Political alienation: the case of the Sidama of southern Ethiopia.
Mulugeta B. Daye (27/09/2012
Introduction
The political alienation of the Sidama is creating destabilizing
effects. Sidama’s quest for regional autonomy based on article 39 of the current
Ethiopian constitution and non-violent and peaceful strategy to perpetuate long
history of struggle to fight against the disruption of indigenous way of life
and livelihood, opaqueness of Ethiopian political tradition, that prevented the
sidama from accessing and having fair share in political play ground of
Ethiopia. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KomsrDpED7k http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DWgW-EAoiUg)
EPRDF/SPDM perceived the Sidama’s legitimate struggle as
threat against the cohesion of Southern
Nations, Nationalities and Peoples’ Regional State(SNNPRS), i.e. one of nine
regional states that formed current
Ethiopia. SNNPRS has distinctive characters from the rest. Unlike the rest of
regions of Ethiopia, It is named after the direction that suggests its location
in Ethiopian jurisdiction, being so, 56 ethnic groups merged together in a
manner of unitary state, that undermined
historical, cultural, livelihood, linguistic differences and reduced
them to be nameless, instead of doing
things in their own way, they were given others to formulate single policy
despite 56 different contexts.
Accordingly, SPDM/EPRDF opted to scare Sidama, instead of
considering the quest positively. It exerted maximum effort to silence Sidama.
The efforts ranged from simple harassments, demoralising, lose of opportunities, imprisonment, internal
displacement, forced migration, and genocide. Since 1991 the sidama-Land is characterised as no peace-no war zone.
From history of modern Ethiopian state formation the late 1890s, mark the turning point for Menelik II’
expansionist policy. In spite of its amazing
victory in battle of Adwa, in 1896, Menelik II recognised Eritrea to Italian
colonialists, and turned his face from North to South for war of conquest.
He faced stiff resistance, from Sidama led by Baalicha Woraawo, Wolayita led by Tona. Finally, he emerged victorious from war of expansion and craushed independent kingdoms.
After southern conquest and consolidation of modern
Ethiopia, successive Ethiopian governments have been implementing non-uniform political,
economic and social policies to the South in general, to the Sidama in particular. The cases in point are the land tenure system of the south was different from the North and the rest of the country, Forced conversion to orthodox Christianity, by demonizing indigenous Sidama religion, and humiliating its followers during the feudal regime. Reluctance and delayed justice for this legitimate quest of
the sidama, places the regime in the same category with its predecessors as far the nationalities question is concerned. Further more EPRDF
breaches article 39 of the constitution when it suits to its advantage.
EPRDF has no credible reasons apart from administrative suitability
of mass merger that made it reluctant and react unacceptably to answer the Sidamas’ quest for regional autonomy. Furthermore,
there are many things that the Sidama should be considered as an asset than
liability, by EPRDF and Federal government of Ethiopia. Demographically:- Being
populace with the size: 3.4 million, the fifth largest nation in Ethiopia, the
sources of human capital; Every greenness, development potential, needs less effort and reciprocal contribution to
federal government: in the forms of direct produces and supplies about 40,000
tons of mostly washed specialty coffee for export markets; and other exportable
commodities; appreciable history of sacrifices paid by the Sidamas against successive
oppressive regimes ; the similarities of values between the SLM of Sidama TPLF of
Tigray that dominate EPRDF to have Federal structure based on ethnic
identities, yet TPLF/EPRDF opted to create rubber stamp PDOS in south that
merged to form loyal SPDM as partner of EPRDF in the south and the entrusted to rule regional state with unitary characteristics.
.
While the North and the rest of Ethiopia is enjoying the fruits of
relative freedom with in federal structure, such autonomous policy making,
needs identification, setting priorities, planning, implementing, monitoring,
evaluating and impact assessments, to learn from successes and failures, to do
things in their own ways, more importantly, to maintain their unique cultural, linguistic
and ethno-centric values transmission to
their next generation, EPRDF rather
opted to create unitary state in the South.
The author’s interest here
is not to reveal social cleavages that may arise from competitions 56 ethnic
groups for little opportunities per se, but on how these are reflected in
citizens’ attitudes towards to Ethiopian politics.
This
paper focuses on two aspects of political alienation or
marginalization. The first aspect can be seen as political alienation
as pressure from outside the consequences of deliberate and strategic
pressing the competent, that are perceived as enemies to bring to
terms that is proposed by pressure creator. The second
aspect of alienation emanates from citizens’ trust of political actors
as well as political institutions and political interest of the
citizens.
It
also tries to understand alienation and the marginalization of the of
the Sidama in those two theoretical lenses. While the first can be used
to see the relationship of the Sidama and successive Ethiopian
governments. The second aspect of alienation helps to explore Sidama
citizen of Ethiopia with current EPRDF regime The economic and political
alienation related to implementation of non uniform policies to the
citizens of the same country could be expected to have a general
mobilizing effect. With an intense awareness creation among the Sidama
citizens of Ethiopia and governments all over presenting efforts to
“solve the problems” it could be expected that political interest and
political trust rises as has been shown to be the case in other crisis, ,
In this case we would expect the differences in political integration, or alienation, between groups to be affected.
The Sidama case study shows that any form of alienation and
marginalization has a tendency to create an identity of alienated
citizens who are not necessarily dormant and loyal, but also active
opposition to emancipate itself from its low and unacceptable status
and position. The second scenario however, is that the crises would
lead to an increased feeling of abandonment and insecurity by risk
exposed Sidama citizens of southern Ethiopia.
Its cadres in South are creating a ground for political suicide if EPRDF is loosing the support of 80% of voters from 3.4
million sidamas. Whilst others that
mainly experience risks to a higher degree might put their trust in the
rescue plans presented by alternative politicians in this case the opposition.
