Talk:Mau Mau rebellion

Updating the Page

I will be updating this page from recent books written by the Mau Mau generals and solders who participated in this war. Mwenemucii (talk) 08:13, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I support a revision of this article. To me, it comes across as a political science essay by a radical student rather than an encyclopedia article. Much of the writing seems to present an opinion. Surely a neutral point of view is possible if editors can put aside their preconceptions and back up every statement.

When you refer to books “written by the Mau Mau generals and solders”, do you mean books written by Mau Mau generals and Mau Mau soldiers? Or is it Mau Mau generals and all soldiers (both Mau Mau and their opponents)? Does the article already cite books by generals other than Mau Mau?

I don’t understand the purpose of the quotation boxes. If the information is important, it ought to be part of the text. If it isn’t important, it is placard-waving and I don’t think it should be there at all.

Here is an example of an essay statement which I think needs several citations: The official British explanation [REF] of the revolt did not include [POV] the insights of agrarian and agricultural experts, of economists and historians, or even of Europeans who had spent a long period living amongst the Kikuyu such as Louis Leakey. Not for the first time,[92] the British instead relied [REF] on the purported insights of the ethnopsychiatrist; with Mau Mau, it fell to Dr. John Colin Carothers [REF] to perform the desired analysis. [REF] - While I’m inclined to question reference 92, I have not read it so I cannot say whether “not for the first time” needs more explanation.

Good luck. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 01:34, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

On page 43 of his Book The Wretched of the Earth, Frantz Fanon reports Kenyan victims as 200,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tracymacl (talk • contribs) 13:12, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

An interesting figure from a foreign observer (who perpetuates the puzzling habit of adding 0's to official figures ... why is that ... laziness?): A victim is usually regarded as a casualty ancillary to the conflict (not a combatant). Does he make that distinction and then make a determination as to how many were killed by Kenyan Authorities (Village Guards, Police, KR), British Forces and the Mau-Mau? 144.134.99.146 (talk) 20:17, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Time to decolonize

It's time this article gets a thorough cleaning. Fortunately a good-faith IP editor removed this tripe a while ago, but there is more to be done. Right now I'm looking to see who put that extension in the infobox listing the "Civilian Victims of the Mau Mau"--as if that matters more than whatever the Brits did. How many did they stuff in concentration camps, and how many people were killed, and women raped? No, that section should go as essentially POV. Drmies (talk) 16:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

That sentiment has already made this article worthless as a source for Mau-Mau studies.

If an incident occurred (or a pattern of incidents occurred as an established strategy) then that ought to be recorded. It's called 'History'. If 'decolonisation' means whitewashing (excuse the inverted pun) and embellishing a particular point of view then that's something other than History. I (and many others) have noted that Wikipedia has become the sounding board for Pan-African propaganda (almost always sourcing from non-Africans) and you're well entitled to play that game if you want. The trouble with doing that however is that you are going to discredit yourself (and whatever virtues you assume you have) in the visage of future generations.

The initial game-plan of the Mau-Mau called for the genocide of white Kenyans which they failed to do (the Mau-Mau never had more than a modicum of support and many Kenyan tribes distrusted the motives of the Kikuyu (with good reason)). It is notable that some members of the Mau-Mau given over to Pan-African zeal would later take this game-plan to Zanzibar where they initiated the planned genocide of the Asian and Arab populace (killing by some estimates 20,000 of them in a couple of days).

Jomo Kenyatta and Julius Nyerere were extremely wary of Pan-Africans, arresting (and in some cases murdering them) at various stages during their respective rules. This only changed when Kibaki started to pander to them for two reasons: 1) The children of the elites had been infected by this disease during 'education' in the USA and brought it back and 2) surprise, surprise ... there was money (and easy virtue) to be made in it.

If you are going to do History then you have to take what the participants did at face value and evaluate them in that light. Anything else is ... well, I guess whatever it is that African Studies Departments in the USA/UK do! 2001:8003:70F5:2400:9AC:3EE5:DA86:8D07 (talk) 14:21, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Do the people writing this know anything about Kenya?

From the opening:

"Dominated by the Kikuyu people, Meru people and Embu people, the KLFA also comprised units of Kamba and Maasai peoples who fought against the white European colonist-settlers in Kenya, the British Army, and the local Kenya Regiment (British colonists, local auxiliary militia, and pro-British Kikuyu people)."

A few individuals from the Kamba may have participated in the KLFA/Mau-Mau but the overwhelming majority did not.

The paragraph mentions the Kenyan Regiment but not stunningly (and perhaps tellingly), the main ground forces of Kenya; regiments of the KAR which were heavily populated by Wakamba whom the British regarded as among Kenya's martial peoples (along with the Maasai, Samburu, Somalis, ...). The KAR consisted almost entirely of indigenous Africans with a British Officer cadre.

Asides from the recalled Kenyan Regiment; Kenyan colonials, apart from forming Home Guard units for local-area patrols (typically at night after work) did not broadly speaking engage in the conflict other than occasionally being victims of it. Incidentally, people of British origin only constituted around 3/4 of the European colonial population in Kenya at that time and if you include colonials of Asian-origin, they probably did not even constitute a majority of colonials.

The Maasai and Kikuyu have a long history of conflict and to infer they were working together is disingenuous (actually, laughable). Their most recent animosity stemmed from the Rinderpest infestations of the 19th century which had severely weakened the Maasai. The Kikuyu took advantage of this, raiding the Maasai and on occasions selling their women into slavery (and yet officially the Kikuyu 'never' sold slaves). The one tribe in Kenya that was notorious for raiding and selling slaves; the Kamba, also had long-standing animus with most surrounding tribes in Kenya for obvious reasons.

To misrepresent the constituents of the opposing forces and to suggest that because a few individuals from tribes may have been with the KLFA infers support from these tribal groups is a complete distortion of the landscape from the outset!

... and what on earth is a "colonist-settler"? Is this new African Studies speak in the US?

2001:8003:70F5:2400:9AC:3EE5:DA86:8D07 (talk) 00:06, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

You should edit the article and make sure your claims are objectively phrased and sourced. Disagreements that this provokes can be brought here. But others are unlikely to edit the article in the way you want on your behalf. Also, sign up to wiki, it doesn't take long. LastDodo (talk) 12:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Cautionary reliance on Caroline Elkins as a source for casualties and conflict

The American academic Caroline Elkins has written a sensationalised account of the Mau Mau which figures regularly in the content cited in this article. Her upper estimate of 300,000 deaths is frankly absurd. As has been pointed out by others that figure is not reflected in census data. Furthermore, I estimate the entire adult male population of Kikuyu in 1950 to be about 255,000 (6,000,000(tot. pop.) / 2(~male) / 2(~18-65 age bracket) * 0.17 (17% pop Kikuyu)).

To quote a death figure higher than the adult male population of the main protagonist (being even within the Kikuyu a minority) is quite frankly unbelievable. While Elkins is to be credited for unearthing Government archives, she none-the-less changes the demeanour of a viscous, localised insurgency into a conflict that she asserts has organised genocidal overtones. This completely inverts the nature of the conflict and I would caution people from parroting this absurd data and drawing conclusions from it. The methodology by which she derived her data has been debunked (i.e. see http://www.opendemocracy.net/david-elstein/daniel-goldhagen-and-kenya-recycling-fantasy ) the same source pointing out that between 1948 and 1962 the Kikuyu population actually grew from 1.03 million to 1.64 million.

2001:8003:70F5:2400:A817:E16E:6C34:7BF5 (talk) 03:33, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

More rubbish data!

The claim that 6 million bombs were dropped

From the article: As the campaign developed, Avro Lincoln heavy bombers were deployed, flying missions in Kenya from 18 November 1953 to 28 July 1955, dropping nearly 6 million bombs.

(below is data taken from the original source that the source for the above statement (Chappel.S) cites for this claim (which incidentally, says no such thing))

The Avro Lincoln had a payload(stick) of 14 bombs (5x1000lb and 9x500lb ; one stick = 9,500lb ). In total 8 Avro Lincolns dropped a total of 4,500 tons of bombs (1 ton = 2204.62 lb) in 900 sorties.

Assuming a full stick of bombs was dropped each time (and the payload was the same as the mix of 500lb and 1000lb bombs described above - it may have sometimes changed depending on the target/intent):

bombs dropped = (bomb tonnage(total) / stick weight) x bombs_per_stick

= ( (4,500 x 2204.62) / 9,500 ) x 14
= 14,620 bombs

I call rubbish on the claim that 6 million bombs were dropped and suggest tonnage is used instead (which is the norm).2001:8003:70F5:2400:7943:9457:231F:621F (talk) 00:04, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Again, more inaccuracies!

The Chuka Massacre Look, I am periodically coming back to this article as it is just so stupendously bad! The net result being that it is so skewed that it bears little resemblance to reality which is not surprising as it is being authored primarily by foreigners born decades after the events with agendas in hand. That some of these people have been awarded "Pulitzer Prizes" for their creative 'work' is a sad indictment on the state of scholarship in the Western World.

From the article:

"The Chuka Massacre, which happened in Chuka, Kenya, was perpetrated by members of the King's African Rifles B Company in June 1953 with 20 unarmed people killed during the Mau Mau uprising ... Nobody ever stood trial for the massacre."

Not true: The company commander, Major G. S. L. Griffiths was tried twice to obtain a guilty verdict (the first time his men lied trying to protect him/themselves). He was sentenced on 11th March 1954 to seven years imprisonment and dismissed from the British Army. 2001:8003:70F5:2400:C1A1:88C:BF59:4142 (talk) 12:04, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Wangari Maathai Homage?

Wangari Maathai is an honoured Kenyan and the first female African recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. I have much respect for her, but she was not however an Oracle. She is referred to 4 times by name in this article delivering opinions devoid of factual reference and the weight of her name is supposed to convey these opinions as facts. It is perhaps pertinent to point out that Wangari Maathai was a trained Biologist whose academic expertise (doctorate) was in cows balls!

1st contribution: Origin of the name Mau Mau - She conveys an opinion.

2nd contribution: Many of the organisers of the Mau Mau were ex British military - Common knowledge, many were ex-KAR.

3rd contribution: Suggests 100,000 (mainly Kikuyu died in concentration camps) - no doubt an "ally" of Caroline Elkins. This fantasy is devoid of any basis in reality and seems to have engendered a life of its own.

4th contribution: 3 out of every 4 Kikuyu men were in detention in 1954. Again this stems from the fantasy world that Elkins created and her interpretation of the village confinement system which was designed to isolate the Mau Mau from the larger Kikuyu populace (who incidentally were the recipients of most Mau Mau murders and coercions (the details of which are not described in this article and yet occupied the front pages of Kenyan Newspapers almost continuously throughout this period - strange?). Having stated that most of the Kikuyu men would by her estimates be dead, Elkins has to find hitherto unknown ways for them to die! This has created a fiction embellished by lurid details that if true would have extinguished the Kikuyu race from the Earth which doesn't seem to be the case as they are still the largest ethnic group in Kenya! Indeed, as others have pointed out the mortality rate amongst Kikuyu during this period (see the study through the link I alluded to earlier) was no greater than any other tribe in Kenya.

Wangari Maathai no doubt is developing mythical status amongst some but her celebrity does not mean that she automatically conveys an authority that is unquestionable (she did famously refute the process of zoonosis (more in the realm of her scholastic expertise) which contributed in no small measure to the mythos surrounding HIV's origin in Africa). 144.134.131.186 (talk) 13:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)