Pay Attention to Nuances When Black People Say They “Don’t Understand What Black Means”
I’m always mildly annoyed when I hear Black people speak the negativity (and downright verbal poison) of “I don’t understand what Black means.” What’s even worse is that many of us don’t understand that this is poison. Any statement that is anti-self is poison, and a form of negativity to be excluded from one’s mental diet. Rejecting a component of one’s identity is definitely anti-self. It’s similar to voluntarily hacking off one of your fingers. Yes, you’ll still survive and be able to function (more or less). By why do something like that? Why do anything that would hinder your ability to live at an optimal level? African-Americans have been bombarded for so long with a steady diet of poison, that we don’t always recognize it as poison.
PAY ATTENTION TO NUANCES—DIFFERENT TYPES OF BLACK PEOPLE MEAN DIFFERENT THINGS WHEN SAYING THAT THEY “DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT BLACK MEANS”
Another problem is that most African-Americans are tone-deaf, and can’t hear the nuances in various statements. This is one reason why we end up being subservient to, and run over by, most other types of people that we encounter. Most African-Americans have the childish mental habit of assuming that other people, and especially Blacks from other ethnic groups, see the world the same way we do, and think just like us. They don’t. See this conversation at the previous blog that touches on this issue.
When African-Americans make these “I don’t know what Black means” statements they are publicly advertising their general lack of ethnic and racial self-respect. Most African-Americans have no sense of ethnic identity, and only a vague (and negative) sense of racial identity.
When foreign-origin Blacks make these statements they are, at best, neutral statements reflecting normal human patterns of how people set priorities. It’s normal human nature to take care of folks in this order: self, family, clan, ethnic group. With many people in many countries, “nation” isn’t even on that list. For other people, “race” also is not on that list; their concern only extends as far as their own ethnic group. With most people, outsiders are almost never on the “take care of them” list.
Most African-Americans have the “take care of them” list backwards compared to every other group of people. We put outsiders first and put ourselves last. African-American women put themselves dead last on the “must be taken care of” list. Our misleaders have programmed most African-Americans to look to create over-arching coalitions with anybody and everybody else . . . in the absence of taking care of self, family, clan, and finally, ethnic group.
Our misleaders have also programmed us to fixate on being “fairer than fair” to anybody and everybody except ourselves. This is why so many African-Americans will come to Black blogs to fight with other Black people to champion the interests of NON-Blacks (such as the “don’t you dare call me Black” so-called biracials, other so-called “people of color,” and so on). (Note that these other “people of color” generally only use that term to describe themselves when they want something from African-Americans. Many other “people of color,” such as many Latinos and Arabs, are heavily invested in self-identifying as “White” in every other context.)
All the above confused thinking is upside-down and backwards. And it doesn’t work.
A NOTE FOR NON-AFRICAN-AMERICAN READERS
Yes, there are non-African-American Blacks who do the same thing. I just happen to feel that members of my own ethnic group (African-Americans) routinely take this madness to levels that other Black folks generally don’t go in such large numbers—we’re the most infected with this particular strain of insanity. Nobody else thinks like this to this degree. This is why I’m addressing this issue with a focus on African-Americans for this particular conversation.
A NOTE FOR THOSE AFRICAN-AMERICANS WHO ARE CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT “AFRICAN-AMERICAN” MEANS
I would define “African-American” as being something parallel to the commonly understood (among themselves) definitions of “Italian-American,” “Irish-American,” “Hausa,” or “Jamaican-American.”
In other words, being the descendants of a group of people that are—distinguishable from others—and connected to each other— by a shared set of historical experiences and cultural norms. When I say “African-Americans” I’m referring to those of us who are, distinguishable from others and connected to each other, by our shared historical experiences as descendants of those Africans who were held in slavery in the United States.
Just like every other ethnic group on the planet is—distinguishable from others—and connected to each other—by some shared set of historical experiences and cultural norms. Why is this concept so mysterious only when describing African-Americans? Answer: Because we’ve literally had our ethnic and racial self-respect beaten out of us. As a result, we slavishly look for validation from other people who do have some ethnic and racial self-respect for their own groups. Nature abhors a vacuum. Something will always rush in to fill one. Even if it’s something harmful, such as self-hatred.
Shared historical experiences and shared (general) cultural norms are not the same as the “acting Black” straitjacket. Sometimes an individual’s connections to their heritage, and to others from their group, are loose ones. That’s okay. Sometimes these connections are tighter (as I’ve noticed seems to be the general case among many Greek-Americans and Jewish-Americans). That’s also okay, for those folks who want closer connections with their group.
Many African-Americans say “Black” when they’re actually referring to what they (often mistakenly) believe to be African-American culture and shared historical experience.
This “acting Black” mess that many African-Americans speak is rooted in their ignorance of their actual history and cultural inheritance, and various types of dysfunction that they’ve lifted up (such as African-American gang subculture, African-American prison subculture).
In short, the “acting Black” fools have confused their African-American historical and cultural inheritance with African-American gang subculture, African-American prison subculture, and African-American hip-hop subculture (which draws heavily from gang and prison subculture).
Many African-Americans have surrendered the “African-American” and “Black” labels to these nuts. And then many African-Americans run from the African-American and Black labels out of justified revulsion to the gang, prison, and hip-hop-based madness the nuts have defined as “Black.”
I refuse to surrender the African-American and Black labels to the “acting Black” nuts.
But above and beyond the relatively recent decades of “acting Black” madness, there was much preexisting confusion among African-Americans. We often conflate “African-American” with “Black.” This confusion is leavened with large doses of racial and ethnic self-hatred.
WHY TALK ABOUT SPECIFIC AFRICAN-AMERICAN IDENTITY ISSUES?
I talk about these specific African-American ethnic and racial identity issues because I want you to be as comfortable and relaxed with all facets of your identity as other people are with theirs. I want you to be relaxed and self-confident enough to enjoy all this world has to offer. Right now, most African-Americans can’t do this because we have emotionally charged relationships with various aspects of our identity.
I want you to hold your head high as you travel this world. Just like other people take what is good from the wider world without feeling compelled to discard their own identity. There are two unhealthy and extreme positions that insecure African-Americans take regarding their ethnic and racial identity. The first unhealthy position is to try to:
(1) minimize (“I’m 1/8 Cherokee, 1/27th Irish, 1/58th German, and . . . umm, I’m too dark to deny it, so I guess I have to say . . . Black”),
(2) deny (“I don’t know what Black means”), and finally
(3) erase (“I’m Cablanasian, biracial, multicultural, anything-but-Black”) the African-American and Black identities that most of us are deeply ashamed of.
The second, and ironically equally self-hating, position is to outwardly show fanatical levels of fixation on one’s racial and ethnic identity. Perfect examples of this second manifestation of feelings of inferiority are the legions of “Blacker than thou” Black male leaders who chased, sexed or married light, nonblack, and White women. Elijah Muhammad and his light-skinned, often teenaged secretaries. Many if not most of the Black Panthers; see Bobby Seale’s autobiography A Lonely Rage for the details of the Panther leadership’s exploits while chasing nonblack women. Harry Belafonte. Amiri Baraka.
In fact, there’s currently at least one minister in the Nation of Islam who is married to a nonblack woman. I’m referring to one of Elijah Muhammad’s illegitimate children by one his light-skinned secretaries, Minister Ishmael Muhammad, who is married to a Mexican woman. For more examples regarding a number of Black male Pan-Africanist leaders, see this post by Halima, blog host of Black Women’s Interracial Relationship Circle. The list can go on.
I never understood either of these extremes. My parents raised me to have a healthy and most of all, relaxed sense of self-respect for every aspect of my identity.
It’s interesting. Without being “Blacker than thou” fanatics, they managed to raise me so that it never occurred to me to feel “less than” based on being a girl, or being Black, or being “Afro-American.” (That was one of the popular terms for us when I was a small girl.) While growing up, it never occurred to me to try to emphasize the White ancestry that led to the light skin and brown hair that runs through my family.
As a pre-teen, I was not excited to hear about the White family in the Southern town that my grandfather came from that has the same surname as him. I never denied that these particular White folks existed. Or that they were most likely related to us, but I didn’t feel any compulsion to emphasize them when the topic of my ancestry came up. Without knowing the term “reciprocity,” this concept was the basis for my indifference and apathy about these rumored White relatives. Since these particular Whites weren’t trying to track us down and claim us as relatives, why in the world would I want to chase them down or go out of my way to claim them?
At the time, I knew some other African-American 6th, 7th and 8th graders who were extremely frantic (every chance they got) to point out all the distantly related nonblacks in their family tree. I remember thinking how strange it was that they were so focused on people who weren’t equally interested in them. In fact, it sounded like many of these distantly related nonblack folks didn’t claim any kinship to them at all.
I was only interested in hearing about, and later on researching, the history of those ancestors who cared about having a connection to the rest of us.
My parents raised me to have ethnic and racial self-respect without disparaging other people. It’s possible to reject whatever injustice exists without engaging in stereotyping, or painting other people with a broad brush.
I also never understood the second extreme of “Blacker than thou” behavior. This includes the years I spent as a Black Nationalist. I didn’t hate Whites or nonblacks. I wasn’t fixated on outward displays of so-called Black consciousness. I wasn’t a natural hair evangelist who berated and harassed other Black women for wearing relaxed styles. I wore my hair however I felt like wearing it, including relaxed styles.
I was a Black Nationalist because I wanted my own people to have the good things that others have. Things like racial and ethnic self-respect, functioning communities, and so on. When I (briefly) considered joining the Nation of Islam during law school, it wasn’t because they talked about White people. It was because they talked about being a free and independent people like everybody else. It was because they took action in support of providing the “money, good homes, and friendship in all walks of life” that Elijah Muhammad promised for as many Black people as possible. It was because they were the only Black group I saw that had visible, tangible, consistent, long-term achievements in improving the lives of large numbers of African-Americans.
Anyway, both of the above-described extreme positions reflect insecurity and an inner belief that one’s own heritage is inferior. Healthy people don’t have emotionally-charged relationships with the various facets of their identity. They simply appreciate and when relevant, celebrate, their identities and go on with their lives.
AFRICAN-AMERICANS ARE THE ONLY BLACKS THAT REJECT HAVING THEIR OWN SPECIFIC ETHNICITY
African-Americans are the only Black ethnic group on the planet that’s so confused about, and often has an active aversion to, having our own ethnic identity.
I’ve never heard a foreign-origin Black person form their lips to disparage their own ethnic group by saying that they “don’t know what it means to be” Hausa, Jamaican, Panamanian, Dominican, or whatever else they are. African-Americans are the only ones who speak that form of negativity about their own group. You’re the only ones who do that.
FOREIGN BLACKS DON’T NECESSARILY MEAN THE SAME THING AS AFRICAN-AMERICANS WHEN THEY SAY THEY “DON’T KNOW WHAT BLACK MEANS”
Too many African-Americans assume that Black people from other ethnic groups see the world the same way we do. We assume that their circumstances are the same as our circumstances. This leads to the (often mistaken) assumption that these other Black folks mean the same things as we do when they use certain expressions. They don’t. Remember, for some foreign-origin Blacks, their level of concern only extends as far as their own particular ethnic group. They only feel connected to: self, family, clan, and ethnic group. Not nation. And not race.
This means when foreign-origin Blacks throw away the idea of “Black,” almost all of them are still proudly hanging on to their specific ethnic identities as Jamaicans, Hausas and so on. It’s important to note that even the foreign-origin Black folks who say they “don’t know what Black means” still hang on to their particular ethnic identity (such as Hausas, Panamanians, Jamaicans, Dominicans). Even if they aren’t interested in anything “Black,” they never say they’re confused about what it means to be part of their own ethnic groups.
Meanwhile, when you as an African-American throw away the idea of “Black,” you’re throwing away the only smidgen of identity that you have! This is because most of you never took the time to develop any specifically African-American ethnic identity. While you’re busy making yourself . . . nothing . . . but a culture-free, “race is an artificial construct,” human being . . . these other types of Black folks are still proudly identifying with their specific Hausa, Panamanian, Jamaican, Dominican ethnic heritage as well as being “race is an artificial construct” humans.
They still (proudly) keep their ethnic “cards” in their pockets when they make these statements, while you completely empty your pockets when you do the same. Unless you develop any sense of specific ethnic pride, you leave yourself empty-handed when you throw away the racial identity card.
Can you see the difference between these two positions? Can you see that African-Americans are the only ones who are so confused about what it means to be part of their own ethnic group? Can you see that nobody else on this planet is claiming that type of confusion? When you’re the only one doing something, that’s usually a clue that whatever you’re doing is unwise.
These “I don’t know what Black means” statements don’t necessarily have the same effect or meaning when uttered by foreign-origin Blacks. This is because, unlike most African-Americans, foreign-origin Blacks are often making these statements in the context of maintaining their own ethnic self-respect. Their context is different from your context of having nothing but a racial identity (as “Black”-Americans).
Lifestyle optimization requires you to examine ideas from the vantage point of your own particular context and circumstances. It’s impossible to have an optimal lifestyle when you make critical decisions based on other people’s circumstances. Parroting the statements of other people whose circumstances (and often their interests) are out of alignment with yours will throw your life into chaos and ruin.
Another nuance that many African-Americans are too tone-deaf to catch is that when some foreign-origin Blacks denigrate the idea of “Black,” they are actually denigrating African-Americans. Many African-Americans are slow to catch on to this because of their own lack of ethnic pride, and their general naïveté when dealing with Black-skinned outsiders. It’s a mistake to assume that Blacks from other ethnic groups see the world the same way we do, and think just like us. They don’t.
Consider that a shared racial identity (“Black”) is the only connection that some foreign-origin Blacks ever claimed to have with you. Aren’t many of them constantly telling you about how different they are from you? And about how differently they do things back on their islands and in their countries? Their cultures are different. And that’s okay. Let me stress that there’s nothing inherently wrong with, or insulting about, recognizing ethnic differences. But too many of you fail to pay attention to the nuances behind various statements.
Sometimes when foreign-origin Blacks make these “I don’t know what Black means” statements they are simple neutral reflections of the normal way of organizing priorities (self, family, clan, ethnic group). However, sometimes when foreign-origin Blacks make these statements, they’re making a point of throwing away the only connection (a racial one) that some of them ever claimed to have to you. They’re not discarding their connections to one another when they say they “don’t know what Black means.” Even when they don’t know anything about “Black,” they still know what Hausa, Jamaican, Panamanian, Dominican, and other identities mean.
When they throw away “Black,” what they’re often discarding is the notion of having any connection to YOU.
Many African-Americans are too clueless to understand this. Just like many African-American men, there are many African-American women who are looking for the nearest exit out of their Black and African-American identities. So they get overjoyed when they hear Black-skinned others make “I don’t know what Black means” statements.
These confused African-Americans mistakenly assume the foreign Black person who makes these statements is joining them in becoming racial AND ethnic blank slates. (Remember, most African-Americans conflate “Black” with “African-American.”) No, when foreign-origin Blacks make these statements they’re not joining African-Americans in making themselves totally blank slates. Unlike the African-American speakers, most foreign Blacks are still holding on to their specific ethnic self-respect when they make these statements. Again, it’s a matter of paying attention to nuances.
These other types of Black people have another way of identifying themselves (as Hausas, Jamaicans, Panamanians, and so on). As confused African-Americans, YOU’RE the only Black ethnic group that doesn’t recognize any identity more specific than “Black” for yourselves. You’re the only ones who call yourselves “Black” only. Sometimes, when foreign-origin Blacks are talking negatively about “Black,” they’re talking singularly about African-Americans. They’re talking about YOU.
I firmly believe that charity begins at home. Every culture on this planet has unhealthy aspects. Having unhealthy aspects is not the same as having nothing of one’s own and being a blank slate. Healthy people recognize that yes, they are part of the overall human race, and that on one level, race is an artificial social construct. However, healthy people also have more specific cultural identities besides simply human.
African-Americans’ previous attempts to become ethnic and racial blank slates is part of why many of our children are still giving the same responses on the “doll test” that African-American children gave in the 1950s. There’s a direct connection between:
(1) The widespread African-American lack of ethnic and racial self-respect.
(2) The resulting desire to be racial AND ethnic blank slates, which nobody else is doing to the same degree. (For examples, Hausas aren’t saying they don’t know if there’s such a thing as being specifically Hausa within the overall context of being Nigerian; and Jamaican-Americans aren’t saying that they don’t know if there’s such a thing as being Jamaican-American.)
And (3) the anti-Black woman colorism that many of us have been talking about.
AFRICAN-AMERICANS CAN LEARN SOME THINGS FROM FOREIGN BLACKS, SUCH AS THE IMPORTANCE OF ETHNIC SELF-RESPECT
We live in a world of other people who, for the most part, have some ethnic self-respect. At minimum, other people tend to have more ethnic self-respect than the “typical” African-American (including the ethnic self-respect that most Africans and West Indians display when they come to the US).
This baseline of ethnic self-respect is why I’ve also never heard a Nigerian (of any Nigerian ethnic group), Jamaican, Panamanian, or any other foreign-origin Black person use terminology like “pro-Hausa,” “pro-Jamaican,” or “pro-Panamanian.” The unquestioned assumption appears to be that they’re going to be for themselves, whoever that is.
These other Black people don’t have any problem with being for themselves. Meanwhile, there are African-Americans who use the terminology “pro-Black” as if it’s a slur, when “Black” is the only tiny bit of identity they know (because they haven’t developed any ethnic identity as an African-American).
Any African-American who wants an optimal lifestyle needs to appreciate the difference between healthy ethnic self-respect and “acting Black” madness. It seems to me that one set of confused African-Americans (sometimes deliberately) misinterpret “expanding one’s horizons” as “oreo.” While another set of confused African-Americans (sometimes deliberately) misinterpret having ethnic and racial self-respect as “militant,” or “acting Black” madness, or being anti-others. Somehow, this confusion only arises in reference to African-Americans. Others, including other types of Black people, are free to have ethnic self-respect without having it mischaracterized as something negative. Other types of Black people are also free to take advantage of whatever the wider world has to offer. I want you to be free to do this as well; while also holding your head high as an African-American.
I’ve spent a fair amount of time traveling abroad. To say that African-Americans are very Westernized, and specifically very Americanized, after centuries of living here does not negate the fact that African-Americans are a separate, identifiable ethnic group. African-Americans are a people that are distinguishable from others, and connected to each other, by a shared set of historical experiences and cultural norms. African-Americans are not ethnic or racial blank slates.
African-Americans have legitimate cultural practices of our own. Is every single artifact of our African-American culture “legitimate”? No, but I vehemently disagree with the notion that African-Americans have absolutely nothing that’s real. I disagree with the idea of giving respect to everybody else’s cultural heritage while disrespecting my own by saying that I don’t have one. Or by saying that mine doesn’t count relative to other people’s cultural heritage.
For example, I don’t believe that West Indians or the various Black Latino ethnic groups have any more of a “real” cultural heritage than African-Americans. If African-American culture is a hodgepodge—as I’ve heard many African-Americans say in public—then the same applies to other Western Blacks. I never hear the African-Americans who make these statements apply the “hodgepodge” label to the cultures of other Western Blacks. They reserve that particular dismissive term and attitude for their own people’s culture.
The bottom line is that ALL Western Blacks are enmeshed in whichever European culture was and is dominant where they live.
English-speaking West Indians are enmeshed in British culture. African-Americans are enmeshed in British-descended, WASP culture (with pockets of also being enmeshed in French culture in Louisiana). Black Latinos are enmeshed with the culture of their former slave owners, the Spaniards.
Before somebody says that all these other Western Blacks have cultures that are more “real” than ours because they have their own independent countries, please consider the following questions. Are any of these other Black folks’ countries independent in the same way that China is independent of the US? Or are some of them independent the same way Mexico is “independent” of the US? Finally, are some of these countries independent to roughly the same extent the city of Detroit is independent? (For example, note that Puerto Rico is not an independent country.) Let’s be clear about all of this.
Even the straightened hair, green-contact-lens-wearing, skin-bleaching Sammy Sosa is not claiming confusion about his specific ethnicity as a Dominican. He’s not saying, “What is Dominican? I just don’t know what that means.” He simply wants to be any race but Black. Mr. Sosa is a good example of a Black person who has racial self-hatred, but not ethnic self-hatred. He’s thrown away “Black,” but he hasn’t thrown away the “Dominican” part of his identity.
African-Americans’ cultural heritage is no more (and no less) made up than those of these other Westernized Black people.
