How is it possible that a President can publicly claim that his government is pro-youth yet it’s policies led to increased youth unemployment, banishment of youth, 100 000 children out of school and 250 000 learners dropping out, and 60 000 graduates sitting at home? How is it possible for the hungry masses seated at a stadium, some of them diagnosed with malnutrition, to clap hands as they witness belly-full politicians enjoying the cake at the 58th anniversary of their political party? Answers to these questions requires illustrations of the order and meaning of things. Political scientist Prince Mashele provides counselling on what should happen when the masses discovers that it is the material condition of the people as a whole and not the specious promises of elites that should guide their action. He writes; “what is more important is to accept that what is gone is gone. The children who refuse to leave the graveside after burying their father who was a breadwinner are bound to succumb to starvation. It does not matter how violently you sob, the dead will never return.”
How does it start? A reoccurring theme in post-colonial African leadership, particularly authoritarian regimes, is the thirst for control of public opinion and consciousness. African authoritarian leaders were always envious of the Bishops. They salivated for a situation where their words speedily and unquestionably sinks into citizens minds. Indeed, their wish is for the political congregation (citizens) respond to their political sermons with only one word; the political Amen. Bishops have the bibles and the Christian doctrine as a basis of their legitimacy. To overcome this obstacle, African authoritarian leaders created doctrines of their own. The doctrines served three interconnected purposes; (a) to elevate the leader to the level of serious thinker or demi-God, (b) to shield and divert attention from the personal conduct of the leader for all analysis must be to the programs under the doctrine, (c) and to serve the manipulative purposes of public discourse.
Zambia’s Kenneth Kaunda concocted a doctrine called ‘Humanism’ to elevating him philosophically and enabling him to amass moral legitimacy. Resultantly, insignificant things such as what he carried made national news. His white handkerchief (also used for nose cleaning) he usually waved became a symbol of leadership. Unemployed woman would jump at the site of Kaunda's handkerchief. If you disagree research the public auction of this nose-cleaning cloth. Kaunda's entire rule of Zambia was under the State of Emergency. He established a one-party dictatorship while brainwashed citizens were waiting for the next waiving of his handkerchief. In private, SWAPO veterans would disclose Kaunda’s role in the party's relocation of its headquarters from Zambia to Angola. Zambia still battles in dealing with Kaunda’s legacy who was arrested by his successor President Frederick Chiluba. All the subsequent president that followed, apart from those who died, were arrested after leaving office. Current President Edgar Lungu recently arrested his opponent Hakainde Hichilema, for failing to make way for his cars.
To project himself as a thinker, Kenya’s Daniel Arap Moi concocted a doctrine called ‘’nyayo’ (footsteps), casting himself as a confidant of the departed Founding President Jomo Kenyatta. Listen to him; “I call on all Ministers and Assistant Ministers and every other person to sing like parrots. During Mzee Kenyatta's period, I persistently sang the Kenyatta tune…Therefore you ought to sing the song I sing. If I put a full stop, you should put a full stop. This is how the country will move forward. The day you become a big person, you will have the liberty to sing your own song and everybody will sing it”. Those who didn’t follow his ‘footsteps’ where sent to ‘Nyayo House’ – a 26 story government building build in the early 1980s wherein political activists, academics and journalists not following the ‘footsteps’ were tortured. Kenya is still battling the legacy of the Nyayo dictatorship.
President Geingob concoction of ‘Harambee’ – a Kenyan word for ‘pulling together’ aligns to the thinking to President Moi. As it were with the Nyayo, everyone is expected to sing the Harambee song and put a full stop when Geingob does so. There are consequences of those who don’t put the full stop – examples are many. Like the nyayo’s corruption harambee is becoming synonymous to corruption. 13 of 28 Cabinet Ministers, representing 46% of Cabinet, are either frequenting courts on corruption, associated with corrupt transactions and individuals, subjects of corruption investigation or associated with misappropriation of public resources. Speaking to his ministers, Geingob followed Moi’s path on loyalty; “some are saying the [Harambee plan] was never approved by Cabinet. It is my programme, it is not a cabinet programme…After all, some are appointed by me including you. So, if you do not agree with it…you resign”. Even the Cabinet 46% requires of citizens to follow their ‘nyayo’. This author is facing Geingob’s Justice Minister, Sacky Shanghala, in court for correctly observing that Shanghala is Namibia’s corruption symbol. This author is further aware of the pressure exerted on Namibian institutions of higher learning to block or eject those not following the harambee ‘nyayo’ - it is characteristic of African authoritarianism.
Like ‘nyayo’, there is evidence that harambee sloganeering seek (a) to elevate the leader to the level of serious thinker or demi-God, (b) to shield and divert attention from the personal conduct of the leader for all analysis must be to the programs under the doctrine, (c) and to serve the manipulative purposes of public discourse. That there are citizens succumbing to political manipulation is not the grounds for the critical voices to subdue. It was the silence of critical voices that allowed Kaunda and Moi to make a joke of Kenya and Zambia. It was the silence and surrendering of critical voices that both Kenya and Zambia still struggles to recover from the legacy of the ‘nyayo’ and ‘humanism’ dictatorship. Those of you choosing to look the other way, preferring ‘safety’, comfort and stomach above the future of our country must think of an answer to the question of your grandchildren; ‘grandfather/mother, what did you do when Namibia started to degenerate?’
Job Shipululo Amupanda is a Senior Lecturer (political science) at the University of Namibia and a Decolonial Scholar and Activist with the Affirmative Repositioning movement. Email: jamupanda@unam.na
*An edited version of this article was originally published in the The Namibian newspaper (May 2018)