Mystery of the Odingas: Capitalists in the night, ‘Communists’ by day!

I am not a fun of communism or socialism whichever way you may look at it despite the fact that I do accept capitalism has its weaknesses. Nevertheless, there is no system I know of that has lifted many out of poverty like capitalism. Enough of myself, I am here to write about the Odingas! Capitalism is simply an economic and political system whereby control of trade and industry is under profit-making private ownership rather than the state. When it comes to communism, ownership is with the community hence everyone contributes or receives based on their abilities or needs whereas socialism entails a political system that ensures all citizens have an equal allocation of state resources and social ownership of the means of production.

The fall out between Jaramogi Oginga Odinga the then Vice president and his boss President Jomo Kenyatta not long after Kenya’s independence threw the young state into an ideological battle of ‘East and West’ despite attempts to portray a non-aligned image in international affairs. Odinga’s questioning of Kenya’s move towards the west quickly provided room for Kenyatta to label him a communist sympathizer. A key concern for Odinga was why the Mau Mau or to a large extent the landless were being sidelined with most of the land the British relinquished going to Kenyatta’s cronies. According to John Howell’s analysis of Kenyan foreign policy, Odinga in a 1965 speech claimed that the British were working through Mr. Mboya and Mr. Ngala. Faith Mabera’s article titled Kenya’s foreign policy in context further opines that “Odinga’s engagement with communist patrons rattled the British, who were quick to label him as a threat that needed to be neutralised.”

Something to ponder, was Jaramogi Oginga Odinga really a communist? A few years have passed since I read Odinga’s biography “Not Yet Uhuru” and that of his son Raila “An Enigma in Kenyan Politics”, hopefully I can do justice to some of the arguments I do remember. First, the elder Odinga denied the charge that he was a communist sympathizer with both outlining that their business practices did not really reflect communist ideology but inclined more towards capitalism. During his time under house arrest, the elder Odinga claims that intelligence agencies planted a story in the Standard newspaper that there was an interception of trucks carrying weapons from the Chinese heading to his home in Kisumu as way of justifying his detention on top of feeding the communist narrative. It is important to note that the Standard had British owners at the time. However, circumstances of the break with KANU forced him to change course. The decision to engage with the East came when it was obviously difficult for his own children and those perceived to be pro-Odinga to get admission to higher education. Anyone who was suspected to be sympathetic to the Odingas was also disqualified from scholarships to study in the United States under the arrangement of Tom Mboya and Senator John F Kennedy. Pushed to the corner, he organized for the education of his sons and others in East Germany as well as Russia.

Raila Odinga’s political exploits are well known although what has not been covered much is his business acumen. Still, a lot of coverage has been given to East Africa Spectre, a gas cylinder manufacturer owned by the family. The Daily Nation has carried a story in the past of how Raila the second son of Odinga, made good use of his alliance with Moi in an arrangement where he served as the energy minister to give a new life to their struggling family business securing energy deals within Kenya and beyond. There is no doubt that their business interests run into billions, what is critical here is that their conduct of business is not a reflection of communism or socialism. The young Odinga has come out in defense of what he calls democratic socialism which I believe is just another fancy line for socialism. This idea has been pushed in the United States by the likes of Senator Bernie Sanders too and just like Odinga, he has amassed wealth through capitalism without necessarily sharing out. Never mind their charity contributions are wanting. So why would someone preaching socialism keep a lot of wealth to himself? The only answer is that they believe in capitalism but use socialism to excite voters in their pursuit of power.

This reminds me of the biblical Nicodemus who was a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin well known for their opposition to Jesus’ teachings yet he made night visits to listen to the Messiah signaling where his heart was. In their public statements, it is easy to conclude that the Odingas are communist but in their business practice there is hardly any evidence of communal sharing of profits and means of production. What is mysterious though, is that those who sought to ‘neutralise’ Jaramogi Oginga Odinga because of his perceived links to communism have now embraced his son. Whether they will ever trust him with the presidency is a story for another day.