| Abstract: | The constitutions adopted by newly independent sub-Saharan African countries have taken many forms and sought to address a range of social, political, ethnic, tribal and regional problems, suggesting the existence of a high degree of pluralism. However, whatever their apparent diversity, African constitutions are increasingly mere variations on a Western theme and, as such, appear to encourage pluralism while producing its exact opposite. From a theoretical perspective, the confusion of form and content - 'constitutional fetishism' - and the persistence of more fundamental problems such as that of the African nation-State, make this illusion more cruel. Africa's integration into the global political economy undermined the organic development of democratic structures while liberal democracy, which is often not very democratic, has generally proved a failure. Liberal democracy is exclusive rather than inclusive. It is at odds with Africa's history, traditions, culture and social relations, and it is only from the bottom up that democracy can emerge. Current talk of liberalization and 'good governance' is not about empowering the African masses but rather an ideology and a means of incorporating them into a wider capitalism in the interests of the West. Bibliogr., notes, ref. (Commentary by Filip De Boeck, p. 89-94.) |
AfricaBib 
Periodical article
Leiden University catalogue
WorldCat
