This is precisely the kind of reasoning above that leads me to believe that Afrocentrists of your ilk are not dealing with the facts of the ground. Do you really believe that Mugabe's actions have benefited Zimbabweans and that supporting him are in the best interests of the region? There is a power disparity in the world at present and it is a fact of life - you have decided to characterize it as one of attitudes. This I have disagreed with. Changes in attitudes have been the bedrock of the American education system for the past few decades and are the results where the Afrocentrists would like them to be with respect to the Africans within them? If yes, then great! Well, I've been waiting for you to define this "world", so that we can deal with the details, but as far as I can see, I will be waiting for a long time. The western box has nothing to do with the "White-Black" dichotomy that your ilk has repeated attached to me. It has more to do with an empirically motivated mindset that is continually solving problems through a hardheaded approach to evidence and facts. It's rare to find an Afrocentrist who has a decent training in statistics/mathematics for example (Neop probably being an exception). But what I am saying is that this approach to facts does not need labeling, but to contrast it with your support for Afrocentrism, I have labeled it. When you have specified the details of what you consider Afrocentric, I will be better able to adjust my view point. Until then, all these generalities are simply that. Even the way I described Eurocentrism should tell you that it is not really Eurocentric, unless you believe that the ability to practice scientific thinking is exclusively European. Maybe because I consider your Afrocentrism threatening to African people until I hear more about the details to make finer judgment? What is the Afrocentric agenda? What are specific actions to be taken on the basis of supporting it? Responding to my questions with defenses of imagination as a substitute for real problem solving is part of the problem, not the solution. Feel free to report my posts to a third party moderator. After all, nothing I have posted has not been in the spirit of this thread. That you should, with all your usual rejection of third party insults, be supporting insults cast against me with your silence is hypocritical, but I will post here as I see fit and if you want me to remain silent, simply stop talking about me and I will not talk about you. To summarize, in case you do not want to deal with the details: The idea that I or any other opponent of Afrocentrism cannot see issues from an "African" perspective will only become clear when that "African" perspective is defined in detail. If only those who defend Mugabe against the West can see that African perspective, then I fully retain the right to be against such a perspective. POST SCRIPT I was discussing the Yoruba-Igbo relations with a friend of mine and the topic went off tangent and he said that Africans should outsource their energy production and other industries to Americans etc. or those who could do the job better. I said that was inviting problems that I would almost definitely prefer technologies that were sustainable, even if less efficient, and could be developed by Africans given the conflicts inherent in giving your technologies to foreign (especially Western) nations. And he said that I was a joker, given that our level of technological achievement was not where it should be. That is the difference between specifics and generalities. One side has a position that is substantially different in theory and practice and these sides exemplify these positions in various actions and decisions on various issues. What you all are doing is attacking my claims without defining your positions. So start defining your positions. So like I said, let's hear the details of this Afrocentric agenda and what results it expects to achieve.