Thesis (M.A.)--Boston University / Great Britain has adopted two definitive yet different political goals in Africa, each of which has been controlled in large part by the internal situation of the territories. In West Africa, colonial policy has granted power of decision to African political leadership, while in Central Africa, political authority has been given in large measure to the local European minority.
Contrasted to these two major decisions, Britain has not adopted specific definitive policy goals for Kenya. The general goal of self-government is too vague to be meaningful to the different members of its disparate multi-racial population. The immediate question is "self-government for whom?" To what racial or ethnic group does the 'self' refer? In West Africa it certainly meant Africans and in Central Africa it has meant Europeans. What accounts for the unwillingness of Britain to define specific and immediate policies in Kenya? It is believed that an answer to this problem through analysis of the internal political and social situation will reveal not only the distinct problems that Kenya poses for policy, but will suggest that the present policy of traditional empiricism may not be able to meet the critical problems of this territory. [TRUNCATED]
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bu.edu/oai:open.bu.edu:2144/23058 |
| Date | January 1957 |
| Creators | Smyke, Raymond Joseph |
| Publisher | Boston University |
| Source Sets | Boston University |
| Language | en_US |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis/Dissertation |
| Rights | Based on investigation of the BU Libraries' staff, this work is free of known copyright restrictions. |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds