Coups and Corruption

31 views
Skip to first unread message

Sabella

unread,
Sep 5, 2021, 6:27:59 PM9/5/21
to USA Africa Dialogue Series

Military coups can be terrible. In almost every instance, they serve no significant purpose. But under rare conditions, they become essential. As of today, there are seven governments on the African continent that deserve to be toppled because there are no scintilla of checks and balances left…the governing process has been corrupted and weakened to the point where the judiciary and the law-making bodies seem fused into the presidency.

It is basically a one-man show in those seven countries and with a high degree of political and economic excesses. Their leaders also show signs of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and or other mental disorders. At this point, therefore, a military coup d’état is about the only solution left. And in Nigeria, many do not want to admit that they cannot fight corruption using old approaches and tools.

The courts, police, and bodies like the EFCC are corrupted and or paralyzed and are therefore profoundly ineffective. It is either Nigeria legalize corruption or employ the Chinese Method. The entire system – economic, political, social, cultural, religious, etc., – is so weakened and debased and rendered nonsensical by corruption and corrupting acts that the country is not only stagnant but also showing signs of excruciating deterioration.

Things are so bad in Nigeria that less than ten percent of the elected, selected, and appointed can say “I am clean, I am not corrupt” and be vindicated by the “courts and the gods.”

Sabella O. Abidde

Harrow, Kenneth

unread,
Sep 5, 2021, 9:44:37 PM9/5/21
to USA Africa Dialogue Series
i am not happy with any analysis that affirms that a military coup is the only solution.

first, no one could say with assurance what is necessarily the only solution to any political situation; nor can one say how a military rule in any given country will turn out.
at this point in africa's 54 states, i would say too many are ruled by a military elite. the notion that a single dictator rules is wrong: the leaders rule only with the coordination of the military, and it is increasingly the case that the wealth of a country ruled by the military winds up in the hands of the military. we don't have simple dictatorships any more, or philosopher kings dressed up in nice camouflage clothes. we have an oligarchy who takes over the reins of the economy. in egypt i read it was an enormous percentage of the economy now owned and run by the military. i am sure it is the same in many many countries. that's not simply undemocratic, its against the interests of the people. their lives are not improved, they are worsened.
ken

kenneth harrow

professor emeritus

dept of english

michigan state university

517 803-8839

har...@msu.edu

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Sabella <sab...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 6:27 PM
To: USA Africa Dialogue Series <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Coups and Corruption
 
--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/042f6649-92a7-4eeb-a85a-1d80cf950f15n%40googlegroups.com.

Oluwatoyin Adepoju

unread,
Sep 5, 2021, 9:45:11 PM9/5/21
to usaafricadialogue
Hmm

Even beyond corruption, the Nigerian President is at the centre of a terrorist coalition composed of Fulani supremacists represented by Miyetti Allah, Fulani militia, violent Fulani herdsmen and Fulani kidnappers.

Recurrent massacres, internal colonisation and displacement of populations, kidnapping for huge ransoms, individual murders, rapes and extortions, have become a staple in Nigeria as these characters roam free without challenge, openly justifying their massacres, their kidnapping dens well known but undisturbed.

That is the current Nigerian reality.

We need a coup by the masses, not a military coup.

We all need to come together to bring the country to a standtill and renegotiate the nation moving forward.

There is uncertainty everywhere, North, South, across Muslims, Christians, African religionists etc.

No region is immune. No one is free from this evil shadow Buhari has enabled through his collusion with Fulani supremacists, who, beginning from massacres in the Middle Belt,  have eventually turned on everyone.

Thanks

Toyin

--

Harrow, Kenneth

unread,
Sep 5, 2021, 10:04:45 PM9/5/21
to usaafric...@googlegroups.com
a "coup by the masses" is called a revolution. that's what sowore called for in today's zoom meeting that toyin falola set up, where moses posed the questions about revolution to him. he was vague what revolution meant, but normally it is not peaceful. and it certainly is not a simple coup d'etat, which guinea is now experiencing
ken

kenneth harrow

professor emeritus

dept of english

michigan state university

517 803-8839

har...@msu.edu

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Oluwatoyin Adepoju <ovde...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 8:56 PM
To: usaafricadialogue <USAAfric...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Coups and Corruption
 

Sabella Abidde

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 1:13:37 AM9/6/21
to USA Africa Dialogue Series

Hello Prof. Harrow,

Yes, coups and military regimes come with their own sets of unpredictability, intractability, and unreliability. We saw these in almost all the regions of the continent.


