AN ANSWER TO THOSE WHO SHIFT THE BLAME TO AFRICANS FOR SELLING THEIR OWN PEOPLE INTO CHATTEL SLAVERY IN THE AMERICAS

“AFRICAN RULERS SOLD THEIR OWN PEOPLE INTO SLAVERY!”

This is a common consideration/objection raised concerning the responsibility for reparations and I have previously addressed slavery in the West African context. However, I have a very simple answer to this objection that is being made by some in the reparations movement.

Because NO Africans were trafficked to the Americas BEFORE June 18, 1452, and because the Dum Diversas Apostolic Edict was a declaration of total war issued by the Pope claiming planetary authority, and following the declaration a military invasion was initiated, then all trafficking by all parties are de facto "war time activities".

It doesn't matter who was taking the action of capturing and trafficking, all of it occured by virtue of the war declaration. Here is how Sir Hilary Beckles, Chairman of the CARICOM Reparations Commission, describes it in his speech “The Age of Terror: Europe and the Trade in Africans in West Africa,” given 3-2-2023:

"The chattel slave was not an African product. One of the characteristics of European History has been this notion that slavery existed everywhere and therefore there was nothing new in what they were engaged in and this was one of the first mythology and lies and deception imbedded in European History. The word Slavery was used historically in the most loose and elastic fashion to include all relationships in which individuals experience some reduction in your freedom. Institution of marriage, the female experience some reduction of freedom through resources, control of them, naming and control of children. This is imbedded in most systems of the world historically. This was seen as the shallow end. Then there was a question of What do you do with prisoners of wars, you go to war you have prisoners you have a choice, You can execute them as losers or bring them home and integrate them into your community but now they are now working on behalf of the state, chief or family. But these people had rights. They had rights to live in the community, rights to resources, rights to their own family, to get married, they could become high officers in the families in the royalty. . . . None of that was significant in the context of what the Europeans wanted. The Europeans invented a new category of slavery that had never been seen on planet earth before. No culture of civilization had ever created this thing called chattel slavery. Have never been found before. It was something specifically created to enslave the African and bring him across the Atlantic to slavery in the Americas. That moment in history. How do I establish the authenticity of that statement? What chattel slavery was? This is something that seems to have erupted from the depth of hell. Never seen before. First, A Chattel slave under law is not a human being. In no system of labor,in no system of domestic usage, in no system of family usage, in no system in which the word slavery was used before were those people denied their human identity –all of these people who were classified as slaves loosely were seen as heroic people were people who had status in their families. They performed domestic work, they performed agricultural work, they were married they had their children, many became ambassadors of the kings to go and do things on behalf of the king, they were just servants. In chattel slavery The African was not a human being, the African was property. The so called domestic slave in Africa was not Property, they were human beings whose identity was respected.

We also know that this military engagement in Africa began as a search for gold. And shifting from gold trade to the kidnapping of enchained labor. That was the enormity of this military complex that was unleashed upon the indigenous people of Africa . . . In Europe the royal families were the principle investors in these military operations. . . . The British Royal African Country had the full might of the British army and navy behind them. No West African government had the military capacity to withstand the military onslaught of these companies. These companies built forts along the coast of West Africa from Senne Gambia to Congo. . . . These corporations, and I have to emphasize this for people who have not been effectively exposed, there is a belief which you will find from observing movies and Hollywood type images, that slave traders were just a group of random individuals who took a small ships went out and randomly grabbed people and took them down the river and put them on a boat. You are looking at the most highly organized commercial military complex at this time. These corporations had dozens and dozens of ships, and thousands of soldiers in West africa on the coast to protect the storage and the shipment. They were Highly militarized with the latest military technology with the guns and the cannons and they were able to penetrate deeply into Africa with this military capacity. The Wealth that they accumulated, which was in the first instance the monopoly wealth of the royal families, eventually tricked down to the private sector, when they were given free access and down to the banks. The Bank of England was established in 1694 to help to finance the slave trade. All of the wealth coming back into England, going to the royal family and aristocracies that money had to be converted into investment capital . And so the Bank Of England was created . . . ."

Meanwhile, I have previously discussed The Correctness of Shifting from the European "Slave Trade" to the African "War Crimes" Narrative: Notes on José Lingna Nafafé's New Book on the 1684 Mendonça (Kongo) Reparations Case at the Vatican. My friend, Jose Lingna Nafafe, makes the point in his new book, Lourenço da Silva Mendonça and the Black Atlantic Abolitionist Movement in the Seventeenth Century:

"To fully comprehend Mendonça’s work, it is crucial that we understand from the outset that the enslavement of Africans was part of the Portuguese conquest of West Central Africa, and the enslavement of Angolans was inseparable from Portuguese military aggression in the region. From the beginning of Portuguese settlement there in the mid-sixteenth century, war was waged against the West Central African people. This was the catalyst for the enslavement of ordinary civilians. . . If we are to grasp the rationale behind the capture of enslaved people, in the region and understand how they were obtained, it is crucial to recognise the role played by the Municipal City Council of Luanda, which regulated the shipment of the enslaved Angolans sent to Brazil. Indeed, it is impossible to understand the significance of Mendonça’s court case without taking account of the involvement of the Municipal City Council of Luanda in the slave trade. Central to the argument of this book, then, is the story of the destruction of Pungo-Andongo and the death of its last king, Joao (John) Hari II, who was Mendonça’s uncle. . . Crucially, to fully understand the involvement of sobas (Angolan local rulers) in the slave trade in Angola and perhaps eslewhere in Africa, I contend that it is necessary to take into account the introduction in 1626 by Fernao de Sousa, the Portuguese governor in Angola, of baculamento, a tax payment of enslaved people in place of encombros, a tax payment in produce.  This is a piece of new data that has not been used by historians of West Central Africa, Africanists and Atlanticists. I argue that it had far-reaching consequences for the historiography of the region in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Unaware of this legislation, West Central African historiography on ‘taxation’, ‘wars’, ‘debt’ and ‘legal practices’ has unwittingly been prevented from truly understanding the reasons for and methods of enslavement. These historians of West Central Africa have remained ignorant of Sousa’s introduction of the baculamento. Subsequent governors and their captains in the presidio (Portuguese outpost) in Angola used the baculamento for centuries to naturalise the Atlantic slave trade. And the baculamento has remained obscure until now; most West Central African historians have taken it as accepted wisdom that slavery was an African practice, and the idea that Africans colluded in Atlantic slavery has never been challenged. Generations of scholars have studied systems of ‘taxation’, ‘wars’, ‘debt’ and ‘legal practices’ without interrogating the Portuguese institution of baculamento, which overrode local practices; instead, blame has been placed on the Angolan institutions. All Angolan soba allies of the Portuguese conquest were obliged to make a payment of 100 enslaved people annually to Portugal. This Portuguese taxation, which was named after the local baculamento practice - a tribute system- profoundly disrupted the Angolan socio-political and legal system and resulted in social upheaval. Communities and their rulers were turned against each other, a new local judicial procedure was imposed that served the interests of the Atlantic slave trade, putting judicial officers in local courts in Angola to adjudicate local cases in their own interest - what Kimbwandende K.B. Fu-Kiau called a turning point in African governance and leadership in West Central Africa.

Conquered, and subjected to Portuguese rule, Angolan kings and sobas loyal to the king of Portugal were made subject to annual tax payment in human beings in 1626, thus turning people into a currency. This was particularly the case for Angolan kings, because ‘native’ soldiers were recruited directly from the region where the Portuguese had established control and maintained fairs (markets). The Municipal Council of Luanda was charged with dividing land already conquered from the Angolans between the Portuguese and African war captains, so-called guerra preta. . . . Guerra preta was a term used to refer to Angolan soldiers who were recruited by force from the Portuguese-controlled or -conquered region of Angola. All loyal sobas in both Angola and Kongo were conquered by the Portuguese and forced to give obedience to the Portuguese Crown in five areas: (1) pay annual tax in enslaved people to the Crown; (2) allow recruitment of soldiers for war to fight alongside the Portuguese contingent of soldiers stationed in Angola or Kongo against fellow Angolans or Kongolese; (3) open local and regional markets for the Portuguese to freely trade and impose their rule; (4) allow Portuguese priests to build churches and carry out Christian mission activities in the area; (5) allow land to be alienated for the Portuguese use. In return, sobas were granted protection from their Angolan enemies, and their children offered Portuguese education. . . .

On 19 November 1664, members of the Municipal Council of Luanda showed their power by lodging a complaint with the Crown that was adjudicated by the Portuguese Overseas Council, which dealth with all overseas affairs: 

‘That the trade of the same Kingdom [Angola] consists only in the enslaved that is carried out in the lands of Soba’s vassals of His Majesty, that is, from presidios such as Lobolo, Dembos, Benguella, and from those that are mostly conquered by that government . . . that the most important thing that there is in that kingdom, which is in need of maintaining, is the Royal standard tax duty in slaves that they dispatch from the factory of Your Majesty. It is not that its profit is great, but also for being used for sustaining the Infantry, and to pay governors’ salaries of five presidios of hinterland, of secular priests in Kongo, and of other clergy of that kingdom, and other salaries, and budgets.’


This clearly demonstrates that the City Council’s budget depended entirely on revenues from enslavement. The slave trade in Angola was the lifeblood of the council and maintained the Portuguese project of conquest; without it, there was no Portuguese Empire. . . .  
Mendonça represented those constituencies from his own family - his grandfather, Philipe Hari I, and father, Ignacio da Silva - who were coerced into the slave trade by the Portuguese regime in Angola. . . . When it comes to historical sources, in 1682 the Jesuit missionaries Francisco Jose de Jaca and Epifanio de Moirans, who knew and supported Mendonça’s court case, completed their work Servi Liberi Seu Naturalis Mancipiorum Libertatis Iusta Defensio ( Freed Slaves or the Just Defence of the Natural Freedom of the Emancipated). Both also offered a critique of the capture of Africans in Africa who were then taken to the Americas as enslaved people. While renowned Spanish Jesuit Barolome De las Casas (1484-1566) defended the Indigenous Americans against slavery, the lesser-known Jaca and Moirans also spoke out against the enslavement of Africans using the legal arguments of the time. Their work, however, did not come to the fore in the debate on the Atlantic slave trade until the beginning of the 1980s, when their defence was translated from Latin to Spanish by Jose Tomas Lopez Garcia as Dos Defensores de los Esclavos Negros en el Siglo XVII (Two Defenders of the Black Slaves in the Seventeenth Century). Neither Jaca nor Moirans went to Africa as missionaries, but they both worked as Jesuit priests in Venezuela and Cuba, where they met. Their defense is a major work on the injustice of African enslavement in the Americas, and on the abolition of slavery in the Atlantic yet it is almost unknown. They analyzed in great depth the same legal terms that were used by Mendonça in the Vatican, such as ‘natural’, ‘human’, ‘divine’, ‘civil’, and ‘canon law (jus canonico)’, challenging why Atlantic slavery was being practiced against these laws. They argued that the Atlantic slave trade was illegal, stating that ‘when we begin with natural law, all men are born free’. They contended that the responsibility for those enslaved Africans in the Americas law with the pope, because ‘the lords of blind slaves with their ambition to impress the Governor (the governors in the Indies are subject to the Catholic King and the kings are subject to the Pope). This chain of responsibility made it necessary for the pope to punish the guilty parties committing such crimes, particularly the Portuguese governing authorities in Africa, Brazil and the Americas. And this obligation also implicated the pope in a crime against humanity: the Atlantic slave trade.”

When so-called "complicit African kings and queens" raided and attacked each other and trafficked African people, it was done so to fulfill the war tribute/tax imposed by the Dum Diversas principals subject to the Pope . . . .

This is just a small sample of the research which informs my work and the reason for the questions in the Request for the ICJ opinion. Again, it doesn't matter who it was doing the capturing, buying and selling, all of it was initiated and exacerbated by the Dum Diversas and succeeding Asiento monopoly war contracts.

REPARATIONS FOR THE DUM DIVERSAS WAR IS THE UNIFYING GLOBAL AFRIKAN REPARATIONS CLAIM that the Resolution on Africa’s Reparations Agenda and The Human Rights of Africans In the Diaspora and People of African Descent Worldwide - ACHPR/Res.543 (LXXIII) 2022 - Dec 12, 2022 calls for:

"2. Calls upon member states to: . . . take measures to eliminate barriers to acquisition of citizenship and identity documentation by Africans in the diaspora; to establish a committee to consult, seek the truth, and conceptualize reparations from Africa’s perspective, describe the harm occasioned by the tragedies of the past, establish a case for reparations (or Africa’s claim), and pursue justice for the trade and trafficking in enslaved Africans, colonialism and colonial crimes, and racial segregation and contribute to non-recurrence and reconciliation of the past;, . . . 4. Encourages civil society and academia in Africa, to embrace and pursue the task of conceptualizing Africa’s reparations agenda with urgency and determination.” 

IMARI OBADELE ON MALCOLM X AND REPARATIONS

Excerpts: 

3:54 - Greetings from the Provisional Government of the Republic of New AfriKa and from the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America . . . . distinguished people who have come here tonight not only to honor Malcolm X but also to talk about and plan for and finally act upon our future. I'm going to talk very briefly and center my remarks today on the issue of reparations. You will recall that reparations is the idea that black people in our context should be paid for slavery that even those of us who exist - they should receive payment for the unjust war and the enslavement of our people in this country, unjust war waged against us by the United States and sanctioned in the United States Constitution . . . . 


15:27 - We were entitled to believe that the federal government made a promise for 40 acres and a mule . . . . the promise of the 40 acres goes back beyond General Sherman. White folks when they indentured other white folks, when they held white servants during colonial time in South Carolina and Maryland used to give an indentured freed person freedom dues. They did that in all the colonies. They had been indentured - you work for seven years if you were a criminal you might have worked for 14 years occasionally even 24 and when you whites were free there was freedom dues. This is sometimes $50 and acts and a suit and a new suit of clothes, a barrel of corn. In South Carolina where we were long in the majority and in Maryland they gave the freed indentured servant 50 acres. So the idea that somehow we could help ourselves if we were just given a little to work with. We have never forgotten reparations. In the 1818 -19s black people across this country organized into something called the Ex-slaves Bounty and Reparations Society, collected 50 cent apiece, waged their campaign at Congress and indeed found some black, some white congressmen willing to support the idea that blacks should be compensated for slavery or at least given something with which to begin to build economically new lives. Well what happened to the Ex-slaves Bounty and Reparations Society? . . . . the American government jailed these men and women who were in the leadership of this movement . . . .


20:42 -  They sent a missive to the United Nations . . .  in 1963 because they had an idea that unless within 100 years of the Emancipation Proclamation we made a formal demand to international sources we might as well forget reparations since they did it to try to preserve for us the idea and the right to avoid this legal concept . . . .


21:25 - And all of you here most of you here except the very young know the modern story Republic of New Afrika in 1968 formed the cause in large part of the work of Queen Mother but these were the Malcolm X, the members of the Malcolm X Society, formed after his assassination who then called the black government conference . . . . and here where a declaration of independence was concluded part of it says we claim no rights from America except those rights that belong to people all over the world and these include the right to reparations for the grievous harm inflicted upon us, our people, by the United States. Republican of New Africa people went into the streets, some of you in Chicago may have first encountered provisional government people asking you to sign a petition and incidentally we have petitions. . . .  What is the minimum that they owe and as you can plan in your mind, when you take into consideration the the Middle Passage, when you take into consideration just the war waged against us in North America under the United States constitution's provision of what we call a fugitive slave provision which said that you could not even leave just peacefully and quietly and go away because the whole force of the United States government, Army, Navy, Marines, stood against you, their court system stood against you . . . . never mind that . . . they will cut off Gabriel's head and hang it on the post.  Gabriel [Prosser] understood that if he lost the revolution that they were going to do that to him. He knew what kind of people they were dealing. I said he stuck his head and those of his companions on the posts and an arrayed the walks into the town of Richmond with these heads so that everybody and particularly the black people would understand that you don't raise your hand against white people. . . . What about the little old lady reading her Bible and decides, unlike the Hebrew, she won't take any gold and silver, won't say to the people who have been harming her, “let me just borrow so I can go out into the desert and pray.” I pray the little old lady who just leaves quietly at night watching the North Star barefoot the full force of the United States government was against her, not just Gabriel or that [Nat] Turner . . . . 


26:26 - and so the African people's Socialist Party worked in the streets and then in Baltimore and in Tallahassee in certain other places across the United States trying to raise this consciousness and in 1987 the provisional government's legislature - this is the national body. [I] Hope some of you who really believe in land who really believes that we should have independence, I hope in the RNA elections this year those of you who are really serious and will bring your talent and your money will run and be elected out of Chicago or wherever you may happen to live, to this national body. They decided that we were trying to call together black people from across this country to see if we could form a coalition that was not just land-based nationalists like myself but to spread out to the sororities and fraternities to churches to spread out to all groups and we said we wanted to at that time work make a more positive New AfriKan contribution to the freedom of our people in southern Africa and mind you that's another story . . . . so the National Conference of Black Lawyers came together with the Provisional Government and formed the National Coalition of Blacks for reparations in America (NCOBRA).


32:50 - We have never forgotten reparations. It really doesn't matter to our enemies and the United States is our enemy until they are willing to sign a peace treaty. As you know they never signed it with Elijah Muhammad not to mention Denmark Vesey, Gabriel, they haven't signed it with the Republic of New Afrika . . . . the United States is our enemy until they cease its war against us. Now the enemy has to be forced . . . .


39:11 - Now I think brother Hannibal told me I'm gonna have a chance tomorrow to talk something about the Republic of New Afrika but I just want to mention this to you. We in the Provisional Government take the position that black people should not say we're American citizens. I mean this relates to also this question of our using the term African American and alas one of my colleagues and I said . . . .  Ron Walters who was one of those who pushes, I said,  “look Ron you know what? I use this term African American because you know we're not Americans” and he said,  “yeah, but just to get us to say African now is such an improvement that maybe we ought to take this step.” But what concerns us is maybe let's just say African. It’s just Africans. I mean, like I said, we're Africans in the new world so were New Africans or Africans because in the 200 years between 1660 and 1860 we have what, ten, seven generations? And in that time who were these Africans? They didn't come from one country, one state one nation in Africa, they came from several. I mean even though they say well we came mostly from the west coast but you remember it was a Spanish and the Portuguese who attacked into the Angola region and who also went around and attacked them, attacked them in Mozambique and so we came from all over the continent and here we had many people from many different nations who could not stay together. In Africa you knew who you could marry. Once you get here, you've got a mind to marry the woman who was next to you and so we have in America across seven to ten generations a fusing of people from many different African nations and States. And then you've got the Indian genes and you got the European genes in our gene pool and so here then you'll have a common history that solidifies the people. . . . How do you know I'm black? You know it because, not only because the gene pool, but because you know my brother and sister we may not have blue eyes and fair skin. Not only because of the gene pool but you know it also because of the common perspective and the common history. So when we look for instance at people on the same territory in the same space . . .  Maybe it's easier if we look at say the Mohawk or the Passamaquoddy or some of those in New York and New England here when the whites come. The Europeans come to Massachusetts, they are on the same land with the Passamaquoddy, they are in the same time frame, they are experiencing the same event which will be war - because we read the end of the books that we know it turns into war - so here they are at the same time, same place, same timeframe, two different perspectives. The whites are saying,  “Oh God thank you for giving us this wonderful land” and the Indians are saying much like, “God what did we do to lose this land?”  Always we would say,  “God what did we do wrong to get us in this mess? What can we do to get out of it?”  It's the same time, same place, same event - two different perspectives and those two different perspectives in history create two different nations.  See, the nation is what evolves. We can't create it. Queen Mother couldn't, Elijah Muhammad couldn't. The nation evolves, it's not made up. Either we are or we are not and we are because of gene pool [and] perspective in history. We don't have state power. Gabriel tried, Denmark Vesey tried,  Tunis Campbell tried, and for a while succeeded. The Sea Islands off of South Carolina and Georgia, the red towns and black towns joined together in Florida before 1819 and succeeded - the Indian’s Seminole State for one. But in general we have not succeeded in freeing the land. We don't have state power.  Yes, we have an army.  When we think of state power, think army. It's so small now, so tiny now. We are a nation without state power and so in . . .  overthrowing colonial education, brother Hannibal needs help. We all need help. We got to get it, I mean, because this is an essential part of our reparations campaign. We cannot demand certain things if we don't want, as Malcolm says, and here in the education pieces, we don't know the past. And then if we don't know the terminology that is used . . . it isn't that the terminology is right or wrong, but some of it is so potent in its acceptance that we have to understand the terminology in order to deal and get what we want. Again not a question of whether the terminology is right or wrong but we have to understand it. We must not be shy in the classrooms. Brother Chaos, he was just telling me about his experiences, how principals come up and say, “you got to teach this and this and this” and he goes in, he says “okay I'll do that and teach us the liberation of his people.” We must not be afraid in the classrooms to teach that we are a nation of the oppressed people.  No matter what, Europe or Africa who retain some sense of the nationality strive to build state power. You see it a little bit today in Latvia. They understood that they were a separate people, a nation, that the Soviet’s claim to their land was bogus and so they fight or struggle to free themselves, to build, to have state power and the army.  We know that in Poland's history, the Germans have come in from the west as Russians have come in from the east from times ago and wiped out Poland and noted that in many instances Poles who lived under the Germans said, “it's your school around here, these Germans are such marvelous mechanistic people and they're letting us to go to these schools. We ought to just forget this thing about Poland.” And to those who are living in the Russian area, this “so what do we need Poland for because we are all slaves around here. Great Russian people, what do we need Poland for?” But some Poles understood that their history was distinct from the history of the Russians. . . . And the moment they got the chance, which came at the end of World War II,  there's gonna be a new and free Poland. So it's not just us, but we must fight here against the colonial education. We must be ashamed for the children and so what they would go into the streets in opposition to colonial education to be taught in Africanist and we teachers walk in and collect our salary, don't even back up to it,  go straight up there smiling and collect our salaries and teach horse manure, teach nothing about a New African Nation. You must teach these young people who are wearing Malcolm medallions and singing about Malcolm. . . . They are entitled to learn from you and me, they are entitled to have the explanations that they need. As a teacher, I always say to the young people, “you are entitled to trust your professors. Imani,  have faith, but question everything. And it is important for us to put the information in front of the young people. Queeny Mother did not make up the New Afrikan nation, it grew, it evolved, like every nation and we struggle for state power. My reference is Malcolm X's message to the grassroots . . . . talking about statehood really independent land. Now think not that we have an easy battle here at Congress. They don't regard you as any subjugated nation because you walk around talking about you are American whatever that is . . . Malcolm gave us the word. He said I am NOT an American citizen, remember I am one of the 20 million victims of America. We say, “hey cool that's a statement of the international law” and that's law today. It says you can't take a captured people and make them into anything . . . so if you have conquered somebody you must ask them what they want to do afterwards. The Conqueror cannot come and make you into anything. . . . 


56:03 - Nevertheless if I want to go back to Africa that is a logical choice or if I just want to say I'm out of here because these people have treated me so bad, I'm going somewhere else, I don't care if it's China, Sweden, nowhere - that's another choice. It's two of them right then because they held you here. If you decided, well I want to be an American citizen, that was a logical option and a possible option. Okay, so you got a right to do that. If they held you here you're not able to do it. . . . There's more to this three lines of stress but then finally obviously you could do what so many Africans tried to do here is get on out in the woods and build you an independent state. So those are the logical four options you had and so when John Franklin told us about the law we said well what we need to do is to bring to black people generally the idea of self-determination. . . . If you wanted to vote in the enemies election you have to sign something that says “I'm an American citizen”. So you know we said well that's under duress. So first of all, the Provisional Government put out the word, we have issued the words, “no black people have valid US citizenship” but they still take our taxes, don't it?  I mean, you can't go up and tell them, “well I'm a citizen of Republic of New Afrika, therefore I'm not paying the gasoline tax” but you don't get the gas. I mean, so they take your taxes and so if you're sitting in Chicago and they are getting ready to have an election for the mayor what is wrong with you trying to get somebody in that's going to take better take better care of your taxes than somebody else? So I don't vote in the United States election because I have served as President for these years. I am . . .  there will be a new president in the fall and I will hopefully get elected to the People Senate Council from Louisiana, but in any case the citizenship in New AfriKa is not going to stop you from having to pay taxes and so if they take your taxes go ahead and vote if you wish. I mean, if you feel like it and I think you honor in many circumstances, if you've got a chance to do better in the enemy system and have somebody in the enemy system that does better for you than somebody else who's going to get there anyway . . . .  Okay? So don't worry. Signing IOUs in status under duress doesn't mean a thing. Now but it is important for you to know and for you to teach whether or not these options are viable . . . . 



1:06:54 - We really don't have to tell them squat about what we want to do with the reparations but the other side of the picture is that we make a more significant case when we not only say that we want to do things to end the dope economy to do something about border babies and young women and the use of crack and cocaine and all of that.  Not only when we say we want to do that but when we begin to build the institutions and the industries that will make it possible for us to do that . . . .  So you notice that Poland doesn't come to the United States and say give us some money because now we have overthrown communism. They come to America with a plan. All of those countries . . . Panama doesn't come and just say look y'all did us wrong and blew up the house, give us some money. They come with a plan and so we in the Provisional Government, and mind you, this is only one idea because we must come together as a people and decide what the ideas are, there's. . . . the national conference is June 15 in Washington. There are leaflets out there about it, but we have to come together and talk so let me just tell you about the RNA idea. We say give one third of the reparations straight to the black families, black individuals. [Some] said well you give it to them and [it will] be right back to the white man. Don't worry about it. I mean people aren't entitled to raise their income, they are entitled to take ten, twenty, thirty, forty thousand dollars, whatever their family gets, and use it for what they want because what are they gonna do? They're gonna buy a house, maybe a decent car, help the children with education and some of you all buy stocks and bonds. So yeah, some of us are gonna waste it. Give the money to individuals. We say that a third of us should be given to those groups and organizations that are working on all these problems. Obviously we are not satisfied with what the United States government is doing. What we are doing about these problems? And all of us know but we think that if the agencies - I don't mean agencies, I mean people like the Deltas and all those community groups that are working on these problems - if they had a little more money without any budget cuts - because you know how the white folks do, they want to give you this and take that back - if they had a little more money they could do even better programs to help. And of course, we say that a third should be given to the nation builders. . . .  part of the effort of the United States was to destroy the state every time you raised up the question of statehood, the question of having an army. And it didn't matter whether it was Tunis Campbel or those revolutionaries or they are for Indian Seminole State - they never let you have any peace. Why was Malcolm X killed? Because he talked to you about State Building and the state builders money would be used for economic development, collective economic development. We have to talk together and plan together through organized efforts. . . .

Video Block
Double-click here to add a video by URL or embed code. Learn more

𝐏𝐆𝐑𝐍𝐀 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐀𝐟𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐬 𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 - Queen Mother Audley Moore's Speech to the Summit Meeting of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in Kampala, Uganda - July 28, 1975

𝐏𝐆𝐑𝐍𝐀 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐀𝐟𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐬 𝐇𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 . . . .

