BABILIMANSA; THE VENGEFUL EGOMANIAC

Back in 2009 at the launching of the Q-Cell head office on Kairaba, sitting in the audience I can still clearly recall getting angry and barely being able to contain that anger when I heard Yaya say something along these line;

“When I say that the sky is the limit for the Gambians, I mean it. I must add that if you get to within a few meters of the sky, wait for me to get there first since I am your president.”

“This is a beautiful building; I challenge Muhammed Jah to build a similar one in Medina (Niumi). Come to Kanilai next year, there will be an even taller building.” These statements of course are paraphrased, meaning the words did not flow in that exact sequence but the meaning has not been lost even after all these years.

I was not at the launch of Q-City but I bet similar sentiments were not expressed in that the president did not see himself as being in competition with industrious citizens whose entrepreneurial skills have paid off.

Why am I making this frame of reference? Having seen very recent pictures and videos on social media presenting Banjul and the sorry state it is in; another aspect of Yaya’s vengeful nature is exposed yet again. Yaya is typifies the classic egomaniac, but more than that he has been consumed by hate and jealousy for most if not all of his life. Here was a man whose ultimate goal for seizing power was to unleash misery and suffering on innocent people because he blamed society at large for his humble beginnings and the misfortunes that such a life wrought. Remember his attitude towards former officials of the PPP government; the continuous reference to their “flamboyant lifestyle” and how they beat their chest accompanied by “do you know who I am” scenarios he referenced? That was the hate in him speaking and henceforth his mission was; I go show them peppeh! Sadly, “them” became every Gambian he viewed as a threat to his primitive mode of consumption. “When they were practicing their dirimo-cracy you benefitted and now you want to challenge ME?” That right there embodies Yaya’s whole outlook on opposition and dissent. To the Banjulians he said “now it is time for you to taste what the rest of us have been enduring our entire lives.”

This attitude also, in part explains the neglect of Banjul. You see, Yaya may be primitive, but he is shrewd. Yaya knew very well that Banjul, or at least Banjulians benefitted the most under Sir Dawda; remember he was close to that seat of power and was very abreast with the comings and goings within the corridors of power. He will sweet talk the capital into aligning with him but in his mind he was plotting to take everything away from them, unless some direct benefit was in it for him. We dare even go a little further and claim that the roads he built were partly a political bait but partly because he needed to travel on them. That may be a stretch but by now we have wizened up to know that we should never put anything past him as being incapable of. Look at the Arch, a monument he dedicated to himself and only he drove under it for the longest time. 

An egotist like Yaya likes to bask in his own perceived grandeur; just take a closer look at his lifestyle and choices of material objects. I bet he drives on those roads, have those street lights shone on him and thinks to himself, "wow I definitely made it." Those items all served as reminders to him, who he was before July 22, 1994 and who he became. “Dekka bi maako morm” sums it all up for us. When he inaugurated those street lights he claimed them to be his and categorically stated that any driver who accidentally veers into one of them will pay for it. Even his investments in Kanilai were just for him, he enjoyed having people grovel at this feet and having the power to either give them or turn them away. Yaya’s whole attitude was to thump his chest and say “I am the guy.” And since no one else can claim such or be seen to be of similar status as him, his colleague council members had to be eliminated, humiliated, or rendered irrelevant, all hail Yaya the mighty Babilimansa!

So those claiming that “this is how Yaya started and became a dictator”; in reference to President Barrow, take a closer look and you will see that from the get go, Yaya was never well meaning or well intent. Yaya was a vengeful egomaniacal tyrant. Ask those who knew him from childhood and through his adult life and you’ll see a man full of himself. Even in the Gendarmerie, his mates will tell you he took pleasure in “punishing” arrestees which included beatings; the man likes to exert authority and likes being on top.

Seeing folks trying to paint a saintly picture of benevolence go to show how misunderstood Yaya the man was, he is a case study for psychologists. Or are such attempts at drawing similitudes with President Barrow out of insincerity and selfishness? I am not saying President Barrow is perfect, incorruptible or beyond reproach, but going so far as saying there is no difference between him and Yaya is a manifestation of ignorance as to who Yaya really was, or that one does know who Yaya was but out of some personal motive tries to make comparisons where none exists.

With an independent city council about to emerge, the Mayoress will have all of the tax money collected in Banjul used to give a face lift to the city and hopefully with a generous augmentation from the central government.

This was just a simple reminder, a dedication lest we forget! We will NEVER forget.

LOSING OURSELVES

For colonialism to succeed, the invaders must adopt an air of superiority and cast native ways as inferior in every aspect. All colonizers share that characteristic. They will represent themselves with their best attributes and highlight the seemingly worst and often misunderstood ways of the natives interpreted to suit a negative narrative and conclude that in fact the natives are inferior. That skewed logic is the “evidence of history” that unfortunately our very own “intellectuals” buy into; consequently every prescription they proffer is the proverbial ‘garbage in (flawed evidence), garbage out (proposed solutions to our “problems”)’. That is one explanation of why we are in this seemingly unending cycle of stagnation in terms of development, both human and capital.

The sad truth is that the narrative, sustained over the past many centuries has had an effect on us as a colonized people; the inferiority complex. We have come to believe that in fact we are as our oppressors have labeled us, that in fact we are less. “See how advanced their societies are and how backward we are; see how democratic and open their societies are and how intolerant ours are,” etc. etc. that our backward culture is to blame for our lack of ‘advancement. The purveyors of the narrative that we need to do things exactly like our former colonizers are doing are those we view as “intellectuals”. Steve Biko once said that “the greatest weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.” That reality is what we are living today. Those we view as educated or intellectuals for a large part have had their minds ‘programmed’ by those very colonizers and that most potent weapon; their minds, have been unleashed on us to further enhance the colonial narrative.

