defending the - umdrive

Defending the ParadigmAuthor(s): Adisa A. AlkebulanSource: Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 37, No. 3, Sustaining Black Studies (Jan., 2007), pp. 410-427Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40034783 .Accessed: 05/07/2011 12:38

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of BlackStudies.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40034783?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage

DEFENDING THE PARADIGM

ADISA A. ALKEBULAN San Diego State University

Recent attacks on Africana studies follow a historic path of institutional- ized racism in the academy and its custodians questioning the discipline's relevance. These ongoing attacks demonstrate this society's refusal to allow African people's full participation within it. Therefore, the assault on Africana studies is really an assault on African people. This article seeks to remind scholars in African studies that the Afrocentric idea has been the guiding paradigm of the discipline and it not only needs to be defended, but Afrocentric scholarship needs to be vigorously pursued. The paradigm distinguishes this discipline from all others. This article also confronts the false notion of Afrocentrism and critics' use of the claims of a few non-Afrocentrists as an indictment against the Afrocentric movement. In defending and reasserting the Afrocentric paradigm, this article sets out to further define Afrocentricity. Finally, it addresses the false claims attributed to it by its critics.

Keywords: Africana studies; Afrocentricity; Afrocentrism

Debating the importance of Africana studies is not an anomaly. For nearly 40 years, scholars in this discipline have been in con- stant struggles with their institutions. Many have been fighting for their own professional survival, on one hand, and their sometimes- fledgling departments, on the other. In spite of the attacks on the discipline, old and new, they must be understood within a much larger framework. At the heart of this debate is not really the significance of Africana studies but rather the value, or lack thereof, that this society has placed on African people. After all, what is the significance of a people deemed worthless by a racist society? This article attempts to reassert the Afrocentric paradigm as the framework to guide the discipline. In doing so, the Afrocentric paradigm distinguishes Africana studies from traditional disciplines. The aim is also to defend Afrocentric scholars against the

JOURNAL OF BLACK STUDIES, Vol. 37 No. 3, January 2007 410-427 DOI: 10.1177/0021934706290082 © 2007 Sage Publications

410

Alkebulan / DEFENDING THE PARADIGM 41 1

false claims and media distortions that typify the Eurocentric response to African agency.

The recent debate is merely the latest manifestation of a decades-old White American dilemma: the "Negro problem." This predicament plays itself out in academia with the lack of support for many Africana studies departments, but more important, it is a direct assault on African intellectuals themselves. Historically, academic institutions have been hostile to scholars who challenge traditional scholarship and disciplines that promote Europe and its ideas as the model of civilization while, at the same time, omitting or distorting the means by which Europeans obtained their global dominance. This is most apparent with the ongoing attacks on the Afrocentric paradigm or what has been misnamed "Afrocentrism" by its critics. Although academic and media critics distort the Afrocentric idea to where it is unrecognizable to Afrocentric scholars, it nevertheless represents the ongoing war games over the audacity of African scholars to interpret African reality from their own cultural perspective. Maulana Karenga (2002) accurately explains the difference between Afrocentricity and the media's use of Afrocentrism when he writes,

[The term] Afrocentrism appears more often in ideological discourse between Afrocentric advocates and critics especially in popular pieces on the subject. . . . [There is a] popular appropriation of the category by some of its advocates, critics and the media who use it for purposes which tend to define it as an ideological posture rather than an intellectual category. Its transformation from Afrocentricity to Afrocentrism is indicative of this. For the use of "ism" tends to suggest that it is seen as more of a political posture than a methodology or orientation in intellectual work. (p. 46)

Afrocentricity is placing African ideals at the center of any analysis that involves African culture and behavior (Asante, 1987, p. 6). The publication of Molefi Asante's (1980/1992) book, Afrocentricity: The Theory of Social Change, in 1980 and his subsequent publications on the subject, The Afrocentric Idea (Asante, 1987, 1998) and Kemet, Afrocentricity and Knowledge (Asante, 1990), revolu- tionized the way we study African phenomena. The paradigm provided the theoretical foundation for many scholars to question,

412 JOURNAL OF BLACK STUDIES / JANUARY 2007

challenge, and ultimately rid us of European notions of White supremacy and patriarchy. More important, it provided a framework to interpret and present the study of African people and culture from the perspective of the African person.

Mazama (2001) points out that the development of the Afrocentric paradigm cannot be understood outside of the development of the first PhD program in Africana studies in 1988 at Temple University. Furthermore, she writes, "It was a milestone not so much because the Ph.D. validated the African experience but because, for the first time, we were systematically and consciously building an army of scholars who were going to challenge white supremacy in ways it had never been challenged before" (p. 403).

