July 22 2007 Massive Rigging Of Cameroun Elections

PostWatch Magazine The Undiluted Truth

The Fundamentalism of Difference Reaction to the July 22, 2007 Rigged Election in Cameroun Sankofa (Kalu, 2006:1) is the bird that turns its head to look backwards in the direction from where it came because a person who is not conscious about where a journey started may not know where he/she is going. The symbols urge people to “go back and take it,” or look back and reclaim their historical and cultural heritage. Sankofa, a Twi word, is one of the symbols used to promote unity based on the recovery of Ghanaian cultural heritage. “Quebec, je me souviens,” is the foundation upon which the minority French Canadians want out of the Canadian federation. Africans and Africa countries that dug into historical, traditional and cultural values in search of unity have discovered more than unity. The foundation is of steel when it is anchored on the communality of shared values. Ntemfac A. N. Ofege unveils the parallel between the enduring Southern Cameroons determinism and the antics of the Sankofa. The fundamentalism of difference. Contemporary Cameroon, all 475.000kms2 of territory, is a composite entity created in 1961 “of the territory of the state of Southern Cameroons henceforth called the state of West Cameroon and the territory of the state of La Republique du Cameroon, henceforth called East Cameroon. Southern Cameroons brought circa 80.000km2 of territory to the federation while La Republique brought in the rest. Contemporary Cameroon also has a horizontal divide of circa 240 ethnic groups – some 70 ethnia in Southern Cameroons (West Cameroon) and the rest in East Cameroon (La Republique). As in the US, Britain and other democracies the circa 70 ethnia of Southern Cameroons had toned down the real and symbolic boundaries of their native nations (tribes) for the benefit of the Southern Cameroons nation. Today, apologists and detractors of that enduring nation know of an Anglophone nation. Yet this nation has 70 ethnia. At its creation, the ostensibly new state inherited the structural-functionalism the East Cameroon state whose mores, regime, customs, traditions and system of

the state of East Cameroon had been had been savaged and obliterated by the French colonial masters and the West Cameroon state whose customs, mores and values had been maintained intact by British Indirect Rule. While the French attempted to make Frenchmen and women out of those it colonized, the British left native customs, authority, values and mores in their colonies intact. The British even improved upon the native authorities under their charge. Improving the native system meant grafting the British culture of governance and perception of public life to her colonies. It a way grafting the British system to extant native authorities was facile for most native communities in Southern Cameroons had traditional democratic modules. Consequently, in reality and in spirit, the state resulting from the merger of the state of Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroon was a Federation. The proponents of this federation reasoned (logically) that a federation and/or confederation were plausible options in getting incongruent

by

Ntemfac Ofege

peoples to live together. Pursuant upon that logic, the Federation had a majority partner and a minority partner. The size and population of the components determined the majority and minority status. Perhaps roles may have reversed had resources and economy been the TOR. Oil was only discovered in Southern Cameroons in 1970 despite the fact that a 1902 geological map of the territory prepared by the Germans hinted on the prospects of petroleum deposits off the shores of Southern Cameroons. Every known extrapolation says that there are circa 6.000.000 Southern Cameronians to circa 10.000.000 Frenchspeaking Camerounians in this litigious territory. It has always been in the strategic interest of successive Francophone-led regimes in Cameroun to down grade the population of English-speaking Cameroonians. The intent herein is to justify the unequal sharing of rewards, resources, power, prestige and privileges. The majority of English-speaking Cameroonians live in their territory while a majority of French-speaking Cameroonians still occupy their territory. Both majorities still function under the traditions, customs, mores and governance systems en vogue since French and/or English colonization began in 1921. This is quite in order given that the United Nations treaty, which brought the two Cameroons together, did not intend a mixing of peoples. The UN documents spoke of an Inter-Parliamentary Union. However, there is a nebulous zone of bastardized issue (mixed blood) from parents who have married into both cultures. This group is an absolute minority, which minority is getting thinner and thinner. The dearth of marriages between citizens of both cultures has a logical explanation. It is a natural occurrence that frogs live

