by Son of Ahset

African people¹ think that if they have sex with a non-African and especially an Eurasian (white) person a.k.a. Inbred Mutant Albino (IMA) that they are advancing as an individual. It is the similar pathological thinking which has infected the minds of leading Blacks (i.e. Blacks put into leadership positions by whites) that if they get a high level position such as Chief of Police or the US Secretary of State that this is an advance for all African people because they have attained an opportunity to serve the white power structure in a high profile position which then affords comforts and trinkets befitting of their new-found “class” level. Furthermore, Africans often think that because the children they have with white people aren’t accepted as white among the family members of their white sex-mates and other IMAs, then they are de-facto Black or African and all other Africans must accept them as such otherwise we are practicing “colorism”. Yet, Africans fail to charge white people with practicing racism for rejecting these children who have a white parent from being defined as white in their collective. In addition, to define mulattoes and hybrids as African is made by affirming a negative and not affirming the features of an actual African person. Why can whites have a definition of who is white and in their group, but Africans can not? To get around this Africans say “we come in all shades”. Africans and others also charge that a person, who is accepted as white and has attained positions in white society and institutions of power, is really only “passing for white” and is in reality Black/African. How can this point of view actually serve African people? If all appearances of obviously being an African has been erased and they are living, loving, and benefiting from the white hegemonic system as a white person, what could possibly make them African at all? People say that it is due to his or her great, great, grandmother/father having been African that makes this so. Therefore, the logic follows that even though Africans have no collective material power, we do however have an invisible and non-materially beneficial genetic power. So I ask, what if that white person “passing for white” has a child with an authentic white? At what point in the sexual dilution process does one cease to physically represent an African? Ah ha! The negro-centric scholars have a solution for us which they learned from their white and negro professors, “We are all African!” Bingo! This solves the problem and the system of anti-African white hegemonic control stays intact.

 

We Africans have fundamentally misunderstood what racism is and how whites practice racism. Indeed, racism is not an accurate term to describe the phenomenon we are experiencing as African people. We are actually being systematically terrorized in several ways by whites so that they as a collective can maintain power, leadership, intellectual control, and access the material goods and create the conceptual ideas that will allow them as a collective to do so in perpetuity. Many people ask the question, “Are all white people racists?” People (mulattoes, hybrids, negroes, Africans, and Eurasians/whites) are quick to reply, “No, not all white people are racist.” People also state reflexively that in the protests marches in Ferguson, MO and New York for Mike Brown and Eric Garner that “I saw white people marching too, so it’s not about all white people being racist.” But actually this is the wrong approach and conceptualization of the issue. We should not be asking if all white people are racists, we should be asking “What are white people trying to protect?” The short answer, which includes ALL whites, is that they are protecting a system of social relations whose logical foundation defines them as superior.

 

The basis for economic activity, the basis for political activity, the basis for cultural activity, creating families, and educational interactions are supported by the social relations which inhere among a population. Therefore, if whites are overtly racists and they maintain exclusive neighborhoods and kill Africans upon sight or harass Africans in those areas or call their towns “Sundown towns” and admonish all negroes to get out by sundown, and then they proceed to have Ku Klux Klan rallies and on occasion they may catch and lynch an African and enjoy this as a recreation, then it is obvious that they way they choose to relate to Africans is in a way in which the logic of the relations is based on a definition whites have of themselves as being superior with the group power to enforce it. If whites are covertly racists and you seek employment or admission at a school in which they own, operate, attend or work and you experience social slights and insults or you are passed over for promotions, given less pay, ridiculed at “Ghetto parties” and other social affairs where whites lampoon Africans, then the logical foundation of the social relation here is not only that whites see themselves as superior, the African also sees whites as superior due to the choice Africans’ have made (or had to make) to avoid African institutions and choose to participate in social relations at a European (white) dominated one.

