Archive for July 22nd, 2007


July 22, 2007

I read a review of P-Diddy’s interview with Essence Magazine about his relationship with Kim Porter the mother of his newest babies. P-Diddy was lamenting that this was the longest time he has ever been “monogymous” and that why can’t he marry more than one wife! Of course this is the dilemma of most BLACK men(in fact quiet as it’s kept,all men). How can they accomodate all the women that they love and still be able to add more. Ask Akon. Now this African Brother is practicing Polygamy in amerikkka with 2 amerikkkan wives,l African one!! Brother P-Diddy go for course in how to handle polygamy from any Good Black Muslim Brother practicing it,BLACK JEW,BlackAncient Egyptian Religion, BLACK Yoruba Brother. Once you learn how to operate the system, you can then educate your loved ones and organize some fairness and honesty about the love Black men can have for all the SISTERS in their lives!

Dedicated to Seyi, a
Nigerian “Acada”

The Afrikan man is explorer
Lover of different beauty
Handler of Tropical flowers
Of all hues and shapes
Delighted by the freshness
Of any new intrigue
Can love the smile
Just the walk
Or the sway of Afrikan hips
Gone outrageous
Or the way she says
“Food is ready-
Come eat now on the
Mat with me”
From one shared bowl

You deceive yourself
If you think Afrikan man
Can just love one woman
For man is not woman
Who loves just one
So naturally
Man is not bird
You cage to keep Man is free
Afrikan free
To taste delicacies
Of God’s gift.


July 22, 2007


Garveyism not Continentalism is what Black Africa Needs!!

User Rating: / 4
Written by Chinweizu
Monday, 16 July 2007
Garveyism not Continentalism is what Black Africa NeedsBy Chinweizu


1] The essence of Garveyism consisted of two projects:

A] Black Governments:

Here is Garvey’s conclusion, a century ago, after traveling in the Americas and Europe and informing himself on the situation, world wide, of Blacks [Negroes]:

I asked: “Where is the black man’s Government?” “Where is his King and his kingdom?” “Where is his President, his country, and his ambassador, his army, his navy, his men of big affairs?” I could not find them, and then I declared, “I will help to make them.” [P&O,II:126]

And he formed the UNIA to help do that.

B] A Black Superpower in Africa:

In the 1920s, Garvey diagnosed the global prospect of the Blacks and prescribed the remedy when he said:

The Negro is dying out . . . There is only one thing to save the Negro, and that is an immediate realization of his own responsibilities. Unfortunately we are the most careless and indifferent people in the world! We are shiftless and irresponsible . . . It is strange to hear a Negro leader speak in this strain, as the usual course is flattery, but I would not flatter you to save my own life and that of my own family. There is no value in flattery. . . . Must I flatter you when I find all other peoples preparing themselves for the struggle to survive, and you still smiling, eating, dancing, drinking and sleeping away your time, as if yesterday were the beginning of the age of pleasure? I would rather be dead than be a member of your race without thought of the morrow, for it portends evil to him that thinketh not. Because I cannot flatter you I am here to tell, emphatically, that if we do not seriously reorganize ourselves as a people and face the world with a program of African [Negro] nationalism our days in civilization are numbered, and it will be only a question of time when the Negro will be as completely and complacently dead as the North American Indian, or the Australian Bushman. [P&O, II:101-102] . . .

This is the danger point. What will become of the Negro in another five hundred years if he does not organize now to develop and to protect himself? The answer is that he will be exterminated for the purpose of making room for the other races . . . [P&O, I:66]

[T]he Negro peoples of the world should concentrate upon the object of building up for themselves a great nation in Africa. . . .[ P&O, I:68]

We [in the UNIA] are determined to solve our own problem, by redeeming our Motherland Africa from the hands of alien exploiters and . . .[by] the creating for ourselves [there] of a political superstate . . . a government, a nation of our own, strong enough to lend protection to the members of our race scattered all over the world, and to compel the respect of the nations and races of the earth. . . . [P&O, I:52; II:16; I:52]

Go ahead, Negroes, and organize yourselves! You are serving your race and guaranteeing to posterity of our own an existence which otherwise will be denied them. Ignore the traps of persuasion, advice and alien

leadership. No one can be as true to you as you can be to yourself. To suggest that there is no need for Negro racial organization in a well-planned and arranged civilization like that of the twentieth century is but to, by the game of deception, lay the trap for the destruction of a people whose knowledge of life is incomplete, owing to their misunderstanding of man’s purpose in creation.

[P&O, II:16]

2] Continentalism

Continentalism is the doctrine and project of uniting the entire continent of Africa, uniting all the races that now live on it, black and white, Negro and Arab, preferably under one government that will rule the entire continent. This project has been going on since the 1958 Conference of Independent African States that was held in Accra, Ghana. It produced the Afro-Arab OAU, then the present Afro-Arab AU [Africa Unmanned/Arabist Underwear], which is on the brink of transforming into an Afro-Arab USofAfrica.

By the end of the 20th century, with the rise of black-ruled countries in Africa and the diaspora, Garvey’s first project was realized, but only partly so, since these black comprador governments remain fronts and agents for white supremacy and White power and none has become a Government of black people, by black people, and for black people.

Moreover, none of these black-mask governments of White Supremacy has dared to embark on the second and vitally urgent Garvey project of creating a Black superpower that would be in the same power rank as China and the G-8.

The dangers which Garvey pointed out in the 1920s are still with the black race. If anything, they have been intensified and augmented by such disasters as the AIDSbombing of Black Africa by the USA and the WHO; Arab expansionism and colonialism in the Afro-Arab conflict zone that stretches from Mauritania to Somalia, including the Afro-Arab war theatres in Chad, Darfur and South Sudan; UN Imperialism which, through the IMF, World Bank and WTO, has inflicted Debt Trap Peonage, economic maldevelopment, and deepening poverty on the Black countries of the world. Black powerlessness continues without letup. And the black extinction that Garvey alerted us to is already underway.

Whereas Garveyism correctly focuses on our developing the Black Power we need to defeat these dangers and protect ourselves from all dangers; Continentalism says nothing at all about Power, let alone about Black Power. It doesn’t even offer to create Black Unity. Its focus is on unification of the entire continent, which translates into Afro-Arab unification. Since the Arabs have, for nearly two thousand years, been White invaders, exploiters and enslavers of Black Africa, Afro-Arab unification is like a unification of black lambs with white lions that eat lambs—a unification whereby the lambs end up in the stomach of the lions! The Arabs would naturally love, welcome and eagerly promote such unification. But isn’t it suicidal for the Black Africans to agree to it, let alone campaign eagerly for it—as some have done for the last 50 years?

For that basic reason, Continentalism, with all its projects –OAU/AU, USofAfrica, is the mortal enemy of Black Africans.

Those Blacks who are deluded into thinking that Afro-Arab unification would be good for Black Africans would do well to find out just how rosy life has been for those blacks who have lived under Arab colonialism since the 1950s, and especially in Darfur and South Sudan, where the blacks have taken up armed struggle to escape Arab colonialism and racism.

3] The Garveyite Black Survival Project

We do not need to politically integrate or federate all the 53 Arab and Black African neo-colonial states on the African continent to produce a Black African superstate that can protect all Black Africans wherever they are on earth.

To implement the Garvey idea, what we need, above all, is just one Black African country, big and industrialized enough, and therefore powerful enough to be of G-8 rank, a country that could serve as the core state– protector and leader—of Global Black Africa.

We also need a Black African League that shall be the collective security organization of Global Black Africa, our equivalent of NATO and the defunct Warsaw Pact. These are the two things we need in this 21st century to implement the Garvey requirement for Black African survival.

For building a Black African superpower, as urged by Garvey, an ECOWAS or SADC Federation, or some equivalent in East or Central Africa is more than enough. Just one of them, if integrated and industrialized by 2060, would meet the need. ECOWAS or SADC is big enough in territorial size, population and resource endowment to become an industrialized world power provided its neo-colonial character is eliminated.

Let us look at the numbers:

Country AREA in sq. km Population in 1993
ECOWAS 6.5m 185m
SADC 7m 130m
Brazil 8.5m 156m
USA 9.5m 256m
Russia 17.1m 148m
India 3.3m 900m
China 9.6m 1.2b
EU 2.4m 350m

ECOWAS, with 16 states, 6.5m sq. km and nearly 200m population; or SADC, with 11states, 7m sq km and some 130m population–would be a country of sub-continental size, and in the megastate league, in territory and population and resources, to which belong the USA—with 9m sq. km and some 260m people; Brazil—with 8.5m sq. km. and 156m people; and Russia, India etc. ECOWAS or SADC, if properly integrated, industrialized, and thoroughly decolonized, would be a megastate of the type Black Africa needs. So why don’t we get on with the task of building each into a power of G-8 rank? Why set off on the false, diversionary and dangerous mission of Arab-Black African state integration of the impotent neo-colonialist OAU/AU/USAfrica type?

