Protection of minorities: the perversion of a political imperative legitimate

If all true democracies in the world agree to defend minorities, it remains to clarify the defense system to make. It can only be a national compromise, consisting of positive discrimination, processes daffirmative famous action in all ethnic mosaics like the United States of America. But do we not short the risk of an equalizer and a race to the bottom? Hence lindignation Eyinga Abel: The meaning of the Constitution Biya (art 57, par. 3) appears to give the Aboriginal word when it states that the regional council is chaired by an Aboriginal in the region, carries the sense of germs destroying any notion of a national state of Cameroon (18).
 
The revised constitution, in that it lays down principles of discrimination, is actually far from reflecting any such constitution, the aspirations for national consciousness. Rather, it reflects a false consciousness. And daut in the constitution, and these concepts dallogène dautochtone were left in great uncertainty both at the semantic level where it nor any details of the concept in the basic text, quau political level where they are open to all kinds of manipulations. We can then understand the contempt of the philosopher Eboussi Boulaga: indigenous alien, these words sound pedantic and barbarous. They are one of the manifestations of ignorance and greed of a growing (...) the protection of minorities is a bad ecology was not to protect one class of citizens as a result of animal species or endangered plant (...) for us, autochthony is a matter of anthropology, myth dorigine found throughout the world, according to which human groups say out of the land , termite mounds, barracks, rocks. (19)
 
Against the quil-called prophets of urban tribalism that have been revealed to him according to Douala, in the wake of municipal elections, Lécrivain Mongo Beti recalls that for lAntiquité Greco-Roman, the city can not belong to any ethnic , daut more than our African cities were created rather lhomme White: The Sawa Douala nont no more created the Beti nont created Yaoundé. No doubt these sites were they occupied respectively by Sawa and Beti, but both groups were well lépoque Dantan unable to create a city with nen or technical means, much less resources financial.Lhomme White came chooses lemplacement, traced the tracks, drew up the plans of the buildings, builds, administration. (20)
 
Cest so pretty sophism think Mongo Beti, to claim that the Sawa generously hosted the other ethnic groups in Douala, the Beti doing the same in Yaounde. Lhomme Cest rather white natives gradually ushered in the city had just founded quil regardless dethnie. There can be no dautochtone dallogène in a metropolis, and as is true elsewhere, every Cameroonian is at home in all our cities and the rest as stammering dillettrés nest, concludes thewriter.
 
Considerations made, it must be admitted however that the majority population must limit their rights to live and grow in harmony with minorities. The majority that wants to stifle the minority does not show in fact a special case of létouffement law by force, in a context where the Cameroon electoral majorities ironically coincide with ethnic majorities, if the Bamileke.According to a formula of the French philosopher Edgar Morin, as opposed to one-party democracy is the recognition of minority rights, it determines the limits of the exercise of power by the representatives of majority and establishes the rules that meet lexpress minorities ; democracy in its ultimate nature is a game rule allowing the expression of antagonism. Now that the antagonism may exist, it must safeguard the diversity and protect minorities. The plurality is moreover a value par excellence.
 
We can not, however sempêcher to question deeply the notion of terroir based lautochtonie, this land that is here claimed as the birthplace of parents, grandparents and ancestors. Cest space-time element that grounds the autochthony. The history of African people is a history of migration in the long journey through the ages, there is no room for absolute autochthony. It is essentially relative, in the axis of temporality, since historically, all populations are migrants. Lautochtone today may be the alien of tomorrow and vice versa. The soil is not a chattel, a human creation that can be appropriated, it is by far a given, a universal heritage, within reach of all but metaphysical mystifications.Moreover, in urban sociology, city, built as a collective, is essentially marked by anonymity, so can not be identified with an ethnic group, be it native. Where visible the arbitrary concept of autochthony.
 
For many dobservateurs, protection of minorities and indigenous recently enshrined in the Constitution of Cameroon rather betray the will of the government in power to differentiate in terms of ethnic cleavages citizens dun country, to divide the people forLasserve better. The protection of people and would cover so-called minority rule quà qualified majority of those political victories. Wrongly or rightly, as suspected lethnie here is that the Bamileke who in 1992 had suffered sexual dact dhostilités ethnic, following the presidential elections on October 11 in the cities of Yaounde and Ebolowa Sangmélima on the part of local dune fringe, having yielded to the seductions of electoral violence.Given all the complaints more or less justified, observers have raised The idea dun risk Bamileke in Cameroon.