Pan-Africanism : Father of Pan-Africanism; Kwame Nkhrumah

Ankhur,

In my view, the title...Father of Pan-Africanism...is not in dispute, just being shared, based on the record. As previously stated, I have no dog in this hunt and respect both Brothers equally.




The "dog" I have is called confusion. Confusion leads to conflict, un-necessary conflict.

One of the biggest obstacles to African Unification is rooted in what has risen from the ideas of Blyden. No matter how you look at it, Blyden's ideas are rooted in his white preacher. That is the problem we have with Blydenism. We take ideas that have been planted in our community by our enemies. And, because men like Blyden preach those ideas, we think thay are African ideas. They are not African ideas and values.

No. What Blyden is actually the father of is absolutely not Pan-Africanism which is a geo-polotical theory. There is no point in me trying to soft peddle this fact. Blyden was an advocate of white racism with a black face. What we must understand is that racism preached by a black African is still racism, not Pan-Africanism.

Blyedn's ideas, at best, formed what became known as "negritude". "Negritude" is currently peddled under the label of "afrocentricity". Neither "afrocentricity nor "negritude" is Pan-Africanism. Both are based on racism and/or ethnocentrism. Pan-Africanism is not racism and it is not ethnocentrism.

Blyden was a high official in the Liberian government. While the founders of Liberia had some good and positive ideas about Africa, many had perverted ideas towards Africans and Africanness. I am now inclined that most if not all of these perverted ideas come from a perverted religion called Christianity.

Look at it this way. The American Colonization Society was controlled mainly by whiite Europeans, not Africans. They wanted to get Africans out of America to make this white man's country more of a white man's country. So, they supported the colonization of Liberia.

Most of the colonizers were supported by American Christians and missionaries. So, their idea was to impose Christianity on west Africans. Keep in mind that Islam was and is the main religion in west Africa. So, to impose Christianity is bound to bring conflict. And, it did.

Early on, Liberia was very similar to what we have now in the zionost monstrocity of israel. The settlers wanted to impose western religion, namely Christianity, on Muslims. So, they set up a power structure in which only western Christians could participate. This meant that native Africans could not exercise their political and civil rights. Only so-called Americos could have political power. And what did they do with it? They used it to give African lands and resources to white western Euroepans, especially Firestone Company. It is precisely this model that is the basis on neo-colonialism, not Pan-Africanism, and it is the major obstacle to Unification in Africa.

Firestone got with started a rubber plantation around 1900 in Liberia. Later, it was determined that "The Plantation workers allege, among other things, that they remain trapped by poverty and coercion on a frozen-in-time Plantation operated by Firestone in a manner identical to how the Plantation was operated when it was first opened by Firestone in 1926." And, it gets worse: "...Firestone managers in Liberia admitted that the company does not effectively monitor its own policy prohibiting child labor." And worse: "... also noted that workers' housing provided by Firestone has not been renovated since the houses were constructed in the 1920s and 1930s."

Let us not fool ourselves, the problems created by Bldenism in Liberia contributed directed to the Liberian Civil War and the same things in Sierre Leone, Ivory Coast and now Guinea. An army sargeant rose up overthrew the Blydenism goverment of Liberia. He executed the Unlce Tom leaders. And, this eventually led to civil war. And this civil war spread to surrounding countries.

So, I do not take this issue about about Blyden ligtly at all. The jury is taill out on how this will ultimately work out. I think the current president of Liberia is trying hard to get the country on the right track. But, she must deals with the Blyden demons to do so. And, elections are scheduled for June in Guinea. The end of militray rule in Guinea is a positve step. But, if it brings Blydenism back to power, we will see more warfare all over west Africa, including Nigeria.
 
In the Spirit of Sankofa and Real Truth!

The "dog" I have is called confusion. Confusion leads to conflict, un-necessary conflict.

One of the biggest obstacles to African Unification is rooted in what has risen from the ideas of Blyden. No matter how you look at it, Blyden's ideas are rooted in his white preacher. That is the problem we have with Blydenism. We take ideas that have been planted in our community by our enemies. And, because men like Blyden preach those ideas, we think thay are African ideas. They are not African ideas and values.

No. What Blyden is actually the father of is absolutely not Pan-Africanism which is a geo-polotical theory. There is no point in me trying to soft peddle this fact. Blyden was an advocate of white racism with a black face. What we must understand is that racism preached by a black African is still racism, not Pan-Africanism.

Blyedn's ideas, at best, formed what became known as "negritude". "Negritude" is currently peddled under the label of "afrocentricity". Neither "afrocentricity nor "negritude" is Pan-Africanism. Both are based on racism and/or ethnocentrism. Pan-Africanism is not racism and it is not ethnocentrism.

