The Origin and Content of African Political Ideas

The origin of African political ideas remains a contentious topic or subject among political analysts.
Eurocentric scholars argue that there is nothing like African political ideas. Rather African Political
ideas were borrowed from outside the continent. According to Sithole, “Many westerners have argued
again and again that freedom was introduced to Africa by white man; that democracy was also
European introduced; that the African clamour for freedom and for democracy was but a clamour for
the things of the white man.”

Since 1960s African politicians as well as political analysts started to reject the European views that
African political ideas were borrowed from outside the continent. Scholars such as Sithole expressed
their views arguing that African political ideas are expressed in music, art, sculpture, etc. This also
illustrates that Africans are independent human beings who can master their own motivation and
destiny. George Shepperson argues that African political thought is as old as human society in Africa.
To believe otherwise is to presume that preliterate peoples cannot think politically-yet man is a
political animal.

NB it can be noted that Major aspects of African political ideas include, Humanism,
Decolonisation, Liberation, Unit, National Development, African Socialism, Abolitionism, Self-
reliance,

Cultural nationalism

By and large all modern African political ideas started with cultural nationalism. This is explained by
the fact that European’s colonisation of Africa was justified in terms of cultural inferiority of the
Africans or the non-existence of culture in Africa. Therefore, in this sense cultural nationalism was
more than a plea by the colonised for acceptance by the colonisers as a cultural man, rather than just as
a cultureless beast.

An analysis of the history of different government systems of different tribal groups in Africa shows
that Africa had its own political ideas before the coming of colonialism. For instance, Jomo Kenyatta
argues that the Gikuyu nation not only had a viable political system but also a democratic process.
This shows that black Africans had viable systems of governance before they were exposed to
missionaries or any other colonising influence. Nyerere argues that, Africa had its own type of
Democracy which was monistic and based on egalitarian society where resources were shared
equally. It is important to note that the African system of government which comprised the king, the
indaba and the headmen was a centralised type of democracy opposed to the Western pluralist
democracy.

Ndabaningi Sithole in his Article “The African Himself” examines important areas of African
systems of life such as philology, the institution of Slavery and judicature to illustrate the existence or
non existence of African political ideas before the coming of European Occupiers. Sithole argues that,
the African way of life shows beyond any reasonable doubt that there were strong political ideas in
Africa way before the coming of colonialism. In his Article Sithole tried to answer the following
questions to determine the presence or absence of freedom and democracy before the white people
came to Africa.

1
Did Africans have any sense of freedom before the coming of white people to Africa?

Did he treasure freedom?

Did Africans have any democratic institutions before the European era?

Philology

The study of language in written historical sources, as such it is a combination of literary studies,
history and linguistics. Philological studies in Africa indicate that aspects such as freedom and slavery
existed in Africa before the occupation of the continent. The table below illustrates this argument.

English Freedom

French liberte

Portuguese liberdade

Zulu (South Africa) inkululeko

Ndebele (Rhodesia) inkululeko

Shona Rusununguko

Ibo (Nigeria) efe

Swahili (East Africa) Uhuru.

The institution of Slavery

English Slave Slavery

French esclave esclavage

Portuguese escravo escravatura

Zulu isigqili ubugqili

Shona nhapwa nhapwo

Using the two tables above, Sithole concludes that there is no linguistic resemblance between African
and European words. The African words are as un-European as the European words are un-African.
There is no philological relationship between African and European words. Thus one can argue that
the concept of freedom was not alien to Africa before the advent of colonialism. Sithole further states
that there is hardly an African language that has no word or phrase for freedom and slavery.

The existence of two classes of people namely: the captor and the captured, master and slave-logically
implies freedom and unfreedom. Thus, slavery which is the deprivation of human freedom has been in
existence in Africa before the coming of Europeans to the continent. Thus the struggle for
independence has its roots in the pre- European Africa and African languages are a living testimony to
that fact.

2
African History

Before the colonial powers came to Africa, there were many bitter, cruel tribal wars which resulted in
the subjection of tribes by others and in the domination of tribes over others. In West Africa, in the
Gold Coast for instance, there were many tribes that were very hostile to each other. Very often the
stronger tribes would conquer the weaker ones and deprive them of their freedom. As time went on
the subject would revolt to regain the lost independence and freedom. Sometimes the conquered tribe
sought the help of another strong tribe so that it would be able to overthrow the domination of the
victor tribe, and thus regaining its lost independence. The life and death struggle between the Ashanti
and Fanti is a case in point. As the independence of the Fanti was constantly threatened by the Ashanti
the Fanti sought European protection to preserve their tribal integrity against the Ashanti. Incidentally,
such foreign protection turned out to be foreign domination. Similar tribal struggles existed between
the Shona and the Ndebele in Zimbabwe as well as the Yoruba and other tribes of Nigeria.

In Southern Africa, the history of the Bantu speaking peoples shows the existence of struggle for
independence and freedom between the victor and the vanquished tribes. In Zululand, for instance,
there arose at the beginning of the 19th Century a black military genius- Shaka, who conquered many
small tribes and made them into Zulu nation. As he embarked on a grand scheme of conquest, other
tribes whose sovereignty he threatened unsuccessfully attacked him.

Seeing that they could not live in complete freedom and independence while Shaka threatened them
with subjection, death and extinction, they trecked into the unknown where they could live in peace
and complete freedom, and thus began the early nineteenth-century migrations of the Bantu speaking
people. The Angoni fled from Shaka’s fury and settled in what is then called (Nyasaland). The
Shangana fled from Zululand and settled in what is now Portuguese East Africa.

Thus it is important to note that African tribes subjected one another, that, is deprived one another of
freedom long before the white people made their influence felt on the whole African continent. Sithole
therefore, made a conclusion that, Freedom was not only philologically but also historically known to
Africa.

Hensbroek and the “Import Thesis” of African political Ideas

Hensbroek, argues that, the central argument advanced by several historical studies in relation to
African political ideas is that nationalist thought in Africa was derived from the Enlightened ideas and
revolutionary thought that came from abroad. It has been argued that the same powers that colonised
Africa also spread the basic ideas that guided the struggle for its abolition.

Proponents of the import thesis also argue that the troubles of Africa result from importing foreign
ideas instead of building upon indigenous ones.

As was for Sithole, Hensbroek argues that historical events have been used to understand the origins of
African political thought for example the History of anti-colonial struggles. This can be divided into
two stages that is, the primary resistance and the secondary resistance.

The primary resistance was characterised by African Communities revolts against colonial invasions.

The second are the movements of civil colonial liberation that developed within the colonial context.
The import thesis is advanced in explaining secondary resistance and thus applies to resistance after
the mid nineteenth century resistance developed exactly in those places where colonial presence

3
became established first. For example, in the so called West African Settlements (Sierra Leone, Gold
Coast etc.) This brought Christian missionaries and enlightenment ideas of freedom and self
determination to Africa.

Analysing the work of African Scholars since 1850s the import element could be identified in the
development of Christian Abolitionist ideas combined with Pan Negroist ideas which came to Africa
from America with the influential intellectuals like Edward Wilmot, Blyden and Alexander Brummell.

The idea of modern political movements, such as the Aboriginals Rights, protection society in the
1890s and the National Congress for British Western Africa in the 1920s, emerged under the
leadership of the so called “educated elites” Who took their education from Britain and America.

In more recent History one can notice Marxist inspired nationalism in the Nkrumah-Padmore tradition
after the Second World War, African socialism in the 1960s, so much influenced by the European idea
of Welfare State and Humanist Christianity.

Also the introduction of African communism and multi-partysm in the 1990s tends to be seen as
foreign imports.

Hensbroek argues that these views can be rejected on the basis that African intellectuals such as
Sarbah and Hayford made use of their European training and European ideas when beneficial for the
movement. Hensbroek argues that the thrust of the movement its participants, as well as its political
discourse, were not European. The ideas were creative indigenous resistance in its own right.

Sociologically the ARPS was a movement of close co-operation between traditional rulers, important
business men and the educated elite. The direct objective was to resist the undermining of traditional
authorities’ powers over land issues as a consequence of the colonial land laws. Thus such resistance
was purely African.

This also proves that Africans had their own political systems even before the coming of the white
man. Casely Hayford, for instance, identified in his study of the Akan traditional system an elaborate
division of roles and tasks between council and the Chief, in fact the kind of separation of powers
between the legislative and the executive. The chief was the head of the executive, but the legislative
had its own leaders such as the so called linguist.

Hayford notes that in the Gold Coast, the abortive attempt to establish the Fanti Federation, in 1872
and the 1873 and the earlier Maknkessim Declaration, a statement by prominent persons such as kings,
advisors, business men and the educated shows a progressive joint policy of local African leaders
involving, for instance, the establishment of schools and compulsory education something that had not
even been implemented in the most advanced countries in Europe at that time.

Hensbroek concludes that rather than a process of import, we have a process of selective appropriation
and re-coining of terms and ideas within struggles and discourses that have their own dynamic and
orientation. Such a type of appropriation is a sign of an open minded and pragmatic orientation, rather
than of dependency. However, this is not to deny the fact that some political ideas were wholly
imported from outside the continent. The introduction of state controlled farms, of the proletarian
vanguard party, or of a simple multi-party recipe for organising the political power struggle are classic
examples.

4
Julius Kamabarange Nyerere

He makes it clear frequently and instantly that his social and political thought is very substantially
related to traditional African values.

The influence of autochthonous roots- the values imbedded from his Natal society.

Nyerere in 1962 “We in Africa have no more need of being converted to socialism than we have of
being taught democracy. Both are rooted in our past- in the traditional society that produced us.

I grew up in a perfectly democratic and egalitarian society.”

In Zanaki Society

There was a form of security system known as the erisaga.

Influence of Marx on Fanon

Influence of Mao and Lenin on independence struggle in Africa.

NEGRITUDE, LEOPOLD SEDAR SENGHOR

It was a black literary and cultural movement that spanned the 1930s to 1950s. The movement first
took shape among French speaking writers most of whom were studying in France. The leading figure
on the Negritude movement was Leopold Sedar Senghor – poet and philosopher who became the first
president of Senegal when it won independence from France in 1960. For Sengor Negritude, is the
whole complex of civilised values cultural and economic, which characterise the black people
especially the Negro Africans?

Origins

The origins of Negritude can be traced to the shared experiences of Africans who suffered under
slavery and colonialism. It developed partly as a response to western views of Africa as a primitive
and savage land and of blacks as inferior race. These views inspired people in the Negritude
movement to emphasize positive African qualities such as emotional warmth, closeness to nature, and
reverence (respect) of ancestors.

As it developed, Negritude came to represent black protest against the colonial rule and assimilation of
western culture and values by blacks. Thus many writers in the movement attacked colonialism and
Western ideas.

In the eyes of the Westerners exotic civilisations were static in character and not dynamic. In extreme
cases black Africans were regarded as uncivilised at all. The Negritude movement originated from the
resistance of what the white referred to as “Civilising Mission” as the justification for colonizing
Africa.

The colonial policies of most European powers particularly the French and the Portuguese policy of
assimilation-turning the African into a black civilised European in Africa is one example). Whereas
the British used the indirect rule which respected the existing traditional values and the structures and
tried to reinforce the native civilisation, The French and the Portuguese did exactly the opposite

5
through forcing the African people to be assimilated to European civilisation to the detriment of their
own civilisation. This is what influenced the rise of Negritude. Senghor argued that, “Paradoxically, it
is the French who first forced us to seek its essence, and who then showed us where it lay …when they
enforced their policy of assimilation and thus deepened our despair..”

The central objective of negritude is to assimilate what is positive. This support the views of Senghor
who argued that Negritude should not be perceived and treated as expressing itself more and more in
opposition to all western values rather it should be regarded as complementary aspect to human
civilisation. Therefore militants of negritude are and should always be considered with how not to be
assimilated and how to assimilate and to assimilate what. In other words they should be concerned
with taking from the western civilisation only those humane values and blend them with Negron
African Values. In doing so, disciples of negritude will be helping immensely toward improving
universal human civilisation. Supporters of Negritude question Eurocentric thesis about African
Culture being static as monstrous and anti- humanistic. They insist that on the other hand Negritude is
humanistic as it accepts and welcomes the complementary values in western culture in particular as
well as the positive aspects and values found in other civilised states. Negritude welcomes all exotic
values to the extent that they can be viewed as ingredients in the construction of a human civilisation
that has the potential of embracing all human kind.

Negritude and Independence Movement

Fore Senghor as was for J Kenyatta colonialism had resulted in cultural and racial alienation
particularly in former colonies of France and Portugal-Yet for him cultural alienation transcended all
aspects of life that it also resulted in social, economic and political alienation. As such only the
philosophy of negritude could end this culture of alienation and res-establish a process of cultural
reintegration with the African culture and all its positive values. Senghor predicted the coming African
renaissance was to be less the work of the politicians than of the writers, painters, musicians, artists,
who in his opinion excellently portray the whole African culture in their trade. To the 1 st Conference
of Negron writers and artists held in Paris in 1956 Senghor openly expressed his views about the
primacy of African culture when he said “we want to liberate ourselves politically in order to justly
express our negritude throughout black values.” For him political liberation was a necessary
prerequisite for cultural liberation therefore he denies that culture is subservient to politics arguing that
African politics have a tendency of ignoring our culture to make it an appendage of politics. This is a
mistake as culture should be viewed as the basis and aim of politics. –indeed culture is the very texture
of society. Diop A in an Article Remarks on African Personality and Negritude states that, “We
must not forget that political independence is only one step, it is only a means, and that
independence will never be total until the moment when it is assured on both economic and
cultural levels”.

Like his theory of Socialism Senghor’s theory of negritude reaffirms strongly the dignity of traditional
Negro African culture blend it with only those positive humanistic values found in Western Culture to
produce what he referred to as the civilisation of the Universal, thus maintaining its humanistic
foundation. He warned however that assertion of one’s negritude does not and should not be allowed to
mean or inspire black racism against the whites-he condemned severely racism by either blacks or
whites. He observed that the positive values found in African societies are universal yet the blacks
embody the totality of these virtues and traits in their fullest form. Therefore Africans are honest,
respectful, trustworthy etc, Senghor’s ultimate goal was to blend all the positive aspects of all

6
civilisation to produce a civilisation of universal that is humanistic. As he argued “The great
civilisations have been mixtures of disparate elements; the mixtures emerge from the numerous
contacts between and among civilisations.” Senghor further argues that only through the resolutions
of the contradictory elements does progress result. In short both Negro African and the Western should
contribute to the final construction of the civilisation of the universal.

Unity and Liberty

The themes of unity and liberty are the most pervasive elements found in most African arts and
literature, Senghor contrasts this theme of unity and liberty found in African culture with the European
tendency towards disunity and dominance. (Discrimination and exploitation) For him Western reason
is antagonistic in that it breaks things down into their component parts whereas on the contrary the
Negro reason is interactive and sympathetic as it unites and synthesises things. Under the Negro
African sympathises and identifies himself with others- the members of his own family tribe, strangers
etc.

He lives with others in common life. In Contrast the European segregates others. The Negro prefers a
unitary order of the world. African Society forms a series of concentric circles based on the family as
the constituent unit. The clan, the tribe and the kingdom are therefore composed of a series of
overlapping families beside expressing unit the African culture also embody the spirit of liberty and
reciprocal independence. To the contrary the European always shows the desire to dominate others. In
order to express this spirit of liberty and unity the African Negro must have a choice between
civilisations that he comes into contact with. He must not be assimilated but must assimilate freely. He
must carefully choose on what he takes from the European culture and what he must retain. Therefore
from the integration of these two civilisations African and Western, Senghor hopes to achieve a
universal humanism (universal civilisation). The African Negro must not reject the most obvious
positive Western contributions, eg technical skills and machines because such are not antagonistic but
complementary to his civilisation. He further noted that for their desire for rapid industrialisation the
then newly independent African states had to guard against sacrificing African spiritual, moral and
artistic values for the western technical superiority. Thus only by an equilibrium between the material
and the moral values can an African culture make a worthwhile contribution towards world
civilisation. According to Senghor Negritude a form of Humanism contributes to the civilization of
the Universal. This humanism of Negritude is hoped to redeem the anti-humanistic civilisation of the
West which are now dominated by materialism at the expense of spiritual and moral values. Through
the expression of negritude Africans will secure their static independence from European Disunity and
Dominance.

