Political education crisis weakens party accountability
Tsaone Basimanebotlhe | Monday April 6, 2026 06:00
To begin with, political education plays a fundamental role in shaping informed, active, and ideologically grounded party members. It equips individuals with a clear understanding of their party’s culture, constitution, and guiding principles.
More importantly, it empowers them to meaningfully participate in decision-making processes and to hold leadership accountable. In democratic systems, informed participation is not optional; it is essential.
However, as parties increasingly sideline political education, members are left with limited knowledge of internal processes, weakening their ability to question authority or contribute constructively.
Furthermore, political education fosters consistency and discipline among party members. Individuals who have undergone structured political training tend to articulate issues with clarity and confidence.
They are not easily swayed by temporary political tensions or internal disputes because their understanding is rooted in ideology rather than personality-driven politics.
In this regard, Political socialisation becomes particularly relevant.
Through political education, members internalise the values and norms of their party, enabling them to engage more critically and responsibly in political discourse.
In addition, political education plays a key role in shaping what party members consider important.
According to Agenda-Setting theory, institutions influence priorities by deciding which issues receive attention.
When political education is deprioritised, it sends a clear message that ideological grounding and internal accountability are no longer central to party operations.
Consequently, members may focus more on short-term political gains rather than long-term institutional development.
In the country, one party that was widely known for consistently emphasising political education was the Botswana National Front (BNF), although this tradition declined over the years. The BNF previously ran structured study groups in which members were taught ideological principles, including aspects of communism, thereby building a well-informed and disciplined membership. Although other political parties also practised political education, their efforts did not match the depth and consistency of the BNF’s approach.
Currently, the BNF is attempting to revive this culture, having realised that it is now confronted with a situation in which some members occupying key positions lack a clear understanding of the party’s ideology and principles, an issue that many within the party view as both problematic and embarrassing.
Through political education, members internalise the values and norms of their party, enabling them to engage more critically and responsibly in political discourse.
In addition, political education plays a key role in shaping what party members consider important.
However, despite these clear benefits, many political parties appear reluctant to invest in political education programmes.
This reluctance raises important questions about leadership intentions and the distribution of power within parties.
One possible explanation can be drawn from Elite theory, which argues that power is often concentrated in the hands of a small group of leaders who seek to maintain control.
By limiting political education, these elites reduce the likelihood of being challenged by informed and empowered members.
Moreover, leaders may perceive politically educated members as a threat rather than an asset.
Members who understand party ideology and governance structures are more likely to question decisions, demand transparency, and hold leaders accountable when they deviate from established principles.
As a result, restricting political education becomes a strategic move to minimise dissent and consolidate authority.
While this may provide short-term stability for leadership, it ultimately weakens the party’s democratic foundations.