| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
 Posted - 04 Sep 2006 : 20:17:26
|
Gainako's Dalton
The table conference in Chicago brought together African intellectuals: Baba Galleh, Halifa Sallah of NADD, Dr. Gomez (Ba Banuttu), and Dr. Kzusi.
Gainako was in attendance, and we report to you news as we saw it, and not as seen by others.
|
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2006 : 00:13:08
|
SUN SHINED IN GAMBIA'S CHICAGO CONFERENCE;
As African intellectuals preached African Values.
Midwest Gambian Association's 7th annual Conference kicked off September 2nd 2006 at the Majestic Star hotel, Gary, Indiana. The conference that attracted a lot of Gambians in the area was also a forum for African intellectuals to argue their opinions on what is the reality for our current Africa. The theme of this year's conference "Vote 2006-Beginning of our Third Republic or Continuation of our Second Republic" brought to the conference table Mr. Baba Galleh Jallow, Dr. Michael Gomez, Dr. Nnam Nkuzi, Honorable Halifa Sallah via telephone conference, and lot of other Gambians living in the American states of Chicago, Indiana, Illinois and Minnesota.
Dr. Gomez in his speech called for a real change of attitude from Gambians. "It's about changing the hearts and minds of the Gambian people. You don't lead by dictating, you lead by examples.", said Dr. Gomez while emphasizing the need for Gambians to criticize, offer solutions to problems, and not condemn others. Dr. Gomez, who spoke openly against corruption, also signaled Gambians to have a term limit to the presidency, and exercise intellectual honesty at home and abroad to avoid overthrowing of Governments because of African leaders overstaying in power.
Dr. Nkuzi, a Nigerian professor living in Chicago, called on Africans not to abandon their culture. "What is African doesn't appeal to us than what is foreign, even though ours is better.", he said in a speech that he titled "Colonial Mentality In Africa", which is also a summary of a book he authored deals with societal morality of the abandoned cultures which he blamed on colonialism.
Mr. Baba Galleh Jallow who spoke on "Beyond Neocolonialism: Approaches of Understanding Africa's Underdevelopment.", hit hard on many African rulers describing them as mere rulers out to terrorize the citizens of their countries. Galleh cannot comprehend the so called excuse of terror meted out to Gambians in the name of national security. "It needs to be National Security with a human face.", Galleh emphasized while frowning at Gambian tyrant, Yaya Jammeh, who he accused along other rulers of being monsters, sycophants, criminal rulers, and thugs.
"You have to build a nation's state from below, and never above-that will never work. Develop the minds of the people, and the people will develop the country", Galleh pointed while explaining the proper order of how the system needs to look like. Galleh also called on Gambians and Africans to have a common National Identity, rather than seeing themselves as belonging to tribes: "Gambians and Africans need to see themselves under a common identity." Meanwhile he asked his wide readership to check for his funny stories at the Gambia post, and watch out for the book in the pipeline titled "Diary of an African journalist", which he said will unveil of all the atrocities taking place in our the Gambia since 1994.
Joe Sambou who chaired the conference mourned two of their late members namely Amie Njie and ML Prom, and the whole crowd observed a moment of silence for them, in respect for their past dedication to the Midwest Gambian Association of Chicago.
In a similar development, Hon. Sallah of NADD honored the invitation, and briefed Gambians about NADD's development so far. Hon. Sallah, who sounded very optimistic of victory for NADD, openly described NADD as the real progressive party with galvanized supporters who are in charge of their destiny. The chairman of the occasion, Mr. Sambou revealed to the gathering that the same opportunity was accorded to the UDP/NRP, and they failed to honor it saying they are too busy with campaign, and no reason was advanced why Jammeh of the APRC didn't honor his'. Meanwhile a document submitted by Karamba Touray, external youth activist for the UDP couldn't be shared with attendees because of an alleged forgery and plagiarism on the said document, and he was notified of the association's move not to share the document with attendees. It is not clear to the author of this piece if the document was written by Karamba or not, and we do hope he deems it necessary to give an explanation to Gambians.
One Kemo Jarjou, Executive member of the SeneGambian Association in Madison, Wisconsin, sounded very critical to the Midwest Chicago host when approached for comments. Mr. Jarjou's argument that the name " Midwest" is supposed to represent all the surrounding states, and therefore the yearly gathering should be rotational in all these states. Mr. Jarjou said they are patient, and he will continue to call on the Executives in Chicago to reverse their decision of hosting it continually in Chicago to foster unity among all the states of the Midwest, and he cited some states that used to attend this gathering, but now backed off after they suspected that Chicago is making this gathering a personal event. Others who wish to remain anonymous made similar comments, and in fact one commentator said he already signaled the association about that for a long time. At this time, we hope Mr. Ousman Conteh, Isatou, Demba Sowe, Joe Sambou and their entire team will communicate to Gambians about this situation, which is likely to jeopardize their cordial relations with their neighboring states if no remedies are implemented.
In attendance Samba Baldeh, President of the SeneGambian Association of Wisconsin, described the conference as "well spirited". Mr. Conteh, Chairman of the Midwest Gambian Association gave the vote of thanks. The night dance on Sept 2nd was also well attended with Mbalax and Ndagga echoing in one of the famous "Sunugal" restaurant, where the night program was held.
Comments: We report the news as we see it, and not as you see it. We look forward to hearing from our brothers Karamba Touray, and Ousman Conteh in earnest.
DETROIT TAKES AMIE NJIE'S TROPHY HOME WHILE PROM'S TROPHY STAYED IN CHICAGO.
Sad and honorable was the second day events in Chicago. Two trophies were contested among the Midwest states. Detroit won Chicago in the finals of the soccer competition, taking home the first trophy provided in honor of the Late Amie Njie, and Chicago being second won the ML Prom's trophy-it is noted that the late Njie and Prom were very active members and participants in the Midwest Association. As attendees at the soccer field observed a moment of silence for the two, family members were honored to present the trophies to the winners. We summarize the soccer matches below.
FIRS GAME: Detroit (1), Chicago (1)
SECOND GAME: Madison (1), Chicago (1)
THIRD GAME: Madison (o), Detroit (1)
FINAL GAME: Chicago (0), Detroit (1)
|
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
 |
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2006 : 05:14:08
|
We will do the same for Dr. Banutu/Gomez and others. Enjoy Galleh's tears of Africa's repressive regimes with "criminal rulers"-as he openly termed them.
PAPER DELIVERED AT MIDWEST GAMBIAN CONFERENCE, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, SATURDAY SEPTEMBER 2, 2006
Baba Galleh Jallow
Beyond Neocolonialism: Alternative Approaches to Understanding Africa’s Underdevelopment
Claude Ake, a prominent African scholar, makes the interesting proposition that Africa’s problem is not so much that development has failed on the continent as that it was never really on the agenda. In other words, Ake is arguing that neither the colonial powers nor the post-colonial African governments have ever really been concerned with developing the continent but rather with the accumulation of power and material benefits. At first glance, Ake’s claim would sound rather odd, considering the fact that development is literally the catch phrase of all African governments as well as virtually all major actors in the international community such as the United Nations system, the World Bank and the IMF. But however odd it sounds, Ake makes a valid and profound point that should serve as a wake-up call for those of us who are struggling to make sense of the mess that is today’s Africa.
But first, let us reflect on the two key words in our topic tonight: neocolonialism and underdevelopment. The concept of the neocolony derives from the argument by some Africanist scholars, mostly of Marxist persuasion, that the post-colonial state in Africa is really not independent because its economy remains organically tied to the economies of its former colonizers and its political institutions are not indigenous to the continent but modeled on those of its former colonizers. That Africa is economically dependent for its survival on European states and institutions is common knowledge. African products are sold on the world market, its crude oil and other raw materials are exported to the West and western finished products are imported into the continent in vast quantities. Trade aside, all African countries are now heavily indebted to western financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank. Basically, what neocolonialism means is that Africa is only partially independent because it remains economically dependent and there cannot be any political independence without economic independence. Also, neocolonialism presupposes that vestiges of the colonial state still remain ingrained in post-colonial state structures and social institutions such as education.
The concept of underdevelopment also has a lot to do with the West. Underdevelopment is a comparative term that automatically suggests the existence of a yardstick of measurement. If Africa is underdeveloped, its underdevelopment must be measured against someone else’s level of development. That someone else is Western Europe. The underlying assumption here is that Africa should strive to become as developed as Western Europe. It is interesting to note that what constitutes being developed is determined not by Africa, but by Western Europe. For Western Europe, being developed means being industrialized, having stable political institutions, strong economies, effective health and other public services, good road networks and utility services, and being a well managed consumer society, among other things. According to development or modernization theory, in order to be considered developed, Gambia for instance, must become like America. Indeed, so improbable is such an eventuality that it was considered logical to stop talking in terms of first, second and third worlds and talk instead of developing countries, or the south, when referring to Africa and other underdeveloped countries of the world.
There are other aspects of neocolonialism that have been impediments to the development of Africa. One of them is the colonial boundary. These were drawn up with absolutely no regard for the indigenous populations or other demographic factors. In the process of haphazardly slicing up the continent among themselves, the European powers not only created mini entities like The Gambia or sprawling wastelands like the Sudan, but also lumped disparate populations within or on different sides of the border. A cursory glance at countries like The Gambia and Senegal, Mali and Burkina Faso, Rwanda and Burundi among other places, reveals the effects of the social mutilation that Africa suffered from colonialism. The logical thing to do after independence would have been for the new rulers to wield the continent together to create viable political entities. But of course, our new rulers wanted to be kings in their own fragments and so while they purported to have created the Organization of African Unity to help unite the continent, they laid the organization’s foundation on the principle of sovereignty and territorial integrity, thus effectively ruling out the possibility for unity.
Having briefly examined the concepts of neocolonialism and underdevelopment, let us now backtrack a little and examine colonialism itself. At this point, we need to keep in mind that we are dealing with two distinct entities here: The state, meaning the government, and the people, who constitute the nation.
Europeans scrambled for and partitioned Africa after the Berlin conference of 1884 not because they loved Africa, or wanted to civilize Africans as they claimed, or to develop Africa, but because they wanted to exploit the labor and resources of the continent to feed their industries and develop their economies. Having colonized Africa, the Europeans needed to provide a framework of stable political control in order to guarantee the conditions necessary for the extraction and accumulation of African resources. It was with this aim in mind that the colonial state was created. The roads and infrastructure they built were designed to facilitate the exploitation, storage and transportation of extracted resources. The schools they built were designed to provide clerks for the colonial bureaucracy. Thus, as far as the colonial state was concerned – to revisit Ake’s proposition – development was never on the agenda. The colonial state was totally based on the calculus of power and profit. So, we can argue, is the post-colonial state.
After colonialism came independence. The exponents of the theory of neocolonialism argue that what we now refer to as independence was nothing more than a tactical withdrawal by the colonial powers. Apart from the wars of liberation fought in Algeria and the Portuguese countries, self-rule in Africa was negotiated around the table. The colonial powers, according to this school of thought, realized that after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the aftermath of the Second World War, and after the example set by Indian and Pakistani independence in 1947, there was no way they could hold directly on to their colonies in Africa. So the British policy of Indirect Rule was sort of extended. Originally, the colonial state ruled the protectorate through the local chiefs. Now, Britain was going to rule both colony and protectorate through the new local, western educated chiefs – the nationalist agitators, whom the British scornfully called apes in trousers. The tactical withdrawal was more organized in the French territories. In 1958, France organized a referendum offering its colonies two options: One, internal self-rule with close ties with France – A Franco-African community in which France would continue to support the CFA Franc and the economies of its former colonies and two, a clean break with France. All but one African colony voted yes to the French proposals. Sekou Toure’s Guinea voted no. Guinea was stripped of all French support. The others were granted independence en masse in 1960. While no such arrangement was offered by the British, they made sure that close ties remained between London and the former colonies through the Commonwealth of Nations whose head is the British Queen.
Another school of thought describes independence as “deradicalization through accommodation.” In other words, those African nationalists who sought independence were sufficiently softened up and turned into great sons of the British Empire or La Francophonie, as the case might be before they were sworn in as leaders of their countries. This process of deradicalization by accommodation is graphically demonstrated in the knighting of some of the new African heads of state. We can think of Sir Dawda Jawara, Sir Milton Margai and other Sirs across the former British Empire. Modibo Keita of Mali and Houphouet Boigny of the Ivory Coast held French ministerial positions before becoming rulers of their own countries.
Our so-called independence aside, African countries had to deal with the ugly realities of superpower rivalry during the cold war into which they were born. After defeating the Axis powers - Germany, Japan and Italy in the Second World War, two of the former allies – the United States and the Soviet Union - emerged as superpowers, each espousing an ideology that proclaimed its intention to dominate the world by any means necessary. Moscow and Washington did everything in their power, regardless of the consequences, to keep each other outside their spheres of influence through their policies of global containment. In Africa, this superpower rivalry translated into unconditional support for all manner of rulers from Mobutu to Samuel Doe to Mengistu Haile Mariam of Ethiopia. So long as the ruler declared his support for Capitalism or Communism, they were given everything they needed to stay in power and muzzle dissent in their countries. Monsters like Mobutu and Samuel Doe, who professed support for America, were given millions of dollars as well as arms and ammunition with which they oppressed and killed their own people. By the time Mobutu was removed from power, he was one of the five richest men in the world while his country was one of the five poorest countries in the world. Both Mobutu and Doe were invited to the White House to meet with the leader of the world’s greatest democracy. So in effect, the cold war did irreparable damage to Africans by turning a blind eye to the despotic activities of such criminal rulers as Mobutu and Samuel Doe. On the other hand, the Soviet Union turned a blind eye to Mengistu’s red terror in Ethiopia. The cold war also claimed the lives of Africa’s most enlightened leaders – Patrice Lumumba in the Congo, Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana and Thomas Sankara in Burkina Faso, among others.
Then there was the pumping of debts into Africa – the so-called debt trap – and the eventual imposition of structural adjustment programs on African countries. While African rulers took hundreds of millions of dollars in debt money in the name of development, they stashed these millions away in Swiss bank and other foreign accounts for their own personal use. When donor fatigue set in, the IMF and World Bank stepped in with structural adjustment programs that further squeezed the life out of Africa’s ordinary people. To qualify for external aid under the SAPs, African governments had to do several things such as devalue their currencies, remove government subsidies from public services such as health and education, which were already in short supply, and cut the size of their civil services, which meant retrenching thousands of poor hapless workers whose sole means of survival with their families was their job. The net result of SAPs was increased poverty and hardship for Africans and a further marginalization of the continent from the center of world development activities. Meanwhile, our rulers grew wealthier by the minute to the extent that one of them could publicly declare on national radio and television that he would never be poor, his children would never be poor and his children’s children would never be poor. His country, meanwhile, lies at the bottom of the world’s poverty ladder.
Transposed over these impediments to our development are the realities of the “overdeveloped” state and the shadow state.
As we have seen, the colonial powers were only interested in the exploitation of Africa’s resources. In order to do this, they needed to put in place an institutional framework that would ensure law and order. Thus, they set up a colonial police force, a colonial court system and a bureaucracy designed to help achieve the aims of the colonial power. In short, they created a colonial state based entirely on power. They did nothing to develop the people of the colonies. Thus after independence, there was a state but no nation.
So nation-building was not part of the colonial lexicon.
