| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
159444
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
“Zimbabwe’s politics continues to be driven by a generation that defines itself in terms of its contribution to the liberation war and remains committed to defending that legacy.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
061865
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
074913
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the politics of African states in which insurgencies or liberation movements have taken control of the government. It analyses the impact on governance of reforms introduced by these post-liberation regimes, their relations with traditional authorities and civil society and relationships within and between competing guerrilla movements. It interrogates the nature of the state that emerges from this process. The ‘post-liberation’ state label is argued to be both meaningful and useful, as part of a larger project of exploring and explaining the post-colonial African state, highlighting debates about representation, citizenship and nation building. While post-liberation regimes have advantages in implementing state building projects, they are also subject to contestation when the new state institutions and regime incumbents become too exclusivist or predatory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
138405
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Nationalism in Africa is often dismissed as artificial—not reflecting “real” nations, or, more cynically, organized by political elites solely to achieve and maintain power. Because of this presumed artificiality of national ties, at independence new states were seen as unlikely to survive, and cases of state collapse have been interpreted as proof that cynicism was merited.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|