In an excoriating attack on Liberia’s political and economic class, George Gerake Kamara argues that fate of the masses cannot lie in the hands of the frontline political parties who seek only to advance the interests of big bosses and international financial institutions. What is needed Kamara argues is a force that will mobilize the people around transformative ideals against the existing system.
By George Gerake Kamara
Once every six years the Liberian people are required to decide on the question of the political governance. This singular decision as practiced in most forms of liberal democracies is often considered to be the most decisive moment that determines how far a nation-state will advance in all facets of its material development. What is interesting for the determination of political leadership is that, in an underdeveloped, dominantly illiterate, and poverty-stricken society like Liberia, the humble and unsuspecting masses are expected to elect honest, knowledgeable, and nationalistic leaders, competent enough to govern a complex and modern state from an enlightened, informed, and rational perspective, irrespective of their pitiful living conditions.
The scenes during these voting processes are so humiliating as the people are summoned and lined up in long queues under the scorching sun or humiliating rain. The poor masses are condemned to material poverty as a result of the elites that dominate the political spectrum, they are considered historical objects indispensable to the advancement of democratic governance during the few minutes it takes to cast their ballots, though soon after they become simple subjects for domination and exploitation once the votes are counted and winners announced.
If this is not a mockery of any form of democratic governance, what more can we call it, as the people must survive another six years in pain and misery, while they wait for another election after six years to be consulted on the question of state building.
The dispositions of our elites – ignoble thinkers, indiscreet apparatchiks, and domestic agents of international private capital – as they sit at the edges of their seats in their luxuriating offices are unutterable. The scorched-earth socioeconomic policies and programs imported from the Global north often masquerade as popular democratic elections in Liberia and other Third World nations, become the master plan for national development and political governance.
The tragedy is that none of the “popular parties and candidates” dare question or challenge any of these “development frameworks” from IMF, World Bank, WTO, or any multilateral financial and trade institutions during election debates. They remain silent in an effort to assess their viability in the context of the society in which their implementation is recommended if not a requirement to obtain financial assistance.
The ill-informed and unsuspecting masses, seeing no earthly end to their material misery watch with bemusement as participants or spectators in this theatrical spectacle. The political spectacle that unfolds before their eyes is intended to entertain rather than deal with the question of the economic and political governance of the Liberian republic. The tragic reality is that the material contradictions that result from this political mockery set-up the nation-state for violent social eruption as the political misfits and agents of international private capital become incapable of providing any progressive change to the material condition of the suffering poor.
The people, in their frustration, resort to brute lawlessness, which threaten the security of both domestic and foreign private and public investments. These conditions mounts pressure from both the people who demand to live in peace irrespective of their material poverty and the owners of domestic and foreign private capitals who seek returns on their investments.
In most instances, the political elites in power, unable to serve both the interests of their foreign masters and the masses of the people at the same time turn politics into a minefield of sectarianism and bigotry that borders on ethnic and religious stereotypes. This explains the senseless slaughtering of one tribe or religious group by the other during periods when the nation-state degenerates into absolute anarchy as was the case in Liberia from 1989 to 2003.
Understanding the Post-War Political Economy of Liberia
Events are expressing themselves more violently than ever before, the economic quagmire besetting Liberia is overwhelming; reduced student enrollment in both private and public schools and high prostitution are graphic displays of the nation’s economic turmoil as 10 October election approaches. The dire economic conditions in the little plot of land in West Africa – Liberia – is once again assuming the responsibility for democratic regime change.
Beginning in 2005 after the brokered peace accord in Accra, Ghana, in 2003, an intellectual initiative that ceased the nation’s 14 years of civil upheavals which decimated the lives of over 250,000 Liberians, ruined properties worth hundreds of million and bruised the nation’s economy in such a manner that I cannot describe.
Since 2005, elections in Liberia have only been a process yielding benefits for unprincipled politicians and their colleagues. This period conditioned a shift in the consciousness of Liberians who felt that the logjams of Liberia’s underdevelopment was gender related – men have failed, so let’s try a woman. This banal conceptualization of nation-building created an egregious impact on the Liberian economy after the cessation of the fourteen years of carnage.
The election of Liberia’s and Africa’s first female president – Ellen Johnson Sirleaf – was never going to be an end to the economic woes of the country, rather it was the very beginning. Her era, which many saw as the light at the end of the tunnel of economy paralysis, witnessed a vicious pattern of privatization and deregulation that afflicted and continues to afflict incurable economic wounds on the standard of life in Liberia.
The cravings of many Liberians for socioeconomic prosperity after a protracted period of living on humanitarian aid was now at the mercy of foreign multinational corporations. To revive the country’s economy and grow its GDP, which at the time stood at US$897 million, by means of attracting Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), there was a widespread liberalization, deregulation, and privatization of the Liberian economy towards that end.