A cursory glance at Western Europe and the United States shows us that it is the people who built the states. A state should not build a nation. It is a nation that must build a state. Americans migrated to the New World from other parts of the world. They settled here and built states based on certain liberal traditions. They made sure that their elected representatives would be accountable to them and will not be able to abuse or overstep their powers. They realized that human beings are by nature selfish and power hungry. That if checks and balances are not put in place to check people’s propensity to abuse their powers, they will abuse their powers. Africans had the peculiar misfortune of having a state system imposed upon them. They had no say in the design of the colonial structures and institutions that ruled their lives. At the time of independence, the institutional mechanisms – ideological and otherwise - necessary to subject state power to constitutional constraints and accountability did not exist. The responsibility to create such mechanisms unfortunately fell to the new rulers who had little interest in being accountable or responsible to their peoples. Even where such institutions were put in place, they were eventually removed. A typical example is the now common practice of changing constitutions to allow incumbents to seek indefinite re-election.
Having received their powers from the West, the new rulers also derived their legitimacy from the west. They saw little need to be accountable to their own people because these were powerless to do anything about it. When the ideology of nationalism became redundant following independence, the new rulers adopted the ideology of development as espoused by the former colonial powers. They sang every tune the West sang and danced every dance the west danced. They proclaimed their resolve to “catch up with the west.” Development in Africa became synonymous with development according to European standards. But while they parroted and continue to parrot the ideology of development and the need for development, African rulers continue to miserably fail to transform the idea of development into a program for societal transformation. After building a few miles of road, some hospitals without trained doctors or medicines, schools without furniture, books or teachers, and some other white elephant projects, African rulers loudly proclaim that their countries have seen great development during their misrule. In The Gambia, Mr. Jammeh is so excited and tickled with the sweetness of power that he recently declared that The Gambia is now a superpower. Of course, Mr. Jammeh has not the faintest idea of what development means, that development is not synonymous to building infrastructure. That development should, first and foremost, be concerned with developing the people of the nation, creating a national mastermind by harnessing the brain power of the nation and channeling it toward the charting of novel forms of social advancement, day in and day out. It is only the combined mental and physical powers of the people that can build a nation. But in Africa, the mental powers of the people are crippled, their creativity is denied expression, and everyone is forced to live a big white lie, to testify that the Emperor’s new clothes are the best in the world while the emperor has no clothes and is strutting naked in the streets. Whoever dares to proclaim what they see with their naked eyes is immediately silenced in the name of national security.
Tragically, African rulers have no idea what national security is either. As far as they are concerned, national security simply means regime security; and to ensure this militaristic brand of security, they spend huge amounts of national resources in building up military, paramilitary, regular and secret police forces to terrorize their own populations. National security means that people should enjoy a certain level of food security, job security, income security, health security, judicial security, political security, particularly the right to freely participate in the national discourse and politics of your country, to criticize and offer your opinions on issues of national significance. National security cannot be confined to militaristic concerns. It has to be security with a human face.
The “overdeveloped” and all-powerful state aside, another reality we need to deal with is that of the shadow state, also called the criminal state, which is the most common variety in Africa today. The concept of the shadow state derives from the observation that people in power in Africa normally by-pass formal state structures and build parallel channels of power through a network of loyalists and psychopants that would cater entirely to the security of the regime, or the ruler. Where we have a shadow state, the cabinet, the legislature, the judiciary and other formal state structures and institutions become redundant. The shadow state does not care about the rule of law. Such concepts as the separation of powers or the independence of the judiciary are thrown to the dogs. The ruler creates a secret police unit like the NIA directly controlled by him and whose loyalty lies entirely with him. He bypasses legal and legislative processes and runs the country through his informal network of cronies and informal channels of power and coercion. The shadow state informalizes the government and turns it into the private property of the ruler. The chief concern of the shadow state is not national service, but the enhancement of material flows into the greedy pockets of the ruler and his criminal network of cronies, and the preservation of that malignant system of exploitation for as long as possible. Once it emerges, the shadow state insitutites the politics of violence and the economy of violence. Like the colonial state, it seeks to deradicalize its critics through accommodation, and when it fails to deradicalize anyone, it simply seeks to eliminate or silence that person. Recent African history is replete with examples of such deradicalization and elimination.
Certainly, no discussion of the causes of Africa’s underdevelopment will be complete without at least a passing mention of the military. More than any other group, the military has been responsible for the worst atrocities against the African people and have been among the most corrupt on the continent. Think of the most corrupt and most brutal rulers in Africa over the past forty years and you will come up with the names of soldiers: Mobutu, Samuel Doe, Bokassa, Sani Abacha, Musa Traore, Eyadema, Yahya Jammeh. With very few exceptions like Sankara, Tumani Ture and Mohammed Vall of Mauritania, all those self-proclaimed messiahs of peace and deliverance who seized power through the barrel of the gun turned out to be monsters and virtual criminals in power. It is interesting to note that in many cases, military coups have just formalized civilian banditry and looting of the state coffers. The military in power proved more vicious because unlike the civilians they removed, they actually had direct control of the guns and tanks and could easily and directly employ them in inflicting terror on the civilian population.
What we have in The Gambia today is a combination of all of the above. An overdeveloped power-crazed neocolonial state in the grips of a pseudo-military regime that functions through informal channels as a malignant shadow state. There is absolutely no respect for the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary or the rule of law in The Gambia today. The professionalism of the civil service and the most basic rights of the ordinary people of The Gambia are treated with utmost contempt b y the shadow state. Such contempt for the Gambian nation is manifest in the countless unexplained sackings of government ministers, the killings of government critics like Deyda Hydara in December 2004 and innocent school children in April 2001, the arson attacks on independent media houses, the forcible and unexplained closure of The Independent newspaper, the arbitrary arrests and long incarceration of Gambians without charges and the many other unlawful activities of Yahya Jammeh and his thugs and cronies.
Well, we cannot hope for any changes if Yahya Jammeh is re-elected because he has neither the political will nor the know-how to effect the desired changes. A victory for Mr. Jammeh will be a vote for the continuation of the shadow state and its nefarious activities. Mr. Jammeh has long declared that he will stay in power for the next thirty years. Making such a pronouncement indicates that as far as Mr. Jammeh is concerned, the elections of 2006 are merely an exercise in formal futility.
Finally, I wish to argue that contrary to the contention of neocolonial theorists, the national question in Africa today is less subject to imperialist interests, but to the personal interests of the shadow ruler and his shadowy interests pursued through the agency of the shadow state. Europe and America have virtually no interests in most parts of Africa today, with the exception of oil and other resources. True, Africa is still tied to the economy of the west. But that is a reality we have to live with and learn to deal with as intelligently as possible. Of more urgent concern today is the problem of the shadow state, which is irresponsible, malignant, unaccountable, and supremely contemptuous of the people, who are the real custodians of power in any country.
If Africa must develop, the task of nation-building must start from below. Trying to build a nation from above is like trying to build a house from above. To develop Africa, we must either develop our people or allow them to develop themselves and take their destinies into their own hands. Africans must retrieve their powers from the clutches of the criminals hiding behind the shadow state, and build a state that is accountable to them and that will cater to their most basic needs. If this happens, the world will be forced to revisit the concept of underdevelopment because alternative models of development will emerge and claim their rightful place in the development lexicon.
|
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
Edited by - Dalton1 on 05 Sep 2006 05:21:34 |
|
|
|
kayjatta
2978 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2006 : 18:42:24
|
The response to the invitation by the different parties is instructive. NADD responded favorably with a speech by Halifa, APRC didn't bother to honor the invitation, and UDP's representative responded with a fraudulent and possibly plagiarized document.
Res ipsa loquitur. |
|
|
|
Aku_pickin
Christmas Island
162 Posts |
Posted - 06 Sep 2006 : 04:11:49
|
Perhaps I should have posted this under this topic:
Why Britain did not develop it's former colony.
http://www.gambia.dk/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1745 |
Justice must be served as impunity brings more repression and corruption! |
Edited by - Aku_pickin on 06 Sep 2006 04:12:55 |
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 06 Sep 2006 : 07:47:46
|
Readership,
Just for the records, all the pieces forwarded here were also forwarded to both our local papers-foroyya, the point, and online forums-Freedom, Allgambian, the Echo, bantaba, and the Gambia journal.
