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).