INTRODUCTION:
By 1950 Africa had already become “a mental no man’s land” for indigenous institutions, moral codes had become subordinated to, but not eliminated by colonial social-political structures. The aftermath of this was the split personality that issued from the simultaneous existence of at least two mutually conflicting but interacting value systems, in the same society. The seemingly competitive scenario which ensured between old value systems and newly imposed patterns of behavior, is undoubtedly still unfold with an important consequence for the polity. Those competitions explain, at least in part, the interesting parallel of the primacy of politics and the failure of politics in modern Africa.
To be sure, politics is a most basic activity in all society(ies), Aristotle ones referred to it as the master science, because in the final analysis power configurations determines virtually everything else, including religion, science and art. Invariably, the social order is fashioned, maintained, or changed by political arts or decisions. Given Africa’s Colonial experience, the primary of politics is understandable. The continent requires viable mechanisms for regulating conflicts, punishing crimes, provision of welfare and promoting “fellow feeling” ie, the feeling of consciousness of kind” which binds together, those who have it so strongly that it overrides all differences arising out of economic conflicts or social gradations and saves them from those who are not of them or their kind. This implies that Africa needs a new consensus on which society can be built.
However, an individual or person will only discount economic and social destinations which affect him, only when a perceived inequalities can be redressed through excising institutional mechanisms, usually through access to policy responsive linkages. This is itself, constitute a restrain on limited power and promote constitutional rule. Other requisite conditions for constitutional rule include a bourgeoisie (or political class) in command of productive resources, capable of setting its own affairs peacefully and as well maintain the authority of the state, accommodate the participation in politics of subordinate classes. Finally, the failure of politics in Africa is invariably attributable to socio-structural factors which are deeply rooted in her colonial heritage.
The understanding of the reality of the contemporary (modern style or form of African politics, must necessarily start from the grasping of the underlying historical processes that have their roots in the history of social and economic development of Europe. More so, the understanding of the emergence of state system in Africa can be a prelude to the understanding of this subject matter. Though there is no general consensus globally, as to how state emerged, theorist assumed the existence of coercion or force in the emergence of a particular society as a criteria in ascertaining how such society emerged as a state. According to Thomas Hobbes a British philosophy states emerged following the great insecurity that characterized the pre-state, primitive society, which according to him, was (life) nasty, brutish, short and solitary. There was anarchy during the pre-state era. This primitive societal anarchy, gave rise to the concept of a leviathan ruler i.e. a very powerful and dreadful monarch (King or Queen) that would be able to curtail, control, manage and as well organize the society properly and effectively. This autocratic form of Rule had every facet of the society monopolize by the head or the controller or leader of the system i.e. the king or queen. The need to brake these social and economic monopoly which all those dictatorial monarchs arrogated to themselves, brought about the emergence of the economic system known as capitalism, under which the greatest wealth in the society was produced not in Agriculture but by machines in factories and in mines.
The advancement of capitalism towards a stage (new then) known as the stage of monopoly, ie when fewer and fewer capitalist entrepreneurs were in active business co-operation, while their firms were getting larger and which also means more and increased profits for them, came the discovery of the law of capitalism by Karl-Marx. The capitalism law is also known as the tendency to fall. This implies that under certain conditions, the profit maximization level of the capitalist tends to fall or fail, since the cardinal objectives of every capitalist is profit maximization. It flows therefore that in her curiosity and in an attempt to ensure that his profit does not fall and if it does, it doesn’t have too much effect on his business the capitalists created the circumstances within Europe which gave rise to colonialism.
Almost the entire continent of Africa was shared candidates of these socio economic and political exploration and exploitative policy of the Europeans. This however justifies the fact in an extant literature that the emergence of states in Africa was prior to colonial rule in different parts of the continent under different circumstances. In other words colonialism brought about the emergence of states in Africa. (The modern African states) pre-colonial era here serves as the underlying precepts to the understanding of the realities of the contemporary African politics. Henry L. Bretton, in one of his writings “power & politics in Africa” posits that, “it was the power of gun that made Africa safe for colonial rule and sealed the continents fate for centuries”
During the colonial period an astonishingly social expenditure in money, men, and materials, mainly arms were required to maintain control over African territories/colonies. In other words law and order was maintained by a mere regiment or two either soldiers or politician and some cases the both. A critical study and a careful observation of the present day African political environment, reveals a total transfer of these colonial pacifications/coercive apparatus. In fact, in most instances in some “independent” African states, the European military as well as their civilian officers/officials remained in key security control positions under an African head of state & government. The crucial special and secret service security structures of the colonial government are kept intact and maintained by these African leaders. These services initially provided effective protection for these new regimes in government, ensuring certain level of secrecy. It also keeps the internal security cost low while they enjoyed the concept of government monopoly of arms.
However the Europeans have since been faced out of direct armed services. But the special services and the policies in Africa, the cost and budgets for security had astronomically gone up and even raised more sharply where severe internal repression became necessary or where for instance, as in Kenya, Ethiopia, and the Sudan, border incursions, major rebellions, or insurrections were under way. These scenarios also elucidate the genesis of inherent political crisis, conflicts and war that have characterized the African political environments since the post-colonial era.
Unarguably, personal security of any leader or leaders in any system is very paramount in the prevailing “globalized” modern day politics, irrespective of its philosophy, ideology or structure.it is also disheartening that in an attempt to practice or implement this coercive policy of colonial heritage. The 1964-65 fiscal year in Nigeria, reveals an increased allocation for cabinet security to over (85,000) British pounds sterling, an increase of (25,000) pounds. This was at the time when the entire region was bordering on a state of insurrection and powerful oppositional forces were maneuvering for positions of power. Similarly, this same scenario is being witnessed today in Nigeria under President Goodluck Jonathan. It’s reported that Nigeria’s security budget is estimated to (5.8 billion US dollars) as at June 2014, understandably due to terrorist activities by the Boko Haram insurgent group in the northern parts of the country, particularly the north east.
In January 14, 1966, the Nigeria army furnished the contingents that executed federal and regional leaders, overthrew the regime and ended the first republic. Surprisingly, this was consequence to the increase by more than (1 million pounds) the budgetary expenditures for the armed forces. However in Ghana, President Nkrumah, expended far more on personal security, yet he couldn’t prevent his overthrow when the critical moments came, in spite of the substantial amount expended on bodyguards and vast arrays of other intelligence and security measures.
These paraphernalia of the western states which were bequeathed to Africa via colonialism, though to some extent placed her and some of her leaders in positions that made them powerful, at least in formal terms, could also be held accountable for ethnic and religious polarization of most African states. In other words the existence of these colonial socio-political and economic systems and structure in African society meant the emergence of new social forces in an indigenous society whose interests could be expected to and did conflict on many aspects, both to the colonial and traditional elites. This implies therefore that Africa’s unending struggle for neo colonialism is an indictment of her political elites as it’s of their colonial orientation.
It’s important to note here that the socio-political and economic exploitation of Africa by the Europeans via colonialism even after decolonization had taken a new tune, thus; neo-colonialism.
Henry L. Bretton in his words posits that “if decolonization is to mean anything at all, it must extend to the basic socioeconomic features colonialism, knowing fully well that independence does not necessarily alter these features”.
This implies that the decolonization of the African states is and would remain an ongoing systematic process, decades after the acclaimed independence from their colonial masters. This stems from the fact that the relationships between these so acclaimed independence states and their formal colonial masters has not changed till date. This is particularly in most critical areas of government administration and economic management system and structures.
However, decolonization of the African states did served as a political disguise in breaking the monopoly of interests formerly an exclusive preserve of the colonial masters (the Europeans). As a result of these the economic system in today’s contemporary African polity has taken different forms and directions, with many of them assuming multi/international characteristics, though traceable to their colonial roots.
For instance, most pressure and interests groups like the civil society organizations in Africa today are of foreign identity and in most cases they represent multi-national combinations, many of which operates across international boundaries. Usually they operate behind indigenous facades, often via local representatives and under various legal disguises. In economically weak states as in most African states, these groups carry more weight, respect and influence than the economical marginal local groups. On the other hand, in the economic stable African states, these groups are usually on a par with the privileged indigenous groups that enjoys the support of the government in power.
More so the factors of economic determinism in view of the new world order is also key to determine the questions of “what”, “how”, and “when” in terms of the modus of operando as well as the significant level of pressure and influence these groups can wild on any given issue in the society, particularly in terms of the essence of capital and foreign exchange.
Finally as I had earlier stated in the introductory part of this essay, “the failure of politics in Africa, inevitably is attributed to the socio structural factors which are themselves deeply rooted in her colonial heritage. These are subject to the existing social class and the political powers in the contemporary African states. Inclusive also is the performance of the party systems, bureaucracy, judiciary, certain political policies with respect to national integration, political participation, the internal national questions as it affects ethno religious issues as well as the welfare problem of relative political deprivation, which generated mass alienation, separatism and political refugees in some African states. Consequently these problems manifest in different ways, such as political instability, political repression, separatist tendencies, abuse of office and electoral manipulations.
The exclusion of most popular groups from the political process, which prevailed during the colonial era, are noticeably still with the African states, in some bureaucratic-authoritarian regimes in the disguise of a democratic government. This is a common regime experience in most African states in recent times. Also the existence of, for instance the urban poor and the rural peasantry which subsists largely outside the framework of the state , together with the underlying influence of neo colonialism in political processes in modern African states, all form the basis for understanding of the contemporary African politics.
REFERENCES
. Power and politics in Africa (Henry l. Bretton 1973)
.colonial sequence -1930-1949 (Margery perhas 1967)
.African traditional political thought and institutions (Zaccheus Sunday ali et al 1989)
.How Europe underdeveloped Africa (Walter Rodney 1972)

.