I thought this thread was going to be about Shaft in Africa. Oh well, carry on.
Marc
by vivalostwages
This question is quite common and for the life of me, honestly, I can’t understand the confusion.
If your friend had been a citizen of France, would she technically be a European-American? Well maybe, but more correctly she’d be called a French-American. You’d look rather silly calling her a European-American.
Now let’s apply this to Africa. If your friend had been a citizen of Nigeria, she’d be called Nigerian-American, not African-American. And nationality is not dependent on race so it doesn’t matter how pale your friend’s skin is or how blue her eyes are.
The only reason blacks in America are called African-American is because they don’t know what countries their ancestors come from.
Just a little nitpick - I think you’re talking about the Scottish-Americans here. 
But the term “African-American” is routinely used in situations in which the speaker has no idea whether the person in question is aware of their ancestery. If an eyewitness to a robbery describes a suspect as being “African-Aerican”, it’s a pretty safe bet that the witness didn’t stop to interview the suspect regarding knowledge of ancestary. And the term “Caucasian” is used even when the person in question is fully aware of their family tree. The reason the term “African-American” is used is not because we want to discuss their ancestors’ nationality, but because our society considers them to all be in the same category. Even if we knew the family tree of every black, we would still consider them to be in the same category, and would use an all inclusive term.
Sub-Saharan African American would be more appropriate a category/name for black folks.
Rider, “Sub-Saharan African American” would not be a good name for black folks. Africa is a continent of countries, and the point–at least as I understand it–is that in adopting the name “African American,” many black folks are saying that since they can’t trace definitively which country in Africa they came from, they’re claiming the whole country. I don’t see why you feel it necessary to set limits on where they can claim they came from, since you most likely can’t say definitively where they can trace their ancestry either. I’m black, and I don’t even presume to do that! If you understand not only human nature that inspires folks to move around from place to place, but also the craziness of the slave trade in Africa that disrupted and displaced folks from all sorts of countries all over Africa, then you would realize that your reasoning’s a little faulty. Just because slave traders picked up enslaved Africans from the coast of West Africa, doesn’t mean that all enslaved folks came from there. IIRC, J.L. Dillard talks about this from a linguistic perspective in Black English, and I’ve no doubt plenty of other history books discuss this as well. And, might I add, that black folks are individuals first and foremost and really are capable of defining themselves as they see fit, and may find it just a little insulting when folks who most likely know nothing of their history/culture/personal preferences for self-identification condescend to tell them what would be appropriate.
As far as me as someone who self-identifies as black–but I don’t mind using the term African American–wanting to go to Africa, yes, I do want to do that someday. I like traveling and would like to visit countries in Europe, Asia, and Africa at some point. Right now, however, I don’t have the time or the funds to travel anywhere, but I have several friends who have traveled to various countries in Africa, and they’ve enjoyed experiencing the cultures there. Still, while I want to go there, I am well aware that there are language and cultural barriers/prejudices that most likely may not integrate well with my American and Southern cultural identity. I like to travel and experience different cultures because that can only help me grow as a person.
slight hijack here–
it occurs to me that at some point (if we haven’t already reached that point), shouldn’t DNA testing be able to pinpoint African-Americans’ links to various extant African tribes, cultures, etc.? I’m wondering if some deeply curious, relatively well-off African-American has udergone extensive DNA cross-checking to explore this. It’s a neat idea for a book, isn’t it? ROOTS 2003, kinda.
Or am I all wet?
End hijack.
Celestina…no offense intended, but if you had a basic knowledge of African geography, you would know that the Sahara essentially separates “Black” Africa from “Arab” North Africa, where the people look much as they do in the Middle East and Southern Europe. Hence my Sub-Saharan comment.
