Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History

Beyond Settler and Native as Political Identities: Overcoming the Political Legacy of Colonialism Author(s): Mahmood Mamdani Reviewed work(s): Source: Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 43, No. 4 (Oct., 2001), pp. 651-664 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2696665 . Accessed: 02/02/2012 12:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and Society for Comparative Studies in Society and History are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Comparative Studies in Society and History.

http://www.jstor.org

and BeyondSettler Nativeas Political the Overcoming Political Identities: LegacyofColonialism

MAHMOOD MAMDANI
University Columbia Our that Africa's coloniallegacy. is point thegeneration inherited My starting to We on followed theheelsofnationalists. went schoolinthecologeneration generfirst We after and nialperiod to university independence. wereAfrica's was consciousness shapedby Our intellectuals. political ationofpostcolonial on that of we a central assumption: wereconvinced theimpact colonialism our African In followed political economic. thedecadethat societies was mainly of focused theexpropriation on intellectuals nationalist militant independence, wrote How Europe Walter Rodney crime colonialism. of as thenative thegreat Africa. of But Underdeveloped Africa.1 no one wrote howEuroperuled tool economy themostappropriate to was We wereconvinced political that of contributionunthe The great cometoanalytical with coloniallegacy. grips of the was derdevelopment theorists to historicize construction colonialmareconoidentities. popularity political The of of ketsandthereby market-based precisely African academy like fire myspread a forest inthepost-independence economic way. evenifin a narrowly becauseithistoricized colonialrealities, two a Politicaleconomy provided way of countering kindsof colonialpreThe was of embedded various in theories modernization.2 first that sumptions, The secondwas in processes. colonialcultures werenotgrounded historical since for societies, the of marked beginning a history these that colonial contact and them culturally, economically, was to colonialism presumed haveanimated politically. for as began analysis The limits political of economy a framework political for economy in violence, political to surface thefaceofpostcolonial political marketfrom clash between a could onlyexplainviolencewhenit resulted of Fromthis poclass of point view, basedidentities-either ordivision labor. In the or revolutionary counterrevolutionary. liticalviolencehad to be either thanbetween violencethatcut across social classes rather face of political but nor them-violencethatwas neither revolutionary counterrevolutionary in crafted mainly distinctions by violenceanimated nonrevolutionary, simply from economy-exthan colonial rather sprouting thesoilofa commodity law
0010-4175/01/651-664 Studyof Societyand History $9.50 ? 2001 SocietyforComparative

651

652

MAHMOOD

MAMDANI

clarity. less economy offered and less analytical in planations rooted political of for of explanations an Thislimit provided opening a secondcoming cultural of resurgence the mostobviously thoseaddressing political conflict, political ethnicity. poof the to hereis totry understand spread nonrevolutionary My objective in assumptions two from widelyheld culturalist liticalviolenceby breaking formation generates political I the ways.First, willarguethat processof state but market-based identities also from not identities aredistinct onlyfrom that tendency rootcausesofvito a identities. Second,facedwith growing cultural ominously calleda clashofcivilizations3 difference-now olenceincultural identities. cultural political and I willdifferentiate between it me noneofus-neithernaTo return thetimeofRodney, strikes that to the of legacyofcolonialism, the tionalists Marxists-historicized political nor as that particular politcomplex reproduced colonialstate a legal/institutional in void, The was ical identities. tendency to discussagency an institutional by Marxists calledthe to on focusing how it was harnessed thecolonialproject; Bothbeand called them"collaborators." agents"compradors" nationalists "race" and as whileassuming moaned "tribe" "tribalism" colonialconcoctions, sense.It was said that to and "racism" existas something in a positivist real, and Marxists nationalists nor was ethnicity cultural race biological.Neither to as identities undergirded reand tried historicize andethnicity political race had becauseneither yetmanaged by produced colonialinstitutions-perhaps on Becauseouremphasis agency sufficient distance from legacy. that analytical agency, underto of we was to theexclusion institutions, failedto historicize the of stand extent which to colonialinstitutions shapetheagency thecoldid onized. in of only The question institutions rulehas surfaced recently, thefaceof of of of In conflict. the a breakdown political institutions an eruption internal and it calledtheliteraan of generally genre literature, West, has stimulated entire in WhenI first heardofthecrisisof governance postture state on collapse.4 I to I colonial Africa referred as a state collapse, was a bitsuspicious. rebeing for to the considered capacity membered tradition Aristotle Hegelthat the from I the life historical achievement.also remembered state as thepeak ofhuman in as of Hamitic which tookall evidence state-buildingAfrica the hypothesis, considered blackbutnotNegro.And I remembered as influence Hamites, of giventhat that rationale colonialism alwaystheneedfortutelage, the for was law to and Africans weresaidto lackthecapacity buildstablestates a durable andorder. I that do On second Africanists havea point. however,realized these thought, It justany There a state is haveis toogeneral. is not they collapse.Butthepoint it of that collapsing; is specifically whatremains thecolonialstatein state is is Africa's institutions in crisis.But are Africa that collapsing. True, political are If we which institutions these? we lookatthecrisis closely, willrecognize

