Racialized Representations of Evolution

Paul M. sent along the image below, from an NPR story, commenting on the way skin color is used in the portrayal of evolution.  There’s one obvious way to read this graphic: lighter-skinned people are more evolved (dare we say, “civilized”) than darker-skinned people.  (The portrayal of fatness and its relevance to evolutionary fitness is another story in this particular graphic, as is the use of men and not women to represent humanity).

It seemed worthy to make a point of Paul’s observation, because this racialized presentation of evolution is really common.  A search for the word on Google Images quickly turns up several more.  In fact, almost every single illustration of evolution of this type, unless it’s in black and white, follows this pattern.  (See also our post on representations of modern man.)



This is important stuff.  It reinforces the idea that darker-skinned people are more animalistic than the lighter-skinned.  It also normalizes light-skinned people as people and darker-skinned peoples as Black or Brown people, in the same way that we use the word “American” to mean White-American, but various hyphenated phrases (African-American, Asian-American, etc) to refer to everyone else.  So, though this may seem like a trivial matter, the patterns add up to a consistent centering and applauding of Whiteness.
—————————
Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College.  You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.
(View original at http://thesocietypages.org/socimages)

American Uprising: The Untold Story of America's Largest Slave Revolt


American Uprising: The Untold Story of America's Largest Slave Revolt


From the Star, "Untold story of U.S. slave rebellion retold centuries later, by Mitch Potter, on 23 January 2011 -- DESTREHAN PLANTATION, LA.—A long-lost chapter in American history is being written anew today, as southerners begin to come to terms with the previously untold story of the continent’s largest slave revolt.

And while historians today debate the details, a consensus is forming around just how close New Orleans came to becoming a free black colony precisely 200 years ago when a makeshift army of some 500 slaves, some just a few years out of Africa, rose up in carefully calculated unison with epic consequences.


The oldest plantation in the lower Mississippi Valley


Here at the pastoral Destrehan Plantation, the aftermath of the January 1811, insurrection was especially brutal — newly unearthed colonial records show the estate was the epicentre for a judicial reckoning, with the white slaveholders ordering as many as 100 ringleaders shot or hanged.

They black rebel leaders then were decapitated, with their heads mounted on stakes in a horrific necklace of retribution stretching 70 kms down the Mississippi, all the way to the gates of what was then America’s most crucial frontier city.“It is one of the most striking moments of amnesia in our national history. What you had in the end were plantation owners sitting down to sumptuous five-course meals as they looked out the window at their own beheaded slaves,” said historian Daniel Rasmussen, who began his investigation as an undergraduate student at Harvard.

“The planters were outnumbered and terrified. They thought of their slaves as sub-human they saw ritual beheading as a prime way to get their message across.




“And what followed this gruesome display was a concerted attempt to write it out of the history books. The southern newspapers suppressed the story, either refusing to publish or delaying for months. Only a few papers much further north published small paragraphs condemning the savagery of the planters.”

Tulane University, the African American Museum in Treme and Destrehan Plantation all are filling in the blanks with the launch of a yearlong look at the 1811 uprising.

But it is Rasmussen’s riveting new book, American Uprising: The Untold Story of America’s Largest Slave Revolt, that is turning the most heads, in academia and beyond.




Collating clues from dust-encrusted plantation ledgers, colonial court records, obscure snippets of antebellum correspondence and the oral memory of slave descendents, Rasmussen’s study recreates the intense planning and careful timing that underpinned the audacious bid for freedom involving slaves from a dozen plantations along the river.

Two Asante warriors, Kook and Quamana, likely battle-hardened from wars in Africa, conspired with Charles Deslondes, a mulatto slave-driver of mixed parentage, who Rasmussen describes as “the ultimate sleeper cell.”




All had, in one way or another, been “sold down the river” — a cliché that first conceived to describe the especially horrific nature of slavery at southernmost end of the Mississippi, where extreme violence underpinned the extreme wealth of the lucrative French sugar plantations.

Spiked collars were the norm for the uncooperative — the spikes pointing inward to prevent sleep. Deslondes, working on behalf of his plantation owner, was responsible for administering punishment, including the lash for those who would dare refuse the backbreaking labours of harvesting, beating, boiling and refining the sugar cane.




Haiti was also a factor. The slave revolution of 1791 was, in its own way, a shot heard round the slave world, as French colonial refugees and their slaves washed into New Orleans. It remains unclear whether Deslondes came from Haiti.

