In one of my submissions I suggested that political parties should invent campaign tactics that awaken passion for politics. I also suggested that bearing in mind that the BDP propaganda machine is on overdrive, the opposition parties should fight fire with fire and take on the BDP pound for pound. I further enjoined the opposition parties to wise up and embrace aggressive politics and become fiery without being violent. My argument was that and still is that the opposition campaigns are subdued and that the parties lack the necessary aggression and determination to effectively challenge the mighty BDP.
Nevertheless, I wish to caution the opposition parties, especially their youth leagues, to tread with extreme care so that they are not truthfully classified as political hooligans or feral yobs deserving to be censored. In more precise language, the opposition should avoid creating anarchy which would inevitably create fertile grounds for the justification of state tyranny under the pretext of national security. Their frustrations and anger with the state should not cause them to behave in a manner that would give their political adversaries an opportunity to suspend the constitution and usher in a virtual tyranny.
Their determination to express their irritation and anger should not translate into violent protests and unwarranted intolerance. It must be understood that authoritarian regimes are often trigger happy and in this context, violence is a strategic tool they so often use to the fullest extent and their appetite for it often run rampant, itching for the slightest opportunity to pounce. Thus, the strategic intent and practical import of violence in an authoritarian or regressing democracy is to stimulate chaos and justify use of excessive force under the claim of restoring and maintaining order.
Violent protests naturally lead to a state of paralysis and causes extreme anxiety that terrifies people into a virtual stupor making people to believe state-sponsored lies calculated to whip people into buying every bit of nonsense. For instance, when the USA sought to justify the invasion of Iraq under Saddam Hussein, they duped the world into believing that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction that could wipe out humanity in a second and the world had to act immediately or risk virtual extinction. The USA caused anxiety and propagated a lie that eventually licensed them to eliminate Saddam.
The opposition parties need to be aggressive and fiery without being violent and intolerant in spite of their justifiable anger. They need to take on the BDP the democratic way to avoid tempting the despots to crackdown on opposition activists under the pretext of quelling a rebellion against a legitimate, democratically elected government. The opposition must be careful not to press the desperate and beleaguered malignant narcissists too hard.
They must refuse to be tricked into creating conditions which will allow the BDP to vitiate the elections or influence voting patterns through threats or intimidation. Avoiding chaos is one way of denying them an opportunity to manufacture excuses meant to create tyranny and this depends upon the opposition clinging onto the path of virtue, keeping calm and remaining grounded. The opposition must stay focused and refuse to be trapped into acquiring the character of a village scoundrel who has no moral compass; easily yielding to every appetite of the moment in pursuant of usurping state power to the point of anarchy.
Obviously, the stakes are high and neither party is prepared to concede grounds. Erstwhile self-respecting men and women are bound to turn into wolves and famous scoundrels ready to start bitch fights or war of each against all. Yet, the opposition must guard against becoming a mob that is easily swayed by their passion to restore the dignity of the Botswana society for while their actions would be justified under circumstances, their integrity will be questioned especially given that ours is a loyal citizenry conditioned to believe every lie from the ruling leadership. Many of our people live at the pleasure of the government through food hand-outs and are thus vulnerable to mindless manipulation by what they probably consider to be their benevolent benefactors.
It is known that the present BDP is one of the sorts and pretending to deal with them as though they were a credible political party is not an option but the folly in thinking that violent protest and or intolerance however minor, would boost the opposition’s campaigns will suit the BDP while at the same time characterizing the opposition parties as a pack of beasts in human bodies. Violent protest and related activities lacking in civil decorum would allow the BDP to put aside lawful procedures and fish out opposition activists to crackdown on dissent to the point where many who faked bravery would cower like small boys queuing for circumcision.
Mahatma Gandhi said that ‘intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit’. In the Art of War, Sun Tzu writes, ‘the greatest victory is that which requires no battle’. Granted, protests are a constitutional means to make a point and should be defended robustly, as soon as they make one of an infinite number of perceived infringements in the pursuit of a legitimate cause, they are instantly de-legitimized or tainted with stage-managed rioting to create fear and allow the state to retaliate. Thus, violent protest would never help the opposition to unseat the BDP.
Instead, the opposition parties should resort to strong rhetoric to create a win-win situation for themselves by characterizing the BDP as incorrigible thieves looting the country. Former US president George W. Bush became synonymous with ‘war on terror’ and this rhetoric initially worked for him in terms of mobilizing international support for his belligerent foreign policy. The Botswana opposition will be within their rights to compose a rallying cry in the mould of ‘restoring our democracy and fighting against corporate greed’. This is the art of using language as a parapet to hide behind when their folly comes to haunt them and then come out seething when they have to score cheap political points. This is called scheming the Machiavellian way which allows one to use appalling methods to achieve a goal without necessarily offending the law.
The use of strong language and rhetoric would allow them to speak like possessed agents of Satan while playing by the rules of the game. It would allow them to sensationalize issues and whip people’s emotions while remaining grounded to avoid provoking the architects of terrorism. Such humility in the face of concerted smear campaign would ward off physical confrontation and deny the BDP an opportunity to inspire panic among voters with a view to sabotage a trustworthy vote and ensure they remain in government, be it a sole BDP government or in a government of national unity. That is what Zimbabwean President Mugabe expertly did to remain in power.
