posted
February marks so-called "Black History Month" in the U.S. In Britain, it's October. Yetthen topics covered for both months deal with personalities and are limited to just 300 years of the 200,000 year history of blacks in Africa.
Such a "history", of course, is very limited and parochial as if blacks/Africans entered history only when they came in contact with Europeans post the 15th century.
The present situation is one of complacency encouraged by the black bourgeoisies of both the Americas and Africa. There was "purpose" during the days of direct oppression but once the independence movement in Africa resulted in new African nations and the Civil Rights movement in the U.S. meant that 10% of blacks in the U.S. could hold positions in industry and government then complacency set. History came to a standstill.
In Africa, the Pan African ideal(Nkrumah's model) has been jettisoned and in the U.S. the idea of autonomy and and Pan African linkages(Malcolm X's model) have been more or less completely smothered. The Martin Luther King model is the one touted by dominant white liberalism.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
February marks so-called "Black History Month" in the U.S. In Britain, it's October. Yet then topics covered for both months deal with personalities and are limited to just 300 years of the 200,000 year history of blacks in Africa.
So then, you think that Blacks in the United States and Britain, should be taught African history, instead of the history of Blacks in the United States, or the History of Blacks in Britain?
So does that mean the reverse: that Africans will have to study the history of Blacks in the United States, and the History of Blacks in Britain?
I dunno, but wouldn't it make more sense for Africans to study African history, and Americans study Black American history, and Britain's study Black European history?
He,he,he,he:
See, I didn't even curse you out, But I really wanted to. I'm sure you have no clue how pathetic the true nature of your request is: What you really want is for Americans and Brit's to research and compile a Sub-Saharan history to be taught to Africans.
And you know me - I say, do it yourselves!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
First of all, the concept of "sub-Saharan African history" is a racist Eurocentric term. Sober-minded blacks/Africans should avoid using this Eurocentric and racist lingo. Its original ideological goal was to excise the history and linguistics of Ancient Egypt and Kush/Nubia/ from the rest of Africa--purelo on pseudo-racial grounds.
Given that Africans/blacks in the Americas derive from events that took place in African history, they would not be able to understand their own history without studying African history. Same for those blacks/Africans in Britain.
The evidence for the fact blacks/Africans of the Americas have their history derived from Africa is borne out by a number of facts. Consider the film named "Roots" that--according to reports--mesmerised U.S. blacks for a whole week. It was an African American author Alex Haley who provided the narrative for the film. Then there's the film named "Amistad" also depicting events that began with a ship of captives from West Africa.
Then there's the biological clincher which finds that the majority Y and MtDNA haplogroups for black males and females in the Americas derive directly from West Africa. In Brazil, even a large percentage of whites carry African DNA.
In sum then, the history of blacks/Africans in the U.S. and Britain constitutes just a short footnote on their direct history of some 200,000 years.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"In Africa, the Pan African ideal(Nkrumah's model) has been jettisoned and in the U.S. the idea of autonomy and and Pan African linkages(Malcolm X's model) have been more or less completely smothered."
Here is what many do not understand about African Independence. The idea was one created by Blacks in the West !! ...perhaps thr notion has been jettisoned By Africans because it was never an African generated concept to begin with.
Here is the history of Nkrumah and his ideas:
'While at the school, he was noticed by the Reverend Alec Garden Fraser, principal of the Government Training College (soon to become Achimota School) in the Gold Coast's capital, Accra. Fraser arranged for Nkumrah to train as a teacher at his school.[6][7] Here, Columbia-educated deputy headmaster Kwegyir Aggrey exposed him to the ideas of Marcus Garvey and W. E. B. Du Bois.'
'Nkrumah had heard journalist and future Nigerian president Nnamdi Azikiwe speak while a student at Achimota; the two men met and Azikiwe's influence increased Nkrumah's interest in black nationalism. The young teacher decided to further his education. Azikiwe had attended Lincoln College, a historically black college in Chester County, Pennsylvania, west of Philadelphia, and he advised Nkrumah to enroll there.'