This would lead to increased cleavages in political alienation due to social, economic and livelihood risk exposure that have a tendency to
explode unless it is checked and balanced by creating conducive
political ecology by the regime in the power by responding to
heartfelt needs of the Sidama citizens of Ethiopia The following
section, will explore political marginalization as the other face of
participation:- from the characteristics of the regime, the third
section review literature on political
alienation from the citizens’ internalization perspectives. The fourth
section presents the consequences of political alienation from
historical analysis and continuous struggle with EPRDF/SPDM, and the
last section concludes.
2) Political alienation as pressure from outside: the characteristics of the regime perspective.
Political alienation or marginalization has been defined as "a process
by which a group or individual is denied access to important positions
and symbols of economic, religious, or political power within any
society" (Marshall, 1998: 385). Political
alienation may manifest itself in forms varying from
genocide/ethnic-cleansing and other xenophobic acts/activities at one
end of the spectrum, to more basic economic and social hardships at the
unitary (individual/family) level.
It is associated with other sociological processes particularly those
of "exclusion" and "closure" in various forms (social, economic,
political, spatial, etc.). It is also linked to such concepts as poverty
and inequality, status and power, and class. In a multi-ethnic society,
it inevitably implies ethnic competition and rivalry. To some, it
conveys a deep sense of deprivation and injustice. It is thus
objectionable as a socio-economic phenomenon to all sections of society.
Marginalization
varies in intensity during different periods of time and in different
places. Yet it is significant only in a "relative" sense and in
"comparative" terms. It is meaningful because of its many forms of
impact on different sections of society. Of
course, the forms of marginalization may vary—generally linked to the
level of development of society; culturally, and as (if not more)
importantly, with relation to economics. For example, it would generally
be true, that there would exist more “marginalized” groups in the Third
World”, and developing nations, that in the Developed/First-World
nations. Indeed, there can be a distinction made, on the basis of the
“choice” that one has within this context—those in the Third World who
live under impoverished conditions, through no choice of their own
(being far removed from the protectionism that exists for people in the
First World,) are often left to die due to hunger, disease, and war. Issues
concerning marginalization are subjects of debate and tend to be
controversial. This may be because the measurement of "marginalization"
depends on the choice of criteria and the availability of reliable data.
Both the criteria and the data may not be free from subjective
judgment. Quantitative measurement is therefore the first step in the
analysis of "marginalization".
Marginalization
takes on different dimensions and is encountered at varying spatial
scales. The important dimensions would include the economic, political
and ethno-cultural. The economic dimension manifests itself in
competition and the work of market forces arising from such processes as
economic restructuring, globalization, and the effects of official
economic policies. Politically, marginalization is associated especially
with the practice of communal politics and the inevitable outcome of
ethnic bargaining and rivalry, the hegemony of dominant groups, or the
pursuit of ethnic-oriented political and economic agendas. Intense
ethno-cultural competition arising from religious, ethnic and linguistic
complexities - especially when "ethnicity" is a major determinant of
national objectives and official policies - is often reflected in the
creation of marginalized groups.
Marginalization
also occurs at two spatial scales, namely, local/national and
regional/global. Over-emphasis on local economic issues may breed
parochialism, inward-looking attitudes, narrow vistas, and unhealthy
internal competition. Failure to stress the mounting trend of
globalization to accommodate its best and to resist its worse features
will work to the disadvantage of a nation. Hence, at the same time that
certain groups (e.g. indigenous groups, women, farmers, plantation
workers, etc.) within the country become marginalized, the nation as a
whole or some of its functional parts (such as education or industries)
may also be marginalized at the regional and global level.
Causes and Origins
Marginalization
as a process has been around for a long time and has appeared as a
result of various causes. How it arises and operates as a process and
the nature of its long-term impacts and implications are subject to
different interpretations. In
the context of the term "marginalization," some terms of a
socio- political nature can be better defined. For example, “War," is in
essence the large-scale social violence, aiming to marginalize a
perceived enemy. Similarly, "Enemy" is in essence the declaration of a
peer as one with hostile intent, and the intention to
marginalize—making, either by "their own choosing", or by a choice of
targeted aggression the" enemy" a marginalized (or to-be marginalized)
entity. Marginalization lies at the core of all social conflict issues,
which are themselves described by varying terms for heir aspects and
forms/incarnations
I t can be seen also as unintended outcome of policies formulated to
achieve stated objectives and the enabling mechanisms to realize these
objectives, by dominant political actors actor such us state and civil
societies, institutions or few official policies are formulated with
the intention to "marginalize" specific sections of society. But the
objectives of policies and the manner by which the enabling mechanisms
are put to work often lead to various forms of imbalances between the
mainstream and marginal groups.
Official
policies implemented to achieve stated objectives on behalf of target
groups may deny or reduce access of non-target groups to the same
objectives. In theory, no one is denied access to desired objectives. In
practice, discriminatory decisions by individual holders of authority
may, over time, effectively bar access to opportunities and lead
directly to the marginalization of non-target groups. Official policies
may also produce unforeseen consequences from attempts to achieve
well-intentioned objectives. This "back-firing" of policies may in
itself lead to the marginalization of the target groups. Again, the
pursuit of "agendas", official or otherwise, that involves chasing after
"moving" targets to meet growing demands through time may sideline one
group in favor of another. In the context of a multi-ethnic society,
the interests of one group may be seen to encroach on those of other
groups. Resorting to various enabling mechanisms meant to create a level
playing field may often mean the use of preferential treatment to favored groups at the expense of all others. These enabling mechanisms
are legal and policy instruments by which official policies are to be
implemented. These mechanisms provide the means and legitimacy by which
priority is accorded to one group over other groups. When applied in a
concerted manner, the likelihood of pushing less favored groups to the
periphery is real indeed.
