Introduction
Cutting Edge developed as a result of contributing montly articles to a local newspaper. Mainly, the themes are a sociological review of recent occurances localy as well as internationally. I attempt to go beyond the news by giving a commentary with both subjective and objective opinions.
It is my hope that this offers an interesting reading.

-Kamau Muiruri, 2008


When South Africa took a wrong turn

What is happening in South Africa is just a symptom of a bigger problem waiting to occur and it could be sooner than most of us would believe. When the presumed foreigners have gone, these unsatisfied groups will find a new enemy whereby the issues of historical injustices and tribalism will begin to be real issues in the country.

-Kamau Muiruri Monthly contribution to Stavanger Afenbladet, Norway, April 2008

In the recent past, South Africa shocked everyone when outbursts of anti-foreigner violence in and around Johannesburg led to death of ten scores of African people, hundreds injuries and thousands others become “refugees in refuge”The so called foreigners are indeed Africans from all walks of life mainly Zimbabweans who had fled economic collapse and political violence in their homeland, Kenyans who had taken their small scale tourist business skills abroad, Nigerians who had gone to open their African fashion stores, Cameroonians who had wanted to work a year or so and then go back home and so on -- were driven from their homes by South Africa blacks who later patrolled along the roads, apparently guarding against any foreigners trying to return. It is as though, they forgot that just few years ago, all Africa was united in one song of calling for the release of Mandela and praying for the end of apartheid. As school pupils, we had made T-shirts and “release Mandela” songs and Sarafina film had often aroused our anger against the apartheid regime. We were united in soul then, yet far. What has happened now?It is argued that those who are doing these shameful acts are those South Africans struggling to find jobs and to buy food as prices rise, and that they are targeting foreigners they see as competing with them for scarce resources. Therefore, the greatest failure is that of the current regime to provide basic life to all people of South Africa.This violence will likely only worsen South Africa's economy as well as image as a crime capital -- it has a murder rate of more than 50 per day -- just as it prepares to host visitors from around the world for the 2010 soccer World Cup. Ambitious Africans shocked by the violence have dropping their plans to study, do business, visit or take refuge in SA and instead they are now heading to US and UK. And who knows how many “Obamas” are in the blood of those Africans SA is rejecting today. They will eventually be accepted in US, UK, Norway and so on and I know that they will one day rise and shine for those communities that showed kindness in time of need.In other words, South African is quickly falling apart because its people are disillusioned by poor leadership. The hope that was represented by the fall of apartheid has long gone with the winds. The coming of a black dominated government did not transform into a change of life but a change of colour from a dominating white to a dominating African. Now that the South African blacks cannot fight the black government they put in place with their blood and sweat, they are unconsciously displacing their frustration on a presumed enemy. At the moment, the greatest enemy to them is the flood of Africans from all walks of life who wanted to live the Mandela dream. However, this is just a symptom of a bigger problem waiting to happen in South Africa and it could be sooner than most of us would believe. When the poor Africans have been scared off from South Africa, South Africa will definitely suffer as its image in the continent is already tinted. Their interest in Africa will also suffer. Further, when the presumed foreigners have gone, these unsatisfied groups will find a new enemy whereby the issues of “historical injustices” and tribalism will begin to reincarnate into real trouble for the country. South Africa was in the beginning seen as hope for Africa but the turn it has taken is wrong. As Mandela grows old and less visible, there comes in more shocking images from the country which might give lead to what awaits South Africa if things are not put right in good time. When there are problems in South Africa, that time, it might be peaceful in Zimbabwe, fine in Mozambique, Kenya, Nigeria, Cameroon, Rwanda, Uganda and so on, so where will South Africans seek refuge? There is a wise saying in my local language that states that “the firewood that is in store may laugh at the one that is already burning in fire, forgetting that it will be next some day”.


The symbolism behind 2008 American presidential race.

Introduction
Looking at the state house race closely, there have been so many messages that is better symbolised than mouthed. Sociologists point out that the use of symbolism largely improves interaction. It makes it easier to make meaning of what would, otherwise, not be easily stated or need not be stated.

-Kamau Muiruri Monthly contribution to Stavanger Afenbladet, Norway, May 2008

The world is desperate for a change of tone and course of domination. Nothing short of a revolution will alter the course of any domination of one group by the other and that explains why Clinton and her supporters were determined to stop that historic occurrence from happening. All the same, nothing will stop change from happening when the time is ripe. Obama’s triumph is symbolic and shows that something is happening to our world. Unexpected person is making a historical mark and inspiring the right change of how our society is ordered.

