identification and trust in the local or traditional authorities is high, and their legitimacy
is unquestioned.
When tools of the rational-bureaucratic national structure are not consistent with the
desired purposes – legitimacy, power, consent - authorities resort to symbolic capital of
power. Religious capital provides a solid base for strong symbolic power, since: 1)
metaphysic’s beliefs are an utter parcel of symbols, myths and values. As with traditional
chiefs, widely accepted beliefs serve as a foundation for authority and legitimation of the
president authority; 2) although human security is a determinant, though not
deterministic, element to define one’s religiosity, perceptivity to religiosity is higher in
those societies where individuals are more vulnerable to life-threatening risks.
With regard to the postulated hypothesis, the analysis proves that the pervasiveness of
religion-related values, myths and symbols in Guinean politics serves more purposes.
One the one hand, myths worshipping the president “Nino” Vieira supplied him with
outstandingly high levels of legitimation and consent. First, they were a means to
overcome the ethnic traditional legitimation impasse. Second, “Nino” power was
underpinned in a mixture of legitimation based upon mythological fame and fright. Myths
and narratives endowed him with a Übermensch identity, which efficiently provided
deterrence against opposition and rebellion upon the established government. “Nino” is
both known as the heroic general who freed the country from the Portuguese colonizer,
and as the sanguinary president, whom police would pitiless murder any opponents. The
mystique surrounding the figure of the president hence represents the prompt of an
authoritarian political system’s breakthrough.
On the other hand, the employ of religious based symbols by “Nino” Vieira is a tool to
compensate for loose relationships between the government and the citizens.
Nevertheless, such practices are part of traditional African political systems, where the
religious and the political sphere are interdependent. The use of religion-related values
by national leader frames within the political-religious syncretism. The latter is a defining
feature of African political systems.
According to Western tradition, life in plurality takes form of politics, an art underpinned
in human beings’ faculties, whose underneath of power rest upon human beings’ societal
organization. Contrarily, African politics tightly grounds the ultimate foundation of
government on a metaphysical, somehow higher entity. In Guinea Bissau, it is called
irân. Irâns are the real owners of power, whilst traditional, local and – we might affirm –
national authorities are means of its will. In this sense, the religious dimension is
indivisible from the political one, for they inherently imply one another. Transposition of
the use of myths, symbols and religious values into the national political sphere
epitomizes the cornerstone for the africanization of power process, or rather the
construction of a complex State, not underpinned exclusively in the western nation-State
model.
References
Almond, Gabriel A. (1956). Comparative Political Systems. The Journal of Politics. Vol 18
n 3, pp. 391 - 409