Other
causes of marginalization may also be identified. These include
complacency and failure to cope with changes. These are self-inflicted
causes, but are often imperceptible and take effect over a period of
time. For instance, groups or businesses that are unable to compete
because of technical incompetence or obsolesce will almost certainly be
sidelined.
talents,
we have done little to reduce the loss. At the same time that we stress
the importance of talents, a substantial number is in fact leaving to
serve in countries that are our competitors. Yet the economic
consequences of this loss to the nation have not been quantified. The
positive and proactive response takes the form of the emphasis on
self-improvement and upgrading of personal and community capability.
Self-reliance as a form of response to perceived discrimination is
expressed in terms of improving and uplifting one's worth through
education, skills and ability. This may also be seen on a community
basis when it attempts to keep abreast of the latest trends in business,
technical capability, etc. within and outside the country.
Participation
comprises the strategy to involve the beneficiaries in development
programs / projects, including resource management. This concept has won
the acceptance of many people most probably as it can be interpreted
differently. There exists no consensus on a single definition of
participation and participatory approaches that has brought paradoxes.
Some also view participation as a means to an end while others view it
as an end in itself (Yeraswork, 2000; Pretty and Shah, 1997). Also some
pay only lip service to participation for reasons of its political
usefulness (Brohman, 1996). As Chambers (1974:84) puts, “[r]hetoric has
important political functions and relies on the loose use of
[participation] with ideological overtones.” Thus, the ways
participation is interpreted and used by different entities are many.
These
“range
from manipulative and passive where people are told what is to happen
and act out predetermined roles, to self mobilization, where, people
take initiatives largely independent of external institutions” (Pretty
and Shah, 1997: 53).
The
first four participation types, indicated in Table 2.1, do not have
lasting effects on development programs or project and can be even
considered as non-participation. This is because they involve no more
than telling what is going to happen or requiring responses to some
questions where the local people respond and contribution of resources
like labor in return for food or cash to put to practice what has been
already decided by ‘outsiders’. On the other hand, the last three
participation typologies are genuine participation where local people
actively involve in decision-making, implementation activities affecting
their lives and also sharing the benefits. As one moves from the fifth
down to the last typology the effects are more sustainableal though
the three tend to bring positive lasting effects. Thus one has to be
cautious in using and interpreting participation and reference must be
made to the type of participation because most of them threaten the
goals of projects or programs rather than promoting (Pretty and Shah,
1997).
Despite
its rhetoric uses, participatory approach to development programs in
general and resource management in particular are believed to bring many
benefits that include enhancement of efficiency, transparency and
accountable, empowerment of the poor and disadvantaged, sense of
belongingness and capacity to learn and act (Uphoff, 1992; World Bank,
1994).
Table1) Marginalization as the other face of participation designed as parameter to measure the level of asset access , identifying marginalizes, loyals pessimists marginalised and livelihood asset tracking matrix. (See appendix 1)
The way the researcher understood marginalization as another face of participation a its stages 1-10 can be used as para meter (index) on the degree of access to livelihood assets pentagon and local peoples perception on livelihood asset tracking matrix, see figure 2.2 and livelihood asset tracing matrix at local level perception of the status of the sample households.
From this table it is possible to understand Peoples’ political
marginalization as the negative face of participation in the processes
of accessing and use of livelihood assets.
3) Political alienation from the citizens’ internalization perspectives.
Political alienation in Ethiopia in this regard quite different,
compared the marginalization that might have occurred in democracy.
When we explore the concept of marginalization in democracy so far,
previous research have presented quite diverging results regarding the
marginalization hypothesis, depending on how political involvement or
integration is defined; or rather, whether it is political interest
and/or political participation or political trust that is seen as the
central dimension. Political equality is fundamental for democracy. In
general, the concept of political equality is restricted to the formal
rights and opportunities of citizens to participate in politics. Whether
or not citizens actually choose to participate is usually seen as an
individual decision, depending on the individual’s interest and
resources. Studies of political participation have taught us a lot about
what lies behind actual political participation, and how political
equality in post -modern democratic states is reflected in actual
participation (Verba et al., 1995). Most of these studies state that a
central prerequisite for actual participation is some degree of
political involvement or engagement.
As Verba and his co-authors write, “It is hard to imagine that at least
some psychological engagement with politics is not required for almost
all forms of political participation” (Verba et al., 1995). Political
involvement could accordingly be seen as a prerequisite for democracy
and for fulfilment of political citizenship. The argument here is that
the consequences of social and economic inequalities on the relationship
to politics should not be restricted to incorporating only political
trust. Citizens could report low political trust, but still be
interested in politics and be ready to participate, yet at the same time
report a low level of political trust as a result of feelings of
marginalization.
Political interest is quite clearly related to such things as education
and income as well as the general level of economic inequality (Solt,
2008, van Deth and Elff, 2004)., whilst low levels of political trust is
rather found among highly educated and younger citizens(Norris, 1999a,
Dalton, 2004).
When
political alienation is linked to the social and economic
marginalization thesis of Dalton “Democratic Challenges – Democratic
Choices,” it is defined as the opposite to political trust (Dalton,
2004). Dalton concluded that there is no strong relation between “lower
status” (defined as “low education”) and low trust. Rather, it is among
the well-educated younger generations that he finds mistrust. This
finding is in line with the argument presented by Inglehart that
post-materialists are demanding and distrustful citizens (Dalton, 2004,
Inglehart, 1997).
