In a message dated 3/13/1999 9:08:03 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< I do believe that it is demeaning to the oppressed to refuse to acknowledge
such power as they do have; and it is bizarre to absolve Third World
governemts, armies and individuals of responisbility for what they do, good or
bad. Sure, the US, France and Britain (and most other countries you could
name) meddle, interfere and generally contribute to mayhem, and deserve to be
exposed and vilified; but so do the people who aid and abet them. >>
Where exactly have I refused to acknowledge the power that the "oppressed" do
have? Where have I absolved Third World governments? What makes you think I
don't address the people who aid and abet them?
Both would be bizarre for me to do because my focus is on the ability of, and
the need for people in the Third World to hold their governments accountable.
I actually commented on what I wrote, quite often in fact, about the current
Commission on the Status of Women going on at the United Nations and the work
of the African Caucus, the Asian Caucus, and hundreds of civil society
organizations, individuals. I have been involved actively in the CSW1996, and
have been strongly impressed by the strength of indigenous civil society in
the third world, so just based upon that one experience how could I not
acknowledge the power the oppressed have?
The African caucus works directly focused on African/Arab governments. On
Thursday the African Caucus had a meeting with the leader of the African Group
of the G-77 and several African country representatives. We most certainly did
not sit for three hours and absolve the governments of anything. We strongly
reminded them that there loyalty needs to be to there people, not their own
pocket, power, or to Europeans/Americans.
The African Caucus requested their presence and put our concerns directly to
them on not only the main theme of women's health issues and the actions the
governments must take, but the ways in which African women - in governmental
positions, civil society, religious organizations, un staff, oau staff,
igad/sadc ,etc. were going to contribute to the process- ways in which we were
monitoring and pushing forth that progress.
When in my email, I commented on the west - that was the topic addressed -
America as the pre-eminent/only western country engaging in negative global
tactics - and I especially focused on Australia - however it doesn't mean I
absolve third world governments or ignore the strength of the oppressed.
You also wrote " Nicole's account of the EU also misses the mark, I think. If
her version
was correct (that the EU is there as a way for Europeans to regain from the US
the hegemony they have lost in the world), then one would expect Britain to be
in the EU van, and within Britain, one would expect the right-wing (who were
traditionally the supporters of imperialism) to be the great EU fans. It
ain't like that. Britain (speaking broadly of successive governments since
WW2) has always been suspicious of the EU, not least
because the EU's original and enduring impetus was a rapprochement between
France and Germany, in a bid to end European wars (such as had begun WW1 and
WW2). Mrs Thatcher was virulently anti-German, despite the fact that the
German Chancellor Helmut Kohl was in all respects of her own cast of mind
(except that he was German and therefore not to be trusted and an enemy of
Britain), and this had a great deal to do with Britain's strange policies
towards Europe during her years. The left-wing, however, traditionally anti-
imperialist, is broadly pro-European: partly because the left's anti-
imperialism is in some cases translated as anti-Americanism, but mainly
because of the EU's anti-nationalist feel. Those on the left who oppose the
EU do so mainly because of the EU's status as a 'rich man's club'. "
The article was actual a forward from the MAI email list run by Public
Citizen, as was noted as on the list recently. The list is titled MAI-NOT and
is themed on the anti-mai work of the Global Trade Watch division of Public
Citizen. The opposition to the MAI is worldwide, not just american. And the
MAI was a mainly EU formulation - more on that in another email.
The motivation for the EU is most certainly for power overall and to compete
with America. This does not contradict with the understanding of national
resentment by some for what they perceive to be the loss of cultural autonomy
- as in the EU using the english language, the loss of national currency. I am
fairly aware of the anti-EU sentiments in Europe. Pro-European can certainly
be anti-american, when american and EU interests compete. My commentary does
not negate those facts.
Emails can get very long and tedious when we go into long debates - and there
is far too much to be addressed fully. Also, when morals are concerned then a
bit of moralizing is in order. I try to keep more of my energies for real life
work - rather than email discussions with random people not seriously geared
to the issues other than for "talk".