Blyden was a high official in the Liberian government. While the founders of Liberia had some good and positive ideas about Africa, many had perverted ideas towards Africans and Africanness. I am now inclined that most if not all of these perverted ideas come from a perverted religion called Christianity.

Look at it this way. The American Colonization Society was controlled mainly by whiite Europeans, not Africans. They wanted to get Africans out of America to make this white man's country more of a white man's country. So, they supported the colonization of Liberia.

Most of the colonizers were supported by American Christians and missionaries. So, their idea was to impose Christianity on west Africans. Keep in mind that Islam was and is the main religion in west Africa. So, to impose Christianity is bound to bring conflict. And, it did.

Early on, Liberia was very similar to what we have now in the zionost monstrocity of israel. The settlers wanted to impose western religion, namely Christianity, on Muslims. So, they set up a power structure in which only western Christians could participate. This meant that native Africans could not exercise their political and civil rights. Only so-called Americos could have political power. And what did they do with it? They used it to give African lands and resources to white western Euroepans, especially Firestone Company. It is precisely this model that is the basis on neo-colonialism, not Pan-Africanism, and it is the major obstacle to Unification in Africa.

Firestone got with started a rubber plantation around 1900 in Liberia. Later, it was determined that "The Plantation workers allege, among other things, that they remain trapped by poverty and coercion on a frozen-in-time Plantation operated by Firestone in a manner identical to how the Plantation was operated when it was first opened by Firestone in 1926." And, it gets worse: "...Firestone managers in Liberia admitted that the company does not effectively monitor its own policy prohibiting child labor." And worse: "... also noted that workers' housing provided by Firestone has not been renovated since the houses were constructed in the 1920s and 1930s."

Let us not fool ourselves, the problems created by Bldenism in Liberia contributed directed to the Liberian Civil War and the same things in Sierre Leone, Ivory Coast and now Guinea. An army sargeant rose up overthrew the Blydenism goverment of Liberia. He executed the Unlce Tom leaders. And, this eventually led to civil war. And this civil war spread to surrounding countries.

So, I do not take this issue about about Blyden ligtly at all. The jury is taill out on how this will ultimately work out. I think the current president of Liberia is trying hard to get the country on the right track. But, she must deals with the Blyden demons to do so. And, elections are scheduled for June in Guinea. The end of militray rule in Guinea is a positve step. But, if it brings Blydenism back to power, we will see more warfare all over west Africa, including Nigeria.




abdurratln,

Brother, your fight is not with me, but those having rightly or wrongly, given Blyden the title, Father of Pan-Africanism. Unlike Brother Corvo, save the history lessons, I’m all too familiar. Below is an excerpt and its accompanying link, which directly contradicts the theory you have of Edward Blyden's role as a Christian.

Repeating myself, Blyden’s recognition as Father of Pan-Africanism is legit and will not be changed through back and forth discourse between us, in this forum:



"Blyden, who was a nominal Christian, argued that a legion of Christianized and Western educated “Negroes” would not lead Africa to the promise land of modernity and continental development. He argued that Christianity has had a demoralizing effect on blacks whereas Islam, on the other hand, has had a unifying and elevating impact. He also believed that education was being used as one of the critical instruments to support and continue the colonization and exploitation of Africa. According to him, “All educated Negroes suffer from a kind of slavery in many ways far more subversive of the real welfare of the race than the ancient physical fetters. The slavery of the mind is far more destructive than that of the body.”

http://www.africaunbound.org/index....on-the-struggle-for-african-liberation-2.html
edward_blyden_ecc44417d439300facce78d732ad706a.jpg
 
abdurratln,

Brother, your fight is not with me, but those having rightly or wrongly given Blyden the title, Father of Pan-Africanism. Unlike Brother Corvo, save the history lessons, I’m all too familiar. Below are an excerpt and its accompanying link, which directly contradicts the theory you have of Edward Blyden's role as a Christian.

Repeating myself, Blyden’s recognition as Father of Pan-Africanism is legit and will not be changed through back and forth discourse between us, in this forum:



"Blyden, who was a nominal Christian, argued that a legion of Christianized and Western educated “Negroes” would not lead Africa to the promise land of modernity and continental development. He argued that Christianity has had a demoralizing effect on blacks whereas Islam, on the other hand, has had a unifying and elevating impact. He also believed that education was being used as one of the critical instruments to support and continue the colonization and exploitation of Africa. According to him, “All educated Negroes suffer from a kind of slavery in many ways far more subversive of the real welfare of the race than the ancient physical fetters. The slavery of the mind is far more destructive than that of the body.”

http://africaunbound.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=83




I do not question that point you have made.

