“Rethinking Pan-Africanism”? Okay. Let us first figure out what is and is not pan-Africanism. History is our best teacher.
Pan-Africanism is a combination of not less than two theories: a political theory and an economic theory. From this point, we can clearly see that to understand Pan-Africanism, we must know some African economic history.
Prehistorically, Africans have inhabited Africa for millions of years. What the Arab-haters and Muslim-haters do not seem to understand is that those we know as Arabs have inhabited Africa for not less than 200,000 years. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_people). Furthermore, in the natural order of things, Africans have always had positive and constructive relationships with the Asians to the east. At a minimum, much commerce and trade existed between Africa and Asia in prehistoric time. Accordingly, any ideology predicated on anti-Arab and anti-Asian sentiment is fallacious and anti-historical. On the other hand, Pan-Africanism is a theory based on the idea of economic ties in the modern world between Africans (including the Berber/Moors/Arabs) and Asians.
Pseudo-Pan-Africnaists like to mention Marcus Garvey when it suits their hidden agendas. They never mention Garvey’s connections to Duse Muhammad Ali. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dus%C3%A9_Mohamed_Ali and http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/shoulders-our-freedom-fighters/20...) Ali was profoundly interested in African unity as a basis for Economic development.
In terms of Economic development, we can also consider the founding of the Republic of Liberia and the roles played by Martin Delaney(http://www.gutenberg.org/files/17154/17154-8.txt and http://books.google.com/books?id=Q29GUexeQUkC&pg=PA227&lpg=...), and Alexander Crummel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Crummell) and Henry Highland Garnet (http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/etas/8/). Garnet is a very powerful link to the Convention Movement which preceded the Pan-African Congress Movement under Dubois and later Nkrumah.
Twas mercy brought me from my Pagan land,
Taught my benighted soul to understand
That there's a God, that there's a Saviour too:
Once I redemption neither sought nor knew.
Some view our sable race with scornful eye,
"Their colour is a diabolic dye."
Remember, Christians, Negroes, black as Cain,
May be refin'd, and join th' angelic train.´
Thus by considering this brief outline of the history of Pan-Africanism, we can see clearly that the questions posed have long ago been answered by those greater than us. History is our best teacher. And, it becomes clear, even from the later writings of Diop, that the “who” question is answered by saying simply “Africans”. Africans include the current inhabitants of Africa, plus the African Diaspora. This is geo-politics, not race baiting and racism.
To succeed economically, we should re-establish the economic ties that existed prior to European encroachment between Africa and Asia. This the secret to the success of His Excellency Borther Umar Al-Bashir’s resistance to neo-colonialism and economic development. The Chinese need Sudanese oil. And, they are willing and able to pay for it. Accordingly, economic warfare against Sudan will not succeed. Furthermore, Sudan has the financial resources to bring in rapid development on a massive scale. This includes the weaponry needed to maintain Sudanese territorial integrity and national dignity. Similarly, Somalia is finally on the road to Unity and peace. And, Zimbabwe has withstood illegal sanctions and will continue to do so. In fact, with ever growing Chinese interest in southern Africa, we can expect greater rates of economic growth in the region during these times of economic collapse in the west than most places in the world.
Now that South Africa has been liberated, even European citizens of Africa are becoming Pan-Africanists if for no other reason than that pan-Africanism make economic sense to those who have economic stakes in development in Africa. Let me rephrase this: white folks are getting rich by promoting African Unity.(I will bet that did it: some Africans cannot do anything without European approval.)
I think the questions have been long ago answered. All of these questions were evident from before the concept of Pan-Africanism was even developed. The only real question is: do we want Unity? If we do, then the who, what, why, how and what kind becomes secondary issues. The objective of Pan-Africanism is African Unity. Interestingly enough, the foremost advocates of Pan-Africanism are barely mentioned, and none are quoted. Those quoted are not uncompromisingly and clearly committed to Pan-Africanism. This alone should raise red flags.
Williams started the Pan-Africnaist Movement. Dubois was the early theorotician. Nkrumah, Toure, Nasser and Keiti were the early practicians. As for men like Nyerre, it is not altogether clear that they were ever sincerely committed to Pan-Africanism. Diop came to accept it because as a trained economist, he realized that Africa cannot Develop in the modern world without political Unity. But, this realization was not strong enough to motivate him to revise his earlier works that definitely were not thoroughly Pan-Africanist.
