Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T05:42:19.241Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rural Rebels and colonial Kenya: the argument against Buijtenhuijs's re-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2011

Audrey Wipper
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Robert Buijtenhuijs's critique of my book Rural Rebels (1977) is interesting because it highlights serious flaws that can be made in critical analysis, among them the ‘I think the writer means’ fallacy, a false dichotomy, reductionism and a disregard for the quality of the data. Since space limitations prevent me from replying to all of Buijtenhuijs's criticisms (his critique is three times longer than my permitted reply) I will limit myself to the aforementioned that are matters of more general concern.

Type
Short Communication
Information
Africa , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , July 1988 , pp. 353 - 363
Copyright
Copyright © International African Institute 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baechler, Jean. 1970. Les Phénomènes Révolutionnaires. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Rosberg, Carl G., and Nottingham, John. 1966. The Myth of ‘Mau Man’. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Wipper, Audrey. 1977. Rural Rebels. Nairobi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
de Wolf, J. J. 1977. Differentiation and Integration in Western Kenya: a study of religious innovation and social change among the Bukusu. The Hague & Paris: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar