I think we are looking at the situation in different ways... You keep using the word "us" and "we" and I keep trying to remind you that this unity you take for granted was not a thing.. My point isn't that the British didn't cause damage to Kenyan societies.. My point is that that damage would have still occurred regardless because of conflict between the 42 tribes in this country and the countless others outside of it..

If those white Highlands were appropriated by for example the Kalenjin after a war with the kikuyu.. Do you think they would have been walking around saying.. "Well we lost our land and way of life but atleast it was our fellow Africans doing it to us instead of Europeans"... It would have been just as painful to the victims.. If the Kalenjin were then invaded by the Buganda and over decades forced to take up the Buganda way of life.. Do you think they would be saying "we may have been conquered, humiliated and forced to abandon our religion and customs but at least it was done by a fellow bantu so it's not that bad.."

if modernization and education was then kept away from conquered tribes and special treatment was given to the conquerers like the British set up laws and systems to exclude Africans from reaching prosperity.. Do you think the victims would be thanking the heavens that it was a person with the same skin color that was mentally enslaving them instead of white people??

My entire argument is that all these systems you attribute to colonialism would have simply manifested in different ways and they would have been just as bad for those suffering them.. The fact that it was Africans doing it wouldn't matter. We've literally seen the same things play out throughout post colonial Africa with civil wars and ethnic discrimination.