Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: NigerianID | Introduce Chinese Language in Schools - Fashola

dear edward
i love this stuff!
the accompaniment to this, for me, is the etymology of words that denote nonsense, like barbarian which was, possibly, derived from the noises non-greeks made in their so-called languages; or maybe berbere.
the french have a term like that, charabia, meaning the same thing; gobblygook, which is the sound of the non-languages of those non-civilized peoples. i think there are a batch of such terms in english. also in french baragouin, with amazing etymologies, tracking french peasants into north african immigrants.
we have seen how the europeans softened that by calling african languages "dialects," and of course, all those other demeaning terms, like hut for house, and everything else under the sun, with literature, music, etc, on every point having a non-civilized counterpart. (the french do the same with "cases" for huts).
and then, the list of:
la mission civilisatrice
the white man's burden
kulturarbeit.
(don't know what the portuguese used)
we call that lesson african humanities 101--and it certainly gets tiresome after a while. that's why i like damas and cesaire who have the courage, unlike senghor, to push the rejection to the limit.
i think you do a wonderful, splendid job in tracking how the greeks both came to this same point, and undid it. i imagine it would equally fascinating to track how the romans, in their appropriations of their greek slaves, greek tutors, greek conquered peoples, turned the tables of "civilization" "civitas" on the romans' ears.
and on your last turn, we can do the same with montaigne, right?
which leads us, inevitably, to cesaire's turning of The Tempest on its ear. and the culmination of that is the brilliant novel of dionne brand for whom sycorax becomes the Mother of the Diaspora.
Dionne Brand, the end of the lines begun in Algiers, as shakespeare put it. right next door to...alexandria!
ken

On 11/27/12 1:53 PM, Kissi, Edward wrote:

Brother Ken,

 

Even the Greeks themselves,  by the years of the Peloponnesian War (ca 431-404BC), and the time of the rise of the Sophists and their new interest in human nature, had begun to question the bases on which the pre-war generation of Greeks  had discussed civilization; its origins and who embodied them.

 

Long before the war, Greek thought and tradition had left no doubt about who the “Barbarians” were. They were, simply,  non-Hellene, and they included the Trojans, Persians, Thracians, Egyptians, Lydians and, indeed, all who were regarded “Eastern” by the average Greek. The “natural inferiority”  of the “barbarian” to the Greek, and the barbarian’s inability to produce “culture” and “philosophy” had been a theme of perennial interest to Aeschylus and Sophocles. In their writings exist that pre-war Greek tendency to equate barbarians with “ignorance” and “emotion” and Greeks with “wisdom” and “courage.” The average Greek of Aeschylus’ time strongly believed that Greek philosophy and social institutions were better than eastern despotism, and the Greeks, the most enlightened and free.

 

Evidence? Just look at the discomfort that Iphigenia and Helen, and other Greek characters,  display in non-Greek lands in Aeschylus’ and Sophocles’ plays. But, this orthodox representation of  Hellenic conduct and the nostalgia for Greece that Greek characters displayed in “Barbarian lands” in Greek drama changed in the immediate post-war years.

 

Folks, my intervention here  is not meant as a lesson in classical history and literature, but as a reinforcement of Ken’s point, from a student of Classics, that the Greeks who had dabbled in theories and assumptions about civilization and barbarism saw these debates as futile, as Moses put it,  and specious, as Ken acknowledges,  by the late 5^th Century BC.

 

Antiphon, the Sophist,  led the charge, in an extant fragment of his On Truth,  that the Greeks were no different from the Barbarians and Greek thought had no superior value over what others in Thrace and Troy thought about themselves and their institutions. But, perhaps, the most radical critic of notions of civilization and their bearers and origins, in Greek history, was the dramatist Euripides. Look at his extant plays and how he deals with the binary themes of “Greeks and Barbarians”; “The Slave and The Free”; “Nobles and Commoners”, for instance.  Euripides spares no time to assert, in his Andromache,  in a conversation between Andromache and the supposedly civilized Hermione, that “Shameful is recognized as shameful, east or west.”  That is an emotion expressed by all humanity and all human beings exhibit the intellect to detect what is shameful irrespective of region or race.

