Perhaps, Barrack Obama is the greatest thing that has happened to the Black race since the independence era. The joy and unity Obama has brought among Black people irrespective of their colonial backgrounds can only be compared to the kind of unity of purpose and belief in shared destiny said to have existed in the Black world during the 1950s through to 1970s before the White colonizers driven from most of our lands regrouped and conquered our brains. The hope for President Obama has ecstatically gripped not only African Americans, in the Black world, but apparently all people of Black African ancestry all over the world. President Obama commands the kind of acceptance and adulation no other Black person has ever attracted in modern history.
President Obama appears to be Gods timely answer to our prayers for unity and leadership. It appears the prophecy of the great Bob Marley and the aspirations of our great leaders like Kwame Nkrumah are finally coming to pass. Knowing that lack of unity of purpose and lack of leadership have blighted the Black race, having a person generally respected and accepted as our leader by all Black people may signal the beginning of our salvation from backwardness. President Obama appears to have provided the much needed unity and leadership needed to propel the Black race towards development and the improvement of the lives of our people.
Of course, President Obama is not coming to be the President of the Black race more than the President of the United States of America, but it is a matter of fact that President Obama will equally be the president of all the presidents of the Black race. He is being elected to lead America first and foremost, but the primary purpose of the White liberals who groomed and marketed the “project Black president” to the world has always been to give African Americans and the Black race this extraordinary opportunity. The making of President Obama by White liberals has always been more about making history by installing a Black president than any other interest. To the cream of White liberals, the issue of President Obama’s policies for America has always been far less important than the interest in ensuring the emergence of a Black president.
The almighty western media shares the dream for a Black president and all over the white world; racism has almost disappeared for the sake of President Obama. Far beyond America, from London to Berlin, Rome and all over the White world all you are allowed to say aloud is support for President Obama, if you are not and do not wish to be branded a racist. Call it bullying or hypocrisy if you like, but it is official! A BBC weekend programme, Reporters last Saturday night featured a White reporter touring the American State of Virginia to interview people about the election. He went to a café and asked a White lady, who she would vote for and when she replied McCain he asked her whether she was not voting Obama because he is Black. Meanwhile, he did not ask the Black woman he later interviewed whether she was voting Obama because he is black.
BBC news and documentary coverage of the US election appear more like campaigns for Obama than information to the public. There is little doubt that the cream of British media and the society have officially adopted Barrack Obama.
Prime Minster Gordon Brown and his ministers have voiced aloud their support for President Obama. Across Europe, we hear that Germany and possibly some other European countries are declaring that they are either Obamaland or Obama-friendly. There is no doubt that a powerful group of White men supported firmly by the cream of the western media are committed to hand African Americans and the Black race our greatest opportunity ever, to change our world. It appears the Black world has no choice but to embrace Barrack Obama.
However, the intolerant and crude manner with which the cream of the American and British media are manipulating African Americans and bullying White Americans to vote Obama, besides being very annoying, appear to undermine the quality and potency of President Obama. It is deeply worrying to think that President Obama may be yet another fake or half or useless victory for the Black race. It is very sad that Obama is actually not a Black victory, but a victory for some self righteous White men who made him. President Obama has been made with little or no Black contribution except as followers.
One would not advocate a segregated America where Blacks isolate themselves and do their own thing, but it worries one deeply that African Americans and indeed the whole Black race have remained so disunited and conquerable, that the White media can drive, push and shovel us as they please. We have been proven so weak and vulnerable by the way and manner some self-righteous white men and their media now determine what is good for the Black race, when and how they get it.
Today only leaders of Black Africa endorsed by white men in New York and London become good leaders no matter how corrupt and ho horribly they treat their people. We have become much weaker and useless as a people that our independences now seem like massive mistakes. Hence, the grooming and global marketing of brand Obama actually demonstrate more of our weakness and failure as a people than our resurgence. It has and will always continue to undermine our existence and survival as a people to allow ourselves to remain swayable as we are today.
