The influence of Tribalism/Ethnicity on political party choices and government effectiveness.

Description

THESIS OUTLINE RESEARCH QUESTION The influence of Tribalism/Ethnicity on political party choices and government effectiveness. Example In 1992 Kenya held its first multi-party election in 26 years. Since this re-introduction of multipartism, the “politics of tribe” has been blamed for the country’s political tribulations. This has led to a system under which leaders channel government resources to their ethnic supporters to ensure their political survival. In turn, their supporters begin to feel entitled to government resources. The politics of ethnicity therefore becomes an inter-community competition, not merely for representation in governance, but for resources. This isn’t a problem exclusive to Kenya. Studies show that many African countries are finding it difficult to manage diversity, and particularly ethnicity. In other parts of the world such as Yugoslavia, Burma, and Sri Lanka, ethnicity has been politicised and has consequently played a major role in triggering violence. In Kenya, tribal politics has given rise to rampant corruption, marginalisation, disenfranchisement of entire communities, and fullblown violence. TRIBALISM/ETHNICITY THEORY The intensified reflexivity about social relations explains why apparently simple ideas such as ‘tribe’, ‘race’, ‘nation’, and ‘ethnicity’ are now so hard to outline. It is why, across various disciplines, scholars are increasingly shying away from oppressing these ideas. In fact, what theorists tend to do is problematize the terms so that they no longer work, and then use the exact same terms anyway. This has made it increasingly difficult to write something regarding the social without careful definitions of every catching thought and also the creating of new ideas to deal with the perceived issues of the recent. One idea that needs express consideration is social arrangement. It had its causes in the neo-Marxist endeavour to make tracks in an opposite direction from what was prior alluded to as ‘methodological patriotism’. As opposed to treating society and country as coextensive, imagining a social formation was to write in a progressively unique register. In this sense, a social development was a community-nation in the entirety of its chronicled particularity, yet with its social political limits crossed by more extensive social powers. Those powers were framed in principle by the predominant method of generation in articulation with different methods of creation. I need to utilize the term in a more generalized path than the ‘method of  creation’ approach. It will be utilized as the generic term for designed developments of social practice and discourse(notice here that the word ‘arrangements’ acts at the same time as a thing of outcome and of procedure). These developments can be portrayed at various levels of expository reflection. At the dimension of exact examination, a nation or worldwide network, or even a connection gathering, can be known as a social formation, continually remembering that such an arrangement is never unitary, homogenous or self-comprising. The concept of ‘tribe’ derived from the traditional Latin term tribus, names real, self-reproducing and changing communities framed by the social dominance of face-to-face integration and living in the world today. Making the issue more complicated, it is possible to have tribalism beyond traditional tribes. The problems of definition are now more than lexical. The common application of the generalized concept of ‘tribalism’ has become almost repetitive. Used to denote how those face-to-face communities we once unproblematic ally called ‘tribes ‘are different from modern abstracted communities such as the nation, the concept of ‘tribalism’ begins to turn on a convention of self-naming. This has opened up the possibility of a postmodern relativism that says that you are part of a tribe if you name yourself as such. The question of self-naming is only one of the dimensions of community. As a way out of the problem, tribalism is treated here as an ontological formation, in the same way as traditionalism, modernism or postmodernism were used earlier in the chapter. Customary tribalism is defined, most generally, as the framing condition of a certain kind of community in which persons are bound beyond immediate family ties by the dominance of modalities of face-to-face and object integration, including genealogical placement, embodied reciprocity and mythological enquiry. Political parties are established based on certain common principles by people who share in such principles, virtues, philosophies, customs etc. In most African countries the issue of tribal and ethic dimensions play major role in determining the strength and weaknesses of political institutions and body politic of these countries. In Zambia for instance the Bemba tribe has huge influence on the country’s political dynamics and politicians always take advantage of the existing tribal dynamics to push their agenda depending on where they gather their strength from and that led to the introduction of the one party state by Kaunda and his “Humanism” theory. Just like the Akan language in Ghana, the Bemba language has come to supplement English as Zambia’s second language. What we must know is that language can be used as a vehicle of tribal dominance and if not curbed strategically, could be used by mischievous politicians to push through their parochialism agenda. can you add that an outline