Good stuff from our intellectuals. The only challenge for them, i hope they never get polluted by joining tyranny-we have numerous cases of born agains. If Ganji Touray, who i interviewed once can deflect to the APRC, no one can i totally trust-even my little daughter.
be careful our intellectuals !!
Gainako's comments: In the Jamaican culture, they say "word is bond."
Onn'jaramah.
Gainako.
Below's Dr. Gomez's piece. The struggle's face must never be selfish. I thank forum and newspaper editors for giving us all a voice to interact, without which we are nothing. We would rather have our personal opinions censored than that which is for nationa's progress.
GREAT LEADERS IN THE GAMBIA KNOW THAT ALL CHANGE MUST START BOTH AT THE TOP AND THE BOTTOM: THE WHOLE HUMAN SYSTEM MUST CHANGE.
The Gambian Association of Mid-West 6th Annual Conference
September 1-3, 2006
Chicago, IL
By
Michael Ba Banutu-Gomez, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Rowan University
William G. Rohrer College of Business
Department of Management & MIS
2001 Mullica Hill Road
Glassboro, New Jersey 08028-1701
Tel. 856-256-5425
GREAT LEADERS IN THE GAMBIA KNOW THAT ALL CHANGE MUST START BOTH AT THE TOP AND THE BOTTOM: THE WHOLE HUMAN SYSTEM MUST CHANGE.
MY PHILOSOPHY OF LEADERSHIP
A true leader always has a vision; knows where he/she wants to go and how to get there. He/She values others' skills and experiences and builds teams that make use of them. He/she courageously accepts responsibility for problems and is able to clearly communicate the mission, goals and objectives of his/her party. A great leader is willing to challenge the Status Quo while trusting and empowering people. He/She uses obstacles to create a positive future; is consistent: willing to set an example of sacrifice for the good of the next generation. The primary task of Leadership is to establish and maintain “intimacy” (caring) because disciplined unselfishness comes about only through close social relationships. Traditional sources of intimacy such as the family, the club, the neighborhood, life-long friendships, Mosque and church are all presently threatened by modern life-styles in The Gambia. Intimacy is essential for healthy individuals and thus, a healthy society. Once a society de-values intimacy, its young people will not develop a sense of community responsibility. These young people will go on to produce the next generation that will have a permanently diminished sense of community. This will soon result in a society solely comprised of individuals with no or only tenuous social ties to each other. By and large, leadership is an influence process and not dictatorship.
For that reason, they take time to first establish understanding and true commitment at the highest levels of their party first. The most important attribute a leader must have is integrity. A leader with integrity provides consistent responses that show a sense of equal respect for everyone. This fosters “family” type relationships between people. A leader who behaves consistently exhibits the integrity necessary to nurture the growth of trust. The first task of leadership in The Gambia is to establish and maintain TRUST because the success of a party is determined by the willingness of individuals to make personal sacrifices. Before the objective of commitment to the development of a less selfish, more cooperative approach to working together can be achieved, there must be understanding which comes from the open expression of opinions, feelings and ideas through a process of public debate and group analysis.
The first step in creating a party philosophy is for leaders to conduct a Cultural Profile Audit. Leaders should set an example during these discussions by critically examining the party’s current, actual operating philosophy, business strategy, citizen goals and the values they place in people. A way to do this is to examine the most recent 5 key decisions in order to discover what principles were consistently applied. A sufficient level of trust must be established first to facilitate honest questioning of assumptions on the part of everyone. The first task for a leader is to set an example by openly disagreeing with others and actively working to create an environment where different opinions are welcomed. Leaders should establish a discussion process that reflects the egalitarianism, openness and participative ness that are the objectives of the change to take place.
Leaders set an example when they facilitate the growth of trust which needed to implement this type of discussion process by positively accepting criticism.
Though it will be painful, any nation or group of people who trust one another to expose their deepest weaknesses, is a nation/group that can successfully implement change. It is only by examining all party practices that one can uncover the roots of current party behavior. In order to deal with change, everyone must be open; that means being willing to investigate and question each other’s work as well as to appreciate the feedback others give in response when they look into one’s own work.
Change requires Leaders to demonstrate a willingness to expose their weaknesses to members; in other words, a willingness to reveal themselves so completely those members may find human weakness there. This teaches members that their Leaders are ready to acknowledge that everyone has weaknesses and it proves that all will be accepted in spite of their weaknesses. When nothing needs to be hidden, a tremendous energy is released.
Skillful leaders do more listening than talking; they observe the pattern of interaction in the group, citizens and know when to intervene. Skillful leaders utilize frequent periods of silence to give everyone time to process the preceding discussion which will allow the true issue or conflict to arise in their conscious mind. Good leaders teach citizens group dynamics to all party members so they can recognize group and citizens interaction patterns. Everyone must learn to see when a group is moving too quickly, how some behaviors interfere with group process, and how to stay on course. THE BEST LEADERS TEACH LEADERSHIP. Members should be taught how to provide leadership that facilitates identifying issues, finding the roots of conflicts and creating solutions to problems that everyone can support.
Good leaders communicate with their behavior more than their words and then make sure they recognize and reward positive results of members’ efforts immediately. They solicit suggestions from members, as a group, citizen and move quickly to implement helpful ones immediately. Good leaders set an example by being prepared to address tough questions during regular question and answer sessions with members about how the party is doing, its successes and problems, and other important work-related issues.
Good leaders establish mentor-apprentice relationships throughout their party which provide frequent one-to-one involvement of members on projects, in order to supply close instruction and guidance to all members. Leaders can encourage party members to transfer to related jobs, in order to expand their skills, by setting up a system of job rotation. Leaders can set an example by participating in the established system of career circulation, themselves. To achieve coordination across functions of an party, all that is necessary is people who have become experts in several functions, specialties and offices and therefore can knit them together into an integrated whole. Every department should have in it someone who knows the people, problems and procedures of any other area within the party.
LEADERSHIP AND THEIR PARTY’S CULTURE
Party or organization culture is usually created through a vision by an individual who has a vision, goals, beliefs, and assumptions about how things should be (Schein, 2004). Such beliefs are imposed on select individuals based on their similarity of their thoughts and values. This does not automatically imply that a party culture has formed. What it does is produce compliance in the followers to do what the leader asks of them (Schein, 1991). If the resulting behavior leads to success—in other words, the group accomplishes its task and the members feel good about their relationships to each other—the founder’s beliefs and values will be reinforced come to be recognized as shared.
That is why each Party in The Gambia today must create a specific party culture to clearly establish standards of desirability with which to assess itself. Without leaders who know how to create and maintain effective party cultures, their party can be paralyzed by differences of opinion. According to Thompson, "The most important question a party can ask itself is not what it has accomplished in the past but whether it is fit for FUTURE action". Since even the near future is unpredictable in a time of massive global change, the up coming presidential election, parties can best prepare themselves by creating responsive party cultures, which take the place of traditional structures based on rigid standardization, and by building flexible networks of cooperation interconnecting them so that they can serve to the best interest of the citizens including those who do not support their party..
According to previous research, there are seven main traits that capture the essence of a party’s culture (O’Reilly and Caldwell, 1991). (1) Innovation and risk taking is the degree to which citizens are encouraged to be innovative and take risks. (2) Another trait is attention to detail, which is the degree to which citizens are expected to exhibit precision, analysis, and attention to detail. (3) Outcome orientation is the degree to which leadership focuses on results or outcomes rather than on the techniques and processes used to achieve such outcomes. (4) People orientation is the degree to which leadership decisions take consideration the effect of outcomes on people within the party. (5) Team orientation is the degree to which work activities are organized around teams rather than individuals. (6) Aggressiveness refers to the degree to which people are aggressive and competitive rather than easygoing. (7) Stability is the degree to which party activities emphasize maintaining the status quo in contrast to growth.