Attacks on Afrocentricity, quite frankly, have been insidious. Writers such as D'Souza (1995), Schlesinger (1991), and Lefkowitz (1996), who allege that Afrocentric scholarship is "pseudo- science," "feels good history," and "group self-esteem," demonstrate that the attacks emanate from the left and right of the Euro- American political spectrum. The irony of these charges is that they actually describe the propaganda many Europeans pass off as Western education. At any rate, the criticism of Afrocentrists deals primarily with the discussion of ancient Egypt's (Kemet) influence on Greece. This criticism gives the uninformed reader the impression that Afrocentric scholars have an ahistorical obses- sion with Kemet and are concerned with little else. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. However, Eurocentric scholars have rarely let the "truth" interfere with the White supremacist cheerleading that represents a good portion of Western scholarship, namely, the false notion of Greece as an ancient oasis miraculously emerged with little outside influence and certainly none from Africa.

The reality is that ancient Greece is merely a footnote in African history. For most Afrocentrists, Greece is irrelevant. Afrocentric scholarship is varied. Afrocentrists specialize in diverse areas such as psychology, literature, linguistics, cultural expression, social work, history, philosophy, communications, and political science. Greece, therefore, does not fall within the scope of most Afrocentric research. In spite of this reality, the debate of "Egypt versus Greece" remains the central battlefront

Alkebulan / DEFENDING THE PARADIGM 4 1 3

over the Afrocentric idea but certainly not because Afrocentrists have made it so. The aim of this article is not to engage that debate, however intriguing it may be. Interested readers are directed to the works of Diop (1974, 1981), Asante and Mazama (2002), James (1954/1992), and Van Sertima (1995), to name a few. This article, however, further advances the Afrocentric paradigm as a necessity for the discipline in charting new understand- ings of the African world experience. Afrocentricity wrests the study of African people away from traditional disciplines and methods. Afrocentric scholars also position their experiences on par with all others after centuries of exclusion. In discussing the paradigm, it is most instructive to start with what Afrocentricity is and then to proceed to what it is not.

THE AFROCENTRIC PARADIGM

Afrocentric scholars recognize that all investigations are cul- turally centered and are informed by a particular worldview. Linda James Myers (1987) agrees with this assertion and holds that the worldview is yielded by a set of philosophical assumptions that are represented in the conceptual systems that those assumptions structure. She also maintains that "a cohesive set of philosophical assumptions create [sic] a conceptual system, a pat- tern of beliefs and values that define a way of life and world in which people act, judge, decide and solve problems" (pp. 74-75). She asserts that it is this conceptual system that structures the worldview at the level of deep structure to be reflected in surface structure across time and space. Afrocentricity, as a paradigm, requires its practitioners to have a knowledge base that comes from the life experiences of people of African descent (Kershaw, 1992, p. 477). The collective experience of African people, their worldview, and their culture has helped construct the Afrocentric paradigm.

For any Afrocentric enterprise, four issues must be considered. Afrocentric scholarship must reflect the ontology/epistemology, cosmology, axiology, and aesthetics of African people and must be centered in African experiences (Mazama, 2001, p. 399).


These are fundamental issues that need to be considered for any Afrocentric inquiry. The African voice is embodied in these cate- gories. In other words, these are the means by which African people articulate the African worldview and it guides their thought and action.

Of cosmology, Asante (1990) asserts that the place of African culture in the myths, legends, literatures, and oratures of African people makes up, at the mythological level, the cosmological issue within the Afrocentric enterprise. Furthermore, he asks the following: What role does African culture play in the African's interface with the cosmos? Are dreams of life and death in this tradition reflected in metaphysical ways? Finally, he maintains that the fundamental assumptions of Afrocentric research are based on the African orientation to the cosmos (pp. 8-9). Similarly, Myers notes that the "African extended self is God manifesting, the human being is with God having structured consciousness through conceptual systems to be divine of supremely good" (p. 77). In other words, the work of the Afrocentrist must be rooted in a spiritual conception of what is good. There must be an ethical/ functional dimension to Afrocentric research. Research must address the needs of African people for it to be relevant.

