When the winds of colonialism blew towards Africa, this status quo was either maintained or given a new orientation: maintained in a sense that some states like those under Britain were mainly governed through indirect rule; and given a new orientation in a sense that some states were governed through "divide-and-rule" and others through assimilation.

In this new development the baculum changed hands from a native king or traditional ruler to the colonial offices based in Europe. It is at this juncture that the first contradiction was hatched. Political and economic policies which were to steer Africa along the road of "civilisation" and economic development were tailored in Europe in the form of straight jackets. The civilisation of Africa became the white man’s burden. The sad implication of this phenomenon was that almost everything African in the form of culture was perceived as dark, evil and disoriented. The first victims were the African traditional religions, African technology, African agricultural practices and eventually almost all the artifacts, values and practices in African cultures. Unfortunately, this trend has continued appearing in different forms and shapes up to the present fantastic developments of social reconstruction and modernization. Social reconstruction and modernisation are not putting forward anything new. These fantastic ideas remind Africans of their inferior position in the world. Their basic message is that the landmarks of African identity in the form of cultural practices such as politics and economics are backward and out of place. It is high time Africa embraced such modernistic ideas as privatisation, structural adjustments and market economy.

In opposition to this position are Africa leaders whose hands and brains are tied by forces beyond their control, and who project modernistic ideas of social reconstruction and modernization as best for Africa. Fortunately for Africa, this crop of African leaders includes exceptions like Mwamar Gadafi of Libya. Given this state of affairs, one cannot avoid echoing the classical question "Which way Africa?"

Given the perennial history of fallacies and contradictions, there emerges inevitably wonder whether social reconstruction and modernisation can be realised objectively in Africa. The present chapter will focus on this issue.

It should be recalled that traditional Africa emphasized a balance between material wealth and morality. In contrast, social reconstruction and modernisation tend to emphasize a balance between material wealth and law. In the former, morality was the tool for ensuring order in civil society; in the latter it is law which is supposed to serve that purpose. This state of affairs appears fine on the surface; but on close analysis it contains an embedded contradiction. It is a classical dictum that the law is for the protection of the rich, never the poor. The question then is, who are the rich and who are the poor? The rich is the capitalist who lives according to the modern trend of the market economy; the foreigner and the poor is the African who has been for the last two centuries a producer of raw materials for the capitalist. Social reconstruction and modernisation appear poised to swallow up traditional Africa: in other words, the wealthy capitalist or industrialist swallowing up the raw material producer and labourer who is the African. Of course, he will be swallowed up not literally but in a figurative sense because the relationship between the capitalist and the producer of raw materials is in a way symbiotic. However, such a symbiosis is absurd for only the capitalist truly lives, while the producer of raw material merely survives.

At this stage a logical qusetion is, are not some African statesmen in the name of liberalisation in a way encouraging the emergence of capitalism by Africans? It should be remembered that in Africa capitalism is to a great extent tied to politics, indeed, to the politics not of democracy, but of division; not of law and order, but of corruption and intrigue. It is common knowledge that in order for politicians to succeed, they must have allies who are capitalists. If they cannot woo them to their side, the remaining option is to become capitalists themselves. But politicians cannot succeed in this venture if they follow business ethics, for capital takes a relatively long period to build. So they resort to corruption, bribery and heavy taxation of the unsuspecting masses. Because they get this capital dishonestly they do not want to relinguish power. Hence, there is a tendency to transform from democratic leaders to dictators. They want to remain in power for life not because they are political geniuses, but because they must protect their property through state security organs like the intelligence, police and army, who to some extent also thrive on the same loot.

It is well known that Africa has not been short of these voluntary lunatics who have attempted to userp the position of God on earth. In the 1970s Uganda had Idi Amin who crowned himself with the highest rank in the military (Field Marshal). The connotation was that he was the highest symbol of death, which he proceeded to demonstrate by eliminating the pseudo-capitalists and intellectuals. He did not stop at that; by indirectly killing a Ugandan Archbishop, he demonstrated that he did not fear God himself. In the heart of Africa Bocasa crowned himself Emperor of the Central African Republic. Further south Kamuzu Banda also identified himself as president for life.

This chapter intends to identify some of the anomalies evident in African political and economic life.

It is almost impossible to talk of social reconstruction and modernisation in Africa outside the realm of politics. To some extent it is the distortions in the political arena which have provided the platform for the developed nations to talk of social reconstruction and modernisation.

