OUTCOME OF SECOND PREPARATORY MEETING FOR THE 8TH PAN AFRICAN CONGRESS PART 1 IN HARARE, ZIMBABWE

From April 14 to the 17th 2023, the government of Zimbabwe will be hosting the “8th Pan African Congress Part 1 (8PAC1)”. One of the main Agenda items is the establishment of a continental pathway to citizenship for the descendants of the formerly enslaved. On Saturday, February 25, The Second Preparatory Meeting for the 8PAC1 discussed the agenda item, Establishment of AU 6th Region Headquarters . Below are the comments culled from the Questionnaire soliciting input on the location of the proposed AU 6th Region Headquarters for the Zero Draft Resolutions working document for the 8PAC1 Harare Declaration.

It was also decided that the following committees would be set up:

6th Region Headquarters Committee - to create specifications/criteria for host city nominations

ADD YOUR CRITERIA INPUT USING THE FORM AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE!!!

INPUTS CONCERNING LOCATION OF PROPOSED AU 6TH REGION HEADQUARTERS

Outcome of the First Preparatory Meeting for the 8th Pan African Congress Part 1 in Harare, Zimbabwe

Later this year, the government of Zimbabwe will be hosting the “8th Pan African Congress Part 1 (8PAC1)”. One of the main Agenda items is the establishment of a continental pathway to citizenship for the descendants of the formerly enslaved. On Sunday, February 19, The First Preparatory Meeting for the 8PAC1 discussed the agenda item, Pathway to Dual-Citizenship for Continental Diaspora and Descendants of the formerly enslaved . Below are the comments culled from the Questionnaire soliciting input on citizenship for the Zero Draft Resolutions working document for the 8PAC1 Harare Declaration.

It should be recalled that in 1996 the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations granted consultative status to the Rastafari Movement who were represented by Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges. [Note: it is unclear which organization received the ngo consultative status. The Jamaican Observer, November 24, 1996 says it was the International Rastafarian Development Society while others say it was the IRGC and still others say it was the Barbados-based Africa Hall ngo.] In 1998, at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges ask: “What is the responsibility of the nations to Africans in the diaspora with respect to the age-old quest for Repatriation?” Said the Rasses, “Our advice from that committee and from the UN Office of Human Rights . . .. was simple.

The United Nations as an organization of states cannot at this time in any serious way entertain the issue of repatriation without the consent of the African states and the African Governments to which we want to go in Africa. So we were directed to seek the support of African governments with respect to the acquisition of land. And after that, the matter can be brought up again to the United Nations and the issue of [settlement] can take place.”

Pathway 1: Investment 

Citizenship granted anywhere in Africa to African Diasporans who have bought a home, started a business, or invested $100,000 to $200,000 in one way or another in the country of their choice.

Inputs:

“I think this pathway will be rejected by most African Diasporans. It doesn’t reflect or respect the principle of “Right to Return” and seems elitist and class based. This could further divide African people. Most Diasporans can not afford this investment upfront and many if not most will not want to be a kind of “indentured servant” for three years to qualify.”

“I believe this requirement may be a bit of a hinderance for many in the Diaspora. There appears to be an underlying assumption that many can meet this requirement. That would be a poor assumption, if implemented as an only option. Yes, it is a pathway for some. However it may be perceived as a barrier to entry and should not be implemented alone in any African territory. Otherwise, I think this is a valuable offer for those who can accommodate the requirement, granted that there are multiple options for entry.”

“Favors the already privileged class. Would not favor this as the only pathway.”

“This sounds good for the economy and the repatriate, somewhat extensive in recommendations but fair.”

“It is a positive action plan for people who wish to move. However, there should be transparency. Some countries are lacking in the administration department, they need to be clear on the timelines. Do you get citizenship 2 minths from application?”

“I'm not opposed to this if I was looking for more than just to learn more about my heritage.”

“Is it possible to change the word "bought" a home to "Have" a home? There are people who may have been gifted properties.”

“This is a great idea. I particularly like the part about buying a home or investing in a business. That would open the door to many and would require us to have actual skin in the game.”

“I think that is fine. I invest through M1 finance.”

“This is limiting. One shouldn't be barred from getting to their home simply because they do not have money to purchase a home or start a business.”

“Yes its a good idea but look at us in Africa we are paying $500 thousand to invest in DRC but you are suggesting $200 thousand.”

“Yes, I think this is good but reduced the investment amount.”

“The $ amount is high and may be unaffordable for the average Diaspora member.”

“Home investment, and jobs for African countries.”

“This path should be approved in general, but streamlined and made less expensive.”

“Foreign direct investment is a way for Africa to support all continents. We've supported every continent for years, there are no African cellphones or cars, for this only for creating an extraction economy which isn't necessary anymore, land, mines and businesses can receive investment with easier access.”

“I suggest lowing the investment amount..”

“One concern with buying a home is whether or not you actually own it. I read that in Ghana and Kenya it was only a fifty to ninety-nine year lease. One of the reasons for going home to Africa is to have a sense of belonging. As a retiree having so many resources (land and home) tied up in property that you cannot pass on to your children is unacceptable.”

“I like this, it shows commitment from those who are coming back home and have the money to invest.”

“Since the intention is to develop Africa then the investment should be directed to the specific area what needs development. But this should be for Africans or the descendants of Africans that left on a volunteered vs forced departure. It should not be used as a requirement for African descendants whose parents were departed by enslavement. To keep in line with the UN resolution already approve the domicile of an African who have been the victims of enslavement retain the domicile of the last free parent.”

“The investment amount should be at minimum $50,000. Given the fact that it is not just an ordinary foreigner but a diaspora to whom special privileges should be considered.”

“Investment must be a smaller amount younger people who want to move and bring their ideas should have that opportunity. As ADOS (African descendants of Slaves) we didn't have much when our fore fathers built America. We must found a way for anyone who has a will we should making a way.”

“is it possible to include land acquisition too... Land is everything and should be first... our Ancestors have been taken from Their Land...”

“I plan to take this path in the next 2 years but will also be bringing my retired mother with me who has her own savings and will not require assistance. I am an entrepreneur but need to know that I move to the continent and quickly setup and run my business from the African country of my choice. Waiting on full citizenship to be able to have full access and liveable business expenses is extreme important to me. I can't move to an African country and afford to walk away from my business because of expired visas and exorbitant setup fees. I'm not sure if there is a residency step that can be implemented as part if the process for others who are entrepreneurs and have dependents moving with them but it needs to be considered. This includes access to business registration, drivers license, internet access etc without hassles because I'm not a citizen or additional fees. Same with buying and building a home, I don't want to rent especially since I'm a home owner now so I need the access to a lifestyle of a citizen while I wait for paper work-what are the options they can provide once we decide we want to stay. I also plan to invest or expand my business into other African countries, will not having citizenship cost me more as well?! I'm thinking of Canada and the USA where we can expand our business across provinces and states without concerns of citizenship or extra fees or have to deal with citizenship or residency. How can I grow my businesses and create jobs across the continent without concerns of extra fees and restrictions tied to citizenship and residency. Also processing time needs to be considered. If this is a true effort to accommodate us, it needs to be timrly and efficient. I can't financially afford to wait 3 years, then take another 3 or more years to process the paperwork. Efficient processes need to be put into place and support for local businesses like internet, banks, real-estate, motor vehicle licenses, electricity companies, etc. need to be given directives on how to handle our service applications as new residents/new citizens/etc... we need an end-to-end cross-functional process where all parties impacted are involved. This means laws and legal accountability and ways for us to be protected if local companies try to take advantage of us. This is like the issue we have in North American companies who claim they want to hire "diverse talent" but don't prepare the company to welcome the talent and endure they want to stay... Ghana is loosing face by doing this exact thing and we can't turn the Diaspora off behaving like thus. Thank you for starting this conversation.”

“I suggest a smaller amount investment amount, otherwise it may be seen as the elite can gain automatic citizenship while others take longer. If the amounts prove to be too low, we could propose a lower amount (example $10,000 - $25,000 plus 1 year residency). I suggest special considerations if investments are made in African businesses. Include children up to a certain age (example 22) gain citizenship with the parents. Questions: -- If a home is purchased using a down payment and payment for a certain period of time (example 5 years), would the citizenship only come when the final payment is made? -- Would paying home/apartment rental costs count as investment?”

“Please consider a tier step process where organizations, i.e., faith based organizations, charity foundations, and co-ops, whose members would be allowed citizenship if their organization have invested or plan to invest funds in Africa based on the following scale:
1 - 10 members, $20,000. 11- 25 members, $50,000. 25 - 50 members, $75,000. 51 - 75 members, $100,000. 76 - 100 members, $125,000. 101 members and over, $150,000.”

“For this pathway, I am in agreement with home ownership and business start up as a way to citizenship. I however feel that the $100,000 or $200,000 investment is a bit too steep. Again, the bar should not be placed too high for persons of African descent to gain citizenship in any country of their choice on the African continent. I suggest investments between $50,000 to $100,000.”

“This should be a lower amount so as not to be exclusive”

“I believe the investment of skill should be added. For example, one may not be able to buy a home, start a business or invest $100,000 but may have the skill of teaching or plumbing etc.”

“This should be an "alternate" option; definitely not the primary one; even with this being a consideration, it will "exclude" many in the diaspora with the investment amount that high. Recommend the amount be lowered considerably to not exceed $10,000 USD.”

Pathway 2: Work

Citizenship granted anywhere in Africa to African Diasporans who have worked for three years in the country of their choice.

Inputs:

“This is a great option for anyone in the African Diaspora seeking citizenship. It allows for a viable path to entry. It should also be one of the alternative paths to citizenship. I do not believe it should stand alone.”

“Many Countries will only grant you a work permit if you are working in an area that is considered to be a « skill shortage » area. Typically is you are working for three years then you are needed and established. Citizenship should be granted after this time.”

“Sounds good, and an easy fix for both Africa and the African Diasporian.”

“Good choice as you have invested time that country and have made a contribution, the commitment has been made.”

“I'm not opposed to this if I was looking for more than just to learn more about my heritage.”

“This is a wide category. What qualifies as "work." Does one have to have an employer? Is this folded into the first pathway? If one has to be eliminated we can perhaps leave this one in favor of number one.”

“I say 1 year.”

“Europe has allowed people who can prove that they have direct ancestry without any other further barriers. Citizenship should be granted ad such to allow lost and displaced people to find their ways back to their homes.”

“Already there is a lot of unemployment of in Africa after COVID 19 companies are closing down so how are we going to accommodate our brothers.”

“No I think we should be granted citizenship by just returning home to Africa.”

“Great Option.”

“The process re this path should also be streamlined and made less expensive. One should not have to apply for a residency permit along with an application for a work permit.”

“This would work well, making sure that they have multiple streams of income can also be made possible if we create a better infrastructure to help the diaspora.”

“I suggest a one-year work limit.”

“As the kidnapped children of Africa. I believe we should be granted residency from day 1 of acquiring a contract of work if our desire is to make that African country our home. After 3 years of working we should be able to be granted full citizenship.”

“I would prefer this pathway. I can bring my profession as a DNP/board certified FNP with a strong background in oncology and feel strongly that with my medical skills, I can contribute to the healthcare and wellbeing of my people.”

“I believe this is a viable alternative for those who wish to use it. One should, in my opinion, be a willing contributor to Africa.”

“Three years is a lot especially if you have to leave the country every 3-6 months. This is good however, for people who have been living on the continent already, and already put in the time.”

“Freedom is good and per ur choice”

“The idea of work in Africa also has to be specific because people can put in work that is counter to the development of Africa. As for descendants of enslaved Africans this should not apply. We will have to put in work for ourselves in order to survive. So those who left Africa on a volunteer departure to work or make money should share with Africa as a requirement for citizenship.”

“I think two years is a sufficient time.”

“I'm a retired paralegal and would be willing to work in some capacity, however, we discussed during the zoom making an exception for those of us who are purchasing homes and bringing our pensions.”

“from my research, and from what I have learned from those of the diaspora who are currently on Mother Land that entrepreneurship is the only real alternative...”

“I suggest making sure to include working remotely while in the country. Question -- Will this require 3 consecutive years, or 3 years within a certain time frame?”

“African Diasporas should be granted for those who have worked for at least 3 years regardless of where they may elect to reside moving forward.”

“The idea of working in Africa to gain citizenship is a great idea, however, I believe as diasporans it should be a maximum 2 years to gain citizenship via this pathway. We should have preferential treatment as people of African descent. The integration and unity of persons of African descent globally should be paramount and all avenues to do so should be given the utmost priority.”

“Agreed with a more detailed definition of the work to qualify”

“This is another "alternate" option to have; however, 1 year of work should be sufficient.”

“I agree with this, however 1-2 years is sufficient.”

Pathway 3: Residency

Citizenship granted anywhere in Africa to African Diasporans that have lived in the country of their choice for three years.  For example, students, researchers, NGO workers, etc.

Inputs:

“This is a great option for anyone in the African Diaspora seeking citizenship. It allows for a viable path to entry. It should also be one of the alternative paths to citizenship. I do not believe it should stand alone.”

“If you have been a resident for 3 years than typically you would have been granted a residency permit. Typically a country will consider Citizenship after five years of being a resident. Three years for the diaspora or even two years l think is fair.”

“Yes, for those needing to get on their feet first, perfect”

“Another good plan. Lots of people have done this, NGOs etc, so their commitment is already there.
They have made contribution in person, in kind and in time.”

“I'm not opposed to this if I was looking for more than just to learn more about my heritage.”

“Bought land (50 Year lease) in Ghana and native Ghanaian squared on the land built home on it and land may have been sold by different chiefs. Discouraged any further attempts to relocate to Ghana.”

“This would be great. I would qualify it by adding with allowances for trips outside the country for up to 25% of the year. So, for people who are working or have investments in the U.S. they have the option of traveling outside the country without losing their pathway status.”

“I say 1 year once again.”

“Europe has allowed people who can prove that they have direct ancestry without any other further barriers. Citizenship should be granted ad such to allow lost and displaced people to find their ways back to their homes”

“Good idea”

“Given the opportunity to accept or reject citizenship at the airports”

“Great Option”

“Retiree bringing investments”

“This and the other pathways should be adopted, but the process her, as in the others should be streamlined and also made less expensive. Also, a shorter time period to the achievement of this should be recommend, and the waiting period for this should be reduced.”

“Their documentation can be sorted by PAC for their residency to be permitted easier if the PAC and ADDI has a formal partnership to handle those processes to make it less complicated.”

“I suggest a one-year residency.”

“Absolutely agree. Ties in with my answer for pathway 2. Only addition once again, would be to grant those who want it, Residency from day 1 if they are able to prove they can support themselves.”

“If indeed residency is a requirement (not domicile) then it is also reasonable.”

“This is very similar to Pathway 2 Is it possible to just combine 2 and 3 into one pathway. It stands to reason, if the worked there for 3 years then you probably have lived there for 3 years also.”

“3 years is to long for people who are the descendants of enslaved Africans. If taken into consideration the time the traditional rulers took to give the Tabom people of Ghana when they returned, they were given land and no request for visa or documents to fill out for citizenship. Or the people of the Armistad no visa or citizenship so why us now need those documents?”

“Again, I think two years is sufficient to determine whether the person has added value, also taking into consideration of the fact that the right to return should not be a long and drawn out period of time as if the person is a stranger to the motherland. While he or she was never born in the mother Africa, his or her forefathers would have contributed immensely to Africa before they were taken away two enriched the lives of the Colonial masters. Reducing the period of time to two years is a good gesture to the diasporas of Africa's empathy towards our cry to return home.”

“I began a 501 3c praise dance ministry in 2005 and in 2006 we sponsored an orphanage in Kenya where we visited and brought supplies I.e. schools supplies, toys , and other necessary items. We have also supported them monetarily each year by fundraising. Can something like this be included in this section.“

““Is it 3 years straight or could it be spread as well ? 3 years is not too long, (and it is a good opportunity to create or review the current "NGO" structures or create pan-African ones...)”

“My daughter has just started highschool and I would need high-school access to registration and no fees such as foreign student etc.”

“I suggest the following:
-- Automatic 1 year residency (for those that may not have an extended residency permit).
-- Permanent residency after 1 year.
-- Citizenship after 3 years.
-- Parents status can apply to children that may go outside the country for advance education (college/university/training) during the required residency periods.
-- Lower fees for residency and citizenship.
Question
-- Will this require 3 consecutive years, or 3 years within a certain time frame?”

“I find this option to be reasonable.”

“This pathway should be reduced to 2 years for persons of African descent in any circumstance whether they be students, NGOs or researchers.”

“Agreed with a more detailed criteria for NGO return to the community. For example, working for the Clinton foundation in Haiti should not be deemed as meeting the qualification given how little it returned to the Haitian people.”

“This is another "alternate" option to have for the diaspora; those who can show "previous" residency should be allowed to have that time counted as well.”

Pathway 4: DNA/ Right to Return 

Citizenship granted to a specific country to African Diasporans that have taken an African Ancestry DNA test and have either a maternal or paternal African lineage.

Inputs:

“This makes the most sense to me. It respects the right to return as well as the principle of “each under his/her own vine and fig tree. It achieves lineage restoration, balanced repatriation and development.”

“This should be an automatic qualifier for exercising right to return rights. It can stand alone, but again should not be the only path as it may still present a significant barrier to access for too many in the African Diaspora. It is easily accessible by African Americans in particular. Consideration should be given for the accessibility challenges this may present.”

“I think this should happen. The country may want to protect itself however with review of any criminal background and granting a resident permit for a period of 1 year. They might want to receive from you a $1500 deposit in case they have to deport you for any reason during that one year. At the end of the one year, if you can show that you are stable with no criminal activity, then citizenship is granted and your deposit returned”

“This should be automatic.”

“This is a right, it should not be questioned.”

“I like this path the best. I should not have to pay to return to where I was stolen from. At this time, I'm not interested in living or working in my homeland. I would like to visit many times to learn more about my lineage.”

“I think DNA as a mechanism of entitlement to return to an Afrikan country of origin has severe limitations. Eligibility for Afrikan citizenship is ultimately a political and cultural issue that will never be satisfactorily answered by a turn to genetics. I actually believe that a reparations approach has to undo rather than reinforce the harms of colonisation and dispossession including the 1884-1885 Berlin Conference consensus that created states in the image and likeness of our peoples colonisers. I support the notion of a Pan-Afrikan citizenship rather than return to an existing country as a reparations measure. We cannot simply seek to fit into nation-construct that were designed to atomise our indigenous Afrikan sovereign peoples power. The Afrika many of us want as Pan-Afrikanists is premised on recognising indigenous forms of nationhood and governance as political entities and not simply the elevation of so-called distinct ethnic groups. Afrikan ancestry DNA tests do not provide foolproof answers to questions of Afrikan identity. Ethnicity is a sociocultural factor, it’s fluid, and it changes over time. It’s not purely biological.”

“Have been identified as Temne in Seirra leon. Have yet to pursue citizenship.”

“This is a hot topic. Many people do not trust DNA testing due to Medical exploitation by the west on our people.”

“This is the one I am most in favor of, with qualifications. This one can be pathway if the person satisfies at least one of the other pathways. This would make sure it is not used a loophole by other people who have not identified as African descended all their lives. Many non - African identified people have minute portions of African DNA. I don't believe they should qualify as returnees.”

“Good Idea.”

“That shouldn't be mandatory.”

“Great Option”

“My lineage is from Africa.”

“This should be the easiest path and the Sierra Leone process should be put forward for adoption.”

“This can work if African ancestry DNA is easily accessible through PAC. I would like an ancestry DNA test for myself and royal ancestry test as well just to make sure, I just need to have a place that does that.”

“I agree with DNA/ Right to Return.”

“African Enslavement harmed the entire continent of Africa. Black African Diaposans with DNA should be granted Universal Dual African Citizenship to All African Nations. To engage is a specific Country Right Of Return" is a false argument that should be avoided at all cost.”

“Absolutely agree.
This should be an automatic right to claim Citizenship.
Our ancestors are common to all who live in Africa today. We have as much right to claim Africa as our home. We should not have to beg. We should not have to jump through hoops. If our blood shows we come from a certain tribe we should be able to return to that Country without question. It is indeed worse than being kidnapped and sold from our home 400-500 years ago (by colonisers and other tribes) that now our own African Governments continues to perpetuate those wrongs that were committed against us by maintaining and enforcing the barriers to our return home and to once again join our brothers and sisters. To be denied by your own always cuts the deepest.”

“This also is another pathway I would glady take. Especially since I have already done my DNA testing through Africanancestry.com. I and my brother both did the test so we are aware of our maternal (matriclan) and paternal (patriclan) ancestry. It was one of most liberating things I've ever done for myself.”

“I SUPPORT QUIALITY BLACK OWNED AND OPERATED BUSINESS. The requirement of a single evaluator (African ancestry) is not viable as one should be able to verify with other companies the validity of their tests. IF THIS DATA EXIST SHOW IT. I understand the desire to use a company that claims its baseline is more African than any other, but where is the data. if such exist, then without a doubt it is the first choice. it is important when one is making life (permanent ) choices, this is important.”

“I agree, it should also be for anywhere in Africa especially if your DNA belongs to various countries.”

“I like this and am glad this is being considered as an option to citizenship. My question would be is it required that people become citizens only of the countries/peoples to where or to whom their DNA is traced? I.e., if I'm found to have Ibo ancestry, I'm limited to Nigerian citizenship or wherever Ibos live? If I have it from Guinea Conakry, I can only become a citizen of Guinea Conakry, etc.? Thanks.”

“This would be best for the descendants who are the descendants of Africans that were raped and lost their melanin and African physical features and characteristics of Africans.”

“This is a very good initiative. Sierra Leone is a great example and blueprint to patern from.”

“My first cousin took the African Ancestry test for me, paternal test. and the results were Portugal and Spain. Then I took the ancestry.com and 23andMe, both results were close showing the largest % in Nigeria. So, why just African Ancestry and not the others?”

“I noted that the RTR does not mention Our People who has been deported into slavery in India...
*(my DNA tests with African Ancestry come out on my mother's side as Afro-Indian descendant).”

“I have done my African Ancestry but not interested in going to Nigeria (matrican test proved 99%). Will they look at me as only eligible for Nigerian citizenship? What if Nigeria decides they will not join other countries who offer citizenship with proof. I also don't want to give up my Canadian citizenship due to future pension payments when I retire.”

“I suggest adding that the individual must have identified as African/African Descent for a certain period of time, and on official documents. Allow dual citizenship for all pathways.”

“I find this option to be reasonable and may be the most popular, especially for African Diaspora with limited financial resources.”

“Great idea to use DNA as a means to gain citizenship of an African country. However, if we want to unite the African Continent and the diaspora, persons should be free to decide which country they want to be a citizen of regardless of DNA links. We need to breakdown borders and the idea of them and us. It is WE. I do appreciate that the circumstances can be different on the ground for various reasons, but we must start somewhere.”

“For the DNA/Right to Return, Citizenship (or Residency) should be granted to the country of the person's choice not a specific country because the test proves African Ancestry not where the person's ancestors were taken. My African Ancestry Maternal test shows Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone, & Liberia but I feel a very high affinity to East Africa and specifically to Tanzania.
I lived in Tanzania for nine months (minus short trips to other countries) and not only did I feel at home but I met and befriended people who felt like family including one older Mama who not only looked like my late maternal grandmother but had her same behaviors and cooking skills.
That all being said, any African Descendant of Slavery (ADOS) should be granted Citizenship (or Residency until they decide) to the African country of their choice.”

“This pathway is crucial as more and more Africans in the diaspora, waking up and want to places to live work and raise their families. Someone places where they can retire in community with support and love.”

“We should not restrict it to one company. This company has many faults in their testing the are continually unresolved. All DNA tests should be accepted.”

“All Africans in diaspora should have this right. We shouldn’t have to prove anything but DNA bloodline from our fathers or mothers line. Our mothers and sisters have been raped and produced mixed seed and it’s not their fault. We need to have somewhere to go to be safe from the slavers, murderers and kidnappers. They still butcher us on the streets today like cattle or dogs in the street. I have the paternal DNA test that proves my father was Balanta.”

“This is a must and should be considered as the "primary" or "main" option for those who seek it. The "investment" has already begun once one in the diaspora has decided to find out who they truly are by DNA testing. It is with great respect, admiration, and honor to highlight what the African nation of Sierra Leone have done to do this and welcome Africans from the diaspora home. Our Ancestors demand that we be given our true, original citizenship from Mother Africa, and all the other African Heads of State must adopt the "Sierra Leone" model in this regard. Many hundreds of thousand have taken this DNA and want to be "officially" related to our ancestral homeland with "official" documentation/citizenship!”

“Please make this a more open option to settle in any country of choice once. DNA is established. The Scramble for Africa and colonization was the cause of many lines drawn, we must not conform to the mould created by Imperialization and colonization. If it must be limited it should be based on region of origin instead of a specific country or based on tribal location.”

The following was suggested during the meeting:

Pathway 5: Retirement

Citizenship granted anywhere in Africa to retirees upon submission of qualifying information

Input:

It was generally agreed that this was necessary.

TESTIMONIES

“I have visited Ghana as a tourist and am planning to visit other countries this year, again as a tourist. I have not have the opportunity to live or work in Africa. I am working to establish connections and do business with Africans in country while I plan on transitioning to become a resident. There are many countries I plan to visit while assessing where I would prefer to live.”

“Yes, Zimbabwe. President Mugabe called for African Americans to come and bring their skills. I headed the call. After having a 1000 deposit taken from me at the airport because l did have a return ticket and including going through six months of Bueracracy including being told that is illegal for me to seek a job on a tourist visa, l was finally granted a work permit.”

“I have not repatriated, it I have visited Ghana twice, Togo once, Benign once, and Kemet”

“I have set up two NGOs, in Gambia, too much red tape, not even transparency. Too many fees.”

“The costs are just exorbitant and extortionate”

“Am back in Africa and we have challenges we need to be considered to share our thoughts within these vitural meetings. We need to tell you whats on the Ground here in Africa.”

“Yes I bought land in Kenya”

“I plan to retire in America in less than 1 year and I would like to enjoy my retirement in my homeland in Africa.”

“Have not been to Africa as of yet.shall be their soon”

“I'm an entrepreneur looking to assist people find easier ways to live in Africa, the process to citizenship can be different in every country and I feel obligated to make Africa a developed continent.”

“I worked in South Africa with an NGO. I was excepted by the South African that I worked with.”

“I am from the Caribbean Island of Saint Martin but live in the United Kingdom for now, in 2021 I opened a branch in Uganda and one in South Africa, my company helps organisations solve their challenges and realise their ambitions through the application of leading-edge software and consultancy services. I am also in the process of setting up a packaging company in Uganda, Gambia and South Sudan, the idea is to grow across the continent quickly. My experience in Uganda was hectic I was ripped off, and extorted, and I had to pay facilitations to get things done from everyone from the police to the taxman to the company registration bureau. I learnt that I just can't throw money at people to help them, but I must lead by example and provide advice in hope that they would take it which 90% did not. It was definitely a wake-up call and a lesson in humility, in many ways I admire Ugandans because they deal with so much but yet remain calm and push on every day. This learning curve in Africa cost me money and time but it was well-invested I have grown in my knowledge of East Africa and as a person. This is why going forward I try to advise anyone diasporan that invests in East Africa and South Africa on what to expect as it would save them time and money two of the most precious commodities.”

“In 2008, I started AWOW International Girls Leadership Initiative, in Bogatanga, Upper East Region of Ghana. My quest was not without bribery, corruption or lies. However, I made the conscious choice to remain focus in order to achieve my vision. We have spann our reach into India, Costa Rica, Nigeria and Trinidad and Tobago. Nearly 15 year later, I can not express how priceless it is when I reflect on the number of young women and girls who's lives were forever changed. I am now at a crossroad in life and embarking upon new ventures. The possibility of manufacturing EV batteries and EV bicycle. Rwanda is the leading on the board: however we are visiting other countries . Accepting Africa With Opened Arms.
I pray some day she'll do the same for me♥️ Born and raised in The USA.”

“I have done volunteered work in several countries in Africa. Cameroon, Kenya, Tanzania and visited several other African countries. My experience was positive every country I visited. I would love to have a home in Southern region of Africa, willing to work anywhere on the continent.”

“No testimony since I've never lived, worked, or traveled in the continent. I'm just offering an opinion, and that is that I think it's unlikely that I'll be able to do much in regard to helping ADDI in its efforts because it seems like all the costs involved are prohibitive. I am low to moderate income person who cannot afford to own a home in the US, so it seems out of the question I'd be able to do it on the continent, so I'm thinking moving there is not possible. I'm wondering what other contributions can be made to the efforts of the organization in lieu of actual travel, moving, etc.”

“I repatriated to Africa in 2011. I moved into the rural area of Ghana along Volta river and I was treated just fine like on was one of them, I was dark enough to blend in...but my friend from NY who lived down the road from me was light skin was call "obruni" which is a derogatory name for a white foreigner. I would stand up for him and tell them the story of how Africans were raped during enslavement and that it was an insult to refer to him as a white man. There was some language barriers but not much of a problem because expressions that appear on people face in Ghana represent the same emotions on the faces of Black people from Chicago or the US. The only difference I can attest to is there is a difference in the twist of the tongue when Ghanains talk.”

“I've only been to Egypt as a tourist.”

“I have never been to Africa, BUT i long to return to the Land of my Ancestors.”

“I have not yet returned, however, I have invested over $10,000 in a business in West Africa and another group investment in excess of $60,000 in Eastern African. Currently, my investments will continue through the year 2023. My strategy was to invest so that in the future, when the opportunity arises, I, along with my group may be allowed to set up residency in a country of our choice. Our African elders that came from Ghana and South Africa to the USA between 1925 - 1939, taught us that in order to get something out of Africa, we must first put something into Africa.”

“I lived in Tanzania for nine months and was in the process of getting a business started with the wonderful Tanzanian friends I met but had to leave because of my mom having a stroke.”

“I lived in Africa in my 20s and now I’m in my 70s and I live in Africa, Zanzibar in particular six months out of the year.”

“It is hard to get to know the people. Language is a huge barrier. They see us as rich and expect opportunity beyond relationship.”

“Father had a desire to go to Africa to live permanently in the early 1960s so after meeting some students from Guinea he just decided to pack up a wife and two children, head to Paris, France, go to the Guinea embassy in Paris and volunteer to work in that country.  At that time the president of Guinea was Sekou Toure.  The embassy refused to grant him a visa.  He then decided that he would take his family to Dakar, Senegal and apply for work as an educator.  Once we arrived in Dakar he spent three months trying to get employment for he and my mother as educators to no avail.  He was told that the Senegalese government would not touch him because he was not approved of by the U.S. Embassy.  Finally he was able to secure teaching positions for he and my mother in Mali.  We lived there however he became disillusioned with the way the Malian government treated him and decided to return to the U.S. after three years where he became a minister in the Nation of Islam.  Fast forward to 1992.  My wife and I were invited to attend the Black Think Tank conference in Bagdary, Nigeria.  The Nigerian embassy was of no help to us in getting to Nigeria at that time even when we had a letter inviting us to attend the conference and refused to approve the visa.  We attempted to get the visa approved in London because we were going to stop in Cote D'Ivoire first to stay with the family of a friend of ours.  They would not approve the visa.  While we were in Cote D'Ivoire my Godfather who had lived in Nigeria contacted a banker friend of his in Nigeria who was able to secure a visa for us.  When we arrived in the airport in Lagos it was under military heavy military security.  The military officer looking at our visas told under no uncertain terms not to make trouble in the country after we informed her that we were there a conference. In the meantime, white male oil executives were allowed to pass by with a smile.  

These are two of my horror stories that have taken place.  In both cases when we were able to be around the grassroots people, they treated warmly with open arms.  Because government is about politics and politics is about political parties, it will become important for us to have conversations about dual citizenship not only with governments but also with political parties that will support the dual citizenship process in the government parliaments.  They can influence legislation and the law making of the countries.  It is also important to educate the heads of the different ethnic groups about the history of enslavement and the need for them to bring their children home from the diaspora.  We can do this on the ground while we also adhere to the requirements of the African Union.  The strongest internal advocates we can have are the grassroots people and ethnic groups that the heads-of-state come from.”

“No; however, I have visited 3 of the African countries in the last 13 months on 2 separate occasions; Dakar, Senegal (March 2022); Juffureh Village, The Gambia (March 2022); and Duoala, Cameroon (March 2023). I have had 4 DNA test taken with African Ancestry to find my maternal grandparents ancestors as well as my paternal grandparents ancestors, which are:

Maternal grandmother: Mandinka People of present day Senegal.
Maternal grandfather: Kru People of present day Liberia.
Paternal grandmother: Masa People of present day Cameroon.
Paternal grandfather: Samo People of present day Burkina Faso.

None of my ancestral countries listed above offer dual citizenship to African Americans in the disapora, and this is extremely disappointing. I am praying that this changes immediately to the same as what Sierra Leone grants for DNA testing.”

