Upon their entry into East Africa in the 1860’s, British colonists ingratiated themselves as a political authority over the natives, ipso facto, seizing the role of charting the destiny of a subjugated populace. From then on, Kenya began to reorient herself as a morph of western values and African cultural norms. Having chipped away at native traditional values for the better part of a century, colonialism effectively crafted a hodgepodge of conflicting ideologies. Clamor for liberation ensured, but many of the spearheads of political freedom were intoxicated with the Kool-Aid of western sophistication while chanting to drumbeats of cultural excellence.
Such duplicitous practices made it exceedingly difficult to decipher who was who. Judas Iscariot was all over the place, forever dining at tables of those he was plotting to betray. When you deal with that kind of people, whether they grin and hug, or insult and threaten, you have no idea what’s cooking within the cranium of the fellow sitting beside you. Unless God reveals it to you.
Such was the situation in 1967, when high school education in Kenya held promise of the fruits of independence. A young student was awakened by blinding flashlights burning into his eyes. Someone had broken into his private space. In the wee hours of night, he didn’t even know what time it was. Among other privileges, the head boy of Nyandarua High School had a cubicle to himself within the students’ dormitories. It didn’t take long for Hudson Kamau to realize what was going on as a letter was handed to him to sign and authorize a student strike. In very quick succession, threats were issued by a mob that held machetes, clubs and other crude weapons. If the senior prefect refused to take ownership of what his fellow students were about to do, they’d kill him and frame him as the strike ringleader. He signed the letter, waited for the mob to leave, and then fumbled through the darkness to find the headmaster’s residence.
The sons of ‘freedom fighters’, if we can genuinely call them that, had learned the art of using violence to obtain desired ends. Guerilla warfare, that was Kenya’s freedom struggle, is a story for another day. Suffice it to say it was a crucible by which vilest human behaviors were exhibited. High profile political assassinations continue to characterize post-independence governments. As in George Orwell’s Animal Farm, ‘hounds that unite to win wolf battle later turn at carcass.’ Hounds cannot but retain their innate characteristics. Though they might forge a united front to overcome a mutual threat, they must inevitably resort to their intrinsic proclivity for dominance. Might is their sense of right.
Goliath the Philistine Giant
Many people have heard how David, a shepherd boy, felled giant Goliath with a slingshot. Howbeit, the backstory is not well known. Philistines were Israel’s perennial foes who constantly taunted them. On various occasions, they fielded a single champion, a superhuman terror monster from a family of giants known as ‘the sons of Anak’. Some schools of thought affiliate those giants to descendants of Nephilim, angelic beings that intermarried with human women, resulting in destruction of the first world via Noah’s floods.
Before David flung the decisive shot, Goliath had dared Israel to field their own champion for a duel. 9 If he is able to fight with me and to strike me down, then we will be your servants. But if I prevail against him and strike him down, then you will be our servants and will serve us.” (1 Sam 17:9 ~mev). In other words, the side that emerged stronger obtained the right to subjugate the weaker. Might was right!
The Hoax of Democracy
In his Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as ‘government of the people by the people for the people.’ That theory postulates that “the people” is a society of inherently law-abiding folks who do not need laws as guardrails to rein them within the confines of decency, folks who intrinsically do what is right. Integrity is their forte. They are all above reproach. Every one of them adheres to the policies they set up with religious devotion. In the absence of such a premise, definition of terms begins to beg:
- Who are “the people”?
- What kinds of values do “the people” live by in their public and private capacities?
- Who, if anyone, is excluded from “the people”?
- How do “the people” formulate policies that are agreeable to everyone?
The Law as Guardrails
Amongst honest folks are many who believe that social upheavals are the result of weak laws. However, laws are not a deterrent to lawbreakers. They are edicts on how to deal with crooks. Laws are not standards to live by. They are warnings on what should happen to those who flout public decorum. Telling a decent person to not commit crimes is not only inappropriate, it’s also insulting. Integrity is the guardrail of his life, the wherewithal he develops acceptable manners. You either have it or you don’t. A ‘DO NOT TOUCH’ sign on a freshly painted wall has no capacity to keep defiant fingers from flouting the warning. Human will cannot be legislated.
To educate young pastor Timothy on what the law was about, the apostle Paul wrote thus:
5 Now the goal of this command is love from a pure heart, and from a good conscience, and from sincere faith. 6 From this, some have lost their way and turned aside to empty talk, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, and understanding neither what they say nor what they affirm.8 But we know that the law is good if someone uses it lawfully. 9 And we know that the law is not given for a righteous person, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and the profane, for those who kill their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for sodomites, for slave traders, for liars, for perjurers, and for anything else that is contrary to sound doctrine, (1 Tim 1:5-10 ~mev). (emphasis mine)
Are you paying attention? Law is a gauge for Love! Heart purity! Conscience! Sincerity of faith! When outcomes are weighed against law, the motive behind an action becomes apparent.
If the law is a prefect, a cop, or an enforcement agent, it’s obviously meant for a demographic that is inclined to defiance. Am I saying that the law is unnecessary? If I did, I’d be ignorant of bad apples in society. I’d be prescribing democracy as the panacea for social challenges. Rather, I am simply echoing the apostle’s insight. The law is only as good as its implementers. Devious schemers twist the law to favor the great and mighty because might is their concept of right.
When is Might Right?
Might manifests in varieties of ways. Wealth is might. Influence is might. So is everything that favors one party to the detriment of another. When armed gangs overthrew Haitian government and took the law into their own hands, violence gave them right to decide the destiny of millions of helpless victims. When Burmese military junta ejected an elected leader and took the law into its own hands, gunpower gave them right to dictate the fate of a nation. This chorus dings like a broken record. It gives Putni the right to annex Ukraine and subdue masses of her citizens. It dictates Israel’s relationship with her Palestinian compatriots. It authorizes repression of Uighur Muslims in China, Rohingya of Myanmar, and countless ethnic minorities across the globe.
If a person entrusted with spiritual oversight abuses the people under his care, and such atrocities are swept under the rag, to protect poor role models from fiscal, institutional, or reputational damage, what is lost to the minds of those concerned is the character of God. If the church is unable to exhibit righteousness within its own quarters, who is left on earth to reflect moral values?
Kenya’s Gen-Z recently took to the streets to defeat an unpopular tax bill. Authorities unleashed armed police who killed scores of youngsters. To justify the wanton use of force, politicians hired thugs to infiltrate peaceful protests with acts of hooliganism. In the ensuing mayhem, might and right were indistinguishable because hypocritical games played out from opposing sides. Peaceful demonstrations are enshrined in Kenya’s constitution.
When is might right? Is it in the conniving tactician who arm-twists systems for personal goals? On July 1st, 2024, SCOTUS ruled that the former president has absolute immunity from prosecution on matters relating to attacks of January 6, 2021, at the state capitol. The justices being split 6 to 3 now begs many questions. For instance, if there is no consensus on judicial rulings, does the majority vote justify might, or right? If a president urges mobs to commit crimes citing presidential immunity, is that right, or might? When an electorate goes to the polls and contestants divide ballots by fractions, does the winner rule by right, or by might?
Is right determined by status, influence, numbers, popular opinion, or by ethical standards?
When might is right, decency becomes a liability; just find a sizable Goliath to terrify your opponents into submission. Unfortunately, when might is right, nobody is safe. The law of the jungle only incentivizes weaker opponents to bolster their own gangs of intimidators for tomorrow’s duels. But when such is your gameplan, watch out for surprises. A shepherd boy with a divinely guided slingshot struck a formidable titan with pinpoint precision. In God’s justice, might is not right!