INTRODUCTION
There is no doubt that colonialism produced in Africa consequences far beyond the period when alien rule was terminated. Those impacts are so deep, and the consequences so eroding on the social fabric of the African society that it is now convenient to label such as colonial legacy or heritage. Colonialism may not have completely transformed African society and people but it did not exactly leave Africa the manner it met it. This Unit will discuss the problems associated with, or consequent to, colonial rule, and the political, economic and cultural consequences it created for the continent and its people.OBJECTIVES
At the end of this Unit, you are expected to:
know how colonialism created mini states in Africa and the elements of their political character
understand the reasons for the weak economies of African states and their external orientation
explain the role of colonialism in the fragmentation of African societies.
Background to the Problems and Legacies
It is only logical that before we can reasonably discuss the problems and legacies of colonialism that we settle or agree on a point of departure. It seems convenient that we commence from the period of independence, using 1960, African year of independence, as a base year. What we now call colonial legacy took the colonial powers more than a century to plant and nurture; it was only when the forces of nationalism made colonial business a more risky enterprise that colonial powers took steps to firmly root the crumbing pillars of alien rule in the consciousness of the African people.What most people now refer to as the history of colonialism is the drama of the Europeans who were eager to come to Africa but were reluctant to leave. But the real history of colonialism did not stop or terminate in 1960, or any other year, but its unbroken chain continued after wards, and have been sustained in many forms as the colonial heritage. Close to half a century after “Africa year”, there is no denying the fact that the influence of colonialism on Africa remains crippling. In the post-colonial era African leaders could not sustain the euphoria of anti-colonial nationalism, and failed to convert it into a rallying platform to build a nation out of colonially created artificial boundaries.
Why this was so can be explained from the factor of colonialism which transformed Africa from a purely traditional, to a quasi-modern societies, in which traditional authority exercised by chiefs was displaced, and replaced with charismatic, or achievement oriented legitimacy, claimed by educated nationalists; who eventually took over from the Europeans. But history has shown that charismatic legitimacy tends to emerge during period of national crisis, which is comparable to the period of African struggle for independence. However, this created a major challenge for the immediate post-colonial era due to the failure of African leaders to sustain the nationalist euphoria and transform it into an adhesive or sinew to forge a new national identity.
The colonial powers were deliberately hesitant, partial and reluctant to prepare African colonies because of the need to preserve and safeguard their interest. What the skewed negotiation for independence between the Africans and the Europeans produced was a post-colonial state, with over developed bureaucracy relative to other political institutions. This distorted state structure, gave birth to new brands of coercive organs like the police and military which though served colonialism so well, but was not suitable for Africa (Smith 2003).
Political Legacy
When the former colonies emerged as independent states, they found themselves composed of varieties of tribes, social structures and cultures that were emotionally distant from one another. By extension post-colonial states were weak political entities, invested with political independence but lacked the muscles to assert their sovereignty.
Why this was so can be explained from the factor of colonialism which transformed Africa from a purely traditional, to a quasi-modern societies, in which traditional authority exercised by chiefs was displaced, and replaced with charismatic, or achievement oriented legitimacy, claimed by educated nationalists; who eventually took over from the Europeans. But history has shown that charismatic legitimacy tends to emerge during period of national crisis, which is comparable to the period of African struggle for independence. However, this created a major challenge for the immediate post-colonial era due to the failure of African leaders to sustain the nationalist euphoria and transform it into an adhesive or sinew to forge a new national identity.
The colonial powers were deliberately hesitant, partial and reluctant to prepare African colonies because of the need to preserve and safeguard their interest. What the skewed negotiation for independence between the Africans and the Europeans produced was a post-colonial state, with over developed bureaucracy relative to other political institutions. This distorted state structure, gave birth to new brands of coercive organs like the police and military which though served colonialism so well, but was not suitable for Africa (Smith 2003).
Political Legacy
When the former colonies emerged as independent states, they found themselves composed of varieties of tribes, social structures and cultures that were emotionally distant from one another. By extension post-colonial states were weak political entities, invested with political independence but lacked the muscles to assert their sovereignty.
These states were new to independence and power, but were anxious to prove the legitimacy of their national interests. Forging these diverse people into a single nation was not easy because it required more than geographic proximity. The citizens of these states were naturally oriented almost entirely towards their sub-national groups and were loosely identified with their new country or its government. More often than not, an African country becomes an independent state without a nation to provide a foundation. Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, has within its borders at least ten major ethnic groups, among which the pull of centrifugal forces led to a civil war in the 60s, and are still potent today (Baradat 2000).
