The Black Authority, The Black Channel, and The Business

[Black Haven]

"Sharingan Boy"

Name yourself after a children's anime, brehs.




You expect to be intellectually respected?

Boy you a avid dikk rider of Kodak black you should be the last authority figure on "intellectual respect"

 

[Concerning VIolence]

Boy you a avid dikk rider of Kodak black you should be the last authority figure on "intellectual respect"

Sounds like you're stalking me.

 

[kayslay]

As long as you don't say AAs define blackness and Pan-Africanism for all black peoples of the diaspora, we're good.

Who ever said that?
Y'all love to come in African American spaces talking about well in Africa And in the Caribbean....
we're in Our country doing our own thing.
We don't force our views onto you all so what's the beef?

 

[New Username]

AAs define blackness and we are the epicenter of [black] culture.

 

[IllmaticDelta]

You know Haitians called themselves the first black republic? My dad still says that on the daily.

That would be the first root of a "global black consciousness"

that is not the same "Black" that we know today

this is more like the modern concept

AAs weren't even free until the late 19th century.

there have been free aframs since the 1700's

The frist Pan-African Conference was held in London by an Afro-Trindadian in response to the Berlin Conference.

Before that a global black identify among African-descended people was barely an imagination.

First Pan-African Conference - Wikipedia

Henry Sylvester-Williams - Wikipedia

nope....not the first

That wasn't Pan-African. All AAs and a supposed Egpytian named Yakub just discussing contentinental Africa...

There's barely any sources on this event, that's how much no one gave a fukk.

From August 14, 1893, to August 21, 1893 probably the largest number of African American participants in a world's fair event assembled as part of the Congress on Africa, or as it was sometimes referred to, the Congress on African Ethnology, or the Congress on the Negro.

The World's Columbian Exposition: Paul V. Galvin Digital History Collection

Notice it's the "conference ON Africa" or "Congress on the Negro"


Also that conference wasn't influential at all and didn't spur shyt.

aframs once again giving the global "black" world a style to run with

The Pan-African Conference movement was begun in Chicago in 1893 with such people in the leadership as Bishop Henry McNeal Turner. This Pan-African movement continued with conferences held in England in 1900 under the direction of Trinidadian Henry Sylvester Williams, with W. E. B. DuBois and other African Americans playing a prominent role.

In the aftermath of World War I, the Pan-African movement was revived with DuBois organizing a Congress in Paris in 1919 with other leaders from the African world, including Addie W. Hunton, who had gone to France during the war to work with African-American servicemen suffering under deplorable conditions.

The [Marcus] Garvey Movement—the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA)—founded in Jamaica and relocated in New York, reached its zenith during the 1920s with millions of members and supporters, its Negro World newspaper and its establishment of chapters throughout the world, including the African continent.
​

​

www.workers.org/2007/us/detroit1967-0816/

Atrocities committed by the Belgians in Congo, the British in southern Africa and East Africa as well as the French, Germans, Spanish and Italians in other regions of the continent, had a tremendous impact on Africans living in the western hemisphere. The descendants of Africans who were enslaved in the North America, the Caribbean and Latin America, began to hold meetings on how they could have an impact on alleviating the problems of European intervention in their ancestral home. These Africans saw a direct connection between the colonialism, national oppression, racism and race terror inflicted on people in the West and the conditions under which people were living in the homeland.

As a result in 1893 the first noted Pan-African Conference was held in Chicago. This meeting, which lasted for an entire week, is now recognized as a turning point in the struggle of Africans to build an international movement against colonialism and imperialism and for national independence and continental unity.

The 1893 Chicago Congress on Africa predated by seven years the first formal international Pan-African conference that was held in London in 1900 under the direction of Trinidadian-born Henry Sylvester Williams. This Congress was attended by such activists as Bishop Henry McNeal Turner of the African Methodist Episcopal Church (AME) and Bishop Alexander Walters of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion (AMEZ).

Although notables such as Edward Wilmont Blyden of Liberia and Booker T. Washington had promised papers but did not attend, a broad range of topic were discussed including “The African in America”, “Liberia as a Factor in the Progress of the Negro Race”, and a very challenging presentation entitled “What Do American Negroes Owe to Their Kin Beyond the Sea”.”

Henry McNeal Turner utilized the Chicago Congress to advance the notion of repatriation as a mechanism for building self-determination among Africans in the West and on the continent. He had warned the African-American people some months before that France had demonstrated territorial designs on the nation of Liberia.

This conference in 1893 pave the way for the Pan-African conference held in Atlanta, Georgia some two years later in 1895 that was sponsored by the Steward Missionary Foundation for Africa of Gammon Theological Seminary.

The 1895 meeting was attended by people such as John Henry Smyth, who served as a minister resident and consul general to Liberia. In his paper presented to the Atlanta gathering he stated that “European contact has brought in its train not merely the sacrifice, amid unspeakable horrors, of the lives and liberties of twenty million Negroes for the American market alone, but political disintegration, social anarchy, moral and physical debasements.”

Some two years later the African Association was formed in England on September 24, 1897. This organization was spearheaded by Henry Sylvester Williams, a lawyer from Trinidad, who would later play an instrumental role in organizing a Pan-African Conference in London in July of 1900. This gathering is often considered as the turning point in the world-wide struggle for African unity and liberation that characterized the 20th century.

During the period of the first decade of the 20th century, there were a number of efforts to form race organizations in the United States and other parts of the Diaspora. In 1905, the Niagara Movement was formed on the United States and Canadian borders.

Pan-African News Wire: The Expanding United States Economic and Military Role in Africa

to add to that

The Chicago Congress on Africa in 1893

During the course of the time in which the Columbia Exposition was being held, there was another historical gathering which took place known as the Chicago Congress on Africa. This gathering is referred to by some as the First Pan-African Conference or Congress in world history. The event took place in several areas of the city of Chicago including venues associated with the Exposition and others which were not.

It was during this period that the rise of colonialism in Africa was intensifying at a rapid rate. Just nine years before the Berlin Conference was held in Germany which divided the continent up as political spheres of economic influence by Europe and the U.S.

The impact of the Atlantic Slave Trade from the 15th through the second half of the 19th centuries had set the stage for the rise of colonialism in Africa, Central America, South America and the Caribbean. However, there was a long time commitment among African Americans to either repatriate to the continent or to play some role in its reconstruction from slavery and colonialism.

This was reflected in the mass outpouring surrounding the Chicago Congress on Africa. Reed illustrates: “From August 14, 1893, to August 21, 1893 probably the largest number of African American participants in a world's fair event assembled as part of the Congress on Africa, or as it was sometimes referred to, the Congress on African Ethnology, or the Congress on the Negro. Its eight-day length included a citywide Sunday session that entered the sanctuaries and pulpits of scores of churches, so thousands of interested church congregants listened to information on the status of the global African population. Identified fully for what it was, the Congress on Africa combined the intellectual with the ideological, religious, philosophical and scientific to formulate an agenda facilitating, in effect, a dualistic American African public policy on the status of continental and Diaspora Africans.”

Well known political figures such as Edward Wilmot Blyden, a repatriated African born in the Caribbean and living in Liberia, along with Booker T. Washington of Tuskegee Institute in Alabama, had been anticipated to attend and present papers, however neither appeared at the gathering. Nevertheless, there were papers delivered on “The African in America”; “Liberia as a Factor in the Progress of the Negro Race”; and a very challenging presentation entitled “What Do American Negroes Owe to Their Kin Beyond the Sea.”

Bishop Henry McNeal Turner of the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church was joined with Bishop Alexander Walters of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion (AMEZ) and Alexander Crummell of the Episcopal Church. Turner during the Chicago Congress advanced the notions of the African origins of humanity and civilization.


He also strongly advocated for the repatriation of Africans to the continent as a means of exercising self-determination and nation-building. Turner had stated several months prior to the Congress that France was enhancing its territorial ambitions towards Africa, particularly in Liberia, being a major factor in the colonization of the continent.

This Congress provided the impetus for another Pan-African Conference held in Atlanta, Georgia, two years later in 1895. This gathering was sponsored by the Steward Missionary Foundation for Africa of the Gammon Theological Seminary. This meeting was attended by John Henry Smyth, who was the minister resident and consul general to Liberia.

In his paper presented to the Atlanta conference, Smyth emphasized that: “European contact has brought in its train not merely the sacrifice, amid unspeakable horrors, of the lives and liberties of twenty million Negroes for the American market alone, but political disintegration, social anarchy, moral and physical debasements.”

