GAMBIA-L Archives

The Gambia and Related Issues Mailing List

GAMBIA-L@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
madi jobarteh <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The Gambia and related-issues mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 7 Dec 1999 13:30:03 GMT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (97 lines)
Fellow Afrikans,

The posting on Nyerere from New Afrika magazine written by Alan Rake is
quite interesting. I read the article from the magazine itself, and after
reading it I wondered what Alan Rake wanted to say. Apart from his sarcastic
and demeaning introduction in trying to describe Nyerere's humble beginnings
as a leader, Alan Rake contradicted himself over and over all thru'out the
article. If you had folowed his argument you will be left with no choice but
to conclude that Nyerere was a dictator or an oppressor of his people. Let
us go thru his arguments, "but for his liberal education and friendly
diplomatic character, it also led him to impose an intolerant one
party-state." In another area Alan writes, "...but in fact it was he who was
imposing his will on the party and the country." Again he writes, "Nyerere
found that he could not persuade the people into communal production so in
desperation he turned to force." Now folks, can you say  this of a person
then conclude, "Nor did he pursue power for its own sake." And as if that is
not akward enough, you go to the ludicrous height of concluding that "He
will be remembered as an Afrikan hero and as the beloved father of his
nation." This clearly shows that Alan thinks Afrikans are deaf and dumb to
consider a terror a hero and a dictator as a father who deserved to be
loved. His article is a clearly White attitude and mentality which always
seeks to destroy other non-White people. They always take this type of
subtle hypocritical maneuvres, which unfortunately most of us fail to read
between the lines and critically analyse the theories. He described Nyerere
as an idealist for simply trying to delay Tanganyikan independence while
others caught up. What is idealistic about this? It is because Alan sees
Tanganyikans as a different people from the Ugandans and the Kenyans, but to
Nyerere and us i.e. Pan-Afrikans, there is no difference. We are all the
same people and our independence is stronger if we combine it and come
together. We are Afrikans who have been restricted in demarcated areas
called countries. And how can he say that is idealism? And someone must tell
Alan that "liberal education" and "friendly diplomatic character" and
whatever they mean are not a prerequisite for any type of governance system
or running of a state. Everyone has some kind of education, and that
basically does not determine the type of governance one would pursue. If it
is "liberal education" that he thinks should have made Nyerere "democratic"
or whatever, then since he got that "liberal education" from England and for
that matter Europe then we would expect to see true democracy and good
governence in England and Europe. But when Nyerere was fighting for
democracy in Afrika, the British with their "liberal education" were denying
others democracy! And talking about one party state as evil is to miss the
objective of an instrument. One party state, multiparty state, monarchy, etc
etc are all systems of governance, which are a means to an end. They are not
an end in themselves. Today because some countries tried one party state and
they failed is not the same as one party state is bad. And if England
practices multi-partyism and it seems to succeed does not mean their system
is better. We have to investigate the nature of these systems and see why
one has failed and not the other. If not then we are either trying to judge
the system by the actions of those who claim to be adherents of that system,
or that we will conclude that some people are better than others, because we
do have some Afrikan countries who have a multi-party system, but they are
not better off than the one party states. Alan also tried to discredit
Nyerere in the Zanzibar conflict. I remember when John Major just occupied
10 Downing Street, there was an IRA attack on the residence when a cabinet
meeting was going on. ON television we saw some ministers weeping, and we
are told by the press that the prime minister and his cabinet members were
flying all over the place, under the chairs and tables and on top of each
other. Now is it fair for someone to then conclude that John Major was a
coward? I brought this up, because I do not understand why Alan thinks it is
indecision or an act of hiding when Nyerere took the measures he took during
and following the Zanzibar mutiny?
In another part of the article Nyerere writes ..."afrikan socialism..." I do
not know what he means by this term, but I guess he is not saying that there
exists brands of socialism which could be called Chinese socialism, Soviet
socialism, Cuban socialism, Libyan socialism, Swedish socialism etc etc. If
there is no such brands then why should there be "Afrikan socialism."
I can go on analysing this article on and on exposing the flaws in it, but I
think you might have seen the crux of the matter. The article is a clear
European viewpoint which always tries to demean Afrikan individuals and
efforts. While he judges Nyerere and their efforts, he would have help
himself greatly if he had tried to fathom from where we started, abd
especially to find out what is it that we are fighting against, i.e. what
has the colonialists implanted in Afrikan that we are trying to uproot. If
he understands that fully well then he would not have seen our efforts like
a child's play. Anyway if his article is a true account of the rule of
Nyerere then we also need to ask  how come after all that terror and force,
the ordinary people of Tanzania weep and moan for their oppressor? Are they
stupid or drunk? Why didn't the people of Nigeria weep for Abacha, and why
didn't the people of Congo weep for Mobutu? Are they more intelligent or
aware than the Tanzanians? Why didn't Obasanjo and Kabila declare 30 days of
mourning for Abach and Mobutu? Are they ungrateful or too busy? Is Benjamin
Mkappa stupid or sycophant or sincere in declaring 30 days mourning for
Nyerere?
Alan Rake, please respond to these questions?

Madi

______________________________________________________
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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2