ACBN: A Primer by Kwesi Anan Ababio

ACBN Book.....JPG

Afrikan Centered Biological Nationalism (ACBN): A Primer, seeks to examine what the author posits is the central problem in achieving Afrikan sovereign power. Namely, in answering the question, “Who is Afrikan?” More specifically, the book asks, “Whom exactly are we trying to liberate and/or empower?” This book hypothesizes that what is missing is a definition of who is Afrikan and using that definition as a basis for a viable and practicable social theory which all Afrikans, regardless of their location and political consciousness, can use to organize their behavior in the context of a politically and economically hyper-competitive world—a world which always has and continues to use culture and identity as the basis for social organization and group power. Afrikan Centered Biological Nationalism (ACBN) offers one such social-political theory for consideration. ACBN seeks to revitalize the discussion of Afrikan liberation and Black Power in a way which can achieve real political power for Afrikan people.

WARNING:The Coming Creation of a Transracial/Androgynous Culture

Racial Identity

This is a great video by Youtuber Nubian Times. He speaks his mind and doesn’t care who he offends in the process. But I admire the fact that he speaks his mind. In the video he’s speaking on a recent panel discussion with MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry. Melissa is chatting with her guests about the possibility of a person being ” black” even though they are not biologically of African descent. This is what I call crazy talk. Keep in mind this woman is biracial with a white mother. Yet this mulatto woman is speaking on behalf of black people. She is speaking with a bunch of gay/transgender folks and there is no counter argument on the panel. Melissa and her guests are trying to compare a person who is transgender with a person identifying with another race. This is utter nonsense! First of all, race is biological. I know we are all taught that race is a social construct by the media. As a child I believed that too. But as I got older common sense kicked in. There are obvious differences between racial groups. I see nothing wrong with accepting that fact. There is no reason for people to get offended with the truth. Mixed raced people like Melissa are the cause for all this confusion. I have noticed a lot of mixed raced people that are fence riders when it comes to race issues. Black people are fighting oppression everyday in this racist corrupt society. Anti-blackness is everywhere on this planet. We don’t need idiots like Melissa causing more confusion among our people.

Mixed Race

What about the people in this above pic? Can they all be considered African? Do any of them speak up for African/black people? And when it comes to race,what is the proper definition? Do you believe it’s a social construct? There are different breeds of dogs right? Aren’t there different birds? Why is it so hard for people to accept that race is biological as well? The top ten points I usually hear about race are the following:

1. All humans living today belong to a single species, Homo sapiens, and share a common descent. Although there are differences of opinion regarding how and where different human groups diverged or fused to form new ones from a common ancestral group, all living populations in each of the earth’s geographic areas have evolved from that ancestral group over the same amount of time. Much of the biological variation among populations involves modest degrees of variation in the frequency of shared traits. Human populations have at times been isolated, but have never genetically diverged enough to produce any biological barriers to mating between members of different populations.

2. Biological differences between human beings reflect both hereditary factors and the influence of natural and social environments. In most cases, these differences are due to the interaction of both. The degree to which environment or heredity affects any particular trait varies greatly.

3. There is great genetic diversity within all human populations. Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have ever existed in the past.

4. There are obvious physical differences between populations living in different geographic areas of the world. Some of these differences are strongly inherited and others, such as body size and shape, are strongly influenced by nutrition, way of life, and other aspects of the environment. Genetic differences between populations commonly consist of differences in the frequencies of all inherited traits, including those that are environmentally malleable.

5. For centuries, scholars have sought to comprehend patterns in nature by classifying living things. The only living species in the human family, Homo sapiens, has become a highly diversified global array of populations. The geographic pattern of genetic variation within this array is complex, and presents no major discontinuity. Humanity cannot be classified into discrete geographic categories with absolute boundaries. Furthermore, the complexities of human history make it difficult to determine the position of certain groups in classifications. Multiplying subcategories cannot correct the inadequacies of these classifications.

Generally, the traits used to characterize a population are either independently inherited or show only varying degrees of association with one another within each population. Therefore, the combination of these traits in an individual very commonly deviates from the average combination in the population. This fact renders untenable the idea of discrete races made up chiefly of typical representatives.

6. In humankind as well as in other animals, the genetic composition of each population is subject over time to the modifying influence of diverse factors. These include natural selection, promoting adaptation of the population to the environment; mutations, involving modifications in genetic material; admixture, leading to genetic exchange between local populations, and randomly changing frequencies of genetic characteristics from one generation to another. The human features which have universal biological value for the survival of the species are not known to occur more frequently in one population than in any other. Therefore it is meaningless from the biological point of view to attribute a general inferiority or superiority to this or to that race.

