Mr. Nagenda, there are no tribes in Rwanda
EDITOR: As a Rwandan, I would like to comment on John Nagenda's September 11 article titled "Reasons for speaking the unspeakable". Firstly the writer holds as true the classical, but erroneous view that the Hutu and Tutsi are different "tribes".
EDITOR: As a Rwandan, I would like to comment on John Nagenda's September 11 article titled "Reasons for speaking the unspeakable". Firstly the writer holds as true the classical, but erroneous view that the Hutu and Tutsi are different "tribes".
And from that premise follows the predictable pattern of logic based on arbitrary numbers that if the Tutsi are a tiny minority, then they cannot win elections. Then he suggests that under One Man One Vote, the Tutsi would be democratically eliminated from the political process and even be expelled. How outlandish !
These sorts of narratives which are based on the colonial view of Rwanda, must be put to rest once and for all. Can Nagenda explain what the term "tribe" really means in a country like Rwanda where the so-called "tribes" have one language, one culture, live side by side and have the same socio-economic settings. Exactly what is there to distinguish between the Rwandans that would legitimise the notion of "tribes" ? None whatsoever.
Therefore, it does not matter who might vote what, or who would emerge as the winner in any democratic process as long as the Rwandans will for ever outlaw these unnecessary divides that were imposed by the colonial rule and the divisive psyche that was inherited by Rwanda's post-independence regimes.
If Rwandans will continue to cherish the principle of a one people (Banyarwanda) and bury all perceivable divisive categorisations, then no group needs to worry about the prospects of being eliminated from civil discourse in the name of democracy.
John Ruhinda
Ontario, Canada
And from that premise follows the predictable pattern of logic based on arbitrary numbers that if the Tutsi are a tiny minority, then they cannot win elections. Then he suggests that under One Man One Vote, the Tutsi would be democratically eliminated from the political process and even be expelled. How outlandish !
These sorts of narratives which are based on the colonial view of Rwanda, must be put to rest once and for all. Can Nagenda explain what the term "tribe" really means in a country like Rwanda where the so-called "tribes" have one language, one culture, live side by side and have the same socio-economic settings. Exactly what is there to distinguish between the Rwandans that would legitimise the notion of "tribes" ? None whatsoever.
Therefore, it does not matter who might vote what, or who would emerge as the winner in any democratic process as long as the Rwandans will for ever outlaw these unnecessary divides that were imposed by the colonial rule and the divisive psyche that was inherited by Rwanda's post-independence regimes.
If Rwandans will continue to cherish the principle of a one people (Banyarwanda) and bury all perceivable divisive categorisations, then no group needs to worry about the prospects of being eliminated from civil discourse in the name of democracy.
John Ruhinda
Ontario, Canada