For a long time Africa has been characterised by a number of problems. These include ignorance and illiteracy for which the figures in Africa average around sixty percent. The problem with such a community of people is that it suvives more on sense experience than on intellectual sophistication. They are able to apprehend fully or comprehend knowledge received by their senses. But epistemology contends that sense knowledge does not escape the traps of illusion and superficiality. It is true that a largely illiterate community can still understand its problems, but in the majority of cases these problems do not go beyond the demands of survival. Even the forty percent of the population which is literate is not sufficiently educated to be able to analyse issues as they present themselves in politics. That leaves a small fraction of about twenty percent of the literate who are well enough educated to understand issues as they emerge: the political fate of Africa is based upon this small population. Hopeless as it appears, this entails further problems, for it is not the educated few who necessarily end up in high political positions. Idi Amin of Uganda, his vice president, Mustafa Idris and Okello Tito Lutwa were illiterates in the actual sense of the word; one time Sergeant Doe of Liberia is another case in point. They were at one time in charge of political affairs at the top level. In Uganda, for example, to become a member of parliament the educational requirement is "senior six". Once one is a member of parliament, one is a potential minister who could turn out to be in charge of political affairs.

Another problem which is bedeviling Africa is hunger. It is common knowledge that Africa’s biggest source of foreign currency is the export of agricultural products. Africa contains large chunks of fertile lands. It is ironical to learn that part of the food which is exported to Europe comes back to Africa through the World Food Programme to serve starving Africans. This food is distributed to institutions like schools, colleges and hospitals, to mention a few. The largest quantity of food aid goes to refugee camps to serve the victims of wars created by African politicians. Africa, which is one of the leading continents in the production of cotton for textiles depends significantly on second hand clothes donated by developed countries. This trend of affairs does not please Africans; rather it makes them bitter, for they feel betrayed by the political systems which are supposed to take care of them.

The problem which emerges is that it is difficult to envisage reconstruction and modernisation among people who are starving and embittered, not because they are lazy or because their continent is not fertile, but because of political chaos caused by myopic politicians.

While hunger has invaded Africa largely due to political chaos, Africa is at the same time submerged in mass poverty. In rural Africa many families still live in grass thatched huts, and others in houses made of mud and wattle. Levels of hygiene are below standard. People drink stagnant water from ponds which, apart from supplying unhygienic water, are breeding grounds for mosquitoes and such other waterborne diseases as bilhazea and cholera. Attempting to escape these appalling conditions, many people seek sanctuary in big cities and towns. Being illiterate and unskilled, most of these people, instead of finding heaven, find hell. They are marginalised to the outskirts of the cities and the infamous slums where at times conditions are worse than those in rural areas whence they came. Again mass poverty is a consequence not of a poor continent, but of bad politics.

While some families of the educated elite employed in the civil service go with one meal a day, some African leaders boast of billions of dollars in European banks. Ex-President Mobutu of Zaire alone was quoted as possessing four billion dollars in Sweden and Switzerland. This excludes his accounts in Belgium and his assets in France. If reconstruction and modernisation are to be executed by the likes of Mobutu, who unfortunately are not in short supply in Africa, one cannot help but wonder.

We now have potential officers whose entry point into the system was founded on corruption and whose exit into public life is crowned by corruption. Some of these will enter the educational system, others into health, others into administration, customs offices, revenue offices, the political system, the army or politics; yet others will enter the judicial system to ensure justice and human rights into their countries. In a period of social reconstruction and modernisation can they be the champions!

Political instability is another anomaly characteristic of African states. Since the 1950s when the wave of independence swept over almost the entire continent, large parts of Africa have never experienced political stability. Liberation movements and wars of liberation gave birth to the Maumau in Kenya, Majimaji in Tanganyika, Flerimo in Mozambique; and this instability has proliferated up to the present. Further, sandwitched between the Soviet Union and the United State of America during the Cold War, Africa became a scape goat. Problems, initiated outside Africa, were hatched within Africa. We are aware in Uganda of the exiling of King Mutesa I, in Zaire of the murder of Patrice Lamumba, in Ghana the murder of Kwame Nkurumah, to mention but a few. The anomaly in this case is that while the conglomerates in Europe and the Soviet Union profited from the sale of arms, Africa continued to nurture and develop a perpetual state of instability. It is in this state of affairs that social reconstruction and modernisation knock at the doors of the African continent.

Problems of this nature set up chain reactions of other problems which are particularly noticeable in Africa, including disease and low life expectancy. The threat of Aids threatens to wipe out the entire continent continues to be the concern of Europe and the United States. But in rural Africa malaria and worms are killing many more people than Aids. The statistics of this appalling state of affairs are never released, however, due to the sorry state of the general medical and health conditions. Large communities within the African states survive on the services of traditional herbalists. How will reconstruction and modernisation cure the sick continent of Africa?

