Is ‘Africa’ a Racial Slur and Should the Continent Be Renamed?

geechiedan

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
President William Ruto addressing Africa Climate Summit in Nairobi. PHOTO/PCS.

President William Ruto addressing Africa Climate Summit in Nairobi. PHOTO/PCS.


Should African people be called black – or is the categorising of people by skin colour a racist practice? How about Africa? Is the name of the continent a racial slur because it was chosen by European exploiters and based on the weather rather than the people – and should it be renamed?

Who named Africa and what does the name mean?

The name Africa was given to the continent by European exploiters, slavers and colonists who first arrived as traders and explorers in the 1300s. “Africa” is believed to be taken from the Greek aphrike, meaning without cold; it translates in Latin to aprica, meaning sunny.
You know how it is. Humans habitually give names to strangers or new places they encounter. This is usually to enable them to identify such people or places. But history also shows that such names are often not pleasant because of the unhealthy spirit of competition that naturally characterises such new encounters.

In fact, in many cases, the names are slurs aimed at demeaning such people or places. For example, we learn from the ancient Greek poet Homer’s accounts that when the Greeks first encountered the people of east Africa, they called them aethiops or Aithiops, meaning sun-burnt face. The ancient Jews referred to people of other nations and faith as gentiles, which was a slur that targeted them as outsiders. The ancient Chinese referred to people from Mongolia as barbarians, and the list goes on.

Is the name Africa a racial slur?

Naming is a tool we use to identify objects and make sense of the world around us. To this extent, it’s a good and powerful thing. The problem is when some people decide to weaponise it, such as using slurs to denigrate others. Slavery, colonialism and racialised ideologies like apartheid in South Africa remain some of the worst weaponisation of naming through slurs.

My co-author and I argue in our paper that the name Africa is a racial slur. Aphrike or aprica refers to the hot climate of the continent, perhaps in exaggeration, with the false impression that the continent is “without cold”. If the continent is hot and without cold, that would make it the proverbial hell fire, would it not?
Look at the meaning of aethiops. Here, the people found on the continent named sunny or without cold became people with sun-burnt faces. The inference is that the unforgiving sun burnt the skin of the inhabitants. When something is burnt or charred, we call it black.
Any wonder why the defenders of scientific racism in some European universities in the 1700s and 1800s, especially at the University of Göttingen, Germany, decided to categorise the indigenous African peoples with the colour black, the American Indian with red, some Asian peoples with brown, others with yellow, and the European with white?

We argue that these are various levels of degeneration except for white, which is unspoilt, pure and spotless. In our view, identifying a human being with any colours at all is racist. To identify as white is to discount others as non-whites, which is indirect racism, and to call someone by any other colour – like black – is a direct racial subordination.
The essence of the project of colour categorisation of humanity was to establish racial hierarchy as part of an attempt to defend scientific racism and justify slavery, colonial oppression and exploitation.

You argue for Africa’s name to be changed?
Oh yes, we do. We believe it’s a terrible thing for an entire continent to be called by a slur. A good number of countries in Africa, like Zambia (Northern Rhodesia), Zimbabwe (Southern Rhodesia), Burkina Faso (Upper Volta), Ghana (Gold Coast), changed their names after political independence because they were slurs that demeaned their culture and denied their accomplishments as civilisations.

We argue that is what the continent should do too. It is even more pertinent because the name Africa has some really terrible cognates (names that have the same or similar nature) like aethiops and black (negro), which are the bedrock of modern anti-African racial segregation in America, apartheid in South Africa, and continuing racial subjugation elsewhere around the world.
In our research article we proposed thinking of a name like Anaesia – derived from two Igbo-African words, ana and esi, meaning land or place of origin – as a replacement for the name Africa. A name like Anaesia speaks to the facts of history about the continent as the first home of all humans and where the first human language was spoken.

Jonathan O. Chimakonam, Associate professor, University of Pretoria
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
 
Africa is straight for now. If it were renamed, I bet the low-key White elites would try to name North Africa something different than Sub-Saharan Africa so it would be a plan to divide Africa. This renaming sounds like a possible okie-doke plan of division.
 
Last edited:
The west and Europeans will still need Africa for their vast natural resources and if only my people would realize this and nationalize their resources like most of the Arab countries and for the better collective than the greed and bribing and corruption of some of these African leaders they would realize the power they have.
 
Out of all the things going on and needs correcting their worried about the name "Africa" which means warm and sunny which is a great name .

The land is already carved up,into countries,tribes,cultures at this moment the name Africa should remain the same.
 
There are 54 countries on the continent, I doubt they would come up with one name like Africa. It's too diverse.
they didnt come up with the africa and a gun and european colonialism is what made it spread..

Its the same reason we call the native americans indians....they are not indians.
 
Last edited:
they didnty come up with the africa and a gun and european colonialism is what made it spread..

Its the same reason we call the native americans indians....they are not indians.

:lol: My nigga where the fuck did you get that bullshit from? I already gave the answer a couple posts above.
 
Africa is straight for now. If it were renamed, I bet the low-key White elites would try to name North Africa something different than Sub-Saharan Africa so it would be a plan to divide Africa. This renaming sounds like a possible okie-doke plan of division.
Expect the northern part of Africa to be renamed “Africa Heights” shortly…
It's still one continent.
 
they didnty come up with the africa and a gun and european colonialism is what made it spread..

Its the same reason we call the native americans indians....they are not indians.
Bro, I know that, what I'm talking about is coming up with a consensus involving those 54 countries, that would be too much. Plus, if it were to be renamed, some parts of Africa would probably break away and be named something different which would cause more division. Like I said previously, I see more and more people making the whole North Africa/Sub-Saharan Africa divide if it were renamed then that would give those who sow the seeds of division an opportunity to strike.

We have to think a few chess moves ahead of those who wish to divide the continent.
 
Last edited:
To the best of my knowledge Africa is originally the name of a North West region of Alkebulan. Albebulan is the oldest know name for the continent.
:lol: My nigga where the fuck did you get that bullshit from? I already gave the answer a couple posts above.
to your knowledge...so who called it africa back then...cuz my understanding is the name is attached to the greeks.
 
to your knowledge...so who called it africa back then...cuz my understanding is the name is attached to the greeks.

Brah. The recessive genetic albinistic devils who rebranded themselves as "white" in 1681 are not the original denizens of Europe. As the original Europeans are very brown people referred to as Moors.
 
You're the one who said someone will have at least two different names for the same continent. You also said, watch them try to divide Africa, as if it wasn't already divided.
I also just this:

Bro, I know that, what I'm talking about is coming up with a consensus involving those 54 countries, that would be too much. Plus, if it were to be renamed, some parts of Africa would probably break away and be named something different which would cause more division. Like I said previously, I see more and more people making the whole North Africa/Sub-Saharan Africa divide if it were renamed then that would give those who sow the seeds of division an opportunity to strike.

We have to think a few chess moves ahead of those who wish to divide the continent.
 
Back
Top