Rider, I understand you’re asking questions and what all, and I’ll accept that you mean no offense, but I said what I did to let you know that your words may be offensive to black folks who are perfectly capable of defining how they want/need to self-identify. FYI, while I don’t have the continent of Africa committed to memory, I do have some basic concept of what countries are in Africa. Please read my post again. I said that black folks traveled all over Africa, whether they did it of their own volition or were captured during wars and traded as slaves. If one looks at even linguistic patterns, one can see that with their formation of lingua francas and common trade tongues like Swahili. I do understand that Northern Africa has been settled by Arabs, but it also has been settled by folks from all over Africa. Africa isn’t just about how folks look, it’s about culture and language as well. ?Entiendes?
pseudotriton ruber ruber, I ain’t no scientist, but I think you’re all wet, hon. Don’t you think if this method you propose were possible, folks would have heard about it? And even if we could do what you propose, it doesn’t make any sense. Given how populations are prone to move around–England, for example, is populated by a whole bunch of cultural/national groups from the Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Juts, Vikings, Normans, and so on. Is there a gene that definitively marks nationality, say someone who comes from England? I highly doubt it. But if so, how do you distinguish that gene from folks who come from Germany, Norway, Sweden, France, Ireland, Scotland, and so on? I apologize if I ain’t making too much sense right now. Too little sleep and not enough coffee are my excuse. Folks like edwino & tomndebb would give you a far more coherent answer I’ve no doubt.
I have heard of a company that is taking money from people and offering exactly that sort of promise for the future. (but it’s a rumor and I don’t know where I heard it). From the same citeless, half-remembered reference, I do recall them saying that they could only find traces straight up the male line (some male’s father’s father’s father’s, etc. info - not anything from anyone else). The problem with this being that (due to the way certain things have worked out in this country) for many people who are publically considered “black,” who self identify as “black,” who would be considered deluded if they tried to label themselves anything but “black” or “African American,” the answer to the “where does my DNA point” question is going to be “England” or “Germany” or “France.”
I grew up on the Ivory Coast and in Sudan, Khartoum and spent about a year in Kenya on the way out after the US and Sudan broke diplomatic relations in 1967. Some areas of Africa are interesting, but many are difficult to traverse and potentially dangerous for travellers. As someone else pointed out, Africa is a far more complex and nebulous geo-political entity than Ireland or some other discrete country of origin.
There are many good reasons to vist Africa and if I were AA I might well get a sense of being part of a larger global community, but in practical demographic terms many AA’s have a lot more pressing issues on their plate to contend with than worrying about politically or culturally appropriate choices of overseas vacation destinations.
I don’t see how this would be feasible due to the amount of mixing that has produced the American blacks of today. Assuming that there are DNA markers for different tribes (which I highly doubt), being able to use such markers to place today’s blacks into tribes would be hindered by the high frequency of “inter-tribal” relations that have taken place for multiple generations in this country. Add on the fact that whites and Native Americans have thrown in their own genetic material, and it becomes clear that for most people the waters are a little too murky to reach any kind of conclusions about tribal descent.
Just as an aside here, but I think that it’s an interesting reflection of America’s vast cultural and social separation from Africa that not one single US Airline flies to any country in Africa.
I think it’s more geographical distance than culture.
But Asia is farther away from the USA than Africa, and dozens of US carrier services operate between the two continents every week.
It’s really just a transportation and passenger demographic issue. There is not enough of a market for direct flights to Africa from the US. If there were a market demand you can bet the airlines would meet it if possible. Its not that much of a brain teaser to see that there is (for a variety of reasons) far more commerce between the US and Asia than with Africa and thus the market is there for direct flights.
And presumably almost zero tourism and human traffic, and therefore cultural interaction. That’s my point.
Just to add that I’m not blaming the airlines (although surely they could fill one flight a week to, say, South Africa). I’m saying that it seems that there is so little interst in Africa by Americans of any race or creed, that not one airline can fill one plane for a scheduled service to any country on the entire continent. And this takes me back to my OP about African Americans and any kind of tangible connection with Africa.
Africa is an impoverished continent and doesn’t warrant airline service.
Then why did South African Airlines post a profit of US$100 million this year while United Airlines has just filed for Chapter 11?