WHAT IS AFRIKA’N NATION?
( vision and mission)
Afrika’n Nation is a political blog. A future independent party which doesn’t belong to the opposition groups neither to the ruling parties. Afrika n’ Nation has a different vision and mission and it will bring a new alternative on the continent.
Mainly we are talking about a pacific democratic revolution which we see as a whole.
A lot of people believe that the word “Revolution” means something evil. Just as socialists and capitalists in their race of dominance sees each others as oppressors.
However, it doesn’t matter the definition that the world has given to “revolution”. For us it is not something crazy even if today there are a lot of types of revolutionaries.
We see it as a process that gives the voice to the people. And these people would be the ones that will lead and support this pacific revolution due to starvation and all social injustices that they have to go through in their daily life.
For AFRIKA’N NATION revolution and democracy is the same thing, democracy itself is a revolution. It’s constantly active, it doesn’t support individual interests. It’s a congregation of different identities and interests where everyone has space in it. As it’s commonly illustrated democracy is “the government of the people for the people and by the people”.
For that reason, the government should be selected by a real democratic process where the majority should has a stronger voice to determine their own destiny. Any law that only represents a minority force is irrational and inconvenient for the society as a whole.
As a result we think that is fundamental to determine a program and a series of moral principles that stand for our vision and mission.
1) The most important is to respect the established individual and political rights.
For example:
a) Should not only be the freedom to speak and then be prosecuted or assassinated because of your nationality, religions, or membership of a certain group.
In fact what freedom an illiterate has if he doesn’t even know how to read or write?
What freedom does African innocents who keep dying of aids, malaria, and cholera know? if isn’t the freedom of dying!
What freedom of speech do the African illiterate population know? if isn’t the freedom of keep being ignorant?
What type of freedom do the African helpless children know? beside the freedom of dying of hunger?
What type of freedom do African defenseless women know? Beside the freedom of being rape and abuse?
What type of freedom of speech do the African people know? Beside the freedom of living in fear, poverty and misery?
As you can see, the freedom of speech in Africa still a simple fiction, because people live in fear and in extreme poverty where they only have two choices whether to be submitted and live or to stand up and die.
Freedom under poverty, misery, fear, it is not a real freedom even if most of those corrupted leaders keep mentioning the words ‘’freedom’’ and ‘’ peace’’ on their speeches. Only they know which freedom they are referring to.
The African people want to be free living in union, with no fear and no misery.
THAT IS OUR MSSION!
2) We believe that for Africa to achieve peace, progress and harmony, it is necessary for no single African to be unemployed.
It is necessary for every African child to have access to free education.
It is necessary for every African to have access to free health care.
It is necessary for the people to benefit in the retribution of its natural resources.
And for that, it is worth it to sacrifice oneself.
3) A revolution is not a statue that anyone designs it his own way.
A revolution does not triumph to benefit a group of people as we’ve seen in the past, where after victory, the so called revolutionaries leaders by fear of being overthrown by the former dictators, these revolutionaries became obsess with power, and start being more oppressive than the dictators, converting themselves to tyrants, losing the trust and support of the people. Finally they end up killing themselves due to personal ambitions.
A revolution triumphs to make the people could govern predicting social justice and changes as a democratic society. Only democracy can free the African people ending to all these unnecessary bloodshed erasing all sort of torture, discrimination, humiliation, fanatic, tribalism etc….a revolution triumphs to make people govern!!!!
4) We need to defend Africa’s political, economical, social sovereignty with dignity, situating our nations between the most respected and admired nations in the world.
For us, the public opinion as the world opinion is the best support for a government because it gives the possibility to keep a constant contact with the people that are the most powerful forces of a nation and not the arms.
The media it’s a democratic tool to report the failure of a government and to represent different kinds of interests that are in a community. It also plays a key role as a channel of communication between the members of the society and their leaders. That’s the reason why we are starting by this blog to make our voice louder and stronger.
As a conclusion, a revolutionary government is the government of the people, for the people, by the people. For us revolution and democracy are synonyms because its not static and both have a common goal which is to change everything that is suppose to be changed where the people can sit together and give their view on any topic no matter their beliefs, allowing a cultural diversity.
You can see that our vision as our mission are very extended, we deal with Africa’s many social injustice issues, also the rest of the third world and for that , we take as reference Africa’s socialist leaders and the world revolutionaries.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Nkwame Nkrumah
NKWAME NKRUMAH : ( September 21, 1909 - April 27, 1972)
To many , he is considered as the father of the African Nationalism. Eye see him as an African Abraham Lincoln, America's 16 th Federalist, Republican President who saw the Unites State as a federal State,just as President Doc. Nkwame' Nkruma did for Africa.He was the first African Leader with that vision, willing to unite Africa. who saw the Continent as a whole and not divided.
so who was this great man with extraordinary skills of leadership.This respected African President to most of the world politicians for the role he played in Africa politic.
President Nkwame Nrumah was born on September 21, 1909 in Ghana.
Over time , he will take "a non-aligned Marxist perspective on economics, and believed capitalism had malign effects that were going to stay with Africa for a long time. Although he was clear on distancing himself from the African socialism of many of his contemporaries; Nkrumah argued that socialism was the system that would best accommodate the changes that capitalism had brought, while still respecting African values."
President Nkwame Nhrumah becomes first president of the republic of Ghana on the 1 0f July 1960 after facing challenges on learning how to govern, uniting the nation, winning complete independence from the United Kingdom,in order for it to become a free, sovereign and independent nation.
Even if under his administration, he sent alot of opposition leaders to prison,and proposing a constitutional amendment posing himself as President for life, we have to remember that during his regime
most of his economical project never saw the light and his country still depending on western imports.
His government was overthrown by a military coup while he was on a state visit in Vietnam. He never went back back to Ghana but lived in Guinea Conakry as a co-president under the government of President Ahmed Sekou Toure', also living in fear of being assassinated where he spent the rest of his life writing books about his African union vision such as;
# he Autobiography of Kwame Nkrumah (1957)
# Africa Must Unite (1963)
# African Personality (1963)
# Neo-Colonialism: the Last Stage of Imperialism (1965)
# Axioms of Kwame Nkrumah (1967)
# African Socialism Revisited (1967)
# Voice From Conakry (1967)
# Handbook for Revolutionary Warfare (1968) - first introduction of Pan-African pellet compass
# Consciencism: Philosophy and Ideology for De-Colonisation (1970)
# Class Struggle in Africa (1970)
# The Struggle Continues (1973)
# I Speak of Freedom (1973)
# Revolutionary Path (1973)
He dies at the age of 62 of skin cancer. his body was buried at the village were he was born.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Thomas Sankara ''african Che''
Thomas Sankara , was an African revolutionist from Burkina Faso known to the world as ''The African Che'
he was born on 21 December 1949 and died the 15 of October 1987.was a captain, leader of the burkina Faso Revolution who fought against corruption, averting famine, promoting environmental factors, making education and health the first priorities as Barack Obama.
In 1976,Sankara with a group of commander officers of the commando training center in Pô formed a secret Organisation during the presidency of Colonel Saye Zerbo, known as a the "Communist Officers' Group" (Regroupement des officiers communistes, or ROC)formed by: Henri Zongo, Jean-Baptiste Boukary Lingani, Compaoré and Sankara.
In 1981, He was appointed Secretary of State for Information in the military government.attending to his first cabinet meeting on a bicycle, but he resigned on April 21, 1982 in opposition when he realized that the government was corrupt, which he saw as the regime's anti-labour drift, declaring "Misfortune to those who gag the people!" ("Malheur à ceux qui baillonnent le peuple!")
He will become Prime Minister on November 7, 1982, under the government of Major-Doctor Jean-Baptiste Ouédraogo, but soon will be dismissed on May 17 and placed under house arrest after a visit by the French president's son and African affairs adviser Jean-Christophe Mitterrand. Henri Zongo and Jean-Baptiste Boukary Lingani were also placed under arrest; this will cause a popular uprising.
later on, with the support of the army,the people of Burkina Faso and Libya. they will come to power in a popular coup masterminded by Blaise Compaore'on August 4,1983,where Sankara will become President at the Age of 33 due to his personal charisma and vision.
As President,Thomas Sankara will bring the country into a socialist nation,changing the country's name from formely known Upper Volta to Burkina Faso which means ''land of the upright man''.
He Promoted Health Program and women's rights, promoting a "Democratic and Popular Revolution" (Révolution démocratique et populaire) but this will create division and jealousy among the members of the party, and he would be assassinated in a coup d'etat led by his own friend Blaise Compaore with the support of France.
Sankara saw himself as a revolutionary and was inspired by alot world socialists Leaders such as Fidel Castro, Lt.Jerry Rwanlings , Ghana's former President.
He defined his revolution ideology as anti-imperialist in a speech on October 2, 1983, the Discours d'orientation politique (DOP).
Quotes
"We hope and believe that the best way of limiting the usurpation of power by individuals, military or otherwise, is to put the people in charge. Between fractions, between clans, plots and coups d'etats can be perpetrated. Against the people, a durable coup d'état cannot be perpetrated. Therefore, the best way of preventing the army from confiscating power for itself and for itself alone is to make this power shared by the voltaic people from the outset. That's what we are aiming for.."
