F. (1967). Black Skin, White Masks. New York: Grove Press.
Hansberry, William Leo (1981) Africa and Africans as Seen by Classical Writers. Edited by Joseph E. Harris. Washington, DC: Howard University Press.
Harris, Joseph, ed., (1977) Africa and Afrians as Seen by Classical Writers: The William Leo Hansberry African History Notebook, Vol II. Washington, DC: Howard University Press.
Herodotus. (1972) The Histories. Translated by Aubrey de Selincourt. Rev. ed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Hilliard, Asa G. III (2002) “The Myth of the Immaculate Conception of Western Civilization,� in Molefi Ke | | | |