For African peoples, the essence of life is spiritual. As a con- sequence, "Afrocentric methods as well as Afrocenrically [sic] generated knowledge must reflect the primacy of the spiritual, the relationship between the physical and the spiritual, as well as the interconnectedness of all things" (Mazama, 2001, p. 399). Akbar (1984) also identifies spirituality as a major characteristic of the Afrocentric paradigm. He asserts that a holistic model includes the full dimensions of the human composition: physical, mental, and metaphysical. The Afrocentric approach "views humanity as ultimately reducible to a universal substance that is harmonious with the entire cosmos." Spirituality implies order, harmony, interdependence, and perfectibility and is essential in the human makeup (pp. 408-409).

Epistemology refers to the knowledge or truth in an Afrocentric inquiry. Music, language, rituals, and dance all embody what is considered truth. These modes carry the knowledge and lessons of African people and their culture. It contains the symbols, concepts,

Alkebulan / DEFENDING THE PARADIGM 415

ideas, and all other sources of knowledge. It refers to the question, How do we know what we know? Self-knowledge is the basis of all knowledge in Afrocentric epistemology (Asante, 1987, p. 74).

Mazama (2001) also informs us that all Afrocentric inquiry begins with self-knowledge but must also be conducted through an interaction between the examiner and the subject. Cultural immersion, she asserts, is imperative: "Afrocentric knowledge is validated through a combination of historical understanding and intuition; that is, knowing is both rational and suprarational." Furthermore, she contends, "One must remember always that knowing with one's heart is superior to all and priceless" (p. 399). Similarly, Akbar (1984) concludes that emotional reaction, as a means of knowing and as a balance for rationality, is legitimate within the Afrocentric paradigm. Holistic knowledge "is critical in terms of both structuring the Afrocentric methodology as well as characterizing the appropriateness of certain observations" (pp. 410-411). The axiological issues answer the questions of ethics and values. These issues shape what is acceptable and what is not in the context of the African worldview.

Finally, "aesthetics are said to exist as the leading elements of the African's response to art, plastic or performing" (Asante, 1990, p. 11). This model is an Afrocentric aesthetic and is Pan- African in focus and perspective. Welsh- Asante (1994) explains that the vision of the African has guided, informed, and inspired the reclamation of Africa politically as well as historically and aesthetically. Furthermore, an understanding of aesthetics facili- tates the paradigm "for artistic, literary and philosophical criticism and scholarship" (p. 2). Moreover, Pan-African aesthetics "tend to involve some aspect of functionality. Philosophically traditional Africa refers to values that reflect a specific worldview." In other words, Welsh- Asante explains, "The cultural dynamics of a people create a specific aesthetic complexion. An aesthetic which reflects the images and symbols of a culture exists in harmony with the cosmology of that society, thus facilitating the high- est creative expression and innovation" (p. 2). It is the culture that provides the artist with the perspective with which to voice his or her artistic expression, an expression that speaks to the needs of


the community. Moreover, spirit, rhythm, and creativity are the key criteria in discussing any aesthetic for African people, for "African people can draw upon a collective aesthetic bank that houses images, symbols and rhythms based upon history and subsequent mythology" (p. 4).

Ama Mazama, a leading Afrocentric scholar, edited the most significant text in Afrocentric discourse since Asante's (1998) second edition of The Afrocentric Idea. The Afrocentric Paradigm (Mazama, 2003) has quickly become the most definitive theoretical collection in the brief history of Afrocentric research. It comple- ments Asante's three authoritative texts on the subject: Afro- centricity: The Theory of Social Change (Asante, 1980/1992), Kemet, Afrocentricity and Knowledge (Asante, 1990), and the pre- viously mentioned, The Afrocentric Idea. The Afrocentric Paradigm details the evolution of the idea. Afrocentricity had several important antecedents. Mazama (2003) credits Marcus Garvey, Cheikh Anta Diop, Frantz Fanon, Aime Cesaire, Maulana Karenga, Negritude, Black Nationalism, Pan- Africanism, and Kawaida with providing Asante with a theoretical foundation to develop the Afrocentric idea (p. 10). This text not only defends the paradigm but also dispenses with all other false notions of Afrocentrism. These false notions exist because "there is confusion in large part because scholars have often failed to approach Afrocentricity in a systematic way" (p. 6). Mazama has broken the idea down so thor- oughly that she informs us of the affective, cognitive, and connota- tive aspects of the Afrocentric paradigm. In addition, she provides the reader with the social dimensions of the paradigm; Afrocentric epistemology, methodology, and methods; the multiplicity of Afro- centric theories; the structural aspect of the Afrocentric paradigm; and the functional aspect of the paradigm (pp. 23-26).

