Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:33:40 +0000
By Ngande Mwanajiti
Hostile to Democracy?
WHEN one fails to manage ego and expectations, arising out of frustration, some citizens become hostile to democracy and engage in acts of betrayal. Some are hostile because they plan to and others hostile only as respondents or just criminally minded.
Here, I am talking about what appears to have engulfed political platforms and social media posts. Topical, has been the overall governance of Zambia, wherein challenges and induced problems manifest in hostile commentaries on radio as well as orchestrated news items that speak to disap-pointment.
The most worrying trend is that some individuals have given themselves the “task” of distributing falsehoods, using “Watch-Tower” methods and the mass media.
They claim and lie that the country would have been better off, if an opposition political party was voted in power. Really? Such was recorded in 1964, 1991, 1996, 2011, 2015 and 2016, yet poverty as we know it, remains a problem, be-yond any political party. Is this a circus?
Nobody can deny the fact that the Zambian econ-omy of 1964/1991 is not the same economy as the 2016 one. Trust me, if the powers that be had halted assistance to Zambia in 1991, the country would have witnessed serious economic, social and political tremors.
Ever been so hungry? You see, it is normal for hungry people to be in a hurry, for hungry people to be over expectant etc. Many may have read or know of the post 1964 political realignments.
Arising out of hunger/greed some groups felt they deserved more than others, and some individuals expected a Lion’s share while the general citizenry thought a government led by a black President must end all suffering (The Trump “theory.”)
So, while accepting democracy, the pressure on President Kaunda to distribute benefits was real and that explains some of the political challenges that the first black government faced. An out-come of such has been compromised production, political patronage as well as sacrificing merit at the Altar of partisan politics.
But as of 2018 we are almost 54 years old and going back to where we came from and what we rejected is just unthinkable. Should we eat our vomit?
Each era or epoch, has had its own peculiar challenges. One of the challenges of the post 1991 society and therefore government was managing the transition from the One Party state to a multi-party political dispensation. Unfortunately, not much was done on the political front.
By contrast, a lot was haphazardly done on the economic front. The adverse privatisation programme was introduced and fast tracked. Yes, there was massive suffering from many retrenched employees whose departure from employment was not negotiated/optional. The trigger of suffering was pulled by the Zambia Privatisation Agency!
It was a common sight to see men in particular hanging around taverns and markets appearing to be busy when in fact not. This actually saw the birth of what we call “con-men or con-women.” We saw a graduation from common petty thieving to serious manipulators – the equivalent of 419 in Nigeria.
The more reasonable and entrepreneurial citizens resorted to street vending and other tolerable but equally dangerous activities.
Other than solely relying on specific legislation, such as the Public Health Act, Town and Country Planning Act, the Public Order Act, etc, I want to hazard a view that the response to the unplanned situation and transition remains terribly inade-quate. We can do better and we should plan to do better! This is what the learned French scholar Rene Dumont referred to in his book “A False Start in Africa.”
The belief that vendors carry with them a lot of political power is problematic and responds to an-archy. If this belief is correct, then it is only logi-cal that the equivalent of vendors in political for-mations; equally carry a lot of power!
I see this as a problem, which we are not responding to as we should. It is neither a sin nor a crime to engage in vending. Equally, it is neither a sin nor a crime to be a party cadre. It is just how we manage and align these groups in order to pro-duce a Win-Win outcome.
Friends, promoting activities that undermine insti-tutions of the government of the day; howsoever done; is not only hostile but a blatant stand against democracy and the rule of law.
It offends the commonly held view, which is correct that Zambia is a sovereign state.
My simple understanding is that a State is com-posed of citizens who are expected to be loyal and patriotic towards it. It is hostile, to engage in any-thing or things that by themselves or implication; complicate governance.
Let us take the failed International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme. The programme failed due to an unsatisfactory economic performance. That is the official position. The IMF or its allies as far as I know “do not take political considerations in making a decision.”
But, that said, we all know that this is a decision which has several implications for the economy, socially and in particular, its politics. Among many implications, it has the potential of crippling government and/by direct implication, the Treasury. I doubt this was the intention!
Suffice to say, neither the IMF nor its allies are immune to societal dynamics. Reports from re-spective political officers and some media chan-nels, including political commentators, create an unhelpful and hostile context.
If all sides are properly captured, a different picture emerges regarding consensus on fundamen-tals. These include dealing with the IMF professionally, so that a different result may register!
Hard politics considered, the Zambian President is HE Edgar Chagwa Lungu, the Lawyer, once Deputy Minister in the Office of the Vice President, former Home Affairs Minister, Former Justice Minister, Former Defence Minister, former Secretary General of the Patriotic Front (PF) and former Member of Parliament for Chawama Constituency. The whole world is at peace with this reality, including all former Ministers, who have actually betrayed Zambia. (I wonder why appoin-tees take oath!)
So, since elections are only coming through in 2021, why would parties in the opposition claim that President Edgar Lungu is campaigning, when it is a fact that his Constituency is the whole Zambia and he has a constitutional duty to ensure that his government functions well?
Is this why some opposition parties are actually campaigning and decampaigning President Lungu and the Patriotic Front?
I consider this as a confirmation that some opposition political parties and citizens are hostile to democracy.
Yes, it is alright to be very confident of winning a soccer match or indeed an election. But it is not alright to argue as Donald Trump in America argued that, he can only lose if the government rigged.
Well, well, a mouth full of accusations and insin-uations. In the case of President Trump, maybe he knew what he was talking about, but from this end and my take, I would consider such a posture as a mark of hostility towards democracy. See what has been reported about President Trump’s performance?
The last two weeks, I have talked about the fact that the Zambian government which some opposition leaders condemn for literally everything, including natural occurrences, (even insurance companies will avoid paying the insured) impressed me so much by its response to the cholera outbreak.
Staying with the cholera example: Cholera does not drive itself to infect persons, and communities etc! Conditions, created by persons, must exist for it to become a menace!
Is anybody taking responsibility for the cholera outbreak? Would it be too much of a conspiracy theory to accuse those that blame Government for the outbreak of disease as “silent drivers”?
Put it this way: Zambia has been fighting the cholera outbreak and there has been impressive donor support. Zambia may face crop failure, which 15 years ago, would have meant importing maize!
The IMF deal did not work out! There are ele-ments, masquerading as one thing but in reality are rebels, without a cause! Then there are intra and inter-party feuding!
These, when packed into one – as may be the case, become a potent force of internal insurrec-tion and therefore a danger to the government of the day. How then can anybody be proud of “fighting” the government of the day? What hap-pens when the said government fights back legal-ly and legitimately?
As I alluded last week, every coin has two sides. For instance what I am writing here is my side and there could be another side which could be dia-metrically opposed to my side. I would be wrong to condemn it. Rather, I should say and I am say-ing, bring it on, let’s see which side reflects our reality better.
In short, if “we are democrats” we must then learn to lead, be led, learn to compromise and coalesce on national issues. Campaigning for any political party or personal cause is not a national issue! It is for this reason that, I can confidently argue that NO embassy here in Zambia, will formally sup-port a political party. Never!
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Zambians, please do not be misled. In 2016, there was an unfortunate and problematic campaign against the enhanced Bill of Rights. It failed. The loser is Zambia and not any person or political party!
Why are we hostile to Democracy?
See you next week.
Comments: ngandem12@gmail.com Mo-biles/SMS 0955776191 and 0977776191
