Revisiting the Mugabe Saga
I N Mancho
(c) 2007
After years of bickering President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe was finally given an official invitation to attend the 2007 Africa-EU summit-with this, a place on the rostrum to address delegates. What was the rationale in the delay? Did the EU bow to threats of boycotts from African leaders to let Uncle Bob sit with the “righteous”? What lessons can be drawn from this in future African EU talks and relations?
There has been a continuous debate in this forum on Mugabe and the crisis in Zimbabwe. Mugabe’s legacy and the independence movement in Africa are symbolic of a continent’s defiance to western dictations and imposed standards of measure. To understand Mugabe’s present antagonism with the west it is important to trace its roots into the wars of liberation and Mugabe’s rise to power. The ZANU-PF party that led Zimbabwe into independence was built on a platform of liberation against white domination and economic empowerment of the masses. Their ideology was tied to socialism. Fighting against a minority white led government and threatening foreign interest alienated Bob from the central and conservative western political-aristocracy into closer ties with the Kremlin and Cuba. His stance against the power sharing arrangements under the March 3rd 1978 agreement in Governor’s Lodge in Salisbury endeared him to more nationalist heroes and intensified nationalist campaigns for total liberation.
The central issue however, are the mining concessions granted the British South African Company (under Cecil Rhodes) by HM government and the subsequent encroachment and expropriation of native lands that is at the centre of today’s crisis.
Many would argue that the land redistribution has been used as a pretext to further political gains. However, it must be understood that land redistribution was at the centre of the ZANU and even ZAPU campaign promises during the liberation years. The non-redistribution or the delay in re-expropriation was as a result of the 1979 Lancaster House ceasefire arrangements that paved the way for the 1980 elections that saw the rise of Mugabe and Canaan Banana to the posts of prime minister and president respectively.
EU African relationship
Breaking the shackles over ties with the west seems to be something most if not some African leaders would have loved to do but lack the courage to do so. Robert Mugabe’s defiance of the west is a continuation of a revolution by a revolutionary leader. Mugabe argues yesterday at the Africa-EU summit that “Africa sets its own agenda, of its own free will” challenging the historical western rhetoric of equal rights and equal freedoms. Historically, Europe and the west have breathed down the neck of Africans and African leaders with stereotyped versions of human rights and freedoms and cooked up economic theories and experiments that do not take into consideration social, traditional and least of all the geo-political realities of Africa. They have repeatedly transcribed equal human rights and equality between races to mean sameness-yet at the same time treating our leaders as little school boys with nothing of their own but everything to learn from them the masters. For the first time in history, African leaders have shown a sense of oneness in the face of adversity, challenging the west and winning a highly mediatised war of slander against one of theirs. By challenging the west and by insisting that NI BOB must attend the summit African leaders (at least those who had their voices heard) established themselves as leaders by their right equal in stature to other European leaders.
The “sham” of a democracy
Britain and the United States of America have been quick to describe the elections in Zimbabwe as a “sham” and a disgrace to democracy. The rhetoric is an embarrassment to the UN’s non interference in the internal affairs of member states and is not driven by the quest to protect human rights but by a desire to foster capitalist gains. George “Hitler” Bush; Tony “Mussolini” Blair and Gordon “the clown” Brown have described Mugabe as the modern day dictator who uses violence and intimidation to rig elections.
A survey of Africa’s political leadership over the past 40 years will reveal that other dictators have not received the same media coverage as Mugabe. Ormar al Bashir has been in power in Sudan since 1989. He came to power through a military coup that has since resulted in deaths and suffering including Darfur, which cannot in any measure compared to Zimbabwe. Theodoro Obiang Ngeme Mbasogo has been president of Equatorial Guinea since 1979. He killed the former president, who happened to be his uncle, suppressed the opposition and rules the country like a feudal lord. Omar Bongo Odimba alias M’vengue al hadj has been in power since 1967. I don’t think the BBC or the CNN know anything about the misery and dictatorship in these countries. Next door is Cameroon where killings of armless street students and the arrest and detention of vocal public figures is a daily occurrence. Yet the CNN and BBC have not given these dictatorial regimes the same witch hunt coverage they have accorded Zimbabwe following the land reforms.
