(Yes I know this website is supposed to get away from politics. But this is huge. And deserves more attention that it will receive in the American media.)

Or is it the other way around? As Kenya so America?

Most Americans may not be aware of what happened yesterday in Kenya or its significance. By a 2-to-1 margin Kenyans decisively approved a new constitution. The new constitution represents a political – and possibly social – transformation of the East African republic. Is this a positive change? And what are the implications for the United States?

For the last few weeks I have been discussing this issue with a fine Christian brother who is active in my small congregation – a doctoral student from Kenya who follows political issues closely. He/we are astonished at how this new constitution has come to pass. And deeply concerned over what it represents.

Let me begin with some of the concerns insofar as I understand them.

Kenya has had Muslim family courts for a long time. Just as Kenya also has tribal courts. Fair enough. But the new constitution specifically recognizes the Muslim kadhi courts. There is a sense in which sharia has been enshrined in the new constitution. Kenya is ninety percent Christian and only ten percent Muslim. Certainly there is no objection to religious freedom for Muslims. Nor even to Muslim family courts as such. But for Islam (or more precisely sharia?) to be uniquely recognized and empowered by the new constitution is deeply troubling.

Abortion. There is a clause in the new constitution that many argue legalizes abortion. Something that many Christian and certainly Muslim Kenyans oppose.

The land commission. The new constitution establishes a land commission that can redistribute land that it finds has been acquired illegally. On the face of it this sounds like a good thing right? And perhaps it is. But it could be turned into a mechanism for grabbing and redistributing land in a kind of political spoils system. Has anyone heard of Zimbabwe?

Regionalism. If I understand it correctly the new constitution represents a huge shift of political power from the central government to a new(?) system of counties. Normally I would appreciate this sort of change because of my belief in federalism and decentralized government. But the concern is that this may balkanize Kenya into regions that have strong tribal and/or religious identities. “If you belong to such-and-such tribe you should not live here. You should move to that region over there”. (And to a certain extent this is what we saw happen in the aftermath of the 2007 election.) “If you are Christian you do not belong in this country unless you want to live under sharia“.

It is troubling that only a simple majority was needed to approve this new constitution. A radical transformation of the political structure of Kenya and all you need is 50.1%? Think about what is takes just to amend the United States Constitution. Significant changes require the support of a significant majority.

Put two of these concerns together and what you may have is Kenya becoming increasingly divided along tribal and religious lines.

I should note that this is one perspective. There may be many positive changes in the new constitution. And there are some - such as this AllAfrica writer – who would argue that the above concerns are invalid.

So why given these concerns did seventy percent of Kenyans – which mitigates the concern over the need for a simple majority – vote Yes?

The new constitution is in part a reaction to the violence of 2007. “If we have this new constitution that sort of thing will not happen again”. It may be that for many Kenyans the desire for change was stronger than their concern over particular problems with the draft constitution. Does that sound familiar?

(The above argument is dangerous because it resembles the dismissive “the people don’t know what they’re doing” rhetoric we also hear from the social-cultural-political elite in the United States.)

Another key argument by those in the Yes camp was that sure the draft constitution has problems. But let us pass it because of all the positive changes it will bring. And then we can revise and amend it later. Does that also sound familiar? “We need to pass this so we will know what’s in it”.

We must also note American involvement in this process. The Obama administration – through Vice President Biden and Secretary of State Clinton and Ambassador Ranneberger – has taken an active role in encouraging if not pressuring Kenya to adopt the new constitution.

• Biden says new constitution would strengthen Kenya (article leans pro-Yes)
• Obama Administration Pressured Kenya to Adopt Constitution (articles leans strong pro-No)
• U.S. Envoy Tells Public to Decide Nation’s Fate (strange article – makes it sounds like Ranneberger takes no position at all)
• Clinton, Africa Experts Laud Kenya Constitution Reform Process (at least the American government admits openly what position they took)

It probably did not help the No movement that former president Moi spoke against the new constitution.

Is this simply reform? Or is this a quiet revolution? In which in the name of reform Kenyan society and politics have been fundamentally changed? Dare we ask who stands to benefit?

And is this what is happening in America? A quiet revolution? Dare we ask who stands to benefit from all the hundreds of billions of dollars spent and thousands of pages of legislation passed during the last eighteen months? And whether future generations will be able to undo whatever damage has been done to our society?