The column itself was prompted by a message emblazoned on May Day, proclaiming privatisation as the foundation for workers' poverty.
A month later, the piece comes under attack from Rampholo Molefhe writing in the June 15, 2007 edition of Mmegi.
His op-ed is titled 'Why waste taxpayer's money on loss-making Air Botswana.' The title was not "socialism not privatisation makes people poor" as Molefhe would have readers believe. Therefore, Molefhe is entitled to his opinion but not his own facts.
I do not understand why he decided not to be specific and mention me as the author. Maybe he was torn between expressing his views on capitalism vis-a-z viz socialism and the instinctive journalistic habit of circling wagons around one of your own.
By the way, have you noticed how the folks in the media criticise everyone but their own? So maybe that is what went through his mind as he went about attacking me in his article.
I do not wish to draw attention to myself, but readers would have been better served had Molefhe revealed the name of the person who wrote the article that had so irked him.
This would have simply made for easy reference. In addition, he should not have bothered about circling the wagon - albeit partially - because I am not a member of the herd.
The problem with Molefhe's criticism is that he did not quote me directly, but instead chose to make sweeping criticisms of the article. But be that as it may, I have to offer a rebuttal.
Having said that, however, I need to dispose of the trick that Molefhe employs in his debate. This has to do with his attempt to redefine the meaning of words such as socialism.
He says that government ownership of Air Botswana is not socialism. Well, why not? Socialism is - or was, rather - a system in which ownership of enterprises would be vested in the state.
It was underpinned by a belief that the state was this all-knowing institution that would safeguard the masses against voracious capitalists.
That is why in some countries, socialists seized private property when they came to power. The case of China in which businessmen fled to other countries, including Hong Kong, is a typical case in point.
Whether that system generates economic growth, jobs and wealth is a different prospect altogether. At this stage, it simply makes sense to define socialism.
Molefhe thinks I should have been warned to make a distinction "between state capitalism on which Air Botswana was founded and the socialism about which he speaks in apparent contempt and an equal doze of ignorance."
Molefhe is wrong on the first count. There is no need to make a distinction between state capitalism and socialism because there is none.
State capitalism is socialism, and that is why Government wants to privatise state-owned enterprises, including Air Botswana. Socialism is an attempt by the state to enter an arena that is best left to private enterprise. To try to make a distinction is to engage in tautology.
Molefhe continues with his muddled defence of socialism when he says "there is a fundamental distinction between government enterprise for state profit and socialist endeavour for equitable distribution of social benefits in the citizens interest."
Even Molefhe would be hard-pressed to explain precisely what he means by this worn out clich. The simple question, however, is: how do you generate benefits if the enterprise is not profitable in the first place? It is the failure to appreciate the importance of profit in enterprise that has pushed Molefhe's socialist dream into oblivion.
Molefhe is right about my contempt for socialism. I am not alone in this. There are millions of people around the world who also feel the same way.
Chillingly, most of these people are in countries where this system was implemented for decades.
So I am not about to give succour to a system that is responsible for the death of millions of people, especially in China and Russia.
I don't know about Molefhe, but a system that makes creating misery in the world the top priority deserves nothing less than contempt.
Lefties all over the world have the knack of redefining socialism whenever you press to provide examples of socialist success.
Molefhe is no different. His objection to my characterisation of state-owned enterprises as socialism forms part of ways in which lefties have sought to defend the excesses of the moribund system.
Listen to their feeble excuses. Air Botswana is owned by the state. It's not doing well, but you cannot blame socialism, they say.
Russia failed after seventy years. Again they scream, do not blame socialism. Instead, we are exhorted to blame Stalin. Capitalism is pulling China out of poverty. Again we are asked not to question the veracity of socialism. The apologists want us to blame Mao's excesses.
For the uninitiated, that means millions who died under his rule. Cuba? No, the problem is the US blockade. Cuba can trade with the EU, China, Mexico and the rest of the world.
At the end of the day, Molefhe deserves credit for urging his fellow lefties in the trade union to put down the Kool Aid and smell the coffee!
