One criticism against Afro-centric revisionism is "why can't you talk actual African history like Axum and Nubia instead of erroneously claiming other peoples' history like Ancient Egypt or Judaism?" Well, the thing is, they can't. Afro-Americans of slave descent come from various small West-African tribes who were conquered by empires like Benin and Dahomey and then sold to the Europeans for supplies to expand said empires (and that's a good thing; they kicked all the Untermensch out of Africa). They do NOT descend from any of the great empires such as Axum, EthiopArya, Great Zimbabwe, Kush, etc., therefore they cannot claim them as their own. It would be like me, a Việt, claiming the kingdom of Goguryeo or the Mongol empire as my own. Nay, a click-speaking San and a Shewan AmhAryan have more genetic distance/ancestral divergence from each other than a Brit and a Fijian, so it would be more like me claiming the Roman empire as my own. Furthermore, slave-descent Afro-Americans are mutts of multiple different West-African tribes and ethnicities; they cannot trace themselves to one specific culture so they try to claim all of Africa as their own. They lost all their culture when they came to the US and got BVCK BRVKEN. Some try to reclaim their culture by converting to Islam and giving themselves "reclaimed" names, but they forget that the Arab Muslims ALSO raped Africa, only before the Europeans did, and their "reclaimed" names are usually of either Arab or Habesha origin, which they have no ancestry of. Like all other "races", they are made up of many ethnicities that all hate each other. In addition, Sub-Saharan Africans are to genetically disparate from each other to be considered a single race. There will NEVER be pan-African unity, just like there will never be pan-European unity or pan-Asian unity.
