Intro
As an African, I have always been
intrigued with the history of the African continent- where we come from as a
people and where we are going to. What makes us different, unique? Infact, what
makes us African.
This desire started when during a
boring literature lesson, my teacher explained a poem on panafricanism, the
slave trade and how Africa had been colonized mentally and physically. I have
since then forgotten the name of the poem but the feeling of utter helplessness
I felt that day still reoccurs once in a while.
Pan Africanism as history
The beginnings of pan Africanism
can be likened to the ‘butterfly effect’. This happens when a tiny butterfly
flutters its wings in one part of the earth- a seemingly innocuous event- but
this flutter then develops into a storm on the other side of the earth.
This same can be attributed to
pan Africanism. It started as an idea coined by a west Indian native, H S
Williams in the early 1900s which gained momentum fuelled and driven by the
likes of George Padmore, Marcus Garvey and W. E. B. DuBois to cause a great
storm on the other side of the world in Africa with the uprooting of several
centuries of seemingly entrenched form of social, political governance known as
colonialism.
This idea did not die after the
independence of Africa but metamorphosised as
a struggle for the unity and solidarity of the entire continent and its people
and continues to this day. And for this idea we gather hear today. This indeed
is a very practical example of globalization in action.
But was this journey easy? Not at
all. Historians and critics tell us of the 4 stages of pan Africanism and the
debates that characterized each stage and how these debates were either
resolved or continue to challenge the idea. The first stage starting with the
abolishment of slavery, was when Africans and blacks in the Diaspora were in
search for a spiritual home. The case was made for equality, justice and black
empowerment. According to Robert Chrisman (1973, p. 3): ‘It was precisely the
capture and uprooting of millions of Africans and conditions of slavery which
laid the foundations for pan-Africanism and Black Nationalism in the United States and West
Indies.’ Spanning from the early 1800s with the return of freed
American slaves to Liberia
and British slaves to Sierra
Leone and going on much longer with the pan
Africanist Congresses of the early 20th century and the intellectual
and conceptual work done by its protagonists- W.E.B DuBois, Marcus Garvey,
George Padmore and many others. What most people do not know was that this
period was characterized by an ideological divide between Jamaican Marcus
Garvey’s ‘Africa for Africans’ and American WEB DuBois’ more moderate stance
that emerged from, as Mario de Andrade put it, ‘ a conceptual convergence based
on a utopian vision of Africa’[1].
The second phase occurs with the
importation of the ideals of pan Africanism unto the continent by African
students returning from studies in the land of their colonizers-the United
States, Britain, Portugal and France- and whilst there, having come into contact
with the initiators of pan Africanism. In most instances, these students became
active initiators of pro-African liberation groups such as the Kwame Nkrumah’s
West African National Secretariat, the Paris
based newspaper Presence Africaine,
Cabral’s Casa dos Estudantes do Imperio,
and many more. They later became the intellectuals who reinterpreted pan
africanism in the light of their experiences as colonized subjects.
Intellectuals like Chiek Antar Diop in his thesis, ‘The African Origin of Civilization’ showed empirically that the
black man had a history dating back to Egyptian civilization. Frantz Fanon, through
his analysis of the negative psychological effects of colonial subjugation upon
black people, Leopold Senghor, Aime Cesaer and Leon Damas, the trios peres who reinterpreted the
miseducation of the Blackman in their literary and ideological movement of ‘Negritude’.
And then there were the guerilla freedom fighters such as Amilcar Cabral,
Agostinho Neto, Julius Nyerere, Herbert Chitepo of Zimbabwe who not only made
political warfare sexy, but also gave it an ideological, spiritual and cultural
significance- linking freedom at all costs- even the peril of losing their
lives- to the independence of humanity. This next phase led to the political independence
of Africa and by 1960 almost 30 African
countries had their own self governance structures. Woven within the
independence struggle continued the debate about whether pan africanism should
be a fight for cultural rights (Amilcar Cabral), political rights (Kwame
Nkrumah) or based on race, blackness or Negritude (Leopold Senghor).