Please share your thoughts on the African Diaspora's Right to Return:

“The African 'people have been invaded enslaved and genocided and exported and exiled into perpetual slavery by european edicts.outside of Africa .for centuries No African Armies came to our rescue .we the survivors freed ourselves and made a stand in these foreing slave lands .since Africa was also under occupation by these inhuman europeans,who now controls our African continent.via proxy..now Africa is independent its time to return whats left of its prisioners of 400 years war upon our African forefathers and mothers, regardless of tribe nation or geography. We never left Africa ,we were shanghied and forced onto slave ships and they changed our African family names to destroy our cultures and identities.but we still have the evidence to this crime,its our DNA...we are our African Ancestors.and they want African govts to do the right thing and restore our African citizenships..so we can really come home to build as true Africans .not as tourists residents that can be deported any time one party sees fit.
Dual citizenship is our natural Inheritance ,but our African citizenship is non-negociable.bring the black diaspora home now.”

“The Afro Indian is not encluded :(
This is how i overstand the return of the diaspora based on Taubira Law (passed on 2001 in france) slavery is a crime against humanity, which means that france recognizes its crime against the African descents, and therefore afro-descendants should be able to return to their land in Africa without paying for a plane ticket, or passing through immigration services without taking into account their Western nationality any more and be wellcome and beeing provide with what needed to start a new life as far as ID document is concern...This is not applied, but shoulb be :)”

“I am an African (for lack of a better word) born in America. And it is my desire to return home. I have always had a spiritual connection to Mama Africa. I feel that we are all spiritual beings that have the right to move about this earth as we are directed divinely. There should be no place on earth restricting our presence. I know that all Human and Huwomb kind has origin from the Mamaland, we call Africa today. Therefore, why shouldn't I have the right to return?”

“RTR may appear from a carnal perspective, however, the return of Africans back to our Motherland is biblical prophecy. I truly believe that our African elder statesmen and stateswomen, will be let by THE MOST HIGH to carry out His will, but not greedy gain, if there be any. I pray for peace and cooperation for us all.”

“It was both bitter and sweet reading these words. Bitter, because of the centuries of trauma faced and still faced by people of African descent and Sweet, because it is recognised that this needs to be done to reconcile persons of African descent with their spiritual birthright. There is a long way to go but at least that journey has begun. Our right to return must be assured in law but also no time should be spared to develop cultural and economic links with the global Diaspora.”

“I cannot wait to return but I believe reparations should be earnestly pursued and Caricom's ten-point action plan should be seriously considered, then we can talk about RTR . We need to ensure that the spiritual, socioeconomic, and psychological impact of the legacies of slavery has to be repaired. or else we will return with a western mindset and defeat the whole purpose of the RTR and ADDI mandate. In the meantime, let's build our wealth base, owned by Africans, respect will be restored and the world will listen attentively and begin to apologise for that atrocious Acts against humanity- slavery.”

“Absolutely the right thing to do.”

“I agree 100%. Unity of all African people is required to heal the body, citizenship is needed to know where we belong and are wanted.”

“Displaced and enslaved African diasporans should have a fundamental right to return to the African continent due to historical injustice, the loss of cultural heritage, and the desire for self-determination.


Firstly, the history of African diasporans being forcibly displaced through slavery and colonialism has resulted in immense injustice. Millions of Africans were uprooted from their homeland, forcefully separated from their families, and subjected to brutal conditions. This historical injustice has had long-lasting effects on the descendants of these African diasporans, who continue to face systemic racism, discrimination, and inequality all over the world. Granting the right to return acknowledges this historical trauma and attempts to rectify the injustice inflicted upon them.

Secondly, returning to the African continent would enable African diasporans to reconnect with their cultural heritage. Centuries of forced assimilation, cultural erasure, and loss of ancestral ties have disconnected African diasporans from their original roots. By providing them with the opportunity to return, they can rediscover their customs, languages, traditions, and spirituality, reestablishing a strong bond with their African identity. This reconnection allows for the preservation and revitalization of diverse African cultures, reinforcing the value they add to global cultural exchange.

Lastly, the right to return empowers African diasporans to exercise their right to self-determination. Escaping the constraints of a system that perpetuates their marginalization, returning to the African continent allows them to actively contribute to the development and progress of their homeland. Their knowledge, skills, and experiences gained through resilience and adaptation in various countries could be leveraged to address the economic, social, and political challenges faced by African nations. This mutual exchange of ideas and resources benefits both the African diasporans and their home countries, fostering a sense of empowerment, agency, and belonging.

In conclusion, recognizing the fundamental right of displaced and enslaved African diasporans to return to the African continent is a step towards rectifying historical injustice, reclaiming cultural heritage, and promoting self-determination. By facilitating this return, societies can work towards creating a more inclusive and equitable world that values the experiences and contributions of all individuals, regardless of their historical past.”

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE MODERN RIGHT TO RETURN CITIZENSHIP MOVEMENT SINCE THE BERLIN CONFERENCE 1884: A PRESENTATION TO THE 8TH PAC PART 1 PREPARATORY MEETING DISCUSSING PATHWAYS TO CITIZENSHIP

Ethiopia, Malcolm X and the Liberation Story They Never Told You Part 2

Ethiopia, Malcolm X and the Liberation Story They Never Told You Part 3

These two one hour lectures combines the information from the articles:

MAY 5TH - THE MOST IMPORTANT DAY IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY AND EVIDENCE THAT THE ANCESTORS OF AFRICAN PEOPLE COMMUNICATE TO THEIR DESCENDANTS ON EARTH AND SHAPE WORLD EVENTS

AFTER BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION: HAILE SELASSIE, MALCOLM X, MARTIN LUTHER KING, REPATRIATION AND THE OAAU

JUNE 8, 1954: THE MOST IMPORTANT DAY IN 20TH CENTURY AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY

These are powerful history lessons that explain how the Back-to-Africa movement was subverted by planned integration and the significant role Malcolm X played in the unfinished African Liberation movement and repatriation back to Africa. It also lays the foundation for the proper structuring of African Diaspora citizenship policy in Africa.

Defining the Afro Descendants' Right to Return (RTR) to their Ancestral Homelands on the African Continent

It should be recalled that in 1996 the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations granted consultative status to the Rastafari Movement who were represented by Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges. [Note: it is unclear which organization received the ngo consultative status. The Jamaican Observer, November 24, 1996 says it was the International Rastafarian Development Society while others say it was the IRGC and still others say it was the Barbados-based Africa Hall ngo.] In 1998, at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges ask: “What is the responsibility of the nations to Africans in the diaspora with respect to the age-old quest for Repatriation?” Said the Rasses, “Our advice from that committee and from the UN Office of Human Rights . . .. was simple.

The United Nations as an organization of states cannot at this time in any serious way entertain the issue of repatriation without the consent of the African states and the African Governments to which we want to go in Africa. So we were directed to seek the support of African governments with respect to the acquisition of land. And after that, the matter can be brought up again to the United Nations and the issue of [settlement] can take place.”

Defining the Afro Descendants' Right to Return (RTR) to their Ancestral Homelands on the African Continent for the 8PAC Part 1

The Right To Return (RTR) is the recognition by international society that as many as 250 million members of the African Diaspora, recognized as the Sixth Region of the African Union, are descendants of the people taken as prisoners of war during what is commonly called the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. As such, we have the immediate right to be returned to the territory of our ancestor that survived the middle passage and be recognized as citizens with a unique immigration status, policies and programmes by the government(s) claiming the territory as within its national boundaries. 

The RTR is based first on a principle of traditional African spirituality that identity was formed by the knowledge and preservation of one’s maternal lineage, transmitted from mother to daughter and paternal lineage, transmitted from father to son. Depending on each family’s village tradition, identity, and all that it included – language, culture, spirituality, land, and one’s place in the world and universe (history), was determined either by maternal or paternal lineage. Health and well-being, therefore, required the preservation of one’s lineage. If you did not preserve your lineage, you lost your location or place in the world. Thus, the first priority of the RTR is restoring the lineage identity of the descendants of the prisoners of war that were taken from territories on the African continent and subsequently suffered ETHNOCIDE - the loss of their ethnic and cultural identities. 

The RTR is based second on the historical fact that Pope Nicholas V and the King of Portugal declared total War against the land of “Guine” on June 18, 1452 in a document called the Dum Diversas. The document stated,

we grant to you full and free power, through the Apostolic authority by this edict, to invade, conquer, fight, subjugate the Saracens and pagans, and other infidels and other enemies of Christ. . . . . AND TO LEAD THEIR PERSONS IN PERPETUAL SERVITUDE, AND TO APPLY AND APPROPRIATE REALMS, DUCHIES, ROYAL PALACES, PRINCIPALITIES AND OTHER DOMINIONS, POSSESSIONS AND GOODS OF THIS KIND TO YOU AND YOUR USE AND YOUR SUCCESSORS THE KINGS OF PORTUGAL.

This declaration of total war is now considered a crime against humanity and was followed up with monopoly contracts known as “Asientos” which were variously given to private merchants from 1518 to 1595, to Portugal from 1595 to 1640, to the Genoese from 1662 to 1671, to the Dutch and Portuguese from 1671 to 1701, to France from 1701-1713, the British from 1713 to 1750, and the Spanish from 1765 to 1779. In the United States, several colonies became combatants to the Dum Diversas War when they legalized slavery: Massachusetts in 1641; Connecticut in 1650; Virginia in 1657 and Maryland in 1663. Other colonies followed and the United States of America officially entered the Dum Diversas War trafficking of people from Guine after American independence in 1776. As a result of the Dum Diversas Declaration of War: 

Portugal and Brazil were and are responsible for at least 7,300 slave voyages (26.8%) and at least 5,074,900 (45.9%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally, and immorally transported from the African continent and, using Cooper’s order of magnitude, were and are responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of more than 73 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

Britain was and is responsible for at least 11,632 slave voyages (42.7%), and at least 3,112,300 (28.1%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally and immorally transported from the African continent, thereby being responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of 52.2 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

France was and is responsible for at least 4,038 voyages (14.8%) and at least 1,456,000 (13.2%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally and immorally transported from the African continent, thereby being responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of 21.6 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

Spain was and is responsible for at least 1,116 slave voyages (4.1%), and at least 517,000 (4.7%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally and immorally transported from the African continent, thereby being responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of 8.5 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

The United States was and is responsible for at least 834 slave voyages (2.3%) from 1776 to 1808 and at least 114,960 (1%) of the people who were forcibly, illegally and immorally transported from the African continent, thereby being responsible for the murder, kidnapping and enslavement of 1.7 million people of African lineage and heritage; 

Almost every country of the Western Hemisphere, and especially the British Mainland of North America, the British Leewards, the British Windwards and Trinidad, Jamaica, Barbados, Guyana, the Spanish American Mainland, the Spanish Caribbean, Northeast Brazil, Bahia, Southeast Brazil and other areas, participated in some degree, in the criminal Trans-Atlantic Trafficking of people with African lineage and heritage; 

Finally, the RTR is based on a principle of justice expressed in the 1949 Geneva Convention: Article 4 (1) defines prisoners of war and Article 5 states, “the present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation.” 

The Decade of Return Initiative will see that international society is held accountable for providing for the Repatriation (“Right to Return”) under the Geneva Convention, for all descendants of the prisoners of the Dum Diversas War.

Additionally, United States v The Libelants and Claimants of the Schooner Amistad - 1841 makes clear that

“it is admitted that the African . . . owe no allegiance to (any Nations laws) their rights are to be determined by the law which is of universal obligation - the law of nature. . . a former domicile is not abandoned by residence in another if that residence be not voluntarily chosen. Those who are in exile, or in prison, as they are never presumed to have abandoned all hope of return, retain their former domicile. That these victims of fraud and piracy - husbands torn from their wives and families - children from their parents and kindred - neither intended to abandon the land or their nativity, nor had lost all hope of recovering it, sufficiently appears from the facts on this record.”

Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states,

“Article 15

Everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.”

Article 12 of the AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES RIGHTS states,

“Article 12

1. Every individual shall have the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of a State provided he abides by the law.

2. Every individual shall have the right to leave any country including his own, and to return to his country. This right may only be subject to restrictions, provided for by law for the protection of national security, law and order, public health or morality.”

The World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance Durban Declaration states,

“52. We note with concern that, among other factors, racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance contribute to forced displacement and the movement of people from their countries of origin as refugees and asylum-seekers;

(…)

54. We underline the urgency of addressing the root causes of displacement and of finding durable solutions for refugees and displaced persons, in particular voluntary return in safety and dignity to the countries of origin, as well as resettlement in third countries and local integration, when and where appropriate and feasible;”

On February 4th, 2003, the First Extra-Ordinary Summit of the Assembly of the African Union meeting in Addis  Ababa, Ethiopia adopted the historic Article 3(q) that officially,

“invite(s) and encourage(s) the full participation of Africans in the Diaspora in the building of the African Union in its capacity as an important part of our Continent.”

The AU 50TH ANNIVERSARY SOLEMN DECLARATION states,

“We, the Heads of State and Government of the African Union assembled to celebrate the Golden Jubilee of the OAU/AU established in the city of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on 25 May 1963,

Evoking the uniqueness of the history of Africa as the cradle of humanity and a centre of civilization, and dehumanized by slavery, deportation, dispossession, apartheid and colonialism as well as our struggles against these evils, which shaped our common destiny and enhanced our solidarity with peoples of African descent;

Recalling with pride, the historical role and efforts of the Founders of the Pan African Movement and the nationalist movements, whose visions, wisdom, solidarity and commitment continue to inspire us;

Reaffirming our commitment to the ideals of Pan-Africanism and Africa’s aspiration for greater unity, and paying tribute to the Founders of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) as well as the African peoples on the continent and in the Diaspora for their glorius and successful struggles against all forms of oppression, colonialism and apartheid; . . . .

Stressing our commitment to build a united and integrated Africa;

Guided by the vision of our Union and affirming our determination to “build an integrated, prosperous and peaceful Africa, driven and managed by its own citizens and representing a dynamic force in the international arena”; . .

Guided by the principles enshrined in the Constitutive Act of our Union and our Shared Values . . . .

ACKNOWLEDGE THAT: . . .

III. The implementation of the integration agenda; the involvement of people, including our Diaspora in the affairs of the Union; the quest for peace and security. . . remain challenges.

WE HEREBY DECLARE:

A. On the African Identity and Renaissance
i) Our strong commitment to accelerate the African Renaissance by ensuring
the integration of the principles of Pan Africanism in all our policies and
initiatives;
ii) Our unflinching belief in our common destiny, our Shared Values and the
affirmation of the African identity; the celebration of unity in diversity and the
institution of the African citizenship;
(…)

B. The struggle against colonialism and the right to self-determination of
people still under colonial rule

i) The completion of the decolonization process in Africa; to protect the right to
self-determination of African peoples still under colonial rule; solidarity with
people of African descend and in the Diaspora
in their struggles against racial
discrimination; and resist all forms of influences contrary to the interests of the
continent; . . .

C. On the integration agenda
Our commitment to Africa‟s political, social and economic integration agenda, and in this
regard, speed up the process of attaining the objectives of the African Economic
Community and take steps towards the construction of a united and integrated Africa.
Consolidating existing commitments and instruments, we undertake, in particular, to:


i) Speedily implement the Continental Free Trade Area; ensure free movement
of goods, with focus on integrating local and regional markets as well as
facilitate African citizenship to allow free movement of people through the
gradual removal of visa requirements;

ii) Accelerate action on the ultimate establishment of a united and integrated
Africa, through the implementation of our common continental governance,
democracy and human rights frameworks. Move with speed towards the
integration and merger of the Regional Economic Communities as the building
blocks of the Union.”

The African Union Agenda 2063: Aspiration # 5: An Africa with a strong cultural identity, common heritage, values and ethics states,

“Pan Africanism By 2063, the fruits of the values and ideals of Pan Africanism will be manifest everywhere on the continent and beyond. The goal of the unity of the African peoples and peoples of African descent will be attained (2025). An Agency for Diaspora Affairs will be established in all member states by 2020 with the Diaspora integrated into the democratic processes by 2030. Dual citizenship for the Diaspora will be the standard by 2025. . . . “

In Pan-Africanism and Nationality Rights For the Diaspora: A Contemporary Perspective, in Pan-Africanism, African Nationalism: Strengthening the Unity of Africa and its Diaspora edited by B.F. Banke & K. Mchombu, A. Bernard puts it this wasy:

“The Pan-Africanist Law of Return: Quintessential Reparations

At a very basic level, if reparation is to repair the wrongs committed against African peoples through slavery and its apprentices, colonization and imperialism, the first wrong committed was taking millions of peoples from their homeland. Those taken from Africa lost, among other things, their citizenship and this is the first thing that needs to be given back. It is morally and philosophically the first step in the journey of a thousand miles that needs to be undertaken if Africa and African peoples are to move forward in a forceful, positive and determined manner in the 21st Century.

Concomitant with this position therefore is that the law of return can only be made possible by African governments/states, not the West. It is to be stated clearly nonetheless, that this is a right, not a concession or special privilege. Diasporan repatriates should not have to prove which part of Africa they are from. The loss of this specific identity is a part of the harm done by slavery, and cannot be used by African governments to reject Diasporans. Any African government which challenges the right to return to Africa for proof of specific identity is in breach of their own claim for compensation for slavery.”

It should be recalled that in 1996 the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations granted consultative status to the Rastafari Movement who were represented by Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges. [Note: it is unclear which organization received the ngo consultative status. The Jamaican Observer, November 24, 1996 says it was the International Rastafarian Development Society while others say it was the IRGC and still others say it was the Barbados-based Africa Hall ngo.] In 1998, at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Ras Bongo Spear and Ras Boanerges ask: “What is the responsibility of the nations to Africans in the diaspora with respect to the age-old quest for Repatriation?” Said the Rasses, “Our advice from that committee and from the UN Office of Human Rights . . .. was simple.

The United Nations as an organization of states cannot at this time in any serious way entertain the issue of repatriation without the consent of the African states and the African Governments to which we want to go in Africa. So we were directed to seek the support of African governments with respect to the acquisition of land. And after that, the matter can be brought up again to the United Nations and the issue of [settlement] can take place.”

These and other documents detail the basis of the African Diaspora’s Right to Return to their motherland. What do you think?

The African American Case for Independence at the International Court of Justice

Today, there is no other mechanism in existence which permits a group to internationalize their struggle except the UN. All minority movements go there - if for no other reason than the UN is the crossroads where the world meets and makes decisions which come to represent the moral and legal authority of world opinion. As a pivotal arena of public opinion and thereby political power, the UN forces states to be concerned about its views. No state (nor indeed any serious liberation movement) questions its value.”

- Dr. Y. N Kly

On June 18, 1452, Pope Nicholas V issued the Apostolic Edict known as the Dum Diversas. This document declared total war against the people living on the African Continent. Every person captured and trafficked from their homeland on the African continent and enslaved in the Americas, and their descendants, are thus “prisoners of war”.

In 1841 the decision in United States v The Libelants and Claimants of the Schooner Amistad declared that AfroDescendant prisoners of war owe no allegiance to any Nation's laws and retain the right of return to their ancestral homelands. Page 841 of its decision states that,

“The law of nature and the law of nations find us effectively to render justice to the African . . . and in a case like this, where it is admitted that the African . . .  owe no allegiance to (any Nations laws) their rights are to be determined by the law which is of universal obligation - the law of nature. . . 

The presumption of law is, always, that the domicile of origin is retained until the change is proved . . . The burden of proving the change is cast on him who alleges it. . . .The domicile of origin prevails until the party has not only acquired another, but has manifested and carried into execution an intention of abandoning his former domicile and acquiring another as his sole domicile. As it is the will or intention of the party which alone determines what is the real place of domicile which he has chosen, it follows that a former domicile is not abandoned by residence in another if that residence be not voluntarily chosen. Those who are in exile, or in prison, as they are never presumed to have abandoned all hope of return, retain their former domicile. That these victims of fraud and piracy - husbands torn from their wives and families - children from their parents and kindred - neither intended to abandon the land or their nativity, nor had lost all hope of recovering it, sufficiently appears from the facts on this record. It cannot, surely be claimed that a residence, under such circumstances of these helpless beings . . .  changed their native domicile.”

On July 2, 1864, an Act of Congress authorized the treasury agents to seize land and lease for one year all captured and abandoned estates and to provide for the welfare of former slaves. Property was declared abandoned when the lawful owner was opposed to paying the revenue. Certain tracts of land in each district were set apart for the exclusive use and working of the freedmen. These reservations were called Freedmen Labor Colonies and were under the direction of the superintendents. Schools were established, both in the Home Colonies and in the labor colonies. This new system went into operation the winter of 1864-1865. The treasury agents, in many cases, became corrupt, and these regulations remained in force only until the Freedmen’s Bureau was organized in 1865.

At the conclusion of the United States Civil war, the United States government upheld the Amistad decision and provided for voluntary, compensated repatriation back to Africa. It also decided to create New Afrikan self governing territories (colonies). On January 12, 1865 the United States Secretary of War Edwin McMasters Stanton and United States Army General William Tecumseh Sherman met in Savannah, Georgia with a New Afrikan government council of twenty people representing the new class of free persons. In response to General Sherman’s Fourth request to “State in what manner you would rather live - whether scattered among the whites or in colonies by yourselves, the spokesperson for the black Government council, Garrison Frazier answered: “I would prefer to live by ourselves, for there is prejudice against us in the South that will take years to get over; but I do not know that I can answer for my brethren.” The record shows that Mr. Lynch said he thinks they should not be separated but live together. All the other persons present, being questioned one by one, answer that they agree with Brother Frazier. As a result of these negotiations, the closest thing that New Afrikans had to a plebiscite to determine their will and aspirations as free men, General Sherman issued Special Field Order Number 15.

Forty-thousand New Afrikans were settled under General Sherman’s Special Field Order 15 dated 16 January 1865. Similar centers of the New African nation under New African Governments were established in Mississippi. Captain John Eaton, named Superintendent of Negro Affairs by General Ulysses Grant in 1862, had, by July 1864, settled 72,500 members of the new class “in cities on plantations and in freedman’s villages,” almost all of whom, Superintendent Eaton reported, were ‘entirely self-supporting.’ Davis Bend, Mississippi was occupied by the Union Army in December 1864. Here a New African government was established with all the property under its control and with districts under New African sheriffs and judges and other officers. Again, as on the east Coast, the center of New African Government in Mississippi remained under the protection of the United States Army and ultimately subject to United States law, like many of the Indian nations. But also, like the East Coast centers of the New African nation, these communities were established on land that was in territorial status, and they were composed of persons who, like the residents of the Thirteen Colonies, possessed the inalienable right to liberty. Thus, by word and action, did the American government recognize the fledgling New African nation and the right of the new class, in exercise of its inherent liberty, to independent Statehood.

The status of the New Afrikan self-governing territories and voluntary, compensated repatriation was removed through a United States official campaign of fraud and terrorism resulting from the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. As noted by Imari Obadele

“Just as soon as the United States Government recognized the inalienable rights of the new class of free men - namely the right to seek admission, as citizens, to the American community; the right to return home, to Africa; the right to general emigration and the right to set up an independent State of its own; segments of American society began to narrow the options for the new class which it, the American community, as a matter of political action, would accept.

As early as December 1863 the United States Secretary of the Interior suggested that the new class of free men should not be sent away because they were needed in the United States Army. Also, in April 1865, General Butler replied to President Lincoln’s request for logistical information that ‘using all your naval vessels and all the merchant marine fit to cross the seas with safety, it wil be impossible for you to transport to the nearest place that can be found fit for them - and that is the Island of Domingo - half as fast as Negro children will be born here.’

In the report of the United States Congress’ Joint Committee of Fifteen, 18 June 1866, the Congress explains how this difficult logistical problem - meaning that the new class would stay in the United States and largely in the South - helped determine, from the viewpoint of the American community, that the new class should be given the vote and United States citizenship. The new class, as voters, could be counted upon to support the United States government in power, whereas that segment of the American community until recently denominated the Confederacy could be counted upon to oppose the government in power. If the new class remained voteless, as they were during slavery, when each slave was counted as only three-fifth a man in the basis of representation, their numbers as free men would nevertheless give the former Confederacy a huge increase in members in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College, because now, even if voteless, the free man would be counted as five fifths, instead of three-fifths, a man. Said the Committee: ‘The increase of representation necessarily resulting from the abolition of slavery was considered the most important element in the questions arising out of the changed condition of affairs, and the necessity for some fundamental action in this regared seemed imperative.’ Thus, the American community - reacting to its own need for black labor and reacting to what it believed to be a difficult logistical problem in emigration and reacting to a fear of increased political power for the Confederates - determined to limit the liberty of the new class of men, in the political arena, to the single option of the United States citizenship.

The Fourteenth Amendment, passed by Congress in June 1866 and ratified by the States in July 1868, was, then, the consecration of a campaign of war and fraud by the American community against the new class, wrongfully and illegally to prevent the new class from exercising the full range of political liberty that belonged to it. The new class was not to be barred from accepting membership in the American community - indeed, the Fourteenth Amendment attempted to order the new class into the American community - although that membership would be limited politically and socially. The new class would not be prevented from emigrating in small numbers and at its own expense. But it would be prevented - under this illegal campaign consecrated by the Fourteenth amendment - from establishing independent sovereignty over a land mass in what the American community deemed to be the actual and potential land of the United States. But the campaign was - and is- an illegal application of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

By 1917, Cyrl V. Briggs had reiterated Garrison Frazier’s petition to establish self-governing New African colonies, calling for “Colored Autonomous States”. This seemed to be the appropriate application of President Woodrow Wilson calls for self determination under his “14 Points”.  By the time of the Paris Peace Conference and in its aftermath in 1919, the League of Nations decided to use Scientific Colonialism as the foundation of its Mandates System. 

The Mandates system was applied to the former German and Ottoman colonies after the war. The broad outlines of which territories were to be included in the Mandates System had been clear after the Peace Conference, but no specific territories could be considered Mandates until the administering states had signed agreements to these selections. At the Paris Peace Conference the Supreme Council established the Committee on New States and for The Protection of Minorities. All the new successor states were compelled to sign minority rights treaties as a precondition of diplomatic recognition. The new treaties gave minorities the right to appeal directly to the League (and later, the UN General Assembly). Both W.E.B. DuBois and Marcus Garvey, as well as William Trotter, petitioned for self determination and independent statehood at the Paris Peace Conference. The League of Nations replied that a procedure required the United States to sign a special treaty agreeing to the international protection of its internal minorities. The question of the New Afrikan/AfroDescendants non-self governing territories and status as an internal colony of the United States was ignored. By mid-1920, the UNIA’s Declaration of Rights stated that “we as a race of people declare the League of Nations null and void as far as the Negro is concerned, in that it seeks to deprive Negroes of their liberty.” 

In 1928, Harry Haywood helped develop the Black Belt Thesis: Self Determination for a subjugated black national territory in the United States. Three years later, in 1931, Marcus Garvey set sail for London to file a petition to the League of Nations which accused the United States and the nations of Europe of violating the human rights of African Americans and other African peoples. Eleven days after Garvey set sail, Detroit-area UNIA President Earl Little (Malcolm X’s father), who was responsible for collecting signatures for the petition, was discovered dying on the trolley tracks near his home. Nevertheless, in 1933, a New Afrikan National Movement for the Establishment of a 49th State was established. And a year later, W.E.B. DuBois resigned from the NAACP and drafted the statement, “A Negro Nation Within A Nation”.

In 1945, the United Nations was founded. According to the UN Charter, Chapter XI, Article 73 regarding Non-Self Governing Territories, the United States was obligated to assume responsibility for the administration of the former self-governing New Afrikan territories that reverted to non-self governing territories as a result of President Lincoln’s assassination and subsequent US government campaign of fraud and terror limiting the newly-freedmen’s political rights. Alternatively, the United States government could have declared these New Afrikan territories as trust territories, under UN Charter, Chapter XII Article 77.1.c trusteeship system (see below). Had the United States done so, then these New Afrikan territories - namely, the Black Belt -  could have been subject to the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (GA resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960). The question of self-determination, self-government and independence for New Afrikan/AfroDescendant peoples in the United States would thus have been handled by The Special Committee on Decolonization, or C-24 established in 1961 by General Assembly (GA) as its subsidiary organ devoted to the issue of decolonization, pursuant to GA resolution 1654 (XVI) to 

  1. Examine the application of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (GA resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960; and

  2. To make suggestions and recommendations on the progress and extent of the implementation of the Declaration. 

This is the issue that Malcolm X tried to bring before the World Court before his assassination in 1965. This is the case that still must be decided. 

Thanks to the statement submitted by Siphiwe Baleka, the newly launched Permanent Forum on People of African Descent (PFPAD) has been made aware of this issue and a recommendation entered that PFPAD, under its mandate, request a special advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to substantiate our status as prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention and as a people occupying non-self governing territories foremerly recognized by United States legislation desiring a plebiscite to determine the political destiny of New Afrikan people.

According to the New York Times, 

“From the 15th century to the 20th century, European powers colonized huge portions of every continent except Antarctica. Starting in 1776 in North America, the people living in those colonies began to rebel against their colonizers with the goal of establishing their own independent countries. For the next two centuries, more than a hundred new sovereign nations were created around the world as one colony after the other declared its independence.” [See Times]

Ananda V. Burra: Petitioning the Mandates: Anti-colonial and Anti-racist Publics in International Law writes, 

“The Mandates System broke down in the late 1930s, though the Mandates remained a topic of debate throughout the war. The post-Second World War colonial settlement was fundamentally conservative. Although Britain and France gave some Mandated territories de jure independence (particularly territories in the Middle East), they did not consider granting independence to the rest. The supervisory system of the Mandates survived the war, however, unlike other League expert bodies like the Minorities Commission. . . .

[A] group of US State Department officials, UN bureaucrats and African American activists were able to include petitioning into the UN Charter in the face of resistance from colonial powers. New post-colonial states in the United Nations took up the appeals of petitioners and turned them into sovereign complaints in the Trusteeship Council. Eventually, disputes over the African Mandates led to petitioning coming to the notice of the ICJ in the 1950s. Petitioning in the B and C Mandates was often more controversial than other kinds of appeals, as petitions came primarily from sub-state actors, as opposed to state representatives or those who claimed statehood. With no state or nation advocating for them (as in other tribunals in the League), League officials recognized that these petitioners came to the PMC in an individual capacity, complicating a system that had been designed to serve and facilitate negotiations between sovereign states. . . .

As Robin Kelley has argued, African American historians were thinking beyond the state from the nineteenth century onwards, in part because their citizenship within the state was often so tenuous. It was the very ‘statelessness’ of these petitioners writing about Africa that made their appeals to the League so controversial. The ‘state’ had failed African American petitioners to the League. Black international activism after Reconstruction and through the interwar years was an exercise in trying to leapfrog the state to access alternative spaces to push for emancipation. Especially with the reinvigoration of racial terror at the end of the First World War across the United States, with the support of the government in Washington, black activists had more reason than ever to look to alternative forums to bring claims against racial exclusion and oppression. . . . 

Rayford Logan, Ralph Bunche and W.E.B. DuBois used the precedent of petitioning the Mandates System (of the League of Nations) to argue that the United Nations Charter needed an effective system of human rights petitioning to protect people, especially non-white people, from their own governments.”

During this period, many independent states came into existence. The question must be asked: why does the international community not support independence for African Americans?

List of National Independence: 1896 - 1918

1896: Ethiopia

June 12, 1898: The Philippines

January 1, 1901: Australia

May 20, 1902: Cuba

November 3, 1903: Panama

June 7, 1905: Norway

September 26, 1907: New Zealand

May 31, 1910: South Africa

November 28, 1912: Albania

December 6, 1917: Finland

February 24, 1918: Estonia

November 11, 1918: Poland

December 1, 1918: Iceland

List of National Independence: 1919 -1923

August 19, 1919: Afghanistan

December 6, 1921: Ireland

February 28, 1922: Egypt

October 29, 1923: Turkey

List of National Independence: 1929 - 1943

February 11, 1929: The Vatican City

September 23, 1932: Saudi Arabia

October 3, 1932: Iraq

November 22, 1943: Lebanon

Summary

  1. African American people, known as AfroDescendants in internationl forums, are prisoners of the declared Dum Diversas War.

  2. AfroDescendants owe no allegiance to any Nation’s laws.

  3. At the end of the Civil War, the United States legislated voluntary, compensated repatriation and ceded territory for New Afrikan self-governing territories in pursuit of independence.

  4. The assassination of President Lincoln led to a campaign of fraud and terror to deny New Afrikan’s right to return to their homeland, reduce the status of the recently established self-governing territories, and deny the full recognition of the New Afrikan’s political rights.

