During the colonial period (1885- 1989), Namibians witnessed many years in which their lives were dehumanised by the German and South African colonial masters.
During this period, black Namibians were declared non-existent (fictional or imaginary human beings or mere objects) and their land declared uninhabited in keeping with the European racist arrogance.
Colonisers felt that democracy and rational thinking were not suited for Namibians (Moleah, 1983).
During this period, the colonial governments had an upper hand on the socio-economic affairs of the people by oppressing them and ruling their country against their will.
Over the past centuries, the Anglo- Saxons, Gauls and Teutons of England, France and Germany developed the weaponry, logistics and tactics to conquer and colonise the land, knowledge and minds of the indigenous peoples of Africa.
In addition to colonising African land, Europeans also colonised African knowledge, not just to claim it as their own, but to disconnect Africans from their heritage and culture.
In echoing this sentiment, Ajamu (1997) calls this process ‘intellectual colonialism.’
Hotep (2003) states that this imposition has been more pronounced among the Christianised, Western-trained African intellectuals.
In this vein and era, kleptocracy, which means rule by thieves, was hatched and nursed throughout the colonial period.
Kleptocracy, as a form of government, is when those in power exploit their positions to steal and embezzle the country’s resources and wealth for selfish gain.
In a kleptocracy, corrupt leaders enrich themselves at the expense of the public, leading to widespread poverty and economic decline among the people despite abundant national resources in the country.
In essence, kleptocracy evokes the image of a country whose foundation is rooted in corruption, where those in power use state mechanisms not for governance, justice or progress, but for personal enrichment.
In addition, kleptocracy is not just a later development, but it is embedded from the outset and well-advocated and planned.
From its inception, institutions are designed and allowed to facilitate theft, bribery and exploitation, in which national identity, political culture and leadership are shaped by corruption, nepotism and crony capitalism.
In many instances, corruption at an advanced level is there for everyone to see, as the perpetrators of kleptocracy cannot hide their largesse.
In other words, kleptocratic activities are done in broad daylight.
The corrupt are seen driving very expensive vehicles without explanation and may possess valuable merchandise they acquired through illegal means.
To understand the kleptocratic form of government, it is important to understand the key features of a kleptocratic nation, such as elite capture at birth.
In this case, founding leaders consolidate wealth through state assets, land grabs or foreign aid siphoning while revolutionary and liberation movements turn authoritarian and self-serving once in power.
Institutionalised corruption, on the other hand, points to a situation where there is no separation of powers, as the judiciary, police and military serve the ruling elite.
In efforts to fool the nation and act as if the authority is bent on fighting corruption, anti-corruption agencies may be established, but, in reality, they exist only symbolically.
The anti-corruption agencies may only victimise the so-called ‘small fish’ while leaving the bigger ones still swimming in the sea.
In many African countries, foreign exploitation complicity is common, where foreign powers and corporations extract resources with the blessing of corrupt leaders, who are paid ‘peanuts’ at the expense of the suffering citizens.
In many situations, the money paid by the foreign exploitative nations, aid and loans, funds private luxuries, not public services. The system is so corrupt that it becomes a survival of the fittest.
Through public cynicism and survivalism, citizens may adapt through informal economies, bribery and patronage networks.
Trust in democratic values is low because the state has never modelled them. Although it is difficult to come up with statistics of the amount and value of natural resources siphoned by these colonial powers, it can be said with certainty that Namibia was looted and her resources taken and stashed in foreign lands and banks to service those nations.
This process is espoused by Rodney (1973) in his book ‘How Europe Underdeveloped Africa’, where he explicitly explains how the colonial powers looted the resources of Africa to build their empires.
In a similar vein, this led Mazrui (1986) to question the civility of Europeans who first came to Africa to civilise and educate Africans, ending in underdeveloping the continent.
He emphasises that it was Europeans who were supposed to be civilised and educated instead of the Africans, because of the heinous crimes they committed against Africans in their own countries.
Namibia, as a new nation, was born in 1990 in such a kleptocratic situation with nationalist leaders who fled the country and brought freedom back home.
One would have thought that kleptocracy would be nipped in its buds immediately after Independence, but alas, the political campaigns and manifestos were simply smokescreens for corruption.
Although it is difficult to calculate exactly all the money which is being stashed under the carpet, the kleptocratic system in some quarters in this country has continued unabated.
This can be witnessed by the millions of dollars which have been disappearing without a trace and the failure to repossess the money and freeze the accounts of those who stole from the masses.
Imagine if all the millions siphoned during the pre-and post-colonial period were ploughed back into the country.
Surely, Namibia would become the Garden of Eden.
*Prof. Makala Lilemba is an academician, author and scholar.