Citizens, Constitutions, Institutions and Systems Part 3

Louis Egbe Mbua

The idea that Europeans created the present African chieftaincy to propagate or advance their interests is totally without foundation. While, they may have manipulated African chiefs to suit their interests or agenda on slavery and colonialism, it is clear from reliable accounts that African Kingdoms were always there before the arrival of Europeans. So, if we turn our attention to the African method of traditional governance we may be able to understand how such societies were able to be kept politically stable for thousands of years before the arrival of European culture. While it is true that there were inter-tribal wars – there were also inter-nation wars in Europe -- it seems the present historical accounts of early Europeans are skewed – giving the impression that no system of government was present in Africa. This is evidenced in this statement by Lord Lugard, the British Colonial Commander in East and West Africa in the colonial era. In The Rise and Fall of the British Empire, Lawrence James wrote:

He [Lugard] wanted government along the lines that had evolved in India in which the administration would be impartial, firm and respect local institutions and conventions. He had in mind the Indian practice of indirect rule by which British had adopted and sometimes adjusted existing political structures and co-operated with established rulers. It was an attractive alternative to the infinitely expensive and wearisome process of creating and entirely new system of government, which was bound to provoke upheavals and resentment.

Thus, there always had been established institutions, laws and systems in Africa. If we take a closer look at the present African Kingdoms, it bears a striking semblance to those of both Egyptian and ancient African Kingdoms like those of the Songhai and the Sudan: there is the Monarchy, a Council of Elders and the Chief adviser ruling in tandem; all mutually interdependent; exhibiting the separation of powers. So, what went wrong with the present African political system?

As mentioned earlier, a society can only advance if they maintain their systems, constitutions, and institutions in line with their cultural roots. They may then have the opportunity to adjust them to suit the times and circumstances. It is a matter of irrelevance how long this process towards the match to advancement takes. The ancient Egyptians, following a similar method of governance, took at least 1000 years from an unknown system to the Old Kingdom; 1000 years to the Middle Kingdom; another millennium from the Middle Kingdom to the New Kingdom; and then another 1000 years for the Egyptian civilisation to reach her heights and then fall. The interesting part here is that ancient Egyptians, at first united their land; and then defended their land from invaders. This could only be done because they followed their laws and system as closely as they could. Once they could not maintain or lost focus of their cultural system and laws, they were conquered and as a result their destiny was altered. Since the new system was in complete contrast to their conservative system that served them so well for millennia, they had to capitulate as they had to completely learn a foreign system.

To master this foreign system will no doubt last a millennium, at least. Similarly, the arrival of the Europeans with their own system destabilised Africa since their system and their laws were thrown out for them to relearn an alien system. The point here is not whether the new system was good or bad for humanity; but that their path to development as suits their political, economic and social alignment had been disturbed. How Africans would have developed without western interference is open to question. The simple fact is that human beings in a particular environment do not remain stagnant in developmental terms forever. A typical example is China. They have resisted all outside interference to alter their method of governance for millennia – from Japan to the West.

For millennia, the Chinese stayed true to their cultural system. Although it is secretive in its outlook, it would seem that they continue to apply the rules of separation of powers. As long as they maintain the system which they follow, it is clear that they will come to master their own system, harness it to attain a critical mass to move forward. Once this system has been mastered, development can come at an astronomical speed as we see today in China. Had China succumbed to Western methods of governance, it is unlikely that they would today be a superpower. Similarly, had Africans been left to their own devices, complete with their own system and institutions and laws, they would have come to master this system and once mastered, development would have been rapid as applied to all peoples.

Thus, interference of foreign powers; and imposition of alien systems for their own interest seems the main problem that stifle social, economic and political development in a conservative or liberal society. In so doing, they may have to search for the gullible and unwise to execute their agenda of mass exploitation and devastation. The problem is dire because it becomes a system of recycled beggary. As the foreign powers exploit the people, they become poorer and weaker while the interfering power becomes stronger and richer. The resources they loot are used to further develop their own system, economically, politically, and socially. Additionally, they use the excess resources to develop their education, arts, technology and weapons to intimidate the exploited nation. This has been the case for millennia: it was applied by the ancient Egyptians, the Romans and now the Western nations and China continue this grand larceny of reducing the African and other unfortunate people of the world to nations of beggars.

It has to be understood that all humans are similar in their greed and quest for power. This power is that power to dominate other peoples as to prove or demonstrate a kind of delusional superiority that does not exist in human beings. On top of this food chain are not only the foreign powers; but includes collaborators with the same stagnated and illusory mindset that may be likened to a man who is drunk; and is misled to believe that the power of the foreign is automatically transferred to them from Washington, Paris, Beijing or London. In the ensuing confusion of mind, he transforms himself – in another spectacularly grand delusion- into a French or Chinese person; in which case, he believes he is superior to his own countrymen. In this pathetic case of affairs, he throws reason to the wind, abandons his cultural system and enters into a state of trans-in-tyranny: imposing his debauched will on his own people; destroying their institutions, constitution and the system his forefathers left behind. This, reader, is the cause of backwardness in most societies.

With the breakdown of a system, the interferring foreign powers become alarmed because this would mean their interests are threatened since there is every risk of a revolution to sweep away the corrupted tyranny that they created. In this dangerous situation, they attempt a futile balancing act: attempting to pretend to sympathise with the people while at the same time maintaining a cunning plan to maintain the same tyrannical system that has served them so well and which is still serving them. When the centre no longer holds, they concoct another “change of system” by bringing in another gullible and unwise ruler whose name is cowardice to repeat the same process by deceiving the hapless citizens that a revolution has occurred to save them; when there has been actually a non-event but the status quo remains to serve the foreign powers rather than the citizens.

What the citizens may not discern is that it is the same corrupt system designed to enrich the new masters and their foreign sponsors that is in place. What these rulers, on the other hand, fail to grasp is that those who bestow power on another are the powers behind the throne. The following is that all important decisions conceived, and to be executed by the imposed ruler must be cleared with the powers abroad so that their geo-political and economic interests are protected and maintained at the tremendous cost to citizens of that nation state. Most of such rulers have a firm belief that they may be able to balance the interest of their nation state against those of their masters abroad. However, this is a mistaken view because running a nation state itself is a noble task. To add on the awareness that one is also answerable to interests of an outside party with a totally different agenda; and which the ruler may not be fully aware or have full knowledge, is a much more difficult job.

A foreign power may have a long term plan to colonise the country but will disguise these objectives in sugar-coating economic concessions and “bilateral corporation” without revealing their true aims. Consequently, citizens of the now unwittingly subjugated state would now have two jobs to do so as to meet both their fundamental subsistence needs as well as maintain the luxury life style and objectives of the foreign power. Since there is limited capacity which humans can perform work, it is clear that they won’t be able to increase their hours of work past a maximum effort.

Even if we assume that citizens of that nation state have enough working energy to attain these double tasks, this will prove unsustainable in the long term. The results are that they will return to their normal human state of work with the consequences that the quality of their output may either fall or attain stagnation. In this scenario, therefore, the nation would settle for the basic in human wants; and if the trend continues, then stagnation will follow. With time, social, economic and political stagnation will ensue. Quality and quantity of output will fall giving rise to instability. The power-hungry rulers would be left with no alternative then but to go cap in hand to their foreign masters to come to their “rescue”. The foreign power will be only too glad to return and “help” the citizens out of their misery.

In comes the World Bank, The Paris club, The International Monetary Fund and the G. 8 or “G20” and other “Developed” nations who would then provide funds on strict conditions: to “privatise” the entire doomed nation state on the pretext of capitalism. The problem here is that such privatisations are normally done corruptly because those who would buy up the country are the richest men and institutions. And where are these organisations based; and where do they pay their corporate taxes? Well, in the land of the same foreign powerful masters. So, while citizens of the doomed nation state may be deceived into believing that they are being rescued, they are actually being duped into selling up their patrimony. Once these foreign institutions are well entrenched in the country, they again begin dictating the social, political and economic trend – the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. And the cycle continues.

How and when should this cycle be broken so that the citizens would realise the full benefits of their hard-earned human and capital investment? That is the question? And what happens if the new ruler decides to defy the foreign powers who installed them? Another question altogether. Worse still, what are the consequences to the nation state if citizens decide to challenge both installed rulers and their foreign masters? A much more tricky and difficult question because:

1. They would be fighting a battle on two fronts
2. Their energy is now marginal after decades or centuries of dissipation and exploitation
3. Their resources have been depleted
4. These foreign powers will arm their puppets
5. These foreign powers will support the junta in words and resources.
6. These foreign powers control international organisations to suit their interests
7. The valliant efforts by citizens to throw out these corrupt rulers will be blocked at the UN.

So, what exactly is the way forward in this sombre scenario? A new kind of international-cum-national democratic ideal to be invented? Revolution? Resigning to fate in the status quo?