  5. Cyril Briggs, W.E.B. DuBois and Marcus Garvey advocated for New Afrikan self-government and independence, the latter two petitioning the League of Nations for justice and for self determination. The United States, however, refused to sign a special treaty agreeing to the international protection of its internal minorities 

  6. The United States failed its sacred trust obligation under the UN Charter Chapter XI Article 73 to promote New Afrikan well-being and to “develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions.” It further failed to declare New Afrikan territories as trust territories, under UN Charter, Chapter XII Article 77.1.c trusteeship system.

  7. The United States continues to violate the human rights, and in particular, the political rights, of New Afrikan/AfroDescendant peoples by continuing the campaign of fraud and terror limiting their political rights only to citizenship in the United States when it should be honoring its commitments to voluntary repatriation with compensation and recognition of New Afrikan self-governing territories made at the conclusion of the Civil War.

  8. The Permanent Forum of People of Afrikan Descent (PFPAD) can request a special advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the New Afrikan status as prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention and the necessity of holding a plebiscite to determine their collective political destiny.

  9. CONCLUSION: The United States territory is an acquisition of legal title by conquest that has been rejected as anachronistic and contrary to the Charter of the United Nations. Afro Descendant/New Afrikan presence on said territory is the result of a declaration of total war and the subsequent “Trans Atlantic Slave Trade” that has been acknowleged as a crime against humanity both now and then. Territorial acquisitions or other advantages gained through the threat or wrongful use of force cannot have legal effect, because international law cannot confer legality upon the consequences of wrongful acts incompatible with the Charter. In such cases, there should be full restitution. To claim that our status is “American citizen” is to confer legality on an acquisition of territorial legal title by conquest, a crime against humanity, and a campaign of fraud and terror by the government of the United States of America (after the assassination of President Lincoln and the 14th Amendment).

NEW AFRIKAN STATEMENTS ON OUR COLONIAL STATUS

Mary McLeod Bethune, a last-minute addition to the NAACP’s consultant team in San Francisco, spoke forcefully on how the UN Conference had painted in ‘bold relief’ that ‘common bond’ between African Americans and the colonial peoples. If anything, Bethune remarked, the UNCIO had made it very clear that the ‘Negro in America’ held ‘little more than colonial status in a democracy.’ The similarities were appallingly clear. The fight for colonial self-determination paralleled the battle to overturn the South’s racist voting restrictions. The efforts to revise the UN’s ‘domestic jurisdiction’ clause matched the assault on the states’ rights philosophy of the South.  And the dissatisfaction with a trusteeship plan that denied colonies the right to lay their grievances before an international tribunal mirrored the opposition to America’s separate and unequal system of justice.

John Henrik Clarke (1961) - “all of the Afro-American nationalists basically are fighting for the same thing. . They feel that the Afro-American constitutes what is tantamount to an exploited colony within a sovereign nation . Their fight is for national, and personal liberation.”


Harold Cruse: Revolutionary Nationalism and the Afro-American (1962):From the beginning, the American Negro has existed as a colonial being. His enslavement coincided with the colonial expansion of European powers and was nothing more or less than a condition of domestic colonialism. Instead of the United States establishing a colonial empire in Africa, it brought the colonial system home and installed it in the Southern states. When the Civil War broke up the slave system and the Negro was emancipated, he gained only partial freedom. Emancipation elevated him only to the position of a semidependent man, not to that of an equal or independent being. . . .The Negro is not really an integral part of the American nation beyond the convenient formal recognition that he lives within the borders of the United States. . . The only factor which differentiates the Negro's status from that of a pure colonial status is that his position is maintained in the "home" country in close proximity to the dominant racial group. . . . Of course, the national character of the Negro has little to do with what part of the country he lives in. Wherever he lives, he is restricted. His national boundaries are the color of his skin, his racial characteristics, and the social conditions within his subcultural world.. . . Unlike the situation in the colonial area, the Negro could not seize the power he wanted nor oust "foreigners. . . . Their rejection of white society is analogous to the colonial peoples' rejection of imperialist rule. The difference is only that people in colonies can succeed and American Negro nationalists cannot . The peculiar position of Negro nationalists in the United States requires them to set themselves against the dominance of whites and still manage to live in the same country.”

 The Provisional Government of the African American Captive Nation (PG-AACN) Declaration of Self-Determination of the African American Captive Nation by “Chief” Oseijeman Adefunmi President; Robert F. Williams, Prime minister; Abdul Rahman, First Deputy Prime Minister; Audley Moore, Second Deputy Prime Minister:

“Be it further resolved that all the land south of the Mason-Dixon line where our people constitute the majority, be partitioned to establish a territory for Self-Government for the African nation in the U.S.A.; and Be it further resolved that the United States Government take full responsibility for training our people for self-government in all of its ramifications, and Be it finally resolved that the Provisional Government of the African American Captive Nation be recognized by the Government of the United States as of now.

Malcolm X:

Every nation in Asia gained its independence through the philosophy of nationalism. Every nation on the African continent that has gotten its independence brought it about through the philosophy of nationalism. And it will take black nationalism -- that to bring about the freedom of 22 million Afro-Americans here in this country where we have suffered colonialism for the past 400 years.”

“America is just as much a colonial power as England ever was…what do you call second-class citizenship? Why, that's colonization. Second-class citizenship is nothing but 20th (century) slavery. How you gonna to tell me you're a second-class citizen? They don't have second-class citizenship in any other government on this Earth. They just have slaves and people who are free! Well, this country is a hypocrite! They try and make you think they set you free by calling you a second-class citizen. No, you're nothing but a 20th century slave.”

-Malcolm X, The Ballot or the Bullet

Max Stanford:

“There are two conflicting views; the first sees our people as citizens denied their rights and believes that they will be assimilated or integrated by revolution, reform, or other means into the White American way of life; which means exploitation of non-white peoples. The other sees our people as a nation within the boundaries of another nation, a nation in captivity striving to obtain independence, self-determination, or national liberation. . . . By the proportion of the population - in the South especially - AfroAmericans constitute a nation within a nation.

Donald Freeman:

“Further the conference [1964 AfroAmerican Student Movement conference at Fisk University] maintained that the federal government's refusal to enforce the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments renders AfroAmericans slaves or a colonized Black Nation, not American citizens, thus relegating them to a position analogous to that of Afro-Asian and Latin American nations under Western imperialism.”

Eldridge Cleaver, Head of the International Section of the Black Panther Party, stated,

“We have, in the United States, a ‘Mother Country Working Class’ and a ‘Working Class from the Black Colony. We also have a Mother Country Lumpenproletariat and a Lumpenproletariat from the Black Colony. Inside the Mother Country, these categories are fairly stable, but when we look at the Black Colony, we find that the hard and fast distinctions melt away. This is because of the leveling effect of the colonial process and the fact that all Black people are colonized, even if some of them occupy favored positions in the schemes of the Mother Country colonizing exploiters.

Kathleen Cleaver, Minister of Information for the Black Panther Party stated,

“There was an explanation for why our housing was bad, our education was poor, our political power was limited. And that explanation was that we were held as colonial subjects within the United States. It’s not a perfect explanation. It’s an analogy to situations in Africa and in Asia that we could see that ‘fit’ us. Therefore, colonialism had been denounced by the United Nations and people were entitled to their independence and they were justified in breaking out of that type of control. That was the basic American history.”

Huey P. Newton, founder of the Black Panther Party, stated,

“Police in our community couldn’t possibly be there to protect our property because we own no property. They couldn’t possibly be there to see that we receive the due process of law for the simple reason that the police themselves deny us the due process of law. And so it is very apparent that the police only in our community not for our security but the security of the business owners in the community, and also to see that the status quo was kept intact. . . . In America, black people are treated very much as the Vietnamese people or any other colonized people because we’re used, we’re brutalized. The police in our community occupy our area, our community as a foreign troop occupies territory.”

Imari Obadele made an explicit connection to our colonization and African national liberation movements:

“For no less than they have We boldly shed the nationality of our colonizer and gone to contest for independent land. . . .“ and “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.” - from Foundations of A Black Nation

In A Suggestion Towards the Framework of A Reparations  Demand And A Set of Legal Underpinnings, Imari Abubakari Obadele  Chairperson, the People’s Center Council (National Legislature)  of the Provisional Government  Republic of New Afrika  And Associate Professor of Political Science,  Prairie View A&M University, Texas writes,

“It is relevant to the charge of war against the United States that We were still an occupied and oppressed nation in this period between the Civil War and 1968. We were a colony living on territory claimed by the United States, subject until 1968 to a body of legislation and court decisions which defined our subordination to the White nation and facilitated the White nation’s economic and cultural exploitation of us, and our social degradation.”

Kuwasi Balagoon trial statement at the opening of the Brinks trial,

“This is a war against New Afrikan people for the purpose of colonization and genocide.. . . . When i say we New Afrikan people are colonized, i mean that our lives socially, economically and politically, with the exception of our war of liberation, are controlled by other people, by Imperialist euroamericans. Imperialist euroamericans tell us where to live and under what conditions, euroamerican invaders, colonizers, decide what laws we should obey and what jobs we will get. . . . The American Heritage Dictionary defines a colony as a group of emigrants settled in a distant land but subject to a parent country 2. A territory thus settled 3. Any region politically controlled by another country. But just as the hypocritical U.S.A. claims that it has no political prisoners, it claims that it has no colonies. . . . If the United States was a democracy it would set a date for a U.N. plebiscite, hold elections with no interference, and abide by the outcome.

Ramon Gutierrez writes in Internal Colonialism: An American Theory of Race (2004),

“The tangible results of the Civil Rights Movement remain evident through heightened levels of political representation, patterns of voting participation, and economic upward mobility for some, swelling the ranks of the Black rich and middle class leaving behind a much larger permanent underclass that has continued to fall further and further behind. The theory of internal colonialism was elaborated in the United States for them.

Albert H. Dyson, Office of the General Counsel, Dept. of Defense, Chokwe Lumumba, Chairman, New Afrikan Peoples Organization, Brooklyn, N.Y., Nkechi Taifa-Caldwell, Minister of Justice, Republic of New Afrika, Washington, D.C., for Dr. Mutulu Shakur. - 690 F. Supp. 1291 (1988) UNITED STATES of America,
v. Marilyn BUCK, Defendant. UNITED STATES of America v. Mutulu SHAKUR, Defendant. Nos. 84 Cr. 220-CSH, SSS 82 Cr. 312-CSH. United States District Court, S.D. New York. July 6, 1988.

“As is the case with every colonial experience, the New Afrikan Nation as a colony has no independent economic structure. The vast majority of the population of New Afrika, however, has at all points in history been contained within the same imperialist economic structure, and has shared the misfortune of suffering discriminatory treatment within it. Indeed it is appropriate to say in the case of New Afrika, as in the case of most colonies, that New Afrikans as a National population are an underclass frozen at the bottom of the American economy.”

Nkechi Taifa, in Black Power, Black Lawyer: My Audacious Quest for Justice, writes,

“In one of my college papers, ‘The Political Economy of the Black Ghetto,’ titled after a book of the same name by William Tabb, I argued, ‘A colonial relationship presently exists between the Black ghetto and the larger society, having many similarities with the same oppressive dependence that exists between many underdeveloped countries and industrial nations.’ My paper’s conclusion was that the ‘Black ghetto was also a colony whose situation closely paralleled the political and economic relationships existing between many Third World nations and the industrially advanced countries.’”

Finally, it should be noted that the US Givernment’s response to Imari’s and Gaidi’s Obadele’s Article Three Briefs was:

The government’s response, the Brief in Support of Motion to Quash Indictment for Lack of Jurisdiction Under Article III, U.S. Constitution Brought by the Defendant states,

‘Every element of the limits of Sec. (b)(2) clearly exist, with the exception of Obadele showing that he is a person of foreign nationality. That question, however, is a matter of law and requires a decision upon the issue of whether black folks now within the United States have ever been converted, in accordance with settled principles of universally established law, into United States citizens, and divested altogether of their original foreign African nationality.’

The matter of our “conversion” is the substantive issue to be taken up at the ICJ….

A valid and legitimate question is: What is our status under international law? The immediate follow-up question is, How was/is this status determined? An honest assessment of the second question will show that any such status was obtained without the informed consent of our people and thus, invalidates the answer to the first question and finally provokes the recognition that our people themselves must determine their status through the exercise of free choice. This is the rational basis for the plebiscite. Our strategy should provoke the United Nations, through the ICJ, to make an advisory judgment on our status and force it to the conclusion that it cannot be determined, under the spirit and letter of the UN Charter ( Article 76) and principles of international law, without conducting a plebiscite.

_____________________________________________________________________________

UN Charter, Chapter XI, Articles 73-74 regarding Non-Self Governing Territories

Article 73 

Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end: 

a. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses

b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement; 

c. to further international peace and security; 

d. to promote constructive measures of development, to encourage research, and to cooperate with one another and, when and where appropriate, with specialized international bodies with a view to the practical achievement of the social, economic, and scientific purposes set forth in this Article; and 

e. to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social, and educational conditions in the territories for which they are respectively responsible other than those territories to which Chapters XII and XIII apply. 

Article 74 

Members of the United Nations also agree that their policy in respect of the territories to which this Chapter applies, no less than in respect of their metropolitan areas, must be based on the general principle of good-neighborliness, due account being taken of the interests and well-being of the rest of the world, in social, economic, and commercial matters.

Chapter XII, Articles 75-85: International Trustees

Article 75 

The United Nations shall establish under its authority an international trusteeship system for the administration and supervision of such territories as may be placed there under by subsequent individual agreements. These territories are hereinafter referred to as trust territories. 

Article 76 

The basic objectives of the trusteeship system, in accordance with the Purposes of the United Nations laid down in Article 1 of the present Charter, shall be: 

a. to further international peace and security

b. to promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories, and their progressive development towards self-government or independence as may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned, and as may be provided by the terms of each trusteeship agreement; 

c. to encourage respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion, and to encourage recognition of the interdependence of the peoples of the world; and 

d. to ensure equal treatment in social, economic, and commercial matters for all Members of the United Nations and their nationals, and also equal treatment for the latter in the administration of justice, without prejudice to the attainment of the foregoing objectives and subject to the provisions of Article 80. 

Article 77 

1. The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements: 

a. territories now held under mandate; 

b. territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War; and 

c. territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration. 

2. It will be a matter for subsequent agreement as to which territories in the foregoing categories will be brought under the trusteeship system and upon what terms. 

Article 78 

The trusteeship system shall not apply to territories which have become Members of the United Nations, relationship among which shall be based on respect for the principle of sovereign equality. 

Article 79 

The terms of trusteeship for each territory to be placed under the trusteeship system, including any alteration or amendment, shall be agreed upon by the states directly concerned, including the mandatory power in the case of territories held under mandate by a Member of the United Nations, and shall be approved as provided for in Articles 83 and 85. 

Article 80 

1. Except as may be agreed upon in individual trusteeship agreements, made under Articles 77, 79, and 81, placing each territory under the trusteeship system, and until such agreements have been concluded, nothing in this Chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties. 

2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall not be interpreted as giving grounds for delay or postponement of the negotiation and conclusion of agreements for placing mandated and other territories under the trusteeship system as provided for in Article 77. 

Article 81 The trusteeship agreement shall in each case include the terms under which the trust territory will be administered and designate the authority which will exercise the administration of the trust territory. Such authority, hereinafter called the administering authority, may be one or more states or the Organization itself

Article 82 

There may be designated, in any trusteeship agreement, a strategic area or areas which may include part or all of the trust territory to which the agreement applies, without prejudice to any special agreement or agreements made under Article 43. 

Article 83 

  1. All functions of the United Nations relating to strategic areas, including the approval of the terms of the trusteeship agreements and of their alteration or amendment shall be exercised by the Security Council. 

  2. The basic objectives set forth in Article 76 shall be applicable to the people of each strategic area. 

  3. The Security Council shall, subject to the provisions of the trusteeship agreements and without prejudice to security considerations, avail itself of the assistance of the Trusteeship Council to perform those functions of the United Nations under the trusteeship system relating to political, economic, social, and educational matters in the strategic areas. 

Article 84 

It shall be the duty of the administering authority to ensure that the trust territory shall play its part in the maintenance of international peace and security. To this end the administering authority may make use of volunteer forces, facilities, and assistance from the trust territory in carrying out the obligations towards the Security Council undertaken in this regard by the administering authority, as well as for local defense and the maintenance of law and order within the trust territory. 

Article 85 

  1. The functions of the United Nations with regard to trusteeship agreements for all areas not designated as strategic, including the approval of the terms of the trusteeship agreements and of their alteration or amendment, shall be exercised by the General Assembly. 

  2. 2. The Trusteeship Council, operating under the authority of the General Assembly shall assist the General Assembly in carrying out these functions.

9:00 am:     Welcome & Opening Remarks

  • Prof. Gregory Shaffer, President, American Society of International Law

  • Prof. Verence Shepherd, Centre for Reparations Research, University of the West Indies

9:20 am:     Opening Address

  • Judge Patrick Robinson, member, International Court of Justice  

9:50 am:     Keynote Address

  • Sir Hilary Beckles, Vice-Chancellor, The University of the West Indies

10:35 am:   Discussion of the Legal Framework for Repraations

  • Judge Patrick Robinson, member, International Court of Justice  

11:15 am:   Calculation of Compensation for Trans-Atlantic Chattel Slavery

  • Dr. Coleman Bazelon, The Brattle Group

  • Dr. Alberto Vargas, The Brattle Group

12:15 pm:   LUNCH BREAK

1:30 pm:     First Discussant’s Panel

  • Dr. Mamadou Hébié, Associate Professor of International Law, Leiden University, Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies

  • Prof. Adrien Wing, Bessie Dutton Murray Professor, University of Iowa College of Law

* Participants in discussant panels will present their comments, observations, and responses to the topics covered in the Brattle presentation, encompassing both compensation and satisfaction as remedies for the multiple breaches of international law arising from trans-Atlantic chattel slavery and its consequences.

Secrets of the Forest People: Learning the Bantu Culture in Cameroon

On October 29, 2022, I visited the Museum of the Forest People as a guest of the African Roots and Heritage Foundation. I learned many things. Here are some of the lessons.

THE WRITING SYSTEM ORIGINATED AS A MUSICAL NOTATION SYSTEM AND COLORS WERE DESCRIBED USING ELEMENTS OF NATURE

. The forest people drew pictures of the various drum rhythms which then became their writng system.

MEASURING TIME

Spirit prepares the material. What is needed for the day is prepared in the night. That is why, for the forest people, the night is more important than the day because spirit does its work in the night.

MORE TEACHING ABOUT TIME

YOU MUST BE ATHLETIC

Any “lord” of the forest must appear to be so. Your physical appearance is an indication of your vital life force energy and wisdom.

PALM WINE TECHNOLOGY

LEARNING ABOUT THE LORD AND HIS WIVES

The forest people are polygamous. According to a man’s vital essence, he can satisfy a woman, both materially, emotionally, and sexually. Because children, the continuation of the life force energy, are the purpose of the community.

For this video and the other “secret” videos, go to

SECRETS OF THE FOREST PEOPLE VIDEOS

Celebrating the 50 Year Anniversary of Amilcar Cabral's Meeting With African Americans, October 20, 1972

The Balanta B’urassa History and Genealogy Society in America organized events on two continents to commemorate the 50th Anniversary of Amilcar Cabral’s Meeting with African Americans in New York, October 20, 1972 in which he gave the speech, “Connecting the Struggles: An Informal talk with Black Americans”.

Watch the Premiere at 7:00 PM EST on October 20

https://youtu.be/6_YREg6hbdo

On October 15, 1972, Amilcar Cabral addressed an audience at Lincoln University where he received the honorary doctorate degree. The address was entitled, Return to the Source (see below).

Amilcar Cabral addressing an audience at Lincoln University where he received the honorary doctorate during his last visit to the United States in October 1972. (AIS/Ray Lewis)

Amilcar Cabral then asked the Africa Information Service (AIS) to organise a small informal meeting at which he could speak with different black organisations. The AIS contacted approximately 30 organisations and on 20 October 1972, more than 120 people representing a wide range of black groups in America crowded into a small room to meet with Amilcar Cabral. At the meeting, the vitality, warmth and humour of Cabral the person became evident to those who had not met him before.

“At the period when the great exploitation of African men as slaves in the world appeared. . . . they decided to turn the archpelago into a storehouse for slaves. Folk taken from Africa, namely from Guine, were placed. . . as slaves. . . .There was constant resistance to this force. If the colonial force was acting in one direction, there was always our force which acted in the opposite direction.”

- Amilcar Cabral, Part 1: The Weapon of Theory - Party Principles and Political Practice: 4. Unity and struggle

Amilcar Cabral also said,

FOR THE AFRICANS WHO FOR FIVE CENTURIES HAVE LIVED UNDER PORTUGUESE DOMINATION, PORTUGUESE COLONIALISM REPRESENTS A REIGN OF EVIL, AND WHERE EVIL REIGNS THERE IS NO PLACE FOR GOOD.”  [ PART 1: THE WEAPON OF THEORY, PORTUGUESE COLONIAL DOMINATION]

“I am bringing to you - our African brothers and sisters of the United States - the fraternal salutations of our people in assuring you we are very conscious that all in this life concerning you also concerns us. If we do not always pronounce words that clearly show this, it doesn’t mean that we are not conscious of it. It is a reality and considering that the world is being made smaller each day all people are becoming conscious of this fact.

Naturally if you ask me between brothers (and sisters) and comrades what I prefer then if we are brothers it is not our fault or our responsibility. But if we are comrades, it is a political engagement. Naturally, we like our brothers (and sisters) but in our conception it is better to be a brother (or sister) and a comrade. We like our brothers very much, but we think that if we are brothers we have to realise the responsibility of this fact and take clear positions about our problems in order to see if beyond this condition of brothers and sisters, we are also comrades. This is very important for us.

We try to understand your situation in this country. You can be sure that we realise the difficulties you face, the problems you have and your feelings, your revolts, and also your hopes. We think that our fighting for Africa against colonialism and imperialism is a proof of understanding of your problem and also a contribution for the solution of your problems in the continent. Naturally the inverse is also true. All the achievements towards the solution of your problems here are real contributions to our own struggle. And we are very encouraged in our struggle by the fact that each day more of the African people born in America became conscious of their responsibilities to the struggle in Africa.

Does that mean you have to all leave here and go fight in Africa? We do not believe so. That is not being realistic in our opinion. History is a very strong chain. We have to accept the limits of history but not the limits imposed by the societies where we are living. There is a difference. We think that all you can do here to develop your own conditions in the sense of progress, in the sense of history and in the sense of our total realisation of your aspirations as human beings is a contribution for us. It is also a contribution for you to never forget that you are Africans.

Does that mean we are racists? No! We are not racists. We are fundamentally and deeply against any kind of racism. Even when people are subjected to racism we are against racism from those who have been oppressed by it. In our opinion - not from dreaming but from a deep analysis of the real condition of the existence of mankind and the division of societies - racism is a result of certain circumstances. It is not eternal in any latitude in the world. It is not the result of historical and economic conditions. And we cannot answer racism with racism. It is not possible. In our country, despite some racist manifestations by the Portuguese, we are not fighting against the Portuguese people or whites. We are fighting for the freedom of our people - to free our people and to allow them to be able to love any kind of human being. You cannot love when you are a slave. It is very difficult.

In combating racism we don’t make progress if we combat the people themselves. We have to combat the causes of racism. If a bandit comes into my house and I have a gun I cannot shoot the shadow of this bandit. I have to shoot the bandit. Many people lose energy and effort, and make sacrifices combating shadows. We have to combat the material reality that produces the shadow. If we cannot change the light that is one cause of the shadow, we can at least change the body. It is important to avoid confusion between the shadow and the body that projects the shadow. We are encouraged by the fact that each day more of our people, here and in Africa, realise this reality. This reinforces our confidence in our final victory.

The fact that you follow our struggle and are interested in our achievements is good for us. We base our struggle on the concrete realities of our country. We appreciate the experiences and achievements of other peoples and we study them. But revolution or national liberation struggle is like a dress which must be fitted to each individual’s body. Naturally, there are certain general or universal laws, even scientific laws for any condition, but the liberation struggle has to be developed according to the specific conditions of each country. This is fundamental.

The specific conditions to be considered include economic, cultural, social, political and even geographic conditions. The guerrilla manuals once told us that without mountains you cannot make guerrilla war. But in my country there are no mountains, only the people. In the economic field we committed an error. We began training our people to commit sabotage on the railroads. When they returned from their training we remembered that there were no railroads in our country. The Portuguese built them in Mozambique and Angola but not in our country.

There are other conditions to consider as well. You must consider the type of society in which you are fighting. Is it divided along horizontal or vertical lines? Some people tell us our struggle is the same as that of the Vietnamese people. It is similar, but it is not the same. The Vietnamese are a people that hundreds of years ago fought against foreign invaders like a nation. We are now forging our nation in the struggle. This is a big difference. It is difficult to imagine what a difference that makes. Vietnam is also a society with clear social structures with classes well defined. There is no national bourgeoisie in our country. A miserable petit bourgeoisie yes, but not a national bourgeoisie. These differences are very important.

Once I discussed politics with Eldridge Cleaver. He is a clever man, very intelligent. We agreed on many things but we disagreed on one thing. He told me your condition is a colonial condition. In certain aspects it seems to be, but it is not really a colonial condition. The colonial condition demands certain factors. One important factor is the continuity of territories. There are others, which you can see when you analyse. Many times we are confronted with a phenomenon that seem to be the same, but political activity demands that we be able to distinguish them. That is not to say that the aims are not the same. And, that is not to say that even some of the means cannot be the same. However, we must deeply analyse each situation to avoid loss of time and energy doing things that we are not to do and forgetting things that we have to do.

In our country we have been fighting for nearly 10 years. If we consider the changes achieved in that time, principally in the relationship between men and women, it has been more than 100 years. If we were only shooting bullets and shells, yes, 10 years is too much. But we were not only doing this. We were forging a nation during these years. How long did it take the European nations to be formed - 10 centuries from the middle ages to the renaissance. (Here in the United States you are still forging a nation - it is not yet completed, in my opinion. Several things have contributed to the forming and changing of this country, such as the Vietnam war, though unfortunately at the expense of the Vietnamese people. But you know the details of change in this country more than myself.)

Ten years ago, we were Fula, Mandjak, Mandinka, Balante, Pepel, and others. Now we are a nation of Guineans. Tribal divisions were one reason the Portuguese thought it would not be possible for us to fight. During these ten years we were making more and more changes, so that today we can see there is a new man and new woman, born with our new nation and because of our fight. This is because of our ability to fight as a nation.

Naturally, we are not defending the armed fight. Maybe I deceive people, but I am not a great defender of the armed fight. I am myself very conscious of the sacrifices demanded by the armed fight. It is a violence against even our own people. But it is not our invention - it is not our cool decision; it is the requirement of history. This is not the first fight in our country, and it is not Cabral who invented the struggle. We are following the example of our grandfathers who fought against Portuguese domination 50 years ago. Today’s fight is a continuation of the fight to defend our dignity, our right to have an identity - our own identity.

If it were possible to solve this problem without the armed fight - why not?! But while the armed fight demands sacrifices, it also has advantages. Like everything else in the world, it has two faces - one positive and the other negative - the problem is in the balance. For us now, it (the armed fight) is a good thing in our opinion, and our condition is a good thing because this armed fight helped us to accelerate the revolution of our people, to create a new situation that will facilitate our progress.

In these 10 years we liberated about three-fourths of the country and we were effectively controlling two-thirds of our country. We have much work to do, but we have our state, we have a strong political organisation, a developing administration, and we have created many services - always while facing the bombs of the Portuguese. That is to say, bombs used by the Portuguese, but made in the United States. In the military field we realised good things during these 10 years. We have our national army and our local militias. We have been able to receive a number of visitors - journalists, filmmakers, scientists, teachers, writers, government representatives, and others. We also received a very good report about the situation in our country.

However, through the armed fight, we realised other things more important than the size of the liberated regions or the capacity of our fighters, such as the irreversible change in the attitudes of our men. We have more sacrifices to make and more attitudes to overcome, but our people are now accustomed to this, and know that for freedom we must pay a price. What can we consider better than freedom? It is not possible - nothing compares with freedom. During the visit of the special mission of UN to our country, one of the official observers, while on a long march, asked a small boy if he ever got tired. The boy answered, ‘I can’t get tired - this is my country. Only the Portuguese soldiers get tired’.

Now we can accelerate the progress of the liberation of the rest of our country. Each day, we get more and better workers. Now we need more ammunition in order to give greater impact to our attacks against Portuguese positions. Instead of attacking with 80 shells, we have to attack with 800, if not 2,000, and we are preparing to do this. The situation is now better in the urban centres. We are dominating the urban centres in spite of the Portuguese occupation. Links with our underground organisation in these centers are very good, and we have decided to develop our action inside these centres. We told this on the radio to the Portuguese. We told all the people because the Portuguese cannot stop us. We told them before they would be afraid, and they are. They are even afraid of their shadows.

Another very positive aspect of our struggle, is the political situation on the Cape Verde Islands. Some days ago, there were riots between our people and the police. This is a sign that great developments are coming within the framework of our Islands.

We have taken all measures demanded by the struggle, in the political as well as the military field. With the general election just completed in the liberated region, we are now creating our National Assembly. Naturally we are not doing a National Assembly like the Congress you have here (USA) or the British parliament. All these are very important steps in accelerating the end of the colonial war in my country and for its total liberation.

We have decided to formally proclaim our state, and hope that our brothers and sisters here (USA), our brothers and sisters in Africa, and our friends all over the world, will take the necessary position of support for our initiatives in the political field. In an armed fight like ours, all the political aspects have been stressed. They are stressed naturally when you approach the end. It is a dialectical process. In the beginning the fight is political only, it is then followed by the transformation into the armed stage. Step by step, the political aspect returns but at a different level, the level of solution.

I am not going to develop these things further, I think it is better if you ask questions. We are very happy to be with you, our brothers and sisters. I tell you frankly, although it might hurt my visit to the UN; each day I feel myself that if I did not have to do what I have to do in my country, maybe I would come here to join you.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

CABRAL: I am at your disposal for any kind of question; no secrets, or ceremonies or diplomacy with you.

QUESTION: I am from Mali. I don’t know how comfortable you will be with this question, but given the nature of the fight you have been leading, are you satisfied with the type of moral, political and military aid you have been receiving from other African countries?

CABRAL: First of all, let me say to my brother that I am comfortable with any kind of question - there is no problem. Second, when one is in a condition that he has to receive aid, he is never satisfied. The condition of people who are obliged by circumstances to ask for and receive aid, is to never be satisfied. If you are satisfied it is finished, you don’t need aid. Third, we have to also consider the situation of the people who are helping us. You know the political and economic circumstances conditioning the attitudes of the African countries. It’s true the past decade of the 1960s was a great achievement for Africa - the independence of Africa. But we are not of this tree of independence of Africa. We must take our independence with force and our position is to never ask for the aid we need. We let each people give us aid as they can, and we never accept conditions with aid. If you give us aid like this, we are satisfied. If you can give more, we are more satisfied.

I have said to African heads of state many times that the aid from Africa is very useful, but not sufficient. We believe that they could do better, and so do they. Last June in the Rabat summit meetings (of the OAU) they agreed to increase their aid by 50 per cent. Why didn’t they do this before? We know that they had not only financial and economic difficulties, but political difficulties as well. In some cases, the difficulty was a lack of consciousness about the importance of this problem. But each day they are realising more and maybe when they fully realise the importance of this problem we will all be independent.

QUESTION: I would like to know what forward thrust your country would have in the absence of NATO support, that this country gives, and what the arguments are that the US offers for its participation in NATO which we all know is the conduit which supplies the Portuguese with their arms? This is something that we can take immediate political action on.

CABRAL: You see, Portugal is an underdeveloped country - the most backward in Western Europe. It is a country that doesn’t produce even toy planes - this is not a joke, it’s true. Portugal would never be able to launch three colonial wars in Africa without the help of NATO, the weapons of NATO, the planes of NATO, the bombs of NATO - it would be impossible for them. This is not a matter for discussion. The Americans know it, the British know it, the French know it very well, the West Germans also know it, and the Portuguese know it very well.

We cannot talk of American participation in NATO, because NATO is the creation of the United States. Once I came here to the US and I was invited to lunch by the representative of the US on the United Nations’ Fourth Committee. He was also the deputy chief of the US delegation to the UN. I told him we are fighting against Portuguese colonialism, and not asking for the destruction of NATO. We don’t think it is necessary to destroy NATO in order to free our country. But why is the US opposing this? He told me that he did not agree with this policy (US support of NATO) but that there is a problem of world security and in the opinion of his government it is necessary to give aid to Portugal in exchange for use of the Azores as a military base. Acceptance of Portuguese policy is necessary for America’s global strategy, he explained.

I think he was telling me the truth, but only part of the truth because the US supports Portugal in order to continue the domination of Africa, if not over other parts of the world. I must clarify that this man left his position in the UN and during his debate in the US Congress took a clear position favourable to ours and asked many times for aid to Portugal to be stopped, but the government didn’t accept.

