|
A rejoinder: The Re-emergence of the Americo-liberian Hegemony
Sep 30, 2007
Sekou Seasay
The asymmetrical nature and convexity of the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf’s government towards a certain group, a “a rather narrow and selective pool”, using the words of Theodore T. Hodge or Americo-Liberians, as brother Varfley A. Dolleh puts it, seems, in all fairness, to be accepted, ab initio, by both individuals.
Dolleh made a positive charge. The charge is that the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf government is skewed towards Americo-Liberians. He provided some evidence to this effect. Given our cumulative history, he made a clarion call for the natives to unite against such practices.
Theodore’s response, in substance, is that one cannot blame Americo-Liberians alone for the ills of Liberia. That the call made is unconvincing given the nation’s experience under the PRC and the intra indigene quagmire during the civil war.
I must say that to charge that an Americo-Liberian hegemony is responsible for our problems, and that a similar hegemony is on the rise again, is not to say that Americo-Liberians, en mass, are responsible for the same problems. For it is reasonable, in the least, to accept that there were some Americo-Liberians who benefited not, nor they did support the dysfunctional and corrupt regimes of the past, whose activities are responsible for much of the socio-economic contradictions that serve as the catalyst of the civil war and the state of the nation today.
I therefore endorse, very emphatically, the call made by Varfley A. Dolleh. In endorsing the call, I must make it clear that the concept of the Americo-Liberian hegemony; the predominance of a unit of the citizenry (Americo-Liberians) in decision making, and the socio-politico structure is not synonymous with Americo-Liberian. This distinction is paramount, for we do not want to end up with the situation that merely transforms the oppressed and victimized into the transgressors.
You see, there is an abundance of views about why we went to war. In all the readings I have come across, there is a consensus of views that the war was occasioned by the dissatisfaction of the people with corrupt, inept and colossally discriminatory regimes of the past, including those that inherited the state of affairs post 1980.
As a Mandingo and a person who lost lots of brothers, sisters, parents and friends, most of whom were brutally killed, maimed, and tortured, I am always asking why a war that started out to depose a particular regime, culminated into the mass murder of my people.
The war, it seems to me, is the causa sine qua non of the killing of Mandingoes, but it is not the causa causans. I submitted in a an article “We need to BELONG to each other –A Rejoinder by Sekou K. Seasay, July 30, 2005” at http://limany.org/skseasay2.html that the experience of the Mandingoes in Liberia, the persecutions at various check points in the country before the war, and pillage and killings experienced during the war, can only be explained by a historical turning point. For our history admits that before the advent of Americo-Liberian regimes, the people of Pre Liberia, those who occupied the land now called Liberia before the advent of the slaves, accepted Mandingoes as kings. If we accept this, then it is elementary logic that they regarded Mandingos as indefeasible equals. If this is the case, then a latter generation of the same people could not have possibly turned the same Mandingoes into nemesis unless they were engineered to think so.
Of course, we must accept that we, the natives, are part of the current problems. I echoed this view a long time ago in another article “why did we have to go to war, http://limany.org/skseasay1.html” and see reason to repeat it here.
The point I am trying to get at is that if we accept that predominantly Americo-Liberian regimes of the past are to be blame for much of the current crisis, then a current government that resonates so much with those regimes poses serious problems. Using Hegelian dialectics, we can say that the under representation of the native in the current socio-economic and political decision making processes effectively tilt the balance of power and concentrated it in the hands of a hegemony. This will again lead to the masses being overwhelmingly unsatisfied and we may be propelled into yet another cataclysmic war of the kind already experienced.
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf came to the helm of a nation in need of dire socio-structural and political reforms. Isn’t she aware of all these issues? Is she simply turning a blind eye or is it that she just doesn’t care? My response is that Liberia’s iron lady, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, has a serious lack of judgment. I even submit that this lady lacks the character of a leader that can engender change in Liberia. Surprise!?
Well then. I will break it down for you with a little story. Something that will very much resonate with you.
Suppose you discover the whereabouts of a well sought after treasure in your town. To dig it out, however, you are likely to face stubborn and resisting townspeople. You decide to hire a notorious criminal. This criminal is not a random hooligan. He is the towns’ most wanted. In fact, he is in a penitentiary in big town, far, far away. You gave the criminal, as consideration for bringing you the treasure, your lifetime savings. You warn him that he must not under any circumstances share blood in order to obtain the treasures. He smiles, huskily.
There is one problem though, he is in a penitentiary. You call your contacts. A few days later, the criminal roams the streets free and embarks on the mission.
The criminal finally hits your town and senses a little resistance from the townspeople. He wastes not time. He murdered all that stood his way. He not only takes the treasure for himself, and pillaged the whole town. He threatens to kill you! He reneges on the contract between you and him.
You complain to a group of average reasonable men in an attempt to recover your lifetime savings paid in consideration for the treasures. They say you must have been a stooge to engage a notorious criminal in the first place. What happen to your judgment? They asked, perplexed and numbed.
Suppose a grapevine develops identifying you as the financier of the criminal under consideration 14 years later. Your story is told in every household. You are forced to admission. But the townspeople are egregiously magnanimous and spirited. You apologies and they accept your apology. In fact, they concur that as a repented sinner, you should rule over them. Amidst all the folklore and stories told to children and adults everywhere in the town, the townspeople are unanimous in one thing. They are of different cultures and ethnicities. Decisions affecting their livelihood have hitherto being outsourced to a “select pool”. This has resulted in them not being at ease with each other on the one hand and the decision makers on the other hand. They smell stinky “divide rule” type fish.
You are nonetheless surrounded with the same “select pool” two years into your pardoned leadership! The people begin to moan and groan. Some are even reminding you that not far ago into the distance past, they were so dissatisfied with the asymmetric style of leading that they heal the call of Thomas Hobbes. For he once met the townspeople and gave them a book, Leviathan, or The Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiastical and Civil (1958). The townspeople refer to this book as their holy book. It says on page 106:
“for every man looks that his companion should value him at the same rate he sets upon himself; and upon all signs of contempt or undervaluing naturally endeavors, as far as he dares…to extort a greater value from his contempters by damage and from others by example” [Emphasis added]
My call to President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
Mrs. President, you are now about 18 months or so into your leadership. You were voted into office on the back of colossal challenges. We admit these problems couldn’t be fixed in just 2 years. Our problem is that we do not see any well articulated socio-politico reform agenda. We in fact see a return to the past. We are aware of small steps you are taking on the economic front. But it is shocking that you pay no head to history. We find it shocking that about two years into your leadership, our people are still being discriminated. Their homes are occupied and they are not safe to return to their cottages and homes. We therefore ask you to take urgent action in the areas of property rights, tribal vilification and religious discrimination. We submit that if you put forward, as I think you did, that you appoint people based on merit, then the current make up of your government is an implicit insult to us, the indigenes, for it would mean that we lack competence. We will disagree with this. We say, in substance, Mrs. President, its not too late to make mends, please do.
Article by: Sekou Seasay, Certified Financial Planner, St George Bank, Sydney, Australia. The views expressed in this article are not those of St George Bank.
If you have an alternative views, please write me:manshaq@hotmail.com
|