The third phase culminated with
the creation of the Organization of African Unity when the schism was on what
form African unity should take, a loose federation of individual states with
joint economic interests or a single political body? Nationalism versus
continentalism, the struggle for the territorial integrity of inherited
arbitrary borders versus Pan-Africanist ideology; the discourse about national
construction versus the troubled multi-ethnic reality or as Ali Mazrui (1995)
puts it, a pan-africanism of liberation or a pan-africanism of integration?
Within this debate, African leaders of the time took various stands based on
their specific ideologies. The most known groupings were the Casablanca
group and the Monrovia
block. But there were other groups such as the Lagos
chart, the Conakry declaration and the Brazzaville group which
also had different views of the form and content of African Unity. The success of the OAU’s creation can be
firmly laid at the feet of Emperor Haile Selassie who brokered a truce in 1962
between these varying groups and says in his 1963 speech at the creation of the
OAU, ‘
the commentators speak , in discussing Africa of the Monrovia state, the
Brazzaville groups, the Casablanca powers, of these and many more. Let us put
an end to these terms. What we require is a single African organization through
which Africa’s single voice may be heard within which Africa’s problems may be
studied and resolved’[2].
The establishment of the OAU in 1963 can be credited to its many fathers –and
mothers-, and indeed many intermediate midwives. This process of negotiation
between the various groups affected the declaration that was eventually
adopted, making it a compromise, actually far from the original proposal from
the Emperor. But the significance of that 23rd May meeting is to be
found more on the agreement about the key objectives for a total political
liberation of the continent, solidarity, and integration, all of which came
straight from the common body of the Pan-African ideology.
In the early 21st
century, the face of pan africanism changed once more, following on from
decades where pan africanism was subdued to the challenges of managing a
continent beset by war, famine, strife and economic crises and the phenomenon
of the African strong man. Thus the metamorphosis of the OAU into the AU was
not without good reason. Whilst the OAU has primarily focused on the political
liberation of the continent, which was finally achieved with the abolishment of
apartheid in South Africa
in 1994, it had dismally failed on the economic and social front. The creation
of the AU ten years ago and almost 40 years after the OAU coincided with
significant changes in global institutions and concepts- the end of the cold
war, the glasnost and perestroika, the fourth big wave of independent states
(with the dismantling of USSR and Yugoslavia) and on the African continent, the
end of apartheid, signally the true achievement of the objective of political
independence of the continent. Thus the shift from the OAU to the AU was not
only semantics but also a change in focus- a shift from political independence
to economic independence.
The point I wish to make is that
the journey of pan africanism has neither been easy nor has it been free of
impediments and on this path there has been no easy victories. Each and every
small step has been taken with the sweat, toil and in many instances the blood
of people who believed in the ability of the Blackman to unite. Examples from
Patrice Lumumba and Amilcar Cabral. Africanists, in our quest for the unknown
holy grail called pan africanism have had and continue to struggle to define it
conclusively.
Hi Rebecca,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your highly readable introduction which should be particularly useful to energetic young Pan-Africanist recruits who have often wondered the relevance of Pan-Africanism in the 21st century! Have we lost sight of the Pan-Africanism's high objectives from the pioneering work of Sylvester-Williams, Walters, Brown and Du Bois and most importantly, Garvey? The world has changed in many ways since 1900, but have the fundamental problems we face been made obsolete? What is the key to solving the problems that Pan-Africanism was organised to solve? Is it true that the problem of the 21st century is the problem of Black Power and how to create enough of it to rescue us from every shape and form of our bondage to the dominant power? Why, in this 21st century, are we still not safe, not prosperous, and not respected? Why are we still only nominally and minimally self-governing? Has Pan-Africanism degenerated into something else since the Liberation Committee went into retirement on completing its task in 1994? Why are we still trapped in the poverty, exploitation and physical insecurity into which we were plunged with the onset of the deplorable experience in 1441? Is it reasonable to insist that Pan-Africanism must return to its beginnings and its basics and relearn that its mission is to help to solve our daily problems?