August 21, 1983 press conference.
Source: [3]
"It's really a pity that there are observers who view political events like comic strips. There has to be a Zorro, there has to be a star. No, the problem of Upper Volta is more serious than that. It was a grave mistake to have looked for a man, a star, at all costs, to the point of creating one, that is, to the point of attributing the ownership of the event to captain Sankara, who must have been the brains, etc."
August 21, 1983 press conference.
Source: [4]
"That is the hidden side of November 7 revealed. Mysteries still remain under the cover. History will perhaps be able to speak about it at greater length and to assign responsibilities more clearly."
August 21, 1983 press conference.
Source: [5]
"As for our relationship with the political class, what relations would you have liked us to weave? We explained face to face, directly with the leaders, the former leaders of the former political parties because, for us, these parties do not exist any more, they have been dissolved. And that is very clear. The relationship that we have with them is simply the relationship we have with voltaic citizens, or, if they so wish, the relationship between revolutionaries, if they wish to become revolutionaries. Beyond that, nothing remains but the relationship between revolutionaries and counter-revolutionaries."
August 21, 1983 press conference.
Source: [6]
"I would like to leave behind me the conviction that if we maintain a certain amount of caution and organization we deserve victory[....] You cannot carry out fundamental change without a certain amount of madness. In this case, it comes from nonconformity, the courage to turn your back on the old formulas, the courage to invent the future. It took the madmen of yesterday for us to be able to act with extreme clarity today. I want to be one of those madmen. [...] We must dare to invent the future."
1985
Source: (Excerpt from interviews with Swiss Journalist Jean-Philippe Rapp, translated from Sankara: Un nouveau pouvoir africain by Jean Ziegler. Lausanne, Switzerland: Editions Pierre-Marcel Favre, 1986. Used by permission in following source:) Sankara, Thomas. Thomas Sankara Speaks: The Burkina Faso Revolution 1983-87. trans. Samantha Anderson. New York: Pathfinder, 1988. pp. 141-144.
Writings about Thomas Sankara
* (French) Biographie de Thomas Sankara : La Patrie ou la Mort..., de Bruno Jaffré ISBN : 2-7384-5836-X • 1997 268 pages
* (French) Les années Sankara de la révolution à la Rectification, de Bruno Jaffré ISBN : 2-7384-5967-6 • 1989 new edition in 1997 336 pages
* Le président Thomas SANKARA, Chef de la Révolution Burkinabe: 1983-1987 Portrait de Alfred Yambanga SAWADOGO,Ed. L'Harmattan, Mars 2001. ISBN 2-7475-0588-X
* Thomas SANKARA,"OSER INVENTER L'AVENIR" La parole de Sankara de DAVID GAKUNZI. Ed. PATHFINDER et HARMATTAN, Janvier 2005. ISBN 2-7384-0761-7
* THOMAS SANKARA, L'ESPOIR ASSASSINE de Valere SOME. Ed. L'Harmattan , Janvier 2005. ISBN 2-7384-0568-1
* Thomas Sankara in Godfrey Mwakikagile, Military Coups in West Africa Since The Sixties, Huntington, New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2001.
* Underground System, by Fela Kuti, Kalakuta/Sterns, 1992.
We would like to thank again our friends from Wikipedia Which keep nourishing our ideas in order to improve our Blog and makes it fascinating for our readers but keeping our own originality and skills as Revolutionarists.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
PATRICE EMERY LUMUMBA
After a long struggle,when most African countries gain their independence in the late 1950,early 1960. Most of theses nations Leaders were Socialist Leaders. They chose this system in order to build and organize their nations in unity and harmony because they believed that ''Socialism'' was what Capitalism was not. A system that represented their identity,tradition, values... the unity that they once had.that it would protect their new found independence and sovereignty.a path, a doctrine that could contribute to their people benefit.
Who were these Socialist Leaders? what did they stood up for? why most of them were murdered? and by whom?Those are the questions that we will try to answer in this new topic" African Socialist Leaders''
We will start counting them one by one, starting with who many consider as the greatest leader Africa has ever had. The only African leader whom, only 10 weeks in office changed the history of Africa and became a symbol, not only for African freedom fighters, but for the world as well.
Patrice Émery Lumumba: (2 JULY 1925-17 JANUARY 1961)
was an anti-colonial African leader who would become the first legally elected prime Minister of the Republic Of Congo (known today as The Democratic Republic Of Congo). After he helped the country to win its independence from Belgium in June 1960. But his government would be overthrown, deposed by a popular coup during the Congo's crisis Only ten weeks later. He was imprisoned a lot of times and murdered in controversial circumstance til this day, the real truth about the plot of his death, whom were involve in Lumumba's assassination is still unknown. Some Rumours affirm that the coup was organized by Colonel Joseph Mobutu, endorsed by the CIA and the Belgium Government,even if these last keep refusing the accusation of taking part of his physical elimination.
In my opinion , no Leader in the world have been murdered the way He was: after killing him, his enemies, cut his body and put it in acid. all that was left was some teeth and the skull.
He is considered by many as the greatest African Leader of all time. He never declared himself as a Socialist, but his ideology was socialist. his vision was for not only the Congolese people to unite but for the African people to unite as a whole and that is how he saw Africa. united and not divided. He was considered by Malcolm X as : '' the greatest black man who ever walked the African continent''
and he became today a symbol of struggle, and freedom not only for the African people but for the world as well, where he has inspired millions of people.
But why was He murdered? why was he a threat for capitalism?
they killed him for the same reason they had assassinated most of our revolutionary leaders. they murdered most of them only for the fact of wanting our people to unite and take the destiny of our continent in our own hands in order to determine our future.
The West called him a Communist , when Lumumba Himself denied of being a Communist. He even declared once that he was neutral between having to identify his vision with the EAST and WEST. All he did was comparing Communism and Colonization as facing the same situation of that time. something very sad was when he was arrested for the last time before dieing, the US was the first country he had asked for help. even the United Nation who could have saved him, let him die saying that he had escaped from the protection that they had sent for him at his residence. There was nothing else they could do for him.
His enemies though that by killing him they would erase his vision but it was the opposite. they made him an Prophet, a legend by killing him, because Lumumba's name was bigger than himself. They feared him more when he was dead than when he was alive. His legacy lives on. There are millions of Lumumba's not only in Africa but all around the world inspired by this Martyr who became the symbol of Freedom and Unity.
LUMUMBA'S MISTAKES:
Lumumba as most of our African martyrs made mistakes. In some decision they made,they had no choice but in others they had.
1. eye believe that Lumumba's first mistake was to name Mobutu , Chief of the army.
2. His Second mistake he made it some days after being elected prime minister.that fateful decision he made, raising the pay of all government employees except for the army. at that point he really needed the army, he had to win their trust and support, because a government with no support of it army won't even last a week( we've seen the example in Ghana, when the army deposed the government of President Kwame' Nkrumak, while he was abroad, In Burkina Faso when the army lead by Capt. Thomas Sankara and Capt.Blaise Compaore' led the coup and overthrew the government. In Libya, in 1969 the coup led by Capt.Mohmar Kadafi and some officers, they overthrew King Idris al-Mahdim while he was outside the country for some medical treatment, and proclaimed a republic.)
If Lumumba had gain trust in the army, eye believe that on July 5m there wouldn't be mutiny among soldiers ,who were also rebelling against their Belgians officers for treating them with no respect. this would lead to a general breakdown, which allowed Colonel Mobutu to take advantage of the situation, taking over because Lumumba lost the control of the whole situation.
3. He was surrounded by bad people, alienating his colleagues and supporters.
4. He failed to promote development in the country.
LUMUMBA'S WRITINGS:
Lumumba did not really have time to write about his vision because not only he did not get to live long,( He was only 36 years old when he was assassinated), but he was subsequently imprisoned, he would sometimes write some notes from his cell and throw them outside so that his followers could collect and publish them.most time it was in his speeches.
but he got to write books such as :
Congo, My Country, 1962, New York: Praeger (Books That Matter)
Lumumba Speaks: The Speeches and Writings of Patrice Lumumba, 1958-1961 [Collection of Speeches, Little, Brown and Company, 1972] Translated by Helen R. Lane. Ed. Jean Van Lierde
WRITINGS ABOUT LUMUMBA:
A lot of authors wrote about Lumumba :
Aimé Césaire, Une Saison au Congo (1966); Eng. trans. by Ralph Manheim, A Season in the Congo (1969). A poetic drama about the career and death of Lumumba.
