Generation Z protests against Kenya’s Finance Bill 2024. James Wakibia/ZUMA PRESS/Picture Alliance
By MORRIS ODHIAMBO
The Gen-Z revolution has hit Kenya! I am talking about the wave of “occupy” protests that have engulfed the country for the past week. But, what are the tenets of the movement? What does it stand for? How does it fit into the historical moment Kenyans find themselves in, struggling to push back against extreme and harsh neo-liberal policies of the Kenya Kwanza government and its prefect, the International Monetary Fund?
My reflections today focus on the protests fueled by sharp disagreements over the Finance Bill 2024. I situate these protests within the context of the “youth bulge theory”, perspectives from the Occupy Movements that have protested across the globe in recent years, and Kenya’s stubborn “It’s Our Turn to Eat” corrupt political economy.
First, I will discuss the youth bulge.
The “youth bulge” is a demographic pattern in which a large share of the population is children and young adults. Its importance transcends the spheres of politics, culture and economics; embracing issues of security, violent extremism, and global migration of labour. In Africa, it has been characterised as both a “demographic dividend” (a positive force for progress) and a “demographic time bomb” (a force for violence and destabilisation).
Concerns with a growing youth population are global. In 2006, the African Union adopted the African Youth Charter, thus creating an opportunity to focus on the youth as a force for change. The Charter recognises the need to empower the youth as important players in the development process. More broadly, the Constitutive Act of the African Union recognises the youth as an important partner in strengthening cohesion among Africans.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250 puts emphasis on the creation of a conducive environment for peace-building through economic and social development activities focused on the youth. It considers the youth an important constituency for sustainable change and peace.
In “The Clash of Civilisations and the Remaking of the World Order”, Samuel Phillips Huntington theorised that the youth bulge is a potential source of political instability. However, his position has been increasingly challenged by those who see an expanding youth population “as a chance for innovation, economic growth, and development.”
Edwin Yingi, a Zimbabwean scholar, wrote a very informative article titled, “Youth bulge as a peace-building opportunity for Africa: The Case of Zimbabwe’s Youth Empowerment Programmes”. He revealed that “most Sub-Saharan African countries are ranked among the 40 poorest countries in the world.” This is in spite of the continent’s massive resource endowment.
In his abstract, Yingi says “Demographers have revealed that the youth population in Sub-Saharan Africa is growing to become what is termed the youth bulge. This demographic phenomenon combined with elusive formal wage employment in many African countries has often resulted in youth becoming a destabilising force.”
Quoting several scholars, Edwin posits that, “The bulging youth population in Africa characteristically presents a mixture of threats and opportunities for the continent.” He further points out, “it is widely presumed that in contexts of unemployment and hopelessness, young people are readily driven into participating in violent conflict.”
Far from being a force for destabilisation, the youth, Yingi further posits, are an important constituency for peace building. In relation to Zimbabwe, he states, “As a solution to youth unemployment and vulnerability, Zimbabwe adopted youth development and empowerment programmes. The efforts have, however, suffered from a myriad of challenges, including lack of political will, political interference, and marginalisation of the youth in decision making.”
My problem with Yingi’s and other perspectives that I read while researching for this article is the fact that the youth are often looked at as an entity not central to the management of national affairs. They need to be managed, even “dealt” with!
The question of agency is, therefore, central to my own argument. The youth should not be seen merely as useful agents “for peace”. They are an integral part of the socio-economic realities of society. Therefore, any planning process that treats the youth as an entity detached from the mainstream realities is doomed to fail.
The above brings me to a discussion of the occupy movements and what they stand for.
Scholar and activist Noam Chomsky is acclaimed all over the world for his “praxis” approach to social movements. After its emergence at Wall Street in Manhattan in 2011, Chomsky practically immersed himself into the occupy movement, analysing it, questioning its methods, and giving numerous talks on its philosophical bases. His speeches and lectures were then published under the title, “Occupy”.
According to “Occupy”, one of the outcomes of the occupy movements was to make it possible to tell the stories of people suffering high levels of inequality. “Their stories are being told, and anyone who can read and understand cannot help but deplore the cruelties endured by millions of the people in an economy that for decades has been shaped and coded to serve the rich,” the preface to the book says.