This failure of groups within states in Africa to pull together is also due to the fragmenting impact of colonialism. Berman (1984) noted that the policy of “divide and rule” “obstructed the development of alignments on a national scale by encouraging identification with ethnicity and locality. He argues that this factor persisted into the post-colonial period and became a major source of “destabilizing political conflict”. Also, African states have grafted the British parliamentary and the American inspired presidential systems into their political structures, but it has not produced comparable success. This reason for the failures is that Africa has uncritically embraced what is foreign irrespective of whether it is suitable for African political climate.
This has resulted in contemporary African economy, according to Aluko into “an inconsistent combination of circumstances” of African states not producing what they consume and not consuming what they produce. Cash crop-based, mono-cultural economies, foreign orientation and dependence and fluctuations as well as vulnerabilities constitute the essence of national economies. The loss of control of production to foreigners, the external orientation of the economy and the manipulations of the international economic system has contributed to the destruction of Africa’s pre-colonial self-reliance.
In pursuit of its economic interest colonialism fused political and economic relationship into one. In his comparative studies of African colonies, Berman (1934) observed that colonialism established the state as the source of economic development, which was later transformed by African leaders into arena for managing and manipulating political (class) conflict.
This failure of groups within states in Africa to pull together is also due to the fragmenting impact of colonialism. Berman (1984) noted that the policy of “divide and rule” “obstructed the development of alignments on a national scale by encouraging identification with ethnicity and locality. He argues that this factor persisted into the post-colonial period and became a major source of “destabilizing political conflict”. Also, African states have grafted the British parliamentary and the American inspired presidential systems into their political structures, but it has not produced comparable success. This reason for the failures is that Africa has uncritically embraced what is foreign irrespective of whether it is suitable for African political climate.
Economic Legacy
Since we have largely identified colonialism with the economic interests of the Europeans, it is therefore not a surprise that its impact is more visible here. Colonialism created a dual economy in Africa, two economic systems co-existed within the society, but one was disarticulated, or not connected with the other: the village subsistence economy which served local needs, and the modern economy which fed the needs of international commerce (Onimode 1981:96).This has resulted in contemporary African economy, according to Aluko into “an inconsistent combination of circumstances” of African states not producing what they consume and not consuming what they produce. Cash crop-based, mono-cultural economies, foreign orientation and dependence and fluctuations as well as vulnerabilities constitute the essence of national economies. The loss of control of production to foreigners, the external orientation of the economy and the manipulations of the international economic system has contributed to the destruction of Africa’s pre-colonial self-reliance.
In pursuit of its economic interest colonialism fused political and economic relationship into one. In his comparative studies of African colonies, Berman (1934) observed that colonialism established the state as the source of economic development, which was later transformed by African leaders into arena for managing and manipulating political (class) conflict.
This view is close to the idea of a state as a parasite that extracts resources from society not for purposes of social reproduction, but to sustain the political elite. The mercantilist ethic inherent in colonialism also encouraged the introduction of commercial, together with a money economy. Western trade brought with it the profit motive, which is the basic goal of the capitalist system, encouraged the idea of competition, which fostered individualism, but destroyed the classless nature of African society. Among the Ibos in Nigeria and Creoles in Sierra Leone, African merchant elite emerged and this transformation led to a new commercial practice distinct from what existed in the traditional African societies.
Colonialism also introduced a modern system of taxation. Unlike in the past when traditional rulers irregularly merely collected tributes, taxation under colonial rule was standardized, and based on known assessment criteria. Though this policy was largely successful, it was violently resisted in the famous 1929 Aba riots of Eastern Nigeria and the 1854 hut tax riots in Sierra Leone (Jordan 1978:54). The failure of tax policy in Africa, even in the post-colonial era, is due to the inability of many citizens to identify with state, and the definition of their relationship with government in terms of what they receive from, rather than what they contribute to it.
Colonialism also introduced a modern system of taxation. Unlike in the past when traditional rulers irregularly merely collected tributes, taxation under colonial rule was standardized, and based on known assessment criteria. Though this policy was largely successful, it was violently resisted in the famous 1929 Aba riots of Eastern Nigeria and the 1854 hut tax riots in Sierra Leone (Jordan 1978:54). The failure of tax policy in Africa, even in the post-colonial era, is due to the inability of many citizens to identify with state, and the definition of their relationship with government in terms of what they receive from, rather than what they contribute to it.
Peter Ekeh (1975) explained that colonialism has created two separate publics in political life in Africa: (a) amoral civil public from which one expects benefits but which is not important in the definition of duties; and (b) amoral primordial public, defined in terms of one’s ethnic groups, to which relationships are phrased in terms of duty. What has worsened economic woes in Africa today is that most citizens extract resources from the state to serve the needs of their primordial groups; a carry over of colonial ethos.
Social Plugin