W. A. E Skurnik, African Political Thought: Lumumba, Nkrumah, Touré (Social Science Foundation and Graduate School of International Studies, University of Denver. Monograph series in world affairs, v. 5, no. 3-4), 1968, Denver: University of Denver, ASIN B0006CNYSW
Ludo De Witte, The Assassination of Lumumba, Trans. by Ann Wright and Renée Fenby, 2002 (Orig. 2001), London; New York: Verso, ISBN 1-85984-410-3
Thomas R. Kanza, Conflict in the Congo: The Rise and Fall of Lumumba (Penguin African library), 1972, New York: Penguin, ISBN 0-14-041030-9
Robin McKown, Lumumba: A Biography, 1969, London: Doubleday, ISBN 0-385-07776-9
G. Heinz, Lumumba: The Last Fifty Days, 1980, New York: Grove Press, ASIN B0006C07TQ
Panaf, Patrice Lumumba (Panaf Great Lives), 1973, New York: St. Martin's Press, ISBN 0-901787-31-0
Kwame Nkrumah, Challenge of the Congo, 1967, New York: International Publishers
Tributes To Lumumba:
In 1966 Patrice Lumumba's image was rehabilitated by the Mobutu regime and he was proclaimed a national hero and martyr in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. By a presidential decree, the Brouwez House, site of Lumumba's brutal torture on the night of his murder, became a place of pilgrimage in the Congo.[29] Plans made to erect a spire in Lumumba's memory did not proceed but the anniversary of Lumumba's death was commemorated yearly until 1974, upon the unveiling of Mobutism.
A major transportation artery in Kinshasa, the Lumumba Boulevard, is named in his honor. The boulevard goes past an interchange with a giant tower, the Tour de l'Echangeur (the main landmark of Kinshasa) in honor of the martyr prime minister. On the tower's plaza, the first Kabila regime erected a tall statue of Lumumba with a raised hand, greeting people coming from Kinshasa International Airport.
In Bamako, Mali, Lumumba Square is a large central plaza with a life-size statue of Lumumba, a park with fountains, and a flag display. Around Lumumba Square are various businesses, embassies and Bamako's largest bank.
Streets were also named after him in Haiti, Tanzania, Ghana, Budapest, Hungary (between 1961 and 1990); Belgrade, Serbia; Bata and Malabo, Equatorial Guinea; Tehran, Iran; Algiers, Algeria (Rue Patrice Lumumba);[30] Santiago de Cuba, Cuba (since 1960, formerly Avenida de Bélgica); Łódź, Poland; Kiev, Ukraine; Rabat, Morocco; Maputo, Mozambique; Leipzig, Germany; Lusaka, Zambia ("Lumumba Street").
The Peoples' Friendship University of the USSR was renamed "Patrice Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University" in 1961, but it was later renamed "The Peoples' Friendship University of Russia" in the post-Soviet landscape in 1992.[31]
In Belgrade, Serbia, "The Patris Lumumba Hall of Residence" at Belgrade University was built in 1961 and continues to carry Lumumba's name.[32]
In Kampala, Uganda, "Lumumba Hall" of Residence at Makerere University continues to carry his name.
"Lumumba" is a popular choice for children's names throughout Africa.[33]
American stand-up comedian Patrice Oneal is named after Lumumba.
Argentinian Reggae Band, was named "Lumumba". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumumba_%28band%29
In 1964 Malcolm X labelled Patrice Lumumba, "the greatest black man who ever walked the African continent".
we attached a documentary video about LUMUMBA from www.youtube.com
we also would like to thank the wikipedia.org site to have given us a lot of information to elaborate this topic about Patrice Lumumba.
NB: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrice_Lumumba
Sully A. ''AN AFRIKA'N APART.....''
Who were these Socialist Leaders? what did they stood up for? why most of them were murdered? and by whom?Those are the questions that we will try to answer in this new topic" African Socialist Leaders''
We will start counting them one by one, starting with who many consider as the greatest leader Africa has ever had. The only African leader whom, only 10 weeks in office changed the history of Africa and became a symbol, not only for African freedom fighters, but for the world as well.
Patrice Émery Lumumba: (2 JULY 1925-17 JANUARY 1961)
was an anti-colonial African leader who would become the first legally elected prime Minister of the Republic Of Congo (known today as The Democratic Republic Of Congo). After he helped the country to win its independence from Belgium in June 1960. But his government would be overthrown, deposed by a popular coup during the Congo's crisis Only ten weeks later. He was imprisoned a lot of times and murdered in controversial circumstance til this day, the real truth about the plot of his death, whom were involve in Lumumba's assassination is still unknown. Some Rumours affirm that the coup was organized by Colonel Joseph Mobutu, endorsed by the CIA and the Belgium Government,even if these last keep refusing the accusation of taking part of his physical elimination.
In my opinion , no Leader in the world have been murdered the way He was: after killing him, his enemies, cut his body and put it in acid. all that was left was some teeth and the skull.
He is considered by many as the greatest African Leader of all time. He never declared himself as a Socialist, but his ideology was socialist. his vision was for not only the Congolese people to unite but for the African people to unite as a whole and that is how he saw Africa. united and not divided. He was considered by Malcolm X as : '' the greatest black man who ever walked the African continent''
and he became today a symbol of struggle, and freedom not only for the African people but for the world as well, where he has inspired millions of people.
But why was He murdered? why was he a threat for capitalism?
they killed him for the same reason they had assassinated most of our revolutionary leaders. they murdered most of them only for the fact of wanting our people to unite and take the destiny of our continent in our own hands in order to determine our future.
The West called him a Communist , when Lumumba Himself denied of being a Communist. He even declared once that he was neutral between having to identify his vision with the EAST and WEST. All he did was comparing Communism and Colonization as facing the same situation of that time. something very sad was when he was arrested for the last time before dieing, the US was the first country he had asked for help. even the United Nation who could have saved him, let him die saying that he had escaped from the protection that they had sent for him at his residence. There was nothing else they could do for him.
His enemies though that by killing him they would erase his vision but it was the opposite. they made him an Prophet, a legend by killing him, because Lumumba's name was bigger than himself. They feared him more when he was dead than when he was alive. His legacy lives on. There are millions of Lumumba's not only in Africa but all around the world inspired by this Martyr who became the symbol of Freedom and Unity.
LUMUMBA'S MISTAKES:
Lumumba as most of our African martyrs made mistakes. In some decision they made,they had no choice but in others they had.
1. eye believe that Lumumba's first mistake was to name Mobutu , Chief of the army.
2. His Second mistake he made it some days after being elected prime minister.that fateful decision he made, raising the pay of all government employees except for the army. at that point he really needed the army, he had to win their trust and support, because a government with no support of it army won't even last a week( we've seen the example in Ghana, when the army deposed the government of President Kwame' Nkrumak, while he was abroad, In Burkina Faso when the army lead by Capt. Thomas Sankara and Capt.Blaise Compaore' led the coup and overthrew the government. In Libya, in 1969 the coup led by Capt.Mohmar Kadafi and some officers, they overthrew King Idris al-Mahdim while he was outside the country for some medical treatment, and proclaimed a republic.)
If Lumumba had gain trust in the army, eye believe that on July 5m there wouldn't be mutiny among soldiers ,who were also rebelling against their Belgians officers for treating them with no respect. this would lead to a general breakdown, which allowed Colonel Mobutu to take advantage of the situation, taking over because Lumumba lost the control of the whole situation.
3. He was surrounded by bad people, alienating his colleagues and supporters.
4. He failed to promote development in the country.
LUMUMBA'S WRITINGS:
Lumumba did not really have time to write about his vision because not only he did not get to live long,( He was only 36 years old when he was assassinated), but he was subsequently imprisoned, he would sometimes write some notes from his cell and throw them outside so that his followers could collect and publish them.most time it was in his speeches.
but he got to write books such as :
Congo, My Country, 1962, New York: Praeger (Books That Matter)
Lumumba Speaks: The Speeches and Writings of Patrice Lumumba, 1958-1961 [Collection of Speeches, Little, Brown and Company, 1972] Translated by Helen R. Lane. Ed. Jean Van Lierde
WRITINGS ABOUT LUMUMBA:
A lot of authors wrote about Lumumba :
Aimé Césaire, Une Saison au Congo (1966); Eng. trans. by Ralph Manheim, A Season in the Congo (1969). A poetic drama about the career and death of Lumumba.
W. A. E Skurnik, African Political Thought: Lumumba, Nkrumah, Touré (Social Science Foundation and Graduate School of International Studies, University of Denver. Monograph series in world affairs, v. 5, no. 3-4), 1968, Denver: University of Denver, ASIN B0006CNYSW
Ludo De Witte, The Assassination of Lumumba, Trans. by Ann Wright and Renée Fenby, 2002 (Orig. 2001), London; New York: Verso, ISBN 1-85984-410-3
Thomas R. Kanza, Conflict in the Congo: The Rise and Fall of Lumumba (Penguin African library), 1972, New York: Penguin, ISBN 0-14-041030-9
Robin McKown, Lumumba: A Biography, 1969, London: Doubleday, ISBN 0-385-07776-9
G. Heinz, Lumumba: The Last Fifty Days, 1980, New York: Grove Press, ASIN B0006C07TQ
Panaf, Patrice Lumumba (Panaf Great Lives), 1973, New York: St. Martin's Press, ISBN 0-901787-31-0
Kwame Nkrumah, Challenge of the Congo, 1967, New York: International Publishers
Tributes To Lumumba:
In 1966 Patrice Lumumba's image was rehabilitated by the Mobutu regime and he was proclaimed a national hero and martyr in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. By a presidential decree, the Brouwez House, site of Lumumba's brutal torture on the night of his murder, became a place of pilgrimage in the Congo.[29] Plans made to erect a spire in Lumumba's memory did not proceed but the anniversary of Lumumba's death was commemorated yearly until 1974, upon the unveiling of Mobutism.
A major transportation artery in Kinshasa, the Lumumba Boulevard, is named in his honor. The boulevard goes past an interchange with a giant tower, the Tour de l'Echangeur (the main landmark of Kinshasa) in honor of the martyr prime minister. On the tower's plaza, the first Kabila regime erected a tall statue of Lumumba with a raised hand, greeting people coming from Kinshasa International Airport.
In Bamako, Mali, Lumumba Square is a large central plaza with a life-size statue of Lumumba, a park with fountains, and a flag display. Around Lumumba Square are various businesses, embassies and Bamako's largest bank.
Streets were also named after him in Haiti, Tanzania, Ghana, Budapest, Hungary (between 1961 and 1990); Belgrade, Serbia; Bata and Malabo, Equatorial Guinea; Tehran, Iran; Algiers, Algeria (Rue Patrice Lumumba);[30] Santiago de Cuba, Cuba (since 1960, formerly Avenida de Bélgica); Łódź, Poland; Kiev, Ukraine; Rabat, Morocco; Maputo, Mozambique; Leipzig, Germany; Lusaka, Zambia ("Lumumba Street").
The Peoples' Friendship University of the USSR was renamed "Patrice Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University" in 1961, but it was later renamed "The Peoples' Friendship University of Russia" in the post-Soviet landscape in 1992.[31]
In Belgrade, Serbia, "The Patris Lumumba Hall of Residence" at Belgrade University was built in 1961 and continues to carry Lumumba's name.[32]
In Kampala, Uganda, "Lumumba Hall" of Residence at Makerere University continues to carry his name.
"Lumumba" is a popular choice for children's names throughout Africa.[33]
American stand-up comedian Patrice Oneal is named after Lumumba.
Argentinian Reggae Band, was named "Lumumba". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumumba_%28band%29
In 1964 Malcolm X labelled Patrice Lumumba, "the greatest black man who ever walked the African continent".
we attached a documentary video about LUMUMBA from www.youtube.com
we also would like to thank the wikipedia.org site to have given us a lot of information to elaborate this topic about Patrice Lumumba.
NB: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrice_Lumumba
Sully A. ''AN AFRIKA'N APART.....''
Thursday, October 23, 2008
African Socialism Movement.
The word “socialism” used back in the 1950 and 1960 was a term that most African leaders would use because they though that it was the perfect system that could unite the continent and make it progress. they believed that It would unite us in the recognition to restore Africa’s humanist and equality in the reconstruction of various nation-states.
Mostly Doc. Kwame Nkrumah, who was Ghana's First president,spent his life calling for Africa to unite...not only to help each others in case of any danger but to come together as one uniting their economy, policy, army as one bloc. as The United States of Africa. due to some disagreements among the leaders of that time, Africa lost the best opportunity to determine the future.
now day socialism is still mentioned in Africa, but tends to lose its objective content in favour of a distracting terminology and general confusion. Each state describes its government as socialist, has a different type of socialism than upon the need for socialist development, using it to describe a complex of social purposes and the consequential social and economic policies, organizational patterns, state structure, and ideologies which can lead to the attainment of those purposes. For such leaders, the aim is to remold African society in the socialist direction; to reconsider African society in such a manner that the humanism of traditional African life re-asserts itself in a modern technical community.
Doc. Kwame' Nkrumah, did explain the differences at the Africa seminar ''Problem of peace and socialism'' held in Cairo in 1967, saying that:
there are those who believe in a new social synthesis in which modern technology is reconciled with human values, in which the advanced technical society is realized without the staggering social malefactions and deep schisms of capitalist industrial society. because true economic and social development cannot be promoted without the real socialization of productive and distributive processes. Those African leaders who believe these principles are the ''socialists in Africa.''(1)
Meanwhile there are those who believed that ''socialism'' would,promote economical and social development having nothing to do with capitalism.
those are called “African socialists”.
and these are the leaders we are going to dedicate this page trying to find out who were they? what vision they had for Africa? and what happened to them.
African Socialists:
Nkrumah's Ghana (1957–1966),Ahmed Sékou Touré's Guiné (1958–1984), Modibo Keita's Mali (1960–1968), Julius Nyerere's Tanzania (1960–1985) Leopold Sédar Senghor's Senegal (1960–1981), and Kenneth Kaunda's Zambia (1964–1991) are the primary examplars of "south of the Sahara" African socialisms.
African socialists were nationalist-politicians who believed the anthropologically problematic idea of a long-established ethos within the precolonial community's traditions of extended family networks of social mutualism, social egalitarianism, and a consensus system of political order. This order could be modernized but able to avoid conflicts inherent in European class societies,
as in Tanzania's Julius Nyerere's (1922–1999) vision of a policy of education for self-reliance that would enable a willing peasantry to accept collective decision-making in villages organized by the state.
Ghana's Kwame Nkrumah (1909–1972) is often identified as the major figure, not because he was the most original; nor because of his execution of socialism when in power. It lies, rather, in his posthumous stature among Pan-Africanists and because he left a corpus of writing after his overthrow in 1966 that identified his credentials as a rebirthed radical. While in power, however, his political policies followed a familiar trajectory of one-party socialism—the imprisonment of the opposition, the banning of strikes by the same unions he would demand take up the cause of revolutionary socialism after his overthrow. There is little in his thought or, indeed, in much of his practice that to varying degrees.
one cannot find in Mali's Modibo Keita (1915–1977)
or in Guiné's Ahmed Sékou Touré (1922–1984), or for that matter much that is different in the North African socialist variants. In the case of Touré, he claimed that because prior to Guiné's independence in 1958, colonialism's inability to create class antagonisms was because extensive private ownership barely existed. The Africanization of Marxism could begin by building upon the supposed solidarity of a precapitalist caste-based society. His early, distinctly radical rule tried to create the cadres for a socialist revolution. As his policies failed, Touré responded with greater centralized rule and fiercer social oppression, which was mirrored in a collapse of the economy and livelihoods in Guiné.
Consistent with notions that the one-party state was best suited to carry out nation-building and development tasks, after independence Modibo Keita promptly moved to declare the Union Soudanaise Independence Party the single party of the Malian state, pursue a socialist policy based on extensive nationalization, and court both the Soviet Union and China. Malians were constructing socialisms through choosing the best from their Islamic past, where duties to the weakest and poorest in society were part of Afro-Islamic egalitarianism. Keita genuinely believed economic and financial decolonization from France and the establishment of socialist structures throughout the country. To this end, from 1961 before his overthrow in 1968, Keita's regime would maintain the necessity of structural sectorial reforms.
In contrast, Leopold Sédar Senghor (1906–2001) was a pragmatist for whom socialism was a cultural vision. Less interested in immediate structural transformations in the economy, he was more interested in an identification of the alleged mores of African societies, which, he claimed, were forms of social humanism. For Senghor, African socialism as culture never translated, except pragmatically, into much more than a cultural disposition that could modify some of the more corrosive values of western individualism. There were never the attempts at the large-scale socialization of production found among the more radical African socialists, in part because of the intimate economic and cultural relations Senegal had with France, and also because of the various conservative members of coalitions that supported the ruling Union Progressiste Sénégalaise (UPS), especially the Islamic Brotherhoods, who maintained some control over much of Senegal's main export commodity, groundnuts.
Political compromise rooted in production and key resources made political commitments appear rationalizations. So, Kenneth Kaunda's (1924–) eclectic African humanistic justification of state nationalization and state welfare through bringing together elements of Christian and Fabian socialisms allied with a selective liberalism was joined to a putative African collectivism. If it appeared well meaning, it could also appear a rationalization of state patronage through Zambia's major industry, copper: accumulation by political elites through nationalization. Profiting from soaring copper prices on world markets for over a decade after independence, many urban Zambians benefited from state subsidies and an expanded welfare system. Less than a decade later, however, these services shrunk under the burden of low world commodity prices and accumulated debt, revealing that the socialization means of production benefited a freeloading bureaucracy that contributed little but their vacancies.
Between 1965 and 1977, Nyerere's ujamma (familyhood) socialism was the highest profile African socialism and development. Initially meant to promote an egalitarian ethos, and a way of forestalling the development of classes and inequality, it failed because of a long price depression for its export commodities, costs sustained in removing Idi Amin from power, and the inability for the state to genuinely understand the needs of its peasantry. Peasants, the supposed source of ujamma modernization from below became subject to state-sanctioned bureaucratized replacement of traditional rural households with the forced displacement of nine million rural dwellers into planned resettlement "development" villages.
Nyerere said that villagization was not socialism but a technical decision concerned with the concentration of resources in settlements with little input from the peasantry; socialism and its full appreciation would come later. They never did. Very much reliant upon foreign aid for development programs, Tanzania was anything but self reliant. After a decade of economic failure, and compelled by the demands of international financial institutions (IFIs) to adjust and stabilize its economy, by the time he left office in 1985 there was no more African socialists.
