I recently went for an interview for a job. To my surprise, (or did I really expect to be the only one called for this interview) there were about just over thirty of us, all-competing for the same few posts that the organization could spare for us, the ‘C4 scalers’. There was absolutely no mistaking who the boss(es) was or were. It was quite obvious. The bosses came up with all the terms of engagement even before they knew (if at all they cared) what our varied preferences for the interview would be.
There existed within the atmosphere at that interview, an unseen constitution to which we all (prospective employees) respected without question. In like manner we signed an unwritten or un-negotiated Declaration that we unanimously ‘take an oath’ if you like to abide by those rules which were in actual fact never made available for either our perusal or negotiation. However, each party to this ‘deal’ understood the terms and were all prepared to consciously make the necessary effort required to ensure that we all abide by these unseen terms and conditions.
I want to liken the process I just sketched above to the ‘polling process’ in which we the citizens or compatriots of the electoral candidates, who have heeded the call for the expression of interest for whatever position in the system or the democratic process to which we aspire as electorates ultimately engage.
Suffice it to say the two, above; all lead to a singular goal: employment. And in both cases there is an employee and the employer or the boss-element. Often in political lingua franca especially in Botswana my home country, a Tswana word, often metaphorically over burdened with euphemism is preferred by the vote-seekers (bo nthlopheng). Quoting the former president, H.E President Festus Mogae at one of his farewell speeches at Mochudi, he categorically used the phrase “nne le nthumile… to describe his tenure in office.
This phrase so heavily burdened with a romanticized accent bothering on rhetoric is the root word /ROMA/ meaning to send or rightly so, implying the one who has been sent to do something. However, I often find quite a huge disparity between the linguistic usage of this word and what then actually translates into its actual meaning in practice, i.e. contextual meaning as evidenced by the democratic atmosphere or the articulation thereof by both the voter and the voted.
It is this very disturbing anomaly that I want to base my writing on. Peradventure I strike a cord and offer a distinctive ray of linguistic knowledge between the black, grey and white areas as subsumed and confused often within this lexico-grammatical continuum.
What I principally want to make clear is that democracy is a true democracy only if the voice of the voter determines what goes and what doesn’t. Secondly I want to clearly state to both parties to this system that the voter is in fact the employer and the voted is therefore the employed and thirdly I want to suggest that, this being the case then means that whatever decisions are made or are to be made, the employer and the employee ought to have discussed it thoroughly and in the end, the employers’ word goes and never the other way round. Otherwise a compromise should be entered into and still then the ultimate objective of this rigorous process should be that all parties stand to benefit equally out of this process.
The reason I am going to call the relationship I am painting here with word-pictures a pseudo-demo-dictatorship is because the actual process of democracy is only lived in the minds of the voter but never in practice. The ideologically phrased words such as the one idiom specific to the Botswana process are such hypnotic tools the politician has coined and exploited to the utter detriment of the unsuspecting electorates. The painful truth, however, is that these sexed-up words and phrases only find currency when they conveniently serve and propel the purposes of the employee and not even that of the employer. Else we would say the employer is abusing the employee. Otherwise the way things are manifest now, I find it hard even to coin a word or term for it.
However, Professor Graham Murdock of Loughborough University has identified the implications of the media for the democratic process by making references to the different dimensions of what constitutes citizenship. He identifies three important ways in which the communication media contribute to the constitution of citizenship.
Firstly, according to Murdock, in order for people to be able to exercise their full rights as citizens, they must have access to the information on what their rights are. But how many Africans or at least Zimbabweans especially those who worship Mugabe, has access to the information that made him so obdurate about staying in power at any cost? If people knew what they don’t wouldn’t they be also as equally adamant as he is to see him off the state house of Zimbabwe? However, I also want you to realize that there are those in life who are born-scared. All they are capable of is DENIAL for fear of facing REALITY. And to those NOTHING can be done.
Otherwise, according to Murdock, they would need advice on, and analysis of, how they are to pursue these rights to which they are barred, effectively.
Secondly, Professor Graham Murdock, with whom I fully concur, suggests that, the citizens of any given country, however small or insignificant in the eyes of the international or affilliative bodies, all such citizens must have access to the broadest possible range of information, interpretation and debate on areas that involve public political choices, representing a wide range of viewpoints.They must, according to Graham Murdock (ibid) be able to use media of different kinds to register and express criticism and come forward with alternative models for development.
In Zimbabwe, whether or not the people had full information or were able to use media of different kinds, fact remains that the people “came forward with an alternative model of governance under the banner and emblem of the Tsvangirai regime. To the people of Zimbabwe the Mugabe model of governance is obsolete, but not quite to the Mbeki Mediation and in part also to the diplomatic SADC and the newly formed AU conglomerate. Whether or not the people of Zimbabwe want Mugabe or not, these conglomerates and mediation-supermarkets still stocks Mugabe. What happens to “customer is king” is it a phrase relevant only in movies like, “I AM SAM or what?” I thought it would go a mile deeper than that. But I guess I was wrong, I think I watch too much movies!
Murdock further says that citizens should be able to use the media “on the basis of information and interpretation of events in the local, national and international scene”. I recently watched Botswana TV and was amazed to find a man, an intellectual I used to respect prior to that broadcast firmly endorsing the rags-of-a government and a country to which Mugabe is taking the nation of Zimbabwe. The language, the zeal and blind passion this man displayed left my stomach in knot so growling I was completely lost of speech. I was reminded of a scripture in the Bible that rightly asserts that “…they have eyes yet they don’t see”.
I wondered how big a set of eyes a Christian needs or desire if he or she can’t see the highly magnified trashing of human rights in the country of Zimbabwe through the Holy Spirit enabled eyes. It’s amazing that this man is from Zimbabwe and he works in Botswana, not in Zimbabwe. If Zimbabwe is such a diamond or a gem of a country then why is he not buying a bakkie and go back to Zimbabwe and get three or four loads full of Zim Dollars each month than take few Pulas from my country, and in fact he might be occupying some other man’s job. Unemployment in Botswana is soaring high these days and Batswana are just as skilled.
Thirdly, and lastly, still concurring with Professor Graham Murdock, people must be able to recognize themselves and their aspirations, their cultures and life styles, in the range of representations on offer within the various media, be it political and they should be able to contribute to developing and extending these representations to the development not only of themselves individually but also of their wider communities through an amelioration of governance that transcends pretence and hypocritical consent.
Zimbabwe (and Africa) wake up and smell the brewing coffee!
No comments:
Post a Comment