 

Something to behold about the earlier discussions on Negritude  and about Hellenic rationality and Negroid emotion as Senghor and others presented them.

 

Just a thought,

 

Edward Kissi

 

 

From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com [mailto:usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Moses Ebe Ochonu
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 8:51 AM
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: NigerianID | Introduce Chinese Language in Schools - Fashola

 

Ken,

 

I totally agree with you here. Even if it's not 90%, even if it's 40% or 50 or 60%, how does one ignore this reality of sharing, diffusion, transfers, and "originary syncretism" and proceed to invest so much intellectual energy in arguing about the origins of a particular knowledge form or technological system in the ancient world, or on who invented what, who passed what to whom, and which civilization birthed which? I don't get why the futility of this exercise is not apparent. Civilization is a negatively loaded term, a terrible term in the context of empire and imperialism as you stated. But that's not the only context in which it is fraught with dangers. The folks who first wrote about civilization qua civilization (i am not talking about the multiracial, multiethnic cast of travelers, traders, and adventurers who recorded their experiences and observations about specific things, peoples, practices and objects in specific nodes of travel and sojourn), most of them Europeans; in talking explicitly about "civilization," were they not making arbitrary and strategic judgments in terms of what/whom to value and what/whom to devalue? Were they not classifying people and creating hierarchies in relation themselves, outside of any objective standard, and with the ultimate agenda of positing themselves in Social Darwinist terms as the carriers of high civilization, etc? Where they not also trying to cultivate a genealogy for their own claims of being civilized, etc? Were they not strategically selecting the the criteria for what constitutes civilization? When the Afrocentrics argue that Egypt was an African civilization which birthed Greece and Rome and thus Western civilization, are they not in fact working within these flawed, originary, and hegemonic definitions of civilization, merely re-using these same problematic definitions in a way that supports their own ideology of the civilizational primacy of Africa? As you say, talks of civilization, whether in relation to the ancient world or in relation to modern imperial practices, is usually steeped in specious, hegemonic, or counter-hegemonic claims that are removed from the messy empirical realities of actual experiences. They often display gross infidelity to actual, on-the-ground realities. That's why I use the term "civilization" only in two ways: to critique it, or liberally to denote any society, small or big, grandiose or minimalist, with a history for us to study.

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 8:44 PM, kenneth harrow <harrow@msu.edu> wrote:

i've been wanting to return to this thread, but too busy, and no one took seriously anyway my claim that the defns of civilization were specious.
i still believe that there is a confusion of large societies with civilization, or technologies with civilization.
i once taught medieval civilizations, and learned 90% of all technologies were acquired from outside a given culture. 90%. there is no civilization there, it is an ideological construct, one created by rome and other great states to validate their domination over "barbarians." greek lesson number one. mine is a language, yours is barbar speech.
anyway, without trying to convinced any of you unwashed masses, i will give you a poem. from the great negritude poet, damas.
CHeck out the last word, and remember, what the french called their colonial mission? la mission civilisatrice:

Sell Out by Damas
I feel ridiculous
in their shoes
their dinner jackets
their starched shirts
and detachable collars
their monocles and
their bowler hats

i feel ridiculous
my toes not made
to sweat from morning until night's relief
from this swaddling that impedes my limbs
and deprives my body of the beauty of its hidden sex

i feel ridiculous my neck caught smokestack style
with this head that aches
but stops each time i greet someone

i feel ridiculous
in their drawing rooms
among their manners
their bowings and scrapings
and their manifold need of monkeyshines

i feel ridiculous
with all their talk
until they serve each afternoon
a bit of tepid water and
some teacakes snuffling rum

i feel ridiculous
with theories they season
to the taste of their needs
their passions
their instincts
laid out neatly every night
like doormats

i feel ridiculous
among them
like an accomplice
like a pimp
like a murderer among them
my hands hideously red
with their blood of their
ci-vi-li-za-tion

ken

On 11/26/12 11:21 AM, Kissi, Edward wrote:

Brother Moses,

 

