"Etuk has been indefatigable in his profound determination for African revolution as admonished not only in this piece but also in his other works."
-Adams O. Adah, Founder of Impart Africa, author of Service

As Africa begins her journey into the twenty-fi rst century, the citizens ask: how can we survive? In Listen Africans! A Revolution is Coming, author Emma Samuel Etuk addresses the question of revolution-a fundamental change to the basic fabric of society-and its historical manifestations.

Through thorough research, Etuk presents strong arguments about the need for change in the social, political, economic, and religious life of Africans. He contends that an array of issues has brought the continent to this point, including broken promises by administrators and governments; poverty and widespread hunger; angry youth and unemployment; official corruption, insensitivity, and kleptocracy; tyranny, despotism, and dictatorships; state-sponsored terrorism; infrastructural decay; and environmental pollution. As Etuk uses these examples and makes a call for a revolution, he provides a backdrop by discussing the following:

• Origin of revolutions
• Necessity for an African revolution
• Theological basis for a revolution
• Five kinds of revolutions
• Lessons learned from the six major revolutions of the past
• Preparation for a revolution

Etuk maintains that change is necessary in life and that it is up to the Africans to decide what kind of revolution they should adopt in order to affect change on their continent.

Listen Africans! A Revolution Is Coming

Why It Must Come and How We Should Deal with ItBy Emma Samuel Etuk

iUniverse, Inc.

Copyright © 2010 Emma Samuel Etuk
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4502-7734-1

Contents

Acknowledgments................................................................ixForeword.......................................................................xiiiIntroduction...................................................................xix1. A Definition For Revolution.................................................12. The Origin Of Revolution....................................................83. The Necessity For An African Revolution.....................................144. Theological Basis For African Revolution....................................295. Five Kinds Of Revolutions...................................................406. Learning From Hebrew, English & American Revolutions........................587. Learning From French, Russian & Chinese Revolutions.........................848. Decolonization – Africa's First Modern Revolution.....................1149. Preparing Ourselves For The Coming African Revolution.......................12410. Conclusion.................................................................131Notes..........................................................................135Selected Bibliography..........................................................159About The Author...............................................................177Index..........................................................................179

Chapter One

A Definition For Revolution

The problem associated with the definition of the term, revolution, is similar to that of defining the word pornography, of which it has been said that there is hardly any adequate and satisfactory definition. But when you see it, you know what it is. When a revolution occurs and you see it, you know what it is.

In the past, there have been many attempts to define the word, revolution. But I would like to begin here with Chairman Mao Tsetung's (1893-1976) often-quoted statement that "a revolution is not a dinner party. It cannot be so kind, so refined." Mao went on to say that "a revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another."

Mao's definition implies that any fundamental change in society resulting from a revolution has to come by the barrels of a gun. Understood in this way, every kind of revolution involves sweat and bloodshed. But even before Mao's definition, other kinds of definitions of revolution existed. We can consider that of the historian, Crane Brinton, whose book, The Anatomy of Revolution, first appeared in 1938 and was republished in 1952 and 1965. It is now a classic.

In his book, Brinton admitted that a "revolution is one of the looser words," but he added that "at one end of the spectrum of the meanings revolution has come in common usage to be hardly more than an emphatic synonym for 'change,' perhaps with a suggestion of sudden or striking change." "Obviously in present usage," Brinton wrote, "the word 'revolution' is a class term covering quite a number of concrete phenomena."

In her book, On Revolution (1963), Hannah Arendt (1906-1975), perhaps the most read author on this subject, examined the principles which underlie all revolutions. She contended that revolutions are not about "mere changes" but are about bringing into existence "something altogether new." A revolution, she wrote, is about "a complete change of society," like "the emancipation of the slavish part of all mankind all over the earth."

In the view of Arendt, the most important element in a revolution is "to change the fabric of society." She noted that "all modern revolutions are essentially Christian in origin, and this even when their professed faith is atheism." This is interesting since I have contended that the first revolution occurred in heaven where God abides.

Arendt added this statement:

The modern concept of revolution [is] inextricably bound up with the notion that the course of history suddenly begins anew, that an entirely new story, a story never known or told before, is about to unfold ...

Also, Arendt insisted that "crucial ... to any understanding of revolutions in the modern age is that the idea of freedom and the experience of a new beginning should coincide." "It is not only our understanding of revolution," she stated, "but our conception of freedom." Chapter One of her book, covering 38 pages, is devoted to an analysis of "the Meaning of Revolution."

Regarding the American Revolution, Arendt observed that "no historian will ever be able to tell the tale of our century without stringing it 'on the thread of revolutions.'" It is valuable to add that Arendt provided some insights into the nature of revolutions after her publication of The Origins of Totalitarianism, in 1948. This book was posthumously republished in 1976.

Karl Marx (1818-1883), who was a keen observer of human society and of political changes, also had a definition for revolution. In an analysis provided by Michael Lowy, one of Marx's biographers, Marx described a socialist revolution as a political revolution with a social soul, thus:

Revolution in general – the overthrow of the existing power and dissolution of the old relationships – is a political act . But socialism cannot be realized without revolution. It needs this political act insofar as it needs destruction and dissolution. But where its organizing activity begins, where its proper object, its soul comes to the fore – there socialism throws off the political cloak.

Hence, for Marx, like with Mao, revolution was primarily about the overthrow, destruction and dissolution of an existing or old socio-political order. It was about the class struggles within a society. The Marxian conception of revolution was fully expressed by the publication of the Communist Manifesto in 1848. The "dictatorship of the proletariat" was the eventful triumph of the class struggles through violence.

In 1971, Dr. Vernon C. Grounds published his book, Revolution and the Christian Faith. The introduction of the book was written by Senator Mark O. Hatfield from the state of Oregon. Dr. Grounds provided different meanings of the word, revolution, including an analysis of the origin of the term. Chapter One of the book is titled, "Total Revolution."

In his book, Dr. Grounds pointed out that the term revolution was originally an astronomical word, "which gained increasing importance in the natural sciences ..." and he added:

In this scientific usage it retained its precise Latin meaning, designating the regular, lawfully, revolving motion of the stars, which, since it was known to be beyond the influences of man and hence irresistible, was certainly characterized neither by newness nor by violence. On the contrary, the word clearly indicates a recurring, cyclical movement.

Dr. Grounds then stated that "nothing could be farther from the original meaning of the word ... than the idea of which all revolutionary actors have been possessed and obsessed, namely, that they are agents in a process which spells the definite end of an old order and brings about the birth of a new world."

I wish, with all my heart, that all current and future revolutionaries kept faith with the original meaning of the term. But, this, in reality, is only a wishful thinking. The association of revolutions with violence and destruction – the Marxian and Mao's conceptions of the term — have come to stay, carrying with them the bloodiness and carnage of modern warfare!

Grounds defined a "literal revolution" as "the deliberate use of terror and violence in an attempt to disrupt, subvert, and destroy the whole established order, replacing it with some new form of government and way of life." This phrase, "way of life," is quite significant. For, a coup-de-tat may violently bring forth a new form of government but not necessarily a "new way of life," or a revolution.

Furthermore, Grounds cited one of his former professors at Rutgers University, Everett Dean Martin, author of the book, Farewell to Revolution (1935), in which Martin contended that a revolution is "a social earthquake ... a barbarian invasion and conquest ... the supreme exhibition of mob violence." In his reaction to Martin, Grounds contended that a revolution is "a futile tragedy and a tragic futility."

Dr. Grounds also added that judged by Martin's criterion, "the ten great revolutions of history" constituted "a drama of delusion." "Only a moronic sadist," Grounds said, "would dream of fomenting armed insurrection in our day."

I have already cited the views of Hannah Arendt whose work Dr. Grounds described as "magisterial." But Grounds also wrote about Paul Hutchinson, author of the book, World Revolution and Religion (1931) who "saw and foresaw revolution occurring politically, industrially, socially, racially and religiously."

Going ahead of myself, I believe that it is safe to add here that revolutions can be culturally, intellectually and scientifically understood. After all, Bernard Bailyn, the American intellectual historian, saw the American Revolution as an ideological revolution while Charles Beard, another historian, saw it purely as an economic revolution.

Dr. Grounds mentioned Richard Shaull who, in the 1970s, was a professor of Ecumenics at Princeton Theological Seminary, in New Jersey. Shaull is quoted as saying that "revolution is to be our [American] destiny." This statement is not surprising because any ardent student of American history would have realized that the United States has already gone through three revolutions.

There was the hostile and violent break with Britain in the 1770s – the first revolution. Then, there was the Civil War of 1860 to 1865 – the second American revolution. There was the era of the Civil Rights Movement – the third American revolution. I believe the U.S. is now at the threshold of its fourth revolution, especially with the upheavals precipitated by the Iraqi and Afghan wars under President George Bush.

An interesting aspect of our search for the meaning of the term revolution is Vernon Grounds's notion of what he calls "the phenomenon of total revolution," an idea which he shares with such authors like Richard Shaull, John A. T. Robinson of the Honest to God fame, Richard John Neuhaus and John McHale, author of the book, The Future of the Future (1968).

In particular is Grounds's reference to Neuhaus, who wrote as follows:

We are for revolution. A revolution of consciousness, no doubt. A cultural revolution, certainly. A non-violent revolution, perhaps. An armed overthrow of the existing order, it may be necessary. Revolution for the hell of it or revolution for a new world, but revolution, yes.

But Grounds cautioned against our being the prototype of Rip Van Winkle of Sleepy Hollow fame, or King George III of England, both of whom were the victims of "a somnolent complacency," sleeping while a revolution was going on in the New World. We should, rather, be "insurrectionists in the name of God."

We should not think that Grounds meant that one should become a radical, fundamentalist, Islamic Jihadist, ready to blow up innocent children at school or patients in a hospital, all for the sake of a revolution. I believe that what Grounds meant was that our lives must be revolutionary as to affect change, fundamental change for good in another person's life. This is the transformation of "the human environment and of man himself...."

We ought to understand that the sciences, technologies, economies, religion and political institutions may change. But if there is no transformation of the human soul and spirit, our civilization will remain the same or even worse, with all its perils, faults, omissions and commissions of cruelty and barbarisms. This is the kind of revolutionary change which I want for my motherland – Africa.

As I have stated elsewhere, I am not a hard-nosed capitalist, communist, socialist or welfarist. I am for beauty within the spirit, decency, fairness, love and the treatment of our fellow human being as our brother or sister. We may have all the money that we want to and build all the skyscrapers that we can. But without some virtues and values, we labor in vain and Africa will continue to be plagued by her many vicissitudes.

Grounds pointed to Karl Marx's statement that a revolution is "the locomotive of all history." Virtues, as the history of man has shown, comprise the fuel for the locomotive of history. My motto for an African revolution is: peace, love and freedom. When Thomas Kanza wrote in 1978 that Africa must change, he called his work "an African Manifesto."

Africans need to understand what kind of revolution is necessary for their sustainable development in the future. Africans must change for the sake of peace, love and freedom. Africa cannot forever be lost in the abyss of blind or crude traditionalism – good or bad. In this exercise toward a definition for revolution, I urge Africans to embrace a revolutionary change that is vital and meaningful for human survival.

The African world revolution, as historian John Henrik Clarke called it, must be what Grounds termed a total revolution which embraced all of the areas of the African life: marriage and family, culture, religion, education, economics, militarism, nationhood, ethnicity, race, and foreign or international relations and trade. African revolution must include our view of the African man and woman and their views of or responses to exploitation, prosperity, materialism and their destinies.

In one of my earliest publications, I had argued that Africans cannot and should not continue to be the world's perpetual survivalists. We ought to grow and move fast beyond that level to become actualists – a race of people who have arrived, like the Jews, and are making it at the center of the global village.

We Africans ought to discover the relevant and proper meaning of the term, revolution, not that which will bring to us racial suicide but definitely that which will take us to a new place beyond the Afro-pessimism of the present.

This is what I yearn for myself and for my two wonderful children, and my grandchildren. I believe that the Barack Obama revolution has brought into focus our present and future perspectives regarding the meaning of an African revolution. What is left is how we must sustain this kind of revolution without bloodshed.

In the chapter that follows, I will attempt to examine the origin of a different kind of revolution, namely, the celestial revolution, which is my justification for daring to talk about an African revolution.

Chapter Two

The Origin Of Revolution

Before the dawn of what we now know as human history, there was a revolution – a celestial revolution — the first ever recorded story of a revolution with great cosmic consequences and significance. Here is a succinct and brief account of it in the Bible (Revelation 12: 7-9):

And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. The great dragon was hurled down – that ancient serpent called the devil or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

In this very short but precise and descriptive narrative, we find the ingredients for a revolution. First, there was a clash of interests (Isaiah 14: 12-17), with no one party willing to compromise or yield to the opposition. Then, there was a clash of authority or power. The two contending powers or authorities could not co-exist. Either one wanted to remain in complete power and, as the text above indicates, the devil sought to usurp heavenly power . The result was war.

Second, there was a threat to the status quo. In the infinite wisdom of God Almighty, the devil or Satan was embattled and defeated. God triumphed over Satan. This defeat of Satan led to his expulsion from the celestial realm. Satan and his forces, comprising about a third of the angelic beings that existed at the time, were forced to retreat to planet earth. They have been here ever since that expulsion. Thus, a fundamental change had occurred.

Third, we may never know with certainty why God and this archangel, Michael did not completely annihilate Satan and his evil forces but allowed them to retreat to our planet. What is obvious is that there was war in heaven where God is supposed to reign as sovereign. God's forces overthrew the rebels. That war created an opportunity for Satan to transact his diabolical plans and schemes against God and man.

It may be difficult for the average man to conceive of a rebellion or a revolution in heaven. But the Bible says so. Today, more than a billion professing Christians believe the Bible. In another Bible passage, the motive for that ancient rebellion is provided. Satan's motives for rebellion did not emerge from some pure and virtuous impulses (see Ezekiel 28: 12-19).

Rather, Satan's motives came out of vices such as pride, arrogance, envy, jealousy, selfishness and intolerance. In a word, Satan's motives came from sin. Ezekiel 28: 15 reads: "You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you." Verse 17 of this chapter reads: "Your heart became proud on account of your beauty, and you corrupted your wisdom because of your splendor." There, we have it.

Satan was definitely a created being like many of us. He was a highly exalted being until his ambitions corrupted him. Verses 12 to 17 of Isaiah 14 tell us more:

How have you fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven, I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of the assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.'"

(Continues...)

Excerpted from Listen Africans! A Revolution Is Comingby Emma Samuel Etuk Copyright © 2010 by Emma Samuel Etuk. Excerpted by permission of iUniverse, Inc.. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.