Of course, ending their neo-colonial character is anathema to the Black colonialists who now misrule the Black African countries. These compradors would rather set off on the quest for an unjustified USofAfrica that would still have the neo-colonial character that suits the comprador interest and temperament.

The second component of the Garvey project is to replace the OAU/AU with a proper collective security organization for Global Black Africa, an organization to which the Black African Diaspora countries and communities will rightfully belong. It is one of the blemishes of Continentalist Pan-Africanism that it is embodied, at the interstate level, in an OAU/AU from which the Diaspora originators of Pan Africanism have long been excluded whereas the Arab enemies of Black Africa are, not only members, but the dominant bloc. The Black African Diaspora are only now being brought into the OAU/AU structures as an afterthought and as no more than second-class members. That is not how it should be.

The history of Black Africans demands that we replace the Arab-castrated OAU/AU with a blacks-only collective security organization, and not with yet another Arab-castrated outfit called the USofAfrica.

Unless the members of a group are keen for their group to survive, the group will most probably not survive; for its members will fail to do what must be done for their group to survive. And any such group does not deserve to survive.

If Black Africans wish to survive, they must profoundly change their priorities: Not slothful consumerism here on earth, not paradise for their souls in the hereafter, but collective security here on earth must become their ruling passion.

Those Black Africans who are keen for the Black African people to survive in the 21st century and beyond will have to ensure that the Garvey Black survival project is accomplished in the shortest possible time, starting yesterday. They have two paramount tasks to accomplish simultaneously: (1) They must, by all means necessary, politically integrate, and complete the abandoned decolonization of, ECOWAS and SADC, and effect their exit from maldevelopment by industrializing them into powers of G-8 rank. (2) They must build a Black African League that will organize the collective security of the Black African World.


About the author:

Chinweizu is an institutionally unaffiliated Afrocentric scholar. A historian and cultural critic, his books include The West and the Rest of Us (1975), Second, enlarged edition (1987); Invocations and Admonitions (1986); Decolonising the African Mind (1987); Voices from Twentieth-century Africa (1988); Anatomy of Female Power (1990). He is also a co-author of Towards the Decolonization of African Literature (1980). His pamphlets include The Black World and the Nobel (1987); and Recolonization or Reparation? (1994) He lives in Lagos, Nigeria

Have your say

Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed. You may report objectionable posts by using the report button (). See this link for more details.


# 1

Whereas Garveyism correctly focuses on our developing the Black Power; Continentalism says nothin…Read the full article.

Posted by Robot| 03.06.2007 09:50


# 2

I am happy to know that there are other individuals who share my view about Black unity and not African unity which means lumping ourselves with people who are smarter than us!
I believe we need to withdraw from this world, build our own world (a Negro before we can then come out to participate in either continental or global issues…

Posted by Johntina| 03.06.2007 17:22


# 3



which means lumping ourselves with people who are smarter than us!


Care to shed more light on yours above?


Posted by DeepThought| 03.06.2007 17:29


# 4



Care to shed more light on yours above?



Johntina your above statement really needs explanation. Everything else made sense to me but that. So I join DT to ask for more light on it.

Posted by Hamattan| 04.06.2007 01:27


# 5

Maybe, saying that others are smarter than us may sound like demeaning our people, but the fact that Arabs, white Africans and others are far more organised than us means that they are smarter than us. Black individuals might be mentally and physically stronger than individuals of other races, but group wise, we are the most foolish. The fact that only Black people among all major racial groups have no organised or successful society anywhere on this planet means that we a the least of all and we must appreciate this hard fact to be able to find our way out! The mistake we often make is to fail to understand that our outstanding individual successes have to translate to group success by way of building successful societies like the Asians have been doing since their independences before we can say that the Black race is succeeding. The only time we would begin to gain real respect as equal human beings and ultimately be able to defend ourselves against extermination is when we are able to understand ourselves as a group…

Posted by Johntina| 04.06.2007 05:24


# 6

By Seshatasefekht7 on the AfricaSpeaks board.

peace and hotep,

‘if you do not understand white supremacy(racism)——what it is, and how it works——-everything else that you understand, will only confuse you.’ …neely fuller jr.

According to neely fuller jr., there 3 types of people in the known universe:

1. white people
2. non-white people
3. white supremacists (racist)


1. ‘white’ people are people who classify themselves as ‘white’, and have been classified as ‘white’, and who generally function as ‘white’ in all of the nine major areas of activity, including economics, education, entertainment, labor, law, politics, religion, sex, and war.

2. non’white’ people are people who have been classified as non’white’, and/or who generally function as non’white’ in their relationships withe each other, and withe people classified as ‘white’, in all of the nine major areas of activity, including economics, education, entertainment, labor, law, politics, religion, sex, and war.

3. white supremacists(racists) are people who classify themselves as ‘white’, and who generally function as ‘white’, and, who practice racial subjugation (based on ‘white’-non’white’ classifications) against people classified as non’white’, at any time, in any place, in any one, or more of the nine major areas of activity, including economics, education, entertainment, labor, law, politics, religion, sex and war.

Two basic problems among the people of the known universe:

1. Lack of knowledge and understanding of the reason for existence, and/or for non-existence.

2. Racism (white supremacy).


Every ‘problem’among the people of the known universe can, today, be traced to:

1. A lack of knowledge and understanding of the reason for existence and/or non-existence, compounded by and promoted by

2. The practice of racism(white supremacy).

This is true in all areas of activity among people, including economics, education, entertainment, labor, law, politics, religion, sex, and war.

Two basic “classes” of people in the know universe:

1. the powerful ‘class'(white supremacist)

2. the powerless ‘class'( all non-white people, and those white people who are not white supremacists)


Since the establishment of white supremacy(racism)among the people of the known universe, the terms ‘upper class’, have become so meaningless that to use such terms to describe any people does not promote justice, but serves only to promote great confusion.

It is therefore best not to use such terms to describe any people now in existence int the known universe.

Under white supremacy, and/or, as long as white supremacy exists, the best and most accurate way to describe people by using the category of ‘class’ is to describe their power relationship to each other,

By so doing, all white people who practice white supremacy(racism) must be recognised as the only people in the known universe who are the ‘powerful class”.

All non-white people, being subject to the ‘powerful class’ are, therefore, the ‘powerless class’.

In addition, those ‘white’ persons who do not practice white supremacy are also the ‘powerless class’. These ‘white’ people who do not practice white supremacy are not subject to the white supremacists (‘the powerful class’). The fact that no ‘white’ person is subject to white supremacy(racism) greatly confuses many non-white people.

No ‘white’ person is subject to white supremacy. It is possible, however, for a white person to be ‘powerless’ to do anything that is effective against the practice of white supremacy. some examples of such persons are white people who are ‘infantile’, and/or, who are so ‘senile’ in mind and body that they are completely dependent on others for all of their care, and are completely incapable of doing harm to others.

Since all of the ‘white’ people who practice white supremacy are ‘the powerful class’, it generally serves no useful purpose for a non-‘white’ person to worry about which individual ‘white’ person is ‘more powerful’ than another within that class. A white supremacist is a white supremacist (powerful person).

How one white supremacist relates to another white supremacist at any particular moment should be of no major concern to a non-‘white’ person, since all white supremacists are committed to the practice of racism (white supremacy).

In any event, the white supremacists, who are ‘smarter’ than many other white supremacists, will, in all matters involving the maintenance of white supremacy, give effective support to those who are ‘not so smart’.

This guarantees that all people classified as ‘white’ are automatically ‘entitled’ to receive benefits special only to people classified as ‘white’ in a world socio-material system dominated by white supremacists (the powerful class).

Also, the very existence of white supremacy(racism) automatically eliminates the possibility of any non-white person being so-called ‘upper-class’ or ‘middle-class’. how can they be? If they are ‘upper-class’, or ‘midddle class’, ‘upper’ or ‘middle’ of what—-as compared to what? As compared to who? Certainly not white people, and definitely not the white supremacist.

Though all non-white people are functional ‘lower-class’—meaning they are all ‘lower’ in comparison to the white people of the known universe—it is better not to say that they are ‘lower-class’. To do so would be to promote questions regarding the confusing terms ‘upper-class’ or ‘middle-class’. Therefore, in referring to the ‘class’ status of all non-white people, it is better to that they are ‘the powerless class’.

As long as white supremacy exists, it is incorrect for any non-white person to pretend that he or she is any ‘class’ or person other than ‘the powerless class’.



Posted by Eja| 04.06.2007 05:30


# 7

I appreciate calling it as it. I don’t think many reasonable persons who call themselves “black” can be happy with the conditions in which we are in. No doubt, there is some truth in what you wrote. However this truth is mixed with a lot more lies.

Your kind of argument has been made several times over the years on this board and when I have the energy, I’ll dig through the archives and point you in the direction of how it has been debunked. That is if you care.

Though its little consolation is probably easier for me to just briefly paraphrase the following:

“Untill the lion is able to tell its own story, tales of the hunt will always glorify the hunter ”

I’m far more worried about black defeatists than any white supremacist.