I’m not going to assign a rank to my cultural heritage that’s less than the rank these other Western Blacks assign to their cultural heritage. I don’t hear these other Westernized Blacks saying that they don’t have any culture of their own, or that they don’t know what it means to be part of their own ethnic group. I suspect this is because these other Western Black ethnic groups never demonized having ethnic self-respect as being something negative.
This is something positive that African-Americans can learn from other Black ethnic groups.
Tagged as: low-negativity diet · think about your own circumstances
Popular Posts 
I agree with you. At the same time, you must understand that AA’s have just now started (about one generation ago) this questioning and downplaying what it is to be AA. Consider Maslow Need’s. AA’s typically have full stomach’s, literate, and have more luxuries that other blacks in the world have. This leads AA’s to more relection and questions. Simply put, if AA’s were still trying to ride the front of the bus and earning a dime an hour, I am sure we would not even be discussing this. However, we’ve become the rich, spoiled kid in class and ironically, THIS is why foreign blacks resent AA’s. While we think dragging our heads endear them but it just makes people see us as spoiled brats living with more than anyone on Earth but still complaining.
Hi Khadijah,
I really like the new site. Thank you for this post. As a US born Hatian-Jamaican, I have always found it strange that people (BP and non-BP) constantly lump all black people together under the AA label.
Also, I was thinking that perhaps some of those who are actually AA and do not loudly claim their AA heritage don’t feel they have to… AA’s have been here for centuries, way before many other non blk groups got here. When do they get to be American, just American? Is it still wrong to identify as Americans who are also descendants of African slaves in the US. Is “American” a term reserved only for WASPs? I’m not sure. I don’t hear WASPs calling themselves European American… They just say American. Is that the reason non-wasps must use labels such as Irish-American, African American, Italian American, etc? Just thinking as I type…
Thanks for your contributions.
Excellent post Khadija *applause*
I think that some african american people are still ignorant of their own culture.I think that outside of music dance and sports that many of them don’t think they have any culture.They don’t know of contributions to society that TODAYS african americans are making to american society.Because of their ignorance many of them may think they have nothing to be proud of.Then I think some of them realize they do have a valid culture but at times it has been attacked and disrespected by outsiders and now they don’t respect their culture and have very little pride in it.
I also think that many african americans are trying to claim any and every black person they can claim because they may believe their survival depends on it.Strength in numbers ideology.I guess being called a MINORITY for many years may cause that kind of mentality.I have seen black women with that mentality here on the net expressing to dbrbm who bash bw and black children that they needed black men and that black men need them.They are being dissed and rejected by these men and they still tell them they need them.This is similar IMO to many african americans in general trying to align themselves with other black and even non black people who don’t value or respect african americans as a whole.These people are not looking to form alliances and friendships with quality black people.They will lay claim to anything black even if it hates them and thinks lowly of them and wants to dissassociate itself from them.
This is one of the particular topics at your previous house I paid close attention to. (1) Because when I started grasping the importance of what you and the other commenters were frequently discussing, I knew that this was one of the essential areas being disussed that I wanted my children to be grounded in. (2) Because as you mentioned several times before, each of us are deserving of the same kind of healthy pride as every other person on this here planet.
Great post. I’m definately more cognizant of the boundaries of where a non-African-American Black person ends, and where I begin as an African-American. I think we’ve collectively lost (forefitted) so much in pride, resources, and power over the years going down this ‘no-identity’ rabbit hole. Think of the resources we could have kept among our own if we had sense enough to know who our own really were. I’m thinking of the automatic alliances and support (financial, political, emotional) that we’ve given to others thinking we were on one accord (lol), when those people don’t allow us to sit at their tables and take a share of their pie (often, we’ve given them our slices).
This Black History month will really be African American history month for me. It was initially proposed for our benefit, I think.
Rena,
You said, “At the same time, you must understand that AA’s have just now started (about one generation ago) this questioning and downplaying what it is to be AA. Consider Maslow Need’s. AA’s typically have full stomach’s, literate, and have more luxuries that other blacks in the world have. This leads AA’s to more relection and questions. Simply put, if AA’s were still trying to ride the front of the bus and earning a dime an hour, I am sure we would not even be discussing this.”
Respectfully, I disagree. I think for these sorts of conversations, we need to keep 2 concepts separate and distinct: ethnic identity and racial identity.
I believe that outside pressures of slavery and Jim Crow forced AAs to have more of a sense of (unwanted Black) racial identity. And as those outside-enforced barriers came down, then AAs became more and more deliberately “confused” about “Black.”
I believe that AAs have always had a NON-EXISTENT sense of ethnic identity. This was non-existent during slavery for obvious reasons. And later on, any sense of specifically AA ethnic identity was non-existent for ideological reasons. Remember, AA (mis)leaders have always been pushing AAs to worry about “coming together” with other people under “united” banners. “Pan-African” this. Global “Black Unity” that.
AA leaders have never encouraged AAs to focus on ourselves. They’ve also never encouraged AAs to have any sort of boundaries. Healthy people have boundaries.
___________________________________________
BB,
You said, “AA’s have been here for centuries, way before many other non blk groups got here. When do they get to be American, just American? Is it still wrong to identify as Americans who are also descendants of African slaves in the US. Is “American” a term reserved only for WASPs? I’m not sure. I don’t hear WASPs calling themselves European American… They just say American. Is that the reason non-wasps must use labels such as Irish-American, African American, Italian American, etc?”
The dynamics of “being American” are different for AAs than for White ethnics. White ethnics are NOT required to drop their ethnic identifications in order to “just be Americans.” They get to be both. At the same time. In some contexts, ethnic Whites identify themselves as simply “Americans.” I’ve never heard ethnic Whites refer to themselves (other than White ethnic politicians during campaigns) as “__________-American.”
In other contexts, ethnic Whites identify themselves by their ethnicity of origin. Period. What I hear them say when discussing “what they are” during casual conversations is “I’m Irish, Italian, Greek,” and so on. Not “Irish-American.” Just “Irish.”
I believe that AAs are similarly entitled to be both “Americans” (when convenient, just like White ethnics) AND also maintain our separate ethnic identity (just like White ethnics). All at the same time, just like White ethnics.
________________________________________
TruthP.,
Thank you for your kind words about the post; I truly appreciate it.
You said, “I also think that many african americans are trying to claim any and every black person they can claim because they may believe their survival depends on it.Strength in numbers ideology.I guess being called a MINORITY for many years may cause that kind of mentality.”
I agree. This ideological-based BLIND latching onto any and every other Black person on the planet was encouraged by our (mis)leaders. It’s one thing to have a mutually beneficial interaction based on reciprocity, but that’s not what our leaders have encouraged. I’ve mentioned this before at the previous blog, but I’ll repeat the quick version here: I felt extremely burned and exploited after the fact about my college participation in the anti-apartheid struggle. I was one of those people protesting and screaming “Free Nelson Mandela!”
Well, after Nelson got free, AAs never heard from him again. And, to my knowledge, there weren’t any joint business ventures between the newly-independent SA govt. and AA business people. In other words, AAs got pimped—which was our own fault. It’s our own fault because we haven’t learned how to ask the simple question: “What’s in it for ME (or “us” as AAs) to support these other Black folks’ projects?”
At this point, I only respond to people who are contributing something of value to me or mine. So, I won’t be screaming about Darfur or the Congo, or any of that stuff. Unless and until the people who want me to scream on their behalf offer me something of value in exchange for my support. NO MORE FREEBIES for anybody!
___________________________________________
DeStouet,
Yep. I talk about this because this is necessary for anybody who wants to successfully navigate their experiences in the outer world.
____________________________________________
Sharifa,
Thank you for your kind words about the post; I truly appreciate it.
You said, “I’m definately more cognizant of the boundaries of where a non-African-American Black person ends, and where I begin as an African-American. I think we’ve collectively lost (forefitted) so much in pride, resources, and power over the years going down this ‘no-identity’ rabbit hole. Think of the resources we could have kept among our own if we had sense enough to know who our own really were. I’m thinking of the automatic alliances and support (financial, political, emotional) that we’ve given to others thinking we were on one accord (lol), when those people don’t allow us to sit at their tables and take a share of their pie (often, we’ve given them our slices).”
I 100% co-sign your comment. In fact, you’ve efficiently summed up my point with this post. Healthy people have boundaries.
I’m sure that you’re aware of the following, but let me say this for others in the audience who aren’t aware of this:
I recall hearing a Malcolm X speech where he ridiculed the NAACP for not being able to “advance” a Black man to the head of that organization. If I remember correctly, the NAACP had WHITE presidents until the 1970s!
I would like the audience to consider this Wikipedia entry about one of the NAACP’s past presidents:
“Kivie Kaplan (1904 –– 1975) was a Jewish-American businessman and philanthropist from Boston, Massachusetts.
He served as president of the NAACP from 1966 to 1975. He, along with his wife Emily, fought in support of civil rights for all. He was one of the last in a long line of American Jews who held a leadership role in African American civil rights groups.”
We were foolish and naive enough to allow Whites to set policy for, and CONTROL, what were supposed to be “our” organizations. Meanwhile, how many ethnic White organizations (such as the Anti-Defamation League) have EVER had Black folks setting policy for them, or controlling these groups? NONE, to my knowledge. And there’s nothing wrong with that absence of Black folks RUNNING other people’s ethnic organizations. We’re the ones that are fools to allow outsiders to control our stuff.
And AAs have historically done the same foolish thing regarding Black outsiders (giving command and control of our stuff to them). This is not normal human behavior. NO country, no matter how close their alliance, or how long they’ve been allies, gives their nuclear codes to another (allied) country.
AAs have the unfortunate habit of giving other people access to our “nuclear codes”—we allow others to have COMMAND and CONTROL over our organizations. We allowed a handful of West Indians like Stokely Carmichael and others to run and set policy for many of OUR organizations during the 1960s. While we took orders from them, and served as footsoldiers.
Meanwhile, I can’t think of anything of theirs that foreign Blacks have EVER allowed AAs to control and set policy for. And I don’t blame them!
What I’m talking about here isn’t about foreign Blacks, it’s about AAs and OUR internal pathologies—what I’m talking about here is one of many internal problems. It’s not these other Black folks’ fault that AAs don’t have any sense of ethnic self-respect. That’s OUR problem. Other people are only doing what they’re supposed to do—take advantage of any and all opportunities. My point is that AAs need to learn to have and set healthy boundaries. And it’s impossible to do this when one has NO clear sense of self-identity.
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
I appreciate this post is for African-Americans but I hope you don’t mind me interjecting.
Ethnic identity isn’t always so cleanly cut for foreign Blacks. I am British born (and even this flags up a myriad of problems; there are the English, Scots, Welsh and Irish). My parents were born in Jamaica. The problem lies with what I feel my ethnic identity is. My only connection to Jamaica is the food I ate in the home, my mother’s stories of ‘back home’, my love of Jamaican patois and of course my upbringing. When I visit Jamaica, the Jamaicans call me “English girl”. When you hear that, you don’t feel like you can own Jamaica as your own. I know my heritage is Jamaica but it feels nebulous.
I feel as much English as I do Jamaican. Yet, there are many in this country (both Black and White) who would wish to deny me the right to call myself English. I think this is where the distinction lies between African-Americans and British born Blacks. No one could deny you your American identity. Black British is a term used to describe all Blacks regardless of where they originated. Black-Caribbean (or that peculiar term Afro-Caribbean) is also a catch-all label. The Caribbean has many countries and I can tell you we are all very different. Yet in Britain there is no attempt to understand this. No one goes around saying I am Jamaican-British, Granadian-British, St Lucian-British or whatever. Ideally I’d like to say I’m Black-Jamaican-English but enough about me.
I’m wondering whether ethnic identity can be fluid and perhaps this is why some individuals may say ‘I don’t know what it means to be black’.
Hi Khadija,
I’m so glad to see you’re back, better than ever. I’ve just finished reading “Sojourner’s Passport.” I couldn’t put it down. This book is a MASTERPIECE! Each piece of knowledge building upon the next into a master plan. Keep up the good and necessary work!
Mochachoc,
Oh no, I don’t mind you joining in the conversation at all. From what I can tell as an outsider, there are some parallels and some distinctions regarding this issue when it comes to non-AA Black folks.
There seem to be multiple things going on in terms of identity issues and various non-AA Black ethnic groups:
(1) The identity complications of being a racial minority in “ancestral, blood-line-based” European countries. From the beginning, the US has thought of itself as “a nation of immigrants.” With an ever-widening pool of what sort of people can constitute “the immigrants.” This is very different from European (and other) countries that are founded on shared ancestry and bloodlines.
You said, “I feel as much English as I do Jamaican. Yet, there are many in this country (both Black and White) who would wish to deny me the right to call myself English. I think this is where the distinction lies between African-Americans and British born Blacks.”
I suspect that this is because England, like most other countries, was founded upon shared ancestry and bloodlines. I get the feeling that even though the UK has let in lots of other people (I had NEVER seen so many hijab-wearing South Asian and Arab women gathered in one place until I passed through Heathrow Airport), the UK’s self-identity has NOT caught up with its multiracial modern reality. So, I would guess this is why folks don’t want to agree with you identifying as a “real” Englishwoman.
From what I can tell, Western Europe does an overall worse job than the US of integrating its racial minorities. For a variety of reasons, such as France’s official refusal to acknowledge or statistically count racial differences (an aggressive application of the French Republican ideals of “we’re all Frenchmen”—except that they’re not, and there’s no meaningful way to track the discrimination because officially “they’re all Frenchmen”).
And that’s Western Europe. Other areas of the world such as Eastern Europe and Asia don’t even pretend to want to assimilate racial minorities into their national projects. (For example, ethnic Koreans who’ve lived in Japan for over 50 years are still “Koreans.”) I also recall reading that Japan has a registry of names that can be officially considered “Japanese” names.
(2) The hostility and resentment that folks back home in “the old country” often feel toward emigrants. You said, “When I visit Jamaica, the Jamaicans call me “English girl”. When you hear that, you don’t feel like you can own Jamaica as your own. I know my heritage is Jamaica but it feels nebulous.”
I’ve heard similar tales from Korean-American, Greek-American, and other immigrant-heritage acquaintances. Frankly, it seems to me that a lot of folks that remained “back home” in the old countries are straight-up envious of the people who moved. There was a story the other day in the New York Times that talked about this in the context of the recent disaster in Haiti. It seems that now the Haitian government is somewhat more willing to accept help from the Haitian diaspora.
From the story:
“MIAMI —— Since leaving Haiti in 1974 and becoming a successful engineer here, Fritz Armand has often felt that his skills were unwelcome in his native country. His efforts to build a desalination facility and a portable power plant in Haiti failed in part, he says, because of antipathy toward expatriates. He has been called “diaspore,” an insulting term. Under Haitian law, when he became an American citizen, he automatically “renounced” his birthplace. For years, educated émigrés like Mr. Armand, from Miami to Montreal, have tried hard to play a more vital role in Haiti’s development, with little success.”
There’s something wrong with the link I tried to copy to this story. Here’s the title of the news story that folks can Google: “Scattered Émigrés Haiti Once Shunned Are Now a Lifeline”
You said, “I’m wondering whether ethnic identity can be fluid and perhaps this is why some individuals may say ‘I don’t know what it means to be black’.”
The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) taught that actions are judged by their motives. Based on our past history, I’m inclined to believe that most AAs are lying (to themselves as well as to others) when they claim to have such “fluid” notions of identity. I believe that the motives for saying these sorts of things are the SAME Black-hating motives that most AAs have always had. After all, AAs are the same people who:
1-Enforced “paper bag tests” among ourselves.
2-Had “quaint” little sayings among ourselves, such as:
“If you’re white, you’re alright.
If you’re yellow, you’re mellow.
If you’re brown, stick around.
If you’re black, GET BACK!”
____________________________
Celeste,
THANK YOU so much for your kind words and ongoing support; I truly appreciate it!
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Khadija,
What insight you have. I can really use this. THANK YOU.
Mochachoc,
You’re most welcome, and thanks for the compliment, but I don’t think I have all that much “insight.” I just watch people and try to pay attention to what’s going on. LOL!
Back to Heathrow—it was shocking to me to see so many South Asians. That sight let me know that the Brits have allowed the Indians/Pakistanis to overrun their country. I’ve never seen so many South Asians walking around before. I’ve also NEVER seen so many veiled women in public before. AND there were specially set-aside prayer rooms to accomodate all these native-garb-wearing South Asians and Arabs. I’ve never seen anything like that in US public places. Never.
The few times I’ve passed through Heathrow reminded me of my first impression of Vancouver—it seemed that every fourth person was Chinese there.
White folks in these various countries have made HUGE mistakes by letting so many of these NON-assimilating, non-White folks in.
(1) White Americans screwed up big time by letting so many Mexicans in. There are problems with other Latino categories—the Cuban population in Florida and their “NATIVE (SPANISH) SPEAKERS ONLY” job discrimination was discussed at length in the comment section to this post at the previous blog.
But the REAL threat to the US cultural equilibrium (ideas such as maintaining English as the national language) is coming from the Mexicans. The Cubans are a problem, but they’re concentrated in Florida. There are simply too many Mexicans spread across too many different US states.
Including in places that folks wouldn’t think of—such as what used to be AA population strongholds in the deep South. The Mexicans come to these small, rural Southern towns to take over all the jobs in the poultry factories, etc. [If I can find it, I'll post the link to a news story from over a year ago about how some of the native, working poor White and AA employees (the ones with common sense and a sense of self-preservation) were cheering when Immigration finally got around to raiding some of those factories.]
I’m also irritated that the AA (mis)leadership class was/is stupid enough to help the Mexicans take over here in the US. And help them do so while they’re riding AA civil rights martyrs’ coat tails. But that particular demographic battle has already been lost. Latinos now outnumber AAs. Soon, Asians will outnumber AAs in the US. As Dr. Claud Anderson warned AAs years ago, if we didn’t get anywhere are the largest minority population, what do we think happens when we slide down to #3, #4, and beyond? Answer: Nothing nice.
(2) The Canadians messed up by letting so many Chinese in (the Chinese only play at being cooperative citizens when they are numerically weak . . . on their way to taking over everywhere they go).
(3) And the Brits messed up by letting so many Pakistanis/Indians in. There will be trouble later on down the road in all 3 of these places because of these shifting demographics. There’s already trouble bubbling right now in these various places with these folks (I’m thinking of the 7/7 bombings in London a few years back). Oh well.
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
I remember Oprah’s embarrasing claims to be part Zulu. I was surprised when I saw the reaction of most AA’s, as alot of them were quite pleased and even saying that it is possible that they, too, had Zulu ancestry. Even after the tests were done and it was proven that she didn’t have an ounce of Zulu blood in her, Oprah still kept on with the charade, as if she couldn’t accept that this tribe that she so wanted to be a part of wasn’t a part of her. The saddest thing was the way the Zulu leaders actually humoured her. They knew from the very beginning that her claims of Zulu ancestry were bogus, and frankly, I was quite disgusted with the glee on their faces that this billionaire foreigner so desperately wanted to be a part of them. I guarantee that had it been any other random AA, they would have been laughed away right from the very beginning. And people should take note of how such a lack of ethnic pride is viewed by outsiders. I’ll elaborate in my reply to Truth P’s comments(in my next post).
_____________________________
Khadija said: “This baseline of ethnic self-respect is why I’ve also never heard a Nigerian (of any Nigerian ethnic group), Jamaican, Panamanian, or any other foreign-origin Black person use terminology like “pro-Hausa,” “pro-Jamaican,” or “pro-Panamanian.” The unquestioned assumption appears to be that they’re going to be for themselves, whoever that is.”
I never looked at it from this point of view. I hear people in African countries being very pro-their ethnicities, but rarely hear them say the same things when they are outside their countries. I remember being very surprised when I was in Nigeria, reading a glossy magazine, and there were pictures of a swanky party rception that had been held at some hotel in, if I remember correctly, either Texas or Atlanta. The names of all the people in the pictures were Yoruba. It’s only when I actually looked properly that it said that the hotel was hosting dignitaries from ….Olori-Ife Iyabo (I pretty much made up that name). But it was some village, in some one of the south-western states in Nigeria. Only very few Nigerians live in the village areas. Most of these people probably never even met themselves when they were in Nigeria, yet they put on this event so they could commune with themselves. At the time, I was baffled as I couldn’t understand what sort of solidarity one would have based solely on the fact that one or both of our parents have ancestors that came from the same village. I was only ever used to hearing about ethnic/tribal loyalty. Now that you’re talking about being for self, family, clan etc., I actually get it. Even amongst tribes, there is still a battle for resources between clans.