Broadly the Negritude’s preoccupation appeared to be

-the artistic enunciation of African cultural values,

-the romantic evocation of an African heroic past, or valorisation of African History and traditions and
beliefs

-the denunciation of the ills of colonialism,

-acceptance of and pride of being black,

The rejection of Western Domination,

7
Denunciation of Europe’s lack of humanism

AFRICAN PERSPECTIVES ON THE CONCEPT OF DEMOCRACY

All African leaders whether from the populist or traditionalist orientation emphasised the
distinctiveness of African democracy arguing that democracy was an integral element of African
traditional society. They hold that contemporary African states embody the essence of democracy.
Nkrumah once wrote about Ghana,

“Ghana Society is by its own form and tradition fundamentally democratic in character. For
centuries our people gave great powers to their chiefs but only so long they adhered to the rules
and regulations laid down by the people. The moment they deviated from these rules they were
deposed. I have no doubt with time we in Africa we will evolve forms of government rather
different from the traditional Western pattern but not less democratic.”

Even conservative monarchies like Emperor Haile Selassie found democratic values in the historical
tradition of Ethiopia. He once Said Democracy as the share of people’s voice in the conduct of their
own affairs is not foreign to Ethiopia. The democratic spirit is not new to us; it is only that Ethiopia ’s
traditional democratic concepts and convictions have now taken on a new expression and fresh forms.
In the view of most African leaders this spirit must not be considered synonymous with certain forms
of democracy found in western parliamentary system. Such institutional features like a two or more
political party system, a loyal opposition, an independent judiciary and a neutral civil service simply
constitute the circumstantial as opposed to fundamental democratic system of government. Therefore
whilst all African societies may embody the otherwise universal spirit of democracy, the democratic
institutions norms and values will vary according to the social, political, cultural and historical
conditions of each country.

The then Prime Minister of Nigeria, Abubaker Balewa once cautioned Western critics the danger
about confusing essential spirit of democracy with certain imported institutions. “The West Minister
brand of democracy is but one method of ensuring democracy as a form of government. If that method
is not applicable then another may succeed”

In principle therefore, all African leaders would agree that all the essence of democracy consist of
promoting the welfare of the people, free discussions, promote equality, and respect for the general
interest but this democratic spirit in the African leaders does not extend to anarchy and a licence to
activities that threaten stability and progress in the African states.

According to Sengor the role of opposition to criticise but criticism should mean a critical spirit and
not a spirit of criticism. In a democracy criticism must be constructive and serve the general rather
than the individual and factional interests. For all African leaders order and authority constitute part of
the essence of democracy but besides this seemingly unanimous verbal attachment to African
democracy, African leaders have formulated somewhat different ideological interpretation of what
democracy is. Sekou Toure, Nkrumah and Nyerere express a monistic interpretation of democracy
whereas Nigerian Leaders expanded the pluralistic model of democracy in which large
institutionalized political groups compete for influence.

8
MONISTIC MODEL

The monistic model of democracy emphasise the value of popular sovereignty, political equality, and
national unity or integrity. According to this interpretation the social and political structures must
maximize equality of the people in decision making must function on the basis of consensus not in the
form of votes. Decisions ought to be unanimous – arrived at thru consensus.

The individual must subordinate his interest and desires to those of the group or society. The leaders
should always minimize conflict and deviant behaviour in societal goal which all members should
pursue. They should stress the need for cohesion, co-operation and consensus.

Sekou Toure

The idea of Sekou Toure best exemplifies the monistic model of democracy. For him there only
existed one popular will and one general interest or one political party state. Democracy denotes the
subordination of individual interest to the general interest. In a democracy the interest of a more
general group or majority takes precedence over the interest of the more particular. In hierarchical
fashion the interest of the family lead to the interest of the village to the district, to the province then
finally to the national interest. At the highest most general level citizens in a democratic African state
such as Guinea ought to achieve a conscious of universal interest of the entire African continent. (Pan
African Interest). Consistent with this stress on the dominance of the general interest the political
thought of Toure condemns both individualism and liberalism. As he argued, instead of individualism,
Guineans must focus on the solidarity and sovereignty of the people. Since the distinctive African
philosophy affirms collective values. “If it is necessary we should not hesitate to sacrifice the
individual for the good of the nation.” Since he equates individualism with selfishness Toure identifies
liberalism with compromise, anarchy, and the reign of individual over the group interest that is not
good for Africa. In accordance with this interpretation of democracy he equates democracy with the
dominance of the general will.

African democracy is based on egalitarian relations-there are no privileged groups. The leaders
exercise their power in the interest of the whole nation rather the interest of particular classes or
groups in society. Since Africa, generally has no antagonistic classes, it can construct a democracy that
is founded on the unanimous will of the people than on the social class basis as is often the case with
some western liberal societies or on religious conception such as characteristic of Islamic as what
happened in the middle east or on the basis of a political system as is the case with parliamentary or
presidential democracies.

By stressing participation of all people in political Affairs Toure formulated a theory of popular
dictatorship. The dictatorship will be democratic since the major political principles are defined in
party congress and assemblies. The dictatorship would be popular since decision is meant to safeguard
the rights of all the people in the society (it will be guided by egalitarianism). However in this popular
dictatorship formal rules do not constitute the source of authority rather political officials must obey
the interest of the people (popular interest), the law of the people rather than invoke a formal law to
justify an action that is contrary to the interest of the nation.

The single political party assumes the dominant political position in the nation and since there is
only one general interest, one unanimous popular will, one preeminent thought (ideology), only
one political party must carry out political activities. Therefore the Democratic Party of Guinea
PDG defines the general interest it serves as the custodian and the depository of the popular will and

9
embodies the collective thought,(collective ideologies) of the people of Guinea. The PDG by defining
the general policies of all sectors of society it directs and controls activities of the state. Essentially
therefore, the PDG did not resemble any European party. Whereas European political parties represent
the partial interest of either workers or capitalists the PDG refuses to become the political expression
of the particular social class rather it embodies the common indivisible interest of all African Social
strata. On the relationship of the masses Toure shows the same ambivalence-a characteristic of those
leaders who were influenced by the Marxist- Leninist ideology. On the one hand, for Toure the party
must be both in the vanguard of the masses and in their midst. In the vanguard, the party defines the
objectives and the meaning of the political struggle. It raises the political consciousness of the people.
It educates the people and improves their character. Working in the midst of the masses a good party
leader participates in all activities of the masses and he serves as a good example to the masses. He
demonstrates superior organizational and mobilizing talent as well as encouraging a spirit of struggle
and sacrifices. As he summed it, “everywhere the party is pre-eminent everywhere it must think, act,
direct and control the actions of the toiling masses.”

In Contrast to the Communist Parties, the PDG is a mass organisation rather than an elite organisation.
In the government, the party exercises supremacy over administrative organs. The party is the brain
conscience of the society while the state is simply the executive arm of the party. Therefore, the party
directs all sates organs because it embodies the collective conscience. Consistent with this notion of
party hegemony over government Toure ideology opposes the concept of omnipresent state and a
representative government based on parliamentary supremacy. He identifies these with political
practices under colonial administration. However, while the supremacy of the government and
administrative implies domination by alien forces the pre-eminence of the party (PDG) connotes the
supremacy of the people.

By reasoning based on Rousseau’s principles Toure holds that even a parliamentary regime does not
ensure popular sovereignty, where the parliament is supreme the voters become slaves of the elected
representatives and their deputies (MPs) asserting the dominance of partial interest. Only on election
time do people in a parliamentary system regain their sovereignty. Therefore, in Guinea all deputies in
the National Assembly are elected from a single national list for example do not represent the more
partial interest of geographic regions.

Unlike its counterparts in Western democracies the civil service in An African set up is not politically
neutral vis-a vis the party in office.

For Toure Political office should be granted on the basis of loyalty to the ruling party and not
according to class, origin, wealth, education or even technical knowledge. With regard to the party
militants and supporters the party leader tends to emphasise the need for discipline within the party.

PDG Secretary General Toure was always opposed to all factions based on self-interest. Like Lenin on
whose ideas the organisation of the party was largely based Toure articulated the doctrine of
Democratic Centralism –a blend of free and open discussion and unity in action. Democracy in this
sense operates when the party militants freely choose leaders and discuss various policy decisions. But
this emphasis on discipline and unity action also reveals Toure’s tendency and interest towards
centralization. Responsibility of leadership in contrast with the responsibility for decision cannot be
shared. Violation of party discipline is also prohibited/ forbidden.

10
The leaders select what they think are appropriate tactics which they think and decide on best ways to
apply them. In turn the supporters in have the responsibility of discussing problems and choose
solutions for them.

CRITIQUE

In line with Toure’s concept of the relationship between the party leaders, militants and the masses in
practice the commitment to the freedom of expression within the party and legitimate opposition
would be very unlikely. The stress on party discipline, unity of purpose, absolute authority of the party
and anti-factionalism increasingly made it difficult for the voicing of disagreement over policies.

The establishment of many organisations affiliated to the party not only did it provide the popular
participation in political life but it also facilitated total party control of the people(totalitarianism). For
instance the hierarchical structure of the party (elitism) the autonomous bodies outside the party
control inevitably hindered the development of legitimate political conflict which is necessary to the
democratisation of the state. Therefore, under these conditions the opportunities for effective popular
participation seem to be very limited as some critics have argued. Toure’s conception of democracy
resembles Bonapartism. Robert Michael notes that Bonapartism does not recognise any intermediate
links----- the power of the chief of state rests exclusively upon the direct will of the nation. Although
the individual may commit errors the party as an organisation never make mistakes. Toure frequently
reiterate on the necessity of the individual personality to become submerged in the personality of the
party. This faith in the virtues of the organisation led Toure like Lenin from whose ideas he borrowed
most to ascertain that an organisation can only be virtuous as its leader.

Undesirably pressure towards total politicisation resulted in the bureaucratisation of the social life
within Guinea. In contrast with the western models the party tended to produce a rather in efficient
instead of nationally effective bureaucratic system.

KWAME NKRUMAH

The political beliefs of Nkrumah reveal the same emphasis on simplicity that characterises the
monistic model. Inherent in monistic process is the tendency towards homogeneity, reduction of
differences and trying to eliminate deviant behaviour and attitude (factionalism). Like Toure
Nkrumah’s concept of democracy illustrates centralist populist bias. Rather than stressing the values of
diversity and complexity Nkrumah upheld the need for simple structure, he opposed the complicated
system of checks and balances. Consistently with this stress on simplicity, Nkrumah tends to equate
democracy with centralisation of power. He opposed the Federal system of government not only
because the maintenance of both regional and central government absorbed great man power and
economic issues than does a unitary system but also because federalism confuses the locus of power
and there becomes African nations had to live a strong government in order to face the mentioned
threat.

However, Nkrumah holds a less monistic Theory of Democracy than Toure. While Toure believed that
the PDG the only one legitimate political organisation in the country could legitimately embody the
general interest and the political will. Nkrumah felt that three agencies are necessary 1 national
parliament 2 the party 3 the president embodies the popular sovereignty. He states that, “we have
developed a people’s democracy in which the sovereign will of the people is exercised through
parliament, party and ultimately by the President.” Since Ghana received its independence in 1957 for
many years the Convention People’s Party assumed a more dominant role over parliament. In a speech

11
delivered to the Ghanaian legislative Assembly in November 1956, Nkrumah defined democracy as
the provision of rights for the opposition and minority parties. For him the opposition should receive
guaranteed representation in the national parliamentary committees as well as equal right with the
government to communicate through the broadcasting committee (reflecting more closely the
influence of the British parliamentary Tradition.)

Nkrumah felt that all political parties should have the freedom to operate and recruit membership.
However, four years later Nkrumah spoke in more sweeping terms about the supremacy of the ruling
CPP. He had the following to say, “The CPP is the uniting force that guards and pilots the nation and it
is the navy centre of the operations in the struggle for Africa’s backwardness. Its supremacy cannot be
challenged. In fact the CPP is Ghana and Ghana is CPP”

Henceforth party membership began to take precedence over parliamentary membership and Nkrumah
emphasised to his followers that party membership is not only more important than parliamentary
status but also more politically important than a government ministerial position. This monistic
interpretation of democracy coincided with the increasingly dominance of CPP over all aspects of
Ghanaian lives. As was in neighbouring Guinea few organisations if any remained free from party
control. In fact Nkrumah viewed the CPP in terms of an organic analogy;

“Our party is likened to a tree, a huge and mighty tree with great branches striking or stretching
on everywhere. The trunk and the branches form the tree. It is a single, unity living a single life and
when it dies it dies a single death” he considered the various organisation s attached to the CPP as
branches of the party, the Trade Union Congress, the United Farmers Council, the National Women
Council of Ghana as He argued, these organisations are not affiliates of the party but they form
integral elements of the party. Various youth groups particularly the Ghana Youth Group, also came
directly under party control. In short, party Leadership over communication, trade unions, youth
farmers, women groups tended to hinder the expression of no- violent opposition. In fact the demand
for order and the desire to bind the leaders of the masses closely together do not allow for the
spontaneous operations of intermediary groups between the central government and the citizens.
Furthermore, the role of personal leadership (cult of personality) assumes greater prominence in the
political thought of Nkrumah than that of Toure. For Nkrumah not only the Parliament and the party
but also (most importantly), the president expresses the will of the people. Although S Toure rarely
spoke of his personal life Nkrumah is said to have written widely about events of his personal life. In
fact he is said to have regarded himself as a living embodiment of the national legitimacy of Ghana.
His autobiography is entitled Ghana: The Autobiography of Nkrumah meaning to say if you saw
Nkrumah you have seen Ghana. During his days at the helm of Ghana the press and the political
subordinate most frequently referred to him has Osagyefo the victorious leader. Party leaders took an
oath of personal loyalty to Nkrumah. Those who deviated from the party line were oftenly accused of
insubordination and rebellion towards the president. There are accounts of people like close
lieutenants of Nkrumah who tried to make out of such ideas a philosophy of Nkrumaism.

This view of leadership clearly reviews the monistic concept that was held by the Ghanaian President.
He also favoured the unicameral legislature, a unitary form of government, one political party and one
leader (executive president). He said democracy does not imply disorder or anarchy and it does not
mean supporting multiple factions, warring within the bosom of a divided nation. Therefore the
demand for order in a stable, prosperous democracy takes priority over factional competition.

Nyerere Julius

12
He held a more pluralist or less monistic interpretation of democracy than both Nkrumah and Toure. If
Toure proceeds from the process of Jean Jacques Rousseau focusing on the general will, national
interest, coercion/cohesion and community solidarity. Nyerere elaborated a democratic model that
stressed the reconciliation of differences through discussion. More often than note, Nyerere reiterates
the values that were more or less held by the Athenians who carried out widely debates or arguments
in small Greek city-state. For Nyerere the concept of African democracy was similar to that of the
ancient Greeks. Like Aristotle, he saw the family which is the most significant small group in any
societies as the basis of the state and for him the feeling of democratic equality arose from the sense of
belonging to a community, brotherhood and indeed a family. In his view the traditional African
polities/societies formed a society of equals. One could feel integrated to a community rather than
separated from it. As he put it in his own traditional society, the African has always been a free
individual, very much a member of his community but seeing no conflicts between his interests and
those of the community. This is because the structure of his society was in fact the macro cause of the
micro-cause. First you have a small family, this merged into a large “blood” family which in turn
merged into the tribe, which in its turn merged into an ethnic group and if these ethnic groups merge
they form a nation. The affairs of the community were conducted by means of free and open
discussions.

