BNF rediscovers intellectual political roots
Tsaone Basimanebotlhe | Monday November 2, 2026 06:00
Rather it was a reminder of what made the party distinctive, a glimpse of its intellectual traditions and perhaps, an acknowledgement that governing demands more than the slogans and political mobilisation that sustain a movement. The atmosphere appeared to evoke an older BNF, affectionately known as Puo Phaa, where arguments were tested, policies dissected and members expected to defend their positions with substance. For those familiar with the party's history, the forum was a welcome return to a political culture in which debate was not an inconvenience but an essential part of political life. For years, the BNF cultivated a reputation as a movement that attracted academics, scholars, lawyers and tertiary students.
Its appeal rested partly on its willingness to interrogate political and economic questions, encourage intellectual engagements and create room for members to challenge ideas. In that environment, political education was not merely an activity on the party calendar as it was central to how members understood their organisation and its place in society. Against that background, the Selebi-Phikwe forum appeared to signal that the party was beginning to take its intellectual responsibilities more seriously. The carefully arranged gathering and the quality of the debates indeed suggested an organisation attempting to reconnect with the traditions that once distinguished it from its political competitors. The more important question is whether the enthusiasm displayed in Selebi-Phikwe can be translated into sustained political education, better policy formulation and more accountable governance.
Political education has historically been one of the BNF's defining features. Its study groups provided spaces where members could engage with political theory, examine policy proposals and develop a deeper understanding of the party's ideological commitments. The party's founding leadership, including the late Dr Kenneth Koma, placed considerable emphasis on education and ideological awareness. Members were expected to understand not only what the party stood for but also why its positions differed from those of other political formations.
This tradition helped cultivate a membership that valued argument, research and familiarity with political ideas. It also gave the party a distinctive identity, its members were expected to do more than attend rallies, engage in song or demonstrate loyalty to their leaders. Nevertheless, political education cannot depend on occasional forums or the presence of a handful of committed members. It must be a continuous process, extending from the party's national leadership to its branches and grassroots structures. The risk is that without that continuity, intellectual engagement can become an occasional performance rather than an organisational culture. The forum also brought into focus the role of the party's committed traditionalists.
Often referred to as Maforanta, their relationship with the organisation has at times differed from that of members whose political involvement is expressed more visibly through mobilisation and public campaigning. In the BNF, these members are often associated with defending the party constitution, protecting its ideological identity and raising the alarm when they believe the organisation is drifting from its founding principles. Their significance lies in their insistence that political loyalty must involve more than support for individual leaders. It must also include an understanding of the organisation's rules, values and responsibilities.
They represent a political tradition in which members see themselves as custodians of the party's institutional memory and ideological direction. Significantly, BNF president Duma Boko appeared pleased to see members who are not always prominent in the party's everyday activities as he knows their value and how they will contribute into debates. The party now faces the demands of participating in government, where ideological commitments must be reconciled with administrative realities, legal obligations and competing public interests. The Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC), which the BNF is an affiliate of, only won elections in 2024. As things stand, BNF members wanted cadre deployment which they had to deliberate on for it to be a policy as it was not catered for in the constitution. These are amongst the questions that made former BNF president Otsweletse Moupo's contribution particularly significant to members interested in the relationship between the party and the state after the attainment of political power. Moupo continues to command respect in the organisation, and his experience offers an important perspective on the responsibilities that accompany governing. The distinction between a political party and the state becomes especially important when a party assumes governmental responsibilities. He was once a civil servant while the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) was in power and consequently, the relationship between party principles and government decisions requires careful examination. However, BNF members must understand that governing involves not only implementing political commitments but also navigating the laws, institutions and practical constraints that shape policy delivery.
Now, it is clearer that the party needs members who could be equipped to scrutinise legislation, assess ministerial performance and examine whether public policies advance the objectives the party presented to voters. Despite the encouraging discussions at the former mining town, the forum also exposed the work that remains unfinished within the BNF, particularly in strengthening members' understanding of government policy, legislation and ministerial responsibilities. It is one thing to debate broad political principles; it is another to understand the specific Acts, regulations and administrative frameworks governing individual ministries. If members are expected to hold their representatives accountable, they must have the knowledge required to assess their decisions.
Political education should therefore include structured discussions on legislation, public expenditure, government programmes and the practical obstacles that may affect implementation. Ministers, in turn should be given regular opportunities to explain their policy priorities, outline implementation challenges and respond to questions from party members. Therefore, the engagements would help narrow the gap between the party's grassroots structures and those occupying positions of governmental responsibility. That alone will help the members to defend their party rather than criticising government performance through general accusations, as they will examine specific policies, identify shortcomings and propose alternatives supported by evidence.
For the BNF, strengthening this understanding would help ensure that political education remains relevant beyond internal ideological debates. It would become a means of preparing members to participate constructively in public affairs and assess the consequences of decisions made in their name. If the Selebi-Phikwe gathering marks the beginning of a sustained revival of that tradition, it could help the organisation bridge the distance between the roots of its political ideologies and present political responsibilities.