By Eyob Balcha Gebremariam, MA candidate at the Institute of Social Studies,

The Hague; The Netherlands in Development Studies in Children and Youth [Year
Studies Specialization (2008/2009) Email: ebalcha@gmail.com
]

Generational Relations; a brief view in Ethiopian Context (Post 1974)

Key words: Youth, Ethiopia, Generational Relations

Introduction

The most natural way of describing a society and its structure might be using
the various age groups and members that belong to the groups who
constitute the entire society as a whole. In their article, Braungart and
Braungart argued that age can be taken as the most basic social category of
human existence based on which further decisions are made in granting
prestige and power with the attached roles and responsibilities (Braungart
and Braungart, 1986). Hence, we can consider age and the relationship
among people who belong to different age categories to analyze the various
socio-economic as well as political processes and the nature of these
processes. In this short essay, I will try to explain why generational relations
are perceived as social relations and thereby how the relationship between
generations is influential enough in determining the material and social
conditions of children and young people. For the sake of being more specific,
I will be mainly dealing with how generational relations determine the
political role that young generations of a society would play by taking the
Ethiopian post revolutionary period as an example, hence my emphasis will
be more on young people than on children.

I. Studying Youth

With regard to studying the role of age and social role in a society,
sociologists make use of two basic analytical approaches which have been
used as tools to understand the role of age in determining the perceptions,
actions, roles and expectations of individuals in their lifetime. These two
approaches are life-course approach and the generational approach, and also
a third new approach which use the combination of the two.

Life-course approach contends the idea that human beings are passing
through different stages of life-course development where their experiences
and exposures are determined by their encounter to various social and
historical realities which in turn require specific actions and reactions from
them. In this approach the changes in biopsychological development and the

1
By Eyob Balcha Gebremariam, MA candidate at the Institute of Social Studies,
The Hague; The Netherlands in Development Studies in Children and Youth [Year
Studies Specialization (2008/2009) Email: ebalcha@gmail.com
]

human lifecycle during the lives of individuals is given more importance in

determining the role that people would play in their society (ibid).

The other approach explains the role of age in terms of generation which is
mainly understood as an age category in which individuals identify
themselves by using their shared sociohistorical as well as political
phenomena with others which will be used as a cohesive factor to
differentiate themselves both from their predecessors and followers as well
(Braungart and Braungart 1986; Alanen 2001). Karl Mannheim, the widely
credited scholar in the study of generations, has argued that generations are
formed when people who belong to a specific age-group (cohort) share a
particular social and historical experiences during their youthful years which
creates a common consciousness or identity amongst them in their world
views and socio-political attitudes (Alanen, 2001). By defining generations at
such a broader level, Mannheim initiated the idea of understanding
generational relations as social relations rather than as biological or natural
relations. The basic characteristics that we find with members of a specific
generation is their shared life experience which results in giving them a
common way of understanding the social world they are living in -
generational consciousness, the roles that they have assumed or assigned to
play – their social position, and the interactions that they have build both
amongst themselves as well as with others who are not part of their
generational group – the social interaction.

In this sense, passing through particular historical circumstances and

identifying domains of convergence within a cohort in relation to others who
might have different perceptions and roles with regard to those particular
social incidents is a sine qua non for a generation to be formulated. Hence,
one can argue that generational membership is more of a dialectical process
whereby people identify themselves in relation to others.

II. Generational Relations

Though society has its own way of ensuring its existence and perpetuation
into time through its various institutions, shared values and norms, people
will continue to experience different social reality in their life time. At the
same time, members of a society who belong to a specific generation that
has developed a common way of interpreting social realities and began to
act collectively as ‘generational units’ (Alanen, 2001), will also engage in a
2
By Eyob Balcha Gebremariam, MA candidate at the Institute of Social Studies,
The Hague; The Netherlands in Development Studies in Children and Youth [Year
Studies Specialization (2008/2009) Email: ebalcha@gmail.com
]

relationship with other generations in their society. According to Mannheim,

these generational units ‘work up the material of their common experience in
different ways’ (Braungart and Braungart 1986, Demartini, 1985). Hence
there is always a continuous interaction between generations who have
developed their own particular way perceiving their sociohistorical
framework and assume different roles and responsibilities. In fact these
relationships between generations are rarely smooth and harmonious rather
filled with their own contestations and contradictions.

