You will recall that President Ian Khama is an alien in the philosophy of democracy. This is based on the premise that Khama is a chief. Chieftainship in terms of governance is in itself feudalistic, and in feudalism or monarchy there is no democracy because in those systems the word of a leader is the law. He is a soldier and in the barracks there is no criticism to the words of seniors, only orders, "discipline" and commands are the order of the day. What pains me most is the voting of the vice president. I had thought that parliament would endorse a more conversant person of Ponatshego Kedikilwe's calibre who is learned enough in democratic dispensation. I had thought that parliament would be wise enough to vote a civilian.
That has happened is like parliament endorsed that Botswana is ruled by Juntas and militias. Mostly the opposition baffles me. I know that BDP are the majority in parliament but what is important is that the opposition could have voted a different person even though we know that they would lose, at least they could have given Batswana an opportunity to see how they think but instead some voted with BDP MP's. Some either abstained or made spoils when voting. How can people who have been elected by the people prefer to be fence sitters?