Those on the left (depending on who "those" are) also oppose the EU (its
intended activities) because of the threat to Third World autonomy -
especially to Africa which suffered tremendously when in the past the
Europeans united to partition Africa (name that year for five points!). They
tend to see the west as the rich man's club too - kind of why the G-77 was
formed. Also why other countries are making sure to form coalitions, south
south, africa, asia, to protect themselves (this time). (Actually the South
tends to have natural resources that the North wants/needs) They are going to
have a lovely south-south conference this fall, in Jakarta it seems, which I
will take part in -- with that and doing some work in the area, as well as on
the MAI/WTO - re:Gender and the Third World - I have come across a bit of
information about the European Union (Just a bit) and Third World economic
issues from which I take my views.
You also wrote " And as for Nicole's response to Joe's point about Imam:
well, I've never
fancied David Bowie myself either, and super-models strike me as a waste of
newsprint and a corruptor of youth, but I damned if I can see what any of that
has to do with a woman pleading for the life of her family. Shame on you,
Nicole! "
Oh yes, I accept your cloak of shame. Oh my, how can I live now that you have
lain shame on me, oh the burden of it all! How much money does Iman have? Yet,
she is pleading for her family? Is it that they can't leave Somalia? She can't
go to Somalia and help them? Funny, I know of people entering and leaving
Somalia on a repeated basis. What exactly do you know of Iman? Her background?
>From which clan is she? Where is that clan located? What is the role of that
clan in the current conflict in Somalia? What is the status of conflict in
Somalia now? Is my opinion based on as much knowledge and experience as yours?
Are you shaming me for expressing an opinion different than yours or dees?
Didn't you lecture me on not doing that to other people?
As to colonialism and the methods of France, Britain and Portugual (as noted)
THAT itself is a book - I am very well acquainted with the differences in
colonial styles.
You wrote " There is, presumably, some connection between these two stances
and the post-colonial picture, where the French are far more active (and far
more welcome) in
their ex-territories than are the British in theirs."
The french tactics were to encourage assimilation, as long as that
assimilation reflects a love of all things french - and was done while
rejecting african/arab culture. The goal for the French was simply to have a
mass of people reflecting the self-love of the French. The number of revolts
and rebellions against the French, remember a little place called Haiti?
Toussaint? - reveal that they were not so welcome as you claim. This of course
is a relatively brief comment, but as I am comfortable with my knowledge in
this area to support my briefly given opinion, I instead urge you to go read a
bit more on the issue. I suggest you read Franz Fanon to gain an understanding
beyond the superficial of the application of colonialism and mental
colonialism that went along with it. This would give some further insight into
your ideas about the french being welcomed.
Furthermore you wrote " On the other hand, and I find this intriguing, when
those Africans visit or migrate to the erstwhile Mother Country today, the
positions are rather the other way around. No one would call Britain
unracist; but it is a significantly less nasty place for a black person to be
than France. "
Explain why it is a significantly less nasty place for a black person to be
than France? I would say that there are somewhat different situations (i.e.
sans papier in France) but there is no justification to say it is a
signficantly less nasty place.
Actually, I spent a lot of time this week with a woman with whom call aunt and
mom, who is in the leadership of the Federation of African Peoples
Organizations based in Tottenham, London. She is also a member of the EU
Migrants forum. She has long been instrumental in my awareness on such topics.
FAPO speaks actively about the racism in Britain, and the feelings on, effects
of, that racism on the black people represented by the hundreds of members of
the FAPO organizations across Britain. They speak of racism in employment, in
the media, in the attitudes of the majority of the white British, ranging from
direct racist hate/violence - to paternalistic liberal interaction - to white
women/men have sexual/friend relationships with black men/women, while at the
same time looking down on black women/women (both or either) as well as the
cultures.
