As has come to be expected, there are several attempts to twist and distort the issues surrounding Colorism and Black Leadership. The debate was never about if Africa or anywhere else has Blacks of diverse shades. That we already know. The issue was not about discrediting or dehumanizing others as I have clearly stated on several occasions, all sides contribute to Colorism. Trying to spin around these points is misleading.

The issue is about considering color when evaluating suitability for leadership towards addressing Colorism alongside Racism. I am saying that being black, especially being dark-skin kinky-hair Black without stereotypical European features may deny one all privileges in the system, but it allows one who develops special insights.

It is an indisputable fact that people who experience the worst SYSTEMATIC abuses ARE more experienced about abuses. The fact is, if conscious dark-skin kinky-hair Blacks understand and experience the worst of the system, then they will automatically be more qualified than anyone else about abuses in the system.

To disprove my premise, one has to show that some other color of persons experience more SYSTEMATIC abuses than dark-skin kinky-hair Black people.

Since Black movements are about addressing the ills in the system that affect Black people, then on MERIT, conscious dark-skin kinky-hair Blacks (people with understanding and experience who can articulate the ills of the system in its widest dynamics) will always be more qualified than anyone else about the negative impact of the system. There is no way around that.

Hence, a conscious dark-skin kinky-hair Black African is the most fitting person to lead Black causes that are about addressing issues that negatively impact Blacks.

There is an automatic meritorious position for the worst victims in the system to balance the automatic position that gives light-skin ones privileges. Light skin ones cannot have it both ways.