The work of Kenneth Good, a veteran scholar who has taught at a swathe of universities in Africa and Melanasia, and whose principles led him being booted out of both Rhodesia under Ian Smith and Botswana under Festus Mogae, has displayed a consistent preoccupation with democracy and democratization, and in particular the tendency for elites to hijack democracy. For the present reviewer, his article “Settler colonialism: Economic Development and Class Formation” in The Journal of Modern African Studies (14, 4, 1976; 597–620) was formative, its general thrust being that, ironically, through their very success in promoting a skewed capitalism, settler colonial states summoned up opposing classes which ultimately defeat them. In that justly revered analysis, Good examined the histories and trajectories of Algeria, Kenya, Rhodesia, and South Africa, correctly predicting the doom of settler colonialism in the latter two countries where it had not yet been defeated. Good’s latest book picks up on his abiding themes: popular struggles for democracy against elites, elites’ confounding of those struggles once placed in power, and the perpetual need for renewed democratic struggle. He is a champion of participatory democracy, although he tends to eschew democratic theory for the study of democratic practice. In this study, Good’s opening chapter outlines his understanding of participatory democracy by exploring how it operated in ancient Athens, was developed again by the Levellers during the English Revolution in the seventeenth century, and subsequently by the Chartists, again in England, in the nineteenth century. He goes on to suggest that participatory democracy made its most striking appearance in Africa in the form of the five organizational principles of the United Democratic Front in the struggle against the apartheid regime in the 1980s: elected leadership at all levels, collective leadership, mandates and accountability, reporting and reporting back, criticism and self-criticism (96). Given this important argument, it is a pity he does not directly relate the Congress tradition of the ANC back to the Chartist movement, a point which would have been well worth making given contemporary debates about the colonial legacy. Africa Spectrum 2019, Vol. 54(3) 285–286 a The Author(s) 2019 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/0002039719881451 journals.sagepub.com/home/afr

中文翻译：

---

书评：当代非洲民主化反对威权主义的斗争

Kenneth Good 是一位资深学者，曾在非洲和美拉西亚的多所大学任教，其原则导致他在伊恩·史密斯领导下的罗得西亚和 Festus Mogae 领导下的博茨瓦纳被逐出，他的工作表现出对民主和民主化，特别是精英劫持民主的趋势。对于目前的评论者来说，他在《现代非洲研究杂志》（14, 4, 1976; 597-620）上发表的文章“定居者殖民主义：经济发展和阶级形成”是形成性的，具有讽刺意味的是，它的总体主旨是通过他们的成功在促进倾斜资本主义的过程中，定居者殖民国家召集了对立的阶级，最终打败了它们。古德在这一备受尊敬的分析中考察了阿尔及利亚、肯尼亚、罗得西亚和南非的历史和轨迹，正确地预测了定居者殖民主义在尚未被打败的后两个国家的厄运。古德的最新著作讲述了他的永恒主题：民众为民主而反对精英的斗争、精英对一旦掌权的那些斗争的混淆，以及对重新民主斗争的永恒需求。他是参与式民主的拥护者，尽管他倾向于避开民主理论来研究民主实践。在这项研究中，古德的开篇一章通过探讨参与式民主在古代雅典的运作方式，概述了他对参与式民主的理解，这种民主在 17 世纪英国革命期间由 Levellers 再次发展，随后由宪章派在 19 世纪再次在英国发展世纪。他继续指出，在 1980 年代反对种族隔离制度的斗争中，参与式民主以联合民主阵线的五项组织原则的形式在非洲最引人注目地出现：各级民选领导、集体领导、授权和问责制、报告和报告、批评和自我批评 (96)。鉴于这一重要论点，遗憾的是他没有将非国大的国会传统与宪章运动直接联系起来，鉴于当代关于殖民遗产的辩论，这一点非常值得提出。非洲频谱 2019，卷。54(3) 285–286 a 作者 2019 年文章重用指南：sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI：10.1177/0002039719881451 journals.sagepub.com/home/afr 各级民选领导、集体领导、授权和问责、报告和报告、批评和自我批评 (96)。鉴于这一重要论点，遗憾的是他没有将非国大的国会传统与宪章运动直接联系起来，鉴于当代关于殖民遗产的辩论，这一点非常值得提出。非洲频谱 2019，卷。54(3) 285–286 a 作者 2019 年文章重用指南：sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI：10.1177/0002039719881451 journals.sagepub.com/home/afr 各级民选领导、集体领导、授权和问责、报告和报告、批评和自我批评 (96)。鉴于这一重要论点，遗憾的是他没有将非国大的国会传统与宪章运动直接联系起来，鉴于当代关于殖民遗产的辩论，这一点非常值得提出。非洲频谱 2019，卷。54(3) 285–286 a 作者 2019 年文章重用指南：sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI：10.1177/0002039719881451 journals.sagepub.com/home/afr 鉴于当代关于殖民遗产的辩论，这一点非常值得提出。非洲频谱 2019，卷。54(3) 285–286 a 作者 2019 年文章重用指南：sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI：10.1177/0002039719881451 journals.sagepub.com/home/afr 鉴于当代关于殖民遗产的辩论，这一点非常值得提出。非洲频谱 2019，卷。54(3) 285–286 a 作者 2019 年文章重用指南：sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI：10.1177/0002039719881451 journals.sagepub.com/home/afr