What is its approach and relation to the white world in terms of its security?
Original Post
We best have some type of military
quote:Originally posted by Shango67:
We best have some type of military
I'm not being critical, but practically speaking, of what value would "some type of military" be when the U.S. spends more on defense than the rest of the world combined? Again, I very much respect the symbolism of creating a military presence, but of what practical value would that be to us?
Ask Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea, Iran? Seems to me if you got the big bang it deters a lot of people from fuckin with you. They seem to want to come to the table.But if you have nothing , how can you have respect. Its not the big military that countries need, its the bomb, period
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
Ask Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea, Iran? Seems to me if you got the big bang it deters a lot of people from fuckin with you. They seem to want to come to the table.But if you have nothing , how can you have respect. Its not the big military that countries need, its the bomb, period
So who would get this bomb and how? Aren't we talking about a multi-national Pan African group? How would this happen?
That comes after you do the real work.Organizing a United Africa, an United Diaspora, I believe once you get our people organized and focused everything else is easy. If Africans come together and unite anything is possible.Im not an advocate of Nukes but how does everyone else get them. the Technology is already out there and as the years go by the material will be easier and easier to get it. THe short answer is after we do the serious work , nations will simply purchase the technology like everyone else does.
I asked this question here a long time ago, but would love current members' thoughts about it. In thinking about Pan Africanism, it seems that the onus has been placed on African Americans to reach out to Africa and Africans. Even without necessarily arguing that specific point, I am at a loss to put my finger on any meaningful effort coming from Africa that seeks to embrace us/invite us back etc. On an individual basis, I am well aware that there is - in some places - warmth toward us. I have friends who have visited a number of places and been made to feel quite welcome. Nevertheless, I am not aware of any scholars or movements or populist leaders who have included reaching out to African Americans specifically as a strategic part of their thinking.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
quote:We best have some type of military
The United States government is going to sell us tanks and attack helicopters, maybe a few nukes too.
During the Falklands War the Argentines had French made equipment. The British got the French to give them the codes to disable Argentine electronics. Why were the Argentines dumb enough to buy equipment that could be disabled? The electronics is so complicated how could you know unless you designed it yourself?
With the state of the world today concentrating on getiing up to date on technology is more important than the military but martial arts training with the philosophy could be made mandatory for boys in school.
In college I met a Chinese kid from New York who had studied kung fu. He said that his master told him he would not teach kung fu to Europeans because they turn everything into a sport.
umbra
quote:Originally posted by MBM:quote:Originally posted by Shango67:
We best have some type of military
I'm not being critical, but practically speaking, of what value would "some type of military" be when the U.S. spends more on defense than the rest of the world combined? Again, I very much respect the symbolism of creating a military presence, but of what practical value would that be to us?
It would actually seem to harm us initially, because if we there was a cohesive group armed to the teeth, it would just play into the opposition's rhetoric on terrorist and extremist. Honestly, could you blame them? If another ethnic group in America, say the native Americans, were to form a functionla group with paramilitrary overtones, wouldn't you think they were a little....I don't know....nihilistic?
There are many African Scholars promoting Pan Africanism. There are also programs and Organizations that also promote Pan Africanism. Its seems to me people look for excuses or reasons not deal with Africa.All I would say is do some research, google, check out the African Studies programs, email the professor, look at the organizations that are doing good work on the ground.Its a tall order, its not easy but people are doing it.
PanAfrica: 'Greater Africa' Has Changed the World Too
Email This Page
Print This Page
The East African Standard (Nairobi)
COLUMN
April 16, 2006
Posted to the web April 17, 2006
Ali Mazrui
Nairobi
Two trends relevant to the African people have been under way since the second half of the 20th Century: globalisation of Africa and hegemonisation of the United States. Africa and the people of African descent have become more of a global presence. And the US has become more of a hegemony: Empire by control rather than occupation.
The concept of globalisation is new but the processes of globalisation have been going on for centuries.
