Excerpts from speech by Nicholas Sarkozy, given at the University of Dakar, Senegal on July 26, 2007.
The speech given by French President Nicolas Sarkozy at the University of Dakar on July 26, 2007 is arguably one of the most talked-about and most controversial speeches in recent times; one that has generated - and is still generating - tons of reactions from across the world, particularly from 
Africa. Although excerpts of the speech have appeared in many publications and websites, it has been quite difficult getting a full transcript of the speech in English. A good samaritan recently directed me to an unofficial version of the speech in English. Find below sections of the Dakar speech that generated most of the controversy. (Subtitles are mine).
The excerpts are followed by links to rebuttals by Achille Mbembe, a Cameroonian Professor of History at the University of Witswatesrand in South Africa, which have also generated widespread debate in Africanist circles.
Colonization took... and gave back...
Africa is partly responsible for its own misfortune. People have killed each other in Africa at least as much in Europe. But it is true that a long time ago the Europeans came to Africa as conquerors. They took the land of your ancestors. They banished their gods, their languages, their beliefs, the customs of your forefathers. They told your forefathers what they had to think, what they had to believe, what they had to do. They have cut your forefathers from their past, they have torn their souls from their roots. They stole Africa’s spell. (Could also be translated as They killed Africa’s enthusiasm).
They were wrong.
They did not see the depth and the wealth of the African soul. They believed that they were superior, that they were more advanced, that they were progress, that they were civilisation.
They were wrong.
They wanted to convert the African, they wanted to make them in their image. They believed that they had all the rights and that they were all powerful, more powerful than the gods of Africa, more powerful than the African soul, more powerful than the sacred ties that men have woven patiently during thousands of years with the sky and earth of Africa, more powerful than the mysteries that came from the depths of time.
They were wrong.
They ruined a way of life. They ruined a marvellous imaginary world, they ruined an ancestral wisdom.
They were wrong.
They created anguish and misery. They fed hatred. They made it more difficult to open up to others, to exchange and to share because in order to open up oneself, to exchange and to share one must be sure of ones own identity, values and convictions. Before the coloniser, the colonised lost all confidence in himself, did not know who he was anymore, let himself be overwhelmed by fear of the other, by fear of the future.
The coloniser came, he took, he helped himself, he exploited. He pillaged resources and wealth that did not belong to him. He stripped the colonised of his personality, of his liberty, of his land, of the fruit of his labour.
The coloniser took, but I want to say with respect, that he also gave. He built bridges, roads, hospitals, dispensaries and schools. He turned virgin soil fertile. He gave of his effort, his work, his know-how. I want to say it here, not all the colonialists were thieves or exploiters.
There were among them evil men but there were also men of goodwill. People who believed they were fulfilling a civilising mission, people who believed they were doing good. They were wrong, but some were sincere. They believed to be giving freedom, but they were creating alienation. They believed they were breaking the chains of obscurantism, of superstition and of servitude. They were actually forging much heavier chains, they imposed a heavier servitude because it was the spirit, the soul that was enslaved. They believed they were giving love without seeing that they were sowing revolt and hatred.
Colonisation is not responsible for all the current difficulties of Africa. It is not responsible for the bloody wars between Africans, for the genocides, for the dictators, the fanaticism, the corruption, the prevarication, the waste and the pollution.
But, colonisation was a huge mistake that was paid for by the bitterness and the suffering of those who believed they had given all and did not understand why they were so hated.
Colonisation was a huge mistake that destroyed the colonised’s self-esteem and in his heart gave birth to this self-hatred that always results in hatred of others.
Colonisation was a huge mistake, but from it was born the embryo of a common destiny. And this idea is of particular importance to me.
Colonisation was a mistake that changed and intertwined the destinies of both Europe and Africa. And this common destiny was sealed by the blood of Africans that came to die in European wars.
And France does not forget this African blood spilled for its liberty.
No one can pretend that nothing happened.
No one can pretend that this mistake was not committed.
No one can pretend that this history did not transpire.
For better or for worse colonisation has transformed African and European.
...
Africa's Tragedy
I want to say to you, youth of Africa that the tragedy of Africa is not in the so-called inferiority of its art, its thought, its culture. Because, in what concerns art, thought and culture it is the West that learnt from Africa.
Modern art owes almost all to Africa. The influence of Africa contributed to changing not only the idea of beauty itself, not only the sense of rhythm, of music, of dance, but as Senghor said even the way of walking or laughing of the world in the 20th Century.