__________________________________________
Rena, with all due respect, you really can’t actually believe what you just wrote. I’ll adrress your comments one by one.
Rena said: “I agree with you. At the same time, you must understand that AA’s have just now started (about one generation ago) this questioning and downplaying what it is to be AA.”
This trying to be anything ‘other than black’ done by AA’s is nothing new. The same way that AA men’s poor treatment of AA women is nothing new. You just need to take a look at history, articles from yesteryears and see that this rush to be anything OTHER than AA was present decades ago. Notice how the labelling has changed over the years. AA’s didn’t always refer to themselves as AA’s. I’m wondering when another so-called AA leader will come up with another name that he thinks is more suited. The fact is that once there is that widespread pride in onc ethnicity, no one, even other insiders who belong to the same ethnicity, can take it away.
Rena said: “Consider Maslow Need’s. AA’s typically have full stomach’s, literate, and have more luxuries that other blacks in the world have.”
AA’s have ‘full stomachs?’ Really? You really think that in America, AA’s are satisfied (using Maslow’s hierarchy of needs), in terms of physiological needs, safety (definitely doesn’t apply to most AA women, ESPECIALLY if they are living in this so-called black community), love & belonging, esteem and self-actualisation. You’re really telling me that AA’s have had their ‘full’ in that respect. I beg to differ.
This brings me to another point. I’ve noticed that alot of AA’s (and western Blacks in general, of which I am pretty much one myself), in order to excuse the poor situation in which they find themselves, will point to some devastation some black folks are facing elsewhere (usually somewhere in Africa), to somehow say…”things ain’t THAT bad”. Which ‘luxuries’ do other blacks in other parts of the world not have that AA do have AND, by and large, take full advantage of? It’s easy to go on about access to a good education but whats the point if one does not take advantage of it? It’s easy for me to list all the advantages I have in Britain, and how great the business environment is, but if I can barely scratch enough toghether to eat, cannot afford to send my children to good schools, etc, how is it a luxury. Please, I’ve seen how most negroes in the UK live, and the same applies to most negroes in America. There is a reason there are so many negroes amongst us black folks, and let us western blacks not pretend that we, as a collective, are living in some sort of ‘luxury’. Luxury is not relative!
Rena said: “This leads AA’s to more relection and questions. Simply put, if AA’s were still trying to ride the front of the bus and earning a dime an hour, I am sure we would not even be discussing this. However, we’ve become the rich, spoiled kid in class and ironically, THIS is why foreign blacks resent AA’s. While we think dragging our heads endear them but it just makes people see us as spoiled brats living with more than anyone on Earth but still complaining.”
I disagree that foreign blacks resent AA’s. For what? Whether it is blacks in America, blacks in South American countries, blacks in Europe, and blacks in African countries, the majority aren’t doing particularly well. The same way that negroes are looking for handouts in America, the same is happening in the UK. These folks are from both the Carribean and Africa. The same way blacks in America are ‘dragging their heads’ is the same way these other folks are ‘dragging their heads’. Please don’t let them deceive you into thinking that they are a different kind of black that actually contributes to their community. They don’t.
Truth p. said: “I think that some african american people are still ignorant of their own culture.I think that outside of music dance and sports that many of them don’t think they have any culture.They don’t know of contributions to society that TODAYS african americans are making to american society.Because of their ignorance many of them may think they have nothing to be proud of.Then I think some of them realize they do have a valid culture but at times it has been attacked and disrespected by outsiders and now they don’t respect their culture and have very little pride in it.”
This is where I reply to Truth P’s comments. I am of the opinion that it is AA’s, and not outsiders, who have attacked and disrespected AA culture the most. No one can really disrespect your culture without you permitting it. What phenomenon has lead to the tearing down of what were once the positive traits of AA culture? The gang, prison/hiphop subculture, as Khadija said. Correct me if I’m mistaken, but it was AA’s who promoted this. It was AA’s who tried to bully other AA’s with their “acting white/acting black” accusations. If you continue to see it as something that others are doing to you, you will only ever continue to view yourself in the position of a victim. A victim always requires SOMEONE ELSE to come to their aid. So in this instance, how will outsiders (non AA’s), help to promote repsect for AA culture, both among AA’s and non-AA’s? This is a job that can only be done by AA’s.
When the “Acting Black” (AB) brigade turn up, you have to shut them down. I can tell you that the ABC types don’t go round telling other folks to excuse the marauding negroes who come into their communities. It is ONLY the AA’s that they tell this to.
They (the AB brigade) don’t go to Africans to tell them that nonsense. Part of their mindset is ethnic and racial self-hatred, so they try to impose their toxic viewpoints on other AA’s to ensure that they hate themselves as well.
(From an African-American male.)
I didn’t know you were a Black nationalist. That’s actually pretty cool. Haha, I sometimes lurk and out of respect I never comment… because well, sites like this aren’t meant for guys like me.
Well, I was never a Black nationalist. But I always identified with my roots in this country… and the country my family and I share in the Caribbean. I love my people so immensely. As I look back at our history here, we’ve always been very willing to accept Whites and have been eager to live in an equal society with or without them.
We always recognized the rights of everyone in this society, moreso than the highest courts within the nation.
We’ve (AA’s) always been the peaceful, accepting ones. But since we weren’t willing to assimilate like “we were supposed to do” anything of our own heritages and cultures were cast in a vicious light.
So, now you have situations where it’s becoming more socially dangerous to identify as “Black”. You can’t go to that job interview as a Black woman with a neat afro, or braids even… you have to perm your hair, get it straightened, or just flat out buy a wig.
It’s all a part of assimilation. That’s the paradox in America. You can be who you want to be and accomplish anything you set your mind to… just as long as you it “the American way”. You know what I mean?
-K. Michel of K. Michel Press
“(2) The hostility and resentment that folks back home in “the old country” often feel toward emigrants. You said, “When I visit Jamaica, the Jamaicans call me “English girl”. When you hear that, you don’t feel like you can own Jamaica as your own. I know my heritage is Jamaica but it feels nebulous.”
Overall I agree with your points Khalija. But the above statement is not necessarily one made out of any sense of resentment. I am from Jamaica myself and I spent most of my life at home (Jamaica). I’ve seen my Jamaican relatives address relatives who were born in the UK this way as well – and it was not done out of a sense of jealousy. In fact, often it was done out of affection for all the cousins who came to visit “yard” from “foreign.” After all, the cousins had different accents and mannerisms than us who grew up at home. It was merely an acknowledgment of the fact that they were “different” in the sense that they did not grow up at home. The aunts – who were born at home – had acquired British accents – but as soon as they “touched down” in Jamaica that evaporated immediately.
Even I get teased by my parents and brothers when I go home to visit, lol. They sometimes call me “tourist” (American). LOL. It’s all done out of love. There is no malice behind it.
JaliliMaster,
About the Oprah-Zulu caper: Lord have mercy. {shaking my head}
You said, “I never looked at it from this point of view. I hear people in African countries being very pro-their ethnicities, but rarely hear them say the same things when they are outside their countries.”
In the American context, what I’m talking about is how being explicity “pro-self” (whoever group that is) is okay for everybody else except AAs. Whenever AAs try to do like everybody else and go out of our way to consciously, deliberately, and explicitly support each other, then all sorts of outsiders rush in to tell us that we’re doing something wrong.
When AAs are pro-self (like everybody else on the planet starts from a baseline of being pro-self), then it’s called being “militant,”"nationalist,” and other negative terms. When 1960s AA activists started talking about “Black” economic power, “Black” cultural awareness, etc., then many of our White “allies” screamed that this was “reverse racism.” Including the Whites, particularly the Jews, who were running what AAs mistakenly believed were “our” organizations like the NAACP.
A similar thing often happens in terms of non-AA Black folks. I think of how many non-AA Black folks have been annoyed in the past by my comments referring to them as “cousins” to AAs and NOT our “brothers” and “sisters.” You see, many non-AA Blacks feel entitled to keep AAs at arms length (when they want to), but resent it when an AA (like me) puts them at arms’ length. I’ve had situations where non-AA BW activists have been dismayed by me referring to them as partial outsiders. As if AAs don’t have the right to draw the lines areound our own inner circles however we wish. The same as anybody else.
The bottom line is that you’re correct that this exploitation and disrespect only happens because AAs allow it. However, there are a lot of non-AA Black folks that DON’T want to see AAs wake up and start enforcing boundaries.
You said, “Now that you’re talking about being for self, family, clan etc., I actually get it. Even amongst tribes, there is still a battle for resources between clans.”
Yep, it seems to be a common pattern. My former personal trainer (who is Korean) would keep me amused with tales of various clan-based rivalries in terms of South Korean politics, businesses, etc.
You said, “Notice how the labelling has changed over the years. AA’s didn’t always refer to themselves as AA’s. I’m wondering when another so-called AA leader will come up with another name that he thinks is more suited.”
I laughed out loud at this comment. Speaking for myself, I actually prefer the AA name. To me, it shows that we’ve come full circle back to acknowledging a link to Africa (which is where we started during the early 1800s—for example, when we proudly named some of our institutions names like the African Methodist Episcopal church). Then we started running away from acknowledging any connection to Africa. It took almost 200 years, but we came back to acknowledging our African origins.
You said, “When the “Acting Black” (AB) brigade turn up, you have to shut them down.”
YES! YES! YES! I’m also very vocal in my disgust regarding the FOUL hip-hop garbage and all of its FOUL spin-offs (such as the so-called street/urban literature trash).
__________________________________
K. Michel,
You said, “I didn’t know you were a Black nationalist. That’s actually pretty cool.”
Yes, I believe that there are many good things within Black Nationalist thought (in addition to the extreme sexism and large doses of craziness). Historically, various Black Nationalists were the ONLY AA leaders talking about, and actually working to create, AA economic independence. If the bulk of AAs had listened to this part of Black Nationalist ideology, we would be much better off today. Instead of being a race of beggars who produce NOTHING, and have to get everything from others. Including the toilet tissue we use.
The non-nationalist majority of AAs’ leaders have consistently been trying to beg and aggressively panhandle their way to freedom. Instead of building AA businesses to create an independent economic base, they specialized in solely shaking down White institutions for jobs. Which was a necessary step; but it should have only been the first step, NOT a permanent strategy.
It took Rev. Jackson and others decades after Elijah Muhammad died to figure out that politics without an independent economic base is a sham. Meanwhile, during his prime, Elijah Muhammad’s NOI owned restaurants, farmland, trucking businesses to transport the produce from the farms to the grocery stores they owned in AA neighborhoods in various cities, etc.
You said, “We’ve (AA’s) always been the peaceful, accepting ones.”
I agree that AAs are peaceful and accepting…but ONLY in reference to nonblack others. Among ourselves, we readily beat, maim and kill each other over things like “you stepped on my foot” and “you looked at me funny.” [Incidentally, I question our true motives for being so "accepting" when it comes to others. It has the stench of really being about the fear of White authority coming crashing down on our heads if we were to "clown" with nonblack others. Yes, AA criminals prey on nonblack victims. But they don't do so as readily as they prey on other AAs. The legal system dishes out enhanced penalties for doing things to White victims.]
You said, “So, now you have situations where it’s becoming more socially dangerous to identify as “Black”. You can’t go to that job interview as a Black woman with a neat afro, or braids even… you have to perm your hair, get it straightened, or just flat out buy a wig.”
I agree in part; and disagree in part. I agree that it’s becoming more socially stigmatizing to identify as “Black.” However, I feel that the bulk of that pressure is coming from AAs! For an AA person to actually care about Black racial self-respect is becoming passe among AAs in the Age of Obama. Even though our previous internal “paper bag test” has escalated into a “manila folder and lighter test” (just look at the “music” videos on Black Exploitation Television), AAs want to pretend that everything’s okay. We’ve developed a totally dishonest script to justify our escalating colorism and flight from Blackness: “I’m just celebrating all of who I am, yadda, yadda, yadda,”.
I disagree with your comments about the (I believe non-existent) hair issue. I think that many of the fanatical natural hair evangelists are living in a time warp. From what I’ve seen, White people don’t care about BW’s hair. I know plenty of BW attorneys who work in a range of places (including as judges and in corporate firms) who have natural hair. They have NOT been harassed at work over their hair. The last time I heard or read of such things happening with any frequency was in the 1980s.
I believe that part of the reason why White people stopped caring about natural hair styles is that they figured out that there’s NOTHING political about natural hair at this point in time. In previous eras like the 1960s, wearing natural hair was an indication that the Black person wearing the natural style had liberation on their mind.
Not any more. And not for a VERY long time. Whites long ago (since the 1980s) learned that a Black person with natural hair can be AS or MORE mentally enslaved as any other Black person. Blacks with natural hair are no longer perceived as threats to White supremacy.
______________________________________
Robyn,
That’s between y’all. I’ll just say this: The immigrant-origin folks that have talked to me about being called “American” by their old-country relatives (when visiting the old-country) DIDN’T feel “loved” by those sorts of comments.
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
From what I’ve seen, White people don’t care about BW’s hair. I know plenty of BW attorneys who work in a range of places (including as judges and in corporate firms) who have natural hair.
Exactly, Khadija. And this is just why I sometimes urge bw to just ACCEPT their beautiful, gravity-defying hair, keep it healthy, get creative with it, and wear it proudly. In my experience and from what I’ve observed and read and from listening to other blacks, it’s MAINLY BLACK folks who don’t like the natural hair of other black people. Duh!
I’m referring here to AAs because most Africans I’ve encountered above 40 do accept their hair texture. The self hate of many Africans I’ve encountered expresses itself in a somewhat different form from the way it’s expressed among AAs. It’s not centered on hair texture. It’s focused on different things or it’s not quite as granular–YET or not among the African adults above 40 who I mostly mingle with. But just look at what Oprah obviously felt she had to do to prove that her hair was her own hair! Some BLACK people still don’t believe that Oprah’s hair is her hair, despite her allowing him to pull on it. PLEASE!!I’ve encountered people who don’t believe my hair is my hair, but I’m not about to let anybody pull on my hair to prove it’s mine!!!
I’ve worn my hair natural for most of my life and it’s BLACK people, who react STRONGLY negative to it or in strange ways. I get positive attention to my hair from non-blacks and some AA women have come up to me and expressed that they want hair “freedom” like mine (LOL!) or a low maintenance style, and ask me about mine. I’ve NEVER gotten a compliment from a bm about my hair. Not that I care. I’m just mentioning that because so many of them LOVE to complain about bw’s weaves and such and use that as yet another BOGUS reason to reject bw. SMH
I’m not saying that no bm has ever complimented a bw on her natural hair. I’ve actually caught black folks frowning at my hair and one bw came up to me at work a few years ago and said in a low voice “why don’t you go and get your hair permed?” LOL!
But what caused me to have an outer body experience a couple of times with other AAs was when they would drop these odd comments to try to make fun of my ex-husband’s (a Nigerian)tightly coiled hair and his complexion too.
We may as well just face it squarely. All lip service to the contrary, the vast majority of AAs do NOT LIKE being “black” and I rarely meet AAs who have pride in their blackness. We cannot build or develop anything with people who don’t like looking at themselves or each other. LOL! That’s a BASIC requirement. Can you imagine sitting at a job interview with a bunch of high-powered AA men and women and have them make major decisions about your worth to the company based on your hair texture and length, nose width, skin shade, the size of your lips, etc. Some of those factors WOULD and DO determine whether you get the job or the contract, if you’re an AA woman. Let’s not kid ourselves.
So you’re not going to find me living with and loving people who don’t like looking at me. My white husband obviously likes looking at me. He likes what he sees; he obviously likes what I represent and he TREATS me accordingly. My ex husband was the same. Anyone is welcome to say whatever they want about me, and I can easily sweep them out with the trash BECAUSE I am PROUD of my heritage, and I know that if they’re an AA person, they’re most likely NOT proud of their heritage. So I DEFINITELY do not want to be around other AAs or any black person from anywhere who is not proud of their heritage. I’ve made it a point to keep those folks away from my children. Some people might call me a self-hater, but I call it self-love, and it’s how I define myself that’s important to me. Actually, I don’t like being around anybody who is not proud of their heritage.
So I do NOT know what “black” means to the next typical AA person, but I can be reasonably certain that it doesn’t mean to them what it means to me. And when I’ve tested that, I’ve been right. Every single time. That’s the biggest problem. “BLACK” has different meanings to too many of us. You can really have problems with people when you’re using the same word, but defining it differently. It can cause constant infighting.
I know I sound like a broken record about this, but as long as AAs don’t have enough of us AAs who subscribe to the SAME basic precepts in a RUCOSS (reasonably uplifting culture of some sort), all of this dysfunction is going to continue and get worse. EVERY group that has made any progress always starts with the same cultural base. Then comes economic progress and then comes political progress. AAs have deviated from that and that’s why we’re always back at Square 1. The tried and true order of progress is culture, economics, politics. Look at every other group in the U.S. or world. That’s how they did it. Subscribing to a similar culture is the base.
So I no longer believe that there’s any such entity as US “Black-American” folks or US “African-American” folks. I look for Like-Minded folks who understand reciprocity and are willing to practice it with me. I give ALL people the same opportunity to practice reciprocity with me.
Yeah, those of us AAs who were shaped by the AA “old-school” culture wouldn’t have much difficulty reclaiming or resurrecting it, IF we wanted, but the vast majority of AAs of that sort are too spread out and others don’t have a clue about “old-school” unless it’s old-school music or they may laugh at “stories” about “old school” behavior.
So the bottom line is that since MOST AAs are not even thinking about any dangblasted RUCOSS–LOL!–and are and liking each other LESS by the day, those bw who plan to survive and thrive, IMO, must move as quickly as possible to ASSIMILATE in every way into mainstream society, just as other groups are doing. If not, you and your children are most likely going to drown while those black nationalists men and their current counterparts who keep calling bw “Queens” are going to be sitting off somewhere with their ww.
Evia,
I consider the situation with the “Black” and “African-American” labels to be similar with what’s happening with the “Muslim” label. There are a lot of folks within each of these labels who are doing things to bring DISGRACE to each of these labels. And these MUTANTS (be they “Acting Black” nuts, deranged terrorist “Muslims,” etc.) are aggressively claiming that their madness is what’s truly representative of each respective label.
Reactionary, deranged Muslims like to claim that normal and sane Muslims aren’t “authentic” or “real” Muslims. This is similar to the Acting Black mutants’ distorted claims about what “Black” means.
I believe that those of us who are sane, productive, healthy AA people need to make ourselves distinct from the Acting Black mutants. But not by surrending the original AA and Black labels to the mutants. We make ourselves distinct by creaing new, MODIFYING labels to add to the original label. This is why I identify myself as a “progressive” Muslim. I refuse to surrender the “Muslim” label to Bin Laden or other nuts. But I want it to be clear to others that I’m NOT for the various reactionary ideas (oppression of women, unjust violence, fanaticism) that the mutants have claimed represent “Muslims.”
Sane, healthy AAs are going to have to come up with a modifying label to make ourselves DISTINCT from the Acting Black mutants. For our own self-preservation—I DON’T want to be swept up in the stigma that the Acting Black nuts are creating and amplifying for themselves. For shorthand, I’ve been referring to myself as having “old-school” AA values, but that’s not sufficient as a distinguishing, modifying label.
Another problem is that too many sane AAs are afraid to make themselves DISTINCT from the Acting Black mutants. I’ve seen so many normal AAs act apologetic about not liking the hip-hop filth or its by-products. When they actually need to be OPEN about how they are NOT in favor of the hip-hop trash; in order to make themselves distinct from the Acting Black mutants who support horror shows like the “Goonette” video that was discussed a while ago at What About Our Daughters.
You said, “In my experience and from what I’ve observed and read and from listening to other blacks, it’s MAINLY BLACK folks who don’t like the natural hair of other black people. Duh!”
I agree. Like I said earlier, most of the anti-Black pressure I see nowadays is coming from AAs!
You said, “I’ve worn my hair natural for most of my life and it’s BLACK people, who react STRONGLY negative to it or in strange ways.”