Pan-Africanism is a geo-political theory. It is not to be confused with any form of tribalism, sectarianism or subcontinentalism.
It is also an economic theory. The biggest problem facing Africans all over the world today is poverty, famine, disease, etc. Millions of Africans have starved to death in recent years and decades. The remedy for this poverty is development, especially in food production. All Pan-Africanist practicians have dealt with this problem. Nasser of Egypt had to do the Aswan dam Project as essential to feeding the millions of Egyptians. Nkrumah did the Volta Dam Project. Qaddafi did the Man-Made River Project. Mugabe is doing similar projects. There is a reason for this. And, this is what make these Africans true, sincere and honestly commiited Pan-Africanists.
As an economist, Diop asked himself how to reclaim the vast wastelands of Africa. Not only do we have to determine how to stop the advancement of and promte the development of Sahara, there are several other waste and marginal lands all over Africa. When these lands are put to productive uses, much of the problem of poverty can be resoleved. Africa will be able to feed her people. Because Allah has Blessed us so greatly in terms of fertile soil, no other land in the world can produce food cheaper than Mother Africa. Thus, all the questions posed have logical answers. Because China, Japan, Arabia, etc., for instance, have relatively less capability to produce food, we must sale food to them. Economic Development.
It is always interesting to see those who want to hide behind the name Pan-Africanists are so quick to instigate racial issues with Asians and Arabs while never, repeat NEVER, finding fault with the European colonizers and immperialists. I recell the 1980's when thugs attacked Korean shop keepers in Los Angeles. This was followed by various conspiracies to balkanize Sudan and Somalia. Now, the same elements are threatening and attacking Africans, so-called Black sub-Sahara Africans, you and me. It has always been clear to me that these elements were self-hating traitors all along.
this should be self-explanatory. but, i guess it needs to be clarified. simply put, unity for the complete liberation and self-determination of afrika and people of afrikan descent, the return to afrikanism as we knew it before the white man came and signalled the beginning of the end, which was predicated on the annihilation of the self, which includes spiritualism, our story (not history), an agrarian economic infrastructure, political collectivism, a social psychology and lat but not least, a warrior class.
unity of whom?
since we are the original people of the afrikan continent and have suffered the most on the continent, then it is only imparative that that unity of whom should be predicated upon afrikan people, the afrikan philosophy of revolution, the afrikan system of collectivism and social cohesion. therefore, it is afrikans who must dictate what pan-afrikanism should and must be.
"our objectives must be the creation of an economic and politically federated continent. . . . If despite goodwill on our part, North African Arabs were to refuse a continental federation, then nothing should stand in the way of the formation of an exclusively sub-Saharan continental federation. . . . In such an eventuality, no one could accuse sub-Saharan Africans of being guilty of exclusivism, since their appeals to the North would have been refused."
it couldn't be put any better, in regard the situation or position that the afrikan must take toward the arab peoples of north afrika. in addition to that, it must be brought to the fore the subject of the arab enslavement of the afrikan and the reparation that it curtailed. anything short of that is a failure to recognize genuine pan-afrikanism, both on the part of the arabs and the afrikans who would want to the two peoples to unite under an afrikan federated continent.
what type of unity?
an unrelenting unity should be at the core of pan-afrikanism, if it is to be the cornerstone of afrikan self-determination. there cannot be "one Africa that fights against colonialism and another that attempts to make arrangements with colonialism."
fanon was absolutely clear and most definitely correct regarding the position of the two types of afrika toward colonialism, which is no different than the two types of revolutions that are going on in the black community of the united snakes of amerikkka. those who negoitiate with the neo-colonialists should be eradicated from the goal of genuine pan-afrikanism. or else they will have only continued illusion of afrikan independence, which is similar to what fanon called black skin white mask.
This raises a paramount series of other questions ... How can this conversation/dialog be expanded to include all/most stakeholders throughout the Diaspora and how soon? How do we set an agenda for this dialog? Will there be action items, or is this just an intellectual conversation? What role will the advice of such past leaders/mentors as Garvey, Malcolm X, Chancellor WIlliams, etc. play in these discussions and/or action items?
This IS what is happening , as we articulate our thoughts , questions , hopes for the future ... I think that to ' realize' our dreams , we must firstly , 'have the dream' ... then , we share that dream concept , and others add to it , 'their understanding' ... We WILL continue to figure this out , one step at a time ...
