← RAMBLE in the JUNGLE: Debating Africa and the World

RAMBLE in the JUNGLE · Textbook · Unit 3: The Cameroons: History, Freedom and Institutions

Issue 3.2

Does Freedom Depend on a Strong National Government?

YESEditorial counterpoint, Freedom Needs a Strong Centre, Too (written for this book)
NOWanaku Verdzekov, Doctrine of Freedom in the Cameroons Crisis (2024)

Learning outcomes

After reading this issue, you should be able to:

Explain the author's "Doctrine of Freedom" and the idea of self-rule.
Define decentralization, federalism and subsidiarity.
Evaluate when local and when national government is better suited to a task.
Identify claims that need evidence in a persuasive essay.
Write a reasoned argument about how power should be shared.

Introduction

If you are new to the Cameroons. Cameroon is a country in Central Africa, on the Gulf of Guinea, bordering Nigeria. It was a German colony from 1884. After the First World War it was divided: about four-fifths went to France and one-fifth, on the Nigerian border, to Britain. The British part was run together with Nigeria. In 1961, after a UN vote, the northern part of the British territory joined Nigeria and the southern part ("Southern Cameroons") joined the newly independent, French-speaking Republic of Cameroun in a federation. In 1972 the federation was replaced by a single, centralized state. Today, English is the main official language in the two western regions and French in the other eight. Since 2016, a conflict in the English-speaking regions has pitted separatist groups, who call the territory "Ambazonia", against government forces. See Appendix A for a full timeline.

Local and national power. Around the world, countries share power between central and local government in different ways. In a unitary state, most power sits with the central government. In a federation (such as Nigeria, the United States or Switzerland), regions have constitutionally protected powers. Decentralization means moving powers and money from the centre to regions or municipalities. The European Union uses the principle of subsidiarity: decisions should be taken as close to citizens as possible. In 2019, Cameroon passed a law giving the two English-speaking regions a "special status" and more regional powers; critics said it did not go far enough.

The author, Wanaku Verdzekov, supports self-rule for the former Southern Cameroons. In this 2024 essay she argues that freedom begins with citizens taking responsibility at their own doorstep, and that arguments about language and marginalization distract from this.

As you read, ask: Which problems are best solved by a family or village, and which need a national government?

YES

Freedom Needs a Strong Centre, Too

Editorial counterpoint Written for this book, not by Wanaku Verdzekov.

This essay was written for this textbook to present the opposing side fairly. It is not by Wanaku Verdzekov.

Wanaku Verdzekov's essay has a simple and attractive message: freedom starts at your own doorstep. No government will sweep your yard, so take responsibility and govern yourselves. There is wisdom in this. Communities that organize themselves solve many problems faster than any distant ministry. But freedom that stops at the village boundary is fragile. It also needs things that only a strong, fair central state can provide.

Rights need protectors beyond the village

Local communities are not always free inside. A chief, a wealthy family or a majority group can abuse a minority, a woman, a stranger or a critic, and local institutions may take their side. In such cases, the victim needs somewhere else to turn: a national court, a constitution, a human-rights commission. In the United States, for example, it took federal courts and national laws in the 1950s and 1960s to end racial segregation that some states defended as their local right. Local self-rule without national protection can become local oppression.

Some problems are bigger than any community

Many of the things that make freedom possible, such as vaccines, highways, electricity grids, a stable currency and defence against armed groups, work only at a large scale. A village can sweep its yard but cannot build a hospital that trains surgeons, or negotiate trade deals. In other Rambles, the author calls for Ambazonia to have its own currency and central bank, which shows that even self-rule needs strong shared institutions above the local level.

Language and marginalization are not just distractions

The author calls arguments about English and French, and about marginalization, "smokescreens". But for many citizens they are the substance of freedom. If you cannot read the law that governs you, speak to a judge in your own language, or get a fair chance at a government job, you are not fully free, however well your village runs its affairs. These grievances were at the heart of the 2016 protests by lawyers and teachers. Fixing them requires national reform, not only local initiative.

Local power can be captured

Decentralization often hands power to local elites rather than to ordinary people. Studies of local government in many countries have found that when money and power are moved to regions, local politicians can become as corrupt as national ones, with less media attention and fewer checks. Self-rule needs transparency, elections, courts and a free press at every level.

Balance, not choice

Many successful countries combine strong local self-government with a strong centre. Switzerland's cantons and communes decide a great deal for themselves, but the federal state protects rights, runs the army and manages the currency. The principle of subsidiarity, used in the European Union, says decisions should be taken at the lowest level that can handle them well, and at higher levels when they cannot.

Conclusion

Freedom does begin at the doorstep, as the author says. But it does not end there. A person is free when their village lets them live as they choose and when a fair state stands behind them if their village does not. Self-rule and a strong, just centre are partners, not rivals.

— Editorial counterpoint

Doctrine of Freedom in the Cameroons Crisis (2024)

By Wanaku Verdzekov

At the end of each day, for every citizen, whether they realize it or not, the Doctrine of Freedom is rooted in self-rule.

Once citizens understand that no one, not even the government, is coming to:

sweep their yard,
cut the grass on their farms,
protect or preserve their sources of food and water,
design or build their homes,
make comfortable beds for their children…

once they grasp that it is their right to make decisions for themselves as a:

family,
community,
district,
state, nation, tribe or kingdom,

it becomes clear that what really matters is self-rule.

This understanding renders many other arguments in the Cameroons crisis moot:

English vs French divisions,
accusations of marginalization,
appointments to government posts.

These issues pale beside the fundamental need to regain the power of self-rule, starting from each citizen's doorstep and extending into the community and national spaces. Real freedom begins at home. That's why politics, at its core, is local.

Of course, some people might be seeking something different. That's their concern. It does not change the essential truth about self-rule: citizens taking responsibility for their own welfare and deciding how they want to govern themselves.

If this doesn't happen, then expect to be ruled by others. That reflects a lack of confidence in citizens' ability to manage their own "business". When a people cannot manage their own affairs, others (who can) will. That's exactly what happened during colonization, and it continues today.

It is unfortunate that some communities still have self-governing systems that are now mere skeletons, weakened because colonial systems dismantled them, pillaged resources and replaced them with foreign institutions. These colonial structures have prolonged colonization, physically and mentally, to the point where the Doctrine of Freedom seems like something to import from overseas.

Breaking news: freedom is at every citizen's doorstep. We simply need to pick it up, dust off the colonial years, and move forward.

Colonization is not a charitable act; colonization is slavery.

The antidote to all forms of colonial tendency is self-rule: real self-rule, not a pretend post-colonial fanfare of sandcastle projects. Every human is capable of self-rule. It's not as complicated as some might make it seem. It comes down to a family, a people or a community enabling themselves to live as decently as they see fit, within their own means.

The idea that a benefactor will descend from the sky and magically solve a community's problems is a pipe dream. It won't happen.

In conclusion, the struggles of the people of the formerly colonized British Southern Cameroons, now under the French system of the former French Cameroun government, present different realities for different people. Some explain the fighting, killing, looting, stealing, rape, arrests and imprisonments by pointing to issues like French vs English, or the marginalization of Anglophones.

But these are distractions: smokescreens hiding the true power that citizens need to reclaim from the remnants of colonial control. Many African countries have not yet moved away from the systems and institutions that colonized them.

This leads to the question: who is ruling whom, again?

Refrain: the Doctrine of Freedom begins at the doorstep, with self-rule. Most local communities already have the framework in place. They just need to nourish it, and it will thrive.

Before you leave home in the morning, ask yourself: are you free? Are you self-governing? Is your community ruling itself?

If not, why not?

The Doctrine of Freedom is a state of mind.

— Wanaku Verdzekov

Written in September 2024; lightly edited for this book.

Vocabulary

Word or phrase	Meaning in the readings
doctrine	a set of beliefs or principles
self-rule	governing oneself or one's own community
moot	no longer worth arguing about
marginalization	pushing a group away from power and resources
pillage	to steal by force
antidote	something that cures or counteracts
benefactor	someone who gives help or money
smokescreen	something that hides the truth
decentralization	moving power from the centre to local levels
segregation	forced separation of groups, especially by race
subsidiarity	taking decisions at the lowest level able to handle them
canton	a self-governing region of Switzerland

Comprehension questions

Literal (find it in the text)

Where, according to the author, is the Doctrine of Freedom rooted?
Which arguments does the author say become "moot"?
What does the author say colonization is?
What example from the United States does the counterpoint give?
Which country does the counterpoint give as an example of balancing local and central power?

Inferential (read between the lines)

Why does the author say "politics, at its core, is local"?
According to the author, what happens when a people cannot manage their own affairs?
Why does the counterpoint mention the author's wish for an Ambazonian central bank?
Why does the counterpoint say language grievances are "the substance of freedom" for many citizens?

Critical (evaluate and respond)

Make a list of five public services. For each, decide whether it is best run by a village, a region or a nation. Explain your choices.
Is the author right that language and marginalization are distractions? Use evidence from the introduction and both readings.
Write your own one-sentence "doctrine of freedom". Explain it.

Is there common ground?

Both writers agree that citizens should take responsibility, that distant governments cannot solve every local problem, and that colonial-style centralized systems have caused harm. The counterpoint accepts that "freedom does begin at the doorstep".

They disagree about whether local self-rule is enough. The author treats it as the heart of freedom, with other issues as distractions. The counterpoint argues that freedom also needs national protections, large-scale services and attention to language and fairness.

A middle ground is the principle of subsidiarity: local communities decide what they can handle well, while a fair national framework protects rights and delivers what only scale can deliver.

Debate and writing prompt

Debate motion: This house believes that freedom depends on a strong national government.

Divide the class into proposition and opposition. Each side must use at least two pieces of evidence from its reading and answer the other side's strongest point.
After the debate, hold a vote, then discuss which arguments changed minds.

Writing task: (400–600 words) Write an essay titled "What freedom means in my community". Describe one problem your community solved itself, and one it could not solve without a larger government. Use the readings to explain what that shows about freedom.