Politics and Violence in Kenya
POLITICS AND VIOLENCE IN KENYA
The 2007 Post election violence in Kenya has by far been the most adverse form of ethno-political violence witnessed since the political freedom was wrestled from the hands of our colonial masters .Since the restoration of multiparty politics, with the repealing of section 2A in 1991, ethnic based violence has always been part and parcel of the electioneering period. The violence that erupted after the hotly contested presidential race were a shocker to the Kenyans themselves and the international community at large as it was nothing like the mild inter ethnic squabbles that had been witnessed before.
The most immediate trigger to the spontaneous chaos is any person’s guess. The revelations of the irregularities led to this tsunami of violence which wiped away 1300 lives never to be seen again. According to Safeworld, a U.K based newspaper r, this was the ultimate end of social tensions that had built up slowly gaining intensity just like a volcano and the tension subsequently reached its snap point.
There are many theories that have been postulated to explain what crime is and why people engage in crime. One thing that the various sociologists and schools of thought have disagreed about is explaining what crime is. Positivists argue that crime is as a result of internal and external reasons beyond the control of the individual committing the crime. Utilitarians , the likes of Cesar beccaria and Jeremy Bentham argue that crime is as a result of rational choices and that man is a hedonistic creature who will weigh the costs incurred visa vis the benefits that accrue from such acts or omissions criminalized by the legal system.
In this case I would like to opine that I strongly believe that the best suited theory to explain the post election violence which crippled the economy that had been growing at a whooping rate of 7% per annum is the Marxist theory of criminology. Criminology tries to delve into the reasons as to why
The 2007 Post election violence in Kenya has by far been the most adverse form of ethno-political violence witnessed since the political freedom was wrestled from the hands of our colonial masters .Since the restoration of multiparty politics, with the repealing of section 2A in 1991, ethnic based violence has always been part and parcel of the electioneering period. The violence that erupted after the hotly contested presidential race were a shocker to the Kenyans themselves and the international community at large as it was nothing like the mild inter ethnic squabbles that had been witnessed before.
The most immediate trigger to the spontaneous chaos is any person’s guess. The revelations of the irregularities led to this tsunami of violence which wiped away 1300 lives never to be seen again. According to Safeworld, a U.K based newspaper r, this was the ultimate end of social tensions that had built up slowly gaining intensity just like a volcano and the tension subsequently reached its snap point.
There are many theories that have been postulated to explain what crime is and why people engage in crime. One thing that the various sociologists and schools of thought have disagreed about is explaining what crime is. Positivists argue that crime is as a result of internal and external reasons beyond the control of the individual committing the crime. Utilitarians , the likes of Cesar beccaria and Jeremy Bentham argue that crime is as a result of rational choices and that man is a hedonistic creature who will weigh the costs incurred visa vis the benefits that accrue from such acts or omissions criminalized by the legal system.
In this case I would like to opine that I strongly believe that the best suited theory to explain the post election violence which crippled the economy that had been growing at a whooping rate of 7% per annum is the Marxist theory of criminology. Criminology tries to delve into the reasons as to why