In 1955 Queen Mother Audley Moore founded the Reparations Committee of Descendants of United States Slaves. In 1957, Queen Mother Audley Moore presented a petition to the United Nations and a second one in 1959, 𝒂𝒓𝒈𝒖𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒔𝒆𝒍𝒇-𝒅𝒆𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏, 𝒂𝒈𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒔𝒕 𝒈𝒆𝒏𝒐𝒄𝒊𝒅𝒆, 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒍𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒓𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔, making her an international advocate. Interviewed by E. Menelik Pinto, Moore explained the petition, in which she asked for 𝟐𝟎𝟎 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐬 to monetarily compensate for 400 years of slavery. The petition also called for 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐰𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚.

In 1962, Moore organized the Reparations Committee of the Descendants of United States Slaves, which filed a claim in California. She went to the White House in 1962 to meet with President John F. Kennedy. In 1963, at the time of the one hundred years of the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation, Queen Mother set up the Reparations Committee with a petition drive to get signatures to demand reparations for slavery and 100 years of economic, political inequality. She went all over the country getting signatures and organized the African-American Party of National Liberation in August 1963. and its political position was that African Americans constituted a captive oppressed nation in the black belt South. Some members of the Revolutionary Action Movement in Philadelphia joined the African-American Party of National Liberation (AAPNL) and formed a joint study collective. Among the works assigned to study by Queen Mother was Negro Liberation by Harry Haywood, The Negro Question in the United States and Reconstruction: The Battle for Democracy by James Allen. Queen Mother sent Robert F. Williams (who was in exile in Cuba) a letter asking him to chair the AAPNL, and to become President of the provisional African-American government in exile. Williams accepted the offer and sent a telegram back to the States to Queen Mother. The AAPNL split in late 1963 and became defunct. 

In 1965, Robert L Brock, an African American attorney working along with Queen Mother Moore, filed a brief in federal district court representing the Self-Determination Committee.

In the 1970s, Queen Mother Audley Moore 𝐰𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐬𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧-𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟-𝐝𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐮𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐫𝐠𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 in Kampala, Ugand at the request of Ugandan President Ida Amin.

( Special thanks to Professor Ashley Farmer, author of Remaking Black Power: How Black Women Transformed an Era (UNC Press, 2017) and the first full-length biography on Moore, Queen Mother” Audley Moore: Mother of Black Nationalism for providing the text below)

AFRICAN PEOPLES PARTY (USA) REACHES OUT TO :

THE ORGANIZATION OF AFRICAN UNITY

PRESENTED: JULY 28. 1975

KAMPALA, UGANDA

PRESENTED BY: QUEEN MOTHER MOORE. REPRESENTING

ALL AFRICAN PEOPLE'S PARTY (USA)


Your Excellency, Excellencies, and most Honorable guests of the Organization of African Unity. 

The All African People's Party of the (USA) is honored to accept the invitation tendered by his Excellency Al Hajji ,General Idf Amin Dada, President of the Republic of Uganda. My attendance at this gathering of the Heads of State on the African continent demonstrates to the world that the children of Africa who were kidnapped centuries ago and scattered throughout the western hemisphere are linked by the bonds of common origin, common struggle, and common aspirations. For more than three centuries we were forced to toil as slaves, building up the very foundation of the capitalist structure on which today imperialism stands as a barrier to your development and our liberation.

In those centuries of boundage our African heritage was mocked, our very blackness was made a laughing stock,we were-brainwashed and crippled mentally as a people. But simultaneously with the accession to sovereignty of the formerly colonized states of Africa, we experienced a cultural revolution, the fight for identity, this revolution has largely been won. We know now that we are a people, that we are an African people, that we are an entity-- a unique entity as Africans born in the United States of America.

Our party emerged from the struggles of the past fifteen (15) years. The African People's Party has had to take the vague slogan Black Power and give it concreteness for power has to be exercised by a people, a nation and before power can be exercised, the right of self determination must be won. Citizenship in the United States was imposed on us in 1867 by the government (unilaterally} without even consulting us, without a plebiscite.

We had no choice. The Congress of the United States declared us citizens. By declaring us citizens we were not only denied the right to self determination, we were also denied the right to reparations for unpaid labor and the social degradation that slavery entails. While the act of conferring citizenship on Black captives seemed magnanimous on the one hand; on the other hand Black Codes were enacted by various states to nullify completely the benefits of citizenship. Our party emerged from the spontaneous rebellions that flared in every big city of the USA and made cities such as Watts, Newark, Detroit, Cleveland and many others international symbols of our revolutionary national discontent; from murderous repressions officially approved,  which killed or imprisoned a generation of our most gifted and dedicated Revolutionary Nationalist Youth, from the so called war on poverty aimed at placating the youthful revolutionaries, while building a black middle class buffer. From all of this our party has emerged with a scientific program for the black nation.

We are building the national consciousness of our people for the maximum unity of the thirty million Africans born in the United States. Our party has as its principal task the mobilization of the black people to fight for our survival. The nature of our Party’s struggle is indicated by the following statistics:

Nearly five million black people of 17% of the black population live on public assistance  with no hope of improving their condition. Black young people from 17 to 21 years of age are 40% unemployed. Health conditions are indicated by infant mortality rates - deaths per 1,000 births - 4.7 for whites and 12.1 for Blacks. The recession has meant 95 to 12% unemployment for the white workers but for Blacks the recession is in fact a deep depression with 18% to 40% unemployment. Our program is addressed to these conditions.

The thirty million Africans born inside the United States are not a minority caste and here I must speak of race. Our race in the New World has coincided with, or I should say, determined our social, political and economic status. Slavery in the U.S.A. was African slavery, Africans are black. In the early history of colonial North America there were white and black indentured servants. This was changed before we entered the 18th century, when legally whites were indentured but blacks were made slaves in perpetuity. Even to this day the long shadow of the slave plantation darkens and makes difficult our path towards full liberation

This partially explains why the word ‘slum’ is synonymous with ‘Black Community’ where more than 34% of all black families in the USA live in substandard housing without hot water and adequate plumbing. These depressed conditions are not the result of an act of God, they result from a conscious policy which is consciously administered on a racial basis. We are not racists, we do not hate white people as white people, but the conditions under which we live remind us daily of white capitalists who are supported in these acts of oppression by the white citizenry, who still reap the benefits of exploitation.

I mention the above because a few of our young people and intellectuals have read a few books by Marx and Lenin and have announced themselves as Marxists-Leninists. They have learned no more about Marx than what he wrote about Europe in 1848 and they know what Lenin wrote about Russia in the early part of the 20th Century, and some have a smattering of the writings of Mao Tse Tung. They know by what these great men have written about Europe and China. But Black revolutionaries and independent revolutionary thought concerning the Black struggle is strangely absent. 

The activities of these youthful phrase mongers, whether they realize it or not, is diversionary and aids the imperialist because they hamper the mobilization of the most powerful revolutionary anti-imperialist force inside the USA. For by insisting dogmatically that the white working class aided by a minority of blacks must lead the anti-imperialist struggle, they deny and ignore the power of the most exploited, the thirty million Africans born inside the United States. They would deny that Black people, most of whom are workers, can by theory activity in behalf of their own freedom, positively affect the thought and action of the white working class.

They would prefer ‘the cart before the horse’. If we take the example of Portugal and its colonies of Angola and Guinea Bissau and Mozambique we note that it was the fight for African Liberation that brought about the final crisis that resulted in the freedom for the Portuguese themselves. Suppose the people of Angola, Guinea Bissau and Mozambique had waited for the Portuguese workers to free them. In that case, they and the Portuguese people would still be living under the Catano dictatorship.

We live in the head office of imperialism in the world. We recognize too that this is a critical period for world imperialism. It is confronted with insoluble contradictions. The current recession results from the urgent necessity to expand, to find new markets when there are no markets. That is too dangerous. So it had to seek market outlets in the socialist countries i.e. China and the Soviet Union.

The Southern African position of the USA can be understood from the viewpoint of markets, even the US persuasion of SOuth Africa to lift the apartheid bars a little, to improve the African wage scales a little, can be understood from the imperialist imperative to expand their markets.

The African states that are politically free are not immune to the imperialist’s attempts to solve their contradictions at the expense of others. They cannot bring back colonialism, but the CIA and other agencies will do their utmost to ensure safe access to the raw materials it needs to keep its factories going.

Our party demands the right of All of Africa to be free of colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, imperialism and capitalism. We Africans who are captives in the western hemisphere understand that our destiny and liberation are historically interlocked with Africans everywhere. We who are in colonial bondage by the United States Government ask that our African brothers and sisters in Africa take a stand in respect to our human rights. Africans born inside the United States ask our African brothers and sisters to hear our demands

  1. We want self-determination and independent nationhood. We believe African captives in the USA will not have freedom until they have land of their own and a government; a nation that we govern, run, and control. We demand the states of Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Louisiana as partial repayment for injustice done to us for over 400 years.

  2. We want an independent self-governing economy to guarantee full employment for our people. We believe the US federal government owes us for 400 years of slavery and 100 years of forced citizenship-servitude. We demand the US government pay the colonized captive African 400 billion dollars for ten years as partial repayment for its crimes of genocide against our people. 

  3. We want community control of all businesses in the black community and an end to the economic, political and cultural exploitation by the capitalist class waged against our people. We demand of the US government the long overdue debt of forty acres and two mules, we demand this repayment in land, the territory stated in point one and currency and period stated in point two. We also demand Black community control of all businesses located in the Black community. We want all businesses in the Black community to be turned into community cooperatives.

  4. We want community control of housing and community planning of Black communities. We believe all housing and land in the Black community should be turned over to the Black community to be developed into communal-communities we call communes. We advocate the formation of Black housing cooperatives wherever possible. We believe urban renewal for the Black community has meant Black removal. We therefore demand 100% control of all planning boards that are planning housing and other project relocations of the Black community. We believe we are the best qualified to plan our own community. 

  5. We want to control the education of our children. We want an education that teaches us the true history of Black people and of our racist oppressors. We believe because the present racist educational system is inadequate to the needs of our people, Black people must form an educational system of their own. We advocate the establishment in every Black community, Black institutes that teach and train youth and adults alike in the knowledge of self and prepares them in job retraining and in the scientific and technical fields

  6. We want all Black men to be exempt from military service. We believe that Black people should not be forced to fight in the military service to defend a racist government that does not protect us. We believe until racial abuses, police brutality and racial genocide is stopped being waged against our people right here in the US, ‘the US is THE BLACKMAN’S BATTLEGROUND’. We therefore call for the formation of Black People’s Liberation Army and seek to organize Black youth into Black Guards

  7. We want an immediate end to the racist war of genocide that is being waged against the African held in captive bondage inside the United States. We believe Black people living inside the US who are called citizens are actually colonial captives because after the emancipation proclamation was signed so-called freeing us from chattel slavery, a vote was never taken among the so-called freedmen to determine whether we wanted to be citizens of the US government or not. Therefore the last 100 years of enforced citizenship has been one of citizenship slavery and we are, therefore, still captives of war. We have also in the last 100 years been victims of a systematic plan to destroy our captive nation. 

  8. We want freedom for all Black people held in federal, state, county, and city prisons and jails. We believe under the present system that this racist system is organized in all ways against Black people. We especially demand the release from prisons and jails of all Black political prisoners. We believe all Black people should be tried in court by a jury of their peer group, meaning people from Black communities.

  9. We want an end to the social degradation of our community. We want to rid our community of drug addiction, prostitution and other social evils that destroy the moral fiber of our community. We believe these evils which are controlled by organized crime is a vice that is controlled by police who accept bribes and graft. We feel these evils are allowed to exist to lower the moral fiber and to weaken our community.

  10. We want independence, self determination and Black State Power. We believe Black people in the US will not have true freedom until we control and govern a government and nation of our own. We advocate the formation of a national Congress of African Peoples run by Black people to determine the destiny of the Black nation. We feel the decision (vote) of this Congress should be taken to the U.N. to present our case of self determination to the World Court. We the African Peoples Party of National Liberation, call on all Black leaders and organizations to unite to form a Black Liberation Front that would serve as a centralizing committee of a national Black Congress.

We ask our African brothers and sisters to make a public stand in defense of our just cause of self-determination against our common imperialist oppressor. We call upon our African brothers and sisters to support us in our just demands for reparations, self-determination and ask that you bring the United States before the United Nations General Assembly for violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and support our just demand for a United Nations convened plebiscite.

Being that our liberation movement is under constant harassment, counter-intelligence and over-kill tactics, a war is being waged against our liberation fighters some of whom have been murdered and tortured while in prison. These and other acts of racial genocide is constantly being waged against our people in an attempt to nullify our mentality. We ask you to support our position for amnesty for all African prisoners of war inside the United States. 

In behalf of the African People’s Party (USA), we wish again to thank General Amin for his very kind consideration in inviting us to this OAU Summit Meeting. We feel that thru General Amin’s invitation he has shown great depth, understanding and brotherly love for African People. This invitation has been an inspiration to our movement, where we were suffering enormous casualties.

We hope this is the beginning of a dynamic relationship between our brothers and sisters in Africa and thirty million Africans born inside the United States. We feel that the significance of our attendance here at this O.A.U. Summitt marks the beginning of the end of imperialist oppression which began with our separation  from our motherland Africa and the beginning of the realization of common aims of African People everywhere. 

Our Party is willing and ready to fulfill to the best of our ability any service that we are able to render in our common struggle to defeat our common enemy - U.S.A. imperialism.

LONG LIVE THE UNITY OF THE O.A.U

LONG LIVE OUR MOTHERLAND AFRICA

LONG LIVE THE GREAT AFRICAN REVOLUTION

***********************************************************************

Foreign Affairs Minister Siphiwe Baleka is proud to be following in Queen Mother Audley Moore's footsteps, leading the effort for New Afrikan self determination and reparations at the United Nations and the African Union.

𝐋𝐞𝐭'𝐬 𝐇𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐫 𝐐𝐮𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐌𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐀𝐮𝐝𝐥𝐞𝐲 𝐌𝐨𝐨𝐫𝐞! 𝐉𝐨𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐆𝐑𝐍𝐀 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐝𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐃𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐲: https://www.balanta.org/nadcsc-initial-plebiscite-survey

Feb 3, 2024 - The Interim Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika Applies to Renew Observer Status at the African Union - https://www.balanta.org/.../the-interim-provisional...

Feb 26, 2024 - Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika Advises African Union Legal Reference Group - https://www.balanta.org/.../provisional-government-of-the...

Apr 26, 2024 - Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika Statement to the Permanent Forum on People of African Descent - https://www.balanta.org/.../provisional-government-of-the...

Apr 26, 2024 - THE POLITICAL-LEGAL HISTORY OF THE REPUBLIC OF NEW AFRIKA AND THE WAR WAGED AGAINST IT BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - https://www.balanta.org/.../the-political-legal-history...

Apr 27, 2024 - Analysis by the Republic of New Afrika of Legal Issues Requiring an Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice - https://www.balanta.org/.../analysis-by-the-republic-of...

May 9, 2024 Republic of New Afrika Minister of Foreign Affairs Siphiwe Baleka Concludes Successful Diplomacy Tour in Ougadougu, Burkina Faso - https://www.balanta.org/.../republic-of-new-afrika...

May 19, 2024 - The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika addressed the Afrodescendant Nation National Reparations Convention in Washington, D.C. - https://www.balanta.org/news/a18r6d73a7jrxrpq43zjcrbn7zwg4s

May 27, 2024 - PGRNA Minister of Foreign Affairs Siphiwe Baleka discussed the UN Permanent Forum and the Request for an Advisory Opinion from the ICJ on the 𝑹𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝑵𝒐𝒘 podcast - https://www.balanta.org/news/at50j2ptg017w7i0ajdl6sz5vlqu5s

June 14, 2024 - Republic of New Afrika Minister of Foreign Affairs on RealTalk: History as a Weapon for Black Liberation, Black Power Media Network podcast - https://www.balanta.org/.../republic-of-new-afrika...

June 19, 2024 - Minister of Foreign Affairs Presents at Juneteenth Commemoration Highlighting the Need for Reparatory Justice - https://www.balanta.org/.../balanta-leaders-present-at...

July 12, 2024 - The Republic of New Afrika Returns to the African Union for Diaspora Day https://www.balanta.org/.../the-republic-of-new-afrika...

#pgrna #republicofnewafrika #ReparationsNow #ReparationsIsADebtOwed #unpfpad #AfricanUnion #AfricanUnionCommission

THE ABSENCE OF THE BLACK NATIONALISTS IN TODAY’S REPARATIONS MOVEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES: A FAILURE TO LEARN THE LESSONS OF HISTORY

Where is the Black Nationalist Voice in the Reparations Movement? 

Where is the Black nationalist voice in today’s local state and national reparations movement and conversation? With the exception of the New Afrikan Diplomatic and Civil Service Corps (NADCSC), the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika (PGRNA), and the Afrodescendant Nation (ADN), which have been promoting a plebiscite for self determination that includes recognizing the right to establish an independent nation on American soil, the rest of the reparations movement is largely silent on the question of nationalism if not outright dismissive. Why isn’t the issue of establishing an independent black nation, which was historically and traditionally the central aim of the reparations movement, front and center in the reparations conversation? Why are the nationalists not supported by the integrationists and the repatriationists? Why is there no Reparations United Front containing NCOBRA, ADOS, FBA, Repatriationists and Nationalists speaking with ONE VOICE? Why can't ADOS and FBA support the nationalists and the nationalists support those who believe that the Democrats or Republicans should “Earn the Black Vote”? How do we overcome the ideological, strategic and tactical differences to unite and amass enough compelling force so that WE ALL GET WHAT WE WANT = Cessation/Assurance of Non-Repetition, Restitution and Repatriation, Compensation, Satisfaction, and Rehabilitation?

The First #ADOS Division Splitting the Emigrationists and the Integrationists in 1853

Prior to the Civil War, the overwhelming desire of the majority of both the enslaved and free Africans in the United States was to either return to their ancestral homelands in Africa or escape to liberated territory on American soil and develop separate, independent communities of their own. W E B DuBois writes in Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880 that

“It is clear that from the time of Washington and Jefferson down to the Civil War, when the nation was asked if it was possible for free Negroes to become American citizens in the full sense of the word, it answered by a stern and determined ‘No!’ The persons who conceived of the Negroes as free and remaining in the United States were A SMALL MINORITY BEFORE 1861, AND CONFINED TO EDUCATED FREE NEGROES AND SOME OF THE ABOLITIONISTS.”

See:  VIEWPOINTS OF THE ORIGINAL AMERICAN DESCENDANTS OF SLAVES (ADOS) from 1792 to 1861.

Louis Mehlinger, in The Attitude of the Free Negro Toward African Colonization, writes,

“To carry out more effectively the work of ameliorating the condition of the colored people, a National Council composed of two members chosen by election at a poll in each State, was organized in 1853. As many as twenty State conventions were to be represented. Before these plans could be well matured, however, those who believed that emigration was the only solution of the race problem called another convention to consider merely that question. Only those who would not introduce the question of African emigration but favored colonization in some other parts, were invited. Among the persons thus interested were Reverend William Webb and Martin R. Delaney of Pittsburgh, Doctor J. Gould Bias and Franklin Turner of Philadelphia, Reverend August R. Greene of Allegheny, Pennsylvania, James M. Whitfield of New York, William Lambert of Michigan, Henry Bibb, James Theodore Holly of Canada, and Henry M. Collins of California. Frederick Douglass criticized this step as uncalled for, unwise, unfortunate, and premature. . . . The greatest enemy of the Colonization Society among the freedmen . . . . was Frederick Douglass. At the National Convention of Free People of Color, held in Rochester, New York, in 1853, he was called upon to write the address to the colored people of the United States. A significant expression of this address was: ‘We ask that no appropriation whatsoever, State or national, be granted to the colonization scheme.’ . . . .[I]n writing to Mrs. Harriet Beecher Stowe in reply to her inquiry as to the best thing to be done for the elevation of the colored people, ‘The truth is,’  he said, ’we are here and here we are likely to remain. Individuals emigrate, nations never. We have grown up with this republic and I see nothing in her character or find in the character of the American people as yet, which compels the belief that we must leave the United States.’”

Hollis Lynch writes in Pan-Negro Nationalism in the New World Before 1862 that,

“Before Delany could act on his scheme, the largest Negro national conference up to that time was convened in Rochester, New York, in 1853, and the persistent division between emigrationists and anti-emigrationists was forced into the open. The anti-emigrationists, led by the Negro leader Frederick Douglass, persuaded the conference to go on record as opposing emigration.  But as soon as the conference was over, the emigrationists, led by Delany, James M. Whitfield, a popular poet, and James T. Holly, an accomplished Episcopalian clergyman, called a conference for August 1854, from which anti-emigrationists were to be excluded. Douglass described this action as ‘marrow and illiberal,’ and he sparked the first public debate among American Negro leaders on the subject of emigration.

Here Douglass is betraying the expressed desire (through songs) of his enslaved brothers and sisters who wanted to leave the United States and return to Africa. This either/or rejection of emigration was a major mistake made by Douglass and the ADOS. At this time, the leaders should have united around and demanded a plebiscite to give each person the exercise of self determination and then advocated that the resources for emigrating, integrating, or building separation communities (nationalism) be provided. That they did not unite around this most necessary procedural step is the legacy that has been bequeathed to this generation and the historically, politically necessary procedural step that still needs to be performed.



Historical Periods of Black Nationalism

In my April 27, 2020 article, Black Nationalism in America - Cultural, Religious, Economic, Revolutionary: The Need for a Black United Front, I noted

Nationalist ideologies have been in the ascendant only at certain historical periods ; in others, the major emphasis has been on racial integration and assimilation. During four periods, nationalist sentiment in various forms has been prominent in Negro thought: the turn of the eighteenth century, roughly from 1790 to 1820; the late 1840s and especially the 1850s; the nearly half-century stretching approximately from the 1880s into the 1920s; and since the middle 1960s. In general, nationalist sentiment, although present throughout the black man's experience in America, tends to be most pronounced when the Negroes' status has declined, or when they have experienced intense disillusionment following a period of heightened but unfulfilled expectations.

This is exactly what happened after the period of Civil Rights, prompting the Black Power and New Afrikan Independence movements. The 1969 Newsweek poll captured this ascending nationalism. But what happened? In my June 11, 2020 article INTEGRATION (ELECTORAL POLITICS) VS. NATIONALISM (SELF DEFENSE) VS. REVOLUTION (BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY): UNDERSTANDING THE ART OF COOPTING BLACK LIBERATION I quoted William W. Sales, Jr., who  explains in From Civil Rights to Black Liberation Malcolm X and the Organization of Afro American Unity:   

“There is still a lack of understanding of the African American nationalist tradition and the context within which it reemerged in the 1960s. Little is known or understood about the important integrationist-nationalist debate of this same period. If this generation of African American youths is to be oriented toward revolutionary options, it must deepen its understanding of the African American protest tradition and the ideological and programmatic alternatives between which they must choose. . .

The study of Malcolm X is important because he was the best critic of an era and a movement which still holds significance for us today. Malcolm asked the right questions, some of which he found answers for. We must know these questions and and answers so that we don’t ‘recreate the wheel.’

The Black Liberation movement developed in the latter 1960s in marked contrast to the integrationist Civil Rights movement. It was repressed violently by the agents of the state. Even today it represents the only significant alternative to Civil Rights integration-ism that African Americans have ever developed. This movement, for a time, energized those groups in the ghetto who are today vilified as ‘the underclass.’ Our present oppression as a people is tied to the defeat and destruction of the Black Liberation movement. It is also tied to the sanctification of Black electoral politics within the confines of the Democratic Party, the sainthood of Dr. King, and the canon of nonviolence.

This sanctification stood as an alternative to the mobilization of poor and dispossessed African Americans outside of the institutions of electoral, legislative, and executive politics which are institutionally structured to maintain powerlessness. A rejuvenated Black Liberation movement can be constructed only upon an accurate understanding of the strengths and weaknesses, the accuracies and errors of our previous major efforts at rebellion. Critically studying Malcolm X is central to this reconstruction and rebuilding effort.

With a few notable exceptions in the tradition of Malcolm X, like the National Black Independent Political Party and the National Black United Front from the period of 1979-81, the dominant strategic motion in the Black community has come from those in the tradition not of Malcolm X but of Martin Luther King Jr. Their bankruptcy and that of Black electoral politics, from the perspective of resolving the pressing needs of the masses of ghettoized Black people, has engendered a renewed interest in Malcolm X and the Pan-African nationalist and internationalist tradition of which he was the most elegant spokesman in the latter part of the 20th-century. . . . While many years have passed, the questions which the Black Liberation Movement addressed are still with us. The groupings in the Black community are even more distinct and opposed than in Malcolm’s time. And we should not forget that, as Malcolm X said, if you want to know a thing, you must know its origins.”

And this is exactly what is happening now. There was great expectation during the Presidency of Barack Obama and then we witnessed that little changed. The white backlash resulted in the current Donald Trump/Maga era. But what has been the response? Mostly a one-sided and uninformed fear-trauma familiarity heuristic that begins with, “Our Ancestors died for the right to vote” and then proceeds to “choosing the lesser of two evils” and climaxes with dismissing or insulting everyone who doesn't “vote Democratic”. Nowhere does anyone stand up and say, “No, my ancestors died for the right to return to Africa” or “My ancestors died for the right to establish their own nation.” Unfortunately, often it is people within the reparations movement, the very people who ought to know better and should check such thinking that reduces our political struggle to merely voting in the Anglo American system.  This article helps to contribute to a proper understanding of what our political discourse, especially at this time and concerning this election, should be - that is, if we want to build a Reparations United Front with sufficient compelling force. 



Block Voting in the Democratic Party vs. Nationalism

Sales continues,

“Through force, exploitation, and deprivation of social necessities, Black people internalized the notions of minority status, and remained isolated from and ignorant of the larger world. They came to believe that physical resistance was impossible. African Americans were conditioned to believe that the violence which maintained White superiority and Black subordination could be minimized only through conforming with a code of behavior which at every turn symbolized racial power discrepancies and Black acceptance of them. . . . Those who ascribed to the ethnic-assimilationist model were heirs of the militant-assimilationist posture of the established Civil Rights leadership. They made their peace with Black Power by defining it as no more than the traditional strategy of European ethnic groups applied to the Black problem. Politically, bloc voting within the Democratic Party would increase Black elected representation in the South and in U.S. cities. The resources obtained in this fashion - patronage, influence, and the control of government contracts - would be, as for European immigrants, major sources of African American empowerment. Economically, the construction of civic-minded Black middle-class business persons would be the center of gravity around which Black community development would occur. In this way, the struggle shifted from the arena of protest to the electoral arena, from tactics appropriate to those frozen out of the polity to those who now had access to the polity.

This represented an argument for extending leadership credentials to Black politicians and the Black middle class generally.

The masses of Black people were to give up the protest option and concentrate on expanding their voting power so as to increase the number of Black insiders who would then seek resources on behalf of the masses.

[Siphiwe note: this is where voting became elevated as THE tactic among black people. Until then, it was not considered a SACRED DUTY]

This tendency was responsible for greatly increasing the Black electorate and number of Black elected officials at all levels of government. It was responsible for the establishment of the Congressional Black Caucus, the Joint Center for Political Studies, and TransAfrica, the Washington-based African American lobby on African affairs. Almost all of the largest U.S. Cities have experienced the election of a Black mayor, and there is a greatly expanded African American presence in the Democratic Party. The high point of achievement for this tendency was the presidential campaign of Jesse Jackson in 1988 and the election of Ron Brown as Democratic national chairperson. [Siphiwe note: this was superseded by the election of Barack Obama in 2008]

Nationalist forces generally reflected two alternative responses to this thrust: revolutionary nationalism and cultural nationalism. Both responses united in viewing the Black predicament as a form of domestic colonialism. Their position was that racism was not an aberration but inherent in the nature of U.S. society.

In the tradition of Malcolm X, revolutionary nationalists focused on the question of the achievement of self-determination for Black people.”

In response, Mumia Abu -Jamal emphasized  in “While Rage Bubbles In Black Hearts”,  August 20, 2011 in Have Black Lives Ever Mattered?

“It has taken a while to reach this conclusion, but upon reflection it is inescapable. Why, after over a half century of Black voting, and the election of more Black political leaders than at any time since Reconstruction, are the lives, fortunes, prospects , and hopes of Black people so grim? . . . One is forced to conclude that Black America suffers maladies similar to those faced by continental African nations: a segregated neo colonial system in which a political class gives the appearance of freedom and independence while perpetuating racial oppression and financial exploitation. . . . If Black politicians are to do the very same thing as their white colleagues, why have them at all? What’s the difference? Neocolonialism at home and abroad.”



The Issue is Compelling Force 

On April 26, 2020, I published an article entitled, LEARNING THE LESSONS OF HISTORY: SLAVE SONGS, REPATRIATION, INSURRECTION, INTEGRATION, NATIONALISM & THE ORIGINAL #ADOS MOVEMENT FROM 1792 TO 1861. In the article I lamented, 

I am writing this article because of the tragic, lamentable state of division and hostility that exists within the “black” community, both in and outside of Africa, and specifically in the United States of America, recently intensified because of the #ADOS movement. The massive amount of non-constructive conversation and activity is preventing the development of substantial COMPELLING FORCE that could be harnessed and used in the collective liberation of all people who continue to be dominated by the global system of white supremacy. The infighting among some members of ALL of our groups and movements - #ADOS, Pan African, Black Nationalist, Aboriginal, Native American, Kemetians, Nation of Islam, Black Hebrews, Moors, Washitaw, Christians, Rastas, Black Greek Fraternities, Democrats, Republicans, Conservatives, Hip Hop, Entertainers, Sports Stars, Politicians, Facebook Groups, etc…. - is definitive PROOF that collectively, we have not LEARNED THE LESSONS OF HISTORY. All of the debates that we are having now we had during the period of 1792 to 1861. The fact that we are still having the same debates and have failed to create a UNIFYING platform that does not require homogeneity or “sameness of thought” has prevented us from developing the COMPELLING FORCE necessary to achieve each group’s goals. A UNIFYING PLATFORM whose aim is to gain all that each group desires IS POSSIBLE if we LEARN THE LESSON.”

Concerning COMPELLING FORCE, I wrote in my November 11, 2019 article THE ESSENTIAL ISSUE IS COMPELLING FORCE: REPARATIONS AND #ADOS 

“The essential point is this: the current world order is run according to COMPELLING FORCE. Now, who among us has enough COMPELLING FORCE to COMPEL the system of white supremacy to submit to our interest?  Come on - which group? Jamaicans? African Americans? New Orleanians? Afro Cubans? Temne? Balanta? Nigeria? South Africa? Ghana? ....when you stop all the nonsense you are talking, you will realize that if any one group had enough COMPELLING FORCE to safeguard its interest, IT WOULD ALREADY HAVE DONE SO. So, when you all are finished with petty emotionalism and how you feel about it, and either return to or come up to both a common and scientific understanding of the COMPELLING FORCE of white supremacy used against ALL of us, then you will realize that the reason why we come together and forget all the distinctions between us is because of the overriding imperative to develop enough COMPELLING FORCE to effectively oppose white supremacy and all the nations it has built. Malcolm X already schooled everyone.”



Are You Just Another Nigger With An Opinion Or Do You Have Data?

Now, my father once told me, “Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one. Without DATA, you are just another nigger with an opinion.” So I proceeded to scientifically determine what could be the basis of the Reparations United Front by launching a survey designed to gather the data and find the answer. And although the survey has not been large enough to draw a solid conclusion, the initial survey results were revealing. The “identity” questions showed the most diverse range of answers, indicating that to try to build unity around what to call ourselves or identify as IS NOT GOING TO SUCCEED IN ACHIEVING UNITY. Meanwhile, the questions that received the most agreement were: 

15. Do you believe that black people in America experience and interpret shared historical events the same way as white people in America?

Yes - 4%

No - 96%

16. Do you believe that black people in America are fully integrated into American society?

Yes - 4%

No - 96%

17. Do you believe that black people in America constitute a “nation within a nation”?

Yes - 86%

No - 14%

18. Do you believe black people in America should have a government of their own like all other free peoples?

Yes - 89%

No - 11%

The results from questions 15-18 suggest that black people in the United States do, in fact, see themselves as a nation within a nation as W.E.B. DuBois put it at the turn of the century. This is important since if we wish to have the UN Decolonization Committee (C-24) recognize our current condition as an internal, domestic colony and non-self-governing territory that has been undeclared since the founding of the UN Trusteeship system.

20. Do you believe that Reparations are owed to the descendants of Africans who were enslaved in the American colonies and later the United States of America?

Yes - 100 %

No - 0 %

Undecided - 0%

21. Do you believe that Reparations are owed to African Americans because of the legacy of slavery such as Jim Crow laws and other systemic forms of racism?

Yes - 100%

No - 0 %

Undecided - 0%

29. Would you participate in a plebiscite recognized by the United Nations or the African Union that would give you the a chance to choose among the four options: (1) US citizenship, (2) return to Africa, (3) emigration to another country and (4) the creation of a new African nation on American soil 

Yes - 93% (72%)

No - 7% (28%)

Using the Data to Build a United Front Centered Around The Plebiscite

So the DATA shows that if we want to build a UNITED FRONT, we should frame reparations around the PLEBISCITE concept. And this makes complete sense since the plebiscite would be the one mechanism where everyone can document their demand on what principle form of reparation they want. Additionally, it would then set the discussion on the macro-distribution of resources. Let’s look at an example. Suppose the approximate 29 million black people of voting age in the United States were to participate in a plebiscite conducted by Plebiscite Committee (comprised 100% of trained plebiscite coordinators within the black community) and the results were the following:

7 million voted for establishing a nation of their own (24%)

4 million voted to return to Africa (13.7%)

300,000 voted to emigrate somewhere else (1%)

17.7 million voted to integrate into America as full citizens (61%)

Now suppose, $112 Trillion were approved for reparations to be paid to a Reparations Fund controlled by the Plebiscite Committee. Thus, we would now know that 

$26.9 trillion needed to be allocated for establishing an independent nation

$15.5 trillion needed to be allocated for repatriation to Africa

$68.3 trillion needed to be allocated for integration into America

And the remaining $1.3 trillion for those emigrating elsewhere.

National Committees for each option composed of local committees would then go about the business of determining how those funds would be used to achieve the identified purpose. 

This is a straightforward, common-sense approach to reparations that will provide each group what they need and eliminate, to a significant degree, the in-fighting between the various groups. Moreover, it will lead to SATISFACTION, which is one of the components recognized by international society as a requirement for full repair. 

And so this begs the question,

if the NATIONALIST are largely excluded from the various commissions and conversations, how will they get SATISFACTION?

And now it is important to remind everyone that the modern reparations movement as we know it emerged out of the NATIONALIST segment of our nation.



Remembering the Nationalists - Don’t Betray Their Cause

Marcus Garvey and W.E.B. DuBois Call For A New Afrikan State at the Paris Peace Conference 1919

In 1918 and 1919, both Garvey and DuBois sent delegations to the Paris Peace conference to negotiate the establishment of a NEW AFRIKAN NATION right alongside other peoples that were also seeking admission to the new League of NATIONS. Both Garvey and DuBois suggested that the former German colonies in Africa be given to BLACK PEOPLE to form a NEW AFRIKAN NATION.

The National Movement for the Establishment of the 49th State - 1930s

Following that came The National Movement for the Establishment of the 49th State, a movement popular among African-American separatists during the 1930s. The movement, led by Oscar Brown Sr. from Chicago, Illinois, sought to create a state for African Americans in the American South. Following that, The development of revolutionary territorial nationalism in the United States also includes the formations of the African Nationalist Partition Party of North America (ANPP), the African Descendants Nationalist Independence Partition Party (ADNIP), and the Provisional Government of the African American Captive Nation (PG-AACN). 

Queen Mother Audley Moore and the Reparations Committee of Descendants of United States Slaves - 1955

In 1955 Queen Mother Audley Moore founded the Reparations Committee of Descendants of United States Slaves.  In 1957, Queen Mother Audley Moore presented a petition to the United Nations and a second one in 1959, arguing for self-determination, against genocide, for land and reparations. Interviewed by E. Menelik Pinto, Moore explained the petition, in which she asked for 200 billion dollars to monetarily compensate for 400 years of slavery. The petition also called for compensation to be given to African Americans who wish to return to Africa and those who wish to remain in America. In 1962, Queen Mother Audley Moore's Reparations Committee filed a claim inCalifornia. In 1965, Robert L Brock, an African American attorney working along with Queen Mother Moore, filed a brief in federal district court representing the Self-Determination Committee. On March 31, 1968, Queen Mother Audley Moore became the first signer of the Declaration of Independence of the Republic of New Afrika.

In the 1970s, Queen Mother Audley Moore went to Africa several times and raised the question of the right of African-Americans to self-determination at the Summit meeting of the Heads of the State of the Organization of African Unity in Kampala, Uganda.  



Reparations and the Republic of New Afrika

Republic of New Afrika Declaration of Independence

As we will see from the excerpts of the works of Imari Obadele included below, the modern Reparations movement as we know it today can be credited to the NATIONALISTS and specifically the Republic of New Afrika. Here it is important to note that, the Declaration of Independence states,

“We, the Black people in America, in consequence of arriving at a knowledge of ourselves as a people with dignity, long deprived of that knowledge, as a consequence of revolting with every decimal of our collective and individual beings against the oppression that for three hundred years has destroyed and broken and warped the bodies and minds and spirits of our people in America, in consequence of our raging desire to be free of this oppression, to destroy this oppression wherever it assaults mankind in the world, and in consequence of our inextinguishable determination to go a different way, to build a new and better world do hereby declare ourselves forever free and independent of the jurisdiction of the United States of America and the obligations which that country’s unilateral decision to make our ancestors and ourselves paper-citizens placed on us.

We claim no rights from the United States of America other than those rights belonging to human beings anywhere in the world, and these include the right to damages, reparations due us for the grievous injuries sustained by our ancestors and by ourselves by reason of United States lawlessness.”



Imari Obadele Foundations of the Black Nation (1972) 

It should be further noted that after the establishment of the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika (PGRNA), Imari Obadele wrote in Foundations of the Black Nation (1972) that, 

“Proposals for the Black Agenda To The National Black Political Convention in Gary, Indiana, March 10-12, 1972. . . . 

Today the Republic of New Africa is locked in struggle for liberated land - independent land - the one thing the black nation lacks. 

Our presence at this historic convention is to further that struggle. We think We understand the role of the Republic in black people’s total struggle for freedom in America. We know that today New Africa stands just outside of the center-of-vision of most blacks in America. Thus, in coming here to further the Republic’s struggle for independent land, We are not here to urge all black people to become citizens of record in New Africa: New Africa is only for those who freely want New Africa. Nor are We here to argue that conventional politics should be abandoned by black people: in our four years of struggle New Africa could not have made the advances We have made without timely help, now and then, from sons of conventional politics like Judge George Crocket, Congressman John Conyers, and Representative Julian Bond. In Mississippi, moreover, We have enjoyed certain protections and leverage which We could not have enjoyed except for work done before and since our coming by “conventional” politicians like Representative Robert Clark, Dr. Aaron Henry, Sister Fannie Lou Hamer, and others whose names you might not recognize.

Like all those men and women, the Government of New Africa understands that We blacks in America are one people and that, no matter how many fronts We must fight on, We are engaged in one struggle.

Let me, then, assure you that the Government of New Africa is here to join you in supporting all those things which benefit all black people.

The RNA requests on the black agenda are two, and while they emerge from the standpoint of an RNA perspective, they are calculated to benefit all black people.  We urge that this Convention insist that no candidate for President of the United States, and no political party, receive black support unless he or she pledges the following:

  1. To seek legislation and use presidential power to assure the peaceful acceptance by the United States of the results of the plebiscites, for land and independence, to be held in the Deep South.

  2. To accept the principle of reparations for blacks in America and to work for prompt payment of these reparations in accordance with the Republic of New Africa’s ‘Anti-Depression Program’, submitted this month to U.S. Congressmen and Senators, calling for no-strings payment of 57.5 billion dollars in the first two years and a total of 300-billion dollars. . . .

We know whence the ‘start-money’ for the nation should come. It SHOULD come from the nation of our former slave masters, from the United States, whose wealth today is ALL derived, in essence, from the tri-cornered trade - that is to say, from the body and exploitation of the African slave. Repayments for this is what is known as reparations. The principle of reparations is well established in international law. Nations pay reparations to nations. . . . We have proposed a settlement to the United States federal government: $10,000 per individual descendant of slaves, some 300 billion dollars. (The US defense budget every year is well over 70 billion dollars.) Because of the special nature of our oppression and a belief within the RNA Government that economic development would best be advanced this way, we have proposed that 40% - $4,000 of the $10,000 - go directly to the individual. . . . What is more, the struggle can be successful. A great deal, however, depends upon how fast and how completely Africans in America can un-track their minds from the inability to think about land, independent land, as not only an integral part of our struggle for freedom but as an essential primary goal. For success of the struggle depends a great deal upon the support those of us who now opt for and are working to build an independent African nation on this soil, get from those of us who do not now choose for themselves the route of an independent nation. We calculate that those who do not now opt for independence may number as many as two~fifths of Our people. And the support of these people must be founded upon Understanding of what the New Africans are about. . . . Perhaps the best way for people to un-track their minds from the slaving inability to think of land as a real and legitimate goal of our struggle is to understand how a people acquire claims to land. There is, of course, what we call the bandit rule of international law: that says, essentially, that if a people steals land and occupies it for a long time, the world will recognize that land as belonging to them. This, of course, is the manner in which the United States acquired claim to most of America: white folks simply stole it and held it. As a people We Africans in America have been cowed by this rule; We have cringed before it (and before the power of the beast) as if it were the only rule of land possession. There is, fortunately, a civilized rule of land possession. It says that if a people has lived on a land traditionally, if they have worked and developed it, and if they have fought to stay there, that land is theirs. It is upon this rule of international law that Africans in America rest their claim for land in America. The essential strategy of our struggle for land is to array enough power ( as in jiu-jitsu, with a concentration of karate strength at key moments) to force the greatest power, the United States, to abide by international law, to recognize and accept our claims to independence and land. The purpose of this strategy can be further simplified: it is to create a situation for the United States where it becomes cheaper to relinquish control of the Five States than to continue a war against us to take back or hold the area.”




The Anti Depression Program and the National Black Political Convention in 1972

That same year, the PGRNA submitted a reparations program called the Anti Depression Program to the National Black Political Convention in Gary, IN in 1972. In the book Reparations on Fire: How and Why it’s Spreading Across America, Nkechi Taifi writes, 

“The RNA supported James Forman’s Black Manifesto, which in 1969 called for white churches and synagogues to pay Black people half a billion dollars in reparations. The RNA drafted an Anti-Depression Program which called for a lump-sum reparations down payment and a negotiating committee between its subjugated government and the U.S. government, and successfully had the Program adopted at the 1972 National Black Political Assembly Convention. . . . It was an act . . . to determine kind, dates, and other details of paying reparations. The Mississippi Loyalist Delegation to the Democratic National Convention accepted the Anti-Depression Program that same year. . . . 10,000 Black delegates gathered at the Black National Convention in Gary, Indiana, and adopted a Black Agenda which specifically called for reparations to Black in America from the U.S. government. The Black Agenda also recognized the right of the Republic of New Afrika to political independence and sovereignty over Black Belt land in the southeast.



Nkechi Taifa: Black, Power, Black Lawyer and Reparations on Fire

Nkechi Taifa also writes in her memoir, Black Power, Black Lawyer,

"The spark for [the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America - NCOBRA] founding emanated from a 1987 conference on Race and the Constitution spearheaded by the National Conference of Black Lawyers (NCBL) and held at Harvard University. . . . [Note, in Reparations on Fire, Taifa adds, “Aiyetoro invited Imari Obadele, President of the Republic of New Afrika, Chokwe Lumumba, co-founder of the New Afrikan People’s Organization, and me, along with economist Richard America, to address the issue of the constitutionality of reparations on a panel at Harvard and to discuss whether a U.S. constitutional amendment was needed to effectuate reparations.”] We also examined an act authorizing negotiations between a commission of the U.S. and a commission of the RNA to determine kind, dates and other details of paying reparations. We discussed the significance of 'government to government' reparations as the negotiated settlement that follows the conclusion of war . . . . Out of that historic September 26, 1987 gathering, the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparation in America (NCOBRA) was born, bringing together diverse groups under one umbrella. Black Nationalist politics clearly dominated the room. . . . Since the creation of NCOBRA, the demand for reparations in the United States has substantially leaped forward, generating what I've dubbed, the modern day Reparations Movement. It was the perfect storm. The Black Power Movement was open and receptive to a broad-based approach to further the issue of reparations. The Black legal community sanctioned the largely Black Nationalist effort . . . . I am appreciative that leaders in the New Afrikan Independence Movement had the humility to tone down their analysis and distinct ideological position in favor of facilitating broader acceptance of the concept of reparations and allowing new voices to come to the fore." (pp. 174-179)

Nkechi Taifa continues in Reparatios on Fire:

“Broad national attention to the call for reparations for descendants of Africans enslaved in the U.S. unquestionably accelerated with the 1987 founding of N’COBRA. . . . Our presentation both at the Haarvard convening and in our co-authored 1987 book [Reparations Yes!] were replete with historical precedents for reparations. New Afrikan Political Science, and analysis of international law including our revolutionary fervor promoting the right to self-determination. Indeed, we felt the issue of self-determination for the descendants of Africans held as slaves in the U.S. to be key and central to a reparatory justice remedy. After the enslavement era Black people never had the opportunity to decide what our future would hold, with full appreciation of our options and reparations to put our choices into reality. Would we repatriate back to Africa? If so, how? Would we settle in the independent Haiti Republic or somewhere else in the diaspora? Would we accept the U.S. offer of 14th amendment citizenship into the new white nation it was developing and strive to make a multiracial democracy real? Due to severed homeland ties, would we plant our own flag in the ground in this country that we worked and built, negotiated with Native peoples, and establish our own independent Black Nation on soil claimed by the U.S.?

Our theory was that a reparations settlement must include the manifestation of each of these options through a national plebiscite, inclusive of both direct and group benefits. For those who wish to repatriate, we wrote that they should have sufficient resources to make that reintegration a reality, as well as for those who seek to emigrate elsewhere. For those who wish to force this country to respect our rights as full citizens, that option must be accompanied by transformative changes in policies and practices, closure of the Black/white wealth gap, elimination of educational and health disparities, cessation of mass incarceration disproportionately impacting black people, and release of Black political prisoners and prisoners of war. And for those who wish to establish an independent New Afrikan nation-state on this soil, following the model of five states in the Deep South or elsewhere, should likewise have the economic resources and political diplomatic recognition to make that self-determination choice a reality. . . .

‘Making’ a free people citizens without their informed consent is a limitation on that people’s freedom. If the informed consent exists from the population in question, then the population is ‘made’ citizens, but have become citizens under their own volition.

The imposition of US citizenship on New Afrikans without their express consent offends our human right to self-determination, and leaves true realization of other human rights in doubt and/or in jeopardy. The distinction making us citizens of the U.S. and voluntary choice of such citizenship, by New Afrikans desiring the same, is important. First, many of us do not want to be citizens of the United States. In fact history suggests that this has been the case since the inception of the United States (i.e Denmark Vesey, Gabriel Prosser, Nat Turner, Henry Garnett, Afrikan Blood Brotherhood, Marcus Garvey, Nation of Islam, etc.).

Second, it should be noted that an imposition on those of us (New Afrikans) not desiring the same is a badge of slavery. But fo our enslavement no such ‘citizenship’ could be imposed. 

Third, imposed citizenship offends the 13th Amendment. It limits the freedom declared by that amendment, and subjects many so called free persons to an unwanted political status, merely by virtue of their presence in the United States - a presence which emanates from the enslavement that the 13th Amendment is purported to have abolished. No person or population so disposed can be said to have received full reparation for slavery.

The political essence of slavery is not merely found in economic exploitation of labor, but in the illegal and imposition of United States jurisdiction on the slave, or the slave’s descendants. Full reparation must relieve those imposed upon of any political status forced on them. Recall that Sister Collins has appropriately defined reparation as ‘redress for an injury, or amends for a wrong inflicted.’ A wrong doer certainly cannot amend for a wrong inflicted by inflicting another wrong. . . . 

Black Reparations Commission President Dorothy Benton Lewis, . . . who worked closely with the Republic of New Afrika and the African National Reparations Organization. . . Working closely with the RNA and its Foreign Affairs Task Force, . . . urged Brother Imari to convene a national gathering on reparations to discuss how to increase its exposure in the U.S. and make the issue of reparations a household word. I credit Brother Imari Obadele for downplaying the New Afrikan independence politics outlined in Reparations Yes! and agreeing to issue the call for reparations-loving people to convene in Washington to discuss, among other agenda items, dealing with an independent Black foreign policy, how to move the issue of Reparations for Black people in the U.S. forward. . . . Obadele could have demanded that the diverse organizations and individuals he summoned to Washington had to refer to Black people as ‘New Afrikans.’ But he didn’t. He could have demanded that the only way forward must be ‘nation-to-nation’ reparations. But he didn’t. . . . .The higher ground was taken, and Obadele made the unifying national call for a mass-based gathering of activists not beholden to any specific ideology, and it was out of that historic September 26, 1987 gathering, that N’COBRA was born, bringing diverse groups under one umbrella.”

Here it must be emphasized that Imari Obadele, the RNA, and the Nationalists in general made a concession for the sake of unity and moving forward. Downplaying the Nationalist position did not mean abandoning it. Now that reparations is, indeed, a household word, the reparations movement owes a debt to the Republic of New Afrika to fervently pursue the manifestation of each of the options through a national plebiscite which would include, on equal footing, the nationalist demand for land and independence

Again, both logic and the data show that this is the only way to establish a Reparations United Front with maximum COMPELLING FORCE. This is especially true due to the division in the Reparations movement that occured with the emergence of #ADOS and Foundational Black Americans (FBA) movements.



Reparations: A Proposed Act Submitted to Some Members of Congress in September 1987

The REPARATIONS: A PROPOSED ACT TO STIMULATE ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE UNITED STATES AND COMPENSATE, IN PART, FOR THE GRIEVOUS WRONGS OF SLAVERY AND THE UNJUST ENRICHMENT WHICH ACCRUED TO THE UNITED STATES THEREFROM prepared by President of the PGRNA Imari Obadele (September 1987) proposed the following, simple and logical formula for reparations:

1. One-third of the annual sum shall go directly to each individual;

2. One-third of the annual sum shall go directly to the duly elected government of the Republic of New Afrika and to any other state-building entity of New Afrikan people; and

3. One-third of the annual sum shall be paid directly to a National Congress of Organizations. And all of this to be framed and manifested through a PLEBISCITE.



PROPOSED REPARATION AMENDMENT

  1. All descendants of Afrikans (New Afrikans, Liberians, etc) previously held in slavery within the United States and its occupied territories during any period of time when the laws of the United States, or any states thereof, protected and/or permitted this enslavement and all descendants of Africans transported in slave commerce permitted under United States law, or the law of any state which is part of the United States shall be entitled collectively and individually, to reparations from the United States government and full compensation for all physical, educational, economic, political, cultural, and mental loss and injuries that such Afrikan descendants have suffered as a consequence of their Afrikan ancestor’ enslavement. All such persons shall also be collectively and individually entitled to reparations from the United States government and full compensation for injury and loss due to all other violations of their human rights, or the human rights of their ancestors, by the United States government, by any state of the United States, or by individuals subject to United States or state laws, whose commission of such violations were allowed by, and kown to, or which should have been known to officials of the United States government, or to government officials of a state of the United States. 

  2. This Amendment shall require payment of reparations by the United States Government directly to individual Afrikan descendants entitled under the Amendment, to representatives of Organizations, chosen by the entitled persons and to the Afrikan states and Nations in the Western Hemisphere and Afrika to which the entitled persons belong. In addition to reparations payments received on behalf of entitled individuals, and groups, the Republic of New Afrika and any Afrikan state shall be entitled to reparations for any damages suffered as a nation or state, because of slavery, the slave trade and other human rights violations perpetrated by the United States or one of its states against the nationals of these nations or states, or against their ancestors. This Amendment shall allow such nations or states reparation for belligerent acts committed against them by the United States, or any state organization, or individual operating under United States authority or protection, where the Act was designed to facilitate the continuation of slavery, the slave trade or other human rights violations against Afrikans, or their descendants. 

  3. Reparations under this Amendment shall be paid and money with interest, and machinery, technology, land and in any other appropriate form as determined by the United States Congress, after consultation with representatives of the Afrikan Nations, states, and individuals entitled to reparations payments. The amount to be paid shall also be determined by Congress after such consultation. 

  4. The United States and each state of the United States and each individual under its jurisdiction shall hereafter recognize and respect the human rights of all persons and nations, including those entitled to reparations under this Amendment. Such recognition and respect shall include an absolute recognition of the right of Afrikan descendants (New Afrikans) in the United States and its occupied territories, to self-determination.Thus neither the government of the United States or the various states, nor individuals under the jurisdiction shall restrict the right of New Afrikans to (a) repatriate to Afrika, (b) emigrate to another country, (c) become full citizens of the United States, or (d) establish an independent nation state in the New Afrikan territory in America.

  5. The United States, the states of the United States, and individuals under United States jurisdiction shall make no effort to impose United States citizenship on Afrikan descendants in America and elsewhere.

  6. To the extent that any prior provision of this constitution is inconsistent with this amendment it is hereby repealed.

  7. Congress shall have the power to enact the appropriate legislation and take necessary steps to implement and enforce the provisions of this amendment.

SUMMARY

The following should now be clear:

1. The people captured from their homelands in Africa and brought to the American colonies were not Christian. Most black Americans trace their ancestry to areas of Africa that, centuries ago, were not primarily part of the Christian world. However, nearly eight-in-ten black Americans (79%) identify as Christian. This means that one of the tragic effects of surviving the middle passage was religious conversion under conditions of violence and trauma that persists until today.

2. Oral history, slave songs (coded), and modern scholarship record that the desire of the enslaved was to return to Africa or to escape to liberated territory and NOT to integrate into the Anglo American colonies..

3. The enslaved people from Africa were willing to rebel, revolt, risk death and kill their white Christian enslavers in order to obtain their freedom.

4. Christianity was formally introduced to the enslaved  in 1847 following the Nat Turner Rebellion TO PREVENT INSURRECTIONS AND TO ENCOURAGE DOCILITY, OBEDIENCE TO THE WHITE SLAVE MASTER, and INTEGRATION while COLONIZATION was adopted for the same purpose by removing free blacks who were considered the most troublesome segment of the population as well as slaves who desired to return to their homelands.

