What is Pan-Africanism?

[MsLioness]

Originally Posted by Langalibalele

I am glad this discussion came up, because it is being waged in other forms across the blogosphere. It is being waged as a war of words on Sons of Africa, the BlackList, Blackthought and other discussion boards. However the quality of discussion is not strong at all and much of it is defined by subjectivism.

While Marcus Garvey called himself an African Fundamentalist, most of us today say he was a Pan Africanist. I continue to say that modern Pan Africanism developed from two separate sources: John S Rock, Henry Sylvester Williams and others who built the black pride movement, and the theory of class struggle articulated by Marx, Lenin and others.

One thing we always have to understand is that Pan Africanism is a developing theory. From the first Pan African Congress until 1945, there was little more than a race-based theory, which worked out African identity but did little as far as applying a class analysis. Then the Fifth Congress in 1945 applied a revolutionary content for the first time. That content became sharpened over time by contributions not only of Nkrumah but Fanon, Cabral, Sobukwe, Huey P, Walter Rodney, George Jackson, Yeshitela, Bantu Biko, Malcolm X and many others.

Many people have contributed to Pan Africanism, and many are still workingon it. There is Nkrumah's saying, "Theory without action is empty, and action without theory is blind." We must respect that. We must respect the notion that practice is universality, that is it clarifies our assumptions.

POWER TO THE PEOPLE!
IZWE LETHU I AFRIKA!

Pan-Africanism is an objective, not an ideology.

The total unification and liberation of Africa under scientific socialism.

you cannot improve upon Pan-Africanism, without it becoming something else. Socialism is not a theory, its a TRUTH.
And I am not being "indoctrinated" about it...it is a TRUTH.

Why this is so confusing to our People is because they lack a revolutionary ideology. So now they think Pan-Africanism is a thought or a place in your mind...almost worst than "the pie in the sky" church message. Thats idealism...and thats a problem.

Pan-Africanism is a real objective that calls for real action. Its passed the idea of being "possible or impossible." It is inevitable.

Why fight for it? Because we do not want to see it forestalled a second longer.

Socialism is a Truth...lets not forget that. Why would you delay truth?

Nkrumahism-Tureism is an ideology. Yes, this can grow.

Pan-Africanism, an objective... (like if you win a game...once you won, you won. you may go on to another game, but never can you play the same game and win...and improve upon winning, after you have won and the game is over and the pieces are put up).

[Majadi]

Originally Posted by MsLioness

Pan-Africanism is an objective, not an ideology.

The total unification and liberation of Africa under scientific socialism.

you cannot improve upon Pan-Africanism, without it becoming something else. Socialism is not a theory, its a TRUTH.
And I am not being "indoctrinated" about it...it is a TRUTH.

Why this is so confusing to our People is because they lack a revolutionary ideology. So now they think Pan-Africanism is a thought or a place in your mind...almost worst than "the pie in the sky" church message. Thats idealism...and thats a problem.

Pan-Africanism is a real objective that calls for real action. Its passed the idea of being "possible or impossible." It is inevitable.

Why fight for it? Because we do not want to see it forestalled a second longer.

Socialism is a Truth...lets not forget that. Why would you delay truth?

Nkrumahism-Tureism is an ideology. Yes, this can grow.

Pan-Africanism, an objective... (like if you win a game...once you won, you won. you may go on to another game, but never can you play the same game and win...and improve upon winning, after you have won and the game is over and the pieces are put up).

Pan-Africanism is most definitely an active concept, I have personally deemed it an objective and an active entity at the same time. It seems something we have not reached and something we have a clear, WORKING definition for. I tend to lean towards what you have said MsLioness, it seems more to get to than to theorize on!

[MsLioness]

Originally Posted by Majadi

Pan-Africanism is most definitely an active concept, I have personally deemed it an objective and an active entity at the same time. It seems something we have not reached and something we have a clear, WORKING definition for. I tend to lean towards what you have said MsLioness, it seems more to get to than to theorize on!

Pan-Africanism is an objective.

