| PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION 1997 |
Afrocentricity, Politics and the Problem of Identity
Kathy Hytten
Southern Illinois University at Carbondale
In his book Afrocentricity, Molefi Kete Asante describes an Afrocentrist as one who "studies every thought, action, behavior, and value, and if it cannot be found in our [African and African American] culture or in our identity, it is dispensed with quickly."[1] He goes on to develop Afrocentricity as a philosophical theory and curriculum model which aims at constructing a collective black consciousness that can engender political strength, meaningful identity, and the power necessary to positively transform the social and economic circumstances of both Africans and African Americans. Speaking to blacks worldwide, Asante claims "there can be but one true objective for us in the contemporary era; to reconstruct our lives on an Afrocentric base."[2] Afrocentricity reads as a social and political manifesto, imploring blacks to recreate and rediscover their true, authentic, Afrocentric identity. It also reads as a form of religious credo, that Asante argues can stand among "Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, or Judaism" in showing blacks "the way," and more significantly, their "truth."[3]Asante's Afrocentricity is problematic on several levels. Following one crucial direction, Professor Palermo challenges Asante's text from a political standpoint. In so doing, he offers a compelling ideological critique of Asante's conception of Afrocentricity. The essence of Palermo's argument is that while adopting an Afrocentric world view may lead to a new sense of empowerment and identity, this "empowerment" is both illusory and politically impotent. This is because the Afrocentric stance works predominantly on a psychological level to connect individual blacks to their ancestors, to their historical traditions, and to a larger sense of community. However, on a material level, it does nothing to change the social or economic conditions of their existence. Moreover, given some of the central tenets of Afrocentricity, including its rejection of Marxism, its maintenance of an intelligence hierarchy, and its quasi-religious sentiment, it actually serves to reproduce structures of exploitation which disempower blacks.
In supporting his claim that Afrocentricity results in a "politically imaginary" self that in reality is largely materially powerless, Palermo usefully draws from Althusser's conception of ideology. For Althusser, ideology is the vehicle through which those with power are able to maintain and normalize that power. Through the function of Ideological State Apparatuses (such as schools, churches, political groups, and the legal system), social class hierarchies, including the relationships between the oppressed and oppressors, are hegemonically reproduced. Using the example of schools as Ideological State Apparatuses, Palermo, via Althusser, shows how school practices are not politically neutral or meritocratic, rather they sort and select students, sending some into positions of power and privilege (that is, managers, business owners, professionals, and so forth) and others into more exploited positions (that is, laborers, minimum wage workers, and so forth). Thoughtfully paralleling this process of ideological reproduction with elements of the Afrocentric model, Palermo demonstrates how Afrocentricity, when taken on as the core of school curriculums, is as guilty at reproducing the status quo as schools historically have been. The crux of his comparison involves describing how Asante's hierarchical notion of intelligence (creative, recreative, and consumer) carries with it an implied socioeconomic division of labor which equally, and materially, sorts and selects students. This is compounded by the fact that Asante also advocates for a wage labor system, further alienating blacks from their production, and presents Afrocentricity as a form of religion, which works to empower emotionally and spiritually, but not often materially.
Overall, Palermo's critique is valuable. Given the increasing call for Afrocentric curricular approaches (the debate over the recognition and utilization of Ebonics is particularly relevant in this context) it seems important to consider the dynamics of how embracing Afrocentricity may or may not be beneficial, and at what costs. Furthermore, addressing the political and economic dimensions of Afrocentricity is central to uncovering the potentially negative unanticipated consequences that may result if Afrocentric schools, for example, become more common. What Palermo's analysis and critique of Afrocentricity does well is point out the fact that more research and study is necessary in order to create educational approaches that support the development of blacks not just emotionally and psychologically, but also socially and materially. As part of this broader research, there are a few issues that Palermo brings up which could use further elaboration and investigation. First, while the use of Althusser is instructive, his model of ideological reproduction is heavily structuralist and reductionist, and ignores the multiple ways in which subjects have both power and agency. It is possible, for example, that individual blacks negotiate their subjectivity in more materially powerful ways than the Afrocentric model, taken as a whole, seems to allow. Especially considering the more postmodern and poststructural ways in which educational theorists now talk about the development of subjectivity, examining this potential for agency could prove useful.
Second, the clash between Marxism and Afrocentricity needs to be more fully developed. It is important to note here that this weakness is Asante's, not Palermo's. Asante too quickly dismisses Marx, mostly it seems because he is not of African origin, and secondarily because he does not focus enough on race. Yet Asante does not provide a clear enough picture of what embracing Afrocentricity does mean economically for blacks. Nor does he connect maintaining an Afrocentric identity with material success, except to mention, but not further develop, the idea that the path to economic survival for blacks will result from "owning secure industries, creative breakthroughs in art and music, exploitation of all fields of athletics and salaried positions based on education and talent."[4] Palermo's contribution here could prove invaluable, particularly as uncovering the deeper economic consequences of Afrocentricity is central to more systematically substantiating the critique of it as a curriculum model.
Third, Palermo's political critique could be complemented and enhanced through challenging Asante's notion of Afrocentricity in a different, yet similarly philosophically provocative way, that is through exploring the question of identity. Palermo touches on this issue briefly, capturing the essence of Asante's intent to "revise the story of the black African in such a way that a new sense of subjectivity will be constructed" in which individual identity will be connected to a "collective Afrocentric consciousness shared" by all blacks worldwide. Throughout Asante's text, and peripherally in Palermo's paper, the question of identity stands out. From where and what do individuals create their identities? The Afrocentric identity constructed in Asante's model is problematically static, monolithic, and predetermined. He argues that simply because of the color of one's skin, they have a particular identity, an "ultimate reality which is blackness."[5] He adds that "one is always born with a certain heritage and identity; to deny it is to deny yourself."[6] If postmodern theories have taught anything, it is that identity is not fixed and eternal but socially constructed and continually in the making.
The suggestion that identity is somewhat predetermined by the color of one's skin is certainly troublesome, both in terms of how people make and find meaning in their lives and with respect to building strength for social and political action. An Afrocentric stance necessitates that all values, thoughts, beliefs, and actions come out of African and African American culture and history. All else must be rejected. Even granting that such a distinctive and singular "African" culture can be found, building only from what can be show to be originally of black people seems significantly limiting. By this measure, true Afrocentrists would be forced to reject ideas and practices which may afford them tools for social and political strength. For example, they would not look to learn from worldwide struggles for democracy and human rights other than those which occur in an African or African American context. Similarly, they would be intensely skeptical of theories which draw from Marxism because they do not originate from an African context and thus should not be imposed where black people "would have responded more naturally to other political expressions."[7] This ethnocentrism only exacerbates the key problem with Afrocentricity raised by Palermo, namely, the "politically imaginary" social and economic stance that is ideologically embedded in its adoption. Taken together, these issues and critiques surely make implementing Afrocentricity as a curricular model a cause for concern.
[1] Molefi Kete Asante. Afrocentricity (Trenton, New Jersey: Africa World Press, Inc., 1988), 5.[2] Ibid., 85.
[3] Ibid., 43.
[4] Ibid., 98.
[5] Ibid., 42.
[6] Ibid., 41.
[7] Ibid., 33.