Mazama assembled a collection of scholars whose work represents the core of Afrocentric research. None of these scholars' work represents the "spurious body of knowledge" that anti- Afrocentrists erroneously attribute to Afrocentricity (Oakes, 2005). These major scholars in the field of Africology/Africana/African American/Black studies have contributed significantly to the Afrocentric idea and have various areas of specialization in spite of


the claims that Afrocentrists are only concerned with Kemet. Each article in The Afrocentric Paradigm provides a solid framework with which to engage Afrocentric research. Afrocentric scholars understand that a cohesive and coherent set of philosophical assumptions is necessary in developing an Afrocentric frame of reference. Ama Mazama has created a text that will help correct the distortions of the Afrocentric idea.

ATTACKS

Scholars in the field of Africana studies, regardless of subject area, are often placed in the position of having to defend the intellectual traditions of African people and our right to exist in academia. The reality that philosophy existed in Africa long before there was a Greece of which to speak is a fact conspicuously absent from the curriculum of most philosophy departments. Africana studies is not simply about the study of African phenomena. The fight against Western hegemony, unfortunately, remains of great concern for the discipline.

In fall 2002, the Department of Africana Studies at San Diego State University was confronted with this challenge. Some pro- fessors at the university challenged an Africana studies course on African intellectual heritage being added to a general education section monopolized by the departments of philosophy and religious studies. Some faculty members asserted that this course was neither philosophy nor religious studies and had no justification for being placed in a section of general education entitled, "Philosophy and Religious Studies." Not philosophy?

Africana studies scholars who specialize in philosophy or reli- gion are quite familiar with ancient African philosophers such as Imhotep (2700 BCE), Ptahhotep (2414 BCE), Khunanup (2040 BCE), Merikare (1990 BCE), Amenhotep, son of Hapu (1400 BCE), or Akhenaten (1300 BCE). They also know, as Western philosophy scholars must, that the Greek Thales (600 BCE), the so-called father of Western philosophy, spent several years study- ing in Kemet, acquiring knowledge of geometry, mathematics,


and philosophy (Obenga, 1995, p. 54). Such obvious omissions are predictable when we consider that defenders of the Eurocentric thesis believe that (Lefkowitz, 1996)

any attempt to question the authenticity of ancient Greek civilization (i.e. Greek philosophy) is of direct concern even to people who ordinarily have little interest in the remote past. Since the founding of this country, ancient Greece has been intimately con- nected with the ideals of American democracy, (p. 6)

The Akan, Dogon, Yoruba, Zulu, Kikuyu, and more have contributed a significant body of knowledge that has led to our understanding of traditional African philosophies. Furthermore, Nyerere's (1962/1995) Ujamaa, Nkrumah's (1964/1995) Consciencism, Stewarts's (1833/1996) On African Rights and Liberty, Garvey's (1926/1986) The Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey, DuBois's (1940/1995) The Concept of Race, Blyden's (1887/1996) Mohammedanims, Christianity and the Negro Race, Washington's (1895/1996) Racial Accommodation, do Nascimento's (1980/1996) Brazilian Quilombismo, D. Walker's (1830/1995) An Appeal in Four Articles, Wells-Barnett's (1900/1996) Southern Horrors: Lynch Law in All Its Phases, Malcolm X's (1963/1996) Message to the Grassroots, Fanon's (1967) Black Skin, White Masks, Ture and Hamilton's (1992) Black Power, Hudson-Weems's (1993) Africana Womanism, and Asante's (1980/1992) Afrocentricity: The Theory of Social Change represent but a portion of African intellectual thought and characterize several aspects of the African intellectual tradition. Nevertheless, those who objected to the inclusion of the Africana studies course used the San Diego State University (2004) Curriculum Guide to make their case. The guideline refer- enced reads,

Humanities courses in Foundations must embrace the broader content and application of a discipline or field and are not to be limited by national, cultural, or historical boundaries. . . . Courses dealing with major non-Western cultures and with ethnic and other minorities as they relate to the prevailing modern cultural context and courses the primary intent of which is to redress this cultural heritage or move student awareness beyond it are pedagogically more appropriate to GE Explorations, (p. 87, italics added)


The guideline itself demonstrates the Eurocentric hegemony that pervades the academy. The opposition's defense of European cultural space and the stranglehold that traditional disciplines had on the Philosophy and Religious Studies section should be expected and surprise no one. Africana studies scholars have always been battling for inclusion and defending our right to exist in these "liberal" institutions. The idea that Western philosophy is some- how not "limited by national, cultural, or historical boundaries" supposes that Western culture is universal to all peoples. This ide- ology, in typical Eurocentric fashion, attempts to push all "non- Western cultures" to the periphery of the "universally" accepted European cultural center. This clearly assumes that Western culture serves as the foundation for all peoples. The rest of the world (the majority of the world) may play but a supporting role.

The broader attacks against African intellectuals and Afro- centricity have been much more insidious in their deceptiveness and dishonesty. Given the momentum of the Afrocentric movement, it cannot be dismissed by racists and Eurocentrists. Critics now feel the urgency to warn against the dangers of Afrocentrism. Critics of Afrocentricity take the claims of a few scholars and attribute them to the entire movement. Furthermore, the few scholars whom they focus on are not Afrocentric and have never made the claim that they were. The only criterion to be classified as an Afrocentrist, it would seem, is to challenge the traditional scholarship that places Europe at the hub of intellectual achieve- ment; this is hardly the makings of a systematic analysis of Afrocentricity or an honest discussion of the paradigm.

In this way, Louis Farrakhan, for example, has been labeled an Afrocentrist. He has not identified himself as an Afrocentrist and has not contributed to Afrocentric research. At the Million Man March on October 16, 1995, Farrakhan asserted that Napoleon destroyed the nose of the Sphinx to hide its African features. Farrakhan's claim, which is not supported by evidence, is juxta- posed on 60 Minutes (Reiner & Pearson, 1996) with Molefi Asante defending what the host is calling Afrocentrism. This bit of deception gives the impression that Asante, the creator of the Afrocentric idea, and Farrakhan, a religious and community leader, have formed an axis of dubious scholarship. At any rate,


the claims that are attributed to Afrocentrists are, more often than not, insignificant in the discussion about Afrocentricity.

Although this article does not seek to enter the Kemet versus Greece debate because it distorts the nature of Afrocentric scholarship, it is important to highlight the dishonest claims of Eurocentric and racist critics. Currently, it is this debate at which a good portion of the attacks against the discipline are lodged. Martin Bernal (1991), a European scholar, found himself in the middle of the Afrocentric debate after the publication of Black Athena. With Black Athena, Bernal made a significant contribution to the world's understanding of the relationship between ancient Kemet and Greece.

Of course, Bernal was not the first scholar to bring attention to Greece's debt to Kemet. James (1954/1992), Diop (1974), Nantambu (1996), and Obenga (1995), just to name of few, have also done so. The difference, however, was that Black Athena was more about Greece than it was about Africa. Nevertheless, Bernal, according to his critics, not only became an Afrocentrist but was also given credit for providing the foundation for Afrocentric scholarship. Bernal (1991) sought to debunk what he called the "Aryan model," which holds that "Greek civilization was the result of cultural mixture following a conquest from the north by Indo-European-speaking Greeks" (p. 1). Bernal sought to replace the Aryan model with the "Ancient model." The Ancient model contends, "Greece had originally been inhabited by Pelasgian . . . [and] civilized by Egyptian and Phoenician settlers" (p. 1). For that, Bernal miraculously ascended to the forefront of a movement that he did not initiate and is clearly not a part of. Although Black Athena does make a contribution to the study of classical civilizations, it hardly represents the foundation of Afrocentric research. This racist supposition reveals the historically false notion that African people can do nothing for themselves and require outside influence and guidance.

The primary claims that Eurocentrists are fixated on and that represent their most adamant objections to Afrocentrism include the charge that Cleopatra was Black and that Aristotle stole his ideas from the library at Alexandria. They are quick to point out that Cleopatra was not Egyptian but Macedonian and that Aristotle


died before the famous library had been built. However false those assertions are, the fact is that they are not Afrocentric claims. Yosef Ben-Jochannan and John Henrik Clarke have been accused of making such claims (C. Walker, 2001). Both scholars have made significant contributions to the study of Africa and its people. I will let their work speak for them. However, neither Ben-Jochannan nor Clarke is Afrocentric. In fact, both have rejected the Afrocentric paradigm.

Clarke (1994) took issue with the word Afrocentricity and with the paradigm as well. He opined, "I have an argument with the word 'Afrocentricity' because it is a compromise with the word Africa. There is no 'fro' in Africa" (p. 113). In his view, the Afrocentric circle and paradigm are much too limited. His vision, which he called "Africancentricity," is quite broad in that it includes the sum total of African scholars, people, and move- ments that challenge and seek to destroy European oppression regardless of their ideologies or value systems. On the other hand, however, it is also quite limited as Clarke most clearly articulates when he writes that Africancentricity "began to develop in this African Holocaust and it hasn't ended yet. It has continued in its progression" (p. 116).

