Weep Not, Child: A Must Read

 

One of the most remarkable works of Prof. Ngugi Wa Thiong’o is the novel titled "Weep Not, Child." This novel traces the life of a young boy called Njoroge. The novel is set in colonial Kenya after the Second World War and a few years before Kenya's independence. Freedom fighters, especially from the Gikuyu tribe, have waged war against the colonial government. This novel depicts how innocent people, Njoroge being one of them, suffer from the endless struggle between the colonialists and the African freedom fighters. This article analyzes the themes present in “Weep Not, Child.”

Summary of the Plot

The novel begins when Njoroge, a very aspiring young boy, gets the opportunity to go to school. As young as he is, Njoroge is aware of his demanding environment. His father is a labourer at Mr Howland's farm. His brother Kamau is an apprentice at Ng'ang' a's carpentry workshop. Njoroge’s eldest brother-Boro is a disillusioned young man damaged by his involvement in the Second World War. Njoroge’s two other brothers are in Nairobi working for white men, probably as casual labourers. His family is squatting on Mr Jacobo’s land. Njoroge is aware of these dire circumstances of his family. His opportunity to get an education puts him at the forefront of saving his family from poverty facing it.

He starts school and works hard on his education. He performs well until he reaches high school. Unfortunately, his learning stops in the third term of his first year of high school. Their local community chief, Mr Jacobo, is murdered, and all the males of their family are accused of killing him. The police pick up Njoroge from school and take him to a concentration camp, where they torture him to reveal Jacobo’s murderer. Later, the police allow him to leave the camp. Njoroge reaches home and finds his father dying. His brother, Boro, now a freedom fighter and fugitive, also comes to see their father for the last time before he goes back to hiding. Boro is gravely affected by his father’s situation such that the next morning, he goes and kills Mr Howlands, the District Officer and the torturer of his father. Boro gets arrested and faces execution.

Since Njoroge can no longer attend school, he seeks work at an Indian shop. He gets fired due to his lack of interest in work and life. He is a young man who has seen his dreams shatter. He seeks comfort around Mwihaki, Jacobo’s daughter. She also rejects his idea of leaving Kenya and moving to Uganda. Njoroge considers this rejection a rejection of the love he and Mwihaki share. He contemplates committing suicide. However, when his two mothers call, he realizes he is wrong in trying to commit suicide. He is the only remaining man in his family. He should fulfil his duty of caring for his mothers and protecting them. He starts doing this by running ahead and opening the doors of their hats for them.

Themes

Disillusionment

Disillusionment pervades throughout this novel. The lives of several characters start with glimmers of hope that end in disillusionment. For example, we have Ngotho, Njoroge’s father. He labours on the farm of Mr Howlands. He loves working there because he knows the land is his and should take care of it. He believes that Mr Howland will leave and the land which belonged to his ancestors will be transferred to him. However, as time passes, this dream fades away, and a feeling of failure and sorrow grapples him. After attacking Jacobo in a rally, he loses his job at Howland's farm and gets kicked out of Jacobo’s land, where he lives with his family. These occurrences symbolize how Ngotho gets increasingly detached from his ancestral lands. He places a lot of expectations on Jomo, a Kenyan politician fighting for freedom, and thinks he is the “Black Moses” to lead them to salvation from the white colonial masters. Unfortunately, Jomo gets arrested, and his hopes of ever getting his ancestral lands back crash.

 The life of Ngotho gets worse. His son Boro considers him a coward for not fighting for his land. When Jacobo, the community chief, is murdered, Ngotho is arrested and tortured severely. He dies a poor man who had lost the ability to support his family, protect his children, and give them their ancestral land.

Another example of disillusionment is in the life of Mr Howland. He escapes England after World War I to come and settle in Africa, Kenya. He desires to be away from the politics of Britain that had left him a young man bruised by war with no employment. When he arrives in Kenya, he settles on Ngotho’s land, where he farms a lot. All is well until the Mau Mau Uprising forces him to leave his simple farming life and become a District Officer. This war forces him to send his wife and son back to Britain for safety, a place he had promised never to return. As a District Officer, he indulges in war and politics, which he resents, and abandons farming, which he loves. Mr Howland finds nothing fulfilling in his role as a District Officer. When he tortures Ngotho after the murder of Chief Jacobo, that incident leaves him with an uneasy and unpleasant feeling. He ends up dead without achieving his heart's desires.

Another prominent example of disillusionment is in Boro’s life. When Boro returns from the Second World War, the lack of employment and the loss of his brother Mwangi leads him into misery. He does not understand why they (Africans) had to be involved in the white man's war. Boro lost a brother and friends when fighting for nothing, only to be unrewarded by the ungrateful white man. He is always quiet and lost in his thoughts. Later, Boro joins the Uprising when Boro hears of the Mau Mau. Fighting is all he knows, and that is what he chooses to do. Boro goes to the forest to join the guerillas. When his second-in-command states they are fighting for freedom and their land, he laughs off those beliefs. Boro says that there is no freedom. There is only life and death. Either you kill, or you are killed. He also adds that he has lost many important people in his life such that even if they were to redeem their lands from the white man, such a victory would be of little value to him. The morning after his father's death, he indulges in a suicide mission to kill Mr Howland, the District Officer. He gets arrested by the home guards and is destined for execution. These incidences show how meaningless life was to Boro.

Lastly, Njoroge's life is the perfect example of disillusionment. As a young boy, Njoroge is full of hope. He sees himself as the saviour of his family, community, and even country Kenya. He hopes the Mau Mau Uprising will end soon and his country will be peaceful again. When he goes to secondary school, he sees his dreams taking shape. He even tells Mwihaki of his plans to study in Makerere after high school. Unfortunately, during his third term of high school, the police arrest him and transfer him to a concentration camp where they torture him for involvement in Jacobo's murder. A few days later, he witnesses his father's death. At this point, his brothers are either dead or arrested. When Njoroge seeks comfort from his childhood friend-Mwihaki, she chooses his mother over him. He feels beaten by life and has nothing to keep him going. He attempts suicide. Njoroge's life transforms from a very hopeful boy into a very hopeless young man. The author describes him later as an "old" young man to symbolize his high degree of hopelessness.

Christian faith and hope

The theme of Christian faith and hope are also common in the novel. Several characters in the book are Christians. They strongly believe that God will make things better in the coming days. For example, the Agikuyu community calls Jomo the "Black Moses" and compares itself to the Jews in Egypt. They believe that God sends Jomo to free them from the shackles of white men. Njoroge is also a firm believer in God. He prays every night before sleeping, hoping things will get better. When he attempts suicide, his mothers’ calls to rescue him. This rescue restores his faith in God, and better days are ahead. There is also Isaka, Njoroge’s primary school teacher. Even at the point of his death, he keeps calling the name “Jesus”, hoping that he will come and rescue him from these white soldiers who end up killing him. Additionally, there is Mwihaki. When she rejects Njoroge's proposal to flee to Uganda, she reminds him that they should believe in God; better days are ahead.

Opposition to Violence

The novel sends out a strong message that nothing good comes out of violence. The first instance of this message occurs when Ngotho attacks Jacobo on the podium. Ngotho ends up with an injured head, loses his job at Howland’s farm, and Jacobo kicks him out of his land. Since the rally turned violent, it failed in its purpose of pushing for better wages for Africans.

 Another instance of opposition to violence occurs when Jacobo has nightmares. According to Mwihaki, his father usually dreams that people are after his life. She believes that Jacobo has killed many people in his night patrol duties, so he has nightmares about people coming for his life. Jacobo receives threats twice due to his murderous activities against Africans. In the end, Kamau, Njoroge’s brother, kills him.

 Mr Howland’s violent lifestyle when he assumes the position of the District Officer also shows that violence is not good. He tortures Ngotho and his family, which leads to the death of Ngotho. The next morning, Boro kills him for killing his father, Ngotho. Boro is also arrested after killing Mr Howland, and he is destined for execution.

Moreover, the violence in the community makes both Ngotho and Mr Howland lose their families. Ngotho’s sons, except Njoroge, are either dead or arrested. On the other hand, Mr Howland’s family moves back to Britain.

Conclusion

“Weep Not, Child” is a thrilling encounter in Central Kenya following the Mau Mau Uprising. It shows how people not involved in the violence were innocently absorbed into it and punished for crimes they did not commit. Communities were at the mercy of the ruthless British troops, home guards, and determined freedom fighters. In the end, dreams were crushed, and hopelessness filled the air. Young women and men were reduced to merely living for the moment present or not desiring life at all.