I therefore want to say, to the youth of Africa, that the tragedy of Africa does not come from the idea that the African soul would be impervious to logic and to reason. Because, the African is as logic and as reasonable as the European.
...
The tragedy of Africa is that the African has not fully entered into history. The African peasant, who for thousands of years have lived according to the seasons, whose life ideal was to be in harmony with nature, only knew the eternal renewal of time, rhythmed by the endless repetition of the same gestures and the same words.
In this imaginary world where everything starts over and over again there is no place for human adventure or for the idea of progress.
In this universe where nature commands all, man escapes from the anguish of history that torments modern man, but he rests immobile in the centre of a static order where everything seems to have been written beforehand.
This man (the traditional African) never launched himself towards the future. The idea never came to him to get out of this repetition and to invent his own destiny.
The problem of Africa, and allow a friend of Africa to say it, is to be found here. Africa’s challenge is to enter to a greater extent into history. To take from it the energy, the force, the desire, the willingness to listen and to espouse its own history.
Africa’s problem is to stop always repeating, always mulling over, to liberate itself from the myth of the eternal return. It is to realise that the golden age that Africa is forever recalling will not return because it has never existed.
Africa’s problem is that it lives the present too much in nostalgia for a lost childhood paradise.
Africa’s problem is that too often it judges the present in terms of a purity of origin that is totally imaginary and that no one can hope to achieve.
Africa’s problem is not to invent for itself a more or less mythical past to help it to support the present, but to invent the future with suitable means.
Africa’s problem is not to prepare itself for the return of misfortune, as if that is supposed to repeat itself indefinitely, but to want to give itself the means to combat misfortune, because Africa has the right to happiness like all the other continents of the world.
Africa’s problem is to remain true to itself without remaining immobile.
Africa’s challenge is to learn to view its accession to the universal not as a denial of what it is but as an accomplishment.
Africa’s challenge is to learn to feel itself to be heir to all that which is universal in all human civilisations.
It is to appropriate for itself human rights, democracy, liberty, equality and justice as the common legacy of all civilisations and of all people.
It is to appropriate for itself modern science and technology as the product of all human intelligence.
Africa’s challenge is that of all civilisations, of all cultures, of all peoples that want to protect their identity without isolating themselves because they know that isolation is deadly.
Civilizations are great to the extent that they participate in the great mix of the human spirit.
The weakness of Africa, which has known so many brilliant civilizations on its soil, was for a long time not being able to participate fully in this great engagement. Africa has paid dearly for its disengagement from the world and that has rendered it so vulnerable. But from its misfortunes Africa has drawn new strength by re-engaging with itself. This re-engagement, regardless of the painful conditions of its origin, is the real force and the real chance for Africa at the moment when the first global civilisation is emerging.
The Muslim civilisation, Christianity and colonisation, beyond the crimes and mistakes that were committed in their name and that are not excusable, have opened the African heart and mentality to the universal and to history.
Click here for an unofficial English version of the Dakar Speech.
Achille Mbembe's Critique of the Sarkozy Speech
How is it possible to come to Cheikh Anta Diop University in Dakar at the start of the 21st century to address the intellectual elite as if Africa didn't have its own critical traditions and as if Senghor and Camara Laye, respective champions of black emotion and the kingdom of childhood, hadn't been the object of vigorous internal refutations?
What credibility can we afford such gloomy words that portray Africans as fundamentally traumatized beings incapable of acting on their own behalf and in their own recognized interests? What is this so-called historicity of the continent which totally silences the long tradition of resistance, including that against French colonialism, along with today's struggles for democracy, none of which receive the clear support of a country which, for many years, has actively backed the local satrapies? How is it possible to come to promise us a fanciful Eurafrica without even mentioning the internal efforts to build a unitary African economic framework?
Click here for the complete critique.
Achille Mbembe's rejoinder to his initial critique
Colonialism is now presented not as the crime it was from the wars of conquest to the struggles for independence and decolonization, but as a simple "error" that should now be wiped from the slate: massacres perhaps, but bridges and railway too; institutionalized racial discrimination maybe, but also clinics; the Code de l'Indigénat (1) indeed, but schools to; conscription to serve as canon fodder in Europe's First and Second World Wars against France's "civilizing mission" in general.