It is gladdening to see an unprecedented level of unity of purpose and commitment among African Americans today for President Obama, but one cannot suppress the urge to wonder where this highly motivated and united African America had been that we never heard of it since the time of Martin Luther King Junior. If African Americans can be so well mobilised to the extent that we saw in a recent BBC panorama, even children as young as under 10 year olds begging money on the roadside (an act the western media of the old would have termed child abuse) to support the emergence of a Black president. We now seem to have an African America that is almost 90 per cent united for one good cause, but it is baffling why African Americans have never since the 1960s civil rights movement, mobilised themselves in a similar way towards greater participation and embracing of the great American ideals. The shameful fact that Obama is currently the only Black senator out of 100 elected Senators despite Blacks constituting about 13% of the population further highlights the seriousness of the failure of Black people in America and that having a Black president should not have been the priority of African Americans. Integrating themselves properly and taking full part in the socio-political development of America as natural Americans should have been the main priority of African Americans. Starting the renaissance of African America with President Obama appears like building from the top!
Of course, President Obama could still fulfil our dream of building a better integrated and successful African America and Black Africa and the Carribbean, despite the way and manner of his emergence. Of course, if he possesses the right vision, he could still be the messiah we are waiting for irrespective of how or who made him what he is. There are many signs, that Barrack Obama is a really nice bloke. His continued link with his people in Black Africa is particularly commendable, but there are signs that suggest that President Obama could be another wasted opportunity for the Black race.
The fact that nobody has really heard him express serious concern about the situation of Black Africa is deeply worrying. All that can be inferred is that he shares the White liberal view that African America and Black Africa should not take responsibilities for their inexcusable failures, but must continue complaining about slavery and colonialism.
Even if President Obama has the best intentions for African Americans and the Black race the lack of any consensus and or any ideological framework for our development would mean that his best intentions would not yield any progress on the ground. We must not fail to realise that the Black race has already enjoyed great opportunities although not as great as what we are about to, courtesy of President George W. Bush whom some dubious journalists have so wickedly demonised as racist. The rare opportunity of having Colin Powel and Condoleezza Rice in the most high profile political positions ever to be occupied by any Black person along with Koffi Annan as Secretary General of the UN provided the Black race the chance to chart a new course, but we blew it. The principal reason why we wasted the opportunity of using Powel/Condi and Koffi Annan to organise the Black race must be the lack of structures (in terms of organised people, forums and or ideological frameworks) on the ground and not lack of good intentions on the part of those leaders. Those who follow the zombie view that great Black leaders like Condoleezza Rice do not care about Black people fail to understand that having our own up there without an organised people on the ground would result in a wasted opportunity. No where in this world do people build from the top!
Modern governments are based on well reasoned policies. Positive impacts are made though sound policies. A President Obama will only help African Americans and the Black race through policies and programmes and not through waving of some magic wands. The only way president Obama can save African Americans and the Black race from inferiority and backwardness would be through well thought out policies. The fact that we do not have any consensus and any Black led ideological framework for our development may mean President Obama’s African policy would be more financial aid and more IMF loans in line with contemporary white liberal beliefs.
Enlightened Black leaders across the world must get organised now to ensure that President Obama delivers the good leadership he is expected to deliver. He will not succeed in changing the status of the Black race without some useful structures on the ground. Hence enlightened Black individuals must start organising themselves now, not for selfish gains, but for the harnessing, debating and building of ideas and understanding for the development of the Black race. The most likely consequence of Black people not organising themselves now is that Rock Star policies like Band Aid and make Poverty History will define Obama’s African policy.
We must understand that having President Obama is not just for feeling good that we have our own person there, but seriously about our greatest opportunity to organise ourselves and pursue development like other racial groups. Every enlightened Black person whether as African American or Caribbean or Black African, must be worried that there is no civilised or properly organised society of Black people anywhere on this planet and that being able to organise ourselves is our greatest collective challenge. The White people giving us this great opportunity are very well aware of our shameful situation and probably want us to take our destinies in our own hands. We must therefore not waste this great opportunity to prove that we are not inferior by utilising it towards building civilised and successful African American communities and successful societies out of Black Africa and the Caribbean. Even if in the end Americans decide otherwise, we must not abandon President Obama as the rallying point for our renaissance! We must not fail again!!
John Iteshi
London
29 October 2008
Wednesday 29 October 2008
Friday 28 March 2008
White Supremacists will Lose Again!
I feel sad I am unable to make it to Zimbabwe to help provide alternative views and information to the world, but here in Johannesburg, I can feel the determination of the majority of Zimbabweans to once again show the world they reject colonialism in all its ramifications!