As countries on the continent transitioned to civilian rule – and with fewer coups – the hope was that we have seen the last of the coup years. But unfortunately, some of our leaders tinkered with the constitution, the courts, the national assemblies, the military and intelligence agencies, and other arms of government to enable them to stay in power for eternity. There must be exorbitant prices to pay by those who engage in such extralegal acts; otherwise, other leaders would be tempted to do the same.  


No matter how benevolent, how visionary, and how effective a president is -- past eight years or so -- he becomes a danger to the people and the country. He begins to think and act like a god. Before you know it, he begins to erase all the lines between the public and the private and sees himself as the all-knowing and the Father of the Nation.  He begins to believe that without him, his country would cease to exist or evolve.


A military coup is not “the only solution” to the decay, tenure elongation, and misery in any of the seven countries I have in mind. There are other alternatives, but none of them would be as pretty and bloodless as some coups have been. The chap in The Gambia left with millions in his pocket. The fellow in Guinea is likely to do the same.


Revolutions, by their very nature, are bloody. I do not ascribe to the notion of a silent, bloodless, or incremental revolution. Do you want a revolution? You spill innards and blood. And you will not be allowed to leave with millions in your pocket or in the purse of your wife and concubines.


In my understanding of military coups in Africa and Latin America, they have never been planned and or executed by one man or by military officers alone. Frankly, I know of no situation where civilians were not involved before, during, and after the coup.


What we have in Egypt, in terms of coups and governance is, in many ways, an anomaly and has been so since the days of Gamal Abdel Nasser where the military establishment has deeply meshed with every aspect of society.

Sabella Abidde 


To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/BL1PR12MB519117E0EC8BC6C9AC8D449BDAD29%40BL1PR12MB5191.namprd12.prod.outlook.com.


--
Professor of Political Science
Department of History and Political Science
Alabama State University
915 South Jackson Street
Montgomery, Alabama 36104
Office: G.W Trenholm Hall 203
Office: 334-604-8038 I Cell Phone: 334-538-8628

Harrow, Kenneth

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 9:19:10 AM9/6/21
to usaafric...@googlegroups.com
dear sabella
two quick small points. i agree no one rules by themselves. it is best to have rotations of power. habyarimana was regarded as a progressive figure when he took power in rwanda. after twenty years, he had had to increasingly share out the spoils of power, and the good system he initially set up became corrupted. in burundi the soldiers took the spoils of wealth. in zimbabwe the generals in the drc took the wealth of the mines, as well as in zimbabwe itself. and so it goes.
so, the second point: egypt is not at all the anomaly. it is the general rule. democratic states with just distributions of wealth are the anomaly. military rule and control over the wealth is the general rule. and it has to end. democracy should be the goal for ending it; not autocracy.

i believed in revolution when i was young. i am not opposed to it now with age, but no longer believe it is per se a solution to anything. i do believe military hegemony is the curse of modern rule in many african states, and elsewhere in the world
ken

kenneth harrow

professor emeritus

dept of english

michigan state university

517 803-8839

har...@msu.edu

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Sabella Abidde <sab...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 11:27 PM

To: USA Africa Dialogue Series <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>

Moses Ebe Ochonu

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 10:36:44 AM9/6/21
to USAAfricaDialogue
Ken, broadening the discussion out from the narrow Guinean case, are you saying that had a coup toppled Hitler, a democratically elected leader, the world would not have welcomed and celebrated the undemocratic regime change? Would we not have been eternally grateful to the coupists? And would history not have judged the coup to be a necessary and positive intervention? 

The broader point I'm making is that often you Western liberals (sorry I couldn't resist it😀), well-intentioned and motivated by a sense of justice, fairness, and egalitarianism as you may be, are too rigid and absolutist in your ideals and convictions. You tend to sometimes not see the nuances and messy grey areas in many parts of the world, which might call for an exception to the convictions and ideals you cherish, and which might make some people at a particular juncture in their history to embrace political events and options that disturb and trouble your belief in electoral democracy and its associated ideals of human and civic rights, rule of law, etc.