The Fundamentalism of Difference and croak (die) in the mud. It is also a natural occurrence that frogs do not get married to lizards. By frog, we do not mean any of God!s creatures. Rather we mean an individual who believe in, lives by, defends and would probably die for the structural functionalism and values of the corrupt system foisted on its citizens by successive governments of La Republique du Cameroun. The Meaning of Difference Since the biblical Tower of Babel, boundaries (be they symbolic or real) have been very powerful in maintaining separation between nations and individuals. Boundaries between individuals and nations can either be real or symbolic. Boundaries are those frontier points recognized, legalized and legitimized by national and/or International law, attitudes, behaviour, customs and mores. Boundaries often have their own history and anthropology some of which are contentious. Often a ten-kilometer drive leads into the next nation, the next ethnia, the next tribe with their own real and symbolic boundaries. In the specific context of Africa, symbolic and real borders became an issue once seemingly disparate peoples were lumped together by colonization into dubious territories called states. The colonial masters expected the peoples forced into these heathen wedlock to forge nations out of the states.

A real boundary is that recognized national/ international frontier post separating individuals and groups. A symbolic boundary is that moral code, that spiritual thing, that convention that makes of its adherents the “we” versus the “them” nonadherents and unbelievers on the other side. "Symbolic boundaries are central to all culture. Marking “difference” leads us, symbolically, to close ranks, shore up culture and to stigmatize and expel anything which is defined as impure, strangely attractive precisely because it is forbidden, taboo, threatening to cultural order! (Hall, 1997: 237). There are therefore symbolic and real boundaries between Southern Cameroonians and French-speaking Cameroonians. A combination of symbolic and real boundary separating a people (any people) means that the have no business living together in the first place. In its present structural-functionalism, what is passing around for a united Cameroon is doomed. It cannot endure. Like Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, Cameroon is bound to implode, break-up into its foundation components. Things fall apart, the center can no longer hold. Zero option looms. What God has put asunder. Take it or live it, oil will always be oil while water will always be fire. It takes a mighty hand to forge something new

out of water and oil. Frogs have no business having intercourse with human beings, let alone producing children. This marking of difference is articulated within clear boundaries; it does not tolerate ambiguous, unstable or hybrid spaces of indeterminacy. To paraphrase Hall: "Majoritarian Francophone culture requires things to stay in their appointed place. Symbolic (and real) boundaries have been erected to keep the categories "pure!, giving cultures their unique meaning and identity. Even it its most stable situation, the different group will always be perceived by the dominant group as potentially threatening. (Yetman @ Steele, 1938:3). Dominant groups always operate from the vantage point of prejudice. Allport defines prejudice as an aversive or hostile towards a person who belongs to a group, simply because he belongs to that group, and is therefore presumed to have the objectionable qualities ascribed to the group.” Prejudice is an attitudinal phenomenon and often involves and intense emotional component. The dominant group goes forward to elaborate mechanisms to keep “the