7. The human species has a past rich in migration, in territorial expansions, and in contractions. As a consequence, we are adapted to many of the earth’s environments in general, but to none in particular. For many millennia, human progress in any field has been based on culture and not on genetic improvement.

Mating between members of different human groups tends to diminish differences between groups, and has played a very important role in human history. Wherever different human populations have come in contact, such matings have taken place. Obstacles to such interaction have been social and cultural, not biological. The global process of urbanization, coupled with intercontinental migrations, has the potential to reduce the differences among all human populations.

8. Partly as a result of gene flow, the hereditary characteristics of human populations are in a state of perpetual flux. Distinctive local populations are continually coming into and passing out of existence. Such populations do not correspond to breeds of domestic animals, which have been produced by artificial selection over many generations for specific human purposes.

9. The biological consequences of mating depend only on the individual genetic makeup of the couple, and not on their racial classifications. Therefore, no biological justification exists for restricting intermarriage between persons of different racial classifications.

10. There is no necessary concordance between biological characteristics and culturally defined groups. On every continent, there are diverse populations that differ in language, economy, and culture. There is no national, religious, linguistic or cultural group or economic class that constitutes a race. However, human beings who speak the same language and share the same culture frequently select each other as mates, with the result that there is often some degree of correspondence between the distribution of physical traits on the one hand and that of linguistic and cultural traits on the other. But there is no causal linkage between these physical and behavioral traits, and therefore it is not justifiable to attribute cultural characteristics to genetic inheritance.

Do you agree with this? Most of it or none at all?

Rachel and Jenner

This is Rachel Dolezal and Bruce Jenner. Two very confused white people. I think they both suffer from very low self esteem.

Cherno Biko

This is picture of Janet Mock and Cherno Biko. Yep you guessed it! They are both men! As a matter of fact Janet and Cherno are both activists for the transgender community. They are writing books,appearing on talk shows and doing lectures. I’ve noticed an increase of black gay/transgender people in the media over the last ten years. It’s like they’re everywhere. They are really trying to redefine what a black man and woman is supposed to be. The white controlled media does everything they can to degrade and dehumanize black people. They want black men to be seen as feminine little punks. And they want black women to be seen as butch,masculine and unattractive. This is one of the reasons why so many black actors have to dress in drag in Hollywood. This is a full assault on the BLACK MIND! They are doing everything they can to destroy how we are seen by the entire world. I’ve seen this madness promoted on ABC,NBC and CBS. And cable stations like CNN,FOX and MSNBC. The media promotes more interracial couples rather than black love stories. So this creates more division and tension between black men and women. This is all by design. These sick bastards in the media know exactly what they’re doing to us. This is what happens when another race of people control your image. They get to decide how you are depicted. No wonder other races think black people are nuts! We look like useless zombies with no cultural identity. We can’t even decide who is black and who is not! Then you throw in the gender confusion…..and you have a recipe for disaster. Can you see what’s slowly happening? Are you a black person who is aware of your surroundings? Do you want liberation for your people? Are you even awake? Or are you one of the useless zombies?

Shailene Woodley is a Black Woman( and other myths)

Shailene

I want you to take a good hard look at the woman in this picture. Some people want to claim her as a black woman. Are you a bit confused? You’re not alone. She is an actress by the name of Shailene Woodley. There’s a lot of hype about her right now. She is the star of the Divergent films series. The second installment comes out later this week called Insurgent. While was looking on the internet last week I came across an article about this actress. There were an article stating that Woodley was of African descent. I thought this was a joke at first and it peaked my interest. As I did a little investigating I found some sites that said her great-great grand parents may have been of Creole descent. And of course all the white racists were having a fit! They were not happy that their beautiful white starlet may be tainted with black blood! Heaven forbid! I found out that most of her so called “African lineage” was on her mother’s side. I found a bio about her which states:

“Shailene’s father has English ancestry. Shailene’s maternal grandfather had African-American ancestry, and Shailene’s maternal grandmother has Louisiana Creole (including African, French, Spanish, and German) ancestry on one side of her family, and English and Swiss ancestry on the other side of her family.Shailene’s paternal grandparents were Virgil James Woodley and Dovie Oralee Sims (the daughter of Omer Epsy Sims and Eva Ellen Payne). Virgil was born in Oklahoma. Dovie was born in Texas. Their families had been in the United States for many generations, and had English ancestry.Shailene’s maternal grandfather was Stephen David Victor (the son of Harold Victor and Bessie Harrold). According to most censuses, both Harold and Bessie were Black and/or biracial (censuses list Harold and Bessie as black, and one census lists them as “Mulatto”). Harold was from Louisiana. Bessie was born in California, to Texas-born parents, William John Harrold and Bessie Hutchins.Shailene’s maternal grandmother is Diane Lynn Fauria (the daughter of Vernon Louis Fauria and Marguerite Lois Davis). Vernon was a Louisiana Creole. Maguerite was Caucasian.Both of Vernon Fauria’s parents had black ancestry, mixed with caucasian. Vernon’s father, Joseph Mathews Fauria, was of African, Spanish, French, and German descent. Vernon’s mother, Aline Louise Martinez, had Spanish, African, and possibly French, ancestry. Maguerite Davis’s father, Norman E. Davis, was likely of British Isles/English ancestry. Maguerite’s mother, Shailene’s maternal great-great-grandmother, Evangeline Perinjacket, was the daughter of Swiss immigrants. This makes Shailene Woodley of 1/16th Swiss ancestry.”

Shailene Great grand Vernon and Marguerite

This picture is her great grand parents Vernon Fauria and Maguerite Davis. Vernon looks like he could be a mulatto or maybe Italian at best. But neither grandparent looks very black to me.

Great great Grand Jospeh

Here’s another picture of her great-great grand parents. How many of them look really black to you? Not too many from my viewpoint. So what is Shailene then? 1/48 black? 1/25 black? I have no idea. I was never good at fractions.  Whatever black she has in her it must be very small.This issue is much bigger than Ms Woodley. This issue goes back to the “one drop” rule. It was a system set up by the white power structure during slavery. It’s an issue that wont seem to go away. I have seen many  black people attach themselves to celebrities that don’t look very black in my opinion. This madness has to stop. It begs the question. Who is Black? Who is African? Should we accept anyone who has the smallest bit of “black blood” as one of our own?

Vin

Is actor Vin Diesel black? His mother is white but he says he never knew his father. He wants to be called “racially ambiguous”. What the hell does that mean? Does having a colorblind mindset help to end racism?

Wentworth

What about actor Wentworth Miller? Is this a black man? He speaks out about racism from time to time? Does that qualify him to be a black man. His bio says his racial makeup is Dutch,African American,Jewish,Swedish,Syrian,German,French,Lebanese and Russian! Whew!!! Did you get all that? Okay so what is he?

Rebecca Hall

Actress Rebecca Hall is Dutch,African American and Sioux. Which makes her about 1/8 black. Say what you want be she has more African ancestry than Shailene Woodley and Wentworth Miller put together. The reality is there are a lot of people of mixed race nowadays. And black people have so few heroes that we want to be able to see people that represent us. That’s only natural. But I think they should at least look somewhat black. I think when you have people claiming that the Wentworth Miller’s of the world are black…..it can cause a whole lot of confusion. They should be called what they are…biracial or mixed. I don’t mean to offend anyone at all. That is not my intention. I just think that calling mixed raced people, African or black doesn’t help fight white supremacy. If we want to really move forward as a people and end racism we need some clarification on who is black and who is not. All this talk about “post racial America”,”colorblindness” and “we are all mixed” is nonsense. We have to deal with the REAL world. There are social and class divisions. But the racial divide is the biggest of them all.

Here’s a post by blogger Lumumba Afrika. He makes some very valid points on this very topic.

“It took me a year to finally accept this conclusion. I had an argument with a YouTuber concerning this issue in reference to a video he posted entitled “Just because you got black in you.” He proceeded to say that racially mixed people (i.e. people with parents from two distinctly different racial groups with one being Black/Afrikan) are not Afrikan and I predictably had an emotional argument referencing the systematic rape that occurred to Afrikans perpetrated by whites (Europeans) in the USA which resulted in the wider spectrum of skin colour seen in the Afrikan population in the US today. However, after failing to convince him and unsubscribing from his channel, I had several months to listen to interviews and read a lot of material, historical, biological, sociological, and political. I eventually reached the conclusion that indeed he is correct. Hybridized people are not Afrikan and should not be accepted as such.

Before you throw around the term “racist”, let me define the term as per my understanding, The terms “racism” and “racist” are actually misnomers. The phenomena should more accurately be termed “ethnocentric economic protectionism for the purposes of seeking, securing and wielding wealth and power”. Understandably, with this more accurate term, it is more convenient for the “racists” to use the former terminology because it deftly conceals the true nature of the phenomenon and makes confused, naive, and unsuspecting people believe that “anyone can be racist” because they treat someone of another race or more appropriately termed “geno-cultural group”, rudely or make disparaging comments about them. Moreover, the more academically accepted terms “white supremacists” and “white supremacy” are actually not a correct terms either, although from a eurocentric point of view these terms do surreptitiously stimulate the “utamaroho” (Ani, 1994), of Europeans and people classified as white, these terms are nevertheless used to describe the phenomenon in critical race theory and other fields of study. The appropriate terms are actually either “white world domination by terror” (Kambon, 2006) or “white hegemony”. This is an ideology that holds that whites are better, smarter, and more capable producers and managers of wealth than non-white people, and specifically those categorised as black. Hence it justifies by any means necessary the total destruction of any successful model of development independent of whites or without white people leading, organising and directing it. The logic of this racial hierarchical model proceeds downward with each racial group being more adept at this activity than the lower caste. This ideology informs the system of “white supremacy” that is presently masquerading as globalism. Therefore, it is impossible for a non-white victim (and especially Afrikans) of this system to be a racist, practice racism, be a white supremacist, white hegemonist, or participate in white ethnocentric economic protectionism or “white world domination by terror” in any way that ultimately benefits his or her existence within his or her geno-cultural group and the group as a whole entity as such.

So back to why mulattoes are not Afrikan. Firstly, I would like to posit the view that mulattoes are genome terminator entities, meaning that they can’t reproduce themselves like their respective parents can if they had have mated with one of their own geno-cultural group. A mulatto must mate with another mulatto to reproduce themselves or else their offspring reverts back towards whichever geno-cultural group they have chosen to mate with or they create another hybridised offspring should they decide to mate with another hybridised person or someone from a geno-cultural group which is not one of their parents. Hence their genome pattern cannot maintain structural integrity and they terminate. This is actually the strongest argument for why mulattoes are not Afrikan. Every other geno-cultural group on the planet knows this including the hybridised groups such as the Arabs. The Hispanic/Latinos are another matter which I will address later. I won’t discuss the Indians of South Asia (see the talk by Dr. Velu Annamalai – “Dali: The Black Untouchables of India” on YouTube) but one could reasonably compare my discussion below of the Hispanic/Latinos with that of the Indians, although it is not entirely the same. Other geno-cultural groups never accept a hybrid as one of them. This DOES NOT mean that they treat the hybrid unkindly or should do so in all cases, nor does it mean that the hybrid cannot participate in economic or educational opportunities. However, at the level of strategic power in which the lives and destiny of the geno-cultural group are at stake, hybrids have no place, no relevant voice in matters such as these as they are not part of the geno-cultural group’s GENETIC survival. This is an error that Afrikan people have made. They have assumed that because of “racist” practices of other geno-cultural groups to cast off their hybrids among us, even when they have been created but not fully accepted among the ranks of others, and furthermore the other groups made rules about why they have done so, (i.e. the one drop rule), we have felt an obligation to accept them which has resulted in a non-exclusive preachment befalling the Afrikan geno-cultural group. This failure to address who is Afrikan and who is not has left us vulnerable to infiltration, not only by hybrids, but by non-Afrikans under the false claim that they are too Afrikan because they were either born on the Afrikan continent, they have some distant ancestor who participated in or was raped into producing a hybrid, or they cling to an as yet unproven theory of the “out of Afrika hypothesis” of human origin founded with the propagation of Darwin’s THEORY of evolution. This has left Afrikan people without a codified set of standards, rules and regulations about who is an Afrikan and has exposed us to confused mulattoes seeking a constituency and other unscrupulous interlopers seeking to dominate us.

It was part of racist practices of our enemies to create a one-drop rule. White men did it so they wouldn’t have to legally and formally acknowledge the offspring they had as a result of raping Afrikan women and mulattoes. In fact, I would submit that non-Afrikans who pursue sexual relations with Afrikan people are practicing ethnocentric economic protectionism by way of furthering the social hegemonic aspect of this system, albeit it in a vulgar, perverted, and insidiously biologically destructive way. These people know full well that at present Afrikan people are the least respected geno-cultural group on the planet, so they are seeking to fulfill a need to feel superior to someone through a sexual encounter (which is one of the most vulnerable situations, psychologically and spiritually, a victim of this assault can engage in) which is done most likely due to a sense of inferiority in the non-Afrikan’s own geno-cultural group, or the perpetrators are inherently lustful and perverted and seek to satisfy carnal sexual fetishes at the expense of the non-geno-cultural other, in this case the Afrikan.The Afrikan geno-cultural group is under no obligation through this behaviour to “accept” mulatto offspring as part of our geno-cultural group anymore than other geno-cultures. It is due to our relative powerlessness and refusal to strictly define who is an Afrikan that has lead to this confusion. Afrikans as part of our liberation and industrial renaissance of Afrikan civilisation, must codify and institutionalise a valid definition of who is an Afrikan. I would suggest reading Chinweizu’s discussion of the “mirror test” for some insight into this matter.”

I think Lumumba has thought about this subject long and hard. It’s a very touchy subject for many people. But a subject that I felt needed to be addressed.

N Word

So we can stop foolishness like in this pic. And just in case anyone is still confused…Shailene is a white woman.