Furthermore, electoral malpractices are not unique to Zimbabwe and that even in America a president has been elected on “fictitious” ballots. The question I’d like to ask is why the recent obsession with Mugabe? In Cameroon, Nigeria, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Uganda, Sudan etc elections have not received the same scrutiny as in Zimbabwe in recent years.
As stated earlier the bone of contention between Mugabe on the one hand and Britain and America on the other hand is the land seizure that Mugabe initiated. To say that the campaign has been a success is a gross exaggeration and it is true that it has adversely affected the Zimbabwean economy. Though some will argue that Mugabe took out the policy for the wrong reasons or at the wrong time, I still believe it was a giant and bold step. Britain and America fear that a success in the land reform policy in Zimbabwe will spur similar policies in South Africa, Mozambique and Lesotho. Furthermore, Mugabe is paying for the price of foiling a military coup d’etat by an officer of the British Empire Sir Mark Thatcher against another African leader.
The present witch hunt launched by the CNN and the BCC is not different from that started before the British and US invasion of Iraq. The economic sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe do not affect the ruling class but is felt heavily by the citizens. If Britain, America and the European Union were interested in the welfare of the Zimbabwean people they would have considered making the land redistribution scheme more manageable and more successful so to alleviate the economic strain on the population. Their present approach to the crisis of bullying the political class of Zimbabwe into a regime change suggest that the plight of the people is just a pretext to foster their economic dominance over the country
Any Lessons for the future
Inflation in Zimbabwe stands at 8000% and unemployment at 85%, the highest in the world. Economic indices portray Zimbabwe as the poorest and the least economically disenfranchised on the old continent. The economic stagnation in Zimbabwe is not as a result of Mugabe’s land reforms but because of the imposition of economic sanctions by the west and particularly Britain. In the 1890s when Cecil Rhodes and the BSAC expropriated lands from Africans, HM government issued charters and signed protection treaties with the BSAC. However, when ZANU-PF re-expropriated the same lands they were called racist and terrorists. Instead of being a divisive element Mugabe’s land reforms should have served as a tool for empowering the masses. Though the process of land redistribution has been hasty and some what ill planned, the ideology or the idea of redistributing land to the locals is a laudable one. His land reform has brought more lands under the control of blacks than it was initially. With labour being something that largely available within traditional black families, they now have two major production factors that can help in the production of goods (if only food crops) to improve their livelihood. The present economic stalemate in Zimbabwe is meant to discredit Mugabe. It is intended to continue the racist doctrine that blacks are stupid, that when the whites owned the lands they could boost the economy but with lands coming into the possession of blacks they are unable to produce.
Mugabe is the elected president of Zimbabwe. He is endorsed with the same legitimacy as all other “elected dictators” in Africa supported by Britain, France and America. South Africa’s political class is sympathetic to Mugabe not because they enjoy the suffering of the Zimbabwean people but because they understand the reasons behind the hate campaign against Mugabe.
Wednesday 18 August 2010
Monday 7 June 2010
Facing Biyaism: The New Challenge of the Cameroon Revolution
Political movements grow out of shared values and concerns of a people or a group. Rather than being seen as political parties galvanized to win votes and elections, political movements, on the contrary, work towards convincing the citizenry and influencing government to adopt policies favorable to their course. The line between a political movement and a political party, is a very thin one. Their goal being to bring change of some kind- be it regime or policy change-political movements inevitably always end up as political parties, the latter being the only, if not most common platform through which such change, via an electoral process, is ultimately generated in most political systems.
Political movements are built around the struggle for political space and benefits. The struggle is driven by recognition and rewards. In most national political movements leadership is embedded in the elite who will power and make decisions even where these movements are meant to be popular. The emergence of personality cults is a common practice in national political movements (Gaulism, Fascism, and Nazism). Even where political movements are seen as representing class interests, elitism still surrounds the leadership (Chinese Socialism and Bolshevik Communism).