It is clear that this is not an Afrocentric position. Afrocentric scholars rely on African history and culture as their foundation. An ancient tradition that is certainly not borne out of slavery, as Clarke suggests, shapes our worldview. Afrocentricity is charac- terized by a consciousness of victory, not a consciousness of oppression. Clarke's criticism mirrors that of the paradigm's chief Eurocentric and racist opponents. This is not to say that Clarke is a racist or Eurocentric but that he clearly dismissed the basic premise of Afrocentricity, which places African ideals at the center of any analysis that involves African culture and behavior (Asante, 1987, p. 6).

To attribute the words or actions of a few to an entire group is blatantly racist. All scholars have the right to confront others over false claims. They also have a responsibility to challenge assertions that are believed to be inaccurate or problematic. After all, this is precisely what Afrocentric scholars are charged with, in


part. However, critics of Afrocentricity have labeled an entire cadre of scholars, whose areas of specializations and ideologies are varied, on the basis of a few scholars who made insignificant notations to begin with.

Much of the public's understanding of Afrocentricity relies "heavily on journalists, rather than on the published research of scholars" (Hilliard, 1995, p. 130). The media rest primarily on the controversial polemic, Not Out of Africa, by Mary Lefkowitz (1996). Lefkowitz emerged as the chief academic proponent of the bogus notion of Afrocentrism. Not Out of Africa has become, for the extremist cheerleaders of Western civilization, the definitive text that deals with the Afrocentrists once and for all. The media distortions of Afrocentricity place Lefkowitz in the role of the courageous scholar, in the face of charges of racism, who right- eously reestablishes Greece as the monumental civilization that gave birth to the Western world and owes little gratitude to Kemet. Although there are other scholars, Lefkowitz emerged as their great White hope with Not Out of Africa. Asante (1999) writes,

The aim of Professor Lefkowitz is to support the unsupportable idea of a miraculous Greece and thus to enhance a white supremacist myth of the ancient world. Perhaps George Will and Roger Kimball believe that they have found a savior of the pure white thesis. They are wrong. The thesis cannot be supported with facts although Professor Lefkowitz goes to great lengths to confuse the picture by concentrating on irrelevancies. (p. 51)

The pedestal on which the media placed Lefkowitz, despite the weaknesses of her argument, demonstrates how pathetic the attempts are to deny Africa's contributions to the world. For example, Michael Gove (1996), in The Times of London, writes, "61 -year-old classics don, Mary Lefkowitz, pointed out that these African emperors had no togas. In ... Not Out of Africa, the Wellesley College professor took a scythe to the rank, unweeded garden of bogus scholarship" (p. 1). Washington Post columnist Ken Ringle (1996) weighs in with, "Mary Lefkowitz, the philosophical scourge of Afrocentrism, is talking about truth" (p. E01). In spite of the media fanfare over her propaganda, several scholars


have responded strongly to her weak defense of academic racism (i.e., the deliberate falsification of African and conversely European history). Asante (1999) further remarks,

The book is badly written and terribly redundant, as if she is in a hurry to enlarge a relatively poor argument. How many times can you really say George G. M. James should not have used the term "stolen legacy" when he claimed that the Africans influenced the Greeks? (p. 52)

Similarly, Bernal (1996) exhorts, "Lefkowitz's book was obvi- ously written in a hurry. It still shows signs of its origins in the cobbling together of articles written with passionate urgency for the popular and semipopular press" (p. 86). Nevertheless, the frailty of her arguments has not prevented publications from The Washington Post to The Times of London from regurgitating Lefkowitz's tired straw-man arguments about a Black Cleopatra and a plundering Aristotle.

