Tell Your Story, Or Others Might Tell It For You

Image by Priscilla Gaona for Afro-Latino Festival NYC 2017 “Women of the Diaspora Edition”

By Amilcar Priestley, The Afrolatin@ Project

September 6, 2020

July 25 marked the International Day for Afro-Latin American, Afro-Caribbean and Diaspora Women, which was started in 1992. In the context of the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests this summer, we have seen a flurry of conversation around Afrolatinxs. We have also seen too many pieces written about (but not written by) Afrolatinxs, articles discussing Latinx solidarity with BLM (while superficially mentioning that Black Latinxs exist), a flurry of self-proclaimed experts with little track record, and more recently, the revelations of imposters, who were never part of any Afrolatinx community, yet who flourish in academia and write our histories as such. While we hoped to read more of the knowledgeable voices of those who have been consistently fighting for Afrolatinxs and addressing racism and anti-Blackness in Latinx communities, alas, this comprises the vast majority of what we’ve seen thus far.

There are 125 million people of African descent in or from Latin America and the Caribbean; nearly ⅓ of the population. While a new topic for some, one might consider that these 125 million people, whose first rebellion in the Western Hemisphere was December 25, 1522, might have a significant history of their own. In fact, Afro-Puerto Rican bibliophile Arturo Alfonso Schomburg, namesake of the New York Public Library’s Harlem home, built the library’s collection around the histories of the Black diaspora, specifically highlighting Latin America. 

The op-ed authors opine on the racism and anti-blackness experienced by Black Latinx communities. Very few pieces have attempted to capture the tenor of community concerns.  While the increased coverage is notable, none of the authors were actually Black Latinx. It will always be more impactful to cede space and uplift voices better equipped to discuss the issues. At this moment, Black Latinxs need more amplifiers - not others speaking for us. For many, it is past time for superficial “conversations”, substantive engagement in these issues is necessary. The recent revelations of imposters, as well as the ensuing public conversation, further clarify a centuries old issue, that Afrolatinx histories and our present, have been equal parts violated, ignored and appropriated. 

Latin America’s myth of racial democracy hides the fact that it has its own intimate relationship with slavery, rape, racial discrimination, eugenics, violent police and state repression, criminalization and sexualization of Black Latinxs, un/underemployment, cultural appropriation, abdication of government, systemic and institutional racism, exclusion and invisibilization from education, political, and economic progress, issues similar to the racial realities of the United States. Framing Afrolatinx experiences with racism and anti-blackness as a by-product of the “U.S. war on drugs” or as a residual of the racism “deeply rooted in America’s social system” obfuscates and misleads. Neither began in the U.S; both pre-date any drug war or immigration debate. 

The United Nations launched the International Decade for People of African Descent (2015 - 2024), recognizing that Black communities throughout the Americas are under siege and have been denied full citizenship rights. In fact it was only 2019 when Mexico, one of the largest Latin American members of the U.N., finally began the process of recognizing Black Mexicans.  It is not the first time an international body has convened a Decade for communities under siege. Interestingly, when we assess the efforts of governments, NGOs, media (Latin America, US or global) we have achieved nowhere near the level of visibility of the highly impactful First or Second International Decades of the World’s Indigenous Peoples as declared by the U.N. (from 1995-2004 and 2004 to 2014, respectively). Clearly there is work to be done in both public and private sector spaces. 

Instead of co-opting space, feigning ignorance of anti-Blackness, or deflecting, platforms, organizations, and academia particularly Latinx owned should be bringing more Black Latinx to the table in substantive ways. In business, media, entertainment, and arts that means both up front and behind the scenes.  For example, proposed new programming about Afrolatinxs whether it be film, tv, print, digital, OTT, radio or any other medium, should be written by Black Latinx creatives, or as a key starting point, with their substantive direction. In politics, academia and funding, that means prioritizing the voices of authentic doers for policy, education and strategy. Such efforts, not those driven by superficial gestures, will move us closer to a reckoning of the issues of racial hierarchy among Latinx. It would also help weed out the frauds and opportunists that have and will arise.  Throughout all, Afrolatinx efforts to build independent platforms should be financially supported, not just verbally supported. 