Resistance to Change
Change resistance is one of the most prevalent characteristics in a party. It can have both a positive and negative effect. On the positive end, it can evoke functional conflict. For instance, resistance to a change in any development can stimulate a healthy debate over the validity of the idea, leading to a better decision. However, there is a downside to change resistance. The fact that individuals and parties are set in their own ways of conducting business, they are less willing to change their mindset along with the changing times. This resistance is a hindrance to both adaptation and progress (Namenwirth and Weber, 1987).
Resistance to change can come from both individuals and party. From an individual perspective, change resistance can come from these main sources: habit, security, economic factors, fear of the unknown, and selective information processing. First, individual resistance can stem from habits, which is how people deal with life’s complexities. People rely on habits or programmed responses. But when confronted with change, this tendency to respond in our accustomed ways becomes a source of resistance. Second, in terms of security, people with a high need for it are likely to resist change because it threatens their feelings of safety. Third, changes in job tasks or established work routines can arouse economic fears if people are concerned that they won’t be able to perform the new tasks or routines to their previous standards, especially when pay is closely tied to productivity (Robbins, 2005). Fourth, changes substitute ambiguity and uncertainty for the known. Finally, individuals are guilty of selectively processing information in order to keep their perceptions intact. They hear what they want to hear and they ignore information that challenges the world they have created.
Parties are also facilitators of change resistance. There are several sources from this perspective. First, structural inertia is a source of resistance. Parties have built-in mechanisms—such as their selection processes and formalized regulations—to produce stability. When a party or country is faced with change, this structural inertia acts as a counterbalance to sustain stability (Robbins, 2005). Second, limited focus of change can promote resistance. Parties are made up of a number of interdependent subsystems. One cannot be changed without affecting the others. Thus, limited changes in subsystems tend to be nullified by the larger system. Third, group inertia can be a problem in parties. Even if individuals want to change their behavior, group norms may act as a constraint. Fourth, threats to expertise—which are changes in party pattern that may threaten the expertise of specialized groups—may cause change resistance. Fifth, any distribution of decision-making authority can threaten long-established power relationships within the party. Finally, groups in the party that control sizable resources often see change as a threat. They tend to be satisfied with the way things are.
Overcoming Resistance to Change
Though there are various ways that individuals can exhibit change resistance, leaders find it easiest to deal with it when citizens overtly voice their opinions, go on strike, or engage in work slowdown. The difficulty in managing change resistance is when it is implicit and subtle. Loss of loyalty to the party, loss of motivation to attend party rallies, and increased absenteeism are more difficult to identify. Such deferred actions make it tough for leaders to find the source of resistance and provide a remedy for it.
According to O’Rellly and Caldwell (1991), there are six tactics that can be used by change agents in dealing with change resistance.
Education and Communication-through communication with employees, change agents can help them see the logic of a change. This strategy assumes that the source of resistance lies in misinformation or poor communication. In other words, if employees were to get all the facts and get any misunderstandings cleared up, resistance will diminish. Other methods of communication include one-on-one sessions, memos, and reports. These tactics will work, assuming that the source of resistance is lack of communication.
Participation-It is difficult for people to resist a change decision in which they participated. Before changes are implemented, however, individuals who are opposed can be brought into the decision-making process. Their involvement can reduce resistance, obtain commitment, and increase the quality of the change decision. However, the downside to using participation as a tactic to change resistance is the potential for a poor solution and time consumption.
Facilitation and Support-Change agents can offer numerous supportive efforts to reduce change resistance in parties. When citizens’ fear and anxiety are high, the government must practice reconciliation to facilitate adjustment in a positive democratic process. The downside to this tactic is that, as with the others, it is time consuming, expensive, and worse, there are no guarantees for success.
Negotiation-is another way for the change agent to deal with potential resistance to change, which can be done through the exchange of something of value for a lessening of the resistance. For example, if the resistance is centered in one or more power individuals, then a specific reward package can be negotiated that will meet their needs. Using negotiation as a tactic may be necessary to overcome resistance when it comes from a powerful source (Morgan, 1986). However, there are risks when using negotiation as a tactic. There is the risk that once a change agent negotiates with one party or individual to avoid resistance, he or she becomes open to blackmail by other powerful individuals.
Manipulation and Cooptation-Manipulation refers to covert influence attempts. Twisting facts to make them appear more attractive, withholding undesirable information, and creating false rumors to get citizens to accept a change are examples of manipulation. Cooptation is a form of both manipulation and participation. It seeks to “buy off” the leaders of a resistance group by giving them a key role in the change decision. The leaders’ advice is sought not seek a better decision, but to get their endorsement. Both of these tactics are relatively inexpensive and simple ways to gain the support of their adversaries. However, such attempts can backfire if the intended targets become aware that they are being used (Morgan, 1986).
Coercion-the application of direct threats or force on the resisters. Examples of coercion include threats of transfer, loss of promotions, negative performance evaluations, and a poor letter of recommendation.
EVALUATION OF GREAT LEADERS CURRENT LEADERSHIP PRACTICES
Feedback from others will show that each party leader needs to work harder to stay up-to-date and to seek challenging assignments. All, party leaders need to be continuously aware of what is going on so that they can make strategic plans with others in order to implement changes, which can solve problems, nurture democratic process and eradicate corruption. The party leaders need to be more organized in a continuous process to create a vibrant vision of the future for the Republic of The Gambia. Furthermore, they need to more clearly communicate their vision of a more positive Gambia so people can take ownership of it to put it into positive practice. They need to conduct more out-reach in the country especially those who do not support their political party, and community groups to empower people to feel a sense of identity, take ownership of and participate as a team in the nation’s vision for developing a sustainable democratic Gambia that is free of corruption, dictatorship control and manipulation to the poor citizens in the country.. Above all, the party leaders need to help people feel valued respected and that they must know that their knowledge, skills, commitment and contribution can benefit The Gambia as a nation. Thus the party leaders must eagerly want to continue to allow citizens to take up responsibility to make their own decisions and to show them that they can be trusted in their judgment and ability to apply their skills and knowledge to create an effective democratic Gambia for the good of all. They must willingly continue to supply them with constructive feedback so that they can identify their strengths and weaknesses in order to develop strategies to help them improve for the benefit of their own, as well as their country's future. Nurturing Evaluation by others shows that all humans need to work on improving how they organize projects into manageable steps and how they communicate their beliefs of how their party/country should be run and governed in today’s global environment.
Operational zing projects in their party will allow followers to embark on small tasks to facilitate success which will produce the confidence and faith in their ability to solve larger problems in the country. If they tackle smaller issues successfully, then they will win more people to their cause and in that way, each party can capitalize and build on their success. The most important and urgent question each party should ask is: What have our party achieved since creation in The Gambia that has and will continue to serve to the best interests of all citizens even those who do not support our party? Thus, the party leaders need to continue to be aware to not neglect the need to make sure others are recognized for their contributions; that they articulate those contributions and take time to celebrate them. They must need to continue to learn from others so they can learn how to more successfully implement actions to bring about their vision into reality in The Gambia.
By and large, their action plan must include collecting new ideas and informing people/citizens through their research, testing their assumptions by trying to "fix something broken" in the Gambia and developing and trying out a stump speech at conferences/rallies they attend. As they expand their ability as a leader, they will try to incorporate five exemplary leadership practices into their actions and behavior. They will energetically Challenge the Process by taking risks and experimenting with new ways of doing things in The Gambia. They will Inspire a Shared Vision of how they see the future of the Gambia by communicating it clearly to all the citizens. They will Enable Others to Act by fostering collaboration among people and avoid categorizing those who do not support their party as enemies, tribalism, dictators or name calling. They will Model the Way by setting realistic goals in order to become successful party as well as the Gambia as a nation.