It is obvious that there is also a political agenda involved in these attacks. The lack of civility and the pejorative name-calling (myth-makers, pseudo-scientists, etc.) that characterize the response to African agency are telling. Hilliard (1995) points out that there is a "private (political and social) network that is funded by right wing think-tanks. The think tanks fund propaganda on the topic but do not fund research and publish technical scientific papers on the topic" (p. 130). Case in point: Lynne Cheney (1995), wife of U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney and senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, regurgitated much of the "same ole same ole" Aristotle/Cleopatra and Greece miracle mantra in her right-wing polemic, Telling the Truth. In this propaganda piece, as well as in a review of Lefkowitz's Not Out of Africa (Cheney, 1996), she promotes the insignificant ranting of her right-wing comrade and hero. In the review, Cheney (1996) writes, "Lefkowitz knows better . . . she applies her knowledge of the ancient world and its languages to showing, as she puts it, that 'virtually all the claims made by Afrocentrists can be shown to be without substance'" (p. 29). Lefkowitz does no such thing and, of course, cites no Afrocentric source. So-called liberals also figure prominently in


the political debate over Afrocentricity. They take part in the attacks and distortion of Afrocentricity as well. Arthur Schlesinger Jr. (1991), a celebrated liberal, also cautions against the dangers of the Afrocentrists, so much so that he warns of this in his book, The Disuniting of America. Black studies scholars are mindful that it is in the liberal halls of academia where they find their most immediate opposition. Conservative and liberal scholars and pun- dits represent two sides of the same coin when it comes to attack- ing intellectuals who challenge and debunk the European mythology that parades as universal truth.

CONCLUSION

The recent attacks on Africana studies are a part of a much larger conflict, a battle that is not likely to be settled soon. It is hoped that this article will accelerate the process of resolving the fracas. African and Afrocentric scholars must stand firm in their tradition and continue to produce applicable research for African people. If this stops, that is when Africana studies will cease to be relevant. If Africana studies follow the path of traditional disciplines and abandon the founding principles of Black studies, its demise is inevitable. This is why the Afrocentric paradigm is cru- cial. It forces African and Afrocentric scholars to generate scholarship that speaks to the needs and aspirations of African people. The Afrocentric idea draws a significant distinction between Africana studies and other disciplines. It was a discipline borne of struggle and must remain an extension of African communities. It must also continue to produce scholars committed to these ideals. It must continue to understand the political dynamics of chal- lenging Western scholarship. Afrocentricity must be defended with vigilance. Afrocentric scholarship must be approached with rigor and a sense of purpose. It may seem that liberals and conservatives find little in common ideologically. However, when Afrocentric scholars shake the foundation of Western society, liberals and conservatives find common ideological ground and a common enemy. And that enemy is us.


REFERENCES

Akbar, N. (1984). Africentric social sciences for human liberation. Journal of Black Studies, 14(4), 395-414.

Asante, M. K. (1987). The Afrocentric idea. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Asante, M. K. (1990). Kemet, Afrocentricity and knowledge. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press. Asante, M. K. (1992). Afrocentricity: The theory of social change. Trenton, NJ: Africa

World Press. (Original work published 1980) Asante, M. K. (1998). The Afrocentric idea: Revised and expanded edition. Philadelphia:

Temple University Press. Asante, M. K. (1999). The painful demise of Eurocentrism: An Afrocentric response to

critics. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press. Asante, M. K., & Mazama, A. (2002). Egypt vs. Greece and the American academy: The

debate over the birth of civilization. Chicago: African American Images. Bernal, M. (1991). Black Athena. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Bernal, M. (1996). The Afrocentric interpretation of history: Bernal replies to Lefkowitz.

Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 11, 86-94. Blyden, E. (1996). Mohammedanims, Christianity and the Negro race. In M. K. Asante &

A. Abarry (Eds.), African intellectual heritage: A book of sources (pp. 470-482). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (Original work published 1887)

Cheney, L. (1995). Telling the truth: Why our culture and our country have stopped making sense - and what we can do about it. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Cheney, L. (1996). Review of Not out of Africa. Insight on the News, 72(14), 29. Clarke, J. H. (1994). The historical basis of Africancentricity. In Who betrayed the African

world revolution? And other speeches (pp. 115-124). Kent, OH: Institute for African American Affairs.

Diop, C. A. (1974). The African origin of civilization: Myth or reality. Brooklyn: Lawrence Hill Books.

Diop, C. A. (1981). Civilization or barbarism: An authentic anthropology. Brooklyn: Lawrence Hill Books.

do Nascimento, A. (1996). Brazilian quilombismo. In M. K. Asante & A. Abarry (Eds.), African intellectual heritage: A book of sources (pp. 505-516). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (Original work published 1980)

D'Souza, D. (1995). The end of racism: Principles for a multiracial society. New York: The Free Press.