I have severally maintained that the only reason why the white world is obsessed about Zimbabwe is because white farmers were sacked from the land they stole from the people. I have had more reasons to affirm my belief since arrival in Johannesburg two days ago. I have so far observed white dominated media organizations in South Africa are working tirelessly in favour of Zimbabwean opposition candidates. If you are in South Africa and read only white newspapers or watch white television channels like the one they call e channel, you probably would believe that 99% of Zimbabweans are anti-Mugabe as only anti-Mugabe news and views are aired by them. I have read Black controlled newspapers like the Sowetan and found that Mugabe is still the hero of Zimbabwe.
God Bless the majority of Zimbabweans for refusing to be recolonized
I have severally maintained that the only reason why the white world is obsessed about Zimbabwe is because white farmers were sacked from the land they stole from the people. I have had more reasons to affirm my belief since arrival in Johannesburg two days ago. I have so far observed white dominated media organizations in South Africa are working tirelessly in favour of Zimbabwean opposition candidates. If you are in South Africa and read only white newspapers or watch white television channels like the one they call e channel, you probably would believe that 99% of Zimbabweans are anti-Mugabe as only anti-Mugabe news and views are aired by them. I have read Black controlled newspapers like the Sowetan and found that Mugabe is still the hero of Zimbabwe.
God Bless the majority of Zimbabweans for refusing to be recolonized
Friday 4 January 2008
Kenya: Why is Britain not doing Zimbabwe?
It is a shame that Britain and her media cannot afford not to be biased especially on Black African issues. It was Britain who colonised Kenya as well as Zimbabwe, Uganda, Nigeria and many other failed Black African states. Britain ought to be acting like a father nation to Anglophone Africa as a whole, but unfortunately it acts like a biased and dubious father. Britain applies different rules to its former colonies as it suits her selfish interests.
After one of the most civilised general elections in Black African history was held in Zimbabwe in 2002, the British government could not accept the will of the people because Robert Mugabe whom it loathed for sacking white British farmers was re-elected. The British government and its overbearing media have been campaigning for the total collapse of Zimbabwe to the extent of severally encouraging civil uprising. Britain and her media have also tried to persuade South Africa to stop allowing Zimbabwean immigrants in their bid to ensure the total collapse of Zimbabwe.
It was particularly significant that the same British government and British media that turned democracy defenders over Zimbabwe in 2000, after the sacking of white farmers, did not react against Nigeria after far worse general elections were held in Nigeria in 2003 by the worst president in Nigeria's history, General Obasanjo who killed and maimed to ensure a re-election. A number of top opposition leaders and perceived opponents of the president even within his own party were assassinated to ensure a smooth re-election yet; the same British government which condemned Zimbabwe did not even issue any strong statement in condemnation of the Nigerian government. We all know that nobody was killed by Mugabe in 2002 in order to get re-elected.
Again in 2007, the same evil president conducted the most fraudulent elections imaginable. International observers unanimously condemned it entirely because there were no elections at all. Father Britain and her media declined to condemn what even openly racists would agree was far worse than anything that ever happened in Zimbabwe.
Right now, it is happening again in Kenya. Another case of massive electoral fraud has occurred in one of Britain's ex-colonies, and rather than greet it with the same measure applied to Zimbabwe, Britain and her media are dancing about to thwart the very kind of revolution they have been sponsoring and campaigning to happen in Zimbabwe since 2000.
The entire British media is now focused on Kenya, tactically demonising the opposition leader for no justifiable reason. Times online called Odinga ruthless, stubborn and desperate and made him look like the cause of the violence. Odinga is being blamed for the civil unrest in reaction to the massive election fraud perpetrated by the incumbent president. Odinga is being demonised for refusing to compromise over an indisputable case of electoral fraud. He is in fact being condemned by British media for allegedly doing that which the entire white world has been urging Morgan Tsvangirai to do in Zimbabwe which has failed because the majority of the people continued to support Mugabe. One wonders what kind of father nation Britain is when it cannot apply the same rules and standard to its former colonies.