I’ve had similar experiences about my Muslim name. It’s mostly AAs who react negatively or strangely to my name—a lot of slave-mentality AAs are frightened by other AAs having ALL non-Western names (first names AND surnames). Most nonblacks and Whites don’t have any reaction one way or the other to my name—they don’t give it a second thought. Only racist Whites are fixated on my name. [As one of Min. Farrakhan's ministers said in a lecture, "Whenever you give the slavemaster a name that doesn't belong to him, then he wants to know how you got that name!" This sums up the reactions of the racist Whites I've encountered.]
You said, “So you’re not going to find me living with and loving people who don’t like looking at me. . . Anyone is welcome to say whatever they want about me, and I can easily sweep them out with the trash BECAUSE I am PROUD of my heritage, and I know that if they’re an AA person, they’re most likely NOT proud of their heritage. So I DEFINITELY do not want to be around other AAs or any black person from anywhere who is not proud of their heritage. I’ve made it a point to keep those folks away from my children. Some people might call me a self-hater, but I call it self-love, and it’s how I define myself that’s important to me.”
I feel the same way. This is why I reject anti-Black slogans and talk whenever I hear it. Across the board. This includes rejecting it when it’s a Black-skinned person who’s saying that kind of mess.
I agree with the need to affiliate with LIKE-MINDED people, whoever these like-minded people are. I do so using the SAME priorities that every other ethnic group uses for themselves: self, family, clan, ethnic group, then outsiders. I start with myself, then with the handful of LIKE-MINDED relatives I have, then my LIKE-MINDED AA friends, then LIKE-MINDED AA women in general, then LIKE-MINDED whoever else (non-AA Blacks and nonblacks).
Now, if a “whoever else” person (non-AA Blacks and nonblacks) is doing something of VALUE for me, then they get moved higher up in my list of priorities based on the VALUE that they’re actively contributing to my life.
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Khadija
You said:
“Back to Heathrow—it was shocking to me to see so many South Asians. That sight let me know that the Brits have allowed the Indians/Pakistanis to overrun their country.”
7.9% of the total population in the UK are “non-white” (this terminology I find interesting because we have many white people who are from eastern Europe recently settled here). Of that 7.9 50% are Asian(Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi). 25% are Black (this includes all Blacks) the rest is made up of “mixed”, Chinese and “other ethnic groups”. It doesn’t take much to guess which of these groups has the most wealth and educational achievements.
Britain spends an inordinate amount of money to accommodate non English speakers. The tax payer pays for interpreters, government leaflets in several languages etc. Yet many Asians who do not speak English have been here most of their lives.
When I was a child I don’t recall ever seeing anyone dressed in as you say “native garb” apart from the sari. The landscape of our major cities have changed dramatically. It is the South-Asians who are having the most children. I honestly think the Black Caribbean population is in decline. Apart from the Irish we (along with the white British) have the smallest households. We are more likely to live alone and live in households which only contained pensioners. Behind white Irish men, Black Caribbean women had the highest rates of smoking @25% and of course we had the highest prevalence of obesity, single-parent households etc (only 19% Black Caribbean households contained a married couple).
So I’m afraid what has happened in America is mirrored somewhat in the Uk. I don’t blame the South-Asians one bit. They have seized all the opportunities Britain have allowed them. The Brits suffer from a liberal minded sense of fairness (so long as it doesn’t encroach on their back yard. Most middle-class white families are not sending their children to schools where the majority of the children do not speak English for example).
Data from the 2001 office for national statistics.
Mochachoc,
{sadly shaking my head at the UK statistics that you described}
You said, “So I’m afraid what has happened in America is mirrored somewhat in the UK.”
Unfortunately, yes. In both cases, the local Black population had a narrow window of opportunity to secure a stable, prosperous place within these countries, and failed to do so. Now, both groups are being displaced and replaced by other, more dynamic ethnic groups. All of which is a disgrace.
The battle at the “group” level has already been lost in both cases. Nevertheless, there are still plenty of opportunities for dynamic INDIVIDUALS and small groups of dynamic, like-minded people within both of our respective ethnic groups to secure stable, abundant lives for ourselves and legacies for our descendants! That’s what I’m working to support and promote with the book and this blog. Onward and forward!
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Honestly, I’m one of those people who if asked what “Black” means I can’t really tell you. I only really think (if I have to) in stark Black vs White terms living in the US and to a lesser degree when I’m in Europe. Growing up back home I went to an American International school w/ children from all over the world and had friends from all the “races”. Besides family and clan, it usually ethnicity, class, nationality.
Regarding the situations of “Blacks” around the world, I’ve said this for years (before I discovered these BWE sites). A family/community/group/nation/race, whatever will rise or fall depending on the behaviors and actions of the men. Women can only hold things together for so long. However, there is always that critical point, where once passed, the negative consequences can’t be corrected and will just have to play itself out till the bitter end.
Like Evia’s says, each group/culture needs a RUCOSS in order to survive and thrive. If not they’ll perish.
Concerning those who try to de-black themselves:
I have to say, I initially thought this was something one saw mainly among black latinos/hispanics (i.e. Dominicans and Puero Ricans especially), but after much observation, I have realised this so much among AAs. What makes it really sad and to be honest, quite pathetic is that with Black Latinos, a lot of them were ‘recently mixed’ but with AAs, I’ve witnessed some negroes who go about claiming the non-black ethnicity from 4,5,6 etc generations ago. Cases in point:
1. There was this series that was done which involved tracing the ancestry of AA celebrities. The vast majority of them claimed to have significant Native American ancestry. I remeber two in particular (Don Cheadle and Morgan Freeman). I think Don claimed that his grandmother was Native American, while Morgan said it was a great-grandparent. Due to this, Morgan Freeman is apparently a ‘member’ of one of the American Indian nations and frequently gives large sums of money. In this documentary, it was revealed that he didnt have much if any Native American ancestry. I could see the dissapointment on his face. I then thought to myself, so he was willing to give large sums of his hard earned money to something he was not even sure of just so he could claim ‘something other than black’? As for Don Cheadle, he got similar results. He began arguing that he was told she was Native American. I specifically remeber him saying “but she had long wavy hair, high cheekbones”. They showed a picture of this woman. She looked like a lighter complectioned Sojourner Truth. She just looked the way alot of black women from ‘those days’ looked. When I saw the woman’s picture, I just thought to myself, ‘ok this guy is ridiculous. That looks like a black woman’. You would only think she was Native American (NA) if you were told she was or if she was in a picture with other NAs. The only thing that I could not tell was her hair. I could not distinguish wether she had long natural hair or wether it was indeed ‘wavy hair’.
…..To be continued….
I am not saying that AAs should not claim any non-black ethnicity. My point is that it seems it is done more out of shame in trying to be ‘something other than black’.
2. The other example is of one young black male actor. He is AA and claims to be of Dominican and Irish descent. Seeing as the guy just looks like a black person as opposed to a biracial person, I just assumed he was possibly quarter white (i.e a white grandparent). It was only later that I found out by chance that he had no close white or Irish ancestor. The Irsish ancestry he is so dearly holding on to is from around slavery times, several generations ago!
—————————————————————
Concerning the change in the UK landscape:
To be honset, this is old news. The whites here have been very dumb in how they went about it. I know a Saudi woman who has been living here for more than 35 years of her life, bore and raised her children here, yet the only words she speaks/understands in English are: ‘Hello’, ‘What is your name?’, ‘My name is’. Those are literally the ONLY three English phrases/words this woman uderstands. Her two older daughters went to my A-level school in London. I just assumed they were recent immigrants, until they told me how long their mother had been living here. Bear in mind, this was not some lowly refugee type because it was a rather expensive private school so for their parents to be able to afford the tuition fees, they must have been doing quite well. So it was quite obvious that this woman just REFUSED to learn the language.
Also, sometimes one would encounter someone who can barely speak a word of English being employed and I’ll just be thinking to myself, “am I really in England”. In a bid to appear ‘open and welcoming’, the Brits made all sorts of silly and nonsensical accomodations for people coming in and now, the chickens have come home to roost. As for the South Asians, I’m not even going to ‘hate’ on them. They were smart and did their thing. It is the foolish black folks that need to be slapped. I up to this day do not know what black people here were waiting around for. What did they want to happen first before they got in and grabbed the opportunities available? Now, unfortunately, those opportunities have been lost.
Here white people (the working class ones) seem to hate on the South Asians much more than the blacks. You’ll hear things like “oh I cant stand thise p*k*s, I wish they would all ‘f’ off back to their countries…..but black people are cool though, I dont have problem with blacks, its just Asians I don’t like”. These stupid black people will be hearing this and feeling happy with themselves. They don’t realise what the real issue is. The whites here do no view blacks as a threat. They view blacks as still being at the bottom of the ecocomic ladder. As for the south Asians, they see so many of them as bankers, doctors etc and so feel threatened by it. Yet black folks are too stupid to wake up and realise this.
NijaG,
Well, it’s simply a reflection of your circumstances being different from those of AAs. [And so there's no confusion about my comments, that's perfectly okay---not that my approval is needed. {chuckling}]
______________________________
Foxycleopatra,
It IS pathetic. And despite AAs’ new-fangled cover stories of “I’m just celebrating all of who I am…yadda, yadda, yadda”, our true motives are TRANSPARENT to all.
I mentioned this bizarre incident years ago on another blog—an AA male coworker once got angry with me and another AA woman colleague because we weren’t going out of our way to claim White ancestry by playing the “I’m 1/57th Irish” game! This happened when the topic came up in a casual conversation among the 3 of us. The man was seriously annoyed with us behind that (“Y’all know you got some White blood!”).
At first, we thought he was joking. But after a few minutes we realized that he was actually annoyed. It took us awhile to figure out what the probable source of his irritation was about that. We ultimately concluded that he was angry because our refusal to play the “1/28th Irish” game made it more difficult for him to seriously talk that “I’m part Irish” stuff in our presence (which is what he wanted to do). He’s darker than both of us.
As far as the Native Americans that so many AAs want to claim, it’s a mixed bag where NOBODY involved has clean hands historically. On the one hand, some Native American nations held AAs in slavery. On the other hand, AA soldiers helped White Americans STEAL from and KILL Native Americans. [Specifically the "Buffalo Soldiers" that AAs love to celebrate.]
And those AAs who feel warm, fuzzy and misty-eyed when contemplating their (distant) Native American heritage need to keep in mind the modern example of the Cherokee Freedmen Controversy. From Wikipedia:
“The Cherokee Freedmen Controversy is an ongoing political and tribal dispute between the administration of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and descendants of the Cherokee Freedmen related to their tribal membership. After the American Civil War, slaves held by Cherokee were freed, and the Cherokee Freedmen were made citizens of the tribe in accordance with an act of the Cherokee National Council in 1863. A treaty made with the United States government in 1866 further cemented the freedmen’s place as Cherokee citizens, giving them and their descendants federally protected rights to citizenship. The Freedmen were Cherokee Nation citizens until the early 1980s. The Cherokee Nation stripped them of voting rights and citizenship, a situation that lasted for more than two decades.
In March 2006, the Cherokee Nation’s Supreme Court ruled that the descendants of the Cherokee Freedmen were unjustly kept for over 20 years from enrolling as citizens. They were allowed to register and to become enrolled citizens of the Cherokee Nation. Principal Chief Chad “Corntassel” Smith called for an emergency election to amend the constitution. A petition for a vote to remove the Freedmen descendants was circulated and Chief Smith held an emergency election. [1] As a result of the amendment’s approval in a referendum in which they could not vote, the Freedmen descendants were removed from the Cherokee Nation tribal rolls. They have continued to press for their treaty rights and recognition as tribal members.[2]“
As far as the South Asians in the UK, I can see why some folks are starting to refer to London as “Londonistan”!
You said, “As for the South Asians, I’m not even going to ‘hate’ on them. They were smart and did their thing. It is the foolish black folks that need to be slapped.”
I agree. And as a start, I would really like to slap most members of the AA (mis)leadership guild. LOL!
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
I am not saying that AAs should not claim any non-black ethnicity. My point is that it seems it is done more out of shame in trying to be ’something other than black’.
I mentioned this bizarre incident years ago on another blog—an AA male coworker once got angry with me and another AA woman colleague because we weren’t going out of our way to claim White ancestry by playing the “I’m 1/57th Irish” game! This happened when the topic came up in a casual conversation among the 3 of us. The man was seriously annoyed with us behind that (“Y’all know you got some White blood!”).
*****************************************************************
Okay, I don’t want to seem like I’m rambling, but I’m trying puzzle this out in my brain.
It’s so strange how certain similar circumstances produce different reactions. In Nigeria (from the Slave Trade era up until pre-Independence), especially in the coastal areas, many of the locals were interacting with the Whites (first Portuguese, then British) and if you go to some of these places today and look at the present day descendants, you can tell there were racial mixing going on.
However, it’s hard to find anyone who’ll admit willingly that their family line may have some white blood in them, even with pictures of relatives and even RL relatives (older like 60-70′s) whom you’d be hard pressed not to give the “side eyes” as they’re speaking and starring at your from blue or green eyes.
It just dawned on me, thinking of Halima’s Pan-African post and a few discussions I’ve had with my Dad. Before, the movements and when black African men started going to school abroad and being more exposed to white women and some marrying them, it was the black women in these various African countries that had more freedom to interact with the WM which of course led having “mixed” babies. Just like in the States, African men couldn’t interact w/WW w/o major negative consequences.
So, double standards being what they are, these women were more looked at negatively while as we’ve touched this topic before, their children, especially, the females where considered prizes by the men around them. However, the pink elephant in the room is usually overlooked as to the fact of the mixed race of woman or man is ignored.
Then comes the Pan-African and Independence movement and some of these African leaders and the upper-class men who school abroad are now the ones marrying white women and having mixed kids.
Of course, now since it has been the men (those who married inter-racially) who have had majority of the mixed kids in the last the last (1-2 generations) 40-50 years the negativity of having white blood has been reduced. Anything longer that these time periods is treated like the skeleton in the closet in most families.
The whole thing reminds of a point that Khadija you make about the labels of Biracial, Mixed, etc. You said (correct me if I’m wrong) something to the fact that here in the US, when it’s a BW who has a Biracial child, then it was considered Black regardless. However, once it was WW who started have Biracial kids, then that’s when this who label of Biracial started getting bigger momentum.
I apologise in advance for digressing a bit here. I get what you are saying, but it is not completely accurate. This idea that any light-skinned, non-dark-skinned or non-brown-eyed black person must have some significant non-African ancestry is a very commonly-held misconception. There are tribes all over Africa where the skin-shade varies widely so to say that any black person with light skin or light eyes has non-black ancestry is flawed. The main way to actually know is through hair texture because it is much less varied across different tribes and ethinicities, but even as at that, you can still go to some villages in Western Africa in the ‘middle of nowhere’ and see kids with what some might call ‘Arab hair’. It is most likely not from having non-black ancestry but just some genetic mutations.
For example, the first time I saw a picture of my paternal grandfather, I felt it looked odd, because to be honest, he looked white. He had blue-ish looking eyes, medium brown hair and it was a bit straight (think of a tanned hugh grant and you will get my drift). It was when I began asking questions that I was told he was a ‘mulatto’ (in Nigeria, we used to call them half-caste….my goodness! how un-pc). Anyway, the picture was a painting but when I saw an actual black and white photograph, I could see that he was very pale-skinned. Apparently, his father was part Glaswegian (Scottish) and part English. Anyway, the reason I am telling this story is this: This would therefore make my dad ’1/4 white’, yet he is darker than my mom who is 100% African and also darker than me, who technically has a less poportion of European genes than him. In fact, after my older brother, my dad is the second darkest person in my family, while my mother who for the sake of this conversation, is the only ‘genetically 100% black’ person in my family, is the second lightest person in my family. She is not actually light skinned, but in comparison to my dad, is lighter than him. My mother has light-medium brown eyes while my dad has dark brown eyes. If you saw him, you could not differentiate him from the average black man.
My dad’s older brother is very dark. I mean the guy is ‘black’. When he was young, some pple in the village they were born in, used to make jokes that he was not really my grandpas biological son. If you look at them (my uncle and grandpa), you would know, they were related but based solely on how dark my uncle is, people questioned wether or not he was really the son of ‘that mulatto man’.
Secondly, using Nigeria as an example, there are tribes in which the occurence of lighter skinned people is more common than in other parts. For example, tribes found in the eastern part of the country (Igbos, Efik, Calabar, Ibibio) are known to have a more frequent occurence of light skinned people than some other tribes. This is why when I see AAs who based SOLELY on the lighter colour of their skin, start claiming to have European ancestry without actually knowing wether or not they actually have a white ancestor, I just shake my head. Some pple want to say that it is because of racial mixing that this occurred. It is not true.
1. These more frequent occurneces of light-skin, especially among the Igbos, have been documented for centuries…even befor the Europeans went there. Even when whites got there, a lot of historical accounts indicate that the whites also made such observations.
2. In terms of mixing with Europeans, the regions this was most common was people from present day Lagos state (with the Portugese) and present day Rivers state (with the English). That is why people from these states in Nigeria are more likely than anyone else to have English surnames (for Lagosians and Rivers ppl) and Portugese/Brazilian names (for Lagosians). Yet people from these states are generally not lighter than the average Nigerian or black person. So if all that mixing could not significantly change their general skin shade, how would it alter that of others when the mixing was to a much lesser extent? Also, why would this change in skin shade due to racial mixing with Europeans only affect those in eastern regions yet not in other regions, even though the contact was practiaclly the same?
Lastly, as for this obsession black people all over the world seem to have with light skin, in West and West Central Africa, this ‘prizing/elevation’ of light skin began mainly after slavery began. When the Europeans came, light skin was just seen mainly as variation of skin shade. The same way, dark skin, medium skin etc. It was not seen as ‘different’. When the Europeans came, foolish African negro males were not able to bed ww because they were the wm’s woman. So when wm began settling and marrying African women, these negroes began prizing the resultant daughters of such unions. It was not actually the ‘white/light skin’ they wanted, but the idea of being with the wm’s ‘woman’. Seeing as they could not get their ww wives, they went for their mulatto daughters. That was what it was initially about. People think such nonsense only happened in America, but they are wrong. It was from here that the light skin obsession began…atleast in Western and West Central parts of Africa. If you look at some ATRs (African Traditional Religions), you will be able to see how such thinking penetrated into these religions. For example If you look at Oshun, Ori, Oha (all goddesses of water but for different ethnicities….also known as ‘mami-wata), pre 1400-1500s, she was always depicted as a beautiful chocolate skinned, curvy woman with long afro hair. From around the 1700s-onwards, folklore began to describe her as a ‘beautiful light-skin woman with unusually long hair who comes out of the river’. If you ask some of your older realtives, they will say that she has always been assumed to be light-skinned but yet in all the earlier drawings of her, she was drawn with darker skin. Also, for some reason, the light skinned version is usually accompanied with the ‘unusually long hair’ description and sometimes, they would add ‘with fine silky/wavy hair’. Why is the long hair on the light skinned depiction reagrded as different to the same long hair on the darker skinned description? A good example of one of the darker descriptions would be the profile picture used by the commenter ‘Oshun’ but the actual ‘classic’ one can be found on wikipedia (i think).
FoxyCleopatra,
I don’t think there is any disagreement btw what you and I are saying. I’m Igbo, lived in Lagos, so I know light-skin doesn’t usually equate to having white blood, especially in Africa.
My premise was how power and gender dynamics affects the way mixed race progeny/ancestry are viewed depending on the male group in power.
Your last paragraph basically covered it. Before Civil Rights and Post-Colonization. BM couldn’t get with WW w/o severe penalties. Human nature being what it is, “We want what we can’t have, especially if it is specifically forbidden to us.”
Of course, men in the power groups have access to all women, so WM consorted with some of the native women around them. This of course breeds a certain kind of resentment with the native men and usually there a more negative social consequences that the woman faces in her community.
However, if they can’t get the WM’s women, they’ll make do with the next best thing their mixed BiRacial female children. Male psychology, gotta love it.
I’m sure we can all agree that until BM had more access to White women and started producing their own BiRacial male and female children, they were almost always much more HOSTILE and AGGRESSIVE towards the WM’s BiRacial male children.
NijaG,
Hmmm…what you’ve mentioned about Nigeria is interesting. In my view, there are some parallels and some distinctions between the various reactions both there and here in the US.
Speaking from my own perspective, I don’t think having White ancestry has ever been perceived as much of a “negative” among AAs. Folks were angry about how much it was acquired, but not angry about the result—after all, the appearance of White ancestry is a prized possession among most AAs.
