Jump to content

Talk:Umar Johnson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 4 months ago by Kelelain in topic Response

Conflict of Interest

[edit]

The entire intro reads like one long advertisement or like it was copied from his website. Immediate edits necessary MasterHedgehog76 (talk) 18:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Response

[edit]

This article contains several quotations of Dr. Umar's detractors. The most shocking to me is the last quote that accused him of not being Afrocentric and lacking academic knowledge of Afrocentric theory. Nothing can be further from the truth. Instead of these people simply disagreeing with Dr. Umar's stance, they attempt to discredit him. They even assume that by comparing him to Farrakhan, that this is a bad thing. If people only understood the nature of black intellectual intensity, they would know that non blacks would be safer around pro black thinkers such as Farrakhan, Khalid Muhammad and Dr. Umar than they would be around their own race. Part of this is because those who have mastered loving their own, have no difficulty loving others. Justintucker242 (talk) 19:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

This thing about him not being afrocentric, not being an academic guy, is a bit strange.--Ralfdetlef (talk) 07:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
I can help as I am familiar with Molefi Asante, and I can confirm no Afrocentric considers this guy an Afrocentric. He is the bain of Afrocentric scholars who actually do serious research. Hotepts have destroyed Afrocentric studies by polluting the internet with memes as opposed to scholarly papers. He is Afrocentric in the lay uneducated meaning of the word on social media, not Afrocentric per Wikipedia standards. He is also NOT Pan-Africanist. He is a black nationalist and has no scholarship on Africa. Africa is his gig. --Inayity (talk) 17:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
He doesn’t have anything to do with afrocentrism, and is clearly a racist grifter who tries to fleece ”his community”. And Farrakhan and co. are blatant racists who are literally black Nazis with their bigoted views and let’s not start with the laughable historical revisionism and their ignorant ”religion” which is a racist twisted ideology which feels more like a childish fantasy, than anything serious or something to be taken seriously. Like whites came from the moon from a test tube of Yakubs and the great black aliens came and built the pyramids etc. Im sorry, but you have to be a troll or so lowly educated that it’s a pity. I hope you someday can get from those borderline schizophrenic delusions they call ”the truth”. Afrocentrism and pan-africanism are fine ideologies by themselves but men like Mr.Shoemake/Johnson or whatever he calls himself nowadays, make a mockery out of them and just get the majority of global populus to not take those ideologies seriously or see them as racist and facist bigoted conspiracy BS. And in my opinion the funniest thing is, that this man has nothing to do with Africa, he is a American grifter. I think he was real when he started, but now everything he says is a lie, something racist or just defamation. Please, do not try to defend him ever, because it is starting to sound like how closeted facists sound when talking about Nazi-Germany, Mussolinis Italy or Japanese Empire. He should just go hang with the neo-nazis and KKK, because they have so many opinions that are same word for word. 80.220.65.48 (talk) 14:13, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
I'm a historian and these last two comments here quite excellently defend scholarship on Pan-Africanism as a discipline, not a vibe.
One doesn't need to be an academic to study the discipline, but have respect for the people who study it academically for a living because they are trained to sort through hundreds of years of historical primary sources and analyze the information to build a nuanced, 360° panorama of their discipline, not a fetishized angry vibe that tears people apart.
That's the part that I find fascinatingly oxymoronic: Dr. Johnson states he's "pan-Africanist," then dismisses many African-Americans because they don't obsess over one issue. He's the one creating a wedge, not them. I was always taught that the African diaspora is not a hegemonic monolith. He's criticizing others for just that reason: not being a hegemonic monolith!
A cursory internet browser search (granted, I am a research historian so I'm used to evaluating sources) brought up a good place to start when evaluating, what does pan-Africanism look like, that scholars say Dr. Johnson is not one? https://sahistory.org.za/sites/default/files/archive-files/hakim_adi_pan-african_history_political_figuresbook4you.org_.pdf
This book is out of the UK, and the preface & forward are critical reads to understanding the answer to this issue. The people they review are in alphabetical order - I'd have preferred chronological order, so readers could see the history of the discipline unfold, but it shows how each generation of pan-Africanist influenced the other, and demonstrates the discipline much better than Dr. Johnson does.Kelelain (talk) 14:23, 17 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

He changed his name

[edit]

I think he recently changed his name per one of his many YouTube vidoes. I am not sure how serious to take it but he now has a NON-Islamic name since he cursed out Muslim history. Inayity (talk) 17:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:08, 30 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Pseudoscientific psychologists

[edit]

Nothing in the body confirms this. If it is true, then the body of the article must speak to this category. Inayity (talk) 05:19, 17 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

And the School?

[edit]

Nothing about his school? Inayity (talk) 05:26, 17 August 2025 (UTC)Reply