They say blackness is not a monolith until it’s applied to Black Americans then magically everyone’s Black American.
We come from
different societies different cultures different histories
What binds us is our collective effort in eradicating successively colonial structures and the paradigms that fuel them in order to attain sovereignty.
Sovereignty has been gained for some groups who have self governance although those colonial structures still very much hold sway over the minds of the people. For Black Americans our fight and our struggle is different. Any effort to direct our energy to any other cause that doesn’t empower our right to unity self governance (sovereignty) only siphons our energy.
Phenotypical conflation is a colonial tool.
Think of how racist it is to conflate us all simply because we share similar features. Think of how we promote colonial structures via imposition of blackness onto cultures that had nothing to do with that classification system. Out of simply appearing the same. It’s the White lens and the semiotics of race theory being applied across vast groups of people. Tropical features adapted for tropical environments is what that label was applied too.
Break the spell.
If you look past skin tone, hair type, and certain features. You can see as others do. A West African looks entirely different to an East African even within their respective regions they can easily identify between each other. There’s exceptions to the rule but for the most part they can easily identify between who is who. A Nigerian can tell the different between themselves and a Ghanaian because their unique distinctive features are different from others
These differences should be honored recognized celebrated etc but it’s like in America there’s this need to push heavily for this conflation.
We all look entirely different and of course there’s some overlap hell we have overlap with groups we have nothing to do with.
You want to see the phenotypical conflation they never want to mention because it’s inconvenient for the origin myth narrative?
She claims to be Choctaw by blood. However, she appears to be a Negro and cannot be enrolled as such.” — Dawes Application testimony, Choctaw Nation, ca. 1902.
“They look like Negroes and not like Indians… although they may have Indian blood, their appearance is that of colored people and they are to be placed on the Freedmen roll.” — Dawes Commission Testimony, cited in Kent Carter, The Dawes Commission and the Allotment of the Five Civilized Tribes (1999), p. 110.
“All negroes and other slaves… shall be deemed and taken to be absolute slaves… whether they shall have been in this province for many years or were brought from the Indian nations.” — The Statutes at Large of South Carolina, Vol. VII, p. 397.
William Byrd II on Indian Slaves (Virginia)
“Indians make indifferent slaves, and are too near a-kin to the Negroes… They run away and blend into the Negro population.” — The Secret Diary of William Byrd of Westover, 1709–1712, ed. Louis B. Wright and Marion Tinling (1941), p. 143.
“Some of the Indians are black, and some of a copper color. Their features and hair differ little from those of the Negroes, except for the nose.” — James Adair, The History of the American Indians (1775), p. 5.
“Many of the Chitimacha and Taensa resemble the Negroes in complexion, but speak a language entirely different from the Africans.” — Le Page du Pratz, Histoire de la Louisiane (1758), English edition Vol. 1, pp. 324–325.
“The complexion of these Indians is much like the Ethiopians… if they be not somewhat lighter.” — Daniel Gookin, Historical Collections of the Indians in New England (1674), Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, 1st Series, Vol. 1, p. 142.
North Carolina: John Lawson, 1709
“Their skin is of a tawny dark color… some so black they differ not from Negroes, only in hair.” — John Lawson, A New Voyage to Carolina (1709), p. 190.
French Colonies: Jean-Baptiste Labat, 1722
“The Indians and Negroes are mixed together so much that they pass for one another among us.” — Jean-Baptiste Labat, Nouveau Voyage aux Isles de l’Amérique, Vol. 2 (1722), p. 177.
The Dawes Rolls – Legal Dispossession via Reclassification (1898–1914)
“They are Negroes, and as such they do not possess Indian blood, notwithstanding any claim to the contrary.” — Dawes Commission testimony denying tribal status to Freedmen applicants, many of whom had Native ancestry. (Sourced from: Angela Y. Walton-Raji, Black Indian Genealogy Research; see National Archives, RG 75, Dawes Enrollment Cards)
Why all of this matters? Placing dark-skinned tribal citizens on Freedmen Rolls instead of “By Blood” rolls denied them land allotments, citizenship, and federal recognition.
They stole your ancestors land YOUR LAND and labeled you African to dispossess your claim of it.
“Reclassification of persons of African appearance as Freedmen — even if they had blood ties — was necessary to expedite land liquidation and limit tribal claims.” — Historian Tiya Miles, Ties That Bind: The Story of an Afro-Cherokee Family in Slavery and Freedom, Harvard University Press, p. 11
“Indians were called ‘negros de la tierra’ so they could be enslaved like Africans, despite legal prohibitions.” — Andrés Reséndez, The Other Slavery (2016), p. 128, citing AGI, Mexico 49.
Negroes de la Tierra and Negroes de la Guinea were used to delineate between the two populations. It means Blacks of the Land and Blacks of the Guinea.
“The boundaries between Negro and Indian were fluid… This fluidity was manipulated for legal benefit — to make slavery permanent, or to invalidate land claims.” — Hugh Thomas, The Slave Trade: The Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade: 1440–1870, p. 218.
Bienville Letter (1725)
Source: Historical Collections of Louisiana, Vol. II, p. 71 Quote:
“The Choctaw have sold Natchez captives to us. We treat them as Negroes.”
1543:
“Los indios cautivos se llaman negros de la tierra, y se venden como tales en los mercados.” (“The captured Indians are called ‘negros of the land,’ and are sold as such in the markets.”)
Despite Crown prohibitions on enslaving Indians, colonists created a false racial label (“Negros de la tierra”) to legally justify enslaving Amerindians as if they were Africans. They would often lie to inflate the cost as well.
Where are the Amerindians populations that were sold to the Caribbean? Why don’t they pop up in Caribbean DNA when we know they were amalgamated into the enslaved population ?
Un negro nacido en Sevilla” – “A Black born in Seville.”
“Una negra esclava natural de Lisboa” – “A Black female slave native to Lisbon.”
We were dispossessed by being misnamed. Reclassification was not an accident. It was the mechanism of erasure.
Honor the differences. Respect the sovereignty. Break the colonial spell.
