I journeyed to my homeland, to my Africa, to my Nigeria, the country of my birth, recently. I spent good seven weeks and enjoyed every minute of it, almost every minute. It was ecstatic, so festive, so exciting, so rapturous, so. . . so wonderful, very soothing, like a balm on a fatigued joint. I promise to tell you all about it and the reason why we think we should make sojourns regularly until we decide to resettle.

This Issue is about the Africa Solidarity Council, Inc.=s argument that government and public service (politics and civics) should form the bedrock of the new Pan-African movement for the ttainment of the two elusive goals of the Pan-African movement of the past: achievement of the social modernization and political unification on a continental scale.

All governments must inter-vene in their economies, as in their politics, to shape people=s appetite, as in their politics, and create both social and political infra-structures for economic development. All govern-ments must evolve institu-tions of culture (social, financial, psychological, production, consumption, educational, legal, techno-logical, and political) that seek an efficient use of its material, human, intellectual and natural resources and promote a habit in its people that constantly seeks to improve and sustain the efficiency of use of all of its resources for the benefit and enjoy-ment of all of its people. -

Christian C. Nwachukwu

-excerpted from my ABD seminar presented to the Graduate Faculty and students at Howard University=s Department of Economics in 1994.

Nation-building business has always been a bloody act. For instance, feudal lords would be forced to give up their lands and regional autonomy because kings wanted to rule over larger areas. England had to fight France for hundred years (the Hundred Years= War - 1337-1453) just to free herself from France. The rise and fall of the West African Empires, such as the Ghana, Mali, and Songhai Empires are other illustrations of the bloody act ever present in nation-building. After wars nation-states are supposed to be created. In Africa, south of the Sahara, we seem to be blessed. It is possible to build our nation-states without having to resort to wars. But creating a nation-state is one thing, how to make the people who live in it believe in it is quite another. As Massimo d=Azeglio pointed out when the nation-state of Italy was created in 1861: AWe have made Italy, now we have to make Italians.@ Thus, the making of a nation-state becomes a two-pronged phenomenon, each prong is pursued by people (leaders) and these leaders (nationalists ) believe in the nation-state Deductively, therefore, we conclude that nationalist leaders are the creators of nation-states. But how do we make the rest of the people of this new nation-state?

In 1791 Toussaint L=Ouverture (a leader) led an insurrection of black slaves that gave birth to the independent republic of Haiti in 1804. It can be argued that it was his disdain of his treatment as a slave and not his desire to build a nation that became the catalyst for the insurrection. If it were not, then he failed to make Haitians because the Anew@ Haiti still followed in the manner of those who had colonized them, following in the master=s traditional style with guarded borders, flags, and national anthems. We will submit that this is neither patriotism nor nationalism. We are disappointed that nothing original was introduced in the administration of the new nation-state.

Creating nation-states is about politics. The making of the people is about economics. When national economies are regulated by the state, people=s sense of economic security will be attached with their sense of geographic place. This blend will capture the hearts and minds of men and women, those of the children will, as a matter of course, follow those of the adults, their parents.

Nationalism (belief in the nation) always provides something for people to believe in, to belong to. It is easy to manipulate and for people in power (rulers, leaders), it suits them just fine for it makes their task a lot easier. This is not because people are manipulated. It is a simple rational outcome like people being loyal to ethnic communities not because they were born into them, Abut because such foci of loyalty promise to offer something deemed meaningful, valuable or useful.@ This must be the case because when the promises or expectations fail to materialize people will orient Athemselves to new or old foci for social allegiance.@ In nation-building, as in economic development, the central problem for Africa is how to evolve a culture(social, financial, psychological, production, consumption, etc.) that seeks and promotes an efficient use of its material, human, and intellectual resources and sustain the habit of constantly seeking to improve the efficiency of use. Nation-building, as well as economic development, should focus on how to transform a mental structure that is averse to itself to become a culture that seeks and promotes an efficient use of its material, human, intellectual, and natural resources. Judging from the actions and behaviors of the individuals from sub-Saharan Africa, one would agree that these individuals act in a manner suggestive of a desire for an immediate aggrand-izement, the desire to live in a mansion but unwilling or unprepared to mix the cement and sand for its construction. Therefore, by making people accept a little bit of irrationality, using the apparati of state as confined in the hands of the officers of state (government agents, [agent, as in instrument for change and not as in provocateur]) and by inculcating Asuitable@ values, we will build a base that will foment conducive nvironment for an attractive nation as well as make feasible the realization of a long term economic development objective. Such will be a product of deliberate government actions (e.g., enlightening messages a.k.a. propaganda) and institutional framework and policies.

For a traveler (traveling from a familiar territory to an unfamiliar one), a map becomes an essential instrument to have. A map will guide you on your trips, guide ships and sailors to reach their destinations safely. Similarly, in nation-building, a map (similar to an >architectural drawing=) is essential and will guide the nationalists as they embark upon their project of nation-building. We posit that nation-building is the primary business of nationalists. Non-nationalists do not possess the initiative, the drive, the commitment, and the courage essential for this task but they can make excellent citizens if they are well-schooled in the art of good citizenship.

But what is a map? How is it defined? For most people, the definition of a map is couched in its purpose (Aa thing that shows me how to get from here to there@) rather than in its reality. Let us examine three characteristics of a map. First, a map is a symbolic representation of geographical and physical features. For instance, major roads are represented with colors such as red. Water is represented with color blue. Etc. Second, a map represents those important physical features for which the map is made. For instance, a road map will show you a lake and the roads that lead up to it. A navigational map will show the different currents, depths, and sand bars of the same lake. A nationalist map for nation-building will show you systems - legal, educational, political, social, cultural, etc. Third, a map abstracts from reality and in so doing it simplifies reality. This means that not every physical feature is captured on a map. The important thing is for the map to contain the important features for which it is made. The nationalist map, for instance, abstracts from its own reality as well, the culture of the people. Keep in mind that the sailor will be lost at sea if he uses a road map. The driver will be lost on the road if she uses a navigational map. Needless to say, the nationalist engaged in nation-building will be so lost and confused if he uses the nationalist map of other people=s culture. I am sure we all will agree that all will be confused if they started on their respective tasks without a map.

Let us consider these concepts: government, politics, system, legitimacy, and power; and to help us understand these concepts, some questions need to be asked as well: what is the role of government in nation-building, what is a political system, what is legitimacy (who creates it and who gives it?), what is power, (who exercises power)? These concepts and questions are not exhaustive, mind you, just forming the premise for the argument we wish to make and the conclusion we wish to draw.

Broadly speaking, government, is the mechanism (the process) for setting up rules of behaviour and for enforcing these rules to realize group interests and protect individual rights. Obviously, this definition is too broad, even for our purposes here. This definition of government will apply to such institutions as the family, labor unions, businesses, churches, and even social clubs. Needless to say that club rules and regulations are not what we have in mind when we speak of Athe government.@ The formal government (public govern-ment), may be defined in the words of Marian D. Irish and James W. Prothro: AGovernment consists of the structures and processes through which rules or policies are authoritatively determined for society as a whole.@ The rules may be geared toward realizing one goal or the other or even pursuing contradicting goals such as making war and making peace. Whatever the goals or how contradictory they may be, public government differs from private government in that it can rely on physical compulsion which means that its rules are authoritatively prescribed. The decisions are not suggestive or advisory in nature; force or the threat of force is behind them, and certain feelings that they ought to be obeyed. Take the decision by government that no one should run a red light; if you disobey this decision, you probably still feel you should obey it. The fact that if you are caught, you feel you need to offer excuses to justify your running a red light is an indication that you normally accept the obligation to obey the decision not to run a red light. This is giving legitimacy (we will return to it momentarily). Furthermore, only the policies of the public government apply to the society as a whole. For example, if one loses faith in one=s church, even the power of excommunication no longer serves as punishment, but if one loses faith in one=s government, the power to put one in jail remains real and potent. Obviously, the role of the public government in nation-building is in its definition. Politics may be defined as the Apursuit and exercise of power.@ Power in this context refers to relations in which some people make policies and rules of behaviour that others are obligated to follow. Government and politics are synonymous. So we can use politics to Arefer to the acquisition or exercise of power for ends@ which the politician or the government approves of.

The concept of a system refers to a variety of units, such as the circulatory system (heart, blood vessels) or the economic system (consumers, products, producers). The major characteristic of a system is that it contains separate and distinguishable units which interact to perform certain functions. This means that if one unit of the system is removed the system can no longer perform its function. A political system has its distinguishable units (judiciary, legislative, executive, and even these may be broken down into sub-systems. For instance, justice system is a subsystem within the judiciary, etc.) that interact to perform a societal function. Thus, the chief function of a political system is decision-making. The decision is authoritative as we saw above. The decision is marked by the allocation of advantages and disadvantages. That is, some may benefit from the decision and others may lose. Lets review the decision not to run a red light. To those who never start on time and who will like to keep driving nonstop until they reach their destination, they will not like the idea that they will have to stop at a red light because their normal driving habit has been restricted. To others who start on time they will have advantages because their normal driving habits have not been affected and they will be protected from these non-stopping drivers. Political decisions are made for the society as a whole.

Legitimacy relates to the citizens= conviction that the political system is legitimate and their acceptance of an obligation to obey its decisions. Legitimacy is very essential in generating support for, and sustaining, the political system. Legitimacy is created by the decisions the political system makes and the way it makes those decisions, such as accentuating and using traditions and creating ideologies. For instance, when a political system fashions certain rituals (military or civilian) either in its dress code or ceremonies, or how elaborate and flamboyant the ceremonies, such as swearing-in ceremonies for a new head of state, and the originality involved in these fashions, that political system is helping mightily to create legitimacy. Government, through its political system, creates legitimacy and the citizenry, by their own acceptance, gives legitimacy. Note that govern-ment is a product of the culture. Culture is influenced by environment. Government can create or modify environ-ment. There is a circular flow here filled with energy and dynamism. If the political system relies on coercion alone, it is bound to fail, decline, and collapse, sooner rather than later.

Power (political, all powers) is a derivative. It derives from role performance. It is also a relationship. To have political power there must exist a relationship between someone who responds to the claims of the politically powerful with respect to the performance of some activity. Political power some-times benefits from the rituals of coercion, which makes it synonymous to government. This is in an extreme case. Ordinarily, political power should rely on influence and role performance to create its own brand of legitimacy and allow the citizenry to accept or reject. Power and authority are synonymous and can be used interchangeably.

We submit to you that it is the role of nationalists to create a government in their efforts to create the nation-state. The government, once created, and like the map, must serve (and in this case perpetuate) the purposes for which it is created. In creating this government, the nationalists will bear these in mind: (1) how to build and strengthen the national identity through an effective government; (2) how to establish a system of government which the people would accept as both authoritative and representative; (3) how to devise a political system or structure that will last forever (at least, so they will think, if such a system or structure will be devised with the mind of advancing the national interest, promoting the general welfare of the society, protecting individual rights, and protecting society from intruders or adversaries); and very importantly, (4) how to legitimize their own efforts by obtaining the consent of the people. We must be remiss if we fail to add that such a government will be devised and fashioned out of the characteristics of the people, their culture, their environment, and their mores. Not to do so will be uncivilized.

The scenario described above is the preoccupation of nationalists in the first 5-10 years following indepen-dence from colonial rule and domina-tion. African nations, particularly south of the Sahara, can still benefit. The fact of the matter is that when these African nations gained political independence their nationalists failed to build political systems with which to administer the new nation-states and thereby failed to master the art of government and governance. By employing the apparati of government of the colonialists in the administration of the new nation-states, they have ended up colonizing their own people for the continued benefit of the colonialists. We can still begin now, only if we have courage. The erstwhile nationalists had the courage to fight for independence from colonial domination.

Contemporary nationalists, show thy courage! Play the game nationalists always play!! Build us some nation-states in Black Africa!!!

We all must agree that there has occurred a restructuring of rational choice amongst the people of Africa, south of the Sahara, due to their exposure to colonialism and their interaction with the colonial masters. Given this exposure and interaction, we contend that the central problem facing the contemporary nationalists in the task of nation-building (as in economic develop-ment) is how to evolve a culture (social, financial, psycho-logical, production, consumption, political, legal) that seeks and promotes an efficient use of its material, human, and intellectual resources and sustain the habit of constantly seeking to improve the efficiency of use. So, before bearing in mind the four elements described above in their creation of a govern-ment, the nationalists from Black Africa will first worry about how to transform a mental structure that is averse to itself to becoming a culture that seeks and promotes an efficient use of its material, human, intellectual, and natural resources for the benefit of the peope. This is why nation-building in Black Africa today appears difficult but is doable, only if we have patience. The nationalists and the people must be patient and allow themselves time - ample time. It is like teaching one the use of one=s left hand in old age. Difficult but doable. Both the teacher and the taught must be patient and tolerant. At the end both will smile and rejoice for a job well-done. If not now, fine. Posterity will do so for us.

Judging from the actions and behaviors of the individuals from sub-Saharan Africa, one would agree that these individuals act in a manner suggestive of a desire for immediate aggrandizement, the desire to live in a mansion, so to speak, but unwilling or unprepared to mix the sand and cement necessary for its construction. Therefore, by making people accept a bit of irrationality in the way of inculcating suitable values, they will establish a culture that will foment a conducive environment for an attractive political system. Therefore, it must be the function of government in Black Africa to transform the present borrowed political structure that diverts people=s energies and resources from nation-building and economic activity, that creates uncertainty, anxiety, and political tension, and transform it into a congenial structure that exhumes vigor and patriotism in the people. Such a structure is a political system legitimized by the people because it is their own. If it takes 100 years for us to finally develop one, fine, but lets have something that is original to Africa, that responds to her unique cultural, social and economic sensibilities. Government, nay, nationalist government only, can play this role.

Organisation of African Unity

African leaders met in Libya

recently where they decided to set up an African Union and establish the parliament by the year 2000. The Africa Solidarity Council, Inc. hails this idea but recommends a slower approach. Lets discover why an African Union failed in the past and try to fix it before proceeding. We oppose any rushed effort that may lead to failure of this long over-due phenomenon.

More next Issue.

The Community Workshop planned for September is being postponed for logistical reasons. A new date will be announced soon.

The Africa Solidarity Council, Inc.

P.O. Box 77352

Washington, D.C. 20013

Back to Newsletters Page