In conclusion, all party leaders must Encourage the Heart of the citizens by acknowledging the contributions of others with genuine appreciation even though it is not from their political party or the party they support. It is important and urgent in this coming presidential election for all party leaders to understand that when they failed to encourage the heart of the citizens, they will alienate their party from the citizens in The Gambia. They must work positively to win the heart of all citizens. This year’s presidential election will serve as a challenge to all Gambians in and out of the Gambia to decide on the type of Gambia that will be created in the next five years. The choice rests in the citizens of The Republic of the Gambia. What kind of Gambia do you want to see in the next five years?
References
Namenwirth, J.Z. and Robert Philip Weber, Dynamics of Culture, Unwin Hyman Publishing, (June 1, 1987), pp. 215-7.
Schein, Edgar H. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 2004, John Wiley and Sons, Inc. San Francisco, pp.18-25.
Grensing-Pophal, Lin. “Hiring to fit your corporate culture,” HRMagazine, Alexandria: August 1999, Vol. 44, Issue 8, pg. 50-55.
Robbins, Stephen P. Organizational Behavior, 11th ed. 2005, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, pp. 450-455.
O’Reilly III, C.A. and D.E. Caldwell, “People and Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-Party Fit,” Academy of Management Journal, September 1991, Vol. 34, Issue 3, pp. 487-516.
Becker, H.S. “Culture: A Sociological View,” Yale Review, Summer 1982, Volume 75, Issue 3, pp. 513-27.
Morgan, G. Images of Party (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1986), pp. 105-110.
E.H. Schein, “What is Culture?” in P.J. Frost et al., Reframing Organizational Culture (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991).
Schein, E.H. 1999. The Corporate Culture Survival Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp. 89-92.
Schein, E.H. 1996. Culture: The missing concept in party studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), pp. 229-239
Schein, E.H. 1985. Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, p.168.
Quick, J.C. (1992), “Crafting an Organizational culture: Herb’s hand at Southwest Airlines,” Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 21, Issue 2, pp. 45-57.
Trice, H.M. and Beyer, J.M. (1993), The Cultures of Work Organizations, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
Hennessey, J.T. (1998), "Reinventing government: does leadership make the difference?" Public Administration Review, Vol. 58 No. 6, pp. 522-32.
Lok, P. and Crawford, J. (1999), "The relationship between commitment and organizational culture, subculture, leadership style and job satisfaction in organizational change and development," Leadership & Party Development Journal, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 365-73.
Pillai, R. and Meindl, J.R. (1998), "A meso-level examination of the relationship of organic structure, collectivism, and crisis to charismatic leadership," Journal of Management, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 643-72.
Brooks, I. (1996), "Leadership of a cultural change process," Leadership & Party Development Journal, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 31-7.
Allen, R. and Thatcher, J. (1995), "Achieving cultural change: a practical case study", Leadership & Party Development Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 16-23.
Wood, J. (1999), "Establishing internal communication channels that work," Journal of Higher Education Policy & Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 135-50.
Rost, J.C. (1991), Leadership for the Twenty-first Century, Praeger, New York, NY,
p. 102.
Block, Lory (2003), “The Leadership-Culture Connection: An Exploratory Investigation,” Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, Bradford: Volume 24, Issue 5/6, pp. 318-335.
References
Beyer, Janice M., Trice, Harrision M., “Cultural Leadership In Organizations”, Organizational Science, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1991.
Brown, Andrew (1992). Organizational Culture: The Key to Effective Leadership and Organizational Development. Leadership and Party Journal, Vol. 13(2), pp 3-6.
Brown, Tom (1996). Can You Create ‘Predictable Miracles’? Management Review.
Conger, Jay A. (1991). Inspiring Others: The Language of Leadership. Academy of Management Executive,Vol. 5(No. 1),31-45.
Corey, Marianne, Corey, Gerald. Groups: Process and Practice, Brooks/Cole Publishers, Pacific Grove, CA, 1992.
Demers, Russ-Forrer, Stephen E.-et al, (1996). Commitment to Change. Training & Development, 08-01-96, pp 22.
Greene, Robert J. (1995). Culturally Compatible Human Resource Strategies. Human Resources Magazine,Vol.40, pp 115(7).
Hackman, J. Richard. Groups That Work. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1990.
Kouzes, James M.; Posner, Barry Z., The Leadership Challenge, Jossey-Bass,1987
Nixon, Bruce (1992). Developing a New Culture for Organizations in the 90s.
Management Education and Development,Vol.23(1),33-45.
Schein, Edgar H., Organizational Culture and Leadership, Second Edition,
Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA, 1992.
Schneider, Benjamin; Brief, Arthur P.; Guzzo, Richard A. (1996). Creating a Climate and Culture for Sustainable Organizational Change. Organizational Dynamics, pp 6(14).
Senge, Peter M., “The Leader’s New Work: Building Learning Organizations”,
Sloan Management Review, 1990
Smith, Peter B.; Zhong Ming (1996). The Manager as Mediator of Alternative Meanings. Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 27, 03-01-96, pp 115(23).
Trice, Harrison M., Beyer, Janice M., The Cultures of Work Organizations, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1993.
Wiener, Yoash (1988). Forms of Value Systems: A Focus on Organizational Effectiveness and Cultural Change and Maintenance
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY IN ORGANIZATIONAL LIFE
By
Michael Ba Banutu-Gomez, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Rowan University
William G. Rohrer College of Business
Department of Management & MIS
2001 Mullica Hill Road
Glassboro, New Jersey 08028-1701
Tel. 856-256-5425
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY IN ORGANIZATIONAL LIFE
Our Assumptions
Through our assumptions and choice of method, we create the world we later discover (what we see is what we get). Our assumptions and choice of method are selected from among choices predetermined by the particular CULTURE we live in.
Thus, when we look (and think we discover something), we see mostly what our culture tells us is OUT THERE. For example, in the 1800s, Europeans were very proud of themselves for bringing the "light" of European civilization and Christianity to the "DARK CONTINENT", Africa. The only darkness that existed was in their cultural assumptions about Africa. Their minds were clouded by many inaccurate beliefs about Africans and Africa that were shrouded in ignorance. These beliefs were part of a myth of racial superiority, which formed part of the foundation of European culture. The "darkness" Europeans experienced when they looked at Africa was a reflection of this false belief at the center of their cultural myth about their own identity as a people. The darkness came from a taboo. Their cultural myth about their superiority hid a desire to obliterate African culture and steal Africa's natural wealth. Europeans could not see this desire at the center of their culture's myth of superiority because it was taboo. What they could see was darkness; an emptiness that contained only a mystery. When they focused their attention on Africa, the presence of this taboo hung like an impenetrable curtain, hiding a more knowledgeable image of the history and culture of Africans from them.
Darkness and Taboo
The darkness they experienced was a projection of a taboo existing in their minds, created by a cultural myth, which hid from them their greed. Their guilt stemming from this and fears of being exposed and punished by Man and God for this greed was tidily wrapped in an unseen and thus, inaccessible taboo. Therefore, the presence of this hidden guilt produced an emptiness; a mystery that they described as darkness, when Europeans looked at Africans that came between them. Europeans assumed that this darkness was a quality inherent in African culture and for that reason, as they strove to sweep away the "darkness" that clung to Africa wherever they looked they became more and more adamant about CLEANING every remaining crumb of traditional African culture from Africa. The more embedded this hidden taboo was within them, the more frustrated Europeans became at their inability to "en-lighten" Africans. The violence perpetrated on Africans by Europeans caused by this frustration was cultural, psychological, spiritual, physical, military and economic. A real Holocaust.
Historic Struggles between Two Peoples
This is merely one example of a historic struggle between two peoples that is typical of thousands of similar conflicts, which have occurred throughout human history.