Du Bois, W. E. B. (1995). The concept of race. In F. Hord & J. Lee (Eds.), / am because we are: Readings in Black philosophy (pp. 255-260). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. (Original work published 1940)

Fanon, F. (1967). Black skin, White masks. New York: Grove Press. Garvey, A. J. (1986). The philosophy and opinions of Marcus Garvey. Dover, MA: The

Majority Press. (Original work published 1926) Gove, M. (1996, September 2). The woman who defied political correctness. The Times of

London, p. 1 . Hilliard, A. (1995). Bridging Maat, destroying Isfet: The African and African Diasporan

presence in the study of Ancient Kmt. In I. Van Sertima (Ed.), Egypt: Child of Africa (pp. 127-148). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Hudson-Weems, C. (1993). Africana womanism: Reclaiming ourselves. Troy, MI: Bedford Publishers.


James, G. G. M. (1992). Stolen legacy: Greek philosophy is stolen Egyptian philosophy. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press. (Original work published 1954)

Karenga, M. (2002). Introduction to Black studies (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: University of Sankore Press.

Kershaw, T. (1992). Afrocentrism and the Afrocentric method. Western Journal of Black Studies, 16(3), 477.

Lefkowitz, M. (1996). Not out of Africa: How Afrocentrism became an excuse to teach myth as history. New York: Basic Books.

Malcolm X. (1996). Message to the grassroots. In M. K. Asante & A. Abarry (Eds.), African intellectual heritage: A book of sources (pp. 721-728). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (Original work published 1963)

Mazama, A. (2001). The Afrocentric paradigm: Contours and definitions. Journal of Black Studies, 31(4), 387-405.

Mazama, A. (2003). The Afrocentric paradigm. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press. Myers, L. J. (1987). The deep structure of culture: Relevance of traditional African culture

in contemporary life. Journal of Black Studies, 18(1), 72-85. Nantambu, K. (1996). Egypt & Afrocentric geopolitics: Essays on White supremacy. Kent,

OH: Imhotep Publishing. Nkrumah, K. (1995). Consciencism. In F. Hord & J. Lee (Eds.), / am because we are:

Readings in Black philosophy (pp. 55-64). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. (Original work published 1964)

Nyerere, J. (1995). Ujamaa: The basis of African socialism. In F. Hord & J. Lee (Eds.), / am because we are: Readings in Black philosophy (pp. 65-72). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. (Original work published 1962)

Oakes, J. (2005, July). History lessons in Philadelphia. Retrieved August 17, 2005, from http://left2right.typepad.com/main/2005/07/historyjessons.html

Obenga, T. (1995). African philosophy in world history. Princeton: Sungai Books. Reiner, S., & Pearson, E. (Producers). (1996, November 24). Out of Africa. In 60 minutes.

New York: CBS News. Ringle, K. (1996, June 11). A professor's collision course; Classics scholar Mary Lefkowitz

shakes up academia with her critique of Afrocentrism. The Washington Post, p. E01. San Diego State University. (2004). Curriculum guide. Retrieved from http://www.sdsu

.edu/curriculumguide/ Schlesinger, A., Jr. (1991). The disuniting of America: Reflections on a multicultural

society. New York: W W. Norton. Stewart, M. (1996). On African rights and liberty. In M. K. Asante & A. Abarry (Eds.),

African intellectual heritage: A book of sources (pp. 397-401). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (Original work published 1833)

Ture, K., & Hamilton, C. (1992). Black power: The politics of liberation. New York: Vintage Books.

Van Sertima, I. (1995). Egypt: Child of Africa. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Walker, C. (2001). Why we can 't go home again: An argument about Afrocentrism. New York:

Oxford University Press. Walker, D. (1995). An appeal in four articles. In W. Moses (Ed.), Classical Black nation-

alism: From the American Revolution to Marcus Garvey (pp. 68-89). New York: New York University Press. (Original work published 1830)

Washington, B. T. (1996). Racial accommodation. In M. K. Asante & A. Abarry (Eds.), African intellectual heritage: A book of sources (pp. 483-488). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (Original work published 1895)


Wells-Barnett, I. B. (1996). Southern horrors: Lynch law in all its phases. In M. K. Asante & A. Abarry (Eds.), African intellectual heritage: A book of sources (pp. 651-655). Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (Original work published 1900)

Welsh- Asante, K. (1994). The African aesthetic: Keeper of the traditions. Westport, CT: Praeger Press.

Adisa A. Alkebulan is an assistant professor in Africana studies at San Diego State University. He received his MA and PhD from Temple University. His research area is Pan-African languages in the Caribbean and the United States. He is a major contributor to the Encyclopedia of Black Studies and his work appears in publications on rhetoric, literature, and Malcolm X.

defending the - umdrive

Documents