Feminist thought and the Pan-African struggle: From Anna J. Cooper to Addie W. Hunton | Pambazuka News

 

[IllmaticDelta]

"Around 1442, the Portuguese first arrived in Southern Africa while trying to find a sea route to India.The term negro, literally meaning "black", was used by the Spanish and Portuguese as a simple description to refer to the Bantu peoples that they encountered. Negro denotes "black" in Spanish and Portuguese, derived from the Latin word niger, meaning black" - Wiki

Negro or Black is an european concept (yeah, fukk em). But at the end of the day every negroid is a black man to me. And if there were no african americans, guess what europeans will still call africans? Black. Negro = Black

Neg away folks.

that is not the same as the modern concept.


What's In a Name?
Negro vs. Afro-American vs. Black

Are there substantial grounds for the violent opposition to the word "Negro"?

To answer these questions and to relate them to the whole bubbling controversy, one must go back 400 years. For Americans of African descent have been arguing about names ever since they were forcibly transported from Africa by Europeans who arbitrarily branded them "Blackamoors," "Moors," "negers," and "negros." The English word "Negro" is a derivative of the Spanish and Portuguese word negro, which means black. The Portuguese and Spanish, who were pioneers in the African Slave Trade, used this adjective to designate the African men and women whom they captured and transported to the slave mart of the New World. Within a short time, the Portuguese word negro (no capital) became the English noun-adjective "negro." This word, which was not capitalized at first, fused not only humanity, nationality and place of origin but also certain white judgements about the inherent and irredeemable inferiority of the persons so designated The word also referred to certain Jim Crow places, i.e., the "negro pew" in Christian churches.

Although the word "Negro" became a generally acceptable designation in the l930s, there was strong opposition from militant radicals like Adam Clayton Powell, who continued to use the word "black," and from militant nationalists like Elijah Muhammad, who continued to speak of "so-called Negroes." This opposition, inchoate and unorganized, was sharpened in the '50s and '60s by the rhetorical artistry of Malcolm X and the emergence of the Black Power movement. But MalcoIm X and the Black Power movement were reflections of a general crisis of identity which is similar in tone and urgency to the crises of the 19th century and the first decades of the 20th.

It appears, from this short historical sketch, that the word "Negro" has been a generally acceptable term in the black or, if you prefer, the Negro community for relatively short time. It appears also that there has been continuous and sustained opposition to the term. Contemporary critics of the word "Negro" say Booker T. Washington was primarily responsible for the campaign in which the word "Negro" supplanted the the words "black," "colored," and "Afro-American." There is truth in this -- the Negro Year Book and the Negro Business League were Washington projects -- but it is not the whole truth. The movement for adoption of the word "Negro" was also given a strong impetus by militant radicals like W. E. B. Du Bois, who was one of the founders of the American Negro Academy, and militant nationalists like Marcus Garvey, who used the word "Negro" consistently and named his organization the Universal Negro Improvement Association.

Baird objects to the word "Negro" on two grounds. 1) The word "Negro" is a slave-oriented epithet which was imposed on Americans of African descent by slavemasters. "The word came into use," Baird says, "in connection with the enslavement of the African in the New World. The use of the word became connected with what Earl Conrad has so well called the "Negro-Concept," that grotesque conception of the African which has been shaped in the mind of the European and forced with Procrustean cruelty on the person and personality of the black American."

2) The word "Negro" is not geographically or culturally specific. "Historically," he says, "human groups have been named according to the land from which they originated .... The unwillingness of the dominant group to recognize the humanity of the African is evidenced by the fact that when it is necessary or desired to identify Americans in terns of the land of their origin, terms such as Italian-American, Polish-American, Spanish-American, Jewish-American (referring back to the ancient kingdom and culture of Judaea), etc., are employed. In the American mind there is no connection of the black American with land, history and culture--factors which proclaim the humanity of an individual." Baird denies that the English word "Negro" is a synonym for black. He says. "'Negro' does not mean simply 'black,' which would be the simple, direct opposite of 'white.' We talk about a 'white man' or a 'white Cadillac'; we may talk, as many unfortunately do, of a 'Negro man,' but never of a 'Negro Cadillac.'