Multiculturalism: A Necessity

 

As the world marks 100 years since the end of World War I, there are fears of the rising demand for monoculturalism in the US and Europe. People must remember that monoculturalism was a principal cause of the rampant wars raving Europe in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. Most importantly, people have forgotten that monoculturalism was a primary cause of the first and second world wars.

Even today, the primary force behind the many global conflicts is monoculturalism, the inability to tolerate and respect other people and their different cultures. Fortunately, today, 11th November 2018, serves as a reminder that monoculturalism and a high-spirited nationalism are the critical ingredients for international wars, as they did over 100 years ago. Over 20 million people died in the first world war, virtually wiping out the young generations of that time.

Proposition for monoculturalism

 Proponents of monoculturalism argue that it is the only way to create peaceful coexistence in the world. They claim that people who share the same culture and heritage are more likely to live peacefully than people of different cultures.

This argument may be right. Observing the high crime levels in the metropolitan urban areas than the less diverse rural areas, one may believe this argument is valid.

However, the push for monoculturalism and limitation of diversity is a vanity venture. Humans are interdependent. Their communities and societies are interdependent. Nations are also interdependent.

Interdependence makes multiculturalism a necessity

 The interdependent nature of humans as individuals, communities, or societies makes creating and maintaining monocultural nations and societies impossible. The presence of international trade; the need to produce goods on a large scale; and the need to maximize profits make humans interdependent, which advances multiculturalism.

International trade and multiculturalism

International trade is the exchange of goods and services across national boundaries. Comparative advantage makes international trade a necessity. Since different nations have different resources, they must rely on one another to meet their needs. For example, much of the world relies on the Middle East to meet its energy needs. Similarly, the Middle East relies on the US and Europe for expatriates to work in their energy industry.

Now, during these exchanges of goods and services across national boundaries, merchants and experts must travel and live in different countries to make trade successful. Local economies need them to promote local businesses. These merchants also need to be treated well and feel welcome. Thus, local people need to accept and respect these foreign merchants and experts to enjoy the benefits of international trade that improves their living standards.

Production and multiculturalism

As mentioned earlier, countries need industry experts to produce quality goods and services to make them profitable. Many foreign expatriates work in the energy, building, and construction industries in the Middle East. These expatriates have helped the Middle East tap into their energy resources efficiently, which has made them rich.

The US carries out an immigration program every year. It recognizes the benefits of immigrants in improving the creativity and innovation of a country, which results in increased economic growth and development through the production of various quality goods and services. Many US fortune 500 companies have foreigners as their CEOs. These companies perform well. Thus, they indicate that countries need foreigners to get talents and skills they cannot tap locally.

Africa is a continent rich in resources. However, it needs more capital to tap into these resources. Thus, Africa relies heavily on foreign investors to help it establish industries and use its resources. Investors come mainly from Asia, Europe, and North America. They help create industries that produce goods and services and offer employment to people. Thus, African countries must create conducive social climates for these foreigners to reap the benefits of direct foreign investments in their countries. They must encourage immigration.

Profit Maximization

The recent past has witnessed a rise in corporations whose primary objective is maximizing profits. One of the critical strategies in maximizing profits is reducing the cost of labour. Companies strive to reduce this cost by outsourcing cheap labour. Companies have taken out their production facilities to countries where labour is cheap. Others have opted to import cheap foreign labour. Thus, so long as profit maximization is the primary objective of corporations, outsourcing is necessary, and it promotes multiculturalism.

Conclusion

Multiculturalism is inevitable. Societies need different people to create robust economies that offer good jobs, produce goods and services, and develop. People depend on one another due to their differences. Thus, they must be close to one another to get the necessary help.

Fathers' Day

I do remember him. He suffers quietly and is lonely. He keeps it all to himself. He is a man. Men should not complain.
 He educated them, all his children, boys and girls. He supplied them with necessities. He loved his daughters more, not because they were weak, but because he knew they were vulnerable. Now he suffers alone, alone in quietness.
 They do not give him money, "Mama, have it all. Men waste money, they waste it on women and alcohol," they say.
 "Baba is a drunkard. Baba never worked hard," they say.
 "Baba, I do remember you, yes, I do."
 "Baba, its not because u were drunk, its because they never take the blame. Even today, they still dont take the blame."
 "Yesterday, she paid our house rent baba, now the whole neighborhood knows I depend on her."
 "Her mother called, told me to stop bleeding her daughter dry."
 "She left me. she left with my kid. she left with my Brian. all because i sell beer."
 " I cant find sleep baba. my presence, my existence, is irritating."
 "Yesterday, my favorite Argentina played, but it was all messy in my house. My legs on my table, abomination dear friend."
 "why can't you find work? what plans do you have for us."
 "Baba, you never said anything. I won't say a thing. Baba Brian cant complain, because they never take the blame."
 

Trump vs. Kim: Imperialism vs. Sovereignty

 
 
I have keenly observed Donald Trump and his confrontation with North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un. Unlike most observers, blinded by the controversy over nuclear weapons, a post-colonial African can read the struggle between imperialism and sovereignty that has dogged this controversy.
Ultimately, the imperialist (Trump) wins the battle as Kim promises to abandon his country's nuclear program, creating the latest example of how imperialism always subdues the struggle for sovereignty. That aside, the questions raised by Trump's victory are: is the rest of the non-nuclear world safe by the US and its nuclear company of friends having loads of atomic weapons? Are Western efforts to prevent the rest of the world from acquiring atomic weapons measures of safety or standards of maintaining imperialism?
Why should the non-nuclear countries believe that owning nuclear weapons is dangerous when the US and the West have stockpiles of atomic weapons with rumors of plans to increase and update them? The Trump-Kim controversy is a perfect example of imperialism at its best. It reminds me of Colonial Africa, when the Europeans enslaved Africans and used Christianity to quell African resistance by telling them that resistance and revenge were reserved for God. No wonder some people view Christianity with contempt as a colonial religion. The European imperial behavior is the same as the current nuclear controversy. The West expects the rest of the world to believe nuclear weapons are dangerous. Yet, they advance their nuclear military capabilities, which helps them maintain control and dominion over the world. Imperialism at its best!
 
 

 

Since time immemorial, imperialism has always been driven and maintained by militarism. This militarism is the reason for the impossibility of a third-world country gaining a seat at the UN Security Council, a body composed of militarist nuclear countries with veto powers on critical international decisions, such as war and peace. This militarism has continuously contributed to Western interference in developing countries. It is this Western militarism that the rest of the world should rise and oppose vehemently.
If nuclear weapons are dangerous, then they are harmful to all and sundry. If the US views the North Korean nuclear program as a threat to it, likewise, North Korea and the rest of the world should treat the US' atomic stockpile as a threat to the whole world.
A similar struggle between imperialism and freedom exists between Iran and Israel in the Middle East. It is shameful that the US and the European Union forced Iran to abandon its nuclear program while ignoring Israel's atomic stockpile. The fact is that the middle east can never be safe with every Arab knowing that the Jews have nuclear inventories that can wipe them out at any time. The US and European Union's failure to cut and eliminate Israel's nuclear capabilities only proves that they intend to establish Israel (their ally) as an imperial power in the middle east.
Suppose the US is honest about its desire to improve and maintain world peace. In that case, it should focus on reducing and eliminating its nuclear stockpile and encourage other atomic countries to do the same. Upon taking this action, the US can have a moral ground to convince potential nuclear nations that nuclear weapons are dangerous. Without the adoption of this recommendation, all the struggles that the US has with North Korea, Iran, and other potential atomic countries serve merely as evidence of United States imperialism in the post-colonial world.
 
 Protest towards UN headquarters to push for nuclear disarmament
 The nuclear world should appeal to South Africa's morality. She merely gave up nuclear weapons. In the 72nd United Nations General Assembly, President Zuma reaffirmed this commitment to a nuclear-free South Africa by stating that no hands are safe with weapons of mass destruction, not the US, nuclear Europe, India, China, or Pakistan.
The West cannot keep fooling the rest of the world that nuclear weapons are safe with them but dangerous to others. We came from a history of the Third Reich, slavery, imperialism, and colonialism. Unfortunately, the existence of nuclear weapons maintains the elements of this dark past. It is time for the US and other nuclear countries to walk the talk by reducing and eliminating nuclear weapons.
I eagerly await the day the US and Britain destroy their nuclear stockpiles. I long for the day Russia destroys its world's largest atomic weapon arsenal. I long for the day when world leadership genuinely focuses on world peace. I long for the day when imperialism comes to an end. I long for Western nations to realize that authentic and successful leadership stems from exercising self-accountability before looking at others.
The day has dawned for nuclear countries to blow their "Trumpets" in a musical way towards the values of unity‚ peace‚ togetherness, and dialogue, as stated by President Mugabe in the 72nd UN General Assembly.

Divide and Rule

Divide and rule was a strategy Britain used in many colonies to prevent and suppress liberation movements that rose or attempted to rise. Divide and rule are grounded on the concept that if an oppressor keeps the many oppressed people divided, the oppressed fight one another while ignoring the failures and malpractices of the oppressor who continues to rule them. In short, division weakens people and makes oppressors have or gain the power to rule and control them. There are many examples of the application of divide and rule strategy globally. They are discussed below. 

British India

British India comprised two major religious groups: the Hindus and the Muslims. The Hindus were characterized by their caste system and intolerance towards other religious groups. They lowly regarded the Muslims who lived with them in British India. The British, who knew this fact, worked towards creating further division between these two religious groups to maintain their rule of India. Their policy was to keep and elevate the Hindu-Muslim antagonism to secure their rule of the territory.

 At one time, the Hindu members of the Indian National Congress resigned because the British had declared that India was at war with Germany without consulting the Congress. The British went ahead and appointed Muslim leaders to their positions. The Muslim leaders had no support of the electorate to hold these posts, yet the British appointed them in their effort to create and increase hatred among the Hindus and the Muslims. This strategy worked. The relationship between the Hindus and Muslims soured because many Hindus grew angry that their elected politicians languished in jail. At the same time, the Muslims assumed their roles in the Indian National Congress as if nothing grave had occurred.

The British used the divide-and-rule policy in India because of the Revolt of 1857, where Hindus and Muslims fought side by side against them and threatened to depose their rule of the territory. The unity the Hindus and Muslims expressed during this revolt surprised them. The British knew that their control of India would not last with such integration. Therefore, they embarked on creating division between the Hindus and the Muslims, which has had long-lasting consequences that are even felt today by the people.

Colonial Kenya

Another example of the British divide-and-rule strategy was in colonial Kenya. In the early 1950s, cooperation between the two major Kenyan tribes, the Luo and the Kikuyu, intensified in their struggle for Kenya’s independence, threatening the British, who had no intention of leaving the country soon. In 1954, a Luo Councilor, Ambrose Ofafa, was killed by the Mau Mau soldiers, a resistance movement mainly composed of Kikuyus, due to his alleged collaboration with the British. The British exploited this opportunity to exercise their divide-and-rule tactic by trying to create division between the Luo and Kikuyu communities. They created propaganda urging the Luo to join Kikuyu Home Guards, a force generated by the British to tackle the Mau Mau, to revenge for the killing of Ambrose Ofafa. Fortunately, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, a Luo political leader, saw beyond the British divide-and-rule tactics. He arrived at Eastlands, Nairobi, mainly occupied by the Luo community, to calm his tribe members’ desire for revenge against the Kikuyu. He told his tribe members that the Mau Mau war efforts were focused on freeing the country from the colonialists. There was no need for Africans to turn against their fellow Africans. The real enemy was the British. The Luos took Jaramogi’s message, and the British efforts to divide the two tribes failed. The increased cooperation among the Kenyan tribes ensured that Kenya gained in the next decade.

Application of Divide and Rule Policy Today

Unfortunately, the British divide-and-rule strategy did not end with colonialism. Many politicians learned it and used it to maintain their hold on power. 

The modern-day divide-and-rule tactic in Africa is the promotion of tribalism by top government officials. An example is in President Moi’s 27 years of rule in Kenya. Although many of his speeches were against tribalism, he promoted it with his actions. He often got elected to office based on his propaganda that the small Kenyan tribes were threatened by the prominent tribes, especially the Luo and Kikuyu. He also managed to keep the Luo and Kikuyu divided as he got elected unanimously by the small Kenyan tribes. 

Today, in Kenya, Uhuru Kenyatta’s corrupt administration survives by mastering the art of divide and rule through tribalism. This government engages in heinous fraudulent acts and indiscriminate murder of citizens but survives due to a divided people. The people of Kenya cannot speak with one voice to condemn the atrocities committed by this administration due to their division along tribal lines. Tribalism has spurred hatred among tribes, so people are ready to sacrifice values for loyalties to their tribal leaders. This occurrence is a significant problem in Kenya and Africa. Tribalism has also created suspicions among different tribes, which prevents the creation of a thriving democracy in Kenya and the African continent. Many tribes or tribal leaders exploit this mistrust to stick to power and even rig elections to have power.

Therefore, the fact that many African leaders are not ready to fight tribalism and other social divisions is unsurprising. These divisions among people are their source of power. I often imagine that if Kenyans were united and there was no tribalism, would corrupt leaders be tolerated? Would the government kill and maim innocent civilians as others watch and support its actions? The answer is no. 

Political leaders (holders of government positions) survive with social evils because of tribalism, a form of divide-and-rule tactic. One should know that these leaders are not trying to kill tribalism or any other type of divide-and-rule tactic globally. It is their source of power. It was the source of power for the British over their colonized populations. It is the current source of power for corrupt African leaders.

21st Century: A Century of Self-determination

Definition of terms: Capitalist- Rich legal persons focused on profit making.

Nearly 100 years ago, Vladimir Lenin predicted the collapse of capitalism and the rise of communism across the globe. His main argument was that capitalists' accumulation of financial capital would reach a saturation point, leading to the collapse of economies and, finally, the destruction of capitalism. Many economists agree that the 2007-2008 Financial Crisis marked the saturation point of the accumulation of financial capital by capitalists that Lenin had predicted, almost leading to the collapse of the major capitalist economies.

Several government interventions that led to the bailing out of capitalists made capitalism survive this predicted collapse. However, many middle and low-class people felt disappointed by their governments because they bailed out these capitalists who had dug their graves by driving their economies into this crisis. They were disappointed because their states quickly gave these capitalists billions of dollars to save them from bankruptcy. Yet, the many poor or middle-class masses do not have adequate social welfare programs to assist them in getting by each day.
Unfortunately, the laws that try to provide for the social welfare of the poor and the middle class are met with unnecessary debate and rejection due to the capitalists' unwillingness to spend on social welfare. On the other hand, the laws that bail out the capitalists are quickly drafted and passed because capitalists are deemed more critical than proletarians. This example perfectly depicts capitalism's unjust nature, which increasingly irritates more people as time passes.
The wealthy (capitalists) are the ones who matter under capitalism. They control the governments and the fate of everyone, undermining the individual right to self-determination across the globe.

The selfish nature of capitalism has promoted all forms of vices that threaten its collapse. If not the destruction of capitalism, then this skepticism endangers the existence of most capitalist governments. Capitalism has led to the rise of petty politics marred with corruption that hinders service delivery to the masses. Corruption comes in the form of nepotism, tribalism, ethnocentrism, racism, xenophobia, religious discrimination, and much more, as capitalists accumulate more capital while locking out the competition or fair distribution of resources.
This occurrence undermined our forefathers' dreams and agreements when they came together to create nations that offered the equal opportunity, protection, and justice for all. We are called citizens of one country or the other for these reasons (opportunity, security, and justice). A nation or a state is made by groups of people who come together and enter into an agreement to form institutions that can guarantee their protection, create opportunities for prosperity, and settle disputes among them fairly and respectfully.
The failure of capitalist governments to recognize these fundamental reasons for the creation of states by people spurs the growth of skepticism against capitalist governments in the 21st century. The selfish nature of capitalism and the greedy nature of humans has increased calls for cessation by significant pockets of populations who feel short-changed by their allegiance to their countries as citizens. Many nations are threatened by the breakup of the various units that formed them, as many people recognize their rights to self-determination. Many people realize today that they form the state and government, not vice versa. Countries are just institutions made by agreement among different groups of people. A group or groups may always feel short-changed by these arrangements. They deserve a right to opt out of the union or agreement, especially when the union fails to promote cohesion through truth, justice, and equal opportunity.
Unfortunately, political leaders, corrupted by the power excessively harnessed through capitalism, tend to undermine individuals' right to self-determination. We saw such a case recently in Catalonia, where the Spanish government shamefully thwarted a referendum for the people of Catalonia to break away from Spain.

Regardless of the occurrences in Catalonia, the time has come for capitalists and capitalist governments to realize that this century is a century where their very existence is under threat. Many struggling (economically) masses are beginning to review their relationships with the many underperforming capitalist governments worldwide. Thwarting people's determination to self-determine can never succeed. It did not succeed in the past, as demonstrated by the revolutions of the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries in America, France, Russia, Cuba, and Africa.


The push for a referendum in Catalonia; the Independence referendum of Iraqi Kurdistan, the Palestinian struggle for independence; the Br-exit; the Scottish referendum; the formation of South Sudan are clear indications of the imminent collapse of capitalism or the underperforming capitalist governments. Admittedly, this century is a century of self-determination.

Monogamy versus Polygamy

Polygamy refers to the cultural practice of a man or a woman having several wives or husbands. It is common among African people and Muslims. On the other hand, monogamy refers to the cultural practice of marriage between a husband and a wife. It is common among Europeans, North Americans, South Americans, and Christians.

Globalization has led to the clash of different cultures sparking several debates. One significant debate concerns monogamy and polygamy and tries to identify which is better. I want to discuss faithfulness as a point rather than delve into the debate.
Colonization spread western culture in new continents such as the Americas, Africa, and Asia. These colonizers introduced new laws, religions, and practices into the new regions that they occupied. Adopting Christianity in several parts of Africa challenged the long-held practice of Polygamy in Africa. Many Christian denominations vouch for monogamy. However, many Africans, although Christians, still consider polygamy an acceptable cultural practice.
The West, like always, criticizes polygamy as one of the "backward" cultures of Africans. They have used feminism and gender studies to criticize polygamy as a form of sexual and economic exploitation and degradation of both women and men. I will focus on the sexual exploitation part and discuss it from a different point of view.
The West has promoted monogamy for a long time. However, my primary concern is the high divorce rates in monogamous marriages. Divorce rates in the US and Europe are very high, which may indicate that monogamous marriages do not form strong bonds between couples. Infidelity or unfaithfulness is a primary cause for the breakup of these marriages.

Many a time, we see Westerners touring our beaches here in Africa. They Indulge in promiscuous behavior with our young men and women that patrol our beaches as sex workers. A majority of these promiscuous westerners are married. This occurrence makes me wonder why Westerners engage in promiscuity far away from their homes, where their spouses are nowhere to supervise them. It could be that monogamous marriages do not satisfy their sexual desires.
Besides, feminists and gender activists should know that promiscuous men and women in monogamous marriages are the greatest abusers of both womanhood and manhood. Engaging in a sexual relationship with somebody and failing to fulfill your responsibility as a partner is the highest form of sexual exploitation. Married men who "sleep" with other women besides their wives exploit these other women sexually because they do not exercise social, emotional, and economic responsibilities towards these women. Similarly, married women who "sleep" with other men besides their husbands exploit these men sexually because they do not exercise social, economic, and emotional responsibilities towards these men. Extramarital affairs are illegal and thus prevent those who engage in them from supporting their sexual partners. The result is the sexual exploitation of extramarital affairs partners by married people. Therefore, monogamous setups insult both manhood and womanhood through infidelity.

Unlike monogamy, polygamy discourages the irresponsibility common in monogamous setups where men and women are exploited sexually by married people. Polygamous setups allow both men and women to marry the people they get attracted to after their previous marriage of unions. These marriages formalize and normalize relationships and enable males and females to fulfill all their responsibilities towards their newly acquired life partners. Therefore, women or men dating married people in polygamous setups are less likely to be sexually exploited because there are formal and recognized channels where they can get married to married people and have their already married partners fulfill all the duties that they have towards them.

This must be the main reason why Africans practice polygamy. Their societies discourage irresponsibility caused by infidelity, such as the sexual exploitation of men and women, which is common in monogamous setups.

Colonialism and Corruption

Corruption is the opposite of integrity. It is the practice of engaging in fraudulent or dishonest behavior when holding a position of authority. It is an abuse of power or authority for personal gains. This abuse is why corruption is a crime in many jurisdictions. The most common examples of corrupt activities are the embezzlement of funds and bribery. However, corruption goes beyond these two common occurrences. The act or failure to act for personal gain is also considered corrupt. For example, a president may choose to ignore the corrupt activities of the ministers in his administration due to the fear of losing their support. In such a case, the president is also considered a corrupt leader.

 

 an officer receiving a bribe

 

After the European colonizers left Africa, corruption became one of the continent’s biggest problems. Corruption is present in every sector of the many African economies. For example, in Kenya, the transport sector is marred by corruption. Police officers mainly patrol Kenyan roads to take bribes for motorist traffic offenses. In the education sector, parents pay large sums of money to high school principals for their children to get admission. In the healthcare sector, doctors and nurses prioritize patients whose relatives can bribe them with large sums of money. Companies that give large sums of money to government officers in the trade sector receive trade licenses and contracts. There is more to this list than you can imagine.