Sometimes it is literally a choice between survival and the facade of democracy in many African countries, with the survival side of the ledger represented by coupists and anti-"democratic" forces. Sometimes there is, for all practical purposes, no qualitative difference between the "democratically elected" but actually fraudulently selected regime and a military one that came to power through a coup.

Is man created for democracy, or is democracy created for man? In other words, if "democracy" becomes threatening to lives and livelihoods, which it has in several African countries, should we not err on the side of life and remove such a destructive "democracy"?

In any case, if we're being honest with ourselves, has democracy, in the liberal Western sense of it, not been rigged out of existence in much of Africa? Are many regimes not simply paying perfunctory homage to democracy to satisfy Western interlocutors and keep international patronage, support, and aid flowing? Many "democratic" regimes in Africa are anything but democratic, but they have successfully gamed the international system by adopting the avatar of "democracy" while circumventing its tenets.

When are Western interlocutors going to stop pretending and become a bit more realistic and pragmatic in their dealings with Africa? If Western pro-democracy and pro-rights activists and funders truly want Western style liberal democracy in Africa, then insist on it in all situations and do not let regimes get away with half-measures or dictatorships that are christened democracy. But since, all over Africa, many regimes that are far from "democratic" have been recognized and accepted as "democratic," the meaning of democracy has been diluted and commitments to it undermined. What is left is hypocrisy and mutual deception on the part of African "democratic" regimes and their Western patrons and supporters.

It is now simply a game that is being played on a vast gameboard at the expense of African peoples.


To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/BL1PR12MB51919B705A868F89CFC17310DAD29%40BL1PR12MB5191.namprd12.prod.outlook.com.

Toyin Falola

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 12:08:19 PM9/6/21
to usaafric...@googlegroups.com

Moses:

Would it be possible to frame the argument differently, from the “Western liberal” one?

Samuel Zalanga is my favorite read on this alternative framing: can we not examine the possibility of other models based on different readings of history. The Chinese model, for instance, which uses bureaucracy to deliver development?

TF

Moses Ochonu

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 1:09:37 PM9/6/21
to usaafric...@googlegroups.com
Oga,

I am definitely open to alternative and multiple framings, hence my disagreement with Ken. Certainly, the Chinese model is one. Even in Africa—precolonial and postcolonial—we have models that approximate democracy in the generic sense  as opposed to the Western liberal sense, or models that can be recalibrated to become democratic in that generic sense.

Look at the developmental dictatorship of El Sisi in Egypt. Not too many Egyptians are complaining. The Chinese built developmental state capitalism without democratizing in the Western liberal sense but they will argue with good reason that their system is no less democratic than Western ones. 

That’s the type of democratic multiplicity and pluralist framing of democracy that I am willing to debate. I am not fond of debates democracy that start out on the premise of certain ideological givens that are rooted in Western post-Enlightenment, capitalist, and (neo)liberal experiences and ideals.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 6, 2021, at 11:08 AM, Toyin Falola <toyin...@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:



Toyin Falola

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 1:12:46 PM9/6/21
to usaafric...@googlegroups.com

How can people being killed, kidnapped, and unprotected be talking about democracy? Of what use is it?

Moses Ebe Ochonu

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 1:24:58 PM9/6/21
to USAAfricaDialogue
Oga Falola,

My point exactly to Ken. Democracy discourse is an expensive distraction in many African countries because they're confronted by several existential threats, some of which, ironically, were brought about by the "democracy" and "democratization" partly orchestrated and funded from Western venues.

If I wasn't feeling so charitable today, I would even call it a first world obsession and a discourse of privilege.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/SN7PR06MB7247971AD7185D50C557C24CF8D29%40SN7PR06MB7247.namprd06.prod.outlook.com.

