10636167_10204769207940603_3774867834168548783_nSurvival of the New Afrikan Independence Movement

by Rev. Khandi Konte-BeyRev. Khandi Paasewe

©Copyright Nov’ 27ADM ®Registered Washitaw/PGRNA

Registered Washitaw/PGRNA

Outline Thesis: Discussion of New Afrikan Independence Movement Survival to

spite united states governmental policy & CONstitutional Impacts

I. Key terms

A. New Afrikan

B. grants

C. rescind

D. informed choice

E. viable options

F. plebiscite

II. Author’s note

III. Content

A. Definition of New Afrikan

B. declaration of war against Afrikans

C. brief analysis of colonial europeans founding fathers

D. Three Viable options plus one

E. Afrikan nation builders

IV. Conclusion

Author’s Note

All spellings of amerikkka, overstand vs. understand, “i” lower case, We in

capital, u.s.a., european, white, in lowercase, Black in upper case and the like

are purely intentional, as symbolic of the efforts of this author to purge from

the psychopathology which is in opposition to the Afrikan centered ethos of

which this author subscribes.

Survival of the New Afrikan Independence Movement

Thesis: Discussion of New Afrikan Independence Movement Survival to Spite

united states governmental policy & CONstitutional Impacts New Afrikans are

defined as a people linked by common experience, being captured by invaders of

the new world, sold into slavery, suffering dehumanizing treatment and were

denied basic human rights. Being denied our history, cultures, tradition and

languages, the common thread that binds community and family were broken. So

We could not build alliances on the basis of being identified as Ashanti or Hausa,

Zulu, Yoruba or Mandinka. Thus, We find a New Afrikan, with new common

bonds: Independence. New Afrikans set into full motion the revolutionary actions

necessary to fight amerikkkans for our own independence. The New Afrikan

Independence Movement grew out of a desperate need to respond to governmental

policy and CONstitutional laws of the united states.

The written declaration of war against the New Afrikan Independence Movement

in the form of Article one, paragraph one, section 9 (titled the legislative

articles/powers denied to congress), states, “…the migration of importation of

such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit,

shall not be prohibited by the congress prior to the year one thousand eight

hundred and eight…” (Burns; 1989:22C) What this means in plain english is, the

united states declares war on Afrikans in Afrika as well as New Afrikans. It

also meant the slave trade would continue another 20 years and “…the full

powers of the united states government would be used to protect all amerikkkans

engaging in the trade.” (Obadele; 1989:17) The united states, by law, supported

war in Afrika against Afrikans.

In brief analysis of some of the european colonial founding father’s writings,

We find some very interesting text, relating to New Afrikans. In the

CONstitution for example, article 4, section 2, paragraph 3, interstate

relations (in the portion some textbooks refer to as privileges & immunities),

it states, “…no person held to service or labour in one state, under the laws

thereof, escaping into another shall in consequence of any law or regulation

therein, be discharged from such service or labour, but shall be delivered up on

claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due.” (Burns; 1989:

22d) This article was certainly never for the benefit of New Afrikans. For

amerikkkans, article 4, section 2, paragraph 3 calls for no celebration of New

Afrikans who dared to seize independence by fighting for our freedom. For New

Afrikans, article 4, section 2, paragraph 3 represents a clear, unquestionable

declaration of war which still stands today. The authors of various text books

would have us think that the 13th amendment repeals this article. Such is not

the case. Article 4, section 2, paragraph 3 is clearly defined in Imari

Obadele’s book titled, The New International Law Regime and united states

Foreign Policy, where he states, “…article 4, section 2, paragraph 3 …

pledged the full force of the united states’ state structure — president,

governors, courts, militia, army, navy, sheriffs — to prevent the quest of

freedom of the brave New Afrikans and to return those to slavery who succeeded

in winning their strikes for freedom.” (Obadele; 1991:323) Clearly, the white

founding fathers (policy makers) and their documents, they co-authored, were

designed to have damaging affects on the New Afrikan Independence Movement.

Further, more obstacles to the New Afrikan Independence Movement include the

13th, 14th, & 15th amendments. Amendment 13 made a change in the law. New

Afrikans held as slaves were no longer slave or property. Slavery was dead but

the 13th amendment was merely declamatory of the fact that New Afrikans died

with honors in the civil war for the rights of freedom.

As for the 14th amendment, where it grants citizenship, it must be noted that,

that which is granted can be rescinded. In fact, it is, at best an offer, not a

grant. It is an option which We have and have never given up our rights to. The

CONstitution assumes a conqueror’s superiority when addressing New Afrikans in

legislation under the facade of offers and grants. Such is the case with the

united states and Turtle Islander (native amer. indian) nations like the

Cherokee, Creek, and Tuscarora in which the supreme kkkourt stated these

nations and others were not completely independent but “domestic and dependent

nations.” (Obadele; 1991:323) Thus, these amendments (even if well intended,

which is questionable) are in violation of New Afrikans’ rights. Freedom,

citizenship, the vote, which the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments attempt to

address, are rights, not grants or offers or acts of legislation; rights of choice of

New Afrikans; rights demonstrated by plebiscite which has yet to occur. New

Afrikans have the right to informed choice to follow the Strategies of Struggle.