Afro-Marxism
Marxist socialisms grouped under the rubric of Afro-Marxist regimes, which came into and out of existence between 1963 and 1995, primarily coming to power through military coups. They include Congo's Massemba-Debat to Sassou Ngeusso (1963–1991), Ethiopia under Menigstu Haile-Miriam (1974–1991), Somalia under Siad Barre (1969-1991), Mathieu Kérékou's Benin (1972-1991), and Didier Ratsiraka's Madagascar 1975–1993, 1997–). Also included is Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe (1924–), who came to power through armed struggle and subsequent elections, and who also used Marxist-Leninist rhetoric. African "scientific socialisms'" only real affinities to Marxism-Leninism and most practicing African socialism were one-partyism, the nationalization of industries, and authoritarianism. There were also Marxists, like the Cap Verdian Amílcar Cabral (1924–1973), the Angolan Augusthino Neto, and the Mozambiquans Eduardo Mondlane and Samora Machel, whose successors came to power inheriting very unstable states in the violently uneven and unresolved Luso-phone national liberation struggles. All regimes accepted some alliance with the Soviet Union. The one actual social revolution, which sought to socialize production and attempt to actually transform society, was the Ethiopian Revolution (1974), which was also the most bloody, killing thousands in its wake. Afro-Marxists also came into existence at a time when there was a revivification of Third Worldism, but also at a time when world markets were contracting, and debt was beginning to grow.
Afro-Marxism's rhetoric and practice were divorced from the realities they enforced themselves upon. Few understood, even cared to understand, both peasant life and the ethnic environments within which they inhabited. The exceptions were the assassinated leaders, Cabral and Eduardo Mondlane (1920–1969). For both Marxism had little utility unless it allowed activists and peasants alike to understand their worlds as ends to participation and well being, and both felt that understanding the materially cultural aspects of the populations that sought liberation was practically and normatively important. Striking about all of Afro-Marxist regimes is how easily they either collapsed or so easily altered themselves from Marxist-Leninist parties to liberalizing recipients of neoliberal adjustment policies. The regimes and leaders that did not collapse transformed themselves into devotees of the advice offered by (IFIs). Often leaving a bloody bequest of failure and death, these regimes' rhetoric was as deep as their commitment to actually revolutionize the relations and forces of production.(2)
As conclusion, we must understand that Whether Marxist, social democratic, or state-capitalist, African socialism reflected diverse political economies and polities, covering theoretical intents, ideological perspectives, political movements, cultural and regional orientations, revolutionary struggles, and formerly actually existing socialist states. Over half of Africa's states had celebrated themselves as socialist or social democratic, have identified socialism in the pages of their liberation charters, and/or have retained "socialist," or socialism in their constitutions.
Like most other African political systems, African socialism failed to meet people's aspirations and needs. They sometimes employed opportunistic and brutal ambition to thwart people's wishes for greater freedoms and choices over the nature and status of their needs. Equally, they frequently had their hopes aborted as casualties of Cold War realpolitik and vacillating economic desires of a world capitalist system.
African socialism's prospects look inauspicious. The wave of post-1970s, liberalization, and the collapse of the regimes, or death of many important leaders associated with African socialism's preeminence and disgrace, also saw many of these socialisms go with them. Increasing constraints of economic deprivation and debt, the imposition of adjustment and stabilization, and the demand, internally and externally, for greater pluralism and political choice, further limit prospects for renewal. African socialism became a consensus metaphor for failure—of the centralization, authoritarianism, and inefficiencies of state malfunction. The history of socialism in Africa suggests much failure and a history of false promises; it also suggests, however, that those failures arise from development failure, a failure not generic to Africa and not to socialism alone. African socialism was a history of intent; as such it should also be remembered as past optimism for what it promised, even where it couldn't fulfill it.
(1)http://www.marxists.org/subject/africa/nkrumah/1967/african-socialism-revisited.htm
(2)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_socialism.
Mostly Doc. Kwame Nkrumah, who was Ghana's First president,spent his life calling for Africa to unite...not only to help each others in case of any danger but to come together as one uniting their economy, policy, army as one bloc. as The United States of Africa. due to some disagreements among the leaders of that time, Africa lost the best opportunity to determine the future.
now day socialism is still mentioned in Africa, but tends to lose its objective content in favour of a distracting terminology and general confusion. Each state describes its government as socialist, has a different type of socialism than upon the need for socialist development, using it to describe a complex of social purposes and the consequential social and economic policies, organizational patterns, state structure, and ideologies which can lead to the attainment of those purposes. For such leaders, the aim is to remold African society in the socialist direction; to reconsider African society in such a manner that the humanism of traditional African life re-asserts itself in a modern technical community.
Doc. Kwame' Nkrumah, did explain the differences at the Africa seminar ''Problem of peace and socialism'' held in Cairo in 1967, saying that:
there are those who believe in a new social synthesis in which modern technology is reconciled with human values, in which the advanced technical society is realized without the staggering social malefactions and deep schisms of capitalist industrial society. because true economic and social development cannot be promoted without the real socialization of productive and distributive processes. Those African leaders who believe these principles are the ''socialists in Africa.''(1)
Meanwhile there are those who believed that ''socialism'' would,promote economical and social development having nothing to do with capitalism.
those are called “African socialists”.
and these are the leaders we are going to dedicate this page trying to find out who were they? what vision they had for Africa? and what happened to them.
African Socialists:
Nkrumah's Ghana (1957–1966),Ahmed Sékou Touré's Guiné (1958–1984), Modibo Keita's Mali (1960–1968), Julius Nyerere's Tanzania (1960–1985) Leopold Sédar Senghor's Senegal (1960–1981), and Kenneth Kaunda's Zambia (1964–1991) are the primary examplars of "south of the Sahara" African socialisms.
African socialists were nationalist-politicians who believed the anthropologically problematic idea of a long-established ethos within the precolonial community's traditions of extended family networks of social mutualism, social egalitarianism, and a consensus system of political order. This order could be modernized but able to avoid conflicts inherent in European class societies,
as in Tanzania's Julius Nyerere's (1922–1999) vision of a policy of education for self-reliance that would enable a willing peasantry to accept collective decision-making in villages organized by the state.
Ghana's Kwame Nkrumah (1909–1972) is often identified as the major figure, not because he was the most original; nor because of his execution of socialism when in power. It lies, rather, in his posthumous stature among Pan-Africanists and because he left a corpus of writing after his overthrow in 1966 that identified his credentials as a rebirthed radical. While in power, however, his political policies followed a familiar trajectory of one-party socialism—the imprisonment of the opposition, the banning of strikes by the same unions he would demand take up the cause of revolutionary socialism after his overthrow. There is little in his thought or, indeed, in much of his practice that to varying degrees.
one cannot find in Mali's Modibo Keita (1915–1977)
or in Guiné's Ahmed Sékou Touré (1922–1984), or for that matter much that is different in the North African socialist variants. In the case of Touré, he claimed that because prior to Guiné's independence in 1958, colonialism's inability to create class antagonisms was because extensive private ownership barely existed. The Africanization of Marxism could begin by building upon the supposed solidarity of a precapitalist caste-based society. His early, distinctly radical rule tried to create the cadres for a socialist revolution. As his policies failed, Touré responded with greater centralized rule and fiercer social oppression, which was mirrored in a collapse of the economy and livelihoods in Guiné.
Consistent with notions that the one-party state was best suited to carry out nation-building and development tasks, after independence Modibo Keita promptly moved to declare the Union Soudanaise Independence Party the single party of the Malian state, pursue a socialist policy based on extensive nationalization, and court both the Soviet Union and China. Malians were constructing socialisms through choosing the best from their Islamic past, where duties to the weakest and poorest in society were part of Afro-Islamic egalitarianism. Keita genuinely believed economic and financial decolonization from France and the establishment of socialist structures throughout the country. To this end, from 1961 before his overthrow in 1968, Keita's regime would maintain the necessity of structural sectorial reforms.
In contrast, Leopold Sédar Senghor (1906–2001) was a pragmatist for whom socialism was a cultural vision. Less interested in immediate structural transformations in the economy, he was more interested in an identification of the alleged mores of African societies, which, he claimed, were forms of social humanism. For Senghor, African socialism as culture never translated, except pragmatically, into much more than a cultural disposition that could modify some of the more corrosive values of western individualism. There were never the attempts at the large-scale socialization of production found among the more radical African socialists, in part because of the intimate economic and cultural relations Senegal had with France, and also because of the various conservative members of coalitions that supported the ruling Union Progressiste Sénégalaise (UPS), especially the Islamic Brotherhoods, who maintained some control over much of Senegal's main export commodity, groundnuts.
Political compromise rooted in production and key resources made political commitments appear rationalizations. So, Kenneth Kaunda's (1924–) eclectic African humanistic justification of state nationalization and state welfare through bringing together elements of Christian and Fabian socialisms allied with a selective liberalism was joined to a putative African collectivism. If it appeared well meaning, it could also appear a rationalization of state patronage through Zambia's major industry, copper: accumulation by political elites through nationalization. Profiting from soaring copper prices on world markets for over a decade after independence, many urban Zambians benefited from state subsidies and an expanded welfare system. Less than a decade later, however, these services shrunk under the burden of low world commodity prices and accumulated debt, revealing that the socialization means of production benefited a freeloading bureaucracy that contributed little but their vacancies.
