God of Hunger HTML version

While both schools affirm the supreme value of isonomy - equality before the
law - the difference between the two is in their different attitudes to politics.
The liberal approach assumes politics to be a matter of trial and error. The
democracy of a People’s Republic on the other hand, is based upon confidence
in political prescription; ab initio it admits to political totality. A predominant
collective purpose; all social acts are measured against an all-embracing and
coherent ideology and politics is defined as the art of applying this philosophy
to the organization of society.
Distilling the lessons of history we would be wise to be aware of the un-
anticipated outcomes of any revolution. Uhuru, our cry for freedom, may well
lead to something unforeseen if we adopt liberal democracy. We cannot afford
the luxury of political ends arrived at by trial and error. We have no option but
to lead our people to nationhood with the least offering of choice. Aware of the
past, let us steer a steady course to nationhood.
What kind of Nationhood?
Of the disciplined kind. Not the Western European kind based on liberal or
social democracy. In forging our national politics let us instead emulate the
discipline of the Bolsheviks and speak of and create a nation in which party,
state and people are one and the same thing.
In matters economic let us keep in mind the resolve of the Meijis; Japan’s
rulers who demonstrated an unwavering sense of purpose. Their example is
perhaps too elitist, but worth bearing in mind. At present, we must emulate the
Bolshevik experiment: concentrate our energy to transform our fundamental
element: the peasant. Let us, like the Soviet Union, resolve to better ourselves
as a nation of peasants.
How? By admitting to the abiding character of all peasants throughout the
world: their innate conservatism. And by destroying it.
We shall not progress as a nation unless we transform our peasant society.
How? Get rid of the tribal system and its customs. Go for a top down
transformation. Destroy the power of the Chiefs. Instead of the party, it is they
who still wield influence at village level. Get rid of them and the glue of
tradition begins to weaken. Replace them with party loyalists answerable only
to the centre.
Next, dissolve the tribes. Each with its customs and loyalties, each is an
obstacle to national unity. That requires a new dispensation: a mixing of the
people. Let us move them out of their tribal areas and into new surroundings. It
happens in towns. It must also happen in the country. How?