Also active in th EU migrants forum are members of the group TIYE which is a
platform of the national organizations of black migrant and refugee women
based in Amsterdam. The woman from FAPO, and two women from TIYE, one of which
is the chairwoman of TIYE and the other who is also vice president of the
European Women's Lobby. The five of us, including of my best friends in the
world, who is Sudanese and lives in Sweden where she works strongly as part an
International Migrant Women's group, had a long conversation about the issues
of racism within the EU system and the perspective of black people, born in
and immigrated to, Europe. The women, all active within the EU system spoke
at length about the amount of marginalization of black women, their refusal to
quietly assimilate giving up their African identity and connections, and their
views that the EU is formulated primarily to preserve the power of these
former colonial nations by drawing upon a collective strength in the face of
the economic power of America. These elder women were very clear about the
sense of our people they wanted to transmit to my friend and I. They spoke
about various kinds of discrimination, even for those well-educated women,
even within the EU system where they felt that the issues of migrants,
especially black migrants were mainly disregarded.
Also kin,is another woman, national coordinator for Mali of the Association
Internationale Des Femmes Francophones - who has eloquently educated me to
have a substantive understanding about the manifestations and implications of
French racism - and how the french "being welcome" is just a manifestation of
the damage of their colonial tactics and an imagery which avoids the reality
of racism and resistence among Africans on a variety of levels. The African
caucus has a massive representation of black women of francophone countries,
include Guadaloupe, Martinique. Many of these women live/lived in, travel
often to, study, studied, in France.
I also work with Akina Mama Wa Afrika and Abantu for Development, both are
African women's (Pan-African) organizations based in London. Akina Mama Wa
Afrika has published a bi-annual journal titled "African Women" which has a
solidly pan-african, continent and diaspora perspective. One of their best
issues was "African Women in Europe" (June-November 1993) because it opened me
up to several issues in this area, in which I later became involved and
introduced me to black women, who later become close friends and mentors. This
issue include articles from black women in scotland, germany, italy, france,
sweden, britain, America, Peru, Brasil, Cuba, Puerto Rico.
This issue was the "report" on the conference they held in 1992, the first
ever on the topic " Strengthening our Links: African Women in Europe". The
conference was attended by African women from all over europe, Africa, as well
as the United States, Brasil. On this conference Akina Mama writes in the
opening page " For two days, we shared testimonies, experiences and
strategies. We cried and laughed together. And at the end of it all, we danced
till dawn at the Africa Centre, London....From the account of their lives in
Europe, we could see that all the conference participants had the same thing
in common; struggling to survive against all odds. It was also apparent that
African women in Europe are not passsively accepting a fate of being
perpetual, second-class citizens in a dually oppressive environment. We are
organizing and fighting back, and this is why we all agreed to form a Pan-
European network for African women. With a united front, we all stand a chance
in 'Fortress Europe'.
I gleaned quite a bit (more than a thumbnail sketch) from speaking with Bisi,
the director of Akina Mama often this week. Especially powerful was hearing
her speak on wednesday night at a lecture and reception (in her honor) at
Columbia University, (sponsored by the African-American magazine "Essence",
the Institute of African Studies at Columbia, and several organizations of
which I am part - and notably I connected Essence, Akina Mama and the other
organizations together on some efforts which resulted in this lecture). Bisi
spoke very clearly on the racism in Britain which her organization, as well as
the others in their group, fought against - with unity - on a regular basis.
Her words gave no sense that it was significantly better than France where she
has also had experience. The topic of the lecture was " Who Speaks For African
Women? Partnerships for Change" The keynote address was given by the Honorable
Thami Ngwevela, Consul General, South Africa. African women from quite a few
countries spoke on economic, political and ecological topics.
Overall, I think a few of these black women, people, may have some direct
insight on what it feels like for a black person to be in either country,
credible enough to count almost as much as what you have said. If there was a
significant difference in racism in England, as opposed to France, why do such
organizations draw together black women in both countries to do collective
work from what they perceive as a unified racist sysem, equally doing them
harm? Is it that you just have a better perspective on experiencing racism as
a black person, than they do?
