AGAJA

KUYO

BARUPE

WECHE DONGRUOK

MBAKA

NONRO

JEXJALUO  

NGECHE LUO

GI GWENG'

THUM

TEDO

LUO KITGI GI TIMBEGI

SIGENDNI LUO

THUOND WECHE

;

 
  
 

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.jaluo.com

I wanted to take some time before I responded to Elijah Ngugi and David Nderitu. The worst mistake, I think, is to fight hatred with hatred, fire with fire, propaganda with propaganda. I will, therefore, attempt to give a level-headed response to what (especially on Nderitu's part) amounts to rubbish.

The most obvious problem (which I will revisit later) with Ngugi's diatribe is that he lacks any hard evidence to support his claims. Let's look at the following statements made by Ngugi.

1. "is it authoritarian ideology giving him (Raila) authority to order one ethnic group not to pay rent to some Nairobi house owners and follow the command like robots or ordering a group of youth to set church properties on fire and they do so without question or remorse"?

2. "For example, Raila magnetizing votes from some ethnic tribes by promising position or titles like Prime Ministers and Vice Presidents to various tribes while there is no policy in the constitution that allows such provision."

3. "Raila's accuses all Kikuyus collectively of having been the grubbers who have had opportunity to enrich themselves through the rate president Mzee Kenyatta."

4."He has managed to portray that whether the Kikuyus worked in their business, as professionals or bought their cows right in the village and bought more and more cows to establish themselves they are all accused of being the greedy and whose appetite of getting rich is perpetual."

These are serious allegations indeed! But where is the evidence to support these claims?

In my own research, I have been unable to corroborate Ngugi's broad accusations. Yet you would think that Ngugi could point to specific speeches given by Raila in which he made such statements. However, any close reader will see that nowhere in his post does Ngugi provide hard evidence to support his claims against Raila.

In the same vein, Ngugi asks, "Is it Anarchy especially when he is able to say one word and all follow like ˜Kibaki tosha?" Quite frankly, I find it ironic that Ngugi and Nderitu would even bring this up as an argument against Raila. You would expect that Kibaki supporters would appreciate whatever support Raila gave to Kibaki since it at least gained them some votes. This is kind of like a job candidate badmouthing the writer of one of his best letters of recommendations - - and to HR (that would be the Kenyan public) too!

Raila supported Kibaki, as did most Kenyans because it was the best way to end Moi's long reign and it seemed like Kibaki would continue the push for democracy. How sad we all have been to find that we were deceived in the latter. Actually, I am convinced that this election will be decided in a similar fashion - - that Kenyans will vote for Raila because they are tired of Kibaki's sham of democracy.

Although it is strange that some Kibaki supporters would use Raila's past assistance to their candidate against Raila now (strange and convenient in terms of timing), it is stranger yet when we realize that much of Ngugi's argument is based on the premise that Raila should not win because people like him too much - - because he makes them "euphoric." This is really not an argument since there is no rationale behind it. What else is an election but a vote based on one's popularity with a given populace? Ngugi's fears are, therefore, based more on an antagonism toward democracy than on anything substantive. If it were up to him, the presidency would likely be decided by executive appointment.

Ngugi and Nderitu also attempt to portray Raila as anti-Kalenjin because of allegations made in a book by Dr. Babafemi Adesina Badejo that Raila really did participate in an attempted coup against Moi. Again, I find it strange that anyone who supports democracy would actually use his struggle against the Moi dictatorship as an indictment of Raila. Assuming that this claim is true, I suspect that most Kenyans actually appreciate the suffering that Raila endured to rid Kenya of dictatorship. Far from lambasting him, they appreciate the freedoms that he helped them gain. Unlike Ngugi and Nderitu, they may even (and I think understandably) feel gratitude.