Louisiana was vital American territory 200 years ago, but just barely — Napoleon had sold France’s claim to the vast Mississippi watershed to the United States a few years earlier for a paltry $15 million, a gift that would ultimately open the drive to the Pacific. But Louisiana’s French colonial class had nothing but contempt for its new American overseers, who were in January 1811, preoccupied in battles with the Spanish to secure a tract of west Florida. New Orleans was nearly defenceless.


“The attack came at just the right moment — the Americans were fighting the Spanish and with the harvest completed, the French planters were focused on the month-long series of lavish carnival balls and all-night parties leading up to Mardi Gras. And several days of steady rains had turned the road to mud, impeding any counterattack. Their guard was down,” Rasmussen said in an interview with the Toronto Star.

“Scarcely a resident in New Orleans had a musket. The city had a weak detachment of 68 troops.”

The rebels rose first at André Plantation after sunset on Jan. 8, 1811. And within hours, they were on the march to New Orleans. A ragtag army, perhaps, but one that marched in uniform, having seized militia clothing and weapons from plantation armories. Their numbers grew as the march advanced and as rumor of the uprising swept down the river road, the ruling class fled for the safety of the city.




“The planters couldn’t understand it — the idea that the slaves were not just savages, but that this was something planned. You had an army marching in military formation, wearing military uniforms, carrying flags and banners and chanting, “Freedom or death,” said Rasmussen.

New Orleans was on the edge of chaos — not least because its own population was 75 per cent black, awakening the fears of a second front rising up within the town itself. The city would order its taverns closed, imposed a curfew on all black males and summoned able-bodied whites to arms. Simultaneously, fleeing French planters regrouped on the West Bank of the Miscopy upstream from the city.

The two forces, American regulars and French planter militia, ultimately were able to confront the freedom fighters from both sides in a series of pitched battles beyond the city gates in the days that followed. Surviving slaves fled to the swamps and manhunts ensued, with dozens rounded up for the rough justice to come.

In the end, 21 slaves were interviewed by their colonial overseers in a bid to piece together the roots of the conspiracy and assign criminal blame. Elements of the story, says Rasmussen, survive in the oral histories of slave descendants, passed down and told “even to the present day at family reunions.” But the main snippets are to be found, refracted through the writings of the white ruling class, which show extent of fears never before told.




“They were sitting on a powder keg and when it exploded and was put down, everything changed. Instead of a mini-Haiti, Louisiana society became militarized. The revolt pushed this old aristocratic society into the hands of the American government,” said Rasmussen.

“What you see is that the foundations of American power in this part of the deep South were built upon the commitment to restore and uphold slavery. Essentially, the French planters decided to cling to the United States as an ark of safety.”




As for Kook, Quamana, and Charles Deslondes, only now are historians weighing how to elevate them alongside the likes of far better known revolutionaries like Nat Turner and John Brown as major figures in the American struggle for emancipation.

“None of this has ever been taught in American schools and the hope now is that these men who were executed for the strongest ideals will take their rightful place in history,” said Rasmussen.

“They were political revolutionaries, they deserve a place in the national memory and there is a sense now that they are getting it. We need to wrestle with this history if we are ever to truly understand it.”  (source: The Star)





Yalla, Reine du Walo, en tenue royale -...


Yalla, Reine du Walo, en tenue royale - 1853
Gallica, bnf.fr - Réserve DT 549.2 B 67 M Atlas - planche n °5 - Notice n° : FRBNF38495418 - (Illustrations de Esquisses sénégalaises)
Llanta. Lithographe, L’Abbé P.David Boilat, aut. du texte
@credits
Ndatté Yalla was Queen of the Kingdom of Waalo, a Kingdom located where is now the Republic of Senegal, after the death of her sister, Djeumbeut Mobdj. She exhibited all the attributes of a Waalo leader :  Father David Boilat took a photo of her smoking, surrounded by her female warriors in ceremonial clothes.
She fought against the French colonisation and for example refused to ceade the island of Saint Louis to the French, despite the threats of the French governor. Unfortunately, war finally started and the Waalos were defeated by Faidherbe’s troops in February 1855. Her son Sidiya was taken away and raised as a European, but as soon as he returned to Senegal in 1865, he began to resist the French colonisation; he then rejected Western civilisation to adopt his native culture back and started a rebellion.

