Abstract
Towards the end of the 1940s, Nairobi was characterized by momentous political conflict. A large proportion of Africans were said to be living outside the confines of colonial supervision, a situation that resulted in gangsterism and serious anarchy. Extensive research has been carried out on various dimensions of this episode, revealing that militarism and anarchy were deeply rooted in unresolved issues revolving around economic deprivation and the political exclusion of Africans by the colonial authorities. Some aspects of this violent agitation however remain unexplored. It’s demonstrated in this study that the urban poor in post-1945 Nairobi, pushed to the limits of human endurance, created their own alternative society in clandestine opposition to the forces of law and order. Examining the anarchy, however, reveals a nexus between anti-colonial militancy and ethnic acrimony. The study reveals that tribalism remained an important influence on daily life and political allegiances in the African locations. Armed with various weapons, Kikuyu gangs roamed the streets, terrorizing people of other communities. The spate of militant activity in Nairobi alienated the non-Kikuyu elements in the African population. Anti-colonial militarism thus had far-reaching implications on inter-ethnic relations in Nairobi. The ethnic question remained critical in political transitions that took place in Nairobi city in the post-Mau Mau period. The study was carried out in Nairobi County, particularly in the colonial ‘African locations’ of Pumwani and Shauri Moyo. It entailed the collection and analysis of data from both primary and secondary sources. Primary data was collected from oral informants and the Kenya National Archives while secondary data came from newspapers, books, magazines and dissertations. Data was then corroborated and both context and content analysis were done to guarantee consistency, reliability and validity of the information. A historical research design based on qualitative procedures was employed. Interpretation was done within the Marxist theoretical framework. Marxists hold that social and political behaviour can be reduced to economic motives, and ethnicity is an important force in political behaviour.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have