Postcolonial State Versus Ethnicity

Abstract

Decolonization marked the birth of the Third World-its primigenial and legitimating act-at least as it was perceived by its own members. When it was created as a category, the Third World corresponded to the newly independent former colonies. Africa, in particular, burst onto the world stage out of a kind of political void-its entrance a product of the winds of change set in motion by the colonial powers as they handed over the keys of sovereignty. Latin America, which had completed its risorgimento more than a century earlier, was to reexperience independence in new forms-as revolution, anti-imperialism-and thus secure a place in the Third World, called third not only because it was neither capitalist nor socialist but also because it did not yet belong to the higher realm of politics. The process that was to endorse independence and thence the existence of Africa was shackled by the total dependency of the people of the African nations and of their state institutions. Their only frame of reference was colonialism. As the inspired Kwame Nkrumah said, summarizing his national emancipation program for the first African possession to gain independence, Seek ye first the political kingdom and everything else shall be added unto it. Although this simplification was then used by the elite for their own ends, they were the only ones who could take possession of the political kingdomthat is, power-and lead Africa out of the condition of impotence to which it had been reduced by European colonialism. Nkrumah himself tried to avoid getting caught in that inevitably narrow perspective and rechristened the Gold Coast with the glamorous name of so as to anchor it firmly to African history. However, allusion to the ancient Sudanese Empire known as Ghana was somewhat forced, as the connection was too vague in terms of population, culture, and even geography. Paradoxically, the past continued to be the most difficult problem to resolve.