Is politics a dirty game?
Michael Dingake | Tuesday April 26, 2016 15:07
I was attracted to this article by the popular picture of Honourable Ndaba Gaolathe. Below the picture there were the words in bold letters: “Plan to dethrone Gaolathe exposed.” The article opens with the words,” Politics will always be a dirty game,” and ends with the lament, “Indeed politics is a dirty game…” A very short article, it made me think many thoughts.
It wasn’t the first time I heard or read the uncomplimentary and harsh statement about politics; if it’s a game many people, including journalists, see it; it makes one sit up and mull over the nature of games people play. Politics if indeed is a game differs from many other games played to entertain, win personal or group prize or exercise body and mind. Though games are played by rules, precisely to scrape off the dirt that may be inherent in them, it appears some dirt always sticks, resisting scraping or laundering. But let’s face it, politics is a vastly different game from many games played: it’s played and ought to be played to preserve the peace, order, and good health of human species to let the species survive the challenges and rigours of communal life full of contradiction and conflict, the species is heir to. Without politics our world, would be a jungle where humans live under the law of eat or be eaten.
To me what makes politics dirty is that very often many leaders in the seat of power grow bigger, powerful and richer, tend to subject the smaller, poor and weaker of their species to oppression, exploitation, and humiliation. I doubt however whether this is what the maligned subject of politics imply. In football, we say, play the ball not the man. What shall we say to discourage dirty politics? Play politics and not the politician? It doesn’t make sense because politics is integral to the politician and cannot be divorced.
Man is a political animal. That’is why we need to investigate what individuals mean when they label politics, dirty! Do we mean politicians have no morals? That they lie, cheat, don’t pay their debts, mistreat their spouses or fail to keep pledges they make to voters when they canvass for votes, after they have been elected? Politicians I know, the world over, are notorious for not fulfilling the pledges they make to the electorates while they canvass for votes during elections campaign. Could it be the sneer whence dirt in politics arises?
In The Voice article I read over the weekend it appears political dirt is reflected in the fact that there are some in Honourable’s party who are busy plotting to ‘dethrone’ him. It implies what they do is not done according to the party constitution. Which thing may destabilise the organisation concerned. Conspiracy should never be condoned wherever and whenever it rears its ugly head.
One doesn’t know whether the ‘dethroning’ mentioned in the article was conspiratorial or above board. If above board, there’s nothing wrong and no dirt is created. What we should keep in mind is that party politics sanctions renewal of leadership and structures from time to time; that cannot be alluded to as dethroning except when sensationalised. Party members who offend against inner party democracy deserve to be disciplined. ‘Dethroning’ lends a sinister complexion in the equation of the democratic party process. What insulates democratic organisations from dirt and keeps them spic and span, is due process that guides operations. Democracy is built on the hard rock of set principles, constitutions and regulations drafted and endorsed democratically to ward off the muck that may threaten the existence of democracy - government of the people by the people for the people! Whenever the rules and regulations are violated, the stability of democratic organisations is endangered. At times we may sense deviation where it doesn’t exist, due to the fact that we may be unacquainted with rules and regulations of the situation. Whenever I read or hear people talk about politics being dirty I am reminded of HE President Khama who never tires of depicting politics as dirty.
Despite his political viewpoint he continues to wallow in its murky waters, without saying how it can be redeemed.
The way I see it, politics is clean and of course essential, except that some of its practitioners deliberately make it look dirty when they attempt to impose their personal whims and rules for their selfish ends! Politics is far from dirty.
How can it be dirty when it’s a discipline, profession if you like, whose objective is to harmonise human relations. How can such a noble profession be described as dirty?
What makes politics ‘dirty’ is the fact that the majority refuse to soil their hands with politics, through organised structures, avoid participation; as long as the majority doesn’t learn, cherish, advocate and defend human rights for harmony, peace and prosperity of community, as long as the majority shy away from political engagement, as long as the majority avoid arming themselves politically, as long as the majority don’t vote during elections, as long as people think politics is for a chosen few, shall politics remain ‘dirty!’ Humans are political animals and ought to live politics!