Reclaiming of Liberia’s future: A call that must be inclusive

Today, July 28, 2018, I attended and witnessed at the Monrovia City Hall a live theatre performance Starring Major Dawnsaw. It is a historical drama titled ‘’Citizen Teage’’- a story long forgotten of a settler whose contributions are seldom referenced in the Liberian History.

The theatre is being led by Dr. C. Patrick Burrowes an acclaimed author and writer known for now famous book titled ‘’ Between the Kola Forest and the Salty Sea’’. Dr. Burrowes called all Liberians to reclaim their fame. However, I am left with few concerns and a single question ‘’ How do Liberians reclaim their future’’?

Technically, live theatre, something I did while growing up in refuge in Guinea was a great performance and congratulation to the writer and producer as well as the performing actor.

Fascinatingly, the drama touched the life of a Citizen Teage who has done too much for the founding of Liberia to be forgotten. My commentary is a mix on the intent of the play and the play itself including some of the topics discussed.

I am concerned about a glorified history that fails to build the bridge needed to unite a country like Liberia. Whether we like it or not, there are prevailing divides which have never been harsh but quietly and softly, they achieved their intents and for whatever reason, anyone who fails to recognize this divide, will not do justice to Liberia. The Unity we call for since the founding of Liberia lingers because we keep to manipulate the processes and one group always feel superior and claim to have founded a nation for the black race- that claim in itself is divisive. The natives that live in Liberia both by the coast and the hinterland before they sold a piece of land to the American Colonization Society owned a culture, a trading system and a government. For instance, my tribe (Kissi) we had a currency, we had a god and we had a government. Anyone telling me or my past generations that they were not civilized and that the settlers opened our eyes will hardly find a place in my heart for whatever reason. The divide of the educated and the uneducated needs a dimension where people consider quality above quantity. I am saying this because the education as claimed before and now has always been associated with civilization and such has made certain educated Liberians even when they lack a practical knowledge on how things work to still claim superiority. They use their education to rule and if they cannot find a place, they divide and delete the reality and fix it with what they think represent them to the masses of heroic deeds.

Watching at the play, I realized that in all his writings, Hilary Teage never worked with a group of committed natives and never forge for a nation that would have created a home for all. He rather limited himself to the settlement but with kind and tender thought of the natives in ways that could have ensured the protection of the settlement. I am convinced that if Hillary Teage had tried to create a nation for both settlers and natives, he could have blend his arguments for both the natives and the settlers as an African heroism of heroes and heroines.

Recognizing that kingdoms were built by Africans, those kingdoms flourished; and creating a  blend of the  experiences and connecting the natives and the  freed slaves would have resulted into a form of democracy that would have speak differently, positive of the two societies. For instance, in Foya, we had Tamba Taylor and in Bong, we had Madam Suakoko. If there is a history that brings the story of the natives and blend it with the well documented struggles of the settlers, such will proclaim the true struggle of citizens building a nation for their children from two perspective without any discrimination. When anyone opens the historical sojourns of Liberia, it does not matter which divide you find yourself, you will trace your past into it. But here we are, little is written about the natives and all that we hear is the glorification of the settlers and we are still trying to claim that there is no divide.

Let us face it. The claimed freedom was in a way reclassified as the means to power and fame. Education in Liberia was linked to specific families who were settlers. How can we distinguished between soft segregation and that which was practiced in Liberia? Many natives were not allowed to attend university except they were civilized by a settler. This led to many natives changing their names from ‘’Yekeh’’ to ‘’Yekeson’’. From ‘’Hallie’’ to ‘’Hilson’’.

Notwithstanding, there were other issues in the play that resonate with us as a people and I think we need to raise a public concern. The actor keeps drinking and in his statement, he condemns alcoholism as an entrenched practice in Liberian Society long ago. What happened in the past to have discouraged this practice? It was important to note that he serves as a role model.

There was a mention of ships owned by Liberians and actually built in Liberia. My concern is what the institutional knowledge was built to maintain that heritage for our generation. The businesses that existed, were these built to last or the very settler hegemony killed it. What was done at the University of Liberia to have maintain this knowledge based in the country? If the past was too selfish and could not established institutions, how can we blame the present generation of being lazy?