http://www.postwatchmagazine.com

The Fundamentalism of Difference troublesome presence” (Stamp, 1956) in subservience. The dominant group operates on the foundation that what unsettles culture is “matter out of place”– the breaking of our unwritten rules and codes! (1997: 236). Name-calling, ethnic and economic cleansing, economic genocide, election fraud, intellectual and actual terrorism and violence are just some of the methods used by the dominant group to maintain its position of prestige, privilege and power. For example, a Southern Cameroonian must never hold the position of any of the “ministries of sovereignty” – finance, home affairs, foreign affairs and defense. They must always be relegated to symbolic and inconsequential (faire valoir) positions. Even when they have been prime ministers, they have been only in name. The system also creates other structures and positions to water down the powers of a prime minister when a native Southern Cameroonian is involved. In the early 1990s, Sadou Hayatou benefited from the full plenitude of prime ministerial power and prerogatives in Cameroon. When a native of Southern Cameroons (Achidi Achu) came into the job, Mr. Biya created a Vice Prime Minister and an omnipotent secretary general to hem in the prime minister. Ditto for the current Southern Cameroonian native, Inoni Ephraim, who has to contend with the minister of justice, Amadou Ali, as vice prime minister. Whenever the heathen culture starts reaching out for freedom and independence, the symbolic or boundary marking “difference” leads the majority, to close ranks, shore up culture and to stigmatize and expel anything that is defined as impure, taboo, forbidden or whatever it is that threatens the cultural order. (Hall, 1997: 237). This process of purification legitimizes exclusion, intolerance, tribalism and racism. It also allocates marginal identities to individuals who do not conform to the values and perception of the norm – the majoritarian view. Southern Cameroonians a have been called Anglofous, Anglo-fools, Biafrans, Anglos, l!enemie dans la maison, etc. In fact, a francophone CPDM parliamentarian once called Paulinus Jua, a Southern Cameroonians representative of the opposition SDF Party, a Biafran. As a last resort, the majority culture resorts to statesponsored economic cleansing and other genocidal practices to get rid of the unwelcome and troublesome presence. And violence (war) is used to keep the slaves in their proper place of subservience. In extreme cases (and the Cameroonian scenario is extreme by all definitions) genocidal practices (ethnic and economic cleansing, intellectual terrorism, violence) against “the troublesome presence” starts at the initial level of conflict. Grinshaw argues that the most intense conflicts between majority and minority have resulted when “the subordinate minority group has attempted to disrupt the accommodative pattern or when the super ordinate group has defined the situation as one in which such an attempt is being made.” Richard Dyer argues that stereotypes are nourished by "vivid, memorable, easily grasped and widely recognized! features about an individual. Dyer posits that there are three basic points related to stereotyping. The first point tends to reduce, essentialize and naturalize "difference!. Stereotyping has done a lot to exacerbate the Francophone – Anglophone conflict in Cameroun. Understanding Difference The Camerounian system has always attempted to forge unity out of its disparate foundation. In 1972, Cameroon!s first president, Ahmadou Ahidjo, claimed to have swept aside the real and symbolic boundaries between English-speaking and French-speaking Camerounians (in favour of a dubious entity called the United Republic of Cameroun) via a dubious referendum. The problem with real and symbolic boundaries is their enduring, eternal and spiritual nature. They cannot be swept aside by decree of by fraudulent referenda. Being an illiterate (albeit another professional manipulator), Ahidjo attempted to undermine the real and symbolic boundaries between the two founding states of Cameroon by subterfuge. In 1962 in passed

http://www.postwatchmagazine.com

The Fundamentalism of Difference Emergency Laws to proscribe dissent and opposition voices. In 1966, he massacred democracy by coercing existing political parties to coalesce into his Cameroun National Union, CNU party. Political opponents (Felix Moumie) were murdered. Dissidents (Ernest Ouandie, Wambo le Courant) and refuseniks were tied to the stakes as terrorist (Maquisards) and decently shot. A Securitate (Cener) was invented to establish a police state and newspapers were abolished. Generally, the principle that historically governed the regulation of ideas was national public interest with the great national party, its alta ego, the government and its government institutions like the government-control media diffusing the unique thought and controlling the narrative. The one party state erected a tyrannical dictatorship, banned dissenters and the contrary voice and evolved slogans extolling the merits of national unity and integration. Operating along the Communist-Marxist Leninist module that was currency at the time, Ahidjo reasoned that a nation-state, national unity and a single voice could be invented top to bottom by presidential fiat and decrees. It takes more than that to obliterate real and symbolic boundaries between individuals and groups. In fact, cultures and nation states (the United States of America for example) that have had to invent a melting pot (pluribus Unum) between disparate peoples know that democracy, power sharing and equal opportunities, an authentic federation are just some of the ingredients to create a Pluribus Unum. The need for uniformism monoculturism and a linear thought pattern was so acute that the journalists operating in the government-controlled media were brained-washed to believe that they were “Soldiers of development” with development being codifies as decisions from the Head of State and the great national party. Small wonder, these journalists transformed almost immediately into choirboys who sang the praises of the regime and its strongman from here to there. The brainwashing even went down to schools and school curricula. Whenever young Camerounians were proscribed from learning Cameroun!s history, the regime taught them taught history from one side of the mouth. A major taboo subject is the process that created Cameroon. The processes that led to the death of Cameroon!s president remain a taboo subject thanks to political censorship. The one party state and its linear thought pattern had the seeds of its own destruction. This national thinking conceives a cultural map in which cultures are homogeneous and it does not tackle diversity (Robins, 2006). Whenever counterpoints are excluded, debate banished, corruption unchecked, and public servants unaccountable, the system tends towards decay, gangrene and mortification. Scholarship becomes limited. The result of that gangrene is visible all over Cameroun today. French-speaking Cameroonians, (East Cameroonians) may disagree strenuously with the severity of one or all of the items that symbolize their side of the symbolic boundary, but facts are facts and truths are truths. The regime in Yaounde is identified with fraud, tyranny, dictatorship, trickery, thievery, pilfering, hegemony, Pedes, nepotism, Freemasonry, occultism, witchcraft, kleptocracy. Oligarchy, corruption, extortion, election-fraud, subterfuge, graft, tribalism, colonization, annexation, incompetence, confusion, underachievement, subterfuge, grand larceny, autocracy, violence, etc., etc. Francophones dare not quarrel with this depiction after all the socio-political system in Cameroon is created and sustained by the majority. Robert Bierstedt: Within every polity, it is the majority, which sets the cultural pattern and sustains it, which is in fact responsible for whatever pattern or configuration there is in a culture. It is the majority, which confers upon folkways, mores, customs, and laws the status of norms and gives the coercive power. It is the majority, which guarantees the stability of a society. It is the majority which requires conformity to customs and which penalizes deviation…“except in ways in

http://www.postwatchmagazine.com

The Fundamentalism of Difference in which the majority sanctions and approves. It is the majority which is the custodian of the mores and which defends them against innovation. And it is the inertia of the majorities, finally, which retards the processes of social change." Small wonder the regime has been twice voted Most Corrupt in the World. Corruption in Cameroun is systemic, a tradition, the norm. It is a way of life. Would you be comfortable with a mother who purchases GCE examinations questions for you ahead of the examination? Would you be comfortable knowing that you father, the Divisional Office, the minister, the fon or the director, is busy stuffing ballot boxes in the parlour? Or that your father is ferrying you and your friends up and down the town to rig elections by voting several times? The system, the mores, the customs and the tradition of French Cameroun are etched in fraud, corruption, election heisting, trickery and thievery: written in Solid Gold characters. These values are foreign to Southern Cameroons and Southern Cameroonians. French Camerounians are so comfortable with their system that they support it; they glorify it; they thrive in it and they live in it. A frog can only live in the swamps, the mud and the muck. Frogs can only croak (die) in the swamps, the mud and the muck. Remove a frog from its natural habitat and it will no loner croak. You do not believe me. Francophone Cameroun has just massively rigged yet another election to give themselves and their very own CPDM party yet another moon slide victory. The frogs used all election-fraud strategies known to man. They ethnically cleansed English-speaking Cameroonians from the voter!s register; they created fake registers; they registered themselves in hideouts; they refused to give English-speaking Cameroonians voting cards; they created a fake Election Observatory, so fake that it could do nothing when it had evidence of rigging; they registered foreigners; they refused to publish voter!s registers; they stuffed ballot boxes; they asked known or suspected opposition hands to produce birth certificate, bank statements, driving licenses, residence permits, ID cards before voting; they sent the voting cards and registers of known opposition hands to wrong polling stations; they ferried themselves to vote left, right and center; they refused to produce indelible ink; they voted many times; they confiscated ballot boxes; they corrupted voters; the decreed shortage of opposition ballot papers; they bought votes; they sold votes; they used state resources to campaign; they hijacked the public media; they disqualified the lists of opponents; they created ghost polling stations; they declared fake results; they created fake result sheets; they cancelled votes; they announced the result of past fake results; etc. They gerrymandered and invented fake constituencies. The purpose of this exercise was to eternalize the system by giving themselves the means (vast majority) to maintain the Chairman of the Board for life. That, in some areas, they were aided by desperate Southern Cameroonian“Collabos” (collaborators) is immaterial. This is a frog-system. Southern Cameroonians have no business being part of this mess. Had the system in Cameroun been established by free and fair means, all Southern Cameroonians, especially this pundit would have accepted it fully. After all, we are by nature, culture, education democrats. Between 19222 and 1958, Southern Cameroons were in the British school of “emancipation” (see Article 76b of the UN Charter.) Until it happened in Benin in the 1990s, Southern Cameroons was the only territory in Africa so imbued with democracy that a ruling government (the Endeley government) would conduct elections, be beaten by the opposition (Foncha) and then accept the results. Fraud we abhor. After decades of being the victims of a state control of the narrative via, an iron grip on the private media, and state terrorism on dissenting voices, Southern Cameroon (like most other oppressed people) now have a lethal outlet called cyberspace to let out some steam. As the wind of change blows, as dictatorships crumble, as audiences fragment, as cyberspace ignores and threatens national frontiers, as global communication on the internet threatens to overtake sex as a past time, as (in Bible terms) knowledge becomes widespread,