Worse still, the new legend has it that colonization was a benevolent and humanitarian undertaking. Prostrate in self-hatred and a hatred of France, trapped in their ingratitude even, the former colonial subjects, we are told, are sadly ultimately incapable of appreciating its benefits given that, left to their own devices, they would never have found the path to progress and freedom.
cool blog. thanks for the link. i added your feed an will keep popping in
Posted by: dionysusstoned | September 17, 2007 at 05:09 PM
Sarkozy is a lightweight from a wannabe place trying real hard to be a George Bush. Africans, especially Francophone Africans really ought to take this dude seriously. The blood has not even dried from the genocide that Sarkozy likely had prior knowledge or helped to finance in Rwanda–according to Martin Marschner a German financier who testified under oath at the Rwanda genocide investigations. No wonder he is indulging in a Disney-nightmare fantasy version of Africa to assuage his conscience. As a charitable person, I would like to assume he has one. that he is in the process of trying to cover. The man is a dangerous caricature, an in your face asshole. What is the french translation for asshole? I suggest they adopt the word into French. Sarkozy is "le asshole". He is a MF who cannot but be obnoxious. He will also kill again, big time in Africa, when he finds a clutch of Africans.
Posted by: bantoo metoo | September 18, 2007 at 01:49 AM
The trouble with us is that we are letting people define us and our history. If we had had a clearly established identity, Sarkozy would have thought twice before he made his speech. He rams his definition of us down our throats because he can. He can because we let him. We let him because we have not defined ourselves. We have not defined ourselves because we have not considered all the elements of our past and present in a dispassionate manner in order to determine where we come from and where we're going. We have not considered these elements because we live with the view other people have of us. We live with this view because it is in the interests of others that we remain subjugated. Those who want us to remain subjugated are people like Mr. Sarkozy, and, of course, or own bad leaders, who are often supported and maintained in power by people like Mr. Sarkozy.
The solution is to get rid of our bad leaders first, and then throw off the yoke that people like Mr. Sarkozy would prefer us to bear. It's not going to happen quietly. But if we are to survive as a people, it must be done.
Posted by: Rosemary Ekosso | September 18, 2007 at 02:31 AM
The greatest crime the French committed was leaving the legacy of conscription in Their colonies. France abandoned it years ago but it lives on in many countries.
Would you be willing to spread the word about www.draftresistance.org? It's a site dedicated to shattering the myths surrounding the selective slavery system and building mass civil disobedience to stop the draft before it starts!
Our banner on a website, printing and posting the anti-draft flyer or just telling friends would help.
Thanks!
Scott Kohlhaas
PS. When it comes to conscription, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure!
Posted by: Scott Kohlhaas | September 18, 2007 at 02:46 AM
In practice no draft occurs because the oppressive police and paramilitary forces are paid well, while the population starves. They also have a free hand at extorting bribes from the people. Therefore the lines to join these forces are long.
Rosemary these kinds of governments have got to be overthrown. You are correct, but the work of sensitizing and educating the people should be ongoing. You do not leave the job of rehabilitation until after. It starts now. The basis starts now. Achille Mbembe does a pretty good job of summing up some of the thinkers.
We must not forget the African American thinkers, psychologists and Afrocentric scholars who are way ahead of us native Africans in this matter of comprehending and counteracting white supremacy as well as ordering an alternate ideology. It is an odd fact that despite its flaws, the United States has some of the safest spaces for being a person of African descent to be himself, even more than in some African countries. We need to study and adapt some of these.
Lastly, we cannot forget Rwanda, which made real Africans to clap after it tossed out every French influence in November of last year and began to chart a new course out of that tent. We can do it. Discard little Napoleon Cheeseater.
Posted by: bantoo metoo | September 18, 2007 at 05:44 AM
Biya Paul, why don't you start by implementing real change to shame the French so as to have a something positive in your legacy? We really do not need the French the way they need us. Why are we not calling the shots here?
Why are tax inspectors, custom and uniformed officers who are supposed to be earning modest salaries make the most money in our country? Why are we "begging and bribing" their personal pockets? Let us start by cleaning our dirty acts and getting the right people in there.
Posted by: Washington. DC | September 18, 2007 at 08:52 AM
My personal take on Sarkozy's speech is that his intent is noble, though his manner of expression leaves a lot to be desired as it opens up far too many avenues for destructive criticism.
A negative critic may take issue with what appears as Sarkozy's attempt to 'justify' colonialism - an exploitational and oppressive activity that leaves far too many scars for any one to think of it positively... even when Sarkozy makes a reasonable attempt to give a balanced account.
A better approach would have been to first apologise profoundly, on behalf of all Europeans, for this heineous activity. This would have quietened a good number of critics.
Then he could have pushed on to outline the essential thrust of his speech, which I discern to be the need for Africans to make themselves part of POSITIVE history by making the best use of the tons of creativity that belies them.