Its like this: once Africa was divided and split up between the different colonial powers, every nation within Africa wanted their land back. if you were to speak about that, you might say, "the Africans are developing a concept to liberate themselves, that they may receive their land back."

"receive their land back" is the objective.

we say scientific socialism because we understand that Socialism is whats next. The People are going to take over, inevitably.

Pan-Africanism IS an objective. Logically, it is an objective.

[Langalibalele]

Originally Posted by MsLioness

Pan-Africanism is an objective, not an ideology.

The total unification and liberation of Africa under scientific socialism.

you cannot improve upon Pan-Africanism, without it becoming something else. Socialism is not a theory, its a TRUTH.
And I am not being "indoctrinated" about it...it is a TRUTH.

Why this is so confusing to our People is because they lack a revolutionary ideology. So now they think Pan-Africanism is a thought or a place in your mind...almost worst than "the pie in the sky" church message. Thats idealism...and thats a problem.

Pan-Africanism is a real objective that calls for real action. Its passed the idea of being "possible or impossible." It is inevitable.

Why fight for it? Because we do not want to see it forestalled a second longer.

Socialism is a Truth...lets not forget that. Why would you delay truth?

Nkrumahism-Tureism is an ideology. Yes, this can grow.

Pan-Africanism, an objective... (like if you win a game...once you won, you won. you may go on to another game, but never can you play the same game and win...and improve upon winning, after you have won and the game is over and the pieces are put up).

I beg to disagree, my sister. Pan Africanism has always been improved upon, since Henry Sylvester Williams called for and organized the First Pan Africanist Congress in, what, 1900, until the Fifth Pan Africanist Congress in 1945, where it was defined as a unified Africa under one socialist state. I mean, the goal and objectives of Pan Africanism are guided by an ideology of Pan Africanism. There is no current congress which has codified its definition, so we all need to meet, to have a worldwide meeting of Pan Africanists, and work out a revolutionary agenda. Until that happens, my sister, your definition is as good as, say, Clarence Thomas's, if he decides to call himself a Pan Africanist. Don't think I am trying to belittle or insult you. Remember, the most foul elements like Jonas Savimbi called himself a Pan Africanist, as did Mobutu, Idi Amin and Yoweri Mluseveni. These bloodsucking sell outs have made a mockery of Pan Africanism, but the Imperialist ruling class has been able to get lots of mileage from them. So we need an organization or a Congress to codify a revolutionary agenda that is Pan Africanist.

[MsLioness]

Originally Posted by Langalibalele

I beg to disagree, my sister. Pan Africanism has always been improved upon, since Henry Sylvester Williams called for and organized the First Pan Africanist Congress in, what, 1900, until the Fifth Pan Africanist Congress in 1945, where it was defined as a unified Africa under one socialist state. I mean, the goal and objectives of Pan Africanism are guided by an ideology of Pan Africanism. There is no current congress which has codified its definition, so we all need to meet, to have a worldwide meeting of Pan Africanists, and work out a revolutionary agenda. Until that happens, my sister, your definition is as good as, say, Clarence Thomas's, if he decides to call himself a Pan Africanist. Don't think I am trying to belittle or insult you. Remember, the most foul elements like Jonas Savimbi called himself a Pan Africanist, as did Mobutu, Idi Amin and Yoweri Mluseveni. These bloodsucking sell outs have made a mockery of Pan Africanism, but the Imperialist ruling class has been able to get lots of mileage from them. So we need an organization or a Congress to codify a revolutionary agenda that is Pan Africanist.

I am speaking about Pan-Africanism as an objective...not an ideology.

How more developed can this get: The unification and liberation of Africa under scientific socialism.

Once we reach this objective, the next phase begins...which will not be called Pan-Africanism again.

Its not Pan-Africanism if it is not a united and liberated Africa under scientific socialism. Period.

[Majadi]

Originally Posted by MsLioness

Pan-Africanism is an objective.

Its like this: once Africa was divided and split up between the different colonial powers, every nation within Africa wanted their land back. if you were to speak about that, you might say, "the Africans are developing a concept to liberate themselves, that they may receive their land back."

