African Identity In Diversity

THIS is a response to J. Ramphaga’s Letter to the Editor The Namibian May 27th.Somebody born and living somewhere in Africa and intending to stay, work and eventually die there may be accepted as an African in the broadest sense of the word.

This, of course, implies a commitment to a specific African community’s interests or rather to individual interests interpreted and articulated in the context of a specific African society. This would, for instance, make Johnny Clegg of Savuka fame an African, whereas it would exclude, say, Condoleeza Rice.There is also a definition of being African that equates blackness and Africanness and postulates a corresponding black cultural kinship as well as brotherhood.Whites therefore cannot be REAL Africans whereas African Americans and African Europeans can..Definition No.1 may sound wishy-washy in its all-embracing fashion, but definition No.2 has a number of questionable implications: (1) Being African is, of necessity, a rather general, even abstract concept because it relates to a continent of more linguistic, cultural and ethnic differentiation than any other continent, largely due to its seniority as the Cradle of Humankind: Africa not only offers an estimated 3 000 languages, a wide range of religions from the veneration of ancestors to Christianity and Islam, both religions with more than a millennium of African presence, but also a large variety of complexions, facial features, etc.and a long history of co-operation as well as conflict.In other words, African identity exists, but at the bottom of a sea of diversity.In spite of these difficulties, the definition of REAL Africanness is not infrequently used to override a person’s specific and concrete Namibianness.Harold Pupkewitz, Anton Lubowski, André du Pisani, for instance, had/have very definite Namibian links and clear commitments to the nation-building project, but – according to the emphatic definition of Africanness – they do not qualify as REAL Africans.This is a Damocles sword that makes their Namibian citizenship rights provisional and, in a worst-case scenario, may even annihilate them.This exterritorialisation, though to a lesser degree, also affects less mainstream ethnic groups like Coloureds and Khoisans, whereas Blacks in the Diaspora in the Americas and in Europe would have Africanness bestowed on them.As far as the African continent is concerned, REAL Africa is sub-Saharan Africa.North Africa, including Ancient Egypt, is considered to be something else, possibly even Asian.(2) Today there is scientific certainty that race makes sense only when referring to the human race.Differences in outward appearance between humans do not reflect, say, mental or emotional differences.- Unfortunately early Pan-Africanists – initially almost exclusively African Americans – fought against European and Euro-American racism but did not question the concept of race as such.Being treated as slaves or second-class citizens on the basis of a racist ideology, they opposed racist value judgements but accepted the essential differentness of races.As soon as Africans had become slave material Europeans no longer registered, say, the excellence and beauty of Benin or Timbuktu.Africans became all the same, were brawn not brain, had an inherent sense of rhythm.African culture was something Africans had in their blood, whereas European culture depended on the hard work of cultural geniuses like Shakespeare, Mozart and Pushkin and had to be learned in order to be understood and consumed properly.Equating African culture with nature, of course, was part and parcel of Euro-Racism.We believe that the weakness of early Pan-Africanism, Negritude and some forms of modern Afrocentrism are that they perpetuate some colonial patterns of thought in an anticolonial ideology.A culture that is declared genetic and, thus, unchangeable and static, is a bad preparation for the nation-building process: Africa’s postcolonial nations, invariably, still have to create cultures that link the cultural languages of the regions, that integrate outside cultural influences from all over the world that make sense and strike a chord in every heart, that develop adequate forms for new postcolonial experiences and new challenges.The cultural dialogue between African nations, which is essential because it can and will create a Pan-African cultural language, is, so far, far from comprehensive.And let us not forget that Namibians – with the exception of those who went into exile in Africa – spent many decades under Apartheid’s splendid isolation and its Iron Curtain against the rest of Africa and have extra homework to do.(3) Many countries in Europe and North America officially subscribe to some form of multiculturalism.The media in these regions of the world demonstrate that Brown and Black Canadians, Brits, French, Swedes, Germans are no longer seen as an anomaly.As far as culture is concerned, some space has been created for people of different cultural backgrounds within the context of national cultures, which are rapidly changing anyhow.This trend is not without its opponents in the form of die-hard nationalists.Old-style racism still raises its head and may re-emerge, but the multicultural efforts in the north are real and its repercussions can be detected in Namibia, for instance in the efforts of the Franco-Namibian.Cultural Centre.Those Namibians who believe that a Pink or – for that matter – a Brown African is unimaginable usually refer to Europe’s racist conventions that declare Black European to be an oxymoron and ignore all multicultural efforts over there.Well, we live in a multicultural world and it makes sense to embrace it as a positive program.And what is reconciliation all about if not about practical multiculturalism? Defining Africanness is far from over.H Junge Via e-mailThis would, for instance, make Johnny Clegg of Savuka fame an African, whereas it would exclude, say, Condoleeza Rice.There is also a definition of being African that equates blackness and Africanness and postulates a corresponding black cultural kinship as well as brotherhood.Whites therefore cannot be REAL Africans whereas African Americans and African Europeans can..Definition No.1 may sound wishy-washy in its all-embracing fashion, but definition No.2 has a number of questionable implications: (1) Being African is, of necessity, a rather general, even abstract concept because it relates to a continent of more linguistic, cultural and ethnic differentiation than any other continent, largely due to its seniority as the Cradle of Humankind: Africa not only offers an estimated 3 000 languages, a wide range of religions from the veneration of ancestors to Christianity and Islam, both religions with more than a millennium of African presence, but also a large variety of complexions, facial features, etc.and a long history of co-operation as well as conflict.In other words, African identity exists, but at the bottom of a sea of diversity.In spite of these difficulties, the definition of REAL Africanness is not infrequently used to override a person’s specific and concrete Namibianness.Harold Pupkewitz, Anton Lubowski, André du Pisani, for instance, had/have very definite Namibian links and clear commitments to the nation-building project, but – according to the emphatic definition of Africanness – they do not qualify as REAL Africans.This is a Damocles sword that makes their Namibian citizenship rights provisional and, in a worst-case scenario, may even annihilate them.This exterritorialisation, though to a lesser degree, also affects less mainstream ethnic groups like Coloureds and Khoisans, whereas Blacks in the Diaspora in the Americas and in Europe would have Africanness bestowed on them.As far as the African continent is concerned, REAL Africa is sub-Saharan Africa.North Africa, including Ancient Egypt, is considered to be something else, possibly even Asian.(2) Today there is scientific certainty that race makes sense only when referring to the human race.Differences in outward appearance between humans do not reflect, say, mental or emotional differences.- Unfortunately early Pan-Africanists – initially almost exclusively African Americans – fought against European and Euro-American racism but did not question the concept of race as such.Being treated as slaves or second-class citizens on the basis of a racist ideology, they opposed racist value judgements but accepted the essential differentness of races.As soon as Africans had become slave material Europeans no longer registered, say, the excellence and beauty of Benin or Timbuktu.Africans became all the same, were brawn not brain, had an inherent sense of rhythm.African culture was something Africans had in their blood, whereas European culture depended on the hard work of cultural geniuses like Shakespeare, Mozart and Pushkin and had to be learned in order to be understood and consumed properly.Equating African culture with nature, of course, was part and parcel of Euro-Racism.We believe that the weakness of early Pan-Africanism, Negritude and some forms of modern Afrocentrism are that they perpetuate some colonial patterns of thought in an anticolonial ideology.A culture that is declared genetic and, thus, unchangeable and static, is a bad preparation for the nation-building process: Africa’s postcolonial nations, invariably, still have to create cultures that link the cultural languages of the regions, that integrate outside cultural influences from all over the world that make sense and strike a chord in every heart, that develop adequate forms for new postcolonial experiences and new challenges.The cultural dialogue between African nations, which is essential because it can and will create a Pan-African cultural language, is, so far, far from comprehensive.And let us not forget that Namibians – with the exception of those who went into exile in Africa – spent many decades under Apartheid’s splendid isolation and its Iron Curtain against the rest of Africa and have extra homework to do.(3) Many countries in Europe and North America officially subscribe to some form of multiculturalism.The media in these regions of the world demonstrate that Brown and Black Canadians, Brits, French, Swedes, Germans are no longer seen as an anomaly.As far as culture is concerned, some space has been created for people of different cultural backgrounds within the context of national cultures, which are rapidly changing anyhow.This trend is not without its opponents in the form of die-hard nationalists.Old-style racism still raises its head and may re-emerge, but the multicultural efforts in the north are real and its repercussions can be detected in Namibia, for instance in the efforts of the Franco-Namibian.Cultural Centre.Those Namibians who believe that a Pink or – for that matter – a Brown African is unimaginable usually refer to Europe’s racist conventions that declare Black European to be an oxymoron and ignore all multicultural efforts over there.Well, we live in a multicultural world and it makes sense to embrace it as a positive program.And what is reconciliation all about if not about practical multiculturalism? Defining Africanness is far from over.H Junge Via e-mail