For example, Univision, long accused of perpetuating anti-Blackness in their news coverage and programming, could support a national project in the vein of Jorge Ramos’ “Sembrando Odio” [“Hate Rising”] (2016), directed by a Black Latinx, which reflects and addresses the roots of these issues among Latin Americans and the diaspora and which also takes a critical eye to the media’s own role; they could even amplify their own talent and programming by building on the Emmy winning “Afrolatinos” (2019) short news piece. The upcoming documentary “Afrolatinx Revolution” (2020) directed by Natasha Alford and produced for the Grio with the support of the Pulitzer Center is a good example. Comparable efforts and business strategies to support internal and independent talent are necessary in other companies and industries. 

White/mestizo Latinx have benefitted by walking with much of the same privilege as their Anglophone counterparts; in recent discussions of Afrolatinxs this status quo is being replicated. We observe new attempts at diversity across industries with cautious optimism while wary of cycles repeating.  To be clear, Black Latinx who are working to positively impact our communities and who have an understanding of community concerns should be the perspectives centered and prioritized. If the spaces/platforms typically held by non-Black Latinx are not centering and amplifying such voices in these conversations, what function do they truly seek and serve in this dialogue? 

We know that #BlackLivesMatter because we have been engaged in the struggle for Black lives in the rest of the Western Hemisphere. Look no further than the most recent massacres, disappearances, and torturing of Black (and indigenous) youth in Honduras, Colombia, Brazil or Panamá. Black Latinxs face these issues on both sides of the border precisely because of their commonality of experiences with the Black diasporas of the Western Hemisphere. When others attempt to tell our stories and experiences, we risk having them tell it however they choose. 

Amilcar Priestley, Esq. is the Director of the Afrolatin@ Project (founded 2006), the only digital resource & cultural heritage archive centering the Black Americas. He is also co-director of the 8th Afro-Latino Festival NYC and the 4th Liberacion Film Festival (October 12-16, 2020), both first of their kind events in the U.S. created by Black Latinxs.

New Reading: Identidad y Territorio Afrodescendiente en Chile. ["Afrodescendant Identity & Territory in Chile"] 2018

We had the honor of hosting Cristian Baez Lazcano @afrochileno last month for our panel on the AfroChilean response to the ongoing political crisis in Chile🇨🇱 . He left us with his latest book which documents the Black experience in Chile. The book discusses African epistemology and its importance in revalorizing African identity. It also delves into the traditional African derived cultural heritage and diaspora foodways of Chile. The book ends with an important legal and political analysis of territorial claims made under the ILO-Convention 169 (1989 International Labor Organization Convention on the Rights of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.  International Convention). 

The Convention, one of the first international human rights documents recognizes: the right of indigenous and Tribal groups to self identify, the concept of collective rights, territorial autonomy and the idea of "territory" as a distinct but complementary concept to "land" and the special relationship of said communities to the environment as a source of material and spiritual sustenance. 

The recent civil society protests have forced the government of President Sebastian Pineda to consider  reforms to the Chilean Constitution. The AfroChilean community is pushing to be recognized under this new Constitution as an indigenous or tribal community because Chile is a signatory to the ILO- Convention 169.

The Convention establishes the international framework for rights and protections of ancestral lands traditionally occupied by those recognized as "tribal" or "indigenous communities". These implicate how resources are allocated by the state and international funding organizations. As a result, many indigenous communities reject the idea that Afrodescendants should be considered indigenous or tribal communities, arguing that although brought to the Western Hemisphere forcefully 500 years ago, descendants of enslaved Africans do not have the same connection to the land. Afrodescendant civil society counters that they have been on the land for 500 years, before independence and before the existence of any of the actual countries within whose borders they live.

