what-a-succulent-ass

toniuzoma:

karnythia:

kyssthis16:

negrodocumentary:

Immigration and Assimilation Among African-descendants

Women from Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa discuss the hardships of being first-generation Americans. The stigma of growing up African and Haitian is dissected as well as the “us” versus “them” mentality some immigrants have against Black Americans.

Music by Negros Americanos

Support us 

Like us

Interesting conversation. I won’t go into how and why I designate myself as Black American, #doe. That’s a really long convo I ain’t even in the mood to have, ya dig.

Exactly. Also I love that old girl came out & said “Black Americans fought for the rights you’re enjoying” because I was getting tired of the one sided tone of this conversation.

Why I will never shit on my Black Britons, Black Americans, et al. Even though I intensely side-eye some of the “kumbayah Africa” mythologisation of my continent and its people that some partake in, we are all cut from the same cloth. The systems of power, social, and cultural colonisation are echoed both in Africa and abroad, and when we go to any one of these countries, when we enjoy the rights they bled for yet discount them as people, try to distance ourselves from them, we are buying into the same lies that have been used to divide us—all of use—for centuries. 

And face it, whatever distinction you want to make, to the system you are so eager to please, you are still just another “nigger.”

so-treu

so-treu:

While this is an interesting development, what officials at the White House failed to do through this act was specify exactly which types of African-Americans the program would benefit. Which blacks are benefiting most from programs meant to help them in the sphere of education is sparking controversy. According to a study produced by Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania, immigrants, who make up 13 percent of the nation’s college-age black population, account for more than a quarter of black students at Ivy League and other select universities.

In fact, “census data show that the children of these immigrants were more likely to be college-educated than any other immigrant or U.S.-born ethnic group, including white Americans,” a September 2012 Washington Post story states.

The result of this phenomenon is that policies created to compensate the descendants of American slaves for the deprivations caused by slavery and Jim Crow segregation are benefiting blacks of recent African and Caribbean origin disproportionately. Researchers of this discrepancy have varying theories as to why this trend has developed and continues to grow.

yeah so remember about  month and a half ago where there were a bunch of Africans who were saying that Black Americans have western privilege at all times, absolutely and without complication? and how when folks brought up the positionality of Africans in things like education and employment, namely that they can and do utilize anti-black american attitutdes and rhetoric to their advantage (kinda like this guy here: ““[Black immigrants] are hard workers who have played by the rules of the system and succeeded,” Nigerian-American anthropologist John Ogbu wrote of this actuality in his seminal 1998 study Involuntary and Voluntary Minorities.” right becaue no black americans has ever worked hard or played by the rules EVER), pretty much all of them refused to engage on this point? like no one really wanted to talk about how western privilege isn’t just the sole province of black americans, by far?

yeahhhhhhhh……

guerrillamamamedicine
diasporadash:

-Malika and Khadijah Haqq are descended from the Afro-Iranian community; their parents are immigrants from Khuzestan, Iran. Afro-Iranians are Iranians of confirmed Sub-Saharan African descent. Most Afro Iranians are concentrated in Hormozagan, Sistan and Baluchestan and Khuzestan. Through the Indian Ocean slave trade, Arabs captured and sold enslaved people to the Persian Gulf, Egypt, Arabia, the Far East, the Indian Ocean islands, Ethiopia and Somalia. Check out this documentary Afro-Iranian Lives by Behnaz Mirzai and this in-depth article about Afro-Iranians.
Co-curated by James Daniel Lopez

diasporadash:

-Malika and Khadijah Haqq are descended from the Afro-Iranian community; their parents are immigrants from Khuzestan, Iran. Afro-Iranians are Iranians of confirmed Sub-Saharan African descent. Most Afro Iranians are concentrated in Hormozagan, Sistan and Baluchestan and Khuzestan. Through the Indian Ocean slave trade, Arabs captured and sold enslaved people to the Persian Gulf, Egypt, Arabia, the Far East, the Indian Ocean islands, Ethiopia and Somalia. Check out this documentary Afro-Iranian Lives by Behnaz Mirzai and this in-depth article about Afro-Iranians.

Co-curated by James Daniel Lopez

private-revolution

private-revolution:

so-treu:

guerrillamamamedicine:

honestly, being an black us girl who lives in africa, i have lots of thought on the connections, appropriations, etc between black africans and black americans. 

even more so because i live in a world where

1. most ppl assume im black african

2. most ppl here look down on black africans

3. im actually from the states, like slave descendent black

4. most black africans here insist that i am african, and seem to get slightly offended if i say im not. 

5. most egyptians dont seem to see themselves as african

but i dont really understand the antagonism that is happening in the conversation.  black africans seem to be able to have more economic and academic success than black americans in the states (am i wrong about this?).  and i am under the impression that black africans, in general, are seen, in white society, as ‘better’ than black americans. 

also who gets to decide who is ‘african’.  like i dont call myself ‘african’ because to me in my current context it implies an experience i havent really had.  plus, i stay reppin black culture and black cool.  but considering i havent lived in the states for the past few years, everyone around me, in cairo and berlin, assumed i was african, when they saw me. 

so who gets to decide who is african?

why doesnt this conversation make sense to me? 

i guess what i am wondering is, it cultural appropriation if a girl from niger wears adinkra jewelry, or is it only cultural appropriation if a girl from the states does?  feel me?  are we talking about ‘africa’ or are we talking about ‘ghana’…? 

who gets to decide who is and who is not from here?  and why? 

boldness added. cause that’s a question i would really like an answer to. are we mad when South African designers incorporate adinkra patterns into their fashion, for example? why is it that black u.s.ians are always the ones who are figures are primarily responseible for cultural appropriation in these conversations?

Okay I’ve tried to stay out of this because I’m African and because I can trace my roots back umpteen years, this is not my conversation to have or pain to feel. However, I feel like at this point, I should say something but I am only speaking for myself. I see African Americans as just that, cousins and aunts and uncles who got stolen years ago and did what nature commands us to, adapt. I will not deny anyone the right to explore their heritage or to discover family where they thought they had none, HOWEVER, I also will not stand for the disrespect or appropriation of my sulture just like you shouldn’t stand for yours”. Asclong as you apply wisdom and respect, I don’t believe anyone has the riht to expel you from the African family because you are exploring a portion of yourself that was stolen from you. Not a sermon, just a thought.

rematiration-deactivated2013111

Excerpt: Black Indians: Their Mixing Is To Be Prevented - The Southern Frontier

adailyriot:

@font-face { font-family: “Times New Roman”; }p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: “Times New Roman”; }table.MsoNormalTable { font-size: 10pt; font-family: “Times New Roman”; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }

To an extent not revealed in Hollywood frontier movies, slave labor built the earliest European communities in the south. From 1690 to 1720, Africans cleared land, introduced African rice culture, navigated river vessels, and delivered mail in the Carolinas. Only the most trustworthy slaves were brought to the frontier, and most stood by their masters. But some fled to the woods and Indians at the first opportunity, giving their owners something more to worry about.

For British subjects the question of bringing slaves so close t he frontier and Native Americans stirred a lively debate. A South Carolina law of 1725 imposed a £200 fine on those who brought their slaves to the frontier. A British colonel urged enforcement “because the Slaves… talk good English as well as the Cherokee language and … too often tell falsities to the Indians which they are apt believe.” In 1751, another new law warned “The carrying of Negroes among the Indians has all along been thought detrimental, as an intimacy ought to be avoided.”

But sound racial policies on the frontier clashed with the desire to reap the profits produced by slave labor. Virginia surveyor George Washington, twenty-three, urged the use of “mulattoes and Negroes… as pioneers and hatchet men” in the wilderness. An early print shows a young Washington with a black and white surveying team.

British colonists tried to play one dark race against the other on the southern frontier. The Maryland Assembly in 1676 offered Indians  rewards for recapturing slave runaways. In South Carolina, in 1708, 5,280 European settlers tried to watch over 2,900 African and 1,400 Indian slaves. Europeans sent slave “cattle hunters” to protect Charleston from Indian raids. In 1740 South Carolina offered Indians £100 for each slave runaway captured alive, £50 for “every scalp of a grown negro slave.”

The conflict among the three races on the frontier had each side seeking allies wherever they could be found. During the Yemassee War of 1715, Natchez Indians murdered whites and seized their slaves. When the British ordered one thousand two hundred soldiers against the Natchez, they sent black troops along. And when Governor Charles Craven of South Carolina confronted the Natchez’s army he found it also included armed black prisoners.

By 1729 the frontier racial cauldron was boiling over in South Carolina and Louisiana. Slaves rose in rebellion at Stono, South Carolina. Terrified whites turned Catawbas Indians, noted for heir slavehunting skills, to recapture or slay all rebel. In Louisiana, the governor was shocked to learn Chickasaws had contacted a daring band of Banbara  Africans enslaved at New Orleans. His spies told him the two peoples had plotted and insurrection that would kill whites and create a red-black maroon confederacy.

Hardly had he solved this threat when he heard New Orleans was menaced by Chouchas Indians a few miles north. He governor sent off armed black slaves to carry out a massacre. 

The sporadic conflicts hardly matched the unending racial disturbances along the border between British Georgia and Spanish Florida. Spain relied largely on the blacks and Indians of Florida to resist any invasion by slavehunting British. When Georgia Governor Oglethorpe invaded Florida to 1740, Spain’s red and black troops repelled him. Oglethorpe learned that two hundred Africans, including many ex-slaves from Georgia, guarded St. Augustine.

When Spain ordered a counterattack on Georgia in 1742, their armed forces included a black regiment and “negro commanders clothed in lace” bearing the same rank as white officers. The British concluded they had more to worry about from this force starting a slave revolt in Georgia than anything Spanish troops might do.

At this time the British colonists in the southern colonies began introducing the practice of African slavery among neighboring Native Americans. They concentrated on the Five Civilized Nations- Cherokees, Chickasaws, Choctaws, Creeks, and Seminoles- as the largest body of Indians present on their borders. Their aim was to make their slave property more secure by making Indians partners in the system. Indians who accepted slavery would not take in runaways fleeting European masters.

Except for he Seminoles, the Five Civilized Nations began to accept the foreign idea of slavery. Even so, their idea of how it should work differed from British practices. Quaker slaveholder John Bartram, botanist to the king of England, visited some Indian owners in 1770. He found their slaves dressed better than the chief, married into the nation easily, and their children were “free and considered in every respect equal” to other members. After a visit to the Creeks, Bartram wrote:

“I saw in every town in the Nation I visited captives, some extremely aged, who were free and in as good circumstances as their masters; and all slaves have their freedom when they marry, which is permitted and encouraged [and] they and their offspring are in every way upon equality with their conquerors.”

But how did Native Americans view the way Europeans treated their African prisoners? Two European missionaries, trying to convert the Delaware Nation, returned rejected but with their report on the Delaware response to their plea:

“They rejoiced exceedingly at our happiness in thus being favored by the Great Spirit, and felt very grateful hat we had condescended to remember our brethren in the wilderness. But they could not help recollecting that we had a people among us, whom, because they differed from us in color, we had made slaves of, and made them suffer great hardships, and lead miserable lives. Now they could not see any reason, if a people being black entitled us then to deal with them, why a red color should not equally qualify the same treatment.

They therefore had determined to wait, to see whether all the black people amongst us were made thus happy and joyful before they would put confidence in our promises; for they thought a people who had suffered so much and so long by our means, should be entitled to our first attention; and therefore they had sent back the two missionaries, with many thanks, promising that when they saw the black people among us restored to freedom and happiness they would gladly receive our missionaries.”

Despite every European effort to keep dark people from assisting the other, the two races began to blend on a vast scale. Black Indians were apparent everywhere if one bothered to look. Thomas Jefferson, for example, found among the Mattaponies of his Virginia, “more negro than Indian blood ran in them.” Another eyewitness reported Virginia’s Gingaskin reservation had become “largely African.” Peter Kalm, whose famous diary described a visit to the British colonies in 1750, took note of many Africans living with Indians, with marriage and children the normal result.

That same year a Moravian missionary, J.C. Pyrlaeus, visited the Nanticoke Nation on Maryland’s eastern shore to compile a vocabulary of their language. Years later, all their words were discovered to form a language that was pure African Mandigo.

British authorities repeatedly tried to convince Native Americans to return the slave fugitives they harbored in their villages. But here they collided with an Indian adoption system that welcomed new members and offered them full protection. When whites argued about the right of private property in owning people and insisted Africans were inferior beings, the Indians usually shrugged “no.”

In treaty after treaty southern colonists made native nations promise to return fugitive slaves. In 1721, the Five Civilized Nations solemnly promised a governor of Virginia to deliver slaves, but nothing happened. The British complained bitterly on behalf of their slave owners, the chiefs apologized, and the ex-slaved became a part of Native American life.

When angry slavehunters decided to take matters into their own hands, they met fierce opposition. In 1750 Captain Tobias Fitch sent off a posse of five to retrieve a slave living in the Creek Nation. A Creek chief stood between then and the black man, cut their rope and threw it in a fire. Then he warned them his villagers had as many guns as they did. The posse returned empty-handed but happy to be alive.

African members of Indian Nations often played a vital part of armed resistance to whites. In 1727 Africans and Indians besieged Virginia frontier settlements. During the French and Indian War a British officer, warning about the two races, said “Their mixing is to be prevented as much as possible.”

fyeahafrica:

From left, Mangbetu woman, Congo, c. 1929-37; woman with child, Guinea, 1915; Tutsi woman, Rwanda, c. 1929-37. Photos courtesy of the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art.
During Colonial times, it wasn’t unusual for photographers to feature ‘natives’ (as they referred to Africans) on postcards. 
Over 8,000 different postcards were produced in colonial West Africa from 1901 to 1963. Often these postcards were intended to document racial “types,” as the French called them, or illustrate the progress of French development projects. The postcards were sent mainly by European merchants and members of the French military. These postcards circulated throughout Europe, received by friends and families back home.
(source)

fyeahafrica:

From left, Mangbetu woman, Congo, c. 1929-37; woman with child, Guinea, 1915; Tutsi woman, Rwanda, c. 1929-37. Photos courtesy of the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art.

During Colonial times, it wasn’t unusual for photographers to feature ‘natives’ (as they referred to Africans) on postcards. 

Over 8,000 different postcards were produced in colonial West Africa from 1901 to 1963. Often these postcards were intended to document racial “types,” as the French called them, or illustrate the progress of French development projects. The postcards were sent mainly by European merchants and members of the French military. These postcards circulated throughout Europe, received by friends and families back home.

(source)

fyeahafrica:

With more than 140 tribes and clans, Libya is considered one of the most tribally fragmented nations in the Arab world. Despite modernization, tribalism remains a prominent force in a country now awash with weaponry.

In the aftermath of Gaddafi’s reign, nearly forty different independent militias that reportedly emerged during the rebellion remain at large.

Raising questions as to whether the National Transitional Council (NTC) has the ability to reign in all the various groups, many of which have competing interests like settling scores from the past.

For Libyans from the far south this daunting picture has already become a reality.

Tawergha – which lies some forty miles south of Misurata along the western coast of the Gulf of Sirte – was home to an estimated population of over 20,000 people. Now it’s become a ghost town.

According to some Libyans, the name Tawergha was given to the towns black population because they had dark-skinned features like the original Tuareg.

The Tuaregs, who inhabit the border area of Libya, Chad, Niger and Algeria, were historically nomads that controlled trans-Saharan trade routes and had a reputation for being robbers.

During the seventies, Gaddafi assembled the Tuaregs and other African recruits into his elite battalion known as the Al Asmar. Ironically, Al Asmar means “The Black” in Arabic.

Under Gaddafi¹s supervision, these militias were oftentimes sent on military expeditions into neighbouring countries and at the onset of the country’s revolt in February of this year many Tuaregs were unleashed on protestors.

As a result, racial hatred fuelled by unconfirmed rumours that African mercenaries had been hired by Gaddafi to squash discontent created another common enemy – dark-skinned Africans.

In the eyes of Misuratans, Tawerghans were the perpetrators of some of the worst human rights abuses during Gaddafi¹s siege on Misurata in March and April.

On August 15, in what human rights groups are calling reprisal attacks, rebels forces going by the name of The Brigade for Purging Slaves, black Skin have reportedly detained and displaced hundreds while other Tawerghans have disappeared without a trace.

“If we go back to Tawergha, we will then be at the mercy of the Misurata rebels,” a woman, who has been living in a makeshift camp with her husband and five children, told UK-based Amnesty International.

“When the rebels entered our town in mid-August and shelled it, we fled just carrying the clothes on our backs. I don’t know what happened to our homes and belongings. Now I am here in this camp, my son is ill and I am too afraid to go to the hospital in town. I don’t know what will happen to us now.”

Also caught up in the crossfire of vengeance are economic migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers from sub-Saharan Africa, many of which have sought refuge in neighbouring Tunisia or Egypt.

For them, Libya was a transit country but for others it had become a place of rebuilding.

“Fearing for their life, my parents who are from Al Fasher City in Darfur fled to Tripoli in 1998. I had never lived outside Libya before the conflict started. My father worked as a cook and my mother was domestic worker. Before fleeing I was in my third year of University pursuing a degree in the medical field,” 20-year old Eiman toldWitnessing Life.

“Unfortunately the uprising in Libya took a bloody turn because people no longer respected the law and started raping women, taking hostages and killing people. For two months my family remained trapped in our house. They were accusing and killing all black males caught on the street of being mercenaries, which meant that our mother had to try and gather food but there were many days that we starved.”

In an article published in September, the Wall Street Journal quoted Jibril as saying, “regarding Tawergha, my own viewpoint is that nobody has the right to interfere in this matter except the people of Misurata. This matter
can’t be tackled through theories and textbook examples of national reconciliation like those in South Africa, Ireland and Eastern Europe.”

Calls by human rights groups urging the NTC to protect black Libyans in the newly liberated Libya seems to have fallen on death ears, which could set a precedent of what is to come.

By Guest Contributor Simba Russeau

fyeahafrica:

(TW: Mention of rape, human trafficking, organ harvesting, images of deceased corpses) 

Death in the desert: Tribesmen exploit battle to reach Israel

El Arish, Egypt (CNN) — “I wanted to build a good future for my family, but I failed,” a weak Issam Abdallah Mohammed said in a videotaped statement.

The refugee from the Darfur region of Sudan was trying to illegally cross the border from Egypt to Israel when he was discovered and shot by Egyptian border guards.

Less than an hour after taping the statement, Issam was dead, succumbing to the wounds inflicted by the gunshots.

Every year, thousands of refugees, mostly from Eritrea, Ethiopia and Sudan, attempt the dangerous journey from their war-torn countries to Israel in search of economic prosperity and stability.

Very few make it, and the results of the failed migration can be seen in the morgue of the central hospital in the Egyptian port town of El Arish.

When a CNN crew visited there recently, all the refrigeration units were broken, leaving a biting stench of decaying corpses in the air, which staff members attempted in vain to cover up with chlorine-based cleaner and incense.

On any given day, the morgue will be packed with the bodies of African refugees who died trying to make it to Israel.

Hamdy Al-Azazy spends a lot of time here as head of the New Generation Foundation for Human Rights, which tries to help African refugees in Egypt.

Every week, Al-Azazy combs the desert, searching for corpses, ensuring that they get a dignified burial.

He has spent the past seven years helping the refugees. Many are enslaved and tortured and the women raped by the Bedouin tribes of the Sinai if they are unable to come up with large sums of money the Bedouin try to extort from them and their families, to smuggle the refugees across the border into Israel. As a result, many remain imprisoned in camps on the Sinai Peninsula.

(continue reading//related video)