CNN: Can Democracy Thrive in Africa?

[Dayuhan]

I post these thoughts not to prescribe what we must do, only to help us understand what must be done. There is a difference. Less is more.

Possibly I misinterpreted this, posted on another thread dealing with the same subject...

Soooo, snipe at the symptoms, but ignore the problems?

I have to go with Henry David Thoreau on this one:

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root."

I choose to hack at the root.

"I choose to hack at the root" seems to go beyond merely understanding what must be done, but possibly I overextended the metaphor.

[davidbfpo]

A focus on Zimbabwe, the intricate power play by that superb player Robert Mugabe, but it was the last paragraph that caught my attention:

Professor Goran Hyden of the University of Florida gives a very precise summation in his paper entitled “Between State and Community: Challenges to redesigning governance in Africa” by saying:

“Recent deliberations over what to do with the problematic forms of governance in Zimbabwe shows that the rule that you are either with me or against me continues to be a powerful force in deciding relations between African heads of state and the rest of the world” (2006:16).

Link:http://www.opendemocracy.net/cliffor...-08-25%2018:05

[JMA]

A focus on Zimbabwe, the intricate power play by that superb player Robert Mugabe, but it was the last paragraph that caught my attention:

Link:http://www.opendemocracy.net/cliffor...-08-25%2018:05

Realism must prevail here. The Greeks and Romans started trials with this democracy thing hundreds of years ago but the 1967 coup d'état (Greece) and fascism in Italy (1922-43) proves how fragile this whole democracy thing can be. Stable democracy in Africa? Not in the lifetimes of anyone alive today.

[John T. Fishel]

In fact, Dayuhan, the argument you make is much the same as that made during the ratification debate over the US constitution. Many of those present at the Convention argued that a Bill of Rights was not needed because the structure of the govt protected rights... I would argue that the minimal conditions of the definition I proposed generally protect minority rights through the requirement for sufficient freedom of speechm press, assembly, and religion coupled with an impartial independent mechanism for disput settlement minimally protect the rights of the minoriities. Of course, I would never object to getting specific in the constitution of a state.

Cheers

JohnT

[Dayuhan]

I would argue that the minimal conditions of the definition I proposed generally protect minority rights through the requirement for sufficient freedom of speechm press, assembly, and religion coupled with an impartial independent mechanism for disput settlement minimally protect the rights of the minoriities. Of course, I would never object to getting specific in the constitution of a state.

And I would argue that given the frequency and vigor with which minorities are stomped by majorities even when structural protections are present, the protection needs to be as specific as possible, and needs regular review to see that it's actually functioning.

It is an old argument; dress us up archaic and we could re-enact the debates of the founding fathers. The debate endures because the issue is so fundamental to any system based on majority rule.

[Fuchs]

The best protection for minorities is not written on paper, but based on party power games.

A minority can become a key player, even a king-maker. It can be the decisive few per cent in a democracy. It can play the role of state-loyal group that is above average involved in national authorities.

The truly powerless minorities are those which
- have no economic power
- are not represented in state authorities (especially executive positions such as justice, police, city planning)
- have no own party, nor do form a wing of a powerful party


The Turkish people in Germany are such a minority. The only thing that's left for them is indeed the constitutional protection and the rule of law. They failed to gain influence through anything else. In fact, even much smaller minorities are much more powerful because of better political strategies.

[JMA]

The best protection for minorities is not written on paper, but based on party power games.

A minority can become a key player, even a king-maker. It can be the decisive few per cent in a democracy. It can play the role of state-loyal group that is above average involved in national authorities.

The truly powerless minorities are those which
- have no economic power
- are not represented in state authorities (especially executive positions such as justice, police, city planning)
- have no own party, nor do form a wing of a powerful party


The Turkish people in Germany are such a minority. The only thing that's left for them is indeed the constitutional protection and the rule of law. They failed to gain influence through anything else. In fact, even much smaller minorities are much more powerful because of better political strategies.

Ok, so where in Africa do we see a healthy multi-party democracy?

That not being in place where do we see a rock solid constitution with minority rights guarantees entrenched?

Economic power? That's an easy one. Just grab it and to hell with the consequences.

So Africa gets zero out of your three. As I said, not in the lifetimes of any living person...

[JMA]

In fact, Dayuhan, the argument you make is much the same as that made during the ratification debate over the US constitution. Many of those present at the Convention argued that a Bill of Rights was not needed because the structure of the govt protected rights... I would argue that the minimal conditions of the definition I proposed generally protect minority rights through the requirement for sufficient freedom of speechm press, assembly, and religion coupled with an impartial independent mechanism for disput settlement minimally protect the rights of the minoriities. Of course, I would never object to getting specific in the constitution of a state.

Cheers

JohnT

In the African context who would enforce the provisions of such a constitution?