A Ridiculous British Official, His Pregnant Dog and a Wise Bor Chief

Kuir ë Garang

"She wasn't a divine dog so everyone knew that where there is pregnancy coitus may have happened. No immaculate conception."

 

Photo: Encyclopedia Britannica

My dad used to relate this story about the ridiculousness of some British colonial officials. One incident was about an official’s dog. But what makes the story interesting was the response from a certain Bor chief. It was not only wise, but it was also debilitatingly logical. The rest of the chiefs reportedly acquiesced to the official. This chief did not.

Note that the details are sketchy as I’m remembering from my childhood. The story may not also be true as I assumed it may have been one of the stories exaggerated to make fun of the vile dictatorship of British officials. They had no respect for the local chiefs.

Those of you close to elders in South Sudan, please ask them about this story. We can get the name of the official, where the chief was from and the year.

The story goes like this. There was a cantankerous British official in Bor District, now the counties of Bor, Twi and Duk, with a dog he really loved. He did not like his dog fraternizing with local dogs. But then dogs are dogs and the natural was inevitable. His dog became pregnant. An ‘uncivilized’ dog had impregnated a ‘civilized dog’! That was an offence, an offence to civilization.

She wasn't a divine dog so everyone knew that where there is pregnancy coitus may have happened. No immaculate conception.

Unsurprisingly, the official was not pleased. He summoned the district chiefs because he wanted to know the owner of the dog and the offending dog. The official travelled throughout the district so the dog may have been impregnated by any dog from all the four communities.

Most of the chiefs, the story goes, were asked in turn and they promised to investigate the incident and find the offending dog. It was a ridiculous circus as the chiefs did not understand how they could be called because of a pregnant dog. But dictators always believed their truth must be accepted. Besides, the chiefs could not really oppose the colonial officials without reprisal. These officials acted like mini-gods against Africans.

But one brave Bor chief found the whole incident ridiculous. Being a wise man, he asked a logical, informed, and relevant question. He knew the consequences of opposing a colonial official, so he worded his response in a way the official found gagging to counter. He wanted to show how ridiculous the official case was, so he also countered with a ridiculous scenario of his own.

He said that this looks like a grievance case being brought before the chiefs for a solution. In Jieeng traditions, the chief said, a person who has a grievance must report it and then sit before the elders. The elders and chiefs would then deliberate about the merits of the case.

Since the dog is the one that was pregnant, the case should be between the pregnant dog and the offending dog, he said. The offending dog was not present, so the case was one-sided. They could not deliberate on it. He also wanted the official to sit before the elders as he was the one reporting the case. He could not dictate the terms of the case.

This caused stir and laughter among the chiefs. The official was not pleased, but he was challenged. African wisdom.  

From what I remember, the official found the chief response ridiculous. But that’s what the chief wanted the official to understand. How could the chiefs respond logically to an irrational person?

_________________________

Kuir ë Garang is the editor of the Philosophical Refugee. Follow him on Twitter @kuirthiy.

Ethnic Violence in South Sudan: Jieeng vs. Ethnic Groups in the Equatorias

By Kuir ë Garang 

 Transcript (Edited): 

The problem of ethnic divisions and ethnic feuds in South Sudan, and Africa generally, is something that has been studied a lot by Scholars whether they are African scholars or they are Western Scholars, the so-called Africanists. It's been studied.

And the mistake that many scholars tend to make is that the presence of different ethnic groups that have not been homogenized to build a nation is the problem. So, the presence of different ethnic groups with different languages and different cultures is the problem.

Scholars like Walter Rodney and Francis Mading Deng have [however] argued that the presence of different ethnic groups within a country, whether you're talking about Ethiopia or talking about Nigeria or talking about South Sudan or Kenya, the problem is lack of state infrastructure that can be used to ensure that state resources are distributed in a way that does not leave other ethnic groups with grievances. And also have in place state infrastructure that can resolve problems when they arise.

In South Sudan we have major ethnic groups like the Nuer and then the Jieeng who tend to dominate because of the numbers. That tends to make smaller ethnic groups wary of domination.

So, if there's no any state infrastructure put in place so that smaller tribes are taken care of or their grievances are addressed in a way that makes them comfortable, then there will always be problems. So it's a failure of the state, by the state, to put in place ways in which problems that arise can be resolved, then you will always have problems.

The problem within South Sudan is not that the tribes hate one another. The problem is that differences are politicized.

I lived in South Sudan. I lived among the Nuer; I lived among different ethnic groups, and I've seen their kindness. I've seen that the problem is not the people themselves. The problem is the social condition and the political setup they find themselves in.

So, what is happening between Jieeng and the local tribes in Equatoria now is the politicization of difference. It's also the problem of resources, the problem with spaces where people are saying “this is our ancestral land” and they feel they're not being listened to. They feel their source of livelihood is being destroyed.

So that tends to make people enter into a survivalist state. And when you push people into a survivalist mode, what they do, whatever they do when they kill people or they, you know, try to chase away people they feel like they're trying to protect their livelihoods. So they don't see any problem in what they're doing. They see it as protective.

Unless the state comes in to sort of intervene in a way that is fair, a way that satisfies whoever has grievances. That's the main problem.

The Jieeng people are in Equatoria not because they want to dominate. They are in the Equatorias because where they were born, their ancestral lands, are not safe. But then there's no, as I said, there's no sort of social infrastructure, political infrastructure, economic structure that has been put in place to ensure that the Jieeng who leave their own places and go to the Equatories live with the local people in a way that is respectful of the land, respectful of local people and then respectful of the local people's economies.

That is not being done. And it has reached a point now where it's almost impossible to resolve. But I don't think anything is impossible to resolve. But the government is not strategizing in a way that can resolve this problem.

But the problem in South Sudan now is not ethnic differences. It's the failure of the state to put in place ways to make sure that grievances are addressed. If nothing is done and the same sentiments we have now continue, then it's going to create a situation where people will be insecure.

If you travel for example now from Juba to the town of Bor, or from Juba to Yei, or from Juba to Nimule, you're most likely going to be shot at. People are afraid.

But one of the things I want to advise South Sudanese is: It's easy, and it's different, sometimes it's actually satisfying, to say something when you are offended or you feel your people are being oppressed to say something, to say whatever you want to say.

But here's what I beg from you. When you make another ethnic group unsafe then you make your own group unsafe. You cannot say "you know what I'm going to kill these people and then I'm going to sleep soundly and comfortably and safe." No, you can't.

So, the only way to resolve, the only way for you to sleep safely, is to make sure that other ethnic groups do not have negative attitudes towards you. That's the only way.

But the moment you say you want to go and fight or go and attack other tribes, what will they do? They'll still come and attack you. And [it] becomes counter, you know, attacks and counter-attacks and the people become unsafe. That's not going to help anyone.

But sometimes it makes us feel good to stop to sort of say things against the people who feel have hurt us. We say whatever we want to say. But then it comes back to us.

_____________________

Kuir ë Garang is the editor of the TPR.