Africa’s Oldest Known Boat ..8000 years ago

 
Africa’s Oldest Known Boat

8000 years ago, in the region now known as Nigeria. ”Africa’s oldest known boat” the Dufuna Canoe was discovered near the region of the River Yobe. The Canoe was discovered by a Fulani herdsman in May 1987, in Dufuna Village while digging a well. The canoe’s “almost black wood”, said to be African mahogany, as “entirely an organic material”. Various Radio-Carbon tests conducted in laboratories of reputable Universities in Europe and America indicate that the Canoe is over 8000 years old, thus making it the oldest in Africa and 3rd oldest in the World. Little is known of the period to which the boat belongs, in archaeological terms it is described as an early phase of the Later Stone Age, which began rather more than 12,000 years ago and ended with the appearance of pottery. 
The lab results redefined the pre-history of African water transport, ranking the Dufuna canoe as the world’s third oldest known dugout. Older than it are the dugouts from Pesse, Netherlands, and Noyen-sur-Seine, France. But evidence of an 8,000-year-old tradition of boat building in Africa throws cold water on the assumption that maritime transport developed much later there in comparison with Europe. Peter Breunig of the University of Frankfurt, Germany, an archaeologist involved in the project, says the canoe’s age “forces a reconsideration of Africa’s role in the history of water transport”. It shows, he adds, “that the cultural history of Africa was not determined by Near Eastern and European influences but took its own, in many cases parallel, course”. Breunig, adding that it even outranks in style European finds of similar age. According to him, “The bow and stern are both carefully worked to points, giving the boat a notably more elegant form”, compared to “the dugout made of conifer wood from Pesse in the Netherlands, whose blunt ends and thick sides seem crude”. To go by its stylistic sophistication, he reasons, “It is highly probable that the Dufuna boat does not represent the beginning of a tradition, but had already undergone a long development, and that the origins of water transport in Africa lie even further back in time.”
Egypt’s oldest known boat is 5000 years old.
P. Breunig, The 8000-year-old dugout canoe from Dufuna (NE Nigeria), G. Pwiti and R. Soper (eds.), Aspects of African Archaeology. Papers from the 10th Congress of the PanAfrican Association for Prehistory and related Studies. University of Zimbabwe Publications (Harare 1996) 461-468.
ISBN: 0908307551

“I’ve come to take you home” Interview with Diana Ferrus


In 1998 Diana Ferrus wrote the poem, “I’ve come to take you home” in honour of Sarah Baartman. In 1810, at age 20 Sarah Baartman was lured away under false pretences by British ship surgeon, William Dunlop. She was taken to England where she was paraded as a sexual freak. In 1814 Sarah was taken to France where she was sold to an animal trainer. The terrorizing violation of Sarah Baartman continued after her death. A plaster cast was made of her body and then her body, brain and genitalia were dissected and put on display in the Musee de l’Homme in Paris.
In the early 1950s, a South African indigenous people, the Griquas (one of the Khoi peoples) petitioned the French government for her remains to be returned to her country of birth. However, an 1850 French law stated that all artifacts in French museums belonged to France and the petition was refused. In 1996 President Nelson Mandela also made a petition to then French President Mitterrand. Finally in 2001 a French senator, Nicholas About introduced a Bill for her remains to be returned. The senator came across Diana’s poem, “I’ve come to take you home’ and presented the poem as part of his petition to show how Sarah’s people were ‘emotionally and psychologically’ affected by her remains still being in France. The petition was successful and for the first time, a poem was published in French law. On the 27th April, Diana left with a delegation from South Africa to collect Sarah Baartman’s remains and bring her home. On the 4th of May she arrived in Johannesburg and on the 9th August 2002 Sarah Baartman was finally laid to rest in peace after 192 years. Surely then, Diana played some part in bringing Sarah Baartman home!
In the interview I speak with Diana about her poetry on the themes of memory, healing, Africa and liberation. Diana reads four of her poems, “Dark Red Flowers” one of the many poems dedicated to her mother; “The African Drum” on identity and searching for African within us; The poem, Sarah Tait is in memory of her Irish grandmother who came to South Africa as an indentured servant to British colonials; Diana ends with the incredibly powerful moving story of Sarah Baartman’s return and the poem “I’ve come to take you home”
Links to Diana Ferrus – YouTube, The Peace Song; Badilisha Poetry

Booker T. Washington - The Atlanta Compromise Speech (1895)




Booker T. Washington: Mr. President and gentlemen of the Board of Directors and citizens. One third of the population of the South is of the Negro race. No enterprise seeking the material, civil, or moral welfare of this section can disregard this element of our population and reach the highest success. I must convey to you, Mr. President and Directors, and Secretaries and masses of my race, when I say that in no way have the value and manhood of the American Negro been more fittingly and generously recognized, than by the managers of this magnificent exposition at every stage of its progress. It is a recognition that will do more to cement the friendship of the two races than any occurrence since the dawn of our freedom. Not only this, but the opportunities here afforded will awaken among us a new era of industrial progress.