What is the justification for this? There is no justification - no justification at all. It is US imperialism. Portugal is an appendage of imperialism, a rotten appendage of imperialism. You know that Portugal is a semi-colony itself. Since 1775 Portugal has been a semi-colony of Britain. This is the only reason that Portugal was able to preserve the colonies during the partition of Africa. How could this poor miserable country preserve the colonies during the partition of Africa? How could this poor miserable country preserve the colonies in the face of the ambitions and jealousies of Germany, France, England, Belgium, and the emerging American imperialism? It was because England adopted a tactic. It said - Portugal is my colony, if it preserves colonies they are also my colonies - and England defended the interests of Portugal with force. But now it is not the same. Angola is not really a Portuguese colony. Mozambique is not really a Portuguese colony. You can see the statistics. More than 60 per cent of the principal exports of Angola are not for Portugal. Approximately the same percentage of the investments in Angola and Mozambique are not Portuguese, and each day this is increasing. Guinea and Cape Verde are very poor and do not have very good climates. They are the only Portuguese colonies. Portugal is, principally for Angola and Mozambique, the policeman and the receiver of taxes. But they will not tell you this.

QUESTION: My question concerns the basis of law you are using in your country. Are you using the laws of the Portuguese in terms of the National Assembly? What kinds of criteria are you going to use?

CABRAL: If Portugal had created in my country an Assembly, we would not create one ourselves. We don’t accept any institution of the Portuguese colonialists. We are not interested in the preservation of any of the structures of the colonial state. It is our opinion that it is necessary to totally destroy, to break, to reduce to ash all aspects of the colonial state in our country in order to make everything possible for our people. The masses realise that this is true, in order to convince everyone we are really finished with colonial domination in our country.

Some independent African states preserved the structures of the colonial state. In some countries they only replaced a white man with a black man, but for the people it is the same. You have to realise that it is very difficult for the people to make a distinction between one Portuguese, or white, administrator and one black administrator. For the people it is the administrator that is fundamental. And the principle - if this administrator, a black one is living in the same house, with the same gestures, with the same car, or sometimes a better one, what is the difference? The nature of the state we want to create in our country is a very good question for it is a fundamental one.

Our fortune is that we are creating the state through the struggle. We now have popular tribunals - people’s courts - in our country. We cannot create a judicial system like the Portuguese in our country because it was a colonial one, nor can we make a copy of the judicial system in Portugal - it is impossible. Through our struggle we created our courts and the peasants participate by electing the courts themselves. Ours is a new judicial system, totally different from any other system, born in our country through the struggle. It is similar to other systems, like the one in Vietnam, but it is also different because it corresponds to the conditions of our country.

If you really want to know the feelings of our people on this matter I can tell you that our government and all its institutions have to take another nature. For example, we must not use the houses occupied by the colonial power in the way they used them. I proposed to our party that the government palace in Bissau be transformed into a people’s house for culture, not for our prime minister or something like this (I don’t believe we will have prime ministers anyway). This is to let the people realise that they conquered colonialism - it’s finished this time - it’s only a question of a change of skin. This is really very important. It is the most important problem in the liberation movement. The problem of the nature of the state created after independence is perhaps the secret of the failure of African independence.

QUESTION: Looking at Africa geographically, where does the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde Islands (PAIGC) get most of its support, North Africa, or Sub-Saharan Africa, and in a broader sense, how does support from Russia and China compare?

CABRAL: We don’t like this division of Africa. We have the support of the OAU for some years now. We have the total support of OAU. All African countries support PAIGC, no exceptions of any voice against us. And through the OAU, the liberation committee gives us financial help. There are some African countries, maybe not more than the fingers on the hand, that help us directly also. With them we have bilateral relations. Some are in the north, others in the west, and others in the east.

About China and the Soviet Union, we always had the support of the socialist countries - moral, political and material. Some have given more material support than others. Until now the country that has helped us most is the Soviet Union, and we have said it many times before at all kinds of meetings. Until now they’ve helped us the most in supplying materials for the war. If you want to verify this you can come to my country and see. This is the situation.

QUESTION: My question is about the role of women. What is the nature of the transformation from the old system under imperialism?

CABRAL: In our country you find many societies with different traditions and rules on the role of women. For example, in the Fula society a woman is like a piece of property of the man, the owner of the home. This is a typical patriarchal society. But even there women have dignity, and if you enter the house you would see that inside the house, the woman is the chief. On the other hand, in Balante society women have more freedom.

To understand these differences you have to know that in Fula society all that is produced belongs to the father. In Balante society all that is produced belongs to the people that work and women work very hard so they are free. It is very simple. But the problem is about the political role in the fight. You know that in our country there were even matriarchal societies where women were the most important element. On the Bijagos Islands they had queens. They were not queens because they were the daughters of kings. They had queens succeeding queens. The religious leaders were women too. Now they are changing.

I tell you these things so that you can understand our society better. But during the fight the important thing is the political role of women. Yes, we have made great achievements, but not enough. We are very far from what we want to do, but this is not a problem that can be solved by Cabral signing a decree. It is all part of the process of transformation, of change in the material conditions of the existence of our people, but also in the minds of the women, because sometimes the greatest difficulty is not only in the men but in the women too.

We have a big problem with our nurses, because we trained about three hundred nurses – women – but they married, they get children and for them it’s finished. This is very bad. For some this doesn’t happen. Carmen Pereira, for instance, is a nurse, and she is a member of the high political staff of the party. She is responsible for all social and cultural problems in the southern liberated region. She’s a member of the executive committee of the party. There are many others too, trained not only in the country but in the exterior also, in foreign countries. But we have much work to do.

In the beginning of the struggle, when we launched the guerrilla struggle, young women came without being called and asked for weapons to fight, hundreds and hundreds. But step-by-step some problems came in this framework and we had to distribute, to partition the war. Today, women are principally in what you call the local armed forces and in the political war - working on health problems, and instruction also.

I hope we can send some of our women here so you will be able to know them. But we have big problems to solve and we have a great problem with some of the leaders of the party. We have (even myself) to combat ourselves on this problem, because we have to be able to cut this cultural element, with its great roots, until the day we put down this bad thing - the exploitation of women, but we have made great progress in this field in these 10 years.

QUESTION: Comrade Cabral, you spoke about universal scientific laws of revolution. It is very clear that in this country, we too, are engaged in some stage of development of a revolutionary struggle. Certainly, one of the most controversial aspects of our struggle is the grasp of these scientific universal laws. Would you, therefore, talk about your party’s understanding of revolutionary theory, particularly as related to Cuba, China, the Soviet Union, and the anti-colonial wars of national liberation? So I wonder, would you speak on this problem?

CABRAL: You see, I think that all kinds of struggles for liberation obey a group of laws. The application of these laws to a certain case depends on the nature of the case. Maybe all these laws are applicable, but maybe only some, it depends. In science you know water boils at 100 degrees centigrade. It’s a law. Naturally, with the condition that we are speaking in centigrade degrees, this is a specification. What does it mean if we are measuring Fahrenheit - it’s not the same. And it is also only at sea level. When you go into the mountains this law is not true. It is sometimes more complex.

It’s the same in the field of the scientific character of the liberation struggle. Cuba, Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, and so on. Sometimes you can even explain conflicts between their people because of the different nature of their struggle, dictated by the different conditions of the countries - historical, economical, and so on.

I have to tell you that when we began preparing for our struggle in our own country, we didn’t know Mao Tse-tung. The first time I faced a book of Mao Tse-tung was in 1960. Our party was created in 1956. We knew less about the struggle of Cuba, but later we tried to know the experiences of other peoples. Some experiences we put aside because the difference was so great that it would waste time to study them. We think the experiences of other people are very important for you, principally to know things you should not do. Because what you do in your country you have to create yourself.

The general laws are very simple. For instance, the development of the armed fight in a country characterised by agriculture where most, if not all, of the population are peasants means you have to do to the struggle as in China, in Vietnam or in my country. Maybe you begin in the towns, but you recognise that this is not good. You pass to the countryside and mobilise the peasants. You recognise that the peasants are very difficult to mobilise under certain conditions, but you launch the armed struggle and step-by-step you approach the towns in order to finish the colonists.

For instance, this is scientific: in the colonial war there is a contradiction. What is it? It is that the colonial power in order to really dominate the country has to disperse its forces. In dispersing its forces it becomes weak - the national forces can destroy them. As you begin to destroy them they are obliged to concentrate, but when they concentrate they leave areas of the country you can control, administer and create structures in. You can tell me its not possible in the US, the US is not an agricultural country like this. But if you study deeply the conditions in your country maybe you will find that the law is applicable. This is what I can tell you because it is a big problem.

QUESTION (continued): I’d like to rephrase part of it. What I am trying to get at is how, in setting up a cadre training school that you set up in Conakry, did you access the revolutionary experiences of countries I mentioned? The point I am trying to drive at is not the form of waging a revolutionary struggle. I understand the differences in concrete conditions. I want to know how one moves through a colonial or a semi-feudal conditions into socialism (clearly the dominant revolutionary experience in the world). How were you able to set up a training program in which cadres were exposed to this information?

CABRAL: In the beginning we established in Conakry what you call a political school of militants. About one thousand people came from our country by groups. We first asked: Who we are? Where are we? What do we want? How do we live? What is our enemy? Who is this enemy? What can he do against us? What is our country? Where is our country? We asked things like this, step-by-step explaining our real conditions and explaining what we want, why we want it and why we have to fight against the Portuguese. Among all of these people some, step-by-step, approached other experiences. But the problem of going from a feudal or semi-feudal society or tribal society to socialism is a very big problem, even from capitalism to socialism.

If there are Marxists here they know that Marx said that capitalism created all the conditions for socialism. The conditions were created but never passed. Even then it is very difficult. This is even more reason for the feudal or semi-feudal tribal societies to jump to socialism - but it’s not a problem of jumping. It’s a process of development. You have to establish political aims based on your own condition, the ideological content of the fight. To have an ideology doesn’t necessarily mean that you have to define whether you are communist, socialist, or something like this. To have an ideology is to know what you want in your own condition.

We want in our country this: to have no more exploitation of our people, not by white people or by black people. We don’t want any more exploitation. It is in this way we educate our people - the masses, the cadres, the militants. For that we are taking, step-by-step, all the measures necessary to avoid this exploitation. How? We give to our people the instrument of control, the people to lead. And we give to our people all possibility to participate more actively each day in the direction of their own life.

Naturally, if an American comes he may say you are doing socialism in your country. This is a responsibility for him. We are not preoccupied with labels, you see. We are occupied in the content of the thing, what we are doing, how we are doing it, what chances are we creating for realising this aim. There are some societies that passed from feudal or semi-feudal stages to being socialist societies. But one of their specifics was having a state imposing this passage. We do not have this. We have to create for ourselves the instruments of the state inside our country, in the conditions of our history, in order to orientate all to a life of justice, work for progress and equality. Equality of chance for all people is the problem. The problem of equality is equality of chance. This is what I can tell you. This is a big discussion, philosophical if you want something like this.

QUESTION: What direct relationship does the OAU have with your party? You mentioned the OAU several times and I heard some things about the OAU, but I wanted to know whether or not it has been helpful to you, and if it has, in what ways?

CABRAL: Yes, they are good relations. Now we can even tell that we are nearly members of the OAU, because at the last summit conference in Rabat, they admitted the recognised liberation movements, like my party, to participate in the debate concerning their own cases. The relations are very good. We have the help of the OAU - not enough we think, but they are trying to increase this help and we think that in our own case, maybe next year, we will be a member, a full member of the OAU.

QUESTION (continued): Why? Do you see it as the organisation for Africa?

CABRAL: A real organisation for Africa? It depends. Now at this stage of the revolution in Africa, the OAU is a very good thing. It is such a good thing that imperialism is doing its best to finish it. Naturally, maybe for your ideas the OAU doesn’t answer well, doesn’t fully correspond to your hopes. Maybe you are right, but this is not the problem. In the political field, you have to know at each stage if you are doing the possible or not, and preparing the field for the possible for tomorrow or not. This is the problem.

QUESTION (continued): Yes, but how was it created and how is it being supported?

CABRAL: Oh, that’s a very big matter. You don’t know how it was created? They met in May 1963 in Addis Ababa, and they established a charter.

QUESTION (continued): Who is supporting this organisation?

CABRAL: Who is supporting it? The states - the African states? Yes, the African states. The imperialists - no, you are not right. You are not right, my sister. We can tell that some of the African states (interrupted)

QUESTION: (continued): If there is such an organisation why are we still where we are? It is just the leaders that elect to go there, not the kind of people like yourself, who are coming down to the masses and speaking the truth. These are neo-colonial leaders.

CABRAL: No. But that is not the problem. You are confused. You are making a mistake. One problem is the problem of the OAU. The OAU is an organisation of African states, it’s true. Are imperialists supporting the OAU? On the contrary, they do their best not to because there is a potential danger for them. The other problem is: are these African states all really independent? Some of them are neo-colonialist, but you have to distinguish this thing in order to do something. If you confuse all - it’s not possible.

QUESTION: (continued): But brother, why is it that each time the question of Pan-Africanism is brought to the discussion most of them take different views?

CABRAL: Oh, yes. You see you cannot demand all the African states to agree immediately on Pan-Africanism. Even if we discuss Pan-Africanism you would be surprised. I am for Pan-Africanism. I am for African unity. But we have to be for these things and do them when possible, not to do it now. You see, my sister, you here in the US, we understand you. You are for Pan-Africanism and you want it today. Pan-Africanism now! We are in Africa; don’t confuse this reaction against Pan-Africanism with the situation of the OAU. I can tell you, the head of state in Africa I admired the most in my life was Nkrumah.

QUESTION (continued): He was the only one. He was the father.

CABRAL: Nkrumah was not the father of Pan-Africanism. An American, Du Bois, was the father, if you want. Pan-Africanism is a means to return to the source. You see, it’s a very big problem. It’s not like this. Nkrumah told me in Conakry - unfortunately he is not alive, but I am not lying, I never lied in my life, he was one of my best friends, I’ll never forget him and you can read my speech at his memorial - you see he told me, ‘Cabral, I tell you one thing, our problem of African unity is important, really, but now if I had to begin again, my approach would be different.’

Unfortunately, I am leaving, but if I would like very much to speak with you in order to show you Pan-Africanism is a very nice idea; but we have to work for it, and it is not for me to accuse Houphouet-Boigny or Mobuto, because they don’t want it. They cannot want it! It is more difficult for some heads of state in Africa to accept African unity as defined by Nkrumah than it is for them to come here to the most racist of the white racists and tell them to accept equal rights for all Africa. You see, more difficult. It’s a great problem, my sister. And we think on this problem every day because our future concerns that.

We have a meeting at half past seven with the chairman of the decolonisation committee. We have to go there. It is about 20 minutes from here. I am late.

QUESTION: When will we see you again?

CABRAL: Again? I never know. It is difficult for me, but I hope in two years. Also for some of you, if you want, you can come to my country and see me and see our people.

QUESTION: How?

CABRAL: By paying the fare. (laughter)

QUESTION: What are some of the specific financial and political things we can do to further the struggle?

CABRAL: Personally I don’t agree with this question. I think that this meeting is a meeting of brothers and sisters. You represent several organisations. I am very glad because we want your unity. We know it’s very difficult - it’s more difficult to make your unity than Pan-Africanism maybe. But we would like you to consider this meeting a meeting between brothers and sisters trying to reinforce not only our links in blood, and in history, but also in aims. I am very glad to have been here with you and I deeply regret that it is not possible to be with you longer. Thank you very much.” BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

History Is A Weapon:

National Liberation and Culture


This text was originally delivered on February 20, 1970; as part of the Eduardo Mondlane (1) Memorial Lecture Series at Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, under the auspices of The Program of Eastern African Studies. It was translated from the French by Maureen Webster.

When Goebbels, the brain behind Nazi propaganda, heard culture being discussed, he brought out his revolver. That shows that the Nazis, who were and are the most tragic expression of imperialism and of its thirst for domination--even if they were all degenerates like Hitler, had a clear idea of the value of culture as a factor of resistance to foreign domination.

History teaches us that, in certain circumstances, it is very easy for the foreigner to impose his domination on a people. But it also teaches us that, whatever may be the material aspects of this domination, it can be maintained only by the permanent, organized repression of the cultural life of the people concerned. Implantation of foreign domination can be assured definitively only by physical liquidation of a significant part of the dominated population.

In fact, to take up arms to dominate a people is, above all, to take up arms to destroy, or at least to neutralize, to paralyze, its cultural life. For, with a strong indigenous cultural life, foreign domination cannot be sure of its perpetuation. At any moment, depending on internal and external factors determining the evolution of the society in question, cultural resistance (indestructible) may take on new forms (political, economic, armed) in order fully to contest foreign domination.

The ideal for foreign domination, whether imperialist or not, would be to choose:

  • either to liquidate practically all the population of the dominated country, thereby eliminating the possibilities for cultural resistance;

  • or to succeed in imposing itself without damage to the culture of the dominated people--that is, to harmonize economic and political domination of these people with their cultural personality.

The first hypothesis implies genocide of the indigenous population and creates a void which empties foreign domination of its content and its object: the dominated people. The second hypothesis has not, until now, been confirmed by history. The broad experience of mankind allows us to postulate that it has no practical viability: it is not possible to harmonize the economic and political domination of a people, whatever may be the degree of their social development, with the preservation of their cultural personality.

In order to escape this choice--which may be called the dilemma of cultural resistance--imperialist colonial domination has tried to create theories which, in fact, are only gross formulations of racism, and which, in practice, are translated into a permanent state of siege of the indigenous populations on the basis of racist dictatorship (or democracy).

This, for example, is the case with the so-called theory of progressive assimilation of native populations, which turns out to be only a more or less violent attempt to deny the culture of the people in question. The utter failure of this "theory," implemented in practice by several colonial powers, including Portugal, is the most obvious proof of its lack of viability, if not of its inhuman character. It attains the highest degree of absurdity in the Portuguese case, where Salazar affirmed that Africa does not exist.

This is also the case with the so-called theory of apartheid, created, applied and developed on the basis of the economic and political domination of the people of Southern Africa by a racist minority, with all the outrageous crimes against humanity which that involves. The practice of apartheid takes the form of unrestrained exploitation of the labor force of the African masses, incarcerated and repressed in the largest concentration camp mankind has ever known.

These practical examples give a measure of the drama of foreign imperialist domination as it confronts the cultural reality of the dominated people. They also suggest the strong, dependent and reciprocal relationships existing between the cultural situation and the economic (and political) situation in the behavior of human societies. In fact, culture is always in the life of a society (open or closed), the more or less conscious result of the economic and political activities of that society, the more or less dynamic expression of the kinds of relationships which prevail in that society, on the one hand between man (considered individually or collectively) and nature, and, on the other hand, among individuals, groups of individuals, social strata or classes.

The value of culture as an element of resistance to foreign domination   lies in the fact that culture is the vigorous manifestation on the ideological or idealist plane of the physical and historical reality of the society that is dominated or to be dominated. Culture is simultaneously the fruit of a people’s history and a determinant of history, by the positive or negative influence which it exerts on the evolution of relationships between man and his environment, among men or groups of men within a society, as well as among different societies. Ignorance of this fact may explain the failure of several attempts at foreign domination--as well as the failure of some international liberation movements.

Let us examine the nature of national liberation. We shall consider this historical phenomenon in its contemporary context, that is, national liberation in opposition to imperialist domination. The latter is, as we know, distinct both in form and in content from preceding types of foreign domination (tribal, military-aristocratic, feudal, and capitalist domination in time free competition era).

The principal characteristic, common to every kind of imperialist  domination, is the negation of the historical process of the dominated people by means of violently usurping the free operation of the process of development of the productive forces. Now, in any given society, the level of development of the productive forces and the system for social utilization of these forces (the ownership system) determine the mode of production. In our opinion, the mode of production whose contradictions are manifested with more or less intensity through the class struggle, is the principal factor in the history of any human group, the level of the productive forces being the true and permanent driving power of history.

For every society, for every group of people, considered as an evolving entity, the level of the productive forces indicates the stage of development of the society and of each of its components in relation to nature, its capacity to act or to react consciously in relation to nature. It indicates and conditions the type of material relationships (expressed objectively or subjectively) which exists among the various elements or groups constituting the society in question. Relationships and types of relationships between man and nature, between man and his environment. Relationships and type of relationships among the individual or collective components of a society. To speak of these is to speak of history, but it is also to speak of culture.

Whatever may be the ideological or idealistic characteristics of cultural expression, culture is an essential element of the history of a people. Culture is, perhaps, the product of this history just as the flower is the product of a plant. Like history, or because it is history, culture has as its material base the level of the productive forces and the mode of production. Culture plunges its roots into the physical reality of the environmental humus in which it develops, and it reflects the organic nature of the society, which may be more or less influenced by external factors. History allows us to know the nature and extent of the imbalance  and conflicts (economic, political and social) which characterize the evolution of a society; culture allows us to know the dynamic syntheses which have been developed and established by social conscience to resolve these conflicts at each stage of its evolution, in the search for survival and progress.

Just as happens with the flower in a plant, in culture there lies the capacity (or the responsibility) for forming and fertilizing the seedling which will assure the continuity of history, at the same time assuring the prospects for evolution and progress of the society in question. Thus it is understood that imperialist domination by denying the historical development of the dominated people, necessarily also denies their cultural development. It is also understood why imperialist domination, like all other foreign domination for its own security, requires cultural oppression and the attempt at direct or indirect liquidation of the essential elements of the culture of the dominated people.

The study of the history of national liberation struggles shows that generally these struggles are preceded by an increase in expression of culture, consolidated progressively into a successful or unsuccessful attempt to affirm the cultural personality of the dominated people, as a means of negating the oppressor culture. Whatever may be the conditions of a people's political and social factors in practicing this domination, it is generally within the culture that we find the seed of opposition, which leads to the structuring and development of the liberation movement.

In our opinion, the foundation for national liberation rests in the inalienable right of every people to have their own history whatever formulations may be adopted at the level of international law. The objective of national liberation, is therefore, to reclaim the right, usurped by imperialist domination, namely: the liberation of the process of development of national productive forces. Therefore, national liberation takes place when, and only when, national productive forces are completely free of all kinds of foreign domination. The liberation of productive forces and consequently the ability to determine the mode of production most appropriate to the evolution of the liberated people, necessarily opens up new prospects for the cultural development of the society in question, by returning to that society all its capacity to create progress.

A people who free themselves from foreign domination will be free culturally only if, without complexes and without underestimating the importance of positive accretions from the oppressor and other cultures, they return to the upward paths of their own culture, which is nourished by the living reality of its environment, and which negates both harmful influences and any kind of subjection to foreign culture. Thus, it may be seen that if imperialist domination has the vital need to practice culturaloppression, national liberation is necessarily an act of culture.

On the basis of what has just been said, we may consider the national liberation movement as the organized political expression of the culture of the people who are undertaking the struggle. For this reason, those who lead the movement must have a clear idea of the value of the culture in the framework of the struggle and must have  a thorough knowledge of the people's culture, whatever may be their level of economic development.

In our time it is common to affirm that all peoples have a culture. The time is past when, in an effort to perpetuate the domination of a people, culture was considered an attribute of privileged peoples or nations, and when, out of either ignorance or malice, culture was confused with technical power, if not with skin color or the shape of one's eyes. The liberation movement, as representative and defender of the culture of the people, must be conscious of the fact that, whatever may be the material conditions of the society it represents, the society is the bearer and creator of culture. The liberation movement must furthermore embody the mass character, the popular character of the culture--which is not and never could be the privilege of one or of some sectors of the society.

In the thorough analysis of social structure which every liberation movement should be capable of making in relation to the imperative of the struggle, the cultural characteristics of each group in society have a place of prime importance. For, while the culture has a mass character, it is not uniform, it is not equally developed in all sectors of society. The attitude of each social group toward the liberation struggle is dictated by its social group toward the liberation struggle is dictated by its economic interests, but is also influenced profoundly by its culture. It may even be admitted that these differences in cultural level explain differences in behavior toward the liberation movement on the part of individuals who belong to the same socio-economic group. It is at the point that culture reaches its full significance for each individual: understanding and integration in to his environment, identification with fundamental problems and aspirations of the society, acceptance of the possibility of change in the direction of progress.

In the specific conditions of our country--and we would say, of Africa--the horizontal and vertical distribution of levels of culture is somewhat complex. In fact, from villages to towns, from one ethnic group to another, from one age group to another, from the peasant to the workman or to the indigenous intellectual who is more or less assimilated, and, as we have said, even from individual to individual within the same social group, the quantitative and qualitative level of culture varies significantly. It is of prime importance for the liberation movement to take these facts into consideration.

In societies with a horizontal social structure, such as the Balante, for example, the distribution of cultural levels is more or less uniform, variations being linked uniquely to characteristics of individuals or of age groups. On the other hand, in societies with a vertical structure, such as the Fula, there are important variations from the top to the bottom of the social pyramid. These differences in social structure illustrate once more the close relationship between culture and economy, and also explain differences in the general or sectoral behavior of these two ethnic groups in relation to the liberation movement.

It is true that the multiplicity of social and ethnic groups complicates the effort to determine the role of culture in the liberation movement. But it is vital not to lose sight of the decisive importance of the liberation struggle, even when class structure is to appear to be in embryonic stages of development.

The experience of colonial domination shows that, in the effort to perpetuate exploitation, the colonizers not only creates a system to repress the cultural life of the colonized people; he also provokes and develops the cultural alienation of a part of the population, either by so-called assimilation of indigenous people, or by creating a social gap between the indigenous elites and the popular masses. As a result of this process of dividing or of deepening the divisions in the society, it happens that a considerable part of the population, notably the urban or peasant petite bourgeoisie, assimilates the colonizer's mentality, considers itself culturally superior to its own people and ignores or looks down upon their cultural values. This situation, characteristic of the majority of colonized intellectuals, is consolidated by increases in the social privileges of the assimilated or alienated group with direct implications for the behavior of individuals in this group in relation to the liberation movement. A reconversion of minds--of mental set--is thus indispensable to the true integration of people into the liberation movement. Such reonversion--re-Africanization, in our case--may take place before the struggle, but it is completed only during the course of the struggle, through daily contact with the popular masses in the communion of sacrifice required by the struggle.

However, we must take into account the fact that, faced with the prospect of political independence, the ambition and opportunism from which the liberation movement generally suffers may bring into the struggle unconverted individuals. The latter, on the basis of their level of schooling, their scientific or technical knowledge, but without losing any of their social class biases, may attain the highest positions in the liberation movement. Vigilance is thus indispensable on the cultural as well as the political plane. For, in the liberation movement as elsewhere, all that glitters is not necessarily gold: political leaders--even the most famous--may be culturally alienated people. But the social class characteristics of the culture are even more discernible in the behavior of privileged groups in rural areas, especially in the case of ethnic groups with a vertical social structure, where, nevertheless, assimilation or cultural alienation influences are non-existent or practically non-existent. This is the case, for example, with the Fula ruling class. Under colonial domination, the political authority of this class (traditional chiefs, noble families, religious leaders) is purely nominal, and the popular masses know that true authority lies with an is acted upon by colonial administrators. However, the ruling class preserves in essence its basic cultural authority over the masses and this has very important political implications.

Recognizing this reality, the colonizer who represses or inhibits significant cultural activity on the part of the masses at the base of the social pyramid, strengthens and protects the prestige and the cultural influence of the ruling class at the summit. The colonizer installs chiefs who support him and who are to some degree accepted by the masses; he gives these chiefs material privileges such as education for their eldest children, creates chiefdoms where they did not exist before, develops cordial relations with religious leaders, builds mosques, organizes journeys to Mecca, etc. And above all, by means of the repressive organs of colonial administration, he guarantees economic and social privileges to the ruling class in their relations with the masses. All this does not make it impossible that, among these ruling classes, there may be individuals or groups of individuals who join the liberation movement, although less frequently than in the case of the assimilated "petite bourgeoisie." Several traditional and religious leaders join the struggle at the very beginning or during its development, making an enthusiastic contribution to the cause of liberation.

But here again vigilance is indispensable: preserving deep down the cultural prejudices of their class, individuals in this category generally see in the liberation movement the only valid means, using the sacrifices of the masses, to eliminate colonial oppression of their own class and to re-establish in this way their complete political and cultural domination of the people.

In the general framework of contesting colonial imperialist domination and in the actual situation to which we refer, among the oppressor's most loyal allies are found some high officials and intellectuals of the liberal professions, assimilated people, and also a significant number of representatives of the ruling class from rural areas. This fact gives some measure of the influence (positive or negative) of culture and cultural prejudices in the problem of political choice when one is confronted with the liberation movement. It also illustrates the limits of this influence and the supremacy of the class factor in the behavior of the different social groups. The high official or the assimilated intellectual, characterized by total cultural alienation, identifies himself by political choice with the traditional or religious leader who has experienced no significant foreign cultural influences.

For these two categories of people place above all principles our demands of a cultural nature--and against the aspirations of the people--their own economic and social privileges, their own class interests. That is a truth which the liberation movement cannot afford to ignore without risking betrayal of the economic, political, social and cultural objectives of the struggle.

Without minimizing the positive contribution which privileged classes may bring to the struggle, the liberation movement must, on the cultural level just as on the political level, base its action in popular culture, whatever may be the diversity of levels of cultures in the country. The cultural combat against colonial domination--the first phase of the liberation movement--can be planned efficiently only on the basis of the culture of the rural and urban working masses, including the nationalist (revolutionary) "petite bourgeoisie" who have been re-Africanized  or who are ready for cultural reconversion. Whatever may be the complexity of this basic cultural panorama, the liberation movement must be capable of distinguishing within it the essential from the secondary, the positive from the negative, the progressive from the reactionary in order to characterize the master line which defines progressively a national culture.

In order for culture to play the important role which falls to it in the framework of the liberation movement, the movement must be able to preserve the positive cultural values of every well defined social group, of every category, and to achieve the confluence of these values in the service of the struggle, giving it a new dimension--the national dimension. Confronted with such a necessity, the liberation struggle is, above all, a struggle both for the preservation and survival of the cultural values of the people and for the harmonization and development of these values within a national framework.’

ENDNOTES:
1. Eduardo Mondlane, was the first President of the Mozambique Liberation Front (FRELIMO). He was assassinated by Portuguese agents on Feb. 3, 1960.

We are African peoples. We have our own hearts, our own heads, our own history. It is this history which the colonialists have taken from us. Today, in taking up arms to liberate ourselves, we want to return to our history, on our own feet, by our own means and through our own sacrifices. African Party for the Independence of Guidean and Cabo Verde (PAIGC) - Chicago Committee for the Liberation of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea

Linking the struggles: Amilcar Cabral and his impact and legacy in the black liberation movement

Kali Akuno, Jan 22, 2014

“Of all the African political leaders none have made more profound theoretical and strategic contributions to the advancement of the black liberation movement than Amilcar Cabral. As long as capitalism, colonialism, white supremacy, patriarchy, imperialism, and neo-colonialism exist as forces that exploit and oppress African (and all) people, Cabral’s insights and analysis will always have relevance

‘Keep always in mind that the people are not fighting for ideas, for the things in anyone’s head. They are fighting…..for material benefits, to live better and in peace, to see their lives go forward, to guarantee the future of their children. National Liberation, War on Colonialism, building of peace and progress – independence – all that will remain meaningless for the people unless it brings a real improvement in the conditions of life.” Amilcar Cabral, from “Destroy the economy of the enemy and build our own economy’, 1965.[1]

Since the close of the Fifth Pan-African Congress in Manchester, England and the end of the second great inter-imperialist war (better known as World War II) in 1945, the radical-wing of the Black Liberation Movement in the United States (US) has been inspired by and drawn many lessons from its reciprocal interactions with the national and social liberation movements of Africa (primarily from 1945 through 1994) and the Diaspora (particularly those of the Caribbean).

The Black Liberation Movement or BLM is the historic movement of people of African descent within the territories now occupied and claimed by the settler-colonial government of the United States for self-determination and social liberation in three primary (and often mutually inclusive) forms[2]:

• Repatriation back to Africa

• The creation of a sovereign, independent national-state for Black or New Afrikan people in the southeastern portion of what is presently the United States

• The socialist and/or anti-capitalist transformation of the United States by an anti-racist, anti-imperialist multi-national alliance

The radical elements of the BLM - composed primarily of revolutionary nationalists, socialists, communists, and anarchists – have over the years learned and incorporated many of the critical aspects of the theories and strategies of radical social transformation developed by many of the twentieth century intellectual and political towers of the African world revolution, such as Kwame Nkrumah, George Padmore, Amy Ashwood Garvey, Aime Cesaire, Constance Cummings-John, Sekou Toure, Leopold Senghor, Amy Jacques Garvey, CLR James, Julius Nyerere, Walter Rodney, Patrice Lumumba, Govan Mbeki, Frantz Fanon, Robert Sobukwe, Winnie Mandela, Abdias do Nascimento, Mariam Makeba, Steven Biko, Maurice Bishop, and Thomas Sankara[3]. Of all of these leaders and theoreticians from Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America however, none have made more profound theoretical and strategic contributions to the advancement of the BLM than Amilcar Cabral.