 

If a white person is anti-racist, then they must actualize that self-image. How is this done? It’s achieved by displaying among victims of white hegemony that they are friendly and non-racist, and even that they like sex with African people and might want to have children with an African. This social relation is too based on the definition of the white being superior to the other “racist whites” and being exploited here is the value an African has in whiteness and producing a non-African child over having relations with African people and producing African children. Therefore, all of the above examples are social relations which have as a logical foundation a definition of whites as superior. From these social relations derive one’s cultural, economic, and political activity. If whites have stolen land, labor, wealth, and identities over several centuries and have not ceased this activity at all, and to them has accrued intellectual capital, social capital, and material capital (i.e. group power), then the only beneficiary possible in a social relation between an African with a white ultimately is the white person (read: white people as a collective). The offspring with a non-African will not be African, so the genome of African people is put in danger of disintegrating. But the whites have defined anyone without two white parents as non-white so their genome stays intact. The offspring is not accepted as white among white people, so either they seek to mate with another “anti-racist white” and continue the degradation process, or by being psychologically damaged and rejected by being the non-African offspring of the white parent, they seek a constituency among Africans who have been legally mandated to accept them as African.

 

As far as I am aware, there is no body of law or legal ruling among African courts which includes a definition of who is an African. However, there is in the IMA’s legal system of the USA. It was adjudicated in the case Plessy v. Ferguson in which the court ruled that just because one was a “light-skinned Negro” they were still not white and were not accepted as such. Mulattoes and hybrids who were put into positions of authority over Africans conveniently claimed this case was about facilities being “separate but equal”, but in actual fact it was the legal establishment of the “One Drop Rule” which destroyed in the minds of Africans who accepted this ruling the concept of who is an African to the advantage of whites, mulattoes and hybrids who even though they were not white, could maintain a modicum of power by being “almost white” and being the political and social representatives of the “negro class” which includes both Africans and non-Africans. Hence, here again it is the set of social relations whose logical foundation defines whites as superior which is at play. Moreover, seeking to date “light-skinned girlfriends”, “redbones”, and having parties to which people are not allowed unless they pass the “paper bag test” are also based on the logic that IMAs and subsequently their physical features are superior to the African and so a new set of social relations are sought based on this underlying logic, which sometimes results in African, hybrid and mulatto men stating that they want to “get me a yellow hammer” (i.e. mulatto / hybrid / “light-skinned woman”)

 

Thus because Africans are still undefined, we have to describe ourselves by terms like “People of African descent” or even “Blacks” to include hybrids and mulattoes which then requires that we have lecturers like Dr. Umar A. Johnson declaring that a white woman can have an African child and so the logical foundation for our social relationship to IMAs remains unchanged. So since ALL white people benefit from this foundational logic, ALL white people have to protect it. This allows them hegemony. White hegemony is the ability for white people to infiltrate any organization, club, institution, cultural expression, country, nation, movement, ideology, genome, linguistic style, fashion trend, technological method, philosophy, economy, political system, market exchange, sovereign currency, etc and come to own, control, direct, lead, manipulate, harass, deride, dissent, define, create, reorder, or destroy. It is their illegal ability to do this that they call being supreme. So no matter whether they are working for the global banking system, volunteering in Africa, committing police brutality, shooting you down in the street, marching in the protests afterwards, miseducating your children, creating policies to gentrify your neighborhoods, moving in after its gentrified, having sex with you to feel the power they have over their conquered and submissive masses, criticizing the overt racists in front of you because they are from the lower classes of IMA society and they need access to you sexually and socially, adopting African children as human accessories, or twerking to hip hop music on TV, they all must protect this system of social relations in whatever sphere they have influence, as a white person, to the death.

 

Notes

1. An African / Black person is a person who is clearly a “close” descendant of people from East Africa, a region comprised of countries now known as Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. Their color variation ranges from bronze, dark reddish-brown, dark or nut brown, dark-chocolate color plus “peppercorn” hair.

Advertisements