Nyerere’s ideas where borrowed from the African society and intellectual readings. Although Nyerere
recognised that free discussion operated best in small communities such as the Greek city states or
African tribal settings. He hoped that this ideal world also be realised on a national level within a
single party system.

He argued that although free discussions in a society of equals constituted the essence of democracy

POLITICAL IDEADS OF NKRUMAH

Nkrumah grew up at a time when the winds of nationalist movements were sweeping across British
West Africa. In his own native land the Gold Coast there was the Aborigins ’ Rights protection Society
ARPS led by the educated elements of society at the close of the 19 th century, in the 1920 led by
Casely Hayford and others who organised the national congress of the British west Africa, Nkrumah’s
conceptualisation of life and politics began during his university days in America and reached its
climax during his active practical training in England. As a student he read widely in diverse fields
which were to shape his thinking in later years. He read theology, sociology, economics, politics and
philosophy.

COLONIALISM

He repeats the Leninist view that colonialism arose for the need for raw materials feed the ever
growing European industries. In their experiences with colonialism African countries differed only in
detail and degree and not in kind. This was because everywhere in Africa colonialists oppressed and
exploited the African people. The colonisers placed their interests above those of the African. They
degraded the Africans, thus the colonial record everywhere was similar. Trade and commerce was
controlled by European buyers and sellers, extractive industries were promoted at the expense of
manufacturing industries. Monocrop and cash crop economies were pushed to the detriment of more
comprehensive agricultural programme. Education was tailor-made to suit the ideas of the colonialist
and their needs. The subject people were treated as inferiors in all spheres of life. The social
infrastructure was characterised by poor health, and living conditions, slums and squalors, ignorance

13
and superstition, malnutrition, poor drinking water, scarce transportation and communication facilities.
(great men do not usually succeed in transforming their societies during their lifetime. Their great
ideas often live and mature after them. The civil service was efficient but was thoroughly Western in
orientation. As a result Africa people came to be ridden with fear and apathy, lacking confidence in
themselves and to adore things associated with the colonial masters. Therefore Nkrumah argued that at
independence colonialism had left behind immense obstacles to national development.

The physical and social infrastructure necessary for national development was absent. Moreso the
people were either uneducated or miss-educated for instance Namibia. Their economic initiatives have
been stifled; the people had also suffered a general feeling of inadequacy and helplessness. Against
this background Nkrumah saw one major task which faced a post colonial country-the removal of
obstacles to national development. Unless this was done the atmosphere that is conducive to
development could not be created. Nkrumah therefore likened these obstacles left by colonialism to
landmines left behind by a vanquished army which have to be cleared for the reuse of the land. He
outlined what the post colonial country had to do.

 it must diversify its economy in a manner that would provide for both the country’s domestic
needs and exports.

 It must promote industrial growth in order to lessen its dependency on foreign sources on key
commodities.

 It must make its agriculture able to produce enough food for a rapidly expanding population,
for raw materials needed by the expanding industries and indeed cash crops in order to pay for
imports.

 It must also expand its educational system, give it local content and gear it towards meeting the
country’s manpower needs.

 It must develop a civil service whose members are patriotic, conscious of their country’s
problems and needs.

 The generality of the people need to rebuilt their self esteem and self confidence – develop a
personality of their own (ubuntu)

Nkrumah correctly observed that all these were very difficult tasks which were made even more
difficult for the post colonial state by neo-colonialism--attempts by former colonisers to continue
driving the economy, social and political structures of the contemporary independent counties.

NEO- COLONIALISM

He defined a neo-colonial state as one that would have all the outward trappings/features of
independence but whose major policies (social, political, economic etc are controlled from outside. He
viewed neo-colonialism as a device by which the developed countries would seek retain or maintain
the nations , in essentially the same status as was the case during the colonial times but using a
different approach. For him neo-colonialism was primarily but solely an economic phenomenon
because through its control of the economy it also extended control over all other aspects of society.
He correctly observed that its methods are hidden, as opposed to those of the classical colonialism. It
establishes its grips through intricate or complex webs of interest and influences from which it is
practically difficulty to disintegrate. Such interest and influences may be established through the

14
dominance of international corporations MNCs (Anglo-American, coca cola, and BATA, banking and
financial institutions and the whole host of cultural, social and ideological factors.

Nkrumah noted that no new African state was able to do away entirely with western Capital or
international corporations. In fact it is the indispensability of foreign capital for the national
development and the new African nation which brings them face to face with colonialism

How to Resist Neo- Colonialism

The first step is for the people of the newly born nations to become knowledgeable about neo-
colonialism and realise that it is a serious stumbling bock to development and that no newly born
African country.

They must also realise that the forces of neo-colonialism are too strong that no single nation can be
able to defeat it on its own.

Finally Nkrumah advised that the only way to ward off neo-colonialism is to create a socialist system.

SOCIALISM

For Nkrumah socialism and capitalism were two competing diametrically opposed models of
development. He rejected the capitalist idea for several reasons.

 The problems that the African had to solve had been created by the same capitalist system.

 Socialism was the only way to defeat colonialism because it would encourage self reliance and
reduction of dependency.

 Capitalism was characterised by insensitive competition and pursuit of supremacy as well as

the unfair destruction of the fruits of national growth.

 He considered government initiatives and its active in the development process to be necessary
(centralised development planning) however he cautioned against uncritical adoption of a
socialist measures that had been adopted elsewhere (one size fits all approach).

 The caution was necessary because for him there was only on true socialism that was,
Scientific Socialism (as defined by Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels) but there were many
different paths of achieving that socialism dictated by the specific conditions prevailing in a
particular country at a defined historical period.

 The crucial thing was therefore every socialist experiment was suppose to create a social
society in which all citizens are equal opportunities, right and responsibilities and free
development of each individual

A socialist society ought to have the following essential

- Common ownership of the means of production (State control)

-Planned industrial and agricultural development.

-political power in the hands of the people -Popular government

15
National Unity

Nkrumah believed that national unity was essential for both stability and national development.. AS
he argued in most post-colonial societies the demands for national development amounted to national
emergencies. It accordingly required united action.

In these circumstances any diffusion of governmental power such that bodies are created with powers
wide enough to impinge to those of the central government made the latter less sovereignty than it
should be of necessity. Thus for Nkrumah centralisation of both power and authority was necessary for
the exercise of political leadership ie the ability of the central government to initiate and carry through
its programmes and policies without hindrance whatsoever. This was in line with Nkrumah’s position
of the CPP and its role in the Ghanaian society. For Nkrumah the CPP embraced all the progressive
elements in the Ghanaian community, indeed it was uniting force that guided the nation. To this extent
its supremacy could not in any way be challenged. He believed that Ghana’s fortunes were
irretrievably bound up with those of the CPP hence the CPP was Ghana and Ghana was CPP.
Surprisingly on occasion Nkrumah believed strong and well organised opposition and he even
suggested in 1965 that all opposition parties should come together and form a strong opposition.
However, taken together his views about centralised power and authority and about the CPP left
virtually no room for an organised opposition; political party. In fact he conceived sovereignty in
Hobbesian sense ie absolutism. This together with his conception of the ruling party ass the
embodiment of the national will made opposition to the ruling party impossible.

In any case Nkrumah saw an opposition political party as an irresponsible one seeking to ad to the
difficulties of the government rather than complementing each other. He once described members of
the opposition as “disgruntled and disappointed politicians who were against the common man and
were determined to undermine the democratic process and reactionaries carrying out vicious and
treacherous activities.” His position on national unity and the centralisation of authority was at the
basis of his objection to the independence constitution.

Continental Unity

He considered Pan Africanism to be a higher level of ideological development than nationalism. He

argued that while nationalism was essential gaining independence it could not be a final solution
because genuine decolonisation of Africa in its entirety could not be achieved within the context of
national boundaries. For him only a united Africa could only resist the pressures of neo-colonialism
and therefore continental interests were to be given top priority compared to the interests of one
country. He believed that although Africa was diverse in race, culture and language its colonial past
meant that the forces making for unity outweigh those which divided Africans. He envisaged a
politically and economically united Africa. From 1960 onwards he emphasised that the African
struggle for independence and unity should begin with a political union could safeguard Africa ’s
independence and provide the conducive and enabling environment for economic social an d cultural
advancement as he argued, Seek ye first the political Kingdom and everything else shall follow unto
you” accordingly he began to object regional groupings because ass he saw them they have the
potential to produce hardened regional loyalties inimical to the envisaged continental union.