All of the above named figures made valuable contributions to the BLM, particularly in the realm of providing ideological clarity on various questions, such as the relevancy of Marxism, Leninism, and Maoism to the struggles of African peoples worldwide, the exploratory power of dialectical and historical materialism, and the necessity of fighting for a United States of Africa and a unified Pan-African world guided by scientific socialism.

What separates Cabral from the others however, is that his work provided detailed theoretical and strategic clarity on a number of fundamental questions that were critical to understanding the transition from “American colonialism” to neo-colonialism following the defeat of legalized white supremacy in the early 1960’s. Some of Cabral’s particular contributions centered on the following questions[4]:

• The limitations of national liberation within the capitalist world-system

• The internal material basis for neo-colonialism within colonized and oppressed nations and the critical dangers associated with this form of capitalist penetration and imperialist rule

• The ideological and theoretical weaknesses and shortcomings of the peoples movements for liberation and the detriments they pose to the success of the movements

• The centrality of culture to anti-imperialist resistance and the need to create a new culture through struggle to restore oppressed people into full agents of their own history and identity

• The imperative of class struggle within the oppressed nation and the necessity of class “suicide” amongst critical segments of the nation (or nation-class as Cabral himself stated), but most particularly the petit bourgeoisie who often constitute the leadership of the movements given their strategic location within the capitalist mode of production and its national/international hierarchies

All of these questions and issues have haunted the BLM since the 1970s, and continue to pose some of the most quintessential challenges confronting the movement. Although the historic development of Guinea-Bissau is profoundly different than that of the Black or New Afrikan nation contained within the United States, there are some fundamental dynamics regarding how colonized and oppressed peoples are subjected and exploited within the capitalist world-system established through European colonialism and imperialism, that can be generalized to address the varied examples of the colonial experience. Cabral’s works not only discerned generalities of the colonial phenomenon that were applicable to the New Afrikan context, they also provided critical specificities that can and are still being used by various forces of the BLM to sustain and advance the struggle for liberation.

Cabral’s theoretical insightful works did not spring from thin air. Cabral was the product of a rather unique nexus of historical conjunctures that enabled him to directly experience and engage the various dynamics he wrote about and reflected upon. Cabral developed his theories on the motive forces of history, colonialism, imperialism, questions of national liberation, neo-colonialism, class and class struggle within national liberation movements, the transition to socialism, and the centrality of culture and identity to resistance and social transformation from his unique social experiences, central location in the struggle against Portuguese colonialism, and his critical study of the numerous challenges and failures of the national liberation movements on the African continent in the 1950s and 60s.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LEADER

Cabral was born in Guinea-Bissau in 1924 and was reared primarily in Cape Verde, a small island chain off the Northwest Coast of the African continent formerly ruled by Portugal. He attended university in Portugal and studied to be an agronomist. In the employment of the Portuguese colonial administration in the 1950s, Cabral was able to gain extensive knowledge of the cultures and social conditions of the various peoples of Guinea-Bissau and (to a lesser degree) Angola performing agricultural census studies. In September 1956, along with five other comrades from Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde, Cabral established the Partido Africano da Independecia da Guinea e Cabo Verde or PAIGC (which translated into English means the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde), which lead Guinea-Bissau and the Cape Verde islands to political independence in the 1970s. While living in Angola, also in 1956, Cabral collaborated with Mario de Andrade and Antonio Agostinho Neto to form the Movimento Popular Libertacao de Angola or MPLA (in English this translates into the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola), which played a leading role in the liberation of Angola.

All-African People’s Conference in Accra, Ghana 1958

In 1957, as part of a conference in solidarity with the Algerian anti-colonial movement in Paris, Cabral again partnered with Mario de Andrade and Antonio Agostinho Neto to form the Movimento Anti-Colonista or MAC (which translated into English means Anti-Colonialist Movement) to discuss strategies to overthrow Portuguese colonial rule. In 1958, Cabral attended the All-African People’s Conference in Accra, Ghana organized by Kwame Nkrumah to coordinate support for the liberation movements from the existing independent nation-states and to unite the liberation movements on a continent wide basis [5]. In 1960, while in Tunisia, Cabral established the Frente Revolucionaria Africana para a Independencia Nacional das colonias Portuguesas or FRAIN (which translated into English translates into the Revolutionary Front for the National Independence of the Portuguese Colonies). FRAIN was established to coordinate the strategies and initiatives of the PAIGC and MPLA against Portuguese colonialism. In 1961, while in Casablanca, Morocco, Cabral helped to establish the Conferencia das Organizacoes Nacionalistas das Colonias Portuguesas or CONCP (which in English translates into Conference of Nationalist Organizations of the Portuguese Colonies) to expand upon and replace FRAIN to include FRELIMO from Mozambique and the MLSTP from Sao Tome and Principe to coordinate resistance to Portuguese colonialism on the African continent. In January 1963, Cabral and the PAIGC initiated the armed phase of the resistance movement in Guinea-Bissau, which lead to its formal political independence from Portugal in September 1974[6].

As these initiatives illustrate, Cabral was a principle architect in the overthrow of Portuguese colonialism and the weakening of imperialist domination of Southern Africa via the white settler colonial regime in South Africa. As the spokesperson for the PAIGC, MPLA, and CONCP, Cabral was able to travel extensively throughout the African continent (and the world). Cabral used the knowledge gained on his travels to judiciously assess the many failures of the first wave of national liberation movements and the national-state governments produced by many of these movements. These combined experiences shaped his worldview, theory, and most importantly, his practice as a revolutionary nationalist, socialist, and internationalist. It was Cabral’s particular ability to systematically and scientifically summarizes these experiences in a coherent and concrete fashion that made his work applicable to the ongoing struggle for liberation of people of African descent in the United States.

UNITING WITH OUR “COMRADE”

“I am bringing to you - our African brothers and sisters of the United States - the fraternal salutations of our people in assuring you we are very conscious that all in this life concerning you also concerns us. If we do not always pronounce words that clearly show this, it doesn’t mean that we are not conscious of it. It is a reality and considering that the world is being made smaller each day all people are becoming conscious of this fact.

Naturally if you ask me between brothers and comrades what I prefer then if we are brothers it is not our fault or our responsibility. But if we are comrades, it is a political engagement. Naturally, we like our brothers but in our conception it is better to be a brother and a comrade. We like our brothers very much, but we think that if we are brothers we have to realize the responsibility of this fact and take clear positions about our problems in order to see if beyond this condition of brothers and sisters, we are also comrades. This is very important for us.

We try to understand your situation in this country. You can be sure that we realize the difficulties you face, the problems you have and your feelings, your revolts, and also your hopes. We think that our fighting for Africa against colonialism and imperialism is a proof of understanding of your problem and also a contribution for the solution of your problems in the continent. Naturally the inverse is also true. All the achievements towards the solution of your problems here are real contributions to our own struggle. And we are very encouraged in our struggle by the fact that each day more of the African people born in America became conscious of their responsibilities to the struggle in Africa.

Does that mean you have to all leave here and go fight in Africa? We do not believe so. That is not being realistic in our opinion. History is a very strong chain. We have to accept the limits of history but not the limits imposed by the societies where we are living. There is a difference. We think that all you can do here to develop your own conditions in the sense of progress, in the sense of history and in the sense of our total realization of your aspirations as human beings is a contribution for us. It is also a contribution for you to never forget that you are Africans.” Amilcar Cabral, from “Connecting the Struggles: An Informal Talk with Black Americans”, October 20, 1972, New York City.[7]

The BLM came to know Amilcar Cabral and his work through a dynamic set of interlocking organizations and networks linking activists based in the United States with the national liberation movements in Africa and Asia (the Vietnamese in particular), and revolutionary and progressive governments and social movements in Latin America (particularly Cuba), Africa (primarily Ghana, Tanzania, Guinea, and Algeria), Asia (particularly China) and the Eastern Bloc. These links consisted of survivors from the anti-communist repression and purges of the late 1940s and 50s, from groups like the Council on African Affairs (CAA) headed by the likes Alphaeus Hunton, Paul Robeson, and W.E.B. DuBois, which was formally active from the late 1930s to the mid-1950s[8]; to liberal organizations like the American Committee on Africa (ACOA), started in the early 1950s[9]; and a host of religious and academic institutions, Black and white, that had been active, particularly around missionary activities in Africa and supporting students from Africa to attend academic institutions in Europe and the United States since the 19th century. Through these links, activists engaged in progressive social movements were able to encounter their international counterparts via international conferences, student exchanges, solidarity missions, and campaigns.

Another critical link that facilitated the introduction and ongoing communication between revolutionaries from the continent with revolutionaries from the BLM in the United States were Black ex-patriots that lived in Europe (particularly London and Paris) or on the African continent, particularly in Ghana after it gained its independence in 1957 and was able to host a number of Black radical activists, intellectuals, and artists like George Padmore, W.E.B Dubois, and Shirley Graham-Dubois[10]. Conversely, African students and political exiles based in the United States and Europe played this critical role in reverse.

The first major student and youth oriented organization to introduce the BLM to the likes of African revolutionaries like Amilcar Cabral, Eduardo Mondlane, and others was the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee or SNCC. Over the course of its 9-year existence from 1960 to 1969, SNCC took several delegations to various parts of Africa to exchange lessons in the struggle and engage in international campaigns. SNCC’s first major trip to the continent was in the fall of 1964, when a delegation of 11 members visited the Republic of Guinea, led by President Ahmed Sekou Toure [11]. The SNCC delegation was exposed to an extensive amount of literature about the national liberation movements on the continent while in Guinea, some of it invariably from Cabral and the PAIGC, which was operating out of Guinea at that time [12].

The next major SNCC trip to the continent was in the fall of 1965, when several members visited Ghana and attended the Organization of African Unity (OAU) conference being held in the capital Accra [13]. Cabral and several members of the PAIGC were in attendance at the OAU conference. However, it is unclear to what extent they were able to meet and exchange at the conference. But, they were definitely exposed to the PAIGC’s politics at the conference via presentations made by their representatives.

The first critical introduction of Cabral and his work to the BLM was provided by Immanuel Wallerstein, a renowned academic on African affairs, via an interview he conducted and published in 1965 entitled “Our Solidarities”[14]. This interview was one of the first major pieces on Cabral and the struggle of the PAIGC against Portuguese colonialism to appear in English. It received modest distribution via the left wing press in the United States, but was read and disseminated by Black activists in New York City, Detroit, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Oakland and Los Angeles that were active in the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and the Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM). Although its impact was limited at the time, it did serve notice to many activists who played critical roles in the development of the BLM over the course of the next twenty years, that there was a major struggle occurring in Guinea-Bissau and other Portuguese speaking colonies on the African continent.

The BLM’s first major encounter with Cabral and his work occurred in January 1966 in Havana, Cuba on occasion of the Tri-continental Conference of Solidarity of the Peoples of Africa, Asia and Latin America [15]. Cuba, like Ghana, Guinea, and Tanzania on the African continent in the 1960s, played a critical role as a revolutionary socialist state engaged in active struggle against US and European imperialism. In this role, Cuba gave shelter, support, and resources to revolutionary organizations throughout Latin America and the world. In this same vein, Cuba was also home to many BLM exiles. The most prominent BLM exile in Cuba during the 1960s was Robert F. Williams. Robert Williams was a militant from North Carolina who fled into exile to avoid false imprisonment for an act of self-defense against white terror in 1961[16]. Williams was one of the most outspoken advocates for armed self-defense and the formation of Negro Gun Clubs in the late 1950s and early 1960s. His organizing, self-defense network, and militant advocacy had a major impact on the thinking of Malcolm X, the Louisiana and Mississippi based Deacons for Self-Defense and Justice, the Revolutionary Action Movement, and the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.

In support of Williams and the BLM in general, the Cuban government provided him with contacts to the various revolutionary organizations that visited or had representatives stationed on the island and with access to printing and broadcast facilities to propagate his message back to forces within the United States[17]. Robert Williams, other BLM exiles, and several members of RAM attended the 1966 Tri-Continental Conference, and like most in attendance, were highly impressed with Amilcar Cabral and his address to the conference. This address, known as the “Weapon of Theory”, was a watershed moment in advance of revolutionary theory, particularly that branch of theory dealing with national liberation and neo-colonialism, called Tri-Continentalism by many following the conference.

Through the “Crusader” journal and his extensive personal correspondence with BLM partisans, Williams, along with the RAM cadre in attendance, introduced Cabral, his works, and the struggles of revolutionaries in Guinea-Bissau, Angola, and Mozambique to their first major audience within the movement. Following the Tri-Continental Conference BLM revolutionaries began critically studying Cabral and the national liberation movements against Portuguese colonialism in the pursuit of how they might help advance the struggle for Black national liberation within the territories claimed by the United States.

From 1966 through the 1970s, more and more BLM partisans visited Africa and engaged in regular and sustained contact with African revolutionaries, particularly those individuals and movements that were operating out of the progressive states of Algeria, Egypt, Guinea and Tanzania (Ghana was removed from this equation in 1966 following a military coup that overthrew the Nkrumah government) such as the PAIGC, MPLA, FRELIMO, the African National Congress (ANC), the South African Communist Party (SACP), and Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC). These exchanges facilitated the deeper exposure of the BLM to the ideas and movements of African revolutionary leaders leading national liberation movements like Amilcar Cabral, or states engaged in socialist experiments like Sekou Toure in Guinea or Julius Nyerere in Tanzania.

In 1969, Basil Davidson, a progressive British Africanist scholar, published one of the most historically important works on Cabral, the PAIGC, and the national liberation movement in Guinea-Bissau entitled “The Liberation of Guinea: Aspects of an African Revolution[18]. This work was read extensively by partisans of the BLM, particularly amongst college students in the late 1960’s and early 70’s in organizations like the Pan-African Union (PAU) in California and the Student Organization for Black Unity (SOBU) in North Carolina[19]. Another critical work also published in 1969 was “Revolution in Guinea: An African People’s Struggle”, by a British collective called Stage 1. This was one of the first English publications of a collection of Cabral’s speeches and writings, and received a decent distribution in the United States amongst BLM forces. It was from this publication that many in the BLM were introduced to the saying most commonly associated with Cabral, “Tell No Lies. Claim No Easy Victories”[20].

By 1969 there were several radical Black and multi-national solidarity committee’s operating throughout the United States that were providing material and political support to the national liberation movements against Portuguese colonialism and white settler colonialism in Southern Africa (Azania, Zimbabwe and Botswana in particular)[21]. The solidarity committee’s played a critical role in spreading Cabral’s ideas throughout the BLM. These networks also played a critical role in providing forums for African revolutionaries in the United States to make their case and present their ideas directly. Cabral and the PAIGC directly benefitted from this organizing on two occasions. Cabral first visited the United States in 1970, where he gave several lectures throughout the state of New York and held several dialogues and interviews in New York City related to the promotion of the PAIGC’s and allied CONCP organizations advocacy for self-determination and national independence at the United Nations. [22]

Watch the video at the 28:30 mark to see BLM leaders meeting with African revolutionary leaders in Algeria, including the PAIGC leader at the 33:25 mark.

In addition to Cabral’s first visit to the United States, another critical event occurred in 1970 that had a major impact on the spread of his ideas in the BLM. In February of that year, members from the Afrikan People’s Party (APP) and the House of Umoja (HOU) based in Los Angeles collaborated with Guyanese revolutionary Eusi Kwayana and the African Society for Cultural Relations with Independent Africa (ASCRIA), along with Forum from St. Vincent, the Afro-Caribbean Movement from Antigua, and the PAC from Azania to develop the Pan-Afrikan Secretariat (PAS) in Georgetown, Guyana[23]. Guyana, then lead by Prime Minister Forbes Burnham, was operating as a progressive base for revolutionary international coordination throughout the Caribbean, South America, and Africa, and was home to several BLM exiles and ex-patriots from the late 1960s to the 1990s. The PAS was the first organization to call for the international launching of African Liberation Day (ALD), originally called World Wide African Solidarity Day (WWASD), and held the first ALD observances in 1970 and 1971 respectively in Guyana, Canada, Europe and several cities in the United States[24]. WWWASD/ALD was specifically intended to promote the African World Revolution, giving particular focus to the struggles against Portuguese colonialism in Africa, settler-colonialism in Southern Africa, neo-colonialism in Africa and the Caribbean, and the New Afrikan Independence Movement within the confines of the United States.

A connected development occurred on the East Coast through the auspices of SOBU and Malcolm X Liberation University (MXLU). In the fall of 1971 Owusu Sadaukai, one of the founders of SOBU and MXLU, toured the liberated territories of Guinea-Bissau, Angola, and Mozambique. In Mozambique, Sadaukai was implored by Samora Machel, the leader of FRELIMO, to build an international campaign in support of the national liberation movements of Mozambique, Angola, and Guinea-Bissau. Upon his return, Sadaukai released a six-part report on his trip in the movement publication the “African World”[25]. This series was widely distributed in the movement and played a pivotal role in helping to launch and guide the formation of the African Liberation Day Coordinating Committee (ALDCC). The ALDCC, a broad coalition of BLM forces representing different tendencies and trends within the movement, called for and organized the groundbreaking May 27, 1972 ALD demonstration that mobilized more than 100,000 participants throughout the United States, including Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Los Angeles, and New Orleans. Following the success of ALD, the ALDCC expanded and transformed into a more permanent structure, the African Liberation Support Committee (ALSC), which was the fulcrum of support for the national liberation movements in African through the mid-1970’s[26]. ALD and the ALSC were very intentional in their promotion of the works of Amilcar Cabral and other national liberation leaders of the era, such as Eduardo Mondlane and Samora Machel of FRELIMO and Robert Sobukwe of the Pan-Afrikanist Congress (PAC).

At the request of the MPLA, in February 1976 the Cuban government hosted a seminar which brought together American sympathetic to their struggle in Angola. Twenty-six Americans, known as the Angola 26 Delegation, attended the seminar representing 19 organizations and five African American publications. Shown here (from left to right) is an unidentified man; Prexy Nesbitt of the Chicago Committee for the Liberation of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea-Bissau and the U.S. Out of Angola Committee; Brewster Rhoads from the Coalition for a New Foreign and Military Policy in Washington, D.C.; and an unidentified man.

African Liberation Day marchers leave Meridian Hill Park, also known as Malcolm X Park, and head toward Embassy Row, May 27, 1972. (Star Collection/D.C. Public Library)

Just as critical as the promotion Cabral and the views of other CONCP leaders was the film “A Luta Continua”, which was produced by Robert Van Lierop and disseminated by the Africa Information Service (AIS) in 1972[27]. AIS was founded by BLM activists Prexy Nesbitt and Van Lierop in 1971 specifically to distribute educational materials about the national liberation struggles against Portuguese colonialism lead by CONCP. The film was shot in 1971 in Mozambique and Tanzania, and focused on the armed struggle being waged by FRELIMO. The film spread like wildfire from 1972 through the mid-1970s, and perhaps more than anything made the ideas of Cabral and Machel real and concrete to millions of Black folks in the United States. AIS subsequently published “Return to the Source: Selected Speeches by Amilcar Cabral”, the first major collection of Cabral’s writings and speeches published in the United States, in 1973.

The AIS was also instrumental in coordinating Cabral’s final visit the United States in 1972. During this visit Cabral asked the Africa Information Service to set up a meeting with various leading forces in the BLM.[28" The meeting was held in New York City on October 20 and involved participants from over 30 BLM organizations. The speech was entitled “Connecting the Struggles: An Informal talk with Black Americans”, and had a profound and lasting impact on the BLM in all its diversity, as it clearly affirmed the interconnectedness between the African liberation struggles on the continent with those in the United States, the Caribbean, and beyond.

Agents of the Portuguese colonialists assassinated Amilcar Cabral shortly after his last trip to the United States on January 20, 1973[29]. The effectiveness of Cabral’s work and leadership in helping to guide a peoples’ revolutionary movement proved the notion of “cut off the head and body will whither” theory to be false in this case. Following his assassination, the PAIGC escalated the war against the Portuguese and not only lead Guinea-Bissau to political independence in 1974, but resulted in the overthrow of the Fascist Salazar-Cateano regime in April 1974, that ruled Portugal since 1932, by a group of Portuguese military officers called the Movimento das Armed Forcas or MAF (which translated into English means Armed Forces Movement) admittedly influenced by the theories and moral example of Amilcar Cabral[30].

Half a world away, Cabral’s works had also become common parlance within the BLM by the time of his death. His works greatly aided the political and theoretical development of the BLM in the 1970s, which unfortunately played itself out in many fractious debates, broken alliances, and organizational splits during the middle of the decade (many greatly aided by the provocations of the Federal Bureau of Investigation or FBI). Despite the fragmentation of the BLM during this period, Cabral’s work has had a lasting influence on the movement, as it is still being studied and referenced today in the formulation of strategy and the programmatic orientation of revolutionary nationalist and Pan-Afrikanist organizations like the All African People’s Revolutionary Party (AAPRP), the African People’s Socialist Party (APSP), the Organization of Black Struggle (OBS), the Pan-African People’s Organization (PAPO), the Provisional Government of the Republic of New Afrika (PG –RNA), the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement (MXGM), and the New Afrikan People’s Organization (NAPO).

Chicago Committee for the Liberation of Angola, Mozambique and Guinea

A LUTA CONTINUA!

In the 41 years since his untimely death, Amilcar Cabral’s political legacy lives on in the strategies and tactics used by the forces of the BLM to defeat the neo-colonial control of Black communities, the advance of neo-liberal exploitation and social decomposition, to counter the consolidation of the Black faction of the trans-national capitalist class, to stop the genocidal assault against the working class via mass incarceration and economic displacement, and build self-determining institutions and communities to liberate our people.

What the radical forces in the BLM have learned to be undeniably true is that as long as capitalism, colonialism, white supremacy, patriarchy, imperialism, and neo-colonialism exist as forces that exploit and oppress African (and all) people, Cabral’s insights and analysis will always have relevance.

From the Lincoln University Bulletin, 1973

Protest against the assassination on January 20, 1973 of Amilcar Cabral of the liberation movement PAIGC. Some 75 demonstrators gathered in front of the Portuguese government's Casa de Portugal in New York. The demonstration was organized by the American Committee on Africa, the Committee for a Free Mozambique and the Southern Africa Committee. The banner is the photograph was produced by Youth Against War and Fascism. https://africanactivist.msu.edu/record/210-849-32713/

In our opinion, the foundation for national liberation rests in the inalienable right of every people to have their own history, whatever formulations may be adopted at the level of international law. The objective of national liberation, is therefore, to reclaim the right, usurped by imperialist domination, namely: the liberation of the process of development of national productive forces. Therefore, national liberation takes place when, and only when, national productive forces are completely free of all kinds of foreign domination. The liberation of productive forces and consequently the ability to determine the mode of production most appropriate to the evolution of the liberated people, necessarily opens up new prospects for the cultural development of the society in question, by returning to that society all its capacity to create progress.

A people who free themselves from foreign domination will be free culturally only if, without complexes and without underestimating the importance of positive accretions from the oppressor and other cultures, they return to the upward paths of their own culture, which is nourished by the living reality of its environment, and which negates both harmful influences and any kind of subjection to foreign culture. Thus, it may be seen that if imperialist domination has the vital need to practice cultural oppression, national liberation is necessarily an act of culture.” Amilcar Cabral, from “National Liberation and Culture”, February, 20, 1970 Syracuse, New York.[31"

REFERENCES:

BOOKS

Braganca, Aquino de, Wallerstein, Immanuel (1982) The African Liberation Reader, Three Volumes, Zed Press, London, England.

Bush, Roderick D. (2009) The End of White World Supremacy: Black Internationalism and the Problem of the Color Line, Temple University Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Bush, Roderick D. (2000) We Are Not What We Seem: Black Nationalism and Class Struggle in the American Century, New York University Press.

Cabral, Amilcar (1973) Return to the Source: Selected Speeches by Amilcar Cabral, edited by Africa Information Service, Monthly Review Press, New York, New York.

Cabral, Amilcar (1969) Revolution in Guinea: An African People’s Struggle, Stage 1, London, England.

Cabral, Amilcar (1979) Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral, Monthly Review Press, New York, New York.

Chabal, Patrick (2003) Amilcar Cabral: Revolutionary Leadership and People’s War, Africa World Press, Trenton, New Jersey.

Cruse, Harold (2002) The Essential Harld Cruse: A Reader, Palgrave Macmillian.

Davidson, Basil (1969) The Liberation of Guinea: Aspects of an African Revolution, Penguin Books, Middlesex, England.

Ferguson, Herman (2011) An Unlikely Warrior: The Evolution of a Revolutionary, Black Classic Press.

Gaines, Kevin K. (2008) African Americans in Ghana: Black Expatriates and the Civil Rights Era, University of North Carolina Press.

Grady-Willis, Winston A. (2006) Challenging U.S Apartheid: Atlanta and Black Struggles for Human Rights 1960-1977, Duke University Press.

Johnson, Cedric (2007) Revolutionaries to Race Leaders: Black Power and the Making of African American Politics, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Kadalie, Modibo M. (2000) Internationalism, Pan-Africanism, and the Struggle of Social Classes, One Quest Press, Savannah, Georgia.

Lumumba, Chokwe (1991) The Roots of the New Afrikan Independence Movement: Revolution Requires Maturity, New Afrikan Productions, Jackson, Mississippi.

Meriwether, James (2009) Proudly We can be Africans: Black Americans and Africa 1935-1961, University of North Carolina Press.

McCulloch, Jock (1983) In the Twilight of Revolution: The Political Theory of Amilcar Cabral, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, England.

Minter, William, Hovey, Gail, and Cobb, Charles Jr. (eds) (2008) No Easy Victories: African Liberation and American Activists over a Half Century 1950 – 2000, Africa World Press, Trenton, New Jersey.

Sherwood, Marika (2011) Malcolm X Visits Abroad, Tsehai Publishing, Los Angeles, CA.

Tyson, Timothy B. (2001) Radio Free Dixie: Robert F. Williams and the Roots of Black Power, University of North Carolina Press.

Van Deburg, William (1993) New Day in Babylon: The Black Power Movement and American Culture 1965-1975, University of Chicago Press.

Von Eschen, Penny (1997) Race Against Empire: Black Americans and Anti-Colonialism 1937-1957, Cornell University Press, New York, New York.

Young, Robert J. C. (2001) Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, England.

ARTICLES

Davidson, Basil (1984) On Revolutionary Nationalism: The Legacy of Cabral, Latin American Perspectives, Issue 41, Volume II, pp. 15-42.

Magubane, Bernard (1983) Toward a Sociology of National Liberation from Colonialism: Cabral’s Legacy, Contemporary Marxism: Journal of the Institute for the Study of Labor and Economic Crisis, No. 7.

Mullen, Bill V. (2002) Transnational Correspondence: Robert F. Williams, Detroit and the Bandung Era, Works and Days, 39/40, Volume 20.

UNPUBLISHED DOCUMENTS

Tyehimba, Watani Sundai Umoja (2012) ‘NAPO/MXGM Roots and Timeline: A View from the House of Umoja’, Unpublished, Atlanta, Georgia.

[1] Cabral, Amilcar (1979) Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral.

[2] Chokwe Lumumba (1991) The Roots of the New Afrikan Independence Movement: Revolution Requires Political Maturity, page 1-2.

[3] For biographies on many of these individuals see Adi, Hakim, and Sherwood, Marika (2003) Pan-African History: Political figures from Africa and the Diaspora since 1787.

[4] There are three key speeches of Cabral that present the clearest articulations of his theories and strategic reflections and which have had the most profound and enduring impact on the BLM. These speeches are: “the Weapon of Theory” (1966), “National Liberation and Culture” (1970), and “Identity and Dignity in the Context of the National Liberation Struggle” (1972).

[5] Mario de Andrade (1979), “Biographical Notes”, Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral, Monthly Review Press.

[6] Ibid, and Young, Robert J. C. (2001) Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction, pp. 283-292.

[7] Cabral, Amilcar (1973) Return to the Source: Selected Speeches by Amilcar Cabral, pp 75-76.

[8] Von Eschen, Penny (1997) Race Against Empire: Black Americans and Anti-Colonialism 1937-1957.

[9] Minter, William, Hovey, Gail, and Cobb, Charles Jr. (eds) (2008) No Easy Victories: African Liberation and American Activists over a Half Century 1950 – 2000, pp 15-22.

[10] See Ibid, pp. 59-150, Sherwood, Marika, (2011) Malcolm X Visits Abroad, and Gaines, Kevin K. (2008) African Americans in Ghana: Black Expatriates and the Civil Rights Era.

[11] See Ibid, pp 83-112.

[12] Wilkins, Fanon Che (2007), The Making of Black Internationalists: SNCC and Africa before Black Power 1960 – 1965.

[13] Ibid.

[14] See reference in Minter, William, et al, (eds) (2008) No Easy Victories: African Liberation and American Activists over a Half Century 1950 – 2000, and Braganca, Aquino, Wallterstein, Immanuel (1965) The African Liberation Reader Volume 1: The Anatomy of Colonialism.

[15] Young, Robert J. C. (2001) Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction, pp. 204-216.

[16] Mullen, Bill V. (2002) Transnational Correspondence: Robert F. Williams, Detroit and the Bandung Era.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Davidson, Basil (1969) The Liberation of Guinea: Aspects of an African Revolution.

[19] Tyehimba, Watani (2012) A View from the House of Umoja, and Johnson, Cedric (2007) Revolutionaries to Race Leaders: Black Power and the Making of African American Politics, Chapter 4.

[20] Amilcar Cabral, “Revolution in Guinea: An African People’s Struggle”, published by STAGE 1, 1969.

[21] Johnson, Cedric (2007) Revolutionaries to Race Leaders: Black Power and the Making of African American Politics, Chapter 4, and Minter, William, et al, (eds) (2008) No Easy Victories: African Liberation and American Activists over a Half Century 1950 – 2000, chapters 3 and 4.

[22] Minter, William, et al, (eds) (2008) No Easy Victories: African Liberation and American Activists over a Half Century 1950 – 2000, Chapter 3 and Cabral, Amilcar (1979) Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral.

[23] Tyehimba, Watani (2012) A View from the House of Umoja.

[24] IBID, page 20.

[25] Johnson, Cedric (2007) Revolutionaries to Race Leaders: Black Power and the Making of African American Politics, page 138 – 139 and Minter, William, et al, (eds) (2008) No Easy Victories: African Liberation and American Activists over a Half Century 1950 – 2000, Chapters 3 and 4.

[26] Johnson, Cedric (2007) Revolutionaries to Race Leaders: Black Power and the Making of African American Politics, Chapter 4.

[27] Minter, William, et al, (eds) (2008) No Easy Victories: African Liberation and American Activists over a Half Century 1950 – 2000, chapter 4.

[28"> Minter, William, et al, (eds) (2008) No Easy Victories: African Liberation and American Activists over a Half Century 1950 – 2000, page 93, and Cabral, Amilcar (1979) Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral.

[29"> Cabral, Amilcar (1979) Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral.

[30"> See Immanuel Wallerstein biography in Cabral, Amilcar (1979) Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral.

[31"> Cabral, Amilcar (1979) Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings of Amilcar Cabral.

*Kali Akuno

A shorter version of this article was printed in ‘No Easy Victories: The Legacy of Amilcar Cabral,’ edited by Firoze Manji and Bill Fletcher Jr, 2013 by CODESRIA.

* THE VIEWS OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR/S AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORIAL TEAM

* BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

THE POTENTIAL OF A MINORITY REVOLUTION IN THE USA - The Crusader, August 1965

ROBERT F. WILLIAMS, Publisher -In Exile in Cuba

VOL. 7 -No. 1 AUGUST, 1965

USA THE POTENTIAL OF A MINORITY REVOLUTION

excerpt:

“Could a minority revolution succeed in racist America? It most certainly could! Theoretically, how could a minority segment win if it collectively decided to embark on such a serious course? Total unity would be required among the youth and a strong revolutionary nationalist spirit would have to prevail throughout the land. The segregationists, the hypocritical politicians and the terrorists have already paved the way for the latter. The spirit of self-sacrifice, selfless dedication to the triumph of a cause greater than any single individual, a feeling of self-confidence in ultimate victory, unshakable courage and identification with the struggling oppressed peoples of the world would be the necessary attributes for the success of a minority revolution.

Organization would require many facets . Groups dedicated to militant demonstrations would have to apply constant pressure to the power structure, create chaos and confusion and force the oppressor to unmask his ugly face before the world by reacting even more brutally and indiscriminately against Constitutional forces . This would expose the true nature of the power structure and inspire greater resistance to it .

