Regarding the book in question, it has been many years since I read it, but from what I recall, it was mostly an attempt to redefine the black stereotype. Basically, there are three main ways to fight any negative stereotype: 1 - Act as a living counter-example and try to develop as many of these counter-examples as possible (W.E.B. DuBois, for example), 2 - Redefine and embrace a different stereotype (Karenga), or 3 - Embrace the stereotype, often in a defiant or mocking way (as can be seen in the gangsta culture). Of course, these aren't the only ways to do this, but they are the most common.
This can be done for any group, whether it is women, homosexuals, or yes, even white men. Which response to negative stereotyping is the "best"? Your guess is as good as mine.
I wouldn't go so far as to even say "best", I would say which is more "correct"?
Your post is very insightful, however, and this observation is a good way to explain some of my beef with this...
Karenga's book, and this class, seemed based on the premise that there is something inherent with "Black people" that is not just skin color. That a certain "race" has a certain "worldview" about it, a certain culture to associate to, maybe even a certain way of thinking. That is essentially the premise behind Black Nationalism, as I understand it, and it's pretty bogus.
As I was taught in this class, Black Studies is not just the "study of blacks", but studying blacks through this "African Worldview".
Here is a quote from Azibo's Articulating the Distinction Between Black Studies and the Study of Blacks: The Fundamental Role of Culture and the African-Centered Worldview--hopefully it will also help you understand why I've been unable to clarify things--what the hell is "Memphite Theology"? and so on:
(I removed all the citations for easier reading)
The essence of pedagogy and curriculum of Black Studies must certainly consist of this Afrocentric body of human sciences (sciences broadly defined), not unlike that in the ancient days of the Mystery System. Indeed, on this point, the reader is queried what conceptual system:
a) substantiates the knowledge that made Kemet "The Light of the World?"
b) did Imhotep, Ptahotep, and the authors of the Memphite Theology employ in their work?
c) substantiates the political, military, and cultural aspects of Pharaoh-Queen Hatsepshut? and
d)substantiates authentic Black theology and its scripture?
The African worldview is the answer. When Africans do not embrace it, our wretchedness ensues; when Africans cleave to it, sustentation and great achievement are attained. "That is why, if we are to return to the source culturally, it [the worldview window on Kemetic/classical African civilization knowledge] must be at the foundation of our humanities [and sciences, i.e., our Black Studies]. "We must teach it systematically," opined C. A. Diop.
Later:
What makes Black Studies a singular discipline at the most fundamental level is its African worldview conceptual basis, i.e., its Afrocentricity. What makes White Studies a singular discipline is its European worldview conceptual basis, the artificial boundaries that separate its so-called disciplines (psychology, religion, sociology, etc.) notwithstanding. That Black Studies must avoid the artificial boundary distinction that characterizes White Studies has been pointed out by many writers. Semaj has understood this in articulating the "cultural science" concept: the African worldview base makes our work culturally centered. That is, applying the African patterns for interpreting reality (cultural deep structure, see Table 1) as the conceptual starting point for our work perforce locates what we do in the African worldview and thereby provides the unifying disciplinary basis. This is an actual point of fact, not just a logical derivation. For example, consider the position that there is no distinction between African (Black) psychology and Black religion, because each owes its existence and unfolding to the dictates of the African worldview.
So, according to this paper, and this class, it seems to me that if this is really Black Studies, it seems to be based on the holism hogwash we see elsewhere; furthermore, let me quote exactly what this so-called "African worldview" entails, from yet another handout (the entire time I have been unable of pointing to single examples because it seems this underlying system of premises and the implications is not stated in just one place):
(formated to make it easy to understand)
(NOTE THE BOLDED SECTION)
-Southern Cradle-
family/community structure: matrifocal
environmental characteristics: primarily warm temperature, temperate, numerous water resource and primarily fertile lands, with numerous salt resources
sustenance: primarily sedentary
essence: connection with the cosmos
-Afrikan Worldview-
Cosmology: all things are interconnected and interdependent through spiritual networks within the universe
Ontology [note... I think a portion was cut off in the handout!: (extrasensory fasion) and material (known through the five senses) are one
Epistemology: knowledge comes through what is seen and unseen; self-knowledge; symbolic imagery and rhythm
Axiology (nature of value): Highest value is in interpersonal relationships between persons
Logic (reason): Diunital--emphasizes union of opposites (both/and conclusions); circular
Aesthetics Orientation: Tied to ethics and character
Life-space: Infinite and unlimited (spirit manifesting)
So, what's the European woldview of ours?
-Northern Cradle-
family/community structure: patriarchal
environmental characteristics: primarily cold temperature, arid/low water resources, poor resources and barren land
sustenance: primarily nomadic
essence: disconnection with the cosmos (note: ...what?)
-European Worldview-
Cosmology: independent and separate entities within the universe
Ontology: Material with possible spiritual aspects that are separate and secondary
Epistemology: knowledge comes through counting and measuring
Axiology: Highest value is in objects or the acquisition of objects (note: damn capitalist westerners?)
Logic: Dichotomous -- emphasizes (either/or conclusions); linear
Aesthetics Orientation: External, superficial (note: superficial....?!
Life-space: Finite and limited (beginning with birth and ending with death).
I think this may clarify where I'm coming from.
