Alieu,
Like Saiks, I found it difficult to get the general gist of your article.
For the sake of simplicity, can you "break it down" and put it in
perpespictive for some of us?
Thanks!
Omar.
>From: saiks samateh <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list
><[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [POWER AND POLITICS]
>Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1999 07:45:42 PDT
>
>Dear Alieu,
>
>Your topic was very interesting but the fact is that I was not able to
>understand what you were out to tell,this might be because of my poor
>knowledge of the English language (or to be frank ,I am no intellectual) I
>did
>try,but even using the dictionary did not help and I hope that you will be
>able to help through some of the things I wish to take up here.When you for
>example say "..If it were not firm political structures and political
>resoluteness and astuteness
>of America and president Clinton respectively,Monicagate would have
>spiraled
>USA into abysmal oblivion.."As said above even using the dictionary did not
>help me to understand the relationship of some words here and the idea that
>you are trying to put forward,please excuse me for perhaps wasting much of
>your time to clarify.
>Another thing you said which was not difficult for me to understand was
>your
>claim that Colonialism was possible because of the political
> immaturity of Africans and Asian.This I believed is just part of the well
>known efforts of Western historians to justify Colonialism,which they have
>been doing for centuries now,but to see an African intellectual like you
>posing the same story is not a nice reading.Our people have fought against
>colonialism since the very first day.This was possible because of the
>political maturity of our people.Colonialism would not use all forms of
>brutal
>method against the Africans,the Asians etc to maintain its rule,if there
>was
>no resistant,no political maturity, within our people,there would not have
>been the need for such brutal activity.
> Another thing ,Political stability does not necessarily mean that there
>are
>no riots,no demonstrations or war.The level of political instability is
>determine by the amount and method of political control that a group ,the
>society etc are subjected to.The LA rebellion in the USA is a product of
>the
>fascist character of the control system that those who participated were
>subjected to,the many shootings and killings in the USA schools and working
>places is a product of this very control system.
>Even though there is oneness in Allah and religion as you claim,is not
>enough
>to give muslims the power you are questioning.There is in fact no such
>oneness
>in Islam as you claim.There are some muslim(as in Christianity) who
>believed
>that religion is a private matter,there are some who believed that
>Islam/Christianity should control our way of life,tell us when to go to
>bed,the films to watch,who has the right to go to work and school etc.There
>are many of us who are oppose to the regime of DR Jammeh but this is not
>enough for political unity and power.I am not oppose to Dr Jammeh just to
>give
>way for another Jawara,Jammeh or one worst than all of them.It becomes very
>absurd and rub "popular support" the "power" it needed to create something
>different and better.Then the "ability to maintain stability and cope with
>the
>opposition" becomes only a dream.
>Can we say this in another way and that is popular support is the physical
>and
>mental activity of the masses ,who by marking their presences felt through
>determining the day to day political agenda,which the power that is, either
>has to face to or resist against.The consequences of which has to determine
>the whole political atmosphere.
>I am not sure if I am in line with what you are trying to say,if not I am
>sorry for the misunderstanding.
>
>For Freedom
>Saiks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Hi Folks,
>
>Just for the purpose of this article, I refer to the notion of Power here
>as
>"degree of popular support" and the "ability to maintain stability and cope
>with opposition", and the notion of Politics as the "ability to mobilize".
>This is only to limit my scope of analysis.
>
>Hypothetically, I wish to suggest a three-factor relationship between the
>two components: 1) a strong Power base and a weak Poiltical base; 2) a weak
>Power base and a strong Political base; 3) a strong Power base and a strong
>Political base. Arbitrarily, I conclude that no society exists which could
>be categorized as having a weak Power base and a weak Political base. My
>supposition is to propose that before any viable, rewarding and long
>lasting
>stability and security is established, power and politics have to be at
>par,
>hence the third-factor connection. In what follows, I will try to visualize
>to dissect an imaginary society that may exhibit features of any one of the
>forementioned propositions. I leave to the reader for a further indepth
>analysis on each one of them.
>
>A strong Power base and a weak Political base. To chart the ever turbulent
>and shaky course of time into the future, it is always prudent to
>retrospect. The rationale, amongst other facts, is to enable one to avoid
>repeating the mistakes of the past. I make a particular reference here,
>therefore, for our studies, to the forces that ousted the late ex-President
>Marcos from power in the Philippines. It was basically "peoples' power".
>Marcos had a very repressive regime but couldn't survive the social
>mobilization activism of the citizens. In Mecca, about 1400 years ago, the
>political prowess of Prophet Mohammed (S.A.W) ultimately defeated the all
>too entrenched power base of his infidel brothers and sisters. The declared
>greatest military power in history couldn't in the 1960s overwhelm the
>collective will of a small post-colonial Asian nation that was seeking its
>autonomy. A conflictual relation between power and poiltics therefore
>reveals that, as defined in this context, victory is always for the latter.
>What society needs,therefore, is to facilitate to create a situation that
>will enhance a balanced interactive relationship between the two for
>stability, peace, progress and development. A pradigm shift seems to have
>occured that suggests that the fundamental foundations of political
>philosophy requires that institutions must accommodate in a prosperous way
>to satisfy certain inherent and universal human needs. A persons
>ontological
>needs of identity, association, free will and developmental needs can never
>ever be frustrated.
>
>A weak Power base and a strong Political base. Again, a society built on
>such pillars can only lose vitality in the agony of infirmity, feebleness,
>unprogressiveness and stagnation. The ease with which Africans and Asians
>were subjected to colonial domination speaks about thier lack of poiltical
>maturity. Imagine, if it were not for the firm political structure and
>political resoluteness and astuteness of America and President Clinton
>respectively, Monicagate would have spiralled USA into abysmal oblivion,
>regardless of Bill's record level popularity rate. One thing that greased
>the American shock absorber at this particular time, could have been a
>mixture of a strong Power and Political bases. It is slightly different
>with
>the plight of a billion Muslims in the world today. One voice, one
>identity,
>one religion and one big following but lack of a genuine power base denies
>them the opportunity to articulate their ideals and aspirations. Turkey, at
>the early part of this century, witnessed the eradication of the last
>Islamic State on the World Map as a result of a weak power base. The
>bottomline is, a large following or the ability to mobilize a large
>following, is just not enough to supervise any progress, development and
>even stability.
>
>A strong Power base and a strong Political base. This is what the
>components
>of the structures of what may constitute my ideal type of society. The
>overall thrust of the argument of the article is that, those in power
>should
>be conscious of needs arising from the forces of society; should be aware
>of
>the glaring fact that strengthening of state apparatus without a
>concomitant
>empowering of the masses can only invite retrogression, humiliation,
>instability, frailty and disillusion; that, on the other hand, banking on
>only a large following with a fragile power base is as good as being lost
>in
>the middle of the desert not knowing which direction to follow.
>
>High time we woke up and looked at the coffee rather than copying blindly
>and not understanding the intricacies of similarities and differences. God
>blesses us all.
>
>Cheer
>
>Alieu
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>____________________________________________________________________
>Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
>http://webmail.netscape.com.
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
>Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