Therefore, should we not ask, "Which is more 'real', myth or facts, or, which has more power? Are not what we see as 'facts' merely the outward manifestation of a cultural myth?" Once we acknowledge that humans are social beings, we will see that culture and the myths that support them, are paramount. We will "(re-)discover" that only the manipulation of cultural forms such as paradigms, norms, ideologies and values can create "second order" social change. When scholars and intellectuals, involved in a traditionally European (what people of non-European descent term - Western) mode of thinking, speak of theory, what they are referring to, with that word is actually myth. In other words, it functions in the same way, in the same role as myth does when they discuss aspects of Non-Western (not traditionally European) thinking and culture.
How can we explain their use of one particular word when referring to Western culture and a different word when referring to non-Western culture? Perhaps we will be "enlightened" when we remember that, because we humans cannot escape into an objective, non-emotional world without becoming insane (nurturing a delusion), therefore, our words are always connotative, even ones we claim are truly de-notative.
Difference between a Theory and Myth
What is the difference between a theory and a myth? Theories are supposed created by people, who have grappled valiantly, unprotected by comfortable cultural illusions, with an uncaring and indifferent Natural force. Theory has a heroic ring to it. Now let's look at the term myth, from a Western point of view, of course…myth being an English word.
According to Western theories of culture, myths are conjured up from inspirations and revelations which arise from mysterious depths of the minds of ordinary people who desperately seek to understand the world around them but pitiably do not have access to authentic sources of valid knowledge. It seems that myth is the ignorant, weak-minded brother of theory whose "facts" are actually superstitions - beliefs. In this hypothetical war between two brothers, Theory and Myth, the bone of contention is Belief. Western intellectuals and scholars respond to the term belief by asserting that belief is necessary and even good, as long as it knows it's place. Theory, alone, should have precedence over Man, while Belief is allowed to rule domestic realms such as the Home and religion. While Belief is invited, as an honored guest, into the "House of Western Knowledge" that Theory rules, Myth is relegated to the dust of backfield wastelands. What would happen if we were to bring Myth to Theory and say, "You are from the same mother and father and were born to serve the same purpose." I believe my story about Theory, Myth and Belief can "shine a light" which illumines the residue of European prejudice that lingers at the center of Western thought, even to this day.
European Thinkers and Myth
European thinkers who believed in the myth of detached discovery and objective verification of social and natural laws because their culture sanctioned the control of humans and nature created Western thought. They believed in this myth because it told them they could predict the behavior of humans and nature. Throughout human history, people have sought methods of prediction. The perceived ability to predict has always meant power. Power to attract more status and material wealth. The perceived ability to predict and the power to control are something people hunger for. The results of a well-known psychological study done with depressed and non-depressed college students seems to indicate that non-depressed people consistently over-estimate the amount of control they actually have over the situations they find themselves in. What we label a depressed person is someone who is unable to take action to perform their daily routines as well as, reach out in confident exploration of their world. They have lost their ability to successfully maintain their illusion of control. They no longer believe they can predict or control their life. They have dropped their cultural clothing, including a warm overcoat of myth and stand shivering and desolate in the terrifying winds of chaos, confusion and change that swirl around all of us all the time.
Depression and Western Cultures
Why is depression a common mental disease of Western cultures and rarely found in non-Western cultures? Is it possible that the scientific theories Westerners believe in form a myth that is incomplete? Is Western thought a religion stripped of its values - a belief system with no norms? Or is it possible that the values at the center of it are inhuman - exploitative because they are merely a rationale for the propagation of capitalism. Is it possible or even necessary for root metaphor of Western thought to transform itself? Will Western thinkers give up "fact" finding and begin to be inspired by inner visions? Will they commit themselves to the egalitarian dialog required for a consensual re-ordering of Western social conduct? Unlearning individualism and being willing to trust in the group to predict and control is not easy if you have been socialized to the myth of the supremacy of the individual that has been the guiding metaphor of modern Western culture. In the myth of the supremacy of the individual, there is no place for any knowledge of the limitedness of Man. From the point of view of a believer of this myth, how can a being more supreme than Man exist, if the ability of Man to discover, know, predict and control the universe is not limited? To believe in, rely on and pray to a god is superstition; Man's gods being figments of his imagination!
See Our Existence
Those who can see our existence, as a species, is predicated on our social-ness, know we cannot escape from being bounded by it. This is the boundary the myth of individualism negates. The taboo at its center: a secret desire to shed the norms, values and responsibilities of the group. "Am I my brother's keeper?" As Western thinkers' view of themselves, as a group, change from natural (belief in Darwin's theories of evolution) to cybernetic (Durkheim's theories of bureaucracy) to something which may be a synthesis of past Western and non-Western beliefs, the focus of their cultural paradigm shifts from natural resources (the growth of imperialism and colonialism) to technology (the industrial revolution and the rise of capitalism) to something new we are not yet aware of which may be a global culture founded on principles of socialism, or does our hope blind us? Are we being too optimistic? Perhaps we are merely exhibiting a typically human need to continually create a utopian vision of human organization so we do not lie down in discouragement, despair and depression. Could it be we are creating a new myth that allows us to predict and control, which gives us the confidence to work for our survival individually and collectively, as a species? This would be appropriate and beneficial if our old myths (theories, beliefs, cultural assumptions, and root metaphors) have caused so much destruction through war and pollution of the earth that we now threaten ourselves with extinction. Maybe it is time to re-evaluate our myths and create new ones. If we must have clothes to keep warm, we should have ones that do not poison or injure us.
Conflict in Our World and Current Western Paradigm
Perhaps the root cause of so much conflict in our world is because the current Western paradigm, which is popular in our day and age, throughout the modern world, is dualistic and dialectical in nature. By re-evaluating and modifying Western cultural myths (theories), perhaps we can help to change the prevalent social paradigms used around the world at this time. If we can transform our own paradigm then perhaps our perspective will expand. Then, perhaps we will be motivated to realign our priorities. When this occurs, maybe then we will attempt new, unheard of actions. Then, change will come - but are we willing to sacrifice our comfort, to stand naked in view of everyone in the world while we change "clothes", in order to accomplish it? It may give us comfort to begin to believe that because we are all blind men constantly seeking to understand the elephantine nature of this universe we are but one part of, there is a fundamental stability to human social order. Though it is too big for us to grasp in its entirety, we can frighten away our own fears of being too little by whistling in the dark of our blindness. And in so doing, Western thinkers, like us, can rediscover (take off the cover over) an ancient social cycle. We are only listening to a place in the rhythm when it changes from phase to another, all of its phases contained in a greater design our ancestors attempted to tell us about in their stories we have forgotten.
Enemy Within Us and Among Us
It will not be easy to do this because the enemy of this endeavor will be both within us and among us. As much as they are necessary for human survival and sanity, myths, beliefs and theories (whatever you choose to call them) have always been appropriated by those who seek to maintain power over others (what Westerners call the Status Quo). Because we need them so desperately, those who know the power of myth, belief and theory to move us embed in them subliminal taboos that constrain and direct us. Myths, beliefs and theories enable these people to acquire a giant stature in our eyes. We tremble in awe at the veracity of their proclamations, like Dorothy before the wizard of OZ. No one dares to look for the curtain covering their machinations. No one has the courage to say the emperor is wearing invisible clothes. Social change requires each one of us to accept responsibility to willingly face mortal and psychological dangers and welcome extensive personal sacrifices. We will need to find within ourselves the courage to leave the safety of our ivory towers. Gandhi did not one day find himself miraculously transformed from an ordinary lawyer into a revered world leader. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. did not wake one day and discover he had changed overnight from an ordinary Baptist Preacher into a powerful national leader. People now hung on their every word and dedicated selfless acts to their name because both of them had, many years before, offered their lives on the alter of love to a higher power, a more supreme Being than themselves.
