This chapter suggests a way of examining African democracies which moves beyond prejudice and generalisation to understanding.

This is not yet another of the reviews of ‘the state of democracy’ in Africa which are so popular among scholars and ‘think tanks’. While these assessments differ, they are generally united by their endorsement of the ‘consolidation’ paradigm – the test is almost invariably how close African states are to resembling an idealised notion of ‘Western’ democracy. A detailed account of democratic progress throughout the continent using a different framework would add much to our knowledge but is well beyond the scope of this analysis, particularly since a meaningful assessment would not be possible unless it offered detailed and textured analyses of each country. Analyses which generalise about an undifferentiated ‘African state’ distort reality by ignoring important differences: often, they stigmatise rather than analyse. New African democracies are not all the same and analyses which ignore their differences miss as much as they explain. The purpose of this chapter, therefore, is not to attempt a detailed appraisal of democratic progress on the continent but to offer a framework for looking at democracy's progress in Africa.

BEYOND LEADERSHIP

Mainstream discussion of democracy in Africa would warm the hearts of democratic elitists – it is preoccupied with leaders, not citizens. The claim that the root cause of Africa's democratic problems (indeed all its problems) is the quality of its leadership dominates mainstream thinking on the topic, regardless of whether the commentator is African or Western. The Mo Ibrahim Foundation, which expresses the mainstream view on governance on the continent, awards an annual leadership prize. However, in keeping with the rest of the mainstream, it is repeatedly disappointed and so often does not award the prize. Even social and medical challenges – HIV and AIDS, for example – are said to depend on leadership. Scholarly work on democracy in Africa is equally fixated on leadership – mainstream credibility requires that it be seen as the core of democracy's problems and possibilities. Thus, a discussion of Africa's ‘waning democratic commitment’ soon turns into an examination of the commitment of its leaders alone.