Globalisation entails all the forces that are pushing the world towards becoming a global village. They include the spread of universalistic religions like Islam and Christianity and universalistic ideologies like capitalism and socialism; the expansion of new technologies; the emergence of a world economy and the dispersal and migration of peoples across continents.
Africa's globalisation is partly the penetration of these wider forces into the African world. But Africa's globalisation also encompasses participation of Africans and people of African descent in the global forces external to the African continent. The world has been changing Africa; but the people of African descent have been changing the world.
But while people of 'Greater Africa' have been getting globalised, the US has been growing into an unprecedented hegemonic force. America has been evolving into a new form of empire, controlling millions of people through a variety of positive inducements and negative intimidations.
For Kuwait, the US extends the carrot of security against a repeat Iraqi aggression. For Egypt, the US extends a billion dollars annually to keep Egypt out of military coalitions against Israel. For Iran and Syria, the US wields the stick of military might. For North Korea, the US fluctuates between the carrot and the stick. For most of the world, the US declares a doctrine of perpetual American supremacy.
In military might, the US is stronger than the next 10 countries added together. If Japan is the next industrial power in the world, it is a distant second indeed. If Germany is the next technological power in the world, it is also way behind the US. If Russia is still second militarily, it is now a limping and damaged war machine.
There was a time when Great Britain, France and Spain were bigger cultural forces in the world than any other Western powers. This is no longer so. American media, Hollywood films, American pop-culture and television programmes, American fast-food, the jeans and T-shirt cultures, have all added up to the coca-colanisation of the world. Culturally much of the world is getting Americanised.
The Roman Empire was once the model of one-power controlling much of the world. Subsequently, the British Empire equalled the Romans in scale and outperformed Rome in changing the human race. But during the days of Rome technologies of control were weak and the geographical area answerable to Rome was only a fraction of Planet Earth.
The British ruled a much bigger part of the human race than the Romans had done. But Britain nevertheless had close competitors. Spain, France and later Germany were among serious rivals to British power at different stages of history.
What is different about the new American empire is that it is truly without a peer; it is the first among 'un-equals.' The US has become the Gulliver of the Globe, reducing much of the rest of the world into a Lilliput.
In the first half of the 20th Century the US was one major power among several. Indeed, that is how five countries became permanent members of the United Nations' Security Council with a veto power for each. In 1945 it looked as if global power was a pentagon, - global power was five-sided.
But in reality the UN was recognising a reality which was about to end. Before the end of that decade of the 1940s it was becoming clearer that world power was bi-polar. A system of only two superpowers unfolded soon after World War II - the United States and the Soviet Union. This was the reality of the second half of the 20th Century.
But the Soviet Union disintegrated in the final years of the century. We unexpectedly had a world with only one superpower by the beginning of the 21st Century. The stage was set for a unique hegemonic presence in human affairs. The US was in the process of transition from a mere superpower into a super-empire. A super-empire seeks to control and manipulate. The Administration of George W. Bush has even articulated the right of pre-emptive war whenever it feels that a country may one day become a threat to the US, even if that threat is a quarter century away.
Meanwhile, Africa and its Diaspora are getting globalised. Indeed, among Diaspora Africans, African-Americans are in the middle of those two processes. African-Americans are themselves becoming not only more of a global presence; they are also inevitably part of the American machinery of empire. As US citizens, African-Americans are inevitably part of the American empire.
Relevant Links
East Africa
United States, Canada and Africa
Kenya
But African-Americans are also part of the dispersal of the African peoples and their demographic globalisation. African-Americans are a factor in the imperialisation of America and a factor in the globalisation of Africa.
Under the administration of George W. Bush, the African-American factor has become even more visible both as part of the American empire and as part of Africa's globalisation. The appointment of Colin Powell as Secretary of State and Condoleezza Rice as the National Security Advisor propelled African Americans to the highest levels of the Empire in policy-making.
