Armed Civilians a threat to stability

The world has for a long time been a center stage for acute competition, domination and power. Initially it was a rule of the mighty against those without the physicality to challenge for power. But as civilization ‘westernization’ occurred, the rule of the intelligent usually less physical took center-stage and sought to control physical power which has worked with mixed reactions.

First physical power was so feared that only intelligent militarists controlled power (like armed generals) and they in turn feared uncontrolled civilian power. At the end of the 16^th century in China for instance Oda Nobunga sought to end freedom of civilians to carry swords for defense or decoration especially the Ikkō-ikki who sought to end Samurai rule. The Samurai in turn later in 1876 were also banned from carrying swords and a standing army and police force was created.

This fear of armed civilian continues to plague contemporary polities with a fear that governments might at a given time be unable to impose on its populace in case of unpopularity. America is abuzz with calls for gun control citing incidents of irresponsible gun use with dire consequences. While the call is undeniably justifiable the end game is de-militarization of the civilian population that will help confine power to bureaucracies and not the rule of the might. This is in hindsight with global trend of giving armies special treatment, holding them above the law and swelling their budgets every year as part of appeasement policies.

During the world war 2, after Brits were armed in case of occupation George Orwell decried their inability to see beyond Germans and realize that for the first time in history power was literally in the hands of the proletariat, when no revolution was borne.

In Kenya the Maasai Turukana, Samburu and other Northern Kenya tribes carry arms for self-defense because of the inability of the government to protect them. The area recently became the center for a world shocker when more than 50 elite policemen were gunned down by bandits. There area, Baraghoi, remains isolated to date with the Kenyan  security apparatus still unable to enter the area and secure it.

As the world reaches the throes of ultimate civilization and negation of militarism, the physically endowed and or armed parts of the populace who do not share in the luxury of the intelligent will come calling. Small arms proliferation continues to be one of the biggest threats to stability in Africa than military tyrants with more discontent being a reality in marginalized communities of Africa like Nothern Nigerians, Southern Sudanese in Pibor, Kenyans in the North  Rift, NFD and coast, Mali etc, we expect more civilian challenge to bureaucratic power.

Politics of fear

Renowned broadcast journalist Edward R. Murrow , ‘A nation of Sheep will breed a government of wolves’ is what transpired in America after 9/11 leading eventually to the hasty passing of the Patriot Act in 2001 that has drained all most all civil liberties Americans enjoyed.

Our own government seem to be catching up fast and Kibunja who is seeming less Mzalendo everyday has declared mentioning land issues or historical injustice tantamount to Kenya’s most feared crime, ‘hate speech and incitement.’ This is outright muzzling akin to satirical novels of African tyrants.

As I had argued earlier on this blog this year is an instrument of politics of fear, not good for free thought and will eventually be used for constitutional attrition against gains of freedom of expression.

It is understandable that Kenyans like post 9/11 Americans will not scrutinize the implications of these muzzling due to communally held concern for a repeat of 2007 post poll chaos.

However we also know government cannot be allowed to be jury and executioner, to determine content and context of speech and impose prohibition especially on a very sane issue around Kenyan politics. The brief demonstration by the lessening Mzalendo and Bitange Ndemo’s assault on Makau Mutua, show that they and only them interpret what constitutes inflaming statements. This they exercise with suspected political inclinations and vested interest. How sure are we that the new found power of politics of fear is not driving us back to the Nyayo days?

They are already armed to the teeth to send online users into silence, discrediting and persecution.

Notably though we understand that freedom of speech does not include the fabled ‘shouting fire fire in a theatre full of people’ risking causing a stampede. The advisory is a caution on tune of conversation around the sensitive issue of land. It should involve both divides knowing that both sides have direct and vested interest in the issues and rightly so, (Ruto comes from Rift Valley with notable concerns over land). And as the constitution gives us rights we must also understand they come with responsibilities and grave consequences for breaking the law.

We own the media!

It is that season again that politicians show just to what extent they own this country. They will barter whole communities to self-beneficial causes n flout money around like a carrot n we will mindlessly follow.

It is sad though that instruments that should try to shift us from this self-imposed shackles should be so compromised. It has been my argument that the media (my profession) has never been impartial in Kenya. And as I argued we should adopt American style of journalism where media houses are out-rightly leftist or right and let the reader decide from a perspective of knowing who controls the media house.

As it stands media in Kenya is controlled by owners, political interest and most at times tribal inkling of its owners. (With all campaigns against tribalism I wonder why media houses have not yet been put in perspective in terms of fueling the vice.)

In recent times we have seen an influx in media personality poaching which stands as a strategic move of increasing readership and viewership. However subject to the knowledge that media houses are tools in the hands of their owners in terms of editorial policy this is a sorry situation.

The media which is supposed to sell the gospel of non-tribalism is owned by tribal overlords. It not uncommon that they run opinion polls of very contentious natures, will announce results that will agitate electorates, will give a black out to issue based candidates and will pretend to be impartial.

The most troubling thing tough is that while the mass of Kenyans follow the media personalities to their new abode like wildebeests they are being set up for political slaughter. It’s a wonder that in this time of elections it has become inherent for media personalities poaching.

The bubble might pop, I know, when we realize as Kenyans we have been wooed to some media houses by personalities who will sell political propaganda (sometimes tribal) and a few with integrity like Mohamed Ali will have the balls to turn down the salary motivation and return to their niches refuting to be pawned.