Armed defense guards would have to be formed throughout the land. These groups would be organized within the confines of the law and when possible become sporting rifle clubs affiliated with the National Rifle Association. They would function only as defense units to safeguard life, limb and property in the ghetto communities. Some form of central direction would be necessary. A tightly organized and well disciplined underground guerilla force would also have to be formed to perform a more aggressive mission. It would have to be clandestinely organized and well versed in explo-segregationists, the hypocritical politicians and the terrorists have already paved the way for the latter . The spirit of self-sacrifice, selfless dedication to the triumph of a cause greater than any single individual, a feeling of self-confidence in ultimate victory, unshakable courage and identification with the struggling oppressed peoples of the world would be the necessary attributes for the success of a minority revolution.

Organization would require many facets . Groups dedicated to militant demonstrations would have to apply constant pressure to the power structure, create chaos and confusion and force the oppressor to unmask his ugly face before the world by reacting even more brutally and indiscriminately against Constitutional forces . This would expose the true nature of the power structure and inspire greater resistance to it .

Armed defense guards would have to be formed throughout the land . These groups would be organized within the confines of the law and when possible become sporting rifle clubs affiliated with the National Rifle Association. They would function only as defense units to safeguard life, limb and property in the ghetto communities. Some form of central direction would be necessary. A tightly organized and well disciplined underground guerilla force would also have to be formed to perform a more aggressive mission. It would have to be clandestinely organized and well versed in explo-sives. Its mission would be retaliation and a force used to pin down and disperse concentrated fascist power. It would prevent the power structure from rushing reinforcements to encircle and crush other defense groups engaged in battle against terrorist forces by ambushing, sniping, bombing bridges, booby-trapping and sabotaging highways. A welfare corps would have to be organized to build morale, raise funds, promote legal defense and take charge of the general welfare of the fighting forces and their families. Many of the members of the Welfare organization front would not understand its total function. They would be recruited on a humanitarian basis.

The most aggressive and irrepressible arm of the overall organization would be the fire teams. They would work in complete secrecy and would be totally divorced in the organizational sense from the main bodies of defense and other forces . They would enjoy complete autonomy. The group's only tangible loyalty to them would be in times of distress . Their legal aid in court defense would be rendered by Afro-Americans giving legal aid to victims of kangaroo court systems, as is commonly known where black people stand no chance of obtaining justice. This would be similar to, but more vigorous and militant than the NAACP's role.

The fire teams' mission would be sabotage. Thousands of these groups would be organized throughout racist America. These teams would consist of from three to four persons. They would only know the members of their immediate team. They would not identify with the civil rights movement. They would appear to be apathetic and even Uncle Toms. They would sometimes masquerade as super patriots, and be more than willing, in a deceptive way, to cooperate with the police. They would even infiltrate the police force and armed forces when possible, and work in the homes of officials as domestics. There would be no official meetings and discussions, only emergency calls and sudden missions.

The mission of these thousands of active fire teams would be setting strategic fires. They could render America's cities and countryside impotent. They could travel from city to city placing lighted candles covered by large paper bags in America's forests, and have time to be far removed from the scene by the time the lighted candle burned to the dried leaves. While unsparingly setting the torch to everything that would burn in the cities, and while concentrating on urban guerilla warfare, the rural countryside would not be neglected. Aside from the devastating damage that could be visited upon the countryside, such a mission could serve a twofold purpose. It would also divert enemy forces from the urban centers. State forces would be forced to spread their ranks and would not be able to sustain massive troop concentrations in a single community . The heat and smoke generated from the fires would render some of the highways impassable to repressive troop reinforcements.

The rural countryside covers vast areas and would require exhaustive man power, equipment and security forces . America cannot afford to allow its rich timber resources and crops to go up in smoke. The fire teams roving in automobiles would find unguarded rural objectives even more accessible. A few teams could start miles and miles of fires from one city to the other. The psychological impact would be tremendous . By day the billowing smoke would be seen for miles. By night the entire sky would reflect reddish flames that would elicit panic and a feeling of impending doom. Operating in teams of twos or threes, one freedom fighter could pour gasoline or lighter fluid from a small flask into public waste paper baskets, another could later enter and toss a lighted cigarette in the same container. Near closing time kitchen matches could be placed in the air conditioning systems of industrial and public buildings. The property of racists would be designated as priority objectives . Through this method, the racist oppressors could be reduced to poverty in a short span of time.

These fire teams could also go on pre-dawn missions just before the morning rush for work. Their objective would be to spread tacks fitted with wire bases to insure their upright position when thrown from a moving automobile in heavily travelled tunnels and freeways . Pure havoc would ensue. Sugar or sand in gas tanks could be used to knock out the engines of public vehicles . During police invasions of the ghetto, lye and acid bombs could be thrown from roof tops . Many forms of booby traps could be utilized.

Yes, a minority revolution could succeed in racist America. It could succeed because the winds of rebellion are rising against the racist oppressor throughout the world. It could triumph because the Afro-American struggle is part and parcel of the universal liberation struggle . It must be handled as such. It is only natural that the power structure would like to keep it isolated and provincial . The enemy's tactic is to divide and conquer. The Afro-American has sought to join the white American league since first arriving in chains in the new world. He has been brutally rejected. The racist whites have made it plain, in no uncertain terms, that the black American is never to be fully accepted in the mainstream of the so-called great society. It is as natural as water seeking its level for the Afro-American to turn to the oppressed peoples of the world to make common cause in the universal revolution for freedom and human dignity. What greater indication do we need, than centuries of barbaric oppression, that the U.S. power structure is our natural enemy?

With or without a common cause with the Afro-American the universal freedom forces are going to triumph over U.S . racist imperialism. The question is simply whether or not the black

American is going to perish with racist imperialist America as a party to her savage crimes against oppressed and progressive human-nity or whether he is going to contribute to the great victory of revolutionary humanity destined to fulfill its historical role .

In summary, let it be made clear that I am not advocating a minority revolution. I am merely exploring certain theoretical potentials as an alternative to passive submission to proposed genocide as projected by the racist, fascist and terrorist white groups now growing by leaps and bounds in the racist and imperialist USA. I hope that others, who are genuinely interested in the survival of black people in racist America, will analyze, debate and contribute to this thesis in a way that our people need never fear extermination under racial tyranny and fascism.

Each year rioting, as a result of police brutality and oppression, becomes more extensive and ferocious. We can neither pray nor hope our way out of this difficult situation. We must defend ourselves . We must fight, and we must fight to win. We must also consider the immediate necessity of effective self-defense and resist- ance to racist terror. During times of massive rioting too many of our people are forced to fight armed cops and troops with bare hands and stones . Cops and troops must be disarmed and their weapons turned against other cops to obtain weapons of defense. Tanks and armoured cars must be knocked out with molotov cocktails and captured when possible. Bazookas and mortars must be taken from troops and national guard armories to prevent heavy concentration of troops and invasion by overwhelming force. The Minutemen, Confederate Underground and other terrorist groups are arming and training with U.S. Army gear such as bazookas, mortars, hand grenades, machine guns and gas masks. Sub-machine guns are even being manufactured in small shops controlled by these fascist groups . These private arsenals must be located and raided for weapons and ammunition. These weapons can also be used to do extensive damage. Oil storage tanks and natural gas lines could be fired through delayed methods. The oppressor must be forced to pay heavily economically for his police brutality, pogroms, racist court frameups and white supremacy terror. The racist imperialist is an unmerciful bully when he can control a situation with his sophisticated weapons of death and destruction.

On the international scene, he will not hesitate to embark on the world's greatest campaign of slaughter in a desperate effort to save himself. The Afro-American liberation force is the only force in the world secure from fascist America's devastating nuclear force. He cannot use nuclear weapons against his own population, property and cities . In such a minority revolution, racist America's very essence of strength and power would become the Achilles' heel of her security and struggle for world domination. 

The advanced technology of the affluent society has made it soft, nervous and hypersensitive . It is a society fearful of the cold realities of life . A society devoid of soul and humanism. A jungle society of dog eat dog, a society of frightful automation that is addicted to tranquilizers. Racist Americans are not psychologically prepared for fire storms, power, communications and transportation failures and long periods without public utilities. The Afro-American has been under siege since the very beginning of his days as a captive person in the so-called New World. Terror is a way of life for the great masses of Afro-Americans . Our people have practically become immune to the fear that flows from violence and brutality. Such a minority revolution could only succeed as an integral part of the universal liberation struggle. From this point of view, we would not be an isolated minority in racist America, but a highly concentrated sector of a majority revolution. 

The Afro-American must take his fate into his own hands. He cannot rely on racist white brutes to dole out liberty like a welfare commodity. His only hope lies in concerted action with his oppressed brothers throughout the world. The racist imperialists are doomed. They cannot muster the power to save themselves. They are morally bankrupt . The vast majority of white Americans are racists who currently identify with U.S. imperialism. They have been deluded into believing that they have a vested interest in the oppressive and corrupt system . There is more hope, at this stage of struggle, for a rabid wolf than white supremacy orientated white workers allying themselves with racially oppressed Negroes. They are no more reliable in coming to the defense of persecuted Negroes than the German working class was in coming to the defense of the Jews under Hitler . The Afro-American is as alien to the so-called American way of life as a shoe shine boy is to Wall Street . The Afro-American is an outcast, the disinherited of the very society that he helped make  affluent . The wilderness that his slave labor cleared; the sprawling cities that he helped build, his rebellious and freedom-starved spirit can make barren and desolate again.

While U.S. strength is spread around the world in a hypocritical gesture of making the world safe for so-called democracy, democracy goes begging at home. Let racist America be apprised of the fact that she can no longer count on a peaceful and united front at home so long as the Afro-American is brutally subjected to racial tyranny. Racism and imperialism are destroying the U.S .A. If her choice is doom rather than justice -if she prefers to emasculate and compromise the Constitution rather than to honor it ; then her irreversible choice most surely will be accommodated by the invincible historical tide of justice-loving humanity, gloriously storming the tyrannical bastions of imperialism and racism. 

Our choice must be freedom or death. We must prepare ourselves to obtain freedom by any means. Let the phony liberals, the pseudo socialists, and their fellow-traveling avowed racists call us what they will . Our cause is just, our cause is freedom. Let us be labeled anything but pacifists suffering racial tyranny in a masochistic spirit of loving oppressive beasts. Yes, in racist America a minority revolution can succeed. Those who counsel patience and nonviolence, in the face of tyranny and aggression as against vigorous self-defense, are the vanguard puppets of U.S. imperialism, white supremacy and its oppressive status quo. They are foolhardy reactionaries, dreaming their psychotic dreams of a white supremacy slave kingdom, in ivory towers fast submerging in the quicksands of time. Yes, because of the relativity of righteous struggle, a minority revolution in racist America can succeed and bring about the establishment of a just and humanitarian government truly of the people, by the people, and for the people, dedicated to universal peace and brotherhood.”

CELEBRATING THE INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR PEOPLE OF AFRICAN DESCENT AND THE 102nd ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNIA'S "DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE NEGRO PEOPLES OF THE WORLD"

“We proclaim the 31st day of August of each year to be an international holiday to be observed by all Negroes.”

- UNIA Declaration of the Rights of the Negro Peoples of the World, August 1920

August 31 is celebrated as the International Day for People of African Descent as part of the International Decade for People of African Descent. August 31 is also the 102nd Anniversary of the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) “Declaration of the Rights of the Negro Peoples of the World.” It is with profound recognition that Marcus Garvey’s words have come to pass one hundred years later, and August 31 is, indeed, an international holiday observed by the entire world.

The Balanta B’urassa History and Genealogy Society of America commemorates these two historic efforts in pursuit of justice and preservation of the dignity of African people.

Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA)

“Declaration of the Rights of the Negro Peoples of the World”

August 31, 1920

Preamble

Be It Resolved, That the Negro people of the world, through their chosen representatives in convention assembled in Liberty Hall, in the City of New York and United States of America, from August 1 to August 31, in the year of Our Lord one thousand nine hundred and twenty, protest against the wrongs and injustices they are suffering at the hands of their white brethren, and state what they deem their fair and just rights, as well as the treatment they propose to demand of all men in the future.

We complain:

1. That nowhere in the world, with few exceptions, are black men accorded equal treatment with white men, although in the same situation and circumstances, but, on the contrary, are discriminated against and denied the common rights due to human beings for no other reason than their race and color.

We are not willingly accepted as guests in the public hotels and inns of the world for no other reason than our race and color.

2. In certain parts of the United States of America our race is denied the right of public trial accorded to other races when accused of crime, but are lynched and burned by mobs, and such brutal and inhuman treatment is even practiced upon our women.

3. That European nations have parcelled out among them and taken possession of nearly all of the continent of Africa, and the natives are compelled to surrender their lands to aliens and are treated in most instances like slaves.

4. In the southern portion of the United States of America, although citizens under the Federal Constitution, and in some States almost equal to the whites in population and are qualified land owners and taxpayers, we are, nevertheless, denied all voice in the making and administration of the laws and are taxed without representation by the State governments, and at the same time compelled to do military service in defense of the country.

5. On the public conveyances and common carriers in the southern portion of the United States we are jim-crowed and compelled to accept separate and inferior accommodations and made to pay the same fare charged for first-class accommodations, and our families are often humiliated and insulted by drunken white men who habitually pass through the jim-crow cars going to the smoking car.

6. The physicians of our race are denied the right to attend their patients while in the public hospitals of the cities and States where they reside in certain parts of the United States.

Our children are forced to attend inferior separate schools for shorter terms than white children, and the public school funds are unequally divided between the white and colored schools.

7. We are discriminated against and denied an equal chance to earn wages for the support of our families, and in many instances are refused admission into labor unions and nearly everywhere are paid smaller wages than white men.

8. In the Civil Service and departmental offices we are everywhere discriminated against and made to feel that to be a black man in Europe, America and the West Indies is equivalent to being an outcast and a leper among the races of men, no matter what the character attainments of the black men may be.

9. In the British and other West Indian islands and colonies Negroes are secretly and cunningly discriminated against and denied those fuller rights of government to which white citizens are appointed, nominated and elected.

10. That our people in those parts are forced to work for lower wages than the average standard of white men and are kept in conditions repugnant to good civilized tastes and customs.

11. That the many acts of injustices against members of our race before the courts of law in the respective islands and colonies are of such nature as to create disgust and disrespect for the white man’s sense of justice.

12. Against all such inhuman, unchristian and uncivilized treatment we here and now emphatically protest, and invoke the condemnation of all mankind.

In order to encourage our race all over the world and to stimulate it to overcome the handicaps and difficulties surrounding it, and to push forward to a higher and grander destiny, we demand and insist on the following Declaration of Rights:

1. Be it known to all men that whereas all men are created equal and entitled to the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and because of this we, the duly elected representatives of the Negro peoples of the world, invoking the aid of the just and Almighty God, do declare all men, women and children of our blood throughout the world free denizens, and do claim them as free citizens of Africa, the Motherland of all Negroes.

2. That we believe in the supreme authority of our race in all things racial; that all things are created and given to man as a common possession; that there should be an equitable distribution and apportionment of all such things, and in consideration of the fact that as a race we are now deprived of those things that are morally and legally ours, we believed it right that all such things should be acquired and held by whatsoever means possible.

3. That we believe the Negro, like any other race, should be governed by the ethics of civilization, and therefore should not be deprived of any of those rights or privileges common to other human beings.

4. We declare that Negroes, wheresoever they form a community among themselves should be given the right to elect their own representatives to represent them in Legislatures, courts of law, or such institutions as may exercise control over that particular community.

5. We assert that the Negro is entitled to even-handed justice before all courts of law and equity in whatever country he may be found, and when this is denied him on account of his race or color such denial is an insult to the race as a whole and should be resented by the entire body of Negroes.

6. We declare it unfair and prejudicial to the rights of Negroes in communities where they exist in considerable numbers to be tried by a judge and jury composed entirely of an alien race, but in all such cases members of our race are entitled to representation on the jury.

7. We believe that any law or practice that tends to deprive any African of his land or the privileges of free citizenship within his country is unjust and immoral, and no native should respect any such law or practice.

8. We declare taxation without representation unjust and tyran[n]ous, and there should be no obligation on the part of the Negro to obey the levy of a tax by any law-making body from which he is excluded and denied representation on account of his race and color.

9. We believe that any law especially directed against the Negro to his detriment and singling him out because of his race or color is unfair and immoral, and should not be respected.

10. We believe all men entitled to common human respect and that our race should in no way tolerate any insults that may be interpreted to mean disrespect to our race or color.

11. We deprecate the use of the term “nigger” as applied to Negroes, and demand that the word “Negro” be written with a capital “N.”

12. We believe that the Negro should adopt every means to protect himself against barbarous practices inflicted upon him because of color.

13. We believe in the freedom of Africa for the Negro people of the world, and by the principle of Europe for the Europeans and Asia for the Asiatics, we also demand Africa for the Africans at home and abroad.

14. We believe in the inherent right of the Negro to possess himself of Africa and that his possession of same shall not be regarded as an infringement of any claim or purchase made by any race or nation.

15. We strongly condemn the cupidity of those nations of the world who, by open aggression or secret schemes, have seized the territories and inexhaustible natural wealth of Africa, and we place on record our most solemn determination to reclaim the treasures and possession of the vast continent of our forefathers.

16. We believe all men should live in peace one with the other, but when races and nations provoke the ire of other races and nations by attempting to infringe upon their rights[,] war becomes inevitable, and the attempt in any way to free one’s self or protect one’s rights or heritage becomes justifiable.

17. Whereas the lynching, by burning, hanging or any other means, of human beings is a barbarous practice and a shame and disgrace to civilization, we therefore declare any country guilty of such atrocities outside the pale of civilization.

18. We protest against the atrocious crime of whipping, flogging and overworking of the native tribes of Africa and Negroes everywhere. These are methods that should be abolished and all means should be taken to prevent a continuance of such brutal practices.

19. We protest against the atrocious practice of shaving the heads of Africans, especially of African women or individuals of Negro blood, when placed in prison as a punishment for crime by an alien race.

10. We protest against segregated districts, separate public conveyances, industrial discrimination, lynchings and limitations of political privileges of any Negro citizen in any part of the world on account of race, color or creed, and will exert our full influence and power against all such.

21. We protest against any punishment inflicted upon a Negro with severity, as against lighter punishment inflicted upon another of an alien race for like offense, as an act of prejudice and injustice, and should be resented by the entire race.

22. We protest against the system of education in any country where Negroes are denied the same privileges and advantages as other races.

23. We declare it inhuman and unfair to boycott Negroes from industries and labor in any part of the world.

24. We believe in the doctrine of the freedom of the press, and we therefore emphatically protest against the suppression of Negro newspapers and periodicals in various parts of the world, and call upon Negroes everywhere to employ all available means to prevent such suppression.

25. We further demand free speech universally for all men.

26. We hereby protest against the publication of scandalous and inflammatory articles by an alien press tending to create racial strife and the exhibition of picture films showing the Negro as a cannibal.

27. We believe in the self-determination of all peoples.

28. We declare for the freedom of religious worship.

29. With the help of Almighty God we declare ourselves the sworn protectors of the honor and virtue of our women and children, and pledge our lives for their protection and defense everywhere and under all circumstances from wrongs and outrages.

30. We demand the right of an unlimited and unprejudiced education for ourselves and our posterity forever[.]

31. We declare that the teaching in any school by alien teachers to our boys and girls, that the alien race is superior to the Negro race, is an insult to the Negro people of the world.

32. Where Negroes form a part of the citizenry of any country, and pass the civil service examination of such country, we declare them entitled to the same consideration as other citizens as to appointments in such civil service.

33. We vigorously protest against the increasingly unfair and unjust treatment accorded Negro travelers on land and sea by the agents and employee of railroad and steamship companies, and insist that for equal fare we receive equal privileges with travelers of other races.

34. We declare it unjust for any country, State or nation to enact laws tending to hinder and obstruct the free immigration of Negroes on account of their race and color.

35. That the right of the Negro to travel unmolested throughout the world be not abridged by any person or persons, and all Negroes are called upon to give aid to a fellow Negro when thus molested.

36. We declare that all Negroes are entitled to the same right to travel over the world as other men.

37. We hereby demand that the governments of the world recognize our leader and his representatives chosen by the race to look after the welfare of our people under such governments.

38. We demand complete control of our social institutions without interference by any alien race or races.

39. That the colors, Red, Black and Green, be the colors of the Negro race.

40. Resolved, That the anthem “Ethiopia, Thou Land of Our Fathers etc.,” shall be the anthem of the Negro race. . . .

41. We believe that any limited liberty which deprives one of the complete rights and prerogatives of full citizenship is but a modified form of slavery.

42. We declare it an injustice to our people and a serious Impediment to the health of the race to deny to competent licensed Negro physicians the right to practice in the public hospitals of the communities in which they reside, for no other reason than their race and color.

43. We call upon the various government[s] of the world to accept and acknowledge Negro representatives who shall be sent to the said governments to represent the general welfare of the Negro peoples of the world.

44. We deplore and protest against the practice of confining juvenile prisoners in prisons with adults, and we recommend that such youthful prisoners be taught gainful trades under human[e] supervision.

45. Be it further resolved, That we as a race of people declare the League of Nations null and void as far as the Negro is concerned, in that it seeks to deprive Negroes of their liberty.

46. We demand of all men to do unto us as we would do unto them, in the name of justice; and we cheerfully accord to all men all the rights we claim herein for ourselves.

47. We declare that no Negro shall engage himself in battle for an alien race without first obtaining the consent of the leader of the Negro people of the world, except in a matter of national self-defense.

48. We protest against the practice of drafting Negroes and sending them to war with alien forces without proper training, and demand in all cases that Negro soldiers be given the same training as the aliens.

49. We demand that instructions given Negro children in schools include the subject of “Negro History,” to their benefit.

50. We demand a free and unfettered commercial intercourse with all the Negro people of the world.

51. We declare for the absolute freedom of the seas for all peoples.

52. We demand that our duly accredited representatives be given proper recognition in all leagues, conferences, conventions or courts of international arbitration wherever human rights are discussed.

53. We proclaim the 31st day of August of each year to be an international holiday to be observed by all Negroes.

54. We want all men to know that we shall maintain and contend for the freedom and equality of every man, woman and child of our race, with our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

These rights we believe to be justly ours and proper for the protection of the Negro race at large, and because of this belief we, on behalf of the four hundred million Negroes of the world, do pledge herein the sacred blood of the race in defense, and we hereby subscribe our names as a guarantee of the truthfulness and faithfulness hereof, in the presence of Almighty God, on this 13th day of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and twenty.

Source: UNIA Declaration of Rights of the Negro Peoples of the World, New York, August 13, 1920. Reprinted in Robert Hill, ed., The Marcus Garvey and Universal Negro Improvement Papers, vol. 2 (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1983), 571–580.

Marcus Garvey, Explanation of the Objects of the Universal Negro Improvement Association - 1921

Inspired by the writings of Booker T. Washington, Jamaican-born Marcus Garvey became the most prominent Black Nationalist in the United States. He championed the back-to-Africa movement, advocated for Black-owned businesses—he founded the Black Star Line, a transnational shipping company—and founded the Universal Negro Improvement Association. Thousands of UNIA chapters formed all across the world. In 1921, Garvey recorded a message in a New York studio explaining the object of the UNIA.

Fellow citizens of Africa, I greet you in the name of the Universal Negro Improvement Association and African Communities League of the World. You may ask, “what organization is that?” It is for me to inform you that the Universal Negro Improvement Association is an organization that seeks to unite, into one solid body, the four hundred million Negroes in the world. To link up the fifty million Negroes in the United States of America, with the twenty million Negroes of the West Indies, the forty million Negroes of South and Central America, with the two hundred and eighty million Negroes of Africa, for the purpose of bettering our industrial, commercial, educational, social, and political conditions.

As you are aware, the world in which we live today is divided into separate race groups and distinct nationalities. Each race and each nationality is endeavoring to work out its own destiny, to the exclusion of other races and other nationalities. We hear the cry of “England for the Englishman,” of “France for the Frenchman,” of “Germany for the German,” of “Ireland for the Irish,” of “Palestine for the Jew,” of “Japan for the Japanese,” of “China for the Chinese.”

We of the Universal Negro Improvement Association are raising the cry of “Africa for the Africans,” those at home and those abroad. There are 400 million Africans in the world who have Negro blood coursing through their veins, and we believe that the time has come to unite these 400 million people toward the one common purpose of bettering their condition.

The great problem of the Negro for the last 500 years has been that of disunity. No one or no organization ever succeeded in uniting the Negro race. But within the last four years, the Universal Negro Improvement Association has worked wonders. It is bringing together in one fold four million organized Negroes who are scattered in all parts of the world. Here in the 48 States of the American Union, all the West Indies islands, and the countries of South and Central America and Africa. These four million people are working to convert the rest of the four hundred million that are all over the world, and it is for this purpose, that we are asking you to join our land and to do the best you can to help us to bring about an emancipated race.

If anything praiseworthy is to be done, it must be done through unity, and it is for that reason that the Universal Negro Improvement Association calls upon every Negro in the United States to rally to this standard. We want to unite the Negro race in this country. We want every Negro to work for one common object, that of building a nation of his own on the great continent of Africa. That all Negroes all over the world are working for the establishment of a government in Africa means that it will be realized in another few years.

We want the moral and financial support of every Negro to make this dream a possibility. Our race, this organization, has established itself in Nigeria, West Africa, and it endeavors to do all possible to develop that Negro country to become a great industrial and commercial commonwealth.

Pioneers have been sent by this organization to Nigeria, and they are now laying the foundations upon which the four hundred million Negroes of the world will build. If you believe that the Negro has a soul, if you believe that the Negro is a man, if you believe the Negro was endowed with the senses commonly given to other men by the Creator, then you must acknowledge that what other men have done, Negroes can do. We want to build up cities, nations, governments, industries of our own in Africa, so that we will be able to have a chance to rise from the lowest to the highest position in the African Commonwealth.

[Source: Marcus Garvey, “Explanation of the Objects of the Universal Negro Improvement Association” (1921), Marcus Garvey and the UNIA Papers Project at the University of California, Los Angeles. Available online via History Matters (http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5124).]

UNIA drafts a petition and decides to send a delegation to the Third Assembly of the League of Nations - 20 July 1922.

Marcus Garvey: Aims and Objects of Movement for Solution of Negro Problem - 1924

UNIA 1928 Renewal of the 1922 Petition with Letters of Support

MARTIN DELANY ON THE QUESTION OF ORIGINAL AND NATIONAL IDENTITY IN 1854

So soon as a people or nation lose their original identity, just so soon must that nation or people become extinct.

- Martin Delany, 1854

Currently, there is a movement underway in which some “black” people in America are saying that they were in America before Columbus. While it is true that some black people were in the Americas before Columbus, it is also true that some black people came after Columbus, especially as a result of the trans-Atlantic trafficking and enslavement of people with African lineage and heritage from the African continent. Unfortunately, because of state-sanctioned ETHNOCIDE committed by the United States, most “black” people don’t really know their ancestral lineage and whether or not their direct maternal and paternal ancestors descended from the “black” people that were in the Americas before Columbus or came after. More unfortunate, however, is the disunity and animosity that has been escalating between “aboriginal/indigenous” black people who seem to be claiming that ALL or MOST black people today are descended from the black people who were here before Columbus. That claim - the idea that ALL or MOST black people today are descended from those black people who were in the Americas before Columbus - is simply a claim that is not a known fact, but merely speculation. Again, most people don’t actually know their lineage ancestry, where their direct maternal and maternal ancestors lived before 1492 or what language they spoke. However, this can be determined now through DNA testing.

Worse, some of these “black” aboriginal/indigenous people are denigrating other “black” people who are claiming that they are descended from the people who came in the slave ships. They say that we have been lied to and that we are stupid because we believe the lie.

NOW, WE REMIND THE BLACK PEOPLE IN AMERICA WHO ARE TRYING TO DISTANCE THEMSELVES FROM IDENTIFYING AS AFRICANS IN FAVOR OF SOME OTHER IDENTITY OF THE WORDS OF MARTIN DELANY ON THE QUESTION OF NATIONAL IDENTITY IN “Political Destiny of the Colored Race, on the American Continent”-

Delaney, like everyone else of his time AND BEFORE, knew that there were black people already here when Europeans discovered America and started trafficking prisoners of war taken from Africa. This is not knew knowledge as suggested by some people who are just now themselves becoming acquainted with scholarship on the AFRICAN presence in the Americas before Columbus. It was common knowledge that some Africans were in the Americas before the slave ship, and some were arriving because of the slave ships. As Delany points out, it is the ORIGINAL IDENTITY that is the key to our liberation. And now there is technology (genetic testing through African Ancestry) that can determine each individual's ORIGINAL IDENTITY. This is what will unite us - ORIGINAL IDENTITY. If your ORIGINAL IDENTITY comes from the continent of Africa, we have a basis for uniting whether you are one of the Africans that was here before Columbus, or whether you are on of the Africans that came after Columbus.

In his keynote Address to the National Emigration Convention for Colored Men - 24-26 August 1854, “Political Destiny of the Colored Race, on the American Continent”, Delaney stated,

"A people, to be free, must necessarily be their own rulers: that is, each individual must, in himself, embody the essential ingredient—so to speak—of the sovereign principle which composes the true basis of his liberty. . . .

Then, to be successful, our attention must be turned in a direction towards those places where the black and colored man comprise, by population, and constitute by necessity of numbers, the ruling element of the body politic. And where, when occasion shall require it, the issue can be made and maintained on this basis. Where our political enclosure and national edifice can be reared, established, walled, and proudly defended on this great elementary principle of original identity. Upon this solid foundation rests the fabric of every substantial political structure in the world, which cannot exist without it; and so soon as a people or nation lose their original identity, just so soon must that nation or people become extinct.—Powerful though they may have been, they must fall. Because the nucleus which heretofore held them together, becoming extinct, there being no longer a center of attraction, or basis for a union of the parts, a dissolution must as naturally ensue, as the result of the neutrality of the basis of adhesion among the particles of matter. . .

This is the secret of the eventful downfall of Egypt, Carthage, Rome, and the former Grecian States, once so powerful—a loss of original identity; and with it, a loss of interest in maintaining their fundamental principles of nationality. . . .

And doubtless the downfall of Hungary, brave and noble as may be her people, is mainly to be attributed to the want of identity of origin, and consequently, a union of interests and purpose. . . . Hungary consisted of three distinct "races"—as they call themselves—of people, all priding in and claiming rights based on their originality—the Magyars, Celts, and Sclaves. On the encroachment of Austria, each one of these races—declaring for nationality—rose up against the House of Hapsburg, claiming the right of self-government, premised on their origin. Between the three a compromise was effected—the Magyars, being the majority, claimed the precedence. They made an effort, but for the want of a unity of interests—an identity of origin, the noble Hungarians failed.—All know the result. . . .

Our friends in this and other countries, anxious for our elevation, have for years been erroneously urging us to lose our identity as a distinct race, declaring that we were the same as other people; . . . The truth is, we are not identical with the Anglo-Saxon or any other race of the Caucasian or pure white type of the human family, and the sooner we know and acknowledge this truth, the better for ourselves and posterity. . . . We are not willing, therefore, at all times and under all circumstances to be moulded into various shapes of eccentricity, to suit the caprices and conveniences or every kind of people. We are not more suitable to everybody than everybody is suitable to us; therefore, no more like other people than others are like us. . . .

We have then inherent traits, attributes—so to speak—and native characteristics, peculiar to our race—whether pure or mixed blood—and all that is required of us is to cultivate these and develope them in their purity, to make them desirable and emulated by the rest of the world. . . .

From the earliest period after the discovery, various nations sent a representative here, either as adventurers and speculators, or employed laborers, seamen, or soldiers, hired to work for their employers. And among the earliest and most numerous class who found their way to the new world, were those of the AFRICAN race. And it has been ascertained to our minds beyond a doubt, that when the Continent was discovered, there were found in the West Indies and Central America, tribes of the black race, fine looking people, having the usual characteristics of color and hair, IDENTIFYING THEM AS BEING ORIGINALLY OF THE AFRICAN RACE; no doubt, being a remnant of the Africans who, with the Carthagenian expedition, were adventitiously cast upon this continent, in their memorable adventure to the "Great Island," after sailing many miles distant to the West of the "Pillars of Hercules"—the present Straits of Gibralter. . . .

Our policy must be—and I hazard nothing in promulgating it; nay, without this design and feeling, there would be a great deficiency of self-respect, pride of race, and love of country, and we might never expect to challenge the respect of nations—Africa for the African race, and black men to rule them. By black men I mean, men of African descent who claim an identity with the race. . . . We must make an issue, create an event, and establish for ourselves a position. This is essentially necessary for our effective elevation as a people, in shaping our national developement, directing our destiny, and redeeming ourselves as a race. . . .

As the first great national step in political economy, the selection and security of a location to direct and command commerce legitimately carried on, as an export and import metropolis, is essentially necessary. . . . The basis of great nationality depends upon three elementary principles: first, territory; second, population; third, a great staple production either natural or artificial, or both, as a permanent source of wealth; and Africa comprises these to an almost unlimited extent. . . .