There were occasions when these two African-Americans were at the centre-stage of America's role as a global machine of manipulation. On the other hand, Powell at his best tried to tame militant Bush hawks. For much of 2002 Powell was a dove's voice of restraint in the Bush Administration. Did he finally lose the battle to the hawks?
Email This Page
Print This Page
The East African Standard (Nairobi)
COLUMN
April 16, 2006
Posted to the web April 17, 2006
Ali Mazrui
Nairobi
Two trends relevant to the African people have been under way since the second half of the 20th Century: globalisation of Africa and hegemonisation of the United States. Africa and the people of African descent have become more of a global presence. And the US has become more of a hegemony: Empire by control rather than occupation.
The concept of globalisation is new but the processes of globalisation have been going on for centuries.
Globalisation entails all the forces that are pushing the world towards becoming a global village. They include the spread of universalistic religions like Islam and Christianity and universalistic ideologies like capitalism and socialism; the expansion of new technologies; the emergence of a world economy and the dispersal and migration of peoples across continents.
Africa's globalisation is partly the penetration of these wider forces into the African world. But Africa's globalisation also encompasses participation of Africans and people of African descent in the global forces external to the African continent. The world has been changing Africa; but the people of African descent have been changing the world.
But while people of 'Greater Africa' have been getting globalised, the US has been growing into an unprecedented hegemonic force. America has been evolving into a new form of empire, controlling millions of people through a variety of positive inducements and negative intimidations.
For Kuwait, the US extends the carrot of security against a repeat Iraqi aggression. For Egypt, the US extends a billion dollars annually to keep Egypt out of military coalitions against Israel. For Iran and Syria, the US wields the stick of military might. For North Korea, the US fluctuates between the carrot and the stick. For most of the world, the US declares a doctrine of perpetual American supremacy.
In military might, the US is stronger than the next 10 countries added together. If Japan is the next industrial power in the world, it is a distant second indeed. If Germany is the next technological power in the world, it is also way behind the US. If Russia is still second militarily, it is now a limping and damaged war machine.
There was a time when Great Britain, France and Spain were bigger cultural forces in the world than any other Western powers. This is no longer so. American media, Hollywood films, American pop-culture and television programmes, American fast-food, the jeans and T-shirt cultures, have all added up to the coca-colanisation of the world. Culturally much of the world is getting Americanised.
The Roman Empire was once the model of one-power controlling much of the world. Subsequently, the British Empire equalled the Romans in scale and outperformed Rome in changing the human race. But during the days of Rome technologies of control were weak and the geographical area answerable to Rome was only a fraction of Planet Earth.
The British ruled a much bigger part of the human race than the Romans had done. But Britain nevertheless had close competitors. Spain, France and later Germany were among serious rivals to British power at different stages of history.
What is different about the new American empire is that it is truly without a peer; it is the first among 'un-equals.' The US has become the Gulliver of the Globe, reducing much of the rest of the world into a Lilliput.
In the first half of the 20th Century the US was one major power among several. Indeed, that is how five countries became permanent members of the United Nations' Security Council with a veto power for each. In 1945 it looked as if global power was a pentagon, - global power was five-sided.
But in reality the UN was recognising a reality which was about to end. Before the end of that decade of the 1940s it was becoming clearer that world power was bi-polar. A system of only two superpowers unfolded soon after World War II - the United States and the Soviet Union. This was the reality of the second half of the 20th Century.
But the Soviet Union disintegrated in the final years of the century. We unexpectedly had a world with only one superpower by the beginning of the 21st Century. The stage was set for a unique hegemonic presence in human affairs. The US was in the process of transition from a mere superpower into a super-empire. A super-empire seeks to control and manipulate. The Administration of George W. Bush has even articulated the right of pre-emptive war whenever it feels that a country may one day become a threat to the US, even if that threat is a quarter century away.
Meanwhile, Africa and its Diaspora are getting globalised. Indeed, among Diaspora Africans, African-Americans are in the middle of those two processes. African-Americans are themselves becoming not only more of a global presence; they are also inevitably part of the American machinery of empire. As US citizens, African-Americans are inevitably part of the American empire.