5. The indoctrinated Christian free colored people held meetings which the enslaved population could not do, and based on a Christian idealism and an extremely naive understanding of the US Constitution, decided that the white slave masters would be persuaded to grant them all the rights and privileges provided for in the U.S Constitution. 

6. The United States, through the American Colonization Society, were prepared to grant the desire of the slaves and begin returning them to Africa (repatriation as a form of reparation). Rightfully suspect and critical of the Society’s motives,  some indoctrinated Christian free Negroes, led by Frederick Douglass, used their advantage of position to propagandize and misrepresent the will of the vast majority of slaves and free Negroes. These indoctrinated Christian free Negroes sabotaged the return of tens of thousands of slaves just prior to the Civil War.

7. So-called Black Leadership, instead of working together to see that all interests were advanced, instead fought bitterly against each other.

8. The current #ADOS movement is making the same arguments and the same mistakes as the first #ADOS movement.

9. The lesson to be learned is that what is needed is enough COMPELLING FORCE to exercise SELF-DETERMINATION so that all groups and interests are achieved. Black people, African American people - whatever you want to call them - must stop framing all the issues as EITHER/OR and instead frame them as EACH/AND/ALL. Such a framework and corresponding organization/centralization of political energies, could bring about the long desired, never achieved UNITY of black people in America.

10. THE FRAMEWORK FOR UNITING BLACK PEOPLE IN AMERICA IS THROUGH A UNITED NATIONS SPONSORED PLEBISCITE FOR SELF DETERMINATION FOR THE DESCENDANTS OF PEOPLE WHO SURVIVED THE CRIMINAL AND GENOCIDAL MIDDLE PASSAGE TO THE COLONIES WHICH BECAME THE UNITED STATES. Such a process will unite all the diverse political energies around the four basic natural choices: (1) US citizenship with ALL rights, privileges and protections, (2) return to Africa, (3) emigration to another country and (4) the creation of a new African nation on American soil.

Excerpt from WAR IN AMERICA by Imari Obadele, first drafted in October 1966 and revised and published January 1968.

THE ANSWER TO FEDERAL OPPOSITION

“THE answer to federal opposition to black state power is a complex of studied moves POLITICAL, DIPLOMATIC, ECONOMIC, AND MILITARY.

The crucial first step is the early acceptance of an essential and inevitable decision by those who seek black state power. This is the decision to withdraw the state (ultimately, withdraw the entire, new, five-state union of Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina) from the United States and establish a separate nation.

This is necessary because the inevitable opposition of the federal government would be irresistible so long as it operates within the state; it must be put OUTSIDE the state.

Of first importance are the diplomatic moves. As Malcolm X taught, the black man’s struggle must be INTERNATIONALIZED, for it is only within the United States that we are a minority. Joined with other peoples of color beyond the American borders, black men bestow upon white men the status of a minority.

The struggle must be internationalized for an even more basic and directly negotiable reason: we must draw to our cause the moral and material support of people of good will throughout the world; this support, correctly used, could impose upon the United States federal government an amount of caution sufficient, when coupled with the military viability of the black state itself, toprotect that state from destruction beneath certain and overwhelming federal Power.

In short, the effort to win public support for the black struggle from the Afro-Asian nations, started in earnest by Malcolm X and maintained so resolutely by Robert Williams, MUST BE CONTINUED AND INTENSIFIED; we must, moreover, continue and intensify the effort to raise serious, substantial questions concerning the status of black people in the United States and bring these questions before the United Nations and the World Court. Fortunately, the groundwork for this effort has already (by 1966) been faithfully laid by such men as Robert A. Brock, founder of Los Angeles’ SELF-DETERMINATION COMMITTEE, and Baba Oserjeman Adefumi, founder of the New York-headquartered YORUBA COMMUNITY.

As Adefumi, Brock, and their fellow workers have shown, the central questions to be brought before the United Nations and the World Court are Two:

A. THE RIGHT OF BLACK PEOPLE AS FREE MEN TO CHOOSE WHETHER OR NOT THEY WISH TO BE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES. 

This right was never exercised: freed from slavery by constitutional provision, black people were given no choice as to whether they wished to be citizens, go back to Africa or to some other country, or set up an independent nation. Instead, the OBLIGATIONS of citizenship were automatically conferred upon us by the white majority, while the RIGHTS of citizenship for black people were made conditional rather than absolute, circumscribed by a constitutional provision that “Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation," and subjected to 90 years of interpretation and reinterpretation by the courts, the Congress, and the state legislatures.

Adjudication of this question must bestow upon those black people wishing it a guarantee of their right to be free of the jurisdiction of the United States and assure that their right to freedom shall not have been jeopardized by the payment of taxes, participation in the election process, or service in the military during the period before adjudication. These later acts are participated in by the blacks in America who seek adjudication, only under coercion and as defensive measures.

B. THE RIGHT OF BLACK PEOPLE TO REPARATIONS FOR THE INJURIES AND WRONGS DONE US AND OUR ANCESTORS BY REASON OF UNITED STATES LAW. 

Reparations have never been paid to black people for the admitted wrongs of slavery (or since slavery) inflicted upon our ancestors with the sanction of the United States Constitution — which regulated the slave trade and provided for the counting of slaves — and the laws of several states. The principle of reparations for national wrongs, as for personal wrongs, is well established in international law. The West German government, for instance, has paid 850 million dollars in equipment and credits, in reparations to Israel for wrongs committed by the Nazis against the Jews of Europe. Demands for reparations, funneled through a united black power Congress, must include not only the demand for money and goods such as machinery, factories and laboratories, but a demand for land. And the land we want is the land where we are: MISSISSIPPI, LOUISIANA, ALABAMA, GEORGIA, and SOUTH CAROLINA.

The bringing of the first question to the United Nations — the question of black people’s right to self-determination — creates a substantial question demanding action by that world body and puts the black power struggle in America into the world spotlight where the actions of the United States against us are open to examination and censure by our friends throughout the world. It provides these friends, moreover, with a legal basis for their expressions of support and their work in our behalf.

The raising of the demand for land, as part of the reparations settlement, infuses needed logic and direction into the American black struggle and increases the inherent justice of our drive for black state power and the separation of the new five-state union from the United States.

The separation is necessary because history assures us that the whites of America would not allow a state controlled by progressive black people, opposed to the exploitation and racism and organized crime of the whole, to exist as a part of the whole. Separation is necessary because black people must separate ourselves from the guilt we have borne as partners, HOWEVER RELUCTANT, to the white man in his oppression and crimesagainst the rest of humanity. Separation is possible because, first, it is militarily possible.

When the 13 American colonies declared their independence from Britain, they also forged an alliance with France, which not insignificantly contributed to the colonies’ victory. When the Confederacy separated from the United States, it formed alliances with Britain and other European powers, and these alliances might have sustained her independence had not this creature been so severely weakened by sabotage and revolts of the slaves themselves and their service in the Union Army. In more recent times the state of Israel was created in 1948 and maintained against Arab arms by her alliances with the United States and Britain. In 1956 the independence of Egypt was maintained against invasion by Israel, supported by France and Britain, by her alliance with Russia: Russia threatened to drop atomic missiles on London if the invaders did not withdraw. In 1959-1960 an independent, anti-capitalist Cuba was saved from invasion and subjugation by American might (as American might would invade and subjugate another small Caribbean island republic, the Dominican Republic, in 1965) because, again, of an alliance with Russia.

The lesson is clear: black power advocates must assiduously cultivate the support of the Afro-Asian world. MORE, that moment when state power comes into our hands is the same moment when formal, international alliances must be announced. Indeed, these alliances may prove our only guarantee of continued existence.”

Excerpt from Imari Obadele speech to the Toward a Black University Conference at Howard University, November 1968:

Government Must Be By Consent

“Ever since the American Declaration of Independence an accepted principle of international law has been that men need only be bound by government that arises from the consent of the governed. That is to say, a group of persons must consent - must agree - to be governed by a government or else that government is a creature of oppression and its rule is tyranny. A group of people has a right - indeed, they have a duty to throw off such tyrannical government and institute such new government and new forms as to themselves seem most likely to assure their future happiness and success.

Thus, because the founders of the Republic of New Africa understood that the government of the United States rules black people without our studied consent, and because the founders understood, therefore, that for black people the United States government is tyranny and an exercise in oppression, we created a new government - The Republic of New Afrika - to which black people can freely and with great hope and justification, give their consent. The new forms which we are instituting to assure our future happiness and success are those to which black people throughout the United States have traditionally aspired, in order to achieve freedom, justice, prosperity, progress, and brotherhood. And they are spelled out in the ‘Aims of the Revolution’ contained in the Republic’s Declaration of Independence (March 31, 1968).

Primary Objective of the Republic of New Afrika: Win Consent of the People

Therefore, the primary objective of the government of the New Republic of of New Africa, in our peaceful campaign to win soverignty over lands on the continent that righfully belong to black people, has been to create opportunities for black people to show that the government of the United States does not have our consent, and that the Republic of New Africa does have our consent.

This continues to be our policy and the primary strategical objective of the Republic of New Africa. Wherever our Consulates and pledged citizens exist - whether in our subjugated colonies in the Northern cities or our subjugated territories in the South - the policy is the same and constantly pursued: to create the means for black people to express their consent to be governed by the Republic of New Africa.

Massive Mis-Education of Black People in America Concerning Citizenship and Building a Separate Independent Black Nation

Because of the massive mis-education of black people in America concerning rights and obligations, the Republic’s campaigns for consent are often described as, and often become campaigns to win consent. For most black people do not understand that their present evidences of consent (payment of taxes, voting, serving in the Army, etc.) have been forced from us by a tyrannical government that has never allowed us a free choice - free consent - in the matter of citizenship. . . . 

To break through the massive mis-education of our people . . . it is necessary to make them understand - not just in their brains but in their gut-bottom emotions - that the only answer to ending the oppression and misery under which they daily live is to join in building a separate, free, powerful black nation of our own right now, right here on this continent. The next step  is to convince them that it can be done.

But the first, most difficult, but most important step is to convince them that our new nation is the only answer to misery and oppression.

Winning Consent for the Republic of New Afrika is Dangerous Work

This work - the work of convincing people anywhere in our subjugated areas within the United States, that our separate nation is the only answer and to join us in building it - is fraught with danger wherever we conduct it.

Even though the Republic’s official pronouncements have made it clear that (1) we wish to negotiate a peaceful settlement of our differences with the United States and that (2) we do not seek to overthrow the United States government or alter its form but only to set up our own independent government - despite this, the United States government is fully capable (though wrong under its own law and international law) of harassing and jailing our workers and leaders. Indeed, the likelihood of this happening increases geometrically as we become more successful and as mis-informed whites (the majority in America) feel tht we are seriously threatening their prestige and power (that is: their white supremacy and white domination).

Moreover, every state in the Union has its own laws on subversion, overthrow, syndicalism and the like. In the five states of the South these laws could be used against us with considerably more justification than similar federal laws - and almost certainly will be. . . . Then, there is the use of uniformed and uninformed white violence.

Workers and officers of the Republic face all these dangers . . . merely for organizing people to express their free consent for a government. It can be no other way. And because we understand the call of history, we can do nothing else but to press on for the freedom of our people, along this certain course: Independence.

Excerpt from Revolution and Nation Building; Strategy for Building The Black Nation in America, by Imari Obadele, 1970:

Eight Strategic Elements

“There are eight strategic elements which are required for the successful establishment of an independent black state on the American mainland. They are these:

  1. Brains

  2. Labor

  3. Natural Resources

  4. Internal Domestic Support

  5. International Support

  6. A Limited Objective

  7. Inherent Military Viability

  8. A Second-Strike Capability

The combination of brains, labor and national resources is what produces wealth, without which no country can contemplate true independence. . . . 

Non-New Afrikan Blacks in America Must Support the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika

Non-New Afrikan blacks in America must support us in a variety of ways. Support of the campaign for reparations is essential. Black Congressmen must take the lead in campaigning through Congress for a reparations settlement which includes substantial payment to the black nation, to the Republic of New Africa, even if it includes direct payments to individuals. But we are completely against reparations payments which go to whites or to U.S. government agencies to use for us - this is no reparations at all. We are also against using funds from our reparations settlement to pay capitalists for the plants and mines which we take over in the South. If at all, payment for these should be arranged in negotiation with our government. But the cold cash of our reparations settlement, and the trading credits, must be largely used to acquire the machine, to improve and expand industrial plants.

The support of non-New African blacks in America must, obviously, include sending dollars and gold, silver and diamonds, which we have in abundance in our jewelry to New Africa so that however long it takes to achieve a meaningful reparations settlement with the U.S. or however destructive our warfare in the South, we will not be without acceptable media for acquiring the machine through international trade. Blacks remaining within the U.S. must also - and importantly - use their influence, so long as it exists, to restrain the hand of the United States in using its court and military establishments against us. Indeed, to put this positively, blacks remaining in the U.S. must exert every influence to help us force the United States to settle with us justly - on the basis of plebiscites and international law - our claims to sovereignty and reparations.

International Support is Equally Important

But international support is equally important in staying the hand of the U.S. government against us. International Support is a crucial factor in assuring that our war for independence will neither be interminable nor unsuccessful.  It is not only a matter of direct material or arms aid; just as the deployment of United States forces on alert status in such places as the Sea of Japan and Korea has been of some value to the VIetnamese, so the same or similar deployments would be of value to us. Too, on the military side, the possibility - however remote, however logistically difficult -that Chinese troops might, if asked by us, make an appearance in the United States such as Alaska or Hawaii, or at some oversees point where the United States has military commitments; the possibility that African nations in retaliation for U.S. military action against us might take action against the U.S. within their countries, which could include breaking off relations, seizures of property and concerted military action  against . . . . allies of the U.S. and supported by and relied upon by the U.S. - these two possibilities count as major elements in our calculated use of foreign support to stay the hand of the U.S. against us and move that government toward a peaceful settlement with us.

Thus, in New Africa we have upon us the obligation to cultivate unilaterally and through regional associations the support of foreign powers. Ultimately we look to the United Nations as the power where world opinion  - supported by the pressures generated by the operation of these eight strategic elements which we are discussing - will validate our independence and our claim against the United States for reparations. But it seems clear that the enforcement of our claims, whatever validation we receive beyond these shores, will depend on our own success at arms.

We follow a classic principle of political science; that for a small nation (us) to maintain itself against a big nation (the United States), it is necessary for the small nation to have an alliance with another big nation (China) or groups of nations (the anti-imperialist nations of Africa and Asia).

The Sixth Strategic Element - the Limited Objective - Has a Clear and Undeniable Importance

This success is made not alone on the battlefield, or even in the very important - indeed vital - preparations behind the battlefield. It is made also through the terms of the war, through the objectives being sought or defended. The sixth strategic element - the Limited Objective - has a clear and undeniable importance.

What we are talking about here is that instead of seeking the overthrow of the U.S. government of the control of 50 states or even 25 states, we seek merely five states. This is only one-forth of the states, and we are one-tenth of the population. Together they are five of the poorest states in the Union. They have great numbers of black people, suffering both a relative and absolute educational poverty, severe health and nutritional problems, and, in many areas, an endemic culture of poverty. They are underdeveloped. In short, the land we seek is an area which white Americans may feel is well worth giving up - once they have reached the point where giving up something seems inevitable or, at least, a better course than destruction and death.

Military Viability

Now, how do we get white people to this point? We would hope that polemics and reason would do it. We would hope that things like this book and diplomatic and political pressures would do it. Unfortunately history seems to teach us otherwise. We would love to be wrong. Yet what we learn from history is the unmistakable promise that the white man will fight us. And so, we must be prepared to fight him - and win - for our limited objective. We must have, therefore, an inherent Military Viability. Our army and our people must be able to survive destruction, and survive not just for a day or a few days but for many weeks and months, for years, if necessary, to establish our independence. And we must at the same time be able to inflict severe damage upon the enemy.

Sometimes the will of our people to suffer through war and persevere for years for our freedom - as the Vietnamese have done, as the black Angolans are doing, as the white American colonists did in the past - is doubted. So many of us are such comfortable slaves. Only time will tell. But if we do not have the will, if we do not persevere we will not win our freedom. It is that simple. Foreign aid and foreign alliances will not win it for us. Only  through our own will. Only through our own perseverance in war, in the midst of suffering, deprivation, and death. Only out of this.

And the role of the people is crucial. In the South, where we must ultimately deploy the Black Legion as our main-force army, our strategy has to include the people on the land and in the cities as a vital element. The Army must be able to move in secret and conceal itself. It must be able to depend on the people for reconnaissance and intelligence information, against the enemy. And it must be able to depend on the people to deny to the enemy food, general supplies, transport and sanctuary in order to maximize for the enemy his supply, concealment, and logistical problems. 

Finally, beyond the South, the black man’s SECOND STRIKE CAPABILITY must be believable. The second strike capability is the Underground Army, the black guerillas in the cities. So long as black people are able to remain in the cities - and there are over 120 major cities where the brothers have used the torch - and retain relative freedom of movement, the black man has, or can develop, the means for destroying white industrial capacity and - if need be - white America in general as mercilessly as a missile attack.

Although the Republic of New Afrika neither directs nor controls these guerrillas - nor is in anyway more positive than the rest of you that they even exist - to the extent that they do exist and support the national policy and objectives of the Republic of New Africa, and to the extent that their power is believable, to these extents is the war foreshortened and more quickly will come the success of our independent black state on the American mainland.”



Excerpt from FOUNDATIONS OF THE BLACK NATION by Imari Obadele, 1971:

“We know whence the ‘start-money’ for the nation should come. It SHOULD come from the nation of our former slave masters, from the United States, whose wealth today is ALL derived, in essence, from the tri-cornered trade - that is to say, from the body and exploitation of the African slave. Repayments for this is what is known as reparations.

The principle of reparations is well established in international law. Nations pay reparations to nations. They pay reparations for the damage to each other, such as for accidental sinking of a ship in time of peace. They pay reparations for war: Germany to France, after World War I. They pay damages for crimes against people, for genocide: after World War II, for instance, Germany not only paid reparations to France for war, Germany paid reparations (over $800 million) to Israel for having slaughtered six million Jews not only during but before the war.

This last is particularly important to us, because the state of Israel, founded in 1948, did not even exist when the Nazis abused the Jews. The Jews used their reparations for economic development, as all reparations are intended to be used. New Africa’s use of reparations will be for precisely the same purpose. We have proposed a settlement to the United States federal government: $10,000 per individual descendant of slaves, some 300 billion dollars. (The US defense budget every year is well over 70 billion dollars.) Because of the special nature of our oppression and a belief within the RNA Government that economic development would best be advanced this way, we have proposed that 40% - $4,000 of the $10,000 - go directly to the individual.

From every state government with a black population, for demonstrable discrimination and oppression in the years after slavery, We are demanding $15,000 for every family which comes to a New African New Community in the South or already lives in the five states. All of this would be used to build the New Community ($7,500,000 for every community of 500 families).”




𝐄𝐗𝐏𝐋𝐀𝐈𝐍𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐇𝐎𝐖 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐍𝐄𝐖 𝐀𝐅𝐑𝐈𝐊𝐀𝐍 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐀𝐅𝐑𝐎𝐃𝐄𝐒𝐂𝐄𝐍𝐃𝐀𝐍𝐓 𝐏𝐋𝐄𝐁𝐈𝐒𝐂𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐒𝐄𝐋𝐅 𝐃𝐄𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐌𝐈𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐁𝐄 𝐎𝐑𝐆𝐀𝐍𝐈𝐙𝐄𝐃

See: NADCSC Presentation to the ADN National Plebiscite Teach In

Just after being sworn in as the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the PGRNA, Siphiwe Baleka presented the plan for organizing the 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐚𝐧 & 𝐀𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐏𝐥𝐞𝐛𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐃𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 at the National Plebiscite Teach - In on January 14, 2024. This followed the Plebiscite Workshop at the New Afrikan People's Convention, December 30, 2023.

See: https://www.balanta.org/nadcsc-presentation-to-the-adn... and https://www.balanta.org/.../plebiscite-workshop-at-the...

A plebiscite vote of all eligible black voters in the United States - approximately 29 million people of voting age - will require a campaign. A campaign will require a campaign machine in each of the ten regions of the United States.

The New Afrikan Diplomatic and Civil Service Corps (NADCSC) is a private group that provides consulting and diplomatic service to the nation of New Afrikan people in the United States in their exercise of self determination in pursuit of freedom, independence and justice. Its ultimate strategic goal is expressed in its 𝐂𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐅𝐈𝐑𝐒𝐓 𝐍𝐄𝐖 𝐀𝐅𝐑𝐈𝐊𝐀𝐍 & 𝐀𝐅𝐑𝐎 𝐃𝐄𝐒𝐂𝐄𝐍𝐃𝐀𝐍𝐓 𝐏𝐋𝐄𝐁𝐈𝐒𝐂𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐆𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐒 𝐈𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐔𝐍𝐈𝐓𝐄𝐃 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐓𝐄𝐒 which would establish an objective, qualified national body constituted to take responsibility for conducting the plebiscite.

The NADCSC plebiscite campaign is divided in several phases which are: 

1. Exploratory;

2. Pre-Congress;

3. Preparation and convening of the First New Afrikan & Afro Descendant Plebiscite Congress in the United States;

4. Campaign for and conducting the Plebiscite which will allow the people to vote on the 4 options

5. The Convening of the Second New Afrikan & Afro Descendant Plebiscite Congress  in the United States and other activities during the transitional phase after the Plebiscite to determine the implementation of all four of the Plebiscite options;

IMPORTANT REMINDER:

Contrary to mobilizing the masses of the people, 𝒂 𝒄𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒂𝒊𝒈𝒏 𝒎𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒆 𝒅𝒐𝒆𝒔 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒏𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒂 𝒍𝒐𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒏𝒐𝒊𝒔𝒆 𝒕𝒐 𝒃𝒆 𝒃𝒖𝒊𝒍𝒕. This is comparable to building an army. First, you recruit generals who look for staff officers. Then, the hierarchy and the officers put together the troops to be trained for the war later on.

𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐏 𝟏: 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐈𝐁𝐔𝐓𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐂𝐀𝐋𝐋

Collect signed 𝑪𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑭𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕 𝑵𝒆𝒘 𝑨𝒇𝒓𝒊𝒌𝒂𝒏 & 𝑨𝒇𝒓𝒐 𝑫𝒆𝒔𝒄𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒂𝒏𝒕 𝑷𝒍𝒆𝒃𝒊𝒔𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒆 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒈𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒔 𝒊𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑼𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒔 and return to newafrikandiplomaticcorps@gmail.com.  An online version is available here: https://www.balanta.org/nadcsc-call-for-plebiscite-campaign 

𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐏 𝟐: 𝐏𝐋𝐄𝐁𝐈𝐒𝐂𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐒𝐔𝐑𝐕𝐄𝐘

Complete NADCSC-PEC online Initial Plebiscite Survey https://www.balanta.org/nadcsc-initial-plebiscite-survey After completing the survey, you will receive the 𝑩𝒖𝒊𝒍𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑶𝒖𝒓 𝑪𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒂𝒊𝒈𝒏 𝑴𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒊𝒏𝒆 𝑫𝒐𝒄𝒖𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕

𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐏 𝟑: 𝐅𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐏𝐄𝐎𝐏𝐋𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐁𝐋𝐈𝐒𝐇 𝐀𝐍 𝐑𝐂𝐂

Anyone who completes the “Call” and checks “Organizer” and completes the Initial Plebiscite Survey is invited to “𝑳𝒆𝒂𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒉𝒊𝒑 𝑻𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑺𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏” with NADCSC Coordinator and at least one member of the PEC. The training session will be no more than two hours and have two parts: 1) Fundamentals of the NADCSC and 2) Profile and Process for assigning individuals to key leadership positions in the NADCSC Plebiscite Campaign structures. Upon completion of the training, sign the “𝑻𝒆𝒏𝒖𝒓𝒆 𝒐𝒇 𝑶𝒇𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒆 𝑨𝒈𝒓𝒆𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕''. At this point, the person becomes a member of the PEC for his region. As soon as a region has 5 Coordinators, that region is active. The RCC’s are responsible for establishing the SCCs and MCCs using the same 3 step process.

Strong teams - municipal coordinating committees (MCCs) - need to be set up in the top one hundred cities with the largest population of Black people to conduct the Initial Plebiscite Survey; other teams may be set up wherever 5 or more people agree to do so.

Collecting a minimum of 10,000 completed Initial Plebiscite Surveys - 1,000 from each of the ten regions - will complete the exploratory phase and provide the basis to determine the viability of the campaign and its marketing strategy.

In the process of collecting Initial Plebiscite Surveys, the PEC should establish at least 3 RCCs and 10 MCCs - the requirement for holding the Pre-Congress for the First New Afrikan & Afro Descendant Plebiscite Congress in the United States

CULTURAL CARRYOVERS, EPIGENETICS AND CONNECTING THE DOTS: BALANTA, PALMERES AND THE REPUBLIC OF NEW AFRIKA - A TRADITION OF LIBERATION, INDEPENDENCE AND REPARATIONS

Introduction: African Cultural Carryovers and Epigenetics

The central point of this study is to show that the Balanta tradition of resisting all forms of foreign domination by migrating to unoccupied territory and establishing decentralized organized society based on egalitarian and communal agricultural-based economics while engaging in armed self defense and second strike capacity has been retained in the Americas and is proved by the direct link between Balanta communities in their ancestral homeland, the establishment of the Republic of Palmares in the seventeenth century concurrently with their role in confraternities that pursued  a legal case at the Vatican in 1686, and the establishment of the New Afrikan Independence Movement in the United States including the current leadership of both the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika and the global Afrikan Reparatory Justice movement emanating out of the State of Illinois. By examining these, it will show a positive Balanta epigenetic endowment that manifests as an irresistible and irreversible desire for freedom and willingness to escape and/or directly confront alien oppressors, and that this genetic expression is a cultural carryover of Balanta people into the Americas.

Cultural Carryovers

It is a common understanding that Africans have, since the early settlement of the Americas, influenced Americas’ (North, South and Central) language, manners, religion, literature, music, art, and dance. The forms of worship, family organization, music, food, and language developed by Africans held in  American slavery can all be seen to bear the signs of African traditional culture, as can the architecture, art, and handcrafts they left behind. However, it is rarely acknowledged that political and military dispositions are also evidence of African traditional culture.

In the abstract for NATIVE AFRICAN ARTS & CULTURES IN THE NEW WORLD; A CASE STUDY OF AFRICAN RETENTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by Omokaro A.Izevbigie of the Department of Fine/Applied Arts, Faculty of Arts, University of Benin, it states, 

“Despite the different languages, and cultures in Africa, there is commonality in religious, artistic and musical traditions. Did the native Africans sold into slavery retain any of the traditions in the “New World” in general and in the United States of America in particular? There is considerable retention in the Latin American countries, because the slaves had many more rights in South America than in the United States. Consequently, the African slaves in the United States of America gradually lost contact with his past. However, there are certain church rituals and some aspects of the black American music which have been identified as cultural carry-overs in the United States.”

Chikodiri Nwangwu writes in Preserving African cultures amid globalization: Lessons from the enslaved communities in the Americas,

“the preservation of cultural identity among the enslaved Africans in the Americas was a key feature of the resistance against cultural assimilation. It is also a testament to their resilience, creativity and adaptability. In his review article published by the University of Chicago Press, R. L. Watson attributed the survival of much of that culture to, among other things, the ratio of blacks to whites, the organization and operation of the plantations, and the predominance of rural settings. Beyond these, however, the will to resist cultural assimilation, which seems absent in many African countries today, was the determining factor. Despite oppressive and harsh working environments, the enslaved Africans devised various ways to maintain their cultural practices, traditions, languages, religions and values.”