Some heads of state begin by bribing noisy members of the opposition with ministerial and other managerial jobs. Ministers from his own party are at the leader’s mercy as he has power to appoint them and remove them at will. Because he is above the law he cannot be investigated by such state security organs as the police. In any case, it is the head of state who appoints the commanders of the army, police and prisons, and can remove them according to his whims and fancies. Above all he is commander-in-chief, with power to declare war or peace. These excessive powers make him feel like God’s representative on earth. With no active opposition in place, he domesticates the state into a personal private estate. Instead of addressing the social needs of the country, he is obsessed with his personal security, creating hords of soldiers around him in the form of a special presidential guard, special force, and the like. He has an unwritten contract with these forces to keep him in power; in turn, he shares with them the fruits from his private estate. Without a miracle in Africa, it is these people who will be in charge of reconstruction and modernisation.

In Africa economics determines politics. It is inconceivable therefore to analyse the political arena while leaving out the economic. As in politics, the contradictions in the economies are based largely on the ad baculum fallacy. It is common knowledge that almost all African countries are being run as charity states: the bulk of the money which helps in constructing and maintaining the social infrastructure is either donations from private organisations in Europe and United States of America or grants from those governments. Consequently, Africa finds it difficult to think independently. European economies are perpetually in charge of African politics.

Before the end of the cold war Africa had two options. Either it became an ally of the Soviet Union and therefore wore communist clothing, or of United States of America and therefore wore capitalist attire. There was almost nothing unique for Africa in terms of politics or economics.

Other African states opted for a Western economic model. With the fall of communism the Western model is sweeping across the African continent. Social reconstruction and modernisation now are seen in terms of the capitalist model. Hence, it is necessary to examine how capitalism took root in Africa in order to see whether capitalism will be fessible in Africa.

Before colonialism Africa was a forgotten or dark continent. Little was known about the economic potential of this mass of land which happens to be the second largest on earth, with a population of over 500,000,000 million. Colonialism exposed to Europe this potential market and source of raw materials. At the time of partition, Europe set about avidly acquiring shares of the treasure constituted by Africa’s viable climate, agricultural potential and virgin mineral resources. Since then Africa has become for Europe a treasured infant. But Europe’s crime in Africa is that instead of developing the economic potential of this land, it created agents in the form of political leaders who have continued to mutilate and vandalise her economically. Its strategy was to control Africa from South to North. South Africa was targeted for its richness in fossil oil, not to mention its mineral potential. In the North, Egypt occupied a particularly important position due to its role in the Middle East. Europe and America needed Egypt because of its Suez Canal as a gateway to the Arab oil in the East and a channel for European and American goods. The United States has bribed Egypt with 2.5 billion dollars annually in exchange for signing the famous Camp David Accord, making Egypt its second largest beneficiary next to Israel which gets 3.5 billion dollars. Considering the fact that the total of US foreign aid is seven billion, that leaves only one billion for the rest of the world. This is a very good example of the ad Buculum fallacy that "might makes right" — here that economics determines politics.

The only African country to stand against the encroachments of the United States is Libya. Ghadafi, whose military training was at Sandhurst, realized that King Idris was receiving huge bribes from Britain which benefited the king and his family and not the Libyans. The bribes were meant to enable Britain to syphon off the best light crude oil produced by Libya. In 1969 he organised a coup d’état which overthrew the monarchy. Consequently America lost her huge naval base at Bengazi and Britain lost hers at Tripoli. In 1974 Ghadafi nationalised all the oil installations, worth 5.1 billion. Raising the cost of a barrell from three to 42 dollars gave him the money to assist all the liberation movements in Africa which opposed capitalist exploitation.

Uganda equally became a favorite of Britain as the British interest in Uganda was mainly economic. It took over land in Buganda and gave it authority for management. Britain allocated land to Kabaka (King of Buganda) and his chiefs in payment for allowing Britain to carry out its economic activities; the rest of the land was allocated to the Queen of Britain as crown land. Again, although conditions changed slightly after independence, it is not for nothing that the West, including the United State, has launched a crusade to invest heavily in Uganda and to set privatisation and structural adjustment conditions. This is reconstruction and modernisation in its naked form. History has yet to tell whether this move is for the benefit of Uganda or Europe and America.

If this trend continues in Uganda reconstruction and modernisation will crash these fences like the Berlin wall in East Germany. Again history will tell whether it will be ordinary Ugandans who benefit from these modern moves. Uganda is an example; the other African states should be prepared to lose their lands or, if they are lucky, to be marginalised by the powerful capitalistic forces from Europe, the United States and now the orient.

Before concluding let us see whether cultural Africa has anything to offer to the rest of the world. Its first contribution can be seen in terms of its traditional judicial system. This is handled by a team of experienced elders, in contrast to the professional occidental judicial system which is handled by a team of professional lawyers. If ‘the law catches the poor and not the rich’, since most people in African states are poor, the occidental legal system is not for them. The occidental legal system has within its structures certain weaknesses which can be exploited by shrewd lawyers to the advantage of the rich and the disadvantage of the poor. Now and then we hear of the extra-judicial killings in police cells and state prisons all over Africa.

