They find some support among those in the West who want our bosses declared respectable so that they can do business deals with our rulers before the Chinese grab everything. Let's not fall into the trap of believing that "my enemy's enemy is my friend", especially when we hear talk of "re-engaging with the West". The ground is shifting, enemies are reconsidering alliances. We need to look at the essentials.
The most important aim should be the greatest possible good of all the people. Of course, some people's interests may need to give way to those whose need is greater, so government needs to be on the side of the less privileged.
That can only happen when government listens to the poor and respects them. The best guarantee that government will do that is when all the people elect them and can vote them out. The remarkable increase in welfare provisions in much of Europe in the last century followed years of mass demands for better working conditions, which led to the forming of powerful trade unions and workers' parties, and for a voice in government, which led to every adult getting the vote.
Giving the people a real share in decision-making is the best guarantee. "Fixing the economy first" as too many of our self-appointed political analysts propose, is putting the cart before the horse. Who decides how the economy is to be fixed? Is it to be designed to produce maximum profit for a few, which here means the small number of men and women who already own most of our country's wealth?
Or does the economy need redesigning to provide the basic needs of everybody? In that case, it is the one who wears the shoe who knows where it pinches. Poor people know they need clean water before they have tiled floors in their kitchens. They know they need bread or sadza before cake.
Some argue that the obstacles are so great that we need a "strongman". There have been good strongmen in history. China's history for the past 2000 years could be summed up as a story of a good Emperor who overthrew a corrupt one, made many reforms, usually to benefit the poor and those who had been oppressed and exploited by the previous regime, and established a new dynasty.
He was succeeded by a son who was not so good, a grandson who was worse and so on until his dynasty was ended by another good emperor. The future might see Mao Zedong as a good emperor, though I reckon Deng Xiaoping deserves the title more.
Unfortunately that system depends on one man, and if he has all the power, he's more easily corrupted.
Jerry Rawlings in Ghana proved a good strongman; he came to power in a coup, made some popular changes, resigned, and was re-elected. Thomas Sankara still inspires his people after the 26-year rule of his murderer. Maybe Nigeria's Buhari is a good strongman, but I don't see a Rawlings, Sankara or Buhari on our horizon. I'd rather trust the people.
Post published in: Analysis