African Forms of Resistance Essay

?African forms of Resistance? African resistance to European colonialism in the twentieth century has often been characterized by violence and political action. These forms of resistance are known as direct resistance, but Africans also exercised another significant form of resistance to colonialism called indirect resistance. The implementation of each form of resistance, however, was not equally successful. African use of indirect resistance against European rule achieved its goals with a much greater success than did the use of direct resistance. The use of direct resistance, which includes political organization, violence and military conflict was carried out by many African groups and for the most part had quite unsuccessful outcomes. The use of direct resistance through violence and warfare by Mzilikazi and Dingane of the Zulu states of South Africa against the Dutch and British and the Tanganyikan people of the Maji-Maji Rebellion against German rule are examples of failed direct resistance among countless of other examples. The Ethiopian violent resistance to colonial rule by Italy is the lone exception to the ineffectiveness of direct resistance, but also owed some of its success to indirect resistance. Indirect resistance in the form of ideological superiority, false representation, economics and subversive politics was a form of resistance that was very successful and had important consequences that would eventually help bring an end to African colonialism. The use of indirect resistance by the characters in the novel Houseboy, written by Ferdinand Oyono, is a tremendous example of its implementation by African commoners. Economic indirect resistance was successfully exercised by the cocoa and coffee planters of the Gold Coast and the Bemba of Zambia. Finally, the indirectness of political leaders in the face of indirect rule was an important form of indirect resistance. The use of direct resistance by Africans in opposition to European colonial rule was largely unsuccessful. The lone success of direct resistance by Africans was the Ethiopian resistance to Italian colonialism in the 1890s. Part of the success of Ethiopian resistance was due to the elusiveness of its political relationship with Italy and its ability to attain modern weaponry from the British and French. The Ethiopians were effective at playing European powers off each other and also rejected deceptive treaties that they made with the Italians. This political elusiveness was a form of indirect resistance to European conquest. In effect, an indirect form of resistance helped enable the Ethiopians to be successful in their direct resistance of military action against the Italians. With these two factors, Ethiopia outlasted and finally defeated the Italians at the Battle of Adowa in 1896. Other than Ethiopia?s success against the Italians, African direct resistance failed again and again. The encroachment of Dutch and later British colonists in South Africa was met with direct resistance by the Zulu states led by Dingane and Mzilikazi. Mzilikazi, leader of the Nbdele, but who considered his people Zulu, did not believe Dutch Voortrekkers, who were migrant farmers that began filling into Nebdele land, could be incorporated into local structures. In response to this belief, Mzilikazi entered into a cattle raiding war with the Boers. Though Mzilikazi enjoyed initial success, the Boers made alliances with Mzilikazi?s enemies who committed joint raids which eventually led Mzilikazi to withdraw to the north. Dingane, another leader who considered his people Zulu, did not accept the large flow of Voortrekkers into his land. Dingane accused Piet Retief, the leader of the Boers of stealing Zulu cattle. This ultimately led to the execution of Retief and about 70 of his followers during a celebratory dance and a surprise attack on the main party of Boers on February 6, 1838. In response, with new leader Andries Pretorius, a well armed force of Boers engaged Dingane in the Battle of Blood River which resulted in a massacre of the Zulu and the end of Zulu resistance. The Ethiopian and Zulu attempts at direct resistance through military action are examples of primary resistance, where resistance is formed through existing political, religious, social and economic structures of a society. The Ethiopians and Zulu used already existing structures in reaction to European intrusion and within these existing structures formed a direct resistance. The Maji-Maji rebellion to German rule in Tanganyika in 1905 to 1907 is an example of secondary resistance. In secondary resistance, a society would create new forms of political, religious, social and economic structures or modify and reform old structures to unite under and revolt against their colonial rulers. The decentralized communities of Tanganyika coalesced beyond the traditional ethnic and regional lines under a new form of leadership, the prophet Kinjikitile. Kinjikitile, later called Bokero, claimed to be possessed by a snake spirit called Hongo and preached that his people were called upon to remove the Germans from their land. Bokero gave his followers war medicine, or maji, the Swahili word for water. The maji would protect his people from German bullets, allowing them to defeat the colonists. Under this belief, Bokero?s followers broke into open rebellion upon the Germans. The maji however did not protect the rebels from German firepower and the rebellion was eventually squelched by the Germans. Though direct resistance was largely a failure in Africa, the use of indirect resistance to thwart European rule was quite