OPINION: Extractive Centralized Political Systems and Inclusive Segmentary Political Systems in Africa

The political institutions of a society are key determinants of its evolution. If the distribution of power is very concentrated, the society is absolutist. On the other hand, political institutions that distribute power broadly allow there to be a broad coalition of governing groups.

The following commentary will address the differences between the centralized political system (state society) and the segmentary political system (stateless society), in addition to the implications they have on the population the ruling party governs. Additionally, the effects of extractive and inclusive governing institutions on both societies will be analyzed. There is a stark relation between the centralized political system and extractive institutions, and segmentary political system and inclusive governing institutions. Although Africa has a history of both state, and stateless societies, it is undeniable that both political institutions have had a long lasting effect on the development of the continent and its countries.

In order to truly comprehend differences between the two, it is essential both societies, in additions to the governing institutions, are discussed in great detail. Africa proves to be an ideal example because it is home to an array of political systems; from those that are exceedingly simple to the most complex and sophisticated governing systems fabricated. The political system within Africa can be distinguished into the centralized political system and the segmentary political system. Both have proven to be successful in Africa, however, the differences in governing between the two are imperative to understand.

The political institutions of a society are key determinants of its evolution. If the distribution of power is very concentrated, the society is absolutist. On the other hand, political institutions that distribute power broadly allow there to be a broad coalition of governing groups.

The ‘state’ is a bureaucracy organized specifically to carry out political activities. It is a political system that proved popular throughout Africa, specifically at the edge of the Sahara and the eastern highlands. The state can be assessed as an organization with a monopoly on the local economy, the army and often its citizens. It can be regarded as the machine of elites that governs a country which exercised sovereignty in political, social and economic matters, in addition to having exclusive control of the means of violence.

Extractive institutions align very closely with a bureaucratic state. Extractive institutions have concentrated power that often discourages political and economic participation by concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few. Like in an extractive institution, in a successful state, the centralized bureaucracy must have the responsibility and the authority to carry out public policy and law.

Extractive states are not foreign to Africa, centralized political systems were common in Africa before the arrival of the Europeans. There was an array of kingdoms in Africa that controlled large populations and a fair amount of amount of land, including the Kongo, Zulu and Luba.

The structure of the African states was very precise. Although it did grant the ruling party an exceeding amount of power, it was not nearly as concentrated as it would prove to be when the Europeans colonized Africa. The king was an absolute monarch who would appoint all officials down to the village level. Although the king did have a considerable amount of power, rival lineages who sought to protect their own interests rivaled the king’s authority when they deemed necessary. Rival lineages, in addition to the king’s council and delegates, reassures historians that it was not a monarchy by any means.

The colonization of Africa by the Europeans is an example of the imposition of states with extractive political and economic institutions. European colonialism in Africa led to a an organization that made decisions, stated laws, passed judgments and sanctioned those they deemed guilty.

Europeans were motivated by the colonization of Africa by three factors: economic opportunity, political prosperity and the implementation of european social order. Their economic policies exploited Africans which only increased the inequality between the European colonizers and the Africans.

In order to facilitate domination, control, and economic exploitation, the Europeans imposed an authoritarian bureaucratic system while disregarding their different national traditions. The social and cultural institutions associated with the colonization cultivated a sense of racial inferiority by the African’s; something that was later exposed by the Apartheid regime in South Africa from 1948-1994.

Before the Europeans colonized Africa, the ruling party’s power over the people of the state was not merely as much as it would be after the Europeans arrival. Unlike the Europeans however, African tribes who controlled much of the power, like the kingdoms of the Zulu and Luba, did not see an economic opportunity in exploiting those whom they controlled. The European colonialism led a legacy of social discrimination, economic exploitation and colonial racism among states.

Unlike the state, the stateless society functions in a much more inclusive manner, one where power is not nearly as concentrated as it would be under an extractive state. The stateless society serves as a system of checks and balances based on a lineage system. In a stateless society, there is no central authority; it is divided among two centers of opposition rather than one authoritative figure.

Stateless societies are those that have no centralized authority, no administrative machinery and no courts of justice. The stateless societies draw a stark contrast to the centralized political system discussed above, most notably about the distribution of power between both societies. As mentioned, there was no elaborate hierarchy of officials or bureaucracy. The society is governed through family and kinship groups which were organized by extended families and clans. The stateless societies viewed equality among all as a necessity in order to avoid a tyrannical system.

The segmentary political system draws many parallels with inclusive institutions. Because there is no concentration of power, this political system “makes it harder for others to undermine the foundations of inclusive institutions. Inclusive institutions, like the segmentary political system, attempts to facilitate all economic, legal, social, and political order to all instead of a few. In the inclusive political system, many people are included in the process of governing hence the exploitation process is either attenuated or absent.

Inclusive societies are those that allow and encourage participation by the great mass of people in economic, political, legal and social activities. The inclusion of all members of society, and the feeling of equality, allows there to be an unbiased system of law which provides a level economic l playing field among members of the society.

Like extractive states, inclusive stateless societies were common in Africa before European colonization. The Tiv People of central Nigeria is an example of how stateless societies prospered in pre-colonial Africa. There was no central authority, they had no king and they lived in compounds administered by the oldest man. The leaders functions were to arbitrate disputes with other lineages, furnish safe conduct and lead people in all external and internal affairs. At the height of their reign, the Tiv people organized nearly a quarter of a million people.

The organization of so many people without any authoritative control is a testament to the power of inclusive systems that enables there to be compromise between the ruling parties rather than tyrannical rule. Although the inclusive segmentary political system is the more comprehensive system, it found it difficult to sustain order after the arrival of the Europeans in the 18th century.

Upon their arrival, European conquistadors were baffled by the system implemented by the likes of the Tiv and Nuer people of southern Sudan. The colonial officers were unable to find a single authority, they sought to implement a more extractive system of governing which proved to be a daunting task, but one that would be overcome with time through the colonization of Africa.

The political systems discussed highlights the political, social and legal system implemented by different empires in Africa before the arrival of the Europeans. Although both systems were proved to be successful, the arrival of the Europeans undeniably led to a more exclusive centralized political system. The success of inclusive stateless societies in Africa is admirable as they were multicentric organization in which two or more centers were concurred with one another, with the absence of authoritarian rule. The colonization process, however, saw a decline of the stateless political system and saw a rise of the extractive centralized political system.