Baird believes the word "Afro-American" will supplant the word "Negro." He does not object to the term "black," which, he says, lacks the historical and cultural precision of the word "Afro-American." He is supported in this view by Richard Moore, Harlem bookstore owner and author of The Name "Negro"--It's Origin and Evil Use. Moore says the word "Negro" is so "saturated with filth," so "polluted" with the white man's stereotypes, that "there is nothing to be done but to get rid of it." He prefers the word "Afro-American" because of its "correctness, exactness, even elegance." He believes the adoption of the word will force "these prejudiced European-Americans" to reevaluate black people in terms of their history and culture. "Black," Moore said, "is a loose color designation which is not connected with land, history, and culture. While I recognize it as a step forward in getting rid of the term 'Negro,' I think it is necessary to take the next step."

Bennett, What's In a Name? Negro vs. Afro-American vs. Black (1967)

 

[IllmaticDelta]

The London Pan-Afican Congress is still infuential to this day and is celebrated despite it ending 72 years ago.








Not that Chicago shyt GTFOH.

that's just the legacy of afram influence just like the Black Panthers had in London

The Amazing Lost Legacy of the British Black Panthers

While, in the mid-1960s, the Black Panthers – the famous, American, shotgun-toting ones – were scaring the crap out of white America, the British Black Panthers (BBP) were educating their communities and fighting discrimination. Outrightly racist laws that threatened to repatriate entire swathes of the black population were being pushed into place, and sections of the white middle classes were resentful towards the black community. But the BBP – based in Brixton, south London – helped to change all that, educating British black people about their history and giving them a voice to speak out against prejudice.

However, despite their successes and influence on black communities in the UK, very little is known about the British Black Panthers. Knowledge of the group – which included figures such as Darcus Howe, Linton Kwesi Johnson and the late Olive Morris – and its aims and achievements isn't aided by the fact that they only officially existed from 1968 till 1972. Luckily, Neil Kenlock – one of the group's core members – took it upon himself to become their official in-house photographer, capturing images of their meetings, campaigns, marches and presence in local communities.

This month, a new exhibition put together by Organised Youth – a group of 13-25-year-olds who were inspired by the activism of the British Black Panthers – will profile Neil's work at a gallery in Brixton, alongside contemporary photos, interviews and a documentary film (click here for more information). I had a talk with Neil ahead of that about the Panthers and their legacy in Britain.

VICE: So, first off, how did you become involved in the the British Black Panther movement?

Neil Kenlock: Well, I encountered racism when I was quite young – maybe 16 or 17. I went to a club in Streatham, and when I arrived I was told it was full and that I should come back next week. Which I did, and I was then told they wouldn't let me in because they didn't want "my type" in there. I protested that I didn't see why I shouldn't be let in. There were, of course, no discrimination laws in those days, so there was no one to tell about this.

And you were never let in?

My friend and I pointed out that we were well dressed, weren't there to make trouble and just wanted to enjoy ourselves like other people, so what was the problem? We were told to go or the police would be called. We wouldn't go, so they called the police, who then told us that we weren't wanted in the club and that we should go home. I pointed out we weren't breaking any laws and the police told us they would arrest us if we didn't leave. I really didn't want my parents to have to come to Streatham police station and bail me out, so I left. But, on my way home, I decided that I was going to fight against unfairness and discrimination in this country.

Neil Kenlock self-portrait. 1970.

How did you come across the Panthers, then?

Well, some weeks later, I saw a Panther in Brixton giving out leaflets about police brutality and discrimination. I joined them then.

Had you already been exposed to the American Black Panthers prior to that?

I'd seen them on TV and things, but I hadn't taken much notice. It might have flashed across my mind, but it wasn't really in my consciousness. It was all more to do with what had happened to me, personally, and that I felt it was wrong. I saw them giving out those leaflets and thought, 'This is what I want to be – I want to fight against discrimination and racism and all the bad things that happen to us.' So I joined.

When was that?

About 1968, just after I left school.