"receive their land back" is the objective.

we say scientific socialism because we understand that Socialism is whats next. The People are going to take over, inevitably.

Pan-Africanism IS an objective. Logically, it is an objective.

O.K. I intended to agree with you after your statements let me reafirm that I do!

[Arecidea Kwilemie]

Pan-Africanism: Agenda for African Unity in the 1990s
An address by Julius O. Ihonvbere, 27 May 1994.

Where do we go from here?
By Ayize Atiba, 8 March 1995. A call for pan-African solidarity.

The 1945 Pan-African Congress and its Aftermath
By Simon Katzenellenbogen, 2 May 1995. Manchester will celebrate the anniversary of the 1945 Pan-African congress held there fifty years before.


Address by Mandela to the National Assembly of Mali
Mamako, 2 March 1996. African unity and Republic of South Africa's role.

Women's Contribution to the Pan-African Struggle: Revisited
By M. Mason, 27 March 1997. Focus on the Fourth Pan African Congress held in New York City, August 1927, but also conferning the First Congress, Paris 1900.

Creation of a Pan-African Senate: A Call for Action
6 May 1997. A call for a Pan-African Senate and a letter to President Mugabe, incoming head of the OAU.

Africans on the Move
From the Nkrumaist, by Sis. Marpessa Kupendua, 19 February 1998. Pan-Africanism in the perspective of the African diaspora.

World History Achives

[QenuMenUas]

Originally Posted by MsLioness

Most of our struggles, brother, are ideological struggles...

Most of our Pro-Black/Afro-Centric brothers and sisters believe and live an ideology that is, in fact, idealism. Pan-Africanists are materialists. That is a major conflict in ideology. It drives me insane to hear our people, sisters especially, talk as if there is some force somewhere that we yield which can just make something happen. For example, BlackQueen when she came with that idea of using patience and Strong Black Love (whatever that is) to liberate an enslaved mind. Idealism is exactly non-promising, and I wonder how to secure any development under such philosophy.

And from Marx to Mao to Che to Ho Chi Minh to Nkrumah...revolutionary organizations need a revolutionary ideology....

One thing we have to eliminate is the myth about the "conscious" group/community.

Pan-Africanists are not anti-religious...we're just not going to use our religion, or system of belief, in a way to make unreal things real and real things unreal or to separate us or distract us from our goals.

But, for now, we settle with begging our People to just JOIN an Organization to teach organizing skills, which will serve as catalysts for the revolution.

Pan-Africanism is a real objective, and a specific objective. Under Pan-Africanism falls freedom, unity, black power, and probably even "strong black love." But Freedom...not specifically physical/material, neither unity, black power, nor strong black love. Those words have lost their physical meanings and have been replaced with these abstract and watered-down "feelings" (ideas) of what they truly are.

When Marcus Garvey talked about it, he was not playing, he was physically shipping people home. When Malcolm talked about human rights, he was going to, physically, put america on international courts to prove his point on the inhumane treatment of his people. Elijah Muhammad told his people to physically separate themselves from these people.

Pan-Africanism is an objective that is real and specific to our needs. Dialectical materialism keeps Pan-Africanism in check. It promises us that we will never resort to singing ourselves from captivity, once we are liberated. We will physically fight.

Pan-Africanism for us in america is so simple. We are supporters of Socialism>Communism being the objective, ultimately. We are to serve as a fifth column of Africa...making alliances with other revolutionary organizations world-wide to attack imperialism, fight for human rights and equality in america, to which we will never receive under capitalism...so a long-lasting fight, a reason to continue spreading the reality to our people.

Are a few technical terms going to get in the way of us taking up responsibility? It shouldn't. Most of the terms become daily use if we can get a brother or sister to just read a book. Terms like: oppression, liberation, enslavement, Pan-Africanism, neo-colonialism, colonialism...become a natural tongue with one run-through of The World and Africa by DuBois. Terms like: enemy, freedom, guerrilla warfare, socialism, The People...become natural with Che: A Revolutionary Life. One book, thoroughly read, can add some great and efficient words to the vocabulary.