First, let me emphasize a fact that is crucial to catching this thing with its hand in the cookie jar: "Blyden was the Liberian Secretary of State (1862-1864) and Minister of the Interior (1880-1882)." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Wilmot_Blyden) And what kind of a government was it? Was it a government that understand that Islam had a positive role in Africa? Or was it a government that imposed Christianity on the Muslim community?

"The population of over 3 million comprises 16 indigenous ethnic groups and various foreign minorities. Indigenous peoples comprise about 95% of the population, the largest of which are the Kpelle in central and western Liberia. Americo-Liberians, who are descendants of African-American settlers, make up 2.5%" "Of the population, 40% hold indigenous beliefs, 40% are Christians, and 20% are Muslims.

"The religious practices, social customs and cultural standards of the Americo-Liberians had their roots in the antebellum American South. These ideals strongly influenced the attitudes of the settlers toward the indigenous African people. The new nation, as they perceived it, was coextensive with the settler community and with those Africans who were assimilated into it. Mutual mistrust and hostility between the "Americans" along the coast and the "Natives" of the interior was a recurrent theme in the country's history, along with (usually successful) attempts by the Americo-Liberian minority to dominate what they identified as savage native peoples." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberia#Demographics)

Reading between the lines, it is not too difficult to see that Muslims were a lot more than 20% in mid-1800's. So, what we have is a situation where 2.5% of the population imposed Christianity on 95% of the people to the extent that Christianity is now 40%. How else did Christianity get into Liberia? This is oppression of Africans by Uncle Tom Africans.

So, this is what Blyden was all about. No matter how much we try to re-write history, Blyden never even so much as used the term Pan-Africanism. Such a geo-political cancept was far from his mind. He was never a Pan-Africnaist, neither subjectively nor objectively. Do not try to fool me. You are wasting your time and mine.

Now to be fair, I know that there were many Americo-Liberians who became Muslims. But, Blyden was not one of them.
 
In the Spirit of Sankofa and Real Truth!

I do not question that point you have made.

First, let me emphasize a fact that is crucial to catching this thing with its hand in the cookie jar: "Blyden was the Liberian Secretary of State (1862-1864) and Minister of the Interior (1880-1882)." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Wilmot_Blyden) And what kind of a government was it? Was it a government that understand that Islam had a positive role in Africa? Or was it a government that imposed Christianity on the Muslim community?

"The population of over 3 million comprises 16 indigenous ethnic groups and various foreign minorities. Indigenous peoples comprise about 95% of the population, the largest of which are the Kpelle in central and western Liberia. Americo-Liberians, who are descendants of African-American settlers, make up 2.5%" "Of the population, 40% hold indigenous beliefs, 40% are Christians, and 20% are Muslims.

"The religious practices, social customs and cultural standards of the Americo-Liberians had their roots in the antebellum American South. These ideals strongly influenced the attitudes of the settlers toward the indigenous African people. The new nation, as they perceived it, was coextensive with the settler community and with those Africans who were assimilated into it. Mutual mistrust and hostility between the "Americans" along the coast and the "Natives" of the interior was a recurrent theme in the country's history, along with (usually successful) attempts by the Americo-Liberian minority to dominate what they identified as savage native peoples." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberia#Demographics)

Reading between the lines, it is not too difficult to see that Muslims were a lot more than 20% in mid-1800's. So, what we have is a situation where 2.5% of the population imposed Christianity on 95% of the people to the extent that Christianity is now 40%. How else did Christianity get into Liberia? This is oppression of Africans by Uncle Tom Africans.

So, this is what Blyden was all about. No matter how much we try to re-write history, Blden never even so much as used the term Pan-Africanism. Such a geo-political cancept was far from his mind. He was never a Pan-Africnaist, neither subjectively nor objectively. Do not try to fool me. You are wasting your time and mine.

Now to be fair, I know that there were many Americo-Liberians who became Muslims. But, Blyden was not one of them.




abdurrantln,

Our faiths are diametrically opposed abdurrantln, as a Christian, I applaud Blyden and his designation as Father of Pan-Africanism, you don't.

For the record, Blyden far preceded the use of the term Pan-Africanism and could not have use it; and so you miss the whole point of the academic determination of the disposition granting him to be, Father of Pan-Africanism...Peace In my brother.




 

Donate

Support destee.com, the oldest, most respectful, online black community in the world - PayPal or CashApp

Latest profile posts

HODEE wrote on Etophil's profile.
Welcome to Destee
@Etophil
Destee wrote on SleezyBigSlim's profile.
Hi @SleezyBigSlim ... Welcome Welcome Welcome ... :flowers: ... please make yourself at home ... :swings:
Back
Top