—Matt Gwinta, B1Daily

Africa’s colonial rulers did not simply seize territory, extract resources, and impose foreign governments. They also established systems designed to make European authority appear superior, respectable, and indispensable. Decades after independence, elements of that hierarchy remain embedded in political institutions, education, public monuments, and social expectations.

The troubling question is why some African governments and institutions continue celebrating figures and systems associated with their own historical subjugation.

This is not a universal African attitude. Across the continent, generations of activists, scholars, and ordinary citizens have challenged colonial symbols. Yet the continued prestige attached to certain colonial institutions reveals how difficult it can be to dismantle a system long after its administrators have departed.

When the Colonizer Becomes a Historical Hero

One of the clearest examples involves colonial monuments.

Cecil Rhodes, the British imperialist whose political and commercial ambitions contributed to dispossession and racial domination in southern Africa, was commemorated for decades at the University of Cape Town.

In 2015, student activists launched the Rhodes Must Fall movement, arguing that honoring Rhodes was incompatible with an institution seeking to overcome apartheid’s legacy. Their campaign succeeded in removing his statue.

The controversy exposed a deeper problem: why should an African university place a colonial conqueror on a pedestal while generations of African intellectuals, resistance leaders, and freedom fighters struggle for comparable recognition?

Similar debates have emerged elsewhere over monuments to European monarchs, colonial administrators, and military commanders.

Defenders sometimes argue that such monuments preserve history. Critics respond that historical preservation does not require public glorification. A museum can explain colonial violence without presenting its architects as national heroes.

Colonialism’s Psychological Inheritance

Colonial rule depended partly on persuading colonized populations that European languages, education, institutions, and cultural practices represented advancement.

Western education frequently became the gateway to employment and political influence, while indigenous knowledge and languages were marginalized.

The effects remain visible in countries where European languages dominate government, higher education, and professional advancement.

Using English, French, or Portuguese does not itself indicate admiration for colonialism. These languages can serve practical purposes in multilingual societies. The concern arises when indigenous languages and traditions are systematically treated as less prestigious or less capable of expressing sophisticated ideas.

The same questions arise around beauty standards, cultural representation, and historical education. When European cultural models are consistently presented as the default measure of refinement or success, colonial hierarchies can survive without colonial governments.

Political Independence Without Institutional Independence

Many African countries achieved political independence while retaining legal systems, administrative structures, economic relationships, and educational models inherited from European rule.

Some of these institutions have practical value. Others have been criticized for concentrating authority, excluding local communities, or preserving economic arrangements established during colonialism.

The issue is not whether every European institution must be rejected. It is whether African societies have the freedom and institutional capacity to decide which systems serve their populations.

Political leaders who invoke independence while treating former colonial powers as indispensable sources of legitimacy invite scrutiny over how much sovereignty has actually been achieved.

Economic dependence can further complicate these relationships, particularly when foreign investment, development assistance, and access to international markets influence domestic policy decisions.

African Resistance Tells Another Story

It would be historically inaccurate to describe Africans as uniformly reverential toward their former colonizers.

Anti-colonial movements were central to the independence struggles of Ghana, Kenya, Algeria, Angola, Mozambique, and numerous other countries.

Thinkers and political leaders such as Kwame Nkrumah, Patrice Lumumba, Thomas Sankara, and Amílcar Cabral challenged foreign domination and argued for greater African political, economic, and cultural autonomy.

Contemporary campaigns to remove colonial monuments, return looted artifacts, revise school curricula, and strengthen indigenous languages continue that tradition.

These movements demonstrate that colonial prestige is contested, not universally accepted.

They also show why responsibility should not be placed indiscriminately on African populations for systems originally imposed through conquest, coercion, and unequal power.

Cultural Sovereignty Requires More Than Independence Celebrations

The lasting influence of colonialism presents a challenge for African governments, universities, cultural institutions, and citizens.

Countries can preserve historical records without honoring colonial oppression. They can engage European partners without assuming European superiority. They can use internationally important languages while investing in indigenous ones.

Most importantly, they can evaluate inherited institutions according to whether those institutions serve their populations rather than according to the prestige attached to their colonial origins.

The question is not whether Africans possess an inherent tendency to admire white colonizers. History offers abundant evidence to the contrary.

The more important question is why some institutions continue reproducing colonial hierarchies long after political independence.

Removing a statue will not transform an economy, and changing a street name will not automatically redistribute political power. But public symbols reveal whose achievements a society chooses to honor.

For countries seeking meaningful cultural sovereignty, the debate extends beyond monuments. It concerns who writes national history, whose knowledge receives recognition, and whose interests shape the future.

—Matt Gwinta, B1Daily