‘Self-preservation is the first law of nature,’ and we go to Africa to be self-sustaining . . . "

This was 120 years before Alex Haley’s roots. It was only 46 years after the United States passed The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 (2 Stat. 426, enacted March 2, 1807) which took effect in 1808. I think Martin Delany and those of his generation knew quite well that people from African were arriving in the Americas, a fact which some “black” are, incredibly, trying to deny and minimize.

The point is, if you are “black”, you are African and if you are African, there is the basis for a unity which can develop enough COMPELLING FORCE to change the current world order. Instead of arguing with each other, all black people should be advocating, as part of reparations, LINEAGE RESTORATION - the establishing of each individuals ACTUAL direct maternal and paternal ancestry that goes back at least as far as 2000 years. Once that is established, genealogy work can done to determine everyone’s true ancestral identity. Only in this way, can we know who was here before, and who came after….

DESCENDENTES DE BALANTA LIDERAM MOVIMENTO DE REPARAÇÃO NO VATICANO: RESPONSABILIZAM OS REPRESENTANTES DE JESUS ​​CRISTO PELA ESCRAVAÇÃO DOS POVOS AFRICANO

Cidade do Vaticano, 18 de julho de 2022 - Membros da Balanta B'urassa History & Genealogy Society in America (BBHAGSIA) e defensores das reparações viajaram para a Cidade do Vaticano na segunda-feira para discutir o papel da Igreja Católica no comércio transatlântico de escravos e traçar um caminho para a cura.

De acordo com o comunicado de imprensa emitido pela Comissão Nacional de Reparações Afro-Americanas (NAARC) , uma delegação de líderes globais de reparações sob a égide do Círculo Global para Reparações e Cura , foi recebida pelo Bispo Paul Tighe, Secretário do Pontifício Conselho de Cultura, junto com seu assistente, em uma reunião formal no Vaticano em 18 de julho de 2022.

Os membros do BBHAGSIA Kamm Howard , ex-co-presidente nacional da Coalizão Nacional de Negros para Reparações na América (NCOBRA) e diretora de Reparações Unidos, e Robin Rue Simmons , ex-vereadora do 5º distrito em Evanstan, IL e fundadora e diretora executiva da FirstRepair ambos viajaram para Roma com a delegação. Outros membros da delegação incluíam o Dr. Ron Daniels, coordenador da Comissão Nacional de Reparações Afro-Americanas (NAARC), Dra. Amara Enyia, estrategista do Círculo Global para Reparações e Cura, e Nikole Hannah-Jones, autora do Projeto 1619. A delegação entregou uma apresentação(veja abaixo para ler todo o documento) descrevendo os “danos e ofensas da Igreja, o legado resultante desses danos e ofensas e medidas de reparação que são necessárias para a reparação e cura completas”.

Não retratado: Robin Rue Simmons

De acordo com a APRESENTAÇÃO À SANTA SÉ NO FUTURO DAS REPARAÇÕES ,

“A partir de 1400, os monarcas portugueses pediram aos Papas da Santa Igreja Católica Romana para endossar e apoiar seus planos de expansão territorial na África. Em resposta a essas petições reais, muitos pontífices, as pessoas que reivindicam autoridade para serem os representantes de Jesus Cristo na terra, emitiram bulas papais, decretos públicos oficiais, que autorizaram a guerra na África e endossaram e apoiaram o tráfico transatlântico e a escravização perpétua de homens africanos , mulheres e crianças”.

A APRESENTAÇÃO , em seguida, detalha o registro histórico que afirma que a Igreja Católica Romana sancionou, através do uso de éditos apostólicos conhecidos como “bulas papais”, a destruição dos reinos africanos, o saque das riquezas e recursos africanos, a guerra total povo africano e a escravização perpétua dos africanos e seus descendentes. “Estas bulas e outras”, afirma a APRESENTAÇÃO , “forneciam a justificativa para o tráfico e escravização de seres humanos negros africanos, bem como o imperialismo europeu e a colonização na África – tudo em nome de Jesus Cristo”.

O documento conclui afirmando,

“COMPELIDOS PELO DIREITO INTERNACIONAL, COSTUMES E NORMAS SOBRE REPARAÇÃO POR GUERRA TOTAL, CRIMES DE GUERRA E CRIMES CONTRA A HUMANIDADE , E ENCORAJADOS PELAS PALAVRAS E PELO ESPÍRITO DA ENCÍCLICA FRATELLI TUTTI , NA QUAL O PAPA FRANCISCO PEDE UM SENTIDO APROFUNDADO DE NOSSA HUMANIDADE COMPARTILHADA , BUSCAMOS REPARAÇÃO TOTAL E CURA PARA PESSOAS DE ASCENDÊNCIA AFRICANA…. CONSEQUENTEMENTE, DE TUDO O QUE PRECEDE, A SANTA IGREJA CATÓLICA ROMANA TEM UMA PROFUNDA OBRIGAÇÃO MORAL E LEGAL DE REPARAÇÃO INTEGRAL.

É a obrigação legal decorrente da declaração Dum Diversas do Papa Nicolau V de guerra total contra os povos africanos que o Presidente do BBHAGSIA, Siphiwe Baleka, vem enfatizando em vários fóruns internacionais e comitês de trabalho dirigidos aos membros da União Africana e especialmente à República da Guiné-Bissau . O argumento legal foi apresentado em RUMO A UM DIREITO DE RETORNO E POLÍTICA DE CIDADANIA PARA DESCENDENTES DE PESSOAS RETIRADAS DE TERRITÓRIOS NA ÁFRICA DURANTE O TRÁFICO TRANSATLÂNTICO E ESCRAVAÇÃO DE POVOS AFRICANO: ESTUDO DE CASO GUINÉ BISSAU , que foi um documento de origem para o PRESENTE e que você pode leia na íntegra aqui.

Recorde-se que tanto Kamm Howard como Robin Rue Simmons regressaram à sua terra natal ancestral Balanta da Guiné-Bissau em Junho de 2021 como parte do segundo grupo da Iniciativa Década de Retorno criada e lançada pelo Presidente do BBHAGSIA Siphiwe Baleka .

Robin, Siphiwe, Kamm e Amilcar Cabral

Robin (segundo à esquerda) e Kamm (3º à esquerda atrás de Robin) em encontro com o Comandante das Forças Armadas da Guiné-Bissau.

Para saber mais sobre o trabalho de reparação de Kamm Howard e Robin Rue Simmon, assista a este

DOCUMENTÁRIO COM DESCENDENTES DE BALANTA E MEMBROS DO BBHAGSIA KAMM HOWARD E ROBIN RUE SIMMONS

BALANTA DESCENDANTS LEAD REPARATIONS MOVEMENT AT THE VATICAN: HOLD THE REPRESENTATIVES OF JESUS CHRIST RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENSLAVEMENT OF AFRICAN PEOPLE

Vatican City, July 18, 2022 - Balanta B’urassa History & Genealogy Society in America (BBHAGSIA) members and reparations advocates traveled to Vatican City on Monday to discuss the Catholic Church's role in the Transatlantic Slave Trade and chart a path toward healing.

According to the press release issued by the National African American Reparations Commission (NAARC), a delegation of global reparations leaders under the umbrella of the Global Circle for Reparations and Healing, was received by Bishop Paul Tighe, Secretary of the Pontifical Council of Culture, along with his assistant, in a formal meeting at the Vatican on July 18, 2022.

BBHAGSIA members Kamm Howard, former National Co-Chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America (NCOBRA) and Director of Reparations United, and Robin Rue Simmons, former Alderwoman of the 5th Ward in Evanstan, IL and Founder and Executive Director of FirstRepair both traveled to Rome with the delegation. Other members of the delegation included Dr Ron Daniels, convenor of National African American Reparations Commission (NAARC), Dr. Amara Enyia, strategist for the Global Circle for Reparations and Healing, and Nikole Hannah-Jones, author of the 1619 Project. The delegation delivered a Presentment (see below to read the entire document) outlining the “harms and offenses of the Church, the legacy resulting from those harms and offenses and reparations measures that are needed for full repair and healing.”

Not pictured: Robin Rue Simmons

According to the PRESENTMENT TO THE HOLY SEE IN FURTHERANCE OF REPARATIONS,

“Beginning in the 1400s, Portuguese monarchs petitioned the Popes of the Holy Roman Catholic Church to endorse and support their plans for territorial expansion into Africa. In response to these royal petitions, many Pontiffs, the persons claiming authority to be the representatives of Jesus Christ on earth, issued papal bulls, official public decrees, that authorized war on Africa and endorsed and supported the transatlantic trafficking and perpetual enslavement of African men, women, and children.”

The PRESENTMENT then goes on to detail the historical record that affirms that the Roman Catholic Church santioned, 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 enslavemenent 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.'‘

The document concludes by stating,

“Compelled by international law, customs, and norms regarding redress for total war, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, and encouraged by the words and spirit of the encyclical Fratelli Tutti, in which Pope Francis calls for a deepened sense of our shared humanity, we seek full reparations and healing for people of African ancestry…. Consequently, from all the above, the Holy Roman Catholic Church has a profound moral and legal obligation of full reparations.

It is the legal obligation stemming from Pope Nicholas V’s Dum Diversas declaration of total war against African people that BBHAGSIA President Siphiwe Baleka has been emphasizing in various international forums and working committees directed at members of the African Union and especially to the Republic of Guinea Bissau. The legal argument was laid out in TOWARDS A RIGHT TO RETURN & CITIZENSHIP POLICY FOR DESCENDENTS OF PEOPLE TAKEN FROM TERRITORIES IN AFRICA DURING THE TRANSATLANTIC TRAFFICKING AND ENSLAVEMENT OF AFRICAN PEOPLE: CASE STUDY GUINEA BISSAU which was a source document for the PRESENTMENT and which you can read in its entirety here.

It should be recalled that both Kamm Howard and Robin Rue Simmons returned to their Balanta ancestral homeland of Guinea Bissau in June of 2021 as part of the second group of the Decade of Return Initiative created and launched by BBHAGSIA President Siphiwe Baleka.

Robin, Siphiwe, Kamm and Amilcar Cabral

Robin (second from left) and Kamm (3rd from left behind Robin) meeting the Commander of Guinea Bissau’s armed forces.

To learn more about Kamm Howard and Robin Rue Simmon’s reparations work watch this

Documentary featuring Balanta descendants and BBHAGSIA members Kamm Howard and Robin Rue Simmons

THE DECADE OF RETURN INITIATIVE IN GUINEA BISSAU CELEBRATES THE 100 YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF THE ETHIOPIAN GOVERNMENT’S OFFER OF REPATRIATION AND CITIZENSHIP

The Decade of Return Initiative in Guinea Bissau  celebrates the one hundred year anniversary of the repatriation invitation made by the Ethiopian government to the the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) 1922 Convention. At the Convention, Persian Consul General H. Topakyan read a message from Ethiopian Regent Plenipotentiary Ras Tafari that said: 

“I invite [African Descendants] back to the homeland, particularly those qualified to help solve our big problems and to develop our vast resources. Teachers, artisans, mechanics, writers, musicians, professional men and women - all who are able to lend a hand in the constructive work which our country so deeply feels and greatly needs.”

The 1922 UNIA Convention deputized a mission of skilled workers to go to Ethiopia which ultimately failed for lack of funds.

Two years prior, in 1919, Regent Plenipotentiary Ras Tafari sent four ambassadors to the United States. The Royal Ethiopian Mission included Dedjamatch Nadao, Empress Zauditu’s nephew and Commander of the Imperial Army, Ato Belanghetta Herouy Wolde Sellasie, Mayor of Addis Ababa, Ato Kantiba Gabrou, Mayor of Gondar, and Ato Sinkas, Secretary of the Commander of the Imperial Army. Their purpose was to renew a Treaty of Friendship with the United States signed by Emperor Menelik in 1904. In honor of their visit, the Ethiopian Flag was ceremoniously hoisted over the White House.

All of this was the result of African Descendants’ efforts that began in 1897. Benito Sylvain, the Haitian born and former secretary of the Haitian legation in London, visited Ethiopia and became an aide-de-camp in the Imperial household of Emperor Menelik. Against this backdrop emerged the African Association that was launched in England on September 24, 1897.

Five years later, in 1903 Benito Sylvain returned to Ethiopia where he introduced William Ellis to Emperor Menelik II. Mr. Ellis  told the Emperor, "Europe for Europeans and Africa for Africans.”

Another five years after Emperor Menelik signed the Treaty of Friendship, Robert Daniel Alexander moved from Chicago to Ethiopia in 1909. He is the first descendant of people trafficked from Africa and enslaved in the Americas to repatriate to Ethiopia. Mr. Alexander provided Emperor Menelik with copies of the black-owned Chicago Defender newspaper. This is how the Ethiopian government learned about the realities of black people living in America and it is the origin of the Rastafari movement.

Not long afterwards, Marcus Garvey organized the first branch of the UNIA in 1917 and repeated William Ellis' call for "Africa for Africans, both those at home and those abroad." That same year, Ras Tafari officially became the regent of the Ethiopian Empire and Heir to the throne. This is the backdrop to Ras Tafari’s Abyssinian Mission to the United States in 1919.

During the Ethiopian Mission, the bloodiest race riot in Chicago’s history erupted on July 27, 1919. Eugene Williams, a young black boy, drowned at the 29th Street Beach after a rock thrown by George Stauber, a young white boy, knocked Williams from a raft. The Ethiopian Prince Nadao, who stated he had seen the Chicago Defender newspaper in Ethiopia, told one of their reporters “[Ethiopians] dislike brutality, burning at the stake, lynching of any nature, and other outrages handed upon [the African American] people …. Fight on, don’t stop!”

Before the Ethiopian Mission ended, an invitation to return (“Repatriate”) to Ethiopia was made to Rabbi Arnold Ford.  That the offer of repatriation was given to him was extremely significant because Rabbi Ford was leader of the Hebrew Israelites (“Black Jews”) of Harlem. In this capacity, he would be able to resettle the existing remnant of Israel that was captured in the slave trade. In addition, Rabbi Ford was the musical director of Marcus Garvey’s Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA). Given that the UNIA was the largest, greatest organization of the scattered Ethiopians/Africans, it makes perfect sense to make the offer to the UNIA. Finally, as musical director, Rabbi Ford could use the traditional, spiritual medium of song (psalms, hymns), to communicate the Ethiopian message to the mass of black people scattered in north, south and central America, including the Caribbean. This Rabbi Ford did. It is, therefore, no coincidence that Rabbi Ford gave the UNIA “The Universal Ethiopian Anthem”, later to be used by the Ethiopian World Federation, Incorporated (EWF). The Rastafari Family Worldwide still sings the anthem at its gatherings.

On September 29th, 1923 Ethiopia joined the League of Nations. By the summer of 1924, Marcus Garvey and the UNIA seemed to have concretized the program for Ethiopian Repatriation. On March 16, 1924, Marcus Garvey delivered a speech at Madison Square Garden entitled, “In Honor of the Return to America of the Delegation Sent to Europe and Africa by the Universal Negro Improvement Association to Negotiate for the Repatriation of Negroes to a Homeland of Their Own in Africa”. Garvey said,

“The coming together, all over this country, of fully six million people of Negro blood, to work for the creation of a nation of their own in their motherland, Africa, is no joke. . . . Our desire is for a place in the world . . . to lay down our burden and rest our weary backs and feet by the banks of the Niger, and sing our songs and chant our hymns to the God of Ethiopia . . . . As children of captivity we look forward to a new day and a new, yet ever old, land of our fathers, the land of refuge, the land of the Prophets, the land of the Saints, and the land of God’s crowning glory. We shall gather together our children, our treasures and our loved ones, and, as the children of Israel, by the command of God, face the promise land . . . . Good and dear America that has succored us for three hundred years knows our story . . . . The thoughtful and industrious of our race want to go back to Africa, because we realize it will be our only hope of permanent existence. We cannot all go in a day or in a year, ten or twenty years. It will take time under the rule of modern economics, to entirely or largely depopulate a country of a people, who have been its residents for centuries, but we feel that with proper help for fifty years, the problem can be solved. We do not want all the Negroes in Africa. Some are no good here, and naturally will be no good there . . . . The no-good Negro will naturally die in fifty years. The Negro who is wrangling about and fighting for social equality will naturally pass away in fifty years, and yield his place to the progressive Negro who wants a society and country of his own. . . . What are you going to expect, that white men are going to build up America and elsewhere and hand it over to us?”

On August 1, 1924, on behalf of the Fourth Annual Convention of the Negro Peoples of the World, Garvey wrote to Ethiopian Empress Zauditu,

“Greetings from the 400,000,000 Negroes of the world through our convention now sitting in New York. We hope for you and your country a reign of progress and happiness. Our desire is to help you maintain the glory of Ethiopia. Your expression of goodwill toward us two years ago through your consul-general is highly cherished and we are looking forward to the day when large numbers of us will become citizens of Ethiopia.”

Finally, on September 2, 1924, Marcus Garvey and the Universal Negro Improvement Association submitted the Petition of Four Million Negroes of the United States of America to His Excellency the President of the United States Praying for a Friendly and Sympathetic Consideration of the Plan of Founding a Nation in Africa for the Negro People, and to Encourage Them in Assisting to Develop Already Independent Negro Nations as a Means of Helping to Solve the Conflicting Problems of Race.

Thirty years later, in 1954, Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie made his first visit to the United States just days after the Brown vs. Board of Education decision heralded the end of the Jim Crow era. For 18 months before and for six weeks during HIM’s visit to the United States, HIM Haile Selassie began a Repatriation recruitment program for Black people in New York, Pennsylvania, Washington, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, and Illinois. HIM Haile Selassie I had granted land in Shashemane Ethiopia, had made a constitutional provision for the Repatriates immediate citizenship, and promised free transportation, a house rent-free, competitive salaries, and paid three-months vacations with round-trip tickets to America and back to Ethiopia. Black Americans interested in the Repatriation offer were instructed to fill out an application (Repatriation Census) available from the Ethiopian Embassy. The Emperor was looking for men of the highest integrity to rebuild Ethiopia. As a result, Black America was faced with the choosing between Integration and Repatriation. Black America chose integration.

It is the legacy of Repatriation, that began with the Ethiopian Government's official repatriation offer to the Universal Negro Improvement Association 1922 Convention one hundred years ago, that the Decade of Return Initiative recognizes, celebrates and continues through its work TOWARDS A RIGHT TO RETURN & CITIZENSHIP POLICY FOR DESCENDENTS OF PEOPLE TAKEN FROM TERRITORIES IN AFRICA DURING THE TRANSATLANTIC TRAFFICKING AND ENSLAVEMENT OF AFRICAN PEOPLE.

Please join us in celebrating this November by joining our

DECADE OF RETURN TO GUINEA BISSAU NOVEMBER 22-29, 2022

Interim President of the Guinea Bissau Swimming Federation, Siphiwe Baleka Gives Motivational Talk To Girls Futbol Team Members in Enterremento, Bissau

Enterremento, Bissãu, Guinea Bissãu January 16, 2022

Siphiwe Baleka, the Interim President of the Federação de Natação da Guiné-Bissau (Guinea Bissãu Swimming Federation) spoke to 18 girls at their futbol practice in Enterremento, Bissãu on Saturday, January 16.

Mr. Baleka was invited to give the motivational speech when one of the coaches explained that after just their first season, the girls made it to the final but lost the championship match. Many of them were disappointed and were losing motivation and they have not been receiving support from their federation even though several girls are on the Guinea Bissãu national A, B and C squads.

Watch the motivational speech:

Mr. Baleka was named Interim President of the Federação de Natação da Guiné-Bissau on October 26 when the President, Mr. Duarte Ioia, resigned citing “personal circumstances and health” as his reason for resigning. In addition, Mr. Ioia stated, “I am resigning my position as President and naming Mr. Siphiwe Baleka as Interim President, subject to Board approval, until GBSF by-laws are drafted and approved and the General Assembly can meet in March to hold elections.”

Former GBSF President Duarte Ioia congratulating Siphiwe Baleka on being approved as GBSF Interim President

250 Years Later, I Returned to the Village of My 5G Grandfather

I am writing this primarily for my father’s side of the family, all the descendants of Yancy Blake. I’ve told the story before how Yancy’s grandfather was taken as a boy from territory known as Nhacra in Guinea Bissãu and brought to Charleston, SC in the 1760’s. I also told the story how I consulted a b’sika, a spiritualist in Guinea Bissãu to discover that the village in Nhacra is called Untche.

According to my friend Claudio, “The name of this village is N'ghuntche, but as some people don't know how to write in Balanta, they pass so that they understand Unche.”

“I know this Tabanka very well and the people there too,” Claudio said. “I don't know, when you need to pay a visit there?”

Yes. I needed to pay a visit there. Like almost all Aftodescendants in the United States who have read the book or seen the movie Roots by Alex Haley, I dreamed of returning to my family’s village somewhere in Africa. But I never thought such a thing could happen. Where are the records from 250 years ago documenting what happened?

Claudio and I made plans to visit Untche on Saturday, January 9. On the morning, Daiana and I took a taxi from Bissãu to Safim where we met Claudio. From there we took a toka toka to Claudio’s tabanca where we walked for about an hour across fields and through mud marshes to get to the river.

It isn’t easy to get to Untche. The primary entrance is by canoe from the river. There are no roads to and from the river. The banks of the river are mud - it is very easy to get stuck in the mud and then you have a real problem!

Everyone using the canoes travels barefoot, so we did as well. They use a narrow path that is lined with tree branches to make a kind of foot path. But this was extremely uncomfortable, even painful to walk on. Yet most of the women were carrying children on their back and bundles on their head! If they could do it - and they did it with such grace and ease, then I had to make it.

While traveling across the river, I couldn’t help but imagine my 5G grandfather traveling by canoe with his mother, going to the market to trade food and supplies. Was this why he was such a great swimmer, as legend holds? Was this water the origin of my swimming success, passed down through transgenerational epigenetic effects?

Once on the other side, it was the same thing, walking on a painful stick-bridge up the bank and through the mud. Claudio and Daiana were having a conversation about the impact this has on the communities in Untche. There are no schools or medical clinics. Kids have to travel - REALLY TRAVEL - to get to school everyday. Heaven forbid someone gets seriously sick!

After walking another ten or fifteen minutes, we finally arrived at the tabanca in Untche. And here I told my story!

The tabanca Elder then said that they were told stories how some of the families went to the river where they were ambushed. A few escaped and warned everyone. They went to fight the “branchu” (whites) and killed them. But those that were captured were lost….

It was remarkable to them that after so many years of hearing this story, one of the descendants of the prisoners of war had returned. I can only imagine the conversation they had when I left!

Now, the next step for me is to go and spend some time there, really integrate into the Untche community. I already have a plan for this and I look forward to a very successful 2022!

Lessons From Amilcar Cabral and Siphiwe Baleka: The Dum Diversas War and the Incomplete Independence of Guinea Bissau

Left: Amilcar Cabral  Right: Siphiwe Baleka

Left: Amilcar Cabral Right: Siphiwe Baleka

This article explains:

  1. Amilcar Cabral taught that our history began before imperialism and Portuguese colonialism.

  2. Prince Henry of Portugal learned about the land of Guine in 1415 during the Battle of Ceuta and decided then to invade Guine.

  3. Pope Nicholas V and the King of Portugal declared War against Guine on June 18, 1452 in a document called the Dum Diversas.

  4. The final battle of the Dum Diversas War began on August 3, 1961 and was led by Amilcar Cabral.

  5. The Dum Diversas War, which lasted 521 years, ended on September 24, 1973 at Madina do Boe when Independence was declared.

  6. Guinea Bissau’s Independence is not yet complete because the prisoners of the Dum Diversas War that were captured and taken to the Americas and elsewhere have not yet been repatriated according to the Geneva Convention.

  7. The government of Guinea Bissau has a responsibility, under the Geneva Convention, to negotiate the repatriation of the remaining prisoners of the Dum Diversas War with foreign governments.

  8. The final project of Guinea Bissau’s Independence is called the Decade of Return Initiative and is being led today by Siphiwe Baleka.

PAIGC Declares Independence.jpg

“In our specific case, the struggle is the following: the Portuguese colonialists have taken our land, as foreigneers and occupiers, and have exerted a force on our society. on our people. The force has operated so that they should take our destiny into their own hands, has operated so that they should halt our history for us to remain tied to the history of Portugal, as if we were a wagon on their train. And they have created a series of conditions, within our land; economic, social, cultural conditions, etc. For this they had to overcome a force. During almost fifty years they waged a colonial war against our people: war against Manjaco, Pepel, Fula, Mandinga, Beafada, Balanta, Felupe, against nearly all the ethnic groups of our land in Guine. In Cape Verde, the Portuguese colonialists found the islands deserted. At the period when the great exploitation of African men as slaves in the world appeared. . . . they decided to turn the archpelago into a storehouse for slaves. Folk taken from Africa, namely from Guine, were placed. . . as slaves. . . .There was constant resistance to this force. If the colonial force was acting in one direction, there was always our force which acted in the opposite direction.”

- Amilcar Cabral, Part 1: The Weapon of Theory - Party Principles and Political Practice: 4. Unity and struggle

Amilcar Cabral said that the Portuguese took our land. He also said that at the period when slavery started, there was constant resistance by the people of Guinea Bissau. Amilcar Cabral also said,

“There is a preconception held by many people, even on the left, that imperialism made us enter history at the moment when it began its adventure in our countries. . . . We consider that when imperialism arrived in Guinea Bissau it made us leave history - our history. . . . The moment imperialism arrived and colonialism arrived, it made us leave our history and enter another history.”

When did imperialism enter the history of the people of Guinea Bissau? When did the Portuguese start the war against the people of Guinea Bissau of which the start of the final battle was declared on August 3, 1961?

ON THIS, THE 48TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE DECLARATION OF THE INDEPENDENCE OF GUINEA BISSAU, IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECLAIM OUR OWN HISTORY. THE INDEPENDENCE OF GUINEA BISSAU IS NOT YET COMPLETE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DUM DIVERSAS WAR.

BACKGROUND TO THE DUM DIVERSAS WAR

Excerpt taken from Volume II of Balanta B’urassa, My Sons: Those Who Resist, Reman:

“An anonymous writer of the twelfth century describes the bartering of salt for gold as follows:

‘In the sands of the country is gold, treasure inexpressible. They have much gold, and merchants trade with salt for it, taking the salt on camels from the salt mines. They start from a town called Sijilmasa… and travel in the desert as it were upon the sea, having guides to pilot them by the stars or rocks in the desert. They take provisions for six months, and when they reach Ghana, they weigh their salt and sell it against a certain unit of weight of gold, and sometimes against double, or more of the gold unit, according to the market and the supply.’

Map of the West African Trade.PNG

Timbuktu first became an important market as early as the eleventh century. The notable part it so long played in the commercial life of the interior of northwestern Africa was due to its geographical position. Situated close to the navigable waterway of the Niger and on the threshold of the desert, it was the meeting place of those who travelled by water with those who travelled by land – the people of the Sudan and the people of the desert. The former brought gold, grain and kolanuts which they exchanged for the salt, dates, and merchandise of the Maghreb. By the end of the thirteenth century it had become an important entrepot for the trade between Jenne, higher up the Niger, and Walata, and was trading not only with all parts of the Maghreb but also with Egypt. . . .

Mansa Musa acquired a European reputation as the result of a spectacular pilgrimage to Mecca in 1324, when he dazzled Cairo with his prodigal display of wealth. As we have already seen, the impression he then made earned him a reputation sufficient to win him a prominent place and a tribute to his wealth on the Catalan map of Abraham Cresques who calls him Musa Mali . . . .His wealth, like that of the independent city of Jenne, was due to the proximity of Wangara. Today this name survives only as that of a Moslem branch of the Mandingo people, but for centuries it was the name of the great-gold bearing districts of Bambuk and Bure, bounded on the north by the Senegal, on the west by the Faleme, on the east by the Niger and on the south by the Tinkisso. It was the region to which the great trans-Sahara gold route led, either by way of Timbuktu or Walata. It was for centuries the goal of all who traveled this ancient road . . . .

John I of Portugal acceded in 1390 and ruled in peace, pursuing the economic development of his realm. The only significant military action was the siege and conquest of the city of Ceuta in 1415.

Prince Henry of Portugal resolved to devote his energies to the conquest of Africa from 1415 when, at age twenty-one years, he won his spurs at the capture of Ceuta.

Ceuta.PNG

In Africa Prince Henry of Portugal first heard of the ancient caravan traffic of the Sahara bringing gold, slaves, ivory, and ebony from the remote countries of the negroes, already known as Guinea. It was this rich trade which kept the ports of Barbary thronged with Christian galleys bartering the trade goods of Europe with the Moorish merchants who controlled this traffic. Though at various times during the fifteenth century the directors of Portuguese policy toyed with the idea of territorial expansion in northern Africa, with the object of securing the trans-Saharan traffic for themselves, an alternative method and one promising more success was to attempt to establish contact with the sources of the wealth by sea, and so divert trade from the land routes and the Moorish middlemen.

[This motive is, in fact, attributed to Prince Henry by Dr. J. Munzer, who moved in official Portuguese circles, and may here be recording a tradition. ‘Knowing that the King of Tunis, that is, of Carthage, obtained much gold each year, he (Prince Henry) sent spies to Tunis, and having ascertained that this king dispatched merchants to southern Ethiopia who exchanged their goods for slaves and gold, determined to do by sea what the king of Tunis had done for many years by land.’]

It is stated in the Introduction to The Chronicle of the Discovery and Conquest of Guinea Volume II that,

“Here, by the capture of Ceuta (area north of Fez on the African side of the Straight of Gibraltar south of Spain), Prince Henry gained a starting-point for his work; here he is said (probably with truth) to have gained his earliest knowledge of the interior of Africa; here especially he was brought in contact with those Sudan and Saharan caravans which, coming down to the Mediterranean coast, brought news, to those who sought it, of the Senegal and Niger, of the Negro kingdoms beyond the desert, and particularly of the Gold land of ‘Guinea.’ Here also, from a knowledge thus acquired, he was able to form a more correct judgment of the course needed for the rounding or circumnavigation of Africa, of the time, expense, and toil necessary for that task, and of the probable support or hindrance his mariners were to look for on their route. . . .

The voyages initiated by Prince Henry were not, therefore, thrusts into the unknown, but part of a sustained attempt to wrest control of an important economic artery then in alien and often hostile hands. . . . The control of this trade was no doubt Prince Henry’s initial objective. . . .

Under king Edward, the colony at Ceuta rapidly became a drain on the Portuguese treasury, and it was realized that without the city of Tangier, possession of Ceuta was worthless. In 1437, Duarte's brothers Henry and Ferdinand persuaded him to launch an attack on the Marinid sultanate of Morocco. The resulting attack on Tangier, led by Henry, was a debacle. Failing to take the city in a series of assaults, the Portuguese siege camp was soon itself surrounded and starved into submission by a Moroccan relief army. In the resulting treaty, Henry promised to deliver Ceuta back to the Marinids in return for allowing the Portuguese army to depart unmolested. The Portuguese needed to find a new source of wealth.

It appears fair to say, therefore, that by 1448 the Portuguese were approaching Sierra Leone and had begun the detailed examination of the coastline between Cape Verde and the latter landmark. It is important to realize this, so that the voyages of the next decade can be appreciated in their true light, that is, as the completion of the work of their predecessors, and as commercial ventures, rather than as voyages of discovery. . . .”

In the years 1451-4 Portugal was also engaged in war with Castile over the Canaries. The difficulties of Prince Henry in regard to the financing of these expeditions was resolved by a proclamation of war in 1452 called the DUM DIVERSAS.

THE DUM DIVERSAS: POPE NICHOLAS V AND THE KING OF PORTUGAL DECLARE WAR ON GUINEA

The Papal Bull Dum Diversas issued by Pope Nicholas V, June 18, 1452, stated,

we grant to you full and free power, through the Apostolic authority by this edict, to invade, conquer, fight, subjugate the Saracens and pagans, and other infidels and other enemies of Christ, and wherever established their Kingdoms, Duchies, Royal Palaces, Principalities and other dominions, lands, places, estates, camps and any other possessions, mobile and immobile goods found in all these places and held in whatever name, and held and possessed by the same Saracens, Pagans, infidels, and the enemies of Christ, also realms, duchies, royal palaces, principalities and other dominions, lands, places, estates, camps, possessions of the king or prince or of the kings or princes, 

and to lead their persons in perpetual servitude, and to apply and appropriate realms, duchies, royal palaces, principalities and other dominions, possessions and goods of this kind to you and your use and your successors the Kings of Portugal.”

Here then is the formal Declaration of War that started the fight with the Portuguese that was ended on September 24, 1973 when the PAIGC National Assembly met at Madina do Boe and victory and Independence was declared. By October 4, the new Republic of Guinea Bissau was recognized by 38 nations.

