Introduction
The majority of Africa endured the yoke of European colonial rule from the late 19th Century through the mid-20th Century. Most Africans suffered profound abuses as well as the plunder of resources under imperial occupation. In the decades since African nations gained independence, the scars left behind by both the ideology and institutions of colonialism continue to enable oppression in various forms (Kelley et al., 2000). Racist attitudes nurtured over the colonial era uphold discrimination against minority groups and sustain highly unequal power dynamics that lend themselves toward authoritarian exercises of power. The institutions and governing frameworks inherited by post-independence states retain extractive and centralized functions that limit civil liberties (Kelley et al., 2000). When combined, these lingering legacies of violence and dehumanization interact in ways that allow micro-authoritarian features to emerge even within facially democratic systems. It is argued that the racial ideologies used to justify such atrocities, coupled with the institutions created for resource extraction and control, combined to nurture lasting authoritarian tendencies within segments of formerly colonized African societies. Therefore, the racial ideologies and extractive institutions imposed through European colonial rule in Africa seeded authoritarian practices and unequal power dynamics that enable contemporary micro-totalitarian features to emerge within democratic frameworks across the continent.
Colonial Rule in Africa Enabled Rights Abuses and Seeded Authoritarian Practices
European Colonies Ruled by Force, Not Democracy
The Age of Imperialism saw European powers scramble to occupy African territory during the late 1800s. Germany, Britain, France, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, and Italy ultimately divided up and claimed colonies across the continent (Yeros & Jha, 2020). A diverse array of pre-existing African political systems were overwritten by European rule, largely without the consent of native peoples. Colonial administrations made no pretense of representative government. Their authority derived from military dominance rather than democratic legitimacy. Also, force served as the underlying instrument behind all facets of colonial governance in Africa. Military power was leveraged to expropriate land and compel labor (Yeros & Jha, 2020). The construction of infrastructure to remove resources relied entirely on various non-voluntary labor schemes. Colonial courts and policing enforced administration directives through detentions without due process. Such systemic coercion and repression meant daily life under imperialism inherently deprived native populations of basic civil rights and freedoms. The violent mechanisms used to establish external control seeded authoritarian strains of administration that carried on in post-independence African nations (Yeros & Jha, 2020). Centralized state organs using force to achieve order emerged as the model to emulate. Combined with the racial hierarchies discussed below, such repressive modalities demonstrated how the trappings of democracy could be undermined by leaders claiming to act in the national interests.
Systemic Oppression and Violence against Native Populations
Colonial states presumed inherent supremacy over native “subjects,” justifying tremendously abusive treatment. Unique in their systematic cruelty were concentration camps erected by German forces to contain rebellious Herero and Nama populations during 1904-1908 in their Southwest African colony (current day Namibia) (Yeros & Jha, 2020). These camps operationalized genocide through starvation, exposure, disease, and dispossession. The estimated tens of thousands who perished in unspeakable conditions were deemed casualties of a national civilizing mission (Yeros & Jha, 2020). During detention, Nama and Herero were denied freedoms and meant for mere survival, citing paternalistic necessity in Germany. Forced labor schemes helped the colonists and viewed camp detainees as sub-humans. They were also made to feel that there was no humanity and sense of morality in outrage at skeletal bodies that they found lying around the camp’s perimeter.
In order to achieve debasement, it needed to cultivate some malicious kind of racism that classified native people as inferior. The pseudoscience of race exploited Africa as a laboratory. Such fabricated theories gave grounds to support segregationist policies and excessive violence on the non-compliant populace (Kelley et al, 2000). It was not a coincidence that legacies of codification of repression on a race basis provided fertile soil for the other brand of repression founded on presumed ethnicity, tribality, or racial difference during Africa’s period of nation-building (Blakemore, 2023). Instead, these disparities have led to divisive politics among some groups, discrimination, and even incidences of violence directed toward some minorities. The effects of cultivated prejudices supporting structural inequalities can be seen throughout vast portions of African politics as well as its society nowadays.