But what about the will to resist the actual oppressive agents?

The Balanta example will show that their cultural resistance meant political and military resistance which safeguarded the Balanta cultural value of sovereignty. Importantly, this Balanta cultural expression that preserves independence can be explained by epigenetics

Transgenerational Epigenetic Effect of Balanta Freedom

What humans inherit from ancestors that makes one unique in personality and behavior, is the genetic and epigenetic material that regulates genetic expression. This genetic material responds to environmental conditions.

In 2020, Dr. Kenneth Knave's published Competent Proof: The Legal Standing for African Americans in the Battle for Reparations  reviewing Judge Norgle's decision in the Farmer-Paellmann v. Fleetboston Financial Corp case. In that book, Kenneth S. Nave, MD states, 

“Science has proven that environmental conditions shape the structure and function of highly specialized cells in key areas of the body. These changes occur in an extension or appendage to the gene known as the epigene. The epigene is an extension of the gene that responds to biochemical signals emanating from the environment. These signals cause changes to the gene. These epigenetic changes to the gene influence and change the cellular genetics of the cell. . . . Under certain environmental conditions, the epigenome programs or ‘reprograms’ the genetics of the cells of the limbic system which, in its most fundamental definition, is the center of all human thought, emotion, behavior, learning and, when present, psychosocial pathology. . . This environmental shaping is usually pathologic leading to physical disease, social dysfunction, and mental illness. Most significantly to the plight and social conditions of the descendants of former slaves is the scientifically proven fact that the changes to the epigene created by environmental pathology is passed down to the descendants of those initially impacted by environmental gene shaping. . . . As it relates to the cells of the brain, this cellular shaping can lead to problems with learning, memory, and mental health. As it relates to cells of the heart and cardiovascular system, these changes can lead to heart attacks, strokes, and kidney failure. Endocrine cells genetic shaping can lead to diabetes and metabolic syndrome. . . . This environmental shaping of the gene is well confirmed and is also recognized to be transmissible at least to the fourth generation of one’s descendants and beyond. That means that any environmental hardship experienced by your ancestors and causing this genetic environmental shaping could possibly, and is probably, transferred down to you, their descendant, and likewise your progeny, for generations. This is The Transgenerational Epigenetic Effect (TGEE).”

EPIGENETICS AND NEUROSCIENCE

The limbic system of the brain is a group of structures that include the amygdala, hypothalamus, the thalamus, and the hippocampus. These brain regions work in concert with one another in the processing of information gathered through the sense organs which are stored as memories which later are processed as the evolving human begins to interact with the environment.  Dr. Nave continues, 

“Liken the limbic system of the brain to the central processor, or hardware, of a computer (human beings are the computer), and the genes of the cells which make up this region, to the software which operates the computer. The epigenome would then be the software programmer, the brain’s Information Technology Specialist, that writes, or rewrites, the genetic program that controls the operation of the cells of the limbic system. Under certain environmental conditions, the epigenome programs or ‘reprograms’ the genetics of the cells of the limbic system which can then lead to pathologic genetic expression, or function, of the cells of this region. The end result of this altered genetic expression is mental illness and/or pathologic social behavior. . . . The limbic system, in its most fundamental definition, is the center of all human thought, emotion, behavior, learning and, when present, psychosocial pathology. . . “

The epigenome possesses within it coding, or programming, that is inherited from a person’s ancestors. Once an environmental stress acts upon the epigene of a person the epigene can be changed permanently. Thereby, epigenetic changes that cause disease states [or mental pathologies] can and will be passed onto an impacted persons’ offspring. The children of a person carrying epigenetic markers for disease [or mental pathologies] will then be susceptible to said disease if exposed to the environmental stressors that can initiate epigenetic activation of the gene. We see this expressed in experiments with mice subjected to electroshocks when they attempt to escape their cage through an open door. Eventually, the mice, fearing harm, stop attempting to leave through the open door. What’s interesting is that their offspring who themselves have never been subjected to the electroshock, will also not try to leave through the open door. Hence a pathology or behavior was epigenetically imprinted and expressed by the offspring.

Additionally, according to neuroscience, when faced with a threat—real or imagined, physical or emotional—the most primitive parts of the brain go into action to determine if the threat is a credible one. If it finds that yes, the threat is real, it will then go into survival mode and determine if you should stay and fight or run away—whichever one will most likely result in survival.

After surviving the trauma of the middle passage, for example, the most primitive parts of a brain are already triggered to enter the most extreme fight or flight condition which are both ACUTE and CHRONIC. Already in a state of physical, emotional and spiritual abuse and degradation,the constant threat of violence made fighting and escaping both unsuitable choices for  survival for most African peoples, especially those who came from societies with classes [unlike Balantas] where subservience to a Chief or King was already epigenetically encoded behavior. For most of the African people disembarking from middle passage ships, submission and obedience proved to be the only choice likely to result in survival. Over time these tactics become imprinted on their brains. They become the brain’s go-to fix when it feels threatened. This then became a pattern. One didn’t have to think about these tactics. They just become part of one’s comfort zone and one’s automatic response to feeling unsafe or uncomfortable. 

These types of tactics are referred to as familiarity heuristic. In other words, the brain reverts to what it’s familiar with when faced with a threat. Remember, the brain’s job is to keep you safe and make sure you survive. What the brain considers safe is what is familiar. After all, what you’ve done to this point has kept you alive. You’ve survived so far, so as far as your brain is concerned, what it’s done to date to keep you safe has worked. For the Balanta, the familiarity heuristic is to escape to remote places, grow one’s own food, defend one’s own territory, and engage in second strike actions against foreign invaders. As we will see, this Balanta familirarity heuristic led to Balanta escaping foreign domination by establishing the Republic of Palmares in 1595 and leading the Republic of New Afrika in 2023.

While TGEE is often used to explain the negative effects of the environment, and in this case, the chattel enslavement environment, TGEE can also be used to explain positive effects of the environment. Following the early descriptions of the Balanta and the later work by Amiclar Cabral and Walter Rodney, Siphiwe Baleka has shown in his three-volume history of the Balanta that 

“. . . the origin of our family’s migration from the land of Ta-Nihisi just prior to the conquest of Menes and the unification of Ta-Nihisi and Ta-Meri to form the first Kemetic (Egyptian) dynasty around 3100 B.C..  . . . From Ta-Nihisi we migrated along the route from Darb el-Arbeen to Wadai and further west to Lake Chad. Somehow, our Balanta ancestors avoided war, capture and enslavement by migrating west to escape the invasion from the east and keeping to the southern Sahel corridor to avoid the invasion from the north. In this way we maintained our freedom for over 4,300 years and did not violate our Great Belief against successive persecutions from the Mesinu (followers of Horus at Edfu), Theme (Libyans), the Shashu and Habiru (Hyksos), Soninke of Wagadu (Ghana), Tuareg (Berbers), Almoravids in Wagadu (Ghana), Keita Clan (Mali), the Sunni Dynasty (Songhai), the Askia dynasty (Songhai), the Moors, fulbe (Fulani coming from the West), and lastly, by the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Bijago, Papel and the Manding of the Kaabu Kingdom. Because we did not develop hierarchical state societies nor written records, much of that 4,300-year history also remains shrouded in mystery.”

Shrouded in mystery, yes, but encoded epigenetically!

I am proposing that this multi-millennial history of Balanta migration, resistance and freedom was triggered by the environmental conditions of enslavement by the Portuguese and resulted in pathologically-produced liberation movements by the enslaved Balanta first in Portugal in the Confraternity of Our Lady of the Rosary of Black Men (1496), then in the communities of Salvador (1549)  and Jaguaripe (Santidade movement in the late 1500’s)) in Brazil, then in the establishment of the Republic of Palmares (1595), and much later in the civil rights movement and New Afrikan Independence Movement in the United States (1960s) up until the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika today and exposes the distortion that only benign cultural carryovers such as dancing and cooking were transferred by the Africans from their homelands to the Americas, but so too did political and military cultural practices.

Connecting the Balanta Through Historic Liberation Movement in the Americas

Outline

  1. Balanta pursued Reparations through second-strike actions during their resistance against the Mali Empire.

When the Mandinka of the Mali empire raided the Balanta villages, the Balanta would flee, leaving their cattle behind. Later, they would go and retrieve their cattle. This is called “Reparations”, not theft.

2. People from territory in Guinea Bissau, including Balanta, were kidnapped and captured as prisoners of war and trafficked to Portugal and enslaved in the 1450’s. 

From the perspective of the Europeans, all the Papal bulls from 1452 to 1493 gave both Spain and Portugal the legal right to capture and enslave Africans at will. When the Portuguese returned from their sixth expedition to Guinea, they brought with them about 653 enslaved, some of which included the Balanta, known for their fierce love of freedom and resistance to foreign domination.

3. People from territory in Guinea Bissau, including the Balanta, formed a brotherhood in Portugal in 1496  for the purpose of liberation. 

The Confraternity of Our Lady of the Rosary of Black Men - was created in Lisbon at the Monastery of Sao Domingos on 14 July 1496, forty years after the Portuguese had arrived in the region of modern Guinea-Bissau. By 1526 the confraternities had been granted the right, via their compromisso or constitution, to liberate their members from slavery or buy them from captivity.

4. People from territory in Guinea Bissau, including the Balanta were sent to Brazil from 1500 - 1600.

From 1570 - 1600, an annual average of 3,000 African captives were shipped largely from Quinara, an important Biafada kingdom in pre-colonial Guinea-Bissau situated between the Geba and Rio Grande de Buba rivers, and about half of the slaves were sent to Brazil. From 1600-1650, about 4,000 slaves from the Upper Guinea coast were exported annually to Brazil and elsewhere (about 200,000 for this period). Balanta had the lowest number of captured prisoners of war because of their effective resistance. 

5. People from territory in Guinea Bissau, including the Balanta, came as free Africans to Salvador, Brazil in 1549 and developed an extensive trans-Atlantic trading and communications network.

From its inception as a city in 1549, Salvador (Brazil) served as a link to Pernambuco, Paraiba and Sergipe in the north of the country and the isles, Porto Seguro, Espirito Santo, Rio de Janeiro, Sao Vicente and Buenos Aires in Argentina to the south. Ships brought “free Africans from the region of modern Guinea Bissau, Cacheu, who were hired to work as carpenters.”

6. People from territory in Guinea Bissau, including the Balanta, started the Santidade movement against the Portuguese in the late 1500s. 

In the late sixteenth century Guineans, probably led by Balanta, helped form the Santidade movement in Jaguaripe (Bahia, Brazil). It resisted Portuguese ideology that marginalized both Indigenous and Africans in Bahia. 

7. People from territory in Guinea Bissau, including the Balanta, started the Quilombo of Palmares in 1607.

The community at Palmares (Brazil) started when forty Guinean men, former enslaved people from Pernambuco and some of them most likely freedom-loving and fiercely resistant Balanta, left for Palmares and formed a republic there that existed as a safe haven from 1607 to 1695. It is unlikely that it was the Beafada and Brame Guineas, or any other peoples from the same region, that led this movement since they were dependent on Balanta for farming and did not have the heritage of resistance and decentralized social structure like the Balanta.

8. Palmares inspired Imari Obadele, principal founder and former President of the Provisional Government of the  Republic of New Afrika.

Imari Obadele wrote ten pages on the Republic of Palmares in his Doctoral dissertation, NEW AFRICAN STATE-BUILDING IN NORTH AMERICA: A Study of Reaction Under the Stress of Conquest

9. The Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika is led today by two Balanta descendants. 

Balanta descendant Krystal Muhammed is the current President  of the PGRNA while Balanta descendant Siphiwe Baleka serves as its Minister of Foreign Affairs. Siphiwe Baleka also created the Decade of Return Initiative in Guinea Bissau and is the first Balanta to return and receive citizenship in his ancestral homeland, making him the first Dual Citizen of the Republic of New Afrika and the Republic of Guinea Bissau.

EARLY DOCUMENTATION OF BALANTAS

Table I: Earliest Evidence

Table II: Upper Guinean Origin of Slaves in the Americas 1560-1600


Early description of Balanta people and communities as “cruel”, “savage”, and “barbarous”

The first documented Balanta to be trafficked and enslaved is recorded in 1510. From the 1570’s - 1600, an annual average of 3,000 African captives were shipped largely from Guinala (or Quinara, an important Biafada kingdom in pre-colonial Guinea-Bissau situated between the Geba and Rio Grande de Buba rivers) in Guinea-Bissau by the lancados and Tangomaos; about half of the slaves are sent to Brazil. From 1600-1650, about 4,000 slaves from Upper Guinea coast were exported annually to Brazil and elsewhere (about 200,000 for this period).

The low number of documented enslaved Balantas (7) as compared to others in the same region such as Biafara (Beafada 167) and Brame (Buramos 212) from 1569 to 1577 is likely a testament to the Balantas effective resistance to foreign domination.

In Planting Rice and Harvesting Slaves: Transformations along the Guinea-Bissau Coast, 1400-1900, Walter Hawthorne writes,

“By forging ties of kinship with local women and through them local communities, Portuguese and Luso African merchants linked local systems of production with a broad Atlantic economy and orchestrated the shipment of slaves from Guinea Bissau. . . . It is partly due to the success of Portuguese and Luso African brokers that the volume of the slave trade from Guinea-Bissau’s shores grew, particularly in the years after Christopher Columbus’s first voyage to the New World in 1492. . . . Diversity and unpredicatablity fueled the wars and encouraged the raids that produced thousands of captives. On this Rio de Sao Domingos [a small tributary of the Cacheu] Almada wrote in the late sixteenth century, ‘there are more slaves than in all the rest of Guinea since they take them [from] these nations - Banhuns, Buramos, Cassangas, Jabundos, Falupos, Arriatas and Balantas.’ Each of these groups was located within the ria coastline and close to the frontier of the powerful and expanding interior state of Kaabu. . . . In the early sixteenth century, the Rio Cacheu was situated on the frontier of the Casa Mansa (or Casamance) kingdom and possessed a mixed population of Cassanga, Mandinka Floup, Balanta, Brame and Banyun. . . . By about the mid-sixteenth century, the Cassanga king had become wealthy by directing military and judicial institutions toward producing slaves who were sold to Atlantic merchants. Andre Alvares de Almada noted that, with ‘spears, arrows, shield, knives and short swords, as well as thick clubs ‘of up to three hand-spans long,’ Casa Mansa’s armies attacked Banyun, Brame, and Balanta communities between and around the Rio Casamance and Rio Cacheu, making slaves of many people. . . . In the closing years of the century, Cacheu replaced Sao Domingos as the most important entrepot on the Rio Cacheu. . . . About 125 kilometers upriver from Cacheu, Farim was also an important port on the Cacheu. Farim sat at the ria coastline’s edge and attracted a great number of Mandinka merchants, who dubbed the town Tubabodaga, or ‘White Man’s Village.’ There lancados met with Mande-speaking traders, most of whom were from Kaabu. . . . This was a period of expansion of both the Kaabu empire and the Atlantic slave trade. Slaves taken in Kaabu wars were sold to lancados at Farim and then shipped west to Cacheu, where they were put aboard vessels bound for the Cape Verde Islands and points beyond. . . . As the violence connected with the Atlantic slave trade proliferated on the coast at the end of the sixteenth and start of the seventeenth century, many Balanta found living in dispersed morancas to be very dangerous. Hence morancas began to ‘concentrate’ into defensive tabancas, many of which were surrounded by large stockades. . . . For example, Adelino Bidenga Sanha stated, ‘the tabanca grew rapidly because of the wars of the Fula. For this, Balanta liked to agglomerate so as to make groups for war or to counter attacks of Fula and Mandinka who at times attacked Balanta. After this Balanta began to marry among themselves. This contributed to the enlargement of this and other tabancas. . . . By the seventeenth century, Guinea Bissau’s ports of Cacheu and Bissau had emerged as the most important commercial centers on the Upper Guinea Coast. The slaves departing from these points found themselves forced to labor beside Africans from elsewhere on the continent on plantations, in mines, and in cities across the New World.’”

Wlater Rodney continues in Upper Guinea and the Significance of the Origins of Africans Enslaved in the New World,

Portuguese slave traders regarded the river Cacheu as a slaver’s paradise, for within the narrow compass of that river basin, they encountered five people’s - Djola, Papel, Banhun, Casanga and Balanta each of whom was divided into several political units. Neither the Djola nor the Balanta took any active part in the slave trade, but they were nevertheless to be found among slave cargoes because they were exposed to attacks and man stealing by their neighbors. The Bijago who resided in the islands off the Cacheu and Geba estuaries, were particularly noted for their piratical activities, and steadily supplied the Portuguese with Djola, Papel, Balanta, Beafada and Nalu captives. Bijago hostilities were at their height at the turn of the seventeenth century, when the raids of their formidable war canoes forced the three Beafada rulers of Rio Grande de Buba to appeal to the king of Portugal and the Pope for protection, offering in turn to embrace Christianity. Long after this peak period, the inhabitants of the tiny Bijago islands were still supplying over 400 captives per year, all taken from the coastal strip between the Cacheu and the Cacine. . . . The most significant partnership was between the Europeans and the Mandinga, among the latter of whom were the principal agents of the trans-atlantic slave trade in Upper Guinea.”

The earliest account of the Balantas by name in written records is recorded by Valentim Fernandes, Descripcam, in 1506:  “There was very little stratification in Balanta society. Everyone worked in the fields, with no ruling class or families managing to exclude themselves from daily labor.”  Andre Alvares Almada (Trato breve dos rios de Guine, trans. P.E.H. Hair -) wrote in 1594, “The Creek of the Balantas penetrates inland at the furthest point of the land of the Buramos [Brame]. The Balantas are fairly savage blacks.” In 1615, Manuel Alvares commented, ‘They [Balantas] have no principle king. Whoever has more power is king, and every quarter of a league there are many of this kind.’ In 1617 more than 2,000 African captives were shipped from Cacheu. In 1627, Alonso de Sandoval wrote that Balanta were ‘a cruel people, [a] race without a king.’ 

Describing the Balanta as farmers and cattle herders with an organized, decentralized egalitarian political system

The terms “cruel” and “savage” used to describe Balanta can easily be qualified as political terms used to demonize them for their fierce and effective resistance to domination and enslavement. According to Amilcar Cabral, “because of their type of society, a horizontal (level) society, but of free men, who want to be free, who do not have oppression at the top, except the oppression of the Portuguese. The Balanta is his own man.” Walter Rodney agrees. During this period from the 1570’s to 1776, Rodney writes in A History of The Upper Guinea Coast 1545 to 1800,  

“Indeed, some tribes displayed chronic hostility towards the Europeans; The Djolas were in this latter category. . . . Another group, the Balantas, were so hostile that the belief was widespread among the Europeans on the coast that the Balantas killed all white men that they caught.

According to John Horhn’s They Had No King: Ella Baker and the Politics of Decentralized Organization Among African Descended Populations

“Furthermore, the Balanta were extremely mistrusting of outsiders not from their own lineage or tabancas. This was true even when applied to members of their own ethnic group and resulted in a culture that held loyalty to the tabancas above all else. Therefore, it was impossible for outside forces to gain influence over Balanta culture without direct conquest and the commitment of military resources. The fact that the Balanta possessed very little material culture and existed in dispersed settlement patterns would have discouraged the notion of any such conquest.

Walter Hawthorne also writes in Strategies of the Decentralized

"One of the most important strategies was abandoning places that were easily accessible and therefore vulnerable to attack. . . . As interior states began to form before the fifteenth century and to harvest captives for sale to Atlantic merchants in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, many groups saw migration as the best way to avoid enslavement and subjutgation. . . . One strategy was to seize captives and to ransom them back to the villages from which they had come. Myriad Balanta communities that were reluctant to have direct trade contacts with Europeans pursued this strategy. For example, in 1927, Alberto Gomes Pimentel wrote that when the Balanta seized people they were often held until ‘relatives’ paid some price for the freedom of their kin.  Cattle, he said, were often demanded as payment, but other items were also requested. Oral narratives also give us a picture of what might have been a typical transaction. Speaking of Balanta raids, one informant said that ‘prisoners were tied to the branch or trunk of a cabeceira tree for some time.  Those of strength communicated to the families of the prisoners that they should pay a ransom for the prisoners if they were to be freed.’ Others spoke of the exchange of captives for a ransom. Through ransoming, some Balanta communities avoided entry into the regional trade in slaves but managed to increase the wealth of their communities and to gain valuable items such as iron, that they needed for defense against slave raiders.”

In Planting Rice and Harvesting Slaves: Transformations along the Guinea-Bissau Coast, 1400-1900, Walter Hawthorne writes,

“Faced with the proliferation of violence associated with slave raids, Balanta living in dispersed morancas or households, began concentrating into tabancas in secluded areas near coastal rivers where they could better defend themselves. . . . As late as 1732, European sailors were loath to venture up the Rio Geba for fear of coming in contact with Balanta age-grade warriors. . . . Portuguese and French officials on the coast left many complaints about Balanta stealing cattle at the same time they were capturing people.They are all great thieves,’ Manuel Alvares noted in the early seventeenth century, ‘and they tunnel their way into compounds to steal the cattle. They excel at making assaults . . . taking everything they can find and capturing as many persons as possible.’. . . Spanish Capuchins specifically mentioned that Balanta ‘play a certain instrument that they call in their language bombolon’ to ‘announce the attack.’ . . .

Oral narratives are not the only places we can find evidence  . . . Occupying lands next to some of the most important interregional trade routes (the Rio Geba, Rio Cacheu, and Rio Mansoa), Balanta staged frequent attacks on merchant vessels. During such assaults, Balanta seized passengers to sell back to the communities from which they had come, ‘to black neighbors,’ who took them to Bissau or Cacheu . . .

If Balanta staged raids on villages and merchant vessels, what did they do with those they seized? Like people in other parts of Africa, Balanta exercised several options with captives. They sold, ransomed, killed, and retained them, and they did these things for reasons inexorably linked to the logic of Balanta communities.

Balanta typically divided captives into two groups: whites and Africans. Whites were often killed, dismembered, and displayed as trophies by bold young men who returned to their villages with members of their age grades to celebrate a victory. Capuchin observers noted this behavior:

‘The Balanta only hold the blacks to sell them, but as for the whites that they seize, unfailingly, they kill them. Immediately, they cut them to pieces, and they put them as trophies on the points of spears, and they go about making a display of them through the villages as a show of their valor, and he who has murdered some white is greatly esteemed.’

Barbot also left a description of Balanta killing white merchants. The inhabitants of the banks of the Rio Geba, he wrote, ‘are more wild and cruel to strangers than themselves; for they will scarce release a white man upon any conditions whatsoever, but will sooner or later murder, and perhaps devour them.’ La Courbe told a similar story. Balanta, he warned, ‘are great thieves. They pillage whites and blacks indiscriminately whenever they encounter them either on land or at sea. They have large canoes and they will strip you of everything if you do not encounter them well armed. When they capture blacks, they sell them to others, with whites they just kill them.’ . . .

In part, the Balanta and other coastal groups resisted enslavement by exploiting the advantages offered by the region in which they lived. Put simply, the coast offered more defenses and opportunities for counterattack against slave-raiding armies and other enemies than did the savanna-woodland interior. In the early twentieth century, Portuguese administrator Alberto Gomes Pimentel explained how the Balanta utilized the natural protection of mangrove-covered areas – terrafe in Guinean creole – when they were confronted with an attack from a well-organized and well-armed enemy seeking captives or booty:  ‘Armed with guns and large swords, the Balanta, who did not generally employ any resistance on these occasions. . . . pretended to flee (it was their tactic), suffering a withdrawal and going to hide in the ‘terrafe’ on the margins on the rivers and lagoons, spreading out in the flats some distance so as not to be shot by their enemies. The attackers. . . . then began to return for their lands with all of the spoils of war’. Organizing rapidly and allying themselves with others in the area, the Balanta typically followed their enemies through the densely forested coastal region. At times, the Balanta waited until their attackers had almost reached their homelands before giving ‘a few shots and making considerable noise so as to cause a panic.’ The Balanta then engaged their enemies in combat, ‘many times corpo a corpo’. . . . 

Having assembled in what the Capuchins called ‘a great number,’ Balanta warriors struck their stranded victims quickly and with overwhelming force. ‘Upon approaching a boat,’ the Capuchins said, ‘they attack with fury, they kill, rob, capture and make off with everything.’ Such attacks happened with a great deal of regularity and struck fear in the hearts of merchants and missionaries alike. Others also commented on the frequency of Balanta raids on river vessels. On March 24, 1694, Bispo Portuense feared that he would fall victim to the Balanta when his boat, guided by grumetes, ran aground on a sandbar, probably on the Canal do Impernal, ‘very close to the territory of those barbarians.’ . . . .

Faced with an impediment to the flow of trade to their ports, the Portuguese tried to bring an end to Balanta raids. But they were outclassed militarily by skilled Balanta age-grade fighters.

Portuguese adjutant Amaro Rodrigues and his crew certainly discovered this. In 1696, he and a group of fourteen soldiers from a Portuguese post on Bissau anchored their craft somewhere near a Balanta village close to where Bissau’s Captain Jose Pinheiro had ordered the men to stage an attack. However, the Portuguese strategy was ill conceived. A sizable group of Balanta struck a blow against the crew before they had even left their boat. The Balanta killed Rodrigues and two Portuguese soldiers and took twelve people captive.”

However, these same “savages” and “barbarous” people were also the most organized farmers and cattle herders with a collective system of land ownership and government as first observed by Valentim Fernandes in 1506. Rodney writes in A History of The Upper Guinea Coast 1545 to 1800,

“The earliest European reports disclose that the Balantas had a multiplicity of petty settlements consisting of family lineages (Fernandes, 80)... The Balantas had quantities of prime yams…. The best farmers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries - the Balantas, the Banhuns, and the Djolas- all had cattle and goats …. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, Andre Dornelas pointed out that Balanta territory was free from heavy vegetation. It was these very Balantas who reared the most livestock in the area, and it was they who provided supplies of foodstuffs for their neighbors…. That peoples who were far superior producers of food than the Mande and Fula are consistently dubbed ‘Primitives’ is due solely to the contention that they did not erect a superstructure of states.... It is only the Balantas who can be cited as lacking the institution of kingship. At any rate there seemed to have been little or no differentiation within Balanta society on the basis of who held property, authority and coercive power. Some sources affirmed that the Balantas had no kings, while an early sixteenth-century statement that the Balanta ‘kings’ were no different from their subjects must be taken as referring simply to the heads of the village and family settlements  as in the case of the Balantas, the family is the sole effective social and political unit. . . .The distribution of goods, to take a very important facet of social activity, was extremely well organized on an inter-tribal basis in the Geba-Casamance area, and one of the groups primarily concerned in this were the Balantas, who are often cited as the most typical example of the inhibited Primitives. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Portuguese realized that the Balantas were the chief agriculturalists and the suppliers of food to the neighboring peoples. The Beafadas and Papels were heavily dependent on Balanta produce, and in return, owing to the Balanta refusal to trade with the Europeans, goods of European origin reached them via the Beafadas and the Papels. The Balantas did not allow foreigners in their midst, but they were always present in the numerous markets held in the territory of their neighbors. . . . Among the Balantas, who are to be classed as a ‘stateless society’, the system of land tenure is different. The Balantas are all small landowners, working their lands on the principle of voluntary reciprocal labour.

