Saying this, Eurocentric works on "rainmakers" or "royal leaders" have all supported "primitive", "backward", and traditional representations. The evidence provided by British administrators during colonial rule never prohibited or demonized the making of rain. As Sanders comments, “the issue of rain production is one that must be approached with the utmost caution.” This is because the “traditional” production of rain and kingdom was linked to “modernity”. For witchcraft to exist, they had to bring rain. By turning these rainmakers into rulers, at least some traditions could exist. This case study reflects, at a political level, an example of the ways in which "traditional" powers have been negotiated by "modern" colonial powers, and can be seen as contrasting with the typical colonialist inferiority/superiority complexes associated with perceived unequal energy relationships. Good Furthermore, given the evolutionary nature of witchcraft and the way in which some witchcraft was imposed in some areas by colonial rulers in nations such as Botswana and Namibia, the belief of a number of colonial authors, such as Levy & Fallers() was that practice would become obsolete, discarded, and replaced by modern institutions of government. “Indigenous structures and practices were destined to disappear” (Levy). However, in a postcolonial context, these predictions never materialized in a postcolonial world. Its ability to "set the sails to different political winds, without capitulating or facing them head-on" (Pinkney) explained its ability to survive in various unstable political terrains, not least the periods of decline following independence, and the periods in which local communities government structures were served... middle of paper... politics in a postcolonial context is obvious, as politics is generally thought to be concerned with the distribution of power in society, religious texts are at least implicitly politicians in nature." Religious discourse therefore has implications for states that, as mentioned above, show signs of political fragility, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the modern “state” hardly functions at all. This is summarized by Ellis & Haar () who state “such discourses are not devoid of political meaning in an African context, where there are deeply rooted concepts of power that tend to merge the religious and the political, and where such movements acquire a public role specific when state institutions have rotted.” It would therefore be more accurate to refer to witchcraft or the revival of religion in the occupation of political space.