When white academics and scholars make erroneous claims such as:
There is no evidence of any ancient civilization in Sub Saharan Africa
There is no evidence of any writing or architecture in Sub Saharan Africa
There is no evidence of any complex language in Sub Saharan Africa
You should know that you are listening to a cold blooded racist. Most black people, do not know the origin meaning or purpose behind the term “Sub Saharan Africa”. As far as archeology is concerned the most preserved elements of ancient African culture exist in or near the Sahara while the most attacked and sabotaged areas of Africa from a historical and cultural perspective are beneath the Sahara. The purpose of the term “Sub Saharan African” is to separate Black people from the more preserved elements of our history and impose a false white and pale Arab paradigm on all great things black and African.
It should be noted that most of the people in Saharan Africa are black and most of the people in Sub Saharan Africa are black.
Alik Shahadeh writes on this topic:
Sub-Saharan Africa is a linguistic vestige of racist colonialism, nested in the notion of divide and rule, which articulates a perception based on European terms of homogeneity. The notion of some invisible border, which divides the North of African from the South, is rooted in racism, which in part assumes that sand is an obstacle for African language and culture. This band of sand hence confines Africans to the bottom of a European imposed location, which exists neither linguistically (Afro-Asiatic languages), ethnically (Tuareg ), politically (African Union, Arab league), Economically (CEN-SAD) or physically (Sudan and Chad).The over emphasis on sand as a defining feature in African history is grossly misleading as cultures, trade, and languages do not stop when they meet geographic deserts. Thus Sub-Africa is another divisive vestige of colonial domination which balkanized Africa assigning everything below the “waist belt” of Africa as negative.