Amilcar Cabral in an excerpt from Part 1 The Weapon of Theory, Party Principles and Political Practice adds,

The Balanta have what is called a horizontal society, meaning that they do not have classes one above the other. The Balanta do not have great chiefs; it was the Portuguese who made chiefs for them. Each family, each compound is autonomous and if there is any difficulty, it is a council of elders which settles it. There is no State, no authority which rules everybody. . . . Each one rules in his own house and there is understanding among them. They join together to work in the fields, etc. and there is not much talk. . . . Balanta society is like this: the more land you work, the richer you are, but the wealth is not to be hoarded, it is to be spent, for one individual cannot be much more than another. That is the principle of Balanta society. . . . As we have said, the Fula society, for example, or the Manjaco society are societies which have classes from the bottom to the top. With the Balanta it is not like that: anyone who holds his head very high is not respected any more, already wants to become a white man, etc. For example, if someone has grown a great deal of rice, he must hold a great feast, to use it up. Whereas the Fula and Manjaco have other rules, with some higher than others. This means that the Manjaco and Fula have what are called vertical societies. At the top there is the chief, then follow the religious leaders, the important religious figures, who with the chiefs form a class. Then come others of various professions (cobblers, blacksmiths, goldsmiths) who, in any society, do not have equal rights with those at the top. By tradition, anyone who was a goldsmith was even ashamed of it - all the more if he were a ‘griot’ (minstrel). So, we have a series of professions in a hierarchy, in a ladder, one below the other. The blacksmith is not the same as the cobbler, the cobbler is not the same as the goldsmith, etc.; each one has his distinct profession. Then come the great mass of folk who till the ground. They till to eat and live, they till the ground for the chiefs, according to custom. This is Fula and Manjaco society, with all the theories this implies such as that a given chief is linked to God. Among the Manjaco, for example, if someone is a tiller, he cannot till the ground without the chief’s order, for the chief carries the word of God to him. Everyone is free to believe what he wishes. But why is the whole cycle created? So that those who are on top can maintain the certainty that those who are below will not rise up against them. . . . In the societies with a horizontal structure, like the Balanta society, for example, the distribution of cultural levels is more or less uniform, variations being linked solely to individual characteristics and to age groups. In the societies with a vertical structure, like that of the Fula for example, there are important variations from the top to the bottom of the social pyramid. This shows once more the close connection between the cultural factor and the economic factor, and also explains the difference in the overall or sectoral behavior of these two ethnic groups towards the liberation movement. . . . In this bush society, a great number of Balanta adhered to the struggle, and this is not by accident, nor is it because Balanta are better than others. It is because of their type of society, a horizontal (level) society, but of free men, who want to be free, who do not have oppression at the top, except the oppression of the Portuguese. The Balanta is his own man. . . . “

Additionally, In Planting Rice and Harvesting Slaves: Transformations along the Guinea-Bissau Coast, 1400-1900, Walter Hawthorne writes,

“Like most in the coastal reaches of Guinea-Bissau, Balanta society was politically decentralized. In such societies, the village or confederation of villages was the largest political unit. Though a range of positions of authority often existed within villages and confederations, no one person or group claimed prerogatives over the legitimate use of coercive force. In face-to-face meetings involving many people, representatives from multiple households sat as councils threshing out decisions affecting the whole. At times, particularly influential people emerged, sometimes wielding more power than others and becoming ‘big men’ or ‘chiefs’. However, no ascriptive authority positions existed. Consensus was king. Whereas state-based systems concentrated power narrowly in a single ruler or small group of power brokers, in decentralized systems, power was more diffuse. Decentralized systems relied on unofficial leaders, but they lacked rulers. . . . 

[B]alanta, like many people living in decentralized societies, have not recorded their history on paper, and have few formalized and structured oral narratives. . . . Balanta frequently exchanged ideas and material goods with people with whom they came into contact. Such exchanges often took place in regional markets where Balanta yam, salt, and cattle producers met and mingled with merchants, some of whom offered expensive items not found locally but carried from other ecological zones. Competing for these items with other coastal dwellers, most of whom produced the same mix of goods, Balanta purchasing power was weak. Their ability to accumulate long-distance trade items, particularly iron, which was valuable for reinforcing agricultural implements needed in the production of particular crops, was very limited. 

Regularly meeting with others to trade, Balanta just as frequently resisted attempts by area groups, most importantly Mandinka from the powerful state of Kaaba, to dominate them politically. The decentralized nature of Balanta political and social structures and the physical environment that they inhabited facilitated this defense. Balanta, then, never became, as some scholars argued, ‘layers within the large section of the population which labored for the benefit of the [Mandinka] nobility.’ They struggled, often successfully, to maintain the independence of their households. . . . Resisters, then, refused to recognize Mandinka authority, uprooting their communities and taking refuge on the coast.”

Thus, from the 1500s to the 1750s, the Balanta people were exceptional farmers and cattle herders that had a heritage of fleeing foreigners attempting to dominate them and successfully defending and maintaining the independence of their households, unlike the other peoples living in the territory of Guinea. As we will see, Balanta would carry-over these things to Brazil and lay the foundation for the establishment of the Republic of Palmares (1607-1695). Likewise, Portugal would carry-over its dehumanization from Guinea to Brazil. However, on this point of demonizing the Balanta as “savages” and “barbarous”, consider:

President of the Republic of New Afrika, Imari Obadele writes in Revolution and Nation Building: Strategy for Building the Black Nation in America (1970):


“All of you who are New Africans have probably heard people ask what kind of political system and economic system will you have? They are attempting to get you to answer in terms of capitalism, socialism, communism, totalitarianism, democracy. What they don’t understand, and what you must understand, is that all of those terms are too limited to describe the African experience and what you as a New African are attempting to build.

Now why is that? One reason, of course, is that these terms were, for the most part, developed by Europeans in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth centuries as they strove to make the world in which they lived understandable to them. The special meanings which we today associate with the terms communism, socialism, and capitalism were developed by Marx and Engels and, later, by Lenin, because they needed a theory - a complete world-view - which they felt to be scientific, to interpret the world and explain their revolution and help provide a method of action for the revolution they were dealing with. But the meanings came out of the European experience.

At the time they wrote, the theories of Darwin were beginning to enjoy a certain popularity. Today we take the theory of the evolution of man more or less for granted, but in those days they didn’t. To the scientists of that time it was a very exciting theory. Once Darwin, who was a biologist, had been able to demonstrate that man was a product of development through physical stages - that is to say, from Pithecanthropus Erectus (a very ape-like type), through Neanderthal man (a less ape-like type) to Homo Sapiens (modern man), Marx and other social scientists of his day, having looked at this type of progress, thought that it might be possible to look at the kinds of societies in which men live, the kinds of governments they have, and explain all this by use of a similar theory of evolution, of progress. As a result, they said that human society develops by passing through three main stages: savagery to barbarism to civilization. That was the game they played in those days. And they said, naturally, that white people represented the civilized world and everybody else was in a state either of barbarism or savagery. 

These so-called social scientists - historians and political scientists - developing their theories in the Nineteenth Century, were writing at a time when the slave trade had barely ended. Remember the Civil War began in 1861 - Darwwin’s ORIGIN OF THE SPECIES had appeared in 1859, and while Marx’s COMMUNIST MANIFESTO had appeared a decade earlier, Marx organized the International Workingman’s Association in 1864 and published the first volume of his DAS KAPITAL in 1867. What Marx and these other writers came heir to, the kind of literature they had to deal with at the time, was literature written by people who tried to justify the slave trade. In other words, it was written by white Europeans who were saying to other white Europeans that Africans were savages, therefore you should conquer them, enslave them, and civilize them. Remember, that was one of the very early excuses for African slavery; they were going to civilize us. And so all fo the books about other societies in the world outside of Europe tended to portray us as living in stages of savagery or barbarism. We NEEDED to be civilized.

Now, this construct - savagery to barbarism to civilization - is just like most of the other ‘rules’ and constructs of a social science: it is merely a hypothesis and not a law. And it is fundamentally untrue. So, too, with the specific progression that Karl Marx tacked onto the savagery-barbarism-civilization construct - the progression from primitive communalism to capitalism to socialism to communism. This was and is an interesting tool for helping us to understand, in some ways, some things that have happened in society and some things that are going on. But it is a hypothesis and not a law. Societies do not, first of all, all conform to the criteria which Marx established for defining primitive communalism.

What these early writers tended to do was to look at African society and say this is primitive communalism because, for instance, the land is held by the tribe. They would then rank African society at the bottom of the scale - of BOTH scales: we would be both savages and primitive communalists. (Occasionally the better studied African societies would be ranked barbarous and feudal - a step higher.) The truth is that most of the African societies to which they made reference were barked by two characteristics not at all primitive. One was a very elaborate theology, cosmology, and religion. The other was a highly organized political system.

Dehumanization language used to to eliminate Balantas in Brazil

From 1550 to 1690 most Brazilian slaves (prisoners of war) resided on sugar plantations in the northeast provinces of Maranhão, Pernambuco, and Bahia and in the southern province of Rio de Janeiro. Jose Lingna Nafafe writes in Lourenco da Silva Mendonca and the Black Atlantic Abolitionist Movement in the Seventeenth Century, 

“The city of Salvador was not a pleasant place for the colonial elite during the years of the royals’ stay, threatened as it was by Indigenous people and the fugitive enslaved Africans. The most important event of the war against the residents was also predicated on the idea that both enslaved Africans and Indigenous Americans joined forces to attack the city. The Indigenous Americans were associated with Africans in Palmares (Guineans, probably Balanta since they established Palmares). . . .  The attack on the city was not unilateral, but rather bilateral, with the Africans joining forces with the Natives. The threat from the Indigenous Americans and Africans worried the City Council, who associated it with Palmares . . . . Palmares was equated with the violence that the ‘non-tamed’ or ‘unseasoned - non conquered’ Indigenous people usually carried out on the Portuguese settlements. The Africans of Palmares (Guineans, probably Balanta) were believed to have a collaboration with the Indigenous people against the Portuguese. . . . In Bahia, it was clear that the Indigenous people and the Africans were seen as threats to the interests of the settlers. So, the council’s petition to the king of Portugal or regent was to ask for support, but also for the license to eliminate the Indigenous people from Bahia: ‘if you were to look at evil things that have been caused to the State of Brazil by the Natives, it was not only that they were made captives, but also to decree that they be eliminated once and for all’. As Marques put it, the category of ‘Indigenous’ underwent a profound change; the Indigenous came to be described as ‘barbarous’, giving the conquistadores a right to make a claim that their actions against them were justifiable. The desired elimination of the Indigenous people required a rhetoric that justified it even while the real objective for repressing them was the appropriation of their resources. . . . On 9 September 1672, the City Council of Salvador requested support from the Crown in Lisbon to destroy Palmares.”

Thus, the dehumanizing language and narrative of “savages” and “barbarous” were used on both sides of the Atlantic, to justify warfare and genocide against the Balanta in their homelands and in Palmares.” 


KIDNAPPED BALANTAS RESIST PORTUGUESE ENSLAVEMENT

Nafafe continues,

Portugal

“The historical evidence I found has shown that the popes were in favour of and even encouraged slavery. . . . The pope represented the very institution, the Vatican, which had passed bulls to the Iberian kings (of Portugal and Spain), enjoining them to conquer Africans in the name of the Christian God. . . . Several bulls to this effect had been sent to the Portuguese Crown in the fifteenth century. There was the aforementioned bull of 1452 issued by Pope Nicholas V, Dum Diversas. In 1455, Pope Calixtus III confirmed the monopoly over all lands in Africa to King Afonso V of Portugal. On 3 May 1493, Pope Alexander VI issued the Inter Caetera bulls, granting the West Africa region, and also Brazil, to the Portuguese monarchy, and the Americas to Spain. The boundaries between Portugal and Spain were then settled at the Treaty of Tordesillas on 7 June 1494. All the bulls gave both Spain and Portugal the legal right [Note: in their mind] to capture and enslave Africans at will. Munzer stated clearly that when the Portuguese returned from their sixth expedition to Guinea, they brought with them about 653 enslaved, some of whom they sold in Portugal, while others were given as a present to the pope and the remaining were given to other people.” ( pp 372-373)

“Many enslaved Africans were brought to Portugal. Even in the fifteenth century, Jerome Munzer, a German medical doctor who visited Portugal from 26 November to 1 December 1494, claimed that he ‘saw an enormous forge with many ovens, where anchors and columns were made’, and that ‘there were a great many Negroes working near these ovens . . . . Indeed, there were so many Blacks in Lisbon, that he exclaimed: ‘Of how large the number of Negro slaves in Lisbon these days brought out of Ethiopia’. On 26 March 1535, a Flemish priest, Nicholas Clenardo, wrote from Evora to his friend Latimo that:

‘... the slaves swarm in every part. All the work is done by captive Negroes and Moors. . . . I believe that in Lisbon male and female slaves are more than the free Portuguese. It is difficult to find a house where there is not at least one of these female slaves . . . . the wealthier have slaves from both sexes, and there are people who make good profit with the sale of the slaves’ children born in the house.’

Resende, a Portuguese historian and chronicler, was critical of the number of enslaved Africans in Portugal: ‘we bring into this kingdom a growing number of captives and if the Natives go, that is, if it goes this way, they will be more than us, in my opinion.’ By 1550, in Lisbon alone there were 10,000 Africans, constituting 10 percent of the population. By the mid-eighteenth century 15 -17 percent of Lisbon’s population was of African descent, and 800,000 Africans had been brought to the Iberian Peninsula.” (pp.302 - 303)

As we have seen above, Cacheu was the Portugues main commercial port in Guinea where many Balanta were trafficked as prisoners of the war and invasion launched by Pope Nicholas in which Bijago, Papel, Fula and Mandinka from the Kaabu empire, became enemy combatants against the Balanta.

Confraternities

“So there were many Africans living in Portugal before Mendonca reached the country, and among them were both enslaved and free Africans who had gone to Portugal on their own initiative as students, ambassadors, priests and businessmen. These groups constituted the members of the confraternities, the first of which - the Confraternity of Our Lady of the Rosary of Black Men - was created in Lisbon at the Monastery of Sao Domingos on 14 July 1496, forty years after the Portuguese had arrived in the region of modern Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone and Senegal.” (pp 303-304)

“By 1526 the confraternities had been granted the right, via their compromisso or constitution, to liberate their members from slavery or buy them from captivity. . . . Furthermore, to comprehend the membership of the confraternities, there is a need to recognize the privileges that the constitution awarded them, in terms of belonging, legal rights and their relationship with the political and religious authorities in the lands in which they were situated.

At the center of the confraternities was the legal framework, the compromisso or constitution that allowed the confraternity members to belong to the community of the free, liberated them from slavery and allowed them to engage in business transactions. By virtue of their membership of a confraternity, members were freemen, the act of becoming a member of a confraternity was an act of freedom. By joining confraternities members exercised their right to freedom. The confraternities were clubs for the free, regardless of their status - be they Africans, Indigenous Brazilians, White Europeans, Blacks, male, femal, Jews, Moors - all could be members. The privileges, particularly those around freedom, afforded to the confraternities via the constitution provided the legal framework in which Mendonca was operating . . . . “ (pp 300-302)

“By the seventeenth century there were many confraternities, or Brotherhoods of Black people, in Portugal. According to Gray, they were seen as ‘a respectable alternative to the revolutionary quilombos or settlements formed by slaves,’ which were more militant in outlook. The confraternities were the centres from which enslaved Africans and free Black, whether born or liberated, living in Portugal could voice their concerns about their position in Portuguese society.” (pp 303-304) [Note: the confraternities were like the early NAACP in the United States while the quilomobos were more like the UNIA]

“The Black Brotherhoods, particularly from Spain, Portugal and Brazil . . . urged the pope to take punitive action against the ‘sellers’ and ‘buyers’ of Africans, and to demand that orders be given to the overseas officials in Africa to prohibit the slave trade inthose regions: ‘It suggested that to repair the situation first, the following is to be done: ministers of Guinea are to order that the sale of kidnapped Black Brotherhoods or those taken from the fields with fraud be prohibited.’ The kidnappers were deploying various tactics to acquire slaves, including capturing them from agricultural fields. Kidnappers went to these places knowing that the Africans would be exposed and an easy target for slave-traders. The Blacks’ statement demonstrates the injustice of the slave trade in seeking captives through easy means, rather than through the alleged wars that were believed to be the legal source of the enslaved.” (p. 358)

Santidade in Bahia

“In the late sixteenth century the Santidade movement arose in Jaguaripe (Bahia). This was described by Ronaldo Vainfas as an Indigenous movement or sect created in response to Portuguese violence in the region. As a movement, it was political as well as religious. It resisted Portuguese ideology that marginalized both Indigenous and Africans in Bahia. Vanifas states that: ‘the Santidade movement was looming in plain sight in its haven in Jaguaripe, inciting revolts, setting Bahia on fire’. As a movement its members included fugitive enslaved Africans and White Europeans. Vanifas declares: ‘there is still no shortage of news about the adhesion of Blacks from Guinea, Mamelukes and even White people who converted to Santidade and practiced their ceremonies.’” (p. 247)

Salvador

“From its inception as a city in 1549, Salvador served as a link to Pernambuco, Paraiba and Sergipe in the north of the country and the isles, Porto Seguro, Espirito Santo, Rio de Janeiro, Sao Vicente and Buenos Aires in Argentina to the south. Ships from India, Angola, the Gold Coast, Guinea and Cape Verde, as well as England, France and Portugal all stopped in Salvador to trade, as Dampier, an English merchant reported in the seventeenth century. The city was home to people from many different nations and included traders, enslaved Africans from West Central Africa, Angola, and form elsewhere on the West African Coast, ‘for the most part, in Senegambia and Guinea-Bissau and Sao Tome and Principe (the so-called Guine [Guinea] enslaved people) among its inhabitants. There were free people from Angola, who were there as soldiers, free Africans from the region of modern Guinea Bissau, Cacheu, who were hired to work as carpenters. Many of them were not employed in the sugar plantations, but as domestic workers, street hawkers, cooks and fishermen, while some of the women became wives or mistresses., or transport workers who carried their masters through the streets of Salvador. The nature of their work meant that both enslaved persons and the free constituted a powerful network throughout the city of Salvador and other regions of Brazil.” (pp 214-215).

Palmares

“According to Sebastiao da Rocha Pitta (1660-1738), a Bahian born in Salvador and a historian, the community at Palmares started when forty Guinean men, former enslaved people from Pernambuco, left for Palmares and formed a republic there. Pitta was a contemporary of the Palmares War (1695). His father, Joao Velho Gondim was a captain, although it is not known whether he took part in the conquest of Palmares. What is certain is that Pitta’s account of the events at Palmares is the most contemporary one that we have. According to him, the men living there were formerly enslaved people, but they had not been ill-treated by their owners, which remains a moot point. In other words, these were men who had voluntarily decided to form a republic of their own with other men with a similar vision to live ‘free of any domination’. Pitta saw their community as a robust republic that was not based on Greek principles or ideology, but on their own African ideals, hence an African republic in Brazil. The group at Palmares was a league of friends, family and relatives or macamba who established a community in which to live and engage in business with the local people. [Siphiwe note: this is the very description of Balanta society back in Guinea] Indeed, the word macamba (meaning friends, family, relatives in Kimbundu) would be a more fitting name than mocambo, as there was no sense that the group set itself up as a military encampment, even though it became necessary for them to engage in armed fighting. It would not be far-fetched to suggest that it was the Portuguese who used the term mocambo rather than macamba to describe the community for political reasons and to encourage support and justify their war against it. 

Histories of Palmares have so far made no connection between members of Palmares with their homes in Africa and with the Brazilian-born political elites. What is known is that former enslaved Africans inhabited Palmares and formed a community there. . . . 

Antonio Luis Coutinho da Camara, the governor of Bahia from 1690 to 1694, and later a viceroy of India, considered it his key mission to destroy the existing mocambo or quilombos in the region. . . . Like Camamu, Palmares was destroyed in 1695 because it posed a constant and very serious threat to the Portuguese authorities economic interests in the region. . . . 

Indeed, an examination of the law regarding war captives in Angola, particularly in Mbundu society, throws light on the dynamics of runaway enslaved people in Brazil. As mentioned in Chapter 2, there was amnesty law used in Mbundu society in the seventeenth century and Angolan customary practices were underpinned by three principles: the Principle of Return or the Principle of mucua; the Principle of Safe Haven; and the Principle of Asylum.

First, the Principle of Return or Mucua was based on the law of liberty, and on the ability of captives to exercise their liberty to gain independence, with the protection of the law. In his Kimbundu grammar, published in 1697, the Jesuit Priest Pedro Dias translated the term mucua into Portuguese as abode, which means a place of habitation. Thus the Principle of Return, that is, of returning home, was not simply about having the independence to achieve freedom, but about having the legal resources to free one’s self when there was a legal precedent to achieve it. This legal framework was the original place, a place of citizenship, home - mucua - and guaranteed nbata rinene or ‘a great house’ or community to which an enslaved could return. According to Thiongo, home is a place of being, where we are taught the values of our legal system, philosophy, history, economy and our identity, in other words, who we are. Accordingly, mucua is a site of Mbundu identity, which is not based on the Cartesian philosophy of being cogito ergo sum  (‘I think, therefore I Am’), but on the African philosophy ‘I think therefore we are’. Crime was dealt with in this original place. If an accused was found guilty, his or her sentence and punishment were dealt with locally, and the guilty would repair the damage of the crime by either serving the plaintiff or giving gifts to make up any losses.The soba ensured that any punishment was fair for both parties. This legal system has survived in Angola until today. 

Second, the Principle of Safe Haven details the amnesty that applies to a fugitive who finds refuge with a powerful lord or a king. The fugitive may feel that legal process had not been followed in events leading to his or her capture or that the legality of his or her capture had not been proven. Seeking amnesty is fundamental to the captive achieving freedom, and amnesty could be sought from a powerful lord, who would use his power to protect the fugitive.

Third, the Principle of Asylum covers cases where the accused could seek to leave his or her community after being found guilty or simply after being accused if there was not enough evidence to support his or her prosecution. The accused might leave his or her original location and move to another province, in which case amnesty would also apply, but she or he could never return to the location where she or he were accused of the crime, particularly in cases of crimes such as murder and witchcraft. Running away in such circumstances is not based on personal whim; there must be protection and a legal network in place to achieve it. IF a fugitive did not know a powerful lord directly, she or he needed to be introduced to one by a representative. 

In Brazil, the Principle of Safe Haven and the Principle of Asylum were applied by the runaway enslaved people through the formation of quilombos or macambos, which entailed the use of these principles. Thus, to run away from one’s captivity was not done in a vacuum; one needed a safe haven. The first principle appears to have been used more frequently than the last in Brazil. Antonil noted that enslaved people, once guilty, could run away or commit suicide, but they normally sought reconciliation with the owners by reuniting with them.

Quilombo dos Palmares could not have existed as a safe haven for as long as it did (1607-1695) without some form of legal space allowing for it. I argue that Brazil, in particular Palmares, was not a terra nullis (‘unowned land’) nor was it res nullis (‘unowned things’); it was not a kind of ‘nobody’s land’. On the contrary, it belonged to the Indigenous Brazilians, who befriended Africans in the region. If it were not for their alliance with the Indigenous Brazilians, who allowed Palmares to exist, there would not have been a safe haven for Africans at Palmares. . . . 

Palmares was macamba and not mocambo, it became mocambo by necessity. The intention of its forty founding runaway enslaved people was to form a community and not a military camp, and any military side to the community was only meant to be temporary and for a specific purpose. The claim that Palmares was mocambo was made by the Portuguese to justify a ‘just war’ aimed at its destruction. A mocambo was formed for the purpose of war and not as a permanent state.  Palmarists did not see themselves as mocambo, but rather as macamba. Palmares might possibly have survived as an independent state in Brazil, however, had it not been for Viera’s interpretation of it and the theologically infused economic/moral case he made against it. . . . 

Palmares was a refusal to submit to the Portuguese, a declaration of independence, and a symbol of insubordination. Resistance provided a space for negotiation as it created an absence in the balance of power between Palmares and the Portuguese Crown. Palmare’s resistance to Portugal’s economic interests was only an option because there was no scope for negotiation. The Palmarists opted for a non-negotiable relationship with the Portuguese. Palmares was a rejection and at the same time an inversion of the colonial values around slavery and the treatment of enslaved people as non-human. However, the Palmarists pursued other things in Palmares, exploring resources, power, wealth, control, collection of taxes and protection. The region of Pernambuco provided the Plmarists with alternative ways to pursue the kind of life that they knew best, the African way of life, with the flexibility to adapt to the local Brazilian environment in which they found themselves.” (pp 241-272)

“Quilobos would not have existed if they were not afforded protection from the so-called ‘untamed’ Indigenous people, the “indios Bravos’ also known as ‘Tapuyas Bravos - Pira-Tapuia. . . . There were two particularly fierce groups of Native fighters in the region - the Cupinharoz and Precatiz. These Indigenous Brazilians could have fought against the Africans in Palmares if they wanted, but they never did; at least we do not have documentary sources to suggest that they did. . . . What is interesting is that the so-called untamed Tapuyas never saw Quilombo de Palmares or Africans in general as their enemies. Instead, they turned their attacks on the Portuguese residence in Peauhy and other areas of Pernambuco. Indigenous people and Africans lived together in Caninde. They supported each other in a fight for survival: they worked together in the fields, herding cattle and trading.” (p. 246)

“To understand the logic of running away from captivity in Brazil, I look at the Angolan legislation covering runaway enslaved people and argue that it was deployed against those who took refuge in Quilombo dos Palmares. . . . Palmares was both a political and social space. It was not only a refuge for enslaved fugitives but also a place in which those born free came together and formed a community parallel to that of the Portuguese enslavers. It was an alternative power structure, with a different economic model. At the time, it was viewed as militant, and a menace to the Portuguese establishment in Brazil who attempted to destroy it by force of arms. Brazilian historiography has seen Palmares as an ‘African state’ in Brazil. More recently there are those who view Palmares as a creolised State.

Based on that, I argue that Palmares created its own economy, which provoked the governing authorities in Bahia . . . . (pp )

“Palmaritsts were the new colonizers of Brazil, and if they were afforded freedom, this ‘would be the total destruction of Brazil, since the other blacks knowing that through this means they could be free, each city, each town, each place, each sugar mill, would soon become other Palmares, fleeing and going to the forests with all their stock, that is nothing more than their own body.” (pp 268-269).

Thus, when Nafafe writes, “according to Sebastiao da Rocha Pitta (1660-1738), a Bahian born in Salvador and a historian, the community at Palmares started when forty Guinean men, former enslaved people from Pernambuco, left for Palmares and formed a republic there” there is a great probability that Balanta where included in those forty Guinean men and that their love of freedom was a driving force behind it since it is unlikely that it was the Beafada and Brame Guineas, or any other peoples from the same region, that led this movement since, back in their ancestral homeland, they were dependent on Balanta for farming and did not have the heritage of resistance and decentralized social structure like the Balanta.



