We have about 1.5 car factories left in Detroit, once the hub of the industry. They all moved south, as moses said; busted the unions, reduced the salaries and benefits. Where did they go? Tennessee, further south, the red part of the country that tolerated anti-union movements. The unions have been broken, thanks to Reagan and the republicans. And that didn't stop the out-sourcing. I also read it is slightly abating when the better trained workers or engineers are here. But it was precisely the better trained setup in china that accelerated globalization.
Our state, Michigan, went from one of the top ten in the country, financially, educationally, etc, to the bottom ten, or even bottom two.
I hold out no hopes for recounts. The state is divided, but due to gerrymandering is solidly controlled by republicans, and they themselves strongly driven by tea-party republicans.
No light here, folks. Or should I say, just beautiful trees and lakes, and the northern lights at night in the upper peninsula.
ken
Kenneth Harrow
Dept of English and Film Studies
http://www.english.msu.edu/
people/faculty/kenneth-harrow/
From: usaafricadialogue <usaafricadialogue@
googlegroups.com > on behalf of "meochonu@gmail.com" <meochonu@gmail.com>
Reply-To: usaafricadialogue <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com >
Date: Sunday 27 November 2016 at 17:46
To: usaafricadialogue <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com >
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Neoliberal Globalization, the White Working Class, and American Exceptionalism
Ayo,
Thanks for introducing that angle. It is true. I live in Tennessee. A couple of years ago, the Volkswagen factory in Chattanooga, which the state had worked so hard to attract with all kinds of tax incentives and giveaways, threatened to relocate from the state to another state--I believe Louisiana, but it could be another state. They were unhappy that the workers were planning a vote on unionizing and threatened that if the vote favored unionizing, they would close and move to a so-called "right to work" state, meaning a state that discourages unionizing. The company held all the cards.The governor and state political leaders frantically scrambled and met Volkswagen executives both in the US and Germany to try to persuade them not to close. They hit a brick wall. When that wasn't working, the state leaders launched a huge, costly PR effort against the unionizing vote. They attacked the leaders of the effort and the effort itself. It was a sophisticated campaign that portrayed the unionizing vote as an effort to chase the Volkswagen plant and its thousands of jobs out of Tennessee. They cast the unionizing vote as a jobs-killing effort. The Tennessee economy and the workers themselves would be the loser if they voted to unionize, they were told. They would all lose their jobs, which would deny them a livelihood. Whatever the benefit of unionizing, what was the point of throwing away a good factory job over it? The campaign was half threat and half suasion. It spooked the organizers of the union vote and some of them threw in the towel. When the vote was eventually held, the pro-union camp narrowly lost and the factory stayed open and cancelled its plans--if there was ever a real plan--to relocate to Louisiana.
Another automobile plant in another part of Tennessee announced that it was moving to Kentucky, setting off a wave of governmental interventions and incentives that ultimately persuaded it to abandon the plan to relocate. Keeping jobs in Tennessee is a good political rhetoric for politicians, and losing jobs to other states can prove a killer for a local politician. Companies know this and are shrewdly playing states off against one another to get generous deals in the form of tax breaks and legislative protections.
There are many stories like these across the country. States are trying to outdo one another to attract and retain factories, giving the companies so much leverage to negotiate all kinds of concessions and breaks as well as exploitative arrangements with workers. In fact, I read one report that said that outsourcing of manufacturing jobs to other countries has actually all but stalled in the last few years and that, now, companies realize that, with so much competition among states to attract factory jobs and with such demands for such jobs, they can remain in the US and pay meager non-union wages and secure enough breaks from taxes and regulations to make as much profit as they would make by shipping the factory to Mexico or Bangladesh. They can simply move plants from state to state to get the best, most profitable deals and to avoid costly overheads. This is what some now call insourcing.
Unfortunately, it is more politically convenient and comforting to scream about "foreigners (Chinese, Mexicans, Bangladeshis, etc) stealing our manufacturing jobs" than to scream about "Kentuckians are stealing our Tennessee manufacturing jobs." The latter doesn't resonate politically. Scapegoating the unseen, distant foreign Other never gets old and is often the go-to rhetoric of demagogues seeking to tap into economic anxieties.