Suddenly, completely ignorant folks, with no insight whatsoever as to how our societies are shaped or molded together are the self-appointed experts on what the problems of our society are, and what the remedy should be. Diagnosis; tribalism and backward culture! Prescription; loyalty to the nation state and shunning African culture! To them the wise and experienced elders can take a nap because they do not know how ‘democracy’ works. Like hell they don’t! You (the more knowledgeable than his elders) are the ignorant ones but too proud to admit it since you are confusing western consumerism with democracy. Without realizing it, their prescription is for a misdiagnosed ailment and it is only going to rip our societies apart and in the process advancing the course of those who, centuries ago held us in bondage and kept our minds captive. The irony is that they claim to be pan Africanists. But just like a well programmed machine, they will say that “we are proponents of democracy and human rights advocates”; which implies our ways were neither democratic nor advanced human rights – the colonial premise. What in fact most of these so called human rights activists and champions of democracy are promoting is westernization which is not the same as democracy.

On the other side of the narrative are the masses, a large portion of who view fluency in the language of the colonizer as equivalent to knowledge. We listen to anyone who can articulate their points well and often fall short of questioning their logic or reasoning. In our case, speak English well and you’re ‘the guy’. That fluency masks the ignorance within. Even on religious knowledge and matters of faith, the unassuming Faa Nyonkoling may only know Fatiha and the last three Surahs of the Qur’an, but his entire life is the perfect representation of the character of a true Muslim; he is honest, he is sincere, he is modest, he is content, he is generous with his meager resources, he is patient with hardship, does not talk about people’s shortcomings, keeps confidence and is always admonishing good conduct, hard work, truthfulness and empathy. Yet, in the eyes of the villagers of Wasabali Kunda, Faa Nyonkoling is a simpleton who has nothing to offer other than outdated traditions. The go-to guy is Alhaji Abdul Malick just returned from Arabia and speaks with every fifth word being an Arabic word; now he is the true Muslim. Instead of admitting his lack of knowledge in Islam, he will use his Arabic literacy to mislead people as long as the respect and attention such fluency accords him keeps coming. The same applies to our social media loudmouths. Neither disciplined nor informed but the ‘boldness’ to speak up and articulately so has earned them followers and so they march on spewing garbage in their wake.

Now this is by no means an attempt at generalizing, but in fact it is an attempt at highlighting instances of such manifestations of inferiority complex. The wealth of knowledge in our modest and unassuming elders is such a treasure throve that it will take real intellectual skills to decipher them in relation to the context such knowledge was acquired; but out of intellectual laziness or a predisposition to consume everything from the colonial masters as gospel, so we just prefer them over our “oral traditions.” Like much else, we just want ready-made stuff, and like every ready-made item, unverified knowledge is poisonous and worse; subjugating and misleading. The only remedy to that has been captured many a time before; “Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery….” so says Bob Marley. “Who taught you to hate yourself?” inquired Malcolm!

In their attempt to subjugate us, the colonialists made it a duty to devalue and eventually eradicate our belief systems, our culture, values, customs, traditions and the last frontier is language! Start small, end big if you like. Culture can be manifested in many ways but language is the total embodiment of a people’s culture. How many of us can express ourselves in our native languages without injecting some European or Arabic word? Now imagine a generation or two from now and the challenges they will face in understanding our culture. We have set course on a trajectory that can only end in tragedy for our people as a collective, but are insisting that we are doing the most good.

How often do you hear that Africa’s problem is tribalism; in the ‘New Gambia’ of course it is the choicest topic of discussion; yet if people are asked to point out such cases of tribalism they fall short of giving any convincing answers; what do we promote in its stead; nationalism. In the greater drive for a unified Africa what is more an impediment, tribe or nation state? The nation state needless to say has a foreign design to it. The partitioning of Africa to suit various Western interests never took into account existing norms and institutions. Attacking any aspect of what is left of our culture without looking inward for substitutes is playing right into furthering that colonial narrative. Being proud of and upholding one’s culture is not synonymous with being unpatriotic, in fact it is a collective of such cultures within certain geographic regions that makes up a country. Try to ‘assimilate’ all into one melting pot and you are sure to kill off some.

Show me an intolerant Gambian and you have an uncultured individual. Our society is unique and worth being proud of. Thousands of years of culture and traditions of peaceful coexistence and intermingling of people of different customs and value systems required an intricate and delicate system to maintain; our forebears did it with no outside ‘help’, but that legacy is under threat from none other than copycat wannabes who falsely project an image of intellectually sound individuals, when in fact they are as ignorant as a toddler when it comes to their knowledge of how such an intricate system of peaceful coexistence was woven and maintained. Our task is to challenge them, and it is simple. Understand and celebrate who you are and embrace your neighbor; that’s all it takes!

OF AFRICAN SPIRITUALITY AND CONVENTIONAL RELIGION

With the anti-Arab sentiment rising among black Africans on the heels of the inhumane treatment and enslavement of black Africans in Libya and across the Middle East, the debate has taken a new turn on social media, at least among Gambians (surprise!). The new narrative is the stance of Islam on slavery, the history of the contact between sub-Saharan Africa and the Arabs, the spread of Islam and the force-feeding of religious dogma and indoctrination of blacks to submit to the God(s) of the Arabs and subsequently that of the Christians from the western hemisphere.

Won’t do much help to invoke historical facts to debunk the claims of Islam’s spread by the sword to sub-Saharan Africa and beyond; the proponents of such a narrative have already made up their minds as to what to uphold and what serves their narrative. So the argument to be had now is whether those adhering to Islam today are under any duress to uphold the belief or not. So respecting people’s individual choices and values is the hallmark of a democratic and civilized society. Labeling, insulting, denigrating people’s beliefs or those they hold in reverence degenerates into a nasty situation fast and averting damage control is prudent; live and let live!

For those so called African idealists, the narrative that “African Spirituality” has been kicked to the curb in favor of “foreign doctrines” imposed on us is always a prominent presence. But what is African Spirituality? A lot of them will fall short of giving you a coherent answer to that effect; so are you really sincere about your pan African stance or you’re just projecting disdain for others using the shield of a “proud descendant” of great forebears with little to no insight as to what they stood for or believed in?

Let’s employ some logic here; logic may not always be true but truth always stands on logic.

There are two distinct narratives as to who we are; Creation vs Evolution – Faith or a lack of it. What category do you fall under?

If you are truly for African Spirituality then you believe in Creation; shocked? Then you’ve been a hypocrite all along.

