The British Empire did not invent the strategy of divide and rule, but they perfected it with bureaucratic precision, leaving behind a blueprint that post-colonial elites have studied with reverence. The formula is deceptively simple: keep the oppressed fighting among themselves, and they will never unite against their oppressor. This tactic, honed in the colonies of India and Kenya, did not vanish with independence—it merely changed hands. Today, from Nairobi to New Delhi, political classes wield ethnic and religious divisions like scalpels, performing intricate surgeries on the body politic to ensure that power remains in the hands of the few while the many remain distracted by tribal squabbles.
The Colonial Laboratory: British India’s Religious Fractures
Nowhere was this strategy more ruthlessly applied than in British India, where the empire transformed religious coexistence into a tinderbox. Hindus and Muslims had lived alongside each other for centuries, their conflicts no more inherent than those between Catholics and Protestants in Europe. But the British recognized that a united India would be ungovernable—for them. The Revolt of 1857, where Hindu and Muslim soldiers fought side by side against colonial rule, was a nightmare scenario for the Raj. Unity among the colonized was an existential threat.
The solution? Amplify difference into hatred. When Hindu members of the Indian National Congress resigned in protest after Britain declared war on Germany without consultation, colonial administrators didn’t seek reconciliation—they appointed Muslim leaders to fill the vacant positions. These were men without electoral mandates, installed precisely because their presence would enrage Hindu politicians languishing in British jails. The message was clear: Your enemy is not us, but each other. The strategy worked. By the time partition came in 1947, the bloodshed between Hindus and Muslims was so inevitable that even Gandhi’s pleas for unity fell on ears deafened by decades of engineered animosity.
The tragedy is that this division did not end with colonialism. Modern India and Pakistan remain locked in a hostility that serves the interests of their ruling classes far more than their citizens. Politicians in both nations still invoke religious nationalism to distract from corruption and inequality, proving that the British didn’t just divide India—they taught its successors how to keep it divided.
Kenya’s Tribal Chessboard: From Mau Mau to Modern Politics
If India was the laboratory, Kenya was the proving ground. In the 1950s, as the Mau Mau uprising threatened British rule, colonial administrators panicked not just at the rebellion itself, but at the unprecedented alliance between the Kikuyu and Luo communities. The murder of Luo councilor Ambrose Ofafa by Mau Mau fighters presented an opportunity. The British propaganda machine swung into action, urging Luos to join the Home Guards—a force created to crush the Mau Mau—under the guise of avenging Ofafa’s death.
But Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, a Luo leader with a vision that transcended tribalism, recognized the trap. He traveled to Nairobi’s Eastlands, where Luos seethed with rage, and delivered a speech that should be etched into every anti-colonial manifesto: "The real enemy is not the Kikuyu, but the British." His words doused the flames of ethnic vengeance. The British plan failed, and within a decade, Kenya was free.
Yet, in a cruel twist, the very leaders who fought colonialism internalized its tactics. Daniel arap Moi, Kenya’s longest-ruling president, mastered the art of governing through tribal suspicion. His rhetoric condemned tribalism, but his actions fueled it. By painting the Luo and Kikuyu as existential threats to smaller tribes, he created a coalition of the fearful—a voting bloc united not by policy, but by paranoia.
The Modern Playbook: Corruption Behind the Curtain of Tribalism
Today, the divide-and-rule playbook is so entrenched that Kenyan politicians don’t even bother to hide it. The administration of Uhuru Kenyatta—a man whose family name is synonymous with both liberation and elitism—has overseen brazen corruption and violent repression. Yet, instead of mass outrage, there is muted acquiescence. Why? Because tribal loyalty has been weaponized to such an extent that a Kikuyu voter will defend a Kikuyu leader’s theft more fiercely than they would defend their own wallet.
Ask yourself: If Kenyans were united across ethnic lines, would a billion-dollar corruption scandal be met with shrugs? Would police killings of unarmed protesters be excused as "necessary for stability"? The answer is no. Tribalism is not a cultural failing; it is a political tool. It allows leaders to steal in broad daylight, secure in the knowledge that their supporters will blame another tribe rather than hold them accountable.
The Global Blueprint: From Africa to America
This is not just an African phenomenon. In the United States, politicians have long exploited racial and cultural divisions to fracture working-class solidarity. The "Southern Strategy" used racial resentment to turn poor whites against civil rights movements. In India, Modi’s BJP stokes Hindu nationalism to distract from economic failures. In Europe, far-right parties pit native workers against immigrants. The methods vary, but the goal is identical: prevent the oppressed from recognizing their shared interests.
Breaking the Cycle: The Radical Possibility of Unity
The solution is as simple as it is difficult: solidarity across artificial divisions. Jaramogi Oginga Odinga proved it was possible in 1954 when he convinced Luos not to retaliate against the Kikuyu. The Mau Mau fighters, though predominantly Kikuyu, included members from other communities who saw beyond tribe. These flashes of unity are what terrified colonialists—and what terrify modern autocrats.
Imagine a Kenya where voters evaluated leaders not by their last names but by their policies. Imagine an America where poor whites and poor Blacks recognized their common enemy in the billionaire class. This is the nightmare of every ruling elite—because history shows that when the divided unite, empires fall.
The Choice Before Us
We stand at a crossroads. We can continue playing the roles assigned to us by those in power—tribalist, racist, sectarian—or we can recognize that division is the oppressor’s oldest trick. The British didn’t just leave colonies; they left instructions on how to keep people enslaved. The question is: Will we keep following the manual, or will we finally tear it up?
The answer will determine not just the fate of nations, but the future of justice itself.
Comments
Post a Comment