On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Cornelius Hamelberg <corneliushamelberg@gmail.com> wrote:
Brother Akonte Braide, then already a scholar of New Testament Greek, taught me the meaning of "indocile" over there in Bakana, Rivers State Nigeria, in 1983. As for me, I am constantly / endlessly being educated by the many alagba and not so alagba contributors to this forum, for which I am enormously grateful
All said and done, I guess that Professor Harrow is keeping his fingers crossed about the Michigan vote recount - Michigan, where he has done his fair share of teaching/ educating, Michigan where "the old Detroit perfume" still lingers although the hard hit motor manufacturing is down for the count and that's why the laid off workers turned to Trump if not for salvation, at least to get their jobs back whereas all that Hillary could say or do was to promise some kind of continuity with Obama's policies, still waiting for the messiah...
Hillary was so sure that Wisconsin was in the bag that she didn't have to bother or waste time making a courtesy call to round up a few more voters. Now there's a flicker of hope, that something was amiss and she probably won that state after all, keeping her fingers crossed...
Prevaricating, splitting various hairs about a privileged or not so privileged group of enlightened/ educated beings - isn't that what election campaigns are all about – informing / misinforming , making propaganda for your chosen one (the better of two evils etc.?
The idiot wind is probably still blowing, "From the Grand Coulee Dam to the Capitol" and history records that your idiot wiped out sixteen strong men who started off on the Republican platform, everyone of them dreaming of becoming president – at which point , especially after the late video leak about some ancient history, your Hillary was confident that she was going to be the inevitable winner, consciousness raising Madeleine Albright having promised "a special place in hell" for women who didn't support Hillary…
Not so much has been made of the Bernie Sanders factor - after the wikileak about how he had been unfairly treated...
N.B. I agree : The American people are not always right, all of the time, as Abraham Lincoln said, "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."
On Sunday, 27 November 2016 07:36:30 UTC+1, Kenneth Harrow wrote:ICornelius is right: it does no good to be name-calling trump, even though I despise what he stands for. ("the idiot" is also a foolish epithet, when I actually like the word idiot. Dostoyevski, and especially Erasmus calling Christ the fool suits my tastes). More to the point, I share the view of those who belabor liberals for educating or failing to educate the working class. I really dislike that notion of a privileged group—call it educated or enlightened—who have the arrogance in believing they know and must inform, i.e. change the minds, of others.
On the other hand… much as the Marxist notion of false consciousness is an annoying anachronism, I do believe that those who voted trump because of their unhappiness with their economic situation were wrong, I wouldn't turn to another class to educate them.
Who on this list wants to be educated by others? We can be informed, and then maybe change our minds. That's different from being instructed.
A case in point: some time ago I was voicing my disapprobation of Mugabe. I was reminded that the economic situation was, in fact, better than the british press would have it, that the brits were doing their best to damage mugabe's economic situation, etc. in short, I didn't really know enough to be able to voice an informed opinion.
It wasn't false consciousness; it was incomplete knowledge.
Workers whose vote runs against their interests may be misinformed, but which of us knows so much as to be sure that a given opinion is the only one we can hold. Aren't experts themselves in disagreement?
So when Cornelius says the American people will make the right choice, I don't really agree that their collective opinion is necessarily right.
Still, I wish it had been a majority decision, not one warped by electoral college structures.
And although I do not agree with vanguardism at all, or the premises of "false consciousness," I do believe that dominant ideologies can serve the interests of ruling classes, and that sooner or later the neoliberal premises of globalization will entail "contradictions," with all the strife that follows.
ken
Kenneth Harrow
Dept of English and Film Studies
http://www.english.msu.edu/
people/faculty/kenneth-harrow/
From: usaafricadialogue <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Cornelius Hamelberg <cornelius...@gmail.com>
Reply-To: usaafricadialogue <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Date: Saturday 26 November 2016 at 11:40
To: usaafricadialogue <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Neoliberal Globalization, the White Working Class, and American Exceptionalism
Speaking from relative ignorance, this calls for some clarification : "I find it hard to believe that americans of any stripe or class recognize non-western victims of globalization." (Harrow). There's something wrong with that sentence.
