In the heart of Africa, a disconcerting pattern has emerged over the past 222 years. The reins of power have been firmly held by six individuals who ascended to authority through means ranging from forceful takeovers to the bending of laws and constitutions. This enduring practice has deep roots, echoing the traditional African governance system, where tribes and communities looked to their hereditary rulers to lead until their last breath. However, it is nothing short of astonishing that in the modern era of governance—democracy—such leaders continue to wield power across the African continent.
On average, these six men—Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo (43-year rule) in Equatorial Guinea, Paul Biya (40-year rule) in Cameroon, Denis Sassou Nguesso (38-year rule) in the Republic of the Congo, Yoweri Museveni (36-year rule) in Uganda, King Mswati III (36-year rule) in the Kingdom of Eswatini, and Isaias Afwerki (29-year rule) in Eritrea—have collectively governed for 37 years each. As we examine this cumulative reign, we must grapple with the mixed outcomes it has delivered for the people and businesses of these nations in terms of good governance and iron-fisted rule.
Immanent critique, a philosophical approach that scrutinizes systems from within, offers a powerful lens through which to understand the implications of this enduring rule. It invites us to evaluate these long-standing regimes not from an external, judgmental perspective, but rather from within the context of their own making.
Through the lens of immanent critique, we are compelled to ask: What has sustained these leaders’ grip on power for such extended periods? What societal, economic, and political factors have enabled their continued rule, despite the tenets of democracy that advocate for change and the will of the people?
One might argue that these leaders, while holding onto power for decades, have navigated a complex web of domestic and international dynamics, making them adept at maintaining stability, albeit at the cost of democratic principles. However, immanent critique does not merely highlight the endurance of these regimes; it underscores the importance of challenging the status quo.
The central question that immanent critique poses is this: Can these nations truly progress and thrive under the protracted rule of a few? While some might point to economic growth or stability as signs of success, we must remember that democracy’s essence lies in the power of choice, accountability, and the capacity for renewal.
Emancipating the people of these nations from the clutches of enduring rule is not about negating the accomplishments or stability achieved during these long reigns. Instead, it is about reimagining a future where leadership is dynamic, participatory, and aligned with the will of the governed.
As we reflect on 222 years of these six men ruling six African nations, immanent critique calls us to examine the systems that have allowed this to happen and to seek paths toward a future where democracy, in its truest form, empowers the people to shape their destinies. It reminds us that progress and emancipation lie in the hands of those who dare to challenge the status quo, advocating for governance that prioritizes the flourishing of nations and their people above all else.
