MY PHILOSOPHY OF CHANGE Many times, in response to my views on various contemporary issues, especially on this media, many worthy critics have questioned what I believe in. One (read Mokinyi Lenna) has even branded me a rebel without cause. Some have however been, to say the cery least, hostile opponents who disapprove of anything I postulate without delving into the logic behind my arguments. I must confess that some of these criticism have been perplexing. I have on some occasions wondered whether or not some of these people have been unfair to my innocent views. But be that as it may, I am happy that more often than not, criticisms - whether positive and negative - have provided me with moments for self reflection. A few times, I have even reviewed my position on certain issues based on informative and convincing alternative thoughts from critics. In deed this is the essence of discourse of reason! What am I? That is the question! I am convinced beyond any reasonable doubt that I am not a conformist. I am a rebel; an activists against status quo in the power politics of my country Kenya, especially its acquisition and its use. My observation of the politics of Kenya reveals, on either side of the current divide, three approaches to politics, and therefore three approaches to the acquisition and use of power in the the country. There are politicians in both Jubilee and CORD, who see power as something to be acquired for its own sake; to satisfy something in their own egotism or to acquire for themselves the fruits of power. This is the category that is responsible for the massive corruption, poverty, inequality and impunity in Kenya. They belong in both sides of the divide and continue to impede socio-economic and political development of the country. Then there are those who see power as something to be used for purposes of minor and immediate adjustments in the society. This group sees the state of Kenya as amoral phenomenon to be accepted in all its fundamental respects and only pursue or allow adjustments in terms of obvious points of inefficiency and in respect to the particular pressures of discontent. These politicians assume that the existing social framework in Kenya is sound and reasonable; but more importantly, just ‘is’ in the sense that it exists. Thus, beginning with complete acceptance of the status quo, Kenya as a society is viewed in an essentially superficial way and the question they ask is: ‘How can Kenya be made a little more efficient?’ These politicians are conscious of points of pressure, seeming to be conscious to discontent and seeks, in response to that pressure, marginal adjustments in the organization of society for the purpose of relieving the discontent and removing the points of pressure. Majority in this group interpret and construct the Kenyan society in simplistic character of tribes and classes and do not believe in the possibility, neither do they seek, the alteration of the current power relations. They are contented with tinkering once in a while to placate restive public. Finally, there are the idealists, amongst whom I believe I belong, who seek to arrange fundamental change in the society. This nascent category of rebel activists begin by rejecting existing social relationships in the country and seek to construct a model of how the Kenyan society should be ordered. This group is concerned with the basic changes that are necessary to effect total transformation of the nation from one state to the other. The moral foundation for action of this emerging group of rebel activists revolves around the question of distribution of wealth within Kenya. The group seeks to entrench a libertarian but social democratic system as a matrix within which wealth is distributed and individual liberty preserved in the country. Like all political leaders who belong to this idealistic stream and believe in the need for fundamental change, I have found myself constantly in the presence of personal, moral imperative: How to isolate a single, central thesis of belief from the welter of conflicting moral categories. Of course, I am concerned with equitable distribution of wealth, with social stability and order, with individual liberty. But always the suggestion has lurked that these categories are in conflict and that a political idealist must make a choice. I reject this notion. The more that I have thought about the morality of politics, the more there has emerged for me a single touchstone of right and wrong; and the touchstone is found in the notion of equality. Kenya, as it is presently populated, is composed of a people of diverse origins pursuing the common objective of survival. Stripped of all rhetorical excesses, this is the point at which social organization of the Kenyan nation begins. However, even at the survival level, this implies the survival of every individual; and if one accepts that everybody is entitled to survive, then one has conceded the foundation of the notion of equality. There is only one supreme, moral imperative that cannot be affected by time, by circumstances and by seasons, by man’s moods or intellectual distractions, by the injunctions of philosophers or the proclamations of pastors and Imams, and it is the notion that Kenya, as a social organization, exists to serve everybody or it has no moral foundation. Kenya, as it is presently populated, is composed of a people of diverse origins pursuing the common objective of survival. Stripped of all rhetorical excesses, this is the point at which social organization begins. However, even at the survival level, this implies the survival of every individual; and if one accepts that everybody is entitled to survive, then one has conceded the foundation of the notion of equality amongst citizens. This, indeed, is my philosophy of change for Kenya. It is my ideology. It informs my engagement in every process and with every group. God bless Kenya! God bless Africa!
Posted on: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 21:05:47 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015