I talk on a weekly basis with friends living in Britain/France, many of my
relatives live in/have lived in, Britain and France. My elder sister spent
several months there, my close-birth cousin, studied law for several years in
Britain. I have been more than once to both countries and primarily met with,
stayed with, shared with black organizations in both countries. These
experiences do keep me informed on life for black people in Britain and France
- from their own direct experiences. What I have learned is that the exact
circumstance of racism against black people certainly has its variations among
countries, among colonizers, but the weighting of "more racist" and "less
racist" is tenuous at best, I have personally lived differences within the
United States, not by north and south, nor by suburban or urban, but simply by
institutions - academic, police, retail - within the same community. However,
it is like being a little pregnant - it is still racism and it is still
damaging.
You wrote " the Portuguese were the least racist of all [presumably, at least
in part, because the concept of race was not available to them at that time,
although my friend did not mention that] , but they were violent,
unpredictable and obsessed with [the Roman Catholic] religion; "
What comes to my mind first is, if your friend did not mention that, upon what
experience or knowledge basis are you saying it?
2. They were the least racist but violent and unpredictable? Might not some of
that violence be a bit linked to racism and seizing land from non-portuguese
people?
3. "The concept of race was not available to them at that time" - where did
you get that?
In 1444 the first Africans were obtained by the Portuguese directly from the
west coast of Africa and enslaved in Portugal. In 1466 by Nuno Trist�o, a
Portuguese slave trader, visited Guinea Bissau (Africa) and it became an
important slave center. By 1479 Spain had contracted with the Portuguese to
supply Africans as slaves for sale in Spain bu the portuguese arrived in Sri
Lanka in the 16th century with no concept of race? (You do your own reading, I
won't go into translate from Portuguese, the records noting the anti-black
racialism inherent in the portuguese during their trading.)
When the portuguese arrived in Sri Lanka in the 16th century, this was the
beginning of 400 years of european domination. I don't understand how that
reflects that they were "the least racist of all"?
In 1977, the legislative and judicial capitals of Sri Lanka were moved from
Colombo (which outgrew its use) to the city of Kotte, why? Because it was the
last capital of Sinhalese rule before Portuguese domination - Kotte (Sri
Jayawardenapura-Kotte) was the capital of Sinhalese kings from 1415 until
1565. The decay of the kingdom of Kotte began with its partition at the
beginning of the 16th century - the portuguese from this point dominated Sri
Lanka (then Ceylon). By the way, Kotte was massively robbed of historical
treasures - guess who was the major thief?
Ask your friend what "to go to kotte" means.
In 1638-39 when the Dutch attacked the Portuguese for control of the port,
they found allies in the natives who wanted to be FREE of Portuguese control.
(The enemy of my enemy is my friend, so to speak). In 1658, the Portuguese
were driven out of Sri Lanka - kind of strange how people who are "the least
racist" fight so hard for control over a land that isn't theirs?
In 1736, the British took control from the Dutch, and later turned it in to a
British colony - introducing growing tea and coffee (for the benefit of the
British, not for the indigenous people) as it did with colonies all over the
world. During this period, the indigenous people staged several rebellions for
their freedom - as did many millions of people colonized by the British all
over the world (including the Americans during this same time). Against a
people who felt proud that they had colonized and created an empire on which
the sun never set - trust that the colonized people weren't quite as pleased.
In 1931, the Brits were kind enough to present a constitution which gave the
"natives" semiautonmous control over their land and lives - bloody nice of
them, don't you think?
For more than a "thumbnail" insight, a good read is the book by Dr
Subrahmanyam in "The Career and Legend of Vasco da Gama". He comments that "
Portugal's naval excursions were a form of organised violence by a nation
which could not understand the cultures of the nations it invaded." and that "
far from "discovering" the sea route to Asia, da Gama relied on the expertise
of local seamen, including Indians, to sail an already well-known ocean".
