Martin begins by bemoaning the state of African studies: mired in Marxist theory. Martin wants to see Africanists – or at least Africanist Marxists – develop praxis: a merging of theory and practice in which each informs and furthers the other. The bulk of Martin's article is a review, defense, and critique of Robert Seidman's eccentric “handbook on how to use state power to overcome underdevelopment” The State, Law and Development (New York: St. Martin's, 1978) (Martin, 316). Seidman offers a technical, even mechanical, approach to problems of law, and argues that it is precisely practical problems of law (such as how to create laws to combat corruption) that should occupy African political theorists and politicians. Martin defends Seidman against a series of anticipated theoretical criticisms from Marxism, such as that revolution is necessary (the defense is that while this is a nice thought, basically no class capable of and motivated to lead a revolution exists [as of 1982]).
Metz, Steven. “In Lieu of Orthodoxy: The Socialist Theories of Nkrumah and Nyerere.” The Journal of Nodern African Studies, 20, 3 (1982): 377-392, http://www.jstor.org/.
Metz explores the socialist theories of Nkrumah and Nyerere, using their degree of Marxist “orthodoxy” as a litmus test. Metz recognizes that for both men, socialist theory and practice were inextricable. Nonetheless Metz proposes to abstract their theory for examination. Both men's theories share a conception of the problems of the post-colonial state, an analysis of the causes and approach to the transition to socialism, and a definition of socialist society. He finds that a substantial distinction between them is that Nkrumah is more orthodox, and generally easier to classify as in the Marxist camp; Nyerere is a bit of a cypher to Metz. Nyerere proposed socialism because he wished to evolve a particular moral situation which he believed socialism would engender. Nkrumah, on the other, believed that socialism was a step towards a communistic state, and that it would follow inevitably once the influence of colonialism had been eliminated through pan-African unity. Thus, Nkrumah was like Lenin and Mao in that he adapted a fairly “orthodox” Marxist material-dialectical perspective to the specific “national” conditions in which he found himself. Nkrumah believed that colonialism had so impacted and expanded any African community's understanding of its place in the world that it was necessary to confront and transform colonialism as a continent, not even as a region within that continent. Nkrumah's relatively radical position certainly must have been a factor in his ouster from Ghanaian government after only a few years. Nyerere, by contrast, led Tanzania for a quarter-century. Metz suggests that Nyerere might be viewed by some Marxists as a sell-out because he was willing to compromise with capitalism.
Nursey-Bray, P.F. “Tanzania: The Development Debate.” African Affairs, 79, 314 (1980): 55-78, http://www.jstor.org/.
Nursey-Bray states that while Tanzania is not earthly perfection, yet the seemingly “Arcadian” vision of Nyerere has in some substantial degree been actualized in Tanzania. Nursey-Bray recognizes that the African situation generally must be understood as neo-colonial, so one must not think of a diametrical opposition of neo-colonialism and socialism, but rather of a spectrum in which neo-colonial governments tend toward either capitalism or socialism. His chief criticism of Tanzanian success has to do with the self-proclaimed goals of self-reliance, nationalization of key industries and commerce, and Ujamaa vijijini; Nursey-Bray proposes that Tanzania has made progress towards these goals, but has certainly not achieved them, being for example (in 1980) dependent upon foreign aid, and moving increasingly into the sphere of international capitalism.
Nyerere, Julius K. Ujamaa: Essays on Socialism. London: Oxford UP, 1968.
Nyerere speaks for himself in this collection of seminal writings which Nyerere calls “essays” although the collection includes the Arusha Declaration, which is a basic mission statement for the Tanganyika African National Union (TANU). Throughout the documents collected in this volume, Nyerere proposes that a traditional African community, at least in an idealized or generalized form, exemplified an exalted moral state in which unselfishness and community spirit directed individual decisions. Nyerere considers this to be a kind of innate socialism, which colonialism has pushed to the side but not destroyed. By progressively reducing the influence of colonialism through reforms of government and the economic order, this innate socialism will blossom in the hearts and minds of the people of Tanzania, and a new era of true prosperity and fellowship will be inaugurated. This may make Nyerere sound like a new-age guru, a bit too precious for the brutal realities of post-colonial Africa. The similarity of his general tone to the Satyagraha writings of Mohandis Gandhi is notable.
Willetts, Peter. “The Politics of Uganda as a One-Party State.” African Affairs, 74, 296 (1975): 278-299, http://www.jstor.org/.
Willetts details the career of Ugandan President Obote, noting that accusations made against him of being of limited intelligence were wrong but at the same time emphasizing political mistakes made by Obote. Willetts concludes that while Obote had socialist leanings, whether his government could truly be said to have been socialist rather than nationalist may be a matter of opinion. Willetts particularly emphasizes the novelty of Obote's suggestions for electoral structures in a one-party nation like Uganda and the difficulty Obote had in controlling the Ugandan military, which ultimately was his own undoing.
No comments:
Post a Comment