Language Hierarchy in Metacolonial Africa and the Marginalization
of African Languages: Byproduct or Necessary Function
of the Global Political Economy?
Colonialism is often misunderstood or narrowly defined.
Some mistakenly confine it to either a geographic area or an era. Others, convinced that colonialism is outmoded and passé, view it a system no longer operative in Africa and generally in the world. Still others narrow it to a system imposed by and serving only inhabitants and descendants of Europe, ignoring that colonialism would not succeed or sustain in the past and present without local collaborators, minions, and conveyor belts essential for all forms of oppression to take root and persist…Metacolonialism revives an old system of colonial exploitation and oppression that masquerades in the more savory euphemism of globalization. Many analysts write about globalization in glowing terms, often extolling it as a system of worldwide innovation that shall bring great advances to humanity. Yet these writings seldom answer this question: Who actually benefits from this new craze, and who suffers because of its global effects? We find the answer not directly from the words of its promoters and defenders, but in the structures of power and global locations where its decision-makers concentrate
Specifically, metacolonialism emanates from the same geography and societies as did the Atlantic Slave Trade, classical colonialism, and neocolonialism...
Metacolonialism brings about a wide spectrum of beneficiaries and victims. Some of the formerly colonized elites are today material beneficiaries of metacolonialism (especially in comparison to the mass misery of their societies), flaunting trivial material benefits while ignoring their subjective victimization. Even the traditional beneficiaries of colonialism—namely Europeans and their descendants—are today in some respects victims of metacolonialism in ways they neither realize nor wish to critically examine.
I start with these remarks to underscore four points.
First, a key indicator of domination is the power to name the world and the self, interpret the past, and preserve memory of it. In usurping that power, the colonizer finds a more insidious and potent psychological advantage than use of lethal arms. Second, because of the lost contest over the defining and naming of reality, the experience and story of the colonized await documenting and telling. Not hearing or reading about either, people assume they do not exist. Third, the forgotten or distorted past leaves the colonized in a state of ignorance and confusion, with no lessons learned to understand the present or chart a new future. Fourth, establishment psychology historically played a significant role in the contest of reality and memory, serving as a potent tool for concealing the violence of colonialism and distorting the experiences of the colonized. To this day, the Eurocentric and reductionist roots of establishment psychology prevent even well-meaning researchers and practitioners from exposing the ravages of colonialism or acknowledging the experience of the colonized.”
Hussein A. Bulhan, Frantz Fanon University
Introduction: Marginalization of African Languages in Pre-Colonial, Colonial, and Post- Colonial (Metacolonial) Society
The introductory quote was selected to provide context about the terms coloniality and metacolonialism in relation to what is known as colonialism. The quote also alludes to significant periods and phenomenon that have had a lingering impact on Africa and African descendants, namely the Atlantic Slave Trade, the colonial period, and post-colonial period which has been dominated by globalization. Each of the aforementioned periods/phenomena have unique characteristics that are distinct, but also similarities with regard to the dehumanization of African peoples and treatment of Africans as subhuman. The psychology of the colonized and former colonized Africans and their descendants become eminent when conceptualizing how groups of people were not only treated as subordinates but forced to adapt or assimilate into a global system where institutions and individuals alike promote(d) African inferiority. Paradoxically, the global systems’ utilization and dependence on African labor never ceased, although negative perceptions and categorizations of African cultural, social, political, and economic practices became more widespread. During the transitions between the Atlantic trade of slavery, colonization, and their antecedents – which will be discussed later when assessing the origins and implications of both periods in Africa – language and the promotion of or mandated use of non-African, specifically European languages, increased and became the standard. As a result, African languages have become marginalized within Africa.