http://www.postwatchmagazine.com

The Fundamentalism of Difference ignorance and the monolithic thought become irrelevant. Real and Symbolic boundaries are now made evident in awesome glory. Evidential of Difference Despite paying lip service to the merits of democracy, Ahidjo!s “illustrious successor,” Mr. Paul Biya is yet to manifest some understanding of the word. Mr. Biya represents continuity and the externalization of a mindset and system, which mindset and system believe that real and symbolic boundaries could be obliterated by shouting “National Unity and Integration” from every rooftop. In 1984, in a fit of maladroitness, Mr. Biya signed a law ending the tie between Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun by re-creating La Republique du Cameroun. The symbolism of this act is clear: The real and symbolic boundaries between the founding components of the Federal and the United Republic no longer exist. Southern Cameroons now has every right to restore its independence, preferably under a new name. For one thing, the difference is clear. Real and symbolic boundaries are eternal. While a gung-ho of Southern Cameroons apologists argue that the revived new state be called Ambazonia others argue for the Federal Republic of Bimbia. The just-ended joint municipal-parliamentary elections in Cameroon prove the point. When all officials of Cameroon!s National Electoral Observatory mean when they say there were "irregularities” is their speak for “massive fraud.” Cameroon may have an Election Observatory, but this observatory is not an Independent Electoral Commission. The observatory does just that – it observes elections. The Ministry of Territorial Administration (hitherto called the Ministry of Territorial Administration and Decentralisation) organizes elections in Cameroon. This office functions in the true pattern of a one-party state, Stalinist module. It fabricates election results years ahead of the elections, which results (if favour of the state party) are released after he elections to be confirmed by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, whose head is the president of the state party and head of state, has never been known to challenge even the most glaring evidential of fraud. The Supreme Court always rubber-stamps the results as tabled by Territorial Administration. In all fairness to the Supreme Court, Cameroon!s electoral law states clearly that the Supreme Court is there to proclaim the results: proclaim and nothing else. Ntumfor Nico Halle, ONEL representative for the North West province, repeated this statement again and again during the campaigns for the just ended elections for the benefit of Mr. Biya and his ilk.” When you rig elections everything else is rigged; appointments are rigged, contract-awards are rigged, etc.” The people who rig elections in Cameroun and even get children to rig elections are “leaders” members of the administration (A levels plus 3, etc). So goes a leader who rigs elections so goes the entire administration. Should anyone be surprised that corruption reeks at all levels of this Francophone-invented and led system? A leader can only move a people from where they are to where he has been. Mr. Biya condones, he lives in and he thrives in corruption and election fraud. He can only lead people into corruption. The system that obtained in Southern Cameroons was different. The state of Southern Cameroons could never have come to the sorry pass. Its governing system had the inbuilt machinery to prevent that. It is most evident that, all things being equal, the Francophone led Cameroon Peoples Democratic Movement, CPDM, cannot beat the Southern Cameroonian led Social Democratic Front, SDF, in any constituency in Southern Cameroons: Except through election fraud. Moreover, the current government of Cameroon is not only a minority unelected, un-representative contraption. Ethnic cleansing of known opposition names from the voter!s register is a parameter of

http://www.postwatchmagazine.com

The Fundamentalism of Difference election fraud in Cameroon. Take the figures. Cameroon has a population of circa 17.000.000. The Minister of Territorial Administration and Decentralization announced that there are circa 5.000.000 registered voters in the country. The participation rate of the last elections was 60% or 3.000.000. Less than 2.000.000 Cameroonians actually voted in the elections. There were less than 500.000 Southern Cameroonians out of 6.000.000. What this means concretely is that 85% of Cameroonians are excluded from the electoral process. Since 1992, Mr. Biya!s score, on the average for every seriously flawed (massively rigged) election, has never been beyond 1.500.000 votes. This is less than 10% of the population and less than less than 15% of the potential electorate of 10.000.000. Article 9 of Cameroon!s constitution states clearly that the head of state, (who is also the president of the CPDM) defines all policies and politics in Cameroon. Were the SDF to win all the councils and parliamentary seats in the country, the CPDM president will still define policies. The CPDM, thanks to fraud currently has some 140 of the 180 members of the National Assembly. It wants 160 members! And the bylaws of the now defunct National Assembly makes out that opposition bills and private member bills are excluded. Only government bills can be tabled, debated and adopted. Forty-five years within this sham system is 45 years too long. Slaveholding of yesteryears was often justified on the grounds of the slave!s docility, dependence, improvidence and fear of freedom. In the Cameroonian context, the slaves are a troublesome presence, l!enemie dans la maison, Biafrans, etc. Surely, Southern Cameroonians are not slaves. Time to march out with alacrity and fulsome glory. May that Old Song, “Home Again” ring out from Buea to Bamenda.

Filae Piratae

Leadership and difference Evangelist Myles Munroe (Munroe, 2006) defines leadership as “The ability to influence others through inspiration, generated by a passion, motivated by a vision, produced by a conviction, birth by a purpose.” Unfortunately, and to agree with Munroe, most characters passing around for leaders in Africa fall short of all of the above terms of reference. Where there is no vision and inspiration, manipulation sets in. Mr. Paul Biya, president of La Republique du Cameroun, is a professional manipulator. The man can only manipulate elections, manipulate people, divide and rule, and preside over corruption. Development is not his thing. When Mr. Biya was asked what his vision for Cameroun is, the man says, “I have Grand Ambitions for Cameroon.” When asked to translate “Grand Ambitions” into bread, the man remains vague and boot faced. The man!s disciples have used their own blindness to attempt putting flesh to Mr. Biya!s dry

Way Forwards Network Southern Cameroonians coordinating with Southern Cameroonians to advance the cause of Southern Cameroonian Liberation. New Language. Enhanced Communication; Planning and Coordination

Stay Tuned

http://www.postwatchmagazine.com

The Fundamentalism of Difference bones. In vain. When Mr. Biya was asked what he expected from the elections (which he has rigged), the man said he expected his party to garner a give him a vast majority to continue the policies he has commenced. Which policies? The artistic miasma of corruption, election-fraud, incompetence and Grand Ambitions, naturally. On Election Day, July 22, Mr. Biya also intimated in an interview with CRTV that he expected other Cameroonians (of the opposition) to join his administration. Blind man leading the blind. So goes the leader, so goes the organization. For 25 years in power, Mr. Biya has proven that he has neither the desire nor the will to expand his knowledge base. La Republique and its regime cannot give what they do not have. Why then should Southern Cameroonians; people having different knowledge base, people trained in a different perception of public life and people with a different set of values continue along this path to the precipice? Therefore, an unknown quantity is leading you to an unknown place called Grand Ambitions. And you are trundling behind him like a goat to the market? God forbid. Myles Munroe says it is illegal (a sin) to lead people to nowhere. The leader you follow will determine your destination. Rather than inspire people, a man anchored on miasma and fumes of “Grand Ambitions” can only be a manipulator. Grand Ambition is out a vision, neither is it an inspiration. Instead, the slogan comes from the profound darkness of a hollow mind and a dark spirit. Would you submit your time, energy, life to a thing called “Grand Ambitions?” Managers maintain. Leaders lead. Managers are concerned about keeping the status quo. Leaders innovate. Mr. Biya is not even a manager for a manager would, at least, be a boutiquier who knows how to sustain a village provision store. Mr. Biya has proven that he is a neither a leader nor a manager. Same for Mr. Fru Ndi, the head of Cameroon!s leading opposition party, who confuses the maintenance of his own stomach and personal provision store with that of the SDF. Conclusion We have seen that contemporary Cameroon is composed of a two nation-states living within defined boundaries. They are the state of Southern Cameroons and the state of La Republique du Cameroun. Although proponents of a unitary-uniformist state and those who support successive attempts to obliterate the minority state for the benefit of the majority would wish for the contrary, the fact is that the Southern Cameroons nation-state is rather enduring. Southern Cameroonians know it as a fact that the hegemonistic paranoia of the Francophone led, invented sustained regime in Yaounde must be halted for a very good reason. Allowing Francophones and their regime to be rampant would only mean the acceptation and the spread of corruption, fraud, thievery as well as other intoxicating, viral and hence catching tares and more. For one thing, Southern Cameroons, founded within internationally defined and recognized real and symbolic boundaries, was never anchored on the same pattern of norms, customs and values. At best, the socio-political dispensation of Southern Cameroons had inbuilt checks and balances to guarantee that such deviant attitudes are sanctioned wherever they are found. Stalinist nationalist systems, national unity, the linear thought, national integration modules (as extant in Yugoslavia and the former Soviet Union), are dead. The focus is now on the last bastions of Stalinism – African dictatorships. It is a matter of causality but the same causes will produce the same effects. If Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union proved to humankind that a “multinational” coalition of disperse and disparate peoples cannot be held together for ever by force, but must lifer fragment along the original foundation lines, then the world is witnessing the dying throes of a major bastion

http://www.postwatchmagazine.com

The Fundamentalism of Difference of dictatorship and the revival of an ancient state. Since 1972, the date of a contentious referendum to obliterate Southern Cameroons, rather than knuckling under, Southern Cameroons “difference” values, nationalism are rather on the ascendancy. It is just a matter of time before that buoyancy translates into implosion. [1] Kalu, (2006). “Pentecostalism, media and cultural discourse inAfrica” WACC. [1] See Article 1 of the Federal Constitution.[1] In the grass fields of Southern Cameroons, especially most fondoms in their structures and functions were democracies. The fon (executive) had a traditional council (legislature) with the traditional doctors acting the judiciary. [1] See UN documents on the decolonization “emancipation” ofSouthern Cameroons . Article 76b of UN Charter,etc [1] Hall, Stuart (1997). !The Spectacle of the“Other.”InRepresentation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. Edited by. Hall. London: Sage Publications, pp.225-79. [1] Normal R. Yetman and C Hoy Steele, Majority and Minority, The Dynamics of Race and Ethnic Relations. (1938, Allyn and Bacon Inc.Boston [1] Gordon W. Allport, The Nature of Prejudice, abridged (Garden City, N.Y. Doubleday, 1958), p. 8 [1] This is Kenneth Stampp"s characterization. See The Peculiar Institution: Slavery in the Ante-Bellum South (New York: Vintage Books, 1956). [1] Hall, Stuart (1997). !The Spectacle of the “Other.” In Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. Edited by. Hall.London Sage Publications, pp.225-79.

[1] Allan D Grimshaw, “Lawlessness and violence inAmerica and their specific Manifestations in Changing Negro-White Relationships,” The Journal of Negro History, 44 (January, 1959): 17 [1] Dyer, Richard (ed) (1977). Gays and Film.London British Film Institute. [1] Once upon a time, a giant signboard outside theUniversityof Yaounde"s School of

Journalismannounced that we train “Journalists: Soldiers of development.” Once out of school these poor devils went through a final brainwashing spell for 6 months in the Ministry of Information and Culture where they were taught CNU party doctrines and made to toe the line. [1] Robert Bierstedt, “The Sociology of Majorities,”America Sociological Review 13 (December 1948): 709. [1] Munroe, Myles, “Priority of Character in Leadership” Shiloh 2006. Winners Chapel, Nigeria

Way Forwards Network Southern Cameroonians coordinating with Southern Cameroonians to advance the cause of Southern Cameroonian Liberation. New Language. Enhanced Communication; Planning and Coordination

Stay Tuned

http://www.postwatchmagazine.com