Generational consciousness which is a defining feature for the formation of a

generation is a crucial factor in determining the generational relations. Since
this consciousness is acquired within the existing socio-political framework of
the society there will be an inevitable interaction with the previously set
generational consciousness. The social realities in which, for example, young
people will face in their society is the result of their parents’ generational
consciousness. Hence, the parent to child relation at the individual level can
be understood as a generational relation at the broader level. Most of the
times, the generational relations between parental and children’s generation
is targeted towards passing some cultural values, norms and heritages to the
new generation, which is seldom a full process of transferring (Demartini,
1985). This can be related with the fact that the cultural meanings which are
very valuable for the older generation might not necessarily as meaningful
as they were for the new generation. Hence, the possibility of changing the
meanings of these cultural meanings and social perceptions to fit into the
new interpretations of the young generation is high. In addition to this, there
is also a conscious rejection of some cultural values and a replacement of
them with the new shared imaginations which usually results generational
conflict (ibid). Hence, the role that members of a new generation will play in
their society is mainly determined by their relationship with members of the
previous generation. This relational concept gives us a reasonable ground to
examine to what extent that the relationship between generations is
influential enough either to maintain the statues-quo, or to bring any kind of
desired change or transformation in the wider society. In other words, how
strong a generation will be in passing through its influence onto the next
generation or how strong will the new generation will be in rejecting the
existing order (emphasis added) and thereby materialize different world view
(ibid).

3
By Eyob Balcha Gebremariam, MA candidate at the Institute of Social Studies,
The Hague; The Netherlands in Development Studies in Children and Youth [Year
Studies Specialization (2008/2009) Email: ebalcha@gmail.com
]

Studies have further shown that particularly political generations which are
formed through particular historical circumstances and social discontinuities
during youthful years are more likely to persist throughout life time
(Braungart and Braungart 1986). Mannheim’s definition of generation has
also asserted that world views and attitudes which were formed through the
shared experiences of a cohort group are strong enough to determine the
actions and perceptions of the cohort members over their life-course. In such
cases, the possibility of having a strong contestation between successive
generations is very high.

III. Brief generational relations analysis in Ethiopian

context

For the purpose of this essay I will be limiting myself to the generational
relations between the young generation which was active during the 1974
revolution in ousting the imperial regime and the current young generation.

Historical Background of the 1974 revolution and its aftermath

Initiated by long history of feudalistic operation and mismanagement across

the country, the Ethiopian revolution was mainly headed by university
students of that time who were obviously in their youth ages and the
educated elite. Though there are many scholarly studies in analyzing the
various features of the revolution, I will be focusing on the ideological
commitment of the then young revolutionaries and its impact in determining
the generational relations between them and their successors. After the
ousting of Emperor Hailesilassie in September 1974, the clandestine political
parties which were leftists in their ideologies were unable to assume power
rather get into trouble with the military which took over the leadership of the
revolution by exploiting the power vacuum (Gudina, 2003). The post
revolution period was mainly characterized by the political turmoil which
result mass killings and assassinations of political activists, and extreme
ideological commitment in Marxism-Leninism among all political movements
in which the leaders and the initiators of the revolution were engaged in
(Zewde, 2003; Kebede, 2003). Other members of this revolutionary

4
By Eyob Balcha Gebremariam, MA candidate at the Institute of Social Studies,
The Hague; The Netherlands in Development Studies in Children and Youth [Year
Studies Specialization (2008/2009) Email: ebalcha@gmail.com
]

generation who have revolt against the power control of the military
continued their fight until the government is ousted in 1991 through a
military defeat.

The new political platform which was created after the dawn fall of the
socialist and militaristic regime was highly dominated by those
revolutionaries who have spent almost all their entire youthful age in fighting
and mainly under the Marxist – Leninist political ideology. As time pass by,
their ideological orientations were changed into other different political
outlooks than Marxism but their radicalism and extremist approach in their
political career still continued and persisted. This is a widely perceived
feature of most political parties in Ethiopia which are led by the then
revolutionaries.

IV. The influence of the generational relation

The political generation which was successful in bringing social change in the
country some three decades before has used the strength of its generational
unit to deal with the existing sociohistorical and political landscape of their
time. After doing so and achieving its goal, the created political platforms
either through direct party politics as well as through non-direct political
scene like the press, the academia and the wider public sphere are heavily
dominated by their outlooks and perspectives. This is the situation that the
current young generation of the country is facing i.e. either to function within
the already established political space of the country which mainly reflects
the interpretation of even the current various socio-political phenomena of
the country in the eyes of the revolutionaries or to ‘work up the material of
their common experience in different ways’ (Demartini, 1985), to use
Mannheim’s explanation.

Though it needs detail empirical study and analysis simple observations of

the generational relation between the revolutionaries and the current young
generation is to the advantage of the earlier one which is mainly manifested
through its strong political determinism in its stands and ideologies. The
revolutionary and radical mind still influences the decisions made by the
then educational elites and young revolutionaries who are the present front
leaders of the political system of the country (Kebede, 2004). The current
young generation is still on the process of defining its commonly shared
interpretations of the social realities which are set by the previous
5
By Eyob Balcha Gebremariam, MA candidate at the Institute of Social Studies,
The Hague; The Netherlands in Development Studies in Children and Youth [Year
Studies Specialization (2008/2009) Email: ebalcha@gmail.com
]

generation. This is obviously uneasy task which requires a sober examination

of finding common domains of convergence among members of the
generation who share their generational location. With this regard, one can
say that political apathy is widely perceived and the existing movements by
the young generation to define the common world view and socio-political
attitude is still yet to inform the transition from a generation ‘in itself’ to a
generation ‘for itself’.

In conclusion, we can say that the political generation which has successfully
reacted to its sociohistorical and political setting during the imperial regime
of the country has still maintains its supremacy into the political platform of
the country to the extent of challenging the formulation of a competent
generational units among the current young people. And some scholars, like
Messay Kebede, argued that this situation can be also attributed to the
political ideology of the then revolutionary generation which was radical and
extreme in its Marxist-Leninist ideology (Kebede, 2003, Kebede, 2004). In
addition to this, I argue that it is also because of the inability of bringing a
strong counter stand by the young generation to challenge this radical
sentiment of the political leaders who believe that the bloody sacrifices that
they have made to ensure the perpetuation of their ideals is the ultimate
positive thing that the country could ever enjoy.

Bibliography

Alanen, L. 2001. ‘Explorations in Generational Analysis’, in L. Alanen & B. Mayall (eds.)

Conceptualizing Child-Adult Relations. London: Routledge Falmer

Braungart, R. G., Braungart, M. M. 1986. Life-Course and Generational Politics, Annual

Review of Sociology, Vol. 12: Annual Reviews

Demartini, R. J. 1985. Change Agents and Generational Relationships: A Reevaluation of

Mannheim's Problem of Generations, Social Forces, Vol. 64, No. 1: University of North
Carolina Press

Gudina, M. 2003. The Elite and the Quest for Peace, Democracy, and Development in
Ethiopia: Lessons to be Learnt, Northeast African Studies Vol. 10, No. 2 (New Series),
Michigan State University

Kebede, M. 2003. From Marxism-Leninism to Ethnicity: The Sideslips of Ethiopian Elitism,

Northeast African Studies Vol. 10, No. 2 (New Series), Michigan State University

6
By Eyob Balcha Gebremariam, MA candidate at the Institute of Social Studies,
The Hague; The Netherlands in Development Studies in Children and Youth [Year
Studies Specialization (2008/2009) Email: ebalcha@gmail.com
]

Kebede, M. 2004. Guilt and Atonement: The Genesis of Revolutionary Spirit in Ethiopia,
Ethiomedia.com (http://www.ethiomedia.com/newpress/guilt_and_atonement_ethiopia.html)
written on August 4, 2004 and accessed on December 21, 2008

Kebede, M. 2004. Bringing Reason Back to Ethiopian Politics, Ethiomedia.com

(http://www.ethiomedia.com/newpress/bringing_reason_to_politics.html) written on October
4, 2004 and accessed on December 21, 2008

Zewde, B. 2003. ‘What Did We Dream? What Did We Achieve? And Where Are We
Heading?’ in Admassie A. & Degfe B. (eds.), Economic Focus: Ethiopian Economics
Association, Addis Ababa