The principal political movement in Cameroon since independence is Biyaism. Biyaism can be used to describe the political practices of the Biya regime, their mode of conduct and execution of national politics. The major highlights of Biyaism are absenteeism; embezzlement of state funds; manipulation; electoral malpractices and economic collapse. Its highest achievement for 25 years has been the reputation of being classified as poor and highly indebted and two non coveted world titles as the most corrupt country.
Biyaism emerged as a political movement in Cameroon in 1982 following the ascension of Paul Biya to power. The announcement of the NEW DEAL was followed by a promise of rigor and moralization with tenets decentralization in communal liberalism. However, following the failed April 6, 1984 coup d’état, Biyaism switched from being a movement for liberalism and economic growth to becoming an elitist political club with the president assuming the position of supreme ruler. Biyaism is built around the institution of the president of the republic and flows down through to all other services. The shared values and concerns of Biyaist are ensuring total submission to and domination by the president. The CPDM is therefore not a political party meant to win votes and elections but rather a vehicle to convince the citizenry and influence political outcomes towards preserving the president (the Man and not the institution).
Biyaism is built on the foundation of political favoritism and “clientelism”. Political appointments are seen as rewards for servitude and subservience. Even where access to public offices is by elections, people who access such offices always consciously or unconsciously pay tribute to the president for holding the said office. Villagers are always called upon to pay tribute and raise motions of support to the president for appointing one of theirs to the position of minister or director. Minsters are longer seen as servants of the nation but rather as rewards for being un bon organisateur (Les Paradoxes du Pays Organisateur). Under Biyaism political actors and commentators no longer have their own opinions and thoughts. Public comments are meant to reiterate what the president has said or what the president thinks. Even where the president’s words are clear, political actors and commentators would want to interpret and give new meaning to tie in with a particular agenda or line of reasoning. (Think of the CRTV political analysts after the president’s speech or interview, ministers’ and directors speeches at public events).
Another corner stone of Biyaism is the “scratch ma back I scratch your own” philosophy, interpreted as the leeway to bribery and corruption. Political actors under Biyaism have tended to show loyalty to the president by attempting to scratch his back by being complacent where the president’s immediate family has been involved in misusing state funds (Cameroon Bank and BIAO. Remember the Messi Messi Affair and the implication of Irene Biya). Also they have pretended to be blind where the president and his family have abused power even when there is an overt case of embezzlement. (Remember the Frank Biya drug scandal in the US and the disappearance of the 1990 Operation Coup de Coeur funds in a plane between Paris and New York ). To seek favors from the president political actors have used rice, salt, cows, goats and palm oil to “rub the lips” of villagers to vote for the CPDM. Even where such vote buying exercises have failed they have resorted to open looting of pulling stations and killings (Bali Kumbat) or hijacking polling results (Santa). Evidently, selective electoral registration and the importation of ghost electors have been a major characteristic of Biyaist electoral practice.
500 FRS CFA under Biyaism has not only replace the road insurance for transporters it has also taken the place of driver’s license as well as a granted laissez passer for non compliance to health and road safety regulations. Over loading of transport vehicles and the growing body counts in road accidents have become the norm. Complacency is not limited to the president’s immediate family but stretches to state owned enterprises like the Cameroon Ship Yard, the Ports authority, Cameroon Airlines, the SNH, the SNI etc. For 25 years Biyaism has been enshrined in every fabric of the Cameroonian community. Even children as young as ten know how to give and receive "choko".