Relevant Links
East Africa
United States, Canada and Africa
Kenya
But African-Americans are also part of the dispersal of the African peoples and their demographic globalisation. African-Americans are a factor in the imperialisation of America and a factor in the globalisation of Africa.
Under the administration of George W. Bush, the African-American factor has become even more visible both as part of the American empire and as part of Africa's globalisation. The appointment of Colin Powell as Secretary of State and Condoleezza Rice as the National Security Advisor propelled African Americans to the highest levels of the Empire in policy-making.
There were occasions when these two African-Americans were at the centre-stage of America's role as a global machine of manipulation. On the other hand, Powell at his best tried to tame militant Bush hawks. For much of 2002 Powell was a dove's voice of restraint in the Bush Administration. Did he finally lose the battle to the hawks?
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
There are many African Scholars promoting Pan Africanism. There are also programs and Organizations that also promote Pan Africanism. Its seems to me people look for excuses or reasons not deal with Africa.All I would say is do some research, google, check out the African Studies programs, email the professor, look at the organizations that are doing good work on the ground.Its a tall order, its not easy but people are doing it.
You make my point. Sure there is plenty of talk about Pan Africanism. Except for people that left in the last century, obviously the greatest exodus of Africans from Africa came to the Americas through slavery. It would seem that any serious Pan African movement would have - as front and center - an effort to get us back home.
To be clear, these comments are less about being critical of anything or anyone, and more out of a real curiosity about why something so incredibly obvious has not happened to any meaningful degree.
ZAKAR - not sure why you posted the article you did. It seems to illustrate some obstacles of Pan Africanism more than anything else.
There are African American community in quite a few African countries, there are scholars from many african countries teaching at many US universities, espeically HBCU's there many Africans on the Continent and the Carribean, who come to these universities, and there has also been a growing trend in Africans in America studying in Africa. You have do things in steps and phases, many people are doing many things, but not everyone is doing the same thing. I say this to say there is a Pan African movement and like Ive said before its not gonna happen in the form of the Slave trade in reverse but in the global world its strategizing exchange programs, as we all as intraculutural relationships
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
There are African American community in quite a few African countries, there are scholars from many african countries teaching at many US universities, espeically HBCU's there many Africans on the Continent and the Carribean, who come to these universities, and there has also been a growing trend in Africans in America studying in Africa. You have do things in steps and phases, many people are doing many things, but not everyone is doing the same thing. I say this to say there is a Pan African movement and like Ive said before its not gonna happen in the form of the Slave trade in reverse but in the global world its strategizing exchange programs, as we all as intraculutural relationships
Perhaps I've been unclear about this part of the thread. I am not challenging the concept of evolution of Pan Africanism. I am merely asking why Africa has not more meaningfully reached out to African America.
I thought it was good article, it speaks on the relationship of the African Diaspora and its affect on the Globalization of the continent. Im not trying to convince anyone to be more Pan African or not. I live it. So as individuals criticize the movement and its results.I as what has intergration done. What has individualism done. Its easy to critique, but to put yourself in the fire, deal with the people and build relationships its a totally different things. I know for a fact that Africans are connecting I see it first hand
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
Im not trying to convince anyone to be more Pan African or not. I live it. So as individuals criticize the movement and its results.I as what has intergration done. What has individualism done. Its easy to critique, but to put yourself in the fire, deal with the people and build relationships its a totally different things.
Who is criticizing? I'm not sure anyone has said a critical word about Pan Africanism in this entire thread. Unless you believe we've already achieved perfect global Pan Africanism then I would hope you'd be interested in thoughts about how to strenghten it.
you have to be a participant in it to strenghten it. how many people on this thread actually know brothers and sistas from the continent, how many have eaten at their houses and visa versa.What about Columbia, Brazil, Haiti,Cuba, I mean do people actually know individuals from these places.I do!
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
you have to be a participant in it to strenghten it. how many people on this thread actually know brothers and sistas from the continent, how many have eaten at their houses and visa versa.What about Columbia, Brazil, Haiti,Cuba, I mean do people actually know individuals from these places.I do!
OK - Mr. Pan Africanist - you be da man!
Since you have all the answers, please explain a couple of questions I have. 1) Please explain your vision for global Pan Africanism. What does it look like? How does it work? How do you connect Africans all over the world?
2) What is your strategy to achieve this global Pan Africanism? The continent is extraordinarily fractured as is. African America has a diverse group within itself. How do you pull all this together with Africans around the world?
3) Who is going to lead this? Is it a person? An organization? Who coordinates thinking and activity to make this happen?
Surely, over dinner, you've put all these pieces together.
P.S. I bet Condi Rice has eaten dinner with Africans from more places than you. Is she a Pan Africanist?
First of all you have to deal with africans on the continent and in the Diaspora. The problems are multi fascit, in order to advance Pan Africanism you have to develop relationships with people who you consider Africans.The main answer is the ignorance on both parts. The Mainstream media paints pictures and throw stereotypes about our people around and often times people use those sterotypes as facts. Again the first thing anyone who wants to advance pan africanims has to do is get to know africans, let them get to know you, treat them like the brothers and sistas they are and visa versa. Understand the histories of various countries, see how the situation deteriorated or improved according to history, how did Colonization affect these regions. Why is it that Africa is underdeveloped, where did this elitest class come from, do they advance the cause of africa or Europe. there is no one arrow shot to all of a sudden correct all the historical wrongs, but the starting point is extending the Olive branch out the one another listen to one anothers experiences and build on those
OK my question is why does the Pan African movement have to include going back to Africa?? I'm very interested in your logic about this, MBM. I don't think that we need to go back to Africa. I think that the main issue is creating a unified front. To make people of African descent proud to be African and to have the resources that enable us to hold our own as a people.
Give you an example. Chinese people. They have China, but if you go in major cities there's a chinatown. They have Chinese communities. They build up their wealth. They raise their children here and even if they are 3 or 4 generations deep chinese they still maintain their culture. Do these folks have to go back to China to be Chinese nationalists? They are doing it here with the help of their people all over their Diaspora and with the aid of their extended families.
I have to say the various ministries that were mentioned during the Millions More Movement earlier this year were great ideas. Like the Caribbean and Africa we need a union. A great idea of the past was the OAAU (Organization of African-American Unity) modeled after the OAU (Organization of African Unity). Today we have the African Union and Caricom. We need to dump the NAACP (or let it crash and burn) and get on a program that will allow us to model after those two organizations. This will allow us to create various off shoot groups that will allow us to create business blocs, and other beneficial organizations to us. And as a group we can interface with groups like Caricom and the AU in a sincere effort to work together for the benefit of all of our people.
Additionally, I don't think that it will take more than 50 people to jump start this off the ground.
Give you an example. Chinese people. They have China, but if you go in major cities there's a chinatown. They have Chinese communities. They build up their wealth. They raise their children here and even if they are 3 or 4 generations deep chinese they still maintain their culture. Do these folks have to go back to China to be Chinese nationalists? They are doing it here with the help of their people all over their Diaspora and with the aid of their extended families.
I have to say the various ministries that were mentioned during the Millions More Movement earlier this year were great ideas. Like the Caribbean and Africa we need a union. A great idea of the past was the OAAU (Organization of African-American Unity) modeled after the OAU (Organization of African Unity). Today we have the African Union and Caricom. We need to dump the NAACP (or let it crash and burn) and get on a program that will allow us to model after those two organizations. This will allow us to create various off shoot groups that will allow us to create business blocs, and other beneficial organizations to us. And as a group we can interface with groups like Caricom and the AU in a sincere effort to work together for the benefit of all of our people.
Additionally, I don't think that it will take more than 50 people to jump start this off the ground.
