Antony Otieno Ong'ayo
3 July 2009
opinion
With Kenya's exploitative elites continuing to monopolise the country's resources, Antony Otieno Ong'ayo argues that profound change is needed to halt a debilitating 46-year status quo of marginalisation and impoverishment for much of the Kenyan populace. While change will ultimately need to come from below, Otieno Ong'ayo contends, Kenya's leadership will need to moderate its relentless appetite for wealth if 'business-as-usual' is to be prevented.
That there are historical injustices in Kenya is not a myth, or some conspiracy theory. It is truth and a reality whose continued denial, sidestepping, and deflection of its victims' perceptions to imaginary enemies in the name of other ethnic groups or individuals is what many commentaries have noted and even the recommendations in the agenda four have emphasised as putting Kenya on a bleak path. The question is, why this hypocrisy, why this contradiction and why does it take so long for Kenyans - regardless of their ethnic background and even basic intelligence - to recognise this mine trap, which has often been camouflaged by statements such as 'our presidency', 'it is our turn' or 'our time to...' and so on. Forty-six years after 'independence' is such a long time to keep lying to oneself, let alone to a nation of more than 40 million people who presumably have some level of intelligence. The only problem is that while the same Kenyans with high intelligence as noted in many parts of the world and at home where their competence is unmatched by African standards, through numerous individual pursuits, there are conspicuous signs that this intelligentsia has not been made to good use, especially for nurturing Kenya into a vibrant nation that is multicultural and diverse (whether by default or otherwise).
Kenya's major problem is deeply rooted in the birth of the nation, especially during the first few years of 'independence'. The wrangles that took personality, regional and ethnic dimensions, and finally culminated into a single party dictatorship after KADU (Kenya African Democratic Union) was swallowed by KANU (Kenya African National Union) and KPU (Kenya People's Union) figures subjected to detentions and imprisonment, set the main trajectory of malgovernance in Kenya. The violence that followed in an attempt to subdue alternative voices, the concentration of powers in the presidency and intolerance and arrogance of ethnic chauvinists in the corridors of power became a hallmark of Kenya's system of governance. The current crop of elites in the ruling positions in Nairobi are just reading from the same old script, however what they seem not to grasp is that it is more than 30 years later and the dynamics within Kenyan society have changed immensely and that citizens' reactions may not be possible to contain in the same old way.
In the context of ethnic politics and mechanisations about power and resources in Kenya, other Kenyans, especially groups that were not part of the power axis or part of the rightful owners of Kenya as has been insinuated in many narratives on post-independence Kenya, have been expected to be loyal and accept their position in the Kenyan matrix without question or even a fight. Kenya started off from a platform where the big-man syndrome shaped the national psyche, and those who did not believe in this modus operandi had very little to count as their stake in the national affairs. For this reason, there has been constant agitation for 'one of our own' to be in the state house, statements which reflect a reality which though often mentioned only in passing are critical for understanding the underpinnings of power struggles in Kenya, struggles which have taken a more ethnic dimension than ever before.
WHO FOUGHT FOR KENYA'S INDEPENDENCE AND WHO OWNS IT?
The other mystery which has been kept out of analysis is who the real fighters for the independence were? Who really sacrificed their lives for land in formerly British-occupied regions in Kenya, especially in the Central, Rift Valley and Coast provinces? Where are the names such as Dedan Kimathi, Harry Thuku, General China, Koitalel Arap Samoei, Gopal Singh Chandan, Pio Gama Pinto, Kungu Karumba, Fred Kubai, Mbaruk al Amin Mazrui, Mwangeka, Waiyaki wa Hinga, Madan, Desai, Makhan Singh, Ochwada, Cege Kibacia, Moraa, Siutuna, Mary Nyanjriu, Muindi Mbingu among others. These names are conspicuously absent in Kenyan history books and analyses or are only mentioned in passing, yet they are critical for understanding the concerted efforts by all Kenyans of diverse backgrounds during the independence struggle.
No one dares explain the role played by many other Kenyans, even though it is well-known that some communities suffered more than others at the hands of the British occupational forces in the 1950s. This distortion in Kenyan history, especially the silence about the true Mau Mau fighters, and the indirect role played by millions who supported the independence struggle is a great disservice and omission that continues to create confusion in the nation-building process. And even in recent times, those who are enjoying and supporting the status quo have very little to do with both the first and second liberation. The discomfort about marginalisation is not only about one ethnic group against others, but it also exists within the same communities that have had a chance to rule the country. For instance, not all in Central Province or Rift Valley communities have benefited from the state largesse and political patronage as often perceived, but they are always painted by the same brush because the rhetoric used by their ruling elites confirm these fears for other Kenyans. For instance, politicians from Central Province urged their co-ethnic vote to the last person to protect 'their presidency', and such statements imply that everyone stands to benefit, but the reality shows the contrary. The elites from the two communities that have ruled Kenya since independence often colluded to protect their wealth (land) - a wealth basically in the hands of a few - at the expense of their co-ethnics who continue to live in squalid conditions in many urban areas in Kenya. Here too lies the hypocrisy, for instance among the intellectuals from Central, Rift Valley, and Coast provinces who do not dare tell it as it is. This silence is what creates a mythical gap being exploited by the political elite, through rhetoric that pits these communities against others. The wrong things done in the name of these communities have to be exposed for other Kenyans to know that they suffer just as much as their counterparts in the regions where the ruling elites originate.
The ruling elite and a middle-class preoccupied with primitive capital accumulation by any means are what is behind the problems in Kenya, especially on the issue of corruption, the stagnation in the democratisation process, nation-building and cohesion. Kenya is a developing African country endowed with significant human capital which it can utilise for its prosperity. If these two groups were visionary and progressive, the reform process could have been on track, but because they are schooled in the old framework where wealth creation is guided by a stomach philosophy, there will always be obstacles to reform in Kenya. The character of those who were part of the second liberation has shown a changed language, tone and colour once in power, something which further dampens the hope of a sustained democratic transition and the establishment of an equitable society in Kenya.
The problems bedevilling Kenyan today, especially in relation to social justice, were raised earlier on by the likes of Bildad Kaggia, Oginga Odinga, J.M. Kariuki and Seroney among others. Those who have attempted to raise similar concerns in recent times, especially on the devolution of resources, have been branded Majimboists, or power hungry, seeking to grab power through the back door.
Even in the context of a plural society where political competition is the norm, the Kenyan elite, whose psyche is often clouded by ethnic chauvinism, continues to flagrantly display insincerity and hypocrisy on issues that they themselves have at one time defended when it suits them and rejected when it does not. It baffles many minds when analysis of where the political problems that bedevil Kenya are often skewed to defend partisan interests that have nothing to do with ordinary members of the communities from which the ruling elite originate. Here too one would question the intelligentsia of these elites, because any critical mind, be it a mind for making money or gaining power to make money or protect the already acquired wealth, would think strategically and long-term. In other words, this would be a realisation that such a status quo cannot continue for long and if it is upset, then they and their communities are the mostly likely to suffer, depending on the nature and way in which societal transformation in Kenya might take place (peacefully or otherwise). They could adopt the old adage of 'eat and let eat', or just disburse some portions of the booty to keep the rest busy.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