I often find little to disagree with about your discussions of weightier issues in this forum. The reason is simple. They are often sophisticated, persuasive and well-composed. But, I went to bed over the weekend scratching my head over the claim you made which reminded me of Elliot Smith’s old and discarded Heliolithic theory of civilization which Wassa Fati was right to call you on. Smith had claimed that human civilization (urbanization, writing, agriculture, metallurgy and architecture) had diffused from the East, Middle East, Mesopotamia (read Egypt, Central Asia, Iraq, Turkey----The Fertile Crescent) to the rest of the world including Africa south of the Nile. Your restatement of this diffusionist Heliolithic theory of civilization (seriously undermined by archaeological excavations in the early 20^th Century) also reminded me of how stubborn theories of history are, in the historian’s thinking,  and how even discredited theories of history endure across generations. But, I held my quiver this morning after reading your detailed clarification below.

 

I tend to share the “interactive” and/or “polygenetic” theories of civilization---what you aptly called “symbiotic diffusion.” But, like you,  I am very skeptical of discourses on “origins” and “cradles” of civilization, institutions and ideas. The historical evidence often assembled to support these discourses are speculative, fragmentary and theoretical suggesting that humility and circumspection  should be the historian’s eternal companion.

 

If you have not already looked at them, I will suggest that you peruse, at your leisure, Daniel F. McCall’s Africa in Time Perspective (1969), and Erik Gilbert’s and Jonathan T. Reynolds’ Africa in World History (2012). These scholars have something to share on the messy matters of civilization; theories of history; historical evidence and historical interpretation.

 

Edward Kissi    

 

 

 

From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com [mailto:usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Moses Ebe Ochonu
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2012 4:38 PM
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: NigerianID | Introduce Chinese Language in Schools – Fashola

 

Wassa,

 

A few thoughts by way of clarification and response to your observation. My omission of a specific mention of Africa was deliberate for several reasons that will emerge shortly. In sum I wanted to avoid making the ahistorical, Afrocentric ideological point that civilization begins in Africa. It's a silly, dead-end debate that I don't wish to dignify. And obviously since my comment was made in the context of a discussion on science and technological modernity in Europe, I had to restrict myself to areas that have a bearing on the discussion on knowledge transfers--African and non-African.

 

1. That humanity began in Africa does not automatically mean that civilization began in Africa, unless you (re)define civilization to make it support your contention. A debate on what constitutes civilization is for me a waste of time.

 

2. Perhaps I should have been more specific instead of throwing out the word "civilization" since I was not referring to civilization per se but to knowledge systems like mathematics, algebra, astronomy, physics, etc. I know about NOK, Great Zimbabwe, and other examples of African civilizational achievements but I was not discussing civilizations per se but specific knowledge forms that were later appropriated or diffused as precursors of modern European science and technology. Besides, I wasn't concerned about these sub-Saharan scientific accomplishment since I was only trying to show what influenced or was appropriated by Europe and there is no evidence that this "inner African" ancient civilizations ever came into active communion with or transfered specific ingredients to Europe.

 

3. Because of this focus, I had to stick to examples that definitely seeped into and influenced later European scientific flourish--the regions of Oceanic knowledge exchanges (the Mediteranean, Indian Ocean, and Red Sea corridors). These regions borrowed and shared scientific knowledge and trade goods in ancient and medieval times. Together, they constituted a civilizational complex around these interconnected waters. This civilizational complex included ancient Nubia, ancient Egypt, Ethiopia, India, China, the Near East, the Middle East,  Maghrebian North Africa, etc. In other words, this civilizational complex was not "African" or solely African but multi-continental. There were many African nodes and centers in it but since it also included several areas (as listed above) that are not geographically African, it would be reductive to describe the complex as African, or the scientific ideas it generated as African. I know that in Afrocentric cycles this type of ahistorical inaccurate leaps are common, but I don't do Afrocentric extrapolation. Terms like "Mediterranean," Red Sea corridor, etc already includes the regions of Africa that participated in this vast civilization complex, so I did not see a need to single out Africa or to slap the label of Africa on a complex that was not African but cosmopolitan and intercontinental.