Posted by DeepThought| 04.06.2007 21:03


# 8



I appreciate calling it as it. I don’t think many reasonable persons who call themselves “black” can be happy with the conditions in which we are in. No doubt, there is some truth in what you wrote. However this truth is mixed with a lot more lies.

Your kind of argument has been made several times over the years on this board and when I have the energy, I’ll dig through the archives and point you in the direction of how it has been debunked. That is if you care.

Though its little consolation is probably easier for me to just briefly paraphrase the following:

“Untill the lion is able to tell its own story, tales of the hunt will always glorify the hunter ”

I’m far more worried about black defeatists than any white supremacist.


I will greatly appeciate if you could tell me specifically where I have lied. It should not take you resarching to tell the village where my lie lies at least!
I only hope you are not like those who prefer to manufacture facts or dwell in unverifiable claims. I however believe as you do that Black people need to begin to tell their own stories, but we must not engage in manufacturing stories. Appreciating that we have faild must be our first step towards moving forward. JOhn

Posted by Johntina| 05.06.2007 03:13


# 9

Its not so much a case of you telling lies, rather its a case of you believing in lies told.

There are many ways of telling a lie and the most effective way is simply by telling part of a story rather than the entire story.

Posted by DeepThought| 05.06.2007 20:44


# 10

This is all good but in my opinion, it misses some essential points:

–The viciousness of not just the Arabs, but even more dangerously, that of the West in scuttling any meaning development in Black Africa. For the West, as long as their interest is protected, the rest of Africa can go to hell, literally. I give two examples: Since 2003 Nigeria has been going through a cynical joke called elections. But the West is only interested in protecting their interests in the oil industry, among other things. Let the present administration undermine the least of that interest and you will see what I mean! It’s happening in Zimbabwe right now. When Mugabe was slaughtering thousands of his fellow citizens in Matabeleland, the West, especially Britain, looked the other way. Then, he got crazy enough to attack the White farmers…the rest is history… In Apartheid South Africa, they called their colonialism “constructive engagement”.

Every brutal dictator in Black Africa has been supported by the West simply to undermine African development. From Boakassa to Eyadema to Bongo to Diya to Mugabe to Mobutu to Obasanjo, as long as the dictator protects their interest. If as much as one Westerner was killed in the genocide of Odi and Zaki-biam, the story would have been different.

–The best strategy now, in my opinion at this stage is to conscientize Black Africans, the kind of conscientization Saro Wiwa did with his Ogoni compatriots. How I miss that guy. His murder was such a loss. Shortly after he was killed, a Briton let it slip through his mouth that the West was scared stiff about what could happen to their interest if Saro Wiwa had been allowed to carry on with his crusade.

Conscientizing the people is the best way to go for now. The solution has to come from bottom up and not from top down as the article seems to suggest.

Posted by igwe| 16.07.2007 01:49


# 11

Igwe et al,

National interest, Black Affrica interest, these are the key words. As long as we keep shifting our gaze from that critical ball, all things shall be lost. I have just started reading a book titled “Staying Power, The History of Black People in Britain”, by Peter Fryer, only to discover that this rain of exploitation, inferoritiy complex and underdevelopment of the continent started beating us long time ago and has continued and will not end because without Africa and the black man, Europe and America will lose power.
So we need to quickly retrace our steps as people and pursue our own interest doggedly if we must survive and be recognised as wquals in teh comity of nations.
If Garveyism is the way forward so let it be because time is of the essence.:mad::mad:

Posted by akuluouno| 16.07.2007 06:25


# 12

Oga Chinweizu,

Thank you for properly aligning the turret of your howitzer, I think the missiles now hit the target.

Would I subscribe to a resurgence of Garveyism or Black racism as a political philosophy by black Africans as the only option for the survival of the Black man against the incessant barrage of caucasian and arab racism?
Considering that all other options of engagement with civilizations dominated by other human races seem to lead to the perpetual enslavement of the black man.
Supposing that with the dynamism of technological development it may not be unlikely that M. Garvey’s bleak forecast of the total annihilation of the black man may come sooner than he predicted.
Within the limits of the etiquette of political correctness, I would subtly subscribe to your prescription.

The more important question however is: would our Black African political leadership subscribe?

The purpose of black racism being to establish a single political structure exclusive to the black dominated parts of Africa that is able to withstand and repel the imperialist and vampirist tendencies of other more organized world civilizations. To the end that the security of the black race amongst men on Earth is assured.

You have identified two existing organizations most viable as launch vehicles to carry the black man towards this aspiration. The SADC and ECOWAS. Each of which is led and dominated South Africa and Nigeria respectively.

The leadership of these nations are indeed not unaware of the realities divulged in your riposte, but how to get the train going seems to be the problem. A case of butterflies in the tummy perhaps.

Thabo Mbeki, President of South Africa speaking about the proposed Unity government for Africa in a speech delivered at the University of Cape Coast Ghana (also published on NVS) said, inter alia, that:

From the discussions it is clear that the political leadership of our continent is of the view that the future of all our peoples and individual countries lies in the socio-political and economic integration of Africa…..
Therefore, the political and economic integration of Africa has to happen not merely because we share the same history, populate common geographic space and exhibit identical physiological features – important as these are – but because our destinies are intrinsically bound together…….
Accordingly, it was not surprising that at the beginning of the twentieth century….. W.E.B. duBois correctly identified racism as the problem of the twentieth century, because to address the identified problem of racism required Africans to unite.


Mbeki also expressed the thinking amongst black African contemporary leadership that tighter economic integration is a pre-requisite for any sort of political union. He identified the Regional Economic Communities (REC) as ‘the building blocks of our integration’ and acknowledged in this wise that ECOWAS seems to be much further down this road than any other RECs in Africa.

The ECOWAS should then be the ideal candidate for a Black African Superstate. A model that can then be copied or expanded to include other Central, Southern or even North African states if successful.

Of its approximately 200M people, 3/4 of all the ECOWAS people or 150m are in Nigeria alone with possibly another 5M Nigerians (or 10% of the remaining number) spread amongst the other states. ECOWAS can otherwise be described as Nigeria and its environs.

Therefore much of the work necessary to be done to realise the Africa of our aspirations, the economic emancipation and political liberation of the Negro or in short, to sustain the hope for the survival of the Black race into the next millennium, as it appears, rests squarely with Nigeria today.

So what can Nigeria do to “to ensure that the Garvey Black survival project is accomplished in the shortest possible time, starting yesterday” using ECOWAS as the vehicle?

Up till now, without a doubt ECOWAS led by Nigeria has achieved significant strides towards complete economic integration. Despite the debilitating effects of neo-colonialism on the member states sustained with the boundless energy of the imperialist comprador groups.

By the way, the term comprador is often used by Pan-African progressives to refer to members of the indigenous elite who are actually agents of western imperialist powers who as running dogs to their masters, overtly and surreptitiously advance the interests of their European and American lords over and above that of their compatriots.
In the context of your missile I suppose the term is extended to include those comprador groups commonly found in communities along the southern borders of the Sahara desert whose interests for centuries have been the actualisation of the fancies of their Arab masters, particularly the Fulani who happen to be in power in Nigeria today.

However, Nigeria’s enigmatic President Musa Yaradua who has known progressive antecedents although a Fulani, is not easily lumped with this group.

At the Accra summit, Yaradua’s contribution ‘s were heavily coloured by the circumstances that made his membership of that forum possible, regardless he managed to ramble on to deliver some food for thought by challenging the “essence of our Africanness”

In not too many words, Nigeria response to the Gaddaffi led US of Africa proposal can be summarized by the following pre-conditions:
1. Strengthening internal governance and growth structures i.e. transparency, accountability and wider political participation
2. A determination of the essence of our Africanness.

Yaradua actually was inadvertently responding to Marcus Garvey’s charge quoted by Chinweizu above:


Go ahead, Negroes, and organize yourselves! You are serving your race and guaranteeing to posterity of our own an existence which otherwise will be denied them. Ignore the traps of persuasion, advice and alien leadership. No one can be as true to you as you can be to yourself.


The esssence of our Africanness is expressed in our physiological attributes. We are Negro, black. It is therefore futile to contemplate any strategic political organization for the furtherance of African interests outside of this fact.

For emphasis, the same Marcus Garvey’s quote continues:


” To suggest that there is no need for Negro racial organization in a well-planned and arranged civilization like that of the twentieth century is but to, by the game of deception, lay the trap for the destruction of a people whose knowledge of life is incomplete, owing to their misunderstanding of man’s purpose in creation”


Maybe 90 years ago yes, but I’m led to believe that leaders like Thabo Mbeki and Musa Yaradua are a little bit more informed than Garvey’s contemporaries. At the leadership level today, there is some evidence of a clearer and more accurate understanding of the black man’s purpose in creation.

What is not clear is if the same can be said of the followership.

A villager responding above mentioned the concept of conscientizing the people, I’m not sure what the term means but I assume it refers to raising the awareness of the people beyond the clouds of ‘civilized deception’ to an altitude where they can perceive the pristine realities of their situation as Black men and women in a fiercely antagonistic global atmosphere, so that their every thoughts and actions are defined at that same level.

The process of conscientizing the people has to come from the top, it is deliberate and meticulous, an agenda has to be defined, developed and disseminated down to the people.

Africa cannot rise until there emerges a generation of Nigerians who realize that the future of the Black race depends on Nigeria and that the power of Nigeria derives from each individual working alone or in a group towards a collective purpose to make Nigeria great.

This is the task our facing our Nigerian President, I think men like Chinweizu should be handy to provide him the best tools for

I think we have a chance here.


Posted by SBI| 16.07.2007 13:03


# 13



Africa cannot rise until there emerges a generation of Nigerians who realize that the future of the Black race depends on Nigeria


Could you kindly clarify why the future of the black race depends on Nigeria?


Posted by DeepThought| 16.07.2007 23:24


# 14



=DeepThought;192444>Could you kindly clarify why the future of the black race depends on Nigeria?




Abeg you to pardon my lack of clarity in expressing my logic. Typing into this page online can sometimes be a challenge particularly when my Internet connection is not at its best.

Nevertheless, in the context of the thread, I can outline for you the steps that took me to the statement that prompts your question:

1. Early 20th Century Black thinkers like M.Garvey prescribe formation of race conscious great Nation of Blacks as a means of uplifting the Black people and protecting themselves against other races.

2. Since the 1960s Black African leaders have endorsed and championed this idea.

3. In 1990’s AU endorses the idea of a great African state but recommends regional economic integration as a primary step towards this.

4. 2007 Accra Summit, Gaddafi pushes for continental government (not Black), Umar Yaradua calls for time out to allow us determine ‘essence of Africanness’. Yes we need unity, but let us first of all know who and who we are uniting with. (Refer to Marcus Garvey: Non Blacks cannot lead us to a secure future)

5. Chinweizu protests continentalism and instead advocates consolidation of regional economic organisations into single political entity as the fastest way to achieve Black power and security, specifically SADC and/or ECOWAS

6. Thabo Mbeki agreed with Chinweizu’s approach to the desired goal, but confesses that ECOWAS today is in better position to achieve the goal than SADC. He should know.

7. At this point, you would agree that the ball is now in ECOWAS’ possession, but who will take this shot that all agree will save the Black man’s future.

8. Since over 75% of all the people in ECOWAS are Nigerians, ECOWAS can not move unless Nigeria moves.

Therefore, the responsibility falls on Nigeria to make the move that will save the Black man.

What do you think about that?


Posted by SBI| 17.07.2007 17:54

Jah Guda

# 15

We might need to ask ourselves if Garveyism can be applied to the political and economic realities of the 21st century, in todays global community and economy.

Posted by Jah Guda| 18.07.2007 11:33



July 22, 2007


USAfrica: A Mortal Danger for Black Africans

User Rating: / 5
Written by Chinweizu
Monday, 09 July 2007

USAfrica: A Mortal Danger for Black Africans

A Black Power Pan-Africanist Viewpoint


Part I: Black African aspirations vs. continental Unification

Is there any black African, whether in the homeland or the Diaspora, who doesn’t want, by yesterday, a Black Africa that is prosperous, secure from exploiters and invaders, and is respected by the whole world, like China or Japan is? That, I believe, is the basic aspiration driving the desire for Continental African Unity, as attempted through the OAU/AU, and now through this proposed USAfrica.

Let me give three reasons why the continental union government approach to our aspirations hasn’t worked, won’t work, and is very dangerous for Black Africans.

1. The USAfrica doesn’t have a camel’s chance in the ocean of delivering on the hopes and aspirations which its promoters are encouraging naïve black Africans to invest in it. Simply put, 53 neo-colonial Arab and Black African worms stuffed into a bottle will not yield a black African lion. If you add up 53 zeros, you’ll still have zero!

2. The USAfrica will be, for black Africans, a disaster much worse than even our terrible disunity. If this USAfrica is enacted at the AU Summit in Accra in July, Black Africans would have jumped from the frying pan of disunity into the fire of unity under Arab colonialism. And all Black Africans would quickly find themselves reduced to the terrible condition of the Black Africans under Arab minority rule in Darfur, South Sudan and Mauritania.

In our naïve approach to this matter, we are behaving like nigger monkey who insisted that he and python were brothers because they both lived on the same island. Nigger monkey rushed to embrace python and quickly ended up united with python all right, but in python’s stomach.

3. Just like the OAU/AU did for the last 50 years, this USAfrica will divert us, for another century, from what we should have done in the last 50 years to achieve our hopes and aspirations as Black Africans.

But what should we have done since “independence” and why did we neglect to do it?

Since Black Africans gained “independence” during the last 50 years, we have lived by the slogan “Seek ye first the political kingdom, and all else shall be added unto you”.

Unfortunately, little has been added unto us except poverty, more poverty, beggardom, social disorder, neo-colonialism under UN Imperialism, the debt burden, AIDSbombing by the USA and the World Health Organization (WHO), and Arab territorial expansion at our expense. Why? The basic reason is that we did not — as our history demanded, and still demands we do –take as our cardinal guide the slogan:

Build ye first the kingdom of collective security, and you can, within its ramparts, achieve all your other desires!

We have failed to build our system for Black African collective security. That is what we must focus on now and build in the next 50 years if we don’t want to be exterminated by our White Power enemies, who have declared, after exploiting us for centuries, that they now want our land and resources without us.

All our historical disasters in the last 1000 years resulted from the basic fact that we were too weak to defend our land, our population, and our cultures from Arab and European invaders. Until we equip ourselves to defend ourselves, our disasters will continue and will multiply until we are exterminated, most probably within this century.

For building the Black Power to protect ourselves, a continental union government is simply irrelevant. None of the great powers of today or before has been a continental state. Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Russia, USA, China, and India — none occupies a whole continent. Belgium, whose GDP is said to be greater than that of all of the countries of Africa put together, is not a continent. Nor is any of the Asian Tigers. On the other hand, Australia occupies an entire continent. But where is Australia in the league table of great powers? Is it in the G-8? Antarctica likewise is a continent.

So, let us stop deluding ourselves about the necessity for a continental African union government as the means to our legitimate and historically based aspirations

Instead, let us follow Marcus Garvey the Great, and focus on what we really need to build: a black African superpower that will be a great power in the rank of China and the G-8 countries. As Garvey taught us some 80 years ago:

The Negro peoples of the world should concentrate upon the object of building up for themselves a great nation in Africa . . . a political superstate . . .a government, a nation of our own, strong enough to lend protection to the members of our race scattered all over the world, and to compel the respect of the nations and races of the earth.

A political program, to be valid and useful, must have a correctly defined constituency and a solution to the cardinal problems of that group. Garveyism does that for Black Africans. Continentalism fails on both counts, which is one key reason why, in its 50 years reign, it has not achieved what we have aspired to as Black Africans.

Whereas Garveyism correctly focuses on our developing the Black Power we need to protect ourselves from all dangers, Continentalism says nothing at all about power, let alone about Black Power. It doesn’t even offer to create Black African unity. Its focus is on unification of the entire continent, which translates into Arab-Black African unification. But since the Arabs have, for 1500 years been white invaders, expropriators and enslavers of Black Africans, Arab-Black African unification is like a unification of nigger monkey with python. The Arabs would naturally love, and eagerly promote, such unification. But isn’t it suicidal for Black Africans to agree to it, let alone campaign eagerly for it—as continentalist Pan Africanists have done for the last 50 years?

For those who do not know about it, below is the Arab Agenda for this USAfrica.

Part II: USAfrica- The Arab agenda

1] We must never forget that, despite Gadhafi’s rhetoric against colonialism, he and his Arab fellows are colonialists in Africa–white settler colonialists who invaded, conquered, expropriated and have settled on 1/3 of Africa beginning in 640 AD.

2] Gadhafi’s hurry to implement his USAfrica is suspect. He has spent 40 years trying to force Libya’s unification with Sudan, to forcibly annex the Auzou strip from Chad, and sponsoring destabilization in Liberia, Uganda, Mali, Niger etc. Should we trust his intentions? We should be highly suspicious of a project by which he would diplomatically swallow in one gulp all of Black Africa where he has, hitherto, failed to militarily grab bits and pieces.

3] In Gadhafi’s speeches in 2005, where he pushed for the fledgling AU to appoint a Defense Minister, and a Trade Minister etc as matters of priority; and called for a continental army, he also urged the AU countries to compete to host the institutions of the AU/USAfrica. This hurry is all highly suspicious.

Clearly, the Arab countries, awash with oil money and with unlimited back-up from the rest of the oil-rich Arab League, will outbid the poor Black countries, leading to Arab domination of the USAfrica; just as the UN is dominated by the gang of imperialist countries where its key institutions are located—the USA with the World Bank and IMF in Washington and the UN Hqtrs in New York, and Europe with Unesco in Paris, the Maritime agencies in London, and other key agencies in Geneva.

If the Gadhafi formula for locating its key institutions is allowed, this USAfrica will become an instrument of Arab colonialism in Africa; and will entrench Arab power over Black Africa.

4] Defense is the last thing a sensible sovereign country surrenders. Note that after 50 years of their merger process, the EU states have yet to do that and appoint a defense minister. Yet Gadhafi wants the AU to start with that! Highly suspicious.

5] The dangers of Arab racism, colonialism and expansionism are evident in Mauritania and Sudan, and should be studied and heeded.

For basic information on that, please go to

http://www.nigeriavillagesquare .com/articles/chinweizu /usafrica-arab-colonialism -part-1-arab-quest-for-leben-2 .html

6] Gadhafi’s arguments about the potential economic benefits of USAfrica are invalid. Continental size is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for becoming an economic power. If it was, Britain, Japan, Germany, France, let alone Switzerland and most of the European countries would be economic midgets, and the Asian tigers too. On the other hand, Antarctica and Australia, as continents, would be economic giants. Gadhafi must believe that he is addressing an audience of economic blockheads!

7] Here is Gadhafi’s Lebensraum [Living space] statement at the Arab League meeting in Jordan in 2001:

“The third of the Arab community living outside Africa should move in with the two-thirds on the continent and join the African Union ‘which is the only space we have’”

–Col. Mouammar Gadhafi of Libya, at the Arab League, 2001

It should be taken seriously as a clue to his intentions and what he and his Arabs will set about doing to Black Africa once they have us in their USAfrica trap.

Where will Gadhafi settle his new 100million Arabs from outside Africa? How will he get land to give them? Here is an example of Arab land grab intentions. Back in 1962, as he flagged off his troops to the war front against the Black Africans in South Sudan, the Arab Sudanese General Hassan Beshir Nasr declared:

“We don’t want these black slaves . . . what we want is their land.”

That is what the wars in South Sudan and Darfur have been about: seizing land from black Africans. Darfur is an ongoing example of how Arabs seized 1/3 of our continent,

and of how Gadhafi will grab the land to settle his 100million Arabs from outside Africa.

8] There is a vital need to think through the Black African interest, and negotiate in detail to secure its requirements, before agreeing, if at all, to this USAfrica proposal. After it is signed, the Arabs will, predictably, treat as treason any second thoughts and objections to details from Black Africans.

Black Africans must never again repeat the folly of their leaders in 1973, when the OAU lined up behind the Arabs on the oil embargo, in hopes of getting concessions on oil, without any pre-agreed quid pro quo, and got nothing after the Arabs had exploited African support.

9] Because we are convinced that this USAfrica is a cover for Arab colonialism and Arab expansionism in Black Africa, we urge every Black African president in the AU to vote against it at Accra in July. At the very least, they should vote to postpone any decision on it for five years so that a vigorous debate can be carried out by the people, so they can knowledgeably and democratically mandate their presidents on what to do about it. We could take a lesson from the EU process where key stages of the unification have been preceded by plebiscites in each member country.

10] If this USAfrica is agreed this July at Accra, Gadhafi and all Arabs will be laughing at the dumb blacks whom they have easily duped yet again. Don’t forget their view of Blacks, as stated over the centuries, most famously by Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Sena and Osama Bin Laden, as in the following quotes:

Ibn Khaldun, the greatest Arab historian (1332-1406), sees the blacks as “characterized by levity and excitability and great emotionalism” and [says] that “they are everywhere described as stupid” . . . He adds that blacks are “humans who are closer to dumb animals than to rational beings.” . . .

al-Dimashqi had the following to say: “The Equator is inhabited by communities of blacks who may be numbered among the savage beasts. Their complexion and hair are burnt and they are physically and morally abnormal. Their brains almost boil from the sun’s heat.”

Ibn al-Faqih al-Hamadhani follows the same line of reasoning. To him . . . the zanj [black Africans]. . .are “overdone until they are burned so that the child comes out between black, murky, malodorous, stinking, and crinkly-haired, with uneven limbs, deficient minds, and depraved passions” . . .

Even such luminaries as Ibn Sina [Avicenna] (980-1037), the most famous and influential of the philosopher-scientists of Islam, considered blacks to be “people who are by their very nature slaves.”

“All African women are prostitutes, and the whole race of African men are abeed [slave] stock. Your people are like rats plaguing the earth” –Osama Bin Laden to the Sudanese-American novelist Kola Boof in Morocco in 1996.

When next you meet an Arab, you should ask what is the Arabic word for a black person; then ask what is the Arabic word for slave; you’ll discover that the words are the same “abeed”. Which is why, when an Arab looks at a black African, what he sees is a slave.

Now, that is how their language teaches these Arab ‘brothers’ we are eager to unite with to think of us—as slaves!

And as one traveler in the Sudan observed in 1930:

“In the eyes of the Arab rulers of Sudan the black slaves were simply animals given by Allah to make the life of the Arab comfortable”

A word is enough for the wise!


Chinweizu is a Black Power Pan-Africanist and an institutionally unaffiliated Afrocentric scholar from Nigeria. His books include The West and the Rest of Us (1975); Decolonising the African Mind (1987); Voices from Twentieth-century Africa (1988); Invocations and Admonitions (1986); Energy Crisis and Other Poems (1978); Anatomy of Female Power (1990). He is also a co-author of Towards the Decolonization of African Literature (1980).

Have your say

Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed. You may report objectionable posts by using the report button (). See this link for more details.


# 1


USAfrica: A Mortal Danger
for Black Africans
…Read the full article.

Posted by Robot| 09.07.2007 22:47


# 2

Very interesting article as we expect from Chinweizu.
The Arabo-phobia is justifiable, however must a continent-wide debate about the political and economic future of Africa be reduced to racist banalities?
If we took the next 5 years to contemplate a referendum what would be the issues on the table? To be a Monkey or to be a Python?
Let’s not forget that the idea of a United Africa was not originally Gadaffi’s, Kwame Nkurumah who has been acknowledged by many as a political visionary mooted this idea of an African superstate involving the political unification of African states in the ’60s.
Nkurumah at the time gave 3 priority objectives of the proposed union:
1.Economic consolidation
2.Unified defense strategy or command
3.Homogenized foreign policy

The idea itself exudes many positive points that can deliver solutions to many of the problems of Africa, including the seemingly intractable tragedy in southern Sudan.
If, as Chinwiezu has pointed out, an embrace with the Arabs in the name of continental unity is likely to become certain suicide for Black Africa, is there a possibility of continuing with the idea as a US of Black Africa?

According to Nkurumah: ‘The forces that unite us (should be) far greater than the difficulties that divide us at present, and our goal must be the establishment of Africa’s dignity, progress and prosperity’…..Even if those forces include a common suspicion of Arab intent.
Afterall, the Soviet Union was able to achieve a strong political union to the exclusion of several other states on the European continent. So sharing the same land boundaries does not automatically become the sole criteria for desiring political union.

Perhaps, one of the stronger Black African leaders can seize the initiative back from Gadaffi to drive the process from a different and more black African perspective.

Perhaps Chinweizu could help us all out by highlighting those forces that can drive us towards a desirable union over and above the difficulties that divide us today because if we remain as divided individual and still fragmenting states as we are today I suspect Black Africa won’t stand a camel’s chance in the atlantic against the odds of making any of our collective aspirations.


Posted by SBI| 10.07.2007 17:51


# 3

Good response SBI,
The writer is obviously blind to what is happening around the world. Why do u think europe is trying so hard to create an entity. U think the french and the english love each other so much? Or you think they dont have differences. And who said we cannot define the limits and boundaries of our unity. if mighty europe is trying to unite to counter US and east asian economic blocs and survive in a new world economic order what future do you think africa should have? Continue to receive aid forever? Look beyond your nose my friend and stop wallowing in paranoia.

Posted by chubrock| 11.07.2007 18:20


# 4


Hold it there buddy! You may be the blind here. Please read the article again and do some thinking.

Nobody in todays world should go into association with political Islam with glibbness or shortsightededness as you have indicated. Look around you, the entire world of Jihadist Islam is consuming nations and devastating people and real estate all over the world.

Chubrock, are you a moslem? If you are, I forgive you. If you are not, you are a dumb ass. You must never take Islam ever so lightly. This is serious stuff. Islam is viciously vile, quasi-religion. Mark my word!

Chinweizu is absolutely correct. I hope that many Nigerians would read him and take him very seriously. USAfrica is very dangerous indeed .The Islamists and their jihadists will become our new masters. Suicide-bombing, decapitations, disenfrachization of women, mass poverty and above all extreme violence will be our lives for generations and generations to come.

Chubrock, you are the blind here.

Posted by Onyeachonam-Okwu| 11.07.2007 20:41


# 5

In the eyes of the Arab rulers of Sudan the black slaves were simply animals given by Allah to make the life of the Arab comfortable”

A word is enough for the wise!

Posted by DeepThought| 12.07.2007 08:24


# 6



=DeepThought;191223>In the eyes of the Arab rulers of Sudan the black slaves were simply animals given by Allah to make the life of the Arab comfortable”

A word is enough for the wise!


Aaaaahhhhh! May be.

