Monday, July 10, 2006

 

THE PRESIDENCY AND CIRCUMCISION

The sentiments of Dominic Odipo on the electability of a non circumcised president in Kenya belay the wider problem of leadership in the country. (Eastandard, July 10, 2006). Over the years tribalism has permeated the political culture of the country to the extent that merit, qualifications and commitment are secondary. In every level of elected leadership in the country the issue of tribe is paramount. Even in cosmopolitan constituencies like those in Nairobi, the tribal constitution and concentration of the population determine who gets elected.

Over the years the issue of the tribe has been hammered into the minds of Kenyans to the extent that we no longer see ourselves as Kenyans first and tribes second. We are tribes first and Kenyans second. There are those who would say the tribe is not a factor in their national thinking, they are silent and in the minority. History has taught us otherwise. When Kenyatta was president the Kikuyus received favors from the government in jobs, ministerial appointments, parastatals, land allocation etc disproportionately from the other tribes. When Moi took over he replaced the Kikuyus with Kalenjins in meting out favors and preferential treatment. Kibaki has now reversed the trend and put Kikuyus back on the most favored table.

National issues will unite people irrespective of tribes. We have seen it happen in Kenya right from the war of independence and lately with the formation of LDP, although it was a group of disgruntled Kanu elements, and during the constitutional referendum. We have seen the nation coming together in times of natural disasters and other man made tragedies. The people have transcended the tribe and pulled together as a nation in the recent past. As soon as these tragic events pass we retreat to our tribal cocoons and seek to promote the egoistic interests.

The principal culprits in propagating tribalism, in my opinion, are our leaders. Over the past forty years, during election time the leaders hammer on the tribal theme at the expense of other agenda. The electorate is bombarded with the false gospel of tribal supremacy. They are told the enemy is the other tribe, if you elect the other tribe you will deny your own the chance to eat and consequently the chance for you to collect any crumbs. From previous practice and experience, the people regrettably have seen this happening and therefore elect their own. But if we were a nation that valued and promoted meritocracy we would be a nation that fights tribalism. When the area is tribally homogeneous we transcend to the clan and filial ties to promote ourselves. Rarely is merit a prerequisite for leadership.

Right from the top, the seats of power are shared on tribal considerations. It does not matter whether you have the relevant qualifications to lead a ministry, what matters is if you are of the relevant tribe. Merit is thrown out of the window and that is why we have a bloated cabinet with people manning ministries in which they have no background training or experience.

What has all this got to do with circumcision? We may have the best candidate for the presidency from the Luo community, he may have all the best credentials and present the best agenda for the nation and still be unelectable. By virtue of lack of physical mutilation of genitalia of their male species, the Luos are in the minority in the Kenyan tribal cultural practices. When threatened by a common enemy, the Luo, the Kenyans will revert to their common bond and perception of cultural supremacy by virtue of their having faced a common torture, the knife. That is why the Kikuyus perceive themselves closer, culturally, to the Luhyas and Mijikenda than to the Luos and vise versa.

Circumcision as a tribal rite of passage is consistently dying. Among the Kikuyus it no longer carries much significance to the initiates. Most, if not all, are circumcised in hospitals and clinics. This is increasingly being performed at younger ages when the significance of the ceremony is lost to the initiates. There is no longer the glory of withstanding the knife and the teaching that went with it. As a rite of passage it is obsolete and therefore irrelevant in the modern world. There are some tribes that still hang on the past performance like the Bukusu, but with the advent of AIDS the tribal circumciser is fast joining the jobless crew. The pain of cutting the foreskin or plucking teeth is pain. You cannot and should not apportion degrees to either. Neither should you determine leadership on whether you have withstood either pain. Our leaders know this but they will not dare tell it to their people. They thrive in the perpetuation of peoples’ ignorance that the enemy lies in the foreskin and not the government policies and their execution.

Time has come for this nation to grow out of tribal psychosis and promote national leadership based on merit and vision. Loss of foreskin does not instill wisdom and leadership, it instills a permanent scar and momentary pain. The covering of the glans is not the covering of the brain, the two are not related and that is why God in His inestimable wisdom placed the two in opposite ends. To judge a leader by removal of foreskin is not only immoral but also downright degrading to both the potential leader and the electorate. What we need to do is to remove the mask we conveniently adorn as protectors of culture and traditions, while what we are protecting is greed and avarice for leadership and exploitation of the masses.


Charles Wairia

Comments:
Hi Charles,
I think we all pass the buck when we point at "our leaders". We are the ones who give them audience.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?