Obama now adores world’s media and is definitely taken seriously as the only hope for removing America from the awkward position it finds itself in the modern arena especially in Iraq. But more so, Obama adores the bedrooms and office boards of young and ambitious black people world over.(Including me). Why? Black young men see themselves in Obama. They have come to learn that many barriers to success only increase the determination to excel. This determination to excel is a seed and when planted on good fertile minds it can cause great positive change in the world today. In sociological terms symbolism is partly a forum of passing messages intentionally or unintentionally without use of words. We consciously and unconsciously decode symbols/actions/personalities every day. Looking at the state house race closely, there have been so many messages that is better symbolised than mouthed. Sociologists point out that the use of symbolism largely improves interaction. It makes it easier to make meaning of what would, otherwise, not be easily stated or need not be stated.

In Obama’s quest for the highest office in the most powerful nation, we have seen the issue of black vs. white arising. However, Obama’s triumph was not solely because he was black, but really because he was not black enough. Indeed many afro Americans feel that Obama does not fully represent them because he is not coming from the black people who truly languished under the yoke of slavery in America. Here we see a symbolic difference between black Americans as opposed to African Americans. Black Americans can best be described as those who descend from the black slaves while the African Americans are the new generation of black people who have freely emigrated from Africa and made America their home. Africans who have settled in America as immigrants tend to succeed usually because they go there with an independently developed self as opposed to those who are born and grow up in the backdrop of slave master history. The greatest struggle of the black Americans as opposed to Americans who are immigrants from Africa is that they try to settle an old score and fight an old battle. They go back to the history of years of exploitation in slavery as well as civil rights denials and discrimination to get their inspiration from there. Therefore they tend to overdo things and to be more bitter, angry and emotional about issues that establish their history. On the other hand, Africans immigrating to America are more open-minded. They do not have much problem with the white people and they can easily work under pressure without feeling emotional and philosophical when some white people treat them badly. In other words, they feel that there is no much difference between being treated badly by a fellow African or by a white person. This is because they have not internalised the “we and they” concept as much as those who have grown up with such dominant history. Obama’s father being from Africa gives him a more interesting background and history that does not try to free itself from the chains of slave history. Another perspective that gives the contest some symbolic significance is that of a contest between genders. Where the contest was not seen on race perspective, the more progressive people would look at it in terms of man vs. woman. Many women identified with Mrs Clinton simply because she was a woman while many men as well as women identified with Obama as a man. Many people would naturally trust their life on a male figure than a female on matters so sensitive such as leadership. But Mrs Clinton was also out to make her history to become USA first female president and that is something she would have wanted to prove; that women are also capable. The other perspective is reflected by the issue of experience as opposed to inexperience. Mrs Clinton feels that she is experienced to handle USA politics and is better placed than Obama who is still “green” in this field. Her experience however is still a disadvantage in an age that is hungry for change. Clinton experience is based on the old politics, she is bringing nothing new or inspiring to the people of America and the world. We know her so well to be able to predict her every move in the future. On the other hand, the sky is the limit for Obama. His “inexperience” stands for open opportunity. He can come in there and decide to take America in a desired direction without so much surprise. For example he can pull out American troops from Iraq and begin a brand new policy to deal with that issue. That is the good thing about “inexperience”. It offers a chance for radical changes because the person is out to prove himself and mainly he is honest with the decisions that are made (at least in the beginning). An inexperienced person is therefore preferred in a time when people are out for change. The race between Clinton and Obama had also in it the symbolism of rich vs. the poor. Mrs Clinton stands for the rich while Obama stand for the poor. The rich and middle class in every society often want to retain the statuesque (things as they are) while it is the poor who are dissatisfied with the system and push for changes. In his funding, Obama received much from individuals including low income category. On the other hand, Clinton had much money from her husband’s connections as well as her own rich connections. That Obama was identified with the poor and vulnerable in the society played a vital role in his vote. In a time of hunger for change, the candidate that presents some hope to the desperate and some future for the vulnerable is likely to win.
As Obama now face John McCain, the main symbolism will more likely be that of young vs. old. Obama is seen as young, charming, charismatic and dynamic while on the other hand McCain is old, slow and not very charismatic. When the race is at the level of age, the youthful person has more energy and chance of charming the audience. Thus, if Obama does not face too many complications with his party and other issues, his youthfulness might deliver the statehouse to him. On the other hand, an older person is more steady and experienced and can use this strength strategically to wear-out a younger person.
In a nutshell, the State House race offers a rich symbolic intersection. As I have stated before, the world is desperate for change and Mr Fate and Mrs Destiny has brought in Obama to inspire America towards a better direction.


Get ready for a new image

Now if you wake up one day and the government has changed a law on how to view and respond to your culture then you have lost something that helps you to construct and interpret the reality as well as deal with the world around you. I hope this gives you a simpler way of understanding what I wish to argue below concerning introduction of the new law in a society.

-Kamau Muiruri Monthly contribution to Stavanger Afenbladet, Norway, june 2008

You know when get up, you have a wash and get all ready for the world out there, and this says a lot about you as a person, plus it sets the stage for what you believe about your self as well. You only know who you are when people tell you, oh you are a good guy, you are smart today and so on. Another person can also say, “You know so and so.. He is a good guy.” When people say that you are good, then you begin to unconsciously believe “I must be a good guy.” Now draw a picture in your head about a society waking up and presenting itself to the world. It is the same as you waking up. If the society waking up to the world does not take time to prepare well for the day, this is what the world sees that society as being. In other words we are who we are by our beliefs, character, our buildings, our home, our families and this is what forms our culture. Through our culture we maintain our identity and integrity of our country and present our people to the rest of the world. Now if you wake up one day and the government has changed a law on how to view and respond to your culture then you have lost something that helps you to construct and interpret the reality as well as deal with the world around you.
I hope this gives you a simpler way of understanding what I wish to argue below concerning introduction of the new law in a society.Over the last few days I have seen a number of people concerned by the effects of the newly passed law on gay rights. Unfortunately, the voices were not strong enough and there is luck of a steady debate involving psychologists, sociologist and anthropologist as well as the church community about the prons and the cons. So I decided to develop my own analysis and understanding of how this law will affect the future of this society.
The first thing to point out is that this law has great, social political hidden features that cannot be decoded even for the coming 10 years. It solidifies and allows one of the most controversial phenomenons to the main stream norm of the Norwegian society. In other words for example the stories and the basic socialization that tell us that a family institution is made up of father, mother, and siblings will be challenged. A social ethics teacher speaking of such a thing in the new setting can go to court for teaching something which is contrary to the law. According to sociologist, law helps to enhance behaviour and to make given previously not allowed or allowed behaviour permitted or not permitted.
As a sociologist, I see law being a distortion tool that offers multiple levels of control that would not be available without it. Law start with a little step of legislation but the more complex work start when it comes to implementation and response to the law in practical situations in real life. Law have proved to bring desirable social political as well as economical changes. For example in America, the Black people and other minority have received a lot of acceptance and social, political as well as economic progress as a result of civil rights laws. At the current America election, a black man has been chosen to be the front runner of a major political party. This is great and positive change.
I believe that law can also prove to be deadly. They can become a point of conflict and division in an otherwise united nation. With the introduction of the concerned law we see little debate or protest from the Norwegian people. However this silence does not mean that all people unanimously support the said laws, contrary, and a good number of people I have consulted do not support it but they would better keep off the issue. Others are so indifferent to comment on it or so super-neutral to have any supportive or opposing views. To me, there are dangers in such a society. First, the people of Norway seem to be less and less detached to the issues that affecting their society. They have become a culture that takes almost anything for granted and without challenging it. Most Norwegians seem to luck a united front to respond to sociological issues because indeed they may not be sure of what they themselves believe at present and therefore they can not take any direction. Many are taking the direction being taken by their closest family or friends and no wonder Norway itself is taking the direction being taken by its closest sister nations.
Further, I see Norway lacking challenges that inspire personalities. Great personalities are created by a great problems or a great controversy. A society that lack problems lacks great personalities and hence a culture of silence is generated. Nobody rises to face a giant when it comes because the stories of e.g. David Vs Goliath / Mandela vs. Apartheid and so on are rare. There is therefore lack of personalities who can take such important debates and issues by their horns and become symbols of the people’s stand. The problem of many years of peace and prosperity is that it leads to erosion of culture, family and community. It makes people to relax and unconsciously begin with the process of substitution of what they have with something else.
That is to say, the greatest danger for Norway today is that the foundation and pillars that established this so good society are in the process of being substituted little by little. At the moment the margin of substitution has a positive intention but the process will increase because the consumption of what we have substituted with will depend on associated new laws and accessories to ensure satisfaction of the new order.
In sociological terms, we can argue that if you are consuming two things, an increase in one of the other means that one of the two things under consideration causes negative effect on the other unless accompanied by equal increase of the amount of the other. Using this model for Norway, we expect there to be more family related laws to protect family institution as well as the new image of family brought by the new law, however, everything is easier said than done. In the next few years, I bet that Norway must be prepared to pay the painful price of the social impact of this laws that are casually being passed.


When freedom fighter turned enemy

Mugabe is a man who has been imprisoned by his past and fighting long gone battles. He is kind of mad player who would be left playing a football game when the official time is over and claim what he has scored as legitimate GOAL

-Kamau Muiruri Monthly contribution to Stavanger Afenbladet, Norway, june 2008

What is wrong with Mugabe? Have to be the question everyone asks. Is he crazy? Asked a friend of mine. Just what the hell does he think he is doing? Asked another.
Robert Mugabe is a very unfortunate man. He is a man who has been imprisoned by his past and fighting long gone battles. He is kind of mad player who would be left playing a football game when the official time is over and claim what he has scored as legitimate GOAL. For me, Robert Mugabe is still fighting the colonialists. He is talking about Britain as if we are still in 1950. I am not so sure whether he has visited Britain in the last 20 years, realising that the United Kingdom is not a land of white people only. It is a multi ethnic country with over a million black people full citizens of Great Britain (including thousands of Zimbabweans). Mugabe got stuck, because he believed that after fighting for freedom things will work out by themself and as quickly as possible. After gaining independence he failed to read the signs of time. He did not study the history of countries like Kenya, Nigeria, and so on as much as he has failed to clearly read the signs on the walls of every Zimbabwean suffering that his leadership is over.

Mugabe saw the remnants of white people in the country as a problem rather than a resource. He failed to realize that an African country may also be a multi racial society regardless of the discrimination possession of historical events, however painful they might be. He failed to understand that it is not possible to change the past history, but he can make history. Instead of trying a smart way to work with the white Zimbabweans and work together to make the country better, he chooses confrontation. We all know what followed. That colonialist did a bad thing, doing a bad thing does not make a right. When Mugabe began to expel white farmers from their farms, it seemed as though that something or someone will soon stop him.

Some white Zimbabweans rented some apartments in Harare as internally displaced persons and no one has noticed as much about them because they were not living in a refugee tent that attracts attention from the media. At the end of the day, nothing was done and Mugabe had his day. Most of these white Zimbabwe victims gave up the wait and went elsewhere to start a new life. It is said that Nigeria attracted most of the farmers who were welcomed and helped to invest in their country. At the time, Mugabe was through with the eviction, he may have sat back and celebrated, and may have even relaxed to write a book that "Finally Fully Free", but little did Mugabe know that he had dug his own grave and that of Zimbabwe as a nation?

Zimbabwe, a once prosperous country today suffers the highest inflation ever recorded, and I believe it is now in the Guinness book of records. Several Zimbabweans have died of starvation, violence and unnecessary because of a lack of basic needs than ever before. So that is the enemy of the people in Zimbabwe today.

Mugabe has turned the enemy of the very people he fought for a few decades ago. When he was fighting for freedom, the enemy was obvious-the British, when he fought for his fading power, the enemy was vaguely the white residue, when fighting for his own political power survival, the enemy is his own people as his main challenger, Mr Morgan Tsvangirai and his supporters have learnt.

Mr Morgan Tsvangirai who pulled out of the polls, citing the government supported the campaign of violence that has seen dozens of opposition supporters killed and thousands forced to flee their homes, have been seeking refuge in the Dutch embassy in Harare fearing for his life.
In spite of everyone's out cry and protests, presidential run-off on Friday will go on and that is what Mugabe has "cleverly" intended, it will be “a walkover” for him.

The octogenarian president, who has ruled Zimbabwe since independence in 1980, has been dismissing the pressure of the international community. As a freedom fighter, he finds inspiration in deviance and finds words in the face of an enemy than in the face of comrade. The kind of language he has been using suggests that Mr Mugabe is no longer amenable to reason or logic.

It is very likely that he will proceed with uncontested poll on Friday and call for an extension of his 28 years in power. Should it happen, the international community should move with firmness in order to save the people of Zimbabwe from more misery under Mr Mugabe's tyranny. No matter what measures have been taken, most must be initiated and driven by African people that have to recognise that the crisis in Zimbabwe is an embarrassment for the continent and can re-occur elsewhere in the continent if not dealt with properly. To begin with, Zimbabwe should be suspended from the African Union and all regional bodies. They must also impose targeted sanctions by refusing Mr Mugabe and his ministers entry in their territories. And when push comes to shove, then even military intervention under the auspices of the African Union must be considered. This is probably the only language that Mr Mugabe would understand. But all this is nonsense to Mugabe because according to him "only God can remove him," Then it is best that we turn to God and request that he should remove Mugabe by that means which is necessary.

Impressum

Texte: This articles are a copyright of Kam.resource.center and may not published or used without prior permission of the author.
Tag der Veröffentlichung: 27.06.2008

Alle Rechte vorbehalten

Widmung:
To all my readers