Between 1965 and 1977, Nyerere's ujamma (familyhood) socialism was the highest profile African socialism and development. Initially meant to promote an egalitarian ethos, and a way of forestalling the development of classes and inequality, it failed because of a long price depression for its export commodities, costs sustained in removing Idi Amin from power, and the inability for the state to genuinely understand the needs of its peasantry. Peasants, the supposed source of ujamma modernization from below became subject to state-sanctioned bureaucratized replacement of traditional rural households with the forced displacement of nine million rural dwellers into planned resettlement "development" villages.
Nyerere said that villagization was not socialism but a technical decision concerned with the concentration of resources in settlements with little input from the peasantry; socialism and its full appreciation would come later. They never did. Very much reliant upon foreign aid for development programs, Tanzania was anything but self reliant. After a decade of economic failure, and compelled by the demands of international financial institutions (IFIs) to adjust and stabilize its economy, by the time he left office in 1985 there was no more African socialists.
Afro-Marxism
Marxist socialisms grouped under the rubric of Afro-Marxist regimes, which came into and out of existence between 1963 and 1995, primarily coming to power through military coups. They include Congo's Massemba-Debat to Sassou Ngeusso (1963–1991), Ethiopia under Menigstu Haile-Miriam (1974–1991), Somalia under Siad Barre (1969-1991), Mathieu Kérékou's Benin (1972-1991), and Didier Ratsiraka's Madagascar 1975–1993, 1997–). Also included is Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe (1924–), who came to power through armed struggle and subsequent elections, and who also used Marxist-Leninist rhetoric. African "scientific socialisms'" only real affinities to Marxism-Leninism and most practicing African socialism were one-partyism, the nationalization of industries, and authoritarianism. There were also Marxists, like the Cap Verdian Amílcar Cabral (1924–1973), the Angolan Augusthino Neto, and the Mozambiquans Eduardo Mondlane and Samora Machel, whose successors came to power inheriting very unstable states in the violently uneven and unresolved Luso-phone national liberation struggles. All regimes accepted some alliance with the Soviet Union. The one actual social revolution, which sought to socialize production and attempt to actually transform society, was the Ethiopian Revolution (1974), which was also the most bloody, killing thousands in its wake. Afro-Marxists also came into existence at a time when there was a revivification of Third Worldism, but also at a time when world markets were contracting, and debt was beginning to grow.
Afro-Marxism's rhetoric and practice were divorced from the realities they enforced themselves upon. Few understood, even cared to understand, both peasant life and the ethnic environments within which they inhabited. The exceptions were the assassinated leaders, Cabral and Eduardo Mondlane (1920–1969). For both Marxism had little utility unless it allowed activists and peasants alike to understand their worlds as ends to participation and well being, and both felt that understanding the materially cultural aspects of the populations that sought liberation was practically and normatively important. Striking about all of Afro-Marxist regimes is how easily they either collapsed or so easily altered themselves from Marxist-Leninist parties to liberalizing recipients of neoliberal adjustment policies. The regimes and leaders that did not collapse transformed themselves into devotees of the advice offered by (IFIs). Often leaving a bloody bequest of failure and death, these regimes' rhetoric was as deep as their commitment to actually revolutionize the relations and forces of production.(2)
As conclusion, we must understand that Whether Marxist, social democratic, or state-capitalist, African socialism reflected diverse political economies and polities, covering theoretical intents, ideological perspectives, political movements, cultural and regional orientations, revolutionary struggles, and formerly actually existing socialist states. Over half of Africa's states had celebrated themselves as socialist or social democratic, have identified socialism in the pages of their liberation charters, and/or have retained "socialist," or socialism in their constitutions.
Like most other African political systems, African socialism failed to meet people's aspirations and needs. They sometimes employed opportunistic and brutal ambition to thwart people's wishes for greater freedoms and choices over the nature and status of their needs. Equally, they frequently had their hopes aborted as casualties of Cold War realpolitik and vacillating economic desires of a world capitalist system.
African socialism's prospects look inauspicious. The wave of post-1970s, liberalization, and the collapse of the regimes, or death of many important leaders associated with African socialism's preeminence and disgrace, also saw many of these socialisms go with them. Increasing constraints of economic deprivation and debt, the imposition of adjustment and stabilization, and the demand, internally and externally, for greater pluralism and political choice, further limit prospects for renewal. African socialism became a consensus metaphor for failure—of the centralization, authoritarianism, and inefficiencies of state malfunction. The history of socialism in Africa suggests much failure and a history of false promises; it also suggests, however, that those failures arise from development failure, a failure not generic to Africa and not to socialism alone. African socialism was a history of intent; as such it should also be remembered as past optimism for what it promised, even where it couldn't fulfill it.
(1)http://www.marxists.org/subject/africa/nkrumah/1967/african-socialism-revisited.htm
(2)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_socialism.
Monday, October 20, 2008
what type of system african nations need;''socialism'' or ''capitalism''
what type of system africa nations really need to get unite and put an end ot it political and economical crisis?
is it a socialism system or a capitalism?
Eye grew up hearing socialism as something evil, something dangerous. that every world socialism leaders such as ; Lenine, Ho chi Min, Mao,Fidel Castro,Hitler,General Tito, Salvador allende... and african socialist leaders such as ; where considered as dictators, and dangerous for the world, for that they were most murdered especially african socialist leaders. Some had to change their doctrine in order to survive.
and capitalism was and still is seen as something good, a hope , an opportunity where each one could fullfill his dream depending on their efforts; but the problem is that there was never an explanation why socialism was considered as a bad thing.
Was it that the capitalism bloc feared the Socialism Bloc because it was winning support all over europe and africa? afraid that it would take over America too?
if we could analize today's world new order; whom are really dictators? is it the socialist leaders or the capitalist leaders?
what is really socialism?
Socialism according to wikipedia,(the free encyclopedia);'' referes to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating social or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society where labor is the main source of wealth.
The World have had all type of socialism;most have disapearded with the fall of the Soviet Union, very few a left.
-Libertarian socialism (which includes Socialist Anarchism and Libertarian Marxism) rejects state control and ownership of the economy altogether and advocates direct collective ownership of the means of production via co-operative workers' councils and workplace democracy.
-Chinese Socialism through the Mao Ze Tong Chine's Revolution, establishing a communism state in China.
-the German Socialism ''fascist'' under Adolf Hitler.
-the North Corea Socialism.
-The Cuban Socialism lead by Fidel Castro.
-The africa Socialism embraced by most of african countries colonized by french, but also those colonized by great britain.
Julius Nyerere (Tanzania)
Amílcar Cabral (Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde)
Kenneth Kaunda (Zambia)
Modibo Keita (Mali)
Samora Machel (Mozambique)
Michel Micombero (Burundi)
Eduardo Mondlane (Mozambique)
Sam Nujoma (Namibia)
Oginga Odinga (Kenya)
Didier Ratsiraka (Madagascar)
Jerry Rawlings (Ghana)
Thomas Sankara (Burkina Faso)
Léopold Sédar Senghor (Senegal)
Ahmed Sékou Touré (Guinea)
Leaders such as Agostinho Neto, Marien Ngouabi, Mengistu Haile Mariam, and Siad Barre, while avowed socialists, were widely considered to build their respective countries on a structure that was much more Soviet-oriented than indigenous.
-And the so called Socialsim of the 21st Century In Latin American countries,refering it politial programs as socialist, with an anti-imperialist stance, rejecting of the policies of neo-liberalism and the nationalisation or part nationalisation of oil production, land and other assets.lead by Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and Bolivian President Evo Morales, still copying part of the cuban revolution program.
Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.
Ernesto Cheguevara whom eye consider as one of my all time favorite revolutionarist. eye even gave my first Child Jorson Che' his name, he believed that; '' it is only through a armed struggle that the third world country could free themselves from the oppression of the capitalism ideology''
but we have seen socialists leaders also comming to power without violence; leaders as salvador allende of chilli, even if he would later be killed by the militaries of his own government leaded by his one time most trusted general ''Pinochet''with the help of the CIA.
1* If eye was asked about which regimes were more authoritarians and considered as dictators, eye believe that it are the sam regimes that emerged after the Socialism administrations, which in most case were the same parties that served the african nations under African socialist programmes which did not deliver on the promises of self-sufficiency, prosperity, and equality (partly as a result of the empowerment of the governments at the expense of the people), and as a result many have grew disillusioned with African socialism.
2*This is what eye believe, and wish for africa;
Eye believe that today's world need to embrace both system. we need to combine both systems, because if we look profound socialism and capitalism goes together as republican and democrate. socialism has always been inside capitalism,every capitalism country always have to deal with socialism ( social issues) for the well being of it people.That is why the republicans accuses Barack Obama wanting to bring socialism in america,saying he wants to share wealth.
eye do admire Mr.Barack Obama,not only for being the pride of the black people, but also the newest generations all over the world, saying that the time has come for a new type of leadership, not only in america but all over the globe.
Eye to not think that he is a socialist or that he wants to bring America in that direction, but the point is that he understood that when ever the wealth of a country is only manage by a group of minority that does not even represent one third of the population, this brings separation, division, egoism, in the country.if capitalist only concentrate it power and wealth among a small group of opportunists individuals who control the capitals,this will only lead to corruption and desorganization. that's why there is so much civil wars in africa, because as we all know the hand that gives, is the hand that controls. having economical power is having political power.
eye believe that in africa we need a Socialist-Capitalist system,supporting the belief that african socialist leaders had back in the 50th and 60th , of a so called african socialism sharing economic resources in a "traditional" African way,but with todays africa reality that is not very different from back then.but it needs to be as distinct from classical socialism.
we need to use some of our martyrs Socialism program because it represent a break from the imperial ruling tradition. this type of Socialism ,will be all that capitalism haven't been for the african people.
