Kenya's misfortune

 

Kenya was a British colony from 1888 to 1962.

The king and queen of Britain are enjoying a holiday known as a royal tour in Kenya. Spoiler alert; no apologies for Britain’s previous exploitation of that country were made.

Does SOYMB include readers who are royalists, i.e. those who, in the twenty first century, support the UK capitalist state, and are happy to be known as ‘subjects’? If so,

In a footnote to Capital, Volume One, Marx wrote; ‘One man is king only because other men stand in the relation of subjects to him. They, on the contrary, imagine that they are subjects because he is king.’

The Kenyans, like many other people forcibly colonised, became British ‘subjects’ whether they wanted to be or not.

The August 1968 issue of the Socialist Standard contained a book review pertaining to Kenya.

Not Yet Uhuru, by Oginga Odinga.

‘The people of Kenya have had the misfortune, reserved for colonial peoples, of experiencing two sorts of capitalism. One at second hand through colonial occupation, and the other, a more modern version, exploitation by capitalists of local origin and by the economic interests of the ‘advanced' countries.

Today, control of the resources of Kenya is in the hands of large international firms and of the Kenya government. The local would-be capitalists and bureaucrats have certainly derived much benefit from independence, but the vast majority of the people of Kenya, who were at one time led to expect a post-independence egalitarian Utopia, have been disappointed.

In this autobiography we learn well how the “benefits” of capitalism were first introduced to Kenya. There is an interesting survey of early land-appropriation by the British authorities and of the break-up of the tribal system through forced wage- labour. Odinga is particularly good in his account of the Mau Mau uprising and the reasons for it. Once the rebellion presented a real threat to British authority in Kenya, and thus to British economic interests, ruthless measures were taken. All civil liberties were suppressed—an African could be arrested in the street at any time. All Kikuyu (the main tribe concerned in the rebellion) were forced either to collaborate with the authorities or to join the Mau Mau bands as a result of persecution. British capitalism wanted to hold on to Kenya so as to have an assured and cheap supply of raw materials and a market monopoly.

Today, some four-and-a-half years after independence, things have not changed much. The people of Kenya are now exploited not only by businessmen with white skins, but also by civil servants and politicians who have somehow succeeded in securing company directorships and land. Little free expression of opposition to the government is allowed. The only consolation that the people may draw is perhaps in seeing men with skin the same colour as theirs replacing white colonists at the wheels of large motor-cars manufactured in West Germany.

Odinga is allowed, probably by virtue of his popularity (he was at one time Vice-President of the republic and Kenyatta's right-hand man) to lead a tiny opposition of nine in parliament. His party is, however, allowed few extra-parliamentary ‘privileges’ such as the holding of public meetings or recruiting campaigns.

This autobiography, as well as being a good document of British colonial history, is worthwhile reading because part at least of Odinga's conclusion is acceptable. Odinga himself left high state office for the political wilderness because he saw that national independence does not in itself end servitude for the mass of the people. He also recognises the oligarchic character of the present Kenyan government. To solve these problems, however, he presents a creed which he calls “African Socialism". The use of the word “Socialism" in independent Africa is very common but worth little. It is used, for instance, by both government and opposition in Kenya. The general purpose of this is clear: to give obviously oligarchic governments a façade of popular support and concern for justice and equality.

Odinga’s “African Socialism" would take the form of “a Kenya government backed by popular enthusiasm and national mobilisation". We suggest to the people of Kenya, and indeed to the people of the world, that the only way they will solve their problems will be by overthrowing capitalism which deprives and degrades them. This can only be done, not on a national scale, but by an internationally united working class who reject all leaders and governments.

Not Yet Uhuru (freedom) is the personal and political testament of a sincere, but unfortunately misguided, political figure. It is well worth reading for the insights which it offers into the lot of the people of Kenya.’

Amit Pandy

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2017/08/capitalism-in-kenya-1968.html

The Royal Purse

The bill for South Africa’s royal families and traditional leaders, cost the country in excess of R650 million a year.

As of 2010, South Africa recognizes seven royal families in the country, after a recommendation by a traditional leadership commission that South Africa lose six of its kings and queens. Of the 13 recognized traditional kingdoms recognized previously, only seven will remain once the current incumbent rulers of the identified kingdoms have passed away.

Traditional kings and senior leaders are symbolic figureheads in the country with little political power. However, these rulers play an important role in local disputes as well as in playing advisory roles to government – as well as in the lives of the traditional rural populations. Approximately 20 million South Africans live in areas ruled by kings or traditional leaders. In addition to the ruling monarchs, the country also has a reported 800 senior traditional leaders and over 5,300 chiefs and headmen/women, who serve as leaders of tribes and clans within a kingdom.

All these traditional leaders are paid by the South African government – and at 2014’s published remuneration rates cost the country well over R575 million. The South African government pays each king a salary of R1.03 million a year, while senior traditional leaders get R188,424 and headsmen/women receive R79,364. Additionally, the National House of Traditional Leaders (NHTL), with 23 members, pays salaries in excess of R20 million to support the traditional leadership structures in the country on a national and provincial level. Despite the multi-million budget assigned to traditional leaders in the country, the Congress of Traditional Leaders of South Africa (Contralesa) believes that they should be paid more. The group said that kings were on par with the president, and should therefore draw a similar salary (R2.75 million), and so, too, should chiefs and headmen/women be paid on the same level as their political counterparts.

Assuming that senior traditional leaders are akin to mayors (R1.1 million per annum) and headsmen/women fulfill the roles of councillors (R400,000 per annum), Contralesa would see the traditional leadership salary bill shoot to over R3 billion a year.

Beyond salaries paid by government, the ruling monarchs in the country also benefit from provincial spending, which is discretionary. Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini and a number of other South African royals have been the center of controversy over the years, with reports of exorbitant spending on luxury vehicles, chartered flights and lavish lifestyles.

In KwaZulu Natal, the provincial government even places a budget vote for the Department of Royal Affairs, specifically dedicated to the Zulu Royal Family and the upkeep of King Zwelithini’s palaces. In its 2014/15 budget, the department received R54.2 million for the king, which was reportedly swallowed up within months, used to purchase new vehicles for the king’s eight wives. The king then requested a further R10 million bailout from government, and was awarded R5 million. In previous years, the Zulu King’s expenses extended beyond R60 million.

Paying Royalties

A government official confirmed South Africa’s 10 kings are each getting a salary of R1m a year as well as many other benefits and subsidie.

 10 kings, 829 senior traditional leaders and 5 311 chiefs had been paid over R650m over the past year. Each province determined what benefits and other subsidies were paid in addition to that.

 KZN last year paid R59m for Zulu king Goodwill Zwelithini and his royal household, which included 27 children. Zwelethini also asked for an additional R18m to build a palace for the youngest of his six wives. He and his entourage spend more than R800 000 a month on travelling, for the hire of private jets and helicopters when the king was criss-crossing the province to perform his duties.

The Eastern Cape’s four kings each got a brand new Mercedes-Benz ML 320CDI of about R703 000 in the past year.

Royal Rip-off

In Swaziland it is a criminal offence to criticise the king’s private life. The king enjoys a personal fortune of about £145 million. He also receives money from the national budget for his family’s upkeep. Last year this totalled £12 million — more than was set aside for education. In May he bought 20 armoured Mercedes Benz cars at a cost of £150,000 each.

Reports from the kingdom said that the king had dispatched at least five of his 13 wives and dozens of retainers to France, Italy, Dubai and Taiwan on a secret tour last week, using £4 million from the state budget.

Swaziland is home to about 1.2 million people, more than two thirds of whom live in abject poverty on less than 50 pence a day. More than a quarter of the adult population has HIV — the highest ratio in the world.

Campaigners have been accusing Whitehall of double standards. “They shout about Zimbabwe, but keep quiet about what is happening in Swaziland, even though they are one of its biggest aid donors...” Lucky Lukhele, of the Swaziland Solidarity Network , told The Times.

Swazi King's Birthday

The media are having a field day exposing the hypocrisy of millions ,officially put at $2.5 million though widely believed to be five times higher , being spent on celebrating King Mswati III's birthday .

He will be 40 .

unemployment, 40 percent
HIV rates: nearly 40 percent among adults. Life expectancy has nearly halved since 1998 because of the AIDS epidemic and is now less than 31 years, according to the most recent U.N. figures.

70 percent live below the poverty line, and 20% depend on international food aid.

A new constitution took effect in 2006 maintains the ban on political opposition parties. The king appoints the prime minister and the cabinet. A previous king ,Sobhuza , declared a state of emergency in 1973 which Mswati has never formally lifted.

About 5,000 trade union members took to the streets Wednesday to protest against the expenditure