Thus, the Dum Diversas War began on June 18, 1452 and ended on September 24, 1973. According to Amilcar Cabral,

“For the Africans who for five centuries have lived under Portuguese domination, Portuguese colonialism represents a reign of evil, and where evil reigns there is no place for good.” [ Part 1: The Weapon of Theory, Portuguese Colonial Domination]

The eleven-year armed liberation struggle that began on August 3, 1961 led by Amilcar Cabral, was merely the final battle of the Dum Diversas War that lasted 521 years! This fact has important implications for Guinea Bissau today, and especially for the descendants of the priosners of war that were captured and taken from Guinea Bissau to the Americas and elsewhere.

THE DUM DIVERSAS PRISONERS OF WAR AND THE GENEVA CONVENTION

Documentation exists showing some of the data on the number and identity of the Dum Diversas Prisoners of War from Guinea Bissau (see below). From 1701 to 1843, for example, 112,539 prisoners of war were captured and enslaved in the Americas.

The 1949 Geneva Convention, Article 4 (1) defines prisoners of war as

“Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.” Article 5 states, “The present Convention shall apply to the persons referred to in Article 4 from the time they fall into the power of the enemy and until their final release and repatriation. Should doubt arise as to whether persons, having committed a belligerent act and having fallen into the hands of the enemy, belong to any of the categories enumerated in Article 4, such persons shall enjoy protection of the present Convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal.”

The new Geneva Convention Protocol on Prisoners of War, which the United States has signed but not yet ratified and which went into force for some states on 7 December 1978, has provided in Articles 43 through 47 broader standards for prisoners of war, who come from irregular and guerilla units, than the terms of the 1949 Article 4. Article 45 of the 1978 Protocol states that a

“person who takes part in hostilities and falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be presumed to be a prisoner of war… if he claims the status of war, or if he appears to be entitled to such status, or if the party on which he depends claims such status on his behalf.

Until recently, the descendants of the people who were taken from Guinea Bissau as prisoners of the Dum Diversas War, could not identify themselves because of the ETHNOCIDE that was committed against them. However, because of the advent of the African Ancestry DNA test. such descnendants can now identify themselves. It should be noted that, according to the Geneva Convention, these living descendnats are still classified as PRISONERS OF WAR since they have NEVER BEEN RELEASED AND REPATRIATED.

The first of these prisoners of war to organize themselves and to declare their status are the Binham Brassa, or Balanta people, in the United States. Exaclty one year ago, on the 47th Anniversary of the Independence of Guinea Bissau, the President of the balanta B’urassa History and Genealogy Society in America, Siphiwe Baleka, notified United States Secrtary of State Michael Pompeo that,

the liberation and independence of the people of Guinea Bissau is not yet complete. The Balanta, Fulani, Mandinga, Papel, Manjaco, Beafada, Mancanha, Bijago, Felupe, Mansoaca, and others who were taken to the Americas - North, South and Central - as well as the Caribbean, are still living under foreign domination in the lands of their captivity and enslavement. . . . We invite the United States Government to do its part to complete the liberation and independence of Guinea Bissau by negotiating with us and the Government of Guinea Bissau, a peaceful Reparations and Repatriation treaty that would provide the justice due to the Balanta, Fulani, Mandinga, Papel, Manjaco, Beafada, Mancanha, Bijago, Felupe, and Mansoaca people in America who have yet to be returned to their independent homeland.”

Since then, Siphiwe Baleka has been the first to repatriate to his ancestral homeland and receive citizenship to Guinea Bissau. This is a significant start to the Decade of Return Initiative that has been launched. Two groups have already returned and the third group will be returning November 23-30. It is our hope that during this event, Guinea Bissau will conduct the first ever Prisoner of War Repatriation Citizenship Ceremony conferring citizenship on those descendants whose Naturalization Applications have already been submitted to the Ministry of Tourism.

Now, on this 48th Anniversary of the Independence of Guinea Bissau, the world, and especially the people and Government of Guinea Bissau, is reminded that Guinea Bissau’s Indpendence is not yet complete. Independence imposes a duty on the Government of Guinea Bissau to bring justice to its remaining prisoners of the Dum Diversas War by negotiating their repatriation with the various governments in the Americas, in Europe, and through the United Nations.

Prisoner of War Exports from Guinea Bissau2.PNG
Prisoner of War Exports from Guinea Bissau.PNG
Prisoner of War Exports from Guinea Bissau3.PNG

“The colonists usually say that it was they who brought us into history: today we show that this is not so. They made us leave history, our history, to follow them, right at the back, to follow the progress of their history.”
Amilcar Cabral

Siphiwe and Embalo.PNG

BRIEF NOTES ON BALANTA HISTORY BEFORE AND AFTER GUINEA BISSAU INDEPENDENCE

Excerpts from:

From the Margins of the State to the Presidential Palace: The Balanta Case in Guinea-Bissau

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2013

Marina Padrão Temudo

Balanta farmers 5.jpg

“Balanta farmers of Guinea Bissau are often regarded by neighboring communities as ‘backward’ and as a people who have refused modern life-worlds. Despite the fact that these farmers played a very important role in the making of Guinea Bissau, they were progressively removed from power after independence. However, they also developed original forms of contesting-marginality. . .

Balanta farmers 1.jpg

Balanta suffered an abrupt transformation with the advent of the slave trade but were capable of finding a life-world in the mangroves farming mangrove-swamp rice. . . With respect to the Balanta, the fact that some of the most important ceremonies in their social life (male initiations and marriages) are accompanied by millet or sorghum divination rituals reinforces the idea . . . that they previously were upland farmers whose main crops were millet, sorghum and yams, rather than rice (the crop central in their cultural identity today). . . .

Once in the mangrove frontier, the Balanta became the kind of ‘deep rural’ people Murray Last (1980) once described as following an ‘isolationist rationale’ in their marginalized societies. They resisted Islamization first and then the Westernization and (Christianization) brought by the Portuguese.rule. Unlike other groups who learned to see some positive aspect in either Muslim, Christian or Western impositions (such as the Nalu, who converted to Islam, sent their children to school, changed their styles of dress, etc.), the Balanta viewed them mostly as negative. They adopted a strategy of ‘conservative change’ (Last 1980), consciously developing only those elements that could strengthen their own livelihoods. . . . This isolationist rationale produced among their neighbors the image of the Balanta as a ‘backward’ and warlike people. Yet in as much as this image was also the product of their own agency, we might view it as ‘protective camouflage,’ one more element of their ‘deep rural’ identity. . . .

Balanta nyahes.jpg

During the liberation war (1963-74) and in the post-colony, however, young Balanta ‘aspirations to ‘likeness’’ - with local standards of progress and modernity began to grow and to turn the ‘isolationist rationale’ into a burden. . . . that gave rise to several schismatic processes. . . .

Throughout the whole colonial period which ended in 1974, the Balanta preferred to live off rice (both as subsistence and a cash crop with which they paid the hut tax and bought cattle), choosing not to go to school, privileging the use of their own language (even today many of them do not speak the country’s lingua franca, Kriol) and their fearsome initiation practices, and relying for their survival on physical strength, hard work, and last but not least, theft (mainly of cattle).

Balanta B’urassa History and Genealogy Society in America Vice President Sansau Tchimna visiting a rice field in Bairo Militar in 2021

While these practices probably had as many benefits in colonial times, they eventually created a stereotype of ‘backwardness’ and of the Balanta as the ‘ethnic other’ of the post colony. However, . . . the Balanta were skilled innovators in their agricultural practices and fiercely determined to ‘develop their existing ‘niche’, not to transform it’ (Last 1980). In fact, Balanta migration to the south was triggered by the search for new rice fields (particularly during the famine caused by dry years) along with the need to escape colonial forced labor (which at first did not affect the southern part of the colony). . . .

Balanta Migrations 3.JPG

According to Chabal (1983:69), Balanta farmers became involved in the anti-colonial guerrilla war (1963-74) more quickly than any other group. Amilcar Cabral (1974:86,87), the leader of the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC), explained the Balanta’s adherence to the anti-colonial struggle as a product of their decentralized and egalitarian social organization; he contrasted their attitude to those of the Fulbe, a state-based group that formed an alliance with the colonial power. Cunningham (cited in Chabal 1983:69,79) argued not only that the Balanta were highly exploited by land concessionaries (pointeiros), but also that their organization into age groups - some of them specifically trained for fighting - facilitated their integration into a guerrilla war. . . .

Local explanations are also multiple, but they all corroborate the idea that the Balanta were particularly oppressed in colonial times, more so than any other groups. Consider the following statement made by a Nalu:

“In colonial days, the Balanta were those who suffered the most with slaps, and lashing because they refused to dress, wash or work on the roads. The cipaios [administrative ‘policemen’] beat them and slept with their wives, something they never did to Muslims. In the pontas [land concessions] they stayed like captives and traders would also trick them, because they [Balanta] did not know money. (Interview with Aladji S. C., February 8, 2004). . . .”

In interviews conducted in 2004 with thirty-nine Balanta elders of different Cubucare villages, the most salient feature of colonial oppression was forced labor in the building of roads, during which not even food was provided, and the use of physical violence by colonial officers. . . .

Cubucare1.jpg
Cubucare2.jpg

When the anti-colonial guerrilla war began, Southern Balanta were particularly numerous in its fronts. According to several interviewees, the first Balanta to join the PAIGC were among the biggest thieves, because they were brave, they could walk in the night without being noticed, and they knew how to keep secrets. When the war began, these new commanders found opportunities for revenge against elders who previously had detained or tried them, accusing the elders of collaborating with the colonial power and in many cases having them executed. Furthermore, both commanders and villagers began to interpret the multiple deaths of young Balanta soldiers in terms of witchcraft committed by village elders. With the support of siks (spiritual practitioners), some commanders organized fiery-yaab groups. Accusations of witchcraft got out of control and many people were beaten to death, shot, or even burnt (see Jong 1987:78). The situation was so grave that one of the objectives of the first congress of the PAIGC, held in Cassaca (1963), was to stop accusations of witchcraft among the Balanta and to punish the main commanders responsible, some of whom were executed (see Chabal 1983:72,73,78,79),

Although this initial revolt against the elders was suppressed, the liberation war itself resulted in a considerable empowerment of Balanta young men.

Amilcar Cabral tried to fight what he considered ‘backwardness’ with political teaching and also by sending people to school (children as well as soldiers).

The war had also eroded social organization. For more than a decade no male initiation was conducted, which resulted in the relaxing of the rules controlling marriage and the creation of new households by young men. . . .

After independence, despite their participation in the war, the Balanta felt marginalized by the PAIGC. The politics of the new government led to stagnation in agriculture and the impoverishment of farmers. The fixing of rice price support until 1986, and the compulsory direct exchange between rice and other goods in state stores, affected Balanta farmers (mainly the southern ones, exclusively dependent on rice farming) much more than any other groups in Guinea Bissau. During the war, much of the paddy field infrastructure was destroyed, either by bombs or by lack of maintenance. . . .

In the midst of these dire conditions rumors spread in 1984 about a woman named Maria Ntombikte who was possessed by N’hala (Balanta’s High God) and had started to prophesize important changes in Balanta social life. Very quickly she gathered hundreds of followers. . . . Both the movement and its followers have been known ever since as ‘Kiyang-yang’ (sing. Yang-yang or ‘shadow’). According to the historian of religion Inger Callewaert, the Kiyang-yang movement represented the ‘birth of religion’ among the Balanta, meaning that until that moment they did not have a ‘religion’ in the sense of an ‘autonomous realm’ and institution (2000:173). . . .

[Here is how the movement is described by the journal Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry:

“In the autumn of 1984, a wave of rumors spread across southern Guinea Bissau about “mad” Balanta women who were unable to conceive or whose children had died. They tried to find relief from a woman who received messages from the Balanta god Nhaala, telling her to cure other people, pointing out medicinal herbs and commanding her to put an end to witchcraft in the country. What started as a healing cult for individuals developed into a movement of young people, especially women, that shook Balanta society to its foundations and had national repercussions. At the time, the first author worked as a psychiatrist in the country (from 1981 till 1985).1 The state authorities sent him to the south to treat the “crazy women.” He transformed this order into ethnographic research and, subsequently, tried to convince the government not to medicalize a collective dissociative phenomenon that, in his opinion, was caused by massive traumatic stress. To a large extent, the stress was caused by 22 years of liberation struggle that had ended in 1974. It had escalated into bombardments with napalm and the widespread use of landmines, resulting in large numbers of casualties, amputations and refugees. Part of the population chose to live in the liberated areas, whereas the Portuguese copied the Algerian and Indochinese policy of “protected villages,” obliging the local population to function as a shield against attacks of the guerrilla movement. The war caused further deterioration in the already primitive public health and educational structures that had thus far resulted in only 0.3% of the population qualifying as literate and “civilized.” This war of independence became successful due to the dominant role of the Balanta, who carried the brunt of the traumatic burden in terms of personal and communal losses (de Jong and Buijtenhuijs 1979). De Jong’s interpretations focused on the sociopolitical meanings of Kiyang-yang. He interpreted Kiyang-yang as a collective coping strategy for dealing with stressors originating in three fields of social change: the precarious socioeconomic position of the Balanta as an ethnic group within the newly formed state of Guinea Bissau, the position of Balanta women in relation to gender hierarchies, and postwar intergenerational tensions (de Jong 1987). This sociopolitical analysis agreed with previous analyses of social movements in religious anthropology that generally focused on a collective level, such as antiwitchcraft movements or collective possession (Richards 1935; Marwick 1950; Willis 1968; Ranger 1986; cf. Geschiere 1998; van Dijk et al. 2000; Lewis 2003 [1971]).”]

By the end of 1984 several Kiyang-yang communities were living in the bush, quite apart from the mainstream Balanta villages. . . . In interviews conducted in 2003 and 2004, Ntombikte referred to the perception that the Balanta have been very negatively regarded by surrounding peoples, and said that they face a predicament. ‘N’hala tells us to move forward,’ she said, but she added, the Balanta rarely go to hospitals and they are lax about sending children to school. She thinks not only that the Balanta are the makers of their own misfortunes, but also that witchcraft accusations have been instrumental in keeping them ‘backward.’ . . .

Viriato Pam and Paulo Correia

Viriato Pam and Paulo Correia

Nino Vieira.JPG

By 1985 the government had started to fear the Kiyang-yang movement and sent an investigative commission to the villages. . . . Ntombikte and some of the other leaders were taken to prison in 1985 to be interrogated. When they were released, all the Kiyang-yang activities were forbidden. A few months later, Joao Bernardo Viera (henceforth Nino Viera), then president of Guinea Bissau, fearing a coup d’etat by the Balanta, imprisoned one hundred and fifty of them (mostly those working in the army and the government). Viriato Pam and Paulo Correia (two important politicians) were accused of conspiring against the state and spreading disorder among the Balanta with the assistance of the Kiyang-yang and were executed. . . .

In order to understand the place of the Balanta in today’s political arena, we must also look more closely at how postcolonial party politics have affected the Balanta and how they have responded.

After eleven years of a liberation struggle, Guinea Bissau and Cape Verde (at first one state) attained full sovereignty in 1974 and a one-party regime was established. In November 1980 Guinea Bissau split from Cape Verde following a military coup conducted by Nino Viera, the most famous war commander and former prime minister. Viera ascended to the presidency of Guinea Bissau with the support of the Balanta, who constituted a majority in the army.

Over the years, several potential or actual rivals were successively accused of plots and imprisoned or executed (Forrest 1992:59-60).

Despite their major contribution to the liberation war, the Balanta - accused of ‘tribalism’ by Nino Viera and his entourage - were the group most deeply affected by these party and army ‘cleansings,’ which also served to ‘de-Balantacize’ the PAIGC and the army. This process, in turn, laid the groundwork for the future development of identity politics among the Balanta.

Kumba Yala

Kumba Yala

In 1994 the first multiparty presidential and parliamentary elections took place and the Party for Social Renovation (PRS) was created with a largely Balanta constituency. With the introduction of multiparty politics, a growing political instability ensued. Political mobilization and support for the PRS candidate, Kumba Yala, was achieved by the Balanta with hardly any resources. PRS leaders walked from one village to the next and meetings were held during the night, announced by the Balanta talking drums. The PAIGC won both parliamentary and presidential elections and Nino Viera remained as President of the republic, but there were widespread accusations of fraud. After the elections, the Balantas of Cubucare, feeling aggrieved by the defeat of their presidential candidate, began a temporary ‘strike’ against the other groups -globally considered as PAIGC supporters - by refusing to exchange their surplus for upland products and by raising the price of rice. Furthermore, the liberalization of the economy (which had started in 1986) and the country’s joining of the West African Monetary Union (in 1997) resulted in a worsening of economic conditions and in popular unrest. By 1997, then, there was discontent among war veterans and among the army in general.

In June 1998 a military uprising resulted in the most serious political crisis of Guinea Bissau since independence: the 1998-99 war. Nino Viera called for the support of neighboring Senegal and the Republic of Guinea, and the country was invaded by a foreign military force. A large majority of soldiers (mostly Balanta) and civilians supported the military junta that organized itself in opposition to Nino Viera, and the war ended eleven months later with the defeat of Viera, who went into exile in Portugal.

As a result of the elections that followed the end of the war, the PRS became the main political party and its leader, Kumba Yala, was elected president of the republic. Thus a segmentary ethnic group that had been characterized by its ‘isolationist rationale’ and that after independence had lost its political elite in the successive alleged coup attempts, emerged as a major force in Guinea Bissau politics and initiated a process named by some scholars as ‘the Balantization of the state apparatus’ (Nobrega 2003:293). At the time, other ethnic groups in Cubucare were mostly pessimistic about the Balanta ability to govern, predicting high levels of corruption (e.q., ‘now power is in the hands of real thieves’) and the possibility of violence among rival groups (it was frequently stated: ‘they are going to eat each other’).

After its electoral victory in 1999, the PRS started to create grassroots organization in rural areas. Following the former political practice of the PAIGC, ‘village committees’ were elected in each Balanta village or ward of Cubucare, but they were replaced by adherents of the PRS. These new committees were composed mainly of the most highly educated and hard-working young men -and also women - who also possessed good mobilization skills and were likely therefore to become an engine of social change. . . . The Balanta began to question the legitimacy of traditional authorities, stating that ‘the land has no owners’ (the Nalu landlords) and that the regulos (petty kings) who had been created by the PAIGC could now be abolished by the PRS.

PRS rule, neverheless, was characterized by a constant change of ministers, accusations of corruption, a coup overthrowing Kumba Yala (conducted with the support of some PRS leaders), and the assassination of two armed forces chiefs of staff. IF some Balanta of Cubucare had been ‘ashamed’ of their party’s rule (at least according to comments by non-Balanta people), the coup against Kumba Yala eroded even further their trust in the party. These events, together with an on-going feeling of being marginalized by their political elite, were important in improving Balanta relations with the other ethnic groups, which had deteriorated after the end of the war.

Kumba Yala 1.jpg

The 2004 parliamentary elections returned power to the PAIGC. However, in organizing themselves along ethnic lines, the Balanta became a major political force. Nino Viera came back to Guinea Bissau and was able to win the second round of the presidential elections as an independent candidate, although he would not have won without the support of the Balanta. Kumba Yala - also a candidate, again, for the presidency - was excluded from the second round and decided to support Nino Viera. As an uncontested leader for the Balanta, hew was able to convince his party fellows to forgive Viera and vote for him, channeling Balanta grievances toward the PAIGC. This would have seemed an impossible task some months before the elections. For people belonging to other ethnic groups, the Balanta are ‘not clever’ (i ka jiru) and are ‘easy to fool’ (fasil ngana). They also believe that Kumba Yala ‘has power over them’ (podera ki elis) and that he received Viera’s money to change their vote. Yet, the Balanta have a different take on the issue. According to them, Kumba Yala is an intelligent leader who, seeing that he was not going to win the elections, decided to support Vieira - the candidate they knew well - in exchange for government posts; in the meantime, he was preparing himself to win the next election. They also put forth the argument that Malan Bacai Sanha, the candidate who ran against Vieira in the second round of the elections, was not only a PAIGC member, but also a Muslim who wanted all of them to convert to Islam and made derogatory political statements about non-Muslim people, such as ‘wine mouths (those who drink wine) cannot rule Guinea Bissau’. Interestingly, Kumba Yala went to Morocco following the 2005 presidential elections. There he studied Arabic, and he returned to Guinea Bissau in 2008 to stage his public conversion to Islam in the city of Gabu, the historical captial of the Fulbe Empire. This was obviously a move to appeal to the Muslim electorate on the part of a man who takes his Balanta electorate for granted. Nowadays, the Balanta are learning the logic of the modern state and using the idioms of identity politics to their own advantage. Claiming to have been marginalized and to be the largest ethnic group is an effective empowerment strategy. At the same time, they are diversifying their farming system, engaging in trade activities, changing their ways of dressing, and beginning to accept the selling of cows (so as to invest in trade, to send children to school, to put tin roofs on their houses, and to buy televisions and other consumer goods, among other things); in other words, ‘trying to be modern'. At the political level the Balanta have also revealed that they are able to unite at crucial moments (mainly for elections), although their segmentary structure, in which competition among rival groups is dominant, remains a factor that reduces their capacity to maintain power and to nurture a political elite that will be recognized by the whole nation. . . .

The Balanta have been known for their fierce resistance to any form of external power or loss of their culture, either by the adoption of a more Westernized way of living or by a conversion to Islam. This ethos of enclosure - a legacy of the slave trade - was indeed instrumental in Balanta resilience to precolonial and colonial oppression. However, it also resulted in deep intergenerational and intergender tensions and in the marginalization of the whole group. The PAIGC political mobilization and the war of independence introduced fundamental changes in Balanta culture and in young men’s freedom. . . .

Post independence market and agricultural policies have ultimately been leading the Balanta to abandon mangrove-swamp rice production and to engage in cashew-tree cultivation instead. This activity allows them not only to obtain money or rice (in exchange for cashew nuts) with a very low labor input, but also to access large quantities of an alcoholic beverage produced with the cashew apple that also constitutes a good source of cash income. This change in the farming system corresponds to an increased integration into the market economy. In this way the Balanta are losing their specific niche that favored the maintenance of their strategy of ‘progressive change’ and are opening the war to wider transformation.”

BRIEF NOTES ON BALANTA MIGRATION IN GUINEA BISSAU

According to Ttchogue Rith, 2013, In Balanta ethnicity, there are two large chains called Kentohé and Nhacra. Balanta Kentohé is on the right bank of the Mansoa River crossing Guinea-Bissau from central to west. Balanta Nhacra is located on the left bank of the Mansoa River.

Balanta-Nhacra concentrate on the southern part of the country specifically in the Tombali region which has four major sectors (Catió ′′ Capital ", Cacine, Bedanda and Quebo), with most of the Balanta population because they emigrate from north to west and west to south .... The primordial factor of emigration from Balanta Nhacra to the south of the country is due to the demand for better soil for rice farming. Balantas were the largest rice producers in Guinea-Bissau.

That doesn't mean the Kuntoes don't migrate. In fact, they migrate less in relation to the Nhacras. The Kuntoes concentrate on the northern part of the country along with other peoples belonging to other ethnicities (Mandingas, Manhaws, etc) and practice the same farming activity as Balanta or Nhacras.

Balanta Migrations 3.JPG

Within the Balantas group, in general, there are other branches called Balanta Pache and Nagha. The origin of Balanta Pache may be related to a tabanka (village) whose name is Pache, but they do not only reside in this village like the Nagha. By oral tradition, they live among the Balantas of the Nhacra region, saying they descended from a link between women roles with Beafada men carried out in the localities of Dugal and Nague, primitive settlements of the territory. And indeed, Dugal means in Beafada, ′′ guest "; whereas the word ′′ Beafada ", in Balanta language, designates the brother, the son of the same father. (SIMES, londerset. Black Babel, Port Trade: 1935).

Balanta Migrations 4.JPG

Source: RITH, Ttchoge; 2013. Balantas Intellectual Blog in Diaspora SIMOES, Landerset., 1935. Black Babel: Ethnography, Art and Culture of Indigenous Guinea.

Back in May of 2020, BBHAGSIA and BAMFABA conducted a survey of Balanta Villages throughout the country. Here are some of the results:

Oio Region 1.JPG
Oio Region 2.JPG
Tombali Sector 1.JPG
Tombali Sector 2.JPG
Quniara Region 1.JPG
Quniara Region 2.JPG

Jornada de Quintino Medi para descobrir a Mãe Fula de Amílcar Cabral na Guiné-Bissau

A 8 de julho de 2021, o Presidente da República da Guiné-Bissau, Umaro Sissocó Embaló, fez uma visita de estado a Cabo Verde. No dia seguinte, o Presidente Embaló depositou uma coroa de flores no Memorial Amílcar Cabral, na Praia, afirmando:

“Cabral é cabo-verdiano, valorizamos os nossos lutadores e são os cabo-verdianos que sabem se valorizam ou não um filho cabo-verdiano digno. . . . Ele também é cabo-verdiano e guineense. . . “

Para alguns, a declaração do presidente Embaló apenas agravou o mistério e a confusão em torno da ancestralidade de Amílcar Cabral. Por que o Presidente da Guiné-Bissau não reivindicaria o maior herói da Guiné-Bissau?

Para ter certeza, a entrada de Amilcar Cabral na Wikipedia afirma,

“Cabral nasceu a 12 de setembro de 1924 em Bafatá, Guiné-Bissau, filho de pais cabo-verdianos Juvenal Antònio Lopes da Costa Cabral e Iva Pinhel Évora, ambos de Santiago, Cabo Verde. Seu pai veio de uma família rica de proprietários de terras. Sua mãe era dona de uma loja e trabalhadora de hotelaria para sustentar sua família, especialmente depois que ela se separou do pai de Amílcar em 1929. Sua família não era rica, então ele não pôde cursar o ensino superior. Amílcar Cabral foi educado no Liceu (Escola Secundária) Gil Eanes na cidade de Mindelo, Cabo Verde, e posteriormente no Instituto Superior de Agronomia, em Lisboa, Portugal. . . . “

Ficaria assim a impressão de que Amílcar Cabral era, sim, filho de pais cabo-verdianos, embora na região de Bafatá, na Guiné-Bissau.

Sempre admirei e me inspirei no Amílcar Cabral. Então, quando meu bom amigo Quintino Medi foi recentemente a Bafatá para visitar a casa de Amilcar Cabral, fiquei muito interessado. Como descendente de Balanta que sofreu oito gerações de etnocídio nos Estados Unidos e recentemente redescobriu minhas próprias raízes na Guiné-Bissau, achei curioso que ninguém pudesse me dizer a origem étnica do herói e filho mais famoso da Guiné-Bissau. Ouvimos rumores de que Amílcar Cabral era um Balanta, mas aprendemos que não era verdade - Amílcar Cabral era associado a Balanta porque eles compartilhavam o mesmo espírito de luta e amor pela liberdade, e Cabral trabalhou em estreita colaboração com os Balanta para vencer a luta pela independência contra o portugues.

Agora, pela primeira vez, meu amigo Quintino Medi esclarece o mistério das raízes de Amílcar Cabral na Guiné-Bissau.

“Pude visitar o museu Amílcar Cabral e a sua cidade natal, a casa onde nasceu e muitas coisas. Em primeiro lugar, uma vez em Bafata, foi a minha primeira vez. Sempre ouvi falar do lugar desde que nasci, mas foi a primeira vez que pude visitá-lo. Chegando lá, na entrada, passei por um grande arrozal e a cidade está assentada no alto de um morro. Para você, é possível ver a cidade inteira de uma vez. É muito bonita e dá a impressão de ser uma cidade moderna.

Assim que você entra na cidade de Bafata, você vê que é uma grande cidade com infraestrutura…. Essa é a primeira impressão e imediatamente você reconhece que no passado foi uma bela cidade projetada pela colônia portuguesa. Infelizmente, está em baixa por falta de manutenção da infraestrutura. Também visitei o centro da cidade, caminhando de um lado para o outro do centro. No meio está a estátua do Amílcar Cabral e tirei algumas fotos.

Terminei a minha visita no Museu Amílcar Cabral. É o lugar onde morou com sua família. Disseram-me que o lugar era propriedade de um libanês que o deu ao pai de Amílcar Cabral. Eles moraram lá. Tentei imaginar o tipo de ambiente em que ele viveu e em que cresceu. Você pode ver uma extensão de um campo de arroz em casca. Imediatamente imaginei que fosse uma das razões porque Amílcar Cabral escolheu ser agrônomo. Porque todo dia, quando ele acorda e sai de casa, a primeira coisa que vê, além das casas, é esse arrozal. Eu posso imaginar em uma idade muito jovem, ele viu este campo de arroz em casca todos os dias. Outra coisa que pode ter influenciado Cabral na escolha da agronomia, é que ao entrar em Bafata, a primeira coisa que se vê é o grande arrozal. E quando ele acorda, a primeira coisa que vê é esta extensão de arroz em casca. E sempre que ele sai da cidade, ele passa por outro campo de arroz em casca. Então talvez todo esse ambiente tenha influenciado Amílcar Cabral a estudar agronomia na Universidade. Foi o que pensei enquanto estava ali e vendo o que Amílcar Cabral deve ter visto todos os dias.

O Museu Amílcar Cabral encontra-se em bom estado de conservação no interior. O exterior está um pouco sujo, mas o interior está reabilitado com pintura nova e mosaico no chão. Segundo o diretor, foi reformado em 2012. Dá para ver, de imediato, uma biblioteca com diversos livros sobre Amílcar Cabral e alguns escritos por ele. Na parte principal do museu encontram-se diversas fotografias de Amílcar Cabral. Há fotos de Cabral aos sete anos e na adolescência, além de fotos depois da faculdade e antes de sua morte. Há um trecho com a cama de Amílcar Cabral também. Eu queria deitar sobre ele, mas o Diretor disse que é muito frágil e que posso quebrá-lo! Tirei algumas fotos e fiquei muito próximo do Amílcar Cabral.

Eu fazia várias perguntas e uma das coisas que me impressionou foi sobre a mãe de Amílcar Cabral. O Diretor me disse que a mãe “oficial” Amílcar Cabral de que se fala é apenas uma mãe adotiva. Não é sua mãe verdadeira. A mulher adotou Amílcar Cabral. Segundo o diretor, o pai de Amílcar Cabral, Juvenal, foi para Bafata. Ele foi enviado como professor. Colocaram o povo cabo-verdiano da época, que tinha privilégio educacional mais do que o guineense ... Com esse privilégio foi educado e mandado para Bafata para ser professor. Ele foi enviado um pouco para fora da cidade de Bafata. É uma aldeia Fula. Quando Juvenal esteve nesta aldeia, conheceu uma rapariga Fula e essa rapariga Fula e Juvenal apaixonam-se. Depois de algum tempo, a menina engravidou e, como sabem, naquela época na Guiné-Bissau, é como um crime engravidar fora da própria tribo. Imagine um cabo-verdiano para engravidar uma menina Fula. É como uma humilhação para a família.

Quando a família soube que Juvenal havia engravidado a menina, foi uma pena para a família. Após o nascimento, poucos dias depois, a família obrigou a menina a dar o bebê a Juvenal porque Juvenal não podia ficar ali porque não eram casados ​​e ele não era Fula. Então foi uma pena e depois de alguns dias, deram o bebê para o Juvenal e ele o levou. Juvenal também amava outra mulher cabo-verdiana e essa mulher aceitou receber o menino Amílcar Cabral e educou-o até todos os dias, até que ele foi para a Universidade.

Quando o Diretor me disse isso, fiquei um pouco surpreso porque isso é algo que nós (guineenses) não aprendemos. Aprendemos que o Amílcar Cabral nasceu da mulher cabo-verdiana. Agora, quando você vê que a pele de Juvenal é um pouco clara em comparação com a pele de Amilcar. E a mãe adotiva é uma mulher de pele MUITO clara. Amilcar tem a pele mais escura do que o pai. E isso me fez acreditar mais nessa história porque se a história oficial fosse verdadeira, provavelmente Amílcar Cabral seria muito mais leve. Então, para mim, isso foi uma prova de que a história da mãe Fula de Amílcar Cabral é verdadeiro.

No final, de tudo, perguntei ao Diretor que compromisso o governo tem com o Museu. O diretor disse que, infelizmente, o governo não faz nada em particular para manter o museu. Está um pouco abandonado e foi só em 2012, depois de muita pressão, que o governo fez alguma coisa. Eles não prestam atenção a isso. Mesmo para obter eletricidade, às vezes não há energia. Às vezes, o diretor tem que pagar seu próprio dinheiro para manter o lugar. Ele próprio não recebe há muitos meses, atrevo-me a dizer, há anos, não recebe. Portanto, é difícil manter o museu. Mas ele tenta fazer o seu melhor e continua comunicando ao governo central a necessidade de manter o museu e pagar a ele. Porque um lugar muito importante como aquele, o governo deve mantê-lo para todas as gerações, porque todas as gerações precisam saber sobre Amílcar Cabral, o fundador deste país. Então isso me deixou um pouco triste ... Depois disso, eu saí daquele lugar. ”