Until We vote to either:

1. build an Independent Nation State,

2. Choose united states citizenship,

3. go back to Afrika,

4. go to some other country of our choosing (not Afrika or u.s.a.); live with

independent Turtle Islander nations,

any legislation constitutes an imposition of our right to self determination.

New Afrikans must consciously and freely choose. The key element here is the

right of free informed choice. It can not be emphasized enough that New Afrikans

had and still have four logical choices of political futures. Choices other than

united states citizenship find New Afrikans far less informed, since the other

options still remain less palatable to white amerikkkans.

Another example of the CONstitution assuming a conqueror’s superiority stance is

eloquently stated in Dr. Imari Obadele’s book, Foundations of a Black Nation,

“When the u.s. bought the Virgin Islands from Denmark… the u.s. never asked

the Black Virgin Islanders… to express their views on future status. u.s.

congress simply passed a law and made all Virgin Islanders u.s. citizens.”

(1975:22) This is yet another clear example of the denial of our rights to

self-determination. For those who celebrate Kwanzaa, the New Afrikan holiday

created by Dr. Ron Karenga, you will relate to the principle of Kujichagulia

(Self Determination). Defined, self determination means, man know thyself,

determine for yourself who you are, and accept no one else’s definition of you.

Kujichagulia is one of the laws of the Nguzo Saba (Seven Principles) which

govern conscious New Afrikans’ lives and the holiday of Kwanzaa.

The New Afrikan Independence Movement is not a new concept. Available to New

Afrikans were what i refer to as the Three Viable Options, plus One. These

options were/are:

1. return to Afrika,

2. integrate into united states society,

3. build an independent Nation State or

plus one: escaped to Turtle Islander Nations.

History records a few instances where enslaved/captured Afrikans chose the

option of returning to Afrika. Such instances of resistance to enslavement

include the overtaking of the slave ship Little George in 1730, the overtaking

of the slave ship the William in 1732 and the slave ship Creole in 1841. The

Creole did not return to Afrikan but rather to the Bahamas to establish

themselves as free, independent and sovereign Afrikans. In 1820, 88 New Afrikans

arrived on the west coast in the state of Liberia. Their return to Afrika,

contributed to the building of Sierra Leone and Liberia. Hundreds of thousands

of New Afrikans believed this to be the only way to uplift a degraded people.

Among those who returned was David Coker, religious leader and schoolmaster of

Baltimore. Others who returned to Afrika include John Russwurm, college grad,

co-founder of the first New Afrikan newspaper; Alexander Crummell, minister and

scholar; Lott Carey, clergy, doctor, agriculturist; Ed W. Blyden, scholar; Henry

Garnet; and Dr. Martin Delaney who was a physician.

The next option of integration was chosen by such Afrikans as Osborne Perry

Anderson, who was a comrade of John Brown who led a force of white amerikkkans and New Afrikans on a successful attack on Harper’s Ferry (the

united states arsenal) in Virginia in 1859. Anderson’s hope was that their collective

would become a state of the united states. Instead, John Brown and others were

hung, Perry Anderson escaped and became a fugitive thereafter. Other

integrationists include Richard Allen, Frederick Douglas (who knew of John

Brown’s plan to attack Harper’s Ferry and was forced to flee to europe for fear of

united states prosecution of co-conspiracy), Harriet Tubman, David Walker,

Henry Highland Garnet, Ida B. Wells and Sojourner Truth.

The united states declared its independence in 1776. Its CONstitution went into

effect in 1789. In 1800, on October 7th, a mere dozen years after the

CONstitution was approved, General Gabriel Prosser and his secret army of over

1000 freedom fighters, armed with weapons and a careful, meticulous plan

marched towards Richmond, Virginia. Fierce thunderstorms washed out roads

and bridges, causing the revolt to be aborted. General Prosser and 22 others were

hung when their plans were discovered. General Prosser’s objective was not

merely to abolish slavery but also to establish an independent nation state. His

intentions are stated in his choice of target, the state capital. This objective

makes clear that his was a movement and not an individual or small group attack,

nor a blow in anger to kill evil slavemasters. Herein, Prophet Nat Turner

deserves honorable mention for his revolt which killed 60 whites. Abolishment of

slavery was his mission and less focused was he on New Afrikan Nation building.

As it relates to the Three Viable Options (or the Strategies of Struggle),

General Prosser was in the good company of fellow nation builders like General

Gracia. General Gracia established Gracia Real De Santa Teresa De Mose in

1739 to 1763. Then united states general andrew jackson uprooted and forced

General Gracia southward; exercising the plus one option, General Gracia

established the New Afrikan-Turtle Islander Seminole state in 1836-1842 in

Spanish Florida. General Gracia was later captured and murdered. Also,

following in the footsteps of General Gabriel Prosser was General Denmark

Vesey, in 1822, whose army numbered over 9,000. His elaborate plan centered on

total secrecy and taking Charleston. Due to special preparations by amerikkkans,

the attack was postponed. Rumors of revolt led to the arrests of Denmark, Peter

Poyas and 4 others. They died silently. The army of over 9,000 was never

discovered by the white amerikkkans.

