A recipe for tyranny
A recipe for tyrannyBy Editor
Thursday September 20, 2007 [04:00]
THERE is need for all our politicians to have a correct view of politics. It is clear that our politicians do not really understand the meaning and value of multiparty politics. And this is being demonstrated by the unending defections between or among our political parties.
Every week we are seeing some politicians being paraded by one party or another after joining or re-joining them. All our political parties seem to take pride in defectors. They don’t seem to detest them. Today they can be denouncing those who have defected from them as traitors, but the following day they are parading defectors from another political party as heroes. And this game is played repetitively, it never seems to end.
It would seem our politics is not much different from a soccer league where players are transferred so easily from one club to another. Actually, players don’t seem to move that fast and so much between clubs as our politicians do between political parties. Soccer players are rarely transferred during the season - movements usually occur at the end of the season. But there doesn’t seem to be a season for our politicians, they move at any time as long as they see some personal benefit by doing so.
What is shocking is that even though the character and opportunism of these defectors is well-known they are still welcomed at the highest level of all our political parties. Even in the MMD, party leader Levy Mwanawasa has no problems welcoming into the MMD questionable elements like Syacheye Madyenkuku.
Syacheye has demonstrated frightening political bankruptcy and opportunism. This is the politician who last year was at the centre of tribal politics, trying to champion in the most opportunistic way tribal hegemony in the UPND. And he was tolerated and in some cases defended by the leadership of that party.
But today the people who defended Syacheye’s politics of tribalism have the courage to denounce him for it. And they expect the people of this country to have respect for them. This shows that they are denouncing him not necessarily because they don’t agree with his politics but simply because Syacheye has crossed to the MMD. This is not consistency. This is not principled politics. This is opportunism similar to that of the man they are denouncing.
It is also questionable why political leaders who claim to have integrity, who claim to be morally upright should condone and encourage this type of politics. Of what value is Syacheye to MMD or indeed to Levy himself? If Syacheye is of value to the MMD then the character of MMD should be questioned.
We do appreciate the fact that there is an explanation for everything and everything can be justified. But the justification Syacheye is trying to put up for his seemingly unending defections does not make sense; it is illogical. Syacheye is not ashamed to tell Zambians that it is not right for them to remain in opposition for the purpose of sustaining multiparty democracy.
To him multiparty democracy can easily be sacrificed on the altar of political convenience as long as the price is right. He says “we are not born to sustain multiparty system by being in opposition, under the guise of protecting the multiparty democracy even if government is doing the right things.
We will not be honest in our quest to serve our people through politics, if we did not acknowledge publicly... We cannot afford to differ even though there is nothing to differ.” What type of nonsense is this? Does it mean if the party that is in power is doing well then all opposition leaders should cross the floor and join the ruling party? If they do so what will remain of our multiparty political system? Practically nothing. It will only be there in name and not in practice.
We know Syacheye and his friends don’t care about that. They don’t care about that as long as they are in the ruling party and are eating. Multiparty democracy means very little, if not nothing, to politicians like Syacheye. Imagine what would happen to multiparty democracy in the West if their politicians were like ours.
By now there would only be one party in Britain - the Labour Party.
These political leaders of ours don’t care much about developing a strong multiparty political system in the country. They don’t mind having a one party state as long as they are prominent in it and are not marginalised in any way.
But they are forgetting that a single party state in whatever form, except at rare moments in history, is a recipe for tyranny. We have learnt from the Soviet experience and from the African experience that the one party system of government where one political party presents itself as a godfather of society is a disaster.
What Syacheye and his friends are forgetting is that a good opposition helps those in government to perform better. And moreover, in a well-functioning multiparty democracy the opposition is part of government. We know this is a difficult concept for most of our politicians to understand and accept.
However, this idea is a vital one. It means, in essence, that in a multiparty democracy all sides share a common commitment to its basic values. No matter who wins and forms government, both sides agree to cooperate in solving the common problems of society. This is what is often called “loyal opposition”.
The opposition is loyal not to the specific policies of those in government, but to the fundamental legitimacy of the state, and to the multiparty democratic process itself. Where there is weaker opposition those in government may not perform that well.
Syacheye should just tell the truth about his reasons for re-joining the MMD. The true reasons for his re-joining the ruling party seem to be nothing but opportunism. Looking at him, it is clear that things are not well, the economy is biting and he needs a job. But it will not be right for Levy or the MMD to give Syacheye a job.
The MMD is not short of better men and women without jobs to fill up any vacancies that may arise. Syacheye is not leadership material and should be left as an ordinary member of the MMD.
This may also help to keep political opportunists who seem to be making a living from political party crossings. These defections are not helping to strengthen our political parties; they are weakening them.
And the success of a multiparty political system depends on the strength and stability of its political parties. It is not enough to have one strong and stable political party. We need many strong and stable political parties to have a strong and stable multiparty political dispensation.
For these reasons, we urge all our political leaders to discourage, and not to encourage, political party defections. They are not good for our country, its development and multiparty democracy.
posted by MrK @ 5:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home