As Malcolm X put it, "you can't have capitalsim without racism". Is it capitalisms' enlightened self-interest that does not recognise its own victims despite the world media's attention and all the howling and the many riots about the WTO's impact on Africa ?
But we know Professor Harrow as an Honorary African as well as being a caring sort of fellow and thank God - he goes on to explicate in later paragraphs: "Thirdly, more significantly, the impact of neoliberalism on Africa is more complicated. The import of cheap goods like Asian textiles might have had a small benefit for urban dwellers, but it is foodstuffs that really hit Africans hardest. Cheap thai rice, cheap American chickens, wheat, corn, cotton, all subsidized and then imported w/o tariffs, has had a devastating impact on the African farmers. Urban dwellers got cheaper food; African farmers got wrecked. Ditto for the impact on fishing industries.
This is the uneven globalization of neoliberalism that has had so devastating an impact on Africa. Not being able to protect their own production w tariffs—thanks to imf loans—africans can't compete w subsidized crops from Europe and the u.s. heavily subsidized.
I don't believe any group of americans is aware of this or cares a damn about its impact on Africa, except for American farmers who benefit from the subsidies and know quite well how it competes with others abroad. And not only care, but want to undersell others everywhere. Not just in Africa, but in the Caribbean and latin America as well."
A brief aside : like a bitter old Negro:
"...or who were dumb and disbelieved in science, or believed in angels more than Darwin." ( Harrow) Yeah, who were dumb and disbelieved in science - or were superstitious and believed in angels – with wings , more than in Darwin's tail...
Since the very beginning when the word was free, I have said that I believe that the American people will do what they believe is right for them - in making America Great Again – and that the US Constitution won't allow a Donald Trump or a Hillary Clinton to become a dictator - all this of course, in accordance with the most apt conclusion to Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth" and not without controversy this too is consistent with the idea that "every nation gets the government it deserves"
No parody intended, but having been an ardent follower of Prof Harrow's opinions on this epic presidential election – up to the point of Trump's triumph , it would seem that from the sum total of his points of view the bitter outcome reflects a failure of the intelligentsia in educating the American masses on how to vote in their own true self-interest – therefore post-mortems such as (a) "and the latinos voted in higher proportions for trump, despite his racist comments about Mexican rapists."(to date I'm wondering why only Latinos should be affronted by any talk of Mexican rapists?) (b) "Something like 1/3 voted trump, vs 1/10 afr americans voted for the idiot." (leaves one wondering why the name-calling? The US potus also unarguably the most powerful man in the world is now "the Idiot" as in that sympathetic character who is Dostoevsky's The Idiot more appropriately the presidential election results tally more closely with the title of Bernard Malamud's classic collection "Idiots First"
Jon Stewart calls liberals hypocrites for saying Trump voters are racist
On the lighter side of satire :
Native American Council offers amnesty to 220 million undocumented whites
On Saturday, 26 November 2016 14:50:24 UTC+1, Kenneth Harrow wrote:Dear moses et al
A few reflections on this thoughtful piece.
First, the distinction between white and non-white working class voters seems to me questionable on one point, when you write:" Thinking only in terms of one's narrow, localized interest stems from American exceptionalism, an arrogant postulation that is unintelligible to many of us with roots elsewhere. It is also foreign to many native-born Americans of color who are better able to recognize non-Western victims of globalization and to thus develop a more nuanced articulation of American working class discontent."
I find it hard to believe that americans of any stripe or class recognize non-western victims of globalization.
Secondly, the lumping together of African American and latino/chicano voters is somewhat overstated, for two reasons. The blacks voted in smaller percentages, but overwhelmingly democratic; and the latinos voted in higher proportions for trump, despite his racist comments about Mexican rapists. Something like 1/3 voted trump, vs 1/10 afr americans voted for the idiot.
Thirdly, more significantly, the impact of neoliberalism on Africa is more complicated. The import of cheap goods like Asian textiles might have had a small benefit for urban dwellers, but it is foodstuffs that really hit Africans hardest. Cheap thai rice, cheap American chickens, wheat, corn, cotton, all subsidized and then imported w/o tariffs, has had a devastating impact on the African farmers. Urban dwellers got cheaper food; African farmers got wrecked. Ditto for the impact on fishing industries.