OVERCOMING

THE

POLITICAL

LEGACY

OF COLONIALISM

653

inthe particularly political the legacyofcolonialrule, atitsheart institutional stitutions colonialrule. of It the to Thereis also a secondresponse thecrisis. goes under nameofPanby name,calledthe evenhas an organization that Africanism. tendency This in by with headquarters Kampalapatronized theYowPan-African Congress, used phalanx what of and, recently, theentire by eriMuseveni government until Rwanleaders: those from of tobe referred as the"newgeneration" Africa's to believethat crisis is state and da,Ethiopia, Eritrea, Libya.The Pan-Africanists becausetheseboundaries wereand are artifia crisisof colonialboundaries, up a case weredrawn with penciland cial-in theAfrican moreso, sincethey in would a ruler a mapat a conference inBerlin the1880s.Well,what on table wouldbe that they be genuine boundaries? Fromthis point viewtheanswer of ethnic boundaries. In wouldnotcutthrough wouldbe "natural," meaning they its the should map. other havefollowed cultural mapofAfrica words, political All are I find problems this with kindofargument. boundaries artificial; two havealways beenintegral state-building. to nonearenatural. andconquest War of mobility fithe the Thiswas particularly case before eraoftheextraordinary the of that nancecapital, certainly theglobalization followed collapseof and theSovietbloc-a development gavefinance that capitala truly globalreach. often transBefore era ofmobilefinance the shifting powerrelations capital, beingclaimedmore witheach new boundary latedintoshifting boundaries, howpower finance of capital, one. the natural theprevious With growing than becameporous. ever, boundaries all and The realproblem with point viewis theassumption cultural this of that and thatthe stateshouldbe a nationboundaries shouldcoincide, political boundaries a stateare thoseof a common of cultural state-thatthenatural but Basil state," he community. Davidsoncalledthis"thecurseof thenation curse.5 After the nature that of was never abletodefine institutional arguingin cleansing the I the rightly,think-that curseled to thepoliticsof ethnic the in was he and Balkans, argued-wrongly, illogically-that problem Africa Davidsonthought, EuThereby, that the mapofAfrica. Europe ignored ethnic state So Africa's traditions drawing boundaries. hebrought real in ropeignored us right backtothequestion colonialboundaries. of does notlie in from theseschools. The solution I willargue differently both to back theEuropeans address"statecollapse,"or evenin "recolobringing as more nization" presumably benign Africans, Ali Mazruioncesuggested.6 by lie Africa's boundaries. no matter For how Nordoesthesolution inredrawing crisis the willremain much redraw we incomprehensible boundaries, political of until address institutional-political-legacy colonialrule. the we
THE COLONIAL STATE AND LEGALLY INSCRIBED IDENTITIES

its to Thereis a language state, including colonialverparticular themodern from are of sion.Thatis thelanguage law.Legal distinctions different all oth-

654

MAHMOOD

MAMDANI

by reproduced inand are by they enforced thestate, then inturn are ersinthat within state. the citizen participation stitutions structure that "race"and"ethnicity." in madea distinction law between The colonialstate in Whatis thedifference lawbeI Thisis thequestion wouldliketobeginwith. and biology culture, between Is tween raceandan ethnicity? itthedifference a if Not raceandcultural ethnicity? really, youtakea closer between biological groups; to weresaidtobelong ethnic onlynatives Africa, look.In indirect-rule not racially, ethnicalwereidentified Nonnatives had nonnatives no ethnicity. with racial hierarchy, Europeans-meaning ly. Therewas in factan entire and then then Arabs, then followed "Coloureds," Asians, by whites-atthetop, even influence, ifindifa Raceswereconsidered civilizing Hamites Tutsi). (the to wereconsidered be in direneed of being ferent degrees, whileethnicities civilized. Each into the state divided population two:racesandethnicities. Thecolonial civil through law.They Racesweregoverned legal livedina different universe. Civil soor of as wereconsidered members, actually potentially, civilsociety. not preIf civil ethnicities.we understand society as anidealized ciety excluded sin that we construct, willrecognize theoriginal of but scription as a historical was civilsociety under colonialism racism. laws. Whilecivil law spoke customary through Ethnicities weregoverned of of customary spokethelanguage tradition, aulaw of thelanguage rights, even with different effects, opposite Theseweredifferent languages thenticity. to law.It claimedto setlimits power. of bounded The effects. language rights within ruleoflaw,andhadto observe the Forcivicpowerwas tobe exercised in did The of of thesanctity thedomain rights. language custom, contrast, of The of enfor was notcircumscribe power, custom enforced. language custom it. of it boundaries around In suchan instead checking bydrawing abledpower no arrangement, ruleoflaw was possible. distincLet me return mybasic point. to Coloniallaw madea fundamental not and of those indigenous those indigenous; tion between types persons: two observation-Iwillhavea second in a word, natives nonnatives. first My and Natives to had to not one later-is that belonged nonnatives, to natives. rights of to was to Nationalism a struggle natives be recoglive according custom. and as identity, a race,as "Africans," thus-as a racenizedas a transethnic form was to which a short to of togainadmission theworld rights, civilsociety, I wouldliketo takea closerlookat Before forcivilized goingfarther, society. of we of and (which thetwoworlds: world thenative theworld thesettler the the of with shallsee was notalwayssynonymous "nonnative"), world ethnicilaw of of of tiesandtheworld races,theworld customary andtheworld civil law. Law Customary law all was a In theindirect-rule there never single customary for natives. state, It it Forcustomary was notracially law specific. made specific; was ethnically

