Jacques Depelchin
13 December 2007
opinion
Almost everyone knows about Brazilian football, especially Pelé; but, it is a fair bet that a very tiny percentage of the same people will know about one of the foremost intellectuals of Brazil in the 20th century: Milton Santos (MS), winner in 1994 of the Vautrin Lud prize given to the most outstanding geographer (sometimes known as the nobel prize for geography). Others have described him as the Noam Chomsky of Brazil. One could go on with the accolades. Thanks to a recent documentary (directed by Silvio Tendler) on and around his ideas, MS' reputation (1925-2001) is likely to gain greater recognition among Brazilians as they begin to realize how far ahead his visionary understanding of humanity's plight and challenges was.
This is not an essay on MS, it is an encouragement to those who already know him or of him and those who do not, to get to know him better. It is also an appeal to those who have the wherewithal to contact the film maker and make it available in other languages, including Kiswahili since he did teach in the geography department of the University of Dar es Salaam in the mid-seventies.
The main reason for this essay is to reflect on the growing convergence (economic, political and cultural) between Brazil and the Africa which is not delimited by its geographical borders. To paraphrase MS' view: surely, another kind of globalization is not only possible, but a must if humanity is going to be born [1]. Inexorably, it will be thought and led by the poor, or the Wretched of the Earth, as Franz Fanon long ago, saw it coming. Will African intellectuality join them or prefer to carry on their mimicking of the West?
1. Mimicking or thinking? 1804 or 184?
In one of his interviews (and in the documentary), MS lamented the fact that most Brazilian intellectuals were more interested in copying what is happening in Europe or in the USA, rather than thinking from where they are, where they have come from and where they would like to go. Calling it intellectual laziness, he pointed out that it is easier for people to consume than to produce. Obviously, he is not the first to have said so [2], the question however, for all thinking Africans, as we enter the era of 50th anniversaries of Independence, is what happened after Independence? Is it something one could reasonably describe as an event? One which could or should have mobilized fidelity to what it meant? Were they events on the same scale as other previous emancipatory events , e.g.Quilombo de Palmares in Brazil(1597-1695), Haiti (1791-1804), and so many other unknown feats of resistance. Which kind of subject emerged out of such a collective birthing event? Did Independences rupture the colonizing enterprise, like truths puncture lies? Did there emerge an emancipated subject in our individual and collective consciousness? Which kind of consciousness prevailed in our countries, 50 years after Independence? We can point to heroes and heroines who did all they could to maintain fidelity to the emancipated subject which emerged out of that event. Each reader can fill in the dots.
In Haiti today, 184 is the number of people and institutions who signed a petition against President Aristide, denouncing him in a manner reminiscent of the Congolese who colluded with external forces to eliminate Patrice Lumumba, back in 1960/1. Could 184 coincidentally be an apt metaphor of what came to be of 1804 [3]? The shrinking and squeezing of freedom, equality and fraternity to the point of a group of 184 whishing it never happened? Could it be said that the same process has occurred in many African countries, namely that of reducing Independence not to an event, but to a transition used and abused by a small group to enrich themselves while the largest part of the population remained poor or got poorer? Shouldn't what happens to every single Haitian today, because of that transition from 1804 to 184, be of concern to all thinking human beings?
On December 12, 2007 it will be 4 months since the disappearance of Pierre Antoine Lovinsky [4]. Kidnapping (or rendition?) might be a more appropriate word. How many (among those who knew of it) have done even a symbolic gesture calling on his kidnappers to let him free? Kidnapping used to be one of the ways people were ripped from the continent and dragged to the forts and slave ships. Wherever he is, Lovinsky could be asking himself why there has not been greater efforts to get him back from where he is. He must wonder, like many others, why the Brazilian government, headed by a president who visited Gorée and, more or less [5], apologized for slavery, does not go out of its way to go and find Lovinsky. Or, as some have speculated, is it part of the agenda of the UN mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) to silence, completely, all those who have vowed to continue calling for the return of President Aristide to Haiti?
It is impossible to think of Africa 50 years ago without, at the same time, thinking about its history from 500 years ago, because it is only by looking over the entire period that one can only begin to guess at the magnitude of the crime which has been committed with unimaginable, relentless impunity. If the Brazilian government, through its President, really meant to apologize for slavery, should it not be seen thinking and acting in a manner which is aimed at restoring the Haiti of 1804 rather than allying itself with the 184?
2. Brazil-Africa: South-South or South-North-South?
As more and more thinking Africans clamor for greater and greater South-South cooperation, it is encouraging to observe how the Brazilian government is willing to tread where its ruling clique would not like to go. The ruling clique is only interested in so-called Real Politik, and not at building a Planetary future through healing emancipatory processes. Even if, as everyone can see from the climatic changes, such a course is the only viable one. The ruling clique is more interested in fitting in the world as it is, rather than trying to build a different world, in which solidarity with Africa (and Asia) would loom large. But the world as it is, as seen from G8 Meetings and places like Davos is not interested in solidarity with Africa [6]; Africa and all of the poor of the world -they tell us in their own way-- shall be rescued by charity [7]. The charitable option is the most logical given that even the G8 and Davos have lost their grip on world decision making processes as these have been eroded by the weight and impact of financial decision centers via "the markets". Described as self regulatory, these financial monsters are beginning to show growing signs of being out of control. How could it be otherwise given that the few regulatory leashes in place have been removed...so that these financial monsters could -so the logic went--even better self-regulate themselves [8].
The pressure for greater solidarity with Africa, in Brazil, comes from its African ancestry population and its allies (indigenous, landless, working, jobless people). Even the ruling clique cannot completely ignore the fact that more and more people in Brazil are clamoring for greater justice, and so, on occasion, it has to be seen as responding to these demands. As an emerging country, Brazil wants to have a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. This is one of the objectives which has driven President Lula's foreign visits, including the visits to Africa, including his recent stop in Burkina Faso, on October 15.
As readers of Pambazuka News know very well, October 15 2007 was the 20th anniversary of Thomas Sankara's assassination (along with 12 of his comrades). One can only presume that the ruling clique decided that one additional vote for the quest of a permanent seat at the UN Security Council, should be achieved by any means necessary, and, therefore, accepted the Burkina Be invitation to "celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Burkina Be revolution". In the eyes of Sankara's foes such an accolade from Brazil would help bury Sankara one more time. Or for good!
However, this cynical collusion to treat African history like a serviceable walking mat does help illustrate the longer process of how the splitting apart of humanity has been carried out by the very ones who apologize in one venue and do the exact opposite in another. Most academics are likely to condemn these colluders. And yet, again, should one not ask the same question raised with regard to the 184 in Haiti? However inconvenient it might sound, is it not the case that, overall, 50 years since Independence, African people have been betrayed by those who were supposed to be thinkers and who, on paper at least, always like to be seen and heard as being on their side? Independence as a truth, as an event, has been treated like a mere happening, one which did not seize intellectuals to change their world view of the past, the present and the future. Yes, however uncomfortable it might make one, each one of us should be able to ask: did I do all that could/should have been done, and more, to turn that emancipatory event into a real transformation of the colonial situation? If one thinks one did, then the result should tell one that it was far from enough.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
