Black Man\'s Burden by Basil

¶ … Black Man's Burden" by Basil Davidson

The inappropriate path towards Nationalism in Africa: A book review on "The Black Man's Burden: Africa and the curse of the nation-states" by Basil Davidson

Throughout history, the most marginalized race in most countries in the age of capitalism and technological advancement remains to be the African race. Driven to live a life of bondage through slavery in most Western societies and being colonized in their own land, the Africans have not yet defined their true sense of identity as peoples. Instead, what was developed in their psyche is the feeling that they were indeed a race that would inevitably experience prejudice and discrimination in any society in the world.

In the book, "The Black Man's Burden: Africa and the curse of the nation-states," author Basil Davidson provides his own account and theory about how, in the midst of an almost-politically-free African region, its peoples have yet to experience true freedom, in the sense that they cannot govern themselves effectively, often falling prey to the promises of Nationalism, but failing to live the ideal model of a nation-state.

The thesis of the book is elucidated in the Introduction, wherein Davidson states that, "...nation-statism looked like liberation...But it did not continue as a liberation...it was not a restoration of Africa to Africa's own history, but the onset of a new period of indirect subjection to the history of Europe" (10). This meant that the path towards the establishment of a nation-state in the African region -- and in effect, liberation for African countries -- has been modeled after the European experience and political system. Thus, the book centers on the theory that what made nation-statism a 'failed experiment' in Africa is because the social and economic structure of the region is designed in such a way that European political structure is not applicable nor even close to resembling the African socio-political systems.

This problem was discussed in two-levels. The first one subsisted to the argument that most societies in Africa are not appropriate to the development of a nation-state simply because these societies or communities do not have established social classes. Compared to the Europeans, whose basic social structure is determined through the existence of a higher and lower classes as well as the middle class, African communities are devoid of this characteristic.

This point was illustrated in the book, wherein the author argues, "...this irresistible nation-statism took its rise in a period when economic development in Europe fostered and required the presence in society of acutely stratified classes" (133). This meant that nation-statism was established at the wrong context: introducing a political framework that is based on clear distinctions between the rich and the poor is simply not applicable in Africa, where social hierarchy is present only among its members rather than institutions.

Take as an example the experience of Nigeria, whose attempt to experience independence through self-governance in a political system that is European-oriented led to their further colonization to the country. As the author stated, "[t]hey accepted the colonial legacy...on the rash assumption that they could master it. But as things turned out, it mastered them" (181). The confusion and inability of the new government to govern and control the tribal-ist social system of the country led to further chaos rather than stability and order.

The Nigerian example brought home the argument that the Africans have lost their own sense of history because they have been given a different kind of history by their colonizers, the Europeans. Like Nigeria, other African societies where given 'extended histories,' where one African society associates their experiences through the years through the European experience. The author shared the fact that nation-statism is not applicable because Africa has a collective social structure, wherein affinities are created not through geographic location, but rather, through family and kinship (206).

This characteristic led to a disastrous establishment of nation-statism. This political framework is aimed at creating a political system ran by individuals and leaders who are objective -- that is, they work towards achieving the common good of their society. However, in Africa, politics does not work this way. What happens is that subjectivity is always present in governance, where one's interest is for his clan or tribe only bad intentions targeted towards an enemy clan or tribe. This set-up hardly characterizes an objective political organization. Because of this, according to the author, one can hardly think why nation-statism was even tried out to become as a political structure in most African societies.

At the second-level, Davidson argued that apart from the inappropriateness of the social and political structures of African societies to nation-statism, there was also the dilemma that inevitably, societies establishing their independent governments are actually establishing a government under 'indirect' European control. And why not? The political framework used was primarily European and the supporters of this political exercise were, of course, the Europeans.

As aptly termed by the author, the "black man's burden" is one that is "internally produced...externally created" (303). The internal structures (i.e., socio-political structures) of African societies are inherently created to promote collectivism and a different brand or kind of leadership -- definitely not representative in kind. Furthermore, political governance is externally created because the political framework in which most independent African societies used for years were created and developed for peoples that have an altogether different kind of history than they have.