The reality is that these political tensions between Black and indigenous communities in Chile exist throughout the Americas from the U.S. South, to Mexico, Central and South America.  They are seldom discussed, but (US context aside), most recently have arisen in the context of the 20th century framework for human rights claims made by these international conventions. In the transition from enslaved indigenous to African labor from the 1500's such tensions existed as they were often pitted against each other. Following that however, Black and indigenous communities had long periods of social, cultural, economic and political solidarity against mestizo hegemony.  

The example of the Samarka demonstrates the importance of these designations. In the 1990s Suriname allowed lands occupied by the Samarka, one of 6 Afrodescendant maroon communities in its borders, to be decimated by speculators and deforestation. After making a claim to their territorial rights under the  ILO Convention 169, in 2007, the OAS Inter-American Commission on Human Rights ruled that the Samarka were to be recognized and their land rights protected as a "tribal community". The decision relied on several criteria but in particular Samarka's self governance and traditional reliance on their spiritual, social, cultural and economic relationship to the land. "The land signifies more than merely a source of subsistence for them; it is also a source necessary for the continuity of life and cultural identity... It forms part of their social ancestral and spiritual essence." (Baez Lazcano, 104). 

The constitutional reforms of the 1990s in Colombia, and several other South American countries have sought to address some of these issues, recognizing the rights to territorial autonomy and cultural heritage preservation and promotion. Many of these rights have been codified on paper but poorly implemented, guaranteeing little if any protection to communities. In recent years, as Afrodescendants in Latin America increasingly use international bodies and courts to make human rights claims (against state violence or institutional racism), the 20th century international human rights framework has had the perhaps unintended consequence of pitting  communities against each other for the right to make human rights claims to land and territorial autonomy. While there is precedent in the Samarka decision of how this framework can be used justly, it remains to be seen if the interpretation given in the Samarka case will prove effective for Afrodescendants in Chile and elsewhere in the region facing opposition to their ancestral land claims. 

Following protests, Nike recalls "Puerto Rico" Air Force 1 Edition misappropriating Panamanian indigenous art

Credit: Arnulfo Franco/AP

Nike has recalled its latest edition Air Force 1 which attempted to pay tribute to Puerto Rico, by using art from indigenous communities in Panamá. After coming under criticism for cultural misappropriation, Nike issued a statement on May 21, "We apologize for the inaccurate representation of the design origin for the Nike Air Force 1 'Puerto Rico' 2019. As a result, this product will no longer be available."

Comments across social media were swift including from famous Panamanian -American hip hop DJ Clark Kent and thousands signed several petitions that had been initiated. 

The mola design is the cultural patrimony of the Ngobe Bugle or Ngäbe-Buglé, an indigenous community in Panama which has been recognized by the Panamanian government via century old treaty. They primarily reside in autonomous territory regions and set their own laws.

Representatives from the Ngobe Bugle also denounced the use stating  The indigenous groups of panama consider the design an unacceptable disrespect of Panamanian culture and history. ["Los grupos indígenas panameños consideran el diseño un irrespeto inaceptable a la cultura y la historia panameña”]. 

Others including Belisario López, the traditional leader of the Guna Yala community stated, “We are not against our ‘mola’ being commercialized. What we oppose is it being done without consulting us first."

What is striking is that Puerto Rico has its own indigenous cultural heritage attributed to the Taino,  including famous historic and cultural symbols, such as the coquí. More baffling is that Nike had an internal example of a successful country tribute effort with its Fall 2018 De Lo Mio campaign celebrating the Dominican Republic.

These occurrences of culturally problematic or appropriative designs are not new in fashion, as Gucci and Nordstrom have come under recent criticism from the Sikh community for their use of "indy turbans" in the Fall 2018 collection or Gucci's use of blackface on a turtleneck last winter. One hopes that the recent introduction of a house of Fenty by Rihanna to the LVMH portfolio will ensure that a new standard of cultural awareness will be set across the fashion industry.