'Nkrumah spent his summers in Harlem, a center of black life and thought. He found housing and employment in New York City with difficulty and involved himself in the community. He spent many evenings listening to and arguing with street orators,' ( the street corner soap box orators Mike dislikes so much)
"Of all literature I studied, the book that did more than any other to fire my enthusiasm was Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey."
African liberation came about because of Blacks in the West.
-------------------- Keldal Posts: 2818 | From: new york | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great thread Lamin after the European colonialists and the Papacy erased Black people of 200,000 years of history of creation of civilizations they gave Black People in the diaspora and the world a ridiculous Black History months made of Black Civil Right leaders, contemporary Black Scientists, Black Politicians and weak Black African Kingdoms before and during the Slave Trade.
The Whole World History before the White European took over the world in the 16 cent CE was Black History. Black People created civilizations, were Monarchs, Nobles, Scholars and Scientists in the 7 or 8 continents of the world. The White europeans had to genocide and erased Black people from history in order for the White race to rise. Everyday is Black history because modern Western Civilization was build on top of Black Civilization foundation. A month for Black History is ridiculous. Without Black History there is no real world history.
quote:Originally posted by lamin: First of all, the concept of "sub-Saharan African history" is a racist Eurocentric term. Sober-minded blacks/Africans should avoid using this Eurocentric and racist lingo. Its original ideological goal was to excise the history and linguistics of Ancient Egypt and Kush/Nubia/ from the rest of Africa--purelo on pseudo-racial grounds.
Given that Africans/blacks in the Americas derive from events that took place in African history, they would not be able to understand their own history without studying African history. Same for those blacks/Africans in Britain.
The evidence for the fact blacks/Africans of the Americas have their history derived from Africa is borne out by a number of facts. Consider the film named "Roots" that--according to reports--mesmerised U.S. blacks for a whole week. It was an African American author Alex Haley who provided the narrative for the film. Then there's the film named "Amistad" also depicting events that began with a ship of captives from West Africa.
Then there's the biological clincher which finds that the majority Y and MtDNA haplogroups for black males and females in the Americas derive directly from West Africa. In Brazil, even a large percentage of whites carry African DNA.
In sum then, the history of blacks/Africans in the U.S. and Britain constitutes just a short footnote on their direct history of some 200,000 years.
Damn - Am I the only one who actually reads this fool posts?
lamin - please tell us what connection you find between the people north of Sudan and those south of Sudan.
AND - You dumb Bastard - you're still on the stupidness of all Black Americans derive from the Slave trade?
Damn Boy, what is wrong with you?
Ya, I know, the fool bases his understanding of Black history on movies - sigh.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Here is what many do not understand about African Independence. The idea was one created by Blacks in the West !! ...perhaps thr notion has been jettisoned By Africans because it was never an African generated concept to begin with.
Here's a Black History Month titbit for you. The originator of the idea of Pan Africanism in the Americas was Marcus Garvey. But Garvey himself was set on his intellectual path by Sudanese nationalist Duse Mohammed Ali. Cheikh Anta Diop was another African scholar who on his own wrote the important text "The Cultural Unity of Black Africa" and "Black Africa: The Basis for a Cultural and Federated State". There was no reference to Garvey or Du Bois in that text.
Then way back in history the unification idea was sowed by Narmer who united North and South Egypt. Then Haile Selassie who adopted the Pan African name "Ethiopia" for Abyssyinia.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The people of North and South Sudan are united genetically. Some are within haplogroup J--which has origins in Africa--but most are E1b1a as proof of their kin relationship.
Just that North Sudan have been brainwashed into the Arab nonsense cult called Islam. Where is King? He can straighten them out.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Plus, Mike must understand that a main reason why there are Africans in the Western Hemisphere is that Spanish Priest Bartolomo de Las Casas suggested that Africans should replace the already enslaved Native Americans who were dying in the mines and plantations of the Spanish controlled territories. Thus started the Atlantic trade in African captives.
It's all there in Las Casas's diaries.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic