Whose Fault?

Was it really my fault? I knew that I should have done something about it. I am not particularly sure what i should have done though…

You see this is how it begun. Last Friday I had taken a ride to downtown Minneapolis. At 9.27 pm, I was at the Hennepin Avenue and the 8th Street Bus stage waiting for a 6B to Xerxes Avenue where I live. I had not been there for long when I heard the voice of what I thought was either a drunkard or a severely depressed person. I looked out and saw a young man, probably in his mid twenties and his girl friend (or at least he was accompanied by a young girl). The young man was not only staggering but also shouting some unintelligible words. When reached the bus stop he posed before he began firing salvos at two young men of African-American decent that had been standing at the bus stop, patiently waiting for the bus. He dared the boys to fight him as he mentioned unprintable words against them. These people did not disappoint him. They immediately descended on him with kicks and blows and in no time he was on the ground bleeding profusely. Meanwhile his girlfriend had taken off only to return after the drama.

During this short ordeal that to me looked like a thousand years, my mind went through thousands of emotions. When I first heard the drunkard’s voice I ignored it like I would with any other. My mind said, he will soon become sober and repent. But as he drew nearer, I got interested in what he had to say. Unfortunately, by the time he was nearer enough an audible, he was firing salvos at the black communities, with the usual “nigger” tirades. I wondered whether to sympathize with his ignorance, envy his complacency or just ignore his noise-making and attention seeking tactics. Before I could make a decision on what emotion to employ, the other boys were on him, mercilessly rewarding him for the “kind” invitation to a bout. No doubt, it was a one sided battle as the other side was too intoxicated to tell the right hand from the left.

This was the most confusing moment for me. I certainly could not choose which side of the divide to stand. While on hand I felt that as a descendant of the continent of Africa I had been insulted and looked down upon merely because of the colour of my skin, I also had a different feeling for the poor guy. Something said to me that there was an overreaction by the two African-Americans. That it was needless fighting a poor fellow who was in the first place too cowardly to face even his own self while sober. That he had to intoxicate himself to face the world was to me the surest sign of cowardice. But again, something else came to my mind. I asked myself why in the drunken state, the only “logical” thing for the poor fellow to do was to attack the people of colour – specifically, the African Americans. Why, pray he that he did not look for another white American or a latina? Is there possibility that in the drunken state he was just expressing what has been lingering in his mind in when he is sober? I don’t know! Some of these questions almost have no answer, especially now that I am sure I may never meet the boy to ask him.

So what was suppose to be my legitimate action? Join in the “party” and “discipline” the poor man for “attacking my race?” Ask the other boys to stop beating him? Just watch and cheer in my heart? Actually, I just stared as the events unfolded as I pinched myself to confirm that I was not merely dreaming. Though I was not sure what would have been my right choice of action, I am sure I know my reason for inaction. I did not want to get into trouble with the law. I was not sure whether policemen were patrolling and that by bad luck they would find me in the mix and consequently wind me up with the rest. I did not also know whether the other boys would turn on me and beat me up as well or whether the poor fellow (receiving the beating) had a gun and was going to shoot somebody for revenge – and that I may be just this somebody. Whatever happened, I acted on the principle of my best interest first. Whether or not I did what was right still remains a subject of philosophical discussion. What is suppose to be the greater ethic? What was I suppose to do? Restated, in a larger and a more undefined context, what are the silent majority suppose to do in such circumstances, realizing that I wasn’t the only one who just stood to watch the event?”  How about his girlfriend who ran away?

Lastly, no doubt the two African Americans were offended. Was their course of action right? Legitimate? Why then did they run away? I find it disturbing though that they were responding to a drunkards tirades in the manner that Dr. Patrick Lumumba christened “using a sledge hammer to respond to a mosquito bite.” I am sure common sense would have demanded a more civil action that violence. But again who would have listened to them? They were dared and they showed their “manhood” in response. Uhm, something else… was it the fault of the poor boy that he lost control of himself or the liquor’s fault? Was it his fault that he was drunk in the first place?

My bus came at the scheduled time, 9.33 pm and I jumped in. Still this event haunts my memory to date.

Over to you, what’s your take?

Church Erred in Hosting Ethnic Caucus

Post by Jesse Masai

I read a story appearing in today’s Daily Nation with great dismay.

In the piece, a new council of elders for the Kalenjin community had been assembled at the Reformed Church of East Africa’s conference center in Eldoret.

But I must, first of all declare my interest in this subject.

My father is an ordained minister with the RCEA, and has served with it in various parts of Kenya since the mid 1970s.