This system should not oppose capitalism nor a response to it, but should be something completely different. because at this level we can not destroy or see capitalism as something negative. this system needs capitalism to survive, to feed itself. we have to find a way to co-exist together avoying a another cold war or a 3 world war which could erase the world now that most of powerful nations have nuclear bomb, and others we do not know how far they are in having one, or what other type of nuclear power already exist and are being waitted to be texted....
As our Nationalists leaders claimed that, taht type of socialism was fully African, appealing to an African identity that was even stronger than anti-capitalism. Their socialism, they claimed, was merely a recapturing of the spirit of what it was to be African.
A multitude of reasons were presented in support of African socialism. Many believed that Africa was too far “behind” capitalist states in terms of economic development to compete fairly with them. Others appealed to a sense of unity that would not be provided by the competitive capitalist systems. Still others believed that the development of Africa should be planned in order to avoid wasting scarce resources, and avoid future class conflicts.
African identity and socialism were often intertwined. Some leaders claimed that Africa had always been “socialist,” and appealed to socialism as a unifying cultural element for Africans. This was not by any means the only form of African identity that they appealed to, but the combination of socialism and African identity was doubly effective in ending the era of old imperial regimes. Social revolution usually went hand-in-hand with socialism.
Conclusion:
With all the ressources that africa has , if our leaders were serious, if they were doing their job, we would not even need no aids from no country, but we would be the one helping the world.
what we need to do is to learn from their errors in ths construction of our great african nation in unity,uniting our economy,army, politic with one voice to represent africa as one voice. but becareful, not as a copy of the old african socialsm that our forfather couldn't even realize not because they were murdered but because even since the independence, they were already divided due to self ambitions. that the virus that they have left us all today as the people. we need to break that cicle, and come together as the people and change the direction of our continente leadership.the best way to reach there is by changing everything not from the top to thebottom, but from the bottom to the top, because from the top to the bottom is corrupted, that why we need new type of methode, of leadership.
we need to re-organize everything in africa; our political, social, educational, heal, program...and we will do this not as east africans, or western africans, or central africans, but as Africans, seeing Africa as Patrice Lumumba saw it, as whole, and not divided.
''Africa Or Death''
is it a socialism system or a capitalism?
Eye grew up hearing socialism as something evil, something dangerous. that every world socialism leaders such as ; Lenine, Ho chi Min, Mao,Fidel Castro,Hitler,General Tito, Salvador allende... and african socialist leaders such as ; where considered as dictators, and dangerous for the world, for that they were most murdered especially african socialist leaders. Some had to change their doctrine in order to survive.
and capitalism was and still is seen as something good, a hope , an opportunity where each one could fullfill his dream depending on their efforts; but the problem is that there was never an explanation why socialism was considered as a bad thing.
Was it that the capitalism bloc feared the Socialism Bloc because it was winning support all over europe and africa? afraid that it would take over America too?
if we could analize today's world new order; whom are really dictators? is it the socialist leaders or the capitalist leaders?
what is really socialism?
Socialism according to wikipedia,(the free encyclopedia);'' referes to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating social or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society where labor is the main source of wealth.
The World have had all type of socialism;most have disapearded with the fall of the Soviet Union, very few a left.
-Libertarian socialism (which includes Socialist Anarchism and Libertarian Marxism) rejects state control and ownership of the economy altogether and advocates direct collective ownership of the means of production via co-operative workers' councils and workplace democracy.
-Chinese Socialism through the Mao Ze Tong Chine's Revolution, establishing a communism state in China.
-the German Socialism ''fascist'' under Adolf Hitler.
-the North Corea Socialism.
-The Cuban Socialism lead by Fidel Castro.
-The africa Socialism embraced by most of african countries colonized by french, but also those colonized by great britain.
Julius Nyerere (Tanzania)
Amílcar Cabral (Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde)
Kenneth Kaunda (Zambia)
Modibo Keita (Mali)
Samora Machel (Mozambique)
Michel Micombero (Burundi)
Eduardo Mondlane (Mozambique)
Sam Nujoma (Namibia)
Oginga Odinga (Kenya)
Didier Ratsiraka (Madagascar)
Jerry Rawlings (Ghana)
Thomas Sankara (Burkina Faso)
Léopold Sédar Senghor (Senegal)
Ahmed Sékou Touré (Guinea)
Leaders such as Agostinho Neto, Marien Ngouabi, Mengistu Haile Mariam, and Siad Barre, while avowed socialists, were widely considered to build their respective countries on a structure that was much more Soviet-oriented than indigenous.
-And the so called Socialsim of the 21st Century In Latin American countries,refering it politial programs as socialist, with an anti-imperialist stance, rejecting of the policies of neo-liberalism and the nationalisation or part nationalisation of oil production, land and other assets.lead by Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and Bolivian President Evo Morales, still copying part of the cuban revolution program.
Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.
Ernesto Cheguevara whom eye consider as one of my all time favorite revolutionarist. eye even gave my first Child Jorson Che' his name, he believed that; '' it is only through a armed struggle that the third world country could free themselves from the oppression of the capitalism ideology''
but we have seen socialists leaders also comming to power without violence; leaders as salvador allende of chilli, even if he would later be killed by the militaries of his own government leaded by his one time most trusted general ''Pinochet''with the help of the CIA.
1* If eye was asked about which regimes were more authoritarians and considered as dictators, eye believe that it are the sam regimes that emerged after the Socialism administrations, which in most case were the same parties that served the african nations under African socialist programmes which did not deliver on the promises of self-sufficiency, prosperity, and equality (partly as a result of the empowerment of the governments at the expense of the people), and as a result many have grew disillusioned with African socialism.
2*This is what eye believe, and wish for africa;
Eye believe that today's world need to embrace both system. we need to combine both systems, because if we look profound socialism and capitalism goes together as republican and democrate. socialism has always been inside capitalism,every capitalism country always have to deal with socialism ( social issues) for the well being of it people.That is why the republicans accuses Barack Obama wanting to bring socialism in america,saying he wants to share wealth.
eye do admire Mr.Barack Obama,not only for being the pride of the black people, but also the newest generations all over the world, saying that the time has come for a new type of leadership, not only in america but all over the globe.
Eye to not think that he is a socialist or that he wants to bring America in that direction, but the point is that he understood that when ever the wealth of a country is only manage by a group of minority that does not even represent one third of the population, this brings separation, division, egoism, in the country.if capitalist only concentrate it power and wealth among a small group of opportunists individuals who control the capitals,this will only lead to corruption and desorganization. that's why there is so much civil wars in africa, because as we all know the hand that gives, is the hand that controls. having economical power is having political power.
eye believe that in africa we need a Socialist-Capitalist system,supporting the belief that african socialist leaders had back in the 50th and 60th , of a so called african socialism sharing economic resources in a "traditional" African way,but with todays africa reality that is not very different from back then.but it needs to be as distinct from classical socialism.
we need to use some of our martyrs Socialism program because it represent a break from the imperial ruling tradition. this type of Socialism ,will be all that capitalism haven't been for the african people.
This system should not oppose capitalism nor a response to it, but should be something completely different. because at this level we can not destroy or see capitalism as something negative. this system needs capitalism to survive, to feed itself. we have to find a way to co-exist together avoying a another cold war or a 3 world war which could erase the world now that most of powerful nations have nuclear bomb, and others we do not know how far they are in having one, or what other type of nuclear power already exist and are being waitted to be texted....
As our Nationalists leaders claimed that, taht type of socialism was fully African, appealing to an African identity that was even stronger than anti-capitalism. Their socialism, they claimed, was merely a recapturing of the spirit of what it was to be African.
A multitude of reasons were presented in support of African socialism. Many believed that Africa was too far “behind” capitalist states in terms of economic development to compete fairly with them. Others appealed to a sense of unity that would not be provided by the competitive capitalist systems. Still others believed that the development of Africa should be planned in order to avoid wasting scarce resources, and avoid future class conflicts.
African identity and socialism were often intertwined. Some leaders claimed that Africa had always been “socialist,” and appealed to socialism as a unifying cultural element for Africans. This was not by any means the only form of African identity that they appealed to, but the combination of socialism and African identity was doubly effective in ending the era of old imperial regimes. Social revolution usually went hand-in-hand with socialism.
Conclusion:
With all the ressources that africa has , if our leaders were serious, if they were doing their job, we would not even need no aids from no country, but we would be the one helping the world.
what we need to do is to learn from their errors in ths construction of our great african nation in unity,uniting our economy,army, politic with one voice to represent africa as one voice. but becareful, not as a copy of the old african socialsm that our forfather couldn't even realize not because they were murdered but because even since the independence, they were already divided due to self ambitions. that the virus that they have left us all today as the people. we need to break that cicle, and come together as the people and change the direction of our continente leadership.the best way to reach there is by changing everything not from the top to thebottom, but from the bottom to the top, because from the top to the bottom is corrupted, that why we need new type of methode, of leadership.
we need to re-organize everything in africa; our political, social, educational, heal, program...and we will do this not as east africans, or western africans, or central africans, but as Africans, seeing Africa as Patrice Lumumba saw it, as whole, and not divided.