For him United Africa would operate on the principle of equality of all member states. It should have a
common economy, defence and foreign policy whilst leave residual powers in the hands of national
government. He saw the advantages of such a continental union to be multiple. Unity would make

16
Africa strong enough to practice positive neutrality and no-alignment so as to keep Africa from the
great power competition. Being a large unity Africa could more easily attract foreign capital and
therefore end the senseless competition among African countries for small doses of foreign aid and
assistance. A united Africa would provide a more rational and coherent economic setting for
development. It could make possible the pooling and sharing of human an natural crises an common
currency and monetary zones and a joint exploration of economic and human resources. Rational
planning would eliminate duplication thereby reducing the cost of development for the individual
countries. A united Africa with common air; power, land and defence strategy would also make it
possible to abolish large standing armies in individual countries an din their place establish people’s
militia. He trusted people’s militia to be the best guardian of society because they cannot be subverted,
but for him the benefits that are likely to come from continental union would only be more meaningful
in a socialist context. He therefore found African unity an African Socialism to be organically
complementary.

SOCIAL JUSTICE

For Nkrumah the role of reconstruction of the post colonial country was to achieve social justice.

For him a social just society was one in which at the minimum the majority of the people can afford
the basic needs of life. Therefore creating such a just society required the removal of the obstacles to
progress that were left behind by colonialism and the rapid of education, health and other social
infrastructure and services. To make this possible the economy has to be centrally controlled and
planned. There was need for rapid industrialisation, directing investment into the desired channels
equally. Equally important is that the problems of low productivity had to be solved and economic
surplus had to be created. Nkrumah maintained that in the desire to achieve Social Justice; particular
attention had to paid to develop rural areas with the aim of curbing rural to urban migration. The
development of rural areas for Nkrumah should include construction of industries, cooperatives,
banks, credit facilities good transport networks, clinics, schools. It was to be the initiative and major
responsibility of government to ensure that social justice is achieved. For him the initiative and major
responsibility for achieving Social Justice has to fall on the government because it require government
control of national production and conscious effort to distribute the fruits of growth and social
progress more evenly. The people could also play their role through self-help projects.

Institutions such as trade unions also had a role to play but unlike their counterparts in the Western,
African trade unions had to do much more than simply safeguarding the condition sand wages of their
members. They needed to be an integral part of the overall government’s attempt to solve the problem
of productivity and create economic surplus. He maintained that the much needed social justice should
only be achieved in a truly democratic society. He included the following among the factors that make
a democracy all citizens are equal, entitled to the same rights and subject to the same law.

The Army

Nkrumah tried to bring party education into the army. However, noting that this will take time he set
up a special and privileged presidential guard in the army but unfortunately by so doing he alienated
the bulk of his army. The presidential guard was not a CPP core, but they were made to appear to be
identified by the party especially their use of equipment bought from Russia, China.

Summary

17
  It is essential for government to take the initiative and become actively involved in the
development process-should play a dominant role in the development process

 New institutions suitable to the African environment ought to be created because solutions to
African problems would be different to those adopted elsewhere.

 A democratic socialist one party system is the best framework for achieving social justice.

 National unity is also crucial for national development.

 Continental unity is also essential for development because no any African country can
succeed by itself even inn fighting colonialism.

Kenneth Kaunda

Kaunda sought among other things to understand what would happen to nationalism as a movement of
protest when the basic targets of it have been removed-ie colonialism. What would happen to
nationalism after independence? For him the withdrawal colonial power whilst addressing some of the
problems also raised other more acute problems for nationalist leaders. The disadvantage of solidarity
of nationalist movement and the impetus built during the struggle for independence were for Kaunda
vital for the success and survival of the newly born independent nation yet he warned that unless new
and exciting and worthwhile goals can be proposed for nationalism, there is always a danger of the
movement to turn inwards upon itself and becoming destructive of the national good. Therefore, the
central part of the nationalist leader’s problem was for Kaunda, how can Nationalism be transformed
into patriotism-the zealous love for one’s country (Oxford Dictionary). Using this definition Kaunda
argues that in Africa, patriotism is something that has to be engendered. This is because until
independence very few Africans were aware in this sense that they had a country. Their loyalties were
rather and restricted and fragmented. Independence for Kaunda has not ushered into existence a
mature nation rather it was little more than simply a realisation of a dream, which had to be clothed
with reality. For him the loyalties that nationalism called into being were too general and restricted to
warrant being called patriotism. Its general aspect was that the people’s Africaness (a sense of
solidarity) which transcended national boundaries, drawing sustenance from the struggle and victories
of other African leaders and the people all over the continent. But for Kaunda this emotional
identification of people with brothers beyond the borders was too vague and wide ranging loyalty to
form the basis of patriotism. Patriotism needed shaper and more defined objects at the same time, the
loyalties of the members of the liberation movements may have been too specific with a single
political orientation-the attainment of independence.

The vehicle of these sentiments of loyalty is certainly the party which ------- channels and
controls this loyalty and the --- of the leader provides a specially intensive focus of loyalty, he is
the people’s mouth piece, he suffers with them and equally suffers on their behalf. The people’s sense
of identity in the struggle to achieve certain political goals was much too narrow to constitute
patriotism which demands a certain degree of loyalty to every element in the nation.\

Even loyalty to the leader alone was not enough to constitute (patriotism). He advised that for the new
independent state to be healthy and well founded it must outlast the death or change of its leader and
as a result it ends up in anarchy and factionalism. Therefore, every sound political system should solve
the problem of succession; it should ensure the peaceful transfer of political power from one person to
another or from one political party to another also provide for continuity of leadership. A leader can

18
only prove his indispensability at the expense of his own country. At the same time the leader should
not be too precipitate to divert the people’s loyalty from to another person because in many nationalist
movements the leader is the cementing block in the party. The leader has been chosen and has
survived because he was able to hold in balance tribal, regional and personal factionalism. Also
because people had reason to believe that he would not exercise his power in an arbitrary manner,
favouring certain tribes, drawing his ministers from one area, tribe or ethnic group, all those
contributed to the longevity of leadership.

Therefore, the government of independent state in Africa is usually a masterpiece of c compromise

and delicacy. Kaunda knew that a great volume of criticism is usually heaped on the leaders of post-
colonial Africa because their image after independence tends to assume super human proportions.
Charges of fascism and messianism are common. But this type of criticism except when applied
leaders who are obviously megalomaniacs fail to take account of the national leader in maintaining
national unity. Kaunda acknowledged that this --- of the leader puts a great strain on the character of
the leader of a nationalist movement. Therefore, the effects the leader needs all his moral fibre to avoid
the corrupting effects of great power. There must be rationality about his policies and ---- which will
make it clear to the humblest citizen that he is acting as the servant of the people and therefore he is
the legitimate leader.

He also noted that the problem of transforming nationalism into patriotism was especially more
difficulty in those African countries such as Zambia where the head of state was also the leader of the
party. As the president, the leader must show absolute impartiality to colleagues. He may not use his
office to gain political advantages and restrict unnecessarily the legitimate attempt of the opposition to
unseat him. On the other hand his continuance in office which he may regard as essential for the good
of the nation ultimately depends on his ability to maintain control of the party to strengthen further the
party’s allegiance to the people.

According to Kaunda, it could also be claimed that this transformation of nationalism into patriotism is
also difficulty to achieve when a sizeable minority representing the opposition are taught by their
leaders to view the president not as the head of state but as a mere leader of a political party they are
pledging to unseat in the next election. Whilst aware of the dangers of combining the office s of the
head of state and the office of the president, Kaunda see no realistic alternative suiting an African
state. For him in the absence of a president with some historical or traditional claim to loyalty divorced
from politics there is great danger in expecting a people whose loyalty has been shaped politically to
be able to show two kinds of loyalty to two different personalities. Kaunda’s fear was that the larger
the number of personalities with an absolute claim on the people’s loyalty, the greater is the possibility
of tribal or regional divisions being intensified. Therefore, if the leader is to direct the peoples, loyalty,
the greater to the state over a long period of time, he must first as a pre-condition be in an absolute
possession of the loyalty.

The executive president, answerable to the people not only at the time of election time but can and
should also keep in touch with their mood and thinking through those highly sensitive reflectors of
public opinion-the party officials (depends on credible intelligence). These officials are always in daily
conduct with the masses and therefore they should speak to the leader with utmost frankness in his role
as the party leader because failure to speak in frankness will result in wrong policies.

There is also a danger that a president dependent on elections may become a victim of public opinion
and therefore avoid unpopular but prudent policies and try to give the people what they want and not

19
what they need. Kaunda maintains that leading by impartiality, moral fibre and character the president
are more important than any mechanism of government in ensuring justice for all. He also noted that
efficient system of government, may help prevent a good leader from making terrible errors or
judgment but they are equally powerless in preventing a bad leader from using his great power to
tyrannise his own people either through malice or through stupidity. But the lesson of history seems to
be that the people sooner or later will realise that what they thought was their shepherd is infact a wolf.
The most costly mistake their leader should avoid or can make is to under-estimate the capacity of the
people to appreciate that they are being fooled.

Succession

Kaunda advises that it is the leader’s task to ensure continuity of public function by tackling the
problem of succession to the highest offices of the state in time. he advised that the leader should
constantly be at work, finding and encouraging young man and women to accept ever increasing
responsibilities, accessing their personal capabilities, their honesty, their dependability and their
capacity to handle national power. Kaunda warns however, that it must always be borne in mind that a
nation state is not an innate static thing, to the contrary it is an organism which changes at it grows.
Therefore the leader’s challenge is not only to ensure the supply of both man and women with the
correct qualities to manage public offices today but also to predict what qualities are likely to be
needed in 10 or 20 years to come. Therefore in grooming the future leaders of an independent African
state, African leaders have a daunting task of making predictions with precision in an area where
political, social, religious, economics, tribal forces interact. One mistake which a wise leader should
avoid is to designate too early an heir to his position. This is a foolish thing to do given the highly
fluid state of politics in Africa. Besides, it is also the ultimate cruelty to the young men or woman
designated who would as a consequence excite the envy and spite of the disappointed aspirants who
might do everything to destroy him or her. In this matter, the will of the people is truly sovereign.
Finally the leader must not assume the initiative that must be left for the people-ie ultimately the heir
to the throne should be left to the people.

Other Factors.

The leader must also recognise that politics alone do not build a nation. A whole network of cultural
religious and other social factors may play important role towards nation building and inculcating
patriotism. Therefore, the leader should know that national building is not only a political operation.
Active encouragement must aslo be given to the development of such social avenues such as drama,
poetry, literature, sports and every other activity through which the spirit of the people and their
national unity is expressed. The leader must also always know that the protection and extension of
national symbols including myths is also of paramount importance in stimulating patriotism eg the
return of Zimbabwean Bird from Germany, holding of Bira,

Youth

The young people must be the special target for the encouragement of patriotic sentiments. Kaunda
mourned (a generation is now arising which with only the deemest memory of colonialism and the
national liberation struggle. If anything both are now history. Hence advised Kaunda, there is need to
instill in schools some degree of national sentiments which will make the youth feel like proud citizens
of their own countries. In the school syllabus emphasis should be placed on our won African History,
geography, customs and literature and art, including even in sport. This will make our children more

20
conscious to the country they belong – hence they will be more patriotic. All education is in one way
or another instrument of indoctrination. As such African leaders must not make an apology for the fact
that we intent to indoctrinate our children in the glorious of the nation so that they are proud to be
identified with it. The overall aim is to make out of our youth useful and constructive citizens for our
future society. The inculcation of respect for authority and the protection of national symbols and
heritage is of crucial importance because it is necessary in order to reverse the trend of the nationalist
struggle period eg it was necessary for nationalist leaders to encourage their followers to undertake
civil disobedience as approaches to change but not in post-colonial period. The leader should therefore
take vigorous steps to ensure that they do not become victims of their own nationalist strategies.
Contempt of the police and disregarding lawful authority colonial experience represent the expressed
will of our people therefore the people are the forces behind that authority. The trend should be
reversed through a proper system of education.

The intellectuals in Nationalism

Kaunda acknowledges that the intellectual group in African societies has been the key element in most
20th Century, and more so in Africa. Indeed nationalism often began as a revolt by the intellectuals
who frustrated in their attempts to break into the white elite society, they turned back to their own and
become the spearheads of political emancipation. Often the economic and social colour bar drove the
intellectuals into politics because all doors into their professional advancement were shut/ closed. As it
grew in strength, the nationalist party or movement could absorb all these workers at national, regional
or local levels. Thus, the party or the government ought to be the major employer of it=intellectuals:
why. Reasons: As political consciousness of the freedom struggle, intensified youth intellectuals were
attracted to the cause of the student days. The leaders must always know that students tends to be
naturally rebels oriented against authority and sharpening their ---by challenging those responsible for
their education. The student is always radical by training and temperament. Close off all channels for
legitimate political expression of this radicalism acquired at universities and colleges and u are
inviting them to become revolutionaries. Under Kuomintang regime in China where students were
driven into the arms of communism through such restrictive measures. Kaunda in the same vein
criticised the Rhodesian government of stupidity in 1965 when it fenced students off from politics by
making a condition for receiving government grants that students should not be engaged in nationalist
politics.

Literacy

Kaunda argued that literacy was the most powerful weapon in the nationalist leaders’ armoury. He
warned those intellectuals particularly Western trained ones against becoming so much western
oriented during their studies abroad that they will no longer be along the same wave –length with the
ordinary masses when they return. (Maintenance of an African Identity). His experiences also led him
to alert the intellectual to the many attempts, which would be made to seduce their minds and enlist
them in the causes of some of the African countries’ best interest. He assured the intellectuals and
challenged them that they will be engaged in their own subtle freedom struggle against their own
enemies. When independence come the intellectuals often ripped high rewards, a whole range of
government administration and professional posts become available to them. The intellectuals become
the favoured sons and daughters of the revolution but there is no room for the nationalists, some will
suffer disappointment as their expectations are frustrated when they come back home. Kaunda warned
that in their disgruntlement, such aggrieved intellectuals can become threats to the national unity and

21
progress., these intellectuals will begin to seek outside support to dislodge their comrades from power.
(for regime change). The intellectuals that are committed work of nation building are the country’s
greatest asserts. Life is not always easy for the intellectuals who have been given posts of
responsibility in government because they are often somewhat tender plants. They often see
government in academic rational terms as they have been taught both at home and abroad. They are
prone to disillusionment, when their built theories cannot be applied neatly on the ground. When they
strike all the snags involved in motivating the people, the freedom fighter on the other hand much of
his life has been spend in motivating people through various tactics to the national cause is not prone
to easy disillusionment. He knows what discouragement means, he has seen many false starts, has
suffered many defeats. The intellectual has a trained analytical mind, he can probe a problem and
assess priorities with a great degree of impartiality, he speaks the intellectual language and can feed
the knowledge of his reading and research into the cabinet debates. The freedom fighter on the other
hand is highly sensitive of the reactions of the ordinary people. He knows from his liberation struggle
experience, how fast can the ordinary be driven and has his sympathy with their lot, which comes from
having lived on a miserable pittens and seen his family grow without the good things of life. Possibly
the freedom fighter’s greatest assert is his ability to communicate effectively with the ordinary people.
Having dramatized the issues involved in the freedom struggle and motivated the masses to act and
suffer together, the freedom fighter is the ideal man or woman to put across government policy in
colourful, appetising and simple language and steer the people to the work of the nation building.
Whereas the genuine intellectual often tends to be western oriented, the freedom fighter often has his
roots and focus in traditional Africa. Therefore the leader should strike some form of equilibrium
between the two in forming the post war government. It is fatal for the leader to show or be seen as
showing or making decisions that are easily predictable to be in favour of one group over the other.
The leader must be able to assess and value the respective contributions objectively. He should not be
swayed by his personal orientation of freedom fighter or being motivated by the minds of the
intellectuals. However, this problem of intellectuals versus freedom fighters is a one generation
problem for the leader because the years go by, the government will eventually become intellectual
and the freedom fighters will no longer be a coherent group.