OVERCOMING

THE

POLITICAL

LEGACY

OF COLONIALISM

655

in ethnic groups. different a horizontal distinction,distinction law,between a eachethnic group The is Thiswasnota cultural a legaldistinction. point that but Africa saidtohaveethnicwas hadtohaveitsownlaw.IfEuropehadnations, had "historical" nation Europe itsownstate, in ities, then calledtribes. every If history. If in to every tribe Africa had to have its own nativeauthority enter native auits every nation-state Europepromulgated own civiclaw,every in the in its law. thority Africa to enforce owncustomary So went logicofinhad direct rule. federation, comThe colonialstatewas from pointof view an ethnic this Each nativeaueach ethnically. prising manynativeauthorities, defined so If meant was under central supervision. decolonization thority likea local state rid the state, whatshoulddecologetting of thecolonialpowerfrom central in I a this nization havemeant thelocal state? wrote bookabout in 1996,called the one say to Citizen Subject.7 and Here,letme simply that answer question I as wouldneedto takea closerlook at whatcolonialism constructed custom. in havethree things mind. but Africa nothavea singlecustomary did authority, sevFirst, precolonial in Therewerethusage eral.Each of thesedefined custom its own domain. chiefs, religious groups, so on.It is worth and groups, clans,women's groups, as authority unnoting onlyoneofthese-chiefs-was sanctified a native that derindirect-rule and its of was "gencolonialism, only version custom declared uine."Therest silenced. sanctifying authoritarian In the version wereofficially custom as of custom "genuine," as colonialpowersought construct to native unchanging singular. and If as authority reorganized despotic. we conwas Second,thissingle native the of authority under colonial trast modeoforganization civilandcustomary the Civicauthority organized thebasisoffuncwas on rule, point be clear. will of Evenifthere wereno tional and specificity theprinciple a balanceofpower. there the between executive, legislative, the elections, was a cleardistinction In thejudicial,andtheadministrative moments power. contrast, native of the on of was authority organized thebasisofa fusion power. in I chaired commission inquiry local government Ugandatheyear on a of We two in after President Museveni cametopower. spent years different parts One stoodoutin all areas,no matter how different ofthecountry. thing they the and When the between chief thepeasant. wereinother aspects: relationship the the and theyear wouldenumerate peasant's property assessit began, chief After If he to for purposes. thepeasant tax was dissatisfied, appealed thechief. to he to failed thechief madea ruling, wouldreturn collecttax.Ifthepeasant decidewhere puthimto work to then wouldarrest him, paythetax,thechief term. theendoftheterm, chief At the wouldreleasehimand his during prison of himto pay theunpaidportion theoriginal as well as a fineon tax, require couldalso failed payitinthefirst to place.Thissamechief topofitfor having a did law. For provided they notcontradictnational pass andenforce bylaws, for must donatea chicken the coulddecidethat every peasant example, chief

656

MAHMOOD

MAMDANI

combined So of purposes "development." thecycleoflifewenton. The chief powers. When judicial,andadministrative legislative, in hishandsexecutive, fist. closedandthehandbecamea clenched his he facedthepeasant, fingers ofour tours, beganto meet we to Whenwe returned Kampalafrom district enduring impresmost The ficials theMinistry Local Government. single at of of the me awaywith was howdifferent Ministry Local GovernsionI carried it lineministry-be that other ministry I knewof.Every every ment from was or industry, health-was funcfinance, agriculture, theministry education, of Its of for except one,theMinistry Local Government. concerns tionally specific feeder-butnotmajornot primary-but secondary-education, included of and not roads,primary-but hospital-health, so on. The Ministry Local I that was theminthis the was within state. realized Government likea state of It for istry peasants. was theheart thecolonialstate. emphasis coron customary wasthegreat law Thethird common thing about the definition a customary of say You poralpunishment. couldalmost that very to that right was authority an authority had thecustomary to use force coerce to I extent mayalso apply Sharia this custom. wonder what to to subjects follow Sharialaw, there great is needtohistoricize I law inthecolonialcontext.think on its by historically, application humans for evenifGod's law maynotchange I to to we earth susceptible change. think needparticularly look at twoasis the the between execucontext: fusion pectsof Sharialaw in thepostcolonial (ijtihad),and of tiveandthejudiciary, theexclusion judicialinterpretation to that corporal on punishment. is, thegrowing emphasis Hudud, CivicLaw a and weredemarcated horizontally weresaid to represent Whileethnicities and a vertically weresaidtoreflect cultural races diversity, weredifferentiated civilized than others, Someracesweresaidtobe more civilizational hierarchy. Whileeach ethnicity were rights. andtherefore said to havea claimto higher a within single was saidtohaveitsowncustomary raceswereconstituted law, of that that legaldomain, ofcivillaw,except civillaw was full discriminations; virtual. somereal,others there werecitizens different of categories, racesandethnicities the between is My secondobservation that distinction The hicolonizers colonized. and between was notthesameas thedistinction the and bothcolonizers colonized.Similarly, coloof erarchy racesincluded all whereas and words, nizeddivided thoseindigenous thosenot;in other into of The werecolonizers. hierarchy not natives werecolonized, all nonnatives races of racesand subject races.Who werethesubject race included master indirect-rule Africa? They were the Indiansof East, Centraland Southern and the the theArabs of Zanzibar, Tutsiof Rwanda and Burundi, Africa, racesandsubbetween Africa. distinction of The "Coloureds" Southern subject were the is Whilebothwerecolonized, former grasping. ject ethnicities worth like raceswereeither of immigrants, a fraction thelatter. nonindigenous Subject or wereconstructed as and theIndiansofEast,Central Southern Africa, they

OVERCOMING

THE

POLITICAL

LEGACY

OF COLONIALISM

657

of the example, Tutsi Rwansuchas,for powers, by nonindigenous thecolonial subFinally, wereindigenous. ethnicities subject In da andBurundi. contrast, in the function, either stateor the a ject racesusuallyperformedmiddleman and economically privilege by was marked petty position and market, their legally. treatment preferential recallsanother ethnicities racesandsubject subject between The distinction by context MalcolmX. Thisis thedistinction in distinction drawn a different and in the between "FieldNegro"andthe"HouseNegro," former thefield the and privilege by too in This thelatter themansion. distinction was marked petty effects. had and, treatment as a consequence, itsownideological preferential the was the As MalcolmX putit,when master sick, HouseNegrowouldmim"Wetired." was ic themaster-"We sick"-and whenthemaster tired, races both master included "nonnative" Precisely becausethelegalcategory as "nonnative" a legalidentity to andsubject races,itis important distinguish spokeof the To identity. myknowledge, law never from "settler" a political as by a libelhurled nawas "Settler" rather political only settlers, ofnonnatives. distinguished of races.The notion "settler" races,notsubject tivesat master state, by Itwas undergirded a conquest from conquerors immigrants. anidentity wouldsplinter nationalism In anticolonial a colonialstate.8 thecourseoftime, would Radical nationalism tendencies. even contradictory intotwo distinct, would nationalism whereasconservative settlers withconquerors, identify the wouldbelong 1959 In latter category them all identify with immigrants.this in in Revolution Rwandaandthe1963Revolution Zanzibar. how in is My mainconcern thisarticle thefollowing: does thisinstitutional distinctions between racesandethnicities, enforced with inheritance, itslegally ethracesand subject and subject law, civillaw andcustomary rights custom, colonialism? nicities, outafter play
POSTCOLONIAL DILEMMAS

the arisesfrom growing The dilemmas. first I willspeakofthree postcolonial test under postthe to for tendency indigeneity becomethelitmus forrights the arisesfrom The seconddilemma the as colonialstate, under colonialstate. into and indigeneity a test we fact that havebuilt uponthisfoundation turned state.The third underthe postcolonial forjustice,and thusforentitlement constructed a to the arisesfrom growing tendency identifycolonially dilemma tradition. Africa's authentic law of regime customary with and Indigeneity Rights continued be reto and indigeneity rights To understand thelinkbetween why of on we after produced colonialism, needtofocus thecharacter conservativesharedwithits radical nationalism Mainstream mainstream-nationalism. In to civicrights. contrast militant to effort de-racialize a common counterpart howthe sphere, to nationalists weredetermined de-ethnicize customary who as the nationalists pledgedto reproduce customary theauever,mainstream