Theories and Facts
When we say each other, "Our theories correspond to observable facts." we display our submission to the myth of cultural and racial superiority, and the myth of individualism. The time is past overdue to foster dialog about the myths and taboos we take for granted. In doing so, we need to allow spirituality to enter our dialog of regarding purpose, ethics and values. Some of the questions we may end up asking each other are, "Do we have the right to change our cultural perspective and, is dialog enough to change one's perspective - what about new experiences?" Who has the right and the responsibility to establish a new conceptual and contextual frame (cultural perspective), provide presumptions of logic (rationale), transmit a system of values, create a group-building language, and extend visions of possibility or constraint (utopia)? If we do not have the courage to do this for ourselves, collectively, a few of us will gladly do it for the rest of us. Will we continue to believe in the stories they tell us about who they are and who we are and what we should be doing with our lives here on earth?
Theory and Myth
Will theory and myth continue to be thought control in the West? Will it continue to try to prevent people from challenging their role they are expected to play in the existing order of things when the existing order of things continues to operate contrary to what they know and feel is in the best interests of the creation of a lasting peace on a self-sustaining and healthy planet? We should not expect a class system with wealth concentrated in the hands of a few to allow the myths that support it to crumble. They know well if you control belief systems, you control people's actions. The curtain with which they hide their greed from us floats before us wherever we look. Look, there it is, almost within our reach: our beloved dream of equality with liberty and justice for all. Isn't it beautiful? Does anyone notice the string attached to it leading to the monkey on our backs? Where is our pure and virginal muse, Truth? Truth is real. Who dares to say her lovely face is a mask of control and the search for Truth is a search for a method to control? Our leaders search for Truth to tell us what is real. They have the power to see her, not us. What they tell us is not myth.
Theory, Belief or Truth
Theory, myth, belief or truth is always an agent of something or someone because it has a purpose in human culture. Its purpose is to create and maintain the illusion of predictability, control, knowledge, foresight and most of all, meaning, an illusion that has the power to both quiet and manipulate people. When we are told something is wrong and must be fixed somehow, we need to ask ourselves, "What mythical whole is broken and what kind of 'fixing' is expected of me?" Do we have the courage and is it our right or our responsibility to examine the hidden taboo at the center of the assumptions at the root of this question? Do we dare confront the person who expects us to assume as they do? Can we take time to evaluate our responses and reactions to each other, or are we too busy being led by a ring in our nose? When we are expected to solve our own problems or help others solve their problems we delude ourselves into believing we are creating change when many times we are only propping up what already is. This is the hidden taboo that rests at the center of the myth of problem solving. When we focus on problems to solve, we continue to support the myth of individualism. You cannot possibly understand MY problem so let me help you with YOUR problem; we don't have a problem with each other. Isn't that what the missionary said to the native?
Consensus
Consensus does not recognize problems are either yours or mine because it teaches us that THIS IS US. I am not I and neither are you, you. There is only US (we). Are we O.K.? If not, let's do something about it! We need to talk about what we are what we might be, what we should be and what we can be, right now. When we do that something comes, something larger than us, here, the Us of long ago and soon to be comes from far away. We cannot "see" or comprehend this Being but it comes because it cares to touch us with its miracle of blessings. Problem finding and solution imposing is a paradigm which polarizes and separates us from each other. The mystery that miraculously comes is a paradigm that unifies us and beckoning to us so we can see what WE are.
|
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
Edited by - Dalton1 on 06 Sep 2006 08:02:07 |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 06 Sep 2006 : 10:20:40
|
Thanks for the hard work you enjoy doing. However a few comments on the quotes below:
"we have numerous cases of born agains. If Ganji Touray, who i interviewed once can deflect to the APRC, no one can i totally trust-even my little daughter.
be careful our intellectuals !!
Gainako's comments: In the Jamaican culture, they say "word is bond." END OF QUOTE
Politics is very dynamic but Ganji Touray's defection to APRC is news to me. However have may reservations and some points to forward on this issue. Did he stated what made him to join APRC and I believe the choice rest exclusively with him? He has been with UDP and if he is not optimistic or his confidence has been eroded with their political startegies and ideologies he could choose the party of his choice. UDP/NRP Alliance betrayed "word is bond" to result to dis-integration of STGP's STRATEGIC ALLIANCE FOR REGIME CHANGE (NADD) and if Ganji's hopes of enjoying success is shattered, don't balme him joining APRC. For we are suppose to prepare ourselves to accept the verdict of the forthcoming elections where public accountability and democracy is tested.
Finally the opinions may not absolved Ganji Touray from others to question his integrity inter alia. Other generations would join in the struggle and there is hope!
|
Edited by - kobo on 06 Sep 2006 10:22:39 |
|
|
|
Dalton1
3485 Posts |
Posted - 06 Sep 2006 : 14:00:05
|
Kobo,
Thanks for your intellectual contributions and analysis always.
I must ask you at this point, to dig the achrives and see the interview i conducted with this fellow-especially the words he uttered, and the tone of his voice.
Freedom reported it over a week now, and no one refuted it, so tells me it is true-
The same i told Galleh and Gomez in Chicago- how much can we trust our intellectuals ? We dinner with them today, and the next moment they are with the enermy. Look at the Omar Fye controversy ? Look at the Tamsir Jallow issue in uk ?Lai Conteh ? Just few.
Though Dr. Gomez honestly cleansed himself of prior attachment that he was sympathising with the APRC. some of his statements- "criticise, offer solutions and don't condemn" seems to contradict what Galleh said "say it as you see it, not as they see it."
If you understand the above points- how many more ??
And Ganji's deflection, according to uncomfirmed sources, gave a shock to OJ-though, they are avoiding the point here.
See again ! Busy days ! |
"There is no god but Allah (SWT); and Muhammad (SAW)is His last messenger." shahadah. Fear & Worship Allah (SWT) Alone! (:
|
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 06 Sep 2006 : 17:45:58
|
Don't be surprised of Ganji's defection. "United we stand divided we fall". If the opposition parties were steadfast to the alliance of "UNDER ONE UMBRELLA", hopes and brighter prospects would have been available for them. Ganji have been waiting too long and not seen any progress with UDP. Since last general elections they entangled themselves with wrong moves and political strategies at the wrong time; with boycouts, power struggles, alienation, sagregation, divide and rule policies towards this time around when all plots against Jammeh and APRC have aalready been blown apart. What do you expect if Ganji's patience ran out with UDP's wrong political moves? He may eventually be enticed with money and succumb to corruption to make ends meet for having starve too long await, in my opinion. On a similar points Mam Manik Njie of NRP has exposed or shattered them according to recent reports and joined APRC. BAD LEADERSHIPS CAN CAUSE RANKS TO BREAK AND BECAME DISORGANISED. UDP and NRP are under the commands of weak or bad Generals guilty of dis-integration of an ALL UNITED OPPOSITIONS FRONT (STGP's NADD). Thats the truth and facts for them to face the consequences of BETRAYAL OF PUBLIC CONFIDENCE AND TRAITORS TO THEIR COUNTERPART OPPOSITION PARTIES, TO SALVAGE THE NATION FROM RAMPANT CORRUPTION, DICTATORSHIP AND STATE TERRORISM.
More defections than you think with Ganji Touray under this link http://allafrica.com/stories/200609060454.html
Finally the election would have been unprecedented with a "ONE TO FIGHT"only; i.e APRC Vs NADD (AN ALLIANCE FOR REGIME CHANGE). |
Edited by - kobo on 06 Sep 2006 18:12:06 |
|
|
|
Aku_pickin
Christmas Island
162 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2006 : 03:24:41
|
The opposition should be wary of present and newcomers in their midsts, as it is my belief that the current regime planted individuals (no names to be mentioned) who were and continue to be double agents with a sole purpose of dividing and conquering the opposition.
Keep your friends close and enemies even closer. |
Justice must be served as impunity brings more repression and corruption! |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