Great discussion. Prayerful we will begin looking at actions steps to bring African Unity a step closer to fruition in one form or another. But i the discussions must continue.
https://theblacklist.net/
Replies
Pan-Africanism is a combination of not less than two theories: a political theory and an economic theory. From this point, we can clearly see that to understand Pan-Africanism, we must know some African economic history.
Prehistorically, Africans have inhabited Africa for millions of years. What the Arab-haters and Muslim-haters do not seem to understand is that those we know as Arabs have inhabited Africa for not less than 200,000 years. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber_people). Furthermore, in the natural order of things, Africans have always had positive and constructive relationships with the Asians to the east. At a minimum, much commerce and trade existed between Africa and Asia in prehistoric time. Accordingly, any ideology predicated on anti-Arab and anti-Asian sentiment is fallacious and anti-historical. On the other hand, Pan-Africanism is a theory based on the idea of economic ties in the modern world between Africans (including the Berber/Moors/Arabs) and Asians.
Pseudo-Pan-Africnaists like to mention Marcus Garvey when it suits their hidden agendas. They never mention Garvey’s connections to Duse Muhammad Ali. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dus%C3%A9_Mohamed_Ali and http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/shoulders-our-freedom-fighters/20...) Ali was profoundly interested in African unity as a basis for Economic development.
In terms of Economic development, we can also consider the founding of the Republic of Liberia and the roles played by Martin Delaney(http://www.gutenberg.org/files/17154/17154-8.txt and http://books.google.com/books?id=Q29GUexeQUkC&pg=PA227&lpg=...), and Alexander Crummel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Crummell) and Henry Highland Garnet (http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/etas/8/). Garnet is a very powerful link to the Convention Movement which preceded the Pan-African Congress Movement under Dubois and later Nkrumah.
Twas mercy brought me from my Pagan land,
Taught my benighted soul to understand
That there's a God, that there's a Saviour too:
Once I redemption neither sought nor knew.
Some view our sable race with scornful eye,
"Their colour is a diabolic dye."
Remember, Christians, Negroes, black as Cain,
May be refin'd, and join th' angelic train.´
-Phylis Wheatley
Notice the Pan-Africanist element. Also, Olaudah Equiano (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part1/1p276.html) should be considered a founder of Pan-Africanism.
This is where we separate the wheat from the chaff . Booker T. Washington made immense contributions to the development of the economic aspect of Pan-Africanism. (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/race/etc/road.html) In fact, Washington and Dubois collaborated closely prior to the Pan-African Congress Movement on this theory.( http://books.google.com/books?id=QmMIAzoVt80C&dq=washington+and..., pp85.) But, Washington was the founder of the national Negro Business League which predates the Chamber of Commerce (http://www.blackpast.org/?q=aah/national-negro-business-league). It was Garvey who saw clearly that “Africa for the Africans” involved basing his work on that of Washington (http://afroamhistory.about.com/library/blmarcus_garvey_letter_washi... and http://www.marcusgarvey.com/wmview.php?ArtID=79)
Thus by considering this brief outline of the history of Pan-Africanism, we can see clearly that the questions posed have long ago been answered by those greater than us. History is our best teacher. And, it becomes clear, even from the later writings of Diop, that the “who” question is answered by saying simply “Africans”. Africans include the current inhabitants of Africa, plus the African Diaspora. This is geo-politics, not race baiting and racism.
To succeed economically, we should re-establish the economic ties that existed prior to European encroachment between Africa and Asia. This the secret to the success of His Excellency Borther Umar Al-Bashir’s resistance to neo-colonialism and economic development. The Chinese need Sudanese oil. And, they are willing and able to pay for it. Accordingly, economic warfare against Sudan will not succeed. Furthermore, Sudan has the financial resources to bring in rapid development on a massive scale. This includes the weaponry needed to maintain Sudanese territorial integrity and national dignity. Similarly, Somalia is finally on the road to Unity and peace. And, Zimbabwe has withstood illegal sanctions and will continue to do so. In fact, with ever growing Chinese interest in southern Africa, we can expect greater rates of economic growth in the region during these times of economic collapse in the west than most places in the world.
Now that South Africa has been liberated, even European citizens of Africa are becoming Pan-Africanists if for no other reason than that pan-Africanism make economic sense to those who have economic stakes in development in Africa. Let me rephrase this: white folks are getting rich by promoting African Unity.(I will bet that did it: some Africans cannot do anything without European approval.)