658

MAHMOOD

MAMDANI

repronationalists mainstream of As tradition Africa. a consequence, thentic though, hopedto they Thistime around, ducedtheduallegacyofcolonialism. for In to citizens. addition civilrights over indigenous nonindigenous privilege rights. weregivena bonus:customary those indigenous all citizens, and who of arosethequestion defining was indigenous who In thiscontext as a whole, the the at and was not, both central thelocal levels.Within country and wereindigenous whichoneswere ethnic groups one had to decidewhich own. of authority their to havea right a native would not, onlytheformer for thoseethnito distinguish between authority wouldhave Locally, eachnative wouldbelongto thenative for and callyindigenous thosenot, onlytheformer of right custom. havethe and authority ethnically thus How do youtellwho of person. type indigenous Let us beginwith first the what of not?Givena history migration, and to is indigenous thecountry whois In 1997,a and the line is thedividing between indigenous thenonindigenous? of for a colleagueand I undertook mission theCouncilfortheDevelopment The parin in (CODESRIA) to KivuProvince Congo. Social Research Africa dilemma theKinyarwandaof was thecitizenship ticular focusofthemission weretwo KinyarwandaKivu,there of population Kivu. In North speaking The were and Banyarutshuru Banyamasisi. former considered groups: speaking was The why. answer disarmingWe werenot. wondered the indigenous, latter Belgiancolopredated whosepresence unliketheBanyarutshuru, ly simple: as had the nization, Banyamasisi onlymovedto Congoin thecolonialperiod, labormigrants. in the state wavered itslegaltreatIt is worth that noting whereas Mobutist a of in ment colonialmigrants, 1972evengoingtothepoint passing decree of on as all that recognized citizens thosewhohad beenresident Congolesesoil inclination to to since 1959,thedemocratic opposition Mobutushowedlittle Naas Organized theCongolese the question. repudiate coloniallegacyonthis organizations of hundred society civil a tional Conference,gathering overfour the one passed a opposition and nearly hundred groups, democratic political in then a as an with ancestor living the law in 1991definingCongolese anyone the demarcated Belgiansas thecolonyof Congo.Let us ponder by territory state It the of meaning thisdeclaration. meansthat independent of Congo acdate of of state Congoas itsofficial ofbirth, the cepts establishmentthecolonial inbetween those be considered to the thedateestablishing lineofdemarcation The immigrants. Congo was to digenous thelandandthoseto be considered in of If notandis notan exception. we look at thedefinition citizenship most with some the liveson,albeit we African states, willrealizethat colonialstate the over is in reforms. point that privileging indigenous thenonindigenous, My but the we turned colonialworld upsidedown, we did notchangeit.As a reInworld by t-he sat designed thesettler. sult, native on thetopofthepolitical the for remained test rights. digeneity is level,thelevelof dialectic also playedoutatthemicro The native-settler are neither law Where authority thenative customary norcustomary authority.

OVERCOMING

THE

POLITICAL

LEGACY

OF COLONIALISM

659

is reproduced authentic as trarealm uncritically de-ethnicized, customary the on is The hereis that whilethepopulation theground multidition. dilemma are or of the the ethnic, authority, law,andthedefinition rights mono- uni-ethnic. conempowering those ethnically, is the Theconsequence todivide population nonindigenous. others considered and sidered indigenous disempowering of inevitably leadstoan unraveling themovethis Theirony that dialectic is in for ment built as nationalist thecolonialperiod, thenonindigenous the in up The moreandmoreethnic. clashes are postcolonial period less andless racial, Put moreandmoreethnic. differently, aboutrights areless andless racial, too the to about rights, particularly right landand and ethnic clashesaremore more inwith thoseidentified itas ethnically that to a native authority can empower Congo,the RiftValleyin look at Kivu in eastern digenous. For evidence, or Nigeria. Kenya, contemporary an was a signalfor exodus:those Therewas a time whena clashofthissort on head,andrunin belongings their nonindigenous wouldleave,their branded is them fight out.Faced with to it thedirection home.Now,thetendency for of the into that the a native population two,pitting inauthority divides resident to is the the the digenous against nonindigenous, trend for nonindigenous arm militia theconin in Thus of themselves self-defense. theproliferation armed rights. landandother text ethnically of driven clashesaround is two First, not I we Atthis point suggest pauseandaskourselves questions. to it one theshift from homeward a to flight a tendency fight outwhere is resThatimmigrants ident that of enough thedefinition homehas changed? proof the of That ofyesterday nowbecomeindigenous? wereitnotfor form the have wouldbe today's immigrants state itsdefinition indigeneity, and of yesterday's if continue? citizens? to Second,whatis likely be ourfuture thesetendencies is The dilemma thefollowForifthey clasheswillincrease, decrease. not do, traders economy movespeopleat thetopandthebottom, ing:thecommodity and and capitalists all types thetop,land-poor of at peasants jobless workers acrossnathe the the below.The moredynamic economy, greater movement of tiveauthorities; themorethemovement, greater number nonand the the Here,then, thestructural is authority. residents insideeach native indigenous but dynamizes, thestatepenalizesthose dilemma: commodity the economy Evenwith colonial the them settlers. as gone, more power by dynamic defining a or citizen either native a settler! as we keepon defining every Indigeneity Entitlements and the to arisesfrom very dilemma struggle decolonize. The secondpostcolonial it? law as the reproducing Just customary How do you address pastwithout as ethnicities a claim between and madea distinction indigenous nonindigenous and between civil law made a distinction forgrouprights, indigenous nonit raceswhenitcameto entitlements. thetime facedmilitant From indigenous "native" enstate defined War after nationalist opposition World II, thecolonial in to for titlements response thestruggle justice.

66o

MAHMOOD

MAMDANI

phase, two has of The history entitlements gonethrough phases.In thefirst viointernal worst races.Africa's were entitlements at theexpenseofsubject racesunas thosedefined subject has period targeted lenceinthepostcolonial bothoftheTutsiofRwandain the"socialrevoThis dercolonialism. was true of of lution" 1959 and of theArabsof Zanzibarin theZanzibarRevolution of theAsiansof Ugandain to though a lesserextent, 1963. It was also true, thesetwotypesof cases lies in thefollowing: between 1972.The difference as racesmadea bid forpower, in Zanzibarin 1963 and in Wherethesubject demand their Where wereslaughtered. Rwandain 1959-1963 and 1994,they they forpower, and of was seento be fortheprotection privilege nota quest Asians, case of theUgandan them, disenfranchising as in the meta response expulsion. as which went faras including the During constitutionraceshas beendiverse. of Theresponse thesubject Asianswhohad rein al discussions Ugandain theearly1990s,theUgandan as in be that turned demanded they listed thenewconstitution oneofUganda's as was this indigeneity seenbymany at Not ethnic groups. surprisingly, bidfor expropriaany against future to an theminimum attempt getlegal protection home.Also notsurpristo and tion, maximally getaccess to landas an ethnic way for opted a different ArabsofZanzibar The it ingly, was rejected. returning andprivato gavefullsupport liberalization they the to secure sameobjective: against action the to and tization, thereby narrowing scopeofcitizenship-based Asian and the boththeUgandan have taken The Boersof SouthAfrica them. for Afrikaner have agitated an ethnic poor the Zanzibar Arabroutes: mainly that authority own home, their native and with complete a customary homeland, hopeson their law, can enforce owncustomary whiletherichhavepinned its for demands from majority salvation as and liberalization privatization their theTutsi comesfrom response and tragic troubling the justice.Certainly most Tutsialso seem the the Like theIsraelisafter Holocaust, Rwandan ofRwanda. is their conclusion that a to havereached conclusion is moreof a cul-de-sac: peace possithat without power, theonlydurable there be no survival can that ble is an armed peace. as of of It is thesecondphasein thedevelopment theculture entitlement a into indigeneity thebaof showstherealdilemma turning form justicethat of of African regimes-thebearers In entitlement.this phase,conservative sisfor natives yesterday's nationalism-havesucceededin redividing mainstream of The natives. dilemma indigeneity and settlers postcolonial into postcolonial case. by is perhaps illustrated theNigerian best entitlement as the legalbasisfor as federation, of character theNigerian to I amreferring specifically theethnic institutions-univerthat in provision keyfederal embodied theconstitutional character" the reflect "federal the civilservice, indeed, army-must and, sities, to entrance federal to universities, thecivilservice, that Thismeans ofNigeria. in eachstate theNigeWhere is quotasaresetfor andtothearmy quotadriven. for to mayqualify a quota.This indigenous thestate rian only federation, those

OVERCOMING

THE

POLITICAL

LEGACY

OF COLONIALISM

66I

all meansthat Nigerians resident outside their ancestral homeare considered in nonindigenous thestate which in they reside. The effective elements the of Nigerian federation neither are territorial calledstates, ethnic units nor groups, butthoseethnic groups havetheir that ownstates. The ethnic character theNigerian of federation an outcome has that reinforces tendencies. two First, given way"federal the character" defined, is every ethnic in group Nigeria compelled is sooner later seekitsownethnic or to home, itsownnative authority, ownstate theNigerian its in federation. Second,with each new state, number Nigerians the of defined nonindigenous all its as in states continues grow. cumulative to The outcome tointensify contradicis the tionbetween economic political and I processes. return myoriginal to formulation: more economy the the dynamizes, morethepolity the disenfranchises. The irony thetragedy that postindependence and are our political arrangement disenfranchises most those energized thecommodity by economy. Oncethe law makescultural the identity basis forpolitical it identity, inevitably turns ethnicity a political into identity. Thelawthus penalizes those whotry fashion future to a different the from past by mechanically cultural political translating into We identities. needto recognizethat pastandthefuture the as overlap, do culture politics, they and but are notthesamething. Cultural communities rooted a common do notnecesin past havea common sarily future. Somemayhavea diasporic future. Similarly, political communities include may immigrants, thus characterized culand be by tural even is diversities, ifthere a dominant culture a history signifying shared by the majority. point that The is political communities defined, the are in final analysis,not a common butbya resolve forge common by past to a under sinfuture a glepolitical of roof, regardless howdifferentsimilar or their pastsmaybe. Ourchallenge todefine is political identities distinct as from cultural identities,without denying there that maybe a significant overlap between two. the One wayofdoingso is to accent common residence overcommon descentthe indigeneity-as basis ofrights. initiatives tried makethisshift, For that to we wouldneedto turn thesecond, militant, to and variant nationalism. is of It militant nationalism tried deethnicize colonialpolitical that to the legacyand thereby repudiate notion indigeneity the that should thebasisofrights. be Militant nationalist initiatives weretakenfrom boththeseat of powerand from The oppositional in standpoints. keyexperiences, myview, werethoseofTanzania underthe leadership JuliusNyerere of and the NationalResistance its Movement during guerilla in struggle Ugandafrom 1981to 1986. Ourfinalchallenge also to rethink notion custom, theidea of is our of for is "custom" closely tiedtotheidea of"native." the Rethinking Customary Regime is Custom not version rescued built and justtheauthoritarian uponbycolonial It power. also includes silenced thesame emancipatory legaciesofficially by

662

MAHMOOD

MAMDANI

mulBothareplural, are of nor custom sources custom singular. Neither power. has its If is and tiple, diverse. custom tohaveanymeaning, reproduction tobe traliving every is My coercion. point that through than consent more through of be can Consensus only born cona it dition grows; hasboth pastanda future. the fossilfrom past,one as The idea of custom somekindof geological flict. of of is or be that cannot questioned changed, one point view.Thispoint view authoritaria and buttressing, salvaging domestic has beenkeyto identifying, tradition. anismas an authentic homesin the had customary authority twobig African crafted Colonially the While apartheid was the One period. wasNigeria; other SouthAfrica. colonial the as authority antidemocratic, postapartcustomary to tended debunk struggle au"customary" homes, intact, "customary" as has custom heidtransition kept this dismissed legacyas "antiHavingatfirst rights. and thorities, "customary" the has to National Congress turned embracing regime the democratic," African has SouthAfrica a As postapartheid as of thecustomary "tradition." a result, Africa. Whilethenewgovernment South did duallegalstructure-as apartheid it withan and civillaw,civilsociety, civilrights, stillworks has deracialized If native authority. the law by "customary" enforced an ethnicized ethnicized under civiclaw andof governed was of legaldefinition nonnatives as citizens law, customary woulditbe an exagunder governed natives tribespersons as aparttransition givenus a nonracial has the to geration saythat postapartheid heid?
POLITICAL IDENTITY: A METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATION

Leftmarket-based cultural. or as of We areused to thinking identities either class as saw generally "real"identities market-based identiwingintellectuals Thoseonthe or and and suchas "worker" "capitalist," "landlord" "tenant." ties, that Bothagreed was of that had right a habit arguing the"real"identity cultural. identiof as wereto be understood expressions prepolitical identities political literahad arena. The left itsverifying the ties-"real" identities-in political on and had and ture class struggle revolution, theright itsversion tribalism on tenhas there beena growing SincetheendoftheCold War, andnationalism. of identiidentities expressions cultural as also to see political in dency theleft on is wayto that social on giving ties.The literature class struggle gradually on but intelligentsia also many Thus onlytheright movements. itis no longer for ethnicities. even whonowcall for rights, self-determination, theleft from ecoas identities distinct of I want suggest needtothink political the to of are If identities a consequence thehisidentities. economic nomic cultural or of of identities thedevelopment and of of tory development markets, cultural identities and political language meanings, that communities sharea common forof of a as needtobe understood specifically consequence thehistory state in are identities inscribed law. In the the With modern political mation. state, enforced. first they instance, arelegally