Biya’s movement is built on one simple theory- a theory I have taken the liberty to call the blame theory. The blame theory posits on one simple idea: divert the source of misery from you. That is, give the oppressed someone to blame for the misery and they will forget who the enemy is. The blame theory is inspired by the old politics of divide and rule. The divide and rule politics on the other hand is build around intrigue, manipulation, lies and out right brutality. Thus, Biyaist have not spared their energies when killing armless, defenseless children (Kumba, Buea, Bamenda, Bepanda 6 etc). The intimidating presence of the police, the national gendarmerie and the infantry on the streets and residential quarters are hallmarks of Biyaism. Biyaism has been the champion of lies and falsehood in presenting national history and politics. It has championed the course of political manipulation and propaganda. Remember the 1984 decision to change the name of the country, the propaganda on unity in diversity and national integration. Biyaist used the example of a north westerner getting married to a southerner as being a good instance of national integration. Yet a fellow Nigerian getting married to a Cameroonian cannot in their terms be an instance of international integration. Remember the manipulations of the anti multi party rioters and marchers of the 1990s, the pseudo “grand débat” or débat élargir and the 1996 constitution. Also remember the October 2007 interview on the French TV channel and the recent seminar on the amendment of article 6:2. Remember the recent doctrine of «changement dans la continuité ». I suppose change means to alter, make different or transform. And continuity means uninterrupted connection, succession or uninterrupted duration. How can Biyaist talk of change in continuity? Can there be an alteration in an uninterrupted connection? Also remember the recent celebration of the 50th anniversary of the independence of Cameroon when we all know that Cameroon's national day of 2oth May only started in 1972. 50 years of independence should have been celebrated on the 1st of January 2010 but then that would have left out the Southern Cameroons which only became independt by joining French Cameroon on 1st October 1961.
For 25 years Biyaism has been enshrined in every fabric of the Cameroonian society. The decline in morals is comparable to the dilapidation of national institutions. The very bad roads and liquidating state enterprises are visible relics of Biyaism. Biyaism however, is not limited to the person of Mr. Biya. Though I believe that Mr. Biya must go, changing Biya is not the regime change that Cameroon needs. Regime change in Cameroon requires an over haul of the entire state machinery-a complete revamping of the executive, legislative and judicial systems. If regime change is limited to changing the president, then I am afraid Biyaism will endure even long after Biya is gone. Changing Biya without changing the laws and without embarking on a vigorous campaign to change mentalities and work towards increase social justice will simply be the proverbial putting of new wine in old wine skins.
The new challenge to the Cameroon revolution
Over the years, Cameroonians have exhibited complacency in the way the political live of the country is run. As individuals we have each contributed to making Cameroon what it is today. In as much as I have castigated and blamed the “essingan” mafia for the troubles they have put the people of Cameroon through, I should nonetheless accept responsibility for my docility and role in that destruction.
A lot of times we have sat behind our desk, on our computers and poured our venom and frustration on Biyaist and the essingan brotherhood. How many times have we asked ourselves what we failed to do when we had the time to do it? In the 1990s when the heat of the debate was rife, when a great number of Cameroonians we willing to sacrifice their lives for nation, how many of us stood aside and watched?
I am among that group of people who used to sit behind their desk and type pages announcing the impending revolution. I accept the fact that several years ago, I thought Biya will not stay in power forever. I believed he will soon die and we'll get the change we all desire. Yes, I accept my own complacency and responsibility in sustaining him in power. I recognize my role in that and, because I accept my responsibility, I now know it is my duty to stand up and fight. We have done the talking and we will continue to talk. But the time is changing. The talking must be accompanied by walking. The walking must be followed by the running. The running towards Etoudi must accompanied by the fighting. The fighting should be followed by the screaming and when all these things come together, the pandemonium will be such that the essingan brotherhood will bail out. They will flee and we will be able to sing the victors son. And for once our fatherland will be free and we shall set things right for ourselves, for our children and for our children’s children.
