bn Khaldun, 1332-1406, was an Arab who actively participated in the trans-Sahara slave trade. He observed the passive acceptance of Arab slavery by blacks, concluding that without exception blacks are “as a whole submissive to slavery, because Negroes have little that is essentially human and have attributes that are quite similar to those of dumb animals.”
His argument rests on blacks’ levity which disqualifies them for leadership position. Blacks are unserious in serious business and display a great deal of emotion where situation calls for rigorous thinking and calm judgment. As they are incapable of self-initiative required of a master, their natural position becomes that of followers or slaves.
Disturbingly enough the Indian also fails to see a master in the black man, what he sees is a slave. Same could be said of the white man, the Japanese and recently the Chinese.
I now ask, who is a slave (animal) and who the master (human); the Arab or black?
Legally, a slave is a chattel or property that can be bought and sold. Socially, his nothingness precludes him from all rights. Economically, he owns nothing. Psychologically, he is his master’s voice, saying what his master wants to hear.
Deductively, therefore, the master becomes everything the slave is not. He is free. Socially, he defines and defends his own rights. Economically, he is propertied. Psychologically, he is on the offensive.
I have used the Slave/Master paradigm to demonstrate what I believe Ibn Khaldun means by “essential humanity” and “dumb animality.” Even if I choose the Black/white analogy we would still be contemplating two mutually irreconcilable entities that circumscribed eachother. Each is constantly negotiating and renegotiating his identity through the image of The Other.
We have two worlds here, one strong and one weak. Without one its opposite is meaningless. Without the black man the white man becomes useless. Without the Slave there can be no Master, according to the black thinker Franz Fanon.
Now, let’s apply Ibn Khaldun’s juxtapositions to contemporary black and Arab realities and find out their validities.
Late in 2008 sub-Saharan Africa was fixated with Big Brother Africa, BBA; a brainchild of three white boys. During the months it lasted blacks cheered and cursed as they gawked.
At bus stops, campuses, and taverns blacks talked nothing except BBA. The genocide going on in Darfur and hourly reported by the same television set was conveniently forgotten. It was a classical case of collective amnesia.
In far away Europe whites blew the whistle that the Arab called Omar al-Bashir and his Janjaweeds were killing blacks in Darfur. Europe protested for the arrest and trial of these mass murderers. Black Africa showed little or no interest; cheering wildly when the BBA winner was named.
Now, check this out.
Between December 2008 and January 2009 the state of Israel reduced Gaza to smithereens. Israel made it abundantly clear that it was not about to allow Arabs a free hand to do to Jews what they did to blacks in Darfur.
Seeing that Arabs were mercilessly mauled by Israeli dogs of war, the entire Arab world including housewives, diplomats and university students demonstrated till Israel called home its fighters. Their action was a classical case of group consciousness.
Strangely, blacks now carried placards in copy-cat protest against Israel’s just war against terrorists.
I ask, between blacks’ unconcern to the killings in Darfur and Arabs’ violent protest against the war in Gaza, who are the masters and who the slaves? Who qualify as dumb animals and who essential humans? You be the judge.
Let’s bring the test home.
On November 28th 2008, young Tola Odusole was killed by Islamic fundamentalists at Jos. Tola worked his way through the university offending neither Allah nor Islam. Nigeria forced him to go to Jos for national service even when it was very unsafe.
By mentioning his murder, I stand as historic witness to the black man’s active role in his own defeat. Who knows what Tola could have become?
Since Tola’s gruesome murder I am not aware of Yoruba human rights activists, the Human Rights Watch and Global Rights pleading with the Nigerian senate to do him justice. None is also pleading for Ibukun Akinjogbin, another Yoruba graduate killed. Instead, these activists went to Abuja to lobby for homosexuality.
Tola’s murder and homosexuality, which is more important? Do you now understand why the world never takes the black man serious?
Having sacrificed so much for democracy, all we’ve been rewarded with was everything evil and degrading: homosexuality, bisexuality, lesbianism, transvestitism, transgender, sex tourism and abortion. And the gods of democracy honestly expect us to jump up and shout “Hurray!”
Since the mocking birds now cry at Abuja I will attempt to engage homosexuality for what it is: white racism of the liberal type. To defeat this racism I have no choice than to speak in racial terms.
What is racism?
Racism, and I go by Steve Bantu Biko’s definition, is “discrimination by one group against another for the purpose of subjugation or maintaining subjugation. In otherwords one cannot be a racist unless he has the power to subjugate.”