Another little note about the Portuguse: On da Gama's orders, the town of
Calicut - now known as Kozhikode in southern Kerala State - was bombarded,
and many thousands of indigenous people were sold into slavery. Da Gama's
activities resulted in the Portuguese colonisation of Goa, which continued
long after India's independence, and only ended in 1961 (450 years later) when
Indian troops took possession of the territory.
"We Goans ... cannot tolerate any attempt to glorify our slavery, within Goa
or any part of the country," said Mr V.N Lawande, who fought for Goa's
integration with India. This quote was part of, and a lot of my exposure to
this area came from an international conference that was held on the subject
"Colonialism to Globalization: Five Centuries After Vasco da Gama" at the
Indian Social Institute, Lodi Road, New Delhi from February 2 to 6, 1998. I
met lots of people with whom I maintained contact and learned from in this
gathering that brought together Africans, Sri Lankans, Indians, Latin
Americans, and Palestinians, as well as others.
You also wrote " Berlin sees the cultural autonomy expressed both in the
continuation of African patterns of behavior (braided hair and filing teeth in
the traditional manner, clandestinely performing African rites at births and
burials) and the creation of new ones as deliberate and purposeful. While the
contours of slave life might vary as negotiations shifted, the beliefs,
attitudes, and activities that slaves nurtured among themselves always had an
"oppositional content," even if concealed in the mimicry of dance or later in
the
metaphors of a folk tale. In places where the body of slaves had come directly
from Africa, as in eighteenth-century South Carolina, they often carried so
deep an attachment to old customs that "the conflict over work and over
culture became one." >> "
As I sit at this screen with braids in my hair, I explain to you that at no
point do I fail to recognize or even negate cultural continuation among
African people through slavery, colonialism to the present. I was raised from
birth to understand that - and to know that the very fact that I exist
represented that strength of the oppressed - and raised to understand that
cultural continuation. Attending university, traveling in certain areas of the
south, riding in the front of the bus, drinking from any water fountain,
better access to employment, and a host of other activities were consistently
opportunities for my family to remind me what advances we have made and to
impress upon me the responsibility to fight for even more.
Jazz, gospel, rap, samba, salsa, merengue....examples of our continuation were
juxtaposed with the african music from all over the continent played for us.
The foods we cooked, the clothes we wore, the celebrations we had, the stories
our elders told, so very much was all around to teach us lessons about
cultural autonomy. Lessons that I certainly didn't forget when writing emails
to this list.
But yes, hayley, you teach me about my culture, about my african heritage, our
cultural retentions that you know so very well. I couldn't have possibly
learned such before.
Having family members from various parts of the African continent and the
Diaspora, who were highly conscious of our mutual culture, who raised me with
the same consciousness it have been an amazing feat for me to reach this point
and have you "correct me" on this in an email.
Granted, you have the power of enlightment, but when you talk about hair
braiding to a woman who grew up with her head on her momma's or grandmomma's
or some aunt, elder sister, cousin, neighbor-lady's thigh having her hair
braided, in designs and patterns done by African women for thousands of years
- you must admit the irony that you send your light of wisdom on this topic to
correct what you claim I believe and include a comment on braiding.
My undergraduate study was centered on African Studies - a major I chose when
I was 9 years old while talking to my grandfather about international issues
and pan-africanism. My study included much particularly about the cultural
retention and continuation of the Americas, as well as studies of the Dalit of
Indian, Afro-Asian cultures and the Pacific Diaspora. My major was chosen with
the intent of pursuing international affairs from a Pan-African perspective.
The African Caucus that I have commented on several times, is a grouping of
women of African descent from around the world and we function upon a
fundamental understanding of the cultural retention and connection among us.
My experiences, personal relationships, readings, studies, travels and a mass
of other things far too extensive and not for the info of anonymous eco-
listers, reflects that I do understand a little of this fact. Did my emails
say something different?
I don't know why you felt sure sure that I didn't - or for that matter why you
felt so sure that you were more aware.
I am launching a boycott of such emails.
Nicole
~ You must structure your world so that you are constantly reminded of who you
are ~