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
you have to be a participant in it to strenghten it. how many people on this thread actually know brothers and sistas from the continent, how many have eaten at their houses and visa versa.What about Columbia, Brazil, Haiti,Cuba, I mean do people actually know individuals from these places.I do!
Next time you invite your Colombian friends over for supper, ask them how they spell their country's name.
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
Ask Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea, Iran? Seems to me if you got the big bang it deters a lot of people from fuckin with you. They seem to want to come to the table.But if you have nothing , how can you have respect. Its not the big military that countries need, its the bomb, period
This is not my worlld vision but I agree
quote:Originally posted by Yemaya:
OK my question is why does the Pan African movement have to include going back to Africa?? I'm very interested in your logic about this, MBM. I don't think that we need to go back to Africa. I think that the main issue is creating a unified front. To make people of African descent proud to be African and to have the resources that enable us to hold our own as a people.
Give you an example. Chinese people. They have China, but if you go in major cities there's a chinatown. They have Chinese communities. They build up their wealth. They raise their children here and even if they are 3 or 4 generations deep chinese they still maintain their culture. Do these folks have to go back to China to be Chinese nationalists? They are doing it here with the help of their people all over their Diaspora and with the aid of their extended families.
I have to say the various ministries that were mentioned during the Millions More Movement earlier this year were great ideas. Like the Caribbean and Africa we need a union. A great idea of the past was the OAAU (Organization of African-American Unity) modeled after the OAU (Organization of African Unity). Today we have the African Union and Caricom. We need to dump the NAACP (or let it crash and burn) and get on a program that will allow us to model after those two organizations. This will allow us to create various off shoot groups that will allow us to create business blocs, and other beneficial organizations to us. And as a group we can interface with groups like Caricom and the AU in a sincere effort to work together for the benefit of all of our people.
Additionally, I don't think that it will take more than 50 people to jump start this off the ground.
I agree, where is little congo or nigeria town?
quote:Originally posted by Yemaya:
OK my question is why does the Pan African movement have to include going back to Africa?? I'm very interested in your logic about this, MBM.
Oh, I don't think one must be IN Africa to be a Pan Africanist!
quote:Originally posted by MBM:
I am merely asking why Africa has not more meaningfully reached out to African America.
CONTROVERSY ALERT
Because many of the Africans have no desire to associate with us, and because given the chance of staying in their own countries or coming to the US, a good deal of native Africans would choose the later. The choice to come to the US seems strongly correlated with the drive to assimilate into the American mainstream. This process appears to preclude embracing anything overtly African-American. This is all just based on my own experiences. When Africans, especially Nigerians and Ethiopians, migrate to the US, there is a real tension between these groups and AAs. The Africans think the AAs spoiled and lazy, and the AAs in turn view them as odd usurpers. 've been told by African migrates that people "back home" have one of two views of AAs:
1) the MTV drug dealer/gangster
2) Wealthy distant relatives who left them
behind and now love "the good life" yet
don't realize how good they have it
quote:You make my point. Sure there is plenty of talk about Pan Africanism. Except for people that left in the last century, obviously the greatest exodus of Africans from Africa came to the Americas through slavery. It would seem that any serious Pan African movement would have - as front and center - an effort to get us back home.
I guess I misunderstood your above statement, MBM. I just want to add none of this can be done without a group of dedicated people. As I stated in my earlier post, a group of 50 would be a great starter group and sympathizers also go a long way with causes like this. From some of the responses on this board, I think that there are many sympathizers to the cause of Pan-Africanism.
Next time you invite your Colombian friends over for supper, ask them how they spell their country's name.
and out of nowhere comeS the white guy!, incredible, I should be shot, i misspelled a word. wow! , I will misspell some more I type fast, whats your point? Just because you married a black woman you know what it means to be black? get the fuck out of here.