PAN AFRICANISM

It is thought of as a movement although others regard it as an ideology. It was conceived and

developed by people of African origin in the Diaspora. To some it denotes the search for an African
personality and yet to others it denotes negritude. Others refer it to the African aspiration of an African
continent that is free from the shackles of foreign influence and domination, an African continent that
is united with its leaders free to plan for the orderly progress and welfare of its peoples. Its original
roots to a larger extent were racial yet today Pan Africanism should not be restricted to only racial
factors alone. The main roots can be traced back to the beginning of slave trade a period in which
Africans both at home and abroad lost their nationhood. They lost their culture and indeed their
personal identity. As such the major objective of Pan Africanism centred on the restoration of
nationhood and the dignity of African peoples. It also sought the restoration of the proper place for the
Africa and the Africans in the commentary of world history.

It was therefore a major source of influence, indeed it was a way of drawing a link between all the
peoples with an African ancestry. In the late 1960s the term Pan Africanism came to be used to refer to
the total independence of the whole of Africa. Pan Africanism was also a reaction to racism and
intolerance that had gripped the most Western countries. Black people who were increasingly

22
excluded and discriminated against particularly in the Western societies were they were exploited and
looked down upon.

Pan Africanism was therefore an attempt to find lasting solution to the problems they were facing.
However, the perspective of Pan Africanism was originally first advanced in the international context
by Williams in 1900 at the London Conference. It was also at this conference that W.E. B Du Bois
stressed that, “The problem of the 20th Century is a problem of the colour Bar”

After Williams’ death in 1911 Du Bois continued with Pan Africanism. About 30 people mostly
Western Indians of African Origin and few African Americans attended the London Conference of
900. Remarkably what Williams and his colleagues started became a very powerful mobilising
ideology for decades later in 1945 when the 5 th Pan African Congress was held in England
(Manchester). Between 1900 the 1945 a series of congresses were convened and were presided over
by Du Bois who was regarded by many as the founding father of modern Pan Africanism. The 5 th
Congress is better remembered because unlike the previous ones which were largely represented by
Africans in the Diaspora ie African- Americans) it had representatives from the motherland-from the
African continent among them students , war veterans, trade unionist and intellectuals. Whereas in
previous congresses appeals were made for colonial powers and liberal ,opinion in general to accept
and treat Africans as equal human beings, to consider self governance for Africans and the application
of the same standard of human dignity and honour, just as those accorded to the whites. From 1945
onwards the Pan Africanism strategy changed dramatically to a militant demand for one thing and one
thing only – Africa to be governed by Africans and freedom by whatever means necessary and
possible. The major document of the congress: Declaration of the Colonial and Subject Peoples of the
world. The document was authored by Nkrumah asserting the right to self determination declaring
that:

“We believe in the rights of all the peoples of the world to govern themselves…we affirm the right of
all colonial peoples to control their own destiny. All colonies must be free from foreign imperialist
control, whether political or economic. We say to the people of the colonies that they must fight for
these ends by all means at their disposal.” It concluded by saying that, “there is only one road to
effective action – the organisation of the people or the masses.”

The Fifth Pan-African Congress therefore calls on the workers and farmers of the Colonies to organise
effectively.

Notably within a decade or two of this declaration the world map of colonies greatly changed ie many
countries became independent either through negotiations or a protracted struggle. Therefore, Pan
Africanism has been the principle agent for the self determination.

Pan Africanism is believed to have passed through four main stages.

First Stage: Pan-Africanism and the quest for self determination arose out of the concrete realities of
the partition of Africa and the rise of racism in America. In this period the intellectuals were the main
spokespersons for the ideas of independence and individual dignity. During this phase the major
organisation for Pan African Unity was the Universal Negro Improvement Association UNIA led by
Marcus Garvey

Second Stage

23
This was the period of anti-colonial struggle with the nationalist movements embracing the ideas of
the intellectuals in developing concrete organisations for independence and for the ideals that the
independence of one party of Africa could be meaningless until the whole of Africa was liberated from
colonialism. The first Pan African meeting to be held on African soil was the All African People
Congress held in Accra in 1956 a year after Ghana got independence. It was at this PA congress that
the idea of OAU gained force.

Third stage;

The OAU was formed in 1963 in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) It was committed to Pan Africanism,
liberation and supported decolonisation process with military support for those who were fighting for
their liberation. The founding of the Organisation of African Unity OAU in 1963 resulted from the
perceived presence of an outside threat to African independence. The organisation was also formed at
a time when African Leaders were experiencing their first taste of independence and were anxious to
consolidate their leadership. Across the continent, they saw the danger posed by divisions of language,
culture and religion by economic inequalities by the controversies over boundaries arbitrarily drawn
by the colonial powers. Therefore, it quickly became clear that a high degree of co-operation was
necessary among African states if the continent was to survive as a viable economic and political
entity.

Objectives of the OAU

The Charter outlined the following as the major objectives of the Organisation

-to promote the unity and solidarity of African states

-to co-ordinate and intensify their co-operation and effort

-to defend their sovereignty, their territorial integrity and independence

-to eradicate all forms of colonialism from Africa

Achievements or its Successes

Decolonization, Border disputes,

Impediments to Continental Unity and the Achievement of other Goals

The proposed Unity was never clearly defined. During the time of its formation African was sharply
divided into three rival blocs- The Casablanca group, the Monrovia group and the Brazzaville Twelve.

Due to these divisions OAU represents a largely negative agreement. As a result of this stagnating
consensus, the OAU has in the past moving slowly towards the attainment of continental unity.
Kwame Nkrumah’s vision for continental unity was brushed aside as African leaders settled for a
superficial unity which brought African Heads of state but not the African Peoples. (Top Down
Approach).

Pervasive Poverty

24
When allocating resources it is difficulty for the decision maker from a poverty stricken nation to
justify siphoning any meaningful amount to contribute to OAU sponsored activities, much less for
institutional maintenance.

The are enormous gaps in Africa which are difficult or expensive to bridge: Arab-Sub-Saharan;
Francophone-Anglophone; pro-West and Anti-West; etc

Little history of concrete inter-state co-operation. As such the first decades of independence and
participation in the international arena, the African states have been operating for the most part in a
mode of inter-state competition and most frequently in conflict rather than co-operation.

Lack of Complementary Economies

Economic collaboration requires complementary economies and this has been lacking in Africa.
Therefore, when neighbouring states produce similar products, there is little opportunity for a common
market. In general African economies are based on producing primary products especially in mining
and agriculture. For instance, there is no possibility of trade co-operation between Kenya and Uganda
in tea. Rather the two countries will be competing in the international market-place for the same
buyers.

This activity is antithetical to economic collaboration. More so, cobalt from DRC and diamonds from
Angola, Botswana, and Zimbabwe, other things being equal would provide very little basis for trade
since both are commodities demanded by a technologically sophisticated society and are of little
interest in a developing one.

Political instability and Uncertainty

With few exceptions the States of Africa have experienced irregular changes of governments, some
with distressing frequency

Under such situations, it is unlikely that political leaders will have interest in devoting time or energy
to promote continental unity.

It is unlikely that many leaders will go before their people with proposal to incur costs in order to
achieve a vague and uncertain long range benefit.

Continental unity requires stable conditions for development and not the prospect of a change of
regime which might obviate established modes of co-operation. The coming into power of Idi Amin in
Uganda is a classic example; it affected the well established East African Community.

Boundary Disputes

In Africa there are few natural Frontiers which geographically separate one nation from another, and
coherent tribal groups often divided between national governments. The Ewe for instance are divided
between Benin, Togo, and Ghana, tribal conflict was the cause of hostilities between Rwanda and
Burundi.

25
National Interest

To date the emphasis on national interests over those of Africa as a whole has been the major
stumbling block to continental unity.

Lack of trust

External influence

26