I have come to realize that in our public debates we seem ignore the fact that context is very much a contested space. In the process we get angry and fail to find common ground. I believe as a people Batswana have for ages understood the issue of context, but our people now do not seem to appreciate this, or they elect to take advantage of the uninformed. I will below try to demonstrate what I am talking about.
There have been reports in some radio stations that some women have been denied the opportunity to be vaccinated against Covid 19 at some kgotla in Gaborone because they were wearing pants. Apparently the basis of such denial is that their wearing of pants at the “kgotla” was against Tswana culture.
To be quite honest I find such arguments or representations of Tswana culture to be absurd and downright dishonest. No kgosi of a so called Tswana or traditional kgotla in Gaborone can claim to be a “kgosi” of that kgotla by birth. None of these dikgosi can bequeath or give their position to their sons. Ordinarily one becomes kgosi by succession based on seniority at birth. Our history however shows that this is not a rule cast in stone. Most of our current dikgosi or kgosi kgolo do not owe their position to the supposed rule of seniority. In fact most of our tribal leaders owe their positions not to culture but to the advent of writing and colonialism.
Our ancestors allowed for contestation and competition for one to be kgosi. A kgosi even had the right to choose their successor. None of the so called “kgosi” in the Gaborone kgotla’s can claim that they have the right to choose their successor. This suggests that they are at best third position on the power stakes, a position that not even our traditional dikgosi occupy. No “kgosi” in Gaborone can therefore on the supposed basis of culture deny a woman wearing pants access to our “kgotla” in Gaborone.
Assassination and murder has been used before to eliminate rivals in our bogosi. We do not do that anymore, but it was acceptable in our culture. If we are indeed proponents of Tswana culture why do we not give bogosi rivals the right to kill their competitors?
I have seen a picture of kgosi Mosielele wearing a “tukwi” and ear rings yet I have never heard anyone say that the kgosi was out of line. I have seen a picture of the Bakwena kgosi likewise wearing ear rings. Yet when our young male put the same things they are supposedly being against our Tswana culture. This is absurd to say the least.
Most Westerners will find it strange that two males, who are not homosexual can walk down the street hand in hand, yet Batswana males do not ordinarily have a problem with this. If they have, it is because of some external influence. I have seen pictures of certain pink faced males kiss on the cheek and we generally do not seem to have a problem with this. Personally I do not like hugging, but it is in fashion, and no one has ever said it is against our culture for males to hug.
The only consistency between our Gaborone kgotla’s and the tribal kgotla seems to be that it is fine to misrepresent facts to get what you want. A caller in one of the local private radio stations, claiming to be a kgosana, stated that women could not think at his kgotla when they were wearing pants. Unfortunately the young female presenter did not ask him a very simple question, how did the kgosana establish the correctness of his view?
Sometimes I wonder what women think. Here is someone, male, that I gave birth to, breastfed, changed diapers for, and nursed to maturity, who for some strange reason thinks that he is superior to me, who says that wearing pants affects my faculties. I think women sometimes just keep quiet because some of the things that men say just cannot be responded to by a right thinking person. I mean, if you breastfed some idiot whilst wearing pants, you are justified in going along with his view that wearing pants affects your thinking just not to hurt his fragile ego.
I have heard some radio presenters who unfortunately have access to my ears, say that not wearing a jacket at the kgotla is against our culture. They have every right to propagate their ignorance but where is the evidence. I have seen pictures of Seretse Khama at a kgotla where men were wearing hats and no jackets as he addressed them, yet nowadays we are told that we should take off our hats when a kgosi speaks. The closest to pants and a jacket that I have seen is a picture of Sekgoma of Bangwato wearing “motseto” and an animal skin on his back.
I am sure Mongwato was not wearing the skin because of some supposed cultural convention but because it protected him against the cold. I am fortified in this view by some article I read somewhere that a white man was angry that he could not pick out kgosi Sekgoma from his people when he met them for the first time, and had to ask him to identify himself.
Tshukudu, of Ditharap Ward in Serowe, was assassinated because it was thought he was too powerful. I learnt recently, though I cannot vouch for the correctness thereof that Machaneg is actually” Machana a ga Tshukudu” We do not kill our adversaries these days, but Tswana culture seems to have tolerated this. Just in case you did not know, Tshukudu is the father of MmaBesi, and he is the Mma Mphiri that our first president called himself after. Why do our dikgosi not educate our people on this mode of eliminating rivals? Our women folk would use this mode to eliminate dikgosi who make unreasonable demands on them. I am sure the menfolk will very happily suggest that we subscribe to the Tswana saying that “ntwa kgolo ke ya molomo”
The question then becomes does “ntwa kgolo ke ya molomo”, to jaw jaw is better that to war war, help us resolve our differences? In my view this is too simplistic a view for it ignores how we construct or formulate arguments as Batswana. In the old days politicians like the late Paul Rantao used to paint a picture of the conditions relative to pit latrines, rice, tomato sauce and girlfriends.
Nowadays we have those that talk of being the first to come into the territory called Botswana, but who have no problem with the fact that they like everyone else migrated from somewhere. I mean they want to determine the cutoff point with regard to who is indigenous and who is not. A Marxist on the other hand will be more interested in the class struggle whilst a capitalist will be interested in free enterprise.
I hold the view that Botswana is providing fertile ground for the emergence of a demagogue. We have youth unemployment and a huge income inequality problem. We have social media that allows for free flow of information and propaganda. I feel sorry for our current leaders because a long time ago we warned their predecessors that if they did not invest in the people there will come a time when the people become deaf to their ideas. We are effectively facing a second generation of the unemployed. These people now have children and they have nothing positive to tell their children about this country.
I have a suspicion that in the 2024 elections neither the BDP nor the UDC will matter. There will be a third party led by a Trump or Hitler like figure, but unlike Trump not riding on any of the establishment parties. Of course I may be wrong.
The point I am trying to make is that if one were to observe how we present and interrogate issues, one will realize that very often we seek first to dictate the context. Take the issue of the young artist who supposedly used insulting language in his lyrics. Invariably some commentators reached out to their version of Tswana culture to denounce the artist or to support him. I have no problem with their doing so as a choice, but it creates a problem such that neither side has room to understand where the other side is coming from and find common ground.
I have spent a lot of time with old Batswana, and I have come to learn that they invariably pretend to know very little. In time I have come to appreciate that such claim of ignorance is because they appreciate the hypocrisy and uncertainty of the human condition. We seem to have lost that. We fear and abhor new thinking or differences of opinion. We argue in a manner where each statement is a conclusion, not a fact, that combined with others, and evidence in support, lead to a conclusion.