Moreover, Teage also present a scene where sceptic’s ideas and the propositions then discussed took a centre stage. Where are the records and how the political institution can use these documents to reclaim the country’s lost heritage?  Why is the Liberian political sciences and historical discussions not revealing the then briefings? We need to investigate more at what point did the country lost its political script? Why the script did get missing and who can we hold responsible. When we provide answers to the above, surely, we will arrive to a new direction. In the play, there is a mention of the melting of our justice system with sympathy.  This is a revealing truth but where did the sympathy come from and what were the basis?

In Act two, a fundamental issue was raised- the selling of our brothers into slavery. Interestingly, those who sold them are not the ones reaping the blunt of the divide, rather, the songs and daughters of the very victims that were sold and the sons and daughters of those who sold them. Enough reason to realize that we cannot keep holding ourselves hostage in the name of slavery. By knowing that for us to truly merge and become one, we need to recognize the contributions of the two parties, rewrite a constitution that speaks to all and establish a new order that resonates with all. This fact cannot be ignored and any attempt means the segregation that held us will keep holding us.

Dr. Burrowes suggests that most of our history is told in lies. My question is who told the lies and why? When the past is lost, it has to be retrieved. But when and how needs careful planning.

We are also reminded in the play that Sinoe refused to partake in the referendum that called for the Independence of Liberia. We need to know why and if there are evidences to proof a case, we need it. If Sinoe then had issues, these issues could still make sense today.

For example, If in itself  that there was a fundamental mistake to have declared a body of land as independent without some major discussions and considerations including issues such as the rights and duties of those who live before the settlers arrived, the sharing of powers and the like, then we need to review those errors. For instance, by failing to consider the glory and contributions of the natives. This denial could create a new dimension that divide us and bringing it into the present discussions will serve a good deal.

‘’With fortitude and patience brought forth by the settlers’’. The warriors and kings also had the same vigour and courage. The present question is how many natives were part of this course?  If none, then how can you UNITE and build a prosperous nation with two divides? The wording and the framing as well as the structural divide that followed after independence attributes itself to the present day reality and we cannot ignore this reality as prevalent as it continues to not just divide us but also hold the country backward in entirety.

One of my captured movements was the mentioned of article 14 of the 1847 constitution. Presently, the Liberian Society is engulfed into a national dialogue to pass a new law on Land Rights. Captivatingly, Article 14 of the 1847 Constitution provides that Land was not for sales. However, by 1973, it was open to sales without any repercussions. What led to that overturn decision? After the drama, I tried to ask a question whether Dr. Burrowes could impact the ongoing discussions with the Senate but surprisingly, he replied that we concentrate on the art. To me, it is not a fair deal. The essence of art is to resonate national issues which are political, economic and social in nature, highlighting the issue of land in the play shows that land is an important aspect of the art. How sure we are that the clause then was to stop new territories being established by some disgruntled settlers but by 1973, such was no longer a case and so, the communal land was open to sales. Today, some settlers could claim that they helped to safeguard the communal land.

Well the last mentioned importance was about an educated electorates. Within my philosophical domain, I often say that he who knows the truth plays with the truth. We ended up having a form of education that concentrated on quantity not quality.  Today, we have PhDs that cannot read or interpret simple idea. Many intellectuals in the country hardly write or published anything. The worst of it all, the political class realized that when a nation is educated, it become too difficult to manipulate, we ended up with what we have now. For the most part, we know that the settlers were the elites and they have been in power, who do we hold responsible for the country’s poor educational system?  This explains that Liberia is captured by a class of cruel citizens who continue to manipulate the country.

The play and the story of Teage suggests that he decided to abandon senatorial post for the post of secretary of state. If he were to come back, will he repeat same?

The struggle of weighing democracy against the chieftaincy style of government is again referenced but it is not clear. However, there are examples where democracy has included along chieftaincy style and it is working. The discussions could have been carefully studied and draw an approach considering the good sides – a blend that could have generated a democracy that is decentralized and possibly a federal system. Someone will ask me how possible for a federal system. If Lofa was not part of all the documents and processes leading to the Independence, it means that Lofa was not inclusive. Under a federal system, I paid first allegiance to my state and then to the federal government. That resonates well and we could need it then. I have asked fewer questions, how did Bong, Lofa and many others became part of Liberia? What are the documentation of the discussions and if there are no documents, this shows that there is a flaw somewhere. How a king can joined another political group without some demands?

While Liberia needs to reclaim it past, we must be inclusive in this process or else, the divide will continue.