Because many of the Africans have no desire to associate with us, and because given the chance of staying in their own countries or coming to the US, a good deal of native Africans would choose the later. The choice to come to the US seems strongly correlated with the drive to assimilate into the American mainstream. This process appears to preclude embracing anything overtly African-American. This is all just based on my own experiences. When Africans, especially Nigerians and Ethiopians, migrate to the US, there is a real tension between these groups and AAs. The Africans think the AAs spoiled and lazy, and the AAs in turn view them as odd usurpers. 've been told by African migrates that people "back home" have one of two views of AAs:
1) the MTV drug dealer/gangster
2) Wealthy distant relatives who left them
behind and now love "the good life" yet
don't realize how good they have it
so you take situations that may have happend and make them general. What about all the Negroes in this country, that say "them Africans, stink" Asking people if they got Lions and tigers in their yard. dumb shyt like that. I know brothers and sistas from Ethiopia and Nigeria, it doesnt represent them or any other brothers and sistas I know from the Continent. You meet ignorant people from all over the world , there is no boundaries on that.
and out of nowhere comeS the white guy!, incredible, I should be shot, i misspelled a word. wow! , I will misspell some more I type fast, whats your point? Just because you married a black woman you know what it means to be black? get the fuck out of here.
Because many of the Africans have no desire to associate with us, and because given the chance of staying in their own countries or coming to the US, a good deal of native Africans would choose the later. The choice to come to the US seems strongly correlated with the drive to assimilate into the American mainstream. This process appears to preclude embracing anything overtly African-American. This is all just based on my own experiences. When Africans, especially Nigerians and Ethiopians, migrate to the US, there is a real tension between these groups and AAs. The Africans think the AAs spoiled and lazy, and the AAs in turn view them as odd usurpers. 've been told by African migrates that people "back home" have one of two views of AAs:
1) the MTV drug dealer/gangster
2) Wealthy distant relatives who left them
behind and now love "the good life" yet
don't realize how good they have it
so you take situations that may have happend and make them general. What about all the Negroes in this country, that say "them Africans, stink" Asking people if they got Lions and tigers in their yard. dumb shyt like that. I know brothers and sistas from Ethiopia and Nigeria, it doesnt represent them or any other brothers and sistas I know from the Continent. You meet ignorant people from all over the world , there is no boundaries on that.
quote:Originally posted by Yemaya:quote:You make my point. Sure there is plenty of talk about Pan Africanism. Except for people that left in the last century, obviously the greatest exodus of Africans from Africa came to the Americas through slavery. It would seem that any serious Pan African movement would have - as front and center - an effort to get us back home.
I guess I misunderstood your above statement, MBM. I just want to add none of this can be done without a group of dedicated people. As I stated in my earlier post, a group of 50 would be a great starter group and sympathizers also go a long way with causes like this. From some of the responses on this board, I think that there are many sympathizers to the cause of Pan-Africanism.
I didn't mean necessarily to stay there, but in the way that Jews send their kids to Israel in their teen years or they used to send them to kibbutzes there - we need to start getting to know each other better and sending our kids over so they grow up with Africa in their consciousness. If a percentage of African Americans decided to go and live there then all the better.
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
Next time you invite your Colombian friends over for supper, ask them how they spell their country's name.
and out of nowhere comeS the white guy!, incredible, I should be shot, i misspelled a word. wow! , I will misspell some more I type fast, whats your point?
In general, I couldn't care less about spelling. This one is very common, and is a pet peeve of mine.
quote:Just because you married a black woman you know what it means to be black?
Does this have any relation to anything that I have posted? Get a grip, man! Focus...
quote:get the fuck out of here.
ZAKAR,
Do you always fly off the handle like this at the slightest provocation?
Sheesh!
BTW, when you post comments like the following two comments, it would probably be better to post them is different threads, seperated in time so that the threads end up of different pages, so that folks don't notice that they were actually posted by the very same person...
It's less embaressing that way...
