I came across an incredibly revealing set of data (from a longer report) on Gabriel Oguda’s wall that supported a contention I have always held – and kumiraites have fought tooth and nail to out rightly deny or minimize.
And with the death of one of the individuals mentioned in the report (Kenneth Matiba), the very dynamics that form the title of this piece are predictably playing out – on my wall and elsewhere in the general public – again!
The data citing a February 2007 piece by Prof. Rafael Kaplinsky titled “Capitalist accumulation in the periphery — the Kenyan case re‐examined” lays bare the usurpation of state resources by the likes of Kenneth Matiba (RIP), Njenga Karume (RIP), Chris Kirubi and Maina Wanjigi – with Jomo Kenyatta at the center of the usurpation!
The article also cites the works of noted developmental economist Colin Leys (Underdevelopment in Kenya: The Political Economy of Neo-Colonialism) to buttress its fundamental argument.
All told, the question that I continue to ask and kumiraites and other regime apologists avoid or dance around is a variant of the same question Ley and Kaplinsky ask:Is successful capitalist accumulation at the periphery of the national (global) economy possible?
Short answer: Absolutely!I am yet to shell out the $42.50 (~KSh.4,250) that the research site Taylor & Francis Online charges for Kaplinsky’s entire study but suffice to say, what I have thus far combined with the works of Ley, Himbara, Branch and Hornsby – not to mention my own research, observations and comments from visitors to this and other walls, Kaplinsky’s piece rubbishes the often-cited and self-serving narrative that the individuals mentioned in the report are “moguls”, “industrialists” and “hard-working patriots”.
They are not – certainly not in the traditional sense of the words. They are beneficiaries of their ethnicity and proximity to Kenya's presidencies.
Additionally, there is little doubt that what’s good for the few connected and monied Kenyans is not what’s good for Kenya writ large!
What Kenyans have seen in the circling-the-wagon mentality displayed by the main community at the center of the country’s economy is what Ley refers to as pre-emption; a warding off if you may, of any and all “attacks directed against the educated, propertied and privileged strata of the Kikuyu society” (p.206).I’d replace the word “attack/s” with the more apt expressions including “hold accountable” and “dig into” maybe "forensics into".
Asking the “educated, propertied and privileged” in Kenya to explain how they accumulated so much wealth in such a short period is not “attacking” them.“Digging into” the finances of the shadowy figures behind Kenya’s center of power is not "attacking" them nor is it “tribalism” or “finishing off” someone’s “sons” or “daughters”.
It is doing due diligence when a KENATCO, UCHUMI, ICDC or Kenya Airways runs into financial difficulties – again – and one or two individuals feature prominently – on the institution’s board or management.
It is investigating the whereabouts of the country’s elephants and rhinos.It is asking – firmly and repeatedly – why the country’s chief executive feels it important to offer protection to the estate of a former cabinet minister whose wealth was shrouded in secrecy.
In short, Jomo Kenyatta and those around him – and later on Moi, Kibaki and Uhuru – successfully masked their patently ethnic-driven consolidation of an economic system that placed tribal identity and kinship way ahead of national interest.
Demagoguing patriotism and nationalism, Kenya’s presidents, especially its first, second and fourth, shamelessly blended their obsession with retention of power with “development” or “maendeleo”.
In so doing, Kenya’s presidents bamboozled their mostly tribal bases into believing in their (patriotic) and cult of personality altruism i.e. “Harambee”, “Nyayo” and I’d argue, “Kibaki Tosha” and definitely “Kumira Kumira” and Tano Tena”.
These “Big Men” were then able to goad their base into coalescing support around their leadership even when it was apparent by most objective measurements that these so-called “national” and “development-minded leaders” were just in it (leadership) for themselves, their families and close friends.
So while maintaining deference to the dearly departed, let me point out that Kenneth Matiba was not the self-made patriot his supporters have made him out to be.He was the beneficiary of an economic development model that continued along the (extractive and exploitive) path set up by the colonialists.
The much-hyped Kenyanization (or Africanization) of the country’s bureaucracy that was supposed to emblemize Kenya’s “maendeleo” or “madaraka” happened. However, the process simply saw replacement of the white colonial faces with black ones; people whose selection to these positions was more often than not, a function of their ethnicity and/or proximity to "Mzee"!
The incoming Kenyatta government effectively retained the fundamental structure set up by its erstwhile colonial master Britain. (Ley p.259-260).As evidenced by the violent and murderous struggle for Kenya’s independence, violence and deadliness regularly repeated since, the socio-political and economic structure laid out by the colonialists was neither stable nor sustainable.
Somehow, the economic structure the likes of Matiba and Kirubi inherited from those “exploitative wabeberu” did not seem to be all that “exploitative” now that it was lining their pockets and the bank accounts of the other for-bearers of the kumira! kumira!! crowd.
As evidenced by the accolades showered on the late Kenneth Matiba by the mostly Mt. Kenya/Central crowd, not to mention the sympathy and "protection" respectively offered the ailing Chris Kirubi and Nicholas Biwott's (RIP) estate, these individuals may have been beneficiaries of ill-gotten monies i.e. "crooks", but at least they are “our” crooks – this quote paraphrased from America's 32nd POTUS Franklin (FDR) Roosevelt!