One critical reviewer of Chomsky’s book had the following to say:
“This inequality is the result of a 30-year-long class war that has hollowed out the middle class and put great pressure on the poor in the United States. The neo-liberal push for privatization and lower trade barriers has carried that war to every corner of the globe. The Occupy movement is pushing back against the actors, the actions, and most importantly, the consequences of this class warfare.” (Does this not reflect the situation in Kenya?).
The primary concern of the “occupy movements” was the inequalities that result from capitalist fundamentalism. Facts and figures have consistently shown how the top 10% of the world’s richest control over 90% of resources, while the remaining 90% control only 10%.
Protests against the proposed Finance Bill turned violent. Boniface Muthoni/ZUMAPRESS/Picture Alliance
Chomsky’s perspectives are relevant to Kenya for a number of reasons. The first and obvious reason is the country’s turn to neo-liberalism and International Financial Institutions for salvation from the massive economic mess created by presidents Uhuru and Ruto (2013 to 2024).
This has further taken away sovereignty from citizens, including the youth. Kenyans are actively questioning the relevance of elections in a context where sovereignty has been fully surrendered to the IMF. Some of the key messages adopted by the protesters bring this out clearly.
The second is the inequalities generated by the neo-liberal policies. It is these kinds of inequalities that spurred the global occupy movements in the first place. And, symbolically, they started at the citadel of neo-liberalism and profit fundamentalism, the Wall Street!
Third, the ideology and methods that oppose neo-liberal policies are relevant to Kenya’s current historical circumstances and those of other African countries. The Kenyan Gen-Z have strategically appropriated the methods of occupation and other non-violent tactics, which include picketing, civil disobedience, demonstrations, and internet activism.
Youth in other African countries, such as Nigeria, going through similar, perhaps even more daunting realities, are already keenly studying this model. Only time will tell whether the model will be adopted in these countries to awaken the lazy, self-indulgent elite to the realities of the moment.
The above point brings me to a discussion of Kenya’s political economy.
“Its Our Turn to Eat: The Story of a Kenyan Whistle-blower” is the title of a book by Michela Wrong. It features the story of John Githongo, one of Kenya’s anti-corruption activists who made the interesting “mistake” of joining Kibaki’s government in 2003, spurred by his family’s traditional closeness to power. Though the book is about a specific epoch, its theme covers Kenya’s political economy characterised by corruption and wanton wastage of public resources.
The number of corruption scandals under President Ruto’s tenure has been growing. During the disastrous Jubilee administration under Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto (the current president), a number of senior government officials were taken to court.
When the Ruto regime took power in 2022, nearly all the cases of corruption were dropped, suggesting executive interference. A number of those initially prosecuted found their way to senior government positions.
The message has been quite clear: if you support the regime, you will be cleared of corruption charges, however serious. This has created motivation for individuals of dubious pasts to troop “into government” purely for protection.
The current weight of debt repayment (again, mainly a result of the disastrous Uhuru/Ruto policies) is felt by every strata of society, including the youth. It is the debt burden that is partly fueling the tax increases under the tutelage of the International Monetary Fund.
As the government preaches austerity and asks young people to “go get jobs abroad” (as if the Kenya government has a contract with other governments to employ its people!), it does not mind its own profligate and wasteful spending. Ruto’s numerous travels abroad (with large entourages, including, in one case, a comedian!) are widely perceived as nothing but initiatives to “put money” into the pockets of functionaries through massive allowances as reward for their loyalty.
Furthermore, Kenya’s plethora of youth empowerment programmes such as the Kazi Kwa Vijana programme are known more for corruption than for empowering the youth. The only thing I remember about the Youth Enterprise Development Fund (YEDF), the premier programme in this regard in Kenya, is the massive looting orchestrated by its managers and their networks within and outside the government bureaucracy.
Kenyan politicians and Africa’s policy makers at large have a choice to make. They can either more seriously adopt policies that empower the youth, fight corruption and misuse of resources, or prepare for more political turbulence.
When the government employs people of dubious character, like those who spend time displaying their behinds on social media, it does not display the seriousness needed to resolve sharp economic and social contradictions.
Morris Odhiambo is a scholar, journalist, writer, consultant and social rights defender and a member of the Diplomacy Scholars Association of Kenya (DIPSAK).