See our ancestors believed in the “Supreme Being”, the creator of the universe and all life. They further believed that when we die, our souls are in fact returning to that Supreme Being. One other thing to take note of is that African Spirituality is all encompassing; spirituality informs every aspect of human life, from culture to the environment and especially the public sphere (governance) so let go of your separation of church and state mantra. Even sickness has spiritual significance.

This by no means encompasses all of the various versions of African Spirituality. The point here is that our ancestors believed in a Supreme Being and a life beyond death; which is why the spirits of the ancestors are invoked and the reason why shrines are built for them. Death is not the end but rather it is an ascension to the spiritual realm, a return to the Supreme Being Whom we invoke through those ancestors who have returned to be with Him.

You see the logic in this belief system? You and I are direct descendants of the ancestors; the Supreme Being is the giver of bounds and the healer, since our ancestors are with him it makes sense to call on them to intercede on our behalf, what if that is what the shrines are for? In fact that is the concept in some traditional African religions. Islam teaches that you and I are good enough and worthy enough to ‘face’ the Supreme Being and ask directly from the source and not use intermediaries like our ancestors or anyone else to intercede on our behalf. All that is required is to submit to His Majesty and be humble.

Beyond that African Spirituality is pluralistic and flexible; it does not see other spiritual belief systems as mutually exclusive but rather as a means to strengthen its own spirituality. When I was in tourism, I use to tell this joke when tourists asked me; “why are there many more Muslims than Christians?” I’d reply thus; “Africans have always been polygamous, the Christian missionaries came and said a man can only have one wife; the Africans rejected their call. Then came the Muslims and they preached polygamy of up to four wives and no more, the Africans listened and opened up to receive some more of the message of Islam.” That was a joke but it speaks to the all-embracing nature of African spirituality, which further explains why traditional belief systems are still upheld even with the adoption of Islam and Christianity, are you wearing a Juju? Exactly!

So, now that we can agree that African Spirituality upholds the belief in a Supreme Being, if you truly share that view then we move on to the logic of conventional religion – Islam and Christianity. I’ll lean more towards Islam since I know a little about that. The logical question to ask then is why were we created? What is the purpose of our existence, who is our creator?

How do we know our creator and our purpose?

Our purpose has to be communicated to us somehow, through some medium. From the Islamic perspective, if not that of others this is where the concept of Messengers and Prophets come in. Islam teaches that from Adam, to Muhammad (peace be on them both), the mission was the same, the message was the same; remind us of our purpose and who our maker is; worship the one true God – the Supreme being. So those of you claiming plagiarism understand the mission of the messengers; they come from the same source with the same message; One God – worship Him.

It’s not that simplistic, but you get the gist of it. The first man in this tradition was Adam, to whom was given guidance as to how to live this life; that guidance was passed down from him to his children. Like us today, after a few generations we deviate from the traditions of our forebears and every so often a reminder is sent to get us back on course, and on and on it went through the ages. In that long line of Prophets and Messengers were blacks as well, who are all considered Muslims by the way. When the Rastafarians claim that His Imperial Majesty Emperor Haile Selassie descended from the royal bloodline of King Solomon and David, they are unto something. According to Islamic scholars, Solomon (Sulayman – the greatest king that ever lived) and David (Dawood) peace be on them both were black. So too was Moses and Jesus; peace be on them all. In fact through scientific research, which caused some uproar recently, scientists concluded that the people who inhabited the region that Jesus was said to have emerged from at the time he emerged were of dark skin complexion. Before them, the last Prophet of Islam described him as having dark skin. The Islamic Scripture gives further evidence to this;

“And verily We have raised in every nation a messenger, (proclaiming): Serve Allah and shun false gods. Then some of them (there were) whom Allah guided, and some of them (there were) upon whom error had just hold. Do but travel in the land and see the nature of the consequence for the deniers! (Quran 16: 36).

Nation here does not mean our current nation states as can be spotted on the map, just for note.

So how would you feel if those ancestors and their messages were rejected because of their ethnicity?

See it is absolutely okay to not believe in what these various scriptures call to; but the people who adhere to them are not all just blind followers. If you do not consider yourself as being full of blind hatred or blind pride, then accord the same respect to those who adhere to different beliefs than you do. Ridicule and open contempt is a direct attack on an individual as our beliefs are an extension of who we are as humans. By all means if someone tries to impose their beliefs on you, repel them any which way you know how, but until then live your life and respect your fellow man.

If on the other hand you do not believe in the Supreme Being as the originator of the universe and life as did our ancestors; if evolution is what speaks to your rationality; then stop come off your liner that faithful people are subjecting themselves to foreign doctrine. Simple reason is that the concept of evolution is also a foreign doctrine to Africans which begs the question; how different are you in that case? If truth be told, the faithful are more African than you and your evolutionary theory, at least they are upholding the faith and teachings of some of those great ancestors sent as Prophets and Messengers; whose teaching are you holding on to?

SOLIDARITY OR REVERSE RACISM

We should, at all times be mindful of not becoming the very thing we condemn. The fact that we are condemning it means it is wrong, and two wrongs don’t make right. What is happening in Libya is despicable and should be strongly condemned the world over. Africa, here you are yet again left to fend for yourself. Fingers can be pointed in many directions, and understandably so. Some are more deserving of reprimand than others. Ultimately the fact remains that Africa needs to get her house in order, and by Africa it is you and I and all who claim some affinity from the Caribbean to South America and beyond.

When Ghadaffi was targeted for liquidation, the world seemed to have stood still as far as the western main stream media was concerned. 24 hour news reels fed the world with the moves that NATO was making in Libya, Benghazi became a household name everywhere. Fast forward to the stateless Libya we are witnessing today and the same western media and the war hawks they serve as mouthpieces for are oblivious to the atrocities being meted out against our fellow citizens. Ghadaffi’s tyranny and the denial of basic human rights to Libyans was highlighted to justify his removal, so we ask; what is worse than subjecting human beings to commodity status and systemic abuse as is obtaining in Libya today against black Africans. I am not sanctifying Ghadaffi or painting a rosy picture of the man, but a state he did preside over; and with the gift of hindsight we know such travesties will not happen under his watch. Bigoted Libyans, yes but slave markets I very much doubt will thrive under him. If those who screamed at the top of their lungs that Ghadaffi needed to go for the Libyan people to get the dignity they deserve are mute today, is it then farfetched to ask was human dignity really what motivated his ouster? Then why are Libya and Africans left to fend for themselves now with concern only over potential radicals crossing over to Europe? Wake up Africa!

