He supported Kanu, but he was honest about it

Two weeks ago, I reviewed a book co-edited by Prof William Ochieng — A History Of Independent Kenya, 1963 – 2013: A Celebration Of Kenya’s Fiftieth Independence Anniversary (2013).

The book is worth reading though I was disappointed by the quality of arguments in some of the essays.

My disappointment was caused by what I believe is the rigour with which Ochieng attends to his writing and to edited collection of essays.

As a failed student of history, I hold immense respect for historians, for it is not an easy task to write history.

There are generally just too many stories flying about in the air, hidden in other people’s books and living under the dust in the archives that historians have to contend with before writing.

COMMITTED TO HISTORY

But William Ochieng wasn’t just a historian; he probably represented a breed of Kenyan/African historians that has rapidly been on the way out. They are dying of old age and their subject is struggling for survival in a ‘market-driven’ school curriculum.

But it is worth celebrating Ochieng’s life for his life-long dedication to the discipline.

There are those who may have disagreed with him but even they would find it difficult to question the his commitment to history, a loyalty and intellectual consistency that probably ranks him only second to his teacher and mentor, Prof Bethwell Alan Ogot.

Ochieng’s detractors paint him as a KANU apologist, or a conservative. But they conveniently forget one thing about Kenya: that every so often academics have turned into defenders of their tribes.

Ochieng can hardly be accused to have been an ethnic apologist. At the least, he defended KANU, as a party, probably believing in the possibilities of change in the independence party, like so many other intellectuals and politicians did but were disappointed.

I wish to eulogise Ochieng here by revisiting two books he edited: Themes In Kenyan History (1990) and Decolonization And Independence In Kenya, 1940-1993 (1995), co-edited with Bethwell Alan Ogot.

Ochieng wrote and co-edited other books including A History Of Kenya, A History Of The Kadimo Chiefdom Of Yimbo, and An Economic History Of Kenya.

I am interested in the two books for two reasons: the question of decolonisation in Kenya today and the question of a comparative study of Kenyan history.

These reasons are partly captured in the words of his co-editor, Ogot, when he highlights the objectives of Decolonization And Independence In Kenya: “In particular, this book raises the basic question of how far Kenya is avoidably neocolonial? And what does neocolonial dependence mean?

This book answers these questions by discussing the dynamic between the politics of decolonisation, the social history of class formation and the economics of dependence….”

DECOLONISATION AND INDEPENDENCE

The subjects of decolonisation and independence in Kenya remain as contested today as they were in 1963.

In 1993, Kenyans had just concluded the first multi-party elections after more than 20 years.

These elections had seen KANU triumph over a ‘divided’ opposition that was largely made up of members of the civil society and politicians who had fallen foul of KANU.

According to Ogot, in Decolonization And Independence In Kenya, multi-party politics was really a contest between and among the elite, “At the moment, ‘the national conflict’, embodied in the rivalries for the executive power among the elite in the various political parties, takes priority over ‘social conflict’, concerned with the interests of most of the inhabitants of the country.

It is a democracy of the elite, for the elite and by the elite.”

One would find it difficult to argue with Ogot on this point considering the manner in which, for instance, baseless and spurious theories such as the ‘tyranny of numbers’ have been marketed in the recent past by supposed academics, public thinkers and politicians to justify ethnic balkanisation.

Or take the greed of Kenyan MPs and public servants. Don’t these elite ideas and actions make words like decolonisation and nationalism sound like posh and silly ideals?

How independent are we today? How nationalistic are we? How inclusive can we claim to be? How decolonised would you say Kenyans are when the state itself is anchored on notions of a few ‘colonising’, nay, ‘tyrannising’ the rest?

The value of the essays in Decolonization And Independence In Kenya today is in the topics that the book covers.

Ochieng’ and Atieno-Odhiambo state: “That Kenya gained independence through her nationalist initiatives is not in doubt.

What is debatable is whether the long-term goals of the nationalists, which included complete Africanisation of the country’s politics, economy and culture, have been realised.

It is this notion of decolonisation that extends its definition beyond the date of uhuru.”

Indeed those who have been asking: whose uhuru are we celebrating, can’t all just be naysayers about independence.

Today, we still have IDPs in camps; millions living in poverty as prices of basic commodities skyrocket; insecurity; the state is not sure about how to relate with the media and the civil society etc.

It would seem that to ask these questions is natural and is what Kenyan intellectuals, especially historians, should be doing like Ochieng’ and Ogot do in Decolonization And Independence In Kenya.

The book raises questions about ‘The Invention of Kenya’; about the ‘Formative and Decisive Years’; the ‘Structural, Political, Social and Cultural Changes’ in the Jomo Kenyatta years; the Nyayo reign and the ‘Economics of Structural Adjustment’ programmes imposed by the Bretton Woods institutions.

These questions are a reminder of the role of historians in recording the lives of their countries.

It is such issues that animated William Ochieng; issues that were closely Kenyan.

It is the same issues that Ochieng had addressed earlier in Themes In Kenyan History, a book that is known more in the classroom and less in public.

Yet this is a book that deals with the history of Kenya from the pre-colonial period to years after independence.

The length and breadth of the essays and the background of the contributors to the anthology attest to Ochieng’s understanding of history as the coming together of different strands of stories.

HISTORY'S DIMINISHED STATUS

But why is this assembly of ‘history’ from other histories important? First, the meeting of minds from different academic backgrounds makes for probably a more holistic representation of the stories of the making of Kenya.

From a purely academic sense, there is a shortage of Kenyan scholars who are ‘historians’ of their disciplines. This explains why it is difficult to get books on the history of Kenyan literature, geography, politics, medicine etc.

Secondly, one can argue that the marginal status of history in our school curriculum can be attributed to a lack of research and output.

Probably, it is time Kenyan historians thought of publishing a collection of essays in honour of William Ochieng and Atieno Odhiambo, two of Kenya’s pre-eminent historians.

Ochieng’ may have been loyal to KANU but he was honest about it, taking time to explain why he supported the regime; and to the end, he remained dedicated to scholarship in this country, dying whilst still teaching, researching and supervising graduate students at Maseno University.