After some thought and after listening to advice from people that I deem
wiser and older than myself, I have decided to return to this Bantaba. As
Hamjatta said, a return was necessary in the spirit of togetherness and the
unity of purpose. But, also, my return is mandated for two reasons. First,
it is my moral obligation as an objective Gambian to challenge the flawed
theories of certain members of this list whose flawed thinking and demagogic
thoughts are akin to bigotry. Second, after seeing the way in which Mr.
Saidy Khan has addressed certain members of this forum, I think my return is
necessary. I am sure some of you are asking yourselves what gives me the
right to make all this noise about the issue at hand? My answer to this is
the fact that after having lived in this country for several years and having
received a good traditional education as well as a street education that is
invaluable, I speak from a unique perspective on the theories and assumptions
that Saul has made.
To actually challenge the validity and logic of his article, it is necessary
to view the article in the context in which it was written. His response was
prompted by a very interesting article that Madiba posted to all of us. It
concerned Mr. Henry Louis Gates' documentary on Africa and how it portrayed
Africans as also having been an integral part of the trade itself. This is a
disputable fact and has been the subject of many a debate over the past 400
years. In response to this, Mr. SaidyKhan took it upon himself to stereotype
African Americans negatively to make his point that Africans did not
participate in the slave trade. He proceeded to naively categorize them into
three segments: Blacks, Negroes and Niggers.
Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam typified the way he expected
a black man to be and he subsequently called him a black. His next
categorization was what he called the Negro. According to him, Henry Louis
Gates fit this category and this could explain his the postulation that
Africans sold one another during the slave trade. This was a rather naive
categorization of Mr. Gates to make a point. This man is one of the foremost
scholars of African studies and has done his research over a period of many
years. Therefore, Mr. SaidyKhan's pathetic attempt to explain Mr. Gates'
postulation was laughable at best. All this being said, my biggest objection
to his futile attempt at stereotyping was to his use of the word Nigger.
The word Nigger is defined in any dictionary as a black person, a member of
a dark skinned race or a socially disadvantaged class. However, the
dictionary stresses that it is the most offensive word in the English
language. The truth is that this word did not exist until Europeans coined
the term to describe our ancestors. The word was used to describe our
ancestors at their lowest state. Brothers and sisters from The Gambia and
other places from the continent who, after being subjected to a process where
even to uphold one's pride and self esteem was a burden, were called this
word. And as time went by, every negative unfounded stereotype about black
people was associated this word. Stereotypes such as big lips, big noses,
savagery, laziness and unintelligence were one of the few unsavory
stereotypes that were associated with the word . Those of us that have seen
glimpses of old racist cartoons, like Sambo, can understand my abhorrence to
the negative use of this word. In certain instances, the use of word is
acceptable when it is used by black people as a term of endearment. But
when someone uses a broad brush to paint a whole section of a population with
the most offensive word in the English language, it's use becomes offensive
and derogatory. Mr. SaidyKhan tried to justify his use of the word by saying
that it's use indicated the mindset of those he was trying to describe. But
his interpretation of the word was twisted and completely wrong. Neither
Mr. Saidykhan or his supporters can come up with any evidence of an alternate
definition of the word. I openly challenge those of you who proclaimed that
Niggers existed with an exclamation point to come up with evidence for a
justification of your statements. Yes, it is true that unsavory characters
do exist everywhere. But to label them as Niggers without any justification
for the use of the word is akin to bigotry.
The fact that Mr. SaidyKhan is guilty of stereotyping is quite funny. Given
that in response to one of Alpha Robinson's pieces he talks about
stereotyping. It is as follows:
"I have vowed not to let anyone get away with perpetuating such
stereotypes -- however subtly they put it"
Mr. SaidyKhan openly vowed that he would not let anyone get away with
stereotyping, yet he perpetuates the same type of behavior. Is a man like
this to be taken seriously? You be the judges to that.
His use of the word in a very negative way, explains a whole lot to me.
Because, as I explained earlier, this word was used to humiliate our
ancestors at their lowest state, his use of the word can be described as a
manifestation of self hate. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that he aptly
described himself when he coined his definition of the Nigger. He is the
educated type, mind you, ALA Armstrong Williams .
To conclude, I would like to address a phrase by Hamjata Kanteh. In response
to my piece about my PROTEST, Hamjatta said that this is a democratic forum
and all views should be entertained that we should agree to disagree
respectfully. To that I say that we can never agree to disagree with bigoted
views. Before we start looking at bigger issues, let us start with the
bigots on the Gambia-L.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