Set Precedent for Violating Rights with Impunity
The Africans suffered extreme violence and brutality under the colonialists’ rule. Colonial administrators considered native people as non-citizens instead of human categories which were easily abused without any respect or regard for fundamental rights to fulfill their objectives of governance (Colonial Legacies et al., n.d). Repressive force targeting entire populations identified as unruly/disobedient would become an acceptable control mechanism with impunity. Building structures such as concentration camps was a way of resolving their intent to enforce wholesale denial of fundamental human rights. The use of systemic violence by an unaccounted minority faction to enforce conformity became a pattern utilized in the early African independence decades. Colonial inherited institutional structures concentrated powers into small elite groups with a ready affinity towards ethnic favoritism or cronyism. Such was a continuation of the dependence on deceremonialisation that had existed during foreign domination.
The central state was the only state organ that served one goal, and that was serving the aims of Imperial authorities in regard to resources and commerce. However, their basis had neither been in participatory decision-making nor in transparency. Thus, their legacy of statehood remained a vehicle for autocratic hijack. Such tribal elements were oppressed and tamed by the leaders in order to justify their authority (Madley, 2005). The use of armed force emerged as the supreme authority in coup-generated regimes, where coups imposing militant plans maintained this phenomenon. Multi-party systems started to be re-introduced in the 1990s, and the democrats started forming different structures of governance. Nevertheless, it is still common for dissent to be censored and for power to be constantly consolidated within Africa’s state institutions.
The ideology of Racial Superiority Persists and Upholds Oppression
Racist Colonial Attitudes Linger Within Segments of Societies
There are traces of presumed ethno-regionalism in many newly independent African states that emerged after losing their colonial masters. Dealing with this remaining stigma of hatred based on race remains an effort that must be undertaken to surmount the negative legacies of colonialism (Sadiq & Tsourapas, 2021). With their colonies, racist images depicting backward tribes that needed uplifting from outside rule provided a moral basis for subjugation, which has maintained uneven relations in new postcolonial states. Minorities remained discriminated against and unprotected under weak governing institutions, which worsened ethnic rifts as new territories were consolidated (Sadiq & Tsourapas, 2021). South African apartheid was, indeed, the ultimate form of ongoing state-sponsored, institutionalized repression between populations by a regime based upon racial separation. Even so, other areas around the world also had spots with such segregationist patterns. Although larger societies proclaim personhood as an ideal premised in principle, they often fall short in practice and remain burdened by uncomfortable legacies.
Ongoing Discrimination Maintains Unequal Power Dynamics
Opens Door for Rise of Authoritarian Leaders
Human rights and participation must be made available on a non-discriminatory basis irrespective of ethnicity, tribe/tribe, or religion. Therefore, opportunities for authoritarian takeovers will continue to exist even in a broadly defined democracy. South Africa remains a good example of how black populations may acquire rights yet still be disengaged from resources and governance (Blakemore, 2023). Nevertheless, similar prejudices built on beliefs of a superior race pervade various imperial legacies in contemporary Sub-Saharan Africa. Further, left-over systemic discrimination as regards any ethnic group that had been suppressed by previous colonial rule could serve as an enabling environment for new oppression to arise and flourish. Without providing equal opportunities to work, education, and governance, democracy enshrined in documents is not safe.