Harrow, Kenneth

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 2:41:48 PM9/6/21
to USAAfricaDialogue
hi moses, you end your intervention with a statement about the game played at the expense of african people. my intervention is also the same, arguing for what is best for african people, best meaning in the material sense. i am not advocating for democracy in a formal sense at all.

you've stimilated lots of thoughts, which are running through my head.
--i do not believe in democracy at all costs, that democracy is the best and only politicial system, etc.
i do have questions about democracy, but not as you framed it. if democracy got us trump, it would have served a bad cause. in the long run, would it correct the error? i doubt that populism, and populist fascism is a good result using democratic techniques. in that regard, i am in the camp of gramsci, perplexed.
--but i don't think coups resolve the issue of a bad democratic regime, at least not necessarily. mostly military coups work out for the benefit of the military elite, not for the people. you can give me a few, very few, exceptions, like maybe sankara. that is possible. rawlings? that is disputed, but maybe you could make a case. you are the historian, so answer this question for me: run through the full list of military coups, and tell me after 5-10 years whether you thought they served the interests of the people, or rather, as in the cases i cited, made things worse or turned out for the worse.

--what do we mean by democracy? i think of it along 2 lines: first, a govt that comes into power and remains in power by votes that are one man/woman one vote. you cite the myriad ways that has been subverted in african elections, and i agree 100%. i am opposed to any "formal" notions: they have to be real elections, ones where the presidents do not control the process and remove opponents from contestation, like ingabire in rwanda, for instance, or zillions of others where presidents remove opposition parties. like tanzania right this moment. or rwanda all along.
--secondly, human rights must be fundamental, always respected.
it is hard to argue that a regime will serve the interests of the people while it represses the people.

--if you are arguing that a bad democractic, or "so-called democratic" regime is worse at times than an unelected regime that came into power through a coup, that might be true, but is more likely to be the exception. why? because even a good ruler, like habyarimana, whose coup was judged good and in the interest of rwandans initially, turned over 20 years into a regime that had to pay off its various supporters with clientist corruption.

--a military coup is not a revolution, in my view. i believe a revolution is not simply a change of power, a military take-over, but an overthrowing of an existing system and replacing it by one that is based in the support of the population. i believe most revolutions were good, but over time turned into oppressive and authoritarian regimes. there were lots of reasons, and i still am enthusiastic about our beliefs in revolutions, but the reigns of terror were bad, and have to be eliminated from our blue book on revolutions, and a return to elections and human rights has to be firm, not everlastingly postponed. in the long run the ideals of the revolutions are vitally important. in africa as in europe or asia.

how can we judge between all these systems and possibilities? by what ultimately best serves the interests of all the people. is china better than the u.s. in that regard? i doubt it. am i am not even uighar. the gap between rich and poor has grown in china, is growing, is bad. meaning, bad for the people.

getting ahead of myself. under what system are the people broadly better off? we want to say not just in the short run because you can borrow like trump and stimulate the economy, but something that pays in the long run. and is a system like china, where human rights are mostly shortchanged, but economic development is prioritized the best we can do in present times? my preference would be for a social democratic system like northern europe; even an EU where more egalitarian conditions obtain than now where the powerhouses run the show. i'd rather a state like canada or sweden, liberal democracies.

that's maybe irrelevant to your intervention. what systems in current conditions in africa are the ones we should support. doesn't that depend on the country and its current conditions?

the real question is what? is nigeria so bad that now only a revolution as advocated by sowore would fix it? would conditions under a revolution improve life for the people? no one knows. the last war against the federal state, the biafran war, cost maybe millions of lives. nothing that costs millions of lives is ever good in any sense. i have no idea whether the conditions in nigeria now are so terrible that only a revolution would solve it; and a revolution by whom?
is the change in regime in afghanistan going to be for the betterment of the afghani people?
who could possibly argue that now?
ken


kenneth harrow

professor emeritus

dept of english

michigan state university

517 803-8839

har...@msu.edu

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Moses Ebe Ochonu <meoc...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 9:57 AM
To: USAAfricaDialogue <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>

Emeagwali, Gloria (History)

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 2:42:29 PM9/6/21
to Moses Ochonu, usaafric...@googlegroups.com
I definitely agree with Moses and TF on
the alternative options to liberal democracy-
although I wouldn’t use Sisi’s Egypt as 
an example.

