One distinguished Professor of Political Science from the University of Botswana, Prof Mpho G Molomo in his paper “Democracy Under Siege” stated that after Khama ascended to the reign of power, he embraced populist and autocratic tendencies. According to Molomo Khama was said to be contemptuous of established norms of governance and his conduct in public office received a mixed bag of feelings.
Molomo stated that Khama comes across as a man of action; however, such action needs to be done within the laid out structures and the rules.
What a good judgment the Professor had. What a “Sangoma”!!!!
For his part, the deported Political Science sangoma, Professor Kenneth Good stated that, since Ian Khama succession to Presidency, there has been an escalation in the militarization and personalization of power, seeing military personnel entering government in increased numbers.
President Ian Khama has clearly had the edge when it comes to that magical quality known as charisma. Pundits of every rural area, Members of KFC (Khama Fan Club), some political stripe have commented on Khama’s “rock-star quality.” After meeting him, even the most jaded political reporters , academics have been known to report that he is something rare and special, the heir to such charismatic predecessors as Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, Mahtma Gandhi, Sir Seretse Khama and Kgosi Linchwe II.
In each generation, a few public figures come along who have a personal magnetism that makes strangers care deeply about them. Call it star power, call it charisma, this infrequent gift is akin to the power that great actors have. In real life when charismatic politicians speak, they are able to turn a room full of strangers into a community rich in shared meaning, just as a great actor creates such a community within a theatre. Whether such rock-star politicians talk about 5D’s, Poverty Eradication, Namola Leuba, purchasing of fighter jets or healthcare policy, they articulate a vision that those in the audience quickly make their own.
It is worth noting dear reader that charismatic leader and their followers are interdependent; they feed and energize each other. The Magic leader gives the people hope and makes it believe that, together, they can create a better future; their rhetoric is always suffused with optimism. They purveyed not fear, but shining new possibilities.
Indeed, can one really say all these about President Ian Khama in reality? Khama comes across more as a movie star, an actor than a serious politician. Not even Philanthropist. Hell No!!!.
In his fascinating book titled, “On Politics and the Art of Acting, playwright Arthur Miller stated that acting ability is an aspect of leadership in every arena, from the playground to the board room. The candidate who is most likely to succeed today is the one who acts as though the camera isn’t there, a description that fits very well for Ian Khama.
In its entire televised political coverage Botswana Television camera just loves Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) at ease as much as it hates UDC and BCP. In the last t election’s, the camera’s favourite was BDP’s own Donald Trump, President Ian Khama.
Khama’s ascension to Presidency on April fool day 2008 has left many arguing that after all choosing a president has never been a more serious matter. Contrary to what many of us believe, it is not really a serious matter as one Momba on social media once remarked after all every jack and Jill can become President.
While some question whether a candidate’s personal charisma really matters?
But really how important is the personality of a president? That is, how much of a difference does it actually make to what happens once a person is in office? Are certain personalities more likely to succeed where others are more likely to fail? Take President Ian Khama for example whose critics have been a constant thorn on him.
One Professor of psychology at the University of California who studies Presidential personality Dean Simonton once stated that “Personality doesn’t predict everything, but it does predict some things,” For instance, how flexible the President influences their power and their desire for affiliation and wanting to get along with people, rural poor to be precise and excluding those who matter, then you are more likely to have a scandal as has been the case in Botswana, with President Ian Khama’s “Me Nice Attitude”. When you have a president who’s more oriented towards getting along with cronies than in making tough choices that might alienate their best friends, then be assured of a “DISASTER”. When you have a President who prefers to work with petty gossipers, parrots, apple polishers, mediocres with a yes boss mentality then be assured of a serious ├ÉISASTER”.
The above are just concrete examples of the real-life consequences of personality characteristics and unfortunately President Ian Khama turns a deaf ear or rather pretends everything is fine. When in actual fact he is the root cause of all the evils, he is too rigid, overly pompous and paranoid. The parrots around him do not have the “Balls” to stand up against him to tell him he is a liability.
Does Ian Khama really have that charm or is it just the fear factor?
In his own fantasy it must be stated dear reader. Personally President Ian Khama comes across as someone who thinks he has that charm and has even gone to the extent of labelling himself “Lepako”, a tough un-breakable log.
When personality researchers and behavioural scientists get to analyze his character, they will probably dismiss that fallacy right on the onset and rate him even below average. That is, he just doesn’t have the Zing and has never had it and that the self praises he showered himself by labelling himself “Lepako’ is reminiscent of someone living in the world of fantasy. That is, someone who has probably watched too many movies. Psychologists surely will perceive this as a personality disorder.
During his first inaugural address on April fool day 2008, President Ian Khama was horribly awkward came with un-known 4D’s departing from the mainstream developmental policy agenda. He was very timid, visibly nervous, wasn’t very dynamic and tried so much to be unique. Suddenly there after, there was the widespread use of radio, and Botswana Television. There was a clear shift in the kind of personality to his predecessors. He just tried so much to impress.
So what are the policy consequences of his shift toward the so called president Ian Khama’s Magic and charismatic personality?
The above can just be summarised in one word and does not even require an academic exercise. Unfortunately when one states his honest and open view, members of KFC get so gatvol. They literally resort to violence and even go to the extent of throwing insults right in front of “BIG BROTHER”, calling a Kgosi Kgolo who they now want back at their party “Tinto”, Lenyela Phafana fela le bitsa Kgosi Kgolo “Tinto”. How disgusting!!!!
Charisma is associated with more legislation, more legislative victories, essentially being more successful in general as a legislator than as a Dictator. It doesn’t actually make you better at making good decisions that will steer the country in the right direction when you alone behaves and acts as an abnormal human being with high level of IQ than any other person while the actual truth is known even if it remains a mystery.
All that charisma does is enabling you to influence people, manipulate people, abuse people and make yourself a “ ME NICE.” As far as actually being effective, there’s no guarantee.
I think he sensationalized his own rhetoric to gain clicks because with him, it is just not happening.
History books will tell.
*Thabo Lucas Seleke writes from Seleme Farm, Rasesa