He could then have tied this up with the role the French, Europeans, and US could play in this, as collaborators to a better and brighter Africa.
This role could be highlighted as a complete break from the past... a complete break from the colonial, exploitational, and hideous mentality of the European masters who partitioned and destroyed Africa.
It is to be noted that Sarkozy's claim that Africans have not made themselves part of history, without qualifying this as POSITIVE history, leaves open the avenue for negative critics to attack him.
It is true that most of the recent history of Africa has been negative and undesirable - wars, genocides, destruction, under-development, etc. And the West has played a mighty part in this regretable episode!
However, the distant history of Africa (as evidenced by the Egyptian and other civilisations) could be regarded as positive.
Posted by: Adolf Agbormbai | September 18, 2007 at 11:33 AM
After reading Sakozy's "speech", one can come to the conclusion that the man is not only grossly ignorant but badly educated.
He wrote:
"The tragedy of Africa is that the African has not fully entered into history.”
This in contradiction with biblical accounts and ancient historical accounts by Europeans such as Herodotus (African civilisation was already ancient in the time of Herodotus.) That Africa is today in the throes of trouble has nothing to do with Mr. Sakosky's ill-informed statement. On the other hand, Africans were one of the first peoples to manifest themselves in History. From the heart of the Nile Valley to Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt.
He further states:
"The African peasant, who for thousands of years has lived according to the seasons, whose life ideal was to be in harmony with nature, only knew the eternal renewal of time, rhythmic by the endless repetition of the same gestures and the same words."
How does he know for sure? People rise and fall. That Africans have fallen at this point does not mean they never evolved systems or that they never changed or they will remain the same for ever. Besides, which group of Africans is he referring to? North-East, West, South, North or South-East Africans?
What the pathetic President fails to understand is the fact that indigenous Africans cannot be separated. What was done in Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Timbuktu cannot be de-Africanised; nor that all Africans should reach the same level of development at the same time. The Greeks and Romans became civilised at least 1000 years before the Barbarians in Germany and the balkans where Mr Sakozy has his roots and who later populated the France. Only an uneducated man would then jump into the conclusion that Europeans were Barbarians on grounds of Barbarism of the Germanic tribes as opposed to classical Greece who were millenia ahead of Germany and all Europe in terms of making their mark in history. Further, Africans began civilisation at least 2000 years before European and other continental debuts; making his "speech" meaningless and foolish.
Sarkozy's choice in Dakar appears to have racist connotations because Cheikh Anta Diop, a Sengalese and Professor at Dakar University, demolished, while studying in the Sorbonne, this kind of racist theories expounded by the French President today as concerns African civilisation. It seems, therefore, that it is a well-calculated attempt at reversing decades of African renaissance and historical consciousness.
The psychological implications can be drastic. It must be borne in mind that the Europeans draw their inspiration, values, ethics, knowledge and above all their pride from Classical Greco-Roman civilisation. We respect that; and only an arrogant and ill-informed and uneducated person would travel thousands of miles from Africa to Oxford University or any other leading European University, where giants like Newton made their marks, to completely denounce the European past as a result of the two savage World War Horrors of the 20th century.
Unless Africans counter such arrogant and ignorant pronouncements our generation will be fed with ideas from people with unwittingly or wittingly bad intentions.
Africa has a problem of leadership and system which must be resolved before any progress is made in the modern era. However, it is one thing condemning corrupt leaders and making genuine propositions to this effect; it is another matter condemning the entire African race as having no place in History in a frenzy of ignorance and poor scholarship on the part of the French President.
Posted by: Louis_Mbua | September 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
We must not make the mistake of thinking that Sarkozy was not doing something deliberate and provocative, or that he was trying to be noble and reasonable, but had a poor choice of words.
This is a person whose personal style is brash, confrontational, rude, unapologetic. This is a person who does not believe in a quiet and dignified style. This is a known racist, with a track record, making a speech in Africa to play up to his right wing constituency in France. He fits the classical personality type that Americans call an "asshole" and for you nice ladies and gentlemen in the UK, asshole is not a dirty word in the US when it describes this kind of character. No excuses ought to be meted to Sarkozy and further appearances in Africa should be met by big protest demonstrations.
CUT HIM NO SLACK
Posted by: bantoo metoo | September 18, 2007 at 02:17 PM
Mbeki Criticised for Praising 'racist' Sarkozy
· SA president congratulates French leader on speech · Senegal address widely condemned by Africans South Africa's president, Thabo Mbeki, has been forced to defend his description of Nicolas Sarkozy as "a citizen of Africa", for a speech by the French president that was widely condemned elsewhere on the continent as racist.
Mr Mbeki wrote to the rightwing French leader praising an address to a university audience in Senegal last month in which Mr Sarkozy said that Africans had turned their back on progress.
....
Parts of the South African president's letter to Mr Sarkozy were leaked to Le Monde last week.
"What you have said in Dakar, Mr President, has indicated to me that we are fortunate to count on you as a citizen of Africa, as a partner in the protracted struggle to achieve the renaissance of Africa within the context of a European renaissance and the rest of the world," Mr Mbeki wrote.
Mr Sarkozy was reported to have written back: "You have been kind enough to highlight the 'courage and truthfulness' of this speech. As you very well know, Africa needs truthful friends in order for her to meet the challenges she is facing."
Mr Mbeki's letter has led to criticism in the media and among African diplomats.
One South African political commentator, Xolela Mangcu, wrote in The Weekender newspaper: "Does Mbeki say one thing in public and a different thing in private correspondence with western leaders? Could that be the reason he is treated by suspicion by some African leaders?
"At the very least I would have expected him to have joined other African leaders and publicly condemn Sarkozy."
Mr Mbeki's spokesman, Mukoni Ratshitanga, told Johannesburg's Business Day: "We concur with some of the elements of Sarkozy's speech in so far as it relates to his commitment to partner the continent in its process of renaissance."
Mr Mbeki also publicly praised the speech in his weekly newsletter, saying it suggested that France was willing to press for a fairer trade deal for Africa.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,,2156809,00.html
Posted by: JP | September 18, 2007 at 02:51 PM
Mbeki is no stranger to silly controversies. Dare I ennumerate them?
Posted by: bantoo metoo | September 18, 2007 at 04:32 PM
I still maintain that Mr Sarkozy's speech was not intended to offend.
He is desperately trying to woo African nations. He even tried recently to establish special relationships with Algeria, but did not succeed because of the scars of colonialism.
There is therefore no motive for Sarkozy to give a sarcastic, provocative speech. This is simply not the time for it.
Although I don't know him personally I am inclined to agree with those who consider him arrogant.
His speech seems to indicate that he is the arrogant type of European who is desperately trying to change.
In the attempt to say something useful that will bring Africa closer to France, he unintentionally shot himself in the leg by not having his speech analysed by a French African (either one in his gov't or one in a renowned French university).
If I were him I would seek to put matters straight to quieten the critics.
Posted by: Dr A A Agbormbai | September 19, 2007 at 07:23 PM
Sarkozy has balls is all I can say, he has some balls. He has the audacity to take his racist ass into Africa to insult the people he exploits every single day. Does he think that we don't know about his shady deals with corrupt African leaders? does he think we do not know about how they are exploiting the timber in Cameroon illegally and excessively? does he think that we do not know that France prints the money for all CEMAC countries and control our currency? does he think that we do not know that they intentionally ration our money in a manner that will keep the currency low?
If his stupid ass wants Africa to progress, they should stop exploiting Africa and leave her alone.
As for Thabo Mbeki, if steve Biko was still alive, his Black people's convention would have shot that white-beard monkey. He stands against everything the founding black fathers of Africa stood for. He introduced the excesses of capitalism into Africa and his continuous licks the ass of the West. He sat in Europe and danced to the slave master's tunes while Biko and Mandela were crucified in South Africa. Now, he has seized the throne he didn't work for and continues to destroy the legacy of the people who made South Africa what it is today.
That zulu goat, Mbeki also has the goat balls to call Sarkozy a citizen of Senegal. Who wants that monster to be a citizen of Africa? not us. We can see Tha-stupid Mbeki-goat trying to seek for international favour so that they will give him loans which will go into his French accounts and leave the millions of poor south african masses with nothing.
Sarkozy and mbeki must apologize.
Posted by: unitedstatesofafrica | September 19, 2007 at 10:02 PM
Mbeki's Business Diplomacy:
South Africa: Mbeki Brokers $60m Benin Deal for MTN
Business Day (Johannesburg)
18 September 2007
Posted to the web 18 September 2007
Lesley Stones
Johannesburg
MTN has agreed to pay a licence fee of $60m to have its network reconnected in Benin in a settlement brokered by President Thabo Mbeki and Benin's President Thomas Boni Yayi.
MTN's network was silenced when the telecoms regulator tried to force all four cellular networks to pay $52m in backdated fees after it retrospectively raised the price of a licence 500%.
MTN refused initially, and its network in the west African country was curtailed on July 12.
At the weekend, the regulator's vice-president, Victor Tokpanou, announced on national television that MTN could resume its service.
"The MTN group has accepted the conditions laid out in the new fees structure," Tokpanou said.
MTN had agreed to pay the new fee for its 10-year licence.
MTN CEO Phuthuma Nhleko previously criticised the authorities for acting "completely outside the licence conditions" and crossing the boundaries of both local and international laws.
"We really don't believe that what they are asking for is appropriate," he said last month.
The network in Benin is trading as Spacetel, and was inherited by MTN through its $5,5bn takeover of Investcom. MTN said yesterday negotiations had been going on with Benin's government since the network was shut down 10 weeks ago.
The agreement will see Spacetel accept a new licensing framework and pay $60m for a new, extended licence. Of that, $30m is payable within 30 days of signing the agreement, with the rest payable in annual instalments of $4,2m over seven years.
In return, the government pledged to issue a new licence to Spacetel for 10 more years, grant it a three-year tax holiday, exempt it from customs duties for five years and reduce various annual licence fees from 6% to 3%.
The government will extend Spacetel's licence for a further five years if it meets developmental targets still to be agreed.
In a further concession, the government promised to try to facilitate an extension of the tax holiday for a period of more than three years. "MTN cannot comment further on the agreement," the company said yesterday.
The deal to pay and stay must mean that MTN believes the growth opportunities in Benin justified the higher fee, although political pressure from Mbeki will also have played a key role in persuading MTN to capitulate.
Mbeki's direct approach to Benin's president has also resulted in a deal far more beneficial for MTN than the company would have been able to negotiate alone. The final settlement shows that there has been flexibility on both sides, with MTN winning the extended time frame as well as some potentially lucrative tax concessions.
The initial ultimatum given by the regulatory authority was for MTN to pay the $52m difference between the old fee and the new fee for the right to continue operating. Yet that came with no extended licence period and no tax concessions.
MTN's network has about 569000 users, or a 39% market share, and for the year to last December it contributed R289m revenue and R150m earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation. As only 19% of Benin's citizens have cellphones, there is good growth potential, although the population stands at only 8-million.
Relevant Links
Southern Africa
Economy, Business and Finance
ICT and Telecom
Industry and Infrastructure
Legal and Judicial Affairs
South Africa
Urban Issues and Habitation
The dispute had also silenced the network of Atlantique Telecom, controlled by Middle Eastern operator Etisalat. Atlantique Telecom was allowed to switch its network back on again earlier this month after agreeing to pay the fee.
The two other operators, Libercom and Bell Benin, were not disrupted, as they had already accepted the new contracts and the massive hike in fees.
MTN's share price fluctuated between R112 and R109 yesterday with shares worth R433m changing hands.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2007 Business Day. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections -- or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by: Teko | September 20, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Dr Agbormbai is back. Welcome. It is as if you were holed up in China, where they block these materials and comments.
I must say that the goodwill of a french president can be tested by only one measure- the folding up of Francafrique oppressive, exploitative structures in Africa. This is not likely to happen because there is too much money to be made by France keeping Africa in chains. His words, whatever their shape are therefore immaterial. I read in them a maintainance of the status quo, an attempt to change the vocabulary of oppression and liberation in order to buy time.
USAfrica, I happen to agree with your analysis of what is going on here. I wonder oftentimes whether Dr Agbormbai's apparent naivete is just the open mind of a scientist. If it is, there is abundant data not to take the French president at face value. I do not think Sarkozy would condescend to talk to Achille Mbembe before making a speech. Perhaps we would talk to an idiot clone of Senghor, who like him speaks of Africans as if they were incorporeal ghosts.
Trying to balance both sides is a trick that sometimes does not work because there are no two sides to certain issues. There are no two sides to France's ongoing exploitation and manipulation of Africa. There is no but or "on the other hand" to Hitler's antics for example. There is no excuse. The Algerians have it right. Hot air from Sarkozy's lungs are not the answer to France's crimes in Algeria or la Republique du Cameroun for that matter, but the people of la republique would take off work, stand on lines at the side of the road' they woul perform "jungle dances", and purchase uniforms emblazoned with the icons of of a youthful Biya and a pompous Sarkozy (purchased with their meager earnings from French-owned CICAM) and squander 1% of their economy if their god honors them with his divine presence. No wonder the little cockerel has the audacity to state that Africans have left no impression on history and have no intention of doing so. He is telling us that we are featureless clay for them to use as they see fit; that we are a blank slate; that we have no will, no objective, and being formless, it is their prerogative to use us, and yet some apparently intelligent Africans, from academics to presidents see some benign purpose.
Posted by: Ma Mary | September 20, 2007 at 04:49 PM
Sakorzy's intentions were pure and noble.
How many Western leaders have ever addressed an African University? Let alone, how many African leaders have ever been bold enough to address a Western university?
The idea of seeing every Westerner who stimulates debate on Africa as racist or having ulterior motives quite outdated.
Free speech must reign in Africa, irrespective of its tone.Whether provocative or challenging, speech must remain pure for freedom to reign.
We seem to want to blame the French. What ought to be happening is that, on ocassions like this where a leader chooses to engage young minds on debates, these students ought to put direct questions on French activities in Africa to its leader.
That should be the terms of acceptance of delivery of such speeches. We miss the opportunity to clarify issues by not joining the debate and in such ocassions putting the questions directly to Sarkozy himself.
And how many African leaders have addressed Universities in their own countries themselves? When was the last time Paul Biya visited a University Campus in Cameroon let alone make a speech in one?
We cannot say speech is free, when we choose to want to define how an individual makes his speech.
My take is that African leaders should learn from Sarkozy and present themselves to their Campuses. Perhaps, they may learn the plight of their people.
Posted by: Alexandre Dumas | September 25, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Mr. Dumas,
Free speech does not mean making comments that may be deemed racist or making dishonest speeches. In some countries, making a comment that appears to be racist or any comment deemed to demean a group of people is a crime. In the UK, such a speech could be investigated by the Police to see if Sarkozy broke the law by saying "Africans have never entered History".
Posted by: Louis_Mbua | September 25, 2007 at 11:35 AM
Mbua,
I believe your thread just went to bolster Sarkozy's statements about Africans. We say thesame things he has said everyday, u say it about Cameroon but because a white man has said it, it is racist. Since the Ethopians and Egyptians made significant contributions to mankind thousands of years ago what have we done? The west has made significant strides in every aspect of life, what have we achieved as Africans? It seems to me you're suggesting Africa has retrograded in every respect since these early times. Looks like we discovered fire and said "ok,we've done the alpha and omega, there is nothing more that can be done, this is it".
We need to accept that we haven't taken responsibilities to our African issues, then we can really tackle our problems seriously. Maybe we should start by going back to Africa and stop "begging" from the white man.
Posted by: muna | September 25, 2007 at 12:01 PM
Louis,
if you read the preface to the print out of the speech posted on this site we are commenting on, it clearly states that the portions of the speech we are using is an "unofficial translation" of the speech. And, that portion of the speech you are quoting must not and cannot be read in isolation. It should be taken as a whole.
That tells a lot. I refuse to believe he went to an African University Campus to be racist. If he truely were, he would never have dignified that institution with his presence.
We Africans need to learn to be honest. Here is a French president who has gone to Africa, not to glorify the exploitation of Africans by hanging out in extravagant presidential palaces, but has taken a major step to get into an African lecture hall to join us in debate.
These are the kinds of gestures we need to celebrate and encourage.
What do we do, we demostrate pedestrian thinking by accusing him of racism, instead of participating in the debate.
How many people writing in this forum have ever written and published a critically valid argument about Africa?
Lest we forget, anyone involved in university administration, knows how difficult it is to successfully invite a siting politically elected leader to a campus, let alone for the the purposes of engaging him in a debate.
Posted by: Alexandre Dumas | September 25, 2007 at 12:08 PM
dumas. french man is a criminal and guilty, when it comes to any thing african.
how would you believe that. sakozy was involved in the genocide of africans just
recently? what about many many genocide
french presidents had done in africa?
what really pushes you french men to became mental monsters. when it have to do with africa? its not just racist but
contempt for human civization.
Posted by: paulo laurent | September 25, 2007 at 06:22 PM
M Laurent,
You have not answered some of the fundamental questions I raised. Have you ever seen an African President address a university audience in Africa? Have you seen any African President address a university audience in their own country? How do African presidents promote debate on campuses?
When has an African president had the balls to address a Western University and engage in Debate?
Its folks like you that give reason to Sarkozy to address Africans the way he does and he is right. Instead of making a rebuttal to remarks he made, you choose to ignore the salient points he raises.
If you want to prove Sarkozy wrong, engage in this debate. Stop hiding behind the cloak of history. History is relevant. The brutality humanity has seen in Africa repeats itself IN PART, because Africans sometimes cling to a victimhood attitude.