I am happy to see the back of Alpha
Conde, the stubborn violator of the Guinean
Constitution who, like Alassane Ouattara of
Ivory Coast,  was prepared to go to venomous
lengths to perpetuate himself in power.

At this point we don’t know if  
Mamady Doumbouya is just another
French puppet,  or  whether he is a man 
of his own. We don’t know if his aim is to fill his
pockets or/and to divert Guinea’s wealth to
Paris or Switzerland. Is he a true patriot or
just another opportunistic carpet bagger?
We don’t know. 

He has experience in several
countries including CAR, Israel, Afghanistan
etc. This could cut both ways. He could be 
an incorrigible “yes-man “ to the West or
an awakened agent for change.
Interesting to note that the opposition
seemed happy to get rid of Conde and so,
too, a lot of pro-Doumbouya demonstrators.

Time will tell.


Professor Gloria Emeagwali
Prof. of History/African Studies, CCSU
africahistory.net; vimeo.com/ gloriaemeagwali
Recipient of the 2014 Distinguished Research
Excellence Award, Univ. of Texas at Austin;
2019 Distinguished Africanist Award
New York African Studies Association
From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Moses Ochonu <meoc...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 12:32 PM
To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>

Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Coups and Corruption
 

Please be cautious: **External Email**

Assensoh, Akwasi B.

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 3:31:59 PM9/6/21
to USAAfricaDialogue




Dear Professors Harrow and Ochonu (Kenneth and Moses):


Your "Coups and Corruption" discussions are great! But they remind me of the writings that my legendary Baba 

Ijebu of  Palmgrove, Yaba-fame used to describe as: "Book long!" Yet, please keep up the lively discussions in the

age of COVID-19 quarantine, and the end of Mr. Donald Trump's entertaining political theater, which brought about 

two impeachments in the U.S. House. 



A.B. Assensoh. 



From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Harrow, Kenneth <har...@msu.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 11:27 AM
To: USAAfricaDialogue <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [External] Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Coups and Corruption
 
This message was sent from a non-IU address. Please exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments from external sources.

Harrow, Kenneth

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 6:09:23 PM9/6/21
to USAAfricaDialogue
i wonder if the only way to make sense of this question, what form of governance is the best for africa, african people, is to do it country by country, and not generalize to all countries, as if they were all the same.
i have heard moses give this argument before. he stresses  one thing i don't think about very much, the significance of the west in imposing its beliefs and forms of governance, as if that were all that mattered. i quite agree w him that phony democracy, phony elections, etc, for show to the west are meaningless. but i think that that "exgtroverted" concern is bigger in the mind of people living abroad than at home, where local politics are very immediate.

i know fairly precisely what i want my government to look like here in michigan, and here in the states. but i don't feel sure of myself in making pronouncements for african countries, the more i live outside of africa. living in senegal i had a clear sense of where things stood; from a distance, it is indirect, more uncertain. now for nigeria, with the enormous debate on this list re buhari, it is not possible for me to feel certainty in what would work best for nigeria.
ken

kenneth harrow

professor emeritus

dept of english

michigan state university

517 803-8839

har...@msu.edu

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Assensoh, Akwasi B. <aass...@indiana.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 2:57 PM

Moses Ebe Ochonu

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 7:47:39 PM9/6/21
to USAAfricaDialogue
"i wonder if the only way to make sense of this question, what form of governance is the best for africa, african people, is to do it country by country, and not generalize to all countries, as if they were all the same."

Ken,

I agree with the above point, which is precisely what I keep pleading for--the case-by-case understanding of what may be best for each country instead of beginning from the premise/template founded on the Western liberal democracy form as a hegemonic, paradigmatic frame of reference.

Which brings me to the second point, one of disagreement with you. In your previous post you outlined your definition of democracy to revolve, among other things, around periodic, transparent elections on the basis of one man one vote. Well, that is the very essence of the Western liberal democratic system.

Permit me to state that I do not agree with that definition of democracy as it is too restrictive and not capacious enough to accommodate other democratic traditions, let alone the kind of democratic plurality, innovation, and pragmatic creativity I am arguing for.