And at that time how well organised was the movement? Was it a unified group or more ad hoc?
It was fairly organised. They had a building they were working from in Shakespeare Road, Brixton and a house in north London. They were having meetings, talking about history and all the societal systems – capitalism, socialism and all that stuff. They were teaching us things we weren't taught at school. Back then, we weren't taught any black history – we knew we'd been slaves, but there was no information about the struggles we had faced to get our freedom. We were taught to be proud of our history and colour. Black people then weren't clear about themselves; they weren't strong, they were submissive. They believed in the establishment, society and the system.

Was the link between the British Black Panthers and the Black Panthers an official one? Or was the name informally adopted? I know, for instance, that you guys didn't condone gun use at all.


It was just an adoption of the name. There was informal contact, but nothing on an official basis. They were a political, radical and revolutionary party. We were a movement – we were never interested in gaining seats in Parliament or behaving like a political party. We were a movement aiming to educate our communities and to fight injustice and discrimination. That was our mantra. America was just coming out of segregation then, while we never had it. So there was a huge difference between our problems and theirs.

What were the issues that the British Black Panthers were combating, specifically?

While we were another large black population, we had no segregation here. But it was difficult for us to get adjusted to this country, and there were cultural clashes for us, too. Our parents weren't given good jobs, only menial tasks, factory jobs – there were no real black professionals in Britian. The challenge here was to get a fair deal, to climb that ladder.

There was also a cultural issue, and if I was to blame anyone for that it would be the British middle class and the political class, because they didn't educate the working-class British about the history of black people. They weren't told that we were taken from Africa, that we were actually slaves for this country for over 300 years. And at the end of slavery, plantation owners were compensated, while we got nothing, not even an apology. So, in those days, we believed we had a right to be in this country – we had helped build this country and we deserved some benefits from that. We felt we had a right to share in the profits, while British people felt, 'Why are they here taking our jobs?'

A protester is arrested by police.

So the Panthers were there to educate people about all that?

Yeah, the middle and political classes did nothing to explain the situation. That was what we were trying to get across – that we deserved to be here and we needed laws that reflected that. At the time, they were trying to repatriate us. It was outrageous – you can't take us from Africa, enslave us, and after we've built the country up after the war, tell us to go back. No. That's not on.

How much did you interact with other rights groups? Anti-fascists, for example? Or were you fairly insular at the time?

We had some links with the Socialist Workers and other left-wing groups, and there were many intellectuals who were funding the Panthers – as well as actors and actresses and the like. Left-leaning people were supporting us. We weren't "racist" as such, but we decided that all our members should be black because we were there to educate and advance black people. We felt we needed to be able to sit together and talk about our situation and our history, and to do so in confidence without interruption.

The British Black Panthers eventually dissolved into numerous other groups – what caused that? Was it planned?

The British Black Panthers, in my opinion, came into being as a result of the discrimination that many students from the Commonwealth faced. Back then, the best students from the Commonwealth were sent to Britain to be educated. Many of those who associated with the Panthers were those sorts of people; they had never encountered discrimination in their own countries, where they were the sons or daughters of the middle classes. So when they got here for university, they discovered this inequality and decided to fight against that, but they needed support in our communities, so they came to Brixton and met people like me who shared these challenges, and we worked together.

After we'd educated these students and our communities, lots of the students returned to their countries – in many cases to positions of leadership. We were left with lots of the things we'd been campaigning for actually being achieved. The repatriation bill was quashed, the idea of deportation was gone and the movement just dissolved – not in an organised way, but people just stopped coming around and stopped doing things.

So the dissolving of the BBP was a reflection of its success, to an extent?

Yes. I think we helped to change the way we were perceived in this country. And many of those students who were set to return to the Commonwealth had good jobs waiting for them back home, in government, legal practice and so on – they no longer wanted to risk their future careers by being involved with us.

What do you think the core legacy of the Panthers in Britain was?

The Black Panther movement was a secretive movement, yet it had a great impact on discrimination in this country. The legacy is in all the proposed laws regarding deportation being quashed. We made sure the government were properly educating our children. Lots of black children back then were educated in subnormal schools – those things were quashed, too. There were a lot of successes, but they weren't really attributed to the Black Panthers, even though they were the work of the Panthers. It's a hidden story – that's why it's important that these photos exist. Without them, it would have been difficult to tell this story, especially to young people. The legacy of the photos themselves is important.

Were you aware when taking these photos that they would become an important document in Britain's social history?