Although the initiative yielded dividends and saw Liberia’s GDP grow from US$897 million (World Bank, 2004) to US$2.4 billion (World Bank, 2011) as a direct result of foreign investments, the masses of the people still shouldered the crushing weight of poverty and unmitigated illiteracy. For the few who were fortunate to attain employment during this period – 2006-2011 – and even beyond, given that the model hasn’t changed, their salaries and wages were disproportionate to their labour, thus incapacitating them from financing their basic socioeconomic needs.
Liberia foreign debt portfolio was estimated at U$4.6 billion dollars when the administration of Sirleaf sought to save the nation from the crushing weight of foreign debt. The IMF, under its Enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, released Liberia from the weighty hammer of foreign debt. Yet the Annual Public Debt Management Report of 2018-2019 revealed that the regime of the ex-soccer connoisseur in George M. Weah incurred an estimated debt of U$942.6 million dollars from his predecessor in 2018. At the time of writing, Liberia’s debt portfolio is hovering around U$2.03 billion.
How this astronomical growth in public debt has occurred in little over five years is one of the central questions that the regime of Weah must answer to regain the confidence of the Liberian electorates in coming election or be consigned to the dustbin of history if he fails to provide a plausible response.
The Struggle for National Leadership
There are now visible political marriages being hatched between varying members of the elite who are themselves nothing more than the slaves of international finance capital. These wannabes are united against nothing but the wretched masses, the majority of whom eke out a living on the margins of society, while a few, absorbed by the neoliberal capitalist labour market, are being exploited by foreign multinational corporations on the mines and plantations.
So, it does not matter what shape these political arrangements take, like all African ruling classes, the Liberian political class has no intention of waging a frontal assault against economic backwardness conditioned by the brutal policies and programs doled out by the IMF and World Bank through their structural adjustment programmes. While they spout anti-poverty slogans, the system continues to churns out social misery.
The more things change, the more they remain the same!
The ruling Coalition for Democratic Change
The ruling party, the Coalition for Democratic Change (CDC), which is headed by erstwhile soccer player, George M. Weah, tags itself as pro-poor but has rolled out every conceivable measure that is anti-poor. The party ascended to national leadership after two unsuccessful attempts at winning the confidence of the people on the vague and ambiguous mantra of “Change for Hope”. With the patent ambiguity of this slogan, the people, out of anger for the feckless establishment led by Sirleaf, thrusted political power into the hands of the nation’s most deplorable human being.
Yet, a little over one year later, in 2019, the masses saw through the farce and drew the conclusion that the nation was on an odyssey for something cataclysmic; given the brazen display of wealth and the construction of duplexes by protégés of the president.
The support base of the ruling elite have dwindled over the last five years due to brazen corruption, incessant mysterious deaths, the repertoire of violence against dissent, and the struggling economy which has caused huge unemployment, high prostitution, etc. Liberia has been turned into a hell on earth, or an open prison. With all the enumerated vices in sight and mind, events are expressing themselves at lightning speed, so the ruling party is headed for a colossus defeat in the impending presidential elections.
The Alternative National Congress
As is the case with all liberal democracies, there are many opposition politicians who have expressed their interest in redeeming the republic from these economic quagmires. One of them is the successful businessman, Alexander Benedict Cummings, the political leader of the Alternative National Congress (ANC). The ANC consists of a group of Liberians who propagate the myth that the panacea to an ailing economy is a Successful Businessman. The crux of their argument is that because Cummings once headed a cell of the internationally acclaimed beverage company Coca-Cola and blossomed its finance, he is qualified to be the only alternative, savvy enough to perform an economic miracle.
What this sect has not been able or is deliberately negating is the fact that there exists a gulf between a corporation and a state. They have not been able to discipline themselves to perform an objective scrutiny of the work that goes on within a corporation and a nation-state. The hysteria that is generated when one encounters a wealthy man especially in a backwater society, is so powerful that reasoning becomes a burdensome task. But we shall assist in this regard.
For a corporation, the sole aim is to maximize profits, and this, by every necessary means. This sharply contrasts to the running of a state. In running the state, one deals with conflicting interests beyond profit maximization. It also entails the making of sound economic policy and programmes and the effective management of resources to achieve development for all members of the population. In a corporation, when wages of workers are reduced, it is meant to reduce cost and maximize profits. In the context of the state, when government slashes spending, the consequences are devastating for workers and poor.
By these dichotomies, the idea of leadership for the governance of a state requires something more than maximizing profits and calculating loses. Just as its illogical for any reasonable human being to argue that being an inveterate politician is the best preparation for the effective management of an economy than being a businessman, it’s also banal for anyone to reason that being an adroit businessman is a sufficient qualification for the resuscitation of an ailing economy.
In March 2021, during one of Cummings’ many radio appearances, he made an assertion which he believes will earn for him political capital. On one of the nation’s most revered local radio stations, Cummings promised to increase the Liberia’s national budget to over one billion dollars. This statement would go on to take the front and centre of Cummings’ ANC’s campaign promises. For the many who have studied and understood the political maneuverings of capitalists turned politicians, this pronouncement didn’t come across as a surprise. What came across as a surprise was Cummings’ failure to enumerate steps that will be taken to realize his ambitious plan as president, and how the billion dollars will be used to impact the lives of over five million Liberians.
When Cummings asserted: “I know how it can be done and I know how to do it…” it was an obvious expression that Cummings – a politician in a developing countries, where the means and factors of production are in the hands of foreign corporations and big financial institutions – had read from the same text book, same page and paragraph on economy growth as all the others.
But let’s be clear, that by the assertion, “I know how it can be done and I know how to do it…” Cummings meant the application of brutal austerity measures – increments in taxes, reduction in pensions for redundant civil servants, reduction in salaries for active civil servants, cutting back on government programs, such as education, healthcare etc. In a highly privatized economy, there can be no budgetary increment or economic growth without wages being assaulted. And so, the one billion budgetary growth pronouncement was a beautiful and brilliant public declaration of war against labouring men and women. It would be a farce for anyone to think that an avid capitalist crusader is the solution to the problems faced by the workers and peasant masses.
The erstwhile governing party, the Unity Party
Amid all these developments what is more unfortunate but seems not to be surprising about this national drama is the degree of support for the former ruling party – the Unity Party – headed by the former Vice-President, Joseph N. Boakai, now wields from the masses. It is unfortunate how the popular classes now hail the former ruling establishment after all the pains and sufferings meted against their material lives for twelve years successively in a very short period.
The Unity Party which presided over the governance architecture of Liberia was deeply engrossed into nepotism, corruption, and the servicing of the interests of foreign multinational corporations – this course was effectively pursued for twelve unbroken years.
The question now is: To what extent can these desperate figures who are now parading as patriots be trusted with leadership? The difference between Liberians of this political configuration and the ones currently at the helm of power in their pursuit to deprive the Liberian masses of the necessities of life, is just the difference in degree.
The urgent need for an alternative
The fate of the masses cannot lie in the hands of these three frontline political institutions, for they seek to advance not the interests of the people but the big bosses and international financial institutions. For as long these three parties are collectively united against the people both in principle and practice, there must be a force powerful enough to stand with and for the people both in principle and practice. There is a need for the establishment of a viable alternative for the masses to be mobilized and led by a force that sees politics simply as an instrument for self-advancement.
Liberia needs a force whose policies and programmes will mirror the general wishes and aspirations of the wretched masses. A force that will mobilize the people around transformative ideals and against the existing structures. The mobilization of the masses must be the task of those who see society far from the circles of the individual person and who believe that Liberia’s development begins when the wealth of a given society is equitably distributed to satisfy the material interests of all.
I stand for a force inextricably tied to ideals that are people-driven as the only viable alternative capable of repelling the full-scale assault on working men and women in Liberia and beyond.
George Gerake Kamara is a student at the University of Liberia where he reads Public Administration. George belongs to the Movement for Social Democratic Alternative (MOSODA) in Liberia.
Featured Photograph: A queues in Monrovia, Liberia during elections (10 October 2017).
An eloquent cry for the dispossessed of Liberia. This also seems to be applicable across the whole of Africa, certainly for Nigeria where I’m writing from.
In February, the official winner of the Presidential elections here was a successful business person who has completely bought into the free market neoliberalism of the IMF and the World Bank. During his swearing in ceremony he announced that fuel subsidy was at an end and later abolished the official exchange rate.
Both of these actions led to a surge in inflation and food inflation now officially stands at over 30%. This in a country where the minimum wage has only been increased once in the last dozen years.
But building a viable alternative to these policies (that have the horrific effects that George describes so well for Liberia) is more difficult. The big hope for the poor majority in Nigeria in the last election was Peter Obi, the candidate of the Labour Party. Unfortunately he is also a business person and a supporter of the standard neoliberal policies (as was the third main candidate).
Since the elections the hope for change in Nigeria has been with the trade unions. They have repeatedly shown their ability to organise across the 36 states in the country. This strength cannot be matched by any civil society organisation. Unfortunately, the last general strike was suspended for 30 days on Monday evening an hour before it was due to start.
But we cannot morn, we have to organise. We have to find a way to mobilise the popular classes with a coalition that involves effective collective action by the trade unions and a popular program by a political party that reflects the aspirations of the masses.
We hope that the Movement for Social Democratic Alternative can play that role in Liberia.