Ignorant and inexperienced, it is not strange that in the first years of our new life we began at the top instead of the bottom, that a seat in Congress or the state legislature was more sought than real estate or industrial skill, that the political convention of some teaching had more attraction than starting a dairy farm or a stockyard.


A ship lost at sea for many days suddenly sighted a friendly vessel. From the mast of the unfortunate vessel was seen a signal: “Water, water. We die of thirst.” The answer from the friendly vessel at once came back: “Cast down your bucket where you are.” A second time, the signal, “Water, send us water!” went up from the distressed vessel. And was answered: “Cast down your bucket where you are.” A third and fourth signal for water was answered: “Cast down your bucket where you are.” The captain of the distressed vessel, at last heeding the injunction, cast down his bucket and it came up full of fresh, sparkling water from the mouth of the Amazon River.




To those of my race who depend on bettering their condition in a foreign land, or who underestimate the importance of preservating friendly relations with the southern white man who is their next door neighbor, I would say: “Cast down your bucket where you are.” Cast it down, making friends in every manly way of the people of all races, by whom you are surrounded.

To those of the white race who look to the incoming of those of foreign birth and strange tongue and habits for the prosperity of the South, were I permitted, I would repeat what I have said to my own race: “Cast down your bucket where you are.” Cast it down among the eight millions of Negroes whose habits you know, whose fidelity and love you have tested in days when to have proved treacherous meant the ruin of your fireside. Cast down your bucket among these people who have without strikes and labor wars tilled your fields, cleared your forests, builded your railroads and cities, brought forth treasures from the bowels of the earth, just to make possible this magnificent representation of the progress of the South.





The imporantace of Oral Traditions pt 2.


Khafra and Khamerenebty 4th Dynasty.


A Senegalese Chief with his “Griot” (c.1904).


CONGO BELGE . BURUNDI . PRINCESSES BARUNDI . PHOTO : Le miroir du Congo Belge . BRUXELLES PARIS . 1929 .

nok-ind:
The imporantace of Oral Traditions pt 2.
Perhaps no other method of engendering mystical teachings to future generations is as old as the ORAL TRADITION. The continent of Africa has a plethora of cultures and tribes which still pass along supreme wisdoms by virtue of a GRIOT (African Story-teller) or TRIBAL WISDOM-KEEPER. The Ancient Kemetic culture of Africa was no different and one term used to distinguish a person who bore the great responsibilities of remembering the ORAL TRADITION was “SEDJ’DEE.” The “SEDJ’DEE” was often associated with the “HEM NETER TEPI” or “the priesthood” and their capacity to retain voluminous amounts of information would easily be considered a “miracle” by modern standards. In short, the “SEDJ’DEE” was a literal “WALKING LIBRARY.” Often the traditions passed along by ancient WISDOM-KEEPERS will differ from the traditions accepted in modern academia and by “experts” or they could have an alternate hidden (esoteric) meaning. For this work we will start with Kemet to uncover a few of the hidden oral traditions of Ancient Kemet assisted largely by Griot baba ABD’EL HAKIM AWYAN, who has spent countless years in Kemet as a wisdom-keeper being chosen as a child by female wisdom-keepers of his tribe.
The oral traditions of Kemet emphatically express that the Ancient Kemetu were a MATRILINEAL SOCIETY where bloodlines and ties were observed and solidified through the Divine Mother. One of the most venerable titles given to the Divine Mother in Ancient Kemet was “PER AA” which is interpreted as “THE GREAT HOUSE” or “THE HIGH HOUSE.” The term “PER AA” also refers to the FEMALE as the “HEAD OF THE ROYAL FAMILY” as well as a “FEMALE HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD.” Medu Neter (hieroglyphs) on the temple of HET-HERU in Denderah distinguishes her by the title “PER AA” which is the origin of the modern term “pharaoh.” Most so-called Egyptologists use the term “pharaoh” as a reference to a “male king”, which is inaccurate according to the oral traditions which teach that a “PER AA” may ONLY be female or a male who is “CHOSEN BY A FEMALE” to rule. Often the Goddess ASET is seen standing in her “POSITION OF POWER” which is “BEHIND” her brother-husband ASAR. The Goddess stands BEHIND the male figure as a symbol of “STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY” or a “STRENGTHENED SPINE” and it is the origin of the adage, “BEHIND every strong man is a STRONG WOMAN.”
Click here for more

We are trying brother, but we are dying brother



sadiiqsunra:
We are trying brother, but we are dying brother

Haitian Revolution and 1807 Abolition Act

Haitian Revolution and 1807 Abolition Act:
Dr Hakim Adi will be presenting a lecture The Role of the Haitian Revolution & its Impact on the 1807 Abolition Act.” [London, Harrow Council Chambers, 13November 6-9pm] which draws on his article “The wider historical context of the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade”  [see below].  Hakim explains why slavery which was essential to the British economy, ended so abruptly and what part the Haitian revolution played in abolition.
Much has been written about the Haitian revolution,  but less on the women revolutionaries who also took part.   Suzanne Bélair, called Sanité Belair and Cécile Fatiman were two of these revolutionary women.   Sanité Belair was married to Charles Belair, a lieutenant and aide to Toussaint L’ouverture.  Just a few months after she joined the revolution,  Sanité was captured.  In order that she was not alone her husband gave himself up.  In 1802, just two years before Haiti became the first independent Black nation, the couple were taken to Cap-Haïtien where Charles Belair was shot and Sanité decapitated.   Cécile Fatiman was a voudou high priestess, a mambo who was one of the presiding priests along with Dutty Boukman at the ceremony to mark the launch of the revolution at Bwa Kayiman, remembered every 14th August.

Suzanne Sanite Belair


Cécile Fatiman

The wider historical context of the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade”
In March 2007 large-scale commemorative events were organised to mark the bi-centenary of the parliamentary act to abolish the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
This unprecedented commemoration of a historical event, in which the British government itself is playing a leading role, was difficult to avoid.
There has been a frenzy in the British media. We have seen government publications (allegedly designed to enlighten the public); meetings and exhibitions; a debate in parliament; an apology from London’s mayor; the issuing of postage stamps; a service in Westminster Abbey; and release of the film Amazing Grace which promotes the well-established myth that abolition was largely due to the efforts of the Hull-based MP William Wilberforce.
It would be hoped that owing to the vast amount of information that is being disseminated, everyone would be now disabused of such erroneous views; and would be able to place both the so-called abolition and the centuries of trafficking of human flesh from Africa in historical perspective. The commemorative events certainly provide the opportunity for broad and in depth discussion of Britain’s history and the crimes against humanity committed over many centuries.
But are we any clearer about what went on 1807? More importantly, do we know why parliament decided to make illegal an enterprise which had underpinned Britain’s economy throughout the 18th century, when Britain was the world’s leading slave trading power?
After all, Britain was involved in the trafficking of kidnapped and enslaved Africans from the mid-16th century, when this enterprise was pioneered by John Hawkins and Elizabeth Tudor, until the early 1930s, when legislation was still being passed outlawing slavery in Britain’s African colonies.
In the 18th century Britain, as the world’s leading slave trading power, transported about half of all enslaved Africans not only to its own colonies but also those of other major powers such as France and Spain. British ships transported at least 3,500,000 Africans across the Atlantic.
In total, this entire ‘trade’ led to the forced removal of some 15,000,000 Africans, transported to the colonies of the European powers and the Americas. Many millions more were killed in the process of enslavement and transportation. Historians now estimate that Africa’s population actually declined over a period of four centuries, or remained stagnant until the early 20th century.
In 1713 the British government was militarily victorious against its rivals in Europe. By the Treaty of Utrecht (the same treaty by which Britain lays claim to Gibraltar) , it gained the lucrative contract to supply Spain’s American colonies with enslaved Africans.
The government promptly sold the contract for £7.3m to the South Sea company, whose first governor happened to also be the chancellor of the exchequer.
Indeed the trafficking of Africans was the business of the rich and powerful from the outset. The monarchy was a zealous supporter and beneficiary, as was the Church of England. The slave trade was Britain’s trade in the 18th century. The British Prime Minister William Pitt declared that 80 per cent of all British foreign trade was associated with it. It contributed to the development of banking and insurance, shipbuilding and several manufacturing industries. Most of the inhabitants of Manchester were engaged in producing goods to be exchanged for enslaved Africans. Their trafficking led to the development of major ports of London, Bristol and Liverpool. Today it is difficult to find any major stately home, or cultural or financial institution which is not connected with the profits generated by this trade and the luxury items associated with it such as sugar, tobacco and coffee.
It might be wondered therefore why an enterprise that was so economically important to the rich and powerful in Britain in the 18th century should have been so abruptly ended in the first decade of the 19th century.
The answer requires the abolition of various myths and disinformation peddled since that time. One such myth is that abolition was largely the work of one man – William Wilberforce; and that it was carried out largely for humanitarian reasons. And there is another myth: that abolition was the work of an enlightened parliament, finally acknowledging the barbarism and inhumanity of the kidnapping, enslavement and trafficking of other human beings.
However, on the contrary, it is a matter of historical fact that the struggle to end the enslavement and trafficking of Africans was first initiated and pursued primarily by Africans themselves.
Historians now speak of centuries’ long wars of resistance in the Caribbean; of the maroons; of day to day large and small-scale liberation struggles.
But such resistance also took place throughout the American continent, wherever enslaved Africans were to be found. There were also significant acts of resistance within Africa itself, and on many ships engaged in the human trafficking, most famously on the Amistad.
Such acts of resistance also took place in Britain, where enslaved Africans who liberated themselves were subjects of court cases contesting the legality of slavery throughout the 18th century.
It was as a result of this self-liberation of Africans that drew some leading abolitionists, such as Granville Sharp, into the abolitionist movement in the late 18th century. While the resistance acts of Africans culminated in the famous legal judgement of 1772 which declared that it was illegal for self-liberated Africans to be re-enslaved in Britain and taken out of the country against their will. Africans in Britain had organised their own liberation. But they were assisted by the ordinary people of London and other towns and cities.
African resistance to enslavement and kidnapping contributed to growing public support and opposition to slave trafficking in Britain and elsewhere.
In Britain, a popular movement opposing the trade began in the 1780s. It soon became a broad mass movement of enormous proportions, possibly the biggest. It was certainly one of the first mass political movements in Britain’s history, although it is conveniently ignored in most historical accounts.
Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people eventually took part in this movement which involved the petitioning of parliament and the boycotting of slave-produced sugar. This abolitionist movement coincided with a more general concern with and struggle for the ‘Rights of Man’. Its more advanced elements consciously promoted the view that the rights of Africans were indeed part of that struggle. Therefore what was required was a struggle for and defence of the rights of all.
Africans themselves played a leading role in this movement as lecturers, propagandists and activists. The most notable was Olaudah Equiano, formerly enslaved, whose autobiography became a bestseller. But we should not forget the writing of others, for example Phyllis Wheatley, Ottobah Cugoano and James Gronniosaw.
Africans in London, including Equiano and Cugoano, formed their own organisation, the ‘Sons of Africa’, which campaigned for abolition. It worked with both the Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade and the wider mass abolitionist campaign.
But African resistance in the Caribbean and elsewhere was an even more important factor in the abolitionist struggle, since it had the tendency to make slavery both less profitable and more dangerous for the slave owners.
Uprisings by enslaved Africans threatened not just the profits of individual owners but the control of entire colonies and the fate of Europe’s economies.
The most important of these liberation struggles, the revolution in St Domingue, the largest and most prosperous French colony in the Caribbean, broke out in 1791 not long after the revolution in France. Revolutionary St Domingue therefore became the first country to effectively abolish the enslavement of Africans.
In Britain, the popular mass abolitionist movement coincided with wider demands for political change, at a time when the vast majority were denied the vote. It also coincided with crucial economic changes; the industrial revolution; the emergence of new social forces with the workers on one side and industrial capitalists on the other, attempting to consolidate their economic and political domination of the country. The industrialists were sometimes at odds with the economic and political power exercised by those who owed their position to the slave-based economies of the Caribbean.
