Cashgate Scandal and Masquerades blunders...

Anticipation...

There has been a high anticipation by every Malawian that the Budget Director of the Ministry of Finance holds the key which would lead to disclose the main architects of the Cashgate scandal. Obviously, I thought that the man who had gone close to death would not fail to find the audacity of disclosing who, where, and how this infamous scandal rose after the foiled assassination on that fateful September night.

 

Puzzling...

Unfortunately, for me and the rest of the tax-payers had been given a raw deal when they realised that the one we had originally thought held the keys, only sounded confused and seemingly puzzled at how his fate could be connected to the scandal.

 

Maybe the scandal was a miraculous phenomenon bound to occur after that fateful night, and plausibly maybe most Malawians committed a fallacy of 'post-hoc ergo propter hoc', meaning - after the thing, therefore because of the thing. But as fast as I hoped that many distinguished Malawians were caught in such an ignominious fallacy, I was presented with a surprise that this 'hero' thought the whole scandal, whose overwhelming evidence surfaced every other day after his attack, was nothing but an illusionary cyber-attack. This statement may have come to the defence of the investigations on unexplained wealth, I suggest, yet the same statement is a pin pointer that his presentation was coached.

 

In the first place, I would like to believe that he only had to make such a statement as he was away from events unfolding at home. But would we expect such a man, to come forth and explain to the many sane Malawians that what the think they perceive is unreal and what the think is unreal, real? I wonder what logical connections would Mphwiyo produce to further elaborate how cyber attacks have reached these levels of hoaxing massive plunder of public funds to the tune of 20 Billion Kwacha, which Malawians trusted their government with. Would such a statement not embarrass the donors under the Common Approach to Budget Support (CABS) as whiz-kids and foolishly acting on mere cyber-attacks in instead of making judgement on facts.

 

I think much as I would desire to defend Mphwiyo, but more than three fingers are pointing back at him. It was obvious that he displayed a rhetorical showdown against a club of hand clappers who may not have walked the corridors of prestigious universities that the Director had once galloped. But the issue is not about rhetorical swordplay nor is the matter about intellectual acumen, the issue is about accountability and transparency. The issue is about the waste of government resources meant for the 14 million poor Malawians who are seeking answers from the government after the death of Mutharika and the revelation of his lavishness.

 

I believe that intellect and reason do not necessarily entail justice. The way the presentation was made, leaves a lot to be desired on whether Malawians had benefited anything from the presentation except that 'one man who is naturally gifted with intellect had been victimised for his success' innocently. Nothing to do with the plight of the nation's reserve being looted and nothing about how and why such access has been left unchecked until the fateful September night.

 

What Mphwiyo should know is that the speech will go back to haunt him, even as he tries to recuperate from the fatal wounds. It would have been brave of him to have capitalized the opportunity to outline the events that led to his shooting and where and how these events could have sparked the cashgate revelations. As much as the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc is concerned, it was the expectation of all Malawians to distinctly disconnect his attack from the whole scandal that erupted like a box of pandemonium.

 

It was obvious that his fate led to the unearthing of the government syndicate, even though it remains uncertain on whether his fate was driven by the perpetrators or the cause of the revelation of the cashgate scandal. In fact, logically to infer that the fate led to the scandal, would be sound, but to state that the fate was the cause for the revelation of the cashgate scandal would be an overstatement. However, the very inconsistency of the speech by Mphwiyo raises eyebrows on whether what is circulated in the social media is true or not. In fact, his speech has only served to authenticate what rumours have all along been championing...

 

The speech has appealed to sympathy and failed to offer facts. The speech was greeted with cheerleaders who were less critically and probing for the truth of the saga. What I think should have been included in the interrogation are these questions. Why would you conclude that your shooting was not related to cashgate when you have no evidence of the shooters and their intentions? How could you justify the innocence of people that have long been implicated in the scandal without offering evidence, and how can you defend your sentiments as not in contempt of court as such matters of cashgate remain under investigation...

 

The main question would be how would you be conclusive and expect us to overwrite all issues that have been disclosed as 'nonsensical' when you are not able yourself to present tangible evidence to these matters...