Poverty and barriers to political participation are challenges that still affect a large segment of the population. The challenge occurs because the legacies of discrimination find themselves with scant defense against heavy-handed rulers. Where oppression persists around identity lines, leadership cults elevating autocratic figures promising the elevation of a single faction often ascend during periods of societal stress (Strauss, 2019). This was especially evidenced in the emergence of a wave of independence figures whose names became synonymous with an iron-fisted national rule for decades, whether in service of socialism or capitalism, or some hybrid. The likes of Mugabe, Nkrumah, Kenyatta, and many more claimed to loosen imperial grasp by consolidating control around a central figurehead backed by pliant institutional tools inherited from colonial times (Strauss, 2019). Thus, discrimination’s maintenance of unequal access to rights and participation enables repeated capture of state organs. The state capture was done by demagogues adept at instrumentalizing grievances and fears of marginalized majorities. Authoritarian power leans upon lingering prejudices that dehumanize vulnerable out-groups, allowing abusive policies and rhetoric without checks. Democratic aspirations falter when all people are not equally empowered citizens.
Legacy of Extractive Institutions Maintained After Independence
Colonial Institutions Focused on Resource Extraction Not Representation
Colonial projects in Africa prioritized the export of human capital and import of resource bounty benefitting faraway metropoles over establishing governance inclusive of or accountable to indigenous inhabitants. The securing and enhancing output to global markets of goods ranging from metals to vegetables to human slaves drove institutional development (Hilson et al., 2019). Intrinsic governance aims remained wealth transfer rather than local community development or broad political participation. Also, representative and participatory assemblies are responsible for the involvement of the citizens in the development of the imperial state building. Besides, they are charged with building institutional capability concentrated on recruiting a vast native labor supply to buttress extraction-based export-focused policy concerns. The guards guaranteed that the worker who was powerless to demand fairer terms and conditions fulfilled the stipulated production quota (Hilson et al., 2019). Similarly, it supported liberalism and the right of choice exercised by post-independent regimes. Without political freedom, economic liberation had little meaning in light of colonial terms of trade that compelled raw materials’ outflow. Military partnerships and debt led to a strong-arm commitment of adherence to destructive export schemes that were set up institutions made for channeling profits to the world capital.
Post-Independence Governments Inherited and Replicated Aspects Like
Centralized Authority
The states that gained independence retained a centralized structure where decision-making was in the exclusive executive circle instead of being distributed over functional checks and balances. Dictatorial leaders with concentrated authority used the Cold War as a means of personal authority and not for scaling down the regime of suppression (Thomson, 2022). Rulers like Mobutu acquired and maintained monopolies of force in systems reliant on financial backers from abroad. Rural masses remained the basis for top-down administrative reliance (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2021). Early postcolonial states inevitably inherited more than the proverbial blank slate institutions and soon resorted to reproducing neo-extractivist approaches towards the hinterlands again. These grassroots movements called for equal opportunities for all, and they posed a challenge to the promised nationwide prosperity, which provided excuses to hold on to the power of strongmen instead of giving up the ground.
Crackdowns on Opposition
Post-independence states resorted to colonial practices of curbing civil society through detention, media suppression, or raw violence. At places where dissent arose due to highly unequal citizenship practice, this strategy was used. They deployed old authoritarian instruments and intimidated those who wanted a reversal of state domination and an emphasis on wealth sharing (Fichter, 2019). From Kenya’s violent land seizures targeting political opponents to Banda’s Malawi police state tactics against dissent, early postcolonial regimes replicated means of oppressing alternative civic voices (Fichter, 2019). Even revolutionary independence figures defaulted to autocratic refusals to relinquish control or provide accountability once placed at heads of governance machinery bequeathed by colonialism.
Limits to Civil Liberties
The institutions constructed to efficiently extract resources for imperial export proved compatible with maintaining curtailed civil liberties, denying natives means to control productive capital or influence state policies. Administrations focused chiefly on preventing disruption of outgoing commodity trade had an incentive to curb education, organizing, and open debate (Thomson, 2022). Although couched in overturning external dominance, gaining national autonomy did not readily translate into freedom to challenge authority figures that came to occupy apex positions. Speaking out against policies or corruption by ruling party officials carried risks without established safeguards. Indeed, ideas seen as overly critical of conditions bequeathed by colonialism risked accusations of sabotaging fledging governments. Thus, while elections symbolized representative rule, norms of open debate and dissent remained shaky in environments where the governing party or executive made unchallenged decisions (Thomson, 2022). The democratic choice was largely reduced to picking between personalities atop colonial-era bureaucracy rather than weighing substantive policy visions. The authoritarian tools handed down combined with economic institutions require unquestioning loyalty to authority for daily survival.