Williams started the Pan-Africnaist Movement. Dubois was the early theorotician. Nkrumah, Toure, Nasser and Keiti were the early practicians. As for men like Nyerre, it is not altogether clear that they were ever sincerely committed to Pan-Africanism. Diop came to accept it because as a trained economist, he realized that Africa cannot Develop in the modern world without political Unity. But, this realization was not strong enough to motivate him to revise his earlier works that definitely were not thoroughly Pan-Africanist.
Pan-Africanism is a geo-political theory. It is not to be confused with any form of tribalism, sectarianism or subcontinentalism.
It is also an economic theory. The biggest problem facing Africans all over the world today is poverty, famine, disease, etc. Millions of Africans have starved to death in recent years and decades. The remedy for this poverty is development, especially in food production. All Pan-Africanist practicians have dealt with this problem. Nasser of Egypt had to do the Aswan dam Project as essential to feeding the millions of Egyptians. Nkrumah did the Volta Dam Project. Qaddafi did the Man-Made River Project. Mugabe is doing similar projects. There is a reason for this. And, this is what make these Africans true, sincere and honestly commiited Pan-Africanists.
As an economist, Diop asked himself how to reclaim the vast wastelands of Africa. Not only do we have to determine how to stop the advancement of and promte the development of Sahara, there are several other waste and marginal lands all over Africa. When these lands are put to productive uses, much of the problem of poverty can be resoleved. Africa will be able to feed her people. Because Allah has Blessed us so greatly in terms of fertile soil, no other land in the world can produce food cheaper than Mother Africa. Thus, all the questions posed have logical answers. Because China, Japan, Arabia, etc., for instance, have relatively less capability to produce food, we must sale food to them. Economic Development.
It is always interesting to see those who want to hide behind the name Pan-Africanists are so quick to instigate racial issues with Asians and Arabs while never, repeat NEVER, finding fault with the European colonizers and immperialists. I recell the 1980's when thugs attacked Korean shop keepers in Los Angeles. This was followed by various conspiracies to balkanize Sudan and Somalia. Now, the same elements are threatening and attacking Africans, so-called Black sub-Sahara Africans, you and me. It has always been clear to me that these elements were self-hating traitors all along.
unity for what?
this should be self-explanatory. but, i guess it needs to be clarified. simply put, unity for the complete liberation and self-determination of afrika and people of afrikan descent, the return to afrikanism as we knew it before the white man came and signalled the beginning of the end, which was predicated on the annihilation of the self, which includes spiritualism, our story (not history), an agrarian economic infrastructure, political collectivism, a social psychology and lat but not least, a warrior class.
unity of whom?
since we are the original people of the afrikan continent and have suffered the most on the continent, then it is only imparative that that unity of whom should be predicated upon afrikan people, the afrikan philosophy of revolution, the afrikan system of collectivism and social cohesion. therefore, it is afrikans who must dictate what pan-afrikanism should and must be.
"our objectives must be the creation of an economic and politically federated continent. . . . If despite goodwill on our part, North African Arabs were to refuse a continental federation, then nothing should stand in the way of the formation of an exclusively sub-Saharan continental federation. . . . In such an eventuality, no one could accuse sub-Saharan Africans of being guilty of exclusivism, since their appeals to the North would have been refused."
it couldn't be put any better, in regard the situation or position that the afrikan must take toward the arab peoples of north afrika. in addition to that, it must be brought to the fore the subject of the arab enslavement of the afrikan and the reparation that it curtailed. anything short of that is a failure to recognize genuine pan-afrikanism, both on the part of the arabs and the afrikans who would want to the two peoples to unite under an afrikan federated continent.
what type of unity?
an unrelenting unity should be at the core of pan-afrikanism, if it is to be the cornerstone of afrikan self-determination. there cannot be "one Africa that fights against colonialism and another that attempts to make arrangements with colonialism."
fanon was absolutely clear and most definitely correct regarding the position of the two types of afrika toward colonialism, which is no different than the two types of revolutions that are going on in the black community of the united snakes of amerikkka. those who negoitiate with the neo-colonialists should be eradicated from the goal of genuine pan-afrikanism. or else they will have only continued illusion of afrikan independence, which is similar to what fanon called black skin white mask.
uhuru!
Peace .
www.discussrace.com