Am also as Kalenjin as anything else I might be, owing to my blurred ethnic heritage and command of some Kalenjin dialects.

I grew up in the RCEA, and remain committed to its confession of the Christian faith, even when am part of faith communities outside the North Rift, where the Church’s presence is strong.

In the late 80s and early 90s, I attended RCEA’s youth conferences, including one at which the late Bishop Alexander Muge challenged us to review our cozy relationship with the repressive Moi state.

And when I came to faith in August 1992, it was not difficult for me finding resonance with John Calvin – the Church’s forerunner – and Abraham Kuyper, a fitting intellectual descendant, on Church-state relations, among other issues.

Yet I remained surprised at the RCEA’s ambivalence on the pressing issues of the 90s, particularly the ethnic cleansing that would follow remarks and actions by some of the high and mighty in the Moi state.

The prolonged domination of vital positions in the Church’s leadership by the Kalenjin community then, as in the first Kibaki state, would be seen as key to understanding the RCEA’s shaky prophetic witness under both regimes.

When the RCEA, under the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK), acquiesced to the excesses of the Kibaki state prior to the disputed 2007 polls, few were surprised.

As an aspirant for the Cherangany parliamentary seat in the polls, I followed the Church’s reaction after the polls with even greater interest.

At the height of the post-election violence, the Church’s leadership – including my father – met in Eldoret to determine a united response: predictably, the meeting resulted in an ODM vs PNU and Kalenjin vs the rest retreat.

When, after 2007, the NCCK apologized for having failed the nation, I was among those who thought my own RCEA had also seen some light.

But apparently the celebration was premature, for their decision to host an ethnic caucus barely 24 months after the nation’s ethnic bloodbath smirks of nothing close to repentance.

Councils of elders of the kind the Kalenjin have assembled, as indeed other communities also are putting together, are no way to heal this nation.

I witnessed the truism of this in the 2007 campaigns, when in the multi-ethnic Cherangany various councils would be bought off day and night by the over 10 contestants.

I was, therefore, not surprised when houses began going up in smoke and people maimed, killed or evicted when competing ethnic interests felt betrayed by the overall poll outcome.

Even in areas where it was believed the violence had not been spontaneous, the organizing for power around ethnic identity was still pretty much the staple food.

In the weeks and months following the fall-outs between Prime Minister Raila Odinga and Agriculture Minister William Ruto in the ODM power-games, preliminary indications are that ethnic polarization in relation to the Kalenjin community have increased, not waned.

It’s not for nothing, therefore, that reports have recently emerged about various individuals and communities arming themselves ahead of the 2012 polls, whose violence is in some quarters expected to make the 2007 one appear like a Sunday school picnic.

While ethnic chauvinists across the political divide are busy romancing their final solutions and post-2012 power structures, the sober-minded among us remain concerned about prospects not just for the region but also the country.

From where I sit, one would expect a Church headquartered in such a region to be alive to these realities.

From where I sit, one would expect a Church headquartered in such a region to know that when tribe replaces party and common charity as a tool for political mobilization, then our road back to 2007 becomes very short indeed.

From where I sit, one would also expect a Church headquartered in such a region to know that the use of Church facilities in the manner reported on Monday can be as damning or glorious afterwards depending on the unpredictable political winds of our times, as it was for the Lutheran Church in Nazi Germany.

Make no mistake: Am saying all this for the RCEA, as I would for any denomination or faith community playing lap-dog to the high and mighty of our times.

It is still not too late for the RCEA, as indeed every other person of goodwill, to re-discover the transformative power in becoming the moral conscience of this nation.

Jesse Masai is the President and CEO of Jesse Masai. http://www.jesse-masai.com

The Hood Mentality: A Case Against The Middle Class

The revelations from the Hood exercise were very intriguing. This is random. Have you ever wondered why some people are the way they are? Taking an honest look at some of the opinions I have held about certain people and places finds me at best an ignorant bonehead and at worst some undefined animal. This could be taken in any way, including but not limited to my view of races, tribes, social classes and cultures. I know I have mentioned a few disgusting things about other people – take for example the poor (otherwise known as the lower class), which I think in a sense, I belong to and in a sense, I don’t. Again, it is awash with relativity depending on context. Whatever the case, a historical journey into what made some people what they are or why some people seem not to be trying to get out of their situation is very important before we make invaried judgmental statements about their plights.
If I were to ask why some people live in the slums and are always lacking food. I will receive various responses. Top of which go like this: they are lazy, ignorant, oppressed, born poor, have no access to resources, expect hand outs, love to be that way or are victims of circumstances. Sometimes we say that they made bad choices, they are incapable of changing, need some empowerment or some say they need to stay that way so that they can provide cheap labour. Whatever your characteristic response – good or bad, it is utterly ignorant to make blanket statements concerning other people’s plights.
If it is ignorant to make skirting remarks about such people, it is even immoral to ignore such people. It is only consistent with human dignity to seek an answer to the prevailing human situations. The journey begins from finding out why they are the way they are and how we can change the status quo. An intelligent mind may not have to go far to unravel the mystery. For in most cases, we are the authors and the defendants of the status quo. Sometimes we may not be responsible for the creation of the abhorrent situations, but we are better placed to stand against such oppressive forces. Normally, the problem of mankind is greatly abetted by the power of the silent majority. If the majority white race in America spoke decisively against racism, it surely would end, never mind that that perpetrators are quite a few one or two percent of the total population. If the Kenyan middle class unsubscribed their tribal outfits and came out fighting for the common good of all, it would only take a week to restore political order. At the wake of post election violence (PEV) in 2008, there was economic sabotage on certain products believed to belong to some of the perpetrators of the electoral fraud and ensuing violence. KCC, Safaricom among other products were boycotted, and the response was instant. This was the work of the middle class whose survival had come to the brink of precipice. The middle class have the buying power that they can use against the bourgeoisie economy in order to lift up the status of the lower class. But again, it is never their problem – they say they did not create it. Some don’t reflect on it at all while others see it as an opportunity to acquire cheap publicity – paying the house help or home cleaning peasant a peanut and getting the local watchman to call him “mzee” while he washes his cheap Dubai imported car at zero pence.
So the next day, I think about Kibera slums, downtown Minneapolis… or wherever it is I call the hoods. Those places that we don’t want to go because there are “certain people” we don’t want to blend with – I will check on why they are there and what role I have played in keeping them there. It doesn’t matter from wherever angle I look at it – as a religious animal, or a human rights activist, human beings are human beings. The defining element about humankind is dignity – if they can’t get it, we give it back to them, each one of us playing our small role in a small way, collectively makes a big role for everyone. I believe we can practice some gemenschaftgefuhl…

Methinks

Random: All human behaviour has a purpose. I don’t doubt the statement. There is a motivation for everything: from the small girl throwing tantrums in the supermarket to the gentleman opening doors at the office. It is probably not easy to discern what motives people around us may have – but one thing is for sure: people do whatever they do in order to get some desired results. This may be conscious or sub-conscious! So the next time, you have that beer invite from Mr. Kappur, even as you give consideration to the invite, don’t forget to ask yourself, what is this meant to bring out?
On a separate note: I am sure you’ve noticed that this world keeps defining things for us. Well, it does not just define things, but incessantly seeks to tell us who we are. I don’t really have to mention this, but I will anyway. Why do most adverts portray women as nude – something a kin to objects of sexual gratification? And why do men have to be portrayed as big and violent. My friend Ndambuki wa Musyoki once told me of his experience while growing up. His elder brothers would dare him to box the wall if at all he believed he was a man. Something he was more than willing to do with the obedience left to religion alone. Never mind that he indeed felt the pain. Why is it that whenever I fell down while running, at the mention of “you are a man, not a little girl,” I would rise up without tears on my face? Funny isn’t it? We are told to believe certain things about ourselves.
This is unfortunate, as the world does not even care to stop and think that we may quite indeed be in the know! I have travelled relatively enough and I have met with different definitions of what or who I am supposed to be – depending on which parts of the earth I visit. We are whom we are in spite of what we are made to be or appear to be or forced to believe to be. Thus in this attempt to tell us whom we are, mankind has always responded in two ways: resilience or concession/compromise. I have found myself wearing different hats at different times. And as Kenny Rogers sang, I have known when to fight and when to run away. Although sometimes we don’t have to fight to be a man, we sometimes may have to fight when we are men. Yet, we must increasingly question why the subject of whom we are is more important to others than ourselves. What is the motive of these labelists? Answering that question is an imperative if we are to live a life undetermined by anybody else apart from the inevitable forces of nature. Otherwise, we should stop wondering why we make great guinea pigs for the market researchers.

I Accuse The Two

I have argued here before and I will reaffirm my position today that if anybody should be tried for the Post Election violence in Kenya, it must be two notorious fellows: First baba Jimmy then baba Fidel.

But first notice that this is a hypothetical submission, with the “if” clause relating to the main verb, trial. You know from your junior English that an apodosis is the main clause in a conditional sentence; that is, in a sentence of the form If X, then Y, the apodosis is Y (expressing the conclusion).

Where there is the apodasis, there is the protasis: The dependent clause of a conditional sentence, in this case the protasis is Y. Thus in our case: If anybody should be tried for the post election violence, it must be both Kibaki and Raila. Conclusively our apodasis is “if anybody should be tried for the post election violence. While our protasis (which expresses the conclusion of the premise) is, must be Kibaki and Raila. I argue rightly so by the virtue of their newest titles: Principals.

This is only dependent on whether or not trial is necessary. I will attempt an argument for its necessity towards the end of this piece, but for now, let us operate on the assumption that trial is a necessity. Thus the thesis unfolds itself: If anybody should be tried for the post election violence, it must be Kibaki and Raila.  Make no mistake; I am not a protagonist for either, even though I have my reservation for who is the better option, faced with a situation where we can only choose between the two.

My argument is that the trial is self defeating and unjustifiable if the major culprits are not going to face the dock. Based on the principle of cause and effect, we need to investigate the effect, which was bungled election and consequent violence, in relation to its cause: who bungled the election, how and why! For Kenyans, I am sure, are not entirely mad men and women who woke up some day and thought tonight “wewe Kamau utaniona!” No way! We cannot trivialise matters this much.

History is not devoid of examples. It is only consistent with human nature to ignore historical lessons. When Pilate asked whom he should release between Jesus and Barabbas, the Jew shouted “Barabbas,” When asked what to do with Jesus; they shouted “away with him! Crucify him! Crucify him!” Remember, less than a week before that, he had made a triumphal entry into Jerusalem and a large part of the accusing mob had hailed him as King. It seems to me that upon mass bribery by Jesus’ accusers – a conglomerate substance of the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes – they had shifted loyalty. Does this sound familiar?

I know that Kenyans are relatively a forgiving lot, thanks to their ever failing memory. You can see that from the way retired president Moi has acquired a “canonical” status, you may mistake him for the most recent saint in the Vatican. How so, if Mother Teresa is not there yet? This is a question that insults my intelligence really ought to be a subject for another day. Today, some idiots are shouting themselves hoarse, calling for his return. Even Knee-call-us Be-what? (jijazie) has acquired a new face and can attempt a Kamukunji calling for reforms. Reforms my foot! Who does not know that he forced people to vote for him at gun point? That was when he was still “total man”

The trial of the perpetrators of the post election violence, starting with Kibaki, Raila as the other goats follow suit is a matter so dear to my heart. My friend Michael and his brother can confirm to you this true story of how the allegation that the administration police had been deployed to effect rigging in the opposition stronghold almost cost my life.

Without much detail, this is how it happened. On the 26th of December, armed with a backpack, I left Kisumu early in the morning for Nairobi where I was to vote in Westlands constituency. I took a minibus to Muhoroni where I was to meet with my pal, Mike at 10.00 am so that we could drive together to Nairobi. I arrived at the Muhoroni Sugar Company (MUSCO) junction at 9.15 am and decided to kill time in a makeshift bar nearby.

In less than five minutes, words had spread around that “one of the Administration Policemen” (AP) sent to rig elections had been spotted in the area – this AP was me! So as I sat down sipping my soda, the bar maid asked me to leave the bar right away because she did not want blood spilling in the premises. I asked why and she pointed me to an elderly man who was waiting outside… I walked briskly to the man who calmly asked me whom I was and I explained the nature of my trip.

While I conversed with the man, a crowed kept growing around me, and within no time, the man and I were no longer in charge of the “meeting.” It turned from a friendly conversation to an interrogation.  I watched as the agitating crowd grew and I could recognise anybody who knew me. I explained that I was waiting for a friend. I even explained that I was waiting for a friend whom I described vividly but nobody seemed to listen. I kept calling and informing my friend to drive faster for I was about to be lynched – he was on his way, though he had to take care of some business at the township.

Funny how things change within a short period of time! I had been brought up in MUSCO for ten years of my childhood between ages four and fourteen. My dad had taught in the Company School, Muhoroni Success, which was a household name then before he moved to other departments within the company. He had been there for ten years and was known in person to many locals.

I could not believe that those adults who had caused me trouble by telling my dad that they had met me in some “undesirable corners” were not there to recognise and rescue me. This was the time i needed such nosey people – but alas! it was not my day. Everybody who listened to my defense thought I was a good storyteller, something that fortified their belief that I was a PNU urgent sent to steal their votes. My plea of innocence fell on deaf ears, in spite of the fact that I challenged them to go with me to D44, the house I grew up in and confirm from the present inhabitant if they knew my history or of any Kidha that once lived there. That was a fable to them. I invoked every name in the book, all in vain.

At this time, a drunken youth had arrived and in his irrational stupor was calling upon my immediate lynching. Fortunately he was too drunk to even lift the rock he wanted to place on me. However, his war cry reached its crescendo and other youths began making the same call! Just as the situation begun to get out of hand, my pal, Mike pulled over. Luckily enough, he had lived there longer and was still known to quite a number. In addition, I believe his morphological build up, which automatically gives him out as the son of his father played to our advantage. He just asked one of them – I don’t even remember the name – “what are you people doing?” and everything changed. I was released from this custody and with a sigh of relief we drove fast to Nairobi, fired up and hungrier to change the system than before!

Now this is the background upon which I stake my claim as a victim of the post election violence. It is my valid evidence that this violence did not just happen. It was necessitated. This evidence, like a two-edged sword, cuts both sides. It seems to show the people’s alertness at the possibility of rigging as well as their preparedness to stop any rigging from happening. This is my question: Who should have been responsible for my death, if it all it happened? Would it be me who travelled to Muhoroni to pick up my pal? Is it the would-be lynching mob? Would it be Raila on whose behalf, votes were being protected? Would it be Kibaki who was said to have sent the “AP?” You may reason depending on what side of your bread is buttered, but I assure you my mother, father and siblings would have been mourning! And the truth is that many such innocent families mourned and some still are! Some are even known to me.

This, in addition to my Kenyan citizenship, qualifies me as a stakeholder in this case. I have a stake in this process. In fact, I am entitled to compensation for my emotional pain and anguish. I have my own evidence and if Occampo really wants it, he can pay me a visit.

But even as I insist that Kibaki and Raila must face trial and that is if the trial is necessary at all. I am questioning whether this is the only way we can go. Or if this is the best way we should go!

I am not sure whether we need the trials or not – I am really confused on this matter. But I know one thing deep down my heart – that truth cannot be concealed and that the government of grand confusion that is currently governing Kenya is a charade! Hypothetically, we don’t have a legitimate government and we are living a lie. It is a lie because we all know that Kenya is supposed to be a democratic government – which means we are supposed to be led by legitimately elected leaders. Yet as evident to all, the current composition betrays this truth! We have gullibly accepted a fraud in the name of pragmatism. We claimed that if the “collusion” will bring peace, then so be it and swore in Raila as PM sharing executive authority with Kibaki. Another lie, for we all know who calls the shots – which is no longer my subject of interest! But my pain lies in the fact that we can trade falsehood for convenience. Accepting this immoral arrangement is not different from the Kalenjin-Kikuyu MPs alliance turned fiasco which was to trade Mau for Ringera or vice versa – in the name of political expediency.

From history, we now know that the 19th-20th century pragmatism of Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, John Dewey et al, has seen the last nail on its coffin. What seems to work may never work, but even if it does, it doesn’t negate the fact that it is a betrayal of truth. Martin Luther, the German reformist cried loud “Peace whenever possible, truth at all times!”

Truth is absolute. There are only three possible answers – based on this premise: Kenyans fought because of Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga. Either, Kibaki rigged the election, in which case he should pay for it. Or, Raila lost the election and thus should pay for incitement. Or Kibaki is responsible for both rigging and use of force to keep his office and Raila is responsible for incitement to violence, even though he won. But to say that none of the two won and therefore they should share power is a hoax. And to spiritualize this fraud in the name of God’s will, as some of my friends in the religious circles did is the greatest height of hypocrisy and abuse of spiritual office.

My take: The two should be tried. Based on available evidence, the ICC will determine who is guilty of the two or both, alongside their cheerleaders! Then and only then after we have cut of the head of impunity will we deal with the hands, feet etc. Then only will we tell the rest of the nation that it is immoral to fight ones brother. That it is stupid to be incited by politicians. Then we shall live with the truth as our King. Then our National prayer and anthem to “the god of all creation” shall be answered: Blessing our nation and giving us Justice as our shield and defender! And we shall “dwell in unity and peace,” having been liberated from falsehood. Maybe then, “plenty shall be found within our borders” for we shall have not only reigned on the prince of impunity but also the King of impunity!

And while they are at it, Karua should be on the dock on behalf of Kibaki and Orengo on behalf of Raila just as it was when the country bled. By the way, does Karua still believe that Kibaki won? I know Orengo has not changed his mind yet! Just remember once rule in criminal justice: Kibaki and Raila are both innocent law abiding citizens until proven guilty or otherwise. Don’t you love the law?

Next, I may write about my experience at Alfajiri on the last night before the fraudulent victory was declared!