Which points the next finger to the elephant in the room, the toothless, spineless African Union as far as the plight of the common African man and woman are concerned. Anyone can swoop in and remove any leader or engineer regime change anywhere in Africa with no consequence, not even a frown from the continental body. I think the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the AU is no news to Africans generally, but since we claim power belongs to the people, it is about time we exert people power on that body claiming to represent us. But the African himself as an individual is not blameless. Our total lack of faith in ourselves and what we are capable of is too demoralizing; add to that the penchant for wasting time on trivialities and naysaying.

In a redacted speech entitled The Black Revolution and Its Effect Upon the Negro of the Western Hemisphere, Malcom X stated; “No matter where the black man is, he will never be respected until Africa is a world power.” Tell an African this and he will laugh off the idea of an African world power as unrealistic, an impossibility not worth any effort as it will end in futility. Speak of an African union as was dreamed by the founders of the Organization of African Unity and the average African will start listing all the impediments that will make a unified continent an impossible venture.

The anger and emotions on display about the plight of Africans across the Arab world is very justified. That passion needs to be translated to action to put pressure of the leaders of the Arab world and by extension the UN and the international community to end the systemic racism in the countries within the Arab league. We can collectively take our individual national leaders to task to hold the leaders of these countries to account for whatever injustices are being meted out to Africans in the various Arab countries. Granted, Libya is a stateless society at this point in time but various regions are under the authority of various organized groups, some recognized around the world. At the very least pressure to facilitate the voluntary evacuation of victims should be mounted and further efforts to locate those that may be in some form of detention or bondage.

What we cannot and should not do is to target people for retribution because they are Arab or share kinship with the supposed oppressors. The anti-Islamic sentiments being displayed is a clear dividing line in those efforts to speak with a unified voice against the abhorrent practices in the Maghreb and across the Middle East. That is the kind of trivial issues referenced above that we have a penchant for escalating instead of focusing on the task at hand which is to galvanize and unite in efforts to bring attention to and seek redress for the plight of our brothers and sisters in bondage but instead we are focused on what Islam is or is not. That stance does one thing; engineer a debate around Islam with non-Muslims highlighting how Islam condones slavery and Muslims rejecting the false interpretation of their scripture; meanwhile the suffering masses endure torture, rape and forced enslavement when we could build consensus and hold our elected representatives to task in ending the plight of our brothers and sisters across the Arab world, the religious debate can wait.

“How long shall they kill our prophets while we stand aside and look…?”

LESSONS FROM CATALONIA

If only we’ll look close enough, and reflect/ponder deep enough, there are lessons unfolding right in front of our eyes that we could learn great lessons from. It is a tragedy if one always has to learn the hard way; through bitter experience when lessons could have been learnt from others’ experiences.

Observe every public fora closely in the New Gambia and without fail you will hear talks of ending ‘tribalism’ and creating a Gambian Identity. The proponents of such notion fall short of defining what a Gambian Identity is or is meant to be. The all too familiar line that we need to put country first and ditch ‘tribal’ identities/loyalties gets thrown at anyone who dares ask. What is ‘tribe’ without identity? Who says such identity is anathema to patriotism; that you can’t be a member of one ‘tribe’ and be patriotic as well; creating a mutually exclusive scenario where non-exists.

Take America for example; since we like referencing them so much. With all its racial identities, and the ever present instances of racism one will always find American to be patriots and proud of their country. Americans will tell you that their individual rights and identities are respected and celebrated. They feel a sense of belonging despite the bigotry and hate emanating from one group towards another in certain cases; the law always protect rights and accords individuals the freedom to celebrate their cultures, beliefes and identities. Black History Month, Cinqo De Mayo, Chinese New Year, etc. are all elevated to the national stage without threatening the existence of the state or the union while at the same time according these groups a celebrated identity.

The United Kingdom comprises England, Scotland, Wales, and Nothern Ireland, but to us British culture, especially English culture is what we identify the Kingdom by even though the Welsh, the Scots, and the Irish are not exactly of the same culture as the English. Each has their unique customs and even languages. There are even claims of cultural components to the Scottish independence bid. More pronounced of such cultural components in pro-independence movements is that of the Catalans.

For a large part, to us Africans Europeans and westerners are seen as homogeneous groups with national identities. We hardly ever see any sub cultures within those countries, much the same as we’re identified by a large majority of them as African, period.

In a recent article published in Public Radio International, Christopher Woolfe wrote:

In 1714, under a new dynasty, Madrid abolished the ancient medieval liberties and institutions of almost all the different former kingdoms under Spanish control. That was also the start of discrimination against the Catalan language, as Castilian Spanish became the official language. The 19th century saw a renaissance of Catalan literature, which helped revive a sense of separate identity…. There were various efforts at self-rule in the early 20th century, but then along came the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s. Catalonia and most of the minority regions of Spain sided with the leftists and fought against the fascist forces of Gen. Francisco Franco — who was aided by Hitler and Mussolini…. During Franco’s 36-year rule, all minorities were suppressed: their language, their music and even their dancing. Spanish was the only language permitted in schools. Franco also moved poor Spaniards from elsewhere in Spain to Catalonia to dilute the Catalan population. It's this period that caused many Castilians to become dismissive of Catalan, as though it were just a bad dialect of their "pure" Spanish. After Franco’s death in 1975, Catalans signed up for a new constitution that gave them considerable regional autonomy and control over their language and education. For the last 30 years, most school subjects have been taught in Catalan. That era of discrimination and its legacy help drive modern Catalan nationalism today. (Woolf, 2017)

The recent surge and rise of right wing politics in Europe and America speaks to such cultural identities in part. All such political movements have a strong stance against immigration, the dilution of European or American culture is often referenced alongside jobs and violence. But at the core is the issue of identity that “too much immigration” is seen to threaten.

Suppressing any group identity is akin to colonialism and domination, and eventually colonialism faces resistance without fail. The call to Gambianize us and forget our tribes is taking on a similar trajectory. One group will emerge dominant without fail and that sense of superiority will eventually be challenged.

So I ask again, what is really meant by a Gambian Identity? And it has nothing to do with patriotism. One can embrace one’s culture and its attendant variables while fostering harmony and peaceful coexistence with everyone else. If every Gambians identity is highlighted and propelled onto the national stage, the members of that group feel valued and a part of a bigger ideal, an ideal they will always be ready to defend and uphold. That is the key to fostering brotherhood and celebrating diversity; not the opposite approach of suppressing individual identities and trying to force one ‘national’ outlook for all. Since we cannot import any new cultures to define who we are, one of the current ones will emerge dominant; by design or by accident and with time that dominance will be challenged. Let's celebrate each other.

To end; here is a challenge for those who keep peddling the narrative of ‘tribalism’ taking over our country; give examples or instance of such tribalism you speak of. My bet is, all the answers collected will fall under two categories;

• ·         It is personal; speaks more to individual experiences of bigotry than a collective effort by any group at suppressing others or denying them their due citizenship rights.
• ·         The second category will be an affirmation of my theory, a theory I will reveal after the answers are collected'.

So challenge your friends and people you know who believe such propositions to be true. Unless there is an alternative description to the word "tribalism", you’ll find the answers shocking to say the least.

Works Cited

Woolf, C. (2017, October 20). The Roots of Catalonia’s Differences with the rest of Spain. Retrieved November 11, 2017, from www.pri.org: https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-10-20/roots-catalonia-s-differences-rest-spain

Rejoinder To Mbenga's Piece

When you know a person, you can be a good judge of his or her character through your interactions and observations from up close. If a person is a stranger to you, his utterances and actions determine how you perceive him or her. To those who know Ousainou Mbenga (I am not one of them), they may see a different side to him than what he uttered in a recent article. In his article misleadingly captioned; “No Agenda can Remain Hidden forever: United Democratic Party (UDP) Hegemony Declared.” Mbenga speaks the language of bigots albeit subtly.

 

So what if some guy in New York declared a “UDP government” what evidence is there for that? What about the tags emanating from without way before the New York meeting contemptuously calling the government a UDP government? Claims lacking the basic decency to respect the other members and stakeholders within the government. That aside, how many cabinet positions are there, how many went to UDP and how many went to the other parties? That shouldn’t be too hard a research to conduct. But No it’s not about the UDP and it did not take long for Ousainou Mbenga to reveal what was really getting him hot under the collar;

 

For all intent and purposes, the genuine struggle needs to intensify hundred-fold to prepare the Gambian masses with an unshakable fighting capacity to build the “new Gambia” rooted in our national advancement and not ethnic or tribal loyalties. Yes, the struggle continues. But against what? Tribalism and all forms of reactionary ethnic affiliations against our national interest.  – Ousainou Mbenga

Aha! There you have it, the real reason he was fuming. Just like the Barrow administration is disrespectfully branded a UDP government, so too is the UDP branded a Mandinka party. So replace UDP with Mandinka and you’ll see where Ousainou Mbenga is really aiming at. It is that simple. Why else will ethnic or “tribal” ‘anything’ surface in this write up; supposedly aimed at unmasking some government conspiracy afoot.

You think I’m exaggerating, read on…

Lets assume the claim that U.D.P is the majority party and won the elections. Does that mean that everyone should be under their boot? Conversely, so what if any one of the ethnic groups in the Gambia constitute the so called “majority”? Does it means [sic] you have absolute power with total disregard for the rest of us? In my view, this arrogance is more destabilizing than the mere constructive criticisms made of the regime. - Mbenga

Why else would these two scenarios fit together if not to reveal the underlying intent of the author? Ousainou Mbenga, at least in this episode perfectly represented the narrative of those hateful bigots that hide behind nationalism, patriotism, constructive criticism and equality to mask their hatred and condescension for their fellow countrymen, especially the rural Mandinka folk while behind closed doors and in comfortable company will let loose the oft-repeated line of the bigoted; The Mandinkas think they own this country! That is what that line about “majority party” and “majority ethnic group” referenced above really meant to say. He even referenced that supposed Mandinka sense of entitlement further on in his write up;

We must win the masses of our people to revolutionary politics to cultivate revolutionary leadership as oppose [sic] to “leadership of entitlement” grossly impregnated with tribal / ethnic backwardness. The Gambian masses must know where their interest lies and who serves their interest. Has “tribalism” ever served the interest of the down trodden masses who are historically misused as canon [sic] fodder by the opportunist elite politicians? Never did, never will. – Ousainou Mbenga

You see, you just have to read between the lines to get the message. Here's the tactic at play (not authored by Mbenga): Brand the government a UDP government, that way any failure (which they anticipate) will be blamed on the party to speed up its demise because the party is sectarian in their view. In the meantime with the government labelled thus, Hon. Ousainou Darboe can be singled out for all manner of resentful attacks to smear his name even in matters he has no knowledge of or a hand in. For good measure, throw in Hon. Mai Fatty to offset any accusations of singling Darboe out. 

Meanwhile, Hons. Hamat Bah, O.J, and Henry Gomez are looked at as non-factors even though everyone is absolutely certain that neither Hon. Hamat Bah nor O.J are drag along politicians who’d tow just anybody’s line. Dr. Touray is spared perhaps for fear of being labelled anti-feminist. The same way the bigots mask their contempt for Darboe and attempts at discrediting him and his party by labeling the government a UDP government; is the same way they label the UDP as a Mandinka party so that their contempt for the Mandinka can be shielded with claims of being “constructively critical" of a political party, what’s wrong with that? Nothing, except you’re not.

The roots of such contempt for rural Mandinka folk lies in that bitter political rivalry of the UP/PPP days that still lives on in many. Ousainou Mbenga has given credence to their claims even though he may not be one of them, but that much he has done. Instead of confronting their dissatisfaction head on, they try to mask it. That insincerity and lack of genuine discourse is why the issue of “tribalism” keeps surfacing its ugly head in our political discourse and until we are willing to take the bull by the horns, bring forth evidence pointing to such divisive mechanisms as are being claimed, it will remain an elusive topic; forever present yet never visible while in the process some of our folks are consumed by rage and hatred for a non-existent boogeyman.

To quote Mbenga one last time; “Let’s take possession of our brains and never relinquish it to opportunism.” I agree; one way to achieve that, I would suggest we take a look at issues within their right context and try to cultivate an understanding of issues from all angles possible. Every single political party in The Gambia has a cross-section of all the “tribes” in the country forming its support base.You know why that is so; geography plays into it, kinship, friendships, acquaintances etc.

During the UP days, PPP never had any hopes of winning in Banjul pre-independence, does that qualify as tribalism? See it is easy to dismiss ALL of the factors that led to the formation of the PPP and brand it along tribal lines; that is easy and convenient. If tribe was truly the motivation PPP will remain unopposed post-independence. The only opposition party of any clout against Jawara that was not headed by a Mandinka was the Gambia People’s Party of the late Assan Musa Camara, second Vice President of The Republic of The Gambia (God rest his soul). Foni, today erroneously branded “tribalist” by other sets of bigots was ever PPP’s for the taking.

Mbenga referenced the 1981 abortive coup; here’s a historical fact; Kukoi Samba Sanyang (God rest his soul) ran on an NCP ticket for the Parliamentary seat of Foni Kansala and lost to a PPP sponsored candidate. He went rogue after that. By virtue of his association with the NCP, Hon. Sheriff Mustapha Dibba, (God rest his soul) the party leader of the NCP was implicated in the 1981 coup. He was held in custody and later cleared due to lack of evidence.

When Yaya emerged, Foni went full blown APRC; no opposition allowed. Was any of that “tribalism” NO! Here’s why;

Power is the most coveted thing in the world. People generally want some affinity with power; the adage that power is intoxicating is very true. “Here was a rural native (in the case of Jawara for the rural folk of post independent Gambia) come to extend the franchise to us and he is one of us, let’s back him up” said rural folks (kinship). Then came Jammeh; “here’s a Foni  native ascended to the highest office in the land, we’ll lift him up and never put him down” said the people of Foni. Labelling that “tribalism” is naïve, for rural Gambia is native to every “tribe” just as Foni has Jolas, Mandinkas, Fulas, etc. who all embraced Yaya (geography - he's from our region). Now the difference between the two scenarios is; Did Yaya attempt to cut a demarcating line between the “tribes” to soar up his support? Of course he did in word and action; openly. THAT is “tribalism”- a systematic targeting, exclusion and domination, subjugation even, of others by virtue of their creed.

The people of Foni are not “tribalist” for supporting Yaya; he just gave them that sought after affinity to power through a shared language, culture and geography. That alone does not qualify as “tribalism”. If that qualifies as “tribalism”, well I’d be damned if you do not brand yourself racist for supporting Obama. Yes, black people the world over loved Obama, cheered him on, wished he’d win and celebrated his win. What’s better than being affiliated with the most powerful man in the world by ethnicity no matter how distant and unrealistic that may seem? Fact is it had a symbolic meaning, especially for black Americans. That’s the real fact. The problem would have been if Obama pandered to that narrative.

Yes, some people vote for candidates for the flimsiest of reasons. But besides Yaya, name a politician who courts voters along “tribal” lines. Our task should be to educate people on their civic duties and encourage them towards realistic goals that will motivate their actions and decisions. Educate them on such issues as policy and governance without faulting them for their choice; people want what they want.

Now, what we should especially task ourselves is to hold politicians to different and more rigorous standards; ergo if an aspiring or sitting politician ever opens his or her mouth on a political platform or beyond and utters incendiary or tribal undertones, or panders to such overtly (like Yaya) or covertly; we pounce on him or her and tear him or her down. With citizens, educate; educate; educate! After that we respect their choices and stop peddling this not so subtle bigotry thinly veiled in insincere utterances of UNITY, NATIOANLISM, or ONE GAMBIANESS when all you truly want is power and dominance to be the very thing you’re preaching against. What I can get on board with out of this whole write up is;

ALL POWER TO THE PEOPLE [all of the people]! ONE GAMBIA INDIVISIBLE (never has been)! DOWN WITH TRIBALISM!  [And bigotry of all forms subtly masked in self-deluding patriotism].

The reader comes to Mbenga’s article with hopes of finding evidence of some conspiracy at work that will be brought to light, when all it accomplished was speak the language of bigots. There was nothing neither critical nor constructive in it, just mere speculation and innuendo accompanied by implicit tones of anger and contempt. Yes, a person can love his land (be a patriot) but be contemptuous (bigoted) towards some of those he shares that land with.

Let’s not speak things into existence. The human subconscious can be a dangerous weapon against the person’s being itself. Everyone knows the Gambia is the most close-knit society you’ll find anywhere. Beyond politics we all know that to be fact. So that fabric of our society, if any politician or opinion leader attempts to rip apart, we need to call them out, bring forth the evidence of their plot and condemn them to irrelevance. Insinuating such division speaks to the subconscious that each group should retreat back to their kin and then it becomes an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ scenario that none will ever win, everyone loses.

Just as we do not speak of sectarianism based on religion because Christians are underrepresented in politics, let’s not peddle a similar narrative along tribal lines. Let’s be like Hon. Henry Gomez; believe in yourself, believe in the maturity of Gambians and their embracing nature, be bold and go out and seek what you desire, you have a right to it. You will always find support across the board. We are after all a diverse people; we can all celebrate our individual cultures, speak each other’s language and uphold our valuable customs without fearing domination by one group or the other. We have tasked ourselves to “Join our diverse peoples [together] to prove man’s brotherhood.” For that is what we are; brothers and sisters!

PERSPECTIVES ON HALIFA'S PRESS CONFERENCE

The much anticipated press conference came and went with much to digest. Credit must be given where credit is due. There is no arguing that Halifa Sallah is very passionate about his beliefs and steadfast in his quest. The press conference reflected that passion and much more, it was fiery even. Mr. Sallah’s patriotism is not in question as some would like to allude to. No one will dedicate as much time of their life as did the folks in PDOIS and beyond for naught, however politics is a game of differing views and not all share similar views in that regard. Challenging his political views and stance on issues therefore does not amount to attempts at discrediting the man, although in some quarters he may not be so favorably viewed but that too comes with the terrain. Mr. Sallah has been and remains one of the most respected political and opinion leaders in the country even among those who disagree with his politics. The recent reactions from Gambians can mainly be attributed to disappointment rather than disrespect. Disappointment in the decision to pull the entire membership from taking up any executive positions in the coalition government that they have been equal stakeholders in; granted that choice has to be respected and yes the National Assembly is an important institution of state in a democratic dispensation, but that move was not the very best of political moves and has left many disappointed, that too has to be respected. That disappointment speaks more to the people’s desire and believe that he, or any of the prominent PDOIS members will have only contributed to the executive rather than take away from it; that view too is likened to skirting responsibility for a collective achievement. So no, the spate of criticisms aimed at Halifa and the PDOIS is not borne out of hate as some would like to believe, not that this write up is likely to change that believe, that’s not the goal either.

Coming to the press conference, some issues have been elaborated on but more questions arose as well. The statement issued prior to the press conference was that some investigations will be made to confirm the origins of the press release that was said to have emanated from the office of the President and then a press conference held to give a “fitting response”. From the press conference though it seems the author of the release is unclear still, not that it should matter.

According to Halifa, the release has not been signed by anyone, that it just listed a contact person. In conventional terms though, I’d like to think that since the release has been attributed to the Office of the President and listed the Director of Press as the contact person should be enough to determine the origins of the release. Secondly, since the release aired on the national broadcaster and the said Office of the President has not come out to dissociate itself from the release, it is safe to say that indeed the release came from the Office of the President. Did Halifa reach out to the contact person listed on the release to verify its authenticity? Does listing a contact person at the end of the release suffice under law? Was the release on a letter head with contact details? All these are questions not clarified in that regard. Just as corporations are legal entities, so too are state institutions; that is the very reason why they can sue and be sued in a court of law. So if Halifa wants to take the matter to the courts for example, it will likely be ‘Halifa Vs the Office of the President’, so as to who actually put pen to paper or who dictated it becomes irrelevant. The office holder takes ultimate responsibility, that’s clear.

Next Halifa mentioned following up with the GRTS, but what really should be followed up with GRTS is to determine if they exercised due diligence as to whether the release was indeed from the Office of the President before airing it in order to not falsely attribute the statement to the wrong entity. That is as far as GRTS’s responsibility should go. As to whether they should have aired it or not is not even a question worth asking as we live in a democracy and the state as much as any party has a right to the airwaves with regards to clarifying issues.

Halifa also cited the section of the constitution as regards the conduct of public officials, but how has that code been violated with regard to the content of the press relaese was not cleared up.

The statement that generated this whole hullabaloo appears to have been clarified. In Birmingham, UK what Halifa was quoted as having said was; “what we have in The Gambia is regime change, not system change.” At the press conference he stood his ground but gave a little more clarity and context; “we have attained regime change but are yet to attain system change…” sounds a lot more relatable than the former. With the former, people grew disgruntled as a result of having had the impression that what Halifa was alluding to was that there was no difference between the Jammeh regime and the current administration just the difference in personalities; that was what was construed to having being said. Now with the latter, it becomes clearer that system change is a process that cannot be attained overnight. But by all indications, the current dispensation is by far much closer to our desired ideal than what used to obtain. How I wish the initial statement was that clear. Regime change by default is the prelude to system change and we are in the right direction; that too deserves acknowledgement.

Halifa highlighted, as an example, the fact the country still imports its entire stock of manufactured goods with virtually no capacity to manufacture its own wares; that this has always been the norm since independence. That is a fact. But that aspect speaks to specifics, not the overall system of governance. Beyond that, even in the developed world, the government is only a facilitator. Through the governance system that abides by the rule of law, the government facilitates the environment needed for citizens to unleash their creative minds and transform raw materials into finished good. The government ensures through laws and governance practice that the people are not short changed in transactions involving the use of our collective resources. The government may run some parastatals or partner with private ventures to maximize welfare and ensure the proper management of our shared natural resources. I as well as all well-meaning Gambians are completely; without reservations, in for a self-sustaining and truly independent country with prosperous citizens. The issue now becomes what policies better ensures such an atmosphere; this is where the governance policy comes into play but the government must not be viewed as a provider as opposed to a facilitator. So we should not expect such transformative economic gains to emanate out of government investment but rather from the abundant opportunity it facilitated for its citizens to compete and unleash their potential through laws and policy. The main task of any government should be to regulate and ensure fairness, as soon as it is viewed and relied on as the provider for the people, then it becomes such a large entity that it is in every aspect of the citizen’s life, the very anathema to a sovereign citizenry.

Finally there was the insight into the role of Halifa during the impasse and the overall mission and role of the larger PDOIS in The Gambia. I have always maintained that the PDOIS is akin to a hybrid between a pressure group and a civil society organization with no disrespect intended. Rather it is an acknowledgement of the role they have been playing in the country since inception, which is why I believe we get constantly reminded that position and power are immaterial to their cause as opposed to an enlightened citizenry. That is the role of a civil society organization; political parties sell their programs and agenda to the people in their quest to assume power and office. That factor qualifies them as a political outfit, but by their own admission they give more credence to an enlightened sovereign citizen than to being a party in office. Depending on what perspective one looks at it from, their efforts in relation to enlightening the citizenry could either be through enhancing access to information (which enlightens) or one through selling particular concepts (which indoctrinates), but that is discussion for another time.

On the role Halifa played during the impasse, the question remains thus; were steps taken in consultation with coalition partners or were they independent of input from other stakeholders? Was the President-Elect in the picture as to what Halifa was doing and gave his blessings, or did Halifa took what he deemed the best course of action? What consultations were done behind closed doors before Halifa emerged in front of cameras and microphones? Was there consensus to the positions he relayed over the media as the position of the coalition in his capacity as the spokesman, if not who objected to what position and why? How were disagreements resolved?

You see, it will be disingenuous of anyone to try to take away from Halifa as to what his role was within and outside of the coalition before all this. He earned our respect and he earned the credits given him, but to make it exclusively his and his alone is equally disingenuous if not more so. His love for country is not in question, his contribution thereto is not in question either; from the mid-eighties to date. His politics, his views, and his approaches are not beyond scrutiny or criticism just as any other citizen who dedicates him or herself to public service. Those views and approaches will be questioned, held to scrutiny and reproached even when necessary; and that he wouldn’t mind, that is why he would gladly debate anyone who disagrees with him; an opportunity to defend his position against ill-favored scrutiny.

Disclaimer: The views herein espoused are those of a private citizen with an equal stake in the country as any other citizen. They are not representative of any office or political grouping. Although the said citizen has political views and leanings, he has no capacity (assumed or assigned), to speak for on behalf of any political establishment within or outside of the country.

THE MAKING OF A TYRANT; ‘SUPPORTERS’ V ‘CRITICS’

Extremism and fanaticism in any of their numerous manifestations is never ideal. Even our most noble quality as humans - love cannot be excessive; for excessive love breeds obsession which is a negative quality. The ideal position in any instance is to be moderate.

These two words above are in inverted commas because they can be pushed to extremes in both cases and hence engender negative results. In our ‘New Gambia’ words have come to mean different things from what the originators intended for them to mean. Critics are whiners and supporters are sycophants, but we will stick to the two terms or supporters and critics to avoid controversy although there is some truth to both definitions.

What we hear a lot of in our discourse is how ‘blind support’ breeds tyranny and how we are constantly reminded that failure to criticize the current establishment will see a return to the Jammeh days of tyranny. There is some truth to that but it is not the whole truth, and half-truths are as dangerous as lies, if not more so. The opposite – excessive criticism, borderline whining could breed the same and even faster; here is an example.

“It’s frankly disgusting that the press is able to write whatever they wanna write, and people should look into it.” - President Trump

“Network news has become so partisan, distorted and fake that licenses must be challenged, and if appropriate revoked. Not fair to public [sic]’ - President Trump

The president of the United States, the “greatest democracy” according to some, that we all aspire for our various nations around the world to be like, recently made these statements regarding the press, or “Fake News” as he calls them due to non-stop criticism of his policies and even ridicule sometimes. The First Amendment of the U.S constitution clearly states that Congress shall not make any laws that abridge freedom of speech or of the press. Whatever one thinks of the man and his presidency the above statements points to one fact about to be highlighted.

People like to be respected and treated fairly. This need for respect is so embedded in our nature that some will beat it into you if they have to; for with respect comes dignity and disrespect is demeaning. Now this is not to say criticism is a sign of disrespect, far from it if the criticism is constructive. That is to say criticism meant to make better by offering alternatives but not one made from the perspective of I told you so; an ego booster meant to give the impression that one thinks them self or their choice better than the person being criticized or his choice. That kind of criticism is demeaning and condescending, devoid of substance.

If the United States, like all thriving democracies around the world does not have strong institutions like the kind needed to safeguard democratic gains and protect people’s rights, the president is sure to curtail press freedom and the associated freedom of expression just because he feels he is undeserving of the ‘criticism’ he receives daily. This amongst other issues typifies what the South African comedian, Trevor Noah meant when he jokingly labeled Trump, “…The perfect African President.”

With democracy still in its trial phase in most African countries, it is not unlikely that presidents wield enormous powers and effectively take control of all aspects of the nation state. Now this is by no means gratifying such tyranny or calling for its imposition, but it is evidence pointing to that innate human need to be valued, respected and treated with dignity. The curtailment of freedoms in Africa especially is partly due to corruption but party due to that deep seated African value that elders must be respected even if they have to beat that understanding into you. Now imagine a person with state power and machinery behind him feeling disrespected and is desirous of commanding the respect he thinks he deserves; Yaya Jammeh anyone?

On the opposite extreme end is sycophancy; the deliberate attempt that fail to see any wrong even when staring you in the face. You see, the two extremes need each other to survive; they feed off of each other. The extremists who constantly criticizes and who sees no good no matter how obvious, without thinking some ulterior motive is responsible for that good behavior. Such a stance invites the extremist from the other side to come defend that good action. When in fact a wrong is done, the extremist on the supporting side finds an excuse for it, that invites the extremist from the opposing side to come up with the “you see, we told you so” position; and on and on it goes. In between is the moderate observer, although biased towards one end, he/she is objective enough to see the facts and whichever side the facts leans towards, he/she becomes the darling for that side and hence is bundled and labeled by the opposing side as one of those on that side; a sycophant or a whiner (sellout).

Nelson Mandela is probably the most praised leader of our age; but did he turn into a tyrant, no. You can credit that to the ‘democratic’ (used sparingly considering apartheid) space in South Africa or to age. Whatever it is we know he has an upright character typical of a genuine African, especially one advanced in age. That sincerity of character, in my opinion is the single most important factor that determined his uprightness and his success in shaking off the temptations and entrapments of power, relinquishing it when he did; in dignity and eternal adoration. Otherwise, he had an opportunity to bask in the love of his people and the world and rule for life.

Now I am not comparing Mandela to anyone (a crime by new Gambian standards), but it is safe to say that a person’s character and inner self worth determines their actions more so than the environment they find themselves in. But certainly, a good trigger to bring out the opposite of their good nature is the feeling of being disrespected and undervalued within that environment.

“Hani baa naa dewung ta, akka king dirro kelleh.” A goat may bite if cornered and frustrated.

Truth is we are not always privy to all the factors that motivated a person’s decision or choice as opposed to other choices. In the game of sports, say football (the rest of the world kind of football) for example, the coach is needed to guide the players to a win because he sees the game from a perspective that the players can’t. He is essentially a critic. With all their skills and training, the players need the coach’s guidance. And with all his past experience and training as well, he cannot match the efforts of the players if put on the field, there he gets exposed to a different reality than what obtains from the sidelines. In the lyrics of the legendary Mutabaruka; “Wen ya not in pawa…, it is easy to say dis and dat; but wen you have pawa it is very different, a different sanky you have to sing.”- From the track People’s Court.

So let’s remember we the citizens are the coaches and our goal is to bring home the trophy. The fans lauding the players on the sidelines and booing the opponents are on the same side as the coach, just playing different roles. The cheering enhances performance through positive reinforcement. Let’s be moderate in all that we do, especially when we ‘criticize’ people; not in the criticism itself when it is warranted but in the tone of it. And let us always strive to make each other better not to bring people down or to massage one’s ego. Positive reinforcement helps more in improving performance, so don’t be afraid to praise when an action is praiseworthy. If we do that, Gambia dina dem!