Continuities in Politically Influential Military Forces
A stark continuity marking the transition from direct colonial rule to independent African statehood was the ongoing influence of military forces cultivated under imperial occupiers. Colonial regimes invested heavily in local security forces trained and armed specifically to project power over resistant native populations (Ebeh & Aleke, 2019). Rather than dismantling these implements of repression, post-independence governments incorporated and often expanded armies, police, and paramilitaries inherited from the colonial apparatus. The independent states emerging across Africa in the 1950s-70s frequently faced volatile situations, with new territorial boundaries cutting across ethnic groups and little unifying national identity beyond throwing off external control (Ebeh & Aleke, 2019). These fragile coalitions relied heavily upon loyal men at arms to shore up authority and contain conflicts seen as threatening the central state’s stability. Rwanda’s 1994 genocide stands as a chilling example of how armed forces nurtured under divide-and-rule colonial strategies mobilized for heinous ends (Takeuchi, 2019). The German and Belgian occupiers designated Tutsis patron class status, enabling their dominance over the Hutu majority. This manufactured hierarchy bred long-festering resentment among Hutus.
The influential status of security forces inheriting colonial legacies opened doors for military factions to directly capture control across newly sovereign African states. Nigeria endured multiple successful coups after independence saw officers take charge amid volatile regional and ethnic tensions. Colonel Gaddafi cemented authoritarian rule in oil-rich Libya through a 1969 coup leveraging loyal armed cadres (Dawson, 2022). Such armed seizures of power demonstrate how the colonial tools of violence lived on as a means to subvert democracy. Even in African countries not experiencing outright military juntas, the concept of apolitical, neutral military institutions upholding consensus governance remained lacking (Dawson, 2022). Outsized defense budgets funding internal security organs schooled in command hierarchy and unchecked force blocked reforms to decentralize authority. Bloated militaries like Egypt’s interfered repeatedly to safeguard status quo governance, avoiding accountability. Resources fueled protecting authoritarian continuity over strengthening civic institutions able to channel dissent.
Neocolonial Economic Structures and Dependency
While the era of colonial occupation formally ended across Africa by the 1970s, the economic institutions and commercial networks central to imperial exploitation remained substantially intact. Newly sovereign states struggled to reform infrastructure locked into extracting commodities for export on terms dictated abroad (Yeros & Jha, 2020). The flow of raw materials, such as rubber and copper, for trading purposes still went on from Africa to other industrialized countries abroad. However, infrastructure tying up of African production for Western managed market continued through legally compelled contracts and debt obligations. The pursuit of continued foreign-centered resource exploitation stalled attempts at reform, entrenching the inherited colonial development model (Patel, 2021). For instance, most people do not have access to basic services or protections, with those promises of opening markets and modernization ringing empty. Such perennial economies of external capitalism that prevail today overtly as ‘neocolonialism’ were referred to by Nkrumah as a new phase or form of external governmental authority. Although changes were made, the process of getting rich at Africa’s expense persisted unaffected in most cases.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the various pillars of colonialism in Africa entailed military domination, racial pseudoscience, ethnic manipulation, cultural destruction, labor exploitation, and dispossession. These pillars enacted tremendous individual and societal violence, shaping trajectories in profound and enduring ways. Absorbing the multi-generational collective trauma of survivors remains something most formerly colonized societies around the globe continue grappling with through the present day. In African nations bound up in Europe’s land grabs, the phases of initial occupation through the rise of independence movements and early nation-building saw populations endure a spectrum of suffering. Just as cultural knowledge was torn from memory, bonds of trust and accountability between peoples and governing institutions struggled for definition after the rupture of external rule was overturned. Ideological manipulation around manufactured racial differences and national identities bred lasting ethnic tension from South Sudan to Cote d’Ivoire. Institutions designed for systematic extraction and control retained centralized, authoritarian features vulnerable to despots’ promising order. Combined with lingering prejudice, conditions remained susceptible for oppression to take new forms even once liberation was achieved from past trauma.
References
Blakemore, E. (2023, October 19). Colonialism facts and information. Culture. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/colonialism
Colonial Legacies Endure in Africa’s Legal Systems — undermining rule … (n.d.). https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/03/18/colonial-legacies-endure-africas-legal-systems-undermining-rule-law/
Dawson, G. (2022). “No future for Libya with Gaddafi”: Classical realism, status and revenge in the UK intervention in Libya. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 35(3), 357–374. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09557571.2021.1888879
Ebeh, J. I., & Aleke, M. T. (2019). Neo-colonialism in Africa: A shut-eye in an open world. Trop. J. Arts Humanit, 1, 57-68. https://credencepressltd.com/journal/uploads/archive/201915656773879565842301.pdf
Fichter, J. R. (Ed.). (2019). British and French colonialism in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East: connected empires across the eighteenth to the twentieth centuries. Springer. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NR2nDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=colonialism+in+africa+books&ots=EnQ1WA2-fK&sig=hcfycbj-nANuL8AlZ3K9iqYi2e0&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=colonialism%20in%20africa%20books&f=false
Hilson, A., Hilson, G., & Dauda, S. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility at African mines: Linking the past to the present. Journal of Environmental Management, pp. 241, 340–352. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301479719304347
Kelley, R. D., Césaire, A., & Pinkham, J. (2000). Discourse on Colonialism. Trans. Joan Pinkham. New York Monthly Review. https://www.sahistory.org.za/sites/default/files/file%20uploads%20/aime_cesaire_robin_d.g._kelley_discourse_on_colbook4me.org_.pdf
Yeros, P., & Jha, P. (2020). Late neo-colonialism: Monopoly capitalism in permanent crisis. Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, 9(1), 78-93. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2277976020917238
Madley, B. (2005). From Africa to Auschwitz: How German South West Africa incubated ideas and methods adopted and developed by the Nazis in Eastern Europe. European History Quarterly, 35(3), 429–464. https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/sage/from-africa-to-auschwitz-how-german-south-west-africa-incubated-ideas-O13j6DLPuS
Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J. (2021, February 26). “moral evil, economic good”: Whitewashing the sins of colonialism. Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/2/26/colonialism-in-africa-empire-was-not-ethical
Patel, I. (2021). We’re Here Because You Were There: Immigration and the End of Empire. Verso Books. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=wp0jEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=colonialism+in+africa+books&ots=mlNPLlwuul&sig=0cXenElNpviiuztsHe8pKNnRBRA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=colonialism%20in%20africa%20books&f=false
Sadiq, K., & Tsourapas, G. (2021). The postcolonialpostcolonial migration state. European Journal of International Relations, 27(3), 884-912. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/13540661211000114
Strauss, M. (2019). A historical exposition of spatial injustice and segregated urban settlement in South Africa. Fundamina, 25(2), 135-168. https://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?pid=S1021-545X2019000200006&script=sci_arttext
Takeuchi, S. (2019). Development and developmentalism in post-genocide Rwanda. Developmental state-building: The politics of emerging economies, pp. 121–134. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/23193/1/1006960.pdf#page=135
Thomson, A. (2022). An introduction to African politics. Taylor & Francis. Pp. 29–36. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=BKigEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT18&dq=post+independence+Governments+in+africa&ots=AE6oNX_zrf&sig=5dIbbwx1mBcxY9nv9qySfuYuu4s&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=post%20independence%20Governments%20in%20africa&f=false
write