17 Afrocentrism, Cultural Nationalism, and the Problem with Essentialist Definitions of Race, Gender, and Sexuality Barbara Ransby ince the publication of Molefi Asante's hook Afrocentr iltdfined and often misdefined eoncepr of Miocene eee the almost ubiquitous in the public discourse on race and Aftieen Anere can ‘identity. There is discussion of Afrocentric epistemology. and Pedagogy within academia, Afrocentric curriculum inclementary ged ondary schools, Afrocentric fashion, Afrocentrie spiitualy, Afvoccmeic Suisine—and the lst goes on. Bu, inthe final analysis, what exactly is rocentricity? ie anche 273 has been applied so broadly and loosely sto encompass on one hand, the very specific mandate for authentic “African? living nl thinking, as prescribed by Mole Asante, to the crude cash erop sto émployed by national white-owned real outlet, which now olfer she purchase of Akocetric products, ranging fom fake kente umbrella to lmtacon mad cloth shower curtains and underwear. In essence he very inition of Afrocentrism is contested terrain. Even though one is hard Bresed to define what Afrocenism is, we shouldbe quite clear on what itis not. It isnot, for example, a specific theoretical paradigm for lise tion ora prepackaged formula fora meaningll back lee ne oo centric writers would have us believe. Rather itis an approach, which en Compasses many competing theories and visions. In the most general Afrocentrism and Cultural Nationalism 217 sense, Afrocentrism simply reflects a perspective that places people of ‘African descent—our concerns, culture, and interests—at the center of a particular inquiry, struggle, strategy, or analysis. It certainly does not have to mean that African people are viewed in some sort of artificial historical ‘vacuum divorced from other sets of historical experiences. In fact, in order to fully understand the experience of Africans, and, even more 50, ‘African Americans in the moder era, we must look at the dialectic of po- litical and class struggle between people of African descent and others, and, of course, between Africans and African Americans themselves. Oth- erwise we are left with a very distorted and one-dimensional view of our history and, most important, one that negates the ways in which the dy- ‘namics of power and exploitation have helped to shape the African and African American experiences. Neither African Americans nor Africans hhave created their own history insulated from the larger evolution of ‘world history. To employ an Afrocentric approach in studying the culture and history of African and African American people is to view people of ‘African descent as subjects and conscious actors in the creation of history and culture rather than the passive recipients of someone else's actions. ‘The conclusions at which various scholaractivists have arrived through this enterprise have been diverse and, at times, antithetical. Itis important to note that Afrocentrism has a long, rich, and disparate history, encompassing many distinct intellectual and political traditions. ‘Most often cited is a group of scholars and writers who historian Darlene Clark Hine refers to as “Authentists and Originists.” They include Dr Yosef ben Jochannan, the Senegalese scholar, Cheikh Anta Diop, John Henrik Clarke, and Ivan Van Sertima. Many of the younger cultural and systematic nationalists (as Asante prefers to call himself)—including As- ante, Na’im Akbar, Haki Madhubuti, and Jawanza Kunjufu—trace their intellectual roots to this group. Equally prominent among the pioneer Afrocentrists, but representing a very different perspective, is the great black intellectual and prolific writer W. E. B. Du Bois. Du Bois offered a powerful example of Afrocentric scholarship in his 1935 class analysis of the post-Civil War era entitled Black Reconstruction. In it Du Bois bor- rows heavily from the European-based Marxist tradition to formulate a very cogent and provocative Afrocentric analysis of a particular phase in US. history. Thus Du Bois represents a very different strain of the Afro- centric tradition than Molefi Asante and many of his Authentist predeces- sors, but an equally legitimate one. ‘Most often when we hear the term Afrocentrism, we think of a short218° Barbara Ranshy list of names: a group of nationalist thinkers who see culture, narrowly defined, a the prineipal arena for black politcal struggle. One reason that the struggle over definition is so important is that the term Afrocentrism, applied generally, has a special resonance among African American people, and no single intellectual or political tradition has proprietary rights over it. The concept represents an oppositional stance vis-a-vis the oppressive dominance of Eurocentrism in our lives. More specifically, the systematic promotion of Eurocentrism, and the erroneous notion of white supremacy, a idcological justifications for colonialism, slavery, and ‘modern-day racism are the material bases for African Americans’ positive response to the general ideas of Afrocentrism as corrective. Since Afro- ‘centric scholars like Asante, and the even more controversial Leonard Jef- fries, have received such extensive media attention, it would be easy and unfortunate for the general public, and African Americans in particular, to assume that these individuals represent the intellectual vanguard of the struggle against racism in the academy and the only representatives of that ‘oppositional Afrocentric tradition, They do not. Even while it is important, on the one hand, to recognize that cultural and systematic nationalists do not hold a monopoly over the term Afro- centrism, ivis still necessary to discuss and critique theit ideas as some of the more popular versions of Afrocentrcity that are being disseminated within the African American community today. Firs of all, Asante should be credited with the important positive contribution he has made in forc- ing the issue of racism in academia to the forefront of the national debate about education and the politics of scholarship. At the same time, howev- s this contribution should not lead us to overlook some of the major weaknesses of Asanteism. One such weakness is his subtle endorsement of essentialist arguments about race and, by extension, gender. Although, to his credit, he rejects some of the crudest theories of biological determin- ism, his Afrocentric paradigm, nevertheless, serves to reinforce rather than refute the idea that race is some type of ahistorical phenomenon rooted in a shared genetic heritage, Readers are told there is something in- trinsically African within us, rooted in a great and distant African past, that we must get in touch with in order to know our true selves and be. come truly Afrocentric, something that Molefi himself has achieved but, according to him, the great black leader W. F. B. Du Bois never did. This view suggests a definition of race and ethnicity that transcends social, his- torical, and even cultural realities. It belies the reality of Africa itself: an immense, diverse, and complex continent. When Asante argues, “We have Afrocentrism and Cultural Nationalism 219 cone African cultural system... We respond othe same hythms ofthe verse,” is he refering to the rhythms of the Yoruba, Tho» Hausa, Kikuyu, Ndebele, or Shona peoples? All ofthese African peoples ave i ferent lingua, elgius, and poial tradition that are equally ei sof Africa’s past and present. Moreover, most Africans do not Think of themselves as simply Aion. Sacha broad and homogenizing cury more easily itn fat Tis also ea sere aie avant nonaihc mas, respective of ass and pols, when one is concerned primarily with the “rhythms of the uni- verse. [and] cosmological sensibilities” rather than the concrete ral ties of people's day-to-day lives, On the serious terrain of pola stg ale, for example itis very important to understand the difference between 4 Nelson Mandela of South Africa and a Jonas Savimbi of Angola, One i 4 longime freedom fighter forthe liberation of African people, the other is responsible forthe massacre of thousands of Afscan people ino. enhance his own power. Both men are African, but they respond to very different chythms and sensibilities. Is this fury notion of race as some type of innate biological bond that leads us down the slippery sone o rudging allies and enemies on the basis of the color of their skin and the texture oftheir hair ther than on che content oftheir actions. ‘These erroneous notions of race are predicated upon equally eroneous notions of culture itself. Culture is not something fixed, stati, and ahi: torical Calture i dynamic and constantly in fax it is a process. Wha were authentic and natural practices within Yoruba, Ibo, Nubian, or any other cultures centuries ago woukd nt be, and ate aot “authentic” forms of those caltores (or the surviving products of those clare today, This would be true with of without European intervenson, Cultures chara and evolve if they do nothing else. Otherwise they atrophy and die. foe enrists wo look back and romantiie a fied moment the history of ancignt Egypt as the source of our salvation from our curent dilemmas filo fuly appreciate this fact. This failure makes certain stuns of he Afrocentric tradition essentially backward looking and conse ssive and liberating. : aaa tonto the problematic formulation of race and ethnic Afrocentrc writings of ular and systematic nationalists, thelr anaes of gender and sexuality ae equally disturbing, While most cultural na: sionalits ofthe 1990s acknowledge the value of “complementary.” if not faly equa, relationships herween men and women, theres very ite tention given to the special oppression of women and certainly n220 Barbara Ransby cacy of women’s empowerment, Asante’s Afrocentric ideal of family and sexuality, steeped in virulent homophobia, is very telling about how his notions of gender factor into a larger paradigm. First ofall, Asante blunt. ly argues that “homosexuality cannot be condoned or accepted as good for the national development of a strong people.” He overlooks the real ty that many black lesbian and gay activists—from Audre Lorde and Bat. bara Smith to Essex Hemphill and Marlon Riggs—are, or have been, at the forefront of the struggle against sexism as it impacts the lives of black women and rigidly prescribed gender roles as they constrict the lives of black men, Unfortunately, the idea of men and women stepping outside of theie traditional roles in relationship to one another is somehow seen as threatening to the African American community and family. However, if we are ever to realize a society where men and women are equally re- spected, valued, and empowered (unlike most human societies we have known, African or otherwise), we have to step outside of “traditional” roles. We have to move beyond imposed, and often artificial, notions of family, parenting, and sexuality and find the courage to create new defini- tions of both manhood and womanhood, and how the two relate to one another. Two Afrocentric scholars, both of whom I would place within the cul- tural nationalist tradition, who address more directly the issue of gender within the African American community are Haki Madhubuti and Na’im Akbar, In his book, Visions for Black Men, Akbar offers a scenario for black liberation and empowerment that is inescapably male-centered, de- spite his disclaimer that his vision “though phrased in masculine terms is "ot a masculine vision.” In essence, it is not personhood but manhood that is defined by Akbar as strength, courage, independence, economic ower, and intellectual prowess—and, perhaps most telling, the ability to Actas protector of presumably weaker black women. There is nothing in trinsically liberating oF revolutionary about this image of manhood. In fact, in many ways it simply emulates the definitions of white manhood and masculinity celebrated by the dominant society. In large part Akbat’s vision of a resurgent black manhood hinges on a power struggle between men of European and African descent, which leaves African American women relegated to the sidelines as cheerleaders until the battle is won, This vision, of course, belies the real role African American women have Played as fighters, leaders, strategists, and cultural workers in our own right throughout history. Even more explicitly, in his book, Black Men: Obsolete, Single, Dan- Afrocentrism and Cultural Nationalism 221 ‘ous? The Afrikan American Family in Transition, Haki Madhubuti sejues that *male dominance is on the decline in the Black commu ieee places the community in jeopardy.” This uncritical endorse bh nt of male dominance grows out of an even greater adherence oe seatialise, ‘notions about race and gender than are espoused by i i: ‘Asante or Akbar, According to Madhubuti, “Biological and sexu rae ithin the human species are not interchangeable. . .. The sexual Soce nd needs of men and women are, indeed, different and ed Cencies and needs of men ct rat along biological and cultural lines.” Thus, men and women fea 78 into distinct, immutable, naturally defined roles that we must a ne S| He goes on to argue that racism and white supremacy have inhibi men’s abilit live up to their roles “as warriors, providers, hus- iat ea Tie as ‘ofa patriarchal ideal as model for black : nhood is scen as the key to black empowerment. Thus, the struggle for black liberation is defined narrowly and quite traditionally as a svele between men for power and the protection of their (helpless and coveted) women. Ea d not only a paternalis insu! Madhubuti’s view of black women is not dea black women’s strengths and capabilities, it also, at times, ee : ee fight misogyny. For example, he begins one of the key chapters of his book, Black Men, with a scenario in which a black policewoman cal I shoots and kills a black male she is about to arrestin the presence o white male colleagues. Madhubuti concludes: i cide was in the real world hathad been described as *jutifable homicide” was aan gn murder aby to: Bc malecop bt by Blak woman cop, ew saw the scans ofthis. Ws may Sethe ultimate andmoxt profound reality of or cores suaton may wale thr son ofthe bers that bring may inde be the mes Sis. daughters of mothers chat aid Black men and white men in the e moval of Black men fom this earth nibilators of frican American women are portrayed as the annih isc collaborators, along with white men, in the desruesion of black mn, Iisa painfully citorted and wulgacized version of back women’s role in the survival of black people, men and women, Why would Madhubut choose such an unrepresenative example of volenee inthe black community, andthe lager society, in which generally vole between men or male violence toward women isthe rule?222 Barbara Ransby At atime when African American women are under heavy assault by popular cultural forms that denigrate us as “bitches and whores,” and by ute in welfare that threaten ous very survival and that of our children, such scapegoating of black women for the suffering of black men is not only offensive and misleading but dangerous and reactionary as well. It fits squarely into the conservative victim-blaming scenario propagated by ‘most contemporary culture-of-poverty theorists. This view is also consis, tent with the notion that itis black men, and not black women, who are the principal targets of oppression and racism today, Black women, like the black cop in Madhubuti’s scenario, are allegedly being rewarded, cel. ebrated, and promoted, at the presumed expense of black men. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. The realty is that in comparison to white women, white men, and African American men, black women are still che most exploited and impoverished group. Unemployment rates are highest among black women {if we look at those who have been forced out of the workforce entirely). And, in terms of wages, black women still carn $1.10 less per hour than the average black male. Most depressing is the situation of tens of thousands of black single mothers who receive Public aid, live in dangerous and deteriorating public housing prisons, and are the principal caretakers of all black children. These women, mis. characterized as immoral, irresponsible, and lazy, have become the proto. ‘ypical “undeserving poor”—a stereotype fueled by racism and sexism — Which serves as justification for the erosion of a whole array of public services and minimum access to resources many fought so hard for in decades past. Any supposedly liberating vision that blames, rather than seeks to empower, these women is collaboration of the worst order, As the great poet and activist Audre Lorde reminded us, “We cannot dismantle the master’s house using the master's tools.” The dismantling of the master’s house isthe challenge many Afrocentric scholar-activists heve taken up. However, while some works have scrutinized existing para digms on one level, they have absorbed whole the existing definitions of race, gender, and sexuality on another level. In describing the limitations «and pitfalls of racial identity politics, Manning Marable warns that both the oppressors and those who are oppressed [are] imprisoned by the closed dialectic of race. ... Yet, in reality, race should be under. stood, not as an entity, within the histories of all human societies, or Brounded to some inescapable or permanent biological or genetic aif. ferences between human beings. Afrocentrism and Cultural Nationalism 223 ic notions really apply to our dt ander nds aswell We intra s ta arated ar of tai and often eoneous assumprions about seh fo Samental concepts as nature, culture, ; Sean alaepea ae ma a a none We therfore bud important ates On Sfaty ineellecrual foundations. ‘We must, as intellectuals and Peal qi ise, take up the task of interrogating presumed truths on pad ae and, Gnally, place our confidence inthe optimistic notion that polit a determined in our heads and not in our genes and by our present and fe are actions, nt the greatness of oWr ancestors, as great 38 many were, We have new battles to fight.