The question of change in Cameroon is not about apportioning blame. The new machinery developed by Biyaist is the "blame theory" which states simply that give your people someone to blame for the woes and the fault will never be yours. At the micro level we as individuals have failed to examine ourselves and have turned to blame Biya and co for our woes whereas if we examined our souls we'll see our role in this decadence. Because Biya has understood the blame theory so well he has set Fru Ndi to blame Muna for his failures in the leadership of the SDF. The Ewondo man has to blame the Beti man and the Tupori man must blame the Fulani. The North westerner has got the South westerners to blame so has the Douala got the Bamilike to blame. The blame theory is child of the divide and rule principle. At an experimental phase it has worked remarkably well for Biya and of course, it was once said that fool and people once shame on you. But when you fool them twice, then the shame should be on them. Biya has done it once, shall the shame be ours?
The new revolution for Cameroon requires that we all accept responsibility for sustaining the corruption and decadence in Cameroon. It is going to be difficult for some people to take that responsibility but remember that for every "choko" you gave you were putting a nail on the coffin. How many times did you bribe a police man for not carrying a national identity card? How much did you bribe the immigration service to get a passport? For all the bush fallers, how many times have you bribed customs at the port or the airport to claim your goods? How many times have you bribed the immigration police to enter or leave the country without a vaccination certificate? Did you condemn that friend, brother, cousin, or classmate who bribed their way into ENS and ENAM? We know them, we live with them, we drink with them and we know what they have done. I am not preaching witch hunting. I am not talking about taking advantage of a situation and going after people simply because they happened to have gone to institutions we coveted. I am talking about a responsible and accountable recognition of wrongs we have done to Cameroon both individually and collectively and working towards putting things right.
A mass revolution requires a re-examination of our inner self. The individual will for change super cedes the political will. When as individuals we have that will to instigate change, even if the political will is not there we can force that change to come. The change we crave for in Cameroon is not about changing Biya or the president. It is about changing the institution of the president, over hauling the entire political machinery. Biyaism for 25 years has been institutionalized into every sector of daily life in Cameroon. To remake Cameroon requires not only removing Biya but removing all the tenets and relics of the system. The present war should not just be about Biya but more about eradicating Biyaism because if we only take out Biya, Biyaism might endure even long after he's gone.
I accept the fact that as Cameroonian I have allowed my frustration with the system to over ride my zeal and motivation to fight. I accept that I have resorted to inexplicable excuses why I don't have to fight. Yet I come to understand that a wise man must not wait until his back is against the wall to start fighting. By the time you get to that wall, you might not even have room to move your fist.
Can you have omelets with breaking the eggs? You cannot build a house without a foundation. It is either we destroy to reconstruct or we let the house collapse on us and kill us. If we want a better Cameroon let us get ready to cut down the baobabs of corruption, the irokos of electoral fraud, and the mahoganies of manipulation. For those who want to build a better Cameroon, let us get ready to dig up the foundations of mal-governance.
Political movements are built around the struggle for political space and benefits. The struggle is driven by recognition and rewards. In most national political movements leadership is embedded in the elite who will power and make decisions even where these movements are meant to be popular. The emergence of personality cults is a common practice in national political movements (Gaulism, Fascism, and Nazism). Even where political movements are seen as representing class interests, elitism still surrounds the leadership (Chinese Socialism and Bolshevik Communism).
The principal political movement in Cameroon since independence is Biyaism. Biyaism can be used to describe the political practices of the Biya regime, their mode of conduct and execution of national politics. The major highlights of Biyaism are absenteeism; embezzlement of state funds; manipulation; electoral malpractices and economic collapse. Its highest achievement for 25 years has been the reputation of being classified as poor and highly indebted and two non coveted world titles as the most corrupt country.
Biyaism emerged as a political movement in Cameroon in 1982 following the ascension of Paul Biya to power. The announcement of the NEW DEAL was followed by a promise of rigor and moralization with tenets decentralization in communal liberalism. However, following the failed April 6, 1984 coup d’état, Biyaism switched from being a movement for liberalism and economic growth to becoming an elitist political club with the president assuming the position of supreme ruler. Biyaism is built around the institution of the president of the republic and flows down through to all other services. The shared values and concerns of Biyaist are ensuring total submission to and domination by the president. The CPDM is therefore not a political party meant to win votes and elections but rather a vehicle to convince the citizenry and influence political outcomes towards preserving the president (the Man and not the institution).
Biyaism is built on the foundation of political favoritism and “clientelism”. Political appointments are seen as rewards for servitude and subservience. Even where access to public offices is by elections, people who access such offices always consciously or unconsciously pay tribute to the president for holding the said office. Villagers are always called upon to pay tribute and raise motions of support to the president for appointing one of theirs to the position of minister or director. Minsters are longer seen as servants of the nation but rather as rewards for being un bon organisateur (Les Paradoxes du Pays Organisateur). Under Biyaism political actors and commentators no longer have their own opinions and thoughts. Public comments are meant to reiterate what the president has said or what the president thinks. Even where the president’s words are clear, political actors and commentators would want to interpret and give new meaning to tie in with a particular agenda or line of reasoning. (Think of the CRTV political analysts after the president’s speech or interview, ministers’ and directors speeches at public events).
Another corner stone of Biyaism is the “scratch ma back I scratch your own” philosophy, interpreted as the leeway to bribery and corruption. Political actors under Biyaism have tended to show loyalty to the president by attempting to scratch his back by being complacent where the president’s immediate family has been involved in misusing state funds (Cameroon Bank and BIAO. Remember the Messi Messi Affair and the implication of Irene Biya). Also they have pretended to be blind where the president and his family have abused power even when there is an overt case of embezzlement. (Remember the Frank Biya drug scandal in the US and the disappearance of the 1990 Operation Coup de Coeur funds in a plane between Paris and New York ). To seek favors from the president political actors have used rice, salt, cows, goats and palm oil to “rub the lips” of villagers to vote for the CPDM. Even where such vote buying exercises have failed they have resorted to open looting of pulling stations and killings (Bali Kumbat) or hijacking polling results (Santa). Evidently, selective electoral registration and the importation of ghost electors have been a major characteristic of Biyaist electoral practice.
500 FRS CFA under Biyaism has not only replace the road insurance for transporters it has also taken the place of driver’s license as well as a granted laissez passer for non compliance to health and road safety regulations. Over loading of transport vehicles and the growing body counts in road accidents have become the norm. Complacency is not limited to the president’s immediate family but stretches to state owned enterprises like the Cameroon Ship Yard, the Ports authority, Cameroon Airlines, the SNH, the SNI etc. For 25 years Biyaism has been enshrined in every fabric of the Cameroonian community. Even children as young as ten know how to give and receive "choko".
Biya’s movement is built on one simple theory- a theory I have taken the liberty to call the blame theory. The blame theory posits on one simple idea: divert the source of misery from you. That is, give the oppressed someone to blame for the misery and they will forget who the enemy is. The blame theory is inspired by the old politics of divide and rule. The divide and rule politics on the other hand is build around intrigue, manipulation, lies and out right brutality. Thus, Biyaist have not spared their energies when killing armless, defenseless children (Kumba, Buea, Bamenda, Bepanda 6 etc). The intimidating presence of the police, the national gendarmerie and the infantry on the streets and residential quarters are hallmarks of Biyaism. Biyaism has been the champion of lies and falsehood in presenting national history and politics. It has championed the course of political manipulation and propaganda. Remember the 1984 decision to change the name of the country, the propaganda on unity in diversity and national integration. Biyaist used the example of a north westerner getting married to a southerner as being a good instance of national integration. Yet a fellow Nigerian getting married to a Cameroonian cannot in their terms be an instance of international integration. Remember the manipulations of the anti multi party rioters and marchers of the 1990s, the pseudo “grand débat” or débat élargir and the 1996 constitution. Also remember the October 2007 interview on the French TV channel and the recent seminar on the amendment of article 6:2. Remember the recent doctrine of «changement dans la continuité ». I suppose change means to alter, make different or transform. And continuity means uninterrupted connection, succession or uninterrupted duration. How can Biyaist talk of change in continuity? Can there be an alteration in an uninterrupted connection? Also remember the recent celebration of the 50th anniversary of the independence of Cameroon when we all know that Cameroon's national day of 2oth May only started in 1972. 50 years of independence should have been celebrated on the 1st of January 2010 but then that would have left out the Southern Cameroons which only became independt by joining French Cameroon on 1st October 1961.
For 25 years Biyaism has been enshrined in every fabric of the Cameroonian society. The decline in morals is comparable to the dilapidation of national institutions. The very bad roads and liquidating state enterprises are visible relics of Biyaism. Biyaism however, is not limited to the person of Mr. Biya. Though I believe that Mr. Biya must go, changing Biya is not the regime change that Cameroon needs. Regime change in Cameroon requires an over haul of the entire state machinery-a complete revamping of the executive, legislative and judicial systems. If regime change is limited to changing the president, then I am afraid Biyaism will endure even long after Biya is gone. Changing Biya without changing the laws and without embarking on a vigorous campaign to change mentalities and work towards increase social justice will simply be the proverbial putting of new wine in old wine skins.
The new challenge to the Cameroon revolution
Over the years, Cameroonians have exhibited complacency in the way the political live of the country is run. As individuals we have each contributed to making Cameroon what it is today. In as much as I have castigated and blamed the “essingan” mafia for the troubles they have put the people of Cameroon through, I should nonetheless accept responsibility for my docility and role in that destruction.
A lot of times we have sat behind our desk, on our computers and poured our venom and frustration on Biyaist and the essingan brotherhood. How many times have we asked ourselves what we failed to do when we had the time to do it? In the 1990s when the heat of the debate was rife, when a great number of Cameroonians we willing to sacrifice their lives for nation, how many of us stood aside and watched?
I am among that group of people who used to sit behind their desk and type pages announcing the impending revolution. I accept the fact that several years ago, I thought Biya will not stay in power forever. I believed he will soon die and we'll get the change we all desire. Yes, I accept my own complacency and responsibility in sustaining him in power. I recognize my role in that and, because I accept my responsibility, I now know it is my duty to stand up and fight. We have done the talking and we will continue to talk. But the time is changing. The talking must be accompanied by walking. The walking must be followed by the running. The running towards Etoudi must accompanied by the fighting. The fighting should be followed by the screaming and when all these things come together, the pandemonium will be such that the essingan brotherhood will bail out. They will flee and we will be able to sing the victors son. And for once our fatherland will be free and we shall set things right for ourselves, for our children and for our children’s children.
The question of change in Cameroon is not about apportioning blame. The new machinery developed by Biyaist is the "blame theory" which states simply that give your people someone to blame for the woes and the fault will never be yours. At the micro level we as individuals have failed to examine ourselves and have turned to blame Biya and co for our woes whereas if we examined our souls we'll see our role in this decadence. Because Biya has understood the blame theory so well he has set Fru Ndi to blame Muna for his failures in the leadership of the SDF. The Ewondo man has to blame the Beti man and the Tupori man must blame the Fulani. The North westerner has got the South westerners to blame so has the Douala got the Bamilike to blame. The blame theory is child of the divide and rule principle. At an experimental phase it has worked remarkably well for Biya and of course, it was once said that fool and people once shame on you. But when you fool them twice, then the shame should be on them. Biya has done it once, shall the shame be ours?
The new revolution for Cameroon requires that we all accept responsibility for sustaining the corruption and decadence in Cameroon. It is going to be difficult for some people to take that responsibility but remember that for every "choko" you gave you were putting a nail on the coffin. How many times did you bribe a police man for not carrying a national identity card? How much did you bribe the immigration service to get a passport? For all the bush fallers, how many times have you bribed customs at the port or the airport to claim your goods? How many times have you bribed the immigration police to enter or leave the country without a vaccination certificate? Did you condemn that friend, brother, cousin, or classmate who bribed their way into ENS and ENAM? We know them, we live with them, we drink with them and we know what they have done. I am not preaching witch hunting. I am not talking about taking advantage of a situation and going after people simply because they happened to have gone to institutions we coveted. I am talking about a responsible and accountable recognition of wrongs we have done to Cameroon both individually and collectively and working towards putting things right.
A mass revolution requires a re-examination of our inner self. The individual will for change super cedes the political will. When as individuals we have that will to instigate change, even if the political will is not there we can force that change to come. The change we crave for in Cameroon is not about changing Biya or the president. It is about changing the institution of the president, over hauling the entire political machinery. Biyaism for 25 years has been institutionalized into every sector of daily life in Cameroon. To remake Cameroon requires not only removing Biya but removing all the tenets and relics of the system. The present war should not just be about Biya but more about eradicating Biyaism because if we only take out Biya, Biyaism might endure even long after he's gone.
I accept the fact that as Cameroonian I have allowed my frustration with the system to over ride my zeal and motivation to fight. I accept that I have resorted to inexplicable excuses why I don't have to fight. Yet I come to understand that a wise man must not wait until his back is against the wall to start fighting. By the time you get to that wall, you might not even have room to move your fist.
Can you have omelets with breaking the eggs? You cannot build a house without a foundation. It is either we destroy to reconstruct or we let the house collapse on us and kill us. If we want a better Cameroon let us get ready to cut down the baobabs of corruption, the irokos of electoral fraud, and the mahoganies of manipulation. For those who want to build a better Cameroon, let us get ready to dig up the foundations of mal-governance.
Friday 22 January 2010
REQUIM FOR A FALLEN PROF
LIKE A MONUMENT YOU STOOD
SHUNNING HUMAN GREED AND CORRUPTION
PURIFIED BY VIRTUES OF A THOUSANDS SAINTS
FORTIFIED BY TEACHINGS OF A LEARNED FONLON.
THE ANATEMEA OF A MAD REGIME
THE SCORN OF LAZY SCHOLARS
YOU LEFT YOU MARK ON THE THORNY ROAD
THRODED BY A MILLION ACADEMICIANS
TODAY YOU GENLTY SLIP LIKE A HERO
INTO THE BOSSOM OF MOTHER EARTH
WHERE SERVITUDE IS REWARDED WITH
BOSSOM PEACE.
FROM YOUR FOUNTAIN OF WISDOM
A MILLION HAVE DRUNK
YOUR SANCTITUDE A STEADFAST SHIELD
THAT PROTECTS THEM FROM GREED AND CORRUPTION.
FROM THE AMBAZONIA REPUBLIC
WE MOURN A FALLEN HERO WITH SONGS OF REDEMTION
HOLDING HIGH THE BANNER OF FREEDOM AND JUSTICE TO ALL.
THAT IN OUR A GENERATION A NEW HERO MAY BE BORN
TO THROD THE FOOT PRINTS OF A LEARNED PROFESSOR.
SHUNNING HUMAN GREED AND CORRUPTION
PURIFIED BY VIRTUES OF A THOUSANDS SAINTS
FORTIFIED BY TEACHINGS OF A LEARNED FONLON.
THE ANATEMEA OF A MAD REGIME
THE SCORN OF LAZY SCHOLARS
YOU LEFT YOU MARK ON THE THORNY ROAD
THRODED BY A MILLION ACADEMICIANS
TODAY YOU GENLTY SLIP LIKE A HERO
INTO THE BOSSOM OF MOTHER EARTH
WHERE SERVITUDE IS REWARDED WITH
BOSSOM PEACE.
FROM YOUR FOUNTAIN OF WISDOM
A MILLION HAVE DRUNK
YOUR SANCTITUDE A STEADFAST SHIELD
THAT PROTECTS THEM FROM GREED AND CORRUPTION.
FROM THE AMBAZONIA REPUBLIC
WE MOURN A FALLEN HERO WITH SONGS OF REDEMTION
HOLDING HIGH THE BANNER OF FREEDOM AND JUSTICE TO ALL.
THAT IN OUR A GENERATION A NEW HERO MAY BE BORN
TO THROD THE FOOT PRINTS OF A LEARNED PROFESSOR.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)