It may be right to argue that Britain is entitled to be selfish and protective of her economic interests as she does by way of supporting the worst governments in Black Africa. Mohammed Buhari, the main opposition leader in Nigeria in both the 2003 and 2007 general elections, despite having an impeccable record as an incorruptible Nigerian leader (having been tested and trusted) did not attract the kind of support Mr Tsvangirai of Zimbabwe have always enjoyed because having a reformist president in Nigeria would not favour western economic interests. Odinga is being demonised because he sounds too radical and Britain is not comfortable with having people like him in power to wake up the sleeping giants in Black Africa. Today we get all sorts of patronising British media reports about Kenya as being the most successful African country all in the bid to demoralise ordinary Kenyans determined to make the kind of history Britain supported the Ukrainians to make in 2004. British media reporters and analysts have been drumming “tribal” war songs in their perverted desire to scuttle the general ill-feelings among ordinary Kenyans irrespective of ethnic background by consistently insinuating ethnic crisis rather than political crisis which is the case.
For those that care to think, the question is how the anti-Kibaki disturbances can be said to be entirely about the Luos against the Kikuyus when the Luos are only the third largest ethnic group (not tribe as White supremacists choose to regard Black African ethnic groups). How did the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) of Mr. Odinga enjoy so much support if it is just a party of 13% of Kenyans which translate to just about 4.8million of the population of Kenya which is about 37 million?
Clearly, western governments might be entitled to play dodgy tactics because it does not seem reasonable on the face of it, for Britain or any other successful western economic giant to genuinely support the emergence of successful Black African states because it does not make sense for any merchant to close his sources of cheap goods large profits. It is even right to say that neither Britain nor any other former colonial master owes a dime of support or sincerity to failed Black Africa because each sovereign state ought to fend for itself as we all claim to be equal human beings.
However, considering the real fact that Black Africa desperately needs to build successful societies for the survival of its people and the fact that Britain seeks to be a father nation with conscience, based on its history of fighting injustices both internally and externally, it may be right to expect a more genuine leadership from her. Britain can rightly lay claim to being a beacon of justice and political morality based on its leading roles in ending slavery and ending colonialism and apartheid regimes. The British media is respected across the world and is arguably, the most powerful opinion leader in the world. With a little bit more of genuineness, Britain and her media can truly change this world. Britain and her media do not owe Black Africa anything, but they are highly welcome as genuine helpers. If the Britain truly cares about the Black race, she must change her style in Black Africa. Britain must change from being purely mercantile and often dubious to a more respectable role that befits her leadership status in the world. Britain and other colonial masters might be entitled to manipulate us as it suits their economic interests, but it seems more sensible to play good masters than continuing to play hypocrisy especially now that China is becoming a real threat to their supremacy!
It is plainly obvious that turning good masters and genuine father nations would benefit both the White world and the failed Black world. It is not difficult to be fair-minded as leading nations in international affairs. Simply setting the same standard for everyone and applying the same rules would do. It is unacceptable to set a very high standard of democracy for Zimbabwe and sing a different tune when it comes to Nigeria or Kenya. Democracy and good governance must mean the same in all situations and in all societies. What is good for the Zimbabweans must also be good for Kenyans, Nigerians, Ugandans and other failed Black African states!!
John Iteshi
London, 4th January 2007
After one of the most civilised general elections in Black African history was held in Zimbabwe in 2002, the British government could not accept the will of the people because Robert Mugabe whom it loathed for sacking white British farmers was re-elected. The British government and its overbearing media have been campaigning for the total collapse of Zimbabwe to the extent of severally encouraging civil uprising. Britain and her media have also tried to persuade South Africa to stop allowing Zimbabwean immigrants in their bid to ensure the total collapse of Zimbabwe.
It was particularly significant that the same British government and British media that turned democracy defenders over Zimbabwe in 2000, after the sacking of white farmers, did not react against Nigeria after far worse general elections were held in Nigeria in 2003 by the worst president in Nigeria's history, General Obasanjo who killed and maimed to ensure a re-election. A number of top opposition leaders and perceived opponents of the president even within his own party were assassinated to ensure a smooth re-election yet; the same British government which condemned Zimbabwe did not even issue any strong statement in condemnation of the Nigerian government. We all know that nobody was killed by Mugabe in 2002 in order to get re-elected.
Again in 2007, the same evil president conducted the most fraudulent elections imaginable. International observers unanimously condemned it entirely because there were no elections at all. Father Britain and her media declined to condemn what even openly racists would agree was far worse than anything that ever happened in Zimbabwe.
Right now, it is happening again in Kenya. Another case of massive electoral fraud has occurred in one of Britain's ex-colonies, and rather than greet it with the same measure applied to Zimbabwe, Britain and her media are dancing about to thwart the very kind of revolution they have been sponsoring and campaigning to happen in Zimbabwe since 2000.
The entire British media is now focused on Kenya, tactically demonising the opposition leader for no justifiable reason. Times online called Odinga ruthless, stubborn and desperate and made him look like the cause of the violence. Odinga is being blamed for the civil unrest in reaction to the massive election fraud perpetrated by the incumbent president. Odinga is being demonised for refusing to compromise over an indisputable case of electoral fraud. He is in fact being condemned by British media for allegedly doing that which the entire white world has been urging Morgan Tsvangirai to do in Zimbabwe which has failed because the majority of the people continued to support Mugabe. One wonders what kind of father nation Britain is when it cannot apply the same rules and standard to its former colonies.
It may be right to argue that Britain is entitled to be selfish and protective of her economic interests as she does by way of supporting the worst governments in Black Africa. Mohammed Buhari, the main opposition leader in Nigeria in both the 2003 and 2007 general elections, despite having an impeccable record as an incorruptible Nigerian leader (having been tested and trusted) did not attract the kind of support Mr Tsvangirai of Zimbabwe have always enjoyed because having a reformist president in Nigeria would not favour western economic interests. Odinga is being demonised because he sounds too radical and Britain is not comfortable with having people like him in power to wake up the sleeping giants in Black Africa. Today we get all sorts of patronising British media reports about Kenya as being the most successful African country all in the bid to demoralise ordinary Kenyans determined to make the kind of history Britain supported the Ukrainians to make in 2004. British media reporters and analysts have been drumming “tribal” war songs in their perverted desire to scuttle the general ill-feelings among ordinary Kenyans irrespective of ethnic background by consistently insinuating ethnic crisis rather than political crisis which is the case.
For those that care to think, the question is how the anti-Kibaki disturbances can be said to be entirely about the Luos against the Kikuyus when the Luos are only the third largest ethnic group (not tribe as White supremacists choose to regard Black African ethnic groups). How did the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) of Mr. Odinga enjoy so much support if it is just a party of 13% of Kenyans which translate to just about 4.8million of the population of Kenya which is about 37 million?
Clearly, western governments might be entitled to play dodgy tactics because it does not seem reasonable on the face of it, for Britain or any other successful western economic giant to genuinely support the emergence of successful Black African states because it does not make sense for any merchant to close his sources of cheap goods large profits. It is even right to say that neither Britain nor any other former colonial master owes a dime of support or sincerity to failed Black Africa because each sovereign state ought to fend for itself as we all claim to be equal human beings.
However, considering the real fact that Black Africa desperately needs to build successful societies for the survival of its people and the fact that Britain seeks to be a father nation with conscience, based on its history of fighting injustices both internally and externally, it may be right to expect a more genuine leadership from her. Britain can rightly lay claim to being a beacon of justice and political morality based on its leading roles in ending slavery and ending colonialism and apartheid regimes. The British media is respected across the world and is arguably, the most powerful opinion leader in the world. With a little bit more of genuineness, Britain and her media can truly change this world. Britain and her media do not owe Black Africa anything, but they are highly welcome as genuine helpers. If the Britain truly cares about the Black race, she must change her style in Black Africa. Britain must change from being purely mercantile and often dubious to a more respectable role that befits her leadership status in the world. Britain and other colonial masters might be entitled to manipulate us as it suits their economic interests, but it seems more sensible to play good masters than continuing to play hypocrisy especially now that China is becoming a real threat to their supremacy!
It is plainly obvious that turning good masters and genuine father nations would benefit both the White world and the failed Black world. It is not difficult to be fair-minded as leading nations in international affairs. Simply setting the same standard for everyone and applying the same rules would do. It is unacceptable to set a very high standard of democracy for Zimbabwe and sing a different tune when it comes to Nigeria or Kenya. Democracy and good governance must mean the same in all situations and in all societies. What is good for the Zimbabweans must also be good for Kenyans, Nigerians, Ugandans and other failed Black African states!!
John Iteshi
London, 4th January 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)