In post-colonial Africa, which I refer to as metacolonial Africa, borrowing from Dr. Hussein A. Bulhan, president and founder of Frantz Fanon University in Somalia, African leaders have often adopted to implement language policies that uphold the use of colonial lingua franca. The latest modification in the previous form and presentation of colonialism is metacolonialism. Bulhan provides a brief example of metacolonialism, which uses the Greek term ‘meta’ to denote distinction when he declares: “According to the Random House Unabridged Dictionary (1993, 2nd Edition), the prefix ‘meta’ in Greek translates to after, along with, beyond, behind, or among. I therefore mean by ‘metacolonialism’ a socio-political, economic, cultural, and psychological system that comes after, along with, or among the earlier stages of colonialism that I described in the preceding pages. One can also define it as a colonial system that goes beyond in scope or behind in depth what classical colonialism and neocolonialism had achieved.”
Such policy decisions have only increased the marginalization of African languages and decreased the use of African lingua franca in formal settings such as schools, businesses, the marketplace, government public service offices, and other areas of the public sphere. However, it is important to note that in the current global political economy, African leaders seldom operate independently as they depend on international institutions such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organization (WTO), United Nations (UN), North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the hegemonic United States, and the central banking systems of former European colonial states for economic, political, and sometimes social guidance and oversight.
In the following paper, I will briefly overview three authors analysis of language policies in Africa and their recommendations for how language policies can improve, identifying what can be considered as the limitations and strengths of each set of analysis and recommendations. Before summarizing the language policy authors, I will offer a preliminary analysis of modern development in African states which has taken place under the international capitalist, liberal economic order – otherwise known as the global political economy – which was instituted by international organizations led by former colonial powers. The following texts will be cursorily discussed chronologically based on their publication date: Chinua Achebe’s "The African Writer and the English Language" (1976), Dr. Nkonko Kamwangamalu’s “Effects of Policy on English Medium Instruction in Africa” (2013), and Dr. Leonard Muaka’s “Linguistic Commodification and Africa's Linguistic Identities: Creating a Nexus!” (2020).
After providing a synopsis of each author’s assessment, predictions, and recommendations for language in African states, I will interpret and peruse the major issues highlighted by these authors utilizing works that deliberate and engage an emergent theme that each author has identified: language hierarchy as a derivation capitalist colonialism and its antecedents. In order to provide context about the roots and impacts of colonialism – both objective and subjective – and its implications on the current lingua franca used throughout metacolonial Africa, I will utilize texts that provide a broader understanding of the Atlantic slave trade, colonialism, and neocolonialism, and demonstrate their relation to the issues introduced by the authors mentioned above. Lastly, I will conclude with another discussion of the global political economy, which is fundamentally capitalist, and examine how Africans and African descendants occupy an ambiguous existence as non-African languages continue to dominate and permeate the African continent, while non-African (namely European ideas) continue to occupy land and human beings within Africa and the African diaspora.
The following assessment of language policies in Africa, proposals to improve language policies, and the implications for Africans, African descendants or the African diaspora, and the international community is based on an African-socialist treatment of world history and events in Africa and the world at-large. This treatment and perspective are not entirely aligned with European socialism and Marxist assessments of European and world economic behavior, which have proven to exclude African nations in their theorizing and application.[1] Though identified as a pro-socialist perspective, the paper distinguishes between Karl Marx and Frederick Engel’s capitalist assessments of political and economic affairs as analyses that largely exclude Africa and developing nations. Although Vladimir Lenin often included Africa in his analysis of global affairs and believed African states could take a course towards communism and socialist development absent of the capitalist stage of development[2], this paper is more aligned with the perspective of an African descendant who subscribes to African communal, “socialist” ideology that can be adapted and applied within the modern global political economy, similar to Mwalimu Julius Nyerere’s Ujamaa philosophy which will be discussed later throughout this work. Therefore, this work is critical of both capitalist and socialist paths of development in Africa, as both have produced limited and varied benefits for Africans en masse, or the majority of African citizens in African states.
[1] Mazrui, A. and Wondji, C., 1993. General History of Africa. Paris: UNESCO.
[2] Ibid.
An African-Socialist Assessment of Development in Africa
In the last century many African states have experienced political decolonization and witnessed the spread of democracy. Considering the global political economy, African states fall within the purview of the Washington Consensus and Bretton Woods institutions[1], and abide by international laws and regulations[2] regarding economic development. African states are heavily influenced by foreign institutions and nations[3], and even relegated to secondary status under the current international system. As a result, since WWII, many African states have either pursued a pro-capitalist path towards economic development, or in a few instances, a non-capitalist or socialist path towards economic development[4]. Despite either path toward development, African states (their respective governments and economies) exist in a state of perpetual underdevelopment, especially in relation to developed nations. Despite their underdeveloped state, African nations continue to implement economic and public policy recommendations prescribed by developed nations and international organizations, and continue to pursue political development that reflects and supports the state apparatus of Western nations, namely Europeans nations and America.
Since the advent of the post-WWII international economic system, many African states have pursued economic development policies under the influence of foreign nations such as the United States, Britain, France, Germany, and other former colonizers, and international organizations such as the World Bank, IMF, and WTO. The economic policies and recommendations can be classified as welfare state policies that are applicable and suitable for non-African states that have democratic political and social systems and exists within an international economic system that benefits from African labor.Moreover, after their periods of colonization, many African states have also pursued democratic political development under the auspices of the aforementioned “developed” countries and institutions such as the United Nations. The fact that African states adopt approaches to political and economic development that benefit non-African states and populations more than African states and populations is problematic. Moreover, considering the legacy of slavery, colonialism, and contemporary racialism, it is also a problem that African states have not superseded foreign guidance and instead relied on African traditional and cultural philosophical approaches to political and economic development. An example of such an approach, would be the implementation of language policies that promote use of African languages despite the influence of non-African states in the global political economy.
Often, the narrative of African states on the path to capitalist economic development is told from a perspective of Western dominance where incentives African states could receive are overemphasized. However, capitalist development in Africa has led to conditions of both political and economic deterioration – and even culturally when one considers the diminished use of African languages in the formal sectors of African societies. Instead of considering the impetus of capitalist development and pro-West political and economic activities in Africa as the “consumerism development” that African leaders learned from Western nations, I would suggest that Western influences are just as present as they were in previous centuries. It is widespread knowledge that any economic or political reforms to international economic systems enhanced the control of said system by Western powers. The aforementioned fact, combined with the facts that historically society has been stratified based on a social hierarchy of racialism – which was instituted by false-narratives and pseudoscience, and both were dominant factors in the decisions European leaders (first monarchs and clergy-members, and eventually politicians and businessmen and women) made regarding the economic exploitation of African states – should not be underemphasized. With the underpinned racial subjugation as the driving force of the global political economy, in my opinion, neither capitalist nor [European] socialist development would lead to economic development that would benefit African citizens and descendants, unless said subjugation was eradicated and outlawed. Furthermore, despite the relationship between Africans and European Socialist states, Africans could also reach pro-socialist, and communal paths of economic and political development without Europeans, due to African philosophy, as demonstrated by Tanzania and Mwalimu Julius Nyeyere.
The conditions that led to the perception of Africans as derogatory are all present in modern capitalist countries. Therefore, examinations of African state reactions to the global political economy and newly instituted economic order created in the post-1948 (World War II) society are critical. With the conclusion of the Second Great War and the development of capitalist nations such as Germany, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and others, as well as the United States’ increasing role as a global superpower, African states became the focus of an “extraction based” global economy based on commerce, that sought to convert Africa’s many resources into financial capital that would in turn be used to develop the “developed” nations. The implementation and promotion of non-African languages in Africa were integral to this process. As a result, many leaders of African nations found themselves in compromising positions where they had to participate in the global system of capitalism and accept foreign oversight or administration of economic and political affairs. Although Africa is known to have experienced political liberation due to the independence movements of the 1950s and 60s, the economic systems that were instituted by the colonial nations were maintained under the new global economic order. In other words, African nations were nominally “liberated” under the guise of political freedom as African leaders showcased their power and privilege internally among Africans, but were exploited, subjugated, and manipulated economically and socially by foreign powers and overseers of the global political economy. Consequently, many African leaders faced enormous amounts of political and economic pressure to adapt to this new order, which primarily used languages recommended by hegemonic organizations such as the UN. Using the UN structure as an example, it’s important to note the fact that of the 2000+ known African languages, the UN only has Arabic as an official language, along with English, Chinese, French, Russian, and Spanish.[5]
[1] Ibid.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Mazrui, A. and Wondji, C., 1993. General History Of Africa. Paris: UNESCO.
