Beyond the Numbers

 It is yet another Friday and we have something to feast our eyes on.  When I dropped the article a week ago, I had mixed reactions to the piece. While some found it relatable and practical, a good number of readers found the dominance of articles to do with relationships on the blog a bit nauseating. Perhaps it is something to do with the giver of unsolicited opinions on relationships not being in one or to do with the preaching to the choir scenario. Worst case might be that some of those might be relating to the negative side of the articles. Mwinatu. We cannot be sure, can we? But that was last week. We are in a new one and are anticipating the end to the negative economic phenotypes of General January and a good start to the year (chaka chimayamba mu February, according to one good friend of mine).

I have always made reference to how much I like playing around social networking apps.  A good proportion of my articles make reference to the fact that I saw some chat on WhatsApp or something of the sort. One of my habits I have not made reference to in my prior writings is that of following international news, especially when there are contentious issues. Britain’s exit from the European Union, the United States Government shutdown, Venezuelan political chaos, DRC elections, Zimbabwe riots and many other issues of that kind. Those would get me glued to the TV on a normal evening than would anything else (well, maybe Spanish football could beat it).

I found myself in discussions to do with the exit of Britain from the European Union more often in the past couple of weeks. In the buildup to the vote on the Prime Minister’s Brexit plan, the vote of confidence in the government, plans on voting for a new plan and all. The discussions were dominated by the issue of what possibilities lay on the table for the UK government. In those discussions, we made reference to what had been happening and the possibilities and everyone had their opinions on what they thought was going to happen. Intellectually challenging chats, those ones.

Some might stone me for discussing Brexit without sharing a bit of the background. For some reason, when David Cameron was the Prime Minister of the UK he moved a motion that Britain should leave the European Union. That is more like saying Malawi (or let’s say South Africa) should leave the African Union. In no time, there was a referendum for the people to decide on the same and the majority opted to leave the union. The British government presented the results of the vote to the European Union and discussions were started on how trade relations and other things would be done. 

The government came up with a plan which parliament disapproved and currently they are working on a new plan (or deal, as they popularly call it) on how to handle relations with EU countries when the UK leaves the union. Worth noting is that there is a possibility of not agreeing on the deal for leaving and leaving with no deal. There is also a possibility of calling for a second referendum in which people would decide whether they still want to leave the EU or not. Its all interesting politics for people who follow those kinds of things.

Earlier this week, I also found myself chatting with one good friend of mine who is in the UK. He was telling me about how he made acquaintance with one person who works at the House of Commons (paliyamenti) in the UK. In their chat, they were also discussing the possibility of a second referendum when the discussion took an interesting turn. In the midst of the noise, they discovered, that some of the people who were voting on whether to leave the European Union or to stay in it did not know the implications on international relations and possibly on their own lives. At the end, statistics were applied that the majority opted to leave when in essence it was a majority that woke up the next day wondering what they had just voted for.

We began to relate the story to what happens in elections back home. Referendums first.

In the year I was born, there was a referendum in which people had to choose between multiparty democracy and the one party rule that was in play then. Thanks to that referendum, we have a  whole lot of briefcase (or wallet) parties some of whose leaders have thrown their hats in the ring to challenge el professor for the presidency. I am pretty sure that the people chose the multiparty system on the promise of change and they were relatively knowledgeable on what they were diving into. Mwinanso kuposa awa a Brexit.

Multiparty came with its own difficulties. People now had to choose from a whole lot of leaders to govern them and in the first two rounds they settled for Bakili Muluzi, only to go for the person he gave us in the third. We all know what has been happening in the subsequent times. There are mixed stories in our localities as our members of parliament perform to different magnitudes and are judged based on different bars set by their constituents. The one thing that we are all clear about, however is that the leaders we have been choosing since 1994 have not performed to the standard that was set by the founding father of the nation in one way or the other. While we have enjoyed progress in some areas, we have greatly retrogressed in others which begs the question as to whether it was the problem of the leaders, the ones who chose them or both.

Considering the second possibility (that it is us, the voters who are the problem), one would realize that we have a very big problem when it comes to fixing the leadership of this country at all levels. People would choose a parliamentarian based on his visibility and ability to help them when they are in need disregarding the abilities to fulfill the actual duties of a parliamentarian. People would choose a president on tribal and religious lines despite the agenda and prior performance or their potential. Even when some consider the political manifesto, those documents have been known not to manifest when we elect the candidates into the highest office in the land.

One radical human suggested that we include the Malawi School Certificate of Education as a requirement for a voter. Yes. If you do not have ya foolo usamaloledwe kuvota. When I posted the opinion on my WhatsApp (back to social networks), I had a lot of nods to the idea. You would get the reasoning, anyway. People who have an MSCE are more exposed and they understand issues of governance and development a bit better than those who do not. On paper. One person, however, came out and crashed the idea saying that it did not make sense. She pointed out that even some people who have the so called certificate of education do not have the necessary reasoning abilities that are needed to make the choice of a good leader. In her words, some of us who like to consider ourselves educated because we can read and understand the Venomous Hope’s articles spiced with bombastic words have hardly risen behind the tribal lines which the very people we look down on also use in their choice of leaders. She also mentioned that before we impose such on voters we will need to set reasonable standards on who can stand on what position when it comes to political offices.

I found myself agreeing with this lady on the point that the MSCE was not a good screening tool. This was due to the fact that I could hardly reason beyond how to get my feet into the corridors of the public universities when I had that paper. The secondary school curriculum did not equip me with the understanding of issues to do with political leadership and governance. I have been left with a residual question on what we could use as a good tool to determine who can vote and who not; and whether we need such.

At the end of this all, I realized that we are in trouble just like our friends in the UK. We will go to the ballot on the 21^st of May and vote with ignorance as our only qualification. Call this a pessimistic view but unless miracles happen, it will just be another case of under qualified voters voting for under qualified leaders. At the end of the day, the numbers will decide and those who get majority votes will be declared winners and leaders. The numbers will decide but there will be no solid ideology and view beyond the numbers…. just like with our friends in the United Kingdom.

This is a depressing article but luckily it has been delivered on a Friday. Use the weekend to improve your mood.