1) The problem with claiming "you made someone" of a different race or even ethnicity to you is that to them, you're just being stupid. Because even if you did "make them", you gave away for free what you could've kept for your own race & ethnicity. Claiming a black person is white because they're better than many white people at a particular task won't make the black person white. You don't become another race because of a certain level of competence. Even if the famous Michael Jackson bleached his skin, learnt Hungarian & how to manufacture a gun from scratch; he still wouldn't have been white. Likewise, getting a suntan & learning Swahili wouldn't have made F. W. de Klerk black. Hijacking the success of other races is another form of soft neocolonialism.
2) Black unity was introduced to South Africa - & perhaps Africa - by a group of academics who were educated by people who were not from Africa, not to say black unity did not exist in precolonial Africa but it was more out of necessity than just "learning other cultures & languages." Precolonial Africans had no need to learn other cultures & languages because they had their own culture & language. You did not unite with other tribes, let alone tribes who didn't speak your language, unless you were experiencing insurmountable hardships. Modern black unity is often nothing more than not wanting to feel alone & not so much to make strategic or useful alliances.
3) Ethnostates that had chariots & horses are much larger because they could cover large distances. In Africa, accommodating horses & making roads (excepting for footpaths) was near impossible without modern technology. This is why Africa has more language & ethnic diversity than Europe & Asia, the fact that travel wasn't easy allowed for almost more room for minor ethnicities to branch out. This is why ethnostates in Africa could be so problematic, it could lead to Africa having 120 countries. Some might say that this is fine because Africa is large enough to be divided into even 200 ethnostates but I'd still insist that linguistically similar groups unite to form larger states, this would be to maybe decrease the amount of infrastructure & administration needed if Africa were to repartition into it's precolonial ethnostates.
4) A non-racial ethnostate poses a unique problem. In time, it could be entirely overrun by immigrants in it's quest of inclusivity. Many precolonial African states, which were ethnostates by default, were defeated by inclusivity. By accommodating foreign forces, the precolonial African states gave away their power to outsiders.
5) There's a little problem with African people who don't have African surnames in Africa. Outside Africa, non-African surnames would be okay but in Africa, surnames often are linked to heritage & not always just a trade like in Europe. By having a European surname in Africa as a black person, you simply mean you're from Europe. We can't even trace your heritage to ensure you're not marrying your biological cousin because we don't know the history of your surname. So what to do of Africans who have European surnames because of circumstances beyond their control? I'd then propose the closest relative with an African surname lends that family their African surname & thus, heritage. Many may not agree with this but it is better than giving yourself an African surname that has nothing to do with your heritage or has no history on the African continent.
5.1) In the modern day where we don't live in small tribes where anything outside our tribe is foreign, I'd propose triple-barrel surnames to cement our tribes & tribal connections in ink today in our interconnected multicultural lands. This was the purpose of izithakazelo (praise sayings/izibongo) in my native Zulu culture, it was simply to identify heritage & bloodline at times. We had izithakazelo & Europe had family tree charts. But because many izithakazelo through oral tradition have become lost in the sands of time, the next best thing would be to document our present known heritage into the future. In a world of fleeting relationships, where at times people would leave their families & never return or be spoken of, surnames can easily & deliberately be omitted from a family's history. So the use of triple-barrel surnames or documented family genealogy could be of much use to future generations (& present generations) even if such a practice would need to be law in a land's legislature to ensure it is commonplace.
2) Black unity was introduced to South Africa - & perhaps Africa - by a group of academics who were educated by people who were not from Africa, not to say black unity did not exist in precolonial Africa but it was more out of necessity than just "learning other cultures & languages." Precolonial Africans had no need to learn other cultures & languages because they had their own culture & language. You did not unite with other tribes, let alone tribes who didn't speak your language, unless you were experiencing insurmountable hardships. Modern black unity is often nothing more than not wanting to feel alone & not so much to make strategic or useful alliances.
3) Ethnostates that had chariots & horses are much larger because they could cover large distances. In Africa, accommodating horses & making roads (excepting for footpaths) was near impossible without modern technology. This is why Africa has more language & ethnic diversity than Europe & Asia, the fact that travel wasn't easy allowed for almost more room for minor ethnicities to branch out. This is why ethnostates in Africa could be so problematic, it could lead to Africa having 120 countries. Some might say that this is fine because Africa is large enough to be divided into even 200 ethnostates but I'd still insist that linguistically similar groups unite to form larger states, this would be to maybe decrease the amount of infrastructure & administration needed if Africa were to repartition into it's precolonial ethnostates.
4) A non-racial ethnostate poses a unique problem. In time, it could be entirely overrun by immigrants in it's quest of inclusivity. Many precolonial African states, which were ethnostates by default, were defeated by inclusivity. By accommodating foreign forces, the precolonial African states gave away their power to outsiders.
5) There's a little problem with African people who don't have African surnames in Africa. Outside Africa, non-African surnames would be okay but in Africa, surnames often are linked to heritage & not always just a trade like in Europe. By having a European surname in Africa as a black person, you simply mean you're from Europe. We can't even trace your heritage to ensure you're not marrying your biological cousin because we don't know the history of your surname. So what to do of Africans who have European surnames because of circumstances beyond their control? I'd then propose the closest relative with an African surname lends that family their African surname & thus, heritage. Many may not agree with this but it is better than giving yourself an African surname that has nothing to do with your heritage or has no history on the African continent.
5.1) In the modern day where we don't live in small tribes where anything outside our tribe is foreign, I'd propose triple-barrel surnames to cement our tribes & tribal connections in ink today in our interconnected multicultural lands. This was the purpose of izithakazelo (praise sayings/izibongo) in my native Zulu culture, it was simply to identify heritage & bloodline at times. We had izithakazelo & Europe had family tree charts. But because many izithakazelo through oral tradition have become lost in the sands of time, the next best thing would be to document our present known heritage into the future. In a world of fleeting relationships, where at times people would leave their families & never return or be spoken of, surnames can easily & deliberately be omitted from a family's history. So the use of triple-barrel surnames or documented family genealogy could be of much use to future generations (& present generations) even if such a practice would need to be law in a land's legislature to ensure it is commonplace.
Comments