Naming oneself: essential to cultural survival
By Kendra Fox-Davis
"So we are left with two clear choices  to educate for
liberation, or to educate for domination."
ÂPaulo Friere
Are we at this university to change or to conform? At times it
seems the same racist ideology that has contaminated American
culture since this country’s origin remains as firmly implanted as
ever in the minds of the dominators.
As I sat in the Coop on Friday I was presented with evidence to
support this unfortunate opinion. Matthew Baker’s article on
political correctness ("Political correctness factionalizes
society," Feb. 24) was, at best, a gross simplification of the
issues behind race polarization in America. At worst, it was an
obscene distortion of African and true American culture, an
ignorant misrepresentation of minority identity and a pitiful
attempt at disguising his blatantly racist theories of assimilation
as an advocacy of "American" unity.
To begin my discussion, I will start where Baker’s ignorance
became apparent, in the use of the term "African American." As
Malcolm X explained, the term "African American" began as an
alternative for the so-called "Negro." It, first, identifies the
person in question as African. Secondly, it identifies the person
in question as an American citizen  which, whether or not we
receive the benefits of being an American, we technically
remain.
The whole issue behind our naming and remaining of minority
groups is part of our continual evolution as human beings to define
our identity. This process of evolution has obviously left Baker
behind. Perhaps he would feel more comfortable in speaking from his
heart and referring to us as the "niggers" we clearly exist as in
his mind? Regardless, the process of naming is an integral part of
forming an identity.
When you exist in a society that has systematically obliterated
and distorted your culture, and I am referring to the attempts by
white society to dominate and erase the African culture, the
process of naming yourself is necessary for your survival. Baker
cannot regulate and therefore should not be expected to understand,
the struggles of the African-American man and the African-American
woman to define ourselves in a society which excludes us.
This lack of understanding, this lack of knowledge, this
ignorance that pervades every sentence in his article is not an
excuse. He should speak on what he knows. Since he cannot possibly
know the motivation for our quest for self-determination, he should
silence himself or be silenced.
Until Baker can understand that Africans were stripped of their
names, the very essence of our identity, and renamed by our white
oppressors, he cannot understand why we continue to name ourselves.
Fortunately, this is not a hard concept. Certainly a political
science major should have no problems comprehending it.
In addition, Baker states that since African-American people
cannot trace our heritage to a location in Africa we should abandon
the idea of being of African origin. This is ridiculous. I know
that in 1772 a woman renamed Betsy Bailey lived and gave birth to a
proud clan of AFRICANS, one of whom I am. I know that her original
name was, more than likely, Belali. I know that there are Belalis
in West Africa.
Is that enough to tie myself to the proud African continent, Mr.
Baker? This Africa, which he claims is "nothing to envy," this
Africa which was the birthplace of humanity, this Africa that
flourished while Europe crawled through caves on her hands and
knees, this Africa which was raped, exploited, ravaged by white
"explorers" … Oh, Mr. Baker, you have no idea how much you have
to envy.
Baker does acknowledge that slavery existed, but adds that
African Americans triumphed during the Civil Rights Era.And his
point is what? That we were African when we were enslaved but being
able to sit on the same toilet as a white man made us Americans?
Thanks a lot, but I’d rather be an African. Hey, how about we
invite all the disgruntled minority groups to a sing-a-long in
Westwood Plaza, that way we can all be Americans and no one could
complain, right?
Anyway, Baker’s attempts to divide African-American people in
America from African people in Africa is just a regurgitated method
of the divide-and-conquer strategies utilized by his ancestors to
incite hostility and promote weakness on the African continent. The
African diaspora remains united under the banner of our proud
origin, our mother Africa, whose glorious earth shines through our
black, brown, yellow and red skins everyday all over the world.
I do not need Baker’s approval to hear the beat of African drums
in my heart. Furthermore, I do not appreciate the audacity with
which he suggests that I, as a "modern black," cannot "form a
realistic bond" to Africa. I suppose the blood, sweat and tears of
Africans who built this country is not bond enough. Please do not
attempt to appease your guilt, Mr. Baker, by denying me my
heritage. It lacks conviction. By distancing African-American
people in America from Africans in Africa, Baker distances dominant
American society  white society  from their heinous
crimes against us. Through his attempts to discourage
African-American people from forming bonds with Africa it becomes
clear that he really seeks to discourage African-American people
from seeking restitution from America for her crimes against
Africa.
The comments Baker makes with regard to the indigenous cultures
of Northern, Central and South America are absolutely slanderous
and unforgivable. He takes the term "disrespectful" to new heights.
How dare he represent the sacred position of Indian healers as
cannibals; " … their hearts ripped out and eaten by Aztec
shamans."
Must I remind Baker of the true barbarians, the barbarians who
handed out blankets contaminated with smallpox to Indians in cold
winters, who broke treaty after treaty, practiced cultural
genocide, raped and pillaged an entire people and continue to
systematically ignore and misrepresent native culture? The true
barbarism exists in the words and actions of men like Matthew
Baker.
The insensitivity in Baker’s writing floored me. I cannot
believe, and continue to be shocked and appalled that any person,
European, African, Asian, Indian and the rainbow in between would
feel comfortable enough, in this day and age, to make such
disrespectful, misinformed allegations against another culture.
Because I have not educated myself enough on indigenous cultures to
cite sources, I will not attempt to give a history lesson on native
peoples.
I do know this  that each day when we step outside, it is
on stolen land that we step. Each time we admire the beautiful
California landscape, we are admiring property that the American
government acquired through outright stealing, coercion and
genocide. This fact alone should hold Baker’s tongue as he praises
his "great nation."
Fundamentally, Baker seems to have a problem with respect.
Whether he has a problem with the term "African American" or
"Chicano/a" is irrelevant because it is not being said in reference
to his identity. This is the name with which a group chooses to
identify themselves and as a fellow human being you must respect
that wish and act accordingly.
Forgive us, Baker, if we did not call you beforehand and get
your stamp of approval, but alas, you were born a few generations
too late to exercise any authority on this matter. I would
encourage him to gain real insight on the issue of subculture
identity. He can call me, he can read a book (I suggest starting
with "The African Origin of Civilization") and he can take
advantage of the fact that he is in school  and learn.
Fox-Davis is a first-year women’s studies and pre-medical
student.