[4] Mazrui, A. and Wondji, C., 1993. General History Of Africa. Paris: UNESCO.
Major Issues and Questions of Language Policy in African States
In Chinua Achebe’s "The African Writer and the English Language" (1976), the author brings forth several important issues regarding the use of English and other non-African languages on the African continent, and by African peoples and their descendants. Achebe highlights the 1962 Conference of African Writers of English Expression, held at Makerere University in Kampala, Uganda, where African writers explored the use of African languages and questioned what constitutes African literature.[1] After exploring whether such literature can involve content both about Africa and by Africans, Achebe calls attention to national literature and eventually national African languages.[2] Similar to the current state constructions of African states that were created by non-Africans colonizers, Achebe argues that African writers who decide to write in English, French, and other non-African languages are also byproducts of social constructions created by non-Africans within the current global political economy. Lastly, Achebe delves into how and why literature does not have to be written in African languages, calling the readers’ attention to the practical uses of non-African languages and suggesting how Africans can still utilize their indigenous languages simultaneously.[3]
In Dr. Nkonko Kamwangamalu’s “Effects of Policy on English Medium Instruction in Africa” (2013)[4], the author discusses the use of languages in Africa and provides an assessment that calls attention to the prestige African languages have been assigned (or not assigned) in comparison to non-African languages, primarily English and the languages of former colonial powers. Dr. Kamwangamalu highlights education policies which historically disadvantaged Africans as they gave preference to non-African languages and created formal systems of adherence and utilization via legislative mandates, the complications of multilingualism in African societies which choose to uphold one or two languages as the dominant language for social mobility and participation in society, the economic dependence of African states on non-African languages, and negative attitudes toward African languages within African society. Kamwangamalu cites elite closure as an example of how the elite groups within African society have created social and cultural practices that exclude Africans who cannot formally utilize non-African languages. Kamwangamalu mentions this is “a strategy by which those persons in power maintain their powers and priveleges via language choices. It serves as a tactic of boundary maintenance.”[5] Beyond this, Kamwangamalu argues that language planning can be progressive and lead to development in African states, should African languages receive the same respect and promotion as non-African languages. Kamwangamalu calls this prestige planning or status planning.
In Dr. Leonard Muaka’s “Linguistic Commodification and Africa's Linguistic Identities: Creating a Nexus!” (2020), Dr. Muaka focuses on the economic and social benefits of African language utilization in Africa and calls for language policies to practically ascribe economic value to African languages by positioning them as commodities within the global political economy. The author uses a range of examples to make this case including local languages in East Africa, marginalized informal languages and slangs that are used by subgroups within African societies, and the effects of global issues on African languages such as globalization and World Bank and IMF policies (among others). [6] Muaka notes that although colonialism devalued everything which was African, including its languages, African languages have survived colonialism and are alive in the 21st century.[7] In his argument, Muaka uses specific examples of East African nations, namely Tanzania, Uganda, and Kenya, and demonstrates how the histories and cultures of each nation influenced the eventual leaders of these African states during their newly independent status after the independence movement. After demonstrating how language is a commodity in East Africa, Muaka establishes a balance between African languages as commodities and cultural entities.[8]
Of particular significance in this work, is Muaka’s demonstration of African states that shared similar and distinct cultural, social, and even political characteristics, but experienced divergent paths of development with respect to language policies, as their respective leaders chose policies that they believed benefited their respective African nations. Muaka notes that as many other scholars have highlighted, during the postcolonial period when colonialism first subsided, African leaders were challenged by the multipluralism of ethnicities in African states, and as a means of not prioritizing one ethnic group over the others, many African leaders opted for policies that upheld the use of former colonial languages.[9] Muaka maintains that:
“It is then that the concept of ethnicity became politicized and although it is more than 50 years since independence, politicians and their pundits keep using it to mobilize their political bases. While leaders such as Julius Nyerere of Tanzania took advantage of an African language such as Swahili to promote the ideology of Ujamaa (African socialism) and made it the official language of the state, Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya and Milton Obote of Uganda opted for English, the former colonial language as the official language, first, to propel technological and informational progress, and secondly, to neutralize ethnic affiliations by choosing a ‘neutral’ language (Blommaert, 1999).”
