|
Zaire Belgian Paternalism: Underlying Postulates
Reduced to its essentials, Belgian paternalism meant
that basic
political rights could be withheld indefinitely from
Africans as
long as their material and spiritual needs were properly
met.
Paternalism drew its rationale from a vision of Africans
as
essentially "big children," whose moral upbringing
required a
proper mixture of authority and dedication. Its essence is
perhaps
best captured in the opening sentence of a celebrated work
by a
former colonial governor general, Pierre Ryckmans:
"Dominer pour
servir (Dominate in order to serve. . . . This is the only
excuse
for colonial conquest; it is also its complete
justification.)."
Putting into effect the social welfare postulate of
paternalism
was largely the responsibility of parastatal
organizations,
semipublic corporations enjoying a substantial measure of
autonomy
in organizing and dispensing social services. Their names
became
identified with a wide spectrum of social welfare
activities
ranging from medical services to housing projects, from
education
and health care programs to family allowances and social
centers
(foyers sociaux) for African women. An extensive
network of
social welfare programs thus reached out to the governed
to ensure
their material well-being "from the womb to the tomb."
Roman
Catholic and Protestant missions, meanwhile, assumed full
responsibility for their spiritual well-being, the former
being
more numerous in the endeavor. Through their teaching and
evangelical activities, and with the help of generous
subsidies
from the state, Catholic missions thus formed a major
element in
the armature of paternalism.
The darker side of this paternalism was the political
control
and compulsion underlying Belgian colonial policies.
Extensive
restrictions affected Africans in their everyday
life--ranging from
prohibition of the purchase of liquor (until 1955) to
stringent
police surveillance and curfew regulations in the urban
centers,
and from compulsory crop cultivation to various forms of
administrative and social regimentation in the
countryside.
Part of the Belgian goal was to teach Africans to work,
not in
the "childish" pursuits of their own culture, but in
organized,
rational routines of productive wage labor in the European
manner,
for European employers. Such labor was considered to
exercise a
civilizing influence. A profitable by-product was the
provision of
cheap labor. The Colonial Charter had declared that no one
could be
compelled to work, and by 1912 the forced delivery of
rubber and
other natural products had come to a stop, but until the
depression
of the 1930s, mining and agricultural companies resorted
to
recruiting methods little different from forced labor.
The colonial government believed that Africans could be
"civilized" through agricultural as well as industrial
labor.
Agricultural programs began as early as 1917, when the
administration first required Africans to raise certain
designated
crops. The crops most often raised were cotton for export
or food
crops for towns and mines within the colony, neither of
which
threatened European interests, nor did either ensure the
health and
well-being of the indigenous population.
To help boost production, Belgium set up a national
institute
that introduced improved agricultural technology to the
colony
during the 1930s. But a program that had greater influence
on
African life eventually was the establishment of native
farming
settlements (paysannats indigènes). African
peasants were
resettled on them in order to intensify the cultivation of
cash
crops or export crops, to conserve the fertility of the
soil, and
to facilitate the introduction of modern farming methods.
The
settlements were generally successful but represented
another
European intrusion into African culture. As such, most of
the
settlements collapsed after independence.
In the political realm, Belgian policy was
theoretically to
respect the authority of African chiefs and political
leaders,
permitting Africans to be ruled by their own customs
unless these
customs were judged disruptive of public order or harmful
to
development. Colonial administrators divided the entire
Belgian
Congo into chiefdoms (chefferies), later grouped
into
sectors. Chiefs, salaried by the state and given
administrative and
police powers, were expected to provide the link between
Africans
and the colonial administration. But the Belgian division
of its
territory into chiefdoms often did not reflect ethnic
boundaries or
indigenous political units, and Belgian authorities were
generally
ignorant of African custom. Moreover, the Belgian colonial
system
did not encourage indigenous involvement in the colony's
political
life. By placing the inculcation of colonial moral
principles above
political education, and social welfare benefits above the
apprenticeship of social responsibility, Belgian policies
inevitably ruled out the introduction of institutions and
procedures designed to nurture political experience and
responsibility.
Not until 1957, with the introduction of a major local
government reform, were Africans given the opportunity to
elect
local communal councils
(see Postwar
Reforms
, this ch.).
Important
as this step was in laying the foundation for local
self-government
and a major departure from the postulates of paternalism,
it was
heavily mortgaged by previous decades of enforced
political
passivity. When independence began to seem imminent in the
late
1950s and the future Zairians could make a limited use of
their
political freedom, few had acquired the necessary
practical
experience to guide their first steps toward democracy.
Data as of December 1993
|
