Our enduring preoccupation with the political dear departed

The debates, the conversations and even monologues about the legacy of former leaders (especially the dead ones) are almost always reflective not of those former leaders but of those involved in the debates, the conversations or the monologues. Their legacies divide opinions depending on so many things, even where history has cast its lot with whatever side of such legacies.

The reasons for this range from simple to the complex for it could be something very personal like being passed for a certain political appointment which the individual in question thinks they deserved. That could drive one to hate with a passion. Another individual could end up landing another job courtesy of the appointing authority, changing their life trajectory completely. This one will sing a very different tune about the legacy of a former leader.

For a political leader to die early on before they can do real damage and be followed by a terrible ruler cements their legacy and cast them in a far better light because of the promise of what could have been. Africa is littered with leaders like these from Patrice Lumumba to Thomas Sankara.

Take Mobutu Sese Seko, who came after Lumumba for instance. History has placed him among the worst rulers of post-colonial Africa but there are those from his home village who are still nostalgic of his days when a castle sprung up in the middle of the forests.

Living a long life after retiring from office before answering the calls of one’s ancestors can do wonders as well to the legacy of a former ruler.

They live to see others make huge blunders to turn their legacies to something akin to them being political saints; if that makes any sense. It also helps if those in charge owe their positions to the former big man or the party in power is the same. That can do wonders.

Others have benefited from the passage of time. The benefit of hindsight and a new generation give their legacies a total makeover. They are viewed in a very different light to the headlines of their days in power.

These differences in how the past is viewed can linger on for generations. Such is the power of emotions which can remain raw even after decades, centuries at times.

There are many former rulers who were toppled in the days of the never ending military coups (these are still with us) and died in foreign lands whose legacies have proved too toxic to bring their remains back home. It is safe for the dead to lie in foreign lands because in their eternal sleep they could lead to serious political headaches and do more damage for the living if their remains were to be returned home, to be buried in their ancestors’ land.

Some rulers are simply cast in certain roles with history almost entirely as a result of a single monumental decision they made or did not make. From there forward, it does not matter what else they did, the die is already cast for them. Their legacies, for better or for worse, almost exclusively are tied to a single issue regardless of the complexities of their times or political characters.

There are those who are simply forgotten or time casts them in relative obscurity regardless of what they did or did not do while in office.

No concerted efforts are made to erase their legacies or to even reconstruct it. These are the most unfortunate. These are easily forgotten because their rule was brief and followed by such powerful political characters like Paul Biya or Omar Bongo.

People remember the times of such figures but hardly recall those who came before them. They are merely footnotes in the sands of history.

Time is a strange concept but, when it comes to the dead they preoccupy the living from beyond the grave. It is even more complex in Africa because we do our best to bury the dead with whatever failures we think are theirs.