BALANTA EXAMPLE OF PALMARES INSPIRES IMARI OBADELE OF THE REPUBLIC OF NEW AFRIKA 

In Black Power, Black Lawyer: Memoir of Nkechi Taifa it is stated, 

“Ever since our ancestors were snatched from our homeland of Africa, there have always been people who fought back and fashioned resistance movements to regain freedom and independence. Brother Imari [Obadele] taught that it was military forces nurtured in the hills of Santo Domingo that brought independence to Haiti. One-hundred seventy-five years before that, we revolted and established the legendary Palmares Republic, which lasted over 100 years, located in what is now Alagoas, Brazil, bordering Bahia. Even today, there are more people of African descent in that region than there are in the U.S. This maroon state stood as the greatest challenge to European rule in so-called Latin America.

The Quilombos of Palmeres had hundreds of homes, churches, and shops. Its fields were irrigated African-style with streams. It was a structured society that had courts to carry out justice for its thousands of citizens. It was an elected republic of free, united people, living communally and in prosperity. Unlike the colonizer’s sole emphasis on sugar cane for export, in Palmares, maize, beans, potatoes and vegetables were also planted. Ownership of land was collective, a tradition Blacks brought from Africa. 

Periodically, the people of Palmares ventured from the hills to rescue others who were enslaved, obtain arms, powder, and tools and also to mete out justice to overseers. Despite military expedition after expedition, the Republic of Palmares remained independent and was not destroyed by the Portuguese until nearly a hundred years later..

After a 42-day siege, many of the warriors flung themselves over a cliff rather than surrender to the Portuguese. The ruler, Ganga Zumbi, was captured and beheaded by the enemy. In a case of sheer terrorism, his head was barbarically displayed ‘to kill the legend of his immortality,’ according to the ‘civilized’ Europeans. For generations, the Republic of Palmares had united many people under an African form of government and culture, and had successfully defended itself from invaders. After each victory, they returned to planting and harvesting abundant crops, and continuing the quest for sovereignty.

It was clear to me that Brother Imari idolized the Palmares model of an independent government and military system, despite it having occurred during the eras of enslavement and colonialism. He emphasized that in the U.S., free communities set up by escaped Africans in Florida, Georgia, and elsewhere in territory claimed by the United States, were also continuously sought out for destruction.

He stated, ‘Every time we ran away, it didn’t matter whether we went away quietly in the night like Harriet Tubman. It didn’t matter if we organized elaborate insurrections like Denmark Vesey. It didn’t matter if we fled to Pennsylvania or New York - they always came after us, with their armed forces, paddy rollers, militia, and dogs.’

‘Why didn’t it matter?’ Brother Imari would stridently quiz.

‘Because the White folk had decided they were going to live here!’ he thundered in response to his own query. ‘Wasn’t gonna be no 100 years of Palmares liberation.’

When Nkechi Taifa wrote that, she was unaware that she was writing about Balanta ancestors!

Imari Obadele Studies Palmares in his Doctoral Thesis

In May 1985, Imari Obadele  submitted his thesis, NEW AFRICAN STATE-BUILDING IN NORTH AMERICA: A Study of Reaction Under the Stress of Conquest, to the Temple University Graduate Board in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. In it he writes, 

“The greatest achievement in New African state-building during slavery, next to the triumph of Haiti, was the Palmares Republic in Brazil. Like the Kingdom of New Koromanteen, it lasted for more than 100 years.

In Brazil, the war of European conquest against the Amerindian and the New African, with the European - here, the Portuguese - relentlessly seeking unconditional hegemony, was played out as graphically as anywhere. This remarkable, raging passion of the European not to compromise or share power with the Amerindian or New African but to reduce them each utterly, socially and politically, beneath European hegemony was everywhere present in the Americas. The Kingdom of the Koromanteens had checked it, this passion, and the British had spent huge treasure and the lives of many soldiers, over 75 years, trying not to believe what was happening to them. The Haitians had checked this passion in the French. The Palmares republicans too checked it in the Portuguese - but only for a while. For, in Brazil the passion of the Europeans, the Portuguese, for total social and political hegemony over the Amerindians and the New Africans has been, so far, enormously fulfilled. . . . 

As I have indicated, persons held as slaves escaped the harsh conditions and humiliations of slavery, often, by establishing or fleeing to the ubiquitous freedom communities in the interior, which lasted virtually until the end of slavery in 1888. The fact is that these communities were populated not only by escaped slaves but also by free persons, black and mulatto, who also left the reach of the Brazilian state because of oppression and humiliation and who, above all, wanted freedom and opportunity. Not all of the emancipated slaves in Brazil possessed the skills needed, for them, to overcome the obstacles imposed on peoples of color, once they were liberated. . . . 

The annals of African slavery in the New World contain instances of slaves in North America and in South America who fled from plantations not to set up permanent new communities in the forest but to protest conditions of work and to return on promise of improved conditions (this was in the nature of a labor strike), or who fled simply as a method of gaining a vacation from the plantation routine before returning. Thomas Flory even suggests that some plantation owners in Brazil may have tolerated the existence of nearby quilombos - freedom villages - as a means of maintaining a reserve labor force during the slack seasons without costs to the plantation, since the escaped Africans would grow their own food in the quilombos and might return to the plantation to work during planting and harvesting, much like contract workers.

Whether or not Flory’s speculation is probable, and however un-rare slave labor negotiations may have been, it is certain that many thousands of Africans in the Americas escaped from slavery with the preconceived determination of departing that condition forever. History makes us equally certain that - although this reality is purposely underplayed in the literature, hastily reported, and generally denigrated - thousands of Africans sought not only abstract freedom but the building of states. 

The first of the communities which would ultimately become the Palmares Republic was established in northeastern Brazil about 1595. It was known during the governorship of Diogo Botelho (1602-1608), and while the Dutch seized and held the Portuguese town of Recife and its environs, that determined freedom village - or, quilombo - suffered at least two major attacks by the Netherlanders. The last was particularly devastating When, therefore, a major new group of Africans arrived in 1650, the community made the decision to move the settlement deeper into the forest of the Captaincy of Pernambuco, far beyond the white frontier.

The 50 new arrivals of 1650 had risen against their masters and taken all the arms and provisions which they could manage, before retiring to Palmares. 

At the new location the Republic steadily grew. Early on, a detachment of men was dispatched to secure wives. It swept through the nearest plantations and brought back all the women who came within their reach - black, mulatto, and white. The were secure against successful reprisal or attack at Palmares not only because of the remoteness of the Republic’s settlements but also because each of the towns was well fortified, surrounded by high massive walls made of high tree trunks, with broad gates. (three for the capital city of Palmares) surmounted by observation platforms. Especially were they secure because, toward the end of the seventeenth century, the Palmares Republic could field an army of 10,000 fighting men. Palmares, the capital city, was estimated by then to have had a population of 20,000. Charles Chapman estimates the population of the Republic as 30,000. In addition to the self-freed Africans (including mulattos), the smattering of kidnapped white women, and a number of free blacks and free mulattoes who had come, the population also included some free whites seeking a better life in the industrious communities of Palmares. There were Indians also in the population.

In classic African fashion this New African state was governed by a king and a council of elders. The King was elected  from among African (and mulatto) men whose right to candidacy arose from their exemplary conduct and bravery. Thus, any man of African descent could aspire to this highest political honor.

To assure domestic tranquility, even while on a constant war footing, the Councils passed laws approving the death penalty for murder, adultery, and robbery. Persons who arrived at Palmares freely having achieved their freedom by revolt or flight or purchase or having been otherwise free, remained free. But those slaves taken from plantations by Palmares raiders continued as slaves within the Republic. However, such persons could attain their freedom by inducing other slaves to escape. Clearly, the Palmares Republic placed a premium on freedom - and on those who, though held as slaves, still loved freedom enough to risk life for it. . . . 

At first the men of Palmares would repeatedly cross the frontier to raid the European plantations and highways for provisions and arms and women. But, as in almost all quilombos, the people of Palmares had early turned to an effort at self-sufficiency agriculture and, like some other quilombos, rapidly produced a surplus.  The products included sugar cane, beans, maize, tobacco, cotton, rice and manioc (used for making flour). In short time, particularly as some whites, seeking new lands, pushed the frontier closer and closer to the land claimed by the Republic - and Russell-Wood has put the Palmares land at 4,500 square leagues, or approximately 13,500 square miles, an area larger than Belgium - the proud free people of Palmares entered into regular and peaceful trade with the whites. The trade provided those goods which the towns of Palmares did not produce themselves.

The Palmareans were no junior partners in this relationship. Thomas Flory has reported on Brazilian court records, chronicling a dispute in later days, between whites, over the land of the Palmares Republic. These records indicate that the Palmares Republic had rented land to free white settlers over a period of years. These tenants had rendered their rents, at least in part, in the form of tools, gunpowder, shot, and arms. The records further indicate that the Palmareans had, indeed, evicted some of these white tenants when their rents fell unacceptably in arrears. There is little doubt that the military strength of Palmares was a major factor in the peace and stability which marked most of a half-century of relations between the Palmares Republic and the nearby white settlements.

But that peace did not extend to relations with the Portuguese government and its official colonial structures in Brazil. 

With a territory more than three-fourths the size of the Netherlands and with well functioning political and social structures and a promising economy, the Palmares Republic offered the Europeans of Brazil an opportunity to fashion peaceful relations with a capable, politically democratic, neighboring state. The Portuguese-Brazilians did not accept this opportunity. Instead, across 50 years up to 1696, the Portuguese launched 14 major expeditions against this strong New Afrikan state. These all failed, usually with severe losses for the Portuguese-Brazilians. But a further expedition organized in 1696 by the governor of the Pernambuco Captaincy, Caetano de Mello, was composed of 7,000 heavily armed men, mercenaries from Sao Paulo, who had been promised land from the vast territory of Palmares if they succeeded in overwhelming the Republic.

This expedition brought sufficient cannon to breach the walls of the towns and mercilessly savage the inhabitants. The attackers were forced by the resisters in the capital city of Palmares to lay siege. When they were finally able to enter the city, they were required to fight foot-by-foot. ‘At last the defenders came to the center of Palmares, where a high cliff impeded further retreat. Death or surrender were now the only alternative. Seeing that his cause was lost, King Zumbi hurled himself over the cliff, and his action was followed by the most distinguished of his fighting men. 

It could be argued that the Portuguese and Brazillians are due no special condemnation for refusal to make peace with the Republic of Palmares: after all, they also drove out the Dutch, Europeans, who in the early seventeenth century had invaded and held territory claimed by the Portuguese-Brazilians around Recife. And yet the Dutch would hold Suriname, a 60,000 square-mil territory on the northwest coast of Brazil, and the British at Guyana and the French at Guiana would hold similar territories on either side of Suriname - all without suffering the persistent efforts at destruction which the Portuguese-Brazilians imposed upon Palmares.

The refusal to co-exist with a New African state seems of a piece with the campaigns of destruction which Europeans waged against Indian and New African states throughout the Americas because they were Indian and New African states. The social stratification in the Dutch, British, and French colonies with respect to Indians and Africans was in gross result the same as that established in Brazil. In this respect the Dutch, British, and French colonies offered no challenge to the system imposed by the Portuguese colony. Palmares, on the other hand, with its muti-racial composition and its great attraction for free Africans and some whites, unquestionably represented a challenge to the Portuguese system. Its population growth, in time, might have surpassed Brazil’s. Palmares represented, above all, a magnificent achievement by people ripped from their homeland and brought helpless and culturally assaulted into the hostile environment of Portugal’s oppressive American slave system. Major industrial machinery was not possessed and certainly not yet manufactured in Palmares. But quilombos in Brazil were discovered in some places to have been equipped with sugar refining machinery and to have been producing heavy cloth. Yet other countries have overcome the deficits of being landlocked and agricultural - although perhaps never without achieving access to the sea. (Switzerland, for instance, did not remain dependent on the industrial forces of South Africa.)

The destruction of Palmares was a tragic loss for humanity, it was a fascinating promise aborted. Thereafter Brazilian hegemony gradually extended itself throughout the land, with no substantial challenge. Quilombos would continue to arise ubiquitously. A century after the fall of Palmares, for instance, a quilombo in the Andrahy Mountains in Bahia had 1,000 inhabitants in a township with ‘elaborate defenses’ and a king and captains. About 1824 another quilombo in Bahia was found with a plantation containing over 60,000 manioc plants and much prepared flour. There were, as opposed to the farming quilombos, those which were established in new mining lands and produced ore and gems. These quilombos, like the farming communities, obviously traded these large surpluses with white middlemen and communities. But none of them rose to the power - and challenge - of Palmares.”

Balanta Maroons in the Great Dismal Swamp

At the same time as Balanta and other Africans were escaping to the Republic of Palmares in Brazil towards the end of the seventeenth century, so too were they escaping to the Great Dismal Swamp in North Carolina for the next 100 years. In A History of African Americans in North Carolina, Jeffery J. Crow, Paul D. Escott, and Flora, J. Hatley explain:

Slaves had been shipped directly from Guinea to Virginia and North Carolina as early as the 1680’s, but most of the colony’s slave trade originated elsewhere. With its dangerous coastline, North Carolina depended on overland trade from Virginia and South Carolina to meet its needs in slaves and other commodities. . . . Fugitive slaves from Virginia and North Carolina turned the Great Dismal Swamp into a sanctuary. The swamp was an ideal hideout. According to a 1780’s traveler, runaways were ‘perfectly safe, and with the greatest facility elude the most diligent search of their pursuers.’ Blacks had lived there ‘for twelve, twenty, or thirty years and upwards, subsisting themselves…upon corn, hogs, and fowls….; The runaways cultivated small plots of land that were not subject to flooding but ‘perfectly impenetrable to any of the inhabitants of the country around….’ In 1777, during the Revolutionary War, another observer reported that the Dismal Swamp ‘was infested by concealed royalists, and runaway negroes, who could not be approached with safety. . . . 

Before the Revolution, Africans comprised perhaps half of the runaways. Shocked and bewildered by their enslavement, Africans defected at the earliest opportunity. They were the least acculturated slaves, still bearing the marks and scars of African rituals. . . . The Balanta ethnic group has a recorded presence in the Portuguese colonies of Suriname and Brazil. Their presence in the British colonial areas of the Carolinas and Virginia are evident in the history of those regions rice production industry.

The Guinea-Bissau region produced a disproportionately large number of captive Africans from the early-18th century until 1810, populations which were distributed throughout the Chesapeake region, Carolinas, and Georgia. The evidence reflects that the majority of African captives taken from Guinea-Bissau were sourced from the coastal littoral regions inhabited by the Balanta and other acephalous societies.  A large percentage of these captives were therefore ethnic Balanta, Diola, and Bijago, ethnic groups who were renowned for their tidal rice farming techniques. Their presence in North America not only brought change to rice industry, but also affected the political economy of early America, when escaped African captives began to form maroon societies.”

Wikipedia adds,

“At the beginning of the 18th century, maroons came to live in the Great Dismal Swamp. . . . Most settled on mesic islands, the high and dry parts of the swamp. Inhabitants included people who had purchased their freedom as well as those who had escaped. Other people used the swamp as a route on the Underground Railroad as they made their way further north.Some formerly enslaved lived there in semi-free conditions, but how much independence they actually enjoyed there has been a topic of much debate. Nearby whites often left maroons alone so long as they paid a quota in logs or shingles, and businesses may have ignored the fugitive status of people who provided work in exchange for trade goods.

Herbert Aptheker stated already in 1939, in "Maroons Within the Present Limits of the United States", that likely "about two thousand Negroes, fugitives, or the descendants of fugitives" lived in the Great Dismal Swamp, trading with white people outside the swamp.] Results of a study published in 2007, "The Political Economy of Exile in the Great Dismal Swamp", say that thousands of people lived in the swamp between 1630 and 1865, Native Americans, maroons and enslaved laborers on the canal. A 2011 study speculated that thousands may have lived in the swamp between the 1600s and 1860. While the precise number of maroons who lived in the swamp at that time is unknown, it is believed to have been one of the largest maroon colonies in the United States. It is established that "several thousand" were living there by the 19th century.

Fear of slave unrest and fugitive slaves living among maroon population caused concern amongst local whites. A militia force with dogs went into the swamp in 1823 in an attempt to remove the maroons and destroy their community, but most people escaped. In 1847, North Carolina passed a law specifically aimed at apprehending the maroons in the swamp. However, unlike other maroon communities, where local militias often captured the residents and destroyed their homes, those in the Great Dismal Swamp mostly avoided capture or the discovery of their homes.”

THE BALANTA INFLUENCE IN THE TRANSITION FROM THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT TO THE NEW AFRIKAN INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT

Balanta people played a significant role in the global Black liberation struggle in the 1960’s and early 1970’s. While Balanta people formed The African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC) and initiated an eleven-year armed struggle against the Portuguese, in the United States, Balanta people were also in the forefront of the liberation struggle in America.

Ella Baker, SCLC, SNCC and RAM

Ella Baker, a Balanta descendent, was a friend and advisor to Martin Luther King and played an instrumental role in shaping the American civil rights movement. The dynamic activist was affectionately known as the Fundi, a Swahili word for a person who passes skills from one generation to another and the "godmother of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee".

Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM) founder, Muhammad Ahmad (Maxwell Stanford), writing in We Will Return in the Whirlwind: Black Radical Organizations 1960 - 1975, writes, 

“[Ella] Baker became disillusioned with the NAACP, because it was directed from the top down rather than by the branches. Baker wanted the branches to be more active and in complete control. . . . When the bus boycott erupted in Montgomery, Alabama, Baker and Stanley Levison offered assistance to the boycott movement. Baker, who had worked with Rosa Parks during her NAACP fieldwork in Alabama in the mid-1950s, collaborated with civil rights activist Bayard Rustin to found a new organization in New York called "In Friendship;' which provided financial and organizational support to African-Americans who were fighting discrimination in the South, including the participants in the Montgomery (Alabama) bus boycott. Supporting the boycott was consistent with Baker's belief in building strong mass movements in the South that would pursue a more confrontational course of direct action than had been pursued by the NAACP, which Baker felt had become increasingly "hung up in its legal successes." It was Ella's and the In Friendship group's influence that convinced Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and other southern civil rights leaders that the Montgomery bus boycott mobilization should be used as a foundation to form a mass organization built on mass confrontation with Jim Crow and the racist capitalist system to advance democratic rights for the masses of African-Americans. . . . 

Baker felt that there was a need for a new organization. Her consistent arguments with Dr. King contributed to the founding of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) in 1957, with Dr. King as its president and Ella Baker as its interim executive secretary. . . . Baker consequently exhorted the leadership of the Montgomery Improvement Association to continue its fight against widespread racial injustice, not for just the desegregation of buses. Through Baker's efforts, in 1957 the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) was formed to fight all types of racial injustice. Baker built up the SCLC's organizational structure; set up office in Atlanta, hired staff, worked with the community to prepare voter registration drives, created the SCLC newsletter, ‘The Crusader;' and organized the 1958 Citizenship Crusade, the massive campaign to educate African-Americans in the South on how to participate in the electoral process. She began to work closely with her coworker, Septima Clark. Baker came into conflict with the chauvinist African-American preachers, who dominated the SCLC structure. She felt SCLC was too centered on the charisma of Dr. King (single leadership oriented) and that the movement should have group-centered leadership. Instead of trying to develop people around a leader, efforts should be made to develop leadership out of the group. [Siphiwe note: decentralized leadership is a hallmark of Balanta culture] . . . 

In 1960, the sit-in movement to desegregate lunch counter facilities in restaurants in the South broke out mobilizing 50,000 African American students to participate in non-violent direct action protests against the Jim Crow system. Ella Baker, realizing the movement's potential, borrowed $500 from SCLC and asked Dr. King's permission to call a conference of the sit-in leaders. The conference was held at Ella Baker's alma mater, Shaw University on April 14-17, 1960 (Easter weekend). It drew two hundred and fifty leaders and their supporters. Upon Ella Baker's insistence that the students had something no one could match, they formed themselves into the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and became an independent action oriented civil rights organization instead of affiliating with Dr. King's SCLC. . . . 

According to Ella Baker a basic goal of SNCC was to make it unnecessary for the people to depend on a leader. SNCC's hope was to develop leadership from among the people. At the Highlander Folk School (1960) meeting the decision was made to go into hardcore rural areas under minority rule. During the meeting a split occurred between those who favored non-violent direct action mass demonstrations and those who favored voter registration. Those favoring non-violent direct action feared the movement would be corrupted and compromised if SNCC concentrated on voter registration. Diane Nash from the Nashville, Tennessee student movement and the freedom rides proposed that SNCC split into two separate organizations. Fearing that would weaken SNCC and serve the purpose of the enemy, Ms. Baker opposed the split. Charles Jones was chosen as the director of voter registration and Diane Nash director of non-violent direct action. Charles Sherrod would later be proved correct when he said you couldn't possibly have voter registration without demonstrations. Julian Bond said that tensions within SNCC were about an organizing approach. The debate was whether to proceed as a vanguard approach versus a pedagogic direction to organizing. He felt northerners were better able to articulate their ideas. This caused tensions in the organization between those who thought of themselves as organizing a faceless mass and those who thought you ought to let the faceless mass decide what to do.  SNCC began to grow with the movement, as did its leaders. One of the main people involved with the state of Mississippi was Bob Moses. Bob Moses was a math teacher in New York who had graduated with a Masters degree from Harvard University. He met a SCLC worker who asked him to come to Mississippi for the summer. Moses did and was asked by Ella Baker to stay on and help recruit people for a SNCC conference. Bob Moses went into Mississippi in early summer 1960 to recruit 42 black students to come to the SNCC October 1960 meeting. While in Southwest Mississippi local people asked Moses to give them some help in trying to start a voter registration campaign. From there he also traveled to Alabama and Louisiana. This is what led to his involvement with SNCC. Moses would become a powerful leader in Mississippi. Moses established the pattern that SNCC followed for the next four years: involving local people in all phases of the movement, depending on them for support and protection. On October 14-16th the second conference of SNCC took place in Atlanta, Georgia. There were present ninety-five voting delegates, plus SNCC staff, which voted, plus thirteen alternates. There were probably about a dozen whites out of the ninety-five delegates and there were ninety-eight registered observers, twelve of whom represented eleven different groups or publications. SNCC began a voter registration drive in McComb Mississippi. Several organizers were severely beaten and a crisis situation developed with mass arrests of students and SNCC activists. After the October 14-16, 1960 SNCC conference in Atlanta, On October 19, 1960, King and the students asked Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to join them in sit-in demonstrations.  Some fifty other African-Americans were arrested for sitting in at the Magnolia Room of Rich's Department Store in Atlanta. The others were released but King was sentenced to four months of hard labor in the Reidsville State Prison. On October 26, Kennedy called Mrs. King and expressed his sympathy and concern. His campaign manager and brother, Robert F. Kennedy telephoned the Georgia judge who had sentenced King and pleaded for his release. On the following day King was released. The news of the action of the Kennedy brothers swept through the African-American community, plus distribution of one million pamphlets telling of their deed. In November 1960, the closest presidential election of the century occurred in which African-Americans felt their vote was decisive in the election of Kennedy. . . . Within two years, 70,000 persons had demonstrated and over 3,600 demonstrators spent time in jail. . . . 

Baker left SCLC to become a staff organizer/advisor for SNCC. It was through her guidance that SNCC operated in rural counties in the deep racist South and organized the "Mississippi Freedom Summer" project in Mississippi in 1964. SNCC conducted successful voter-registration drives and raised the political consciousness of poor African-Americans to the point where they formed the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party and challenged the racist Mississippi democrats in Atlantic City. . . . Ella Baker often said, ‘Hitting an individual with your fists is not enough to overcome racism and segregation. It takes organization, it takes dedication, it takes the willingness to stand and do what has to be done when it has to be done.’. . . 

The Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM) evolved from the southern civil rights movement of the early 1960s and the black nationalist movement in northern cities. As a result of the sit-ins, students in northern cities organized solidarity demonstrations. Traditional civil rights organizations like the NAACP and CORE held mass rallies in northern African-American communities. African-American and white students demonstrated against Woolworth stores and along with progressive clergy led economic boycotts. Black students with more radical leanings in the north, while supporting SNCC, had a tendency to reject its non-violent philosophy. Some of these students joined CORE to participate in direct action activities.' . . . 

In the summer of 1961, at the end of the freedom rides, Robert F. Williams, president of the Monroe, North Carolina chapter of the NAACP, issued a nation-wide call for African-Americans to arm for self-defense and come to Monroe for a showdown with the KKK. Williams also called for freedom riders to come to Monroe to test non-violence. Within the white left, the League for Industrial Democracy (LID), planned to form a student branch called Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). SDS was to hold a conference on the new left at the National Student Association (NSA) conference (summer, 1961) in Madison, Wisconsin. SNCC was also represented at the NSA conference. During the conference, news of Williams' flight into exile reached movement circles. Discussions among African-American SNCC and CORE workers and independent African-American radicals took place as to what significance the events in Monroe, North Carolina, had for the movement. African-American cadres inside of SDS met and discussed developing an African-American radical movement that would create conditions to make it favorable to bring Williams' back into the country. This was a small meeting of four people. . . . 

During the fall of 1961, an off-campus chapter of SDS called Challenge was formed at Central State. Challenge was an African American radical formation having no basic ideology. Its membership was composed of students who had been expelled from southern schools for sit-in demonstrations; students who had taken freedom rides and students from the north, and some had been members of the Nation of Islam and African nationalist organizations. . . . 

 In September of 1962, I went to the National Student Association headquarters in Philadelphia. There I met Marion Barry from SNCC, who was in Philadelphia to help raise funds for SNCC. Wanda Marshall transferred to Temple University and began working with African-American students there. I began studying with Mr. Thomas Harvey, president of the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA). In the process of working with SNCC, I met most of the African American left in Philadelphia. . . . During this time, I had discussions with Marion Barry about the direction of the civil rights movement. One night while listening to discussion in the NSA office, Miss Ella Baker encouraged me to continue to develop my ideas. . . . 

Through the NSA coordinator on civil rights, I secured Ethel Johnson's phone number and immediately after going home called her. Mrs. Johnson was receptive to talking to me and invited me to visit her. I went to visit Mrs. Ethel Johnson (Azelle), who had been a coworker with Robert Williams in Monroe, North Carolina and who was now residing in Philadelphia. Little has been written of Azelle (Ethel Johnson). All that I know is that Ethel Johnson was married and that she and her husband had agreed that she would do political work ( civil rights) while he would maintain income for the family in Monroe, North Carolina, and that they had one son, Raymond Johnson. Johnson lived within the same block or next door to the Williamses (Robert F. and Mable Williams). They recruited Johnson as a co-worker in the Monroe, North Carolina branch of the NAACP. Johnson helped Williams with his newsletter, The Crusader, and also participated along with Mable Williams in the community self defense efforts of the African-American community against racist attacks from 1957 to 1961. 

Johnson had visited the Williamses in Cuba in 1962 and served as a barometer for the Williamses of what the masses of African-Americans were thinking in the early 1960s. . . . Johnson (Azelle), as she was affectionately called, was a good friend of Septima Clark; had worked with her on citizenship schools in the South and also knew Ella Baker and Queen Mother Audley Moore. . . . 

