Maravi

The pact and the problem of insincerity

The pact and the problem of insincerity
By The Post
Fri 23 July 2010, 04:00 CAT

It seems there is a serious problem of insincerity and dishonesty in the PF-UPND pact. And probably, this is why Michael Sata is demanding sincerity in this pact.
We all know very well that this pact will not work if it is not founded on sincerity and honesty. And in any pact or alliance, those involved in it have to accept the integrity of their partners. If they fail to do so, it will not be possible for them to build a meaningful or viable partnership.

We say this because a pact that lacks sincerity will have intra-pact strife which will inevitably result in pact members’ concentration on discords, distracting the pact from effective and efficient political campaigns and day to day work among the masses. And this will inevitably lead to loss of public support and influence.

Sata’s demand for sincerity in the pact can be seen as an admission that this virtue is lacking in the PF and UPND electoral alliance. And this lack of sincerity in the pact is also confirmed by the statements attributed to Copperbelt UPND provincial chairperson Elisha Matambo, who is also in the party’s National Management Committee.

Matambo is said to have expressed disappointment with the behavior of the PF and urged them to respect the UPND as an equal, and not junior, partner who was equally strong on the Copperbelt. It seems there is no meeting of hearts in this pact. Sata says it is a matter of fact that the PF is bigger than UPND.

But the UPND believes the two parties are of equal strength. Is there sincerity and honesty in these claims? Is the PF bigger than the UPND? Is the UPND of equal strength with the PF on the Copperbelt?

Are these two political parties valuing themselves at their true worth? Is there sincerity and honesty in their view of themselves and that of their pact partners? Is this truly and sincerely a pact of two political parties of equal political strength?

Honest and sincere answers to these questions will be of great value to the leadership and members of PF and UPND because their alliance is based on what they believe each one of them is going to contribute to the electoral performance of the pact.

And probably the measure one brings in may influence or determine the measure one receives through adoptions for local government, parliamentary and presidential elections.

It is because of the possibility of this that attempts are being made to inflate the levels of one’s political strength. If PF is truly larger than UPND, then this is not a pact of equals because there is a senior and a junior partner in this alliance.

And this disparity may influence the size or number of seats each party takes and indeed which party will supply the pact’s presidential candidate. However, this is not to say that the pact partners cannot adopt different criteria for their adoptions that have nothing to do with their relative sizes.

But listening to Sata and Matambo, it seems relative size is a factor in this PF-UPND pact because both of them are talking about being bigger or being equally strong. And if these are important factors in this pact, then there will be need for honesty and sincerity in their measurement. And sincerity is generally understood to be truth in word and act.

One who means what he says is a sincere person. One who does not mean what he says is not a sincere person, and is perhaps even a hypocrite. And because of its purity, the term ‘sincerity’ has endeared itself to us. We love sincere people. We also love to be known as sincere people.

By ‘sincere’, we understand that the person acts to his conscience. If he acts according to the dictates of his conscience, we accept his sincerity. In that case, he is sincere to himself. In society, this is acceptable as sincerity, but this may be wrong.

Suppose a manager feels that according to his sincere conscience the clerk has to be treated as a second-class citizen, he may be sincere but the world outside may not accept it. He may be sincere but his own conscience may be underdeveloped. It is not enough to act according to the conscience; the conscience must also be cultured and noble.

Of all the levels of sincerity, mental sincerity is the easiest. If we leave aside blatantly insincere people such as liars, clever crooks, and so on and so forth, and really examine their beliefs, several facets of sincerity will emerge.

One can sincerely believe in a false idea – one can think is of equal strength with his partner when this is clearly not so, or one can think is bigger than his partner when this is plainly not so. This belief stands in the way of their progress. Sincerity should also be rational and intelligent and not foolish. It is not enough to be sincere, you must also be right.

A certain wrong belief about ourselves can have tragic consequences for our growth. An insincere political party cadre is perhaps able, by his cleverness, to convince the leadership of his party that he is the most influential, the best political organiser in an area and therefore indispensable to the party. Sometimes he comes to believe himself in his ‘ability’.

If he is a sensitive person, capable of further progress in life, the belief acts like a black cover over his soul and prevents him from any progress. Sometimes people wrongly believe, in all sincerity that their partner is the cause of all their problems.

But the problems they encounter in life, the blocks to their success, are really centered in themselves. These people lose a golden opportunity for progress. Their false view of themselves allows them to even commit outrages on the society. It does not matter they fool others, but it is a pity they fool themselves.

We can call them sincerely insincere people. Most of us have such a streak in one thing or another. Unless and until we come forward to shed this aspect of sincere insincerity, the inner light will not shine forth.

It is open to everyone to make his sincerity greater and greater every day. One can start by being guided by his conscience and becoming conscientious. One bases his sincerity on right information and socially acceptable intelligence, not sincere foolishness.

Insincerity is always weakness; sincerity even in error is strength. We should therefore go on trying to be sincere.

Each day we put on a mask, and we must take it off little by little. Sincerity does not and cannot substitute for truth. And sincerity is impossible, unless it pervades the whole being, and the pretence of it saps the very foundation of character.

Every person alone is sincere. At the entrance of a second person, hypocrisy begins. Clearly, sincerity is an openness of heart; we find it in very few people; what we usually see is only an artful dissimulation to win the confidence of others.

We ought to see far enough into a hypocrite to see even his sincerity. Sincerity makes the very least person to be of more value than the most talented hypocrite. But sincerity is always subject to proof.
Sincerity may be humble but she cannot be servile.

Looked at in this way, it’s clear that many things will need to change in the way the PF and UPND are dealing with each other for their pact to succeed and be of value to the Zambian people.

At the moment, there is too much posturing without addressing the real issues that will make their pact work. But like any structure that is anchored on a weak foundation, the pact if it doesn’t quickly address the problems arising from its weak foundation and make it strong, it is bound to have gigantic cracks that will permanently render it not viable.

Labels: CHILUFYA SATA, ELISHA MATAMBO, HAKAINDE HICHILEMA, PF-UPND

posted by MrK @ 2:27 PM