Despite that overall situation (most AAs treasuring the appearance of White ancestry), throughout all eras there have always been individual AAs who had racial self-respect. There have always been those AA folks who were just not very excited about lighter or Whiter features, etc. There have always been a minority of AAs who were “comfortable in their own skins”—whatever their appearance.
There are those AA families who have worked their fingers to the bone over the years to “work the Black out” of their bloodlines by only marrying lighter and Whiter folks. And then there are those people like my father’s family who were not excited about having or marrying into closer-to-White features, and who never bought into the general AA colorism (while being basically apolitical—NONE of my relatives were ever into “Blacker than thou” ideology of any sort). Again, there are individual reactions to situations. And there will always be at least a handful of individuals who have self-respect.
Yep, that whole “biracial” designation was promoted by (racist) WW with Black children who didn’t want their children to be indentified or classified as “Black.” With the eager cooperation of their BM husbands who ALSO wanted their children to be anything but Black. For a current example of this type of BM, read this bit of slave-mentality madness from a BM Muslim blogger (who is curiously held in respect within AA Sunni Muslim blog circles—which shows you just how SICK and slave-minded AA Sunni Muslims are—but, I digress…).
And now confused, biracial-worshipping BW have run with that “biracial” idea. The general pattern used to be for folks in my age group (40s) and older that most “mixed” people with Black mothers were normal, non-racist Black folks who happened to have a nonblack father. Before now, Black mothers tended to raise half-Black folks who were comfortable and okay with being Black.
The half-Black, “don’t you dare call me Black,” ANTI-Black racists (like Tigger Woods) were almost always the result of BM/nonblack mother combinations. The offspring of BM/nonblack women were the ones screaming “don’t you dare call me Black” (such as Jennifer Beals, Tigger Woods, etc.). But now that more confused BW have bought into that “biracial” notion, BW have joined BM in raising half-Black, ANTI-Black racists.
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Khadija,
I wanted to get some clarification on what I think your stance is on the whole BiRacial “Mixed Race” label issue (specifically Blacks with White/non-Black groups) before I get into my own opinion.
I definitely with you on the ridiculousness of some of these Black people trying to trace some minuscule fraction of non-Black (White, Native American) ancestry in order to make themselves be less “Black”.
I’m also with you on the “don’t you dare call me Black,” Anti-Black types. Since these types are usually doing this as a way to reject/minimize their blackness.
However, I think this where I’m needing some clarification. Is it that you don’t think “Black” Biracials should label themselves that way and just label themselves as Black. How does this play out with those who have less black blood for lack of a better term?
Like I said, just trying to get a better understanding, before I expand of my own views. My views have a lot to do with group/class power and gender dynamics.
Evia said:”I know I sound like a broken record about this, but as long as AAs don’t have enough of us AAs who subscribe to the SAME basic precepts in a RUCOSS (reasonably uplifting culture of some sort), all of this dysfunction is going to continue and get worse. EVERY group that has made any progress always starts with the same cultural base. Then comes economic progress and then comes political progress. AAs have deviated from that and that’s why we’re always back at Square 1. The tried and true order of progress is culture, economics, politics. Look at every other group in the U.S. or world. That’s how they did it. Subscribing to a similar culture is the base.”
I agree. That is why AA’s, I’m sorry to say, are never going to achieve REAL political power in the US. Obama does not count. He was pretty much funded and bankrolled by wealthy whites (He has been around for quite a while, long before his face got on the t.v. Older, wealthy, white democratic women were very eager to financially support his political ascent before he ever ran for office in Chicago). I am of the opinion that most AA ‘mis’-leaders are not really for the upward progress of AA’s “as a collective”. They, for the most part, were only ever interested in political power and office. Note that they assumed that they would be the ‘black’ face to take said political post. Economic power had alwyas preceeded political power. That’s why I do not have high hopes for the Latino’s in the US. They are a low-status group, and until they gain economic strength, they will remain so. They did, however, learn from some of the mistakes AA’s made, and are now replacing working class black and whites as the labour force. For the sake of majority of the working class, I hope they remain illegal!
Evia said: “So I no longer believe that there’s any such entity as US “Black-American” folks or US “African-American” folks. I look for Like-Minded folks who understand reciprocity and are willing to practice it with me. I give ALL people the same opportunity to practice reciprocity with me.”
I get your point, but I have to say I somewhat disagree. Anything that is good for the AA collective, or more specifically for AA women, will be good for any individual AA woman. I’ll be honest, I don’t want to offend any AA’s on this board, but I’ll just come right out and say it…….I’m very indifferent to AA men. And for some months about a year back, I actually gave up on AA women as my view was that seeing as the majority seemed to support the AA men who were, quite glaringly obviously against them, I felt it wasn’t going to be me who was going to bleed and sweat for women who weren’t ready to do it for themselves. That is how I went from a frequent visitor to BWE blogs, to a lurker, then to someone who just stopped coming. So part of the reason I have to disagree with you Evia is that I really think it is necessary for there to be some kind of positive AA ‘group’. There are many kids who would grow up and without that sense of community, it would be much harder for them to have their own sense of ethnic pride. I agree that like-minded people seek each other out, but sometimes, there are ceratin times where you might be able to get some type of support from, say, a fellow black woman that someone else might not provide, or more specifically from an AA woman.
NijaG said: “It’s so strange how certain similar circumstances produce different reactions. In Nigeria (from the Slave Trade era up until pre-Independence), especially in the coastal areas, many of the locals were interacting with the Whites (first Portuguese, then British) and if you go to some of these places today and look at the present day descendants, you can tell there were racial mixing going on.
However, it’s hard to find anyone who’ll admit willingly that their family line may have some white blood in them, even with pictures of relatives and even RL relatives (older like 60-70’s) whom you’d be hard pressed not to give the “side eyes” as they’re speaking and starring at your from blue or green eyes.”
I agree. When I moved to Nigeria, I had to continually ‘convince’ everyone that I wasn’t ‘foreign’. My paternal granddad was British, so I have an English surname. I remember that I didn’t want anyone to know that he was white. It wasn’t out of any type of shame, but I just felt it was unnecessary info that would make people think I was less ‘black’ than them. However, this cancer of self-hatred is slowly seeping into many parts of the continent. I’ve had quite a few Africans ‘compliment’ me on my ‘western’ nose and my eyes. I never knew my nose was different till others said it. This past summer, I jokingly asked my mother whether she too had white ancestry because of the colour of her eyes, the woman was flabbergasted that I’d ask such nonsense. I didn’t understand why she was so disgusted with the thought of having non-black ancestry, but I learnt my lesson…stop asking stupid questions.
However, there is a Nigerian negro musician who made a music video, and describing the girl, who was the object of his affections, said she was slim, pretty, light-skinned……I was like “what”? The difference between there and the west is that though colourism is no where near as rife, there is no political correctness over it so people are quite free to show their toxic stupidity.
Also, the same hypocrisy that one sees here is also there. But here is the difference. AA men are more than happy to put their mixed race sons high up, as well as the mixed race daughters of black women. However, I’ve heard AA men refer to mixed race black men who have black mothers as…the white man’s son. In Nigeria, these men would put lighter women on screen, but even the men who had mixed race sons with non-black women see these offspring of theirs as a threat. In Africa, you are “from where your father is from”. I never questioned the origin of this practice, but seeing as it was thought up by men, I’m not surprised. They want to be able to have relationships with any woman, but at the same time, want to discourage the women in their community from doing the same thing, with the threat that their child will not be accepted.
Some years ago, two Nigerian women were fired from their role as ambassadors to other countries because they had both ended up marrying men (non-black) from those countries (apparently, there is a law in Nigeria that as an ambassador, you are not allowed to marry ‘out’). It was pointed out that there were several Nigerian men who had been ambassadors to other nations and met women from these countries and married them, but they had never been sacked, not even once. I remember that there was a Nigerian man who was living abroad, that replied: “Well, two wrongs don’t make a right!” These men who had drafted this law, decided to only apply it to women.
There are these men whose father is an Englishman. They are Guy Murray-Bruce, Ben, and I can’t remember the third ones name. They are rather wealthy and own various media companies in Nigeria. I’ve heard several Nigerian men refer to them as ‘Oyinbo’ (i.e. white). They usually do it in a resentful manner. Yet, you’ll never hear these men refer to a black guys mixed race son as oyinbo. They don’t mind benefitting from these men’s wealth, but resent the fact that these men are successful because as far as they are concerned, they are a white man’s children. The worst of these countries is Ghana. They way they practically worship those of mixed race makes want to throw up. They tried doing the same thing in Nigeria, but it just didn’t catch on. Ghana’s top two actresses are both mixed race. They had appeared in some Nigerian films. So when Ghana’s most popular male actor, Van Vickers, whose father is Dutch, was cast in a Nollywood film, quite a few people were surprised to see the negative reaction to having this “white man’s child” on the screen. Even in Cameroun, men, grown…….adult…….’men’ took to the streets to protest that there were too many foreign men coming into the country and marrying ‘their’ women. This is despite the fact that interracial marriages are not uncommon amongst Cameroonian men.
AA women need to learn from others. Look at what happened in the UK and learn. Look at what I happening in other parts of the world and learn. I’ve heard AA women make all sorts of statements, even though they are not in line with what has occurred elsewhere. People, in this case, AA men, will not stop in their quest to keep you from ‘doing you’.
Khadija said: “And now confused, biracial-worshipping BW have run with that “biracial” idea. The general pattern used to be for folks in my age group (40s) and older that most “mixed” people with Black mothers were normal, non-racist Black folks who happened to have a nonblack father. Before now, Black mothers tended to raise half-Black folks who were comfortable and okay with being Black.
The half-Black, “don’t you dare call me Black,” ANTI-Black racists (like Tigger Woods) were almost always the result of BM/nonblack mother combinations. The offspring of BM/nonblack women were the ones screaming “don’t you dare call me Black” (such as Jennifer Beals, Tigger Woods, etc.). But now that more confused BW have bought into that “biracial” notion, BW have joined BM in raising half-Black, ANTI-Black racists.”
I’m glad you said this because I’ve noticed that among several BW-IR bloggers, they don’t want to admit it. We all need to stop pretending that these “don’t you dare call me black” negro wannabes are only born of black men. The time were the majority of BW who were having mixed children were raising them with real common sense has long past. What the majority of them do now is say that it is their black parent that is an exception among black people. I’ve noticed that a lot of these black women now want the rest of us to ignore this because they know that they themselves are fill with that self-loathing, and will pass it on to their kids.
JaliliMaster,
I think it’s just part of human nature for males and females of the same group to be jealousy if they perceive that one gender is showing preference for the opposite gender of a different group. Throw in power/race/class dynamics and you’ve got an explosive mix.
I can’t speak about other West African countries, but I’ve have been noticing some positive trends in Nigeria.
* I’ve noticed less “skin colorism” issues.
* The fact that BiRacial girls don’t get that automatic plus/advantage amongst guys as much as they use to when I was younger.
* Also, amongst the Nigerians in the 30 and under group (especially in America), the 1st born Gen’s or those like myself who migrated at a young age, there is less trying to minimize their Nigerian/African heritage by trying blend in more with AA or Caribbean groups.
I attribute these positives to the growing Nigerian Music, Movie, and Fashion Industries. It basically making us see ourselves in a more positive light.
This is very true. If I am to be honest, I think a significant part of what has reduced the skin colouris issue in Nigeria at least was to do with the Murray-Bruce brothers. The Miss Nigeria pageant was notorious for only ever crowning light skinned girls. What made it very obviuos was that a lot of the times, the girls were just ptetty girls as opposed to ‘beauty queens’ if you get my drift. When the Murray-Bruce brothers (the mixed race guys Jalilimaster mentioned above) used their Silverbird productions company to start the rival Most Beautiful Girl in Nigeria (MBGN) pagent, things changed. This was also based on the fact that it was them and not Miss Nigeria organisers who secured the deal to send their contestants to Miss World, Miss Universe and Miss Commonwealth. In MBGN, several darker skinned girls have won. In fact, the skin shade of the winners has been so diverse that one has to honestly say that they very much represent the variety of ‘black beauty’. It is surprising that it was these ‘sons of a white man’ who were very much light skinned themselves that were able to recognise the diverse beauty in black women as opposed to a lot of these other negroes who would insult them, and yet run after their sisters. It is no surprise that their mother is black.
I think another reason would be that in the past decade or so, the actresses in Nollywood have become much more diverse as opposed to the usual nonsense u would see say 20 odd years ago.
If you look at American media, we have began seeing a much wider represntation of black women in terms of skin shade. One funny thing though is that it seems to be more in ‘mainstream’ (i.e. white) media than in black media. For example, the actresses Kerry Washington, Anika Noni Rose to name a few, actually seem to be getting better opportunities from non-black media. Even Sanaa Lathan who is light skinned but identifiably black, also seems to be getting better opportunities from non-black media. Now take a look at black media, whether it be movies or music, majority of the women in any ‘positive’ or loved-by-another role, is going to be, not just light skinned, but ‘mixed-looking’. If you look at the GUTTER MUSIC that is hip-hop (I know some of you like it but as far as I’m concerned, it belongs in the gutter), the love interest is almost always mixed. The only time the woman is dark skinned, is when it is time to shake booty and dance in a depraved manner!
Concerning your third point about More 1st generationers in US being more willing to identify with their heritage, I have noticed this too. I have heard a lot of people (girls especially) saying they hated it when they were young because they, unlike their AA friends, could never lie about being ‘part Cherokee’ because everyone knew they were ‘straight outta Africa’! lol. On the flip side though, I’ve heard AAs complain about the attitudes of some Africans they have met and how some of them ‘look down’ on AAs, if only some AAs knew the kind of self-hating negro nonsense one hears among some of these Africans, they would know that they are not missing anything. To be honest, I dont see anything wrong with a 1st gen trying to ‘blend in’ with AAs or Caribbeans as long as it is not out of self hate or ethnic shame. If that is what they identify with more (afterall, if the person has never been to their home country, i doubt they would identify with it as much).
I too am okay with being Black…just not okay with not knowing enough of my family history and Black history as a whole. Both can be remedied as I strive to–pardon the cliche–celebrate our history daily.
What makes my head hurt is the countless others who are trying to “opt out” of being black (as illustrated in the link in your last comment). It’s extreme othering from within…and the more I think about it, the more disgusted I become. I’m understanding this a little better now.
NijaG,
You said, “I wanted to get some clarification on what I think your stance is on the whole BiRacial “Mixed Race” label issue (specifically Blacks with White/non-Black groups) before I get into my own opinion.
…However, I think this where I’m needing some clarification. Is it that you don’t think “Black” Biracials should label themselves that way and just label themselves as Black. How does this play out with those who have less black blood for lack of a better term?
I apologize for the long-windedness of my reply. When discussing nuances, I feel that it’s best to be as thorough as possible (to help prevent misunderstanding).
Here’s my “deal” with all of these various issues: ALL I really care about is whether or not any particular development is giving resources TO me and my people, or taking resources AWAY from me and my people. Period. That is my only point of concern with all of these sorts of issues. I only want to support things that cause more resources to flow to MY:
self;
family;
clan;
ethnic group.
I’m only reacting like most other people on this planet (react in this regard)! LOL! Other people generally prioritize in this manner. It only seems “strange” because most AAs don’t think like this. We have a long tradition of supporting people who don’t support us; in fact, we support people who hate us. [And we're silly enough to think that supporting people who hate us somehow makes us morally superior. No, we're just poorer and worse off as a collective. Because all of our resource are flying out, with nothing coming back in.]
[Now, I'll support things that help folks outside the above categories IF: that particular "outsider" is doing something of value for me, my family, my clan, and/or my ethnic group; AND supporting this particular thing for this particular outsider does not hinder my, my family's my clan's, or my ethnic group's interests.]
AAs are a BLACK ethnic group. One of many BLACK ethnic groups around the world. So when these self-proclaimed “biracial” folks voluntarily REMOVE themselves from the “Black” category, they have removed themselves from MY group. In general, if you’re not in my “group,” then I DON’T want you helping yourself to a dinner plate of food from MY GROUP’S table that my group prepared with their struggle and sacrifice! The widespread stealing of food off of AAs’ “table” is my first issue with these self-proclaimed “biracials.” For me, the “mixed” Black person who identifies as “Black” is welcome to eat from our SHARED family/kinship/group “table.” They’re welcome because they didn’t remove themselves from the group.
For me, there are 2 prongs to this FOLLOW THE RESOURCES/looking out for the self-interests of ME and the people who are most like ME issue regarding the self-proclaimed “biracials.”
My 1st issue with the self-proclaimed “biracials” is that they want to have it both ways. They want to be considered “Black” like any other Black person when there’s something to be gained (affirmative action slots for Black people, scholarships for Black students, “biracial” actors being hired to play Black roles). But when there’s nothing to be gained (stolen from Black people) by calling themselves Black, then they want to talk about how they’re something other than Black—”biracial.” In doing so, these “biracials” are stealing resources from MY ethnic group/race.
No, if these “biracials” want to be distinct from Black folks, then they need to be all the way distinct. And get a plate of food from their own table. Get their own biracial scholarships for biracial people, etc. Instead of stealing plates of food from Black folks’ table.
My 2nd self-interest issue regarding the self-proclaimed biracials is the question, “How does supporting them in any way work to support me and Black women and girls like me?” Answer: It doesn’t! Let me give an example of what I mean by this. How does the disproportionate presence of people like:
Alicia Keys
Halle Berry
Lisa Bonet
Shemar Moore
Vin Diesel
Persia White
Rashida Jones
Jennifer Beals
Jasmine Guy
Victoria Rowell
Boris Kodjoe
Lonette McKee
Sidney Tamiia Poitier
Clark Johnson
Mario Van Peebles
And MANY, MANY other Black entertainers who are White women’s children promote the aspirations of all-Black, and/or dark-skinned BW and girls who want to be entertainers? In other words, how does their presence serve to promote ME and people who are most like ME? It doesn’t. The overwhelming presence of these half-White folks occupying a disproportionate share of the “Black” entertainment slots serves to BLOCK the career aspirations of all-Black and/or dark-skinned BW and girls who want to work in that industry.
Now, I’m not saying that it’s these people’s fault. But that’s irrelevant to my point. My point is the question of, “How does their overwhelming presence of these half-White “biracial” or Black performers help MY aspirations and the aspirations of people who are most like ME (all-Black AAs)? What’s in it for ME or other people who are most like ME (all-Black AAs) to support these folks?”
There’s NO benefit to ME or to people who are most like ME (all-Black AAs) to supporting this overwhelming cadre of half-White, half-Other folks having a stranglehold on so many Black entertainer slots.
In fact, their overwhelming presence works to DAMAGE the career fortunes of people who are most like ME (all-Black AA women and girls) in the entertainment industry. Let me mention one of many career casualties–Stephanie Mills.
Stephanie Mills came out just a couple of years before the music video era began. This was a couple of years before Vanessa Williams (who looks like she’s half-White, even though she’s not) came out. Which of these two talented singers still has a viable career today?
For those who don’t know, Stephanie Mills was pressured by her record company into having plastic surgery on her nose. And, of course, it didn’t work to save her career. Chopping off her nose did not transform Stephanie Mills into a racially-ambiguous looking woman–which became the emerging REQUIREMENT for BW artists. [There were many other Black celebrities from that era (early 80s) who had half their noses chopped off to appease Eurocentric standards of beauty: The entire Jackson clan, George Benson, and others.]
No, it’s not Vanessa Williams’ fault that Stephanie Mills doesn’t fit into the racially ambiguous type of Black woman that is promoted. However, Stephanie Mills’ career is just one known casualty of this system of light-skin privilege.
On the political tip, I ask the question: “How does reducing the number of statistically “Black” voters—by supporting people who previously identified as “Black” opting out of the Black category—help support AA political empowerment?” Answer: It doesn’t.
In short, I can’t think of a single way that there’s ANYTHING in it for me as an all-Black AA to support self-proclaimed nonblacks who call themselves “biracials.” For anything. Nothing that these self-proclaimed “biracials” want is going to help any sort of resources flow TOWARD ME or MINE (self, family, clan, ethnic group).
In fact, just about everything these “biracials” want (which mostly revolves around “having it both ways”) works to TAKE RESOURCES AWAY from Black folks. Why in the world would I support them? What’s in it for me as an all-Black AA to support them? NOTHING, as far as I can see.
If I’m missing something about this equation—if I’m missing how supporting “biracials” will bring some benefit to AAs, then I hope somebody will point it out to me.