Use this opportunity to engage in the debate and promote debate. Prove that you, as an African, are educated and capable. Take out the emotional content, and engage issue for issue.
Note carefully, I am not French, I am a born Abakwa boy. Make small kraze no inter ya head you call me say Frenchman.
Posted by: Alexandre Dumas | September 26, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Muna et al.
There is a difference between criticisms and demeaning statements. Yes, the Egyptians, Malians, Sudanese and Ethiopians single-handedly dragged the entire world into civilisation. For three thousand years the entire world, including Monsieur Le President de La France’s, knew very little. In fact France was still not as civilised as Ancient Egypt and Nubia when Napoleon arrived in the 18th century, more than 4500 years after civilisation took root in Africa. So, what do you want us to do? Refuse historical facts to placate the statement of a poorly educated French man? I do not care what his intentions are. But he is NOT the right person to preach goodness after genocides in Rwanda and the French Cameroons (1955 – 1971); and the economic exploitation of Africa's resources that he continues to do today. If he is good, why does he not halt this evil? Those of you who support his "goodness" should question yourselves as to why Monsieur Sarkozy has never offered an apology for the crimes of France in Cameroon, Rwanda and the theft of resources and discrimination of African peoples in the colonial era? Have you asked him to pay reparations? Why should we accept a dishonest statement from a supporter of neo-colonialism in Africa?
Talking about me discussing in the same wavelength, as Monsieur Sarkozy, this is an unfounded allegation. Besides, I am African; and thus have the moral capacity to challenge evil against Africans by Africans. Further, I am not guilty of genocide or cheating other peoples. Neither have I tried to lecture Westerners on how to run their countries or continent. Whether Africa is today poor or not is of profound irrelevance in this argument as there are adverse aspects in European governance and moral tolerance as well which one could challenge with strong evidence. Nor have I insulted or deny Westerners their due contribution in human advancement. So, instead of you demanding an apology from Sarkozy, some of you turn around, as typical Africans do, blaming those who challenge evil as opposed to those who perpetuate crimes. One is left with the feeling that Africans appear to enjoy the art of being demeaned for reasons that are certainly unclear at this stage; and that in order that they may be seen as “good boys”, they rather take the easy route of attacking the challenger (a less than noble endeavour) of evil than the cause of evil itself.
I stand by my original statement that the man is ignorant and poorly educated; and possibly a closet racist.
Posted by: Louis_Mbua | September 26, 2007 at 11:32 AM
French aggression on Africa is ongoing. It is real. Philosophie speeches by french presidents mean nothing, if they do not back off. In fact, such speeches are insulting, because they presume that we cannot see what is going on. Then there are those here who cannot see
This is for Alexandre Dumas. The real victim mentality lives in those who would not acknowledge, protest and fight the very real neocolonial french project in Africa. They drink beer and accept the situation as immutable and then blame those who are being exploited.
The Dumas father and son were people of African descent who fought the racism of france by being the best writers that they could be. That is the best that they could do at the time.
Posted by: Ma Mary | September 28, 2007 at 08:52 AM
Ma Mary,
I am happy about one point you make:
"The real victim mentality lives in those who would not acknowledge, protest and fight the very real neocolonial french project in Africa. They drink beer and accept the situation as immutable and then blame those who are being exploited".
What better way of protesting than putting questions to France's leader?
In my September 20th post I stated:
"What ought to be happening is that, on ocassions like this where a leader chooses to engage young minds on debates, these students ought to put direct questions on French activities in Africa to its leader.
That should be the terms of acceptance of delivery of such speeches. We miss the opportunity to clarify issues by not joining the debate and in such ocassions putting the questions directly to Sarkozy himself".
We may disagree with the content of the speech in any form. But the first point is to engage in that debate.I choose the name Dumas knowing that they were of African Decent as I am.
I really dont care whether someone agrees or disagrees in that debate. BUT a refusal to engage on the issues based on a myopic reasoning that the comments were in themselves racist will be a mistake.
We may not like Sarkozy as a man or his style. But I cannot deny that his visit to an African lecture hall to begin this debate is commendable.
We need to do some real navel gazing as Africans if we intend to move forward.
A Dumas
Posted by: Alexandre Dumas | October 01, 2007 at 02:57 PM
Nicolas Sarkozy's gov't is hypocritic and racist.They say they want a "rupture" with de Gaulle's politics but they continue to support Idriss Deby.The latter just like his masters has accepted to pardon the Zoe's Ark child kidnappers.What a blow to Africa?
Posted by: Ndonfack | April 03, 2008 at 02:11 PM