World Cultural Projects
Throughout the ages the writing of a people’s history has proven to be an inherently political project. It can not be argued that the utility of history for the purposes of distinguishing a group, justifying engagement in war, and/or the continuation of cultural, religious, and political homogeneity has been the primary aims of many an annal. InThe World and Africa , W.E.B. DuBois (1947/2007) expresses an Afrocentric position as he proclaims, “…here is a history of the world written from the African point of view; or better, a history of the Negro as part of the world which now lies about us in ruins” (p. xxxi). Of course, the “African” whose point of view Du Bois relies on is his own, as well as that of the many colleagues of African descent he mentions and relies on heavily throughout the text.
Another influential figure in the development of African American historiography within the African context is Carter G. Woodson, known affectionately by African Americans as, “The Father of Black History”. In Woodson’s (1933/1990) most well-known text, The Mis-Education of the Negro , he expresses his frustration at “Negro Colleges” (Historically Black Colleges and Universities) for centering their courses on the history and philosophy of “European colonists” and yet “direct no attention to the philosophy of the African” (p. 137). Both Du Bois and Woodson seemed to clearly understand the implications of not centering African people within their own paradigms of cultural history and philosophy. This is particularly important when considering the dominant contemporary documentation of African history has largely been part of alien cultural projects that have bastardized and demonized African historical reality.
Therefore, in presenting this historiographic assessment, I must begin politically by positing that this endeavor aligns with the cultural project of African people. As such, it sits on the world stage between two other cultural projects. To be clear, I assume the existence of three paradigmatic world cultural projects, of which I describe as, (1) the African World Cultural Project (AWCP), (2) the European Cultural-Imperialist Project (ECIP), and (3) the Asiatic Intercultural Project (AIP). The use of the concepts of the ECIP and AIP in Africological scholarship is largely an assessment of their effects on the African world, and not simply a study of the cultural factions themselves. This article principally deals with the relationships between the AWCP and EICP, and has not been equipped with the necessary arguments needed to engage the interplay of all three. However, subsequent articles shall cover the matter in time.
The development of such a methodology was necessary in order to deal with the theoretical themes presented within this article. It is clear that other minority cultural identities exists that may exclude themselves from within the fold of these cultural descriptions. However, as it is generally accepted that the dominant primary cultures in the world are of African, Asian, and European disposition, the purpose of such a methodology provides clarity on intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships between these primary cultural factions.
The African World Cultural Project (AWCP) seeks the restoration of African autonomy and sovereignty in world affairs. It is Pan-African in scope, and is dependent upon the continuation of cultural, social, political, and economic relations across the African world. Africological assessments of social behaviors and histories of African world societies, both positive and negative, are analyzed for cultural advancement.
The European Cultural-Imperialist Project (ECIP) is described as such for that it is both the historical and contemporary temperament of Europe towards the rest of the non-European world. This is evidenced by the forceful spread of westernization/globalization and the global pervasiveness of white supremacist ideology. The ECIP is evaluated as being dedicated to the continuation of European world hegemony through whatever political means necessary.
The characterization of the Asiatic Intercultural Project (AIP) is largely a description of Asian relationships and social behavior towards each other through shared cultural and/or political ties. It also considers adverse behaviors, such as that of dominant nations like China exploiting weaker nations such as Sri Lanka (Sultana, 2016) and how the history of European imperialism may have influenced such endeavors. Naturally, ancient Asiatic involvement in Africa (Hyksos, Hebrew, Arab, Indian, etc.) considered. However, this assessment is further evolving as we now have the beginnings of quasi-Chinese neo-colonialism developing in Africa, with well over a million Chinese now dotted throughout the continent (French, 2014).