Towards the end of 1962, Wanda and I called together a group of African-American activists to develop a study/action group. I notified Azelle (Mrs. Ethel Johnson) of our decision and she said she would help guide the group. Within a month's time, key African American activists came into the study/action group that was guided by Azelle. The three central figures were Wanda Marshall, Stan Daniels and me. After a series of ideological discussions, the Philadelphia study/action group decided to call itself the Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM). It decided it would be a revolutionary black nationalist direct action organization. Its purpose would be to start a mass revolutionary black nationalist movement. By using mass direct action combined with the tactics of self-defense, it hoped to change the civil rights movement into a black revolution. RAM decided to work with the established civil rights leadership in Philadelphia and eventually build a base for mass support. . . . RAM members felt the movement needed a voice that was independent of the existing civil rights groups. RAM assessed that all of the civil rights groups-except SNCC-were bourgeois in orientation. RAM believed that full integration was impossible within the capitalist system. It believed that all of the civil rights groups were seeking upward mobility in capitalism and were not seeking a structural transformation of the system. On the other hand, RAM felt SNCC would move toward trying to change the system, because it was mobilizing the grassroots masses in the south.”

Stephen Hobbs and the Chicago Black Panther Party 

In The Black Panther Party Was Founded on This Day in 1966: Here’s What We Don’t Learn About the Black Panther Party in Our Schools — but Should Adam Sanchez and Jesse Hagopian note that,

“The Panthers didn’t develop out of thin air but evolved from their relationships with other civil rights organizations, especially the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). The name and symbol of the Panthers were adopted from the Lowndes County Freedom Organization (LCFO), an independent political organization SNCC helped organize in Alabama, which was also called the “Black Panther Party.” Furthermore, SNCC allied with the Panthers in 1968 and although the alliance lasted only five months, it was a crucial time for the growth of the Panthers.”

According to Hobbs family genealogist Joshua Roberts:

“Born to S.L. Hobbs and Bertha Hobbs, my Uncle Stephen was S.L.’s first born son and the second child of Bertha. My uncle and his older brother Donald were born and raised on the west side of Chicago. He had four other siblings, his baby sister (my grandmother) being the closest. My uncle was said to be very grumpy but had a warm heart. A powerful man who never sugar-coated any information. Super smart and a master chess player, this is the story of the Balanta descendant and Black Panther Steven Hobbs.

My uncle was special and had the spirit of a thousand generations within him. A very boisterous, commanding, and authoritative man. While he was stubborn he had a heart and was very protective of his family and especially the females. He was a father figure to many of his nephews and nieces. According to my father when he first met my uncle he thought that uncle Steven was their father until my mother and aunties made it obvious that he was their uncle.

During his teenage years uncle Stephen went to St. Mel High School. The school would eventually become  Providence St. Mel today. The school merged eventually and he was able to unite with his sister.   She said the girls had to go all the way to the top floor while the boys had it easier due to them being on the lower levels. During high school Stephen was on the basketball team at St. Mel and was said to be very talented but his high school career was cut short due to his revolutionary spirit. It is to be noted that his younger sister Lynette went to Providence which was an all girl school at the time. The two were extremely close during their childhood. Almost like best friends considering all things, telling her secrets that he wouldn't tell his other siblings.

During the mid 60s the America experienced one of the most powerful movements in its history. The civil rights movement seen many future black icons stepping up into leadership positions to combat social injustices against Black people. When Stephen was about 15 or 16 decided that he wanted to run away from home so he could support the movement. Uncle Steven ran away in broad daylight and only told his sister Lynette. He told her not to tell their parents what had transpired. My great grandfather S.L didn't realize what had happened until a few days later when he realized Steven was gone. When Stephen left home he joined the Chicago Chapter Black Panther Party where he was one of their first members as he ran away prior to the official founding of the Chicago Chapter in 1968.

Fred Hampton and my uncle were good friends according to my grandmother. Hampton gave my late uncle his own office on Pulaski Rd between Van Buren and Jackson. The office was a complete wreck (debris and rubble, torn walls), however my uncle worked hard and eventually cleaned up the office very well and made it organized.

The Black Panther Party emerged on the city’s west side in the fall of 1968. As one of the 45 Black Panther chapters in the U.S, the IL chapter gained over 300 new members within 4 months.

By the middle of 1969, the Chicago Panthers ideology roots helped them form alliances with the Latino and white Chicagoans called the rainbow coalition. This coalition targeted Chicago’s structural inequalities by placing programs like the free breakfast and free legal consultation for Chicago’s disadvantaged.

Stephen was responsible for opening up the church and doing the breakfast club. Grandma sometimes went to support her brother. She had to do it behind her mothers back (Bertha Hobbs). “I wasn’t an official member of the Party but I worked for the party-we sold papers (BPP) and served food”. She said the children looked so beat up and sad, realizing just how impactful the breakfast club was making on the black youth. She always went to help her brother before school.

The militant image of the Panthers eventually made conservative members leave due to the alienation and negative press. Richard J Daley was afraid of the Panthers due to them having more influence than city hall. Eventually the Panthers got raided on 3 separate occasions. All in 1969, to look for illegal weapons.

My uncle was one of the militant members and was a hardcore Panther.  He even traveled to Michigan and Ohio for a few Panther affairs and missions. However during the late 60s, my Uncle Stephen was back in the city doing the breakfast program. While he was heading to the church something happened.

Grandma who went to help realized that the church doors were locked. “The day was cold, it was freezing outside”. There had been police scouts spying on my uncle for sometime now. The Chicago police kidnapped my uncle and planned to assassinate him out south. However the plan didn't fall through because the cop in the passenger seat wasn't ok with it and didn't feel comfortable, which saved him. However while out south they took all his belongings and he had to walk home all the way to the west side from the south side.

The final raid crippled the organization when Fred Hampton was assassinated.

Uncle Fred was a good friend of my late uncle Stephen. Fred is a year older than my uncle. Chairman of the BPP of Chicago, Hampton formed an alliance with the Young Patriots and Young Lords and several gangs in Chicago. Due to this influence the U.S government and FBI saw Hampton as the most dangerous of the Panthers and was a target alongside Huey Newton and other Civil Rights leaders. (Martin Luther King and Malcolm were already assassinated by the time Hampton rose to power.)

J Edgar Hoover used COINTELPRO to disrupt Hampton’s movement and my uncle was a direct victim of that.

December 3rd-4th 1969

My uncle Stephen Hobbs and several other panthers were supposed to be bodyguards for Fred and his girlfriend Akua Njeri who was pregnant with Fred’s son.

On the evening of December 3, Hampton taught a political education course at a local church, which was attended by most members. Afterward, as was typical, several Panthers went to his Monroe Street apartment to spend the night, including Hampton and Deborah Johnson, Blair Anderson, James Grady, Ronald "Doc" Satchell, Harold Bell, Verlina Brewer, Louis Truelock, Brenda Harris, and Mark Clark. There they were met by O'Neal, who had prepared a late dinner, which the group ate around midnight. O'Neal had slipped the barbiturate sleep agent secobarbital into a drink that Hampton consumed during the dinner, in order to sedate Hampton so he would not awaken during the subsequent raid. O'Neal left at this point, and, at about 1:30 a.m., December 4, Hampton fell asleep mid-sentence talking to his mother on the telephone.

The day of the raid Fred decided to send my Uncle on a last minute assignment. Stephen was at Fred’s house as a form of protection several times in 1969. “China”, a female Panther and also an ally of my uncle, was at the house with Fred and Mark. My Uncle Stephen told me he wanted to go to the house that night to support his friend and help secure the house. Nevertheless with Hampton’s growing power and with him being in line to become the head man for the Central Committee and the national spokesman of the BBP, the United States government and Chicago police decided to raid Hampton’s home that same night my uncle wasn't at the house. There was a massive shootout at Hampton’s home that killed Fred Hampton at point blank and Mark Clark. Everyone else was wounded including Akua.

At 4:00 a.m., the heavily armed police team arrived at the site, divided into two teams, eight for the front of the building and six for the rear. At 4:45 a.m., they stormed into the apartment. Mark Clark, sitting in the front room of the apartment with a shotgun in his lap, was on security duty. The police shot him in the chest, killing him instantly. An alternative account said that Clark answered the door and police immediately shot him. Either way, Clark's gun discharged once into the ceiling. This single round was fired when he suffered a reflexive death-convulsion after being shot. This was the only shot fired by the Panthers.

Hampton, drugged by barbiturates, was sleeping on a mattress in the bedroom with his fiancée, Deborah Johnson, who was nine months pregnant with their child. She was forcibly removed from the room by the police officers while Hampton still lay unconscious in bed. Then, the raiding team fired at the head of the south bedroom. Hampton was wounded in the shoulder by the shooting.

Fellow Black Panther Harold Bell said that he heard the following exchange: "That's Fred Hampton."

"Is he dead?... Bring him out."

"He's barely alive." "He'll make it."

The injured Panthers said they heard two shots. According to Hampton's supporters, the shots were fired point blank at Hampton's head. According to Deborah Johnson, an officer then said: "He's good and dead now."

Krystal Muhammad, Chair of the New Black Panther Party and President of the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika

According to Wikipedia,

“The New Black Panther Party (NBPP) is a . . . . black nationalist organization founded in Dallas, Texas, in 1989. . . . The NBPP traces its origins to the Black Panther Militia. . . . In 1987, Michael McGee, an alderman in Milwaukee, threatened to disrupt white events throughout the city unless more jobs were created for black people. He held a "state of the inner city" press conference in 1990 at City Hall to announce the creation of the Black Panther Militia. Aaron Michaels, a community activist and radio producer in Dallas, Texas established a chapter of the Black Panther Militia in 1992, but chose to refer to his chapter as "The New Black Panther Party". . . . Michaels became increasingly radical, and so too did the group. . . . Aaron Michaels lost control of the leadership of the group to Khalid Abdul Muhammad, a former leading member of the Nation of Islam, who proceeded to fill the ranks of the New Panthers with ex-Nation of Islam members and other Black Muslims. Under Khalid Abdul Muhammad and his successors' leadership, the New Panthers shifted radically from the ideology of the original Black Panther Party towards an extremist form of Black nationalism. . . . 

In 1998, Khalid Abdul Muhammad brought the organization into the national spotlight when he led an armed group of NBPP members to provide armed protection to the family of James Byrd Jr., who had just been murdered in Jasper, Texas by three white supremacists. Events escalated into a confrontation between the NBPP and the Ku Klux Klan. . . . Muhammad continued to seek out high profile and confrontational events, and that same year sought to organize a "Million Youth March" in Harlem, New York City. . . . The March went ahead on 5 September 1998 and Muhammad gave a racist and anti-semitic speech to an audience of 6,000. When the police attempted to end the march at the designated end time, Muhammad encouraged those in attendance to physically confront them, leading to a riot. It was in this same time period that Muhammad and the NBPP featured in an episode of Louis Theroux's Weird Weekends entitled "Black Nationalism". . . .

Khalid Muhammad died of a brain aneurysm on February 17, 2001, and was succeeded by Malik Zulu Shabazz, a protege of Muhammad's as well as his personal attorney. Malik Zulu Shabazz announced on an October 14, 2013 online radio broadcast that he was stepping down and that Hashim Nzinga, then national chief of staff, would replace him. This move created a schism within the group. A vote was held and Krystal Muhammad, a Balanta descendant, was elected leader of the group. However, those loyal to Nzinga left and formed a splinter group called the "New Black Panther Party for Self Defence" or "NBPP SD".

The Southern Poverty Law Center notes,

“The New Black Panther Party (NBPP) believes black Americans should have their own nation. In the NBPP’s “10 Point Platform,” which is taken from the original Black Panther Party, the NBPP demands that black people be given a country or state of their own within which they can make their own laws. They demand that all black prisoners in the United States be released to “the lawful authorities of the Black Nation.” They claim to be entitled to reparations for slavery from the United States, all European countries and “the Jews.’

On July 7, 2016 black nationalist Micah Johnson killed five police officers at a Dallas, Texas, rally protesting police shootings. Johnson was a former member of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, but news outlets assumed it was NBPP and [NBPP President] Krystal Muhammad found herself having to clarify that she had never seen or heard of Johnson before. She followed it up by giving a tacit endorsement of his actions, telling Voice of America, “My moral judgment is an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. What happened in Dallas, who knows, this could be happening all across America. Because people are fed up. You cannot continue to brutalize human beings and think that some human beings are going to fall for it.”

In April 2016, NBPP went to Dallas to stand guard in front of the local Nation of Islam Mosque that the Anti-Muslim group Bureau of American Islamic Relations (BAIR) planned to protest. They also protested the death of Kendole Jackson in the city of Gretna, Louisiana, after which [Krystal] Muhammad boasted online that “WE SHUT THE CITY OF GRETNA PIG DEPARTMENT DOWN.” 

During the summer of 2016, [Krystal] Muhammad represented NBPP at the World Wide Pan-African Convention in Soweto, South Africa. During her presentation she called the civil rights movement “a scheme and a scam” and told the audience Jim Crow laws were “the cracker doing that … our people have always fought against the cracker.” She followed this up with an interview on RT (formerly Russia Today) to discuss the group and racism in America.

The next month, on July 5, 2016, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, local Alton Sterling was shot and killed by members of the Baton Rouge Police Department. The NBPP arrived on site almost immediately, ready to protest what they called the “Baton Rouge Pig Department.” Some members were arrested at the protest. In October 2016, [Krystal] Muhammad held a press conference to announce that the group would be filing a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Department, the Baton Rouge Police Department and the Louisiana State Police because the charges against NBPP members and over six dozen others had not been dropped.

In May 2017, the group organized an event described as a “New Black Panther Party call for National Day of Action for Justice for Alton Sterling”. During a May 2 protest, the group attempted to block Airline highway in Baton Rouge, and three people were arrested including [Krystal] Muhammad, who was charged with aggravated obstruction of a highway, failure to disperse, resisting an officer and illegal carrying of a weapon because she had a concealed revolver in her handbag.

Muhammad made her way to Jackson, Mississippi, to take part in another protest at the state capitol. The June 14 event was a call for justice for two recently slain men, Phillip Carrol and Jeremy Jackson. The NBPP vowed to keep boots on the ground and continue investigating their deaths themselves.

The group was back in Baton Rouge in July 2017 for the anniversary of Alton Sterling’s death where they marched to the police station and were met by officers who commanded them to disperse. As the police began to put up a barricade, a scuffle broke out. An officer and an NBPP member were both shot with stun guns and multiple members, including [Krystal] Muhammad, were arrested.

On August 19, 2017, Muhammad and other NBPP members were in Houston, Texas, reacting to Charlottesville’s ‘Unite the Right’ rally by joining a Black Lives Matter rally to ‘Destroy the Confederacy.’”

Back in 2014, as President of the NBPP, Krystal Muhammad ran for the Presidency of the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika (PGRNA). Despite receiving 94% of the vote, corrupt election officials in the PGRNA announced that the incumbent President Alvin Brown has won the election. The NBPP filed a CIVIL COMPLAINT OF VOTER SUPPRESSION AND DISCRIMINATION  and eventually a Special People’s Court was established to resolve the issue. Unfortunately, corrupt election officials and other government officials waged a campaign against Krystal Muhammad and the NBPP wherein their members were all disqualified as candidates and their votes discarded in connection with the 2014 ,2017, 2018, 2020 and 2023 elections. This prompted the convening of a New Afrikan People’s Convention in 2023 which elected Krystal Muhammad as Interim President of the PGRNA. In March, 2024, a nationwide special election was conducted in the Republic of New Afrika and Krystal Muhammad was again elected President. She appointed Balanta descendant Siphiwe Baleka to serve as her Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Siphiwe Baleka, Founder of the Balanta B’urassa History and Genealogy Society in America and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika

A complete biography of Siphiwe Baleka is available at https://www.balanta.org/about-the-president On September 28, 2010, Siphiwe Baleka received his patrilineal dna test results from African Ancestry that showed a 100% match with the Balanta people of Guinea Bissau. Since then, he has written a three-volume history of the Balanta people, established the Balanta B’urassa History and Genealogy Society in America (BBHAGSIA), Coordinated the Lineage Restoration Movement, repatriated to his Balanta ancestral homeland, established the country’s Decade of Return Initiative and Citizenship Program, becoming the first Balanta to return and receive citizenship. Siphiwe Baleka serves on the National Coalition of Blacks in America (NCOBRA) Health Commission and International Affairs Commission. In 2023, H.E. Ambassador Arikana Chihombori Quao appointed him the Coordinator for the 8th Pan African Congress part 1. Siphiwe Baleka has been leading the effort at the United Nations Permanent Forum on People of African Descent (PFPAD) to bring the case of the New Afrikan Independence Movement before the International Court of Justice. As Minister of Foreign Affairs of the PGRNA, he has initiated at the African Union the renewal of the observer status that was granted by the Organization of African Unity (OAU) to Malcolm X and the Organization of Afro American Unity (OAAU - a precursor to the PGRNA). A thorough compilation of Minister Baleka’s efforts is available at https://www.balanta.org/news/the-board-as-i-see-it-developments-concerning-global-afrikan-strategic-litigation 

Kamm Howard, Founder of Reparations United and Former National Co-Chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America (NCOBRA)

The https://reparationsunited.org/  website states,

“Kamm Howard is a national and international reparations scholar and activist working for over 20 years building grassroots movements to obtain reparations for African descendants in the United States.  From 2006-2022, he served as the National Co-Chair of The National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America, or N’COBRA.  While at N’COBRA, he assisted in forming the vision and developed, led, and implemented many significant actions pushing forward and keeping alive the fight for redress and repair for the intergenerational harm inflicted on black people and the anti-black policies sanctioned by local, state, and federal governments affecting us to this day.  In 2022,  Howard founded Reparations United to further his mission for obtaining reparations.  He provides advisory and leadership to coalitions and activists in the movement.  Currently, he serves as a Commissioner of the National African American Reparations Commission where he led in revising the federal legislation H.R. 40.; a bill to establish a commission to study and develop reparation proposals for African Americans.  Also, he sits on the Board of First Repair – founded by Robin Rue Simmons of Evanston, Illinois, Global Black started by Dr. Amara Enya, and he sits on the advisory councils of the Advisory Council of the African American Redress Network (AARN) and the Descendants of the St. Louis University Enslaved, or DSLUE.”

In June, 2021, Kamm Howard joined Siphiwe Baleka in their Balanta homeland of Guinea Bissau to help launch the Decade of Return Initiative. In July, 2022, Kamm Howard traveled to the Vatican and delivered the PRESENTMENT TO THE HOLY SEE IN FURTHERANCE OF REPARATIONS to Bishop Paul Tighe, Secretary of the Pontifical Council of Culture. The PRESENTMENT details the historical record that affirms that the Roman Catholic Church sanctioned, through the use of Apostolic edicts known as “Papal Bulls”, the destruction of African kingdoms, the plunder of African wealth, and resources, total war on African people, and the perpetual enslavement of Africans and their descendants. “These Bulls and others”, states the PRESENTMENT, “provided the justification for the trafficking and enslavement of Black African human beings, as well as European imperialism and colonization in Africa—all in the name of Jesus Christ.'‘ Since then, Kamm and Siphiwe continue to work together as leading figures in the Global Afrika Reparatory Justice Movement.

Robin Rue Simmons, Founder of First Repair, and Former Alderwoman Responsible for the First Municipal Reparations Settlement in Evanston, Illinois.

The https://firstrepair.org/ website reports,

“Robin Rue Simmons is the Founder and Executive Director of FirstRepair, a not-for-profit organization that informs local reparations, nationally. Previously, Rue Simmons was the 5th Ward Alderman for the City of Evanston, IL, when she led, in collaboration with others, the passage of the nation’s first government- funded Black reparations legislation.

Rue Simmons is a 2023 University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics, Pritzker Fellow.

To date, $20 million has been committed to reparations by the City. She serves as the chairperson of the City’s Reparations Committee which oversees its initial Restorative Housing Program. It began disbursements in January 2021. Several other governmental entities across the country are actively seeking to follow Evanston’s example.

Rue Simmons was born and raised in the largely segregated 5th Ward of Evanston, a city of 75,000 on the shores of Lake Michigan on the northern border of Chicago.

She laid the foundation for her life’s work in 1998 when she became a residential real estate broker. Troubled by the wealth disparities and concentrated poverty she witnessed locally and saw in other communities, she wanted to help young adults begin to build wealth through homeownership.

As an entrepreneur, she has launched and operated multiple businesses, including a bookstore in the 5th Ward, that also offered free after-school programming. She started a construction company in Evanston that employed Black tradespeople and developed dozens of affordable houses funded by the Illinois Neighborhood Stabilization Program. She continues to manage a handful of residential and commercial properties that she owns in Evanston. Until she started FirstRepair in 2021, Rue Simmons was the Director of Innovation and Outreach for Sunshine Enterprises, a not-for-profit on Chicago’s South Side, which has supported over one thousand entrepreneurs (virtually all African American and three-quarters women) in launching or growing their own businesses.

Rue Simmons served as an Evanston alderman from 2017-2021, serving on multiple committees and chairing several. During her tenure, she prioritized improving the lived experiences of and expanding opportunities for Black residents in Evanston, most notably through her work on reparations.

Rue Simmons is also a commissioner of the National African-American Reparations Commission (NAARC), a board member of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America (N’COBRA), and a board member of Evanston’s Connections for the Homeless. She previously served as a board member for the National League of Cities’ National Black Caucus of Local Elected Leaders and as the President of the Evanston Black Business Alliance.

Rue Simmons has received numerous awards for her reparations and other public service work including from the City of Evanston; Evanston/North Shore NAACP; Urban One; Dearborn Realtists Board; Democratic Party of Evanston; Route Fifty; Realtists Women’s Council of Illinois; Family Focus; Chessmen Club of the North Shore; Distinguished Alumni – Evanston Township High School and the recipient of the prestigious 2022 American Association for Access, Equity, and Diversity (AAAED) (pronounced triple A ED) Rosa Parks Award.

She has been covered in numerous national and international publications, on television and radio, and in podcasts including The New York Times, The Washington Post, National Public Radio, The Guardian, ABC’s Nightline, and CNN. Rue Simmons is also featured in The Big Payback, a documentary that premiered at the Tribeca Festival in June 2022 and began airing nationally on PBS on Martin Luther King, Jr., Day, January 16, 2023.”

On May 24, 2023, the State of Illinois House of Representatives 103 General Assembly passed Resolution 292. The Resolution “Calls upon the State to immediately, through its African Descent-Citizens Reparations Commission (ADCRC), provide matrilineal and patrilineal DNA testing through African ancestry to determine the ancestral lineages and territories of origin of its Black residents so that they can seek citizenship in their ancestral homelands, if so desired. Calls upon the State to become the first to conduct a repatriation census in preparation for honoring President Abraham Lincoln's desire for voluntary repatriation with compensation and to make conducting the repatriation census its immediate priority."

Additionally, the resolution states,

“WHEREAS, Additionally of note is the fact that Robin Rue Simmons, Kamm Howard, and Siphiwe Baleka have all taken African ancestry DNA tests and discovered they are each descendants of the Balanta people of Guinea Bissau; they subsequently traveled together to their ancestral homeland to launch the country's Decade of Return Initiative in 2021; and 

WHEREAS, The spirit emanating from Illinois initiated both the first and latest PACs, and it has championed the recent Reparations movement's calls for further action; therefore, be it RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ONE HUNDRED THIRD GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, that we declare that the State of Illinois should take the lead on issues of Pan-Africanism, citizenship in Africa, and reparatory justice . . . .”

José Lingna Nafafé, Leading the Historical Legal Reparations Research


José Lingna Nafafé, a native Balanta, is Senior Lecturer in Portuguese and Lusophone Studies and co-Director of Teaching for Hispanic, Portuguese and Latin American Studies at University of Bristol. Dr Lingna Nafafé’s academic interests embrace a number of interrelated areas, linked by the overarching themes of: the Black Atlantic abolitionist movement in the 17th Century; the Lusophone Atlantic African diaspora; seventeenth and eighteenth century African, Portuguese and Brazilian histories; slavery and wage-labour, 1792-1850; race, religion and ethnicity; Luso-African migrants’ culture and integration in the Northern (England) and Southern Europe (Portugal and Spain); ‘Europe in Africa’ and ‘Africa in Europe’; and the relationship between postcolonial theory and the Lusophone Atlantic.

In 2022, Cambridge University Press published Nafafé’s  Lourenço da Silva Mendonça, and the Black Atlantic Abolitionist Movement in the 17th Century, which subsequently won the award for the best scholarship 2024 for the African Studies Association in the UK (ASAUK). In the Introduction Nafafé writes, 

“Legal, moral, ethical and political debate on the abolition of slavery has traditionally been understood to have been initiated by Europeans in the eighteenth century - figures such as Thomas Buxton, Thomas Clarkson, Granville Sharp, David Livingstone, and William Wilberforce. To the extent that Africans are recognized as having played any role in ending slavery, especially in the seventeenth century, their efforts are typically confined to sporadic and impulsive cases of resistance, involving ‘shipboard revolts’, ‘maroon communities’, ‘individual fugitive slaves’ and ‘household revolts’. Studies of these cases have never gone beyond the obvious economic disruptions caused by enslaved people resorting to poisoning, murder and attacks on plantations and their masters’ household properties. Even those former enslaved Africans who gained their freedom through sheer endeavor and subsequently argued in the strongest terms for the abolition of slavery in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, such as Olaudah Equiano and Ottobah Cugoano, were seen as limited in scope, without international impact and reliant on their European counterparts. Curiously, to date, no historian of slavery of West Central Africa, Africanists or Atlanticists have researched the Black Atlantic abolition movement in the seventeenth century; and those who have attempted to engage with the debate often conclude that any action driven by Africans was a localized endeavor. No historian has yet provided an in-depth study of the highly organized, international-scale, legal court case for liberation and abolition spearheaded by Lourenço da Silva Mendonça, or as Mendonça called it the ‘complaint . . . .

In this book, I examine in detail how Mendonça and the historical actors with whom he was involved - such as Black Christians from confraternities in Angola, Brazil, Caribbean, Portugal and Spain - argued for the complete abolition of the Atlantic slave trade well before Wilberforce and his generation of abolitionists. . . . It reveals, for the first time, how legal debates were headed not by Europeans, but by Africans.’ . . .”

As it has already been shown above in Nafafé’s work, Balanta were present in Portugal and Brazil and played a significant role in the resistance to Portuguese domination. It is not much of a stretch to conclude that Balanta played an important role in the confraternities that assisted Lourenço da Silva Mendonça. 

SUMMARY

Here, then Balanta has come full circle: in the same period as the Republic of Palmares, the most important legal challenge to Catholic and Portuguese domination was made, assisted either directly or indirectly by Balanta and Balanta culture of freedom and resistance, only to be forgotten by global scholarships until three and a half centuries later, the Balanta scholar José Lingna Nafafé resurrected the case during the same period that Balanta descendant Robin Rue Simmons was winning the first reparations battles at the municipal level in the United States, Balanta descendant Kamm Howard was leading the battle at the national level in the United States, Balanta descendant Siphiwe Baleka was revolutionizing the legal battle at the international level, and Balanta descendant Krystal Muhammad took over the Presidency of the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika.

This can be explained scientifically as the result of the transgenerational epigenetic effects and expression of Balanta behavior manifested in their cultural expression of resistance to foreign domination, the tendency to migrate to new territory and establish free, egalitarian communities while engaging in armed self defense and second strike actions to defend their sovereignty. But it can also be explained simply as the work of Balanta ancestors’ vital life force energy.