Kenyatta and the Development of African Nationalism in Kenya
| Published date | 01 September 1970 |
| Date | 01 September 1970 |
| Author | Donald C. Savage |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070207002500305 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Kenyatta
and
the
Development
of
African
Nationalism
in
Kenya
Donald
C.
Savage
One
of
the
illusions
of
1960
was
the
widespread
belief,
particu-
larly
in
liberal
circles,
that
independence
marked
a sharp
break
with
the
past.
In
the
joy
over
independence,
this
was
an
under-
standable
emotion.
But
historians
will
come
to see
that
no such
sharp
break
occurred
and
that
there
was considerable
continuity
from
the
colonial
period
into
that
of independence,
even
in
the
most radical
countries.
A
failure
to
understand
the
reasons
for
this
continuity
leads
both
to
charges
of
the
betrayal
of
the
nationalist
revolution
and
to
a
bleak
and
sometimes
violent
pessimism
which
is
particularly
to
be
found
in
radical intellectual
circles in
Africa. In
particular,
there
is
a
strong
tendency
to
accept
Fanon's
argument
that
the
anti-colonial revolution
in
Africa
brought
to
power
a
black bourgeoisie
made
in
the
image
of
the
European
civil
servant
and manipulated
by
the
great
powers,
particularly
the
United
States,
Britain,
and
France.
Inevitably
this
view
has
begun
to
colour
the
nature
of
Afri-
can
scholarship.
Political
scientists
who
used
to
be
keen
on
modernizing
one-party
states are
now
interested
in
the
inertia
of
parties
and bureaucracy.
Charismatic
leaders
are
giving
way
to
generals.
The
new
growth
industry
is
the
study
of
the
mili-
tary
in
Africa.
Pessimism
and caution
seem
to
be
the
order
of
the
day.
The
tone
of
innocence
shattered
which
can
be
seen
in
the
recent
literature
on
Ghana
can also
be
found in
that
on
Kenya.
Fanon's
general
indictment
of
African leadership
is
very
similar to
Oginga Odinga's
particular
criticism
of
the
govern-
ment
of
Jomo
Kenyatta.
In
the
case
of
Kenya,
moreover,
these
criticisms
are
accentuated, as
Ali
Mazrui
has pointed
out,
by
a
Associate
National
Secretary,
Canadian
Association
of
University
Teachers.
I
am
grateful
to
the Canada
Council
and
to
the
C.
D.
Howe
Founda-
tion
for
financial
support
for
research
in
Kenya.
All
opinions
are,
however,
those
of
the
author
and
not
of
the
foundations.
This
is
a
revised version of
a
paper
given
at
the
annual
meeting of
the
Canada
Historical
Association,
Calgary, June
1967.
KENYATTA
AND
AFRICAN
NATIONALISM
519
continual
and unfavourable
comparison
with
Tanzania,
mostly
by
westerners
jaundiced
by
politics
in
their
own
countries
and
looking
for
a
new
political
Jerusalem
in
Africa and
also
by
the
application
to
Kenyan
politics
of
moral
criteria
which
are
not
usually
applied
so
ferociously
elsewhere.'
The
image
of
Kenyatta
as
the
fiery
revolutionary
of
the
1950s-the
burning
spear
of
Mau
Mau-makes
the
comparison
even
more ironic.
But
it
is
the
contention
of
this
article
that
Kenyatta
was
never
a
revolu-
tionary
and
that
his
politics
have
changed
little
throughout
his
career.
Kenyatta
was
released
from
detention
in
1961
and
came
to
power
as
a
result
of
the
election
of
1963.
During
the
remainder
of
1963
his
speeches
and
those
of
his
chief
lieutenants
set
the
tone
for
and
spelled
out
the
economic
policies
of
the
new
lfgime.
In
May
Kenyatta
told
the
European
farmers:
"There
is
room
for
everyone,
of
whatever
origin,
who
lives
in
this
land." He pledged
that
there
would
be
no
bitterness
about
the
events
of
the
past.
His
government
has
been
faithful
to this
promise,
as
the
title
of
the
President's
most
recent
book,
Suffering
without
Bitterness,
indicates.
Most
Europeans
in Kenya
regard
the
President
as
the
saviour
of
their
community.
Kenyatta
has
been
able
to
pursue
this
policy
partly
because
Lancaster
House ended
the
possibility
of
an
independent
European
political
role
in
Kenya
and
partly
because
both
sides
have agreed
on
an
economic
policy
for
devel-
opment which
emphasizes
private
enterprise
and association
with
the
West.
Business
is
more
important
to
the
leaders
of
the
European
community
than
farming
and
both
sides
could
there-
fore
agree
on
a
policy
which
would
result
in
the
gradual
rever-
sion
of
the
land
to black
Kenyans.
As
soon
as
the
government
of
the
Kenya
African
National
Union
(KANU)
came
to
power,
it
made
it
clear
that
it
wished
a
mixed
economy
in
Kenya,
one in
which
the state
intervened
only
in
areas
into
which
private
investors
would
not
put
their
money
or
in
joint
enterprises
in
which
the
private
investors
would
manage
the
concern.
In his
victory
speech
Kenyatta
promised
a
democratic
and
socialist
regime
but
added, "The
rights
of
all
and
of
their
prop-
erty
will be
fully
protected.
'
"2
In
his
budget
speech
in
June
1963,
James
Gichuru
noted
that
the
private investor
wants
to
be
able
1
0.
Odinga,
Not
Yet
Uhuru
(London,
1967);
Ali
Mazrui,
'rom
Mboya,
Underdevelopment,
and
I,"
East
Africa
Journal,
VI
(September
1969),
27
and
"Tanzaphilia,"
Transition,
VI
(June-July
1967).
2
The
Reporter,
1
June
1963.
To continue reading
Request your trial