 The main question is, why does corruption plague African countries? One explanation is that humans are naturally selfish, a concept argued by Ayn Rand, a Russian-American philosopher, novelist, and playwright, in most of her work. Borrowing from Rand’s argument of natural selfishness, one may assume that Africans are very selfish, which is why their countries have the highest incidences of corruption than any other continent of the world. Chinua Achebe almost supports this argument in his novel, “Arrow of God,” where he writes about a certain man made chief of a particular community by the British colonizers. Days after the man lands the chieftainship, he starts taking bribes from members of his community in the form of cattle. This new chief is using the power he had just received a few days ago to exploit his fellow “poor” community members because they fear the punitive expeditions of the British military. Later, to stress the greed of Africans, Achebe writes about how the British officer in charge of the area is surprised by the intense greed exhibited by the newly appointed African chief. This British officer claims he has never seen such greediness anywhere except in Africa.

 However, it is unfair to claim that Africans are greedier than the people of other continents. A deep analysis of Achebe’s “Arrow of God,” other works, and the African colonial history makes it fair to claim that colonialism played a more significant part in creating and encouraging corruption in Africa. This is due to the reasons discussed below.

 

 European missionaries being served by Africans.

 

When the colonizers arrived in Africa, they forcefully drove populations out of their lands and enslaved them. They created unfair labor practices and segregated themselves from the African communities, which they marginalized. They exploited African labor and controlled African economies, mainly built by free African labor. All these acts show the immense greediness and selfishness of the colonizers. In short, colonization in itself was corruption. 

 

 The colonizers exploited their powers to drive “poor” Africans out of their lands and enslave them. These actions led the Africans to believe they could do anything with power and authority, such as displacing and enslaving people. Additionally, the few colonizers, who enjoyed the economic benefits of free African labor, created a feeling within the Africans that personal economic success was all that mattered regardless of how a person achieved it. This is commonly quoted as “the end justifies the means.”

 After African countries gained independence, the new African leaders continued the corrupt practices they had learned from the colonizers. In Kenya, the leaders of the new republic allocated themselves the lands that the colonizers held after grabbing them from the Africans. They also continued displacing populations as they took their lands. This is one of the significant reasons why land clashes are common in Kenya today. Moreover, the new African leaders started practicing nepotism by appointing friends in government positions who helped them loot public coffers. This was a repetition of the colonizers’ actions, who only appointed Europeans in government positions to increase their control of the African populations. The new African leaders continued to stifle disgruntled African voices that opposed the poor management of their countries in the same way the colonizers had done before them. Political opponents were murdered and assassinated. Moreover, in the same way, the colonizers were reluctant to grant Africans freedom; today, African leaders are reluctant to hand over power even after suffering defeats in free and fair elections.

 Chinua Achebe and Ngugi wa Thiong’o vividly elaborate on the effects of colonization on corruption in the African continent in their books, “Arrow of God” and “The River Between.” In the “Arrow of God,” Achebe narrates about an African priest who sends his son to a missionary school to learn the ways of the white man because the future lies in learning “the ways of the white man.” In this case, the ways of the white man are the ability to displace populations, grab land and control people to work for you freely. Similarly, in “The River Between,” Ngugi narrates about an African father who sends his son to a missionary school to learn “the ways of the white man,” which is the future of the African people. 

 

 Africans are learning the ways of the white man.

 

Another good illustration of the colonial effects on corruption is in the novel “No Longer at Ease” by Chinua Achebe. In this novel, Achebe writes about a community that sends one of their sons to study in London. The community hopes that when the man returns, he will get a top government position and bring a larger share of the national cake to the community. The thought of the community wanting a larger share of the national cake illustrates colonization’s effects on the African minds about governance. In the same way, the colonizers were reaping the economic benefits of free labor and colonization. The African people wanted to reap the benefits of “free money” by having their people in the top government positions to allocate them national resources fraudulently.

In short, colonization took a toll on the concept of leadership in Africa, resulting in widespread corruption. The displacement of populations, the enslavement of people, and the segregation of people created an image in the African mind that success through selfishness is right regardless of how one achieves it. Colonization contributed immensely to the spread of corruption in Africa.