This is the uneven globalization of neoliberalism that has had so devastating an impact on Africa. Not being able to protect their own production w tariffs—thanks to imf loans—africans can't compete w subsidized crops from Europe and the u.s. heavily subsidized.
I don't believe any group of americans is aware of this or cares a damn about its impact on Africa, except for American farmers who benefit from the subsidies and know quite well how it competes with others abroad. And not only care, but want to undersell others everywhere. Not just in Africa, but in the Caribbean and latin America as well.
Lastly, there were multiple reasons why working class whites voted for trump, not just for getting jobs or higher paying jobs. The might have been social conservatives against abortion or other religious reasons, or who were racists and thought that minorities were getting too strong or too many benefits; or because they hated seeing a liberal woman in power, over them especially; or who were dumb and disbelieved in science, or believed in angels more than Darwin. Duped into thinking a "strong man," regardless of his sexism or racism or authoritarianism or lies, would do better for them. Duped into believing lies about clinton's honesty. Duped or else just simply bigots themselves. Duped into accepting claims that global warming is a myth. Duped, dumb, selfish, or bigoted.
Lots of reasons: all of them bad.
We will all pay now for this catastrophic election, sooner or later.
ken
Kenneth Harrow
Dept of English and Film Studies
http://www.english.msu.edu/
people/faculty/kenneth-harrow/
From: usaafricadialogue <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Shola Adenekan <sholaa...@gmail.com>
Reply-To: usaafricadialogue <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Date: Saturday 26 November 2016 at 03:33
To: usaafricadialogue <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Neoliberal Globalization, the White Working Class, and American Exceptionalism
Prof Ochonu,
What you are saying is that the opinion of the white working classes matter more than the opinion of the Black and Latino working classes who overwhelmingly voted against Trump. Are Black and Latinos not the most affected by globalization? Why did these people go with HRC and why are we not articulating their position in this regard?
Black Lives Matter!
On 26 November 2016 at 04:20, Moses Ebe Ochonu <meoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Neoliberal Globalization, the White Working Class, and American Exceptionalism
By Moses E. Ochonu
In the aftermath of the US presidential election, I have been trying to re-understand this country that I have adopted as my own. Shocked and humbled by the outcome of the election, and as a lifelong student of the human condition, I've been trying to better understand the economic and cultural anxieties of the white working class, a group that assumed a mythical factor in pre- and post-election political conversations.
For six years, I lived in Michigan, a state whose working class has arguably suffered more than any other from the outsourcing of American manufacturing. I was therefore not entirely uninformed about this reality of a socioeconomic demographic that has been left behind by the unbridled transition from a localized industrial economy to a globalized, de-territorialized one. I returned to Michigan last summer and toured Detroit and its suburb to confirm for myself the media hype about a so-called Detroit come back.
On the same trip, I drove through the rust belt state of Ohio and beheld the lingering post-industrial economic blight. I returned from the trip disappointed at the seemingly intensifying postindustrial meltdown, and by the deteriorating conditions of those displaced by the forces of global recession and globalized and automated manufacturing. So even before the election, I had been reflecting on whether or how the Midwestern white working class could regain its economic place in America. What I didn't realize was the depth and breadth of the working class resentment and sense of alienation.
Since the election, I have sought reeducation on the frustrations of this mythical class in America. To this end, I have enjoyed reading the treatise of some of my colleagues and friends on the blind spot of progressive politics, on how progressives living and acting in a bubble have missed the growing disconnect between Democratic politics and the working class. Some of these arguments strike me as overly lionizing of the white working class and as excusing the xenophobic scapegoating of some of its members. Nonetheless, as a non-native born American, I have learnt a lot from these commentaries. I now realize that there is and has been a groundswell of white working class discontent, which the euphoria of progressive accomplishments has obscured or dismissed.
Much as I'm in general agreement with the need to recognize the American working class victims of globalization and to reinsert them into Democratic politics, I have two enduring, unresolved quibbles with the current discourse of white working class animus.
1. American Working Class Exceptionalism?
Much of this narrative of American working class victimhood in the orbit of globalization is rooted in American exceptionalism, the idea that the American working class in the industrial belt of the country has been peculiarly victimized by globalization. Much of this claim rests on the notion that the American working class is the only loser of globalization, and that everyone else — non working class Americans and citizens of countries that function as cheap labor reservoirs — has reaped a windfall from neoliberal free trade. This is another facet of American exceptionalism, the exceptionalism of victimhood, if you will. In this narrative, there is very little sympathy for, or solidarity with, the victims of globalization in the decimated industrial centers of Ilupeju, Kaduna, and Kano, in Nigeria. There is very little self-reflexivity, and much navel-gazing.
I conduct much of my academic research in Nigeria. I travel almost every summer to Northern Nigeria, where I see the ruins of industrial complexes and textile factories that used to employ hundreds of thousands of low-skill workers. In the last 15 years, free trade globalization in the form of a flood of cheap Asian manufactured goods has caused the factories to close, taking with it the livelihoods and dignities of many working families. Several of my own relatives who used to work in the textile factories of Kaduna and Kano were victims of this massive economic displacement. Some have died of hardship, shame, and heartbreak.
And yet, when the plight of the American working class is discussed, there is little mention of these Other victims of free trade globalization, those victims located in the Global South. Instead, the discussion is cast in the binary of American losers and third world winners. Everyone outside the American industrial heartland, including my displaced working class cousins in Kaduna, is portrayed as a beneficiary of globalization, as a zero-sum profiteer from the destruction of the American industrial working class. Citizens in the countries of the Global South are posited as undifferentiated, monolithic members of an evil cabal ripping off the American worker and benefitting from his dispossession. Whether they are in Mexico, India, China, or Nigeria, they are categorized uniformly as the beneficiaries of outsourcing, as "those who are taking our jobs." There is no effort to differentiate the outsourcing hubs of India and the outsourced factories of China and Mexico from the countries of Africa, where neoliberal globalization has arguably done the most damage.
Poor infrastructure and the paucity of skilled manpower prevented and continue to prevent the relocation of factories and offshore technology jobs to Africa, exposing the continent to globalization's worst impact and robbing it of its benefits. This reality of deindustrialization without the offset of technology outsourcing of the type that India and other countries have enjoyed is the crux of the African encounter with neoliberal globalization. Yet, there is little recognition of this far-flung non-white victimhood in lamentations of the American white working class about others benefitting at its expense. There is no distinction between African countries, which have not "stolen" American jobs and have had multiple industries destroyed by the same forces of free trade globalization that decimated the American rust belt, and countries hosting offshore factories.
In the lexicon of white working class victimhood, everyone outside America is a winner while the American factory worker is a loser. It is an adversarial interpretation of a neoliberal free trade ideology that has left a trail of victims across the world. It is a righteous, self-absorbed victimhood that fails to reckon with the entwinement of the fates of the world's many working peoples, including exploited factory workers in China, Mexico, Bangladesh, and the Philippines. Across the world, many peoples struggle, like members of the American working class, to maintain some dignity amidst the ravages of neoliberal globalization.
Because of its foundation in insular ignorance, unreflective American working class victimhood fails to inspire empathy among many progressives, who hear in it echoes of American arrogance and white American entitlement. In seeing the globalized economy solely in zero-sum terms and in refusing to entertain the fact that those portrayed as "taking American jobs" are victims of the vast neoliberal restructuring of the global economy, the American working class commits the same isolationist error as Americans who presume that American interests are synonymous and coterminous with global interests, and that others always gain when Americans lose. Thinking only in terms of one's narrow, localized interest stems from American exceptionalism, an arrogant postulation that is unintelligible to many of us with roots elsewhere. It is also foreign to many native-born Americans of color who are better able to recognize non-Western victims of globalization and to thus develop a more nuanced articulation of American working class discontent.
2. You Can't Have it All
The other puzzle for me pertains to the expectational universe of the American working class. Whatever you think of the ongoing restructuring of the global economy away from unskilled to skilled and automated labor, it is something that everyone has to come to terms with, and adjust to.