''Africa Or Death''
Friday, October 17, 2008
african opposition leaders.( lack of unity and leadership)
In reality the opposition is a left force with a mission to explore how to establish a positive role under the opposition leadership, with a different program but sharing a same mission as republicns and democrats,but with different visions.
they need to showcase new hopes and aspirations to the people which they do not do.
the truth is that even if the so called wind of democracy has entered in africa openning the door to multi-party, we need to understand that most african states still have been a one facto ruling party, from the republic of congo to the republic of gabon, from republic of gabon to republic of cameroune, guinea conakri, guinea bissao, guinea equatorial etc....
the opposition haven't done much at all, most of all because the leaders are not united.they rather shoot at each others, splitting instead of taking measures to
The problem with african Opposition Leaders.
unite and face against these regimes which most have been in power since the independence, directly or indirectly.
African opposition passes through a crisis of leadership,disrupted by égoïsme. everyone wants to be leader of the opposition and occupy the first place, hence the inability of the opposition to agree while its leaders share the same vision of change and the same ideas for the development of Africa.
Another factor is that most of these small group opposition leaders, have had to serve this same ruling party that they criticise today ... the other issue of this policy is to support the regime in place elections through party coalition.
those who really stand for real changes, get's tortured and assassinated.
Nobody in the opposition wants to be under another, everyone wants to be above the other, while the presidency is a unique institution. There can't be several presidents of the Republic,but only one.
our oppositions leaders have had alot of chances to lead our nations but due to personal interets, they missed their opportunities;
in Botwana for example; the Botswana opposition has been best known for unnecessarily shooting itself in the foot through splits and half-hearted measures to unite against the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP), which has ruled the country since independence. Indeed, Botswana has remained a multi-party state because of the political magnanimity of the BDP and a democratic culture that has taken root in the country. With its popularity and healthy majority over the years, the BDP would have easily made Botswana a de jure one party state if it so wished.
Currently, the Botswana opposition became in serious state of decline with the possibility to be in line for a thorough wallop in general elections. The country has a number of opposition parties but the main ones, in order of prominence, are the Botswana National Front (BNF), the Botswana Congress Party (BCP), the Botswana Alliance Movement (BAM) and the once dominant Botswana Peoples Party (BPP).
but the leaders of the oppositions not wanting to unite due to slef interets,it created a tension in the oppositions parties.
In Cameroon, the opposition could have won the october 1992 election if they were united behind mr. john fru ndi, like in the center of the opposition there were no understanding,Mr. Biya won the elections with 40 percent votes.
In Guinea conakry, after the militaries capturing the president lasana conte at the palace,like they couldn't agree on how to determine the future of the country,they had no choise but to free him.
Even in the Republic of Congo, after the introduction of multiparty in 1990, president Dennis Sassoun Nguesso lost executive powers as result of the 1991 National Conference and was subsequently defeated in the 1992 presidential election by Pascal Lissouba. like in Mr.Lissouba government,they couldn't agree with their new president, whom for me, eye believe that he is the most intelligent president that the country have ever had. the situation favored Mr. Sassou Nguesso to come back to power 5 years after through a civil war. staying pesident during the transition , and to win the 2002 presidential election which lacked meaningful opposition participation.
But, all opposition leaders weren't so bad, we have countries in africa which has been a good example of democracy in africa; countries such as Ghana with the presidential election of john kufuor.
with the victory of the presidential election of Mr. Abdoulay Wade in Senegal.
but still most of our opposition parties have had opportunities to make a change in the leadership of our nations, but egoistic, selfishness, made us all lose hope.
as long as the opposition leaders won't understand this, it will be difficult to arrive to power for the african people.
we also need the international community to help Africa out of the lethargy by putting pressure on its current leadership, to manage its resources in a transparent manner.
the opposition leaders should most of all also work with the youth,give the african youth a chance to practice a new type of leadership with a new policy.
Conclusion:
eye believe that if our martyrs have had the chance to rule correctly, we wouldn't really need an opposition, because they were devoted for africa's matter. they lived as they died for africa, but like us african, are whom we are. we do not see far, and forget so easily that is why we left the enemies of africa kill and murder our prophets , our hope , and here we are paying the price to have murdered lumumba, sankara, ngouabi,cabral, machel and many more.
eye do believe that africa still has good leaders,but not in these oppositions,
they are outside of africa,all around the world, because the situation home is so desorganized. those in power will never give them a chance, instead they will kill them.
africa's real opposition are the africans students whom after graduating in foreign countries can't even go back home because there's no job for the youth..it are them whom are going to make a change in africa, but in africa not staying outside of africa. for that we all need to come together and take the destiny of africa in our own hands with our tears, sweat and blood.
they need to showcase new hopes and aspirations to the people which they do not do.
the truth is that even if the so called wind of democracy has entered in africa openning the door to multi-party, we need to understand that most african states still have been a one facto ruling party, from the republic of congo to the republic of gabon, from republic of gabon to republic of cameroune, guinea conakri, guinea bissao, guinea equatorial etc....
the opposition haven't done much at all, most of all because the leaders are not united.they rather shoot at each others, splitting instead of taking measures to
The problem with african Opposition Leaders.
unite and face against these regimes which most have been in power since the independence, directly or indirectly.
African opposition passes through a crisis of leadership,disrupted by égoïsme. everyone wants to be leader of the opposition and occupy the first place, hence the inability of the opposition to agree while its leaders share the same vision of change and the same ideas for the development of Africa.
Another factor is that most of these small group opposition leaders, have had to serve this same ruling party that they criticise today ... the other issue of this policy is to support the regime in place elections through party coalition.
those who really stand for real changes, get's tortured and assassinated.
Nobody in the opposition wants to be under another, everyone wants to be above the other, while the presidency is a unique institution. There can't be several presidents of the Republic,but only one.
our oppositions leaders have had alot of chances to lead our nations but due to personal interets, they missed their opportunities;
in Botwana for example; the Botswana opposition has been best known for unnecessarily shooting itself in the foot through splits and half-hearted measures to unite against the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP), which has ruled the country since independence. Indeed, Botswana has remained a multi-party state because of the political magnanimity of the BDP and a democratic culture that has taken root in the country. With its popularity and healthy majority over the years, the BDP would have easily made Botswana a de jure one party state if it so wished.
Currently, the Botswana opposition became in serious state of decline with the possibility to be in line for a thorough wallop in general elections. The country has a number of opposition parties but the main ones, in order of prominence, are the Botswana National Front (BNF), the Botswana Congress Party (BCP), the Botswana Alliance Movement (BAM) and the once dominant Botswana Peoples Party (BPP).
but the leaders of the oppositions not wanting to unite due to slef interets,it created a tension in the oppositions parties.
In Cameroon, the opposition could have won the october 1992 election if they were united behind mr. john fru ndi, like in the center of the opposition there were no understanding,Mr. Biya won the elections with 40 percent votes.
In Guinea conakry, after the militaries capturing the president lasana conte at the palace,like they couldn't agree on how to determine the future of the country,they had no choise but to free him.
Even in the Republic of Congo, after the introduction of multiparty in 1990, president Dennis Sassoun Nguesso lost executive powers as result of the 1991 National Conference and was subsequently defeated in the 1992 presidential election by Pascal Lissouba. like in Mr.Lissouba government,they couldn't agree with their new president, whom for me, eye believe that he is the most intelligent president that the country have ever had. the situation favored Mr. Sassou Nguesso to come back to power 5 years after through a civil war. staying pesident during the transition , and to win the 2002 presidential election which lacked meaningful opposition participation.
But, all opposition leaders weren't so bad, we have countries in africa which has been a good example of democracy in africa; countries such as Ghana with the presidential election of john kufuor.
with the victory of the presidential election of Mr. Abdoulay Wade in Senegal.
but still most of our opposition parties have had opportunities to make a change in the leadership of our nations, but egoistic, selfishness, made us all lose hope.
as long as the opposition leaders won't understand this, it will be difficult to arrive to power for the african people.
we also need the international community to help Africa out of the lethargy by putting pressure on its current leadership, to manage its resources in a transparent manner.
the opposition leaders should most of all also work with the youth,give the african youth a chance to practice a new type of leadership with a new policy.
Conclusion:
eye believe that if our martyrs have had the chance to rule correctly, we wouldn't really need an opposition, because they were devoted for africa's matter. they lived as they died for africa, but like us african, are whom we are. we do not see far, and forget so easily that is why we left the enemies of africa kill and murder our prophets , our hope , and here we are paying the price to have murdered lumumba, sankara, ngouabi,cabral, machel and many more.
eye do believe that africa still has good leaders,but not in these oppositions,
they are outside of africa,all around the world, because the situation home is so desorganized. those in power will never give them a chance, instead they will kill them.
africa's real opposition are the africans students whom after graduating in foreign countries can't even go back home because there's no job for the youth..it are them whom are going to make a change in africa, but in africa not staying outside of africa. for that we all need to come together and take the destiny of africa in our own hands with our tears, sweat and blood.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)