Intellectual Warfare, Theory and Practice: Gates, Thornton, white Supremacy and the War on Afrocentricity-gctid207224

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

Comments welcome on this draft.


Intellectual Warfare, Theory and Practice: Gates, Thornton, white Supremacy and the War on Afrocentricity

by
Ọbádélé Kambon, PhD

Abstract: Afrocentricity has been used as a strawman to knock down in the interest of essentializing a whole host of traditions of Kmtyw/Black thought that are, to varying degrees, non-integrationist or seem to pose a threat to the white supremacist/anti-Kmtyw/anti-Black tradition. In this program of intensive subjectivity laced with ulterior motives, the agenda is not only to vilify any and all who may be broadly associated with what may be termed a "diabolic" Afrocentricity, but it is also marked by a usurping and appropriation of the term for the sake of its currency and familiarity to ultimately serve white supremacist/anti-Kmtyw ends. This article documents this white supremacist/anti-Kmtyw/anti-Black integrationist imperative as evinced in Thornton's Kmt and Kmtyws in the Making of the Atlantic World (Thornton, 1998) and Gates' "Wonders of the Kmtyw World" (Gates Jr, 1999)as two sides of the same anti-Kmtyw coin. In this analysis, links are made to earlier historical appropriations and subversions implemented by white supremacists of various types with and/or without the assistance of their anti-Kmtyw/anti-Black collaborators.
 
Keywords: Afrocentricity, Intellectual Warfare, white supremacy, war
                            Attached files  Intellectual Warfare.pdf (975.3 KB)

[Kwadwo Tòkunbọ̀]

Meda ase.  Reading for tomorrow

The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed - Steve Biko

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

kevlew;207341 wrote: Meda ase.  Reading for tomorrow

The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed - Steve Biko

Saa na ɛyɛ! Looking forward to your feedback.

Sent from my GHANA-MADE RLG Uhuru Accu BrilliantPhone using the NEW Abibitumi Kasa mobile app

[Kwadwo Tòkunbọ̀]

Yɛbɛkasa akyire.

The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed - Steve Biko

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

Yoo, mate. Akyire.

Sent from my Uhuru Accu using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app

[Kwadwo Tòkunbọ̀]

I have finally finished reading the draft. First thank you for the information. I have long been very skeptical with reason of Dr. Gates and his "scholarship" on the very simple premise of where his work shows up and who his financial backers are.  I know that frankly if you are backed by Ford Foundation, Rockefeller or any similar group immediately we should at the least be suspicious , then do the research. In your draft you make the point of revealing the motive behind using Afrocentricity in a way to co-op and alienate "diabolical" scholarship and scholars in that Kmtyw centered camp.  Nothing could be more revealing of the motive than the article written by Gates in The NY Times entitled " Black Demagogues and Psuedo Scholars". In this piece, Gates uses general assertions and sweeping allegations in defense of his "jewish" bosses"'. To understand the motive clearly one should read Dr. John Henrik Clarke's charge:
    Professor Gates, Cornel West and other Black conservatives use beautiful words, sometimes to say nothing, sometimes to say what has already been said and sometimes to say what is not in debate. They display their ignorance of eureurasiaan history and history in general. They decry any form of Black nationalism and often call it racism without knowing that for the last 500 years the world has been controlled by eureurasiaan or White nationalism. ( Clarke, http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/gates22.htm)

Dr. Clarke points out the fallacies, the motives,and the lack of true scholarship on behalf of Gates.  

References:
http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/gates22.htm

The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed - Steve Biko

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

Thanks for taking the time to read it. This is actually a paper that I wrote for a class back in graduate school that I never did anything with. I'm looking at getting the ideas out there since Gates is still a scourge to Kmtyw=Black people.

Sent from my GHANA-MADE RLG Uhuru Accu BrilliantPhone using the NEW Abibitumi Kasa mobile app

[Tenkamenin]

This was a great read and very informative.

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

Tenkamenin;208373 wrote: This was a great read and very informative.

Thanks, what made it a great read?

Sent from my GHANA-MADE RLG Uhuru Accu BrilliantPhone using the NEW Abibitumi Kasa mobile app

[Tenkamenin]

Obadele Kambon;208462 wrote: Thanks, what made it a great read?

Sent from my GHANA-MADE RLG Uhuru Accu BrilliantPhone using the NEW Abibitumi Kasa mobile app

The paper was helpful in understanding the opposition and their war against Afrocentrism. I'm familiar with Gates but not so much with Thornton.

Thornton is cave man wicked for saying we could only win battles and our scholarship is questionable.

Out of curiosity why haven't we had more debates between our scholars and the opposition? Especially on issues revolving around Kemet. Is the position that it's not necessary to debate?

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

Thanks, one of the main points is that it's a proxy war period it targets Afrocentrism directly but by grouping other more serious challenges under the same umbrella it is able to discount many more beneficial Kmtyw ideologies by simply discrediting Afrocentrism. Part of its ability to do that is based on Molefi Asante's loose definition of Afrocentrism. Yes, he's very wicked. I came in contact with his book in a class in grad school where that was the assigned text and Gates' documentary was part of the course materials. Needless to say it was of course run by a white man and his house negro. There used to be a lot of high-profile debates including Dr John Henrik Clarke against Mary Lefkowitz, Dr Ben against Arthur Seltzer, and Dr Khalid in what was termed the great debate against Anthony Hilder. These days what I find is a lot of the debates go on between these hip hop scholars and themselves. I'm not sure what the end goal of this is but I've seen this trend become very popular since I left the united snakkkes.

Sent from my Uhuru Accu using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app

[Tenkamenin]

Obadele Kambon;208835 wrote: Thanks, one of the main points is that it's a proxy war period it targets Afrocentrism directly but by grouping other more serious challenges under the same umbrella it is able to discount many more beneficial Kmtyw ideologies by simply discrediting Afrocentrism. Part of its ability to do that is based on Molefi Asante's loose definition of Afrocentrism. Yes, he's very wicked. I came in contact with his book in a class in grad school where that was the assigned text and Gates' documentary was part of the course materials. Needless to say it was of course run by a white man and his house negro. There used to be a lot of high-profile debates including Dr John Henrik Clarke against Mary Lefkowitz, Dr Ben against Arthur Seltzer, and Dr Khalid in what was termed the great debate against Anthony Hilder. These days what I find is a lot of the debates go on between these hip hop scholars and themselves. I'm not sure what the end goal of this is but I've seen this trend become very popular since I left the united snakkkes.

Sent from my Uhuru Accu using Abibitumi Kasa mobile app

A lot of those debates you mentioned occurred in the 80's and early 90's. We have yet to see any debates recently which is problematic to me. In other disciplines debates are quite frequent, for example, respected biblical scholars debate respected quranic scholars all the time.

The intellectual war is not direct, but rather it's indirect. As noted by Thornton, our agenda is not popular in most of America so I pressume they're not pressed to debate us.

If that's the case, shouldn't we be applying more heat on them? I'm not seeing the heat, but I could be wrong.

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

Here's the final published version also available from: http://www.jpanKmtyw.org/vol10no3.htm
                            Attached files  10.3-7-Kambon.pdf (204.4 KB)

[Ɔbenfo Ọbádélé]

Tenkamenin;208893 wrote: A lot of those debates you mentioned occurred in the 80's and early 90's. We have yet to see any debates recently which is problematic to me. In other disciplines debates are quite frequent, for example, respected biblical scholars debate respected quranic scholars all the time.

The intellectual war is not direct, but rather it's indirect. As noted by Thornton, our agenda is not popular in most of America so I pressume they're not pressed to debate us.

If that's the case, shouldn't we be applying more heat on them? I'm not seeing the heat, but I could be wrong.

Maybe mutual lack of interest in doing so or fear from one side or the other that they may lose the "debate."

[Kwadwo Tòkunbọ̀]

Obadele Kambon;240125 wrote: Here's the final published version also available from: http://www.jpanKmtyw.org/vol10no3.htm

Meanwhile so called scholars saying we do not need Kmtyw Studies.    

Gonna read this tonight.

______________________________________________

We must act as if we answer to, and only answer to, our Ancestors, our children, and the unborn.

Amilcar Cabral