|Wednesday, 15 August 2012 23:17|
into diseased psychological interactions within individual persons who make up African citizenry.
We have a great chain of discontents cementing our societal and cultural make-up, and the culture of dependency and imitation emanates from this historical legacy of discontents.
It does not matter one is making a judgment about good or evil leadership in Africa, or that one is making conclusions of superiority or inferiority, the prevailing dominant factor is always the historic intergroup, intragroup and interpersonal relations.
The subordination of the African by Western influence is centred on historical power relations deliberately constructed by the white colonial establishments, and today perpetuated by the neo-colonial imperialist establishments in the Western world.
African child is socialised to admire the white child while the white kid is conditionally taught to pity the African child.
Hillary Clinton had the audacity to warn African leadership against partners whose aim is to exploit African resources, declaring with a straight face that the US was unlike these evil-minded unnamed partners, itself being such a morally upright nation only driven by the need to “stand up for democracy and universal human rights even when it might be easier or more profitable to look the other way, to keep the resources flowing . . . Not every partner makes that choice, but we do and we will.”
This coming from a representative of a country that has systematically looted world resources for centuries from the Middle East, South America, Asia, and from Africa was quite telling. Hillary Clinton must be aware of her country’s support for Chile’s Augusto Pinochet, of the support the US gave to the murderous Saddam Hussein over the years, of how the US nurtured and sponsored the Taliban in Afghanistan, of how the US together with Britain supported fully the ascendancy to power of Idi Amin in Uganda, of the support given by the US to the murderous Raul Videla in Argentina, of the US support given to the Congolese brute Mobutu Sese Seko, and of the US support for dictatorial General Suharto in Indonesia. The list is endless and includes moments of US support for people like Gaddafi, for as long as they allowed the oil resource to flow northwards.
What Clinton was coming to perpetuate in Africa are social power relations that involve socio-political practices and processes which mediate the Western socioeconomic, socio-political and socio-psychological manipulation and construction of African consciousness and behaviour for the benefit of white interests.
Depending on how African consciousness stands as a threat to Western economic interest in Africa, the arbiter of normality or abnormality is raised by the Westerner. Those African governments that support the continuity of white supremacy over the affairs of Africa and have no problem with the West looting the continent’s resources are labelled normal, and in the process are rewarded with such honourable titles as human rights defenders or democrats.
Today what is being called normal black consciousness on matters of democracy and human rights is nothing more than endeavours created and originated in the West, with black activists sponsored or bribed to front them as matters of personal conscience. It is a matter of adding the black colour to white ideas.
This is precisely why South Africa’s ANC leaders are fiery advocates of revolutionary leftist rhetoric on the one hand and very reliable disciples of capitalist extremism at the same time. Patrick Bond has called it “talking left and walking right.”
Those political leaders like Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe who may be as “abnormal” as to promote thought patterns and behavioural tendencies in blacks which make white dominance ineffective or intolerably so hard to implement are labelled legitimate targets of the West’s regime change agenda, and they are routinely vilified as ruthless despots by Western media, and many times treated as outcasts of the “international community.”
The arbiter of being a democrat in Africa today is tied up to the continuity of white supremacy, not exactly to the idea of the rule of Africa by the people of Africa, and for the people of Africa. In fact, for a people to be labelled true democrats by the West, it must be discovered that in them are behavioural tendencies that serve well the hegemonic interests of the West. Precisely this is why President Robert Mugabe stands isolated and sanctioned while his Prime Minister, Morgan
Tsvangirai, is hailed as a “freedom fighter” in the West.
Today the trademark of African consciousness is degenerating into this collective self-deception, benchmarking the main product of the relations between the West and post-colonial Africa. This power relationship has somehow successfully manipulated Africans into operating against their own best interests, inadvertently pushing for the interests of their Western oppressors.
Those Zimbabweans being led by Prime Minister Tsvangirai into believing that only Western investment can prosper a nation actually count themselves as very progressive thinkers, even geniuses. In fact, they view the indigenous economic empowerment policies being pushed by Zanu-PF as an excruciating attack on modernity. A world of indigenised economies to these people is a retrogressive march back to the Dark Ages. Only the civilised people from the West must lead in the control of resources the world over — so the reckoning goes.
A modern economy is to them a world of powerful Western investors providing jobs and livelihoods for hard-working and loyal African labourers.
Democracy is not the art of mimicking Western secular life. It is the rule of the people by the people, and for the people.
Western line, as guided by those who were meeting Western representatives on the dark sidelines of the constitution-making process. That behaviour is treacherous.