As mentioned by Muaka above, East African leaders had varying conceptions of how African languages could be used for language policy implementation. In the work, the author also calls attention to the language hierarchy of these three nations (Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania) noting that Tanzania’s model of language hierarchy placed Swahili above English, while Kenya promoted English as the primary language as opposed to ethnic languages, and Uganda prioritized the use of Luganda and then English. I believe this acknowledgement of language hierarchy is critical and can be used as an example of a language policy where Africans use African languages in the formal sector. I believe this can be replicated based on Muaka’s assessment and the supporting evidence I introduce in the subsequent sections.
[1] Achebe, Chinua. 1976. "The African Writer and the English Language"
[2] Ibid.
[3] Achebe, Chinua. 1976. "The African Writer and the English Language"
[4] Kamwangamalu, Nkonko (2013). “Effects of Policy on English Medium Instruction in Africa”. World Englishes, Vol 32. No. 3
[5] Ibid.
[6] Muaka, Leonard. 2020. “Linguistic Commodification and Africa's Linguistic Identities: Creating a Nexus!”
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
Language Hierarchy: From Pre-Colonialism to Metacolonialism
Pre-colonialism and Colonialism
In order to understand and conceptualize the future of language(s) in African societies, I believe it is critical to understand the historical relevance of past events. The authors above have called attention in great detail to the significance of colonialism in contemporary African, as well as non-African societies internationally. I will now introduce authors who critically assess the forms of colonialism (and their antecedents) that have occurred in African societies throughout history, while also presenting important concepts and theories that assess the potential future of a post-colonial global society (if possible). I will delineate between pre-colonial events that developed the spirit of colonialism, the colonial period which includes the neo-colonial period, and post (meta)-colonial or modern society which I argue exists in a present state that is dominated by metacolonialism.
Most language policies stem from the transition to political independence from colonialism, which extends to contemporary society. Some scholars, activists, and members of the international community regard the current period as a neo-colonial or metacolonial period, where the guise/veil of political independence influences the international community to overlook the disproportional and unjust amount of influence foreign, former colonial states have over current African governments and their respective populations and economies. Understandably and practically, former colonizers implemented policies of language that improved their control of African states in order to maximize profits and their desired development within Africa. As a result, Africans used languages that colonizers could understand. For example, in areas that were colonized by France, Africans utilized French as the lingua franca to communicate with the French nationals. Using this example, I maintain that analysis of the effects and byproducts, latent and intended, of colonialism and its antecedents would continually yield significant insights into how language has been utilized and even weaponized in African societies. Such analysis can also lead to further projections about how African and non-African languages will be used beyond the 21st century.
In “Underdevelopment and Dependence in Black Africa- Origins and Contemporary Forms”, which was published in the December 1972 edition of the Journal of Modern African Studies, Samir Amin provides a profound assessment of the periods proceeding colonialism in order to ultimately provide an accurate description of colonialism. Amin notes that the pre-colonial period is characterized by “a pre-mercantilist period” which stretches into the 17th century where cultural, social, and economic ties within Black Africa “from both ends of the Sahara, between Dakar to the Red Sea, and the Mediterranean”, where “Old World Africa does not appear as inferior”.[1] Amin notes that the “mercantilist period” of pre-colonialism extends from the 17th to the 18th century and was characterized “by two distinct slave trades – the Atlantic trade (by far the most harmful), which spread from the coast to the whole from Saint-Louis in Senegal to Quelimane in Mozambique [and] the Oriental slave trade operating from Egypt, the Red Sea, the Sudan, and East Africa.”[2] Lastly, the final phase of the pre-colonial period lasted from about 1800 to 1890, as Amin declares that “…attempts - at least in certain regions within the mercantilism - to establish a new form of dependence in the world where capitalism was firmly entrenched. These attempts, however, had very limited backing.” Amin provides a definition of colonialism and states:
“the fourth period, that of colonisation, completed the work of the previous period in Western Africa, took over from Oriental mercantilism in Eastern Africa, and developed with tenfold vigor the present forms of dependence of the continent… The present throws light on the past. The completed forms of dependence - which only appeared when Africa was actually made the periphery of the world capitalist system in its imperialist stage, and was developed as such - enable us to understand by comparison, the meaning of previous systems of social relations, and the way in which African social formations were linked with those of other regions of the Old World with which they had contact.”
Neo-colonialism
While the neo-colonial period features some of the similar characteristics of the colonial period, it is distinct for several reasons. In “Unfinished Business: Confronting the Legacies of Slavery and Colonialism in Africa” J.F. Ade Ajayi provides useful analysis for the term neocolonialism and the implications for language policy. Ajayi claims that “neocolonialism is the situation of dependence created by colonial rule, in which you are granted political independence only to discover that you do not have control over your economy and cannot implement your own policies but must consult various powerful outsiders who directly or indirectly control the policies”. [3] Examples of such instances of external control of African nations is demonstrated when considering the Cold War politics where “because of neo-colonial dependence, the US found it so easy to control and manipulate the economies of most African countries against the interests of the peoples of those countries in the name of containing the spread of communism.”[4]
Ajayi introduces cases of the conflict between Ethiopia and Somaliland where “both neo-colonial powers exploited their position to extort substantial rewards and each was more interested to sell arms and to encourage the futile border wars than to improve the capability of their dependent peoples to control their economic development”, and the crisis in the Congo where Patrice Lumumba was murdered and the secession of Moise Tshombe was followed by the setting up of Sgt., turned General Mobutu Sese Seko as the agent of the US and NATO. Beyond the aforementioned examples of such manipulative control, the author notes the influence of the global political economy on African nations when he declares:
“The economies of the different countries were already integrated into the economies of the metropolitan countries during the colonial period and under colonial exploitative terms, and the colonial powers were unwilling to surrender their advantageous positions. Agents of the World Bank and the IMF began to replace former Residents and District Commissioners as supervisors of the dependent economies in the former colonial territories. Globalisation meant that the World Bank and the IMF could impose drastic devaluation of the currency and other measures of Structural Adjustment Programmes that impoverished the people and brought no visible economic returns. In pursuit of such policies, countries were encouraged to amass huge debts, and managing the debt then became another weapon of control to compel continued compliance with policies of the World Bank and IMF. But it needs to be emphasised here that the debt of African countries is only a pittance compared with what the international communities owe to Africa.”[5]
Metacolonialism
Placing the history of colonialism and its antecedents in proper perspective, we can now provide an in-depth discussion about metacolonialism and its influence on the issues of language in African states, as well as implications for the global political economy. Whereas colonialism captures a binary relationship between two poles: metropoles and colonial territories, metacolonialism has a similar hierarchical social structure and is similar to the world systems theory as core, semi-periphery, and periphery countries feature individuals who occupy the role of colonial subject. Due to globalization, an interchangeable term with metacolonialism as highlighted by Dr. Hussein A. Bulhan in “Stages of Colonialism in Africa: From Occupation of Land to Occupation of Being”, unchallenged accounts of the benefits of globalization, another phase or form of colonialism, have become common and even superfluous. Bulhan asserts that metacolonialism can manifest in both objective and subjective domains “to a far greater degree than the classical colonialism and neocolonialism that preceded it.”[6]
Bulhan characterizes the manifestations of metacolonialism by providing numerous social, political, and economic examples of how colonialism can be applied to objects, spaces, time, geographical areas, and systems of thought and behavior such as the colonization of economics, and individual and group behavior, as he declares: “metacolonialism established the dollar and (recently) the euro not only as the primary currencies of exchange, but also as measures of human worth. This is colonization of economics, wealth, and self-evaluation. Metacolonialism also dictates that international laws promulgated by Europeans are just and essential laws for ‘civilized’ conduct in national and international relations. This is colonization of individual and group behavior, nationally and internationally.” Bulhan also asserts that Europeans and their descendants “today enjoy freedom and opportunity in space not only in their land but also beyond, as exemplified by recent endeavors to colonize outer space (including the Moon and Mars) for more resources.”[7] Of critical importance, is Bulhan’s identification of the problems metacolonialism creates with respect to indigenous languages. Bulhan maintains that “western education in non- European societies erode or change indigenous languages.[8]” He argues that “Africans schooled in neocolonial educational systems choose to speak English or French to show sophistication and so-called modernity, gradually abandoning their indigenous language” and African peoples seeking acceptance from formal institutions within the current global political economy, “even change their indigenous first names to European names like Peter, James, and Joseph”.[9] Moreover, Bulhan claims that Africans sometimes “speak to their people in the indigenous language, and sprinkle English or French terms in their statements to achieve the same impression of sophistication and modernity even if their people do not understand the full meaning of their remarks. Bulhan considers this form of metacolonialism as colonization of language and identity.”[10]
Finally, if the meaning and implications of the term metacolonialism have not been sufficiently conveyed, Bulhan offers the scathing analysis of its relevance when he asserts:
Metacolonialism also affirms that Europeans and their descendants are superior to all other human beings in intelligence, power, beauty, and wealth. This is colonization of values. Related to this is the notion that Europeans and their descendants represent the ideal or personification of beauty. People of color increasingly internalize this self-defeating notion. They use chemical and electrical means to lighten their skin, turn smooth their kinky hair, or simply wear imported wigs to hide their natural hair texture and color. This is colonization of beauty. Metacolonialism, like its antecedents, also glorifies Western education and knowledge as the tickets to enlightenment and the ‘good life,’ while vilifying and eroding indigenous education and knowledge. This is colonization of knowledge. Using modern telecommunication equipment and the internet, Europeans have the right to monitor communication and information of all people, including who talks to whom, how often, where, and for what purpose. This is colonization of digital information. Metacolonialism also sets the Europeans and their descendants as the sole dispenser of aid and compassion for victims of violence and oppression in Africa. Yet, this compassion is primarily self-serving since the countries and organizations delivering the aid gain indirectly or directly by selling products of their farmers and manufacturers or by collecting hefty overheads for service rendered (Maren, 1997). This is colonization of compassion, reaffirming simultaneously the incompetence and dependence of aid recipients, while reasserting and further inflating the self-aggrandizement of Europeans.”
[1] Amin, Samir (Dec. 1972) “Underdevelopment and Dependence in Black Africa- Origins and Contemporary Forms” The Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 10, No. 4
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ajayi, J.F. Ade. 2002. “Unfinished Business: Confronting the Legacies of Slavery and Colonialism in Africa” South-South Exchange Programme for Research on the History of Development (SEPHIS) and the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta (CSSSC). Amsterdam/India, 2002.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ajayi, J.F. Ade. 2002. “Unfinished Business: Confronting the Legacies of Slavery and Colonialism in Africa” South-South Exchange Programme for Research on the History of Development (SEPHIS) and the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta (CSSSC). Amsterdam/India, 2002.
[6] Bulhan, H.A. 2015. “Stages of Colonialism in Africa: From Occupation of Land to Occupation of Being”. Journal of Social and Political Psychology. Vol. 3(1)
[7] Bulhan, H.A. 2015. “Stages of Colonialism in Africa: From Occupation of Land to Occupation of Being”. Journal of Social and Political Psychology. Vol. 3(1)
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
Conclusion: Language in Africa, Metacolonialism, and the Global Political Economy
The fact that African states have implemented European systems of government administration lends credence to the use of English or European languages in African countries. The “state” system Africans abide by is a derivative or emulation of the Westphalian state created and upheld by Western civilization. Furthermore, the theme of Christianization and the use of religion to manipulate socio-cultural, economic, and political systems of pre-colonial Africa highlight how they were used to create conditions where language could be utilized as a premier form of social, economic, and political control of Africans, who were considered subjects. The antecedents of colonialism, namely the Atlantic Slave Trade, play a significant role in current metacolonial society. Ajayi highlights this in “Unfinished Business: Confronting the Legacies of Slavery and Colonialism in Africa”:
“The anti-slavery movement focused its attention on stopping the trans-Atlantic slave trade. It was not designed as such to repair the ravages done to Africa by the slave trade. We could say that the missionary movement that grew out of the anti-slavery movement did attempt some reparation in its policy of combining Christianity, Commerce and Civilisation. But the effectiveness of the missionary movement was greatly compromised by its failure to accept the slave trade as a sin incompatible with the teachings of the Bible. The missionaries were, therefore, willing to compromise with slave owners once again. When they discovered that they needed to promote internal slavery and slave trade in order to promote agricultural production for European industries, they did not hesitate to make the compromise. From the 1840s to the 1880s, they promoted what they called legitimate trade by encouraging a wide expansion of the use of so-called domestic slaves for the production and transportation of palm produce and other commodities to exchange for imported ammunition to continue the wars that continued to yield the slaves.
Like Ajayi, I assert that while much as been written about the trans-Atlantic slave trade, most of this literature is about the economic benefits of Europe and North America, and the injustice of the lives of the slaves in America. More attention can be given to damaging effect done to African peoples. Ajayi notes that African historians have themselves been reluctant to focus much attention on this period of African history asserting: “the attitude generally has been that slavery is a universal phenomenon. Other peoples have transcended their periods of slavery and oppression. Why can’t Africans forget about theirs, turn their faces forward and get on with their lives? Because of this refusal to confront the slave trade and come to terms with it, both Africans and non-Africans surround the subject with various myths.”[1] I believe exploration of the phenomenon mentioned, with respect to colonialism and the concept of metacolonialism will produce valuable results.
Using the case of East Africa presented in Muaka’s work above, I would like to introduce the possibility of other African nations prioritizing or commodifying the use of African languages by assigning them the status of English, French, or UN languages as Kamwangamalu asserts will be successful. An example of commodifying African languages is investing in human capital and creating a workforce of Africans who can teach African languages to the international community. Considering the myriad impacts of colonialism in Africa and on the world at large, I have no doubt African languages will continue to remain relevant in the 21st century and beyond. The questions concerning the viability and utilization of African languages seem to rest on the perceptions of African leaders, technocrats, or members of elite groups who more than likely know how to command and utilize non-African languages, hence their position as “leaders”.
If the present conditions in African states are due to poor African leadership, management, and administration of public services, economic development, and language policy implementation, one must consider the influence of foreign states. Foreign states and international institutions have driven the increase of democratic institutions in African governance and the use of non-African languages, yet economic development that benefits Africans has been absent. Beyond this fact, should we analyze the behavior of African leaders and elites and their pursuit of economic and language policies that do not prioritize Africans through a particular lens, say Pan-African, one could consider their actions indicative of notions they were taught via colonialism/neocolonialism. By neglecting the needs of African citizens, have African elites and leaders in fact treated their fellow citizens in similar ways that colonizers treated Africans during colonialism? Can this be considered benign neglect? Was the purpose of implementing democratic institutions in African states post-independence movements and pursuing language policies that benefit welfare state economies that are non-African supposed to contribute to political and economic development in Africa? One must consider these questions in order to postulate how language will be utilized in Africa in the future.
[1] Ajayi, J.F. Ade. 2002. “Unfinished Business: Confronting the Legacies of Slavery and Colonialism in Africa” South-South Exchange Programme for Research on the History of Development (SEPHIS) and the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta (CSSSC). Amsterdam/India, 2002.