When we accept that it is not the term itself, but the fact that the enemy has strategically extinguished our desire to know such words...we can go on with this thing and get our brothers and sisters into our organizations.

Pan-Africanism is so important, and we should never allow ourselves to lose site or desire to get us there. So what if it is not-likely that we will see it? Our children are going to still be here, do they not deserve to be free? Do not their children deserve to govern themselves and not be oppressed?

We have to fight EVERYDAY.

Pan-Africanism is likened to be an industrialized and technologically advancing form of communalism. To which, some of our brothers and sisters who get caught up in the whole "sankofa" thing, think that we are trying to move backwards, physically, forreal. This is another problem.... That is all wrong. We are moving FORWARD. Anyways, we learn that their is no way to do that...that is impractical.

And that is one of the major reasons why we push Pan-Africanism with so much force. Some people think our objective is a capitalist Africa or over-throwing the american government to become a black capitalist america, going back to communalism days, and just a whole bunch of mush...and un-realities.

Ideology is VITAL to the revolution.

Peace Queen,

I have to respectfully disagree with the thrust of your post. It occurs to me that many Pan-Africanists were, in the first place, "idealists"; that Blyden, DuBois, Garvey, and Woodson (and others who contributed either directly or in an auxiliary sense) were committed to an idea of an overarching African ethos that would unite cultures that colonialists had rent apart.

Nkrumah himself, a chief proponent of "scientific socialism" as against the communalism-based schemes of, say, Nyerere (notably, at a time of increasing isolation from both within and without Ghana), had "the African Personality" as a basic prong in his nascent Pan-African arguments...and it was, indeed, a "mystical" (i.e. non-material) concept.

Now, whatever legitimacy there is to the ideas of "the African Personality" and African philosophy, autochthonous modes of democracy and government and their amenability to a liberating socialism, traditional cults in interface with Western religion, and other areas which are the provenance of cultural analyses, can only be uncovered by an African-centered approach.

Whether Afrocentricity is sometimes diluted by our less sophisticated comrades (and can we honestly say that Mao, Fanon, Cabral, etc. haven't been improperly employed by unsophisticated Black "revolutionaries"?), that doesn't change the importance of the metaphysical for the Pan-African objective.

And there are plenty of materialists (Paulo Freire comes to mind) who would extend the implications of Marxian dialectics into the realm of the faith that binds them to their compatriots. So I don't know that leaving aside "idealism" for a procrustean emphasis on historical materialism is the best route for Pan-Africans to take...it certainly doesn't lend to our credibility with the oppressed.

Edit: it occurs to me that, in saying the colonialists "rent cultures apart," one might perceive some idealism in my thoughts on pre-colonial Africa. I'm well-aware that African cultures had some in-built contradictions; what I don't believe is that these contradictions render every African idea either superfluous or backwards vis-a-vis Western industrialized civilizations. And it's the mission of the Pan-African culturalist to divine the most resilient of our indigenous cultural products, to posit them in a common (enough) origin to pre-empt balkanization, and to synthesize them (thus fortifying them against a mounting postmodern threat, masquerading as the "end of human thought"... imported from populations whose interests are inimical to our own).

[manifestdestiny]

Scientific socialism? Moreso, pragmatic socialism. However, I think the definition of Pan Africanism should be redefined to a certain degree. I have issues with defining reality by way of text, in time, the text will change and lose it's relevance. Imperialism is real but it is not limited to western or eastern interests. Racism is real but perpetuated by the stratification of society and group conflict over scarce resources. Thus, Africanism to me is the return to a perception of existence wherein which there was a partnership between man and nature, a sense of harmony. The rich and various African culltures and ethnic niches of that time understood the interdepency of existence. Something blind ambition and greed has supressed within us. Our civilizations date back to 1.8 million years and yet, within a mere 200 years we have allowed the world we know to be pushed to the brink of destruction. Pan-Africanism is a nationalist solution to a global situation. There are greater forces at play and I feel that Pan-Africanism should include this in its identity. Regardless, I appreciate the information and the posts.