Farrakhan: The Standard by Which the US and its European Partners Measure Good Has to be Off

Afro-Neoliberism: the latest iteration of Western imperialism

By Jehron Muhammad
(Columnist: Africa Watch)

If history, as the saying goes, is best qualified to reward all research U.S. past and present history of global imperialism against so-called third world nations, along with its European partners in crime, can never produce in its latest “strategy for Africa” anything of parity, of equity, of freedom to independently determine the continents best interest.

As Nation of Islam’s national representative, the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan once said, while determining the nature of “good,” that the “standard by which we measure good has to be off.”

Farrakhan a spiritual man emphasized good as having to be “qualified by God who is good.” He added, “So what you take as good and I take as good from the definition of a man that’s no good (Check out U.S. and European history of imperialism) well we would have to check what standard are we using to measure goodness.”

Add to the above Nation of Islam leader, the Honorable Elijah Muhammad’s prophetic remarks which appeared weekly in the pages of Muhammad Speaks. Note: One of the NOIs popular weekly news organs most distinctive attributes according to the scholarly digital library, JSTOR, was its “juxtaposition of religious and secular content.”

This was reflected in 1968 in Mr. Muhammad’s prophetic warning to Western powers and their antagonistic history of war mongering behavior. Published in his weekly centerfold column, Muhammad wrote, “The majority of the citizens of America (and the world) want some kind of peace and that peace is not foreseen in the movements of the government in Washington, unless the newly elected government takes steps to assure the powers of Asia, who have been attacked and their peace upset to the degree of anger, that a continuation of this antagonistic anger will bring an early total fall and destruction of the powers of England and America over the Black and colored races of the earth.”

He added, “The old world (Asia) will not bow to the West for peace. If peace is to be had, it will have to come from the West, who started the trouble that has put the nations of the earth in the present condition (without peace).”

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace misdefines U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and his recent three country “strategy for Africa” tour as ”a vision for a twenty-first century U.S. African partnership motivated by discernible global shifts.”

To write as senior fellow and director for the Africa Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Zainab Usman that U.S. is “positioning (itself) for the great power competition with China and Russia for influence in Africa displays America and NATO cold war redux, not some kind of favorable Western accord of African policy.

The U.S. and Russia cold war escalation can be seen in the sending of America’s UN ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, followed by Secretary of State Blinken to Africa followed by the upcoming December U.S. sponsored African Summit.

After Ms. Thomas-Greenfield’s visit, and threat made to African leaders, to not violate U.S. sanctions, according to the New York Times, Yoweri Museveni, the Ugandan president, responded on Twitter, “If they really want to help Africa, they should consider separating us from the sanctions in a war where we are not participating.” The post carried a picture of himself with Ms. Thomas-Greenfield.

Blinken during his meeting with his South African counterpart, Naledi Pandor displayed the diplomatic equivalent of a strained relationship. Like many other African countries, SA remains neutral over the war in Ukraine and avoided public criticism of Russia.

At a media conference after their initial meeting, reported News24, Blinken said if Russia were allowed to bully Ukraine, invade and take territory without being opposed, then it would be “open season, not just in Europe but around the world.” 

Pandor shot back and said no one in South Africa supported war and the country was also concerned that the prescripts of international law were not being applied evenly.

“We should be equally concerned at what is happening to the people of Palestine, as we are with what is happening to the people of Ukraine,” she said.

The Christian Science Monitor, who once, like Muhammad Speaks was known for its juxtaposition of religious and secular content, noted that Africa’s “weak bureaucracies” with the continents lack of transparency and accountability have opened the floodgates of state officials and the mismanaging of resource wealth.

This latest iteration of U.S. and European imperialism called “Afro-liberalism,” by Senegalese author and development economist and co-editor of “Economic and Monetary Sovereignty in 21st Century Africa” Dr. Ndongo Sylla “implies” giving substance to African neoliberal managers as trade negotiator, at being at root of African state-sponsored mismanagement.

During interview with Africa Watch from Senegal the noted pan Africanist said, “People don’t realize that whenever there is talk about African unity or pan Africanism its not (necessarily) about unity, its (about) how we can unite Africa in a way that the domination by the West or countries like China (can easily exploit the continent and its resources).”

As Dr. Sylla said during recent interview with The New Internationalist:

“The guys in APIX (Agency for the Promotion of Investment and Major works) are people who want to please the World Bank, the French or European development agencies… who want to be perceived as good managers.”

“I see this as a conflict of interest. Most of the people who serve as prime ministers or ministers of finance come from global financial circles – and they will never go against the interests of global finance.”

As Farrakhan has repeatedly said, “Consider the source.”

Back to top button