Mass petitioning of parliament, the only means open to the disenfranchised, against the trade was often strong in manufacturing towns such as Manchester, where perhaps a third of the entire population signed. This was viewed with alarm by the ruling class.
The Prime Minister of the time, William Pitt, recognised that popular sentiment might be used to persuade parliament to abolish Britain’s exports of enslaved Africans to its main economic rival, France. It was Pitt who first encouraged Wilberforce to bring an abolition bill before parliament. Wilberforce’s bill was first introduced in 1791. It was defeated, as were several similar bills during the next 15 years.
But during this period several significant changes took place. First, the French Revolution of 1789. Britain’s declaration of war against revolutionary France in 1793 allowed the suppression of the political activity of the people at home, effectively limiting the popular abolitionist campaign and driving it underground.
The revolutionaries in St Domingue successfully defended their revolution against the French army then against invasions by both Spain and Britain. It is worth remembering that this war was pursued by Pitt and supported by Wilberforce, who clearly did not belief that Africans should liberate themselves.
In 1804 St Domingue declared its independence and was renamed Haiti. The revolution in Haiti contributed to, and occurred alongside, other major insurrections across the Caribbean, in Jamaica, Grenada, St Vincent and elsewhere, which severely threatened the entire colonial system.
Even those Africans forcibly recruited into Britain’s West India regiment in Dominica mutinied. Toussaint L’Ouverture and some of the other leaders of the Haitian revolution became nationally known figures in Britain. Abolition came to be viewed by some both as a means to press home a naval and economic advantage over France and its allies, and a means to limit the numbers of Africans imported into British colonies; thereby preventing the likelihood of further revolutions and maintain the slave system.
It was with these aims in mind that parliament passed the Foreign Slave Act in 1806, banning the export of enslaved Africans to Britain’s economic rivals, a measure that effectively ended around 60 per cent of Britain’s trafficking, but which is now hardly remembered, and certainly not commemorated.
There is no doubt that for many in parliament and outside, the demand for abolition was based largely on economic motives. Prime Minister Pitt, and others had been concerned about competition from St Domingue and other Caribbean colonies even before 1791. They had unsuccessfully sought agreement from both France and Holland to prohibit the trafficking of Africans.
Others were more concerned about what they saw as the subsidies given to slave owners and sugar producers in the Caribbean; and government support for economies and a trade that was declining in importance by the end of the 18th century, not least because there was over-production of sugar.
Others in Britain became more interested in developing direct trade links with India, Brazil and other Spanish American colonies. The trafficking of Africans to Britain’s colonies was no longer so important and was seen as by some as being an impediment to important trading links elsewhere.
These economic motives for abolition have long been associated with the names of Eric Williams and C.L.R. James. Many attempts have been made to discredit them. In fact very similar views were expressed by British historians of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Most importantly economic justifications for an end to ‘the trade’ were strongly advanced in the period preceding the Abolition Act.
What is significant is that this explanation for abolition is hardly ever discussed. It has been largely absent from many of the commemorative events so far and even from the government’s own publication which, it is claimed, is designed to educate the public.
Simply stated, this explanation means that the parliamentary act was passed not for humanitarian reasons but because it was in the interests of the rich and their representatives in parliament to do so. And it should be added that it was the actions of people, and most importantly of the enslaved themselves, in the Caribbean, Britain and elsewhere that made enslavement and trafficking increasing inefficient, unprofitable and dangerous.
In 1807 therefore, parliament was persuaded to pass the Abolition Act; partly on the basis of such economic concerns, partly on the basis that limiting the importation of enslaved Africans would likely limit future revolutions and preserve slavery throughout the Caribbean colonies. Partly it seems, because it was seen as a way of diverting attention away from an unpopular war against France and its allies, and persuading the people that such a war was being fought in the interests of abolition.
Of course after the 1806 act it is arguable that most of ‘the trade’ had ended already. Even some of the major established Caribbean planters were in favour of abolition since this worked against the interests of their commercial rivals, both foreigners and those who had acquired newly captured territory in the Caribbean from Britain’s enemies. They reasoned that this might be especially advantageous if abolition could be forced upon other countries as a consequence of Britain’s military and naval supremacy. Other representatives of the rising bourgeoisie supported the measure as a means to limit the economic and political power of those who had hitherto retarded the development of industrial capitalism and ‘free trade’.
The 1807 Act was subsequently used as the representatives of the rich envisaged, not least as a means by which the Royal Naval might interfere in international shipping across the atlantic.
Yet it did not end British citizens’ involvement in the trafficking of Africans nor slavery itself. Following other major insurrections in the Caribbean and similar economic and political considerations, slavery itself was only later made illegal in 1834. But it continued in some areas of the British empire for another century. The trafficking of Africans in general increased during the 19th century. Many British slavers sailed under foreign flags of convenience.
The 1807 Act did not end Britain’s dependence on slave produced goods such as cotton, the mainstay of the industrial revolution. Even that so-called ‘legitimate commerce’ subsequently developed with Africa, such as the extraction of palm oil, was largely produced with slave labour. The act increased rather than diminished Britain’s interference in Africa which culminated in the so-called ‘scramble’ for Africa at the end of the 19th century: the invasion of the continent and imposition of colonial rule.
It is sobering to reflect that Britain’s first colony in Africa was Sierra Leone. This was the region from where the first enslaved Africans had been kidnapped in the 16th century. It was established allegedly as a haven for liberated Africans in 1807, and has now been under Britain’s domination for the last 200 years Much of this time, it has been occupied by British troops, while its shores are still patrolled by the Royal Navy.
Today the government is demanding that even its basic utilities, such as water, should be privatised for the benefit of British multinationals. Centuries of interference by British governments have produced a country that manages to be one of the world’s poorest – and at the same time the world’s leading producer of diamonds.
The trafficking of Africans over many centuries was one of the greatest crimes against humanity. The current commemorative events, which are organised for a variety of purposes, at least provide the opportunity for widespread discussion.
What is vital is that the myths are shattered and disinformation combated. We must ensure that appropriate and adequate reparations are made for slavery, colonialism and all crimes against humanity. People themselves must draw the appropriate lessons from history, one of the most important being that it is people that make and change history; and that therefore, we are our own liberators.
* Hakim Adi is reader in the history of Africa and the African diaspora at Middlesex University, London, UK.

De-Instinctive Works



Instinctively I reach
The lady shows me two dolls on the table.  She asks me which doll is the nice doll, so I point to the nice doll.  The lady asks me which doll is the bad doll, so I point to the other doll.  Then the lady asks me which doll is most like you...

Instinctively I reach for the first doll, but a storm begins to form in my head.  It changes the direction of my mind and then of my hand.  What is inside of that storm?  Here is what is inside of that storm.

Surprising White Anger whipping the distant spaces into an omni-darkness of Unnecessary White Anger rifled by flashes of Dangerous White Anger and soft booming sounds of My Own Fear. My Own Fear towers growing closer at the center and magnetizes far flung bits of My own exasperation back into My Own Kind fear.  And then, More White Anger-again, resting me suddenly done, saddened and brokened.
                                                February 1, 2009

~livicated to all these beautiful yut that don’t know their last name is european (and) but that doesn’t mean they are european.  -go on sister Bight.  u on the good path chicken.

Intellectual Warfare (fi Pa Carruthers)



I have a slavemaster in my head
I have a slavemaster in my head
this gringo tells me he controls my fate
this wasichu tells me where I come from
this Charlie(town) tells me he can help it, iNi can’t

when I put him in check
i get absurdly free
violently good
flying go
feeling lit.
& elder respecting
                                    April 25, 2009

When Children Ask



When Children Ask
when children ask
a black
             black
                       black question
   you are removing genuine pain
   you are obstructing body-entering cold
   you are holding up a three-storey-vast coloring book
        for them to color
   you are bending straight the roots of pre-beaten statistics
   you are quieting the best-sellers’ best sellings
   you are tracing the shape of a peaceful craft
        for more than one good hungry folk
in your answer
(so please, have an answer).
                                    September 9, 2009

AmericaValue



#AmericaValue
found two ancestors in my family tree
a slave named America
and a slave named Africa
(no joke)
the slave America the property of one man
was charged with manslaughter
of the other slave Africa the property of another man
he had stabbed him with iron or steel
and struck him in the breast and the head with a stick
its master was heard in its defense
and after 39 lashes
he was discharged
what did America do to get off?
It doesn’t make sense.
                      August 27, 2009

Airtkwayk


#66.6 Exajoules in Argentina
While babylon lockdown
de i ainshun mind n'body o'
jah jah-ask-mama
shift ova a few inches
tell dem
dem time
GROWING short.
                 March 9, 2010

There's A Ray


There’s A Ray
You perform
perform good song
(it is all we can do on this current planet)
Undim, your steady pre is old
but comes out watching, careful
your academy is told you
 by men
whom it is quiety and smally certain
you bear (you’ve born)

I guess I’ve just now to realize
  what an awe
  what a love
the unperformed womban [performance]
All y’alls.
~Livicated to all creatrix.
                                    March 20, 2010

Moika & the Elephant Path



I am moika
I am moika
My good spirit
Can not be stopped
Even when I am sick
And tired
My poetry
My realness
My curiousity
Won’t stop me from
Trying things out
And becoming the leader
My people need me to be.
                        Jan 2010

Makak Neonatal Imitation

...love the inter-webs.

Number of Brain States

"The brain is made up of one hundred billion nerve cells or "neurons" which is the basic structural and functional units of the nervous system. Each neuron makes something like a thousand to ten thousand contacts with other neurons and these points of contact are called synapses where exchange of information occurs.
   And based on this information, someone has calculated that the number of possible permutations and combination of brain activity, in other words the number of brain states, exceeds the number of elementary particles in the known universe."
~Vilayanur Ramachandran

Free and Happy

"Do any of you say that you and your family are free and happy, and what have you to do with the wretched slaves and other people? So can I say, for I enjoy as much freedom as any of you, if I am not quite as well off as the best of you. Look into our freedom and happiness, and see of what kind they are composed!!" 
~David Walker, Walker's Appeal, in Four Articles; Together with a Preamble, to the Colored Citizens of the World, but in Particular, and Very Expressly, to Those of the United States of America (Boston, Massachusetts, September 28, 1829).