Furthermore, even after his nine years in prison, Raila continued the fight for democracy, successfully opposing a constitution, favored by Kibaki, that would consolidate power in the president - - only to have this achievement be overturned by said president. Kibaki was so enamored of the idea of concentrating power in the executive branch - - with gaining more power for himself--that he dismissed Raila and the LDP. When he did this, Kibaki negated all pretense of democracy. He showed that he would go so far as to stonewall and abort a democratic voting process, and that he would even remove his democratically-elected opponents from office if he could not get his way. These two examples show why Raila bears a closer resemblance to Nelson Mandela - - a man who fought for real democracy--than to Hitler or Mussolini whose dictatorial (anti-democratic) styles of leadership have had their manifestation in Moi, and to a lesser extent, Kibaki.

Note that I have not even touched on the decline of the media - - notably the East African Standard - - under Kibaki - -  (See http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/africa/4770784.stm and http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2007/08/15/kenya-media-bill-faces-public-opposition/ ) As Ngugi himself writes, "All Hitler's techniques of moving the society under the intoxicating euphoria and soaking their will under well schemed propaganda through radio and journalism was learned from Mussolini. Please note the ability to put media under his control and subjection."

Mr. Ngugi, I am taking your advice and suggest that you do the same. I would like to take this opportunity to note that the Kibaki government has tried, but thankfully failed, to put Kenyan media under his control and subjection.

Were it not for the same international attention that his government's arrest of peaceful protestors garnered, Kibaki would likely have continued with his repression of freedom of speech. Luckily, he has been taught by the people that raiding businesses, and harassing or arresting journalists and activists is bad for publicity.

I think that the majority of Kenyans will vote for Raila because he is the most likely to promote democracy, plain and simple. Kenyans do not want those who pay lip-service to democracy like Kibaki. They want someone who has proven his commitment to democracy through years of struggle and sacrifice. Raila is, quite simply, the most believable proponent of democracy in this race.

Ngugi and Nderitu base most of their claim that Raila "has managed to inject hatred, anger and fear towards one ethnic group, the Kikuyus" on their fear of his popularity with Kenyans. They completely overlook the fact that many Kenyans are simply disillusioned with Kibaki and see Raila as the best alternative. Raila is not Kibaki's worst enemy, Kibaki is.

The irony of tribal politics is that both sides imagine that the other side has some "anger, fear, and hatred" toward them. Even when based more on paranoia than in fact, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The imagined becomes ever more real partly because there are always people like Ngugi and Nderitu stoking the embers. They will add so much fuel to a flickering flame (a kernel of truth) that a fierce fire will eventually consume the land. They will make many blanket statements - - such as, "He has created the seedbed to saw the separation of the Kikuyus with the rest of tribes of Kenya politically." But they have little evidence to support such claims. After stating that "although statistic shows differently he (Raila) has also broadcast that all main jobs in the government and major industries including the Non-Governmental Organizations are pinned to the Kikuyus," Ngugi fails to provide us with these statistics.

What little "evidence" tribalists - - those who incite tribal divisions--like Ngugi and Nderitu do have often lacks relevance.

For example, they accuse Raila of being a fascist because he named his son Fidel Castro. Since when was Fidel Castro a fascist? Although Castro has chosen an economic model that many outside of Cuba do not support, the fact is that Cubans live longer (due to a universal health care system) than do Americans in the U.S. Also, Cuba is extremely diverse. Because Castro outlawed segregation and racism, blacks, whites, and people of mixed race coexist there much more peacefully than they do in the U.S. (However, outside influence--namely tourism--has reversed some of the progress in racial equality. As is often the case, Cuba has been affected by western "values" in this regard.) This hardly corresponds to the definition of fascism provided by Ngugi himself.

The truth is that Ngugi is employing the same strategy of propaganda that Bush et al have employed in their vague, never-ending war on terror. Take, for example, the word "patriotism." If you believe, like Bush and company, that patriotism means following executive orders blindly and without question, then you will likely agree with Ngugi's equation of communism with fascism. In other words, you will take his words at face value. You will refuse to even hear that it is actually more patriotic to question your politicians, to oppose them in the face of a lack of evidence or in the light of conflicting and more convincing truths. You will hold closely to a "yes" or "no," "for us" or "against us" mentality and avoid delving more deeply into the nuances and complexities of ideologies and words like "patriotism," "communism," and "terrorism." There is a war of semantics going on all over the world between conservatives - - those who would like to maintain the political and economic status quo - - and progressives - - those who would like to see more equitable change. In today's Internet world, the fact is that the pen (or youtube video) is often mightier than the sword, bank account, or bomb. Words can incite, mobilize, and manipulate millions. We, therefore, have to be careful when people like Ngugi use terms like fascism and communism loosely.

As George Orwell wrote:

...the word ‘Fascism' is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit , corporal punishment , fox-hunting , bull-fighting , the 1922 Committee , the 1941 Committee , Kipling , Gandhi , Chiang Kai-Shek , homosexuality , Priestley 's broadcasts, Youth Hostels , astrology , women, dogs and I do not know what else... almost any English person would accept ‘bully' as a synonym for ‘Fascist'.

In other words, people like Ngugi have redefined fascism to include every enemy, potential, real, or imagined, who challenges their reality. The target in this case is Raila Odinga.

Yet Mussolini - - the man whom Ngugi compares to Raila - - himself defined fascism as being opposed to both socialism and communism, Raila's chosen ideology and Ngugi's redefinition of that stance, respectively. Mussolini wrote:

Anti-individualistic, the fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only insofar as his interests coincide with those of the State, which stands for the conscience and the universal will of man as a historic entity.... The fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value.... Fascism is therefore opposed to that form of democracy which equates a nation to the majority, lowering it to the level of the largest number.... We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right', a Fascist century. If the nineteenth century was the century of the individual (liberalism implies individualism) we are free to believe that this is the 'collective' century, and therefore the century of the State. (The Political and Social Doctrine of Fascism , emphasis added)

In other words, fascism's own father defined this ideology as a conservative, traditionalist paradigm, pretty much the polar opposite of Raila's platform for change which stresses democracy (with its inherent emphasis on individual rights), pluralism, tolerance, and equity.

Let's be clear. Fascism is inherently racist and/or ethnocentric since it will always favor one group over another. Communism, on the other hand, attempts to equalize all members of a society. That said, I personally do not support communism because I have seen how the means used have rarely justified ends that were never achieved in Russia , China , and even Cuba .

I also know that Raila is not a communist (although Ngugi would like to play red-baiting McCarthy and tell us otherwise). He is a social democrat who has said that he will create conditions favorable to foreign and domestic investment in Kenya while making it possible for more Kenyans (even the poor) to reap the nation's economic progress. Kenyans and most people in the world are tired of the unrealized promises of "trickle down" economics. They are tired of capitalists who will not play fair and who employ corruption to achieve their monopolistic aims.

Although Ngugi would like us to believe that those who support Raila "bear limited historic reverence," the truth is that he and Nderitu who would like to rewrite history. They would like us to forget the years of one-party rule, the totalitarianism of the Moi regime, and the betrayals of democracy under Kibaki. They would also like us to dismiss Raila's work on behalf of democracy during these critical years.

Aside from his attempt to discredit Raila based on his name choice for his son, Ngugi argues that we should be suspicious of Raila because of his parentage. This is again an attempt to equate two very different ideologies (communism and fascism, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga and Mussolini). In addition, I can't think of a less democratic outlook than one that prejudges and predestines people based on who their parents were. Raila should be judged by his own words and deeds, not by his father's.

Imagine if we were all judged by who our parents were or are! This is a frightening prospect that would condemn the vast majority of Kenyans and their children to a never-ending cycle of poverty. Kenyans are ready for a new day, not the repetition of old mistakes.

Peace,

Annah

Akelo nyar Kager, jaluo@jaluo.com

TRAVEL TOOL

INVEST with JALUO

Carry Books to Kenya

WENDO MIWA PARO

OD PAKRUOK