It's less embaressing that way...
quote:how many people on this thread actually know brothers and sistas from the continent, how many have eaten at their houses and visa versa.What about Columbia, Brazil, Haiti,Cuba, I mean do people actually know individuals from these places.I do!
quote:Just because you married a black woman you know what it means to be black?
who really cares about your pet peeve. Anyway if you dont have anything productive to say about the topic at hand leave me out of your posts.
quote:Originally posted by ZAKAR:
who really cares about your pet peeve.
Obviously you did, or you wouldn't have got so excited about it in the first place.
quote:Originally posted by MBM:quote:Originally posted by Shango67:
We best have some type of military
I'm not being critical, but practically speaking, of what value would "some type of military" be when the U.S. spends more on defense than the rest of the world combined? Again, I very much respect the symbolism of creating a military presence, but of what practical value would that be to us?
It is a start. You don't talk about nation building, in the context of sharing the world with an enemy committed to our destruction, without looking to build a military... no matter how lofty the idea.
quote:Originally posted by MBM:
I asked this question here a long time ago, but would love current members' thoughts about it. In thinking about Pan Africanism, it seems that the onus has been placed on African Americans to reach out to Africa and Africans. Even without necessarily arguing that specific point, I am at a loss to put my finger on any meaningful effort coming from Africa that seeks to embrace us/invite us back etc. On an individual basis, I am well aware that there is - in some places - warmth toward us. I have friends who have visited a number of places and been made to feel quite welcome. Nevertheless, I am not aware of any scholars or movements or populist leaders who have included reaching out to African Americans specifically as a strategic part of their thinking.
Thoughts?
Not aware or you choose to ignore????
Please brother, do some study and travel home. GHANA is a prime example of a nation that bends over backward to recruit Africans from amerikkka. Dubois and MANY OTHER Africans from amerikkka have made West Africa their home. But
Keep in mind... Africa can't offer Africans from amerikkka anything close to what white supremacy pays to keep us here. And African scholars and leaders know this to be painfully true. They would love us to return but we expect to much. TLeaving this nation to live in Africa, even for a short stay, requires an incredible amount of personal, emotional, and economic sacrifice.
quote:so incredibly obvious has not happened to any meaningful degree.
IT HAS HAPPENED AND IT HAS BEEN MEANINGFUL!!!
Would you like or need some type of media campaign to understand this point?
quote:I bet Condi Rice has eaten dinner with Africans from more places than you. Is she a Pan Africanist?
This is question that is COMPLETELY out of context. Be fair in your questioning...
No matter what happens, his responses to your questions is not goind to diminish your concern over the inability of Pan Africanism to reach the masses.
quote:OK my question is why does the Pan African movement have to include going back to Africa?? I'm very interested in your logic about this, MBM. I don't think that we need to go back to Africa. I think that the main issue is creating a unified front.
This is so obvious to me, I can't believe any progressive thinking African in amerikkka would take such a stance.
quote:Originally posted by Shango67:
...... You don't talk about nation building, in the context of sharing the world with an enemy committed to our destruction, without looking to build a military... no matter how lofty the idea.
If you are serious about nation building and military development.... you don't talk about it too much in public places either.... no matter how casual the conversation......
Peace,
Virtue
quote:Originally posted by Shango67:
Not aware or you choose to ignore????
Please brother, do some study and travel home. GHANA is a prime example of a nation that bends over backward to recruit Africans from amerikkka. Dubois and MANY OTHER Africans from amerikkka have made West Africa their home. But
Keep in mind... Africa can't offer Africans from amerikkka anything close to what white supremacy pays to keep us here. And African scholars and leaders know this to be painfully true. They would love us to return but we expect to much. TLeaving this nation to live in Africa, even for a short stay, requires an incredible amount of personal, emotional, and economic sacrifice.
Have you seen the activity in East Africa and Southern Africa lately???
Hmmmmm....
There seems to be no problem recruiting Asians for international trade and business ventures... while setting them up real nice and pretty in the inner cities....
Just a thought...
Peace,
Virtue