<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<article article-type="research-article" xml:lang="en-US" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">global-journal-of-human-social-science-f-political-science</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Global Journal of Human-Social Science - F: Political Science</journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn publication-format="print">0975-587X</issn>
<issn publication-format="electronic">2249-460X</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>Global Journals Publishing Group Incorporated</publisher-name></publisher>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://globaljournals.org/journal-seo-export/jats/115786.xml" />
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">115786</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title>Kenya: Explaining State Fragility through the Absence of an Imperial Indegenous State Culture</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Maundeni</surname><given-names>Zibani</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1" />
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1">SOUTH AFRICA, University of Botswana</aff>
<pub-date publication-format="electronic" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2017-01-15">
<day>15</day>
<month>01</month>
<year>2017</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>17</volume>
<issue>F4</issue>
<abstract><p>That the Kenyan state is fragile in political terms is not in doubt. Kenya experiences high levels of political and ethnic rivalry, high possibilities of electoral violence, high levels of fraud, and a general failure to deliver quality services (including security) to the wider society. But, why has Kenya proved to be such a fragile country politically? In other words, what causes Kenya’s state fragility? This paper argues that Kenya’s fragility is primarily linked to the fact that the dominant group – the Kikuyu (Kenya’s economic and political powerhouse) – was historically inward looking, inserted itself as an equal to all other ethnic groups, and was exclusionist in its social culture. It also argues that the state cultures of the other ethnic groups were not any better in terms of aiding state building. This paper on Kenya’s political fragility looks at the pre-colonial state cultures of the main ethnic groups, tracing their continuities and discontinuities, and showing how they worked against the building of a coherent and stable state.</p></abstract>
<self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="https://globaljournals.org/GJHSS_Volume17/2-Kenya-Explaining-State-Fragility.pdf" />
<self-uri content-type="html" xlink:href="https://globaljournals.org/scholarly-articles/kenya-explaining-state-fragility-through-the-absence-of-an-imperial-indegenous-state-culture/" />
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec>
<title>Full Text</title>
<p>That the Kenyan state is fragile in political terms is not in doubt. Kenya experiences high levels of political and ethnic rivalry, high possibilities of electoral violence, high levels of fraud, and a general failure to deliver quality services (including security) to the wider society. But, why has Kenya proved to be such a fragile country politically? In other words, what causes Kenya’s state fragility? This paper argues that Kenya’s fragility is primarily linked to the fact that the dominant group – the Kikuyu (Kenya’s economic and political powerhouse) – was historically inward looking, inserted itself as an equal to all other ethnic groups, and was exclusionist in its social culture. It also argues that the state cultures of the other ethnic groups were not any better in terms of aiding state building. This paper on Kenya’s political fragility looks at the pre-colonial state cultures of the main ethnic groups, tracing their continuities and discontinuities, and showing how they worked against the building of a coherent and stable state.</p>
</sec>
</body>
</article>