New Afrikan freedom fighters all over the new world fought and built independent

nation states from Zumbi of Palmares Republic in Brazil; to General Kojo,

Accompong, Kofi, Johnny and Nana Acheampong (a female) in Jamaica; to

Toussaint L’Overture in Haiti. Other nation builders include Marin Delaney who

published various Black Nationalist newsletters; Rev. Tunis Campell, who built a

New Afrikan government on several islands including St. Catherine and Sapelo off

the coast of Georgia with a 275 man defense force (u.s. army forced him to give up

the islands); Henry Adams who appealed fruitlessly for land for his nation state

in Louisiana; and finally, Edward McCabe who sought to make Oklahoma his

national territory. Generals Prosser, Gracia, Vesey, Kojo and Rev. Campbell with

all the above mentioned nation builders along with those whose names escape the

history books, are prime examples of the support for and the practice of the

viable option (strategic goal) of independent nation-statehood.

The Plus One option, was not considered viable. Escape of New Afrikans to Turtle

Islander states was considered temporary. Though, temporary, many New

Afrikans resorted to finding safehaven in these communities. “The strategic goal

of escaping to the Indians and joining them was pursued by New Afrikans

individually and in groups, but arguably, this goal never became a national

strategic goal. It tended to be an expedient.” (Obadele; 1991:329) Textbooks in

amerikkka would have us think that New Afrikans escaping to Turtle Islander

nations was not necessary and that freedom fighters like Gabriel, Denmark, Tunis

and others, mentioned and not mentioned, were not worthy of note. When these

New Afrikan heroes and sheroes are briefly commented upon, it is mostly in a

unsuccessful or criminal context. But who are the real criminals? Are We to

believe that washington, adams, hamilton, madison and jefferson along with such

notables as roger sherman, robert livingston and ben franklin were lovers of

freedom? Was their love of freedom merely a part of a feel good curriculum? Who

were they really? Let’s look at a few of these men from our Afrikan centered

perspective.

The first draft of the declaration of independence of 1775 reveals a compromise

on the part of jefferson resulting in the omission of the indictment against

slavery. “thomas jefferson never had a white woman by his side after his white

wife died in 1782 and for the next twenty years as he was ambassador to france,

secretary of state, and president of the united states, jefferson only had a

Black woman by his side” named “Sally Hemmings,” as stated in the most

capable words of Dr. Leonard Jefferies, (speech published in the Saturday, August 31,

27ADM [91] issue of the New York Amsterdam News Paper:32). None of the slaves of

jefferson were ever freed by him nor were the children of Sally Hemmings nor

Sally herself.

It needs to be overstood that any New Afrikan who opposed the lovers of freedom

were taking a very principled stand. Benjamin Banneker for example, challenged

thomas jefferson’s beliefs of Afrikan inferiority. Banneker accomplished what

franklin could only take credit for. Banneker and franklin lived during the same

time period and were acquaintances. Both were scientists and creators of

almanacs. However, Banneker’s almanac was so accurate that it is still the basis

of almanacs of today, where franklin’s is not. Banneker was an inventor and

engineer. When Banneker City (washington dc) was in jeopardy of not being built

because the frenchman who had the plans left taking them with him, Banneker,

from memory, drafted the plans. Therefore, Benjamin Banneker represents more

than ben franklin (at least in the hears and minds of conscious New Afrikans).

The real criminals? Throughout history franklin has taken credit for the works

of Banneker. But isn’t that typical behavior of white amerikkka? Lewis Latimer’s

work was taken credit for, by thomas edison. Granville Wood’s work was taken

credit for by alexander graham bell. Woods was a New Afrikan who is quoted in

Dr. Jeffries’s speech, taking the principled stand of “i’m not going to be

bought off by a white man.” (Jeffries; 1991:32) Woods and his brother

established the Woods Electric Co. in Ohio. It also should be noted in the face

of text book omissions, that Woods took edison to kkkourt twice for stealing

his patents and Woods won the case. So, We have franklin and jefferson, for

example, with other white criminals who were claiming freedom for themselves,

while simultaneously trying to protect and preserve the system of slavery,

cultural imperialism and oppression of Afrikans globally.

The New Afrikan Independence Movement today is still being met with violent

opposition just as in the days of Tunis, Gabriel, Denmark and others. Those

seeking the option of building our own New Afrikan independent nation state,

like our New Afrikan ancestors, still sit, today, in u.s. jails, dead,

discredited, in exile or in the underground network. The fact is, neither the

state of Mississippi CONstitution, for example, nor the u.s. federal government

CONstitution provides any methods whereby New Afrikans may exercise our right

to build an independent nation, separating ourselves peacefully from the u.s.

Congressman Fauntleroy and Conyers have forwarded legal documents on behalf

of those seeking the option of an independent nation, placing proposals in the

hands of richard nixon. With the exception of violent attacks against New

Afrikans doing nation building work around the country, the u.s. chooses to

ignore any such proposals.

So, in conclusion, the
the

Advertisements