successful. African societies had failed at preserving independent self-rule and their traditional social and economic structures, which was the intention of direct resistance. But within colonial rule, Africans continued to find ways to retain their personal and social identities. The novel Houseboy, written by Ferdinand Oyono illustrates the diverse possibilities of carrying out indirect resistance and the success of Cameroonians in using this resistance to maintain their identities. Toundi, the main character and house boy of a missionary and later the commandant was very adept at never letting the French colonists learn of what he was actually thinking or believed. Toundi was obscure in his relationships. He smiled when he did not mean it, pretended to believe when he did not, and display fear when he was not afraid. When the commandant returned to the house and Toundi screamed, he lied as to why he did and ?put on my most naïve grin.? Toundi pretended to believe in Christianity to suit the white?s wishes. His fear of the commandant was never genuine after he saw the commandant was uncircumcised. Toundi and his fellow Cameroonians ideological resistance was well documented in the novel. They believed that French men were no men at all because they were not circumcised, that it was a shame that French women had to be with uncircumcised men. Toundi also admits to the irrationality of the whites, ?These whites, once their passions get a hold, nothing else matters to them.? He even acknowledged his position in colonial society with sarcasm, as a ?pet? to Father Gilbert and as the ??Chief European?s boy. The dog of the King is the King of dogs.? Toundi pretended to be what the whites wanted him to be and despite the treatment of abuse and intimidation by Europeans on Toundi and his fellow house workers, they managed to keep their identities and falsely assimilated into the colonial system. Another prominent way in which Africans could employ indirect resistance was through economic systems and strategies that fought against colonial systems. One example of this type of resistance was practiced by cocoa and coffee planters of the Gold Coast. In most places in Africa under colonial rule, cash crapping was pushed, but on the Gold Coast, the Africans had already implemented the system with cocoa and coffee production. The planters were able to keep control over the market from Europeans and also implemented a system of labor based on kinship and client relationships. Some clients were endowed by planters with plots of land to plant for themselves. The planters of the Gold Coast managed to always to stay one step ahead of their European counterparts. Usually Europeans would build railroads to encourage Africans to start cash cropping, but in this case the Europeans built a railroad in response to cash cropping in the region. Economic indirect resistance was also utilized by the Bemba of Northern Zambia with the use of the slash-and-burn farming strategy. The British saw this farming technique as extremely harmful to the environment and pushed the Bemba to use other methods of farming. However, after little success with these new farming practices, the Bemba reverted back to their old farming strategy of slash-and-burn that proved to be the optimal method of producing crops from their land. The Bemba?s superior knowledge about their land over the British and how best to farm it was a successful form of indirect resistance that allowed the Bemba to preserve their way of life and their economic structures. Indirect resistance could also come in the form of political elusiveness as mentioned earlier with the Ethiopian resistance to Italy. In the The creaion of tribes, John Iliffe described another type of political indirect resistance in the formation of a tribes. Sir Donald Cameron, a key contributor to the formation of colonial tribes divulged, ?They know perfectly well (their traditional political systems) but, for one reason or other, they may not tell you.? Africans would also appoint chiefs that were not their chiefs, so that the true powers of native authority could maintain that authority without colonial intervention. Africans would use these political strategies to maintain forms of their tradition systems of political power. The success of African resistance to colonial rule was largely dependent on the forms that it took. Direct resistance was not an effective means of trying to repel Europeans powers. European technology and resources were too superior to overcome directly. Through indirect resistance, Africans did have success. In their minds, Africans did not see themselves as inferior to whites and managed to preserve their identities throughout colonial rule. Africans found ways to work against colonial rule within the system and were be able to keep some of their traditional structures and identities. Through the preservation of these structures and more importantly identities, African communities were able to pressure European powers and gain their independence in the aftermath of World War II. Bernault. Lecture. 2/28 Gilbert, Erik; Reynold?s, Jonathan T. Africa in World History. 2004. p. 259 Gilbert, Erik; Reynold?s, Jonathan T. Africa in World History. 2004. p. 260 Bernault. Lecture. 2/21 Bernault. Lecture. 2/26 Oyono, Ferdinand. Houseboy, 77,78 Oyono, Ferdinand. Houseboy, 64 Oyono, Ferdinand. Houseboy, 33, 63 Oyono, Ferdinand. Houseboy, 24 Bernault, lecture 3/4 Gilbert, Erik; Reynold?s, Jonathan T. Africa in World History. 2004. p. 295 Bernault, lecture, 3/4 Iliffe, John. ?The creation of tribes,? A Modern History of Tanganyika. 1990. p. 322, 323