______________________________________
Rainebeaux,
As I said in the above looong reply to NijaG’s question, my point isn’t so much about these various folks who are frantic to opt out of “Black.” My point is about the RESOURCES that many of them want to continue taking from the rest of us! I want more AAs to get into the mental habit of asking the question, “What’s in it for my: self, family, clan, ethnic group to support this person or idea?”
Right now, AA women rally around and spend our resources on all sorts of people and ideas who contribute NOTHING to us. And many of the people and ideas we support actually work to DAMAGE our own interests. This is why we suffer. This is a mental habit that I want more of us to break out of.
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Ohh…now I get it. I don’t see anything coming our way either…reciprocity is getting clearer to me as the days wear on. I too have been asking “what’s in it for me/where do I (we), the ‘regular’ Black folk, come in?” as of late (took a while to sink in, but still).
Oh Khadija!
If only EVERY AA person could read the above post!
I can say that my opinion on this issue is quite similar to yours. Something that annoys me though is when someone says, ” well seeing as you are open to ir, aren’t I being a hypocrite since I will be having biracial kids?”. Of course, I just ignore them because I know exactly what their real aim is. Anyone with common sense can see that having the above opinion is in no way contradictory to being in an ir relationship. I would liken it unto saying that because I say that I will not support black men who are of no use to black women, means that if I marry a black man, I am contradicting myself.
Rainebeaux,
You said it perfectly: there’s NOTHING “coming our way” with any of these people or ideas that we’ve been blindly supporting. At least, nothing nice. And nothing that we would want for ourselves.
[And let me mention that I like Vanessa Williams and her work. It's not about her as an individual; that's not my point. It's about thinking through the question of "where is trend line headed--and what would a continuation of this trend mean for me and people who are most like me?"]
I’ve been thinking about this over the past few days; and I think I’ve been overly harsh in my language about “mainstream” AA thinking (“gullible,” “clueless,” etc.). I think that it might be a bit more accurate to say that in addition to being gullible and clueless, many AAs are truly INNOCENT of worldly considerations. {long sigh}
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
@Jalilimaster re:
I get your point, but I have to say I somewhat disagree. Anything that is good for the AA collective, or more specifically for AA women, will be good for any individual AA woman.
I agree but whose energy and time are being used to keep that “good” in place. I’ll just be blunt too. I’m TIRED of clueless, cowardly AA women, and I believe that a lot of the cluelessness is deliberate, due to fear. I think these women think that if they pretend not to KNOW anything, then no one can expect them to DO anything or oppose the rotten status quo in the black “community” for bw or in their black social group that they mingle in. Offline, I encounter so many AA women on all levels who have a staggering amount of cluelessness. When some of them run into “outspoken” me (because I’m very outspoken offline too–LOL!), some of them want me to come to their meetings, church, organization and say common sense things to others. Of course, I don’t do it because I know they’re looking for someone to hide behind.
I’ll be honest, I don’t want to offend any AA’s on this board, but I’ll just come right out and say it…….I’m very indifferent to AA men.
Well, I feel exactly the same way, and I think I’ve made that very clear.
And for some months about a year back, I actually gave up on AA women as my view was that seeing as the majority seemed to support the AA men who were, quite glaringly obviously against them, I felt it wasn’t going to be me who was going to bleed and sweat for women who weren’t ready to do it for themselves.
Bluntly speaking, MOST AA women I encounter online and offline are cowardly. They’re always looking for somebody to hide behind. Yet, there is this stereotype of AA woman as being “strong.” That is just ludicrous. All you have to do is say “boo” to a typical “strong” AA woman. Just because somebody has a loud voice and can cuss you out does NOT mean they’re strong.
That is how I went from a frequent visitor to BWE blogs, to a lurker, then to someone who just stopped coming.
I’m moving in that direction myself.
So part of the reason I have to disagree with you Evia is that I really think it is necessary for there to be some kind of positive AA ‘group’.
Well, I agree that it’s VERY necessary, but who’s going to make the sacrifice or be the mules to keep that ‘positive AA group’ in place? Of course, this is exactly what AA men would want AA women to do–to keep that bc alive and functioning so that the men will always have a place to run to when folks start shooting their butts off. They and many others want that “safety net” but who’s paying for it? And unfortunately, if only a few of us are trying to keep that positive group going, we will burn out. Let’s be realistic.
See, there is a critical need for a bw’s organization, but even many very progressive AA women don’t want to get organized, because they know that everyone will start depending on them. In essence, they’ll become even bigger mules than they are now. LOL! AAs are always looking for someone to save them or lay down their burden on. So, a lot of AA women KNOW that organization is needed, but they keep hoping that other AA women will DO it. LOL! Also, that kind of organization would draw heat from bm, and a lot of bw are scared to death of hurting bm’s feelings.
There are many kids who would grow up and without that sense of community, it would be much harder for them to have their own sense of ethnic pride.
LOL! Honestly, Jalilimaster, this is that “you might save one fish” type of guilt trip that folks constantly try to send AA women on when an AA woman talks of withdrawing. LOL! Folks try to send me on this trip often. I’ll just say it. I’m not willing to invest the equivalent of 10 years of my life to save one fish while 99.999% of other AAs are kicking up their heels in front of their big-screen TVs and doing what they want to do with their time, energy, money, talents, skill, etc. My responsibility is to save and develop MY children by first finding a good dad for them and then us together giving them a good moral upbringing, education and safeguarding them while they develop. The next AA woman’s responsibility is to do the same for her children. That’s why I had 2 children. I knew I couldn’t do for more than 2.
I agree that like-minded people seek each other out, but sometimes, there are ceratin times where you might be able to get some type of support from, say, a fellow black woman that someone else might not provide, or more specifically from an AA woman.
Yes, and a LOT of other folks aside from AAs benefit from the benevolent assistance and support of AA women. This is why NOBODY wants AA women to stop being mules. This country might very well collapse if ALL AA women were to tell folks to “take your burden somewhere else because I’m NOT taking it on!” I can just see whole regions collapsing like dominoes because there’s a lot of invisible support of all kinds that AA women provide to–not just the bc, but the entire country. And there’s no reciprocity. It’s just free support.
I agree that it’s wonderful to be able to get FREE support when you need it. I’ve seen for years how Nigerians support each other and I see all the time how whites support each other. There’s always reciprocity in those exchanges though–sooner or later. And that reciprocity can be counted on. It’s wonderful. It’s like having money in the bank when you need it.
However, for a typical AA woman, getting support from other AAs can be like finding hen’s teeth. In my experience, it’s much easier to get support from other groups than it is to get it from AAs. I can count on getting support from Africans and whites; I can’t count on getting support from other AAs, unless it’s close family members. You may not realize it, but the vast majority of AAs don’t feel ANY ***obligation*** to support each other, whereas just about every African I’ve met feels obligated to support other members of their ethnic group because they feel that when they help another member of their group, they’re helping themselves or their children or children’s children. If I were stranded on an isolated backwater road right now, I would call an African person before I would an AA because a typical AA person would have an excuse as to why s/he couldn’t help me. I’ve gotten lots more support from African women than from AA women because African women know from their cultural teachings that they’re supposed to help/support me (since I was married to an African man), as long as we’re not quarreling. Support is virtually an alien idea to MOST AAs these days.
You actually have to tell the vast majority of grown AAs that you need support. Otherwise, they won’t help and when you confront them, they’ll say, “Well, I didn’t know you needed help.” Or they’ll say, “Why didn’t you ask for help if you needed it?” See, I don’t need to be told to support other bw. I KNOW they need support. So that’s why I give it. People say to me that I’m “so nice.” Lawdy! It’s not about “being nice!”
For ex., we’re talking about writing books, plays, etc. I already know those projects are not going to be widely supported by MOST AA women. They’ll be here saying “Amen” but when it comes time to plunk down money, a large portion won’t do it because of the disconnect there. Many AAs, especially these days, believe they should just be GIVEN things. So, they may like what’s created and benefit from it, but it doesn’t mean they will feel obligated to support it. I know folks are not going to like what I’m saying, but this is why many AA businesses, artistic endeavors, etc. flop–because AAs will NOT support them. They don’t feel any OBLIGATION; they feel they should be free to support or not support or do whatever they feel like doing. LOL! Now, do you honestly think that folks like that are going to survive.
“Obligation to support” is a big part of my definition of being “black,” but I’ll bet it’s not for most “black” women reading this, based on their actions. So, I really don’t know what “black” means to any other so-called black person. As a matter of fact, there are whites and other non-AAs who behave more like my definition of “black” than most AAs do.
So, I think that we need to just admit that a lot of this is “too little, too late,” and each of us should just be determined to fly solo and survive and thrive because we actually are flying solo, whether we know it or not.
Evia,
I think you really hit the nail on the head with this one. Although I get where Jalilimaster is coming from, I think it is about time AA women stopped concerning themselves with the welfare of EVERY SINGLE OTHER child born to a black person. It is as if AA women are meant to take care of everybody else. Well then I have to ask, who takes care of AA women??? I try at most opportunities that I have to reach out to black women and black girls especially, and I have to say, I have made similar observations as you Evia. The cowardice among a lot of black women is sooo pathetic. These same women will turn around tomorrow and shout, ‘I am a strong bw’, ‘my mother raised me to be strong like her and her mother before her’. While I am heraing this, I’ll just be thinking, “please shut your mouth”. Also, it is as if so many black women are wilfully gullible. A pile of rotten mouldy beans could be right in front of their eyes, and yet someone will be able to convince them that it is a 24 carat gold plate!.
The kind rubbish that I have had to experience because of my black women empowering views has been ridiculous. A few years ago before I found these bwe sites, I used to frequent this black-oriented entertainment website. I used to knock a lot of sense into the heads of the black women and girls that also frequented the site. There was this particular negro AA male who because he could not actually attack me on the worth of what I was saying, decided to begin using my username and posting stupid, vile and racist comments. He went as far as making up ridiculous stories about me (such as claiming that I was a Nigerian princess) just so that it would make me seem less serious and therefore discredit me. He would begin having all sorts of vulger arguments with other pple on the site. Even after I was notified of this and complained to the blog hosts and told them to start using our IP addresses to identify who the real person was, they decided to ignore it because they found him entertaining. This was my very first experience with such online negativity. The amount of black female supporters that this negro had was what was actually the most surprising thing to me. Some of these ikettes were women who themselves had similar bwe viewpoints (or so I thought), but out of fear of this negro ike, decided to pretend. Now I have learnt a lot from that experince and know the kind of cowardice that exists among many black women. These grown women were more than willing to use me (who was a teenager at the time) as their ‘shield’. I just thank God that I was not as weak as them.
Everybody,
These are exciting times filled with MANY amazing opportunities for those AA women who understand and apply several basic concepts:
(1) Always asking “What’s in it for me/what does will this do in terms of MY long-term interests?”
(2) Always keeping in mind and applying the normal human ordering of priorities: self, family, clan, ethnic group. [I mean this in the sense of the reciprocating folks within these categories. For me, a non-reciprocating biological relative is the same as a non-reciprocating total stranger in terms of my priorities.]
(3) Always take advantage of opportunities to cooperate with like-minded AA women who understand points #1 & #2.
Ladies, you don’t need “the masses” of anybody to understand or do anything in order for YOU to make AMAZING progress. All you need is your own determination, your own willingness to TAKE ACTION, and God’s help (and He helps those who help themselves).
Elijah Muhammad was quite correct when he said, “Start with the believers.” In other words, start with the people who “get it.” And don’t worry about the rest who don’t get it. The ones who don’t get it don’t matter. Best-selling self-help author Robert Ringer (author of “Looking Out For #1″) also stressed this simple rule of only working with what he calls “qualified prospects.” Meaning people who are “qualified” to be worthy of interacting with you because they “get it,” and want to work with you.
When I speak of encouraging more AA women to form publishing and production companies, I’m NOT talking about this in the traditional sense of “Oh, come join this holy and noble crusade.”
Instead, I’m saying this because in addition to being a good thing in terms of promoting healthier visions of sane living for Black women and girls—these are opportunities for you to make LARGE sums of money doing things that you enjoy (for the aspiring writers among us)! I’ve never been interested in taking vows of poverty. For any reason. It’s quite possible and doable to “do well by doing good.” This has always been my motto and practice.
If you’re savvy and you work it right, the writing biz can solve many of your financial worries while also being a lot of fun. Folks who expertly work the angles of the writing biz have found financial FREEDOM! This could be YOU!
Like I mentioned in the sample blog post about the 5 elements of money-making nonfiction, there are a lot of folks making good money without being on a best-sellers list. There are ways of doing this—now, that’s what I’m talking about here. LOL! I’m not talking about the old, played-out “crusade” model of failed, idealistic AA businesses.
The other interesting pattern I’ve noticed is that when you make your move, you’ll often be surprised by the unexpected support that you’ll get from like-minded people. I’ve been humbled by the outpouring of active support that so many of you have given me with this latest project. And I can’t THANK YOU enough for that!
There’s no need to worship other people in other places. Hidden between the deranged masses of AAs, we have our own deep pockets of talent, industriousness, and intelligence within our own AA collective. Ladies, that would be YOU. *Smile* The problem is that right now, most otherwise-sensible AA women are directing their energies and talents toward NON-reciprocating people, places and ideas.
With all the modern tools available at our fingertips (the new technology, an opening of social and business opportunities in the wider world, etc.), those AA women who understand and apply the above will make HUGE strides forward in this new decade!
Onward and forward to full-spectrum abundant life!
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Here’s my “deal” with all of these various issues: ALL I really care about is whether or not any particular development is giving resources TO me and my people, or taking resources AWAY from me and my people. Period. That is my only point of concern with all of these sorts of issues. I only want to support things that cause more resources to flow to MY:
self;
family;
clan;
ethnic group.
*****************************************************************
PART I
Khadija,
This issue is very complex, because you have to deal with various intercepting systems (race/group privilege, class/socio-economic privilege, and gender privilege). I want to take your response/explanation and flip it to what I’m envisioning as a “possible” positive to this whole “BiRacial” issue.
I’m also keeping the parameters to the United States and race/social issues btw African-Americans (descendants of the African slaves) and White-Americans (those who have at least 2-3+ past generations established). I think the history of the U.S., its founding philosophy & principles makes this topic very unique.
First, I think we’re all in general agreement that the BC is in a downward spiral and w/o any positive drastic measures it’ll become overwhelmingly the permanent underclass in America.
Second, the general consensus is that somewhere along the line, BM as a collective have dropped the ball in ensuring the progressive well-being and positive forward movement of the black community (especially women and children).
Like I’ve said before, my belief is that a culture/group will thrive, stagnate, or perish based on the actions of it’s men, especially the influential “top 10-20%”. Why those numbers? Because, the top 10-20% of any society usually control the major potions of the societies resources and influences the majority (social, economic and political). As the saying goes,
“Those that rule, make The Rules.”
Third, with the above two statements, this is where to co-opt you Khadija and Evia’s main message,
AA women have to find ways to Adapt, Evolve or Die (AE/D).
The fastest and easiest way the female species throughout the animal kingdom (which humans are a part off) is to mate/marry and align themselves with the men who controls the resources.
Part II
Bear with me as I try to apply my layman’s understanding of socio-bio-evolutionary concepts to the historical culture of white people meaning their men (Europeans and all their descendants). From just reading their history, I’m sure I’m not the only one who ever thought
“These people just don’t like to stay one place, they also love to FIGHT.” Also, wherever they landed, if they liked what they saw, they wanted to take over IT ALL. Not share with the locals, I mean TAKE IT ALL OVER.
If you don’t believe me, read up on the Romans, Greeks, Vikings, Saxons, Picts, Scots, Normans, The Germanic and Slavic Tribes. All these tribes and the various mixtures from these groups invaded each others lands at various points in time.
In between these conquering/wars, they would try to ensure periods of peace (to regroup and repopulate), by making “strategic alliances via marriages” amongst the new group’s ruling and influential classes and the previous group’s ruling classes. That’s why amongst the Elite royal/noble class in Europe, all the families lines inter-connect at some point.
When they weren’t fighting each other, they were competing amongst themselves. Guess, their favorite game? If you guessed, let’s see which “white” nation can takeover these other “non-white” foreign lands and use their resources to make ourselves richer and then the nation that gets the most and best will rub it in the face of the other losing “white” nation, which will in create jealousy,
then more fighting until another round of strategic alliances/marriages needed to take place.
As we all know, the major winners of the “Conquer and Divide the World Game” from the 1600’s to the early part of the 20th Century was Great Britain, France, Spain/Portugal. Which afaimc, was part of the root cause of WWI & II, but that’s another story.
As we know, Great Britain ends up being the majority winner of what’s now the United States.
The above oversimplified long history background is just to set the stage for my above theory and show the mindset of the group of people that White Americans come from.
I think we can all generally agree that men are very hierarchical beings. Men in general want power, fight for it and respect power amongst themselves. Of course, the flip side is that individual men or male groups with little to no power and nothing to offer get little to no respect and suffer the most. It is thereby a no brainer that women will be affected more positively or negatively depending on the group you belong to.
Part III
Why do I keep emphasizing “Strategic Marriages/Alliance” btw the elites of conquering and the conquered groups? It is the fastest and surest way of actually protecting a portion of the conquered males in the group.
Before all the Political Correctness, Equal Rights, Human Rights, Equality message, etc, all cultures/societies understood that when facing a more aggressive and powerful group of men bent on domination and possible annihilation of the less dominate group, the best thing to do was to GET THOSE MEN AS LEGALLY ATTACHED AS POSSIBLE TO YOUR WOMEN and HAVE THEM POP OUT BABIES ASAP.
I don’t think I need to get into all the benefits as to why this tactic generally worked.
Having said all the above, in N. America the whole process was DELIBERATELY INTERRUPTED
by the major elite ruling class in Britain (Top 10-20%).
I say deliberately because my belief is that once they realized this New World was basically a goldmine with bountiful resources everywhere, they just didn’t want to share. However, here is the major problem. The first few waves of settlers you’ve sent to scout and colonize the place are predominately men. These men are craving out and claiming land. Since there are more men than women, some of the men are marrying the surrounding natives and building families and communities with them.
This doesn’t fit into the long-term plans of the governing elites in the Old Country. Why? Because their plan is to relocate a good % of their population to this wonderful new land to not only colonize it, but use the resources to strengthen their growing world wide hold. So if more established men relocate, start marrying locals and building families, that ultimately threatens the governing elites back in the Old World, because the loyalties of these men will be split.
Now add to the mix, the decision that free and cheap labor is what is needed to colonize this New World as quickly and efficiently as possible. So, however, the decision was made, the people of Africa were the unlucky group to have their names pulled from the hat as the ones to provide this free labor.
So, in order to mitigate the potential future problems with the mixing of all these various groups that would have undermined the hold the British’s ruling elite had on their citizens, they used the #1 Public Relations Corporation of their time. Drumroll please…………….”The Church.” Then as time went on “Science” took the place of religion. So basically, a smear campaign to dehumanize the natives and slaves was enacted, while at the same time pushing the Superiority of the “White Race.” All this was coupled with intense brainwashing, fear tactics, and a rewards and punishment system to keep these NEW WORLD WHITE MALE SETTLERS in line. Of course even after Independence was gained from the British, 3 – 4 generations had gone by with America now firmly entrenched and reaping the benefits of the free slave labor system. Of course, New Ruling elites had cropped up in the new America and they were the ones reaping majority of the benefits of the system so it behooved them to continue even though it was contradictory to the their founding principles and ideals. Isn’t it funny how men can rationalize away discrepancies with their words and actions?
This is how the madness, angst, neurotic, guilt and anger dynamics that is the race relations in American that plays btw Whites, Blacks, Men and Women from both groups got started and continues on today in various ways.
Part IV
From Slavery until about the Civil War majority of any BiRacial children born where from BW/WM (I’m keeping it simple and removing the moral ambiguities). In my opinion, what really stopped WM from just trying to ship off black people en masse back to Africa, wasn’t necessarily just guilt, it was their BiRacial children and the rlsps they had with their mothers. Maybe it would have best for the AA BC in the long run if they had done that, but that’s a whole other topic.
Off course all this creates in the Black Community a whole subset of other issues due to the WM’s Biracial children and future progeny having an advantage over the regular Blacks. Then there are the whole gender dynamics which results of BM having repressed angry towards BW, and so on. Basically, accumulating to the whole crazy mess we have currently in the BC.
This topic is giving me a HEADACHE, but in a good way. LOL!!! While I loved having verbal discussions on social issues, I hated having to write papers in my social sciences classes that’s why I became an Accountant LOL!!!.
*Whew* Okay. Deep breath as I try to articulate where I’m coming from and bring it all together. There is a proverb from back home that roughly translates to the following;
Sometimes in order to get in through the front door, you have to go through the back door and open the front.
How does this relate to the BiRacial issue and how it could “possibly” in the long-run end up positively for BW and by extension the BC?
If the stats are correct in suggesting that BW/WM are the 2nd fastest growing IR married group in America. In addition to the fact that a good percentage of these marriages are occurring amongst individuals of higher socio-economic ladder. Then like you said, it becomes a matter of following the money (resources). I think we’re going to see in the future that it will actually be WM who spearhead the BiRacial label campaign. Not to exclude Black, but due to the EGO of Men in the Privileged position. America is still a Patriarchy, WM are still #1. They want their children to also be identified as part of them.
I believe that if the trend continues increasing of quality BW choosing to marry and align themselves with quality WM/non-black, then by extension his family and social network; BW will now have access to these resources. Also, since women are generally the major influences in the social lives of their families and thereby their communities, these resources will start to trickle back into the BC. Also, the more influential WM who are married to BW grows, it becomes natural for the men to start caring about the issues that would potentially affect his wife and by extension his children and extended families which would naturally include the BW’s.
Note: I wrote this from the perspective of what I perceive to be the unique situation of African Americans in the US. The modern day AA Black community is in a downward spiral due to the lack of positive behaviors and actions from the BM as a collective that is needed to ensure that their communities survival and thrive on a large scale level. BW have been trying to shoulder the burden, but at this point in time it is killing us on every level (Spiritual/Emotional/Mental) and that in order to save ourselves and our present and future offspring we have to stop divest and diversify and make decisions in our own best interest w/o taking into account the opinion of BM.
Okay, I’m going to stop now. Everyone, feel absolutely free to add, subtract, correct, etc this mini paper. LOL
NijaG,
I like substantive, well-considered comments! *Smile* Here are my immediate thoughts while I think about the points you’ve raised.
The wealth/resource transfer that you spoke of only brings benefits to the Black extended family when the half-Black child identifies with, and has loyalty to, their Black heritage. This type of identification and loyalty is the very opposite of the biracial mentality—which seeks to get as far away as possible from anything and anyone “Black.”
Are “biracials” like Tigger Woods transfering resources back to their Black relatives? Unlikely.
The end result of the biracial mentality is the widespread disenfranchisement and powerlessness of ALL Blacks in a particular society, whatever degree of admixture that they have. Modern examples of this are the physically Black, utterly powerless, “don’t you dare call me Black”-Blacks in Latin America and the Arab world. Entire countries filled with Sammy Sosas (and Anwar Sadats—he had similar issues with wanting to be a “Whiter” Arab).
The end result is the mass Black powerlessness seen in places like the Dominican Republic, Cuba, Brasil and so on where there’s often a plurality (if not majority) of physically Black people who are powerless. And ALL of them (no matter what their degree of admixture) are powerless because they have no shared identity upon which they can organize themselves. They have no shared identity (unlike the “off-White” type of “Whites” in those societies—who are unified around being “White”**) because they’ve segmented themselves into various categories of non-Blackness.
[**I have a number of affluent, South American, "White," Latino acquaintances. It's amusing to hear them laugh at the Mexicans and proudly state that they are of "pure" European Spanish---NOT mestizo---descent. It's also amusing to hear some of them complain about the (racist, perhaps? {chuckling}) attitudes of the REAL European Spanish tourists who visit their countries...I'm thinking of one colleague who was pissed off because he got into an argument back home with a Spaniard who prompty told him: "We (Spaniards) CREATED you." but I digress... {chuckling}]
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
I like substantive, well-considered comments! *Smile* Here are my immediate thoughts while I think about the points you’ve raised.
Looking forward to
This situation with the AA community is very saddening for me. My Dad came to America after the Civil War in Nigeria. He knows so much about the Civil Rights movements and Black History and has lot of respect for AA’s. Back home, it wasn’t about what White America was doing it was about What was Black America doing?
So for me it’s really hard to fully grasp how things got to this point in under 40 years. I know the Civil Rights movement wasn’t a magical eraser to make absolutely everything fair and equal, but it was a major plus in the right direction. It’s crazy to know, that if things don’t turn around soon, then a significant portion of the AA community is going to find itself in similar circumstances as the powerless black communities you mentioned in the above countries.
I pray that doesn’t happen, because it truly will be the death of THE DREAM.
That’s why it’s so critical that we make sure that these mixed children value their blackness and aren’t ashamed of it. If we raise more black mixed children that hate their blackness and black people we’re no better than the BM who married with the intention of escaping their blackness. The results will be the same in that resources will flow right into the hands on nonblacks. I’m okay with half of my family’s resources going to the Chinese American community but I’ll be damned if all that I and my ancestors have worked and scraped for goes that way or to any other nonblack group of people. You can be assured that these other groups would never allow *all* of their wealth to funnel into the black american community. You can also trust that any resources that do flow will not be used to benefit BW and very well may be used against us.
NijaG,
After some thought, I decided that it’s better to address some of the premises underlying your earlier comments.
You said, “So for me it’s really hard to fully grasp how things got to this point in under 40 years. I know the Civil Rights movement wasn’t a magical eraser to make absolutely everything fair and equal, but it was a major plus in the right direction.”
It’s too long a tale for me to go into, but in many ways the Civil Rights Movement accelerated the destruction of the AA collective! The main effect of desegregation was the mass AA abandonment of all AA pseudo-institutions (all AA businesses, with the exception of hair salons/barber shops and AA churches, and most Black residential areas for the AAs who could afford to leave).
Desegregation/integration didn’t have to play out that way. AAs could have done like other groups—kept our own infrastructure while taking advantage of what the wider world had to offer. Instead, due to mass AA self-hatred, there was an exodus from anything and everything “Black” as soon as the segregation-prison gates opened.
This was because our civil rights leadership was as sick and self-hating as the AA masses. Those (few) AA leaders who weren’t self-hating made the mistake of trying to work activist agendas that failed to address our self-hatred.
Rev. Albert Cleage (he’s writer Pearl Cleage’s father) explained in his book “Black Christian Nationalism.” Much of his analysis in this 1972 book is outdated and mistaken. However, much of it has been proven correct by subsequent events with AAs:
“No other Black group [he's speaking of the church that he founded] (other than the Black Muslims) is willing to face seriously the fact that Black people are psychologically sick and have been systematically conditioned to hate themselves and love their oppressor. Every other Black group tries to program with Black people the way they are (which is obviously an impossibility)…” pg. 212-213.
“…in every way we have contributed to our own enslavement. Our powerlessness has been perpetuated by our inability to build genuine Black institutions and our refusal to accept genuine Black leadership. Black pseudo-institutions existing in the Black community (such as the Black church) have actually served the interests of the White oppressor.
So-called Black leaders have been selected by the White oppressor. These Black leaders have been accepted by Black people only in a limited interim capacity, while they waited for integration. Black people have been prepared to delegate only limited powers to Black leaders who shared their Black inferiority. Only Marcus Garvey and Elijah Muhammad were given genuine leadership with power and authority.” pg.209.
“DuBois stated our faith in education beautifully with his concept of the ‘talented tenth.’…It was a naive concept which did not take into account the psychological sickness of Black people. The talented tenth used their education to exploit not lead the Black masses. Dr. DuBois did not realize that the kind of education which White people gave Black people only served to strengthen and reinforce the White man’s control.” pg.210.
The mass AA self-hatred and belief in Black inferiority that Rev. Cleage spoke of in 1972 is a thousand times worse in 2010. The 1972 trend that he described of Whites being able to select AA “leaders” (basically by deciding which AAs to place in prominent jobs or feature on tv—AAs respond to seeing “Black faces in high places” and NOT substance) has intensified with the rise of Negro Crossover Politicians.
The Negro Crossover Politicians (and “biracials” like Tigger with some of his early “is golf ready for me” commercials) manipulate AA nostalgia for the civil rights era. They also manipulate AAs’ desperation to see the outward symbols of progress—Black-skinned faces in high places.
NijaG, you said, “It’s crazy to know, that if things don’t turn around soon, then a significant portion of the AA community is going to find itself in similar circumstances as the powerless black communities you mentioned in the above countries. I pray that doesn’t happen, because it truly will be the death of THE DREAM.”
As far as I’m concerned, Dr. King’s so-called “dream” was mostly a self-hatred-induced crack fantasy of “passing into nonblackness” (as the BM Muslim blogger I linked to in an earlier comment above discussed with enthusiasm at his site a few years back).
I don’t know if you visited the previous blog, but I (and other BWE bloggers) have been saying that the majority of AAs are OVER and DEAD. I mean that literally. I haven’t been saying this as hyperbole for rhetorical effect. Let me recap my view of what is happening with the AA collective:
Most AAs will be physically destroyed or form part of a PERMANENT underclass in this country. This is because 99.99% of AAs are in denial and lack the will to take the stern measures that would be needed to salvage even a small fraction of our people. Starting with NOT making excuses for inferior lifestyles and depraved, savage behavior.
The crackdown will come from non-Black political elites when they finally decide that AAs’ horrific crimes and dysfunction are a national security threat to them and their safety. Then you will see physical barriers erected around the Black residential areas. These barriers will be designed to keep the AA residents and our emerging pattern of Rwanda-levels of violence confined within the Black residential ares.
These physical barriers will be similar to the “peace walls” that exist in Northern Ireland; and the walls the US military has built around various neighborhoods in Baghdad.
And the police are not going to risk their lives to enter these blocked-off Rwanda-zones. They’re not going to even pretend to protect the AA residents who live within them. They are going to police the perimeters of these zones and the barriers to make sure that the Black residents stay inside those zones during the night.
All of the above is why I strongly encourage any AA woman who wants to survive and thrive to GET OUT of Black residential areas NOW.
My blog essays are directed to the handful of AA women who have left/are fleeing, and who therefore will be survivors of the current AA collective implosion. The point is for those AA survivors to map out personal strategies for what comes next. As in what comes next for them after 99% of AAs have finished trapping themselves into permanent underclass status?
What fate are the handful of survivors creating for themselves, their own children and the future descendants of fellow AA survivors?
Will they be careless with matters of racial and ethnic self-respect; and become like Sammy Sosa and the other powerless “nonblack”-Blacks of Latin America and the Arab world? And in doing so, will they raise a new batch of racist Tigger Woodses?
Or will they be Sojourners who safeguard their racial and ethnic self-respect, and rise from the ashes of the AA meltdown—similar to how those Jews who (fled Nazi-occupied Europe EARLY in the crisis) survived the Holocaust went on to secure a future for themselves, other survivors, and the descendants of the survivors?
_____________________________
ZooPath,
I 100% co-sign. And your point is a large part of what I’m talking about: What comes next for the resources that we and our ancestors have scraped to accumulate? Will it ALL flow into the hands of nonblacks? If we’re careless about our ethnic and racial self-respect, that’s exactly what will happen with the resources that we and our ancestors bled for!
I don’t have the illusion that AA women somehow automatically have more ethnic-racial self-respect than the MANY, MANY BM who have taken the resources that our ancestors bled for and given it ALL away to nonblacks. And many of these men raised half-Black, anti-Black racist “Tiggers” in the process of doing so.
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Khadija,
Really, all I can say is Whoa!!! to envisioning how this is going to end up if there is no positive counter-force strong enough to halt and reverse the process.
The crackdown will come from non-Black political elites when they finally decide that AAs’ horrific crimes and dysfunction are a national security threat to them and their safety. Then you will see physical barriers erected around the Black residential areas. These barriers will be designed to keep the AA residents and our emerging pattern of Rwanda-levels of violence confined within the Black residential ares.
The only positive I can envision if this happens, is that MAYBE, just MAYBE such enforced partial-segregation will be the wake up call that the black community needs. They will be forced to rely on each other and confront the reasons (such as those listed in your various articles) on why the community ended up in such dire straits.
I know that if this enforced segregation is introduced that there will be chaos, violence and strife for a period of time. However, the optimist in me, is hoping that the same spirit of survival, perseverance, strength and hope that enabled AA’s to survive the slavery era and thrive despite all odds will reemerge.
*******************************************************
What comes next for the resources that we and our ancestors have scraped to accumulate? Will it ALL flow into the hands of nonblacks? If we’re careless about our ethnic and racial self-respect, that’s exactly what will happen with the resources that we and our ancestors bled for!
I image that majority of the resources built by AA ancestors are if not gone, are on it’s last legs. When a good portion of AA’s stopped investing in their communities, businesses, and institutes this naturally decreased or stopped the assets and resources floating in the community.
The passing on of Generational Wealth/Resources, has always been the primary method families, clans, and groups have used to ensure their survival. The more you amass and control, the more bargaining power you and your group have. AA community is losing it bargaining, while other groups are gaining their bargaining power through this method.
*******************************************************
Or will they be Sojourners who safeguard their racial and ethnic self-respect, and rise from the ashes of the AA meltdown—similar to how those Jews who (fled Nazi-occupied Europe EARLY in the crisis) survived the Holocaust went on to secure a future for themselves, other survivors, and the descendants of the survivors?
I don’t have the illusion that AA women somehow automatically have more ethnic-racial self-respect than the MANY, MANY BM who have taken the resources that our ancestors bled for and given it ALL away to nonblacks. And many of these men raised half-Black, anti-Black racist “Tiggers” in the process of doing so.
***************************************************************
If things play out the way you envision, then I don’t think there is much AA women can do. It’s the double bind of patriarchy and gender. Women just can’t sustain or advance a culture/community by themselves. This is what the BC has been expecting BW to do and look at the disastrous results.
That’s why the Jewish comparison is problematic when viewed against what Sojourners will have to face. The Jewish community have always stuck to the basic tenants of RUCOSS (Evia’s term). The women have *their* men providing and protecting for them. Competing against other men, building businesses, acquiring wealth and craving a niche for themselves and also making very rewarding strategic alliances which benefits them/group.
If the stats are correct, then there are already more marriageable-age black women than men. If this crackdown happens, the ensuring violence that will take place will skew these numbers even higher. In war, there are causalities on all side, but women & children are feel it the most. With this happening higher numbers of BW will most likely opt to marry other race/ethnic men. This to me is what is going to change the black race paradigm in this country way faster than when BM marry out. BW who do marry out will have to find a way to teach and pass on their ethnic/racial culture to their mixed race children, w/o needing to label their kids black and thinking of it as a negative reflection of us.
NijaG,
You said,“I image that majority of the resources built by AA ancestors are if not gone, are on it’s last legs. When a good portion of AA’s stopped investing in their communities, businesses, and institutes this naturally decreased or stopped the assets and resources floating in the community.”
I disagree. Although AAs have squandered almost all of the past resources built by our ancestors, we continue to create HUGE, NEW pools of resources, even in our madness and confusion. These huge pools of newly-generated resources are invisible to AAs because we’re dumb enough to let them flow directly into OTHER people’s hands and collectives!
Let me give one example of this. Let’s remember the economic value of the nonblack folks’ careers that were CREATED by the Wayans idiots on “In Living Color” back in the 1990s. How much money did the Wayans idiots initially create for Jim Carrey, Jennifer Lopez, and Rosie Perez? [The first two of whom are still making money a decade later.]
Let’s also look at how the resources that the Wayans idiots MADE POSSIBLE for Jim Carrey and other nonblacks NEVER flowed back to AAs. How many Black actors, camera people, technicians are hired on ANY of Jim Carrey’s movies? Jim Carrey has some “pull.” I would imagine that he could steer some jobs our way if he wants to.
How many AAs has Jennifer Lopez hired for her various videos, and so on?
AAs are still creating large amounts of resources…for the benefit of everybody else!
You said, “If things play out the way you envision, then I don’t think there is much AA women can do. It’s the double bind of patriarchy and gender. Women just can’t sustain or advance a culture/community by themselves. This is what the BC has been expecting BW to do and look at the disastrous results.”
I’m not talking about advancing or sustaining a culture/community by themselves. I’m talking about Sojourners advancing and sustaining themselves and their immediate descendants.
Respectfully, you’re forgetting that there’s MUCH that can be accomplished in her own personal sphere of influence by ONE woman’s choice of how she chooses to redirect her husband’s resources. Look at the examples of what so many nonblack wives of wealthy BM do with these men’s resources! Some of these nonblack women are accomplishing huge strides in securing their individual descendants, and their immediate families.
That’s what I’m talking about—I’m NOT talking about Sojourners trying to “save alla our people.” I’m talking about Sojourners ensuring that their own immediate situation is secure, and that it remains secure for at least one generation (that of their own children).
Securing their own fate and that of their own children is something that ALL women in every time period, in every culture have done—irrespective of the bounds of patriarchy or the limited tools they had at hand for this purpose. I’m reminded of the royal wives and concubines who were forever angling to have their child end up on the throne when the King/Prince/Sultan/Emir passed away.
I reject the notion that every other race and ethnic group of women EXCEPT AA women can take steps to secure their own individual fates and that of their own children and immediate loved ones.
Sojourners have a choice: (1) You can be careless with matters of racial and ethnic self-respect and watch your “Sammy Sosa-Tigger Woods”-type of children give away/destroy ALL the resources that you’ve gathered . . . in ONE generation . . . while you’re still alive to see it be squandered.
Or (2) you can think about the long-term effects of what you’re doing (how what you’re doing impacts self, family, clan, and ethnic group), think about how you’re raising your children, and KEEP your resources flowing to YOU and YOURS for at least one generation.
I think the Sojourners should keep in mind the example of what Reginald Lewis’ Filipino wife did with his resources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loida_Nicolas-Lewis
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Re: Reginald Lewis
Its funny you should mention this. I first saw this on Evia’s blog (i think) a few months ago. I did some ‘internet research’ and I’ve found the things/ causes/issues she diverted her husbands resources to after he passed. They are mainly Philipino. I don’t see anything wrong with giving so much to her comunity but one would expect that there would still be some concern for AAs…seeing as both her husband and kids are part of that community. I try to imagine myself in that position. Say, for example, I was married to a very wealthy Palestinian man. There is no denying that a lot of our resources would go to benefit Nigeria in some way and if I was living outside Africa, the black community in whichever country we live in as well as other ‘black’ causes. Also, a lot of our resources would also go towards benefitting Palestine and Palestinian causes. This is not to say that I don’t presently support help for Palestine, but the fact alone that I am married to a Palestinian and the fact that my kids and family (i.e. in-laws) are also Palestinian, would mean I would have more affinity/interest in Palestine, although I am Nigerian myself. So even if my husband should pass away (God forbid), I would still continue to support any Palestinian issue, even if not for my own feelings, but out of respect for my husband and his own heritage, and I would hope that he would do the same for my own heritage.
To be honest, seeing as I am lead to believe that his wife barely diverted any of his wealth towards the AA community or causes, I would not be surprised to find out that even before he passed away, he probably never felt the need to either. A lot of black men hearing a black woman say this would accuse her of ‘hating’ or being ‘jelluss’ but then Reginald Lewis’ wealth was not just withheld form AA women but AA men as well. So I wonder what they would say about that. As someone mentioned in Halima’s post about pan-African males and their hypocrisy, a lot of these black males cannot see how they hand over their wealth and success to the non-black men they attack via these non-black men’s female relatives!
o Khadija said: “The crackdown will come from non-Black political elites when they finally decide that AAs’ horrific crimes and dysfunction are a national security threat to them and their safety. Then you will see physical barriers erected around the Black residential areas. These barriers will be designed to keep the AA residents and our emerging pattern of Rwanda-levels of violence confined within the Black residential ares.
o NijaG said: “The only positive I can envision if this happens, is that MAYBE, just MAYBE such enforced partial-segregation will be the wake up call that the black community needs. They will be forced to rely on each other and confront the reasons (such as those listed in your various articles) on why the community ended up in such dire straits.
I know that if this enforced segregation is introduced that there will be chaos, violence and strife for a period of time. However, the optimist in me, is hoping that the same spirit of survival, perseverance, strength and hope that enabled AA’s to survive the slavery era and thrive despite all odds will reemerge.”
I am glad you have that much optimism. I, however, don’t. How many ‘wake up calls’ do black folks need, and in particular, black males, before they get their act together. Secondly, it will be much harder to build a stable community under those sort of conditions. If bm didn’t do it when they were pretty much handed all the necessary resources on a plate, and were measured on a very skewed curve, I doubt this same lot would do it when there is even more pressure applied. Mind you that for the past few years, due to the bell curve and all sorts of excuses being made for bm and their many disgraceful shortcomings, most of them could have messed up royally but still ‘come back’, as, let’s be honest, name one thing, just one thing that a bm has to do where he would get shunned by EVERYBODY. You know that in the mess that we call the ‘black community’, degeneracy is accepted. So if at this point, when everyone makes excuses for them, and they KNOW that these excuses and allowances are being made, they didn’t pull their collective socks up, I have very little hope that they’ll do it when it all hits the fan. Take into account that in such a situation as Khadija described, the only thing bw have to depend on for any sort of protection against these black male criminals is the ‘white heat’ (I’m more than happy to explain what that means for those who didn’t get it). When Black residential areas have been cordoned off, that same ‘white heat’ will no longer bother. The thought of any black woman or children having to exist under such conditions sends a shiver down my spine.
o What comes next for the resources that we and our ancestors have scraped to accumulate? Will it ALL flow into the hands of nonblacks? If we’re careless about our ethnic and racial self-respect, that’s exactly what will happen with the resources that we and our ancestors bled for!
o I image that majority of the resources built by AA ancestors are if not gone, are on it’s last legs. When a good portion of AA’s stopped investing in their communities, businesses, and institutes this naturally decreased or stopped the assets and resources floating in the community.
The passing on of Generational Wealth/Resources, has always been the primary method families, clans, and groups have used to ensure their survival. The more you amass and control, the more bargaining power you and your group have. AA community is losing it bargaining, while other groups are gaining their bargaining power through this method.
I think a lot of you are misinterpreting what is happening. The issue is NOT that AA’s are losing their bargaining tools due to the AA community not generating wealth. The AA community is losing its wealth because there is too high a proportion of negroes who are MORE THAN HAPPY to have their wealth flow elsewhere. This includes those men who funnel their money into other communities, and those VERY FOOLISH black folks that are too blind and/or stupid to see that by supporting these negroes, they too are depriving the AA community of much needed resources! There is, in fact, wealth being created on the backs of AA’s. It’s just that those black creatures who are controlling the wealth are all too happy to let it be enjoyed by ‘other people’!
I know that if this enforced segregation is introduced that there will be chaos, violence and strife for a period of time. However, the optimist in me, is hoping that the same spirit of survival, perseverance, strength and hope that enabled AA’s to survive the slavery era and thrive despite all odds will reemerge.
I realize that many of y’all don’t even want to try to grasp what’s going to play out in this scenario, but I think it’s vital to be realistic. That’s critical. I’ve never exaggerated this situation. I’ve been saying: Look at the social indicators FOR YEARS.
Integration was absolutely the nail in the coffin for AAs, but many of these same issues also existed prior to integration, though we sometimes romanticize “old school.” Even if AAs are re-segregated, and do come together for survival as you’re saying, don’t you realize that the SAME thing will happen all over again if they’re ever offered integration again? Without the RUCOSS, absolutely nothing is going to save any size group of AAs because MOST AAs don’t think well of other AAs and don’t have much of anything in common, aside from suffering and rejection. It was the suffering & rejection that created “The Blues,” “Jazz,” the black church, dominance in sports & entertainment, the Civil Rights movement, etc. and is at the root of many other aspects of AA culture. Remember that beautiful pearls are created only BECAUSE of the friction inside of an oyster. Many of the beautiful outputs of AA culture is rooted in friction and PAIN.
I think that in order for AAs to even want to or even try to re-group with other AAs, we would have to develop a RUCOSS and one of the pillars of that Rucoss would have to be support based on reciprocity along with a high degree of appreciation for self, high value placed on the beauty and value of bw, marriage & family, businesses, education and excellence in all things, the importance of the arts and the sciences, spiritual growth and development, etc. Everyone would be strongly expected to grow and develop in as many of these areas as possible, and with barely any thought about what happened in the past. The past has to be minimized because it only offers minimal value in the present. You learn from your mistakes and you MOVE ON.
I think that in actuality, enough AA women could come together to erect such a RUCOSS, but the problem would STILL be the males. If that’s not addressed, we’d be back at square 1. The bottom line is that black men have major issues with white men and other strong groups of men in the world, and bw CANNOT resolve those issues because we CANNOT teach boys how to be EFFECTIVE, competitive men. I’ve watched my husband with our sons. I wish I could teach my sons to be EFFECTIVE men, but I CANNOT DO THAT, and that’s why I carefully chose a MAN to do that for my sons.
I remember when I first heard about that Lewis’ chap. I remember that his wife went on Oprah some years ago to promote her book. Now, even from Wikipedia, I’ll use this case as an example. In my previous comment, I stated that AA wealth was being created, but the wealth was flowing OUT of the community. Note the following:
• Reginald F. Lewis (December 7, 1942 – January 19, 1993), was an American businessman, who was one of the most successful business leaders during the 1980s. He was the richest African American man in the 1980′s.
• In 1992, Forbes magazine listed Lewis among the 400 richest Americans with a net worth estimated at $400 million. He also was the first African American to build a billion dollar company.
• Reginald Lewis, before his demise was married to a Filipino-American Loida Nicolas-Lewis, who took over the company a year after his death.
Also note the following about his wife:
• In 1972, Lewis established a monthly magazine for the Filipino-American community and served as the magazine’s publisher until it merged with another publication in 1980.
• Lewis is the former National Chairwoman of the National Federation of Filipino American Associations (2002-2006), the largest advocacy group for Filipino Americans in the United States.
• Lewis frequently appears in charity and fund-raising events, making financial donations and moral support to poverty alleviation projects in the Philippines.
• In 1999, she founded a school in Sorsogon City, The Lewis College, that teaches Kindergarten through college students
Now, everything she did, EVERY, SINGLE ONE was directed OUT of the AA community. While her husband was alive, he too had no problem with the fact that for all the charity work, none of his wealth was benefitting the AA community. Notice that it wasn’t just the Filipino-American community she was interested in, she used her husband’s wealth in her home country! I’m sure there were millions of AA’s who were actively supporting and patronising this man’s business because they thought they were helping AA’s. WRONG! We can see which communities were helped by his wealth.
JaliliMaster,
You said, “In my previous comment, I stated that AA wealth was being created, but the wealth was flowing OUT of the community.
. . .Now, everything she did, EVERY, SINGLE ONE was directed OUT of the AA community. While her husband was alive, he too had no problem with the fact that for all the charity work, none of his wealth was benefitting the AA community. Notice that it wasn’t just the Filipino-American community she was interested in, she used her husband’s wealth in her home country! I’m sure there were millions of AA’s who were actively supporting and patronising this man’s business because they thought they were helping AA’s. WRONG! We can see which communities were helped by his wealth.”
THIS long-term, idiotic, self-defeating AA behavior pattern is what I’m talking about. Maintaining racial and ethnic self-respect is what PREVENTS things like this from happening. Racial and ethnic self-respect works to “plug the holes in the resource bucket;” and prevents having ALL of one’s resources flowing out to NON-reciprocating others.
Always remember to ask the question: “What’s in it for my: self, family, clan, ethnic group?”
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Khadija said: “THIS long-term, idiotic, self-defeating AA behavior pattern is what I’m talking about. Maintaining racial and ethnic self-respect is what PREVENTS things like this from happening. Racial and ethnic self-respect works to “plug the holes in the resource bucket;” and prevents having ALL of one’s resources flowing out to NON-reciprocating others.”
I think things are at a point where there aren’t ‘holes’ in the resource bucket, but rather, the bucket has no bottom! Frankly, the remedy is not to plug the holes but to change the bucket! This trend of negro males sending their communities wealth to all four corners while restricting, and in most cases, withholding from their own community has been going on for way too long. Unfortunately, it seems that most of them fall into this category. How are these holes to be blocked? Especially when said holes are just so numerous? I think a much more drastic course of action is required.
I think the Sojourners should keep in mind the example of what Reginald Lewis’ Filipino wife did with his resources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loida_Nicolas-Lewis“
A clarification to the above statement, from his estate, he left the following:
He left $5 million to his Philippine-born wife of 24 years Loida Lewis along with “all the rest of my tangible personal property. …,” Jet learned after examining his last will and testament. “I give the sum of $2,500,000 to each of my daughters, Leslie N. Lewis and Christina S.N. Lewis,” along with his extensive art collection, Lewis stipulated.
Lewis made a bequest of $1 million to his mother Carolyn Fugett and left a $100,000 gift to Stepfather, Jean Fugett Sr. To his surviving siblings Jean Fugett Jr., Anthony Fugett, Joseph Fugett, Sharon Fugett and Rosalyn Fugett Wiley, Lewis left $500,000 each. The late business magnate also left his seven nieces and nephews $500,000 each in addition to $500,000 for seven aunts and uncles.
Lewis’ will stipulated that his residual estate be divided in equal shares, with “50 such equal shares” going to his wife, 20 equal shares to both daughters and the final 10 equal shares to his philanthropic concern, The Reginald F. Lewis Foundation, Inc., which he organized.
Source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n26_v83/ai_13686794/
However, the REAL MONEY was in the company and that came under his widow’s control and she has literally sold off all parts with payouts to shareholders which I am pretty confident included “HER interests” as demonstrated by where the money has gone to serve her people.
JaliliMaster,
You said, “I think things are at a point where there aren’t ‘holes’ in the resource bucket, but rather, the bucket has no bottom! Frankly, the remedy is not to plug the holes but to change the bucket!”
{laughing} You’re quite correct! Lately, I’ve been trying to avoid using . . . intemperate . . . language while discussing these issues.
{chuckling} What I refrained from saying is that these various Negroes (Reginald Lewis, Van Jones, Skip Gates, and so on) have been “carrying water” for various nonblacks. And that the silly BW who support these men are indirectly carrying water for these same nonblacks. [This was the point of the "BW: Why Do You Let Becky, Lupe, JLo, Fatima and Mei Ling Indirectly Pimp You?" post at the previous blog.]
___________________________________
Karen,
Thanks for the additional, clarifying information. As you pointed out, the REAL money was tied up with that company that Lewis left for his Filipino wife. The company that she promptly dismantled and sold off! Those other bequests he made to his relatives were CHUMP CHANGE compared to the value of what he gave his wife.
All that money basically FedEx’ed to the Filipino-American collective and to the Phillipines. . .
I remember the days of AAs celebrating and feeling proud of this particular Negro. As if anything he was doing benefitted us. [Yet another episode of AAs celebraing "Black faces in high places" and NOT looking at the substance of the situation.]
Peace, blessings and solidarity.
Khadija Nassif says:
“JaliliMaster,
You said, “I think things are at a point where there aren’t ‘holes’ in the resource bucket, but rather, the bucket has no bottom! Frankly, the remedy is not to plug the holes but to change the bucket!”
{laughing} You’re quite correct! Lately, I’ve been trying to avoid using . . . intemperate . . . language while discussing these issues.”
Lol, you’re not going soft on me now, are you?
____________________
“Thanks for the additional, clarifying information. As you pointed out, the REAL money was tied up with that company that Lewis left for his Filipino wife. The company that she promptly dismantled and sold off! Those other bequests he made to his relatives were CHUMP CHANGE compared to the value of what he gave his wife.
All that money basically FedEx’ed to the Filipino-American collective and to the Phillipines.”
For someone worth $400 million (even more in today’s currency), the cash amounts he left to his family was chicken-change. My real question is that as he saw his wife was using his money to help her ‘people’, which, let’s be honest, any sensible woman would have done, did it ever occur to him that he should do the same? After all, it was his money. I don’t see any of the specifically black charitable causes he supported, given his wealth. But you don’t even have to look hard to see all that his wife did for her country people. That should tell you that he probably didn’t do much. Especially as negroes like to ‘over-celebrate’ any poultry ‘good deed’ that their fellow negroes do, we know for a fact that had this dude been remotely charitable to the AA community, even in half the measure his wife was to the Filipino community, we’d have heard about it long ago.
So true.
Withink 2 minutes of searching, I can already list up to 5 different Philipino/Philipino-American issues his wife has ‘invested’ in yet I’m yet to find any AA one that Reginald invested in to any such degree. Also, we know how, as you said, negroes like to ‘pat their hard behinds’ and shout from the roof top about any charitable thing they do. Even if he wasn’t like that, knowing black pple in general, they would have tooted his horn…….
…….still searching and haven’t found anything yet.
p.s., when I made my comment in reply to khadija a few posts above, when I said ‘wealth’, I was indeed refferring to the actual company he built as opposed to the few millions in cash. $5million is not ‘wealthy’. He was a ‘wealthy’ man so $5million would have been poultry.
My comment was in reference to what his wife did with the company and where most if not all the resources she got from the company went to.
Btw, what is his legacy now? It is actually ‘gone’. The company no longer exist, his name is not a brand. Of course, there could be stuff I’m missing (seeing as I don’t know exactly what his daughters do now) but if you look at other white and even black billionaires, their names and legacies will still linger on after them. E.g, Bill Gates (Microsoft), Paul Allen (Microsoft), Rockerfeller (ExxonMobil) who died long ago, Ellison (Oracle), Peter Norton (Norton/Symantec), Oprah (O-Network), Onassis (whose shipping empire is still ‘legendarily’ referred to several decades after his death and who has been able to secure future generations of his offspring such as his granddaughter who became one of the wealthiest women in the world after inheriting her mother 55% stake in her gradfathers empire).
Now think of Reginald Lewis. He was the richest AA in the 1980s and apparently, the 1st AA to become a billionaire. Where is that legacy now? The company that he was able to turn into a multi-billion dollar one is no longer in the hands of his progeny!
For someone who authored a book (biography) titled:
‘Why Should White Guys Have All the Fun?….How Reginald Lewis Created a Billion Dollar Business Empire.’,….. he obviously still had a lot to learn from those white guys!
At the risk of repeating myself, while typing this comment, I had a conversation with my sister based on this issue. The following points came up:
1. Honestly speaking there is nothing wrong with his wife diverting most of his wealth to her community but one would think AA might be considered as well. Think of for eg, David Bowie. Let’s be honest, the fact he was married to Iman could have played a large part in why he decided to donate into funds to help those foolish Jena 6 negroes. I’ve seen a lot of the resources he has given to AA issues in America and issues in Ethiopia. I’ve seen countless wealthy European men divert a lot of their resources to the countries of their African wives. One might say it is because they are men, well, what of the several white women you see married to middle eastern men and divert a lot of their husbands wealth to those regions. Infact, these women KNOW they would not get away with not doing that. It seems to be predominantly those married to black men (of varying ethnicities) that feel no obligation WHATSOEVER to divert any of thier husband wealth to his community. However, when you give it much thought, does it really surprise you. Look at the negroes they are married to. How often do the negro males ever divert any of their wealth back to the communities they came from? I’ve noticed a lot of ww have audacity to do it ONLY when married to black men but not to men of other non-white ethinicities/races.
2. Why would such indifference from a negro towards the AA collective surprise any of us seeing as there are so many who are indifferent to their own kids.
3. Whether any one wants to admit it or not, the wealth and legacy he built is now most likely in the hands of non-blacks, most likely white men.
4. As Khadija said, this is how blacks support ‘black faces in high places’ when the success of those blacks are in all honesty, of no benefit whatsoever to the black collective as a whole. If you doubt this, well consider the ffg:
- NONE or BARELY ANY of his wealth has flown back to the AA collective. It was AAs and NOT Philipinos that where celebrating him.
- Looking at most successful negro males, how often do you see them trying to lift up other blacks the way you see among say, Latinos, Asians, Greeks and most especially, Jews?
- So therefore, how was Reginalds success of any benefit to blacks? I’m not saying anyone should begrudge his succes bcos that would just be stupid and silly but in terms of giving support (even just by publicising such a person), make sure you are actually getting something valuable in return!
- His wife was promoting a book about him and it had to do with him being an AA and so successful and so on. So think of it, she was willing to financially benefit from her husband’s ethnicity/community even after he passed away but yet not willing to contribute anything WHATSOEVER to that community. It’s as if black people just enjoy getting PIMPED!!!
JaliliMaster,
Yes, I just might be going somewhat more reserved in terms of my tone of voice. LOL!
Regarding Mr. Lewis, I’m sure that if somebody searched hard and long enough, they could probably find some small amount of spare change that he once upon a time tossed at an AA charity or two. {chuckling}
____________________________________
Foxycleopatra,
You said, “Its funny you should mention this. I first saw this on Evia’s blog (i think) a few months ago. I did some ‘internet research’ and I’ve found the things/ causes/issues she diverted her husbands resources to after he passed. They are mainly Philipino. I don’t see anything wrong with giving so much to her comunity but one would expect that there would still be some concern for AAs…seeing as both her husband and kids are part of that community.”
I don’t see anything wrong with what Mrs. Lewis did with Mr. Lewis’ resources—he gave them to her! I never expected her to give anything at all to AAs. Why would she? How would giving to AAs help her and her self, family, clan, or ethnic group? It wouldn’t. She’s not part of the AA collective. She only did what was in her rational self-interest, and I don’t fault her for doing that. That’s what she was supposed to do with whatever resources the Negro handed over to her. {chuckling}
I don’t know if they had any kids, but if they did and raised them to be self-proclaimed, “don’t you dare call me Black,” “biracials” like Tigger or Jennifer Beals, then—NO—those children would NOT be part of the AA community. In fact, the so-called biracials’ primary concern is to repeatedly make the point that they are NOT part of the Black/AA community.
Furthermore, if most AA men give NOTHING back to the AA collective when they get their hands on significant resources, why would anybody expect some “biracial” offspring of theirs to give any (much less significant) resources to the AA collective?
Also, what folks forget is that a large number of these nonblack women who are hooked up to BM are racist to the core, and HATE Black people! How else did his mother raise a Tigger Woods who grows up to tell racist, anti-Black “jokes” in public? (Which I linked to in another comment.)
These nonblack women simply jumped on an easy BM-mealticket for themselves. The Kardashians and other nonblack women know that it’s MUCH easier for them to snag a wealthy BM than to marry a wealthy WM. BM’s entry requirements and standards for nonblack women are VERY, VERY low. And everybody knows this. Didn’t Kirstie Alley “joke” about having to settle for getting a BM if she remained obese (on her tv show) a few years back?
You said, “Btw, what is his legacy now? It is actually ‘gone’. The company no longer exist, his name is not a brand. Of course, there could be stuff I’m missing (seeing as I don’t know exactly what his daughters do now) but if you look at other white and even black billionaires, their names and legacies will still linger on after them. E.g, Bill Gates (Microsoft), Paul Allen (Microsoft), Rockerfeller (ExxonMobil) who died long ago, Ellison (Oracle), Peter Norton (Norton/Symantec), Oprah (O-Network), Onassis (whose shipping empire is still ‘legendarily’ referred to several decades after his death and who has been able to secure future generations of his offspring such as his granddaughter who became one of the wealthiest women in the world after inheriting her mother 55% stake in her gradfathers empire).”
Now think of Reginald Lewis. He was the richest AA in the 1980s and apparently, the 1st AA to become a billionaire. Where is that legacy now? The company that he was able to turn into a multi-billion dollar one is no longer in the hands of his progeny!
THIS is the sort of thing that I’m trying to focus the Sojourners’ attention on! For AAs it would be GREAT progress for us to keep our resources “in-house” (self, family, clan, ethnic group) for just ONE generation! I’m sure you’ve run across the statistics about how often a dollar is turned over in various ethnic communities before it flies outside the group. AAs can’t even turn the dollar bill over ONCE among ourselves before the money is GONE and in other people’s hands.
All of these issues are interlocking and connected to each other. It’s not the lack of money that is causing the phenomenon that we’re discussing—ALL AA-created resources IMMEDIATELY being given away to enrich others—it’s the lack of racial and ethnic self-respect that causes this!
Any Sojourner who wants there to be something left for her own children and maybe even her grandbabies needs to think long and hard about matters of ethnic and racial self-respect. Sojourners need to decide if they want whatever resources they get hands on to ultimately go the way that Reginald Lewis’ resources went. They also need to figure out whether they want to raise a new batch of Tiggers Woodses and Sammy Sosas.
**Addition to this comment:
Foxycleopatra, I see that you were typing your latest comment while I was typing this comment. LOL! Your latest comment sums up my thoughts about all of this. All of the above is why I continue talking about ethnic and racial self-respect for AAs. The lack of such is why AAs keep getting pimped over and over again.
Peace, blessings and solidarity.