The
argument here has left us floating to understand how social and
economic marginalization or vulnerability relates to political
disengagement when the analysis is restricted to political interest and
participation or political trust alone. By combining insights on effects
of inequality and social determinants from two research areas;
political engagement and political trust, it is possible to push further
our understanding. By a specification of political alienation as two
dimensional, incorporating both political interest and political trust,
this study presents a test of the marginalization hypothesis. The
concept of political alienation is presented in this paper as a
qualitative concept indicating citizens “out of reach” of the political
system.
3.1) Understanding Political alienation .
A
general definition presented by Lane in 1962 is that political
alienation refers to a person’s sense of estrangement from the politics
and government of his society… in this sense a disidentification. The
concept of alienation originates from the concept of entfremdung used by
Marx and by Weber. In political sociology, political alienation has
come to refer to the opposite of “political engagement” of any kind, and
to include various aspects of inefficacy, apathy, cynicism, and
displeasure (Citrin et al., 1975, Mason et al., 1985). It implies more
than disinterest; it implies a rejection” (Lane, 1962). In a classic
article from 1960, political alienation is discussed as a consequence of
inefficacy and “…involves not only apathy or indifferences but also
diffuse displeasure at being powerless and mistrust of those who do
wield power” (Thompson and Horton, 1960).
Political alienation is here presented as a qualitative concept
capturing the coincidence of low political interest and low political
trust, thus indicating a feeling distance or exclusion to the political
sphere of society. It is believed to capture the subjective cleavage to
the “elite groups” or “establishment” of politics. In empirical
analyses, mainly from the 1970s, political alienation has come to
include all sorts of aspects of the relation between citizens and
politics such as low efficacy, low trust, and political apathy.
All these different aspects tap into concepts that could be understood
as aspects of alienation from politics, but these different aspects are
multi-dimensional (Mason et al., 1985). To treat political alienation as
the opposite of trust does not include the involvement or participatory
aspect at all, which might be misleading since lack of trust does not
necessarily lead to apathy or rejection. To regard political alienation
as solely a lack of engagement, apathy, or passivity is also too narrow,
since apathy could be a result of trust in others to handle politics in
which one still feels included. The multidimensional aspect of
political alienation is vital. In line with this argument, political
alienation is explicitly treated in this study as multi-dimensional by
combining the dimensions of trust and interest.
To argue that political alienation is more than a lack of political
trust is quite simple. To decide what is missing is more of a challenge.
Some of the more elaborated efforts to define and measure political
alienation have linked it to the concept of political efficacy, that is feelings of potential influence on politics (Southwell, 1985, Craig, 1990).
The definition used here is closer to the definition presented by Kabashima et al (2000) which uses the dimensions political trust and civic-mindedness,
where civic-mindedness is “interpreted as a measure of active
psychological engagement with politics” (Kabashima, 2000 : 786).
Political interest is here treated as a main indicator for the civic-mindedness.
By choosing this strategy the definition of political alienation
presented here is broader than some previous definitions limited to
different aspects of political trust or political trust and efficacy.
Political
alienation is used as a brand for the merger of low political interest
and low political trust. Whether or not political alienation is an
adequate label for this combination of traits is debatable. An
alternative could be to follow the terminology of Jan van Deth and use
the label “disenchanted.” (vanDeth, J. W. (1989) Another alternative
could be “marginalized,” the term used by Jörgen Goul Andersen for
people who are not integrated in political life .
3.2) The Two Dimensions of Political Alienation
3.2.1) Political interest:-The
first dimension of political alienation is political interest, as an
indicator of political engagement. Political involvement or engagement
is generally seen as an umbrella concept, indicating the psychological
and emotional “link” between the individual and politics. It could be
said to point to the psychological aspects of the political citizenship,
and relate to the psychological feeling of being incorporated to the
level of participating in the political sphere. Usually, political
involvement is linked to interest or motivation for actual participation
or the like.By political interest is usually meant “the degree to which
politics arouses a citizen’s curiosity” (van Deth,1989). Self-reported
political interest, participation in discussions of politics, media
usage, and, possibly, political information are considered to be main
components of the internal aspect of political involvement (van Deth and
Elff, 2004, Goul Andersen and Hoff, 2001, Verba et al., 1995).
Variations
in political interest among citizens and different social groups, as
well as any increase over time within one country, is commonly explained
by “push theories,” that is, psychological and socio-psychological
theories, stating that variations are due to different individual
resources and skills. That political interest co-varies with social
characteristics such as education, age, and gender is well proven (Verba
and Nie, 1972, van Deth and Elff, 2004, van Deth, 1989, Verba et al.,
1995).
Variations
in the level of political interest among the regimes of the countries,
on the other hand, are often attributed to “pull theories,” that is,
the level of political interest in a country depends on the relevance
of political and social arrangements (van Deth and Elff, 2004, van Deth,
1989). This means that the more interventionist politics are in daily
life, the more visible and salient politics become, and political
interest is thus aroused (Rothstein, 1998, Goul Andersen and Hoff,
2001).
3.2.2) Political trust:- In general, political trust is included in the wider concept of political support, which is theoretically closely linked to David Easton’s classic work. Easton distinguished between support at three levels of political objects: the political community, the regime, and the authorities (Easton, 1965); and the regime level can be further divided into principles, norms and procedures, and institutions (Dalton, 2004, Easton, 1975, Norris, 1999b).
The
support (or lack of support) for these different political objects is
usually seen as either based on actual performance at the level in
question (evaluative or specific support), or based on more generalized
or affective orientations (affective or diffuse support). Specific
support is naturally closely linked to actual performance, and thus to
whoever is incumbent. Affective support is more vague, and generally
seen as rooted in political socialization and values (Norris, 1999a,
Dalton, 2004, Klingemann and Fuchs, 1995).In recent studies on political
trust, the opposite of political trust is usually labelled political
alienation. The debate has been whether one should incorporate trust in
government, or restrict it to trust in democracy (Miller, 1974,
Lockerbie, 1993, Borre,2000).
This
two-dimensional concept of political alienation enables us to make a
distinction between the pessimistic with low political trust but high
political interest, and the Estranged who report neither political
trust nor interest. The post-materialistic “low trusters” found by
Dalton and others tend to be highly educated and to have fairly high
efficacy, even if they tend to sometimes choose unconventional political
channels for participation (Dalton, 2004, Inglehart, 1999) The
alienated, on the other hand, are much less likely to engage in any form
of political participation.
Political interest is consequently seen as a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for involvement. The argument is that the combination of both dimensions better describes different qualities in political involvement, and that the full citizen engagement builds on both interest and trust. The combination of the two dimensions forms four categories of relations between the individual citizen and the political sphere, as shown in figure 1. In order to make a distinction from the conventional use of the term “political engagement” as political interest in a wide sense, the opposite to alienation will here be labelled “political integration,” describing citizens who, by a combination of high interest and high trust, could be said to be well integrated into the political sphere of society.
Figure 1) Four types of relations to politics
High level political interest
|
Low level political interest
| |
High level Political trust
|
Participant Citizens:-includes with high interest in politics and high who also trust politicians and political institutions.
|
Loyal Citizens:- Comprises citizens who report political trust ,but take a low interest in politics.
|
Low level political trust
|
Pessimist Citizens:- are highly interested in politics, but report low trust on politicians and political institutions.
|
Alienated
(Marginalized ) Citizens :- are citizens with low interest and low
trust in politicians and political institutions and strive for
alternatives or internalise the way they are marginalised.
|
The combination of low or no interest in politics with low trust of political institutions and actors, here labelled political alienation, constitutes what could be termed a risk group for democracy. Citizens with low interest in politics do not seek information, and if information on political matters reaches them anyway, their low trust would lead them to disregard it as they don’t trust the messenger.
In
the article“Economic Inequality and Democratic Political Engagement”
Fredrick Solt (Solt, 2008) tests three theories about the relation
between economic inequality and political engagement and finds that
higher levels of income inequality powerfully depress political
interest, the frequency of political discussion, and participation in
elections among all but the most comfortable citizens. The perspective
presented here claim that involvement in the political sphere of society
has one more dimension, namely trust and support. In order to feel like
participants and supporters of the system, one requirement is that
citizens feel that the political system or sphere can be trusted to
treat them as participants—that is, with respect (Rothstein, 1998).
The
argument in this analysis is that political alienation includes more
than lack of political trust. Political trust is more closely linked to
politics at the individual level than is the case with political
interest, and it is closely related to ideology or political
preferences—voters tend to have more trust in the political party or the
politician they have voted for than in the opposition party or
candidate. This, however, could hardly explain variations in trust over
time. A general conclusion from earlier research was that evaluation of
policy and/or government performance was one of the strongest
explanations for political support, that is, trust in politicians and in
political institutions (Miller and Listhaug, 1999).
When there is a continuing discrepancy between the citizens’
expectations and the actual policies implemented by the government, this
situation might lead to growing distrust (Miller, 1974, Borre, 2000).
There is furthermore a well proven relationship between economic
evaluations and political support (Listhaug, 1995, Miller and Listhaug,
1999, Dalton,2004).
Increasing economic differences between rich and poor might result in
increasing social differences also in political support or trust. Lack
of political support, however, does not necessarily indicate political
passivity. It is sometimes claimed to imply a well-informed and “sound” skepticism toward politics. We would accordingly need to separate this
“sound skepticism” from actual marginalization or alienation, in order
to be able to test the marginalization hypothesis.
Since
we also know that political interest varies with individual resources
such as education and occupational status, the combination of low trust
and low interest in politics is most probably overrepresented in weaker
social groups. This combination, here labelled political alienation, is
more problematic from a democratic point of view.
Citizens
who are politically alienated do not seek information on political
matters, and even if political information reaches them anyhow, they are
not receptive to the information since they do not trust the political
actors.
4) The sidama case study:- Hitorical background against alienation and marginalization
This
theoretical lens, can lay solid ground to analyse historical
marginalization of the Sidama citizens and why the Sidama citizens of
Ethiopia are felt uncomfortable and alienated in their merger in the
Unitary state called SNNPRS. It is clear that the Sidama paid costly from the days of expansion and occupation and settlement of the Sidama land.
Perpetuating
its struggle Against successive Ethiopian governments, direct
confrontational resistance of conquests of the sidama kingdom, such us
in the battles of Lello, Shamana qadiida, led By Ballicha woraawo,
against Bashah Aboye, Ottilcho against Leoul Seged. After occupation
and forced settlement of the resisted forced conversion to Orthodox
Christianity, by avoiding contacts with and commitment to its own
monotheistic religion, that believes in one supreme God. by
excommunicating those who would tend take for granted forced
conversion and practicing Ethiopian Orthodox Christianity. The
circumstances under which anti-occupation movements had developed in the
Sidama were once of accute social change, where old ways of life have
been disrupted, but full integration or assimilation into new culture
has not been achieved. The veneration of spirits of ancestors known as Akaako cults
have provided the sidama nation with reorganization, by creating
conducive ground for group consciousness , organization and group
mobilization. Group consciousness means that the Sidamas perceived
themselves as alienated group distinct from the occupying settlers. This
perception reached not only implicit consciousness of their difference
from coercive settlers, but also attained explicit perception of
collective opposition and rejection of their status less than
marginalized majority in their own land. At that moment Akaako cults
played a vital role as the active medium though which the Sidama
accepted the struggle as inspired by super-natural forces, i.e
ancestors spirit.
In
terms of group organization, Akaako cults gave the Sidama the unity
for continuous existence and periodically repeated collective
utilization of space, time and resources to prepare themselves, to
design, to plan, activities and to achieve agreed upon plan. In terms
of group mobilization, the Akaako cults served to bring together
scattered resources of the Sidama not simply in spontaneous and
discontinues actions of protest expressing the demands of isolated
groups, but also in the systematic and continuous actions of gradually
accelerating offensive against political and economic alienation and
marginalization.
These
actions paved the way to broaden and deepen the transformative
capacities of the Sidama power. Through the experience of failure and
success of Akaako cults, the Sidama learned and began to develop secular
political organizations. Then the cults tend to loose their importance
as the channel of protest. This role of the cults laid foundation for
secular political organization to further struggle.
The
survival of indigenous political institutions is due to nascent
nationalism despite untold torture sustained pressure to destroy
traditional values, their religious beliefs, passing the audacious
performance of the past generation by oral literature, poems, and songs
such as geeraarshsha, weeddo, hanno, faaro, haarookise, hamaaraanchcho. The latter, in turn, served as the sources of inspiration for one to be proud of being Sidama and survival of its nationalism.
Before
the rise of organized Sidama political organization, The Sidama
Nationalism created sporadic and disorganized individual
struggle,great personalities like Baalichcha Woraawo, Aliito Hewano
fought not only black expansionists but also Italian attempt to
colonize the Sidama land. In the same fashion against feudal regime
continued by other personalities like Laanqamo Naaare, Yettera Boole,
Takilu Yota, Laalimo Daye, the last has fought against Neftetgna gang
leader called Baqqala Borshe in locaality called cuucito in Aleta,
after the defeat of Italians, who killed more than 50 sidmams in Aletta
demanding the where about of his mother who actually was failed from the
bridge and taken by Jigeesa river.
Contemporary
organized politcal struggle of the Sidama nation started in the 1970s
with the Sidama Liberation Movement. This movement was established by
few nationalist sidamas who fought against the Dergue regime for
national self-determination. Those Sidamas who were willing to work
with the a Dergue regime without losing their national identity
consciousness were killed or jailed Matewos Korsiisa for example, was
killed by the Dergue regime on false allegation instigated by Teffera
Endallew, a Northerner appointed administrator of the the Sidamo region.
This
Birds eye view of the Sidama resistance movement can give us clue how
some times those alienated not only internalize and accept their
marginalized status their but also reject the political frame work
that is behind their marginalization using any thing available that
might be helpful to organize, mobilize, plan and act, against
alienation.
SLM
is an equivalent of TPLF, who originally, fought against the Dergue
regime for the Self-determination of Tigray, settled for Ethiopian
domination by forming EPRDF.
Both
TPLF and/or EPRDF on the other hand, categorically is not different
from the Sidama struggle as far as quest for regional autonomy, when
people felt not only uncomfortable, but also faced various mistreatment, to demand secession let alone simple regional self-
Administration, with in Ethiopia. EPRDF further worked hard to enshrine
this concept in constitution (see article 39 of the constitution).
Theoretically, the constitution allows freedom for the entire ethnic
groups so that they may develop their cultures and Their language become
the media in their respective offices and schools. Their children were
allowed to learn their own values, their ethino-centric knowledge. It
also gave minority veto-power. For every 100,000people, there is one
representative in the parliament. For ethnic groups that have a
population below 100,000 there are 20 identified seats.
Contrary to this, EPRDF, so far did not entertain the Sidama quest for regional self- Administration as an asset. Examples, EPRDF did not commit it self as far as the Sidama regional self Administration, is concerned, for instance:- Primarily, the Sidama was autonomous region in proposed map during 1991 London conference, and this was little modified and included Gedeo and Burji During transitional government and named region Eight. Even this region did not last- long and merged with other five regions and called Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples Regional state, the Unitary State from which we are straggling against. While the rest of nations are enjoying the fruits of Relative Federalism, Such as autonomous policy making, need identification, planning, implementing, monitoring, evaluating, and impact assessments to learn from successes and failure, which I can name it sustainable self-administration and development, which empowers formerly marginalized nations to do things in their own way, that is what post -modernist philosophy of development advocates. The Sidama suffered a lot due to not only disregard for it s quest for regional self-autonomy, But when, EPRDF responded arrogantly and brutally that culminated in May 24, 2002, genocide, followed by imprisonment, and job losses for thousands of the Sidama, forced the Sidama scholars and development visionaries to leave the country and people they adore very much. This was followed by 2005/6 official and legal quest, which legally accepted and legitimized, but systematically aborted .
Direct daring and denial of national identity of the Sidama was revealed on the secrete document authored by SPDM, that ignited public anger from corner to corner in Sidama Land. That was followed by SPDM Media that opted to black mailing and blaming the Sidama Diaspora intellectuals, imprisonment and harassment of the 300s of Sidama Nationals in their home.(http://amharic.voanews.com/content/ethiopia-sidama-arrests/1511239.html) While above description shows how SPDM failed the sidama on one hand is incapable of treating the Sidama nation as equal partner, and blocked the Sidama form accessing the political exercises both at SPDM and n addition to this meager employment opportunities created in government offices from district to zone level being taken away from the Sidama and given to non Sidamas. The following table shows rough estimation of this trend.
Employment and appointment opportunities at district and Zone government offices
|
Taken from the Sidama and given to Non- Sidama
|
Held by the Sidama
|
21 districts per sectors.
| ||
1 1) Health.
|
80%
|
20%
|
2) Agriculture
|
60%
|
40%
|
3) Education
|
70%
|
30%
|
At the Zone per sector.
| ||
1) Finance and Economic Development
|
39%
|
61%
|
2) Education
|
47%
|
53%
|
3) Health
|
18%
|
82%
|
4) Trade and Industry
|
15%
|
85%
|
In Hawassa City Administration
| ||
1) Addis Ketema
|
95%
|
5%
|
2) Mennhariya
|
85%
|
15%
|
3 3) Bahil Addarash
|
85%
|
15%
|
4 4) City Administration
|
56%
|
44%
|
Sectors
| ||
1)Trade and Industry
|
68%
|
32%
|
3) Education
|
33%
|
77%
|
Participants and beneficiaries
:- to the government employment opportunities primarily, the members
of SPDM, Secondly, loyal to SPDM, thirdly those who have influential
relatives in SPDM.
Pessimists:-
are always followed up suspiciously by the SPDM security agencies, and
suffered from the job insecurity, whenever the self-criticism
“gimgema” is arranged, by SPDM officials. Among them are the Sidama
Diaspora who either prominent Sidama scholars and visionaries who left
the country and forced to leave the government employment opportunities
all together and joined Non -governmental Organizations and business
sectors, and try to be self employed with hardship.
Those alienated and marginalized:-
are either the members of Sidama Liberation Movement who are denied not
only any available opportunities but also denied the right to live
ordinary lives or those who are neutral and neither interested in
politics nor trusted SPDM politics and politicians. They are subjected
to recurrent harassments, imprisonment without fair trials
Those
treatments made the Sons and daughters of the Sidama less than
“minoritised majority” in their own land. These are very few realities
that how EPRDF, SPDM did not open its eyes to observe the suffering
of the Sidama, and credible ground for the Sidama to feel uncomfortable
to stay in unholy union, paved the way for the Sidama’s quest for
regional autonomy. EPRDF/ SPDM in this case perceived the Sidamas quest
regional self-administration liability than asset.
5) Conclusion.
The paper attempted to show Political alienation of the Sidama of
Southern Ethiopia, in theoretical contexts of marginalization as
pressure from outside to the Sidama citizens of Ethiopia. and how this
political pressure created four distinct citizens of the Sidama
Ethiopians, Primarily, Those very few hand picked Sidamas who are
integrated and participated in EPRDF/SPDM’s marginalization processes
of the Sidama.
Secondly:-
Very few loyals who trusted EPRDF/SPDM politicians and who are not
interested in politics just try to secure their lives and livelihood
by any means.
Thirdly:-
majorities of Pessimists those highly educated and interested in
politics but never trust the politics of EPRDF/SPDM and can tolerate
working in government organizations until they are pushed out not
only from the government post but also are insecure to live in the country,
ready to leave the country and those who left the country already.
Fourthly:-
Marginalized or alienated; Most of the members, sympathizers
,supporters of the SLM and those neither interested nor trust
politicians and political institutions of the EPRDF and SPDM.
In
light of growing EPRDF/SPDM’s disrespect of the Sidama nation with 3.4
million population that have vibrant history of resistance and long
history of audacious struggle, as the peer of Tigrians , Oromos,
Amhara, under the leadership of TPLF, OLF, EPRP/ ANDM, The Sidama
National struggle for regional autonomy is the priority for not only,
for alienated and marginalized , pessimists, but also for loyals and
participants of EPRDF/SPDM, exposing SPDM/EPRDFs blatant plans to encroach against the Sidama interest can show how even by those participated and integrated into SPDM/EPRDF is losing trust and joing the Sidama's quest for Regional Self-Adminstration. At this time, using non-violent strategy of struggle
based on Ethiopian Constitution.(http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YFmuCrYFGx4)
o
Bibliography
Brohman, J. 1996. Popular Development; Rethinking the Theory, and Practice of Development, Black well Publishers, Oxford.
Chambers
Robert (1974). Managing Rural Development; Idea & Experience from
East Africa; the Scandinavian Institute of African Studies, Sweden.
Citrin, J., McClosky, H., Shanks, J. M. & Sniderman, P. M. (1975) Personal and Political Sources of Political Alienation. British Journal of Political Science, 5, 1-31.
Craig, S. C., Niemi, Richard G., Silver Glenn E. (1990) POlitical Efficacy and Trust: A Report on the NES Pilot Study. Political Behavior, 12.
Dalton, R. J. (2004) Democratic Challenges, Democratic Choices. The Erosion of Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies., Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Easton, D. (1975) A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science, 5, 435-457.
Flriedman, Thomas L. (2006). The world is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First century, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Goul Andersen, J. & Hoff, J. (2001) Democracy and Citizenship in Scandinavia, NewYork, Palgrave.
Inglehart, R. (1997) Modernization and Postmodernization. Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies., Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Inglehart, R. (1999) Postmodernization Erodes Respect for Authority, but Increases Support for Democracy. IN Norris, P. (Ed.) Critical Citizens. Global Support for
Democratic Governance Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Kabashima, I., Marshall ,Jonathan, Uekami, Takayoschi Hyun, Dae-Song (2000) Causal Cynics or Disillusioned Democrats? Political Psychology, 21.
Klingemann, H.-D. & Fuchs, D. (Eds.) (1995) Citizens and the State, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Lane, R. E. (1962) Political Ideology. Why the American Common Man Believes What He Does, New York, The Free Press.
Listhaug, O. (1995) The Dynamics of Trust in Politicians. IN Hans-Dieter Klingemann, D. F. (Ed.) Citizens and the State. Oxford, Oxford University
Press Listhaug, O. (1995) The Dynamics of Trust in Politicians. IN Hans-Dieter.
Lockerbie, B. (1993) Economic dissatisfaction and political alienation in Western Europe. European Journal of Electoral Research, 23, 281-293.
Marshall Gordon (1998). Oxford Dictionary of Sociology, Oxford and NewYork: Oxford University press.
Mason, W. M., House, J. S. & Martin, S. S. (1985) On the Dimensions of PoliticalAlienation in America. Sociological Methodology, 15, 111-151.
Miller, A. (1974) Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970. American Political Science Review, 68, 951–972.
Miller, A. & Listhaug, O. (1999) Political Performance and Institutional Trust. INNorris, P. (Ed.) Critical Citizens. Global Support for Democratic Governance.
Oxford, Oxford University Press
Norris, P. (1999b) Introduction: The Growth of Critical Citizens? IN Norris, P. (Ed.) Critical Citizens. Global Support for Democratic Governance. Oxford, Oxford
University Press.
Pretty,
J. N. and Shah, P. (1997.) Making Soil and Water Conservation
Sustainable: From Coercion and Control to Partnerships and
Participation; in Land Degradation and Development, Vol. 8, John Willey
and Sons, Ltd.
Rothstein, B. (1998) Just Institutions Matter. The Moral and Political Logic of the Universal Welfare State, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Solt, F. (2008) Economic Inequality and Democratic Political Engagement. American Journal of Political Science, 52, 48-60.
Southwell, P. L. (1985) Alienation and Non-Voting in the United States: A Refined Operationalization. The Western Political Quarterly, 38, 663-674.
Stiglitz, Joseph E (2006) Making Globalization Work: The Next step to Global Justice, London: Allen Lane.
Thompson, W. E. & Horton, J. E. (1960) Political Alienation as a Force in Political Action. Social Forces, 38, 190-195.
Uphoff,
N. (1992). Learning from Gal Oya: Possibilities for Participatory
Development and Post- Newtonian Science; Cornell University Press,
Ithaca, New York.
van Deth, J. W. (1989) Interest in Politics. IN Jennings, K. M. & van Deth, J. W.(Eds.) Continuities in Political Action. Berlin, Walter de Gruyter & Co.
van Deth, J. W. & Elff, M. (2004) Politicisation, economic development and political interest in Europe. European Journal of Electoral Research, 43, 477-508
Verba, S. & Nie, N. H. (1972) Particiaption in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality, New York, Harper & Row.
Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L. & Brady, H. E. (1995) Voice and equality : civic voluntarism in American politics, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.
World
Bank. 1994. World Bank and Participation; Report of the Learning Group
on Participatory Development , April 1994, World Bank, Washington DC.
Yeraswork, Admassie. (2000). Twenty Years to Nowhere: Property Rights, Land Management and Conservation in Ethiopia. The Red Sea Press, Inc., Asmara, Eritrea
Appendex (1)
Peoples Identity and economic effect
|
Type of participation
|
Characteristics
|
Practical examples
|
Participants: Permitted
to access livelihood assets
|
1)Self-mobilization
|
People participate by taking initiatives to change systems independently of external institutions. They develop contacts with external institutions for the resources and technical advice they need, but retain control over how resources are used. Self-mobilization can spread if governments and NGOs provide an enabling framework of support. Such self-initiated mobilization may or may not challenge existing distributions of wealth and power.
|
When they are visionaries, and have provisions to attain the purpose intended.
|
2)Interactive participation
|
People participate in joint analysis, development of action plans and formation or strengthening of local institutions. Participation is seen as a right, not just the means to achieve projects goals. The process involves interdisciplinary methodologies that seek multiple perspectives and make use of systematic and structured learning processes. As groups take control over local decisions and determine how available resources are used, so they have a stake in maintaining
structures or practices.
|
When local people part take and adopt the visionaries ‘ idea as their own feel the sense of ownership and feel free to comment
| |
3)Functional participation
|
Participation seen by external agencies as a means to achieve project goals, especially reduced costs. People may participate by forming groups to meet predetermined objectives related to the project. Such involvement may be interactive and involve shared decision making, but tends to arise only after major decisions have already been made by external agents. At worst, local people may still only be coopted to serve external goals.
|
When local people are used as means of implementers strategy, for the benefit of local people.
| |
Loyal citizens:-Less permitted to access livelihood assets depending on the level of their loyalty
|
4)Participation for material incentives
|
People participate by providing resources, for example labour, in return for food, cash or other material incentives. Farmers may provide the fields and labour, but are involved in neither experimentation nor the process of learning. It is very common to find this called participation, yet people have no stake in prolonging technologies or practices when the incentives end.
|
When local people become loyal for outsiders projects for the benefit they get from such participation not necessarily believing in the project.
|
Pessimist citizens: The
Permission to livelihood assets depends on the level of their obedience, regardless what they actually believe
|
5)Participation by consultation
|
People participate by being consulted, or by answering questions. External agents define both problems and information- gathering processes, and so control analysis. Such a consultative process does not concede any share in decision-making and professionals are under no obligation to take on board people’s views.
|
When outsiders consult local people to achieve their intended goal.
|
6)Passive Participation
|
People participate by being told what is going to happen or what has already happened. This involves unilateral announcement by an administration or by project management without listening to people’s responses. The information being shared belongs only to external professionals.
Primary, information like project marketing
| ||
7)Manipulative participation
|
Participation is simply a pretence, with ‘people’s’ representatives on official boards who are unelected and have no power.
|
When local people are used for hidden agendas of the outsider.
| |
Alienated(Marginalized): prevented from accessing livelihood assets.
|
8)Non-participation
|
Planning from the center for local beneficiaries without their participation
|
Planning , implementing without the participation of local people.
|
9)Ignoring the existence of the group
|
Denial by government officials if the researcher finds some thing that colors the claims, or images of the government to escape the blame.
|
When the project fails or brings unintended results
| |
10))Coercion
|
Forcing local people to accept the vision and mission, projects/programmes that are incompatible to the local needs.
|
Use and abuse of power vested on the implementer arrogance to local people including using violence against local people
|