With a new knowledge economy bearing down upon us, and with industrial automation all but eliminating the stabilities of working class industrial life, is it still realistic to hold on to the old working class dream of forging a respectable middle class and pensionable factory career on the strength of a high school diploma? This is a question that working class Americans who dream of a return to the dignified factory workforce of their fathers' era have to confront without emotion.
In the wake the textile factory closures in Kaduna in the early 2000s, and seeing my relatives lose their jobs, I remember thinking about whether their lack of a college education or specialized skills hadn't already rendered them vulnerable to the vagaries of an increasingly interconnected global economy. I considered whether this failure to keep pace with the educational and vocational requirements of a new economy, rather than globalization itself, was the main causal factor in my relatives' sudden loss of livelihood and their inability to find alternative economic pathways.
Most people don't like the direction of the knowledge-based, postindustrial economy but they have adapted to it in order to survive. A failure to adapt and an angry desire to return to an elusive industrial economy of the past may open the door to politicians who promise to "bring back the manufacturing jobs," but a realistic approach will have to reckon with the reality that an industrial economy of the type that provided millions of Americans with middle class employment security in the past may never be fully recovered.
It is not the fault of workers in Mexico, Bangladesh, or Nigeria that this is the case. This is the kind of economy the world's financial elites and investment class want. It is the result of the global political triumph of neoliberal economics. The bleeding can be halted and productive transitions to alternative economies pursued, but a complete reversal of the impact of neoliberal globalization seems unlikely. This is the depressing truth. Working class Americans, like the displaced industrial workers of Nigeria, have to make peace with this reality.
A second aspect of this point is that there is a fundamental contradiction at the heart of working class narratives against globalized free trade. In exchange for job losses and factory relocations, Americans, including the working class, have enjoyed the benefit of cheap, foreign-manufactured goods. Whether this is a fair exchange for destroyed livelihoods and the lost dignity of the working man is a legitimate debate to have. But, like most things in life, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot love the cheap goods from China and Mexico, which have helped sustain the consumerist predilections and lifestyles of poor and middle class Americans and then rail against the factory relocations that make the goods cheap. You cannot insist on the inward flow of foreign-made cheap goods while demanding the dismantling of the global economic infrastructure that makes the flow possible. Doing what you desire will undermine the availability of and access to cheap goods made in labor-cheap countries. This tradeoff may be hard, but working class Americans have to accept the necessity for it.
This is a contradiction that also plagues globalization's losers in Nigeria. As Nigeria's textile factories closed under the weight of free trade globalization, the country was flooded with cheap Asian textiles. Access to cheap textiles may not compensate for the closure of factories and lost income but Nigerians love the cheap goods from Asia and, unfortunately for them, no realistic nationalistic economic program can reverse industrialization in Nigeria without harming access to cheap Asian goods. A difficult tradeoff is a necessary outcome of any ameliorative economic configuration.
The American working class has to abandon the expectation that factory jobs can come back in the form in which they left without sacrificing access to cheap foreign-made goods. Perhaps, in this regard, it can take a cue from displaced working classes in Nigeria and other African countries, which have made pragmatic, if painful, adjustments to the new global economic order.
The American working class can learn from countries like Nigeria, where anger at neoliberal globalization's damages has neither generated knee-jerk isolationist and protectionist sentiments nor inspired economic xenophobia.
It is obviously not the responsibility of the American working class to give voice to the grievances of victims of neoliberal globalization in other parts of the world, but an awareness of the global spread of neoliberalism's damage will temper the current rhetoric of reactionary, aggressive victimhood. It may also open the door to forging transracial and transnational solidarities to defeat neoliberalism's broader global agenda. For if this agenda is going to be thwarted, it's going to take a transracial solidarity of global working classes to do so, not a localized nationalist and insular reaction.
--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index. html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
--Regards,
Dr. Shola Adenekan
African Literature and Cultures
University of Bremen
Editor/Publisher:
The New Black Magazine - http://www.thenewblackmagazine.com
--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index. html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index. html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index. html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index. html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index. html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
No comments:
Post a Comment