Posted by Enforcer| 13.07.2007 12:27


# 7

Unfortunately, the Arabs have a program, but not Black Africans. We are still hoodwinked with Nkruma’s half baked and shallow notion of “African unity”.

As Chinweizu rightly said, until we have a country in Black Africa that is an economic power, we should simply forget about a phantom unity.

But, in order to achieve economic freedom, we need to have political stability first. There are two countries who can lead the rest in this economic might: Nigeria and South Africa. SA has political stability and that is why its economy is growing even beyond expectations. Nigeria, on the other hand is suffering from years of misrule. Thankfully, the judiciary in Nigeria might help us to achieve political stability which is the foundation for economic welfare. A situation where a president enters into office a pauper and comes out a billionaire does not augur well for both political and economic well being of Nigeria and rest of Black Africa. Thieves don’t build enduring nations.

What Chinweizu is saying in effect is that we need to get our acts together first before we can NEGOTIATE any kind of unity. It’s a wake up call.

Posted by igwe| 13.07.2007 23:36



July 22, 2007



Why black Africa should resist Arab domination of AU
By Chinweizu

Posted to the Web: Friday, September 01, 2006

Part I: The Arab Quest for Lebensraum in Africa“

The third of the Arab community living outside Africa should move in with the two-thirds on the continent and join the African Union “which is the only space we have’ — Col. Mouammar Gadhafi of Libya, at the Arab League, 2001

Many AfriKans take great exception to the sentiments and views expressed by Col. Gadhafi at the March 2001, Amman, Jordan meeting of the Arab League. –Prof. Kwesi Kwa Prah, 2004, in a paper to the AU [both quotes in Bankie and Mchombu eds, 2006:217, 235]
Besides joining Prof. Prah and the other Afrikans who take exception to Gadhafi’s statement, I should like to point out that Gadhafi’s invitation to his fellow Arabs is nothing but a declaration of race war on Africa. It is an invitation to more Arabs to invade and colonize Africa. Indeed, it is a call for the final phase of the 15 centuries old Arab lebensraum war on Afrikans – a war to Islamise and conquer all of Africa, from Cairo to the Cape and from Senegal to Somalia, and to then enslave or Arabise all the conquered Afrikans. In order to make that clear, it is necessary to first put his invitation in the context of the traditions of Arab melanophobia and negrophobia, and of Arab expansionist ambitions and conquests that go back to the time of their Arab prophet, Mohammed.

Melanophobia and Negrophobia in Arab culture:

The following excerpt from The Crisis of Identity in Northern Sudan: A Dilemma
of a Black people with a White Culture, by Al-Baqir al-Afif Mukhtar, gives an insight into the melanophobia and negrophobia that Arab culture has reeked of since before the time of Mohammed: “The contempt towards . . . the dark skinned is expressed in a thousand ways in the documents, literature and art that have come down to us from the Islamic Middle Ages.

. . . This literature, and especially popular literature, depicts (the black man) in the form of hostile stereotypes – as a demon in fairy tales, as a savage in the stories of travel and adventure, or commonly as a lazy, stupid, evil-smelling and lecherous slave. . . . Ibn Khaldun sees the blacks as “characterized by levity and excitability and great emotionalism” and [says] that “they are everywhere described as stupid” . . . al-Dimashqi had the following to say: “The Equator is inhabited by communities of blacks who may be numbered among the savage beasts. Their complexion and hair are burnt and they are physically and morally abnormal. Their brains almost boil from the sun’s heat.”

Ibn al-Faqih al-Hamadhani follows the same line of reasoning. To him . . . the zanj . . .are “overdone until they are burned so that the child comes out between black, murky, malodorous, stinking, and crinkly- haired, with uneven limbs, deficient minds, and depraved passions. . .”

Arab-Muslim doctrines on Black enslavement:

The following excerpt [from Blasphemy Before God: The Darkness of Racism In Muslim Culture by Adam Misbah aI-Haqq, shows how and why Arabs incurably believe in enslaving blacks: “Classic Muslim thought maintained that blacks became legitimate slaves by virtue of the colour of their skin.

The justification of the early Muslim equation of blackness with servitude was found in the Genesis story so popularly called “the curse of Ham,” in reference to one of Noah’s sons . . . .In the Arab- Muslim version, blacks are cursed to be slaves and menials, Arabs are blessed to be prophets and nobles, while Turks and Slavs are destined to be kings and tyrants. . . . The famous Al-Tabari, for example, cites no less than six Prophetic traditions which seek to support this story. One tradition reads: Ham begat all those who are black and curly- haired, while Japheth begat those who are full faced with small eyes, and Shem begat everyone who is handsome of face (Arabs of course) with beautiful hair. Noah prayed that the hair of Ham’s descendants would not grow past their ears, and wherever his descendants met the children of Shem, the latter would enslave them.

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal reported a saying attributed to the Prophet which in effect states that God created the white race (dhurriyyah bayd) from the right shoulder of Adam and created the black race (dhurriyyah sawd) from Adam’s left shoulder. Those of Adam’s right shoulder would enter Paradise and those of the left, Perdition. Other equally racist sayings have been attributed to the Prophet in the traditions.

Contradicting this spirit, there are the sayings of the Prophet which equate the value of a person to his God-consciousness (taqwa), and to their piety without any regard to the tribal or ethnocentric concerns of a racist purport. Such [egalitarian] reports [were overshadowed by] the more deeply rooted tradition of racial bigotry . . . [emphasized by] Muslim geographers and travellers who ventured into Africa. . . . Al-Maqdisi wrote, “ . . . As for the Zanji, they are people of black colour, flat noses, kinky hair, and little understanding or intelligence.” . . . Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406CE) added that blacks are “only humans who are closer to dumb animals than to rational beings.” . . . Even such luminaries as Ibn Sina considered blacks to be “people who are by their very nature slaves.” .

. . The creation or resurgence of the mythology of Ham also made darkskinned people synonymous with servitude in light-skinned Muslim thinking.

This went so far that eventually, the term abd (slave), went through a semantic development and came to specifically refer to “black slave” while lightskinned slaves were referred to as mamluks. And further on in later usage, the Arabic word came to mean “black man” of whatever status. . . .”

We can now see why, when an Arab sees anyone with black skin, all he notices is a dumb animal that he is licensed and even obliged by his religion to capture and enslave. With that background on the Arab tradition of enslaving and holding blacks in profound contempt, let us now examine the meaning of Gadhafi’s call for lebensraum.

In 2001, the Libyan leader, Gadhafi, under the cover of advancing the Nkrumahist Pan- African project of African Unity, was concluding his sub-imperial assignment to round up the African states into his Arab-dominated AU for easier muzzling and control by global imperialism. At an Arab League meeting in Amman, Jordan, Gadhafi exposed another hidden agenda of his AU project when he observed that 2/3 of the world’s [approximately 250million] Arabs now live in Africa, and he invited the rest to move into Africa and join them.

Though the Pan-African News Agency (PANA) reported it and posted it on its website, I wonder how many African leaders took note of Gadhafi’s invitation and saw the danger it poses for Africa. What Afrikans (i.e. the indigenous peoples of Africa) should particularly note is his reason for the invitation, namely, that Africa is the only space Arabs have. This is so reminiscent of the Nazi project of seizing living space, lebensraum, for the Germans from their neighbours in Eastern Europe that any sensible Afrikan must understand it as a threat to all Afrikans.

More importantly, it spells out, for all but the willfully and suicidally deaf to hear, the grand geopolitical purpose behind Arab policy and action in Africa in the last 50 years. But first, we need to put Gadhafi’s invitation in the context that allows us to appreciate the full danger to Afrikans from this enduring Arab ambition for lebensraum. Since the death of their prophet, Mohammed, Arabs have been relentlessly seizing lebensraum – living space—in Africa. Since their conquest of Egypt in 642, they have taken over all of North Africa, and most of the Nile valley and some of their tribes have even infiltrated as far west from the Nile as Lake Chad. Arabs have, by now, occupied supra-Sahara Africa and the Nile Valley, i.e. more than one-third of the African landmass, and they are still grabbing more and moving tenaciously to conquer the rest.

Arab expansionism in Africa, 640-1900

I wonder how many Afrikans today wonder how it came about that Arabs, whose homeland is the Arabian Peninsula, came to occupy all of supra-Sahara Africa, from the Sinai peninsula across to Morocco’s Atlantic coast. And what they did to the Black Egyptians, Black Berbers and other blacks who were the aborigines of all that expanse of land? Similarly, Afrikans need to inquire into why and how an Arab minority has ruled Sudan since 1956? And how did it come about that we hear of Arab tribes in Darfur, Chad and even in Nigeria’s Bornu State? Until 640 AD, there were no Arab settlers of any kind in all those places. But in that year, hungry Arab hordes desperate for plunder and greener pastures charged out of Arabia, flying the flag of their new religion, Islam, and conquered Egypt by 642. Egypt thereafter became their base for invading and seizing lebensraum all the way west to Morocco and Mauritania, and southward up the Nile.