 

Conclusion...

It would be that politics has meddled again in a case that social justice is at stake. Painlessly, this justice will come out whether through the legally sanctioned courts of Malawi, or through the ballot paper. We cannot but notice some form of invisible hand trying to dictate what is to be said and what is not to be said... What would be of priority now is information not misinformation. What puzzles me is the fact that some people seem to underrate the impact of social media in Malawi, but I believe they shall be in for a surprise...

Partisanship and Parrotism

Politics in line with Malawian views...

I notice with gross unbelief how strangely political die-hards take political machination on social media and I do not fail to realise that the more issues are presented, the more empty their capacity to assess what is being presented gets exposed.

It is awkward to realise that debates on the capacity for a political figure to make handshakes and present themselves in distinguished houses become praiseworthy. I sometimes pose and assess the rationale behind such praise and probably justify whether there is a good cause for such praise...

Historically, Malawians are good at accolading praise to their heroes. When Kamuzu, whose profession was that of a medical doctor, came to Malawi, he quickly recognised that gap in our hearts, a gap that searches for something praiseworthy to praise. I do not get surprised to see how foreign football players thrive in our corners and how indefensible we argue to claim that such kind of athlete is indisputable... The sentiment of praise falls deep i our mental make-up and defines our happiness. We are often sentimental and irrevocable when we are in the heat of praise for some hero or anyone who could step in and demand it.

Politically, praise dominate all forums and rallies. An innocent leader would emerge with strategic goals and brilliant ideas for development, but no sooner than we know it, he will be submersed with inexhaustible praise which only serves to daunt him and realign his vision to fill the hearts of praise-givers and make them feel happy about it. All of our leaders, either in the dictatorial and democratic era have been immersed with all sorts of praise, warranted or unwarranted praise. the frenzy of praise is what blinds most Malawians and the connotation of praise is what upset others.

As a young mind, I have grown to realise that praise is a legacy that needs dealing with. Our development efforts have been partly hindered by lack of scrutiny which was substituted by praise in many angles of public policy. Just as one academic genius would at times fail to live to his or her standards, subject to failure to absorb the higher levels of praise from his or her colleagues, so have our politicians found it difficult to stick to their development goals resultant of over-expressive praise...

Praise in social media...

Much of the praise in our social media leaves a lot to be desired. It is what I would call unwarranted praised. It is presented with lack of objectivity and at times manipulated... It is aimed at creating distortion to the truth and disclaimers. What I observe from all these praises in our social media is blatant depravity of objectivity, and abject irrationality. For instance, someone is going to make a comment that some leader has arrived at some airport and it is newsworthy. Or someone will write that their political leader has called in a large number of people and another will contest with a seemingly larger number of audience. the battle rages on...

In other cases, praise come in forms of gimmicks... I would like to cite examples but I reserve a few that had been vibrating in the previous regimes... 'boma ilo'.... 'odi uko'....'wagwa nayo'....'tikumva kukoma'.... when something 'wonderful' has been done by a particular political party. Say a member has defected to your political party or your party has visited a certain hospital...

Surprisingly, when something negative has happened to your party, there is a suspicious silence, as though all hand clappers have vanished in thin air unnoticed. It is a game of 'I surface when something 'good' has happened, and I vanish when nothing 'good' or something 'bad' has happened. This is what demonstrates irrationality.

The missing gap....

We ought to recognise that our leaders are a product of our very actions... one scholar once stated that...'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for the good men to do nothing'....Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797). The praise givers must learn to even suggest and assist their respective leaders when they go wrong... the infallibility clause does not exist in politics and so does it not in football. Much as we do not anticipate any football team to win all the time, so do we not expect any political party to always be right. It sounds like the fashionable attire of political masquerades who would in one regime be at the forefront in praise of the government of the day and switch to the next political party once it is inaugurated into power... Such is what other authors call 'Politics of Chameleon'... Politics in Malawi should be metamorphosed into critical politics, in which what will matter is not the individual person, but the political agenda... What will be primary is the tenancy to preserve the political values and guard against any form of contamination...

The debate gets deeper....

The call for preservation is not what Malawians need, but rather the call for participation. The more Malawians have been on the stands watching the events unfold the more they have shouldered the blame. What this 'praise-happy' sentimentalism stand for is downfall of the very beneficiaries of the praise, especially when it goes on unchecked. We ought to take a leaf from history that most of the leaders that enjoyed unrestrained praise left off their feet from the pedals and headed towards their end... One such leader was or first president, who under the blindfold of praise was guaranteed victory in the vote for referendum and the general elections a year later. Excessive praise left some of the leaders empty of ideas and meaningful direction on where the nation ought to go... I am certain that it is only when you leave the audition room and stand outside, is when you can appreciate the beauty of the song sang by the choir... Sometimes, praise givers ought to remain silent for a little while to appreciate whether their effort is generating desired results....

Concluding words...

It is bizarre to notice how praise is becoming fashionable and irrational. The more the tin makes some noise the empty it is. Praise is not bad, but praise with minimal or little substance is much as good as non-praise, after all it will not matter the quantity of praise a leader gets, what will always matter is the quality of his or her leadership style that guarantees ultimate praise...

Chilembwe's achievement should not be underestimated...

I would like to argue with those who have presented sentiments against Chilembwe’s heroism. The arguments they have made lack historical fact and substantial evidence. What is lamentable with most of those people is their failure to recognize honour where is it due. They are failing to articulate their working definition of heroism. Maybe should they present their workable definition of heroism we would argue along that line. Now let me present my argument through the following points.

1.       Dismissing Chilembwe’s heroism based on the fact that the uprising was futile is lamentable and unforgivable omission of historical facts. Heroes are not defined by the end-product of their efforts. Heroes are defined by the audacity to change the tide of thinking and conventional wisdom. Should that line of thinking prevail, then we are relegating the likes of Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Patrice Lumumba, Oliver Tambo, Geronimo, Che Guavara, and others who died before they realized what they were fighting for to non-heroes.

2.       Dismissing Chilembwe’s heroism on the pretext of his lack of military expertise and strategy is inconsiderate. Judging from the understanding that Chilembwe’s profession was in theology, it is expecting too much from the same to express military prowess and technical capacity in conducting coup-de-tats. John Chilembwe was compelled into a military combat in reaction to the ever-growing heat of tit-for-tat between his development efforts by the colonial regime. Those arguing in this line are not mindful of the contextual features that Chilembwe faced. He preached peace and got atrocities in return. His courage to fight back the cruelty of the colonial masters should not be rewarded by such shameful disrepute.

3.       To claim that Chilembwe lacked courage is an understatement. It suggests that writing the colonial masters singlehandledly a pastoral letter is a symptom of lack of courage, mobilizing community members to face the colonial masters and attack them is a sign of timidity. I beg to differ and probably you need to highlight the new definition of courage you are using.

4.       Lastly, to assess his contribution to the country, would demand an archeological-like fact-finding research, as the events took place in 1915, long before Kamuzu’z declaration of independence and abolition of federation, over 43 years afterwards, and long before our understanding and age of enlightenment when we can bravely and sarcastically dismiss Chilembwe’s heroism (over 98 years afterwards). It therefore becomes plausible to note that failure to keep oneself abreast with historical facts can lead one to make erroneous conclusions, as the facebook is awash of today. Chilembwe built a cotton factory, and tailoring school in his community, thus empowering Africans who were only supposed to work in cotton and tobacco fields as their lone profession. Chilembwe. After his attainment of a degree in the US, seeing the level of segregation in the states, wrote a pastoral letter indicating that: AFRICANS AS HUMANS ARE EQUAL! He further sent using his own resources two African students to the US to pursue further studies in the names of Fred Njilima, and Daniel Malikebu. Even your Member of Parliament has never done that.

I need an honest counterargument to this, but noting the failures of the uprising as a basis of dismissing Chilembwe’s heroism is a trigger-happy counterargument that lacks historical facts and a working definition.