Thinking Through the Crisis of Intra-Party Democracy in Kenya: Reflections on Kenyatta's KANU Leadership (1963-1978)

Purpose: This paper explores the tripodic relation in Kenya from 1963 to 1978 between party leadership, intra-party crisis, and democratic consolidation. Methodology: It relies on the collection and analysis of primary and secondary data materials. Using elite and practical group conflict theories as theoretical frameworks, the study states that KANU's intra-party crises during the Kenyatta regime were due to the high-handedness of party leadership and political elites at various levels of the party structure, as well as their inability to establish stable and coherent party ties coupled with the abysmal level of intra-party democracy and weak party discipline. Findings: The study concludes that the intra-party crises frequently sparked by incompetent and power-drunk party leaders must be substantially curbed for Kenya's democracy to stand the test of time and achieve the consolidation it deserves. A unique contribution to theory, practice and policy: The activity of democratic government relies heavily on political parties. In democracies, parties are the structures that coordinate political rivalry and policymaking. Given the importance of parties in politics, political scientists have long sought to comprehend how they are formed and sustained, as well as the interests and functions they represent. Different party theories offer different answers to these questions, resulting in different predictions about party activity and its role in improving democratic transparency and responsiveness (Moffett,2007). The elite and rational group conflict theory (RGCT) is an intergroup conflict social psychology model. For this analysis, the theory describes how political parties can become hostile as a result of competing goals and power struggles. It also explains why intergroup animosity is accompanied by feelings of racism and bigotry against other political parties. The theory contributes significantly to our interpretation of party politics, reviving critical debates in Kenya about the limits of democratic responsiveness. It emphasizes the importance of party leaders as key players in the formation of each party (Leeson & Harris, 2018). At the same time, emphasizes the importance of political party internal organization as anchors and guardians against the irrational power of political elites. Changes in party organization, according to Aldrich, are significant, but they should be viewed as attempts to address the evolving issues that face the Journal of Historical Studies ISSN 2520-345X (Online) Vol. 2, Issue No. 1, pp 1 - 29, 2021 www.carijournals.org 2 politicians at the center of a party. As a result, parties are ultimately the creations of politicians in reaction to shifting desires (Aldrich,1971). However, the theory leaves a host of theoretical and empirical questions unanswered. More specifically, we argue that future party theorizing must account for voters' unique roles and capacities, as well as reengage the concept of structured parties as hierarchical intermediaries between communities, politicians, and voters. It recommends, among other things, that party leaders/executives exercise restraint in their use of power, create an effective intra-party crisis resolution process, and ensure that all party leaders and members adhere to party internal democracy, constitutions, and guidelines (Leeson & Harris, 2018).