Between the repressed white homosexual and the normal black, the real racist is the former who attempts to subjugate the latter on account of his immense economic and military clout.
There are two types of racists: supremacist and liberal.
The supremacist is the white or Arab who employs violence (physical and psychological) to subdue and degrade the black man whom he hates. Fear of the black man’s legendary sexual exploits is behind this hatred. This fear is known as Negrophobia or Black Danger.
It is a deep rooted fear that calls for some defense, so the white racist instituted racial segregation in the USA and Apartheid in South Africa. As these aberrations crumbled Negrophobia is perpetuated under cultural diversity which privileges homosexuality at the expense of cultural equality.
Fanon explains this phobia as “biological.” At the genital level the white man and Arab have an axe to grind with the black man whom they see as sexual rival: “For the majority of white men the Negro represents the sexual instinct (in its raw state). The Negro is the incarnation of a genital potency beyond all moralities and prohibitions. The women among the whites, by a genuine process of induction, invariably view the Negro as the keeper of the impalpable gates that open into the realm of orgies, of bacchanals, of delirious sexual sensations….”
Biko also complains of white theologians scolding the black man for being sex-hungry. The white missionary is adamant in forcing the black man to give up his many wives. His sermon is never complete without the usual curse on those who fornicate and commit adultery. What the black man does to women behind closed doors horrifies him. It must be rape.
This explains why the pathetic supremacist is always accusing the black man of trying to rape his wife. He moves out the moment the black man moves into his neighborhood, fully aware that the moment his wife sleeps with the black man she will never return to him.
After raping black women in Darfur, Arabs tell their victims that they were being raped because they were blacks. I interpret that as the sexual revenge of a beaten opponent against his nemesis-the black man.
It is also a fact that when whites lynch a black man for looking at a white woman, they begin by cutting off their victim’s testicles. I also interpret such cruelty as the sexual revenge of the impotent.
Supremacists include the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Brotherhood and Arab Janjaweeds.
The liberal racist is the direct opposite of the supremacist but the two work hand in hand against the black man. He does not believe in violence, dialogue is his middle name. If the rifle and conquest serve the supremacist so well, the liberal does his havoc preaching religion and peace. He claims to lead you to God, in fact.
This racist loves the black man on the condition he defines the black man (never the black man defining himself), thinks for the black man and generally acts as ventriloquist for blacks. By so doing he completely takes over your mind and you become his zombie.
Subconsciously, the liberal believes the black man is a dumb animal quite incapable of knowing or defending his rights. He invites you to his opulent offices expecting you to shed helpless tears on how the supremacist burnt down your village and ravished your daughter. Whatever you tell him, he faxes to the supremacist.
The liberal racist is the first person you see in the Anglican Church of England, Episcopal Church of America, British Broadcasting Corporation, BBC, and Non-Governmental Organizations, NGOs, in particular. These bodies are peopled by do-gooders who passionately believe in the White Man’s Burden.
The White Man’s Burden is an unfortunate philosophy propounded by liberals who claim that the Almighty God placed on the white man the moral burden of civilizing the primitive black. Any black who rejects this civilizing mission is seen as an ungrateful racist.
But the black man who must see the light of tomorrow must be wary of the liberal racist even more than the supremacist. The liberal is closer to you and spies on you. He neutralizes your response to the violence inflicted on you by the supremacist and private security contractors.
I once warned a friend that flying to London and Paris to dialogue with NGOs can never help the Niger Delta cause. Oil multinationals and these NGOs purportedly fighting for Niger Deltans are two sides of the same coin. The multinational destroys your environment and the NGO funded by the same multinational is there to make sure that your reaction is civilized and non-violent.
History is my witness.
It was the moment black thinkers like Biko realized that white liberals were an obstacle to black liberation in Apartheid South Africa that things began to happen.
To start with, Biko warns all that if a white man kicks him that he was going to react in any manner he deemed fit. A supremacist cannot kick him and a liberal dictating to him how to respond to such provocation. Biko is against turning the other cheek. If the liberal was interested in non-violence then he must preach his devil’s philosophy to the oppressor and not to the oppressed black.
Secondly, Biko insists on self-definition as a way of helping the black man overcome the inferiority complex white racism instilled in him. He is convinced that the black man will be a perpetual idiot as long as he allows the white liberal to define what freedom and human rights mean for blacks.
Self-definition is an inward looking process, or what Biko calls “Black Consciousness,” aimed at reminding the black man “of his complicity in the crime of allowing himself to be misused and therefore letting evil reign supreme in the country of his birth.”
Finally, Biko rejects the leadership of white liberals on strong moral ground: “I am against the superior-inferior white-black stratification that makes the white a perpetual teacher and the black a perpetual pupil (and a poor one at that). I am against the intellectual arrogance of white people that makes them believe that white leadership is a sine qua non in this country and that whites are divinely appointed pace-setters in progress. I am against the fact that a settler minority should impose an entire system of values on an indigenous people.”
Let’s just stop there.
The assumption in Nigeria today is that we are ignorant pupils in need of a teacher to teach us that homosexuality is human right. I weep remembering Fela Kuti.
But I say to these NGOs sponsoring some young persons to Abuja to weep on how difficult it is “to be black and gay” that I have heard that pathetic cry before.
It was the same cry of shame heard in Harlem that moved Langston Hughes to write his revolutionary essay, “The Negro Artist and the Racial Mountain.” White racism so pulverized the black man in the USA that he concluded that his blackness must be a burden. His daily cry was, “I want to be white. I want to be white. I want to be white.”
I sympathize with the Nigerian copy-cat who cries daily, “I want to be homosexual. I want to be homosexual. I want to be homosexual.” He has internalized the racism of white dominant culture and his feeling of inferiority must be understood.
If he was born or created homosexual why cry in 2009? Where was the Nigerian homosexual in the ‘20s, ‘30s, ‘40s, ‘50s and 1960 when we struggled for our freedom? Why didn’t he cry then to have his rights enshrined in the constitution?
The truth is that he was not “created” homosexual; he was recently “made” one.
To the local copy-cat, I implore you to retrace your steps. The shifting sand of white racism has claimed many. The harder you try, the farther the racist shifts his post. Come back to your senses and realize that by trying to be homosexual, you are in essence insulting the intelligence of God who created you a normal black man.
Here then is my submission to the homosexual debate.
“Human rights,” as presently written and applied, are hostile to the survival of black people. Those who wrote them in the 1940s did not respect our cultural values nor considered us as humans.
Whites, who dominated the United Nations Organization, UNO, were hostile to our opinion. We were sidelined. Due process was intentionally truncated. Lack of consultation made it possible for whites to impose their values as “universal.” We were only asked to come in and sign what others wrote, if we like.
This is my strong objection: since blacks were prevented from giving their own definition of human rights, it is a racial insult to use the same human rights to define blacks today.
Homosexuality is not human right, at least not black right. It is white right.
Ostensibly, cultural diversity would rid the world of racism and give voice to oppressed minorities. Why then do whites still suppress the culture and political parties of their black minorities in the USA, London, Paris and Berlin?
But here’s the trap: deep in the womb of cultural diversity is the evil seed of 21st century Darwinism.
With whites controlling the world economy and blacks the world poverty, homosexuality will condemn blacks into a new Human/Animal, Slave/Master, Active/Passive, Fittest/Weakest relationship at a global level. The partner with the upper hand in this struggle will survive.
Homosexuality will not end with two men going to bed. Ultimately, black extinction is the end. Where are Australian blacks today? As a conscious black man I stand against this racial asymmetric union.
Homosexuality is an obstacle between blacks and their God. For blacks not to hate their God they must part ways with white theologians who distort His essence with their racist interpretation of the Bible.
Anyone who must save or destroy black people by deemphasizing religion will never succeed. Racists know this fact hence their use of religion to justify slavery, colonialism and today’s homosexuality to make it acceptable to blacks.
To reverse this, you must also use religion as weapon.
Start with yourself. Convince yourself that no Arab or white controls the gates to the Kingdom of God. God is just. He is also for all races. Meaning that you have no need to commit cultural suicide, or become another man’s clone, to enter Paradise.
Secondly, believe that God is on the side of the oppressed against the oppressor who uses His name to kill and corrupt. He sided with the Hebrews against Pharaoh and David against Goliath. God will also be on your side against racist homosexuals.
Thirdly, you must for once insist on thinking and speaking for yourself and your community. Never surrender this crucial responsibility.
Lastly, think more about Black Theology. If God accepts White Theology and Arab Theology, there’s no way He can reject Black Theology which is an authentic theology that calls on the Almighty never to forget the Black Experience through history.
Biko warns that the most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.
I wrestled my mind long ago from the hands of white and Arab racists. My mental liberation qualifies me as equal partner on earth and in Paradise.
Do the same.