It was very conscious. When I joined the Panthers, it was a reaction to how I was treated. I felt that this was what I could do for the Panthers. I could record their meetings, their marches, their efforts. Many of the photos were used in our meetings and so on. It was a conscious contribution to the movement.

The Amazing Lost Legacy of the British Black Panthers | VICE | United Kingdom

 

[The Odum of Ala Igbo]

Posters saying the 1945 Pan Africanist conference with Jomo Kenyatta, Kwame Nkrumah and Nnamdi Azikiwe didn't do shyt

 

[IllmaticDelta]

No... the fukk you didn't.

aframs did create the modern concept of "cultural blackness"

Cacs did to impose upon slaves throughout the ENTIRE Americas.

no they didn't....negro IS NOT a straight translation to the modern concept of "black"

Then you AAs wonder why us non-AAs have to give you the ether.

 

[QueenSheba]

Where is @Poitier

 

[NYC Rebel]

I’m Nigerian american. I find those outside the US are extremely Naïve when it comes to race

 

[JBoy]

why do some of you foreigners care so much about Americans opinions, shyt is weird af

 

[IllmaticDelta]

What does it mean to be Black? The concept of race was created by Europeans during the 1400s to justify imperialism and slavery. Techinically Europeans were the ones who gave you that identity.

the modern concept of "black" is based on people being of darker skinned-sub-saharan descent. The euro term "negro" was meant to refer to those same types who happened to be dark....the modern concept transcends that

negro is not the same thing as "black" which transcends actual phenotype and Haiti's "Noir" is clearly not the equivalent. For example, this usage of "black" is not native to Jamaica but a USA/Afram concept that Collin Powell, a Jamaican has adopted.

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, I said it that way because people say, well, how will you be able to be successful in my military career and in the other things I've done in life. And I said that I grew up in a very diverse environment, and because I am not that black as a physical matter -- I am as black as anybody whose skin could be 20 shades darker than mine -- I consider myself an African American, a black man, proud of it and proud to stand on the shoulders of those who went before me. But I know that because of my background and my upbringing, I'm probably more acceptable over the years to the white power structure that I was dealing with as I came up.


Because, you see, Jim Crow and discrimination is not history to me; it's my life. I was raised in the pre-civil rights period. I've been thrown out of places because I was just black enough not to be served. So I have no illusions about who I am or what I am. But as I go about my job, what I say to people is I'm the American Secretary of State; I'm also black. I don't say I'm the black American Secretary of State, because it implies, gee, is there a white one somewhere, you know? [Laughter.] No, I am the Secretary of State. You take me as you see me, a proud American representing his country, and by the way, I'm awfully proud to be black. And I want, as a black person, to be an example and an inspiration to not just other black youngsters coming along, but to all youngsters who may think that because of their background or where they came from or their origins, somehow they can't achieve their dream. In our society you can. And I'm an example of it, out of the South Bronx, immigrant parents; you know the story. And I was able to achieve because there were people who were willing to accept me for what I was, treat me right, and allow me to demonstrate my ability. And these were white people, black people. These were people superior to me, people who worked for me, who trusted me. And that's the message I've always tried to convey to young people.

Be Heard: An MTV Global Discussion With Colin Powell

^^In jamaica he would have been of the same type that Garvey was talking about here

and the other Jamaican guy was talking about here

so while "negro" was meant to describe darker skinned africans like

the afram "black" concept covers that and

.........where the types are both part of a larger "black" wolrd where they are tied together by genetics and culture

 

[3rdWorld]

More coli tribalism as usual.

 

[#1 pick]

No from the outside looking in its about being brought to a land that's not yours or even your enslavers land. Being slaved and building the country for free for white Europeans. Having all your previous culture stripped away from you. And then being treat like 3rd class citizens to this day way after slavery has supposed ended. Then building a culture out of that struggle. Thats clearly what black culture is about in America. I'm not sure how you can be apart of that when you are rich and lived around whites all your life and never had sny struggles. These dudes admitted to never even being pulled over by police before let alone getting into any trouble. Why are blacks shoved into slums that look like war zones and have the murder rates of one? But majority of posters here are living the nice subrban life and tang about struggles they've never faced in real life.

You know all of that but don't acknowledge the system of white supremacy that keeps Blacks stuck in destitute