Political Perspective
By: GWEN LISTERGEORGE Bernard Shaw once said that 'democracy is a device which ensures that we shall be governed no better than we deserve', and while I'm a staunch proponent of democratic governance in the absence of a more workable solution to this tricky question, one cannot help but apply this quotation to the recent US elections which once again put in power a man whose inherent megalomania has already done great damage, not only in his home country, but more seriously, in many other parts of the world.
Ordinarily, shifts from right to left to centrist politics, or vice
versa, in different parts of the world impact primarily on the
local population, and don't have much effect on countries and
people beyond their own borders, if they are reasonably democratic,
that is.
However, in the case of the US, the most powerful country on the
globe, and one always seen as the home of democracy, the person of
the President most certainly determines a lot of what happens in
the rest of the world, and somehow, we all have a stake in who that
person is as well as the choices he makes which affect so many of
us.
This is not something I believe the broad majority of the
American public have realised.
Not in any case renowned for their interest in world politics or
indeed geography beyond the confines of their own borders, their
decision to re-elect George W Bush will yet have repercussions they
may not have dreamed of.
The fact that 'moral values' formed the core motivation of the
pro-Bush voter, is shocking.
The war in Iraq, unemployment, civil liberties and other
socially vital issues in the US, were apparently simply peripheral
issues to the more central theme of protection of family values, as
they are termed! As I said earlier, if a dictator comes to power or
a leader rules through oppression, the world has the right (even a
duty) to expose and denounce and try to change things for the
better.
On our own continent we have condemned the Abachas, the Mobutus,
the Savimbis and the Mugabes and others whose despotic politics
have led to the ruination of countries in Africa.
But is Bush, even though he is presiding over what is termed the
world's greatest democracy, any better? We all know by now that the
invasion of Iraq was a massive fraud and that alleged weapons of
mass destruction could not be found and neither were they the issue
for doing what he did.
He has succeeded only in destabilising that part of the world,
and both the US and the world will continue to reap the
consequences of this action.
To add insult to injury, he is eroding civil liberties back home
in the US, and many Americans haven't yet woken up to this
fact.
His obsession with terrorism is not combating this evil, merely
adding fuel to the fire, and a second term is not likely to temper
his militarism.
We at home may legitimately and vehemently contest, for example,
a fourth term for our own President because we believe it is not in
the best interests of our democracy.
And we do so.
But had there been a fourth term, it would have been Namibians
who would have borne the brunt and not the rest of the world.
In the case of Bush's second term, the decision of the US
electorate will undoubtedly, as it already has, impact negatively
on fragile and emergent democracies the world over.
For whereas in the past the US enjoyed a measure of moral high
ground, and the ability to deter (if they wanted to, which was not
always the case) acts of excess in other parts of the world, they
have now lost that ability in the re-election of George W Bush.
What is absolutely core to the success of democratic systems the
world over, and this most particularly applies to the US, is that
the voters are made aware of their country's place in the rest of
the world.
Otherwise, in the words of an African-American friend of mine
pronouncing his disappointment with what has just happened back
home, they may yet live to rue the day.
And so will the rest of us.
However, in the case of the US, the most powerful country on the
globe, and one always seen as the home of democracy, the person of
the President most certainly determines a lot of what happens in
the rest of the world, and somehow, we all have a stake in who that
person is as well as the choices he makes which affect so many of
us.This is not something I believe the broad majority of the
American public have realised.Not in any case renowned for their
interest in world politics or indeed geography beyond the confines
of their own borders, their decision to re-elect George W Bush will
yet have repercussions they may not have dreamed of.The fact that
'moral values' formed the core motivation of the pro-Bush voter, is
shocking.The war in Iraq, unemployment, civil liberties and other
socially vital issues in the US, were apparently simply peripheral
issues to the more central theme of protection of family values, as
they are termed! As I said earlier, if a dictator comes to power or
a leader rules through oppression, the world has the right (even a
duty) to expose and denounce and try to change things for the
better.On our own continent we have condemned the Abachas, the
Mobutus, the Savimbis and the Mugabes and others whose despotic
politics have led to the ruination of countries in Africa.But is
Bush, even though he is presiding over what is termed the world's
greatest democracy, any better? We all know by now that the
invasion of Iraq was a massive fraud and that alleged weapons of
mass destruction could not be found and neither were they the issue
for doing what he did.He has succeeded only in destabilising that
part of the world, and both the US and the world will continue to
reap the consequences of this action.To add insult to injury, he is
eroding civil liberties back home in the US, and many Americans
haven't yet woken up to this fact.His obsession with terrorism is
not combating this evil, merely adding fuel to the fire, and a
second term is not likely to temper his militarism.We at home may
legitimately and vehemently contest, for example, a fourth term for
our own President because we believe it is not in the best
interests of our democracy.And we do so.But had there been a fourth
term, it would have been Namibians who would have borne the brunt
and not the rest of the world.In the case of Bush's second term,
the decision of the US electorate will undoubtedly, as it already
has, impact negatively on fragile and emergent democracies the
world over.For whereas in the past the US enjoyed a measure of
moral high ground, and the ability to deter (if they wanted to,
which was not always the case) acts of excess in other parts of the
world, they have now lost that ability in the re-election of George
W Bush.What is absolutely core to the success of democratic systems
the world over, and this most particularly applies to the US, is
that the voters are made aware of their country's place in the rest
of the world.Otherwise, in the words of an African-American friend
of mine pronouncing his disappointment with what has just happened
back home, they may yet live to rue the day.And so will the rest of
us.