Your three peasants in 1500 is a genuinely elegant framing.
It is also doing something very specific that needs to be named.
It begins the story at a point before European colonialism restructured the global economy.
Which means it can then present the divergence that followed as something that emerged from within European society: from English ingenuity, from Protestant work ethic, from whatever cultural or institutional qualities you might want to attribute it to.
But here is what was happening to the Indian peasant between 1500 and 1750 while the Englishman was "pulling ahead":
The British East India Company was in the process of capturing the most sophisticated textile manufacturing economy in the world.
In 1750, India produced approximately 25% of global GDP.
Its textile industry was so advanced that British manufacturers lobbied Parliament to pass laws banning the import of Indian cloth because they could not compete with it.
Parliament passed those laws.
Then it went further.
It systematically deindustrialized India to turn it into a raw material supplier and a captive market for British manufactured goods.
The Indian peasant did not "fall behind" because the Englishman innovated faster.
The Indian peasant "fell behind" because the British Empire dismantled the industry above his head, extracted the surplus, and wrote the story afterward as a tale of two different levels of ingenuity.
Your starting point of 1500 is not neutral.
It is the last moment before the mechanism of divergence was switched on.
Multipolarity doesn't mean Western people will become poor.
It means they will become normal.
It means a Congolese engineer and a German engineer will negotiate on terms that reflect their actual value rather than the legacy of who colonized whom.
It means the dollar will be one currency among several rather than the rent the whole world pays to America for existing.
It means European countries will have to make foreign policy based on actual relationships rather than the assumption that their preferences automatically constitute the international consensus.
Normal.
The horror with which this prospect is greeted, the language of civilizational threat, of decline, of loss, tells you everything about how far from normal the current arrangement actually is.
And who it's normal for.
The IMF cannoy be allowed to enslave and subjugate entire civilizations and claim immunity.
The Brenton Woods system benefits only it's imperialist creators.
We must audit Kenya's debt and sever ties with the international banking cartel.
They exported the ideology of the free market to the world with guns and structural adjustment programs and IMF conditions.
Liberalize. Privatize. Cut the public sector. Let the market determine outcomes. Trust the mechanism.
Meanwhile at home, the banks failed in 2008 and received $700 billion in public money within weeks.
The free market for thee.
Socialism for the institutions that own the political class.
The people who lost their homes in 2008, amid 10 million foreclosures in the United States, did not receive a bailout.
The people who created the instruments that caused the crisis, who collected bonuses in the years they were building it, and who collected bonuses again in the years after the public absorbed the loss:
Not one of them went to prison.
Not one.
The ideology of personal responsibility, applied with perfect consistency, would have produced criminal trials and institutional collapse for the people at the top.
Instead it produced: austerity for everyone else, lectures about dependency culture, and a return to bonuses within eighteen months.
This is not corruption in the sense of individual bad actors.
This is corruption as architecture.
The building is designed this way.
The people inside it are not breaking the rules.
They wrote the rules.
Protesters took Ericsson’s body after police ignored him. They draped the flag over him and sang the national anthem.
The brother with the fade and orange shirt held his hand. It broke my heart
📸 @festolang
The genius of the two-party system is not that it gives you a choice.
It is that it makes the absence of real choice feel like your fault.
You chose wrong.
You didn't vote.
You voted third party and spoiled it.
You didn't fight hard enough within the party.
You need to be more pragmatic.
You need to work within the system.
The system will change if you just keep working within it.
Every exit from the arrangement is framed as a failure of the individual.
The arrangement is never the problem.
The problem is always your tactics, your purity, your impatience, your naivety, your lack of strategic sophistication.
This is how you keep a managed democracy stable for generations.
Not by giving people what they need.
By making the failure to get it feel like their own.
Also on this 25th June, we refuse to forget the role that Safaricom played in the abductions and eventual deaths of our friends. One day, you too will be held to account. We also refuse to forget those who fake abducted themselves and those who hosted the butcher on Spaces.
"When the citizens of a Nation deem their most accomplished thieves as the most electable then they lose the right to complain when theft becomes their national creed." ~ Modibo Keita. Pan-Africanist leader and first President of Mali. (1915-1977)
Every time an American politician says "our people" are struggling and "our communities" are being left behind, they are describing a real thing.
Working class people in post-industrial American cities are genuinely suffering.
Their communities were genuinely hollowed out.
Their futures were genuinely foreclosed.
But the story told about why almost never reaches the correct destination.
The story says:
Immigrants. Globalists. China. Liberal elites.
The story does not say:
Fifty years of deliberate policy that moved capital freely across borders while keeping labor immobile.
That offshored manufacturing while financializing the remaining economy.
That extracted wealth upward within Western societies at the same time as it extracted wealth outward from the Global South.
The same class of people impoverished the American worker and the Haitian farmer.
But the American worker is being told to be angry at the Haitian.
And it's working.
It is always working.
Met a 49-year-old Chinese man called Mr. Fu on the evening run, who challenged me to a push-up contest and then casually cranked out 123 push-ups. Had to feign an injury real quick.
They called it a conspiracy theory.
For years, anyone who suggested that powerful people protected each other from accountability, that money bought actual political outcomes rather than merely access, that both parties served the same donor class at the expense of their voters, was dismissed as a conspiracy theorist.
Tinfoil hats.
Paranoid populism from people who couldn't accept complexity.
Then the Epstein case happened.
And the Panama Papers happened.
And the Pandora Papers happened.
And the bank bailouts happened while the people who caused the crisis got bonuses.
And the pharmaceutical executives sold their stock before announcing failed trials.
And the senators traded options on companies affected by legislation they were about to pass.
And the revolving door between regulatory agencies and the industries they regulated kept spinning.
And the lobbyists kept writing the legislation.
And the media kept being owned by fewer and fewer people, all of whom had extensive financial ties to the industries the media was supposed to scrutinize.
At what point does a "conspiracy theory" become a "description of observable reality"?
They took the question away from the conspiracy theorists by proving it in front of everyone.
Now the problem isn't that people don't believe it.
The problem is that the people who confirmed it are still in charge, and accountability is still a concept that applies to the people below them but not to themselves.
That's not a conspiracy. That's a structure.
And structures can be changed.
I told you that all those politicians masquerading as opposition are what we call POTEMKIN or ASTROTURF OPPOSITION.
But you insulted me.
Do you now see the game clearly?
They aimed to discredit genuine clamour for economic transformation, scatter powerful voices and legitimize Government's economic agenda.
This is their mechanism of existence:
INFILTRATION
Movements and social media platforms were quietly infiltrated by individuals loyal to the establishment. These individuals mismanaged the platforms to discredit social media voices in the eyes of the public.
"You have been paid."
"You are tutam."
"How much have they paid you to post this?"
These infiltrators also steered the platforms away from achieving the core goals by creating unnecessary slogans.
"Wantam"
"Tutam"
Example: X users, X posts, X spaces.
CO-OPTATION AND COMPROMISE
Leaders of a genuine grassroots movement are persuaded, bribed, or pressured into watering down their demands.
They are given lucrative platform access and media coverage but are kept on a tight leash, transforming radical critics into moderate voices that the establishment can comfortably manage.
Example: ODM and BREAD-BASED ESTABLISHMENT
STATE-MANUFACTURED OPPOSITION
The state actively creates, funds, and legitimates smaller political parties. These groups appear to challenge the government on minor, superficial issues, but they never truly threaten the ruling regime's control over the state.
"Please don't protest. We shall defeat him on election day. He has no numbers."
Sheep: "Yeees!"
Example DCP and LINDA MWANANCHI
The state played its cards strategically and outmanoeuvred all of us.
Now, we are back to:
"You are a Kikuyu."
"You are a Kalenjin."
"You are a Luo."
Don't under-estimate the STATE.
Anyway, one day, GRASS WILL GROW.
You served in a regime (2018 - 2022) that heavily borrowed EUROBOND.
2018 - KSH 200 BILLION
2019 - KSH 220 BILLION
2021 - KSH 100 BILLION
Today, for every 100 shillings we collect, 87 goes to pay these debts.
How do you now expect anything to improve?
Nothing will improve.