 

4. The issue of which ancient civilization borrowed what from whom is tricky and one must approach it with care. Many ancient civilizations developed simultaneously or overlapped, so they borrowed extensively from one another. Thus the effort to establish a neat trajectory of borrowing is problematic and futile. For instance when some people say Greece is indebted to Egypt and that Rome is indebted to Greece, this is nothing more than an attempt to extrapolate from the chronological order in which these civilizations rose and fell. Take Egypt. Yes, Egypt gave a lot to Greece but Egypt also got a lot from the Greek city states that it interacted with. And Egypt and Mesopotamia influenced each other extensively as did Persia and Greece and Persia and India, etc. Establishing a neat order of knowledge transfer and appropriation is thus difficult, hence my use of the phrase "symbiotic diffusion." A one way trajectory is not faithful to the historical evidence. Nonetheless, one thing we do know is that some civilizations or their knowledge systems informed others more than vice versa. So, we can posit that the Egypt/Mesopotamia complex passed a lot to Greece and that the latter did the same with Rome. Does this mean that civilization began in Egypt and thus Africa? What specific aspect of civilization are we talking about? Is/was Mesopotamia in Africa? Was ancient Egypt  self-contained and entirely homegrown?  As I said, the Egypt/Mesopotamia complex itself was not self-contained or originary in any way; it took in influences from surrounding Mediterranean (Hellenistic and otherwise) and Red Sea zones, and through them from India and elsewhere, making it impossible to state definitely that this was the source of ancient scientific knowledge.

 

So, for me, it is best to preserve this ancient civilizational complexity and this messy picture of sharing and borrowing instead of arbitrarily establishing origins on the basis of ideological arguments that developed in specific moments against hegemonic epistemological claims that have long been discredited. The only thing we know for sure, and which I argued, is that from this vast non-Western or non-European civilizational complex several scientific concepts, disciplines, and rationalities developed and flowed to Europe via several routes, including as Ken says the Islamic modernity and Islamic scientific philosophies of the medieval and Middle Ages.

 

 

 

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Wassa Fatti <wassafatti@hotmail.com> wrote:

Bro. Moses,

I agree with you on your rebuttal of the false believe that Europeans invented ideas, progress, reason and its techniques. However, your argument that "the historical chronology and genealogy of civilization and knowledge formation does not begin in Europe" is a correct rejection of Eurocentricism. To assert that: "It begins rather from the East, the Near East, the Middle East and parts of Mediterranean world and made its way in a symbiotic diffusion first in classical antiquity to Greece and then to Rome, and then to Europe proper in the Middle Ages and the early modern periods" is problematic.

 

This assertion of yours is unclear, confusing and contradictory. It is a known fact that humans originated from Africa. It is also a known fact historically that the first human human civilization in history was the Egyptian civilization which was African. Now what do you mean by "the East", "the Near East", "the Middle East", "parts of Mediterranean world"? The failure to even mention Africa's contribution to the historical development of the East, the Near East, Greece and the Mediterranean world shows how Eurocentricism has affected our minds for the simple reason that in our attempts to reject it, we sometimes end up endorsing it. This has nothing to do with supporting Negritude. I have never believe in that degrading philosophical and intellectual theory. The idea that human civilization originated from the East, Near East or Greece has been refuted by even European scholars since the mid 19th Century.

 

Wassa

 

---

Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:49:38 -0600

Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: NigerianID | Introduce Chinese Language in Schools – Fashola

From: meochonu@gmail.com
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com

And, Toyin, I would not be so fast to reify European-produced or European mediated ideas about progress. As I stated earlier, the idea of reason being a universal invented and bestowed on the world by Europe is not true at any level. First, reason is a relative 'truth," not a universal. It is not the holy grail or the only holy grail of knowledge. Second, Europe did not invent reason and its techniques. The historical chronology and genealogy of civilization and knowledge formation does not begin in Western Europe. It begins rather from the East, the Near East, the Middle East and parts of Mediterranean world and made its way in a symbiotic diffusion first in classical antiquity to Greece and then to Rome, and then to Europe proper in the Middle Ages and the early modern periods. My critique of Negritude, or more precisely Senghor, is not to be taken as an endorsement of European and Eurocentric claims about progress and development. Ken's argument in this regard is compelling and I totally agree with it. The challenge before us is to decenter and relativize Europe and its universalist claims instead of lionizing them. If I understand Ken, his point is that we should search for more holistic forms of "development" and progress, and that even in our age progress and "development" cannot be reduced to mere products of technological modernity. This does not mean throwing away technology and science but bridling their most dehumanizing-- and destructive-- aspects while harnessing their power to drive qualitative change. More importantly, Ken asks that we acknowledge that we pay a price, sometimes a heavy one that may diminish our humanity and "development," by embracing the notion that Euro-modernity and its technological capitalism and consumerism are the path to progress.

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Moses Ochonu <meochonu@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, Pius, that's indeed only one aspect of Negritude. Even the guilty party, Senghor, has other postulations that have stood the test of relevance and intellectual sophistication. Diop and Cesaire do not go so far as Senghor in asserting dichotomies of progress, although aspects of their own epistemologies too can be legitimately critiqued. I feel that one should appreciate the fact that the Negritudists were the first serious group of scholars that did not just critique Western universalist claims but developed alternatives to them. Some of these ideas are quite sound and were iconoclastic for their time. More importantly, they were the first to disturb the idea of Europe as the center of human progress, suggesting that progress could occur simultaneously in multiple contexts. You can argue with how they went about doing this but you have to give them credit for doing it. 

 

Toyin, please read Messey Kebede's A Philosophy of Decolonization. He does a very good job of distilling and defending Negritude's less controversial and important contributions.

Sent from my iPad

On Nov 25, 2012, at 6:30 AM, OLUWATOYIN ADEPOJU <tvade3@gmail.com> wrote:

"Oyinbo repete!" as a particular Yoruba expression would put it.

English [ as a carrier of knowledge]  overflowing.

You people are really educated.

What?!

This river of knowledge is flowing from you as if you are talking a walk next door.

It would be interesting to understand, something  I expect philosophy and psychology of education explore, the initiatory stages, the various mental doors opened and conceptual platforms consolidated, the skills mapped onto the brain as the  mind is reshaped, as one climbs the ladder to becoming  adept in a field of knowledge.

What factors motivate people to pursue such expertise?

Having expressed my wonder, I move on to look at the points made.

The complementarity point is fundamental. Moses puts it beautifully. Thanks for another delightful summation.

I begin to suspect, though, that the European paradigm of progress is much richer than it is given credit for.

On Negritude, I was looking the other day into Irele's 'What is Negritude?' and observed his struggle to present the finer points of the problematic Senghorian formulation.

I am very interested in what one could read to appreciate the richer contributions of Negritude.

I wonder if much has not been lost in the cultural move from French to English across languages and societies in the way Negritude was translated.

thanks

toyin

On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:59 AM, Pius Adesanmi <piusadesanmi@yahoo.com> wrote:

Moses:

Beware of the ides of synecdoche. You may be making a particular strand of "negritudist philosophy" stand for the whole thing here. There was/is more to that discourse than the roforofo fight between Hellenic Reason and Negro Emotion which Senghor initiated and refereed.

Pius

 

 

 

---

From: Moses Ebe Ochonu <meochonu@gmail.com>
To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 24 November 2012, 15:11
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: NigerianID | Introduce Chinese Language in Schools – Fashola

 

Oga Toyin,

 

I had a feeling after writing my comments that I had done more to conceal my point than to reveal it. Thanks for calling me out on it. My point is that Kenn's argument seems to reaffirm the problematic view of Negritudist philosophers and intellectuals regarding progress. Their response to and critique of the technological modernity of Europe was to argue that Africans/blacks are different from Europeans and have been conditioned by geography, culture, and socialization to value and express emotion, intuition, and artistic creativity above reason, verifiability, investigation, science, technology, and other markers of progress valued and posited as universal standards by Europeans. My point is that by positing an alternative African standard of progress, one founded not on science and reason but on artistic and humanistic excellence, this Negritudist notion concedes and surrenders the realm of reason, science, and technology to Europe or Euro-America. Why would one do that when one can narrate Africa and Africans as capable of appreciating and producing scientific/technological knowledge and progress, as in fact a center of scientific and technological progress, even if this technological culture may have some distinctly African flavors? Further, I stated that I prefer the revised Negritudist notion that Africa and Europe are not just separate spheres of progress, separated by the dichotomy of science/technology and arts/humanism, but also zones of complementarity that complement each other, together driving human progress. Technological progress cannot be sustained, the argument goes, without humanistic developments, and qualitative societal progress stagnates when a society relies solely on humanistic and artistic pursuits. I prefer this argument but I also recognize that it, too, is problematic in that it leaves intact the Eurocentric claim that technological and scientific progress defined by European notions of reason is a universal or that it should be. The notion of complementarity does not challenge the hegemony of European technological and scientific modernity. I realize that I have not resolved the problem but I didn't set out to do so. I set out to point out the problem I see with Kenn's argument in response to your query, especially the paragraph you quoted admiringly.

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 12:27 PM, OLUWATOYIN ADEPOJU <tvade3@gmail.com> wrote:

Oga Moses,

 

Your English is really big here.

 

Can you explain, please?

 

toyin

 

On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Moses Ebe Ochonu <meochonu@gmail.com> wrote:

Beautiful words, but for me Kenn's idea in those words comes dangerously close to the highly problematic Negritudist attitude to notions of scientific and technological progress, and their concomitant veneration of alternative cultural and "intuitive" premises of progress, arguments which ultimately serve to unintentionally underscore and reify the equally problematic dichotomous view of progress and lag inherent in the paradigmatic Eurocentric ideas that the Negritudist intellectuals set out to challenge in the first place. I prefer the idea of complementarity, which revisionist rereadings of Negritude, like Messay Kebede's, stress above the idea of a separate cultural baseline of progress for "emotional" African peoples. The idea of complementary, too, has its own blindspots, to be sure, since it does nothing to fundamentally challenge and in fact leaves intact the paradigmatic, universalist claims of Western technicist modernity and the ideas of progress that flow from these claims.

On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:22 PM, OLUWATOYIN ADEPOJU <tvade3@gmail.com> wrote:

i really like this-

...or we can imagine that the notion of progress is totally bound up in cultural values disseminated by dominant structures, and that independence means not only resistance to those structures which privilege the way wealth and power are constructed in the global north, but rethinking the received wisdoms that link notions of progress to scientific rationalism.

 

On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:18 PM, kenneth harrow <harrow@msu.edu> wrote:

or we can imagine that the notion of progress is totally bound up in cultural values disseminated by dominant structures, and that independence means not only resistance to those structures which privilege the way wealth and power are constructed in the global north, but rethinking the received wisdoms that link notions of progress to scientific rationalism.

--
Compcros

Comparative Cognitive Processes and Systems

"Exploring Every Corner of the Cosmos in Search of Knowledge"

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

 

--
There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.


---Mohandas Gandhi

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

 

--
Compcros

Comparative Cognitive Processes and Systems

"Exploring Every Corner of the Cosmos in Search of Knowledge"

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

 

--
There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.


---Mohandas Gandhi

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

--
Compcros

Comparative Cognitive Processes and Systems

"Exploring Every Corner of the Cosmos in Search of Knowledge"

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

 

--
There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.


---Mohandas Gandhi

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

 

--
There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.


---Mohandas Gandhi

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

-- 

kenneth w. harrow 

faculty excellence advocate

distinguished professor of english

michigan state university

department of english

619 red cedar road

room C-614 wells hall

east lansing, mi 48824

ph. 517 803 8839

harrow@msu.edu

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

 

--
There is enough in the world for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed.


---Mohandas Gandhi

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
 
 

--   kenneth w. harrow   faculty excellence advocate  distinguished professor of english  michigan state university  department of english  619 red cedar road  room C-614 wells hall  east lansing, mi 48824  ph. 517 803 8839  harrow@msu.edu