Analysis of Thomas Sankara: The Upright Man Film - Term Paper Example

Thomas Sankara: The Upright Man- Movie Review Thomas Sankara: The Upright Man is a documentary film by the British filmmaker Robin Shuffield and has been distributed by California Newsreel in America. The film is about a very poor and unknown country in West Africa, called Upper Volta. Thomas Sankara was the person who removed the corrupt military control in Upper Volta from power in 1984. He, then, renamed Upper Volta as Burkina Faso which meant the Land of Upright People. Sankara then decided to create his own political infrastructure in the country which would be unconventional as compared to the old system and which would not keep up a correspondence with the gigantic powers that included the United States, France and the Soviet Union. This decision of Sankara was very much like that of Patricia Lumumba who had been a leader in that region and died in the Cold War, and so the result was the same too. The eccentric politics that Sankara conducted gave birth to complexities so much so that the individuals who always seconded Sankara in his social and economic restructuring of the region began to feel uncomfortable with the unconventionality and rather nondemocratic kind of politics that Sankara favored. Another important aspect in the film was that Sankara was bold enough to challenge the supremacy of France in West Africa, and also did not hesitate to criticize his fellow armed forces leaders whom he gave the name criminals in power. This might be the cause behind the collapse of Sankara’s tenure. We also come to know in the film what conventional or unconventional methods Sankara used in his political tenure to stabilize the region and make it known. He favored the issue that Africa’s debt should be crumbled to the international banks and to their previous regal masters. He, in addition, advocated the importance of financial self-sufficiency. The best thing he did was that he rejected the acceptance of loans from other countries and preached his people to rely on the production of their own region which included food and textile, to play a part in the economic stabilization of the region because more loans would mean continued reliance upon others and continued poverty. We see scenes in the film where Sankara is in a delegation at an OAU meeting in which everyone is shown as using in local fabrics and designs. This proposal benefitted the women, the underprivileged people and Burkina’s peasantry the most because their hard work was proving fruitful as they worked and created local production which was in demand then. He promoted his objectives and mission through media and other suitable means. Another good thing that Sankara promoted was that he put a ban upon tribute expenses and compulsory labor that the rural chiefs in Burkina used to practice before Sankara came into power. He also put an end to the country’s poll taxes. Before Sankara, the region was an epitome of male dominance where women were considered as lower class specie with fewer rights. Sankara eliminated this sex discrimination and promoted gender equality. He put a ban upon female circumcision and also forbade multiple marriages for men. He also started an extensively organized immunization program so as to lessen the risk of disease in the region. He also worked out social reforms like building railway tracks and dealing with rivers. He started public housing construction schemes for the shelter benefit of his people. He took interest in spreading literacy in his people for which reason he launched many educational programs so as to put an end to ignorance in the society. He believed that he more educated the people would be, the more progressive would be the whole region. He also made serious efforts in ending corruption in the civil service of Burkina. It was praiseworthy of Sankara that he refused to avail the facilities and lavishness that was offered to him due to his government job. Not only did he practice it himself but he also told his colleagues and followers to avoid such benefits which were just for their own selves and did not benefit the nation. He refused the benefits like utilizing chauffeur-driven lavish cars for his personal chores or availing first class flight tickets which were offered to him because he was a leader. He was okay with the little salary and felt proud of it. He also forbade the officials to put up his portraits in communal buildings. These were the good qualities that Sankara possessed and which were thought to be unconventional because not many leaders used to practice such good things at that time. It was in 1987 that Sankara was murdered along with twelve of his colleagues when he was in his office one day. The murderers cut down his body and buried him. What happened the next day was that Blaise Compaoré, who was Sankara’s deputy, confirmed himself as the President of Burkina. Since that time, Blaise Compaoré has been ruling that region. His political ways and policies do not correspond to Sankara’s strategies and are very much opposite to them. Sankara was mainly undemocratic. But the immediate announcement of presidency by Campaore suggested a fact that he might be behind the murder of Sankara. He is suspected to have made an alliance with the French establishment and the local rulers. His political ways also do not support Sankara’s legacy. And that is why his presidency was warmly welcomed by Sankara’s enemies and foreign funding agencies due to which he started accepting international loans, once again posing a threat to the country’s stability. There has never been an investigation of Burkina Faso’s murder, and this supports that Campaore might be behind this. Campaore made a strong alliance with the United States and has the mission of democratizing the country. Since, he was re-elected in 2005, which means that unlike the short tenure of Sankara that longed for only four years, Campaore’s tenure will start from 1987 and has yet not ended. Current research statistics about Burkina Faso population show that the progress that was seen in Sankara’s reign has declined to a great degree in Campaore reign. The literacy rate has dropped out; heath statistics are poor; and, poverty has grown. And the whole reason is the reversal of Sankara’s reforms and selfish leadership of Campaore. We come to know, after watching the movie, about different political twists in the history of Africans. We learn that Sankara made significant efforts towards the stabilization of his country through planning out strategies related to education, health, and economy, and refusing international loans. He was modest because he did not like travelling in chauffeur-driven cars when his peasant walked bare footed. He did not like to fill his pockets with huge salaries when his local man yearned for bread. He did not want to rely on other countries for funds. His brave attempts need to be talked about and discussed. Although his techniques were purely intended to benefit the local people, still there were many strategic slip-ups and mistakes that he did which became the reason for his violent death. The biggest mistake was that he always misjudged the power of his enemies which included both the French government and the rural leaders. His enemies made him politically isolated. And why they had become enemies? This was due to incidents like Sankara often used to disgrace President Francois Mitterand in crowd, and created grudges against the rural leader, Ivorian President Felix Houphouet-Boigny. This is why, despite sincere leadership, Thomas Sankara: The Upright Man is not much known today, unlike Lumumba. Read More