I believe that elections do not make a democracy, and that you can have democracy without elections. What counts is, 1) whether the system is representative of citizens and the various constituencies that approximate groupings and interests, and 2) whether it is accountable. You can have these two features outside of an electoral framework, as outcomes of an unelected government. Relatedly, you can have elections but not on the basis of a one-man-one-vote franchise.

Speaking of elections, you can also have elections or selections that, unlike the Western liberal model, are not adversarial, that is, they are not winner-takes-all competitive contests in which winners are included and losers are excluded. 

The African alternative to the adversarial Western liberal model is consensus-based selections or elections in which there are no actual losers or winners in the Western liberal sense, or if there are winners, the losers are included or the stakes are decentralized in such a manner that the difference between winners and losers in terms of benefits/spoils is not not significant.

I can return to flesh this out some more, but I think you get my drift in terms of the fluid, flexible way I am thinking about "democracy" and its alleged antitheses in this discussion. 



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/BL1PR12MB5191CAC02718B7E14F20886CDAD29%40BL1PR12MB5191.namprd12.prod.outlook.com.

Harrow, Kenneth

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 11:39:32 PM9/6/21
to USAAfricaDialogue
moses
i love the idea of exploring alternate ways to put together a decent govt.
for me one-person one-vote is basic because it is the only way the person who votes can see themselves counting as a full citizen, a full participant in society.
we might imagine other structures, which you allude to. it isn't the individual voting, say, but the group to which that person belongs, whose interests are represented in the govt in such a way as to hold the govt accountable.
i'd like to see how that works. geschiere writes about that kind of accountability in the old days, before SAPS, when those in power were held accountable in the sense of the Big Man who is required to take care of his people.
i don't think that is a viable option, especially not nowadays when people's expectations of their relations with the govt are framed by structures they can observe around the world.
the virtue of an accountability frame is that needs have to be met. the problem is the risk of violence from factions, like what we have in east congo, where, i read, there are at least 126 militias, there are millions of displaced people, there is a superviolent struggle for the control over mineral wealth. it seems almost daily i read about adf killings and reprisals and so on.

the ideal of a non-antagonist election might work with something closer to a parliamentary system where you have weighted representation based on the percentage of people who vote for a given candidate. i see nothing wrong with that. probably better than the winner take all model here in much of (but not all) the states. another alternative is two rounds, as is donein france; or the system used last time in the nyc elections.

i am skeptical about calling these alternatives western vs african. i don't see such a vast difference in societies and citizens as to warrant that identity difference. i can't see consensus, as in the old days under the baobab tree, working in nation state societies. the goal of overcoming adversarial structures is good; i agree there are probably many ways to get there.

which african states seem to have solved this problem of governance best. nowadays? how can you account for that difference? i'd be curious about that since i don't feel competent to judge all those states.... don't know enough about many countries. which would you offer as model examples for us to consider now?
ken



kenneth harrow

professor emeritus

dept of english

michigan state university

517 803-8839

har...@msu.edu

Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 7:37 PM

Harrow, Kenneth

unread,
Sep 6, 2021, 11:39:41 PM9/6/21
to usaafric...@googlegroups.com
i want to add one more small thing, moses. i did state it before. i think one aspect of decent modern governance has to be a state that respects the basic human rights. some people call it democracy, but i don't really think of it as necessarily linked to systems of voting or representation. i can't imagine a decent life for people where they are afraid to speak their minds, marry whomever they want, are not tortured, can practice their religion, are not persecuted on the basis of race or gender etc etc.
ken

kenneth harrow

professor emeritus

dept of english

michigan state university

517 803-8839

har...@msu.edu

Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 7:37 PM

Harrow, Kenneth

unread,
Sep 7, 2021, 6:36:34 PM9/7/21
to usaafric...@googlegroups.com
notice the issue here is "civilian rule," and the pressure comes from ecowas. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/7/ecowas-warns-mali-progress-towards-february-polls-insufficient
ECOWAS warns Mali’s progress towards February polls insufficient. Regional bloc says it feared potential delays in elections aimed at restoring civilian rule in Mali following last year’s coup.



kenneth harrow

professor emeritus

dept of english

michigan state university

517 803-8839

har...@msu.edu

Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 11:05 PM
To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages