"We didn't elect a tribe. We elected an individual", declared a man of the cloth somberly, while receiving appreciative applause from his audience.
His reaction and many others came after UK threw down the gauntlet on the raging Dynasty-Hustler narrative and introduced the idea of a rotational presidency amongst Kenyan communities. Any self-respecting hustler sympathizer could not let this assault on a carefully crafted political narrative go unchallenged. With this statement, UK gave a clarion call to the dynasty side, which for months had been looking rudderless. Hustlers 1-2 Dynasty.
My opening line begs the question: why are tribes so much invested in election outcomes if one of their own is a candidate? My answer is: because we vote tribes. Our political contests are tribal-based. Our reward system after winning is tribal. The trauma of loss is felt by entire tribes.
The tribe for the early man was a bastion of security, an entity where trust and goodwill prevailed and where values were crafted and taught for the betterment of all. As societies became more complex and division of labor became necessary, tribal organization was one way to achieve structure in leadership, harmony and ensure generational succession.
The tribe was seen as that protective blanket against aggression and had men dedicated to protecting resources- be it grazing rights, water resources, farmlands and even fishing territories.
Some tribes morphed into powerful kingdoms militarily, that conquered and dominated other weaker ones, assimilating them while destroying their culture and identity.
Colonial East Africa became one of the stages for the Anglo-Saxon tribe to pitch tent, pilfer resources and lord over existing tribes. Colonialism weakened existing tribal organizations especially where there was direct rule, the territory known as Kenya being one such place. The colonial masters introduced the idea of a territory, then later a nation named Kenya, and put in place their own administrative structures. For effective governance, it was in their interest to weaken the culture and values of the existing tribes, something they achieved through brute force, collaboration, missionary work and western education.
By the time we attained independence, what was left of the precolonial tribes was basically language and a few vestiges of culture. The few elderly purveyors of the old order, who were considered animist and backward by the emerging educated generation, were shunned and disregarded. Western teachings and practices, with only a slight tinge of the traditional, became the accepted path for many.
And thus died the precolonial tribe.
We can argue that the imperialists, by design or as an aftermath of their colonial experiment, created a new tribe named Kenya, held together by western education, practices and institutions. Or so many thought.
It was expected that, post-independence, this identity would be the fabric that held together the people of Kenya irrespective of their backgrounds, as they undertook the work of building a self governing nation while fighting illiteracy, poverty and disease.
In the neighboring Tanzania the leadership quickly and deliberately harnessed the new identity of mTanzania. Nationality was intentionally placed way above ethnicity. This legacy of Mwalimu Nyerere has prevailed to this day. His adoption of socialism (ujamaa) may have been the reason why he was able to temper ethnic interests. It is a demonstration of how leadership can leave an enduring legacy.
The tribe named Kenya was however very shaky from inception. Tensions between the founding fathers, sectarian and political interests and rabid capitalism snowballed into a dysfunctional tribe. A tribe comprised of pockets of people who felt marginalized or unequally representated in the sharing of the national cake. A tribe where some suffered fewer opportunities in the economy because of their last name. Add to that toxic political rivalries, that exploited ethnic identities, fractured the bonds irretrievably.
Kenya hasn't fully succeeded in integrating the various ethnic outfits that constitute it. The few efforts made have been lackluster and eventually stillborn. It's not surprising how the numbers of public servants per community reflect the regime in power since independence.
A leader will be on one lectern preaching tribe Kenya and later in a political rally promoting ethnic bigotry.
President Obama's speech while visiting Kenya, and delivered on 26th July 2015 -an excerpt:
"As in America -- and so many countries around the globe -- economic growth has not always been broadly shared. Sometimes people at the top do very well, but ordinary people still struggle. Today, a young child in Nyanza Province is four times more likely to die than a child in Central Province -- even though they are equal in dignity and the eyes of God. That's a gap that has to be closed. (Applause.) A girl in Rift Valley is far less likely to attend secondary school than a girl in Nairobi. That's a gap that has to be closed. (Applause.) "
The aftermath of our fixation with ethnicity is that it becomes an advantage or a disadvantage in a Kenyan's life's journey. It's a tag you carry around from birth to death. It can determine if you'll be accorded or denied a job, a scholarship, a government tender or even a tenancy. During elections, it can even get you killed.
It creates ethnic privilege and disenfranchisement. For example if jobs and tenders are given based on ethnicity, financial inflows to the beneficiary's home region will happen. The beneficiary will employ people from his region, set up businesses and this will make his home economy more robust.
My opinion? As it stands we indeed do elect subtribes of the Kenyan tribe.
Our generation, despite having more exposure than our forebearers, hasn't changed much.
Maybe the next one will succeed. Maybe the intermarriages will help. Maybe our tribal tensions will simmer to a point of civil strife, after which we'll reengineer tribe Kenya, the way Rwanda did. On this last one I'd wish to be wrong.
