Those that want to be well-governed must look among themselves with a microscope to find the best among themselves to run their affairs. It is within their competence to entice anyone to avail himself to run the country’s affairs if they recognise the potential of capacity, commitment and ethics.
It is not the sole prerogative of those who have organised themselves into political parties that are to be selling themselves to the population. Political parties arise from people with similar thinking herded into some camps, mostly around the charisma of some leader.
Such camps are not necessarily bad or good. However, they do not differ from charismatic churches in their propensity to be predators on vulnerable masses. It is precisely the expectation that those camps that want to run the country are the only ones expected to canvass the population for votes and be elected that leads to crooks with a mission (of securing themselves income, not taking the country forward) getting to avail themselves and engaging in canvassing for votes, ending up mandated to run our affairs.
Any electorate that does not appoint a government so that it can make the country and it’s people the best is useless. Unfortunately, the overriding consideration in elections in SA is the feelgood sensation of association with celebrity. Once something is portrayed as “great” or “important” in the media, everyone wants to be associated with it. In SA, to be taken seriously you have to be a celebrity. This is where the media does injustice to the country. Celebrities are of commercial benefit to the business of the media.
Therefore, they punt characters with celebrity status as “leaders” without linking it to any value such “leader” brings or has brought to society (let alone downplaying indiscretions, however serious, of such character). The overall effect is that the public is unable to distinguish between what is of value to them and the good feeling generated by idolisation of a charismatic individual.
If only 1% of such a population vote for you, you are regarded as useless. Funny enough, when Helen Suzman was the sole MP of the Progressive Party, having been rejected by the majority of the white electorate, she was taken seriously on the basis of what she stood for.
Currently it does not matter what you stand for, neither does it matter that your performance in your duty proves you to be incapable of doing the job. It is clear that the majority has been so battered that they have no clue what is ideal in terms of their human status and what the country should be like. Their choices are therefore not linked to any aspiration about themselves or the country.
What is important is the feelgood sensation generated by sensing closeness to what has been punted as great. Individuals come to be important through adjectives used to describe them, the number of times your picture appears on TV, other electronic media and in newspapers. Nothing to do with what is in the individual’s head or his performance in assigned duties. Could this be something to do with African self-doubt?
• Dr Mosalakae, is a Sowetan reader and regular contributor.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.