OVERCOMING

THE

POLITICAL

LEGACY

OF COLONIALISM

663

and of you If thelaw recognizes as member an ethnicity, stateinstitutions bethen ethnicity, youbecomean ethnic particular of treat as member that you of you if By inglegally. contrast,thelawrecognizes as a member a racialgroup, to your is legalidentity racial.You understand relationship thestate, then your of the through mediation defined groups to legally andyour relationship other identity. of as thelaw and of thestate, a consequence yourlegallyinscribed from or rights entitleor your you Similarly, understand inclusion exclusion this From race and legally defined inscribed orethnicity. ments basedon your as need of bothraceandethnicity to be understood political-not point view, or cultural, evenbiological-identities. or of The tendency theleft beentothink thelaw as individuating disof has just But creating falseidentities. thelaw does not classesandthus aggregating beas eachperson an abstract justtreat It it individuate,also collates. doesnot in to a party a contractof ing-the owner a commodity themarket,potential inscribed legaland are identities. Theseidentities legally group italso creates through to and Theyshapeourrelationship thestate tooneanother lyenforced. of In also form starting the point ourstruggles. thestate. so doing, they
DEMOCRACY AND INSTITUTIONS: A CONCLUSION

are Moreimand is Democracy notjustaboutwhogoverns howthey chosen. which govthe they through it govern, institutions portant, is abouthowthey difwhichtheyorganize identities and through by ern,and theinstitutional of was notjust abouttheidentity of Colonialism ferent categories citizens. the or it so that werewhite European; was evenmore about ingovernors, they inDuring to to they stitutions created enablea minority ruleovera majority. citizens and the as these institutions unified minority rights-bearing direct rule, I havesuggestethnicities. custom-driven the as fragmented majority so many on was the ed that is what legaldiscourse raceandethnicity all about.Inthis as called "natives," identity the steadofracializing colonizedintoa majority rule direct indirect dismantled did nineteenth-century rule,twentieth-century Thus ethnicized minorities. itwas saidthat this into racialized majority so many in colonies. only there wereno majorities, minorities, theAfrican in the Thiscorecoloniallegacyis at therootofourdilemma, oneI defined is federation. dilemma the That of thecontext mydiscussion theNigerian of the and of dynamizes, thestatedisenfranchises form thestate:theeconomy those In whatare we to do? How do we support mostdynamic. thiscontext, or also that disenfranchised? demanding each ethnicity haveitsown state By If constitution?so, do in native authority, forexample, thenewEthiopian as, will sincethenumber minorities grow of the we notrisk multiplying problem, To or authorities? oppose of defined states native as do thenumber ethnically chauvinforces with ethnic that wouldbe seentobe joining however, demand, is The ists.Is there wayoutofthisdilemma? onlywayout,I haveargued, to a the and the rethink institutional legacyof colonialism, thusto challenge idea

664

MAHMOOD

MAMDANI

and political rights, political justicefirst that must we define political identity, in Let the and foremost relation indigeneity. us reconsider coloniallegacy to in It that that eachofus is either native a settler. is with compass handthat a or we must fashion political our world. thought the crime that real of In sum, suggest go beyond conventional I we the and that percolonialism toexpropriate indigenous, consider colonialism was the an crime. Thatgreater crime topoliticize was indigeneity, petrated evengreater and as self-assertion. first a settler against native, then a native as libel the
NOTES

Africa (Dar-es-Salaam: TPH, 1971). 1. Walter Rodney, HowEuropeUnderdeveloped 2. Immanuel Wallerstein, Uses ofRacism," "The London Review Books22,10(18 of May 2000):11-14. and of 3. See, e.g., SamuelHuntington, Clash of Civilizations theRemaking The 1996). World Order (NewYork:SimonandSchuster, and of 4. See, William Zartman, I. CollapsedStates:TheDisintegration Restoration 1995). Legitimate Authority (Boulder, Colo.: L. Rienner, The Africa theCurseofthe and Nation-State 5. Basil Davidson, BlackMan'sBurden: (New York:TimesBooks,1992). International Need BenignColonization," 6. Ali Mazrui, "Decaying Parts Africa of 2, Herald Tribune, Aug. 1994; also see, CODESRIA Bulletin (Dakar: CODESRIA, 4 1994). and Subject:Contemporary and theLegacy 7. Mahmood Africa Mamdani, Citizen Princeton University Press,1996). ofLate Colonialism (Princeton: Does a Settler Becomea Native? Reflections on 8. See Mahmood "When Mamdani, theColonialRootsof Citizenship Equatorial South in and Africa." Inaugural Lecture, of University Cape Town, New Seriesno. 208, 13 May 1998.