You ask: In the cities/villages you have visited, have you noticed a need or desire from the people to rebel? We studied in class how peasants, or the poor, or those with fewer civil rights are typically the ones to start a rebellion. Why don't the black Africans demand more from their governments?

That's an excellent question. There is a big difference between having a need or desire to rebel and having the means or the willingness to rebel. I would say that hundreds of millions of Africans need to rebel and at least tens of millions are somewhat attracted to the idea of rebellion. However, rebellions of the type you have seen in European history are not, to the best of my knowledge, currently simmering in any African nation—unless you consider the movement to redistribute the land of white settlers to be such a rebellion. The great popular, poor, peasant-style revolts of Africa happened fifty years ago. They were rebellions of mistreated Africans against colonial powers who had worn out their welcome and proven vulnerable. These rebellions and revolutions were accompanied by great optimism, empowering rhetoric and high expectations. Black Africans demanded much of their governments and believed that much could be achieved. Obviously, they were disappointed. This disappointment echoes through much of African literature.

What percentage of current African heads of state have a background in the armed forces? What percentage of them took power forcibly from their predecessors? What are the three most interesting and elaborate titles that these leaders have given themselves? Visit the websites of Amnesty International or Journalists without Borders to learn about the human rights record of selected African countries with regards to protesters, dissidents, journalists, and opposition political parties.

Researching the questions above will give you a preliminary understanding of the nature of many current African leaders. The ones who came before them were, in some cases, much worse. Many aspiring, progressive, political figures in Africa's recent history have been intimidated, deported, tortured, or killed. Many political protests have ended in orchestrated state violence, in huge numbers of civilian dead. In one-party, dictatorial states, the perpetrators of this sort of violence are rarely, if ever, sought after, caught, charged, or convicted. How many of you know why Tiananmen Square is famous? Is there any one in the class who is familiar with a similar incident in recent African history?

In all of the countries that I have visited, people grumble and complain before carefully selected audiences about their governments. Many middle and lower class citizens believe their leadership to be corrupt. Many of them want change. But there is a great deal of fatalism and gloomy acceptance of the state of things. People sigh, "That's Africa," and continue to do nothing about it. What sort of intimidation would make you avoid politics or agitation? If everyone in a country has the right to express him or herself, how might that country still end up silencing all meaningful debate in favor of endorsing one group's view of things? What sort of changes in the United States of America do you think would silence all opposition and turn it into a one-party state? If you were an African, under what circumstances would you choose to simply forget the problems of your African nation and attempt to smuggle yourself into Europe? (Have you read about the violence at the Spanish border posts in Morocco? Sean, Tuuli, and I just traveled with some aspiring illegal immigrants when we hitched a ride on top of a truck full of goats and drove for a couple of days through the Sahara Desert towards Libya. Many of the Africans on this truck intended to cross the Mediterranean and enter Italy illegally.)



Classroom Page