The typical traditional African court is transparent, free from corruption or bribery and manipulation by elements within the system. Usually testimony is by eye or ear witnesses. The practice is so straight forward that even the relatives of the defendant can bear testimony against their close relative and then help him to bear the penalty (which in most cases is compensation). This transparency does not exist in the occidental judicial system where it is claimed that close relatives even when they know the truth are not obliged to testify against the criminal. The African moral code is worth emulating.

Another component which could be borrowed from Africa by the occidental world is its human-based rather than capital-based insurance. This insurance is reflected in the proverb that "he who has people is richer than he who has money." Almost the entire continent of Africa believes in the spirit of collectivisation, togetherness and sharing at moments of happiness and sadness. This practice is enshrined in the traditional structures of clans or even tribes. People invest in people in terms of their action and behaviour toward others. For instance, if a house catches fire in the village, the problem is not left to the owner of the house alone; it becomes the responsibility of everyone in the village to ensure that the victim is comforted and compensated through erecting a new house for the family and replacing the damaged property.

The same goes for every calamity. If a dangerous animal invades a village, all able-bodied men participate in its destruction. It is true as well for all such major calamities as wars, famine and the usual everyday deaths. The victims and the bereaved are always surrounded by the company of everybody, near and distant. Concern of individuals for all and of all for the individual serves as strong insurance based on the human bond. This serves also to curb human selfishness and envy, because a person with such vices is isolated by society, without whose support an individual finds it very difficult to survive.

This presentation has tried to demonstrate that the fall of communism has left Africa in a vulnerable state. Although Africa has its own inbuilt contradictions based on its cultural makeup, many of the contradictions are rooted in the ad baculum fallacy of ‘might makes right’. This is evident on the political and economic fronts. Although the ideas of social reconstruction and modernisation are recent developments, their roots sink into the political and economic structures of the colonial and post-colonial periods, when the contradictions discussed were consciously or unconsciously put in place. The political situation in the larger part of Africa has been outlined and its contradictions sketched. It has been shown also that Africa would not have been devastated by external forces without the collaboration of African agents by its political leaders who stood to gain. This was a betrayal of the people who put trust in them to shape their destiny. The leaders turned into monsters who, together with their colonial masters, syphoned off the wealth of their countries to Europe and the United States.

The analysis has further probed into the economic situation of Africa. It has shown that although Africa is endowed with huge economic potentials, the average African has not benefited much from these natural gifts. In Africa economics determines the nature of politics, but the economic structures have not been designed by Africans but imported in toto from Europe or America. These have been maladjusted for Africa, and have left it largely illiterate, sick, poor and above all politically and economically pitiable.

Given the present unfavourable political and economic variables, it would be surprising if social reconstruction and modernisation could objectively benefit Africa. This carries an implied warning that the intentions implanted in structural adjustments and privatisation are calculated to enable Europe and America to pick up where they left off when Africa gained independence in the late 50s and early 60s.

This presentation does not in any way condemn or discredit social reconstruction and modernisation. It is sceptical only of whether this move will succeed in the present conditions in which history has placed Africa. The suggestion being put forward is that instead of inviting multi-national industrialists to come to invest and buy state corporations, Africa leaders should contract with international financial institutions to secure loans for the indigenous potential capitalists. In other wards local investment and purchase of parastatals should play the primary role, while foreign investment plays a secondary role.

1. J.H. Copi and C. Cohen, Introduction to Logic, 8th Ed. (New York: Macmillan. 1990), p. 105.

2. South African name (Zulu) for King.

3. J.J. Ongang, "The Death of Africa Traditional Religion", in Quarterly Review of Religious Studies. Vol. II (No. 1, Sep - Dec).

4. H. Kahane, Logic and Contemporary Rhetorics (Calfonia: World Worth, 1971), p. iv.

5. E. Malingo, The World in Between (Nairobi: Gweru Press, 1995), p. 86.

6. Kahane, op. cit., p. iv.

7. CNN News

8. Kinyankore proverb (one of the tribes in Uganda).

9. Loan or beginning capital, which at times can mean a bribe. The expression is used in Uganda.

10. Kinyankore word (one of the languages spoken in Uganda) which means once you attain political power, you have solved your financial problems.

11. H. Kahane, op. cit., p. 480.

12. J.K. Nyerere, Ujamaa Essays on Socialism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969), p. 67.

13. CNN World News.

14. A Kinyankore proverb in Uganda.

15. A Kenyan expression, which sometimes meant white master.

16. UTV News.

17. Y.K. Museveni, Tackling the Tasks Ahead: Election Manifesto, 1996, p. 2.