IN a republic, and more so one laying claim to be democratic, it is dangerous to take citizens for imbeciles. Even in states that are not as democratic as we are, where fundamental freedoms and rights are suppressed, it would be foolish to do so.
The Arab spring and the fall of successive regimes at the hands of citizens demanding democracy and freedom ought to provide us with refreshing insights with regard to what is possible when the people think and take charge of their own destiny.It is with such a context in mind that our leaders should approach citizens in this country.For the past 22 years, fear-mongers within Swapo have been selling the fallacy that stability in Namibia is the exclusive preserve of the ruling party, of which much is articulated through the contribution of the founding president, Sam Nujoma.This mantra, largely inspired by the intolerant African post-colonial state of the 1960s, suggests that, in the year 2012, we should approach matters of interest to us like mere boys and girls without hearts and consciences, as well as individuals without the benefit of contextual and spatial experiences, including learned historical and comparative insights. Since it is expected of us to be zombies, every form of democratic critique and reasoning, particularly the type discussing the place and role of Swapo and Sam Nujoma specifically, is mindlessly equated as divisive and a threat to the survival of the republic.Consider this. We are a republic whose goal is to consolidate a flourishing democracy.The government must therefore think, act and take decisions that are in the interests of all Namibians, including minority groups.If it does the latter, Namibians of all walks of life should be rest assured that our state would grow organic roots as a democracy.The contrary is less true. A functioning democratic state cannot be consolidated around the singular reasoning of a political party or person, irrespective of their role in the history of that state. Similarly, a functioning democratic state cannot be anchored around a mindless populace, fearful of a political party and persons in power and authority. The case of state collapse in Ivory Coast is instructive.When the charismatic Félix Houphouët-Boigny, also called affectionately Père de la Nation (Father of the Nation), Papa Houphouët or Le Viex (the old man) came to power at independence in Ivory Coast in 1960, the state was constructed around him and his political party, the Parti Démocratique de la Côte d’Ivoire.Any deviation from these twin lines and symbols of independence would have meant instability and a threat to the ‘Ivorian miracle.’In the absence of thinking democratic state institutions – independent of Le Vieux and his political party, the death of Boigny in 1993 signalled the end of the type of ‘stability’ around which the Ivorian state was build.In essence, the collapse of Ivory Coast since Boigny’s death is a lucid reminder of the shallowness of a state constructed around a political party and its leader, however charismatic he or she may be.Admittedly, Namibia is not a worst-case scenario.Still, the unreconstructed radical wings of Swapo and fear-mongers within cabinet have the upper hand, and have been hardening rhetoric about the fragility of our state in the face of democratic critique and debate.Fear-mongers have scared many sane men and women (sane in a democratic sense) in Swapo into submission, subjecting them to a quiet life of suffering in silence within the party and state institutions.If Namibia were to be divided and eventually collapse because of democratic debate and critique as radical wings erroneously opine, it would suggest that the ruling party and Namibians at large did not invest sufficient democratic oxygen in the life of our institutions.The survival of our republic does not (and should not) rest with the rise and fall of Swapo, nor an individual person – it rests with the people, the vitality and continuity of our republican institutions.Since the people are sovereign in a democracy, individual and collective freedoms must be guaranteed and protected in order to ensure the stability and continuity of institutions, including the creation of a solid democratic republic. In sum, we must think and talk in line with our consciences about the state of our republic.To think is not a disloyal act in a democracy: it is just rudimentary common sense!* Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari is a PhD-fellow in political science and researcher at the Centre for Political Research at the University of Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne, France.