In the first phase of conquest, an Arab raiding army reached Tangier on the Atlantic in 682. Then in the 11th Century, the Fatimids who were then ruling in Egypt, unleashed Bedouin Arab tribes, such as the Beni Hilal and Beni Sulaim, into the Maghreb. These Bedouin tribes overran as far west as Morocco in the 12th and 13th centuries, and brought about the Arabisation of the indigenous Berber population of the Maghreb whom they swamped.

They reached northern Mauritania by the 14th Century. Also in the 14th Century, Guhayna Arab tribes, edged out of Egypt, infiltrated up the Nile into Sudan. In 1820, Mohammed Ali Pasha sent an expedition from Egypt that conquered Northern Sudan by 1841. In 1869, Ismail Pasha attempted to annex the region from Juba/Gondokoro to Lake Victoria, a region that would become Uganda and Sudan’s Equatoria Province. He failed, but the British who ruled from 1899 to 1956 later incorporated Equatoria into the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. In 1874, the Jellaba-Arab slave raider, Zubair Pasha conquered Dar Fur for the Egyptians. Also in the 19th Century, Awlad Sulaiman Arabs migrated, in the 1840s, from the Fezzan in Libya into the Lake Chad area, and Shuwa Arabs in search of pasturelands moved, in the 1810s, from Chad into the Bornu area of what became Nigeria.

From the late 19th Century until the 1950s, Arab expansionism in Africa was stopped in its tracks by the European powers who conquered and partitioned Africa among themselves. Only with the retreat of European political rule did opportunity arise for Arab expansionism to resume its march. And it promptly did.

Arab expansionism in Africa since 1956, i.e. in the era of continentalist Pan-Africanism.
Continentalist Pan-Africanism was launched in 1958 at the Accra Conference of Independent African States (CIAS). It has been the dominant tendency within Pan-Africanism ever since, and it has given birth to the Arab-dominated OAU/AU. As some observers have pointed out, the Arab League, established in 1945, is the institutional organ for realizing the Arab aspirations for unity and imperial resurgence through “an Arab-Islamic empire across Africa into the Middle East.” Under its aegis, Arab nationalism resumed its expansion in Africa when, on attaining independence in 1956, the Jellaba-Arab minority government of Sudan defined Sudan as an Arab country and set out to enforce that definition on Sudan’s African majority.

Islamisation and Arabisation of Black Africa: the pilot project in Sudan:

It has been noted by Opoku Agyeman that Pan-Arabism, in its so-called ‘civilizing mission’ perceives Africa as a ‘cultural vacuum’ waiting to be filled by Arab culture “by all conceivable means” [Agyeman, 1994:30] including Islamisation, and the settlement of Arab populations on lands forcibly seized from Africans. The assumptions, objectives and methods of this project may be illustrated from the statements of its principal implementers in Sudan:
“You are aware that the end of all our efforts and this expense is to procure Negroes. Please show zeal in carrying out our wishes in this capital matter.”
–Muhammad Ali Pasha, Ruler of Egypt, 1825, in a letter to one of his generals in Sudan, quoted in [Nyaba, 2002:36]

In his 1955 book on the orbital scheme [the three circles at whose center he envisioned Egypt to be], President Nasser characterized Africa as “the remotest depths of the jungle,” and as merely a candidate for Egypt’s “spread of enlightenment and civilization” via Islamisation-Arabisation.

-Gamal Abdel Nasser, President of Egypt, 1955, quoted in [Agyeman,1994:34].

“Sudan is geographically in Africa but is Arab in its aspirations and destiny. We consider ourselves the Arab spearhead in Africa, linking the Arab world to the African continent.” -Sudanese Prime Minister, Mahgoub, 1968, quoted in [Agyeman, 1994:38]. Sudan “is the basis of the Arab thrust into the heart of Black Africa, the Arab civilizing mission.”
– President Nimeiry of Sudan, 1969, quoted in [Agyeman, 1994:39] “We want to Islamise America and Arabise Africa” – Dr. Hassan El-Turabi, chief ideologue of Jellaba-Arab minority rule in Sudan, 1999, quoted in [Nyaba, 2002:27]. “The south [Sudan] will remain an inseparable part of the land of Islam, God willing, even if the war continued for decades.”
-Osama bin Laden, April 2006, [from an edited translation of an audiotape attributed to al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden, parts of which were aired by Aljazeera on April 23, 2006]

This thrusting of Arab spears into the body and soul of Black Africa through deAfrikanisation campaigns of Islamisation-Arabisation was, of course, not confined to Sudan, but has been done wherever Arabs spotted an opportunity to exploit Afrikan weakness, such as Mauritania, Chad, Somalia, Eritrea, Uganda. In the past 40 years, Libya’s Gadhafi has been particularly active in sponsoring chaos, anarchy and civil wars in Chad, Liberia, Cote d’Ivoire etc., and in trying to Islamise Uganda, Rwanda, the CAR etc. For example, in a live broadcast on Rwanda Radio on 17 May, 1985, Gadhafi said: “First, you must stick to your Islamic religion and insist that your children are taught the Islamic religion and you teach the Arabic language because without the Arabic language, we could not understand Islam. . . You must teach that Islam is the religion of Africa. . . You must raise your voice high and declare that Allah is great because Africa must be the refugee camps in neighbouring Chad. . . .
Muslim. . . We must wage a holy war so that Islam may spread in Africa. –quoted in [Bankie and Mchombu, 2006:239-240].
Why do Gadhafi and other Arabisers sponsor Islamisation? Steve Biko pointed out the fundamental reason why imperialists make a point of converting their victims to their Christian religion when he said: It has always been the pattern throughout history that whosoever brings the new order knows it best and is therefore the perpetual teacher of those to whom the new order is being brought. If the white missionaries were “right” about their God in the eyes of the people, then the African people could only accept whatever these new know-all tutors had to say about life.

The acceptance of the colonialist-tainted version of Christianity marked the turning point in the resistance of African people. [Biko, 1987:56]. Steve Biko’s observation helps explain why Arab hegemonists like Gadhafi insist on Islamising their intended victims. Since the death of their prophet, Mohammed, Islam has been the religious cloak and entry-dagger of Arab imperialism. Islamisation is used as a prelude to the project of Arabisation.

Among the targeted victims, Islam privileges the Arabic language and culture. Arab names and customs are made obligatory, and the anathema on Jahiliya discourages remembrance of the pre-Islamic, non-Arab culture of an Islamised people. It should be noted that the core Islamic countries that stretch contiguously from the Maghreb to Pakistan are fragments of the empire that Arabs conquered and ruled from 632-1517 when the Turks, under Selim the Grim, conquered Egypt and Syria and extinguished the Arab Abbasid Caliphate. Thus, the core lands of Dar-al-Islam today are a continuation of the Arab Empire. Just as the Commonwealth is the euphemistic PR name for the enduring British Empire, so too Dar-al-Islam is the euphemistic PR name for the enduring Arab Empire. In fact, Dar-al-Islam is simply the Arab empire in religious camouflage, and the Umma are the Arab citizens/masters and the non-Arab subjects of the enduring Arab Empire.

Gadhafi and the Arab lebensraum project in the 21st Century in furtherance of his lebensraum project, in May 2003, proposed a tripartite union of Libya, Sudan and Egypt, a move reminiscent of Hitler’s Anschluss project that annexed, in 1938, Austria as well as Czechoslovakia’s Sudetenland. To appreciate the menace in Gadhafi’s invitation, Afrikans would do well to consider Hitler’s drive for lebensraum and how it was stopped.

Just as Gadhafi wants to enlarge Arabia inside Africa, Hitler wanted to enlarge Germany within Europe by the acquisition of a territory for settlement, which will enhance the area of the mother country, and hence not only keep the new settlers in the most intimate community with the land of their origin, but secure for the total area those advantages which lie in its unified magnitude. [Hitler, 1971: 653] Hitler looked east for Germany’s expansion in Europe. In Nazi ideology, Lebensraum meant the expansion of Germany eastward to conquer lands for Germans to settle and peoples for Germans to enslave. According to Hitler, the ideal war was one of conquest, extermination, and subjugation; the ideal area in which to conduct such a war was in the east, where the German people would win for itself the lebensraum.

The Nazi theory of Lebensraum became Germany’s foreign policy during the Third Reich. A key element in Hitler’s plan for lebensraum was the idea of military expansion and the forced expulsion of the nations of Poland, Ukraine, Russia etc. and their replacement with German settlers. The Lebensraum ideology was a major factor in Hitler’s launching of Operation Barbarossa in June 1941. As the German armies moved eastward, the Nazis began to turn large areas of Soviet territory into German settlement areas. The biggest obstacle to implementing the Lebensraum further was the fact that by the end of 1942, the Sixth Army was defeated in Stalingrad. After the second big defeat in the tank battle at Kursk during July 1943 and the Allied landings in Sicily, all further Lebensraum plans came to a halt.

USA, Australia, Russia — case studies of lebensraum.

Faced, from the 16th Century, with European invaders seeking lebensraum, the Native Americans in what became the USA, failed to muster the necessary will and forces to defeat and drive the invaders away; as a result, these indigenous peoples were exterminated and lost their continent by the late 19th Century. Bands of their remnants were herded into reservations and left to slowly die out. Similarly in the 19th Century, the Australian aborigines failed to muster the necessary will and forces to defeat and drive away the invaders from Europe. They too were exterminated. In contrast, the Russians in the 20th Century, under Stalin, mustered the necessary will and forces, defeated Hitler’s armies and chased them back all the way to Berlin and obliged Hitler to commit suicide.

As these contrasting examples make clear, seekers of lebensraum can only be stopped by decisively defeating and driving them away. How did the Russians manage to do that? First of all, their leaders took quite seriously the Nazi talk of seeking lebensraum in Eastern Europe, and prepared for war. In February 1931, Stalin predicted and warned his people: ‘We are 50 or 100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this lag in 10 years. Either we do it or they crush us.’ And he drove his people with the proverbial whip and scorpion, and forced them to industrialize at a desperate pace. And Russia industrialized in 10 years flat! Which was just in time to be ready when Hitler unleashed his armies on Russia in June 1941. And by 1943, Hitler’s lebensraum project lay in ruins as his mighty armies had been defeated by Stalin’s armies. It took another two years of hard fighting for the Russians to drive Hitler’s armies all the way back to Berlin. Had they not done so, there would be no Russia or Poland or Ukraine etc today. All the land from Berlin to the Urals would have been taken over and settled by Germans. And any Russians not exterminated would have been enslaved as Hitler intended.

If Afrikans want to escape at Arab hands the type of fate that Hitler planned for the Russians, we need to learn from Stalin’s example. We need to build a megastate and industrialize it at breakneck speed into a modern power. And we need to defeat the Arabs and drive them back across the Sahara.

The first step is to expel all Arab League countries from the AU, or better yet, to destroy this enemy-controlled AU and organize a Black World League of States to serve as the collective security outfit exclusively for the Blacks of the World. The second step is to militarily discourage any further Arab expansion into sub-Sahara Africa. We must firmly bear in mind that lebensraum ambitions are effected by military action, as in Sudan’s war on the SPLM, and its use of Janjawid militias in Darfur and Chad. And we must also firmly bear in mind that such ambitions are destroyed only by military action. To think of any other way is suicidal foolishness. So Gadhafi’s ambition must be finally defeated militarily by Afrikan power, and the sooner the better for Afrikans.

Part II: The Challenge to Pan-Afrikanism

First, they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time, no one was left to speak up for me. -Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)

In the last 15 centuries, Arab invaders have grabbed 1/3 of the African continent, and systematically enslaved, exterminated or Arabised the blacks they met there. How? I have already quoted examples from the mission statements of the anti-Afrikan leaders of the Arab expansionists since 1820 in Sudan. Let us now see examples of how they’ve gone about implementing their policy on the ground since 1956 while the OAU/AU Pan-Africanists determinedly looked the other way or buried their ostrich heads in the sand. The following are instructive excerpts, about the events in al-Di’ein and Dar Fur, from Islamisation and Arabisation of Africans as a means to Political Power in the Sudan by Sudanese scholar, M. Jalaal Haashim: al-Di’ein 1987

As its civil war with the SPLM/SPLA intensified, the Jellaba-Arabist Sudan government of al-Sadiq al-Mahdi (1986-1989) used the Baggara Arabs to punish those Dinka who lived on the border of Kordufan and Dar Fur, such as the Ngog, on the assumption that all the Dinka were SPLM/SPLA.

“The Baggara tribes in Kordufan and Dar Fur are nomadic Arabs who have been greatly influenced by the Nilotic tribes, especially the Dinka, from whom they have taken the cows for livestock and the colour of blackness . . . . Until then, the hostility between the two sides was relatively kept at bay due to their historical inter-relationship. Thousands of Dinka who fled the war zone came and lived with the Baggara. This is how in a certain village called al-Di’ein in Southern Dar Fur, more than 6,000 Dinka people peacefully took refuge and lived with the Baggara.

In 1987, the government of Sadiq al-Mahdi established the infamous Popular Defence Forces (PDF) as a pretext for officially arming the Baggara Arabs to fight the Southerners. Armed in this way, the marauding Baggara squads of PDF began making incursions into the South, raiding the Dinka villages. [These] naturally sought help from the SPLM/SPLA [who] came to the rescue . . . . In all aspects, the Baggara Arabs were unequal to the SPLA. Suffering defeat after defeat, . . . the Baggara began nursing deep hatred towards the Dinka in general, [and finally directed their revenge on] the peaceful Dinka who were living with them at al- Di’ein . . .In one day in mid 1987, at least 1,000 Dinka were massacred, 4,000 were burned alive, and the survivors – around 1,000 – were enslaved. The massacre began early in the day. At first, the bewildered Dinka did not believe what was going on. When reality dawned on them, they fled into the houses of their hosts who were also their attackers. They were dragged by their feet like animals to be butchered outside the houses of their hosts. The Dinka took refuge in the Church; there they were killed along with the priest. Then they ran and took refuge inside the Police station, which was part of the railway station, but, alas, the Police turned out to be accomplices.

They were killed there also. Whether in good or bad faith . . . they were ill-advised to take refuge in the empty carriages of a standing freight train so they could be taken away from al-Di’ein. With the trustfulness usually shown by totally vulnerable and helpless people in their eagerness to cling to a straw, they hurriedly obeyed. Once crammed inside, they were locked in from outside. Caged in like animals, they saw with their own eyes barrels full of diesel being rolled toward them. They were burnt alive, all of them. Only then, with the barbecue smell of that holocaust, did the Baggara come to their senses. The survivors were fortunate that they were only enslaved. Slavery was the common sense of that doomed day . . . . In the period 1989-1999, only God knows how many massacres like that of al-Di’ein took place.”

The Janjawid campaign of genocide:

“A decade after the Dinka massacre in al-Di’ein, the scenario of ethnic manipulation by the state expanded to cover the whole of Dar Fur and most of Kordufan, . . . [and] the era of terror of the infamous Janjawid had been launched. . . .

Dar Fur has been the victim of the involvement of the neighbouring Arab states in the civil war in Chad that flared up in the 1970s. Libya, an extreme advocate of Pan-Arabism with highly volatile policies, intervened in Chad with the sole aim of helping the Arab nomad tribes with money, logistics and arms. . . . The government of Khartoum has not only backed the nomadic Arab tribes, but has also armed them and fought by land and air along with them.

All through the decade of 1982-1992, skirmishes and limited killings were commonplace in Dar Fur. The Khartoum government dubbed them ‘armed robbery’. In 1995, the massacres were launched first against the Masalit tribe of the state of West Dar Fur. The governor himself was a Masalit Muslim brother who was given orders from Khartoum to let his sedentary people host a heavily armed clan of pastoralist Baggara who were driven out of Chad to be welcomed by the Khartoum government simply out of bias for the Arabs. . . . The Masalit welcomed the Baggara. Under the official eyes of the State government which was headed by their own son, thousands of the Masalit were butchered in mid 1995. . . . ”

Through these “gruesome atrocities . . ., which are being overtly committed by State- backed Arab tribes”, the nomadic Arab tribes of Dar Fur have been committing genocide and ethnic cleansing against the African sedentary tribes. As both the culprit and the victim are Muslims, the Afro-Arab race war nature of the genocide becomes very clear. As Jalaal Haashim points out, the conflicts in Sudan are “a racist war camouflaged with religion.”

But how exactly do these Arab marauders carry out ethnic cleansing? The next excerpt, from Singing while their men rape, THE GUARDIAN, NAIROBI Wednesday, July 21, 2004, Page 6, tells of an ongoing example of organized raping and killing and enslavement carried out by the Janjawid in Dar Fur: According to an Amnesty International report published in 2004, “While African women in Darfur were being raped by the Janjaweed militiamen, Arab women stood nearby and sang for joy . . .The songs of the Hakama, or the “Janjaweed women” as the refugees call them, encouraged the atrocities which the militiamen committed. . . . During an attack on the village of Disa in June last year, Arab women accompanied the attackers and sang in praise of the government and scorning black villagers.

According to an African chief quoted in the report, the singers said: “The blood of the blacks runs like water, we take their goods and we chase them from our area and our cattle will be in their land.” “The power of (Sudanese president Omer Hassan) al-Bashir belongs to the Arabs and we will kill you until the end, you blacks, we have killed your God.” The chief said that the Arab women also racially insulted women from the village, saying: “You are gorillas, you are black and you are badly dressed.”

The Janjaweed have abducted women for use as sex slaves, in some cases breaking their limbs to prevent them escaping, as well as carrying out rapes in their home villages, the report said. The militiamen “are happy when they rape. They sing when they rape and they tell that we are just slaves and that they can do with us how they wish,” a 37-year-old victim, identified as A, was quoted as saying in the report, which was based on over

To be continued

*Paper presented at the Global Pan-African Reparations and Repatriation Conference (GPARRC) on 25 July, 2006, at the University of Ghana, Legon, Accra.

%d bloggers like this: