Defining our Africanism
The African continent has birthed and is home to a number of revolutionaries that may have succeeded and failed in making the people of their mother countries and the continent have the necessary needs to better people''s lives. These include the likes of Kwame Nkrumah, Julius Nyerere, Kamuzu Banda, Nelson Mandela etc., whose extraordinary lives lead to the decolonisation of their countries from western control.
In response to the conquest and division of Africa by the European colonial powers the early Pan-Africanists, such as Delany demanded “Africa for the African race and black men to rule them'', which became a rallying cry for Africans throughout the continent and the diaspora, from the 19th century, until the slogan was once promoted by Marcus Garvey in the first and second decades of the last century. But the fact is that during this time, important networks of struggle were established between Africans on various continents.
There is so much talk and deliberating done about the African continent; be it about its failures, or its successes and its potential. It is undoubted that the mother continent has vast potential - with lots of obstacles ahead of the potential surfacing into lucrative rewards and successes. The greatest problem that we face as Africans is that we were subdued to colonisation by the West. In this problem the West induced and empowered us with Western education through their initiative of missionary schools. Education is not a bad thing … it may the best thing that has happened to mankind, but with regard to Western education there comes a problem because the West colonised Africa and gave us their definition of civilisation.
Precolonial Africa had kingdoms with their rulers that operated their own systems… be it political, social, economic and cultural. The colonialist colonised Africa and abolished these systems naming them uncivil. Who or what defines civilisation? We as Africans are quick to adopt Western norms and values and believe they are right, as it takes little things such as fashion to influence the way we dress on a daily basis. The same mentality that the West used for precolonial Africa is what they want to use for post-colonial Africa by defining democracy and stating which African countries are not democratic. Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as the government of the people, by the people and for the people.
In contrast to that definition one would look revolutionaries like Thomas Sankara and Muammar Gaddhafi. These two have a lot in common, one of them being that they attained their power from coups, bloodless or not. Sankara and Gaddhafi both had social programmes that empowered the people of their countries and were of the Pan-Africanist movement with Gaddhafi calling for the United States of Africa, which if put into thought and practice, may have been a good and sound idea. Amongst the things that they had in common was that of free press in their countries which they both banned. If we look at the definition of Abraham Lincoln with acknowledgement of the two revolutionaries, their governments were not democratic, but provided for the people and undoubtedly the two men are amongst Africa''s greatest men.
It is said that in southern Africa democracy can be seen in a few countries and we can look at Botswana - it has had an economy that has been stable since its independence in 1966 and could have the strongest economy on the southern tip of the continent, but they too have being ruled by the same party since their independence although they have multiple political parties when they have elections, so thumbs up. Lest we forget this is a country that has an American military base and it''s no secret. It is of this fact that numerous political science scholars ask where international relations is for the African continent? Are we just there to bandwagon and be their Third World allies. The matter at hand is that what the West defines as democracy may not be what we as Africa need, the continent is faced with social injustices like poverty and lack of social reform to benefit civil society. Look at the state of Libya now after Nato invaded it, it can be said to be a failing if not failed state. Gaddhafi deemed a dictator by the West catered beyond measure for his people. Can we ever be able to mention a country African or not that had bread more expensive than oil? The West amongst themselves see no wrong in their monarchies. There is so much talk about ailing African leaders yet Queen Elizabeth II has been there since 1952 and is currently 90. The Queen may not be voted for, but she is allowed to abdicate.
The reality is that adhering to their definition of democracy will not solve the inherent issues we face in Africa as the West will never allow Africa to be on the same playing field with them. A vivid example is how African countries attend the UN summit yearly and keep making emphasis on having a permanent seat on the Security Council. Africa has the second highest population surpassing both North America (USA) and Europe (France and United Kingdom) which have counties with permanent seats in UN Security Council.
It is justified for some African presidents to utter sentiments of remorse regarding the United Nations. The United Nations is mandated to maintain peace amongst nations therefore why not have Africa have a permanent seat at the table? It is common knowledge that the USA contributes the most to the United Nations'' regular budget, does that mean UN should follow their agenda?
*Farai Munoriarwa a fourth-year student studying towards a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) degree in political and media studies at the University of Namibia.
In response to the conquest and division of Africa by the European colonial powers the early Pan-Africanists, such as Delany demanded “Africa for the African race and black men to rule them'', which became a rallying cry for Africans throughout the continent and the diaspora, from the 19th century, until the slogan was once promoted by Marcus Garvey in the first and second decades of the last century. But the fact is that during this time, important networks of struggle were established between Africans on various continents.
There is so much talk and deliberating done about the African continent; be it about its failures, or its successes and its potential. It is undoubted that the mother continent has vast potential - with lots of obstacles ahead of the potential surfacing into lucrative rewards and successes. The greatest problem that we face as Africans is that we were subdued to colonisation by the West. In this problem the West induced and empowered us with Western education through their initiative of missionary schools. Education is not a bad thing … it may the best thing that has happened to mankind, but with regard to Western education there comes a problem because the West colonised Africa and gave us their definition of civilisation.
Precolonial Africa had kingdoms with their rulers that operated their own systems… be it political, social, economic and cultural. The colonialist colonised Africa and abolished these systems naming them uncivil. Who or what defines civilisation? We as Africans are quick to adopt Western norms and values and believe they are right, as it takes little things such as fashion to influence the way we dress on a daily basis. The same mentality that the West used for precolonial Africa is what they want to use for post-colonial Africa by defining democracy and stating which African countries are not democratic. Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as the government of the people, by the people and for the people.
In contrast to that definition one would look revolutionaries like Thomas Sankara and Muammar Gaddhafi. These two have a lot in common, one of them being that they attained their power from coups, bloodless or not. Sankara and Gaddhafi both had social programmes that empowered the people of their countries and were of the Pan-Africanist movement with Gaddhafi calling for the United States of Africa, which if put into thought and practice, may have been a good and sound idea. Amongst the things that they had in common was that of free press in their countries which they both banned. If we look at the definition of Abraham Lincoln with acknowledgement of the two revolutionaries, their governments were not democratic, but provided for the people and undoubtedly the two men are amongst Africa''s greatest men.
It is said that in southern Africa democracy can be seen in a few countries and we can look at Botswana - it has had an economy that has been stable since its independence in 1966 and could have the strongest economy on the southern tip of the continent, but they too have being ruled by the same party since their independence although they have multiple political parties when they have elections, so thumbs up. Lest we forget this is a country that has an American military base and it''s no secret. It is of this fact that numerous political science scholars ask where international relations is for the African continent? Are we just there to bandwagon and be their Third World allies. The matter at hand is that what the West defines as democracy may not be what we as Africa need, the continent is faced with social injustices like poverty and lack of social reform to benefit civil society. Look at the state of Libya now after Nato invaded it, it can be said to be a failing if not failed state. Gaddhafi deemed a dictator by the West catered beyond measure for his people. Can we ever be able to mention a country African or not that had bread more expensive than oil? The West amongst themselves see no wrong in their monarchies. There is so much talk about ailing African leaders yet Queen Elizabeth II has been there since 1952 and is currently 90. The Queen may not be voted for, but she is allowed to abdicate.
The reality is that adhering to their definition of democracy will not solve the inherent issues we face in Africa as the West will never allow Africa to be on the same playing field with them. A vivid example is how African countries attend the UN summit yearly and keep making emphasis on having a permanent seat on the Security Council. Africa has the second highest population surpassing both North America (USA) and Europe (France and United Kingdom) which have counties with permanent seats in UN Security Council.
It is justified for some African presidents to utter sentiments of remorse regarding the United Nations. The United Nations is mandated to maintain peace amongst nations therefore why not have Africa have a permanent seat at the table? It is common knowledge that the USA contributes the most to the United Nations'' regular budget, does that mean UN should follow their agenda?
*Farai Munoriarwa a fourth-year student studying towards a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) degree in political and media studies at the University of Namibia.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article